Untitled Sermon
Sermon • Submitted
0 ratings
· 13 viewsNotes
Transcript
TURNING THE WORLD UPSIDE DOWN
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
Huw Rees
Iain Maclean
Jeremy Gibson
Huw Rees wrote on chapters 6-9, 14, 24-26. Iain MacLean wrote on chapters 1, 12, 15.36-16.5, 17, 20, 27, and 28. Jeremy Gibson wrote the Introduction, the introductions to Unto the uttermost part of the earth and Paul’s third missionary journey, and the notes on chapters 2-5, the second half of chapter 8, and chapters 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21-23. Iain MacLean and Huw Rees compiled the appendix.
Graphics by Stewart Rollo
IM to write 20.1-12, 27, 28, work on appendices
HR to write 25, 26
Contents
Introduction.. 5
Part 1. Jerusalem, Judaea, and Samaria (1.1-8.25). 15
The preparation of the apostles and the Ascent of the Lord (1.1-26). 16
The descent of the Holy Spirit and the birth of the church (2.1-47). 20
Another offer of the kingdom to Israel, which was again rejected (3.1-4.37) 24
The purging of the church and the preservation of the servants (5.1-42). 30
Practicalities and priorities in the church (6.1-7) 33
Israel’s rejection of christ and murder of Stephen (6.8-7.60) 36
Public preaching at Samaria and Personal evangelism in the desert (8.1-40). 41
Part 2. Unto the uttermost part of the earth (9.1-21.17). 45
Saul’s conversion and Peter’s ministry (9.1-43) 48
Cornelius (10.1-11.18). 52
Peter’s deliverance and Herod’s death (12.1-25). 55
Paul’s first missionary journey (13, 14). 58
Cyprus. 59
Antioch.. 61
Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. 64
Jerusalem council (15.1-35; Gal 2.1-10). 67
Paul’s second missionary journey (15.36-18.22). 70
Preaching at Philippi (16.6-40). 73
Thessalonica, Berea, and Athens (17.1-31) 76
Conversions at Corinth (18.1-22) 78
Paul's third missionary journey (18.23-21.17) 82
Evangelising Ephesus (18.24-20.1) 82
The Ephesian elders (20.13-38). 85
Paul's final journey to Jerusalem (21.1-17). 88
Part 3. Paul’s arrest, imprisonment, and journey to Rome (21.17-28.31). 90
Paul before Felix (24). 96
Appendices. 101
Sermons, prayers, and miracles in Acts. 102
Moments of opposition to the gospel 102
Comparing Moses and Stephen (Acts 7). 102
Introduction
Introduction
The Acts of the Apostles is Luke’s beautifully crafted companion to his Gospel. Written with artistic finesse, historical accuracy and spiritual perception, it documents the birth of the church and the rapid dissemination of the gospel message throughout the first century Mediterranean world. The absence of any mention of the rampant persecution of Christians which raged following the great fire of Rome in AD 64 and the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in AD 70 suggests that Luke completed it shortly after Paul’s first Roman imprisonment of AD 59-61.
With irresistible power, the church grew and the gospel spread far and wide, transforming lives, saving souls and cutting across every kind of class and cultural divide. Energised by the Holy Spirit, the apostles and their associates fearlessly witnessed to Christ’s resurrection ‘in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth’ (1.8). The universal use of the Greek language, the political stability and efficient transport links of the Roman Empire all facilitated this movement of the gospel. Paul, as an insightful strategist and Roman citizen, realised that if he established churches at key communication centres he could reach more people with the gospel faster. As the believers ‘went forth, and preached every where, the Lord [worked] with them … confirming the word with signs following’ (Mk 16.20). He kept adding ‘to the church daily such as should be saved’ (2.47; cf. 5.14; 6.1; 9.31; 11.21, 24; 16.5); ‘the word of God grew and multiplied’ (12.24; cf. 6.7).
Acts covers a period of approximately 30 years (c 30-61 A.D.). Roughly speaking, chapters 1-12 describe the first half and chapters 13-28 the second half. Chapters 1-7 focus on Peter’s service at Jerusalem; apart from the first fifty days till Pentecost (2.1), a couple of consecutive days (4.5; 5.21) and one three-hour period (5.7), they contain no time indicators. Chapters 13-28 cover Paul’s wider ministry, including the ten years in which he travelled almost 10,000 miles during three missionary journeys[1], two years imprisonment in Caesarea (24.27), and two in Rome (28.30). In this section, Luke’s references to historical events and characters allow us to anchor the text within a more definitive timeframe. For example, Emperor Claudius expelled the Jews from Rome about A.D. 49/ 50 (18.2)[2], Gallio became the proconsul of Achaia in July AD 51 (18.12)[3] and Porcius Festus was appointed in A.D. 59 (24.27).[4]
While chapters 1-7 and 13-28 follow a linear chronology, chapters 8 to 12 do not. At times they record overlapping events to show how Stephen’s stoning triggered a shift in attention from Jerusalem to Samaria and to the utmost parts of the earth, from Jews to Gentiles and from Peter to Paul. Persecuted believers, who were scattered throughout Judaea, Samaria, Phenice, Cyprus and Antioch, ‘went every where preaching the word’ (8.1, 4; 11.19). Philip himself preached Christ to the city of Samaria (8.5) and when the apostles, who remained ‘at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John’ (8.14). Returning to Jerusalem, they ‘preached the gospel in many villages of the Samaritans’ (8.25).
Meanwhile, Saul, who had assented to Stephen’s stoning, was dramatically converted at Damascus (8.1; 9.1-8). Afterwards, Saul spent three years in Arabia, before returning to Damascus and then visiting Jerusalem, where Barnabas introduced him to the church and he met Peter for fifteen days (9.20-29; 22.17-21; Gal 1.18). When his life was threatened, Saul escaped from Jerusalem to Tarsus, where he spent ‘the best part of ten unchronicled years’[5] (9.30). It was probably during this time that he established the churches of Cilicia that he later revisited and strengthened with Silas (15.41). Saul hailed from Tarsus, teaching us the importance of witnessing at home (9.11; 21.39; 22.3; cf. Mk 5.19).
The conversion of Cornelius was a key turning point which was designed to convince Jewish believers that God had ‘to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life’ (9.32-11.18). Convinced of this, when the Jerusalem church heard that many in Antioch had ‘turned unto the Lord’, they sent Barnabas to that city (11.19-24). He retrieved Saul from Tarsus and together they taught the Antioch church for one year (11.25, 26). When Agabus prophesied at Antioch about an imminent famine, in an act of great generosity, this Gentile church sent a gift by Saul and Barnabas to the Jerusalem church (11.27-30). Having delivered the gift, they returned to Antioch with John Mark (12.25). It was about this time (A.D. 44) that James was executed and an angel delivered Peter from prison before smiting Herod Agrippa (12.1-23).[6]
Acts is a book about people, how they interact with each other and how they surprise us. Who would have imagined that Barnabas, a generous and kindly believer (4.36, 37), would eventually partner with Saul of Tarsus, an intense and violent persecutor of the church (8.1; 9.1-8)? And who, seeing them working so closely together at Antioch (11.25, 26), labouring harmoniously throughout a whole missionary journey (13, 14) and attending the Jerusalem Council in each other’s company (15.1, 2), would have foreseen their eventual split (15.37-39). John Mark, who left them during their first missionary journey, was the cause of the contention (13.13). But we should never write anyone off. Barnabas’ nephew proved good. He served with Barnabas at Cyprus (15.39), was fondly regarded by the Apostle Peter (1 Pet 5.13) and even visited Paul during his first Roman imprisonment (Col 4.10). John Mark’s legacy is a Gospel about the perfect Servant.
No one, not even the Apostle Paul, can achieve anything without others. Having completed his first missionary journey with Barnabas, he started his second with Silas (15.40, 41). Timothy joined them at Derbe and Lystra (16.1-3). Luke, who indicated his personal involvement in the story with the pronoun ‘we’, joined them at Troas but remained at Philippi (16.8-10; 17.1). It was here that he re-joined Paul during his third missionary (20.6). After that they were practically inseparable. Luke stayed with Paul till his arrest at Jerusalem (21.15, 33). Luke then re-joined Paul at Caesarea, travelling with him all the way to Rome (27.1; 28.16). During Paul’s second Roman incarceration, he wrote to Timothy, ‘Only Luke is with me’ (2 Tim 4.11). What an unexpected, yet fruitful friendship. Between them, ‘an Hebrew of the Hebrews’ and a Gentile physician, they wrote more than half the NT (Phil 3.5).
Others helped Paul. Together, they teach us that our service is carefully choreographed by God to ensure it works hand in hand with that of others (cf. Eph 2.10) and that we should be willing to faithfully serve in one place for a long time, or to move as the Lord directs (cf. Num 9.15-23). At Corinth, Paul stayed with Aquila and Priscilla, who travelled with him to Ephesus, where they, in turn, encouraged Apollos (18.1-3, 18, 19, 24-27). During Paul’s third missionary journey ‘there accompanied him into Asia Sopater of Berea; and of the Thessalonians, Aristarchus and Secundus; and Gaius of Derbe, and Timotheus; and of Asia, Tychicus and Trophimus’ (20.4). Sopater was with Paul during his three month stay in Greece when he wrote the Roman epistle (20.1-3; Rom 16.21). Aristarchus had been with him at Ephesus and went on to travel with him to Rome, where he was a fellow-prisoner (19.29; 27.2; Col 4.10). Tychicus was ‘a beloved brother, and a faithful minister and fellowservant in the Lord’, who carried Paul’s letters to Ephesus and Colosse (Eph 6.21; Col 4.7, 8). He remained true right up to Paul’s execution at Rome (2 Tim 4.12; Tit 3.12). After many years of faithful service, Trophimus succumbed to illness at Miletum (2 Tim 4.20). Some twenty years after Philip the evangelist spoke to the Ethiopian eunuch, Paul stayed with Philip at Caesarea, where he had settled and raised four godly daughters (8.40; 21.8, 9). It was here that Agabus prophesied yet again, this time concerning Paul’s imprisonment (21.10, 11).
Alas, this book, which charts so carefully the beginning of the church era, has generated much controversy and discord amongst the Lord’s people. Some teach that Acts, in all its details, is a precise blueprint for church practice today. The regular conversion of thousands is the expected norm (2.41; 4.4). Speaking in tongues is needed to evidence salvation (2.4; 10.46; 19.6). Supernatural healings (including raising the dead), demonic exorcisms and prophecies should continue (3.6-8; 5.12-16; 9.32-41; 11.28; 14.8-10; 16.16-18; 19.11, 12; 20.9-12; 21.10; 28.7-10). And, once saved, there is an invariable delay till a second blessing when the Holy Spirit is received through the laying on of the hands of apostles (8.14-18; 19.1-6). People crave this kind of Pentecostal-style revival and actively attempt to manufacture it. A dangerous thing to do!
One problem with this interpretation of Acts is that it simply doesn’t happen like that today. No church sees thousands of genuine converts on a daily, or even weekly basis. This sudden expansion in numbers was appropriate at the beginning of the church but, as the Lord Jesus taught, normal spiritual growth is slow and steady (Mk 4.26-29). Christians no longer have the supernatural ability to speak ‘the wonderful works of God’ in foreign human languages, which they have never learnt (2.11). Those who profess to, simply babble gobbledygook; and when challenged as to which language they speak, they cower behind the absurd claim to speak the tongues of angels (1 Cor 13.1). Interestingly, every time the Bible records angels speaking, they speak in a human language that is understood by those they are speaking to. The great boasts of the charismatic movement to heal the sick, to exorcise demons and even to raise the dead are fraudulent. They cannot do it. Instead of being channels of divine blessing, charlatan faith healers shamelessly trick their audiences and dash the hopes of many, usually for personal financial gain.[7] And despite the arrogant assertions of some, no one today has actually seen the Lord Jesus and been appointed by Him to be an apostle. Even when the early apostles sought to replace Judas there were only two potential candidates. Both of these had accompanied them from the baptism of John till the Lord’s ascension and had personally witnessed Christ’s resurrection (1.21, 22).
A second difficulty with this view is that it runs contrary to the teaching of the NT letters. At the end of Paul’s life, he noticed widespread declension, not exponential expansion. In his final letter, he wrote, ‘This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me … This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves … Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof’ (2 Tim 1.15; 3.1, 5). In his second epistle, Peter warned, ‘there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of’ (2 Pet 2.1, 2). Jude alerted his readers that ‘there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ’ (Jude 4). The present fascination with speaking in so-called tongues flies in the face of Paul’s clear instructions to the Corinthians. He emphasised that Christian gifts should be exercised in church gatherings with the loving intention of edifying each other; and, if they are going to achieve this, they need to be understood (1 Cor 13.1; 14.1-5). Quoting Isaiah’s prophecy, Paul wrote, ‘In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not’ (1 Cor 14.21, 22). That is to say, tongues were primarily intended to challenge unbelievers (especially Jewish ones), not build up Christians. And that function was temporary: ‘whether there be tongues, they shall cease’ (1 Cor 13.8). The epistles repeatedly emphasise that Christians should fix their focus on things which are spiritual, not physical, eternal, not temporal, heavenly, not earthly. Paul blessed ‘the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ’ (Eph 1.3). He wrote to the Corinthians, ‘While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal’ (2 Cor 4.18). From his Roman prison, Paul exhorted the Colossians, ‘Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth’ (Col 3.2). When professing Christians push a health and wealth gospel, in which they shamelessly demand, as their right, perfect physical health, they are prioritising the wrong things at the wrong time. God will give us a perfect body that is free from sin and illness, but not till the Lord’s coming (Phil 3.21). At the moment, however, ‘the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body (8.22, 23). The suggestion that Christians look for a second blessing of the Spirit contradicts Paul’s words, ‘if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his’ (Rom 8.9). In other words, the Holy Spirit is now received, in all His fullness, as soon as an individual is born again. The suggestion that there are apostles today is also preposterous. The church is ‘built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone’ (Eph 2.20). That foundation layer was laid in the first century and never needs to be re-laid.
A third flaw with the assumption that everything in Acts applies today is the failure to appreciate its transitionary character. For example, the preaching in the first few chapters seems to have held out the very real possibility that, if Israel repented and believed, Christ’s millennial kingdom would be ushered in immediately. Peter declared, ‘Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began’ (3.19-21). As well as demonstrating God’s kindness to suffering humanity and His validation of the apostolic message (Heb 2.3, 4), and furnishing proof that Christ had truly risen from the dead (4.10), the early healing miracles anticipated the widespread health which will be enjoyed by the citizens of Messiah’s glorious kingdom (cf. Is 35.5, 6). This offer of the kingdom ended with the stoning of Stephen.
The birth of the church on the Day of Pentecost also marked a radical shift in God’s dealings with men. The longstanding hostility between Jews and Gentiles was broken down. Through His cross, Christ ‘made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between [Jews and Gentiles]’ (Eph 2.14). But clarity was needed as to how Gentiles (and saved Jews) stood in relation to the Law of Moses. And how would these ancient racial divisions between Jews, Samaritans and Gentiles be broken down in practical terms? In Acts there are four distinct episodes where believers either spoke with tongues or there appeared to be a delay in their receiving the Holy Spirit after they believed. Three of these four events related either to the birth of the church or the dissolution of these national barriers. First, at Pentecost, unbelieving Jews and Gentile proselytes were amazed when the Galilean disciples, filled with the Holy Spirit, spoke in their own languages ‘the wonderful works of God’ (2.4-11). Second, the Samaritans, who ‘received the word of God’, only received the Holy Ghost after Peter and John laid ‘their hands on them’ (8.14, 17). Although it is not specifically mentioned that they spoke with tongues, there must have been a visible manifestation that they had received the Spirit. Why the delay, at this time, between believing God’s word and receiving the Spirit? Historically, the Jews had ‘no dealings with the Samaritans’ (Jn 4.9). This state of affairs could not continue in the Christian church. How better to rectify this schism than if they received the Holy Spirit by the laying on of the hands of two Jewish apostles who had come from Jerusalem to Samaria? Thirdly, as soon as Cornelius and his friends believed the Gospel, they too spoke with tongues, convincing Peter and his Jewish companions that these Gentiles had truly received the Holy Spirit (10.44-48).
The fourth occurrence was at Ephesus, where Paul discovered twelve disciples who were living in a kind of dispensational time-warp, following the incomplete preaching of Apollos (19.1-7). They had neither heard of, nor received the Holy Spirit. Instead of undergoing Christian baptism, they had been baptised unto John’s ‘baptism of repentance’ (19.4). As soon as Paul explained the anticipatory nature of John’s message, which challenged his hearers to ‘believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus’, they believed the truth and were ‘baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus’ (19.4, 5). Their position was unique, as was their reception of the Spirit, mediated through the laying on of Paul’s hand and confirmed by the speaking of foreign languages and prophesying (19.6). None of these events established standard church practice. Instead, they were dealing with specific issues that needed to be addressed in the early experience of the church.
The principles which Acts establishes for current church practice and Christian mission must be practically workable, consistent with the teaching of the NT epistles and take into account this transitionary nature of the book. At Pentecost, ‘they that gladly received [Peter’s] word were baptized’ (2.41). The Lord Jesus taught, ‘He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved’ (Mk 16.16). Throughout Acts, everyone who professed faith in Christ was, without delay, baptised by immersion (8.12, 13, 16, 36, 38; 9.18; 10.47, 48; 11.16; 16.15, 33; 18.8; 19.3-5; 22.16). This remains the pattern today.
Those who believed ‘continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers’ (2.42). The apostles placed such an emphasis on Bible teaching that they appointed others to deal with the physical needs of the saints, while they gave themselves ‘continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word’ (6.6). Today, any local church today which neglects the teaching of God’s word will eventually flounder. Just as the early believers remembered the Lord Jesus by breaking bread on the first day of each week, local churches should continue this weekly practice (cf. 20.7). Luke repeatedly emphasised the importance of personal and corporate prayer (1.13, 14; 4.23-31; 6.4-6; 9.11, 40; 10.9; 12.5, 12; 13.3; 14.23; 16.25; 20.36; 21.5; 22.17; 28.8). These continue to be vitally important to the life of every Christian and local church. No prayer, no power.
It was when they ‘that believed were of one heart and of one soul … with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus’ (4.32, 33). Loving care for fellow-believers remains the bedrock for effective Christian witness. As the Saviour said, ‘By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another’ (Jn 13.35).
As Luke’s narrative unfolds, the gospel moved out by public preaching and personal evangelism, each energised and directed by the Holy Spirit. Peter preached to the crowds in the Jerusalem temple (2.14-40; 3.12-26) and, with the other apostles and Stephen, witnessed to the Jewish Sanhedrin (4.8-12; 5.29-32; 7.1-60). Philip conversed with an Ethiopian eunuch (8.30-35) and Peter spoke to Cornelius and his Gentile friends (10.34-43). During his missionary journeys, Paul taught in Jewish synagogues (13.16-41; 17.2, 3), forbad a Gentile rabble from worshipping him (14.15-18) and disputed with Athenian philosophers (17.22-31). Arrested at Jerusalem, Paul bore testimony before a Jewish mob (21.40-22.21) and stirred discord among the Jewish leaders (23.6). At Caesarea, Paul defended himself before the Jews and Felix (24.10-21), spoke privately to Felix and his wife Drusilla (24.24, 25), defended himself yet again before his Jewish detractors and Porcius Festus (25.8), and gave his testimony before King Agrippa, Bernice and Festus (26.1-23). Having witnessed to the Jews at Rome (28.23-29), Paul continued ‘preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him’ (28.31).
While the style of the preaching varied depending on who was preaching, and to whom, the fundamentals remained the same. Every sermon was thoroughly biblical, either quoting from or alluding to OT scripture, or resting upon the great doctrines of God. Christ was at the heart of everything that was said, especially the historical facts and enormous spiritual ramifications of His death and resurrection. He is the only Saviour (4.12), Who has been exalted and will return as this world’s future Judge (10.42; 17.31). With great courage, the believers preached this gospel, first to the Jews and then to the Gentiles (4.20; 9.27; 11.19; cf. Rom 1.16), calling upon their audiences to repent and receive remission of sins and the gift of Holy Spirit.
This is the same message which we preach today. And it had the same results. Some believed, many were indifferent or rejected it, and some turned violent (cf. 2.41; 4.1-22; 5.17-40; 8.1, 3; 9.1, 2; 14.1, 2, 19; 17.1-5; 18.12, 13; 21.27-31; 28.23, 24). Most persecution came from the Jews. Even when Herod Agrippa killed James and imprisoned Peter, he was encouraged to do so because it pleased the Jews (12.1-3). Gentiles opposed Paul at Philippi and Ephesus because the transforming power of the gospel affected their income (16.19; 19.24-27). At Ephesus, the aggression was so severe that Paul wrote to the Corinthians, ‘I have fought with beasts at Ephesus’ (15.32). But persecution did not hinder the gospel, it accelerated its spread.
Sadly, the church’s greatest threat was from within, not without. Pride, deception and division quickly raised their ugly heads. Craving esteem, Ananias and Saphira faked generosity, for which they were judged (4.32-5.11). Dissatisfaction with the distribution of funds provoked unrest among the believers (6.1). Even Paul and Barnabas eventually split (15.39). If history has taught us anything, the enemy within remains the biggest threat to the church. God help us to maintain harmony in local churches and to reach out with fervour to the masses with this powerful, life-changing gospel. If we do this, we will fulfil Christ’s purpose for His church: ‘ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth’ (1.8).
Greek words used more often in Acts than any other NT book
Word
Number
Pneuma (refers to Holy Spirit in all but x17)
70
‘Jerusalem’
60
Apostolos (apostle)
30
Marturus (witness)
13
Homothumadon (‘one accord’)
11
Anastasis (resurrection)
11
Proseuchē (prayer)
9
Proskartereō (continue)
6
Paul’s letters
Letter
Place of writing
1 and 2 Thessalonians
During eighteen-month stay at Corinth (18.5, 11)
1 Corinthians
During two-year and three-month stay at Ephesus (19.8, 10)
2 Corinthians
In Macedonia (20.1, 2)
Romans
During three-month stay in Greece (20.2, 3)
Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians and Philemon
During first Roman imprisonment (28.30, 31; Eph 3.1; 4.1; 6.20; Phil 1.7, 13; Col 4.3, 18; Philem 10, 13, 22)
1 Timothy and Titus
After first Roman imprisonment
2 Timothy
Awaiting execution, during second Roman imprisonment
Galatians
Perhaps during second or third missionary journey
Part 1. Jerusalem, Judaea, and Samaria (1.1-8.25)
Part 1. Jerusalem, Judaea, and Samaria (1.1-8.25)
The preparation of the apostles and the Ascent of the Lord (1.1-26)
The preparation of the apostles and the Ascent of the Lord (1.1-26)
While the Gospels record the beginning of the Lord Jesus’ great work of salvation (Heb 2.3), Acts records its continuation from heaven, through His apostles, empowered by the Holy Spirit. Redemption was gloriously accomplished when Christ cried ‘finished’ (Jn 19.30), but the risen Lord is presently engaged in the ongoing work of applying that redemption: sinners are still being saved, and saints sustained (Heb 7.25).
Luke wrote his Gospel and the Acts to reinforce his friend, Theophilus, in essential Christian doctrine. Theophilus was probably an official in the Roman empire because, like Felix (23.26) and Festus (26.25), he is introduced as ’most excellent’ (Lk 1.3). The gospel is needed by, offered to, and sufficient for all levels in society (1 Tim 2.1-4). Theophilus’ name means, ’friend of God’, a relationship the Lord encouraged: ’ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you’ (Jn 15.14).
Preparation (vv3-8)
The apostles entered the 40-day period between the resurrection and the ascension sad that their hopes for a national deliverer had been dashed (Lk 24.27,21), and sceptical of the initial resurrection reports (Lk 24.11). Peter was surprised to find the empty tomb, and the two whom the Lord spoke to on the road to Emmaus were slow to believe the scriptures which foretold Messiah’s suffering (Lk 24.25). But not long into that 40-day period they became convinced He had risen. To accomplish this vital transformation the risen Lord used ’many sure proofs’ (1.3, Weymouth), consisting of showing Himself alive, not to one person alone - leaving no possible corroboration - but to twelve official witnesses (a number frequently associated with the size of a jury), and to many unofficial witnesses (1 Cor 15.6).
On these occasions a wide range of spoken interactions occurred between the risen Lord and the twelve. There was exposition, for the Lord spoke (legō, to lay together, i.e., to collect[8]) ’of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God’ (1.3). This included laying out the scriptural expectation of the resurrection (Lk 24.25-27), which put it on a ’more sure’ footing than eyewitness testimony (2 Pet 1.19)! Further, there was the opportunity for a question: ’Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?’ (1.6). Significantly, the Lord did not seek to correct their expectation of a restored Israel at the centre of the kingdom of God - He simply affirmed the sovereignty of the Father as to the timing of its inauguration. Jerusalem will yet be the centre around which affairs on earth will revolve during Christ’s millennial kingdom, as anticipated by prophets such as Isaiah (Is 2.1-5). The Lord’s response, with familiar grace (cf. His reply to Zebedee’s mother, Mt 20.20), moved them on from something not for them to an instruction that was for them: ’but…ye shall be witnesses unto me’ (1.8). These were His final words prior to leaving this earth and, as such, clearly signal the priority of witnessing. The Holy Spirit unmistakably supplies the essential power for witnessing: ‘ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Spirit is come upon you’ (1.8). This was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost (ch. 2) when the Holy Spirit descended to indwell believers, and to form the body of Christ. By contrast, today the Spirit indwells the believer and adds them to the body of Christ at the moment of faith (Eph 1.13; 1 Cor 12.13). The Lord’s plan for witnessing provides a table of contents for the book of Acts (1.8). The witness began in Jerusalem (ch. 1-7), spread to Judea and Samaria (ch. 8-12), and then to the uttermost part of the earth (ch. 13-28). A biblical approach to witnessing is therefore to start where we are and radiate outwards. Paul said to the Thessalonians: ’from you sounded out the word of the Lord’ (1 Thess 1.8). Pause now to mark the change the Lord brought about in the twelve - the reality of the resurrection is no longer a question to them!
Ascension (vv9-12)
The climax of the 40-day period was the witnessed ascension of the Lord into heaven. This provided a vindication of Christ’s words, for John records at least seven occasions when the Lord alluded to leaving the world to return to the Father (Jn 14.12, 28; 16.5, 10, 16, 28; 17.11). At the tomb the angel’s message was, ’He is not here, but is risen: remember how He spake unto you when He was yet in Galilee?’ (Lk 24.6). When Christ says something will happen, we may depend on it!
The ascension was a gracious provision for the disciples. For the short period of time He dwelt among them, they had the unique experience of hearing, seeing, and handling the Son of God (1 Jn 1.1). But He did not leave them abruptly or without explanation. Instead, His gradual ascent into heaven, in their full view, gently moved them on from walking by sight to walking by faith (2 Cor 5.7).
The ascension was a step in Christ’s glorious exaltation. He was ‘taken up’ (1.2, 11, 22; 1 Tim 3.16), indicating it was an honour done to Him by another. The direction He moved signalled His destination, as the repetition of the word ’heaven’ four times in vv10, 11 emphasises. Long before the events of chapter 1, Isaiah wrote of the suffering servant of Jehovah using three terms expressing promotion: ’He shall be exalted and be lifted up, and be very high’ (Isa 52.13, JND). The resurrection, ascension, and seating in glory of Christ answer well to Isaiah’s prophecy, with each step, as it were, a further expression of the Father’s delight in the work of His Son (2.33; Phi 2.8,9).
The ascension informs our blessed expectation, for the angelic affirmation was, ’this same Jesus…shall so come in like manner as ye have seen Him go’ (1.11). Christ’s second coming to earth will be personal; He will not send a deputy, but descend Himself, first to the air for the church (1 Thess 4.16), then, after the events of the tribulation, to the earth. It will be physical, for He left from the mount of Olives in a body (1.12), and at His return, ’His feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives’ – with earth-splitting consequences (Zech 14.4)! His return will be visible; not to a small gathering as at His ascension, but by ’all tribes of the earth’ (Mt 24.30), and by ’every eye’ (Rev 1.7). May we live soberly, righteously, godly, in this present world; looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ (Tit 2.12,13).
Supplication (vv13, 14)
The apostles spent the waiting time in Jerusalem in prayer, illustrating how best to ‘wait on the Lord’ (Is 40.31). Their prayer meeting had full participation, for ’they all continued in prayer’ (1.14). Significantly, Mary the mother of Jesus was there (1.14). Despite her privileged role in the incarnation, her way of access to God was the same as every other believer. The Lord’s brethren were there (1.14), indicating that they had been converted between the feast of tabernacles (Jn 7.5) and the resurrection. In addition to the male apostles, the women were there (1.14). Audible prayer in the gatherings of the church is specifically committed to the males (1 Tim 2.8), but if our prayer meetings are like this one and all pray, then the women’s inaudible contributions have an intrinsically precious quality, for God alone can measure them. Given the current agenda to confuse the divinely assigned distinction between male and female (Gen 1.27, Mt 19.4), may we appreciate afresh the simple opportunities God has given us in His house, ’the pillar and ground of the truth’ (1 Tim 3.15), to mark His glory as the Creator of all things, including the two genders, each distinct in function but equal in value.
Their prayer meeting had united participation, for they prayed ‘with one accord’ (1.14). It is possible to have a wicked unity of purpose, such as the mob who came together to stone Stephen (7.57), but godly harmony is good and pleasant (Ps 133.1), and worth prayerfully cultivating (Rom 15.5-6).
Their prayer meeting had purposeful participation, for at it they made ’supplication’ (1.14). It is good before prayer to consider Ahasuerus’ question to Esther: ’what is thy request’ (Esther 5.3). James gives at least three mistakes to avoid in prayer: swithering as to the goodness of God – ’ask in faith, nothing wavering’ (Jas 1.5-8); silence - ’ye have not because ye ask not’ (Jas 4.2); and selfishness – ’ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts’ (Jas 4.3). May our prayer meetings be characterised by full, united, and purposeful participation, and by prayers that are expressed with confidence in God’s goodness, and submission to His will.
Selection (vv15-26)
Judas was one of Christ’s twelve disciples, a missionary who preached to Israel, a miracle worker, the money handler for the twelve – yet he was not a genuine believer. Little wonder Paul urged the Corinthians, ‘Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith’ (2 Cor 13.5). Far better to recheck the foundations now than to discover that we don’t know Christ as Saviour when it is forever too late. God used Peter, a restored backslider, to oversee the choice of Judas’ replacement. Recovery to useful service is possible for the believer who stumbles, but those who decisively reject the Lord, like Judas, can only be removed.
The selection was approached prayerfully for it was out of the atmosphere of prayer that Peter received clarity on how to deal with the situation created by Judas’ betrayal (v12-14). As the proverb advises, ’commit thy works unto the LORD, and thy thoughts shall be established’ (Pr 16.3). The Lord prayed before He chose the 12 (Lk 6.12), and the apostles prayed before they chose a replacement for Judas (v24). Let us pray, then, before making significant decisions.
The selection was approached scripturally, for Peter realised Psalm 69.25 applied to the situation, which goes beyond its author David, and anticipates the demise of all those who set themselves against the Messiah. He also quoted from Psalm 109.8, which references the swift removal and replacement of Messiah’s treacherous enemy. Peter’s total confidence in the infallibility of the word of God is demonstrated by his statement, ’this scripture must needs have been fulfilled’ (1.16). What scripture says will happen must happen; and the reason is their inspiration: ’the Holy Spirit by the mouth of David spake’ (1.16). God has made Himself known by putting His words in men’s mouths (or pens), under the direction of His Spirit. The Holy Spirit selected the very words, not simply the ideas. Accordingly, Paul established a doctrine on the distinction between a singular and a plural (Gal 3.16), and the Lord stated that the smallest letter of the law, or even part of a letter, would not go unfulfilled (Mt 5.18). Let us have confidence, therefore, in ’every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God’ (Mt 4.4).
Finally, the selection was approached submissively. Joseph and Matthias had been identified as the two most qualified candidates, each having the correct length of acquaintance with Christ, and each having witnessed the resurrection (v21,22, Jn 15.27). When the apostles had no further revelation to inform a decision between the two, they used the method of casting lots to finally select Matthias. This method was undertaken prayerfully, and in consciousness of the sovereignty of God over even the smallest event on earth (Pr 16.33). A guiding principle emerges: proceed as far as possible based on what God has revealed in His word; when we reach a crossroad between equally valid options, make a reverent decision, confident in the Lord’s sovereign overruling.
The descent of the Holy Spirit and the birth of the church (2.1-47)
The descent of the Holy Spirit and the birth of the church (2.1-47)
‘Pentecost’ was one of three annual feasts which Jewish men were commanded to keep at Jerusalem (Ex 23.14-17; Dt 16.16, 17). It occurred seven weeks, or exactly fifty days (from which it derived its name), after Israel waved a sheaf of the first fruits before the Lord (Lev 23.15, 16; Dt 16.9, 16). Also known as ‘the feast of weeks’ or ‘the feast of harvest’, it was a time when Jews formally celebrated God’s goodness to them at harvest-time (Ex 23.16; Lev 3.15-21; Nu 28.26-31; Dt 16.9-12). As with the other feasts of Jehovah, Pentecost anticipated the future. Passover had looked forward to Christ’s death (1 Cor.5.7) and the feast of first fruits to His resurrection (1 Cor 15.20). Pentecost held out the promise of the sending of the Holy Spirit to birth and baptize the Christian church and a yet future outpouring of the Spirit on Israel during Messiah’s glorious rule.
For centuries, Israel had kept the feast of Pentecost without realising its full significance. Finally, ‘when the day of Pentecost was fully come [the calendar day and the event which the Old Testament foresaw], they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them’ (2.1-3). The unity of the 120 disciples pointed to the harmony which should characterise Christ’s church (Jn 17.20, 21; 1 Cor 12.13; Gal 3.28). The suddenness of the Spirit’s arrival showed how, when the time is right, God can speedily accomplish His purposes. Christ portrayed the Spirit as an almighty, unfathomable wind. He told Nicodemus, ‘The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit’ (Jn 3.8). In the upper room, ‘He breathed on [His disciples], and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost’ (Jn 20.22). ‘A sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind’ heralded the Spirit’s coming, unstoppable and divinely sent. The majestic sight of ‘cloven tongues like as of fire … [sitting] upon each of them’ (v3) further emphasised the Spirit’s unquenchable power. Of course, this continued to be demonstrated as the gospel spread swiftly throughout the world.
The Greek word baptizō, which is translated ‘baptize’, means ‘submersion’.[9] John the Baptist had predicted that Christ would baptize Israel ‘with the Holy Ghost, and with fire’ (Mt 3.11). The Saviour Himself had told His disciples, ‘ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence’ (1.5). In fulfilment of these statements, the Spirit ‘filled all the house where they were sitting’. This small nucleus of 120 disciples, who became the first members of the Christian church and representatives of the whole body of Christ, were, at that moment, immersed in the Spirit. The Christian church was born and Christ began to build her ‘upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets’ (Mt 16.18; Eph 2.20). With the exception of two references to the church in Matthew’s Gospel (Mt 16.18; 18.17), this is the first mention of the church in the NT.
Spirit baptism is not a post-conversion occurrence. Nor is it an individual encounter. Rather, every time a sinner believes the gospel he or she enters into what was corporately experienced by those 120 disciples on the Day of Pentecost (1 Cor 12.13). The central place which the Spirit had in baptising and birthing the church at Pentecost was a strong indicator that He would continue to play a vital role throughout her history (Eph 4.12).
As well as being baptised in the Spirit, all the disciples were ‘filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance’ (v4). This was not an angelic language, nonsensical gibberish, nor languages which they had mastered through practice. Supernaturally enabled by the Spirit, they spoke in recognisable human languages ‘the wonderful works of God’ (v11). Because it was Pentecost, ‘there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven’ (Act 2.5). When these men, representing Israel as a whole, heard of the phenomenon, immediately they ‘came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born’ (vv6-8)? Isaiah had warned sinful, drunken Israel (Is 28.1, 3, 7, 8), ‘with stammering lips and another tongue will [Jehovah] speak to this people’ (Is 28.11). Therefore, while this speaking in tongues indicated divine blessing, it also signalled God’s displeasure with recalcitrant Israel (cf. Gen 11.6, 7; 1 Cor 14.20-22). Having been scattered from her beloved homeland, the nation remained under God’s judgment, as seen by the fact these Jews had come ‘out of every nation under heaven’ (v5; Dt 4.27; 28.64; 32.26). The crowd were amazed and ‘were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this? Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine’ (vv12, 13). Peter had recently denied the Lord Jesus before a single maidservant (Mk 14.66-68). Now, empowered by the Spirit (1.8), he stood up with the eleven apostles, ‘lifted up his voice’ and preached courageously – ‘freely speak’ (v24), translates the one Greek word parrhēsia, meaning ‘to speak … without reserve’[10] – to a vast multitude (v14). Quoting David (Ps 16.8-11; 110.1) and Joel (Joel 2.28-32), Peter’s message was biblical. Referring to the Lord’s life (v22), death (v23), resurrection (vv24-32) – of which he and the other apostles were eye-witnesses (v32) – and exaltation (vv345, 35), it was Christ-centered.
While there were Gentile ‘proselytes’ in his audience (v10), Peter addressed Israel nationally: ‘ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem … ye men of Israel … men and brethren … let all the house of Israel know assuredly’ (vv14, 22, 29, 36). Having refuted the allegation that the disciples were drunk (v15), Peter explained that this supernatural occurrence answered Joel’s OT prediction (v16; Joel 2.18-22). In Joel’s day, because of Israel’s disobedience, Jehovah let rip a devastating and unforgettable locust invasion through their land (Joel 1.1-4). This locust invasion foreshadowed three things: first, a more severe locust plague; second, the unleashing of demonic forces on the earth; third, an attack on Israel by a confederacy of northern armies (Joel 2.1-17; 3.9-13; cf. Rev 9.1-11). Against this black backdrop, Joel promised Israel that if they would wholeheartedly repent (Joel 2.12, 13), keep a national fast (Joel 2.15-17) and be genuinely concerned about God’s reputation among the nations (Joel 2.17), ‘Then will the LORD be jealous for his land, and pity his people’ (Joel 2.18). He would send ‘corn, and wine, and oil … remove far off … the northern army … do great things … and ... restore … the years that the locust hath eaten’ (vv19, 20, 21, 25). Israel would eat and be satisfied, be glad and rejoice in Jehovah, praise His name and enjoy His presence in their midst (Joel 2.18-27). It was a detailed promise of the physical blessings associated with Messiah’s kingdom. Joel went on to promise,
‘And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit. And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call’ (Joel 2.28-32; Acts 2.17-21).
At a time of dramatic celestial and terrestrial upheavals and judgments (Joel 3.15; Rev 6.12; 8.12), Joel told Israel, ‘whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call’ (v32). The outpouring of the Spirit upon the 120 disciples at Pentecost and their supernatural utterances will be experienced on a larger scale by the entire repentant nation of Israel during Messiah’s reign. The Lord Jesus taught that if Israel received John the Baptist, the OT prophecies relating to Elijah would be fulfilled in him and the kingdom be established (Mt 11.14). If Israel repented at the preaching of Peter, the glorious millennial kingdom, which these spirit-energized signs were designed to herald, would be ushered in. Peter was not, therefore, stating that Joel’s prophecy had been definitively fulfilled. He was simply explaining that this tongue speaking was completely in line with OT prophecy and of a similar nature to the spirit-empowered phenomenon which Joel said would be seen in the coming kingdom.
Peter fearlessly charged his Jewish audience with deliberately rejecting Jesus of Nazareth, Whom God had approved in their midst (v22). His ‘miracles [dunamis, referring to their power] and wonders [teras, intimating the amazement they generated] and signs [seimon, telling of their spiritual significance]’ were all wrought by God (v22). Even though Jesus was delivered over to death ‘by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God’, Israel took Him and by wicked hands crucified and slew Him (v22). The nation remained culpable, having His blood on their hands (vv23, 36). Peter accused that whole generation of being ‘untoward [skolios, meaning crooked and from which is derived the medical term scoliosis’ (v40). However, even though they crucified Him, God raised Him from the dead, ‘having loosed the pains of death [death itself]: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it’ (v24). Death is the result of sin but since the Lord Jesus was the Holy One of God death could not hold Him.
Peter used two Davidic psalms (16 and 110) to show that Jesus of Nazareth’s resurrection and exaltation was entirely consistent with OT expectations. In Psalm 16, David expressed his complete trust in, devotion to and delight in Jehovah (vv25, 26; cf Ps 16.8, 9). In a bold statement of faith, he confidently asserted that even death could not break his sweet fellowship with the Lord: ‘my flesh shall rest in hope: Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance’ (vv26, 28; cf. Ps 16.9-11). Peter pointed out that ‘the patriarch David [was] … both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ’ (2.29-31; cf. Ps 132.11). About 1,000 years after David’s death, his sepulchre remained identifiable. It is impossible to know exactly how much David appreciated of the messianic import of his words (cf. 1 Pet 1.10-12). What is clear is that under the Spirit’s inspiration, he wrote one of the clearest OT predictions of Christ’s resurrection, even foreseeing that while in the tomb His body would not decay.
God not only has raised Jesus from the dead but declared Him to be ‘both Lord and Christ’ (vv32, 36). In Psalm 110, David saw Christ as a victorious warrior-priest-king, exalted to the right hand of God until He triumphed gloriously over His enemies on earth. Having been lifted up to the highest position in the universe and received from the Father the Holy Spirit, the Lord Jesus sent the Spirit to earth (v33). The Spirit-enabled speaking in tongues by the 120 disciples was proof positive that Jesus of Nazareth now sat the right hand of God’s eternal throne (cf. Jn 7.39). Until Christ comes again, He remains in heaven and the Holy Spirit on earth.
The Lord Jesus had told His disciples that when the Holy Spirit ‘is come, He will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment’ (Jn 16.8). His very presence ‘is an external, objective reproof to the world of its sin of rejecting the Son of God’.[11] He also actively convicts individual sinners of their guilt. Presented with these unassailable facts, the multitude ‘were pricked [katanysso, as ‘the puncture of a spear’[12]] in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation’ (vv37-40). Rather than being a purely Christian baptism, this baptism seemed to be an outward confession of guilt, much like the baptism of John the Baptist. If they did this, their guilt would be forgiven and they would receive the Spirit.
In one day, having gladly received Peter’s word, 3,000 were baptized and added to the church (v41). They then ‘continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship [koinonia], and in breaking of bread, and in prayers’ (v42). This fellowship included a partnership with the apostles in their witness to Christ’s resurrection and a practical sharing with each other (vv44, 45). As the apostles performed mighty miracles of healing, which verified their message and foreshadowed the millennium, ‘fear came upon every soul’ (v43). The early disciples did not immediate dissociate themselves from Judaism but ‘continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved’ (vv46, 47).
While Pentecost was a unique event in church history, the continued gladness of the disciples, their unity and loving generosity, adherence to sound doctrine, prayerfulness, praise and regular breaking of bread to remember the Lord should be continued to this day.
Another offer of the kingdom to Israel, which was again rejected (3.1-4.37)
Another offer of the kingdom to Israel, which was again rejected (3.1-4.37)
Peter and John were lifelong friends. Having grown up near the Sea of Galilee, they fished together (Lk 5.10), followed Christ together and now ‘went up together into the temple at the hour of prayer, being the ninth hour [15:00]’ (3.10). Having traversed the Court of the Gentiles and crossed the balustrade, which barred Gentiles from moving closer to the temple proper, Peter and John approached the Beautiful Gate, through which was the Court of the Women.
Everyone who had made this same journey over the past few years would have seen a man who was now more than forty years of age but ‘lame from his mother's womb’ (3.2; 4.22). Disabled from birth, he may have had a neurological condition, such as Cerebral Palsy or Spina Bifida, or a congenital musculoskeletal defect like talipes (club foot). As well experiencing muscle wasting and contractures, his prolonged immobility would have caused osteoporosis. Utterly dependent on others, he was carried and ‘laid daily at the gate of the temple which is called Beautiful, to ask alms of them that entered into the temple’ (3.2). What irony. A man, who suffered so greatly, begging at a Beautiful Gate.
‘Seeing Peter and John about to go into the temple [he] asked an alms’ (3.3). That was all he expected. When ‘Peter, fastening his eyes upon him with John, said, Look on us … he gave heed unto them, expecting to receive something of them’ (3.4, 5). Peter’s rare intensity did not speak to the man – his words did. Having left his fishing business more than three years earlier to be Christ’s disciple, Peter replied, ‘Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk’ (3.6). Peter and John did not have money, but they had power. With a firm grasp, Peter ‘took him by the right hand, and lifted him up: and immediately his feet and ankle bones received strength’ (3.7). The Greek word which is translated ‘received strength’ is stereo. In the NT it was only used by Luke and ‘in medical language applied to the bones in particular’[13]. Luke used it later to describe the churches being ‘established in the faith’ (16.5).
It was an amazing miracle which needed faith in the all-powerful name of the glorified Jesus (3.16). Instantaneously, any deficient neural functioning was corrected, weak and contracted muscles were fully strengthened and bone mineral density normalised. Feeling a sudden surge of energy course through his body, the man rejoiced in the God of Israel. ‘And he leaping up stood, and walked, and entered with them into the temple, walking, and leaping, and praising God’ (3.8). As well as picturing the wonderful transformation which takes place at Christian conversion, this man’s healing anticipated the healing and praise which will characterise Messiah’s kingdom (Is 12.1-6; 35.6, 10).
The genuineness of the miracle was beyond dispute. Everyone who ‘saw him walking and praising God … knew that it was he which sat for alms at the Beautiful gate of the temple: and they were filled with wonder and amazement at that which had happened unto him’ (3.9, 10). Even the Jewish leadership eventually acknowledged ‘that indeed a notable miracle hath been done by them is manifest to all them that dwell in Jerusalem; and we cannot deny it’ (4.16).
At this hour of prayer, the temple precincts were thronged with people. ‘And as the lame man which was healed held Peter and John, all the people ran together unto them in the porch that is called Solomon's, greatly wondering’ (3.11). Peter seized the opportunity to preach to his nation once more (3.11-26). He addressed the crowd as ‘ye men of Israel … brethren … the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers’ (3.12, 17, 25). He spoke of ‘the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers’ (v13), and repeatedly referenced the OT prophets (3.18, 21, 24, 25).
Why, Peter asked them, ‘marvel ye at this? or why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk?’ (v12). He started to answer those questions by contrasting what Israel had done to Jesus of Nazareth (in a four-fold accusation) with what God had done to Him (vv13-15). The Greek word pais can refer to a ‘child’ (Lk 2.43), a ‘servant’ (Lk 7.7), a ‘maid’ (Lk 8.54), ‘menservants’ (Lk 12.45), and a ‘young man’ (Acts 20.12). While the AV translates it in this section as ‘Son’ (3.13, 26) or ‘child’ (4.27, 30), other Bible versions make it ‘Servant’. Given the various ways it has been used, ‘Young Servant’ – emphasising lowly service and vigour – seems like a reasonable translation. His life and ministry, His suffering and glory were foretold in Isaiah’s four Servant Songs (Is 42.1-9; 49.1-13; 50.1-11; 52.13-53.12). Peter exulted in the fact that ‘the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his [Young Servant] Jesus’ (v13).
So what was Israel guilty of? First, out of envy, they ‘delivered up’ Jesus to Pontius Pilate (v13; Mt 27.8; Mk 15.10). Second, when Jesus was in Pilate’s custody, they ‘denied the Holy One and the Just’ (v14). Demons acknowledged Him as ‘the Holy One of God’ (Mk 1.24). Being ‘holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners’, the Saviour was judicially righteous (Heb 7.26). When Pilate ‘found no fault in Him … he was determined to let Him go’ (Jn 19.4; Act 3.13). Israel resisted. Their third great sin was that ‘they desired a murderer’ (v14). Pilate asked them, ‘Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ?’ (Mt 27.17). Surely, they would not choose the worst criminal, who awaited crucifixion, over this innocent man. But they did. ‘The chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus’ (Mt 27.20). That was their fourth great crime, a sin of monumental proportions. Even though no one could take Christ’s life, nonetheless, Israel was guilty of killing Him. They killed the Prince and the source of all life. Yet God ‘raised him from the dead’ (v15). The resurrection of Christ, of which the apostles were eye-witnesses, was, and still is, the central theme of the gospel.
It was through the all-prevailing name of ‘Jesus’ that this man was strengthened and perfectly healed (v16). No dead person has authority. This miracle proved that Christ was truly alive, and His name had power. The Lord Jesus taught His disciples that ‘whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son’ (Jn 14.13). This was not a carte blanche to demand anything. It was a serious call to believing prayer, in line with Christ’s character and subject to His will. Peter believed in Christ; so did the lame beggar. Their combined faith in Christ’s name led to this man’s healing. Unlike the shady healings of the modern charismatic movement, this miracle was done in a public place, in the middle of a busy temple and before many witnesses.
Even though Israel was thoroughly guilty, Peter threw them a gracious, double concession (vv17, 18). First, when Peter declared that they and their rulers had killed Christ out of ignorance he opened up the possibility of forgiveness (v17; cf. Jn 1.10; Act 13.27). God viewed their great crime – as did the Lord Jesus Christ (Lk 22.34) – as a sin of ignorance, which could be pardoned under Mosaic Law (Lev 5.17-19). Second, their sin had, in effect, accomplished the purpose of God. ‘But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled’ (v18).
Peter called his audience to ‘Repent [metanoeō, an ‘after thought, change of mind’[14]] … and be converted [epistrephō, ‘to turn about’[15]]’ (vv19-24). They had to accept they were wrong about Jesus of Nazareth and wrong in what they had done to Him – and then turn to Him for salvation. If Israel did this as a nation, there would four wonderful results.
First, ‘your sins may be blotted out’ (v19). ‘Blotted out’ translates the Greek word exaleiphō, which referred to ‘the erasure of hand-writing’[16]. The Septuagint version used it in David’s heartfelt prayer for forgiveness: ‘Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions’ (Ps 51.1). The Septuagint included exaleiphō in Jehovah’s grand promise to Israel, ‘I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins’ (Is 43.25). Paul wrote about Christ ‘blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us … nailing it to his cross’ (Col 2.14).
Second, ‘the times of refreshing [anapsuxis, ‘cooling, or reviving with fresh air’[17]] shall come from the presence of the Lord’ (3.19). The Septuagint used anapsuxis of Pharaoh seeing ‘that there was respite’ (Ex 8.15). When Messiah inaugurates His kingdom, ‘He shall come down like rain upon the mown grass: as showers that water the earth’ (Ps 72.6). Israel will be reborn, refreshed and enjoy respite from all her oppressors (cf. Is 66.8). This, of course, is inseparable from the third great blessing. God would ‘send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you’ (v20). It was a remarkable offer! If Israel repented and believed the gospel, Christ would come to the earth to reign. Alas, the nation refused Him. In the future, Israel will finally repent and Christ will return ‘with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him’ (Rev 1.7). Then shall He accomplish the fourth great blessing which was on offer, ‘the times of restitution of all things’ (3.21). The Greek word which is translated ‘restitution’ is apokatastasis. Used only here in the NT, it was ’a technical medical term … [denoting] complete restoration of health’[18]. The healing of the lame man doubled up as a picture of what God will do for Israel, and for the whole universe, at Messiah’s Second Advent. The curse will be lifted, its effects reversed, and the earth will bring forth abundantly. ‘There shall be an handful of corn in the earth upon the top of the mountains; the fruit thereof shall shake like Lebanon: and they of the city shall flourish like grass of the earth … the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose … And the parched ground shall become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water: in the habitation of dragons, where each lay, shall be grass with reeds and rushes’ (Ps 72.16; Is 35.1, 7).
All of these things will fulfil the Scriptures, ‘which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began’ (v21). As well as foreseeing Israel’s acceptance of Messiah (v22), Moses warned that ‘every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people’ (v23). Moses, however, was not alone. ‘Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days’ (v24). Christ’s millennial rule is one of the major themes which runs through OT prophecy.
Peter closed by reminding his hearers of their national privileges (vv25, 26; cf. Rom 3.1, 2; 9.1-5). As well as descending from the prophets, who foretold Christ’s suffering and glory, Israel had Abraham as their founding father, to whom God had covenanted, ‘And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed’ (v25). That seed, of course, is Jesus of Nazareth – through Whom all nations can now be blessed. Having raised up His Young Servant Jesus from the dead, God sent Him, first, to Israel, ‘to bless [them], in turning away every one of [them] from [their] iniquities’ (v26). This sending was accomplished in the apostolic preaching.
Peter’s message received an immediate response. ‘All men glorified God for that which was done’ (4.21), and about five thousand believed (4.4). ‘The priests, and the captain of the temple [who was responsible for its security], and the Sadducees, came upon [Peter and John], Being grieved that they taught the people, and preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead’ (4.1, 2). Peter and John, whose message was particularly offensive to the Sadducees (who denied the possibility of resurrection, 23.8), were apprehended and imprisoned (4.3). The Lord Jesus had pre-warned His disciples, ‘they shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service’ (Jn 16.2). His words were starting to be fulfilled.
The Sanhedrin (Mt 26.3, 57, 59; Mk 14.53; 15.1; Lk 22.66; Acts 4.15; 5.21, 27, 34, 41; 6.12, 15; 22.20; 23.1, 6, 15, 20, 28; 24.25) was the supreme Jewish court of justice. It consisted of ‘priests [mostly Sadducees] … rulers, and elders, and scribes [mostly Pharisees], And Annas the high priest, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and … the kindred of the high priest’ (4.1, 5, 6; 23.7). Even though Caiphas was officially high priest (from 18-36 A.D.), Annas, his father-in-law and previous high priest, still controlled the reigns.[19] As well having judicial authority, the Sanhedrin’s seventy-one members carried significant political clout. These same men had plotted against, tried and wrongfully condemned Christ (Mt 26.3, 66).
The following day, Peter and John, two humble fishermen, stood before them. Having had no formal religious training or recognition, they were deemed ‘unlearned [agrammatos] and ignorant [idiotes, ‘a private person’[20]] men’ (v13). Outgunned and outnumbered by this highly respected group of Jewish scholars, Peter and John remained un-rattled. When the council ‘asked, By what power, or by what name, have ye done this … Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel, If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole; Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole’ (4.7-10).
‘Endued with power from on high’ and buoyed up by a confidence which came from being ‘with Jesus’, Peter answered with a boldness which surprised the Sanhedrin (4.13; cf. Lk 24.49). He made clear that the healing of this lame man was a ‘good deed’, which did not deserve arrest nor punishment (4.9). By broadening out his answer to include every member of the Sanhedrin, and the entire nation, Peter accused every one of them of crucifying ‘Jesus Christ of Nazareth’. Afterwards, however, God raised Him from the dead. It was by the name of Jesus, by His authority and power, that this man had been healed. ‘This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner’ (4.11; cf Ps 118.22; Mt 21.33-46). Israel’s leaders, who were responsible for building up the nation, had rejected Christ as a defective stone. Disagreeing with their verdict, God exalted Him to the highest place in Israel and in the church (Eph 2.20-22). Now in heaven, He is the only Saviour. ‘Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved’ (4.12).
Peter’s boldness stunned the council. ‘And beholding the man which was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it’ (v14). During a brief deliberation, the council confessed, if it had been possible, they would have denied the miracle. But they could not – all Jerusalem knew of it (v16). Instead, they made a feeble attempt at threatening ‘them, that they speak henceforth to no man in this name’ (4.17). But when they ‘commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus … Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard’ (4.18-20). At this time, the Sanhedrin dared not ‘punish them, because of the people: for all men glorified God for that which was done’ (4.21).
As soon as Peter and John were ‘let go, they went to their own company, and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them’ (v23). The church members were not angered at the Sanhedrin’s threats, nor paralysed by fear. Instead, they prayed (vv24-31). Lifting ‘up their voice to God with one accord’, reverently, they acknowledged God as the all-powerful Creator and, with spiritual intelligence, applied Holy Scripture (in this case, the second psalm) to their own situation (vv24-26). They recognised that the malicious machinations of men, which were directed against God’s ‘holy [Young Servant] Jesus … [accomplished] whatsoever [His] hand and [His] counsel determined before to be done’ (vv27, 28). Rather than asking for the destruction of their enemies, or even protection from them, the Christians asked the Lord to ‘behold their threatenings: and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word, By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus’ (vv29, 30). As soon as they finished praying, ‘the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness’ (v31).
This first recorded Christian prayer is worth emulating. We too should pray with other Christians, believing that there ‘is nothing too hard’ for our Creator God (Jer 32.17). If we too apply Scripture to our own circumstances, we will see God’s hand in everything. Rather than being distressed by difficulties, we ought to present them to the Lord, to pray for courage to speak His word for Christ’s glory, and wait expectantly His answer.
This oneness of the believers extended beyond the prayer meeting to a selfless, practical support for each other (4.32-37; cf. Jn 15.12). Barnabas was one of many who, having ‘lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need’ (4.34-37). This same generous spirit should still characterise Christian believers. As Paul wrote the Corinthians, ‘I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want’ (2 Cor 8.13, 14). This harmony lay behind the power of the apostles’ witness to Christ’s resurrection, ‘and great grace was upon them all’ (v33).
The purging of the church and the preservation of the servants (5.1-42)
The purging of the church and the preservation of the servants (5.1-42)
‘Judgment must begin at the house of God’ (1Pe 4.17). When God killed two of His priests (Nadab and Abihu) for offering strange fire, He made it clear, ‘I will be sanctified in them that come nigh me’ (Lev 10.1-3). He confirmed the same principle by judging Achan at Jericho for stealing ‘a goodly Babylonish garment, and two hundred shekels of silver, and a wedge of gold of fifty shekels weight’ (Josh 7.21, 24, 25). Because of their greed and hypocrisy, Ananias and Sapphira felt the same hard edge of God’s righteousness.
The Holy Spirit had compelled many of the new Christians to give selflessly (4.34, 35). ‘But’, Ananias and Sapphira faked it (5.1-11). Prompted by Satan (not the Spirit), they conspired to sell their ‘possession’, keep ‘back part of the price’ and lay ‘a certain part … at the apostles' feet’ (vv1, 2, 4, 9). They wanted to look good. They wanted others to think they had given all, when they had not. That was their sin. Of course, in lying to the apostles, they lied to, and tempted, the Holy Spirit of the Lord, Who indwelt the apostles (vv3, 4, 9; cf. Num 14.22; Ps 51.4).
Divinely enabled, Peter discerned their sin, exposed, and punished it (vv3–5, 8-10). Where they had laid down their gift – ‘at the apostles’ feet’ (v2) – they ‘fell down’ dead, being unceremoniously buried (vv5, 6, 8-10). Unsurprisingly, this caused ‘great fear’ within, and without, the church (vv5, 11).
While Jerusalem became awash with miracles, the new converts still felt attached to their Jewish roots, meeting ‘with one accord in Solomon's porch’ (vv12-16). ‘And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people … Insomuch that they brought forth the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that at the least the shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow some [one] of them. There came also a multitude out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them which were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed every one‘ (v12, 15, 16). People, weakened by illness, were strengthened; others, distressed by demons, were liberated. These mighty miracles, which were a direct answer to the church’s prayer ‘that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus’ (4.30), validated the apostolic message and foreshadowed ‘the powers of the world to come [viz., the millennial kingdom]’ (Heb 2.3, 4; 6.5). They were a tangible bridge between the Lord’s own ministry and that of His apostles, and a fulfilment (in part) of His promise that ‘He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also’ (Jn 14.12). As signs, they were designed to make Jews think (1Cor 1.22); being wonders, they amazed. Seeing God’s power at work, no unbeliever dared ‘join himself to them: but the people magnified them. And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women’ (vv13, 14).
Infuriated and frustrated by this undeniable demonstration of power, the high priest and his co-Sadducees ‘laid their hands on the apostles, and put them in the common prison. But the angel of the Lord by night opened the prison doors, and brought them forth, and said, Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life’ (vv17-20). The angel did what the apostles could not: put prison guards to sleep (cf. 1 Sa 26.12; Acts 12.6) and open locked doors (v19; cf. 1 Cor 16.9; Rev 3.7). The apostles did that which the angel could not: with holy courage, they re-entered ‘the temple early in the morning, and taught’ (v21). Refusing to compromise their message one iota, they preached a living, life-transmitting, life-transforming sermon about the living Christ.
The humour of the situation was not lost on Luke. While the apostles preached in the temple, ‘the high priest came, and they that were with him, and called the council together, and all the senate of the children of Israel, and sent to the prison to have them brought’ (v21). Of course, ‘the officers came, and found them not in the prison’ (vv22, 23). Concerned ‘whereunto this would grow’, as soon as the priests heard that the apostles were ‘standing in the temple, and teaching the people’ they sent ‘the captain with the officers’ to re-apprehend them, ‘without violence: for they feared the people, lest they should have been stoned’ (vv24-26). At that moment, after thousands had believed the message and the gospel gained momentum, the people sided with the apostles (2.21; 4.4).
Incensed because his authority had been flouted, and unwilling to even verbalise the name ‘Jesus’, ‘the high priest asked them, Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us’ (vv27, 28; cf. 4.18). What a testimony to the effectiveness of the apostles’ preaching. They had literally filled Jerusalem with the gospel! The Sanhedrin, before whom they stood, had previously moved the crowds to cry, ‘His blood be on us, and on our children’ (Mt 27.25). While this foolish imprecation has been answered many times throughout history, the immediate concern of the council seems to have been that the apostles’ preaching could whip up a frenzied attack against them.
The apostles’ defence established basic principles for gospel preaching. First, it trumps legislative restrictions. As they said, ‘We ought to obey God rather than men’ (v29). Second, its preachers should connect with their audience (1 Cor 9.19-21). When the apostles referred to ‘the God of our fathers’ (v30), they were identifying themselves with the council. They were all Jews. Third, it foregrounds Jesus, His cross, resurrection, and exaltation (vv30, 31). God forever reversed Israel’s official verdict on Jesus of Nazareth by exalting Him ‘with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour’ (v31). Fourth, it exposes guilt. Quite dramatically, the apostles accused the Sanhedrin of personally slaying Jesus, hanging him on a tree, and exposing Him to the curse of God (v30; Dt 21.22, 23; Gal 3.13). Fifth and sixth, it demands repentance and offers forgiveness (v31). If Israel (who were God’s chosen nation) had to repent and Israel (who were culpable of murdering Messiah) could be forgiven, everyone has to repent and everyone can be forgiven. Seventh, it needs telling. While the apostles were eyewitnesses of Christ’s resurrection (v32; 1.22), every believer is expected to witness for the Son of God (Rom 10.14). Eight, the Holy Spirit energises it (v32; cf. 1 Thess 1.5). Nine, being a heavenly message, it is to be obeyed (v32). The apostles began by saying ‘We ought to obey God rather than men’ (v29); they finished by stating that God gives the Holy Spirit ‘to them that obey him’ (v32). Ten, it incites antagonism. The Sanhedrin ‘were cut to the heart, and took counsel to slay them’ (v33).
Gamaliel was the highly respected teacher of the Torah who instructed Saul of Tarsus (22.3). Unlike the Sadducean high priest, Gamaliel was a Pharisee (v34). As thoughts of murder sizzled through the Sanhedrin ranks, Gamaliel counselled a different approach. ‘Put the apostles forth a little space … Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men’ (vv34, 35). His argument was this. There are two main approaches to any threat. Attack it with vigour, or leave it alone. If the preaching of the apostles was not of God it would fizzle out (v38). Gamaliel gave two recent political examples of this. Theudas had risen up, ‘boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought. After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed’ (vv36, 37). If there was no truth to the apostles’ claims about Jesus of Nazareth, the scattering of His disciples would soon follow His death. On the other hand, Gamaliel concluded, if this new movement was of God ‘ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God’ (v39). They agreed, beat the apostles, and ‘commanded that they should not speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go’ (v40). Remarkably, God had just used Gamaliel’s timely intervention to save the lives of His apostles.
Their beating did not discourage them. Instead, the apostles rejoiced ‘that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name’ (v42; 1 Pet 4.13, 14). Neither did they stop preaching – ‘daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ’ (v42).
Practicalities and priorities in the church (6.1-7)
Practicalities and priorities in the church (6.1-7)
Luke has consistently attributed the increase in number of disciples to the hand of the Lord (2.47, 5.14); this is the implication again as disciples continued to be ‘multiplied’ (v1). God works hand in hand with human agency. This miraculous work of salvation was possible because of the reprieve granted by Gamaliel (5.38) and the apostles’ continued fervour in preaching the gospel (5.42).
Blessing in salvation never comes without opposition. As Paul wrote to the Corinthians, ‘a great door and effectual is opened … and there are many adversaries’ (1Cor 16.9). Satan attempted to corrupt the church from within, by Ananias and Sapphira (Ac 5.3); the religious system (the world) opposed the spread of the gospel (Ac 5.18, 28) and now the flesh nature troubled the Jerusalem assembly. These common enemies are still opposed to the Lord and his people today.
The Problem
Just as the dispensation of Law commenced with murmuring (Ex 16.2) and brought severe judgement upon Israel, ‘murmuring’ (v1) now threatened to derail the dispensation of grace. Sins of the flesh, appear small, but can rapidly grow to become highly destructive; they need to be mortified – ‘little foxes … spoil the vines’ (Son 2.15). ‘A mixed multitude’ had hampered Israel’s wilderness progress (Ex 12.38); the mixture of culture and language between the Grecians (Greek speaking Jews of the diaspora) and the Hebrews (Hebrew speaking Jews and national Israelites), while necessary, had the potential to subvert the advance of the gospel. Even though the Hellenist and Hebrew Jews had been saved and become ‘one new man’ in Christ Jesus (Eph 2.15), there was a discnnect between their position (in Christ) and the practical reality. Lamentably, this same hypocrisy can be true of us. What we are in Christ should be seen in our daily lives. Cultural, ethnic and linguistic differences, which have been abolished by the cross, should not be allowed to cause disharmony between Christians. Christ has once and for all ‘made peace through the blood of his cross’ (Col 1.20). We should make every effort to preserve such a costly unity.
The grumbling arose because the Hellenists perceived that their widows had been neglected (v1). We are not told if this was a deliberate or accidental discrimination. The early disciples had all things common and some had voluntarily sold their possessions for the benefit of others in need (2.44, 4.37). While this was not a form of Christian socialism, but the meeting of a particular need in the unique circumstances of the early church period, we should still do good to the household of faith. The common fund of the early Jerusalem Christians was distributed according to the needs of others, probably including food and other provisions. One group of beneficiaries were widows; here they were overlooked in the daily distribution.
Although Scripture does not demand that we share a common fund with other Christians, we are commanded to care for widows. Paul makes clear to Timothy that this responsibility falls to the nearest family relatives and any failure to do so is tantamount to denying the faith (1Ti 5.8). If there are no relatives available, then care for recognised widows falls to the local assembly (1Ti 5.9). Translating this into 21st century language means that elderly saints, should not be abandoned to care homes. God is ‘a judge of the widows’ (Ps 68.5) and we should emulate his Fatherly care.
The solution
‘The twelve’ moved quickly to solve the problem. As corrosive as grumbling and neglect can be, the enemy who cannot be seen is often a more dangerous foe. The subtle error which raised its head here was the legitimate issue of physical provision taking precedence over spiritual activity. ‘To have allowed social relief to take over to the exclusion of evangelism would have been a criminal dereliction of duty to both God and man …… it can so easily happen that social activities become the cuckoo in the nest and virtually oust the preaching of the word and prayer’.[21] There is ample biblical president for charitable work but to place social enterprise on an equal footing with preaching and prayer is spiritually fatal. The apostle Peter healed many sick (5.15). Dorcas was known for her charity (9.36). When Paul left Jerusalem, he was commanded to ‘remember the poor’ (Gal 2.10). But all of these good works simply supported the advance of the gospel. They did not replace it. Western culture overflows with seemingly legitimate ‘social issues’, but we dare not start down endless rabbit holes that divert our attention away from the great commission. Our mandate is not to make people more affluent on the broad road but to warn them to flee from the wrath to come. The words of the apostles still ring true today – ‘it is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables’ (v2).
The apostles were not passive bystanders but deliberate leaders who ‘called the multitude of the disciples unto them’ and spelled out the problem (v2). They realised that their own energy and time was limited and they had to prioritise their work in the word of God. Moses could not act as sole administrator for the entire congregation of Israel (Ex 18.13) and simultaneously mediate for the people ‘God-ward’ (Ex 18.19). He had to appoint others to address social disputes (Ex 18.22). Similarly, while the apostles engaged in spiritual activity, they appointed others to meet the physical needs of the saints. Each Christian has a unique sphere of service in which they are expected to labour. The Lord Jesus had told Peter to concentrate on his own service, not to mind John’s (Jn 21.22), the same applies for us.
Servants in the assembly should be of exemplary character (1 Tim 3.8-13). The instruction to ‘look … out among you seven men’ (v3) was not an exercise in democracy. The assembly was simply recognising, in unity, spiritual men who could be trusted to steward monetary affairs. In a similar vein, Paul wrote about ‘the brother whose praise is in the gospel throughout all the churches … who was also chosen of the churches to travel with us with this [gift]’ (2 Cor 8.19). It is the work of God to gift individuals and raise up overseers, but an assembly should recognise capable men to administer its own possessions (1 Cor 16.3).
It should be pointed out that they were to be men (aner, a male). Christian women serve God invaluably, but Scripture teaches consistently that in a local church, leadership responsibility lies with the men. This reflects God’s creatorial design. Man was created to lead, bear responsibility and be the head of the woman (1 Cor 11.3).
When God appoints men to serve his people, he is not interested in their academic achievements or managerial credentials. These men had to be ‘accredited’ (v3, Wuest), in the sense of having a proven track-record in faithfulness. The list of qualifications for a servant are outlined in Paul’s letter to Timothy, a servant of the church must be “proved” before he can serve (1 Tim 3.12). They were to be full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom (v3). This is exemplified in Joseph’s life; he was in touch with God, interpreting dreams, but also suggested a practical solution to the imminent seven-year famine (Gen 41). Similarly, these seven men were qualified spiritually and practically. Further, their authoritative position entailed serious responsibility, the two are never divorced.
Having dealt with a carnal problem by spiritual means the apostles now devoted themselves entirely to prayer and the word (v4). They knew that they did not ‘war after the flesh’ (2Cor 10.3). They wrestled ‘against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places’ (Eph 6.12). The gospel would progress as they spent time on their knees. ‘Ministry [diakonia] of the word’ (v4) is the noun for the verbal form of ‘serve [diakoneo] tables’ (v2). Whilst there is a clear emphasis in the passage on spiritual and evangelistic activity taking precedence over charitable works, the ‘sacred/ secular’ divide must not be overly-pressed. All of the Christian life is a spiritual service of sorts, the mundane and the sacred. They are not dichotomous categories in constant competition; both in their proper place work in harmony to please the Lord.
Stephen and Philip stand out amongst the seven (v5). Before they shone in the limelight (Stephen in chapter seven and Philip in chapter eight) they served behind the scenes. This principle of being faithful in little before being entrusted with much is highly pertinent (Lk 16.10-12). The choice of the assembly was ratified by the apostles when ‘they laid their hands on them’ (v6). This simple act showed that the seven had the blessing of the apostles and they unbegrudgingly committed them to this work.
It was then that ‘the word of God kept on increasing and … the disciples … kept on multiplying’ (v7[22]). Luke has repeatedly made this point that God blesses those who are fit for blessing, corporately and individually (2.47, 4.32-35, 5.11-14). It is significant that when the apostles gave themselves to prayer and the word that salvation blessing was seen. The Lord help us to recapture these basic principles and, in the power of the Spirit, to live them out. ‘Obedient to the faith’ (v7) ‘denotes the testimony of the Gospel, which is most worthy of belief … in other passages the expression is used, ‘to obey the Gospel’ (Rom 10.16, 2Thess 1.8), and thence, obedience to the faith (Rom 1.5, Rom 16.26)”[23]. The gospel message is an authoritative, non-negotiable, command from God to obey His word. May we preach it to all and sundry.
Israel’s rejection of christ and murder of Stephen (6.8-7.60)
Israel’s rejection of christ and murder of Stephen (6.8-7.60)
Moses was present at the birth of the nation of Israel. Stephen was the last, for a long time, to offer Israel the messianic kingdom. The nation’s rejection of Stephen marked a monumental shift in the movement of the Acts of the Apostles. Like Moses before him, ‘Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people’ (6.8; cf. Dt 34.11). Just as Korah et al. resisted Moses (Num 16), ‘there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen’ (6.9). But when they could not ’resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake’ (6.10), they falsely accused him of blaspheming Moses and God, the temple and the Law (Acts 6.11, 13). Focusing on externals, the false witness said, ‘we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place [no longer holy place], and … change the customs [rather than the Law]’ (6.14).
Not one of their accusations was true. Having the highest regard for the OT, Stephen would never have blasphemed the law or the temple. However, since Christ has fulfilled the OT, its shadows have been rendered obsolete. ‘The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith’ (Gal 3.24). God was showing the nation that it was time to move on. But, with wilful blindness, Israel would not leave the shadows and endeavoured to silence anyone who pointed out Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfilment of OT expectation.
Hauled before the Sanhedrin, Stephen was asked straight, ‘are these things so’ (7.1)? He boldly refuted the false charges of blasphemy, pointed out that God’s self-disclosure is progressive and He is always faithful to His word. He spoke about the location of God’s presence and charged his nation with refusing to accept God’s appointed deliverer.
Abraham (vv1-8)
Far from blaspheming God, Stephen magnified ‘the God of the glory’ (7.1, YLT). This was the God Who appeared to Abraham in pagan Mesopotamia, long before the nation of Israel even existed (Jos 24.2). Called to leave his family and his home in Ur of the Chaldees, Abram remained in Haran until the death of Terah his father. It was only after Terah’s death that God ‘removed’ Abram into the Promised Land (7.4). With limited revelation, Abraham had believed God and travelled (albeit with a short delay) to Canaan and clung tenaciously to God’s promise when ‘as yet he had no child’ (7.5). Even though these Jews had far greater light, they remained in unbelief, focusing on the external aspects of the law and failing to realise that these pointed to a greater reality.
Stephen stressed that Abraham did not receive one inch of Canaan – the enjoyment of God’s presence is not restricted to the temple. Sadly, these Jews replaced the place with the God of the place. Abraham, the friend of God, was not impoverished one iota because he did not have a temple. God’s promise to Abraham that after four hundred years of slavery in Egypt his seed would ‘come forth and serve me in this place’ (7.6, 7) also showed that at that time the whole nation was without a ‘place’.
Stephen quietly rebuffed the charge levelled against him of blaspheming the law by reminding his audience that Abraham received the sign of circumcision from God before the Law was given. In fulfilment of God’s promise to Abraham, he had descendants, and these descendants were circumcised: ‘so Abraham begat Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat the twelve patriarchs’ (7.8).
Joseph (vv9-16)
Right from its conception, Israel rejected God’s chosen deliverers. The twelve ‘patriarchs, moved with envy, sold Joseph into Egypt: but God was with him’ (7.9). It was only on their ‘second’ visit to Egypt that their eyes were opened and they recognised Joseph (Gen 25). Israel the nation also delivered Christ over to Gentiles because of envy (Mt 27:18). It will only be after ‘the time of Jacob’s trouble’ that Christ will make Himself know ‘the second time’ to His nation that they will finally be converted (Jer 30.7). Joseph himself was buried in Shechem, which in NT times was actually in Samaritan territory (7.16). ‘Stephen reminded the Sanhedrin that their ancestral deliverer Joseph was buried in the land that orthodox Jews despised and avoided. This was yet another instance of helping them understand that they should not think the only place God worked was in the Promised Land’.[24]
Moses (vv17-28)
Stephen sub-divided Moses’ life into three periods of 40-years: Egypt (7.17-28), Midian (7.29-34), and the wilderness (7.35-44). His whole life was lived outside of the Promised Land, the place where the Jews thought God’s presence was bound to.
‘When the time of the promise drew nigh, which God had sworn to Abraham, the people grew and multiplied in Egypt’ (7.17). Having miraculously multiplied seventy souls into a nation of hundreds of thousands, God delivered them from Egyptian bondage. When Pharaoh was murdering Israel’s male babies, Moses was born ‘exceeding fair [‘lit., fair unto God: a Hebrew superlative’[25]]’ (7.20). While his godly mother would have instilled within him the fear and admonition of the Lord (Ex 2.9), Moses was taught ‘all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was mighty in words and in deeds’ (7.22). When fully grown, it came into his heart to visit his brethren (7.23). As the patriarchs betrayed Joseph, Israel rejected Moses, God’s chosen deliverer (7.25, 27). Of course, similarly, they thrust away the Son of God.
The name of Moses’ eldest son was significant (7.29). He called him Gershom, ‘for he said, I have been a stranger in a strange land’ (Ex 2.22). Just as God ‘appeared’ to Abraham, so he ‘appeared’ to Moses (7.30). Moses was not, however, standing in Jerusalem when God appeared to him, but in the Sinai desert. God can meet with his people anywhere. The Jews could cling to the temple with its ostentation and ceremony, but without the presence of God it was utterly empty. And within only a few years it would be raised to the ground.
God sent Moses to Egypt, to a people groaning under slavery, from which he ‘brought them out, after that he had shewed wonders and signs in the land of Egypt, and in the Red sea, and in the wilderness forty years’ (7.35, 36). Stephen stated ‘this is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear’ (7.37). Christ also had come to emancipate Israel, not from Egyptian bondage but from sin. As the father ‘refused’ Moses, so this generation had ‘refused’ Christ, who was also ‘approved of God … by miracles … wonders … and signs’ (2.22). ‘Stephen clearly respected Moses, but he noted that Moses himself had predicted that a Prophet like himself would appear (cf. Acts 3:22). Therefore, the Jews should not have concluded that the Mosaic Law was the end of God's revelation to them’.[26]
Stephen did not just rebut the accusation that he blasphemed the law (6.13-14). He unmasked Israel’s façade of empty externalism and religious ceremony. In speaking of the law as ‘living oracles’ (7.38), Stephen ‘viewed it more in its revelatory than in its regulatory aspect …by insisting on the finality of the Mosaic Law so strongly, as they did, Stephen's hearers were in danger of repudiating what Moses had prophesied about the coming Prophet’.[27]
Stephen reminded them that at the inauguration of the Law the people broke that very Law by asking Aaron to make an idol (7.40, 41). Quoting Amos, he warned them about divine judgment (7.42-43). God had given Israel up to worship the host of heaven in the wilderness and then in the Promised Land (Dt 4.15-19; 2Ki 21.1-5; Jer 19.13). But He punished such idolatry with exile. He would now punish them for their rejection of Christ by carrying far beyond Babylon to every corner of the earth in a world-wide dispersion (7.43).
The holy place (vv44-50)
Stephen now refuted their charge that he sought to destroy the holy place. The tabernacle, the glorious dwelling place of God, was made ‘in the wilderness’ (outside Israel) according to the ‘fashion’ that God had specified (7.44). This tabernacle was brought ‘into the possession of the Gentiles’ (7.45), but not immediately to Jerusalem, the place where the Lord chose to place His name (Dt 12.5). Just as the tabernacle moved from place to place, so God has the right to redirect His people. It was time for the Jews to realise the Messiah had come and He was now building His church. Jerusalem was no longer the place of God’s name. Even though David longed to build God’s house, it was Solomon his son who finally built the temple. Before a single foundation stone was laid god was showing that He is bigger and greater than the temple. He could wait until Solomon’s reign before His glory entered the temple (7.47). Stephen contrasted this temporary, transient building with the eternal transcendent builder of the entire universe (7.48-50).
Conclusion (vv51-53)
Having weaved the tapestry of Israel’s rich history in such a way to vindicate his own position, Stephen condemned the Sanhedrin and the whole nation. He had shown the sins of their forefathers. He now pulled all his points together into one razor sharp conclusion. By shifting from the first-person plural ‘we’, to the second person plural ‘ye’, he laid the blame squarely on the Sanhedrin who represented the nation as a whole.[28] Stiff-necked, like their fathers (Ex 33.3, 5; 34.9), they boasted in circumcision (as a sign of the covenant), as though their natural links to Abraham would save them. Stephen sliced through their self-righteousness. They may be physically circumcised but they remained thoroughly ‘uncircumcised in heart’ (7.51; cf. Dt 10.16). Their fathers resisted God in the wilderness (Num 27.14). They opposed the Son of God, and now the Spirit of God (cf. Neh 9.30; Is 63.10). Their rejection of the triune God was total! Their fathers had ‘persecuted … and … slain [the prophets] which shewed before of the coming of the Just One’ (7.52). They had now betrayed and murdered Him!
They accused Stephen of blaspheming the Law. But they represented the nation which ‘received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it’ (7.53).
The stoning (vv54-60)
The Sanhedrin were ‘cut to the heart’ (v54). But instead of repenting, they ‘gnashed with their teeth’ (v54). This visceral rage was the same which they had unleashed against the Lord (Mk 15.14, Jn 15.18; 19.16). In stark contrast to their blind hatred, Stephen saw things from eternity’s perspective: ‘being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God’ (v55). To Stephen, the glory of God and Jesus were synonymous. His depiction of Him as ‘the Son of Man’ linked to Daniel’s prophecy of One Whose right it is to rule (Dan 7.13-14). Here, in heaven, the Lord Jesus is seen as standing to greet the first Christian martyr.
Understanding fully that Stephen was equating the Son of man with Jesus – in their view the highest form of blasphemy – they pressed their ears closed and violently rushed at Stephen (v57; cf. Lk 8.33). They ‘cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul’ (v58). As the stones rained down on Stephen, ‘he was praying, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit” (v59, DBY). Again, resembling his Lord (Lk 23.46), Stephen committed his life to the One who judges righteously (1 Pet 2.23). Godly Jews only prayed to God. By praying to the Lord Jesus, Stephen, a converted Jew acknowledged His deity. By interceding, ‘Lord, lay not this sin to their charge’ (v60), Stephen was perfectly emulating the Lord Jesus Who prayed, ‘Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do’ (Lk 23.34).
He then fell asleep ‘in Jesus’ (1Th 4.14). He neither feared stoning nor the wrath of man. He embraced death as a gateway to paradise. His spirit would soar into the heavenly temple, and his battered body would await the day when ‘the dead in Christ rise first’, he had finished his course and kept the faith (2Ti 4.7). May we follow his sublime courage and be faithful even unto death (Rev 2.10).
Public preaching at Samaria and Personal evangelism in the desert (8.1-40)
Public preaching at Samaria and Personal evangelism in the desert (8.1-40)
Stephen’s martyrdom triggered mass persecution against the early church in Jerusalem (vv1-4). Chaos descended, few avoiding the havoc wrought by Saul and others. A church that had been richly blessed now experienced severe oppression. Nevertheless, under God’s unassailable sovereignty, ‘they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word’ (v4; cf. 14. 22), each believer ultimately being carefully planted in the place where God wanted them to be. Thus, the Lord used their suffering to further His purpose and to spread His word. Later, after Saul’s salvation, the Lord used conditions of peace to bless His word: ‘then had the churches rest … and … multiplied’ (9.31). If we can hold onto the truth of God’s sovereignty, not only regarding our salvation (cf. 1Pet 1.2), but also our circumstances, we will be motivated to evangelise, like these early saints, regardless of our location and conditions.
The spread of the gospel is often a community effort (v4). Although many of these saints may not have been evangelists per se (Eph 4.11), they fulfilled the great commission (Mt 28.19, 20), ‘announcing the glad tidings [euaggelizō] of the word’ (v4, JND). Philip, who was a gifted evangelist, ‘preached [kēryssō, announced authoritatively] the Christ’ to a whole city of Samaria (v5, JND). He did not rely on social enterprise, worldly innovation, images or even charitable works. But, because ‘faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God’ (Rom 10.17), Philip obeyed Christ’s command, ‘Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel’ (Mk 16.15). The gospel is a message that is meant to be communicated primarily through words. Even though public preaching is currently out of vogue, we must continue to follow the example of these first century Christians and the mandate of Christ Himself.
Even though the Lord Jesus is the Chief Sower, He desires His people to share in the work of sowing and reaping (Jn 4.35-38). He said ‘look on the fields; they are white already to harvest’ (Jn 4.35). Sowing God’s word is a hard and long-term work that requires diligence. But if we never sow, we will never reap. Furthermore, we may sow and others may water, but it is God Who gives the increase (1Cor 3.6). The Samaritan woman had previously ‘left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men, Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ’ (Jn 4.28 29)? Philip was now another link in the chain at Samaria, each individual having their part to play.
The spread of the Gospel inevitably encounters opposition (vv9-13, 18-23), the root cause being Satan himself, the god of this world blinding unbelieving minds (2Cor 4.4). Just as there was demonic activity in Samaria (v7), Christians still ‘wrestle not against flesh and blood … but against spiritual wickedness in high places’ (Eph 6.12; cf. 2Cor 10.3, 4).
When spreading the Gospel, we can encounter people who profess salvation, without being truly saved. Simon the sorcerer was such an individual. Whereas the Samaritans believed in the name of Jesus Christ (v12), Simon was more interested in Philip’s miracles. Kenneth Wuest translates verse 13 as follows: ‘Simon himself also believed and … continuing as an adherent of Philip, viewing with an interested and critical eye … the attesting miracles … which excited wonder as they were being performed, was being rendered beside himself with amazement.’[29] Sadly, as with so many, Simon’s profession of faith was merely based on externals. He was not truly resting on Christ (cf. Jn 2.23-25; 4.45).
The fact that Simon never received the Holy Spirit and was strongly rebuked by Peter (vv18-23), shows that he never had saving faith. If there is no fruit of the Spirit, there was never new birth by the Spirit. If there is no change in the life, there was no salvation. ‘Faith without works is dead’ (Jas 2.20, 26). Unless a person continues to make their ‘calling and election sure’ (2Pet 1.10), the likelihood is they were never saved.
Since this was a new work at the dawn of a new dispensation it was important for it to have apostolic confirmation (vv14-17). Philip humbly accepted Peter and John as they joined, and endorsed, his labours. Because jealousy spoils God’s work, we must constantly remember we are only slaves in the Master’ service – there is no room for self.
The visible manifestation of the Samaritans receiving the Holy Spirit proved that they were now part of the church, ‘where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision … but Christ is all, and in all’ (Col 3.11). They were not inferior to their Jewish brethren. This is the ultimate goal in all our evangelism: Christ glorified and pre-eminent.
DL Moody once said to a critic ‘frankly, I sometimes do not like my way of doing evangelism. But I like my way of doing it better than your way of not doing it.’ The lesson is simple – go out and preach the word (v25).
Personal evangelism is an important, though often neglected, aspect of Gospel outreach. This brief account of Philip’s rendezvous with an Ethiopian eunuch models how it should work, God’s sovereignty acting in perfect harmony with our efforts to bring sinners to Christ.
During a fruitful Gospel campaign in the city of Samaria ‘the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert’ (vv5, 6, 26). Having been ‘destroyed by Alexander the Great in the fourth century … [and then] … in … 96 BC completely overthrown by the Maccabaen prince Alexander … [Gaza] was literally desert.’[30] It made no sense. Why would an evangelist move from a city, with many people, to a desert, with none? Nevertheless, Philip ‘arose and went’ (v27).
It is only after he recorded Philip’s obedience that Luke pointed out, ‘behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come [more than 200 miles] to Jerusalem for to worship, was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet’ (vv27, 28). This man was spiritually disadvantaged in at least three ways. First, as a Gentile, he was alien ‘from the commonwealth of Israel, and [a stranger] from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world’ (Eph 2.12). Second, being a eunuch, he was barred from entering the congregation of Israel (Dt 23.1). Third, his high ranking office in the Ethiopian court, and probable great personal wealth, made it harder for him to receive Christ. ‘For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God’ (Lk 18.25).
But God had awakened in this Ethiopian eunuch a true desire for Himself (cf. Rom 3.11). In Isaiah’s prophecy, Jehovah promised godly gentiles, ‘Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people’ (Is 56.7). He assured faithful eunuchs, ‘Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters’ (Is 56.5). In relation to how difficult it is for rich men to enter the kingdom, Christ explained, ‘The things which are impossible with men are possible with God’ (Lk 18.27). In the Sermon on the Mount, He taught, ‘seek, and ye shall find’ (Mt 7.7). This eunuch sought God. He did not find the solution to his quest at Jerusalem. But God answered his seeking by giving him Isaiah’s prophecy (which speaks about Christ) and Philip the evangelist (who knew Christ).
Of course, God’s timing was perfect. ‘Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot’ (v29). Still obedient and not wishing to miss any opportunity to evangelise, ‘Philip ran thither to him’ (v30). Far from being forceful, he courteously ‘heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest’ (v30)? The eunuch, who was humbly searching for the truth, replied, ‘How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him’ (v31). He had been reading Isaiah chapter 53, which so graphically foresaw Christ’s submissive suffering. The Septuagint’s reversal of the phrases ‘led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth’ (v32), emphasised the barbaric character of the cross as well as the Saviour’s perfect self-control. ‘When he was reviled, [He] reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not’ (1Pet 2.23; cf. Pr 19.11). With an excellent knowledge of the Bible, ‘Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus’ (v35).
When the eunuch believed with all his heart ‘that Jesus Christ is the Son of God’ Philip baptised him (vv36-38). ‘And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more’ (v39). Rather than a supernatural zapping, the Spirit likely compelled Philip to move on. The evangelist had gone, but the eunuch had Christ and ‘went on his way rejoicing’ (v39).
In our personal evangelism, we too must be led by the Holy Spirit, being sensitive and obedient to God’s guidance (Rom 8.14). ‘A man's heart deviseth his way: but the LORD directeth his steps’ (Pr 16.9). We should ask the Lord to bring us into contact with people who are genuinely seeking Him. We ought to grasp every opportunity to tell others about the Saviour, always being tactful and courteous, and basing our discussions on the Scriptures. If individuals profess faith in Christ, encourage them to be baptised. And remember, we are meant to disappear from view. Any one we speak to should be impressed with Christ, not us (cf. Haggai 1.13).
Part 2. Unto the uttermost part of the earth (9.1-21.17)
Part 2. Unto the uttermost part of the earth (9.1-21.17)
Just before His ascension, the Saviour promised his disciples ‘ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth’ (1.8). The Acts of the Apostles records this outward dissemination of the Gospel. Even though ‘we never read of the church at Jerusalem … deliberately initiating any mission to the Gentiles’[31], as Samaria, and then the Gentile regions beyond, received the word of God, Jerusalem remained a firm feature in the narrative. For example, ‘when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John … [who] when they had testified and preached the word of the Lord, returned to Jerusalem, and preached the gospel in many villages of the Samaritans’ (8.14, 25). The converted Ethiopian eunuch ‘had come to Jerusalem for to worship’ (8.27). Determined to prevent further spread of the Christian message, Saul of Tarsus obtained authority from the high priest to travel 300km north east to the ancient Syrian city of Damascus to bind, and bring to Jerusalem any believers he found in its synagogues (9.1, 2).
But there was a seemingly insurmountable barrier to overcome. In the OT Jehovah graciously chose Israel to be His highly prized, “special people”, set apart from the surrounding nations and devoted entirely to Himself (Ex 19.5; Dt 7.6, 7; 14.2; 26.18, 19). The Law, which He gave Israel, was designed to separate her from the idolatrous practices of her Gentile neighbours. The dietary prohibitions alone prevented Jews from eating with Gentiles (Lev 11). Devout Jews took this one stage further, refusing to even enter a Gentile house (10.28; 11.3).
When Christ died on the cross, He broke ‘down the middle wall of partition between [Jew and Gentile]; having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace’ (Eph 2.14, 15). Jews, who under Law, had been treated like children (Gal 4.1-3), were ‘now to leave their childhood and learn to live and be trusted as grown-up sons. One of the first things to go was the food laws’[32]. God, Who instituted them, now annulled them (10.15; 11.9). All could now be eaten (cf. 1Tim 4.3-5). Of course, the Lord Jesus had already ‘declared all foods clean’ (Mk 7.19, NASB).
But how could the longstanding division between Jews and Gentiles, so clearly laid out in Mosaic Law and firmly embedded in the Jewish conscience, be abolished functionally in the church? The story of Cornelius answers this key question (10.1-11.18). It shows how the doctrinal reality ‘that the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel’ (Eph 3.6), was realised practically. Of course, Luke, being a converted Gentile physician, had great personal interest in this vital issue.
Meanwhile, about the time of Stephen’s stoning (which Saul had fully endorsed), severe persecution in Jerusalem led to many believers being ‘scattered abroad [diaspeirō, to sow throughout] throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria’, some travelling ‘as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch’ (8.1; 11.19). ‘Phenice’ (11.19; 15.3), also known as ‘Phenicia’ (21.2), or Phoenicia, was the narrow coastal strip between the Mediterranean and the Lebanon mountain range, now called Lebanon. Christ’s own ministry extended into this region (Mt 15.21); later in Acts we read of at least three churches in this area: at Tyre (21.3, 4), Ptolemais (21.7), and Sidon (27.3). During their first missionary journey, Barnabas and Saul preached on the island of Cyprus (13.4-13). Antioch, the capital city of the Roman province of Syria, was the third largest city in the Empire (after Rome and Alexandria), with an estimated population of 500,000.[33] At first, the scattered disciples preached ‘the word to none but unto the Jews only’ (11.19). But things changed. When several from Cyprus and Cyrene (‘a Greek colonial city in North Africa’[34], cf. Mt 27.32), arrived in Antioch, they ‘spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus. And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord” 11.20, 21. As far as the Acts record is concerned, this was “the first church to be planted outside of Jerusalem and Judaea’[35].
When ‘tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem … they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch’ (11.22). Their delegate choice proved crucial to the work of God. Although Barnabas, being a Cypriot Levite (4.36), came from a Dispersion family, he ‘was regarded with complete confidence in Jerusalem and acted as a pivot or link between the Hebrew and Hellenistic elements in the church’[36]. Being ‘full of the Holy Ghost and of faith’, and the only man in Acts to be called ‘good’, Barnabas was exceptionally godly (11.24). As a natural encourager (4.36; cf. 9.27), sensitive and discerning, ‘when he came, and had seen the grace of God, [he] was glad’ (v23). Avoiding any attempt to enforce these newly converted Gentiles to observe Mosaic Law, he ‘exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord’ (11.23).
Appreciating his own limitations and understanding the enormity of the task in hand, Barnabas departed ‘to Tarsus for, to seek Saul’ (11.25). Tarsus, which was a university city in the imperial province of Cilicia, was ‘ranked as a free city under the Romans from 64 BC’[37]. Three years post-conversion, after a brief visit to Jerusalem, Saul had returned to Tarsus, his home city (9.28-30; Gal 1.18, 21). When Barnabas found him, he was likely obeying his divine call and evangelising the Gentile ‘regions of Syria and Cilicia’ (9.15; Gal 2.2). The churches of ‘Syria and Cilicia’ which he confirmed at the beginning of his second missionary journey had probably been founded during this initial preaching period (15.41).
Saul responded positively to Barnabas’ request. ‘And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch’ (11.26). Their one year of teaching together shows the priority local churches should give to Christ-exalting Bible exposition, the need for new believers to be established in the faith and the benefit of sitting under the varied ministry of more than one teacher.
When the Jerusalem-based prophet Agabus came to Antioch, he ‘signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar’ (v28). Moved with pity towards their Jewish brethren, these Gentile Christians, ‘every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judaea: which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul’ (vv29, 30). This generosity must have contributed to the practical fusion of Christian Jews and Gentiles. After delivering the gift, Paul and Barnabas returned from Jerusalem to Antioch, accompanied by John Mark (12.25).
During the first missionary journey, after leaving Cyprus, John Mark ‘returned to Jerusalem’ (13.13). Sadly, the link between Jerusalem and Antioch temporarily soured when men from Judaea told the Antioch Christians they had to be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses (15.1). This prompted the Jerusalem council, which further addressed the issue of Gentile Christians being accepted by their Jewish brothers (15.2-31).
Saul’s conversion and Peter’s ministry (9.1-43)
Saul’s conversion and Peter’s ministry (9.1-43)
In chapters 1 – 7, God had reached out time and again to Israel (the sons of Shem). Sadly, Jewish history repeated itself. Just as their fathers resisted God in the wilderness, this current generation had hardened their heart against the Son of God in the Gospels, and now steadfastly resisted the Holy Spirit post-Pentecost (7.51). Having utterly rejected the Triune God, ‘blindness in part … happened to Israel’ (Rom 11.25). The stoning of Stephen signalled a change in His dealings with the Semitic race. The salvation of the Ethiopian eunuch (a son of Ham, chapter eight) showed that the gospel was going global.
When the Lord Jesus personally commissioned Saul of Tarsus on the Damascus road to preach to the Gentiles, He indicated that the sons of Japheth were also to be reached (26.17). This ‘Hebrew of the Hebrews’ (Phil 3.5), this Pharisee, with outstanding Jewish credentials, would serve among ‘Gentile dogs’. God’s ways are infinitely higher than ours. He uses whom he chooses. As sovereign Lord, He changed this persecutor into a mighty preacher of the gospel. Having been chosen in eternity in Christ (Eph 1.4), to salvation (2Thess 2.13), and to testify of God’s saving grace, Saul was an elect vessel (9.15), and separated from his mother’s womb for the purpose of God (Gal.1.15). Our experience is the same: elect, saved and serving. Praise his name. The Shem, Ham and Japheth structure of Acts proves God ‘will have all men to be saved’ (1Tim 2.4).
A pattern
Just as the God of glory (7.2) appeared to Abraham in the midst of heathen darkness, ‘the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ’ (2Cor 4.6) burst upon the horizon of Saul’s religious darkness. Although his conversion only occupies a few verses in chapter nine, he recounted it with increasing intensity and adoration. We first read that ‘there shined around about him a light from heaven’ (9.3). Saul later described it as ‘a great light’ (22.6), and, finally, as ‘a light … above the brightness of the sun’ (26.13). This chief of sinners never forgot the sublime joy of being saved. Neither should we. As with Saul, we should constantly wonder at and be thankful for our own salvation.
Saul left Jerusalem with the intention of bringing back Christians as captives; instead, after the Lord appeared to him, he was led by the hand as Christ’s captive. On the Damascus road, Saul learnt the revolutionary idea that Jesus Christ is Lord. He immediately understood that the voice and glory from heaven was God’s: ‘who art thou, Lord’ (9.5)? It was earthshattering to hear God say ‘I am Jesus’ (9.5). Jesus of Nazareth was not the pseudo-Messiah, self-styled redeemer, that Saul had thought, but the divine Lord. Heretofore, Saul had in ignorance and unbelief, persecuted the name of Jesus, convinced that his followers were idolatrous, heretical apostates. He now learnt what every new convert understands on salvation’s day: Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
The Lord’s response to the apostle, ‘I am Jesus whom thou persecutest’ (9.5), teaches vital doctrines. Persecuting the church in ignorance and unbelief (1Tim 1.13), he likely swallowed the conspiracy theory that the disciples had stolen the body (Mt 28.15). For the first time he understood the indisputable fact of the bodily resurrection of Christ, and his subsequent ascension. By revelation, here in embryonic form, he began to appreciate the mystery of the church being the body of Christ (Eph 1.22-23; 3.3, 6). It was fitting, at the outset of a new dispensation, that the mysteries of God, hidden for so long, were revealed to the apostle of the Gentiles. He had ignorantly persecuted the body that was in vital and living union with the risen Christ; with the same zeal, now redirected, he would tirelessly make known the wonder of the church being the body and the bride of Christ. May we never cease to worship at the truth; ‘in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off and made nigh by the blood of Christ’ (Eph 2.13).
The words ‘it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks’ (9.5), emphasise the truth that God is longsuffering and not willing that any should perish. Saul became a textbook convert; a prototype of sorts (1Tim 1.16). Every subsequent conversion would follow a similar pattern: the conviction of sin, the goading of the conscience, the recognition of guilt, and the sinner finally casting their all on Christ’s mercy. To varying degrees every conversion has followed this Pauline mould. In a day and age where Satan makes false professors and sows counterfeit Christians, we must remember what happened to Saul of Tarsus – the pattern convert. Easy believeism and an absence of fruit after profession, is a violation of Saul’s conversion pattern. James is very forthright saying, ‘faith without works is dead’ (Jas 2.20).
Having seen the risen Lord, Saul fell to the earth, completely humbled; and for three days and three nights did not eat nor drink. The fear, the awe and the wonder of beholding the Lord’s glory stripped him of every worldly and material desire. May we also be blind to what is temporal and fleeting, fixing our eyes upon the risen Man in glory.
A pattern for living
Paul was also a pattern for Christian living (1Cor 11.1). While he experienced some extraordinary and supernatural events which Christians today will never experience, much of Paul’s life was marked by the ordinary, routinely beautiful disciplines of the Christian life. After conversion, he relied on revelation from God for direction. In this instance, Saul received an open vision; his later life was marked by reading the word of God on ink and parchment. We are equally reliant on revelation from heaven, not through visions, but via the closed canon of Scripture. Saul also prayed, a discipline which no Christian outgrows. As soon as he was able, Saul was baptised, as should every Christian. We will never reach the stage where we are too spiritual to read God’s word, to pray and to live in the good of our baptism – dying to self and sin. Let us seek to follow Paul as he followed Christ.
Although Saul’s conversion ranks among the most important events in church history, we subsequently learn that even this great man needed other Christians as he brought the gospel to the Gentiles. The remainder of the chapter shows him dependent on Ananias, the disciples at Damascus, Barnabas, the assembly at Jerusalem and Peter to fulfil his commission. If he had not worked in harmony and unity with them, he would not have been able to function. Neither can we achieve much without the help of others. Ananias was the first to embrace Saul as a brother and encourage him in the faith. Babes in Christ can be stumbled and stifled without due care, but under the wise tutelage of a mature saint (no matter how brief) they can flourish.
Saul associated himself with people of like mind, for example, he was ‘with the disciples … at Damascus’ (9.19). Growing in grace, he loved to preach Christ and exercise the spiritual gifts given to him. The period described as ‘many days’ (9.23), was probably when he was in Arabia (Gal 1.17). Rather than being a monastic time, he most likely spent it advancing the gospel. His burning desire to make Christ known should rebuke our apathy and indifference. The Damascus disciples, who were with him in the good times, helped him through the difficult days of persecution, enabling him to escape in a basket. In this way, through thick and thin, they exemplified Christian unity.
Everywhere Saul went ‘he assayed to join himself’ to the Lord’s people (9.26). The caution exercised by the believers at Jerusalem on the issue of reception is highly commendable. Ultimately, however, they received him on the commendation of Barnabas, who knew his manner of life. Whilst caution needs to be exercised in the matter of assembly reception, we must avoid adding extra-biblical requirements which simply reflect our own biases.
Saul made the assembly the centre of all he did. ‘Coming in and going out’ (9.28) with a local company of believers, he was in fellowship with them in the full sense of the word, exercising the gifts given to him by the Triune God. May we throw our all into the house of God, because what we build into it will show for all eternity (1Cor 3). Jerusalem was not, however, to be Saul’s base of operations. Through the believers, the Lord sent him to Troas. May the Lord help us to labour in the locality where he has placed us, knowing we are there according to His sovereign prerogative.
Peter
Saul did not have a monopoly on gospel preaching. Having not read much about Peter since chapter six, we now see this mighty apostle emulating Christ’s miracles, with many on the west coast of Israel turning to the Lord (9.35, 42).
Dorcas had laid some of the groundwork in Joppa for gospel testimony. While she was not a public preacher, her loving labours and good works helped the local people to see Christ in her. Although a social gospel has no place in Holy writ, believers should endeavour to get to know people in their locality and to have a good testimony before them. The gospel is a verbal message, but it is supported by the witness of godly lives. This is what we see in Dorcas.
Peter stayed in Joppa for a significant period of time. We do not read of Saul in earnest until chapter 13. Again, we learn that gospel work involves many inter-connected Christians labouring together. Although Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, the Lord was going to first use Peter in Joppa to open the door of faith to the Gentiles through Cornelius. Paul would then use this foundation to preach to Japheth’s other sons in Europe. God was sovereignly working out his gospel plan in a way that involved the unity and harmony of every believer. They were of one spirit and one mind ‘striving together for the faith of gospel’ (Phil 1.27). May we follow their example for the glory of the Lord.
Cornelius (10.1-11.18)
Cornelius (10.1-11.18)
The story of Cornelius answers two critical questions. First, how did God practically dissolve the divide between Jewish and Gentile believers? Second, how did He respond to a genuinely seeking Gentile sinner?
Cornelius’ angelic visitation (10.1-8, 22, 30-33; 11.13, 14)
Despite being a professional soldier, Cornelius was ‘a devout man’, God-fearing and ‘just’ (10.1, 2, 22). Giving ‘much alms to the people’ and praying ‘to God always’, he was highly respected by local Jews (10.2, 22) and noticed by God. Like OT ascending offerings (Lev 1.3), or grain offerings (of which a ‘memorial’ was burnt on the altar, Lev 2.2), Cornelius’ prayers and alms came ‘up for a memorial before God’ (10.4). But those OT sacrifices could never save; neither could Cornelius’ devotions. Probably sensing this, he seems to have prayed for more light. And God answered him in the same way He answered Daniel’s prayers: with an angelic visitation (10.31; cf. Dan 8.15; 9.3, 20-22).
At the ninth hour (15:00), while Cornelius fasted and prayed, a holy angel, in the form of a man dressed ‘in bright clothing’, entered his house, stood before him and addressed him by name (10.3, 22, 30; 11.13). The vision was clear (‘evidently’ translates phonerōs, meaning plainly), gripping (‘looked’ translates atenizō, to gaze intently), and terrifying: ‘he was afraid’ (10.3, 4). When Cornelius asked, ‘What is it Lord’ (10.4), the angel warned him, ‘Send therefore to Joppa, and call hither Simon, whose surname is Peter; he is lodged in the house of one Simon a tanner by the sea side … who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved’ (10.5, 6, 22, 32; 11.13, 14). Peter’s staying with a tanner may indicate ‘that the strictness of the Jewish law was losing its hold on Peter; since the tanner’s occupation was regarded as unclean by strict Jews, and the tanners were commanded to dwell alone’[38]. As soon as the angel departed, Cornelius ‘called two of his household servants, and a devout soldier of them that waited on him continually; and when he had declared all these things unto them, he sent them to Joppa’ (vv7, 8).
Peter’s heavenly vision (10.7-23, 28; 11.4-12)
God works in harmony with our prayers. When Cornelius’ messengers ‘drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour [12:00]’ (10.9; cf. Ps 55.17; Dan 6.10). Weakened with hunger, undistracted by others, and falling ‘into a trance’, Peter saw a ‘vision’ of ‘heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners … wherein were all manner of four footed beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things [herpeton, reptiles], and fowls of the air’ (10.10-12, 17, 19; 11.5, 6; cf. Gen 1.25; 6.20; Rom 1.23). The Greek word translated ‘corners’ ‘was a technical expression … for the ends of a bandage’[39]. This wide range of creatures represented every major group of land-based animals and birds. They were probably a mixture of ceremonially clean and unclean animals (Lev 11). Having been ‘let down from heaven’, this great sheet was then ‘received up again … drawn up again into heaven’ (10.16; 11.5, 10).
A voice from heaven commanded Peter to ‘kill, and eat’ (10.13; 11.7). Despite his hunger (which heightened the effectiveness of the vision), Peter refused, saying, ‘Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean’ (10.14; 11.8). It was a similar reaction to Ezekiel’s when God told him to eat cakes baked with human excrement (Eze 4.9-14). Having observed Jewish dietary restrictions from birth, the thought of eating ceremonially unclean flesh horrified Peter. While God permitted Ezekiel to replace human faeces with ‘cow’s dung’ (Eze 4.15), Peter was given no such concession. A greater issue was at stake – church unity. God, Who made every creature (Gen 1.24), gave every creature to Noah for food (Gen 9.3). Although He temporarily limited which animals Israel could eat, He now removed such dietary restrictions. ‘What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common’ (10.15). The message was so important, Peter was given the vision three times (10.16; 11.10).
Having “fastened [his] eyes [atenizō, to gaze intently]” upon and “considered” what he saw, 11.6, Peter remained ‘greatly perplexed’ (10.17, NASB). ‘And while Peter was reflecting on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men are looking for you. But arise, go downstairs, and accompany them without misgivings; for I have sent them Myself’ (vv19, 20; 11.11, 12, NASB). Their perfectly timed arrival (and their message), the vision, the heavenly voice and the Spirit’s prompting, all clinched the lesson in Peter’s mind. If he should no longer deem any animal common or unclean, how could he view Gentiles, who ate these animals, as common or unclean? That night Peter lodged the three Gentile messengers; the next day, ‘without raising any objection’, he travelled with them from Joppa to Caesarea, accompanied by six Jewish brethren (10.23, 29; 11.12, NASB). Ironically, it was to Joppa that Jonah fled to avoid preaching to Gentile Nineveh (Jonah 1.3).
Peter’s gospel message (10.24-48; 11.12-17; 15.17-9)
Arriving at Caesarea, Peter did something which, as an orthodox Jew, he would never have done before. He entered a Gentile house (10.24, 28; 11.12). There he found Cornelius, his kinsmen and near friends eagerly waiting (10.24, 27). In his enthusiasm Cornelius ‘fell down at [Peter’s] feet, and worshipped him’ (10.25). Of course, Peter immediately corrected this misplaced veneration, taking ‘him up, [and] saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man’ (10.26; cf. 14.11-18; Rev 19.10; 22.8, 9). With candour, Peter explained that although it was ‘an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation … God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean … I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me’ (10.28, 29). Cornelius, in turn, recounted his own angelic visitation three days previously and clarified that everyone was ‘present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God’ (10.30-33; 11.13, 14).
Having established, as far as salvation is concerned, Jews and Gentiles are on a level playing field (10.34, 35), Peter preached a four-phased, God-centric and Christ exalting message (10.36-43). Phase 1: the OT anticipated Christ, bearing ‘witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins’ (10.43). Phase 2: John the Baptist announced Christ (10.37). Phase 3: fulfilling prophecy, ‘God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power’ (10.38; cf. Is 61.1; Lk 4.18). This anointing, which took place at His baptism, began a public ministry (witnessed by the apostles) of ‘preaching peace … doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him’ (10.36, 38, 39). In contrast to secular rulers, who described themselves as ‘benefactors’ (Lk 22.25), or even Cornelius, who did many good works, Peter presented for ‘admiration and faith the supreme doer of good’[40]. Focusing mostly in Galilee, the Lord’s ministry had a generally southward direction of travel, ending in Jerusalem. It was here the Jews crucified Him, so completing His public service (10.39; cf. 1.21, 22). Even though Christ preached primarily ‘unto the children of Israel’ His fame had spread widely, 10.36,37. Phase 4: God appointed Jesus of Nazareth to be the ‘Judge of the living and the dead’ (10.42, NASB). He confirmed this appointment by raising Him from the dead and showing Him openly to preselected witnesses, who ate and drank with Him (10.40, 41; 17.31). The Lord then commanded His disciples ‘to preach unto the people’ (10.42). This final phase was mostly northward, leaving Jerusalem (1.8).
As soon as Cornelius and his friends heard the Gospel, they believed it, God ‘purifying their hearts by faith’ and the Holy Spirit falling on them, being poured out upon them, and being received by them (10.44-47; 11.15, 17; 15.7-9). When they spoke (supernaturally) in foreign languages and magnified God, Peter and the six Jewish Christians who accompanied him were ‘astonished’. God had given to these Gentiles the same ‘gift of the Holy Ghost’ (10.45) as He had to Jewish disciples on the Day of Pentecost (‘at the beginning’, 11.15). Remembering the Saviour’s pre-ascension prediction of Spirit baptism and feeling unable to ‘withstand God’, Peter ‘commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days’ (1.5; 10.48; 11.16, 17).
Peter’s successful defence (11.1-18)
This section is bookended by what the Jerusalem-based apostles and brethren heard. First, they ‘heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God’ (v1). When Peter came to Jerusalem they challenged him, ‘saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them’ (vv2, 3). But having ‘heard’ his compelling, comprehensive and orderly exposition of the entire series of events, ‘they held their peace, and glorified God’ (v18).
Peter’s deliverance and Herod’s death (12.1-25)
Peter’s deliverance and Herod’s death (12.1-25)
This chapter vividly illustrates that God may bring His people through wave after wave of trouble, even though He has the power to stop it. The Judean believers were undergoing famine (11.27-30), and yet ‘at that time’ Herod began his malicious persecution resulting in James’ execution, and if God hadn’t intervened Peter would have died too. Their contrasting fates show that God could have saved James if He purposed to. But He didn’t, so He must have had a purpose in James’ death. By the same token, He must have had a purpose in the famine (Paul saw one, Rom 15.25-27). As such, even though we may not perceive it, we can be sure God has a purpose in His people’s sufferings today (Rom 8.28).
Herod’s display of power (vv1-3)
Herod’s actions reveal someone in love with power. When he ‘stretched forth his hands’ (v1), things happened. James could not escape him (v2) – so much for the Christian’s God! The Jews liked the spectacle of violence against Christians, so Herod intended to further indulge them (v3). Using the military power at his disposal he had Peter ‘apprehended’ and heavily guarded – all with a view to providing a Passover time spectacle for the Jews (v4). The timing is reminiscent of the Lord’s treatment at the hands of wicked men.
Deliberately set against this impressive demonstration of power, is the picture of apparent weakness: a church that can do nothing but pray (v5). And how they prayed! The whole story pivots on this point. Herod had planned things to maximise his popularity with the Jews, but God would turn the tables into a humiliation of greater measure. Herod created ‘the expectation of all the people of the Jews’ (v11) "but" (v5), he was about to learn what the Lord told Pilate: ‘thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above’ (Jn 19.11). God allows proud man to go so far, but like the sea waves, there is a point as which He says, ‘thus far and no further’ (Job 38.8-11).
Peter’s miraculous escape (vv4-11)
The divine intervention resulting in Peter’s jailbreak underlines important principles about biblical miracles. Firstly, miracles are not naturally explicable. They involve the temporary alteration of the rules by which God normally governs the universe. In this instance Peter's two chains falling from his hands defies the expected behaviour of metallic materials. In addition, Peter’s walk, undetected, past a high security guard defies the normal psychological behaviour of guards – bear in mind Roman solders risked fustuarium (being beaten to death) if they slept while on duty. The fact that the escape remained undetected till morning suggests a trance or sleep came upon them. And then there is the iron gate automatically swinging open (v10). This defies normal laws of motion – no visible force was exerted on it, yet it opened. Put these elements together and we are left with a choice: the story is fabricated, or it is miraculous. We come to the same point as we read the word of God, and indeed, as we investigate the person of Christ (Jn 20.30-31). We can’t accept the Bible as God's word and strip it of the supernatural. And we don't need to; after all, what is incredible about the Creator occasionally intervening in His world?
Secondly, miracles are not normally expected. In Acts 12 we are in the period and with the people through whom God was performing miracles, designed to validate the preaching of the gospel (Heb 2.3-4). Yet when Peter was released the saints were ‘astonished’ (v16). This is no criticism, after all James had just been executed. Miraculous intervention then, is always God's prerogative, and He is under no obligation to do so to satisfy the whim of man (Mt 27.40; Lk 16.31).
Thirdly, miracles are not needlessly employed. Just look at what Peter had to do for himself! He had to get up, dress, put on his sandals, follow the angel on foot, and then when the angel left him one street away from the prison, use his initiative – he was on his own! Angels serve ‘them who shall be heirs of salvation’ (Heb 1.14), but clearly they don’t do for saints what saints can do for themselves – a useful principle to bear in mind when seeking to help saints in need.
The engine room of the church (vv12-17)
A positive effect of the adverse situation was that it united ‘the church’ in prayer (v5). The scene in Mary’s house where ‘many were praying’ is heart-warming. Rhoda answering the door shows the saints felt at home there (v13); but better, they felt free to pray there. The whole church may not have been able to attend the emergency late night prayer meeting, understandably, but their contribution to the prayer effort from elsewhere is still registered and it still availed. The prayer was fervent, being offered ‘without ceasing’ (v5), a word which according to Vine means ‘to stretch out’. They certainly stretched themselves, continuing in prayer well into the night, past Peter’s bedtime at least (v6)!
As to the content of their prayer, the only clue we have is that it was ‘for him’ (v5), i.e. for Peter. The incident therefore encourages intercessory prayer. We may conclude their prayer was effective by looking at what followed it, and thus find guidance when praying for those in need today. First, Peter was sleeping! The expectation of his execution was at fever pitch, and he was in the most uncomfortable of beds – doubly chained between two soldiers (v6) – yet he was so soundly asleep the angel ‘smote’ Peter to awaken him (v7)! Rest is a gracious provision that comes from God (Ps 127.2), thus it is fitting to pray for practical peace for those saints experiencing trouble in this world (Jn 16.33). Second, Peter was set free. This was entirely at God’s discretion, as evidenced by James’ execution, thus we can pray for deliverance from adversity, provided we caveat it with, ‘if the Lord will’. Thirdly, Herod was stopped. We may bring before God the threatening of wicked men, leaving Him to intervene according to His all wise purpose (4.29; Dan 4.7; Ps 76.10). Fourth, the saints were surprised! There is comedy in Rhoda’s response – leaving Peter outside while reporting the good news of his release to those in the prayer meeting! But it simply serves to illustrate that God ‘is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think’ (Eph 3.20). Peter made a point of informing them of his release before quickly departing, reminding us that it’s important to share answered prayer with those we know are interceding for us.
Herod’s demise (vv18-23)
Herod’s reaction to the situation has all the hallmarks of wounded pride. First, and understandably, he held the soldiers to public account for Peter’s escape by having them executed. How solemn that 16 soldiers lost their lives, ultimately because of their wicked ruler’s political whim. Second, Herod moved from Judea to Caesarea. It is reminiscent of Ahithophel who, when he suffered loss of face, could not continue in the same place and in fact resorted to suicide (2Sa 17.23). Herod’s pride caused a further, this time fatal, problem when he was flattered into an insincere reconciliation with the people of Tyre and Sidon. His failure to resist their blasphemous flattery resulted in the angel of the Lord smiting for the second time in the chapter, not now to waken Peter (v7), but to execute Herod (v23). His undignified demise illustrates Hebrews 10.31: it is ‘a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God’.
The enduring resources of the church (vv24, 25)
The chapter ends by drawing a contrast between Herod’s demise and the Word of God’s growth (v4). Proud Herod’s intentions had ultimately been frustrated, yet despite the outward turbulence, God’s agenda had quietly moved forward. What had the young church learned? For one thing, their continuation depended not on James, whom Herod killed, nor on Peter, for after his miraculous release from prison Peter had to depart to another place (v17). No matter the usefulness of a human servant, the ultimate resources for the church, then, and now, are ‘God, and the word of His grace’ (vv5, 24; 20.32). God taught them the lesson by means of a famine, a loss, a dramatically averted loss, and the solemnising removal of a violent opponent. His lessons are perfectly crafted, at times costly, yet He works all things together after the counsel of His own will – harnessing things created, both fallen and redeemed – in order to manifest His glory.
Paul’s first missionary journey (13, 14)
Paul’s first missionary journey (13, 14)
Paul’s trailblazing first missionary journey, into Cyprus and modern-day Turkey, established a biblical pattern for Christian missionaries and evangelists. Knowing the strength of Christian fellowship, the Holy Spirit called Paul and Barnabas to do this great work together. He then directed it (13.2, 4, 9); this threefold testimony to the activity of the Holy Spirit is like ‘a threefold cord’, which is ‘not quickly broken’ (Ecc 4.12). The journey, which mostly consisted of pioneering evangelism, began with commendation from the local church in Antioch.
Conscious of its power, Paul preached ‘the word of God’ (13.5, 7, 44, 46, 48, 49; 14.3, 25; cf. Heb 4.12). He offered the gospel first in the Jewish synagogues. This reflected his deep love for his own people, and his desire for their salvation (Rom 9.1-3; 10.1), and it also demonstrated his practical wisdom, for there he found a ready audience, of both Jews and God-fearing Gentiles (13.16, 42, 43). Once the Jews rejected the message – mostly from envy – he turned to the Gentiles (13.45, 46; cf. 17.5; 18.6); when opposition heightened, and turned violent, he moved on (13.51; 14.19, 20). As Paul doggedly repeated this method time after time, ‘as many as were ordained to eternal life believed’ (13.48; cf. 18.10). Where new assemblies had been formed through local conversions, Paul endeavoured to revisit them, ‘confirming [epistērizō, ‘to give additional strength’[41]] the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith’ (14.22). Having appointed elders and ‘commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed’ (14.23), he left them to continue by themselves; though, of course, his earnest prayers and care for them continued, even though he was physically absent.
Even today, missionary work and evangelism should be done in partnership with other believers, in the Spirit’s energy and with the blessing of a local assembly. Christians should always seek fresh opportunities to reach out to new areas and to new people. Preaching ‘the word of God’ remains the cornerstone of all evangelism. Although many believers lack opportunity to preach to Jews, the principle of reaching out to those with whom they have an immediate affinity remains. Christian servants continue to be opposed but, like Paul, must be ‘stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord’ (1Cor 15.58). God still oversees all gospel efforts, ensuring that ‘as many as were ordained to eternal life’ believe. For individual converts and newly-established churches there needs to be a healthy balance between encouraging them and letting them stand ‘on their own two feet’.
The assembly at Antioch was exceptionally privileged, having at least five prophets and teachers of different temperaments, classes and backgrounds. Tender hearted and encouraging, Barnabas was a Cypriot Levite (4.36). Being ‘called Niger’ Simeon was probably of African extraction. Lucius hailed from Cyrene, a North African port with an established Jewish community.[42] Manaen ‘had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch’. Last listed was Saul of Tarsus, a fiercely intelligent, intensely zealous, converted Pharisee (cf. Phil 3.4-6). This international representation reflected the early spread of Christianity and the intended harmony between Jews and Gentiles. For example, there were at Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost devout Jews from ‘the parts of Libya about Cyrene’ (2.10). Following ‘the persecution that arose about’ Stephen’s death, some Cypriot and Cyrenian believers escaped to Syrian Antioch, where they preached ‘the Lord Jesus’ to Gentiles (11.19, 20).
In the absence of a complete NT, the prophets spoke directly on God’s behalf, unfolding doctrine which had not yet been recorded in written form. The teachers did as they do today, expounding with clarity the sacred text. Even though a finalised canon of Scripture rendered the foundational gift of prophecy unnecessary, the principle remains that local assemblies should have a plurality of teachers, striving together to edify the saints (1Cor 13.8; 14.19, 26, 29; Eph 2.20). This Bible-teaching ministry is not a prestigious role, but a lowly service for Christ, demanding high levels of commitment and self-denial.
As these prophets and teachers at Antioch ‘ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost [probably through one of the prophets] said, Separate Me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them’ (13.2). Having been chosen and called by the Holy Spirit to a work which He had planned out for them, Barnabas and Saul did not join a missionary society, or appeal for financial support. Neither did the church at Antioch arrange a series of committee meetings. Rather, having simply ‘fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them [by way of identification], they sent them away [apoluō, ‘to free fully’]’ (v3). Such unassuming commendation, without fanfare, should characterise the beginning of every Christian missionary endeavour. Believers considering missionary work should similarly wait on the Spirit’s guidance (Rom 8.14), while throwing themselves into service in their local assembly.
Cyprus
Cyprus
After travelling to Seleucia, a fortified sea-port, Barnabas and Saul sailed to Cyprus, where the gospel had already been preached (11.19). Having come under senatorial rule in 22 BC, Cyprus was governed by a proconsul, Sergius Paulus (13.7). Two of its cities, Salamis and Paphos, were renowned devotees of the goddess Paphian, ‘a deity of Syrian origin identified with the Greek Aphrodite’[43]. The eastern city of Salamis had several Jewish synagogues, where the missionaries first ‘preached the word of God’ (v5).
Barnabas came from Cyprus (4.36), and throughout their time on the island his nephew, John Mark, helped the two missionaries (13.5; cf. Col 4.10). But Mark’s first foray into missionary work was short lived and soon after leaving Cyprus ‘John departing from them returned to Jerusalem’ (13.13). No reason is given for his impromptu exit, which eventually contributed to a longstanding rift between Paul and Barnabas (15.37-39). Whatever the cause, Mark recovered sufficiently to write the Gospel of Jehovah’s unerring Servant and for Paul to acknowledge his usefulness (2Ti 4.11). The lesson is plain: recovery is always possible and we should never write off another believer.
During his Cyprus narrative Luke permanently switches from referring to ‘Saul’ of Tarsus, to ‘Paul’ (13.9). It is also here that he begins to chart Paul’s rising prominence in the missionary partnership (by Antioch their order has fully reversed from ‘Barnabas and Saul’ (v2), to ‘Paul and Barnabas’ (v43). However, Luke’s main focus at Cyprus is the intense opposition they faced in the city of Paphos together with the suddenness and strength of the Divine response to the opposition, which prompted the proconsul’s conversion.
Being a false Jewish prophet, who dabbled in the occult (v6), Bar-jesus was the kind of man Isaiah warned Judah against and who, under Mosaic Law, would have been executed (Dt.13.1-5; Is 8.19). The punishment he received was mild in comparison. ‘Elymas’ was probably not a second name so much as a Semitic word, meaning ‘sorcerer’ (13.6, 8.[44] Even though Bar-jesus had wormed his way into the centre of power on the island, unconvinced by his craftiness, Sergius Paulus, ‘a prudent man … called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the word of God’ (v7).
Probably afraid of losing his influential position, Bar-jesus ‘withstood them, seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith’ (v8). Paul reacted with a frightening intensity. Filled with the Holy Spirit, he ‘set his eyes on him’, exposed the wickedness of his character and actions, and, with apostolic authority, pronounced his judgment. Although his name meant ‘son of Jesus’, in reality he was ‘full of all deceit and all craft: son of [the] devil, enemy of all righteousness’ (v10, JND). In his wickedness, he had attempted to ‘pervert [diastepho: ‘to distort, twist’[45]] the right [euthus, ‘straight’] ways of the Lord’ (v10). With immediate effect, he was temporarily blinded by ‘the hand of the Lord’ so ‘there fell on him a mist and a darkness’ (v11). The man who had sought to turn the deputy from the faith now sought ‘some to lead him by the hand’ (v11). Deeply impressed by this miraculous power, Sergius Paulus ‘believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord’ (v12; Rom 10.17).
As an apostate Jew, Bar-jesus represented Israel as a whole. His opposition to the gospel was punished by a reversible judicial blindness. Paul explained to the Romans ‘that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob’ (Rom 11.25, 26; cf. Is 6.9, 10; Acts 28.26, 27). In the meantime, while we await Israel’s national salvation, just as the Gentile Sergius Paulus ‘desired to hear the word of God’ and ‘believed’ it (vv7, 12), the gospel is offered to Gentiles.
Antioch
Antioch
The Roman colony of Antioch was probably founded by Antiochus I Soter in the third century B.C. It now lies in ruins, one kilometre north of modern day Yalvac.[46] Perga is also in ruins, situated fifteen kilometres east of the modern coastal city of Antalya (biblical Attalia, 14.25). According to Google Maps, the two-hundred-kilometre direct route from Perga to Antioch takes approximately forty hours to walk, which includes a one-thousand- metre ascent through the Taurus Mountains. It is more likely that Paul travelled the less onerous, and less direct, Via Sebaste, a Roman road which linked Perga with Antioch and other Roman colonies in the area, including Iconium and Lystra.[47]
True to Paul’s missionary practice of preaching to the Jews first, he and Barnabas entered the Antioch ‘synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down’ (13.14). After the public reading of the Law and the Prophets, when invited to give ‘any word of exhortation for the people’ Paul stood up and energetically beckoned with his hand, saying, ‘Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience’ (vv15, 16). In his first recorded sermon we see the results of a lifetime immersed in Old Testament Scripture coupled with a direct revelation from the ascended Christ (Gal 1.12). He spoke clearly and concisely, and without compromise, fearlessly exposed the murderous ignorance of Israel’s leaders (v27). In his carefully structured message, after giving a selective synopsis of OT history (vv17-22) and introducing the seed of David (vv23-25), Paul drove home the full soteriological implications of the gospel (vv26-39), ending with a stern warning (vv40, 41).
Paul summarised what God had graciously done for the Jewish nation, from the call of the patriarchs to the enthronement of King David, and the raising up of his seed (vv17-25). God chose Abraham and his family to be His channel of blessing to this world (v17; Gen 12.2). While in Egypt, despite severe persecution, God ‘exalted the people’ so that ‘the more [the Egyptians] afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew’ (v17, Ex 1.12). After four hundred years of affliction, God delivered them ‘with an high arm’ (v17; Gen 15.13; Ex 6.6; Acts 7.6), and for the next forty years, as a tender Father, ‘nursed them in the desert’ (v18, JND; Ex 4.22, 23; Dt 1.31; Hos 11.1). Following another seven years (as a comparison of the ages of Caleb in Josh 14.7, 10 shows), when Jehovah ‘had destroyed seven nations in the land of Chanaan, He divided their land to them by lot’ (v19; Dt 7.1). Extending from Israel’s first servitude under Chushan-rishathaim (Jdg 3.8), to Samuel’s anointing of Saul (1Sa 10.1, 2), God ‘gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years’ (13.20).[48] When they ‘desired a king … God gave unto them Saul the son of Cis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, by the space of forty years’ (v21). But God removed Saul and, in his place, ‘raised up unto them David to be their king; to whom also he gave testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after Mine own heart, which shall fulfil all My will’ (v22; 1Sa 13.14; Ps 89.20). Paul climaxed his historical résumé by ‘leapfrogging’ approximately one thousand years to Christ’s baptism, when ‘God according to His promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus’ (vv23-25).
Paul began the soteriological part of his message (vv26-39), with a fresh appeal to his audience: ‘Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent’ (v26). Because Israel’s leaders misunderstood Who Jesus was, despite hearing the clear messianic predictions of their own prophets read every sabbath, they ‘fulfilled them in condemning Him’ (v27). The nation which had rejected Jehovah and desired [aiteō] a king’ (v21; 1Sa 8.4-7), also refused Christ, and ‘though they found no cause of death in Him, yet desired [aiteō] they Pilate that He should be slain’ (v28; Mt 26.59, 60). It was only when every OT prophecy concerning Christ’s suffering was accomplished that ‘they took Him down from the tree [the cross], and laid Him in a sepulchre’ (v29; cf. Dt 21.23).
Within the bounds of divine restraint, men did their worst to Christ, ‘but God raised Him from the dead’ (v30). Paul used three OT quotations to show that this good news, verified by reliable witnesses (v31; 1Cor 15.6), had also been promised to Israel’s forefathers (vv32, 33). First: ‘I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto Me, Thou art My Son; this day have I begotten Thee’ (Ps 2.7). While the Hebrew word yālad, translated ‘begotten’, ‘in its narrowest sense … [describes] the act of a woman in giving birth to a child’[49] here it refers to God’s declaration of Christ’s eternal Sonship when He brought Him out from among the dead (v33; Rom 1.4). He will declare it again when Christ rides triumphantly out of heaven to reign (cf. Ps 2.6). Second: ‘I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David’ (Is 55.3). Having outlined Israel’s future millennial blessings, Isaiah chapter 54, which will be based on the New Covenant (Jer 31.31), and God’s promised mercy to David’s seed (2Sa 7.12-16), Isaiah exhorted thirsty souls to turn to Jehovah for satisfaction (Is 55.1, 2). Since these Davidic mercies can only truly be enjoyed under the unchanging dominion of an ever-living Messiah, Christ’s irreversible resurrection assured their coming realisation (v34). Third: ‘For thou wilt not leave My soul in hell; neither wilt Thou suffer Thine Holy One to see corruption’ (Ps 16.10). In contrast to David’s death, burial and bodily decomposition, while awaiting resurrection, the Saviour’s holy body did not decay in the tomb (vv35-37).
Paul appealed to his audience, ‘Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins’ (v38). Prioritising action over faith, demanding total obedience to all its precepts, and making no provision for presumptuous sins, the Law, which was given to Israel through Moses, was powerless to justify anyone (Ex 19.7, 8; Num 15.30; Gal 3.10-12, 19). In sharp contrast, ‘by [Christ] all [including Gentiles] that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses’ (v39). However, this good news comes with a solemn warning. Using the words of Habakkuk, Paul cautioned his audience that if they despised and rejected this message a judgment would fall upon them; a judgment so severe that they would not even believe the warning of it (vv40, 41; Hab 1.5). Jehovah had previously used the Babylonians to punish His erring people (Hab 1.6-10). In AD 70 God used Roman legions to destroy Jerusalem and to disperse the nation. Now, all who reject the gospel will perish eternally in hades and, ultimately, the lake of fire.
‘And as they went out they begged that these words might be spoken to them the ensuing sabbath. And the congregation of the synagogue having broken up, many of the Jews and of the worshipping proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God’ (vv42, 43, JND). The confidence they had in Jehovah should now be placed in Christ, His appointed Saviour (cf. Jn 14.1).
When large crowds gathered to hear the missionaries on the second sabbath, ‘filled with envy’, the Jews ‘spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming’ (v45). Waxing bold, he and Barnabas explained that ‘it was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you [the Jews]: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles’ (v46). Because he represented Jehovah’s perfect Servant, to Whom it was said, ‘I have set Thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that Thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth’, Paul saw this move as a divine imperative (v47; Is 49.6). This daring statement delighted the Gentiles, who ‘were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed’ (v48). By their telling others ‘the word of the Lord was published throughout all the region’ (v49). Infuriated, ‘the Jews stirred up the devout and honourable women, and the chief men of the city, and raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them out of their coasts’ (v50). Far from being downcast, ‘they shook off the dust of their feet against them, and came unto Iconium’ (v51; Mt 10.14, 15). The missionaries had gone, but the remaining disciples ‘were filled with joy, and with the Holy Ghost’ (v52).
Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe
Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe
Chapter fourteen has a ‘U-turn’ construction. After moving from Iconium to Lystra to Derbe, Paul returned from Derbe to Lystra to Iconium. Although the geography was the same, the repeat visits had a different purpose. As Paul and Barnabas preached the gospel during the outward journey (vv1, 3, 7, 9, 15-17, 21, 25), they fulfilled the first half of the Great Commission (‘preach the gospel to every creature’, Mk 16.15). On the return journey, as they instructed the disciples to obey the teachings of the Lord Jesus (vv21-23), they fulfilled the second half of the Great Commission (‘teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you’, Mt 28.19, 20). Even today we should copy this apostolic pattern: preach the gospel to sinners and teach the Word to the saints.
At Iconium, as in Antioch, Paul preached at the synagogue of the Jews (v1). This was consistent with God’s dispensational dealings (Rom 1.16), as well as a reflection of Paul’s burden for his fellow-Israelites (Rom 10.1). The principle for us is that our gospel outreach should start with those who are near to us, who we know well. The primary means for spreading the gospel has always been through verbal communication. Since ‘faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God’ (Rom 10.17), any social enterprise or community engagement should take second place to preaching the Word of God. In both public preaching and personal witness the gospel is meant to be explained using words. Gospel work is essentially very straightforward: we sow the seed of God’s Word; the Lord saves (v1).
The gospel has always been a polarising message, some accepting it, others rejecting it (v2). Animosity often accompanies rejection. On this occasion the Jews stirred up antagonism toward the gospel preachers. In our day it is the secular world and its religion, under the subtle influence of ‘the god of this world’, which blinds and poisons the minds of the lost (2Cor 4.4). Although opposition to the gospel takes many forms, its root source is Satan himself. We must remember that we are at war, ‘the weapons of our warfare … not [being] carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds’ (2Cor 10.4). The spiritual darkness that engulfs the world today should drive us to our knees in prayer.
Although Paul and Barnabas knew opposition would come, they continued to boldly preach the Word. They did not surrender or compromise. They did not soften their message or change their approach; they refused to accommodate worldly ideas or means of communication. Rather, as faithful stewards of the gospel they continued the work which God had committed to them (1Cor 4.1, 2). May the Lord help us not to be silenced by the pressure of a secular world, but instead to courageously ‘preach the word; be instant in season, out of season’ (2Ti 4.2).
Knowing that ‘the gospel of Christ … is the power of God unto salvation’ (Rom 1.16), with untiring zeal Paul and Barnabas laboured on. Arriving at Lystra, they again ‘preached the gospel’ (v7). It was here they encountered a man who was disabled from birth (v8). Although we cannot comprehend it, Divine sovereignty and human responsibility work hand in hand in salvation, and the healing of this man serves to illustrate this: as in the case of the blind man whom the Lord healed, God had over-ruled in his circumstances (Ex 4.11; Ps 139.13-17), so ‘that the works of God should be made manifest in him’ (Jn 9.3). The Lord Jesus taught that ‘no man can come to Me, except the Father which hath sent Me draw him’ (Jn 6.44). On the other hand, Paul appreciated that this man ‘had faith to be healed’ (v9).
‘In writing the book of Acts, Luke seems to have made a special effort to show that everything Peter did, Paul did’[50]. For example, both were visited by an angel, both raised someone from the dead, both were miraculously released from prison, and in this case both healed someone who was lame, cf. Acts chapter three. By doing this, Peter showed that Paul’s credentials, as the apostle to the Gentiles, equalled those of Peter, the apostle to the Jews. It is also a reminder that Jews and Gentiles stand in equal need before God. The gospel abolishes the enmity that existed between Jews and Gentiles, establishing peace between these two warring factions, reconciling both to God in one body. Converted Jews and Gentiles are now viewed as one new man in Christ (Eph 2.15, 16).
The miraculous healing of this lame man confirmed the divine source of the word that the apostles preached (vv10, 11; cf. Mk 16.20). Having said that, although ‘the signs of an apostle’ (2 Cor 12.12), are not at work today, the salvation of souls and the subsequent change of lives is no less a demonstration of God’s power and confirmation of His Word.
Although the gospel answers the need of man, man’s sin can cause cultural difficulties to arise, as seen in the citizens of Lystra seeking to deify Paul and Barnabas (vv11-13). The ecstatic reaction of the Lycaonians may partly be explained by the superstitious belief that Zeus had visited a local resident of the city.[51] Paul and Barnabas could have used this situation for their own selfish ends, but Paul explains elsewhere saying, ‘we do not, as the many, make a trade of the word of God; but as of sincerity … before God, we speak in Christ’ (2 Cor 2.17, JND). As each of us makes known the gospel we need to ensure that our motives, method and message are transparent. We must not manipulate people and situations for our own benefit. Knowing that people tend to follow and honour men we must point people away from ourselves and direct them to the living God.
The apostles humbly said to the Lycaonians that they were ‘men with the same nature’ (v15, NKJV). In our gospel testimony we do not need to be self-deprecating, but we should humbly preach repentance towards God and faith in Christ. Paul had no qualms in calling their idols ‘vanities’ (v15), reminding us of the balance of grace and truth in preaching the gospel.
Paul’s address to the heathen here was quite different from his message to the Antioch Jews. He adapted his message as the cultural context demanded. Arno C. Gaebelein quotes William Kelly in saying, ‘What is notable, I think, especially for all those engaged in the work of the Lord, is the variety in the character of the apostolic addresses. There is no such stiffness as we are apt to find in our day in the preaching of the gospel. Oh, what monotony! What sameness of routine, no matter who may be addressed! We find in the Scripture people dealt with as they were and there is that kind of an appeal to the conscience which was adapted to their peculiar state’[52].
Although the main tenets of the gospel never change there is plenty of scope in Scripture to adapt the presentation of the message. Our preaching should not be couched in jargon or antiquated language that no one understands. Since our society is increasingly turning away from God we would do well to emulate Paul’s preaching here, and on Mars Hill, Acts chapter 17, since the gospel must be presented in culturally relevant terms.
As Paul and Barnabas continued to preach, the world continued to persecute (v19). Although Paul was singled out for suffering in a particular way (9.16), he reminded the Philippian Christians ‘unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on Him, but also to suffer for His sake’ (Phil 1.29). He also reminded his converts later that ‘we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God’ (14.22). In Iconium Paul escaped from the persecution, but here he was brutally stoned (v19). Sometimes we may escape suffering; at other times God may take us through the eye of the storm. Nevertheless, we remember that the Lord is able to preserve His own (v20).
The unremarkable pivot of the geography of the chapter is full of instruction (v21). Gospel work is often carried out by a few weak believers presenting Christ through the seeming foolishness of preaching. Unvalued by men, but highly esteemed by God, we should emulate the consistency and conviction of the apostles.
As Paul and Barnabas retraced their steps homeward, they strengthened the hearts of early converts. Because salvation is not just the memory of past conversion but an ongoing vibrant reality, they exhorted ‘them to continue in the faith’ (v22). The Christian life begins and continues with faith. Continuance is the proof of inner reality. The assemblies in Asia Minor did not need an umbilical cord attached to any external sources. Realising that the work did not depend on them, Paul and Barnabas also appointed elders in every assembly, committing them to the Lord (v23). The NT shows that assemblies should be autonomous and quickly become self-sufficient (in the sense that they are not to be subject to the direction and control of other assemblies or individuals; this does not mean that they are free to act independently of God’s Word, or to consider that they do not need spiritual help from other assemblies and individual believers).
In difficult days, may we, with renewed vision and exercise of heart, go out with the gospel, labour in a specific locality and rely on the Lord to save and form companies of His own people. Although the day in which we live is spiritually dark the Lord has not changed and has never revoked His commission. ‘Go labour on, spend and be spent’.
Jerusalem council (15.1-35; Gal 2.1-10)
Jerusalem council (15.1-35; Gal 2.1-10)
The Day of Pentecost changed everything. Suddenly, believing Jews and Gentiles were united in Christ, both entering equally into the spiritual benefits of the New Covenant, such as regeneration (Jer 32.39, 40; Tit 3.5), the remission of sins (Jer 31.34; 33.8; Ezek 36.25; Eph 1.7; 4.32; Col 1.14), and the reception of the Holy Spirit (Is 59.21; Jer 31.33; Ezek 36.26, 27; 1Cor 6.19). It was a tremendous jolt to the exclusive Jewish mindset; and ‘there was no small danger lest the new community should be rent asunder almost at its beginning’[53]. How could Jewish Christians now associate themselves with believing Gentiles, who did not adhere to the Law of Moses, and whom they had despised as unclean?
Things came to a head when false Judean teachers, who seem to have claimed the approval of the Jerusalem-based apostles, taught at Antioch, ‘except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved’ (v1). Paul explained later, they were ‘false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage’ (Gal 2.4). Having been smuggled in by Satan, they attacked the very foundation of the Gospel which offers free salvation through faith in Christ alone. Their demand for Gentile converts to ‘be circumcised, and keep the law’ troubled the Gentile Christians, ‘subverting their souls’ (v24). ‘Subverting’ translates the Greek word anaskeuazō, meaning ‘an entire removal of goods and chattels either by the owners or by a plundering enemy’[54]. It was a deliberate attempt to rob them of their freshly found Christian joy and liberty, and to split the newly formed Church.
Concerned that his Gospel preaching among the Gentiles would be negated (Gal 2.2), Paul, with Barnabas, had ‘no small dissension and disputation with them’ (v2). Paul wrote to the Galatians, ‘we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you’ (Gal 2.5, NASB). With Paul receiving divine ‘revelation’ about the importance of settling the issue (Gal 2.2) and the Antioch church wanting a definitive answer, it was ‘determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question’ (15.2).
Accompanied by Barnabas and other Antioch brethren, including Titus, this was the third recorded time Paul travelled to Jerusalem after his conversion (Gal 2.1). Never wasting a moment, as ‘they passed through Phenice and Samaria, [they declared] the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren’ (v3; cf. Pr 25.25). At Jerusalem, there seems to have been a series of meetings, as follows.
First meeting (Gal 2.1-10)
Realising the seriousness of the situation, Paul wisely arranged a private meeting with the apostles, ‘James, Cephas and John’, to whom he ‘communicated … that gospel which [he preached] among the Gentiles’ (Gal 2.2, 9). While the steadfastness of these apostles had given pillar-like stability to the Jerusalem church, Paul was unfazed by their ‘reputation’ (Gal 2.2, 6, 9). Nevertheless, he needed their approval. During this discussion, they decided that Titus (a Gentile believer) did not require circumcision (Gal 2.1, 3); neither did they add anything to the Gospel which Paul preached (Gal 2.6). Rather, recognising the same power of God, which ‘wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision … was mighty in [Paul] toward the Gentiles’ and perceiving ‘the grace that was given unto [Paul], they gave to [Paul] and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that [Paul and Barnabas] should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision’ (Gal 2.7-9). Their only proviso was ‘that [Paul and Barnabas] should remember the poor’ (Gal 2.10).
Second meeting (15.4, 5)
Having secured the private support of the apostles, Paul and his companions reported to the whole Jerusalem church “all things that God had done with them” v.4. Pharisee converts insisted “it was needful to circumcise [Gentile believers], and to command them to keep the law of Moses” 15.5. This prompted a third meeting.
Third meeting (15.6-21)
The apostles and elders then ‘came together for to consider of this matter’ (v6). After ‘much disputing’ Peter arose and reminded them that God had chosen him to preach the Gospel to Cornelius and his Gentile friends (v7; Acts 10, 11). When these Gentiles believed, ‘God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto [the Jewish believers]’ (v8). Any attempt to burden such Gentile converts with the unbearably heavy yoke of God’s law, which the Jews never managed to fully keep, was putting ‘God to the test’ (v10, NASB). Peter concluded that neither Jews nor Gentiles are saved by law keeping but ‘through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ’ (v11). These are Peter’s last recorded words in the Acts of the Apostles, and they were so persuasive that ‘all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them’ (v12).
James directed them to God’s word (vv13-21). In the OT Jehovah visited Israel, dwelt among them, and chose them to be His special people who were linked to His name (Ex 4.31; 25.8; Dt 7.6; 12.5; 14.21; Jer 13.11). James viewed the early (‘at the first’) conversion of Cornelius as a similar visitation by God, this time to Gentiles, ‘to take out of them a people for his name’ (v14). This correlated well with the Jewish scriptures. Quoting Amos 9.11, 12, James said, ‘to this agree the words of the prophets’ (v15). Amos foresaw David’s dynasty restored to its former glory, Israel vanquishing her foes and established and prosperous in her land (Amos 9.11-15). By replacing Amos’ phrase ‘in that day’ with ‘I will return’ (Amos 9.11; Acts 15.16; cf. Jer 12.15), James highlighted that this prophecy will be fulfilled completely at Messiah’s coming. The Septuagint translators altered the phrase ‘that they may possess the remnant of Edom’ (Amos 9.12) to read ‘that the residue of men might seek after the Lord’ (Act 10.17). The Hebrew text pointed out that Israel will defeat Gentile enemies. The Greek translation showed that Gentile nations will seek Jehovah. Both are true. Hebrew and Greek texts agreed that the heathen will be ‘called by [Jehovah’s] name’ (Amos 9.12; Acts 15.17), exactly what James had said of Cornelius and his friends. Gentile conversions within the church era do not accomplish fully Amos’ prediction. But they are entirely consistent with the eternal plan of God, Who has ‘known … all his works from the beginning of the world’ (v18).
James concluded, ‘we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: but that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood’ (vv19, 20). True unity requires a careful balance of give and take, without compromising truth (cf. Rom 14.3). Jewish believers would not impose Law keeping and circumcision on Gentiles; neither should Gentile Christians engage in anything associated with idolatry, which so odious to their Jewish brethren. The ‘pollutions of idols’ referred to the ‘meats offered to idols’ (vv20, 29). Since these animals were often strangled to death their corpses retained the blood which Jews were forbidden from eating (Lev 17.10, 11). Illicit sexual intercourse with temple prostitutes frequently formed an integral part of the worship of heathen deities (cf. Hosea 4.12-14). Christians must continue to ‘abstain from fornication’ (1Thess 4.3), and avoid anything which would stumble a fellow believer or stimulate discord (1Cor 8.1-13). James finished by assuring his Jewish hearers that the Law would never be forgotten. If any Gentile wanted to learn more about it, ‘Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day’ (v21).
Fourth meeting (15.22-29)
Under the Spirit’s direction, ‘the whole church’ agreed to write their Gentile brethren at Antioch. The letter was brief, courteous and authoritative. After a warm greeting, they firmly disassociated themselves from the false teachers, commanded the Antioch believers to abstain from everything associated with idolatry, and wished them well (vv23-29).
Conclusion (15.30-35)
For verbal confirmation, Paul and Barnabas were accompanied by two of Jerusalem’s own highly respected men: Judas and Silas (vv 22, 23, 25-28). As soon as the Antioch believers read the letter, ‘they rejoiced for the consolation’ (vv 30, 31). Judas and Silas then exhorted and confirmed the brethren, and ‘tarried there a space’ before returning to Jerusalem (vv32, 33). Afterwards, Silas seems to have returned to Antioch and joined Paul and Barnabas, ‘teaching and preaching the word of the Lord, with many others also’ (vv34, 35).
Paul’s second missionary journey (15.36-18.22)
Paul’s second missionary journey (15.36-18.22)
Sharing the gospel with those around us is one of the most valuable and yet difficult activities we can engage in. It is valuable because it meets man’s greatest need and is at the same time a practical demonstration of our confidence in the atonement. It is difficult since we know it may well provoke a hostile reception, and like Jeremiah this can terrify us (Jer 1.17). With that in mind, before tracing Paul’s second missionary journey, let us see what we can learn from Paul to help us in our own evangelism: what was it that made him an effective evangelist?
A commitment to care for his converts
Paul’s second missionary journey actually began as a follow up visit to believers converted on a past mission: ‘Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord and see how they do’ (15.36). Just as a parent’s interest in their child does not end at its birth, Paul wanted to see spiritual growth in those who believed. Post-conversion progress is also God’s explicit will for believers (1Ti 2.4). To this end, Paul taught new Christians about baptism (Lydia 16.15, Jailor 16.33, Crispus & other Corinthians 18.8), gave them initial spiritual instruction (16.32; 18.11), and shared fellowship with them (Lydia’s house 16.15, 40; the Jailor’s house 16.34). And he saw to it that existing believers were ‘established in the faith’ (16.5). Far from being an afterthought, Paul’s concern for the spiritual well-being of believers, whether younger and older, was a priority. We too ought to share this ambition.
Carefully chosen co-workers
The surprising fall out between Paul and Barnabas warns us that the Christian life may be complex – friction comes not only from the world, but also from fellow believers, with whom we do not see eye to eye. The question that divided them was whether Mark, who quit midway through the last journey (13.13), should come on this one. Paul evidently felt that a difficult missionary journey was not the place for Mark to prove himself. When Mark later showed his usefulness again Paul was willing to recognise this (2Ti 4.11), indicating that Paul is not here writing him off permanently. But on this occasion Paul chose those whose most recent track record indicated they would undoubtedly bolster the trip. Silas had a joyful confidence in the Lord, even under stress, that is seen in his singing and praying with Paul in prison (16.2, cf. Jas 5.13!). Timothy was selected for his good reputation (16.2) for there is little more harmful to the gospel than servants whose bad behaviour attracts criticism to the cause. Let us be careful that we ourselves make good co-workers, and to choose wisely others with whom to work!
Good Habits
When Paul went to a new city he had a well-practised routine: first to the synagogue to speak with the Jews (17.2, 10, 17, 18.4), and then to the marketplace to speak with the Gentiles (17.17). This order reflected the Jews’ position of first in both privilege and responsibility (1.8; Rom 1.16). It also allowed Paul to engage with people - an essential ingredient in evangelism! In the synagogue he had a semi-interested audience. In the market-place he created an interest by one-to-one conversations which, in turn, lead to the larger opportunity on Mars Hill. Paul favoured opportunities that provided prolonged exposure to his audience – he stayed for three weeks in Thessalonica (17.2); at Corinth he preached every week for 18 months, and then stayed on for ‘a good while’ (18.4, 11, 18). We often find that those whom we have prolonged contact with (e.g. family, friends, neighbours, colleagues) are the hardest to evangelise, but with the Lord’s help we can find opportunities to speak to them one-to–one, just as Paul began in Athens.
Perseverance in the face of many difficulties
Paul faced a formidable list of difficulties during his second journey. These included the following: in house difficulties with Barnabas (15.39); divinely arranged difficulties with travel plans (16.16, 7); satanically generated, undesired, publicity (16.16-18); commercial opposition which led to unjust punishment and imprisonment (ch 16.9, 37); religious hostility (17.5, 13; 18.6), and the overhanging threat of further violence for which Paul received special reassurance from the Lord (18.9, 10). Given this huge number of challenges, it is understandable why Paul insisted that Mark should not come on the journey. He seems to have expected a tough time (9.16). But these difficulties did not stop Paul; they simply brought out his perseverance. His purpose was to preach the gospel and he remained undaunted by the attendant dangers (21.13). May the Lord grant us perseverance like Paul’s!
Faithfulness to the Scriptures
Paul preached a message his hearers could verify by simply comparing what he said to the Word of God. This is so clearly demonstrated in the case of the Bereans, who ‘received the word…searched the scriptures whether those things were so…therefore many of them believed’ (17.11, 12). Because of this link between actively searching the scriptures and experiencing saving faith, preachers must base their message on the Word of God, which alone stimulates genuine faith (Rom 10.17, 1 Cor 2.4, 5). This has several ramifications. Do I quote the Bible when explaining the gospel? Do I remember that it is God’s truth, not the cleverness of my presentation that has power to save? Does the way I explain the gospel bear up to a close scrutiny against the Word of God? If I simply ‘preach the word’, it will!
Adaptability to his audience
Paul pitched his message to the understanding of his audience. To those with a background in the OT he reasoned ‘from the scriptures’ that ‘Christ must needs have suffered and risen again from the dead’; and ‘that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ’ (17.2, 3, 11; 18.5). At Mars Hill, when preaching to gentile philosophers, he did not appeal to the scriptures directly (of course, all his assertions were in perfect harmony with the Word), of which his hearers were probably ignorant, but to their consciences. He began with God as the Creator and Sustainer of all, went on to expose the inadequacy of his audience’s view of God, as witnessed by their idols, and finally called them to a change of mind (‘we ought not to think... repent’) in light of a coming time of reckoning. This flow of thought is similar to his argument for man’s guilt based on our inner consciousness of sin in Romans chapters one and two. As well as using material appropriate to his audience, Paul communicated in an appropriate manner. He ‘spoke’ (16.3), ‘reasoned’ (17.2, 17; 18.4), ‘opened and alleged’ (17.3), or ‘preached’ (17.13). These various expressions suggest that the gospel can be shared in a variety of contexts from every-day conversation and interactive discussions to direct presentations and emphatic announcements.
A passion for the lost
Paul did not drag himself to preach the gospel; he was compelled from deep within his soul. Luke notes Paul’s irresistible inner compulsion to preach on at least two occasions. In Athens, ‘his spirit was stirred in him when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry’ (17.16). In Corinth, ‘Paul was pressed in the spirit and testified to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ’ (18.5). Knowing that God’s truth had set him free, Paul acted as an ambassador for it. Seeing the needs of others, he could not be silent. May God open our eyes to the blinding and binding reality of sin in such a way that we too cannot but speak. Paul’s passion for the lost gave rise to the by-product of courage – he was by himself in Athens when he boldly confronted the idolatry of his audience on Mars Hill! While Paul valued the help of his co-labourers, ultimately, his sufficiency came from the Lord (18.10; 2Cor 3.5, 6; 2Tim 4.16, 17).
Preaching at Philippi (16.6-40)
Preaching at Philippi (16.6-40)
The missionaries’ arrival at Philippi – the first major city of that part of Macedonia – marked a significant movement of the Gospel westwards into Europe (v12). Philippi was located on a plane between the Pangaeus and Haemus mountain ranges, approximately nine miles from the Mediterranean. Being on the Egnatian Way, an important Roman highway which spanned Macedonia from east to west, Philippi was an accessible city. It had local gold mines, exceptionally fertile soil, and a medical school, but no synagogue. While Paul’s habit was to begin his preaching in each city at the local synagogue, at Philippi he started ‘by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made’ (v13). As a Roman ‘colony’ (v12), Philippi enjoyed all the privileges of Roman citizenship (including exemption from taxation and flogging), a status which was highly valued by its population (vv20, 21).
Giants of human history had cast their shadow on the city. It was originally founded in 350BC by Philip of Macedon, the father of Alexander the Great. Octavian, the adopted son of Julius Caesar and the future Caesar Augustus had, in partnership with Mark Antony, vanquished Marcus Brutus and Cassius at the battle of Philippi in 42BC. Seeing the inevitability of defeat, Marcus Brutus fell on his own sword. After the battle veteran soldiers were released to colonise the city.
The missionaries
It was approximately 100 years after the battle of Philippi that the Apostle Paul, Luke, Silas and Timothy evangelised Philippi. Although a diverse group, these four men were united in their desire to spread the Gospel. Paul was a converted, self-righteous Pharisee, who had zealously persecuted Christians. Luke, the author of Acts, was a gentile doctor. As the recorder of events, Luke humbly marked his joining the missionary party at Troas with a subtle transition in the narrative from ‘they’ to ‘we’ (16.8-10). He remained at Philippi while the others passed on to Amphipolis (17.1), perhaps spending time at the medical school. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Paul and Luke – partners in the Gospel – wrote more than half the NT. Silas had been a well-respected Christian at the Jerusalem church (15.12).
Timothy’s devotion to the Lord is evident throughout the NT, this beginning of his missionary life being no exception. Paul viewed him as his own spiritual son (1Ti 1.2, 2Ti 1.2; 2.1). It is likely that Timothy had witnessed first-hand God’s power at work in Paul’s life (14.8-10), seen his humility (14.11-18) and steadfastness in the face of severe opposition (14.19-21; 2Ti 3.10, 11), as well as his genuine concern for the spiritual well-being of new converts (14.21-23). Whether or not Timothy was converted under Paul’s preaching at Lystra during the first missionary journey, it is clear that a solid foundation of Bible knowledge had been laid up in his heart as a young child, probably by his grandmother and mother who were both believers (2Ti 1.5; 3.15). Before starting as a missionary, Timothy was saved and already active in the Lord’s service, being ‘well reported of by the brethren’ in two different assemblies (v2). Despite the pain of circumcision, the half-Jewish, half-Gentile Timothy submitted to Paul’s advice and was circumcised, seeking to avoid any needless offence to local Jews (v3; cf. 1Cor 9.20).
It was the Holy Spirit Who led the missionaries westward (vv6, 7, 9). He prevented them from going south ‘to preach the word in Asia’ (v6) and stopped them moving north into Bithynia (v7). Through a night vision to Paul the missionaries were called westward into Macedonia (v9). With promptness, they obeyed the divine call, immediately endeavouring ‘to go into Macedonia, assuredly gathering that the Lord had called [them] for to preach the gospel unto them’ (v10). While believers today do not rely on visions for divine guidance, as the sons of God they are led by the Holy Spirit (Rom 8.14). Much of this leading takes the form of illuminating God’s word and applying its principles to the believer’s life. Of course, such obedience to the word proves love for Christ (Jn 14.15).
Although we living in a world culture which is obsessed with images, rather than relying on visual tools, we must follow the example of these missionaries and preach ‘the word’ (v6), communicating with clarity the Gospel message using words. Although the missionaries began by speaking to a small group of religious women (13), news spread quickly about these ‘servants of the Most High God, which shew … the way of salvation’ (v17). Since this good news comes from God (Rom 1.1), and men are naturally opposed to God (Rom 5.10), not only is suffering an inevitable part of the Christian life (14.22; Phil 1.28-30; 2Ti 3.13), but any clear presentation of the Gospel inevitably arouses hostility. This opposition began with a demon possessed girl who, while acknowledging the true character and message of the missionaries, attempted to hamper their prayers and thus their service, for nothing of lasting value can be achieved in the Lord’s service without prayer (v16). Paul expelled the demon, but the text is unclear whether or not she was converted (v18). Since this girl and her soothsaying abilities had enriched her owners (v16), the sudden loss of revenue due to her exorcism prompted a violent turn of events. Paul and Silas were apprehended, stripped, beaten with rods and ‘thrust … into the inner prison’ (vv22-24). But they were not downcast. They did not complain that God’s guidance resulted in suffering. Instead, ‘at midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God’ (v25), their witness resulting in the jailor’s conversion. In difficult circumstances we too should pray, being ‘careful for nothing; but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving [letting our] requests be made known unto God’ (Phil 4.6). And we should remain joyful, knowing that ‘the joy of the Lord is your strength’ (Neh 8.10). Since the ungodly watch us, God could also speak to sinners through our reaction to adversity.
The converts
Lydia and the jailor were very different individuals, as were their conversions. Lydia was a wealthy business woman who traded in ‘purple’ (v14), an expensive dye which was extracted from the neck glands of Mediterranean shellfish. Having a religious inclination, Lydia prayed, worshipped God and listened attentively to the words of the missionaries (vv13, 14). The Lord quietly opened her heart, ‘that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul’ (v14).
The jailor, on the other hand, appeared indifferent to the Gospel and callous in his management of the freshly beaten missionaries, thrusting ‘them into the inner prison, and [making] their feet fast in the stocks’ (v24). In his case it took a finely tuned earthquake (which shook the prison’s foundations, opened its doors and loosed its prisoner’s bands, v26) to bring him to an end of himself. Assuming that his prisoners had escaped and knowing the severe punishment for such failure, ‘he drew out his sword, and would have killed himself’ (v27). But his life was preserved by Paul crying out, ‘Do thyself no harm: for we are all here’ (v28); and in the middle of the night ‘he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, and brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved’ (vv29, 30)? Of course, the answer to this urgent and personal question was not ‘do’ but ‘believe’ (v32).
As soon as they believed the Gospel, Lydia, the jailor and his household were all baptized (vv15, 33), symbolising their association with Christ’s death, burial and resurrection, as well as the internal transformation which had taken place in their lives (Rom 6.1-5). Their subsequent behaviour verified this change. Lydia eagerly showed hospitality to the missionaries (v15). The jailor, who had treated them harshly, now ‘washed their stripes … [and] set meat before them’ (vv33, 34). Instead of trembling (v29), ‘he rejoiced, believing in God with all his house’ (v34). Truly, ‘if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new’ (2Cor 5.17).
Paul’s relationship with the church at Philippi continued through the years. Ten years later, while imprisoned in Rome (28.16-31), Paul received a gift from the Philippian Christians. He wrote a letter to thank them (Phil 4.10-20), in which he confirmed his affection for them (Phil 1.8; 4.1). He still prayed for them (Phil 1.9) and with the skill of a true shepherd, ever watchful for God’s people, he encouraged them to live godly lives (Phil 1.27). He warned against the danger of Judaizing teachers (Phil 3.2) and exhorted them to be united (Phil 1.27, 2.2; 4.2). As well as reminding them of his own good example, he urged them to follow the example of other godly Christians (Phil 3.17), and drew their attention to the Lord Jesus Who is the ultimate example to imitate (Phil 2.5-8).
Thessalonica, Berea, and Athens (17.1-31)
Thessalonica, Berea, and Athens (17.1-31)
In this chapter Paul covers about 300 miles, beginning in Thessalonica, stopping off at Berea, and ending in Athens. His movements are prompted by a troublesome group of Jews, resentful of the gospel, who hound him from city to city. However, their opposition did not stop Paul preaching; it simply moved his platform. Acts 17 demonstrates that there is always a reaction when the gospel is preached, ranging from the outright fury of these Thessalonian Jews to the noble faith of the Bereans. Paul’s address from Mars Hill in Athens provides a template of how to preach the gospel to an audience with no background in the scriptures.
Far from welcoming Paul’s scriptural argument that Jesus was the long-promised Christ, a vocal group of Jews in the Thessalonian Synagogue reacted with envy-fuelled fury, hiring local thugs to help stir up a riot. They failed to hurt Paul but regrettably Jason, his host, was caught in the cross fire. The angry reaction prompted Paul’s departure to Berea, leaving the new Thessalonian converts in a hostile environment (1Thess 2.14-16), although firmly sustained by Paul’s prayers (1Thess 3.10). Not content with driving Paul out of Thessalonica, the Jews followed him to Berea and repeated their disturbances, again prompting Paul to move on. What are we to learn? The evangelist is under no obligation to stay around to face down unhelpful confrontation. In fact, outright rejection by one audience seems to be one of the means the Lord uses to move His messengers to a new audience. Paul repeatedly faced rejection and repeatedly moved on (v10, v14, v33, cf. Lk 9.5, Acts 13.46). Ironically, opposition serves to spread the word!
When Paul preached Christ from the OT in the Thessalonian synagogue ‘some of them believed’, but in the Berean synagogue the response was even better, not just because “many believed”, but because of how they believed. They listened open-mindedly to Paul, they checked what he said against the scriptures, and therefore they believed. Their rigour earned them the commendation of ‘noble’, and provides some striking lessons for preacher and listener alike today:
Lesson 1. If the Bereans are commended for checking against the scriptures what even the Apostle Paul said, how much more should we benchmark preachers today against the Word of God? It is all too easy to sit under the preached word without having our critical faculties properly engaged, let alone imitating the follow up investigation at home which the Bereans practised.
Lesson 2. If Paul preached in such a way that his hearers could check the message against his source and come to the same conclusions, then he must have adopted a straightforward approach that allowed the scriptures to speak for themselves. There is nothing to beat contextual exposition of the Bible!
Lesson 3. Faith is not a leap in the dark. The Bereans show that it involves intelligent surrender to the truth of the word. Part of Paul’s preaching involved demonstrating that Christ accurately fulfilled OT prophecies, proof that the Gospel is not from men but from God.
While waiting in Athens for his travelling companions, Paul saw an idolatry epidemic which drew out an irresistible urge to proclaim the truth of God. He began with conversations in the synagogue and the market place, but with word spreading rapidly he was soon invited to address a group of philosophers from the Areopagus. It is encouraging to note that it was Paul’s faithfulness in one-to-one evangelism that created the opportunity. His presentation of the gospel is a model in how to approach an audience with no background in the scriptures. The crux of his message is summed up in verse 30: ‘God now commandeth all men everywhere to repent’.
Among Athens’ many idols Paul found an altar inscribed with the words ‘To the unknown god’, an apt starting point. As the local people were evidently confused over the identity of God, it was therefore necessary to clearly define Him. Paul did this by boldly proclaiming God as the singular, supreme, creating, sustaining and sovereign director of the Universe. This flew in the face of their many idols, and cut across their impoverished concept of deity: the one true God does not need a man-made building to live in, nor does he need their offerings. In fact the reverse is true. Humans are the ones who are dependent on Him for everything, the God ‘who giveth to all life, and breath and all things’. Thus Paul was presenting the gospel as the ultimate message because of the unique greatness of ‘God’ from whom it comes.
While the Athenians occupied their day discussing, debating and endlessly looking for new ideas, Paul presented the gospel as an urgent message from the God who ‘now commandeth’. The gospel is not an idea to be admired, a theory to be debated, or a lifestyle to be chosen. It is a command from the Lord of the Universe to be obeyed. It presents mankind as being in rebellion against God, yet provides an opportunity for rebellion to be replaced with obedience. If obeyed, the gospel brings eternal blessing, if ignored it seals one’s eternal doom (1Pet 4.17). Thus the urgency of the gospel stems from the fact that an eternal destiny rests on a choice made in time. The preacher must urge, with the scriptures, ‘now is the accepted time, now is the day of salvation’ (2Cor 6.2), because one of the evils of the human heart is to presume on God’s longsuffering (Rom 2.4, 5) and delay in responding to His mercy.
The call of the gospel is to ‘all men everywhere’ for it is a truly universal message. The word used for ‘men’ is anthropos, indicating a human being, either male or female. The ‘all’ therefore embraces all genders, all ages, and all social statuses. Equally it embraces all persuasions: atheism, agnosticism, religious, irreligious, or any other label we may wish to create. The ‘everywhere’ covers all locations on the globe. As such there is not a more universal, more relevant message. No one can exclude themselves from its call when God has included all.
The gospel is an uncomfortable message because at its centre is a call ‘to repent’. Repentance involves a change of mind, a turning from whatever wrong belief we may have to a belief in the truth as contained in the gospel. For the atheist it involves an admission that he has been a fool (Ps 14.1, 19.1). For the agnostic there is the admission that he has suppressed his consciousness of the existence of God (Rom 1.19, 20). For the do-gooder there must be the admission that his best is in God’s sight not good at all (Eph 2.8-10), while the person who thinks there are many ways to God must repent and come to God via the one Mediator, Jesus Christ (1Ti 2.5). Yes, the gospel is hard to stomach because it involves a contrite admission of wrongness and neediness. But when the sinner is in that state he is precisely in the place where God’s grace flows (Isa 66.2).
Lastly, the gospel is an unavoidable message, ‘because he hath appointed a day, in the which He will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance to all men in that he hath raised him from the dead’. The resurrection of the Lord Jesus is God’s pledge to all that death is not the end. There is a Day of Judgment ahead, and each one of us will stand before God’s chosen Judge (Rom 2.6). This means that all who have ever lived will be resurrected (Jn 5.28.29) in what will be a stunning display of divine power. Christ’s resurrection is the guarantee that every resurrection will happen. Gloriously, those who have obeyed the gospel can face this day with confidence (1Jn 4.17), for they are safe in Christ with a righteousness every bit equal to that of the Righteous Judge (Phil 3.9; 2Ti 4.8). Solemnly, those who have disobeyed the gospel will face the terrible reality of God awakening in judgment upon them (Ps 73.20). Reflecting on this truth should sort out our priorities and motivate us to witness.
Finally, just as the message Paul preached in Athens is representative of what we need to preach, so the reactions of his hearers are typical of what we might expect. Firstly, some mocked (v32a), because the human heart unaided by grace thinks the things of God are foolish (1Cor 2.14). Others procrastinated (v32b), perhaps sensing something of the weight of the message yet not wanting their comfort disturbed. In reality, this is to presume on the longsuffering of God. But, and this is the power of grace, some believed (v34). Thus the divine purpose was accomplished: ‘Great is the mystery of godliness: God was…preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world’ (1Ti 3.16).
Conversions at Corinth (18.1-22)
Conversions at Corinth (18.1-22)
Corinth was the chief city of the Roman senatorial province (belonging to the senate) of Achaia. In contrast to Roman imperial provinces (belonging to the Emperor), there was no military presence. The city was ‘dominated by the Acrocorinth (566 meters), a steep, flat topped rock surmounted by the acropolis, which in ancient times contained, inter alia, a temple of Aphrodite, goddess of love’[55] where more than 1000 religious prostitutes served. Set on an isthmus between the Ionain and Aegean seas, Corinth was labelled ‘the city of the two seas’. Having three harbours – Cenchreae eastward (v18), Lechaeum westward, and Schoenus where the isthmus was narrowest – Corinth developed into a successful trading centre; its local manufacture of porcelain and ceramics added to its wealth. Corinth’s population, of about 100,000, was constantly changing, the relatively short stay of Aquila and Priscilla not being unusual (18.2, 18). This rapid turnover of inhabitants, coupled with the stability of peace throughout the Roman Empire, made Corinth an ideal place to preach the Gospel, since the message could spread rapidly throughout the region.
The unusually high concentration of Jews in Corinth at that time, due to Emperor Claudius’ recent expulsion of them from Rome, swelled Paul’s immediate audience in the synagogue (vv2, 4). It also demonstrated an underlying gentile anti-Semitism, which has showed itself in the harsh treatment of Jewish people throughout the centuries. En route through Europe to the Holy Land ‘the barbarous crusaders … offered Jews baptism or death’[56]. Having confiscated Jewish assets, in AD 1290 Edward I expelled all Jews from Britain.[57] Sadly, even professing Christians have entertained this anti-Semitic worldview. In his last ever public sermon, Martin Luther, the great reformer, ‘pleaded that all Jews should be expelled from Germany’[58].
Gallio was Corinth’s proconsul (v12). He had been adopted into the family of Julius Gallio, a famous rhetorician[59], and, because of his affable disposition, was nick named ‘Dulcis [sweet] Gallio’.[60] While diligent in his work, he was also wise enough not to get involved in petty Jewish squabbles, in this case their religious accusations against the apostle Paul (vv14-17). This discretion preserved Paul from a further beating as well as giving local gentiles the opportunity to vent their anti-Semititic tendency by beating Sosthenes the chief ruler of the synagogue (v17). Interestingly, it seems that Sosthenes was subsequently converted (1Cor 1.1).
The preacher
Paul lived a turbulent life, marked by relentless change and huge challenges (2Cor 11.23-28). In this case he travelled from Athens to Corinth, moving ‘from a quiet provincial town to the busy metropolis of a province, and from the seclusion of an ancient university to the seat of government and trade’[61]. But in every situation he was content (Phil 4.11, 12), always toiling beyond the call of duty. At Thessalonica he had laboured ‘night and day, because [he] would not be chargeable unto any of [them]’ (1Thess 2.9). Similarly, at Corinth he forewent the rights of apostles and gospel preachers to be financially funded (1Cor 9.1-18; 2Cor 11.7-9), working as a tent maker to support himself. By doing this Paul eliminated any implication that he served for financial gain (1Thess 2.5), he provided a godly example of the importance of work (1Thess 4.11, 12), and he avoided overburdening the Corinthian believers (2Cor 12.13).
Having a deep longing for the Jewish people (Rom 9.1-5; 10.1), as was his pattern, Paul began preaching in the synagogue (v4). And this he did with unshakeable conviction. ‘Reasoned’ (v4) translates the Greek word dialegomai, meaning ‘to ponder, then to dispute with others’[62]. Paul’s strong belief in his message was bolstered by years of intensive Bible study, because it is a ‘firm grasp of the Word of God and an ever-growing absorption of its truthfulness into the fabric of one’s life [which] are the underpinning upon which convictions rest.[63]. With steadfastness he preached ‘every Sabbath’ (v4; cf. 1Cor 15.58), his fervour only increasing with the arrival of Silas and Timothy. Being ‘pressed in the Spirit, [he] testified to the Jews that Jesus [of Nazareth, Who they had rejected] was Christ [God’s anointed]’ (v5). In spite of his immense intellect and comprehensive education, at Corinth Paul kept his message simple, preaching ‘Jesus Christ, and Him crucified’ (1Cor 2.1, 2). Of course, Jesus Christ is the One Who forms the foundation of each local church (1Cor 3.10, 11).
Paul faced fierce and unflinching Jewish opposition – ‘opposed’ translates the Greek word antitasso, meaning to make war against. He reacted to this resistance by turning from them: ‘he shook his raiment, and said unto them, your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles’ (v6; cf. Ezek 3.18; 18.13; 33.4-8). Howbeit, his yearning for his Jewish brethren meant that he did not go far – to a ‘house joined hard to the synagogue’ (v6) – still giving them opportunity to repent. What was the result? ‘Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized’ (v8).
As seen at Corinth, church planting takes a long time; it needs the Lord’s power and protection and it should follow the instructions established in the great commission: ‘And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen’ (Mt 28.18-20). At Corinth God showed his power to touch any life by saving the chief ruler of the synagogue. Those who believed the Gospel message were baptized (v8). The Lord allayed Paul’s fears with the words: ‘Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace: For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city. And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them.’ (18.9-11). This protracted period of Bible teaching ensured that the newly formed church was well established in the truth of God.
The people
The church at Corinth has been described in various ways, each depiction emphasizing different aspects of its character. As ‘the church [ekklēsia] of God which is at Corinth’ the believers were shown to be a called out company of people, separated to the God of heaven, ‘sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints’ (1Cor 1.2). As ‘God’s husbandry [giōrgion, a farm]’ (1Cor 3.9) the assembly was likened to a field in which God worked, with fruitfulness being the goal. The figures of a ‘building’ or ‘temple’ remind us that God, by His Holy Spirit, indwells each local church (1Cor 3.9, 16, 17). A body implies unity amongst the members and the diversity of functions played by each (1Cor 12.27). As a ‘chaste virgin’ the church at Corinth was expected to be holy (2Cor 11.2). As ‘the epistle of Christ’ the assembly was read by others (2Cor 3.3). That is to say, unbelievers marked carefully the behaviour of local saints, and they still do today.
As it developed, the assembly had many positive features. It was ‘enriched … in all utterance, and in all knowledge’ (1Cor 1.5), spiritually gifted and consciously awaiting Christ’s return (1Cor 1.7). Having been bought with a price (1Cor 6.20), the Christians’ lives had been transformed at conversion (1Cor 6.9-11). They were zealous of spiritual gifts (1Cor 14.12), keen to support poor saints (1Cor 16.1, 2; 2Cor 9.1, 2) and to pray for the apostle Paul (2Cor 1.11).
Sadly, the church at Corinth also went on to have severe deficiencies. It became a divided church (1Cor 1.11; 11.18, 19), with saints going to law against each other (1Cor 6.1) and using their spiritual liberty thoughtlessly (1Cor 8.9-13; 10.24). Full of envy (1Cor 3.1-3) and pride (1Cor 4.6, 7, 8, 10, 18), the assembly remained spiritually underdeveloped, preventing it from coping with advanced Christian doctrine (1Cor 3.1-3). Fornication (1Cor 5.1), idolatry (1Cor 10.14), ungodliness (2Cor 12.21; 13.2), and even a denial of the resurrection (1Cor 15.12) infiltrated its ranks. Some members were audacious enough to challenge Paul’s apostleship and godly character (1Cor 9.1-3; 2Cor 10.2). Denying headship (1Cor 11.13-16) and exhibiting selfishness in love feasts, which were directly linked to the Lord’s Supper, eventually led to the disciplinary illness and even the death of some local saints (1Cor 11.20-22, 30). Because such failures can appear quickly in a local church it is vital for all believers, especially elders, to remain constantly vigilant.
Homeward bound (vv18-22)
Accompanied by Aquila and Priscilla, Paul sailed from Corinth to Ephesus and onwards to Caesarea. Having gone up to Jerusalem ‘and saluted the church’ Paul returned to Antioch, where he undoubtedly gathered the believers and rehearsed all that God had done during this second missionary journey.
Paul's third missionary journey (18.23-21.17)
Paul's third missionary journey (18.23-21.17)
Throughout Paul’s third missionary journey, he showed a genuine concern for God’s people, and a steely determination to do the right thing. He performed miracles, worked to support himself, and, despite intense opposition, would not compromise the gospel.
Paul had a true shepherd heart. After planting local churches, he visited them, and wrote them. ‘Having spent some time [in Antioch], he departed and passed successively through the Galatian region and Phrygia, strengthening all the disciples’ (18.23, NASB). Arriving at Ephesus, he discovered about twelve disciples who had not yet received the Holy Spirit, nor been ‘baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus’ (20.1-7). He corrected their misunderstanding, and went on to preach in the Ephesus synagogue for four months (19.8). When resisted, he disputed daily for two years in Tyrannus’ school, ‘so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus …’ (20.9, 10). A public outcry ended his time at Ephesus (19.23-41).
Paul sailed to Macedonia to teach and encourage the believers (20.1, 2). Three months in Greece ended with a Jewish assassination plot, necessitating a return through Macedonia to Philippi, where Luke re-joined him, and from where he sailed to Troas (20.3-6). At Troas, Paul broke bread with the believers, taught them late into the night, and resurrected a young man (20.7-12).
Wishing time alone, Paul walked from Troas to Assos while his companions took ship (20.13). The missionary group then sailed down the western coast of Asia Minor to Miletus, where Paul met and exhorted the Ephesian elders (20.14-28). After this, they sailed to Tyre and spent seven days with the believers (21.1-6). They sailed onward to Ptolemais. Here they met the Christians for one day (21.7). On arriving at Caesarea, they stayed with Philip the evangelist (21.7-9). Despite repeated warnings, Paul went to Jerusalem, where he was soon imprisoned. This imprisonment lasted to the end of the Acts of the Apostles.
Evangelising Ephesus (18.24-20.1)
Evangelising Ephesus (18.24-20.1)
Founded by Alexander the Great in 332BC, Alexandria grew rapidly into the world’s biggest city, holding the largest urban Jewish community anywhere, and becoming a respected centre of Greek culture and learning. It was here, sometime between 250-150BC, that the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT, often quoted by Christ and His apostles in preference to the Hebrew text) was completed.
Being born into a Jewish family in a city with this history gave Apollos enormous educational opportunities, which he grasped, growing into ‘an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures’ (18.24). Having been ‘instructed in the way of the Lord’ in a limited capacity, ‘knowing only the baptism of John’, Apollos came to Ephesus ‘and being fervent [zeō, hot] in spirit, he spake and taught diligently [akribos, accurately] the things of the Lord’ (18.25). Unafraid, and full of enthusiasm, ‘he began to speak boldly in the synagogue’ (18.26), probably demanding repentance, as had John the Baptist.
Aquilla and Priscilla responded appropriately to Apollos’ incomplete Gospel preaching. Immediately recognising true potential, rather than publically denouncing Apollos, with tender care and thoughtfulness, ‘they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly’ (18.26). In so doing they showed one important function of a Christian home: the quiet, gentle support and instruction of young believers.
With the rise of false teachers and the proliferation of false brethren, it was crucial that local churches be cautious about who they received. Letters of commendation helped in this. Therefore, when Apollos wished to expand his sphere of ministry, being ‘disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him’ (18.27). And they received him, without regret, because Apollos ‘helped them much which had believed through grace; for he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ (v28; cf. 1 Cor 3.6). Now in possession of full Gospel truth, with fresh vigour, Apollos proved from the Old Testament that Jesus of Nazareth, crucified, buried and resurrected, was truly God’s Anointed.
Some of the results of Apollos’ incomplete Gospel preaching lingered. Arriving in Ephesus, Paul discovered twelve disciples who were living in a kind of dispensational time-warp (19.1-7). They had neither heard of, nor received the Holy Spirit, and instead of undergoing Christian baptism, they had been baptised unto John’s ‘baptism of repentance’ (19.4). As soon as Paul explained the anticipatory nature of John’s message, which challenged his hearers to ‘believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus’, they believed the truth and were ‘baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus’ (19.4, 5). Their position was unique, as was their reception of the Spirit, mediated through the laying on of Paul’s hand and confirmed by the speaking of foreign languages and prophesying (19.6). The more normal Christian experience is immediate indwelling of the Spirit of God, in all His fullness, at conversion (Eph 1.13).
Paul now began his Ephesian campaign in earnest (19.8-12), entering the synagogue and ‘speaking out boldly [parrhēsiazomai, speak freely, without fear] for three months’ (19.8, NASB). This unrestrained delivery of divine truth characterised Paul’s preaching throughout his Christian life (Acts 9.27, 29; 13.46; 14.3; 18.26; 26.26; Eph 6.20; 1 Thess 2.2). Even though the gospel is to be proclaimed as a command from God, Paul reasoned with intelligent logic and, with feeling and passion, did his utmost to persuade his Jewish hearers of the genuineness and urgency of the message ‘about the kingdom of God’ (v8, NASB). He had to prove from the Old Testament, as did Apollos, that Jesus of Nazareth was God’s Anointed. He had to show his audience that Scripture predicted that the death of Christ and the shedding of His precious blood would ratify the New Covenant, laying the foundation for the soon to be established Kingdom (Jer 31.31-40; 1 Cor 11.25). And he needed to declare that this same Jesus had risen from the dead and ascended to heaven, from whence He will return as Israel’s Messiah, as King of all kings and Lord of all lords, to rule. Thus, this Kingdom message required confession that Jesus is Lord and belief in the heart that God had raised Him from the dead (Rom 10.9).
After three months of preaching, ‘when some were becoming hardened and disobedient, speaking evil of the Way [not just the message, but Christ Himself, Jn 14.6] before the multitude, he withdrew from them’ (19.9, NASB). After a prolonged Christian testimony in an area is rejected, it can be fitting to withdraw the witness (cf. Mt 10.14). God may do it through ending a local assembly. At Ephesus Paul left the synagogue and ‘took away the disciples, reasoning daily in the school of Tyrannus … for two years’ (19.9, 10, NASB). Combined with Paul’s steadfast preaching was the miraculous endorsement of his message through the sweat cloths and aprons he used while labouring as a tent maker to support himself (18.3; 19.12; 20.34; cf. Heb 2.3, 4). The impact on the region was enormous: ‘all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks’ (v10).
Imitation is one of Satan’s most effective strategies. But when seven wandering Jews attempted to duplicate Paul’s exorcisms, using ‘the name of the Lord Jesus’, they got more than they bargained for. The demon recognised Jesus, and knew about Paul – an amazing testimony to the effectiveness of his service for God – but did not acknowledge any authority in the sons of Sceva (19.15, NASB). Instead, with supernatural strength, the demoniac violently assaulted them, news of which spread to all in Ephesus, and ‘fear fell on them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified’ (19.16, 17). Something else contributed to the mighty growth and prevailing strength of God’s word. The transforming power of the Gospel was seen in young converts publicly confessing their occult practices and, determined never to return to them, they incinerated their expensive magic books in one great conflagration (19.18-20). It was just after this, intending to revisit the believers in Macedonia and Achaia, before going to Jerusalem and then onwards to Rome, Paul ‘sent into Macedonia two of them that ministered unto him, Timotheus and Erastus’ (19.21, 22). While things did not work out as planned – Paul reached Rome as a prisoner, not as a free man – nonetheless, his careful planning and insatiable appetite to spread the Gospel should characterise us.
Ephesus was hugely proud of her temple of Diana (Artemis), a goddess depicted by a multi-breasted woman. It is said that the previous temple burnt down on the night that Alexander the Great was born and this replacement – one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, whose immense foundations were sunken in marshland to protect it from earthquakes – was under construction when Alexander visited the city. Famously, they refused his generous offer to subsidise the rebuilding costs.[64] In Paul’s day the Ephesians showed their pride by mindlessly chanting ‘great is Diana of the Ephesians’ (19.34). At that time the term ‘neōkoros’ or ‘temple sweeper’, which had depicted the lowest of the goddesses’ servants had become a title of honour, so that the city itself was described as ‘a worshipper [neōkoros] of the great goddess Diana, and of the image [likely a fallen meteor] which fell down from Jupiter’ (v35).
Nothing angers a man quite as much as the loss of money. This is exactly what happened to Demetrius and his silversmith colleagues. A lucrative trade in silver models of the temple had built up (v24). And it was now peak season. The presence of ‘certain of the chief of Asia [Asiarchēs]’ (v31), wealthy, elected officials who sponsored public festivals and games, suggests that these games were being held, leading to a sudden influx of people from the surrounding area. The crowds would have swelled further because ‘the courts [were] being held, and there [were] proconsuls [touring judges]’ (v38, JND). So many people in the region had turned from idolatry as a results of Paul’s preaching that sales in these silver shrines had fallen (vv24-27). Enraged, Demetrius cleverly played on his city’s pride in their temple to stir up his colleagues and, in turn, to whip up the whole city into a confused frenzy (vv29-34). As Luke wrote, ‘there arose no small disturbance concerning the way’ (v23, NASB).
Alarmed by the effects this uproar could have on the privileges of Ephesus, the town-clerk, who carried overall responsibility for the behaviour of the city, endeavoured to calm the crowd (vv35-40). He emphasized that Ephesus’ commitment to Diana was unchallengeable; he pointed out that the Christian missionaries had not robbed temples nor railed against Diana; and he explained that if ‘Demetrius and the artisans who [are] with him have a matter against any one, the courts are being held, and there are proconsuls’ (v38, JND). Having ‘thus spoken, he dismissed the assembly’ (v41). In this way God protected Paul and his friends from harm.
The Ephesian elders (20.13-38)
The Ephesian elders (20.13-38)
In Paul’s emotional farewell meeting with the Ephesian elders he urged them to remember what he had taught them in order that they might navigate the dangers that lay ahead.
Paul specially emphasised two vital features of his bond-service for Christ (vv18-21). Having been with them three years (v31) and sticking to his purpose despite encountering a variety of antagonism, they knew Paul was marked by consistency. Like Ezra, Paul taught by example as well as exhortation (Ezra 7.10). Secondly Paul highlighted the humility of mind with which he served; an attitude that, as he taught elsewhere, contrasts with strife, vainglory, and despising others (Phil 2.3). Simply put: if I am a troublemaker, or if I pursue some glory other than Christ’s, or if I think more of myself than others, then I do not have a humble mind. The unselfish mindset is essential to the peaceful progress of any relationship, and any local church.
Paul set an example in how he preached for he preached usefully, keeping back ‘nothing that was profitable’ (v20). He was constantly eager to impart spiritual riches to his hearers (Rom 1.11, Eph 3.8). Paul preached authentically, the three-year period that he stayed gave the Ephesians the opportunity to observe the correlation between Paul's lip and his life. He preached courageously in that ‘he had not shunned’ to declare any part of God’s truth to them (v27). The uncomfortable or unpopular parts of God’s word must still be heard today. He preached comprehensively for his approach allowed him ‘to declare all the counsel of God’ (v27). In order to replicate what Paul did for the Ephesians in local churches today, book by book exposition by local brethren has much to commend it. Paul preached ‘publicly’ (v20) for this is an efficient method to simultaneously edify many; but he also preached privately, ‘from house to house’ (v20). Like the Master, he had time for individuals.
Paul’s message was one of ‘repentance…and faith’ (v21), he made clear God’s terms for both Jew and Gentile sinners wishing to be made right with Him. The same message is also called ‘the gospel of the grace of God’ (v24). God’s kindness to the undeserving in the Gospel is incredibly good news! Paul’s message embraced ‘the kingdom of God’ (v25) for our response to the Gospel now, determines our relationship to the Kingdom that Christ will establish at His second coming. Those who reject Him will not see the glory of the Kingdom and will instead be banished eternally to a place of torment (Mt 13.49-50, Rev 20.11-15). But those who repent and believe the Gospel will, after the trials of this life are over, enter and participate in the long anticipated, literal, Kingdom of God – a monumental truth disclosed in the Scriptures as an incentive to perseverance and faithfulness (Act 14.22; 2Ti 2.12).
Paul’s exemplary commitment is seen in his choice of five lively metaphors, each revealing wholehearted devotion to Christ. As an accountant, Paul had done the sums (v24) and if he was to lose his life in the service of Christ that was a price worth paying. This serves as a humbling reminder that it is not possible to sacrifice too much in the service of the One who gave Himself for us. As a runner Paul wanted to finish his ‘course with joy’ (v24). The athlete who joyfully crosses the finish line has accomplished the goal he set out to achieve, overcome exhaustion and the temptation to quit on the way. As a witness, Paul’s responsibility was to solemnly testify to the Gospel of grace of God (v21, 24). Paul repeatedly recounted his dramatic encounter with the risen Lord Jesus, making him the last resurrection eyewitness, and radically transforming him from chief persecutor to chief preacher of the Gospel (1Cor 15.5-8). The word used for Paul’s preaching (v25) means to proclaim as a herald, for just like the word of a king, the Gospel is a formal announcement from God that is to be obeyed (1 Pet 4.11,17). Lastly, Paul’s claim to be “pure from the blood of all men” (v26) echoes God's description of Ezekiel as a watchman (Ezek 3.16-21; 33.7-9). Ezekiel's duty was to warn the wicked and any erring righteous of the consequences of their ways. He was not culpable for their response, only for passing the message on. This underlines the solemnity of Gospel preaching.
The Lord warned of harmful infiltrators (Mt 13.37-43), and so did Paul. He prepared the Ephesians with a call to duty (v28). First, they were to maintain a careful self-watch, a basic duty of every Christian (Eph 5.15). Second, they were to maintain a careful, all-inclusive, flock-watch. The order is significant: watching for others without first watching myself is a recipe for hypocrisy (Mt 7.3-5). A self-watch also stimulates gentleness in dealing with those who stumble (Gal 6.1). Third, they were to ‘feed, [as a shepherd] the church of God’. The spiritual shepherd is concerned that the flock grazes in the good pasture of the word of God. Fourth, they were to appreciate the preciousness of the flock. The church is ‘purchased with the blood of His Own’ (JND), a term expressing nearness of relationship and thus the dearness of the Lord Jesus to the Father. The value of a local church is proportional not to its size, but to the currency of its redemption, which is infinite.
Paul next gave a warning of danger (v29, 30) for he knew that ‘grievous wolves’ would enter in. Jude would soon report that ‘there are certain men crept in unawares’ (Jud v4). Those whom Jude spoke of made grace a free ticket to indulge in sin. Another source of danger would, sadly, come from within. In the pursuit of popularity some would speak ‘perverse [distorted] things’. Paul similarly warned Timothy, ‘the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth’ (2 Tim 4.3, 4). Preaching must conform to the unchanging word of God, not current public mood.
With threats in every direction, Paul reminded them of their defences (v31, 32). They must ‘watch’, for a failure in basic vigilance has left great soldiers effortlessly defeated (2Sa 20.10). Second, they must ‘remember’ all Paul had taught them. There is something especially memorable about spoken instruction, and the godly counsel of those who have spoken to us the word of God ought to be cherished and pondered (Heb 13.7). Third, there is ‘God’. Paul would see them no more, and within a few years would be on earth no more. God, ultimately, is the great maintainer of His people and on Him we must rely. Finally, there is ‘the word of His grace’ which contains all that is required for spiritual stability notwithstanding any danger that may come. The Ephesians therefore were to be alert, but not overwhelmed.
Paul’s financial arrangements were exemplary (vv33-35). He was content with what he had, for he ‘coveted no man’s silver, or gold, or apparel’ (v33), and worked to meet his ‘necessities’ (v34) rather than to provide himself with luxuries. Paul was diligent because the money he did possess was acquired through the graft of his own hands (v34), and sometimes involved ‘labouring’ to the point of growing weary (v35). Paul was benevolent as demonstrated by his financial support for those who served with him, and the weak who could not work to support themselves. He was motivated by experimentally proving the Lord’s promise, not recorded in the Gospels, but revealed here: ‘it is more blessed to give than to receive’ (v35).
Paul’s example should be carefully reflected upon because it provides a balanced attitude toward secular employment: we work diligently to meet our needs; to support our service for the Lord; to support those serving around us; to support those in a position of need; to experience the joy of giving. Paul elsewhere acknowledged gratefully those who supported him in his Gospel missions (Phil 4.15), and absolutely asserts the right of the Gospel preacher to be supported by others (1 Cor 9.14). But when it came to the model he held out for general imitation, he promoted a blend of secular and spiritual labour - a course that avoided burdening the saints, and that didn’t give a stick to his many opponents to beat him with (2Thess 3.8-9, 2Cor 11.7-12).
The Ephesian church had been tenderly nursed through their early years by Paul, and what a start he had given them! They clearly had a deep affection for him as seen in their sorrow at his final departure (vv36-38). He left them with the same resources we have today: may we prove the all sufficiency of ‘God and…the word of His grace’ as we navigate all that lies between now and our finish line.
Paul's final journey to Jerusalem (21.1-17)
Paul's final journey to Jerusalem (21.1-17)
This section completes Paul’s third missionary journey and records his final voyage to Jerusalem. At the beginning of Paul’s service, the Lord told him to flee Jerusalem, ‘for they will not receive thy testimony concerning me’ (22.17, 18). As he now made his way to the city, he was cautioned repeatedly about the dangers he would face there (20.22, 23; 21.4, 11). If these alerts were prohibitions, he was wrong to go. If they were simply warnings, Paul’s determination mirrored Christ’s resolve ‘to go to Jerusalem’, despite the suffering which awaited Him (Lk 9.51). Yearning after his Jewish brothers, keen to keep the Feast of Tabernacles, and determined to bring a gift to the Christians at Jerusalem, Paul felt ‘bound in the spirit’ to go (20.16, 22; 24.17; Rom 9.2, 3, 15.25-31; 1 Cor 16.1-6).
Paul and his companions were so fond of the Ephesian elders, they had to tear themselves away from them (v1)[65]. From Miletus, they sailed to Koos, ‘the day following to Rhodes, and from thence to Patara’ (v1). Leaving Patara, they sailed to Tyre, ‘for there the ship was to unlaid her burden’ (v2, 3). In Tyre, Paul and his friends sought fellow believers, some of whom may have escaped there ‘upon the persecution that arose about Stephen’ (11.19). After only seven days, during which ‘they said to Paul through the Spirit, that he should not go up to Jerusalem’ (v4), they felt a strong connection with each other. Luke recorded that when the apostolic party left, ‘they all brought us on our way, with wives and children, till we were out of the city: and we kneeled down on the shore, and prayed.’ (v5). During a stop off at Ptolemais, the missionary group ‘saluted the brethren, and abode with them one day’ (v7).
The next day Paul travelled to Caesarea, where he stayed with Philip the evangelist. After reaching out to the Ethiopian eunuch and evangelising Azotus, Philip had ‘preached in all the cities, till he came to Caesarea’ (8.40). That was twenty years earlier. Having settled in the city, he raised a family for God. All four of his daughters were saved, morally pure and spiritually gifted (v9). But God brought Agabus – who had previously foreseen the Jerusalem famine (11.28) – from Judaea to predict Paul’s imprisonment. ‘He took Paul's girdle, and bound his own hands and feet, and said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles’ (v11). Genuinely concerned for Paul’s well-being, everyone ‘besought him not to go up to Jerusalem’ (v12). But he would have none of it. ‘What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart?’, he asked, ‘for I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus. And when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be done’ (vv13, 14). Accompanied by some Caesarean disciples and Mnason, a mature Cypriot believer with whom they should lodge, they went up to Jerusalem (vv15, 16).
Part 3. Paul’s arrest, imprisonment, and journey to Rome (21.17-28.31)
Part 3. Paul’s arrest, imprisonment, and journey to Rome (21.17-28.31)
At Jerusalem, Paul and his companions were warmly received by the Christians, and when they met James and the Jerusalem church elders Paul detailed ‘what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry’ (21.17-19). As well as delivering this accurate, humble, and God-glorifying missionary report, Paul, probably (according to the contents of some of his letters), handed over a substantial gift which he had collected from gentle churches for the poor Jerusalem saints (cf. 24.17; Rom 15.25-31; 1 Cor 16.1-6).
Many of us have poured our all into a service for God, only to be misunderstood. Sadly, this gift which Paul put such effort into collecting (by travelling long distances and writing encouraging letters), is not even mentioned in the narrative. Instead, Luke focused on the concern which James and his fellow elders had about the Jews’ criticism of Paul. James and the elders claimed that thousands of Jews which believed in Jesus of Nazareth, and remained zealous for the Law of Moses, had heard that Paul taught ‘all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs’ (21.20, 21). It was a gross misrepresentation of his ministry. At Antioch, Paul opposed those who taught that converted gentiles should be circumcised (15.1, 2). He wrote the Galatians, ‘in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love’ (Gal 5.6). But it is not recorded that he ever forbad Jews from circumcising their children or observing Mosaic Law. During his second missionary journey, Paul, to avoid any needless offence to local Jews, went so far as to have Timothy circumcised (16.3). He even wrote the Corinthians, ‘unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law’ (1 Cor 9.20).
Prompted by a desire not to offend the Jews, James and the others suggested Paul purify himself by paying for the sacrifices of four men who were under a vow. Given that their vow included shaving their heads and cleansing themselves over seven days in the temple, it was probably a Nazarite vow (21.22-24; cf. Num 6.1-12). The goal: that ‘all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law’ (21.24). James and the other elders quickly reassured Paul, ‘as touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication’ (21.25).
The intention was commendable. To demonstrate publicly that he did not intend for Jews to abandon completely the Law of Moses, Paul, the next day, entered the temple, identified himself with those four men, and paid the price for their sacrifices (21.24, 26). However, no matter how far he went to win over his Jewish brothers, they would not be persuaded. Near the end of the seven days, Jews from Asia Minor spotted him. Immediately they stirred up the people, took hold of Paul, and cried out, ‘Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men everywhere against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place.’ (21.27, 28). Having seen Paul in Jerusalem with his Ephesian gentile travelling companion Trophimus, they presumed, wrongly, that Paul had brought him into the temple (20.4; 21.29). Their assumption was wrong. But the feeling was so intense that Luke wrote ‘all the city was moved, and the people ran together: and they took Paul, and drew him out of the temple [probably the court of the women]: and forthwith the doors [most likely of the beautiful gate] were shut. And … they went about to kill him’ (21.30, 31).
Fort Antonio overlooked the temple courts. When Claudius Lysius ‘the chief captain … [heard] that all Jerusalem was in an uproar … immediately [he] took soldiers and centurions and ran down unto them’ (21.31, 32; cf. 23.26). Had he delayed, Paul would have been killed. God used this gentile solider to save His servant’s life. Once Claudius Lysias ordered Paul ‘bound with two chains … [he] demanded who he was, and what he had done … and when he could not know the certainty for the tumult, he commanded him to be carried into the castle’ (21.33, 34). The Jews were so fired up that they chased after the soldiers, ‘crying, Away with him’ (21.35, 36; cf. Lk 23.18; Jn 19.15).
Longing to address the crowd, Paul asked to speak to the chief captain (21.37, 39). Assuming Paul was the false Egyptian prophet who had led four hundred assassins into the wilderness, he was surprised when he spoke Greek[66] (21.37, 38). Paul explained that he was a Jew from the great university city of Tarsus, and asked to ‘speak unto the people’ (21.39).
Paul was always ready to ‘preach the word’ and ‘give an answer to every man that [asked him] a reason of the hope that [was in him] with meekness and fear’ (2 Tim 4.2; 1 Pet 3.15). As soon as Claudius Lysias gave him permission, he ‘stood on the stairs, and beckoned with the hand unto the people. And when there was made a great silence, he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying, Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defence which I make now unto you. (And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence …’ (21.40; 22.1, 2).
Paul told the angry mob his testimony. He was a Jew, born in the respected Cilician university city of Tarsus. As a young man, he was tutored in Jerusalem by Gamaliel, the greatest living Jewish teacher. ‘Taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, [he] was zealous toward God', as were all his audience that day (22.3). This zeal had incited such hatred for Christians, Paul ‘persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women’ (22.4). Jerusalem's religious leaders could verify these facts because they had given him written authority to go ‘to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem, for to be punished’ (22.5).
However, as Saul had neared Damascus, 'about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about [him]’ (22.6). The sight was so dazzling, he fell to the ground. When a loud voice asked, ‘Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? … he answered, Who art thou Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth whom thou persecutest' (22.7, 8). All that Saul's travel companions seem to have seen and heard was a bright and terrifying light, and a booming noise (22.9; cf. 9.7; Dan 10.6). Saul himself saw and heard the risen and exalted Jesus of Nazareth Who is so closely linked to His people that He feels their pain. When Saul assaulted Christians, he attacked Jesus Christ.
It was a life-transforming experience. Humbled and blinded by this unsullied sight of the glory of 'the Light of the world', Saul asked, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ (22.10, 11). His words evinced his conversion. He confessed that Jesus of Nazareth, Whom he had violently opposed, was Lord of all, and Lord of his life. Christ answered, 'Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do' (22.10). Once Saul had been led by the hand into Damascus, 'Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there, Came unto [Saul], and stood, and said unto [him], Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour [he] looked upon him' (22.12, 13). Ananias knew that Saul of Tarsus was a dangerous man (9.13, 14). But when the Lord told him to go to him, he obeyed (9.10-16). With tremendous faith and grace, Ananias addressed this monstrous persecutor of the church as 'Brother Saul'!
Saul's vision was restored, and Ananias said, 'The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard' (22.14, 15). As saved Jews, Ananias and Saul shared a rich religious ancestry. The God of their forefathers (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob) had selected Saul for five significant things:
· to know God's will for him personally and for the church (22.14; cf. Eph 3.2-13)
· to see the Just One (22.14)
· to hear God's voice (22.14)
· to tell everyone what he had ‘seen and heard’ (22.15)
· to be baptised as a picture of the washing away of his sins when he called on the Lord's name (22.16)
Three years later, Paul returned to Jerusalem (Gal 1.18). While praying in the temple, he entered a trance in which Christ told him, ‘Make haste, and get thee quickly out of Jerusalem: for they will not receive thy testimony concerning me’ (22.18). Convinced that the Jerusalem Jews would hear him, Paul remonstrated, 'Lord, they know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue them that believed on thee: And when the blood of thy martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by, and consenting unto his death … (22.19, 20). The Lord stood firm: ‘Depart: for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles’ (22.21). It was not just that the Jews would reject Paul – the Lord had called him to evangelise Gentiles. Still, the Jerusalem Jews rejected Paul. As soon as he vocalised the word 'gentiles', they ‘lifted up their voices, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live’ (22.22). Full of fury, ‘they cried out, and cast off their clothes, and threw dust into the air’ (22.23).
Claudius Lysias could not understand their rage. Determined to get to the bottom of things, he commanded Paul 'be brought into the castle, and … be examined by scourging; that he might know wherefore they cried so against him’ (22.24). The Roman ‘scourge (Latin flagellum) was a fearful instrument of torture, consisting of leather thongs, weighted with rough pieces of metal or bone, and attached to a stout wooden handle’.[67] By law, Roman citizens (of which Paul was one) were protected from this brutal punishment. Paul's question to ‘the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?’, had the desired effect. Immediately, the centurion halted the binding of Paul and reported the issue to Claudius Lysias (22.25, 26). The chief captain had paid a great price to obtain his freedom – Paul 'was free born' (22.27, 28). Claudius Lysias knew now that he had to be careful. Having commanded a Roman citizen to be bound, he was already, possibly, in hot water (22.29).
Claudius Lysias still sought the reason the Jews so vehemently accused Paul. Therefore, the next day, 'he loosed him from his bands, and commanded the chief priests and all their council to appear, and brought Paul down, and set him before them' (22.30). Paul was not intimidated by them; nor was he ashamed of his prisoner status. He knew he was as good a Jew as any of them. As he wrote the Philippians, 'If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless' (Phil 3.4-6). 'Earnestly beholding' the Sanhedrin, Paul made an audacious claim: 'Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day' (23.1). His whole life (pre- and post-conversion), he had always done what he believed to be right before God (24.16; 26.4, 5; 2 Cor 1.12; 2.17; 4.2). It is remarkable to think that Paul had the skill, knowledge, and moral integrity to be high priest!
Ananias was a ruthless and unprincipled high priest who was so greedy that ‘he seized for himself the tithes that ought to have gone to the common priests’.[68] He had no interest in giving Paul a fair trial. As soon as Paul opened his mouth, 'Ananias commanded them that stood by him to smite him on the mouth' (23.2; cf. Jn 18.22, 23). But Paul would not be cowed. Sharp-witted, he retorted, 'God shall smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law?' (23.3). He was accusing Ananias of being a hypocrite – a cracked and rickety wall whose unsteadiness was concealed by a liberal application of whitewash. It was reminiscent of Ezekiel's depiction of false prophets building an unstable wall and daubing ’it with untempered morter’ (Ezek 13.11) and the Saviour's likening the Pharisees to ‘whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness’ (Mt 23.27). Paul's words proved true. Ananias was appointed high priest in A.D. 47, dismissed from office in A.D. 58-59, and assassinated as a pro-Roman by Jewish guerrillas in A.D. 66.[69] God smote the ‘whited wall’!
As with any tyrant, Ananias had his supporters. Those that stood by challenged Paul, ‘Revilest thou God's high priest?’ (23.4). Razor-sharp, Paul replied, 'I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people' (23.5; cf. Ex 22.28). It is unclear whether Paul, visually impaired, failed to recognise Ananias as high priest, or, because of Ananias' behaviour, Paul could not believe he was high priest.
Suddenly, Paul changed tack, and, with a few, carefully chosen words, destabilised the entire Sanhedrin. Perceiving 'that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question' (23.6; cf. 26.6-8). Whether the Pharisees (who believed in resurrection and angels) realised it or not, the very framework of their religious calendar anticipated the resurrection of Christ, 'the firstfruits' (Lev 23.9-14; 1 Cor 15.23). The Sadducees (they were sad, you see), said that 'there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit' (23.8). Chaos ensued, 'and when there arose a great dissension, the chief captain, fearing lest Paul should have been pulled in pieces of them, commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by force from among them, and to bring him into the castle' (23.9, 10).
That night 'the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome' (23.11). This was not the first time, nor the last, that the Lord appeared directly to Paul. Other occasions included the following:
· On the Damascus Road, saving him (9.3-6)
· At Jerusalem, warning him to flee the city (22.17, 18)
· At Corinth, assuring him of His presence and protection (18.9-11)
· At Rome, strengthening him during his final interrogations (2 Tim 4.16, 17)
When it was day, more than forty ‘Jews banded together, and bound themselves under a curse, saying that they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul’ (23.12). It was a ridiculous oath, born out of misplaced passion and a desire to court Ananias' favour. And it was doomed to fail. The Lord had already promised Paul that he would 'bear witness also at Rome'. Therefore, he could not be murdered in Jerusalem. Of course, Ananias and the Jewish elders were more than happy for them to try to kill him (23.14, 15; cf. Is 1.21).
When Paul's nephew got wind of the plot, he entered 'the castle, and told Paul’ (23.16). Paul, in turn, asked one of the centurions to take his young nephew to Claudius Lysias, 'for he hath a certain thing to tell him' (23.17, 18). 'Then [with the utmost discretion], the chief captain took him by the hand, and went with him aside privately’ (23.19). Having heard of the conspiracy, Claudius Lysias ‘let the young man depart, and charged him, See thou tell no man that thou hast shewed these things to me’ (23.20-22).
The chief captain had a serious problem on his hands. He knew Paul was being 'accused of questions of [Jewish] law, but to have nothing laid to his charge worthy of death or of bonds' (23.29). However, because Paul was a Roman citizen, his future was bound up with his. If Paul were killed in his custody, he would be held to account. Therefore, to rid himself of Paul as fast as possible, he mobilised Rome's military machine. Regardless of the time of day or night, soldiers obeyed centurions and centurions obeyed tribunes absolutely. Claudius Lysias commanded two centurions, 'Make ready two hundred soldiers to go to Caesarea, and horsemen threescore and ten, and spearmen two hundred, at the third hour of the night; And provide then beasts, that they may set Paul on, and bring him safe unto Felix the governor' (23.23, 24). By morning, they had travelled thirty-five miles to Antipatris (23.31). The two hundred infantry and two hundred spearmen returned to Fort Antonia while the seventy cavalrymen continued the further twenty-seven miles to Caesarea (23.32, 33).
It was done. Within two days Claudius Lysias had passed his problem (Paul) to Felix. In his letter, he flattered Governor Felix and gave the impression (falsely) he had saved Paul because he knew that he was a Roman citizen (23.25-27). When Felix learned that Paul was of Cilicia, he agreed to hear his case before his accusers (23.33-35).
Paul before Felix (24)
Paul before Felix (24)
In the providence of God, Paul's civil trials took him to Rome, the centre of the empire (23.11). En route, he witnessed to kings and governors (9.15). Felix had read Claudius Lysias’ letter (23.26-30). Although its basic facts had been embellished, it was still in Paul’s favour. The issue at stake was religious, not civil law (23.29). Ordinarily, Paul would have been exonerated, but the Jews were determined to nail him. Happy to run roughshod over justice – as they had done about thirty years earlier, when they accused the Lord Jesus of blasphemy and then treason (Lk 23.2) – the Jews pushed for Paul to be executed. It is clear throughout Paul’s civil trials that he ought to have been released (24.26, 27, 25.10, 26, 26.31). But God providentially used the wicked resolve of the Jews to see to it that Paul was taken to Rome, where he would preach Christ to the emperor himself.
Prosecution (vv1-9)
Tertullus was a forensic orator (likely a Roman), who acted as a legal advocate for the Sanhedrin, the religious juggernaut which now stood ‘against Paul’ (v1). Having sought to tear him limb from limb and assassinate him in the shadows, they now bludgeoned him with the legal system. Although Paul was like a sheep among wolves, the Lord Jesus had promised, ‘blessed are ye, when men shall … persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake … … I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay’ (Mt 5.11, Lk 21.15). When Tertullus addressed Felix, he lathered his opening accusation with brazen flattery (vv2-4). According to history Felix ‘exercised … the royal prerogative in a slavish sense, with all manner of cruelties and excesses’[70]. The ‘providence’ which Tertullus referred to was a peace built on bloodshed (v2). Brutally, Felix crucified hundreds of rebels and oversaw the assassination of Jonathan the high priest.[71]
Tertullus accused Paul of the following:
a) A pestilent (lit. a plague) fellow, stirring up insurrection (v5a)
b) A heretical Nazarene ringleader (lit. a front-rank man) (v5b)
c) A flagrant temple-defiler (v6)
Charge a) was an exaggerated slander which was deliberately vague and had nothing to do with the current trial. Again, the Jews were trying to paint Paul as an insurrectionist, a crime which carried the death penalty. In reality, Paul never fomented political rebellion against Rome. The offence of the cross convicted sinners – it was his enemies who started revolts. ‘Plotted against at Damascus, plotted against at Jerusalem, expelled from Pisidian Antioch, stoned at Lystra, scourged and imprisoned at Philippi, accused of treason at Thessalonica, haled before the proconsul at Corinth, cause of a serious riot at Ephesus, and now finally of a riot at Jerusalem’.[72] Of course, suffering was an essential aspect of the apostolic ministry which furthered the name of Christ (9.16). Paul wrote the Corinthians, ‘God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world … we are fools for Christ's sake’ (1 Cor 4.10).
Accusation b) ‘linked Paul with Messianic movements; and the Romans knew what havoc false Messiahs could cause and how they could whip the people into hysteria which were only settled at the cost of blood’.[73] Luke recorded messianic-zealots who had, in the name of religion, sought to usurp Roman rule (5.36,37; 21.38). Tertullus called Paul the chief of a fringe religious group, known as the Nazarenes. This derogatory term aimed at smearing him as a religious fanatic, who posed a threat to law and order. This too was vague and without evidence.
Complaint c) started several chapters earlier as a lie to stir up the Jews (21.27-29). Tertullus used it because, ‘Rome had given the Jews the right to execute temple desecrators’.[74] What had started as a supposition (21.29), Tertullus asserted to be truth, that Paul had ‘attempted to profane the temple’ (24.6, JND). ‘Attempted’ is a highly ambiguous charge.
The Jewish prosecution was a combination of flattery, half-truths, character assassinations, and ambiguities. Although it sounded impressive, it was bereft of hard evidence, and should have been thrown out of court. Much opposition to the gospel amounts to this. In its varied forms it is fundamentally against truth. Although Paul was outnumbered, in his defence he had only to stand for the truth (cf. 2 Cor 13.8). He would not lower himself to the standards of his opposition. His words and conduct exuded veracity.
Defence (vv10 – 21)
Paul rebuffed the accusations in the order they came. He countered the charge of sedition (v11-13), disproved the charge of heresy (v14-15), and opposed the charge of defiling the temple (v17-20). Having waited silently until Felix permitted him to speak (v10), the apostle showed self-control and dignity. In the providence of God, Felix was not a judicial novice (like Lysias) but an experienced assessor of Jewish issues.
Contrary to Tertullus’ vague accusations, Paul pointed to concrete lines of evidence. The twelve days that had elapsed since his entrance into the Jerusalem temple showed that these events were recent and, therefore, verifiable (v11). Far from inciting rebellion, Paul said little when he went to Jerusalem. He had entered the temple as a quiet worshipper, not a stirrer of revolt (v12). The exaggerated claim of insurrection throughout the whole world was sunk by Paul pointing to real places, like the synagogues and the city where all had remained calm. Definitive truth always trumps ambiguity.
Although Tertullus had smeared ‘the Way’ – ‘a common expression in the Acts for the Christian religion, “the characteristic direction of life as determined by faith on Jesus Christ”’[75] – Paul showed that its beliefs were perfectly orthodox, in full accord with OT teaching. People have always tried to drive a wedge between the Old and the New Testament, but the apostle believed ‘all things written in the law and prophets’ (v14) – so should we. In aligning himself with the OT, Paul came under the protection of Rome, who allowed religious freedom in conquered nations. They were suspicious of novelty, but tolerated historic Judaism.
Judaism was not, however, an end in itself. Therefore, Paul proceeded to speak of the hope of the resurrection. This was the heart of his defence (vv15, 21b). Now answering his charge in a legal setting, he did not, at this point, mention explicitly Christ’s resurrection. Previously, before the Jewish council, he spoke about resurrection to drive a wedge between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, align himself with the Scriptures, and set a foundation for the resurrection of Christ (23.6-7). If he could establish that resurrection was, in principle, an accepted doctrine, then he could apply it later to Christ’s resurrection (25.19, 26.13). However, before specifically defending the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, Paul used the OT to defend resurrection generally. Of course, the only reason anyone could be raised in the future was because Christ has become the firstborn from among the dead (Col 1.18).
In pointing to a resurrection of the just and unjust (v15), Paul reminded his audience that their actions would be judged. He did not need to take justice into his own hands. As he wrote the Romans, ‘avenge not yourselves … vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord’ (Rom 12.19).
The truth of the resurrection had practical implications for Paul. ‘For this cause I also exercise myself to have in everything a conscience without offence towards God and men’ (v16, JND). Unlike the prosecution, resurrection compelled Paul to speak the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. While moral integrity did not count as hard evidence per se, it spoke volumes to an onlooking judge. Just as wisdom cries in ‘the chief places of concourse’ (Pr 1.21), Paul’s honesty would resonate with Felix.
Paul refuted the third accusation of defiling the temple by saying that the Jews had discovered him, not in the sinister act of defiling the temple but, as a purified devotee, worshipping (v18). Years away from Jerusalem, had fostered sentiments of piety, not profanity (v17). Paul stated, ironically, that although those who had found him in the Jerusalem temple had much to say in Jerusalem, in the cold light of a courtroom, when solid evidence was needed, they were conspicuously absent (v19). ‘Roman law imposed heavy penalties upon accusers who abandoned their charges, and the disappearance of accusers often meant the withdrawal of a charge. Their absence, therefore, suggested that they had nothing against him that would stand up in a Roman court of law’.[76] If a man cannot stand by his word, he is not worth listening to.
Court adjourned (vv22 – 27)
Felix should have thrown the case out, but he deferred it until Lysias arrived. In another stroke of providence, Felix was well informed of ‘the Way’ (v22), which meant that he could see through the holes in the prosecution’s argument. It is hard to tell what exactly motivated Felix to defer judgment. It may have been a desire to be bribed (v26), or to follow political expediency (v27), or simply out of curiosity (v24). Behind the scenes, God was moving his servant to Rome. While doing so, He ensured Paul enjoyed relative liberty (v23).
Felix providentially had a Jewish wife in the vicinity. Drusilla, the daughter of Herod Agrippa I (like another Herod (Lk 23.8)) seemed to have some interest in ‘the Way’. In preaching righteousness (v25), Paul reminding this couple of their sins. Self-control addressed the sinful nature that is a slave to sin and its impulses. Coming judgment is the consequence of sin the root, and sins the fruit. Far from indulging their inquisitiveness, Paul challenged their consciences. Every preacher must similarly apply, with power, the sword of God’s word to the hearts of men. Because Felix and Drusilla were living in adultery, they needed to be warned of coming judgement. ‘Drusilla’s brother Agrippa II gave her in marriage to the king of Emesa … but when she was still only sixteen, Felix persuaded her … to leave her husband and marry him’. [77] It is little wonder that Paul’s reasoning caused Felix to tremble. Men need to learn that there is a God ‘with whom [they have] to do’ (Heb 4.13).
Unfortunately, Felix delayed, and dismissed Paul (v25). His growing interest in money, however, made subsequent conversations less profitable (v26). Paul had a clear conscience in public and private. Therefore, he would not bribe Felix. The message he preached rested on his personal integrity. He had come to Jerusalem to give charity to poor saints, not to line a governor’s pockets. Refusing to compromise, Paul was willing to ‘endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ’ (2 Tim 2.3).
Even though Felix had been in charge for many years, after Paul had been in his custody for two years, the Lord, Who appoints rulers, replaced him with Festus. Felix had had time, and space, to repent, but did not, and chose to keep Paul imprisoned. This was all part of God’s sovereign purpose to take His servant to Rome. What Felix meant for evil, God meant for good. The governing authorities may have been set again Paul, but ‘if God be for us, who can be against us?’ (Rom 8.31).
Appendices
Appendices
Sermons, prayers, and miracles in Acts
Sermons, prayers, and miracles in Acts
Sermons
Prayers
Miracles
Moments of opposition to the gospel
Moments of opposition to the gospel
Religious
Commercial
Comparing Moses and Stephen (Acts 7)
Comparing Moses and Stephen (Acts 7)
Moses
Stephen (Acts)
1.
Experienced the murmuring of God’s people
‘the LORD; for that he heareth your murmurings against the LORD: and what are we, that ye murmur against us …’ (Ex 16.7)
‘And in those days … there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews …’ (6.1)
2.
Involved with a mixed multitude
‘a mixed multitude went up also with them …’ (Ex 12.38)
‘the Grecians against the Hebrews …’ (6.1)
3.
Performed mighty miracles
Dt 34.11
6.8
4.
Opposed by religious fellow-citizens
Korah, Dathan & Abiram against Moses (Num 16)
Hellenist Jews confronted Stephen (himself a Hellenist, 6.9)
5.
Shining faces
Ex 34.29
6.15
6.
Confronted with murderous resistance
Ex 17.4
6.12, 7.58
7.
Interceded for the nation
‘forgive their sin .. and if not, blot me … out of thy book’ (Ex 32.32)
‘Lay not this sin to their charge’ (7.60)
8.
Before they died, they had sight of …
… Promised Land (Dt 34.1, 4)
… heaven (7.56)
9.
Experienced unique deaths
Dt 34.5, 6
7.59,60
10.
Followed by unique successors
Joshua (Dt 34.9)
Saul (7.58)
[1] Jensen IL. Jensen’s Survey of the New Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1981), p. 219.
[2] Bruce FF. The Book of the Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Company, Reprinted 1984), p. 368.
[3] Ibid., p. 375.
[4] Ibid., p. 474.
[5] Ibid., p. 26.
[6] Ibid., p. 255.
[7] See MacArthur J. STRANGE FIRE (Nashville, Tennessee: Nelson Books, 2013).
[8] Zodhiates S. The Complete Word Study Dictionary (AMG International, Inc., 1992), accessed via e-Sword.
[9] Vine WE. Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers), p. 98.
[10] Vincent’s Word Studies of the New Testament, 4 vols. (Hendrickson Publishers), vol. 1, p. 454.
[11] Ian Jackson. Speaking at Derby (UK), 18th July 2019.
[12] Vincent’s Word Studies of the New Testament, 4 vols. (Hendrickson Publishers), vol. 1, p. 455.
[13] Vincent’s Word Studies of the New Testament, 4 vols. (Hendrickson Publishers), vol. 1, p. 459.
[14] Vine WE. Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers), p. 962
[15] Ibid., p. 241.
[16] Vincent’s Word Studies of the New Testament, 4 vols. (Hendrickson Publishers), vol. 1, p. 462.
[17] Ibid., p. 463.
[18] Ibid., p. 463.
[19] Toussant SD. The Bible Knowledge Commentary (Victor Books, 1983), p. 362.
[20] Vine WE. Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers), p. 585.
[21] Gooding D. True to the Faith (Coleraine, N Ireland: The Myrtlefield Trust, Reprinted 2013), pp. 97, 98.
[22] WUEST’S EXPANDED TRANSLATION OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
[23] Bengel JA. New Testament word studies (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel Publications, 1971), vol. 1, pp. 785, 786.
[24] Constable TL. Notes on Acts, p. 171. Available at: https://planobiblechapel.org/tcon/notes/pdf/acts.pdf
[25] Vincent’s Word Studies of the New Testament, 4 vols. (Hendrickson Publishers), vol. 1, p. 479.
[26] Constable TL. Notes on Acts, p. 173. Available at: https://planobiblechapel.org/tcon/notes/pdf/acts.pdf
[27] Constable TL. Notes on Acts, p. 171. Available at: https://planobiblechapel.org/tcon/notes/pdf/acts.pdf
[28] Riddle JM. The Acts of the Apostles (Kilmarnock, Scotland: John Ritchie Ltd., 2012), p. 123.
[29] Wuest KS. Word Studies in the Greek New Testament, 4 vols. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), Vol. 4, p. 291.
[30] Gabelein AC. The Acts of the Apostles (Neptune, New Jersey: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1961), p. 156.
[31] Gooding D. True to the Faith (Coleraine, N Ireland: The Myrtlefield Trust, reprinted 2013), p. 221.
[32] Ibid, p. 207.
[33] Marshall IH. ACTS. (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, Reprinted 1984), p. 201.
[34] Davis Dictionary of the Bible (London: Pickering & Inglis Ltd.), p. 162.
[35] Gooding D. True to the Faith (Coleraine, N Ireland: The Myrtlefield Trust, Reprinted 2013), p. 220.
[36] Marshall IH. ACTS. (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, Reprinted 1984), p. 202.
[37] Bruce FF. The Book of the Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Company, Reprinted 1984), pp. 207, 208.
[38] Vincent’s Word Studies of the New Testament, 4 vols. (Hendrickson Publishers), vol. 1, p. 497.
[39] Ibid., p. 499.
[40] Gooding D. True to the Faith (Coleraine, N Ireland: The Myrtlefield Trust, Reprinted 2013), p. 213.
[41] “Robertson’s Word Pictures”, cited in e-Sword
[42] Baker Encyclopedia of Bible Places (Inter-Varsity Press, 1995), p.96.
[43] Bruce FF. The Book of the Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Company, Reprinted 1984), p. 263.
[44] Ibid., p. 264.
[45] Vine WE. Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers), p.862.
[46] http://www.allaboutturkey.com/yalvac.htm
[47] Gill DWJ, Gempf C. The Book of Acts in its First Century Setting. Vol. 2: Graeco-Roman Setting (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994), p.384.
[48] Anstey, M. Chronology of the Old Testament (Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, 1973, pp. 242, 243.
[49] Harris RL, Archer GL, Waltke BK. Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1980), p. 379.
[50] Phillips J. Exploring Galatians (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel Publications, 2004), p.68.
[51] Gill DWJ, Gempf C. The Book of Acts in its First Century Setting. Vol. 2: Graeco-Roman Setting (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994), p.82
[52] Gaebelein AC. The Acts of the Apostles (Neptune, New Jersey: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1961), p.253.
[53] Cambridge Greek Testament. The Acts of the Apostles (Cambridge: at the University Press, 1920), p. 269.
[54] Ibid, p. 282.
[55] Baker Encyclopaedia of Bible Places (Inter-Varsity Press, 1995), p.92
[56] Horner BE. Future Israel: Why Christian Anti-Judaism Must Be Challenged (Nashville, Tennessee: B&H Academic), p. 24
[57] Ibid., p. 26
[58] Ibid., p. 26
[59] Conybeare WJ & Howson JS. The Life and Epistles of St. Paul (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Company Reprinted 1992), p. 326
[60] Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible (Hendrickson Publishers, 1991), vol. 6 ,p.191.
[61] Conybeare WJ & Howson JS. The Life and Epistles of St. Paul (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Company Reprinted 1992), p. 297
[62] Vine WE. Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers), p. 934
[63] Irvin A Busenitz in Macarthur JF. Rediscovering Pastoral Ministry (Dallas: Word Publishing, 1995), p. 129
[64] Freeman P. ALEXANDER THE GREAT (New York, NY 10020: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2011), pp.87, 88
[65] WUEST’S EXPANDED TRANSLATION OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
[66] Bruce FF. The Book of the Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Company, Reprinted 1984), p. 436.
[67] Bruce FF. The Book of the Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Company, Reprinted 1984), p. 445.
[68] Josephus, cited by Bruce FF. The Book of the Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Company, Reprinted 1984), p. 449.
[69] Marshall IH. ACTS. (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, Reprinted 1984), p. 362.
[70] FELIX (ANTONIUS FELIX) - JewishEncyclopedia.com
[71] FELIX (ANTONIUS FELIX) - JewishEncyclopedia.com
[72] Robertson AT. New Testament Word Pictures on Acts 24.5
[73] William Barclay, cited in Constable TL. Notes on the Acts, p. 463. Available at: Microsoft Word - Acts Notes 22.docx (planobiblechapel.org)
[74] Constable TL. Notes on the Acts, p. 463. Available at: Microsoft Word - Acts Notes 22.docx (planobiblechapel.org)
[75] Heinrich Meyer, cited in Vincent’s Word Studies of the New Testament, 4 vols. (Hendrickson Publishers), vol. 1, p. 492.
[76] Richard Longnecker, cited by Constable TL. Notes on the Acts, p. 466. Available at: Microsoft Word - Acts Notes 22.docx (planobiblechapel.org)
[77] Bruce FF. The Book of the Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Company, Reprinted 1984), p. 472.