Wednesday, February 11, 2026

BOOK OF ACTS #22 and #23

 

 New Testament Bible Story

Chapter Seventy-eight:

Paul speaks to the Jews in his Defence

                    

                  Paul's Defence from the Jew's Accusations

                                     Acts 22 and 23


     Finally the mob of people who were calling for Paul's death
were somewhat silent in order to allow Paul to speak to them.
"Men and my brethren and honorable fathers, hear my defence which
I make unto you," Paul began to say in the Hebrew dialect to
them, and as he spoke in their native language they became even
more silent.

     "I am truly a man who is a Jew, " Paul continued, "and I was
     born in Tarsus, a city in the province of Cilicia, yet I was
     brought up in this city of Jerusalem, as a student at the
     feet of Gamaliel (who was one of the great Jewish teachers
     of that day). I was taught according to the perfect manner
     and traditions of the fathers of Judaism, and I was surely
     zealous towards serving God, as all of you are this day. I
     persecuted THIS WAY even to some dying as I hounded them
     down. I put many in chains and delivered both men and
     women into prison, both the High Priest and many Elders can
     bear witness to those facts. 
     I received letters from the aforementioned to give to the
     brethren Jews at Damascus, to bring them which I had bound
     and chained unto Jerusalem, for to be punished. And it
     came to pass, that as I was on my journey to Damascus and
     was about there, that around noon, there was suddenly a
     great light from heaven around me. And I fell to the
     ground hearing a voice saying to me, 'Saul, Saul, why are
     you persecuting me?' I answered, 'Who are you Lord?' And the
     voice said to me, 'I am Jesus of Nazareth, who you are
     persecuting.'
     They that were with me saw indeed the light, and were
     terrified, but they did not hear the voice of Him that spoke
     to me. And I said, 'What shall I do Lord?' And the Lord
     replied, 'Arise, get up, and go into Damascus, and there it
     shall be told you concerning all the things that are
     appointed for you to do.'
     I could not see, I was blind, from the glory of the light,
     and I had to be led by hand into the city of Damascus, by
     those who were with me.
     Then a man by the name of Ananias, a devout man according to
     the law of Moses, a man who had the respect of all the Jews
     at Damascus, he came to me, and said, 'Brother Saul,
     received your sight.' And within the same hour I was able to
     see him. And he further said to me, 'The God of our fathers
     has chosen you, that you should know His will, and
     understand the Just One, and should hear the words from His
     mouth. For you are to be a witness to all persons of what
     you have seen and heard. Now, wait no longer, get up
     and be baptized, and have your sins washed away, as you call
     on the name of the Lord.'
     And it came to pass as I was come again to Jerusalem, as I
     was praying in the Temple, I was in a trance, and I saw Him
     saying to me, 'Make haste, get out of Jerusalem quickly,
     for the people there will not receive your words concerning
     Myself.' And I said, 'Lord, they know that I had many in the
     synagogues who believed on you, beaten and imprisoned.
     and when the blood of your martyr Stephen was spilled, I
     also stood by and consented unto his death, I was holding
     and watching over the clothes of those who were stoning
     him.' And He answered me, 'Depart, for I will send you far
     away to the Gentiles.'" (chapter 22:1-21).

     At the sound of the word "Gentile" they broke their silence.
Once more their angry emotions took over, and they shouted out,
"Away with such a fellow as this, he should not walk this earth,
it is fitting that he should not live."
     They continued to cry this out and as they did so they cast
off their clothes and threw dust into the air, a sign with the
Jews of deep emotional upset, but the emotion in this case was
anger at Paul and a desire to have him put to death (verses
22-23).
     
     We must always guard against the bad side of our emotions.
Emotions are not wrong of themselves. Our heavenly Father has all
the emotions we have. This can be seen from a careful reading of
the entire Bible, but our Father's emotions are always in
perfect control and with righteousness. We can also see from this
account that the Jews had "prejudice" - a preconceived notion or
idea about something that can cause a wrong action, even a
hurtful action to others. The Jews here hated the Gentiles
overall. It had become with them, not just a matter of hating
many of their sins and practices, which indeed were contrary to
the word, and commandments of God, but even the mention of
the word "Gentile" brought revolt and disdain and anger. The
wrong side of those emotions were again manifested as they
shouted out that Paul should be put to death.

     The chief captain of the guards ordered that Paul should be
brought inside the castle, and be whipped, to see if he might
admit as to why the Jews were crying out for him to be put to
death.
     They were binding Paul's hands with thongs of leather, when
Paul said to them, "Is it lawful to whip a man that is a Roman
citizen, before a trial, to see if he should be condemned?" When
the centurion (a soldier in charge of a hundred men) heard this
he quickly ran off to the captain and said, "You need to be very
careful with this man, for he claims he is a Roman citizen."
     Then, with haste, the captain came over to Paul and said,
"Tell me the truth now, is it true that you are a Roman citizen?"
Paul answered, "Yes, it is indeed true, I am." The captain
muttered, "Why, it is with a great sum of money that I bought
this freedom of being a Roman citizen." 
     Yes, like today in some quarters, as they say, "With money
you can buy anything." You could with enough money "buy" yourself
a citizenship in the Roman Government. And with that citizenship
you were entitled to many things that you could not ask for if
you were not a citizen of Rome. Going through a "court" hearing
before being physically punished if found guilty, was one of
those things. 
     Paul was now claiming his rightful Roman citizen privileges
of a court hearing before any physical punishment could be
enacted upon him, if he was indeed guilty of a crime. The captain
had acquired Roman citizenship by buying it with a great sum of
money. Paul answered him on the other hand that he was BORN a
Roman citizen - he was born free - with Roman citizen privileges,
and one of them was that a Roman citizen could not be whipped
without first a trial to see if he was guilty of something that
deserved a physical beating under Roman law (verses 22-28).

     Everyone now departed from Paul. They got together and
talked among themselves, even now being very afraid, because the
captain had bound up and was about to allow physical whipping to
be administered to a Roman citizen, without first having a trial.


     The next day the captain, took off the bonds from Paul's
hands, set him free, but wanting to know if the Jews had a true
cause in saying Paul had done some evil, he called the chief
priests and the Jewish Sanhedrin (the Jewish court allowed under
Roman rule to function on certain religious matters) together. He
set Paul in their midst (verses 29-30).

PAUL ANSWERS THE JEWISH SANHEDRIN - ACTS 23

     With an earnest steadfast look at the members of the
Sanhedrin, Paul spoke: "Men and brethren, I have lived in all
good conscience before God unto this very day."  The High Priest
Ananias then commanded someone standing close to Paul to smite
him on the mouth. Paul immediately said with a stern tone of
voice, "God shall smite you, you whited wall (black underneath,
but looking white and righteous to onlookers). Do you sit
to judge me after the law, and then command that I be smitten,
which is contrary to the law?"
     Those that stood by cried out to Paul, "Do you revile and
speak angry to God's High Priest?" Then Paul said, "I did not
know brethren that it was the High Priest; for it is written,
'You shall not speak evil of the ruler of your people" (verses
1-5).

     Paul is quoting Exodus 22:28. But the whole Bible must be
taken into account with such a verse. When the judges and rulers
are judging and ruling according to God's commandments and
righteousness, then they rule and judge correctly and so must be
shown respect at all times. Under the ideal of God's government
they are living, acting, thinking, and administering, correct
judgment, in the correct godly manner. In so doing God gave
instructions, that all people then should honor the judges and
rulers.  
     In this case with Paul, it is very clear that the High
Priest and the members of the Sanhedrin, were FAR from acting and
thinking and practicing according to God's righteousness. The
High Priest had commanded that a physical action to done to Paul
that was indeed NOT according to any law of Moses or law of God.
The High Priest was way out of line here and in the whole context
of this episode with Paul. Did Paul really not know that it was
the High Priest standing there? I very much doubt he did not.
Paul was a highly educated man, and coming to Jerusalem, being
there for a while, going through all the trouble he was
experiencing with the Jews, I would fully expect that Paul
knew very well who was High Priest.
     Did Paul have a right to protest, even with no uncertain
words, against the High Priest's command to have him stricken on
the mouth. Yes, of course he did. No where in God's word does the
Lord teach that "evil" men, who are NOT fulfilling their function
as supposedly being a judge and ruler in righteousness for God,
over His people, must be respected no matter how they behave and
no matter what commandments they broadcast out to others to
perform against righteous individuals (and Paul was certainly
in full and right standing with God here, it was the High Priest
and the members of the Sanhedrin who were opposed to the Lord
here, and it was they who were really in the hot seat with God,
not Paul).
     Jesus spoke at times with very open and frank words to
"religious leaders" of His day, who were anything but the correct
righteous judges and rulers of religion in Israel. Once more just
read Matthew chapter 23 and hear the blistering words form Jesus'
mouth to religious judges and rulers, which would have included
the High Priest and the members of the Jewish religious council
of the Sanhedrin.

     So, what of Paul kind of apologizing here, and saying "I did
not know it was the High Priest" and quoting from Exodus 22:28? 
He was probably saying it with tongue in cheek, kind of
"appeasing" them we could say. They were so far off from acting
the truth, that they even thought the High Priest had the right
from God to command anything, even that which was against the law
of God, and that it was approved of God.  Yes, Paul I'm sure knew
it was the High Priest commanding something to be done which was
against the law of God, but when they wanted to abuse Exodus
22:28 as if no matter what the judge or ruler of the people
commanded against you, you were to take it like "blind faith
dogs" - then Paul appeased them with a kind of tongue in cheek,
"Oh, I'm so sorry, for I know what Exodus 22:28 says." Probably
under his breath he was saying, "but you guys are so far from
following the righteous way and laws of God, you don't even come
within acting as God commanded judges and rulers to act."

     Many sects and cults, mis-apply this verse of Exodus 22:28.
They first, through various cunning ways get their followers to
believe the leader of the cult and his right hand men, are true
"prophets" or "apostles" or "ministers" of God, usually the
"head" leader is "THE prophet or apostle" of God. Then they
brainwash their followers to believe that anything done, spoken,
or written, by the "head" apostle is THE WORD of God,
directly coming from God, inspired by the Lord, even when it is
in utter CONTRAST and opposition to the laws and commandments and
teachings of the Lord in His word the Bible. 
     If someone then questions the correctness of "THE apostle"
of the cult, as not in accordance to God's word in the Bible, the
cult leaders throw Exodus 22:28 in their face.  How many cult
leaders finally reach the point when they tell their followers
that THEY, the leader, are ABOVE the law, have new revelation
supposedly from God, that makes the written word of God obsolete
at times, is just about ALWAYS the case.  Then they want you to
blindly obey Exodus 22:28. The reasoning goes in a circle. We are
God's judges and rulers, hence we can set whatever we want to
command and set as law, be it against God's law or not, and you
have to take it and say nothing, for Exodus 22:28 tells you to
respect us.

     They want you to look at the Bible with tunnel vision and
fall in line with their reason of circulation. They fail to
realize and certainly fail to teach that the Bible often
speaks with "general statements" and general statements have an
exception side to them. The "whole world" came to be taxed in
Luke 2:1. Obviously this is a general statement. The people in
Argentina or China, or India, did NOT come to Jerusalem to be
"taxed." So it is with Exodus 22:28. The understanding from this
general statement, as expounded in the whole Bible, is that when
judges and rulers are acting in accordance to God's will and ways
and laws, then respect is to be shown to them .... if they are
not, but acting contrary to God's laws, then the verse does not
apply. 
     People did not have to respect or give honor or obedience to
Adolf Hitler of the 20th century. Nor did they have to keep their
mouth shut or their pen from writing about the wrongs and the
evils of that leader. 

     Paul now goes on to use common wisdom of the world, even
what we might say "psychology" on the people in the Sanhedrin
before him.
     He perceived that one part of the Sanhedrin were Pharisees
and the other part were Sadducees. He tells them that he was a
Pharisee at one time, the very son of a Pharisee. And that it is
the hope of the RESURRECTION of the dead that he is called
into question over. Oh, what psychology he used, for when he came
from that point in his defence, with the doctrine of the
resurrection of the dead, he knew it would cause quite
a commotion. For The Pharisees BELIEVED in the resurrection of
the dead, but the Sadducees DID NOT! They, the Sadducees also did
not believe in angels or spirits, but the Pharisees believed in
both.
     There was quite the cry raised up, the scribes from the
Pharisees section of the Sanhedrin, rose and said they found NO
EVIL in Paul, but that if it was a spirit or an angel speaking to
him, they did not want to fight against God. 
     A mighty tug-of-war broke out between the two rival
fractions of the Jewish Sanhedrin, so much so that it looked like
Paul would literally be torn apart between them. So the captain
ordered his soldiers to go down and take hold of Paul by force
and bring him back into the castle. 
     That night the Lord stood by Paul and said, "Be of good
comfort, Paul, for you have testified about me in Jerusalem, so
must you also witness about me in Rome" (verses 6-11).

PLOT TO KILL PAUL IS DISCOVERED

     The anger some Jews (about 40 of them)  had for Paul was so
intense that some actually banded together and put themselves
under a curse, or a vow, that they would neither eat food or
drink water till they had killed Paul. 
     We know that if they stuck to this vow, they themselves
ended up dying, for Paul was not to be killed by the hands of
them or the Jews of the Sanhedrin.
     This band of 40 Jews went to the Sanhedrin, told them what
vow they had put themselves under, and wanted the Sanhedrin to
tell the captain in the castle to bring Paul to them, as if
wanting to question him more. Then the 40 Jews would jump on Paul
and kill him.
     This plan became known to Paul's sister's son (yes Paul has
a sister living in Jerusalem) and he went into the castle and was
able to tell Paul about it.
     Paul was able and allowed to appear before the captain of
the soldiers with this young man who had told him the secret plan
of the forty Jews. The captain took the young man off privately
and asked him what he had to say. He told him that the Jews were
going to ask him to bring Paul to them so they could ask him more
questions, but the forty would jump on him and kill him.
     The chief captain thanked the young man for bringing him the
news of this plan, and told him to tell no one that he had told
the captain about it (verses 12-22).

     The captain ordered two centurions to gather together two
hundred soldiers, seventy horsemen, two hundred spearmen, and
horses for all, and at the third hour of the night, to escort
Paul to Felix the governor at Caesarea. 
     He wrote a letter after this manner:

     "Claudius Lysias unto the most excellent governor Felix,
     greeting. This man Paul was taken by the Jews and should
     have been killed by them; then came I with an army,
     and rescued him, having understood he was a Roman citizen. I
     wanted to know the cause as to why the Jews wanted him dead.
     I perceived it was all to do with their law, and nothing
     worthy of death or even of being bound up and imprisoned. I
     was also informed how the Jews had contrived a plan to kill
     this man, so I've straight away sent him to you. I have
     informed the Jews they need to go before you to state what
     they have against this man Paul, Farewell."

     The soldiers did as they were commanded and brought Paul
during the night to Antipatris. On the morrow they left just the
horsemen to accompany Paul, and they returned to the castle. The
horsemen arrived at Caesarea and delivered the letter and
Paul before Felix.
     Felix read the letter from Claudius, and asked Paul what
Province he was from, and was told Cilicia.
     Felix told Paul he would hear him give his defence when his
accusers arrived. Until then Paul was to be housed in Herod's
judgment hall, a very fine and hospitable confinement (verses
23-35).

                    .....................

Written October 2004

Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, February 7, 2026

BOOK OF ACTS #18 and #19

 


 New Testament Bible Story

Chapter Sixty:

Paul's Third Missionary Journey

                      
                     ACTS chapter Eighteen and Nineteen


PAUL OBSERVES A FEAST IN JERUSALEM
AND CONCLUDES HIS SECOND MISSIONARY
JOURNEY

     Paul stayed in Corinth for a good while, but the time
came for him to move on again. He sailed to go to Syria, but
first came to Ephesus. He brought with him Priscilla and Aquila.
He had shorn his head in Cenchrea; for he had a vow. 
     Cenchrea was the eastern sea port of Corinth. The vow was
probably the Nazarite vow of Numbers 6. We must remember that
there was a transition of Old Testament and New Testament. The
Temple still stood in Jerusalem. The priesthood still functioned.
It was not wrong for Christians to observe Old Testament rites
such as the Nazarite vow, and even Temple rituals and Temple
sacrifices. We shall come to Temple rituals observed by some in
the Christian church in a later chapter of Acts. But we also need
to remember that no Christian was obliged to observe any of those
physical rites.
     Ephesus was a celebrated city in Ionia, Asia Minor, about
forty miles south of Smyrna. It was chiefly famous for the temple
of Diana. In the time of the Romans it was the metropolis of
Asia. The Jews, according to Josephus, the Jewish historian of
the first century A.D., were numerous in that city

     As was Paul's custom he entered the synagogue and reasoned
with the Jews concerning the Scriptures. They were willing to
listen to what he had to say and wanted to hear more, they wanted
Paul to stay around for a while, but he was not about to do
so this time. He said goodbye to them saying, "I must by all
means observe this feast that is coming in Jerusalem; but I will
return again to you, if it is God's will."

     Some believe the feast that Paul was wanting to observe at
Jerusalem was the Passover, but we cannot be sure what feast it
was, for Luke does not get specific in recording exactly which
feast it was. Observing God's festivals of Leviticus 23 was very
much still the custom and tradition of the Church of God during
apostolic times. Jesus observed the festivals as we saw from the
four Gospel records. They truly are God's feasts as clearly
stated in Leviticus 23.

     Paul landed at Caesarea and went up to Jerusalem, observed
the festival and visited the church at the same time. He then
departed from Jerusalem and returned to his home base, the city
of Antioch in Syria. (Acts 18: 18-22). 

PAUL'S THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY
BEGINS

     Paul once more spent some time in Antioch, the length of
time we are not told. Then he departed again and went over the
areas of Galatia and Phrygia to once more strengthen spiritually
the brethren in the churches there.

     Now Luke tells us about something that was going on back in
Ephesus, where Aquila and Prescilla had been left by Paul when he
only departed for Jerusalem. A certain Jew by the name of
Apollos, comes on the scene. He was born in the city of
Alexandria, a celebrated city in Egypt, founded by Alexander the
Great. You may want to read about that city in some of the Bible
Encyclopedias.
     Apollos, had been instructed in "the way of the Lord" - that
is he had certain knowledge of the things concerning the Messiah.
He was fervent in attitude of mind, he spoke and taught very
diligently the things of the Lord, but he was only familiar with
the baptism of John the baptist.  He was then "not up to date" as
we might say. But he went to the synagogue and spoke very boldly
what truth he did know. Quila and Prescilla met him there and
then took him privately and expounded the way of God and the
Messiah more perfectly to him.
     Apollos was led to think that he should go to Achaia, so the
brethren at Ephesus wrote a letter exhorting the disciples there
to receive him. And they indeed did so. Apollos was a great
blessing to them, for in visiting there he helped them
tremendously in spiritual matters, helping all who had believed
through grace. And it is said he mightily convinced the Jews,
right out in a public way, showing from the Scriptures, that
Jesus was the Christ, the Messiah. We are told nothing else about
this man and the work he did in any specific way. Paul does
mention him in his letter to the Corinthians, as one that had
gained such popularity and "fame" shall we say, that some were
making him as a kind of "cult" leader for themselves, while
others made other apostles their "cult" leader, which Paul said
was wrong for them all to do (1 Cor.1:10-13). Paul said he
planted the Gospel seeds and Apollos watered, but it was God
behind it all anyway, and it was God who gave the increase (1
Cor.3:5-9).

     While Apollos was in Corinth, Paul passed over to Ephesus
(Acts 19:1). We are never told if Paul and Apollos ever met.
Maybe they did, maybe they did not. But we are told that both men
were used mightily in doing God's work.

     Paul now again in Ephesus finds certain disciples and says
to them, "Have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed in
the Messiah?" They replied, "Why, we have not been instructed in
whether there is a Holy Spirit." And when Paul heard that, he
asked with a somewhat puzzled look on his face, "Well then, into
what were you baptized?" Their answer was immediate, "We have
been baptized with John's baptism." Then Paul realized what had
not been instructed to them, and answered, "John truly
baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying to the people,
that they should believe on Him that was to come after himself,
that is on Christ Jesus."
     On hearing this there was no question in their minds that
they wanted to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. When,
after baptism, Paul laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came
upon them; and they were given the gift of speaking in a
different language as well as speaking under the inspiration of
the Spirit. There were about twelve of those disciple we are
informed (Acts 19:1-7).

     We can note here that anyone who had ever been baptized with
John's baptism, did need to be baptized in the name of Jesus.
John's baptism was good up to a certain point only, but only to
lead people to believe on the Him that would come after his
ministry was over - who was Jesus the Christ. We see again the
teaching of the "laying on of hands." We see also in this case,
two gifts of the Spirit given. But other people were baptized,
many, even thousands, where no such gifts were given, at least we
are not told that any gifts of the Spirit were given at that time
of their baptism.

     Paul, yes, as his custom was, went into the synagogue, and
for three months spoke very boldly, disputing and persuading the
things concerning the Kingdom of God. Some became hardened and
began to speak evil of "the way" that Paul was teaching, and they
influenced others, quite a large group, and so Paul departed from
them, and took the disciples with him. He went to dispute in a
school owned by a man called Tyrannus. Paul continued teaching
and disputing in this school for two years. So successful was he
that just about all in Asia Minor heard the word of the Lord
Jesus in some way, both Jews and Greeks (Acts 19:9-10).

A SPECIAL MIRACLE BY PAUL

     It was also at this time that God did special miracles by
the hands of Paul. He sent out handkerchiefs or small aprons to
the sick and they were healed every one of them, and those that
were possessed of demons, were released form their power, as the
demons withdrew from them (verse 11).
     It is important to note in this, that Luke wrote God  "did
SPECIAL miracles by the hands of Paul." This was a special
miracle for that time and for a certain duration only. The
account in Acts as well as the whole New Testament says nothing
about Paul doing this miracle for the rest of his life. We can
also note that nothing is said about those handkerchiefs being
anointed with oil.
     I mention all this because some think this miracle done by
Paul was something the Church of God was doing as a whole, or
that the Church of God today should be doing this. It was NOT
something all the church apostles or elders of the church back in
Paul's day were doing. It is said God did this special miracle by
Paul, and no one else is recorded as being able to perform this
special miracle. 
     This is clearly NOT an example for the Church of God as a
whole to try to duplicate today. We are instructed in James 5
what is to be the GENERAL practice for the healing of the sick in
the Church of God. That instruction is for the sick to call for
the elderS (more than one) to come and pray for the sick, and to
anoint them with oil. If for some reason no elders can come (i.e.
say distance being a factor), then disciples of Christ should
mention their sickness to other disciples and have them pray for
them (James 5:16).

USING JESUS' NAME INCORRECTLY

     Some vagabond Jews, ones who travelled from town to town
casting out demons, tried to add some more power to their
undertaking. They were not disciples of Christ. They knew or had
seen what Paul could do by using the name of Jesus, so they
thought they would try a little "Paul to Jesus incarnation" -
they said, "I command you by Jesus, whom Paul preaches, to come
out."
     Seven sons of a leading priest called Sceva, were trying
this incarnation on a man possessed by and evil spirit, and the
spirit replied, "I know Jesus, and I know Paul, but who are you
fellows?" And the man leaped on them and attacked them with such
violent strength that they fled from the house, naked and badly
injured (Acts 19: 13-16).

     Those unbelieving Jews were just trying to see if the power
used by Paul could be used by them. They thought they could
enlarge their popularity and prestige if more instant miracle
power could be had by the name of Jesus. Their hearts were not at
all in the right place, they were as we say, "trying to cash in
on a good deal." And of course they could not fool God in heaven
for one second.

MORE BECAME BELIEVERS

     The story of what happened to those seven sons of Sceva,
spread like wildfire throughout Ephesus, both to Jews and Greeks.
A solemn fear came upon all the people of that city, and the name
of the Lord Jesus was greatly honored. Many who became believers
and disciples confessed their sinful practices, often in an open
way. Some who had been practicing various magic rites brought
their instructive incarnation books and burned them in a public
bonfire. The value of all the books was about 50,000 pieces of
silver, which today would have been several million dollars. One
piece of silver was about a day's wage at that time.

     So the message of the word of God spread near and far, and
had a very powerful effect on people's lives (Acts 19:17-20).

THE RIOT IN EPHESUS

     The Holy Spirit told Paul to go to Macedonia and Achia
before returning once more to Jerusalem. And then Paul thought it
would be time to go from there to Rome, which he had not as yet
done. He sent two of his fellow workers in the Gospel, Timothy
and Erastus, on ahead to Macedonia while he stayed for a while
longer in the province of Asia Minor.
     But at that time serious trouble developed in Ephesus
concerning "the way" as it was now often called. It began with
Demetrius, a silversmith who had a large manufacturing business,
making silver shrines of the Greek goddess Diana. He employed
many a craftsmen. He called the craftsmen together one day, as
well as other skilled men of related trades, and said to them:

     "Fellow tradesmen, you know that our wealth comes from this
     trade with the worship of Diana. As you have seen and heard,
     this man Paul has persuaded many people that handmade gods
     aren't gods at all. And this is happening not only here in
     Ephesus but throughout the whole province. Of course I'm not
     just talking about the respect we have lost for our trade,
     but I also worry that the temple of the great goddess Diana
     - this splendid goddess worshipped throughout Asia and all
     around the Roman world - will have her prestige
     disappearing."

     At hearing this fact, it hit them as never before as to what
was happening concerning their goddess Diana. They boiled with
anger and started to shout as loud as they could, "Great is Diana
of the Ephesians!" They shouted more, "Great is the goddess
Diana!" And on and on they went with, "Great is Diana of the
Ephesians!" Soon a crowd gathered around them, then more and more
people, until the whole city was in an uproar and utter confusion
everywhere set in. Then they all rushed to the Amphitheater,
their football stadium of their day. They dragged along with
them, Gaius and Aristarchus, who were Paul's travelling
companions from Macedonia. 
     Paul wanted to go after them, to try and rescue his friends,
but many of the disciples prevented him from doing so. Some of
the officials of the area, friends of Paul, also sent messages to
him, begging him not to risk his life being taken by entering the
Amphitheater.

     Inside their stadium all the people were shouting out, some
one thing, some others another thing, the whole place was in
total confusion and bedlam. The fact was that most of the people
there did not know why they were there in the first place, they
followed the crowd, some just looking for an excuse to riot. A
man by the name of Alexander was pushed forward by some of the
Jews, who encouraged him to explain the situation to everyone. He
motioned for silence and then would have made his defence, but
when the crowd realized he was a Jew, they started shouting again
as one voice, "Great is Diana of the Ephesians! Great is Diana of
the Ephesians!" And they kept up those kind of shouting for two
full hours.
     Finally the town mayor was able to appease the people so he
was able to speak.

     "Citizens of Ephesus," he said: "Everyone knows that Ephesus
     is the official guardian of the great temple of Diana, whose
     image fell down to us from heaven. As this is the fact,
     you should not be disturbed, no matter what is said. Don't
     do anything in a senseless rash way. You have brought these
     men here but they really have done no harm to you.
     They have stolen nothing from the temple, and they have not
     spoken against your goddess. If Demetrius and the craftsmen
     with him have a case against these men, the courts are in
     session and the judges can hear the case immediately. Let
     them go through the legal channels of our city. And if there
     are other complaints about other matters they can be brought
     before the courts in a legal way. I am afraid we are in
     danger of the Roman government charging us with rioting,
     since there is no justifiable cause for all this commotion
     and disturbance that is taking place here. And if Rome
     demands an explanation, we will not know what to tell them."

     With this sensible and logical speech the crowd dispersed
and went back to their normal everyday living. 

     After all this near riot was over Paul called for the
disciples, and exhorted and encourage them, and then said goodbye
and left for Macedonia (Act 19:21-41; 20:1).

     While Paul lived in Ephesus most scholars believe he wrote
his TWO epistles to the Church at Corinth - the epistles called 1
Corinthians and 2 Corinthians. We shall in the next chapter, take
a look at the overview of those epistles.

                .............................

April 2004

Posted by at No comments:

BOOK OF ACTS #21



 New Testament Bible Story

Chapter Seventy-seven:

Paul goes to Jerusalem

              
                                               Acts 21

     After saying farewell to the elders of Ephesus, Paul and his
company sailed to the island of Cos. They reached Rhodes the next
day and then went on to Patara, and there they boarded a ship
sailing for the Syrian province of Phoenicia. They sighted the
island of Cyprus and passed by it on the left and then landed at
the harbor of Tyre, in Syria, where the cargo of the ship was
unloaded. There they went ashore and found the local disciples
and decided to stay a week with them. Through the power of the
Holy Spirit these disciples prophesied that Paul should NOT go up
to Jerusalem. When it was time for Paul and his company to leave,
the entire congregation, with wives and children , came down to
the shore with them. There they all knelt and prayed and said
farewell. Paul and his companions journeyed on and the saints of
Tyre returned to their homes (Acts 21:1-6).

     We again see here an example that it is quite correct and
honorable at times, for a congregation to all kneel and pray
together. This was no doubt such a time, as they all knew nothing
good from the physical point of view was going to happen to Paul
if he went up to Jerusalem.

     Paul and his co-workers went on to Ptolemais, where they
greeted the believers there, but only stayed for one day. Then
they went on to Caesarea and stayed in Philip's house. He had
become an Evangelist. He was one of the seven men chosen to "wait
on tables" or distribute food, as we saw back in Acts chapter
six. 
     Now, Philip had four unmarried daughters who had the gift of
Prophecy. In the early years of the New Testament Church of God,
this gift of prophecy usually included the ability to foretell
what would happen to a person or persons in a week, or month, or
whatever time frame. They could probably also foretell natural
disasters to come. All of those kinds of things they could
predict, as well as speaking things inspired by the Holy Spirit,
which the word "prophecy" can also be understood to mean (verses
7-9).

     We can see from this that the gifts of the Spirit can be
placed upon ANYONE, men or women, and that is exactly what Paul
taught in 1 Corinthians chapter twelve.
     We note also that the leading of the Spirit had guided
Philip, who at first was chosen by the people and the apostles
(Acts 6) to serve in a physical way, to become an Evangelist. The
details of all this happening to Philip we are not given. It is
given that by this time in the life of the Church of God, he was
known as an Evangelist, and that is sufficient for us to know. An
Evangelist is one who goes out in a public way at times to
proclaim the Gospel to the unconverted masses of the people.

     During the time Paul and his companions stay with Philip, a
man named Agabus, who also had the gift of prophecy, came to them
from Judea. He took Paul's belt and bound his own feet with it.
Then he said, "The Holy Spirit has declared to me, that the
owner of this belt shall also be bound by the Jewish leaders in
Jerusalem and turned over to the Romans." 
     Paul's companions and those believers at Philip's house then
begged Paul not to go on to Jerusalem. But Paul answered them
saying, "Why do you weep for me? You are breaking my heart! I am
not only ready to be jailed at Jerusalem but also to die if I
must, for the sake of our Lord Jesus."
     All then realized it was useless to try and get Paul to
change his mind about going up to Jerusalem, so they stopped
trying and said, "The will of the Lord be done" (verses 10-14).

PAUL ARRIVES AT JERUSALEM

     Some believers from Caesarea accompanied Paul and his
companions to Jerusalem. They arrived and stayed with a man named
Mnason, who was originally from Cyprus, and one of the very early
disciples. They were all welcomed very cordially by the believers
in Jerusalem.
     The next day Paul and his co-workers went on to meet with
James and all the Elders of Jerusalem. Greetings were exchanged
and then Paul gave account of all the things God had accomplished
among the Gentiles through his and his companions efforts.
The Elders of Jerusalem praised God on hearing all this news, but
then after a little silence, with concerned looks on their faces,
they all said with one voice (but probably it was James who did
the speaking for them all):

     "You know dear brother there are many thousands  of Jews who
     have also believed, and still take all the laws of Moses
     very seriously. The Jewish Christians here have been told
     that you are teaching all the Jews in the Gentile world to
     turn away from the laws of Moses. They say that you teach
     people NOT to CIRCUMCISE their children or follow Jewish
     customs. Now what can be done about this? For those Jewish
     Christians will certainly hear that you have come to
     Jerusalem. Here is our suggestion. 
     We have four men here who have taken a vow, and are
     preparing to shave their heads. Go with them to the Temple
     and join them in the purification ceremony, and pay for them
     to have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know that the
     rumors about you and your teachings are all false and that
     you yourself are willing to observe Jewish laws and rituals.
     As for the Gentile Christians, all we ask of them is what we
     have already told them in a letter, that they should not eat
     food offered to idols, nor consume blood, nor eat meat from
     strangled animals, and that they should stay away from all
     sexual immorality" (verses 15-25).

     This is an extremely interesting passage of the New
Testament. It shows that false ideas and rumors that are
incorrect, can and do often float around and get passed on,
that come from a misunderstanding of what someone may say in a
certain context. Often the context is not thought about, only
certain words that are said, are clung to, and from there ANOTHER
context is added, which perverts the original context and the
words spoken within the original context. 
     Paul taught that certain physical rites and "rituals" (like
the rite and ritual that went with circumcising an eight day old
male child) such as physical circumcision was, under the New
Testament, NOT required for spiritual salvation. But he NEVER
taught it was WRONG or that such a law of Moses, should NOT BE
DONE, if you desired to do it. He simply taught that such a
physical rite did nothing for your salvation. He taught that
doing a physical rite like circumcision, neither added to the
grace of salvation, nor took away from the grace of salvation. In
other words Paul said, you did not acquire more "brownie
points" in God's eyes if you circumcised or if you did not
circumcise. 
     We have seen (as we covered Acts 15) that SOME "Jewish"
believing people taught that circumcision WAS needed in order to
be saved. Many other Jewish believers also practiced the Temple
rituals and vows such as the Nazarite vow of Number 6. It may
well have been the Nazarite vow that these four men had taken
which the Elders at Jerusalem wanted Paul to participate in, at
the Temple, with them, as they ended their vow.
     But the context of this passage is certain - it is physical
and ritual laws of Moses, which many Jewish believers, still
desired to practice, even having enthusiasm to still practice
them. The Temple still stood, the Levitical priesthood still
functioned in the Temple. All this was instituted by God under
Moses, so hence it still in that sense, belonged to the Lord. It
was not NOW something "evil" or "bad" or "contaminated" just
because the New Testament was in effect, and because the Messiah
had now come to die for the sins of the world. Some thought that
Paul did teach that the rites and rituals of the laws of Moses,
including physical circumcision, was "evil" or "bad" and should
be kept at arms length, avoiding them like the plague. 
     The Elders at Jerusalem knew Paul did NOT teach such a
theology concerning the Temple ritual laws of Moses, as some
thought he did. And those Elders wanted Paul to literally
demonstrate to all in Jerusalem that he was not against partaking
in Temple rites IF they so still desired to do so.

     Again, let me make it clear. Paul did not teach that a
believer in Christ HAD TO partake of Temple ceremonies and rites
under the New Testament. He taught that such physical rites
(including physical circumcision) did NOT have to be performed
under the New Testament, that those rites gained no favor or
grace with God as such. You were neither "more saved" or "less
saved" or to put it in modern terminology, you were neither
a "better Christian" or a "worst Christian" by doing or not doing
physical Temple rites of Moses.

     It comes as a shock to many Christians to realize the truth
of this passage in the book of Acts. The truth that Paul DID go
to the Temple and with other believers did partake of performing
Temple rites, which included Temple sacrifices. Many today think
that as Christ had been sacrificed on the cross for the sins of
the world, that doing literal animal sacrifices in the Temple,
with the Levitical priesthood, would be a terrible affront to
Christ, would somehow even be evil or sin, to do such a thing as
what Paul and these four men did in the Temple ritual. But as we
can plainly read, this was not the case at all, Paul and the four
men, did go to the Temple, they did partake in Temple rituals,
and God did not rain fire and brimstone down on their heads for
so doing.

     If today there was a Temple in Jerusalem, if today there was
a Levitical priesthood officiating the Temple sacrifices and
rituals, it would NOT be wrong, evil, or sin, for a Christian to
partake of those rituals. It would NOT make you a better
Christian, or a worst Christian, if you did or did not partake of
Temple rituals. You would not find more grace or less grace with
God by participating in Temple ceremonies and rituals, even
Temple animal sacrifices. It was not bad or sin for Paul and the
four men to participate in the Temple laws of Moses,  and it
would not be bad or sin, for you to do likewise IF the Temple
conditions were the same today as it was in Paul's day.

     As for the Gentiles, or none Jewish people, we have the
clear instruction in both Acts 15 and in this passage of Acts 21,
that they were never to feel they ever needed to perform Temple
rites, ceremonies, rituals, including physical circumcision. They
were to particularly watch and be careful about FOUR points
given. We covered all this in some detail as we went through Acts
15. It was four areas where the Gentiles had specific LARGE
problems with. Most can see that of sexual immorality, being a
large problem, with the people who never had God's word to guide
them on the matter of sexual conduct, but the other three .... 
people could question, from the point of "Are not these
also physical laws of Moses?"
     Yes, I guess you could say they are to some degree, or at
least many people classify them as physical laws of Moses, and so
as the Temple ritual, sacrificing, ceremonial, laws of Moses are
not required for salvation, so then these other three laws
of Moses should not be required. But we have the Elders of
Jerusalem saying the Gentiles should take care NOT to defile
themselves by practicing the breaking of these three laws of
Moses (the fourth being accepted by most Christians as right and
correct to be not sexually immoral). So, in the mind of many,
there is a seeming contradiction or ideas, or teaching here. But
the truth must lie then in the understanding, that NOT ALL
physical laws of Moses are the SAME. Some are NOT important for
Christians to practice today under the New Testament, but SOME
ARE STILL to be observed by all Christians (Jews or Gentiles) 
today.
     I did cover this aspect of the question and seeming
contradiction in detail in Acts 15. I ask the reader to refer
back to that section of the Bible Story, for the full answer.

PAUL IS ARRESTED

     So it was that Paul agreed to the Elders request and the
next day he went through the purification ritual with the men in
the Temple. There he publicly announced the date when their vows
would end and when the sacrifices would be offered for each of
them.
     The seven days were almost completed when some Jews from
Asia saw Paul in the Temple and roused a mob of people against
him. They took hold of him, saying, "Men of Israel! Help us! This
is the man who teaches against our people and tells everyone to
disobey the Jew's laws. He speaks against the Temple, and even
defiles it by bringing into it Gentile people [They had earlier
seen Paul in the city with Trophimus, the Gentile from Ephesus,
and they assumed Paul had taken him to the Temple]" (verses
26-29).

     Ah, see what "assumption" can do - it can cause blindness of
heart to the point of wanting to do harm, literally or mentally
and emotionally, towards whom you have falsely assumed has done
what you consider they should not have done, even if what you
consider is evil, is not evil at all. Nothing in God's word said
a Gentile could not come into the Temple of God, but the Jews had
set boundary markers and walls with the Temple structure to keep
Gentiles in only one part and out of another part. They even had
boundaries set up where Jewish women could not cross over within
the Temple. All man made ideas and practices. So these Jews truly
had an assumption and compounded it by adding to it practices and
traditions of their own making, all ending up to bring a great
evil upon the Apostle Paul.
     The whole population of the city was rocked and rolled by
these accusations, and a great riot broke out. Paul was dragged
out of the Temple, and the gates closed behind him. They were now
trying to kill him, so hot was their anger at him. Word reached
the commander of the Roman regiment that all Jerusalem was in a
riotous uproar. He immediately called out his officers and
soldiers who ran into the crowd.  And it was only this action by
the soldiers that caused the mob to stop beating Paul. The
commander arrested Paul and had him bound with two chains. He
then asked the crowd who this man was and what had he done. Some
shouted one thing and others shouted another thing. He could find
no truth in all the shouting and accusations, much of it
confusing and contradictory, so he ordered Paul to be taken to
the fortress. 
          As they reached the stairs to the fortress, the mob
grew so violent the soldiers had to lift up Paul to their
shoulders, and carry him aloft, to protect him. The crowd
followed behind shouting, "Kill him, kill him!"

PAUL SPEAKS TO THE CROWD

     As Paul was about to be taken inside, he said to the
commander, "May I have a word with you sir?"
     "Do you know Greek?" the commander surprisingly asked when
Paul spoke in Greek to him. "Are you not the one, the Egyptian
who led a rebellion some time back and took four thousand members
of the Assassins out into the desert?"
     "No," replied Paul, "I am a Jew from Tarsus in Cilicia,
which is an important city. Please, let me talk to these people."
     The commander agreed, so Paul stood there on the steps and
motioned to the people to be quiet. Soon a deep silence did come
over the crowd, and he addressed them in their own language,
Aramaic, which was the common Hebrew dialect of the people of
Judah (verses 30-40).
                ............................

Written October 2004
Posted by at No comments:

BOOK OF ACTS #20

 


 New Testament Bible Story

Chapter Seventy-Six:

Acts 20 - Elders of Ephesus

                   

      PAUL MOVES ON DURING HIS THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY


                                           
     The books of Galatians and Romans is thought to have been
written by Paul while in the city of Corinth. We pick up his
travels in Acts 20 verse 4. Several men were travelling with Paul
and the names of some are given, Timothy is no doubt the most
well-known name, as Paul wrote two epistles to him, that are
preserved for us in the Newt Testament.
     We are told they went ahead and waited for "us" (probably
meaning Paul and Luke as it was Luke who wrote and compiled the
book of Acts), at Troas. As soon as the days of Unleavened Bread
were over (indicating they still gave honor and respect to those
days of the Passover season. We have seen in 1 Corinthians 5 that
Paul told the church at Corinth, they should observe those days
with a new spirit of heart), they (Paul and Luke) boarded a ship
at Philippi in Macedonia and five days later arrived at Troas,
and there they stayed for a week.
     This was about the year A.D. 57 or 58 as best we can gather,
but the exact year is really unimportant, as Luke does not put
any emphasis on the exact chronology of most events he recorded.

     It was on the first day of the week that Paul and many
disciples (as well as many interested locals) gathered together
to "break bread" - which simply meant they gathered to have a
meal together, and has nothing to do with the observance of the
"Lord's supper" or "communion" as many today call the remembrance
of Jesus' death. It was the first day of the week and Paul was
preaching and teaching. He was going to leave the next day, so he
continued preaching until midnight, wanting to make the best of
every minute he had with them, in giving instructions and
explanations of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
     Now, some have jumped to the conclusion that this preaching
"till midnight" was a Saturday evening, saying the Bible counts
days from evening to evening, so, as this was the first day of
the week, it must therefore have been Saturday evening. It is
true that the Lord does count days from evening to evening as we
see in the first chapter of Genesis, but sometimes writers of the
Bible wrote within the time setting of the general society they
lived in. And that society Luke lived in was under Roman rule and
influence. It is then quite possible Luke wrote within Roman
usage of the day, which if that is the case here, then this
meeting look place on Sunday evening, not Saturday evening, and
Paul was going to leave on Monday not on a Sunday.
     The case cannot be proved either way. Those who want to
insist it was a Sunday evening "church meeting" use it to try and
say Sunday was now the New Testament weekly Sabbath. This is
merely the wishful thinking of those who hold that theological
teaching. The rest of the whole New Testament gives no weight to
that theological belief, and secular recorded history certainly
does not back up that teaching. There is no indication or
straight-forward talk by anyone in the New Testament that at the
death of Christ and His resurrection in the first hours of the
first day of the week (what we call Saturday evening - I refer
you back to the last chapters of the Gospels we have covered
already), the FOURTH commandment of the great Ten Commandments
was changed from the SEVENTH day of the week (Saturday) to the
FIRST day of the week (Sunday).
     Not ONE verse in the New Testament ever calls the first day
of the week, HOLY, or BLESSED, or SANCTIFIED, or a day of REST
from secular work. How easy it would have been for any one writer
of the New Testament to have said somewhere in all they wrote,
"We sanctify and keep holy the first day of the week in honor of
our Savior's resurrection" or "God has now commanded us to keep
holy the first day of the week because His Son was resurrected on
that day." Such words or such a sentence would have been so easy
for anyone to have somewhere incased in their epistles and
letters of the New Testament, but SUCH WORDS CANNOT be found.
     
     Acts 20:7 and 8 CANNOT be used to support a sanctified or
holy day for the first day of the week!

     Paul was speaking on and on, as we have seen, he spoke till
mid-night. A young man named Eutychus was sitting on the
windowsill, and became very drowsy, heavy eyed, and kept nodding
off to sleep. Finally he just went into a deep sleep and then
fell three stories down to his death. Paul immediately ran over
to him, took him in his arms and said to them all, "Don't be
alarmed, he is alive." It was a miracle, Luke tells us the
young man HAD died, was killed from his fall, but Paul through
the power of the Holy Spirit, had brought him back to life. They
were all overjoyed. It was a good time for Paul to now stop his
preaching, and they all "broke bread" and had some food together.

     Paul though was not finished talking to them about the Lord
and the Gospel. After they had had the refreshments, he again
continued talking to them right up to the break of day. Then Paul
departed. The young man we are told was taken home completely
unhurt, and all were joyous and relieved of any worry or sorrow
over his fall.
     
     Yes this was an all-night preaching and teaching seminar we
might say today. No doubt every one was pumped up with excitement
and enthusiasm, and except for the one young man, all were able
to be awake and attentive. When you are in this frame of mind the
body is able to go through the night without sleep, but I'm sure
they all had a good sleep the next day after Paul and his
companions left (Acts 20:4-12).

PAUL MEETS WITH THE EPHESIAN ELDERS

     Paul actually went on by land to Assos, while all the rest of
his companions went on by ship ahead of him. Paul did join them
there and they all sailed on together to Mitylene. Why Paul went
by land and the others by sea is not told to us. Luke just
records the fact of it. The second day of sailing they passed the
island of Kios. The day following they crossed to the island of
Samos, and a day later they arrived at Miletus (Acts 20:13-15).

     Paul had decided not to stop at Ephesus this time, he did
not want to spend any time in Asia, as he was hurrying to get to
Jerusalem for the great feast of Pentecost. The Greek can be
understood to read that he was wanting to "observe" to "keep" to
"celebrate" the feast of Pentecost at Jerusalem. Not that
Jerusalem was still the only place to observe the Feasts of the
Lord. We saw in past chapters how that Paul at one point in his
life had NOT BEEN in Jerusalem for FOURTEEN YEARS!  Obviously
being in Jerusalem this time for Pentecost had certain important
designs for Paul, all of which we are not told.

     When they all landed at Miletus, Paul sent a message to the
Elders of the church at Ephesus, asking them to come and meet
with him. They did come.
     Before we read the important words what Paul had to say to
them, we need to note that this church (and so naturally others)
DID HAVE "elders." Some in the Churches of God and other sects,
have the modern notion that "spiritual elders" are a thing of the
far past ages, and that all in the "church" today (men and women)
can be, and in their teaching, ARE, all "elders." We see here
that Paul did NOT call ALL the church members of Ephesus to come
and meet with him, but he called the "elders" of the church at
Ephesus to meet with him. And we shall see from the very words of
Paul to them, that he TAUGHT and he PRACTICED, the theology, that
there were spiritual "elders" over the "churches" of God, who did
indeed have the calling to be spiritual "shepherds" to the
flocks of God. Truly, all the apostles believed that this was so,
as we see the apostle James writing to the twelve tribes
scattered abroad (James 1:1), that NOT MANY of them should be
"masters" or "teachers" in the church (see the modern
translations on this verse (James 3:1).

     Paul addressed the Elders of Ephesus and said:

     "You know from the day I set foot in the province of Asia
     until this day, I have done the Lord's work in a humble
     manner. Yes, and at times, with tears. I endured the trials
     that came to me from the plotting of the Jews against me.
     Yet, despite all that, I never shrank from telling you the
     truth, either publicly or in your private homes. I have had
     one message for Jews and gentiles alike - the need to turn
     from sin and to turn to God, and have faith in our Lord
     Jesus Christ.
     Now I am going to Jerusalem, as the Holy Spirit has said I
     must, yet not knowing exactly what is waiting for me there,
     except as I've been informed by the Spirit, I'll have
     suffering and many times be put in jail, in various places
     and cities. But my life is really worth nothing if I do not
     serve the calling and work of the Lord that I have been
     called to do, which is to tell others of the Good News about
     God's great kindness, mercy, and love.
     I do know this though, none of you to whom I have preached
     the Kingdom of God, will see me again in this life time. I
     tell you that I have been faithful, and no one's
     damnation can be blamed on me, for I did not shrink back to
     declaring and teaching you ALL that God wants for you in how
     to live, think, and practice.
     Now, BEWARE! Be sure that you feed and shepherd the flock of
     God - His called out ones - His church - that have been
     purchased with His own blood. The Holy Spirit has
     appointed you and made you spiritual Elders and OVERSEERS
     over His flock. I know of a certainty that FALSE teachers
     like wolves will come into the flock, not sparing them, but
     attacking and devouring them. Yes, as shocking as this may
     sound, even SOME OF YOU, will distort the truth to gain a
     following. WATCH OUT! Remember the three years I was with
     you - remember my constant watch and care I had over you,
     day and night, and the many tears I shed for you.
     I have never coveted anyone's money or fine clothes or
     material blessings. You know my own hands have worked to pay
     mine own way, and even supplied the physical needs of some
     who were with me. I have been a constant example of how you
     can help the poor by working hard with your skills. You need
     to remember the words of our Lord, 'It is more blessed to
     give than to receive.' "

     When Paul had finished speaking, we are told he knelt and
prayed with them. Ah, it is good at times to kneel with some of
God's children and pray. There will indeed be times when this is
very important to do. Paul knew this was one of those times. We
are told the Elders "wept aloud as they embraced him in farewell,
sad most of all because he had told them that they would never
see him again in this life. Then they accompanied him down to the
ship" (verses 18-36).

     We see in the last paragraph, that it is far from wrong for
God's people to show some emotions at times, even with loud
weeping. This was a very emotional time for Paul and the Elders
of Ephesus. A kind of special teaching and prayer meeting if you
will.

     Then we again need to notice some up-front, even dogmatic
words of Paul. It should be very clear that God HAS APPOINTED
spiritual Elders as OVERSEERS (as the Greek puts it) over the
flocks of God, over the Churches of God. Not everyone in Paul's
mind was an Elder, and certainly not everyone was an OVERSEER
over the flock. It was the duty of the Elders of the flock to
GUIDE and SHEPHERD the flock in faithfulness, as Paul himself had
done among the church at Ephesus. 

     Then we also find the teaching here that it may be right and
proper and the best thing to do, in that Elders WORK with their
skills at a SECULAR job, and maintain themselves, even as Paul
said, helping others in the physical way also. We have seen
as we went through the books of Corinthians, that Paul knew it
was NOT wrong for those who preached the Gospel to "live off the
gospel" - to be supported by those to whom they taught and
preached the Gospel, supported in a physical way. This is very
clearly brought out in 1 Corinthians 9 and 2 Corinthians. Read
those books in a modern translation and the truth on this point
will become abundantly clear, if of course you are willing to see
it.
     There are times, as in the life of Paul, when it is the
right and best judgment for an Elder to work at a secular job as
well as shepherding the flock of God. Paul found, as with the
Corinthians, that some groups of the flock of God, just were not
in the mind-set to support him with the physical needs of life,
so he gladly supported himself with the skill of being a tent
maker. Then as he shows the Corinthians there were other groups
of the flock who gladly helped him and his companions in the
physical needs of this life.

     The THIRD very important teaching of Paul in this message to
the Elders of Ephesus it that FALSE teachers WILL arise among the
flock of God. It would seem there was nothing more sure in Paul's
mind than this sad fact - false teachers would come into
the flock of God, and would DEVOUR, and speak PERVERSE things
(KJV) to gain a following. The one trait it seems that false
teachers have is that they LOVE to be loved and to have people
following them. Jesus once said to His true faithful apostles
that when men shall say well of you, have you as some great
"religious figure or teacher" then BEWARE, for so they did to the
FALSE prophets of old.
     The other startling truth that Paul gives is that MANY of
these FALSE teachers will COME FROM the VERY ELDERS to whom he
was speaking. Paul knew that many Elders, many shepherds of the
flock would GO ASTRAY, BECOME FALSE TEACHERS, SPEAKING PERVERSE
THINGS. We need to fully realize that just because a person
STARTS out as being called by God to be an overseer and a
spiritual Elder of the flock of God, DOES NOT MEAN, he
automatically and irreversibly, can never become a false
teacher. Paul was addressing those Elders whom at THAT TIME, were
true Elders of the flock. Paul did not say that some WERE and HAD
ALWAYS been false Elders, from the word go. No, those elders were
at the time Paul was speaking to them, true, faithful Elders and
overseers, BUT Paul knew SOME, later, would become FALSE
teachers, speaking perverse things, so thy could have "a
following" - "to draw away disciples after them" (KJV).

     How does a person NOT fall prey to false teachers, one clear
answer is found in Isaiah 8:20. 

     Keep your nose and eyes in the Word of God, the Bible.

                                     
     What an important chapter is Acts 20. The teachings and
lessons for us there are of major importance to our salvation.

                      ................

Written October 2004

Posted by at No comments:

BOOK OF ACTS #24-26

 

 New Testament Bible Story

Chapter Seventy-nine:

Acts 24-26 - Paul before King Agrippa

                        

                            ACTS CHAPTERS 24 to 26


CHAPTER 24

     Felix the governor would hear the case against Paul when his
accusers arrived. Till then Paul was imprisoned at Herod's
headquarters. 
     Five days later Ananias, the High Priest arrived with some
of the Jewish elders and an orator, by the name of Tertullus, to
press charges against Paul. They stated to Felix (through the
orator they had with them):

          "Your Excellency, you have given much peace to the Jews
and have enacted reforms for us, to have this peace. For that we
are most grateful to you (during that time in the first century
the Roman government gave the Jews all the freedom they needed to
practice their religious faith). But not to bore you, please give
me your attention for a short time, as I outline our case against
this man Paul. We have found him to be a trouble maker, a man who
is constantly inciting the Jews throughout the Roman world, to
riots and rebellions against the Roman government. He is a
ringleader of a sect known as the Nazarenes. Further more he was
trying to defile the Temple when we arrested him (Some
manuscripts of the New Testament add; 'We would have judged him
by our law, but Lysias, the commander of the garrison, came and
took him violently away from us, commanding his accusers to come
before you.'). You can find this truth of our accusations by
examining him yourself"
     Then the other Jews spoke up and said all that Tertullus
said was true (verses 1-9).

     Now Paul was given a turn to speak. The governor motioned to
him to stand up and speak.  Paul said:

     "I know, sir, that you have been a judge of Jewish affairs
     for many years, and so this indeed gives me confidence as I
     speak to you in my defense. You can soon discover that it
     was no more than twelve days ago that I arrived in Jerusalem
     to worship at the Temple. I did not argue with anyone in the
     Temple, nor did I incite a riot in any synagogue, or on the
     streets of the city. These men from Jerusalem cannot prove
     anything that they accuse me of doing. But I do admit that I
     follow THE WAY, which they call a sect. I worship the God of
     our ancestors, and I firmly believe all the words written in
     the prophets in God's Scriptures given to us Jews. I have
     hope in God, just like these men do, that He will raise both
     the righteous and the ungodly. Because of this, I always try
     to maintain a clear conscience before God and before
     everyone else. After several years away, I returned to
     Jerusalem with money and goods to aid my people and to offer
     sacrifices to God. My accusers saw me in the Temple as I was
     completing a purification ritual. There was no crowd around
     me and there was no rioting. But some Jews from the province
     of Asia were there  - and they really should be here to
     bring charges against me if they have anything to charge me
     with. Ask these Jews here what wrongdoing the Jewish
     Sanhedrin court found in me, except for one thing I said
     when I shouted out, 'I am on trial before you today because
     I believe in the RESURRECTION of the DEAD'" (verses 10-21).

     Felix, who was actually quite familiar with THE WAY (though
we are not told by Luke how he was familiar with the group
following and teaching about the Lord Jesus), adjourned the
hearing and said, "Wait until Lysias, the garrison commander
arrives, then I will decide the case." He ordered an officer to
keep Paul in custody but to give him some freedom and allow his
friends to visit him and take care of his needs (verses 22-23).

     A few days later Felix came with his wife, Drusilla, who was
Jewish. Sending for Paul, they listened as he told them about
faith in Christ Jesus. As Paul reasoned with them about
righteousness and self-control and the judgment to come, Felix
became quite upset and fearful. "Go away for now Paul, when it is
more convenient, I'll call for you again," said Felix.
     Felix was also hoping Paul would try to bribe him and buy
his freedom, so he sent for him on a regular basis and talked
with him. Two years went by in this way, Paul coming before
Felix, but then Felix was succeeded by Porcius Festus. As Felix
wanted to gain favor with the Jewish leaders, he left Paul in
custody, a type of imprisonment, until Festus arrived to take
over from him (verses 22-27).

CHAPTER 25

     Three days after Festus arrived in Caesarea to take over his
duties from Felix, he left for Jerusalem, where the leading
Jewish priests and elders met with him and made their accusations
once more against Paul. They asked Festus to do them a favor and
transfer Paul back to Jerusalem (they actually had planned to
way-lay Paul on his way back and kill him). But Festus replied
that  Paul was at Caesarea and he would be returning there
himself soon. So he told them, "Those of you in authority can
return with me. If Paul has done anything wrong, you can make
your case against him" (verses 1-5).

     It was about eight or ten days later that Festus did return
to Caesarea, and on the day after he arrived back, Paul's trial
began. When Paul was in court, the Jewish leaders from Jerusalem
made all kinds of serious accusations against Paul, which they
simply could not prove. 
     Paul denied all the charges, and said, "I am not guilty. I
have committed no crime against the Jewish law or the Temple or
the Roman government."
     Then Festus, who wanted to try and please the Jews, asked
Paul, "Are you willing to go to Jerusalem and stand trial before
me there?"
     Paul replied, "No! I am not! This is an official Roman
court, so I ought to be tried right here. You know very well that
I am not guilty. If I have done something worthy of death, I will
not refuse to die. But if I am innocent, neither you or anyone
else has the right to turn me over to these men to kill me. I
appeal to Caesar!"
     Festus then conferred with his advisers and then replied,
"Very well then Paul. you have appealed to caesar, and to Caesar
you shall be sent" (verses 6-12)

     It was a few days later that king Agrippa arrived with 
Bernice, to pay their tribute to Festus. During their stay of
several days Festus discussed Paul's case with the king. "There
is a prisoner here," he told him, "whose case was left for me by
Felix. When I was in Jerusalem, the leading priests and other
Jewish leaders accused him of many evils and wanted me to
sentence him. Of course I quickly pointed out to them that Roman
law does not convict people without a trial. They are given an
opportunity to defend themselves face to face with their
accusers. When they came here for the trial, I called the case
the very next day and ordered Paul to be brought in. But the
accusations made against him were not the accusations I expected
at all. It was all about their religion and some fellow named
Jesus, who died, but whom Paul insists is alive. I was perplexed
as to how to conduct an investigation of this kind, and I asked
him if he would be willing to stand trial in Jerusalem. But Paul
appealed to the Emperor. So I ordered him back to jail until I
could arrange to send him to Caesar."

     Agrippa was by now very curious about the whole situation
and about this man called Paul and the man he preached about
called Jesus. "I'd like to hear this man Paul," Agrippa said to
Festus. "Very well then, you certain shall. I will have him
brought to us tomorrow," was Festus' reply (verses 13-22).

PAUL SPEAKS TO AGRIPPA

     The next day Agrippa and Bernice arrived at the auditorium
with great pomp, accompanied by military officers and prominent
men of the city. Festus ordered Paul to be brought in. Then
Festus said, "King Agrippa and all present, this is the man whose
death is demanded both by the local Jews and by those in
Jerusalem. But in my opinion he has done nothing worthy of death.
However he has appealed his case to the Emperor and I have
decided to send him. But what shall I write to the Emperor? for
there is no real charge against him. So I have brought him before
you all, and especially before you king Agrippa, so that after we
have heard from him, I might have something to write. For it does
not seem reasonable to send a prisoner to the Emperor without
specifying the charges against him" (verses 23-27).

CHAPTER 26

     Then Agrippa said to Paul, "You may speak now in your
defense."

     So Paul, with a gesture of his hand started his defence:

     "I am fortunate, King Agrippa, that you are the one hearing
     my defense against all these accusations made by the Jewish
     leaders, for I know you are an expert on Jewish customs and
     controversies. Now I ask that you listen to me patiently. As
     the Jewish leaders are aware, I was given a thorough Jewish
     training from my earliest childhood among my own people and
     in Jerusalem. If they would admit it, they know I have been
     a member of the strict Pharisees sect of our religion. Now I
     am on trial because I look forward to the fulfillment of
     God's promises made to our ancestors. In fact that is why
     the twelve tribes of Israel worship god night and day, for
     they share the same hope I have. Yet, king, they say it is
     wrong for me to have this hope! Why should it seem
     incredible to any of you that God should raise the dead? 
     I once believed that I should do everything I could to
     oppose the followers of Jesus of Nazareth. Authorized by the
     leading priests, I caused many of the believers in Jerusalem
     to be sent off to prison.
     And I cast my vote against them when they were condemned to
     death.
     Many times I had them whipped in the synagogues to try to
     get them to curse this Christ man they believed in and
     preached. I was so violently opposed to them that I even
     hounded them in distant cities of foreign lands.
     One day I was on such a mission to Damascus, armed with
     authority and commission from the leading priests. It was
     about noon time, your Majesty, and a light from heaven
     brighter than the sun shone down on me and my companions. We
     all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in
     Aramaic, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is hard
     to fight against my will.' 'Who are you, sir,' I asked. And
     the Lord replied, 'I am Jesus, the one you are persecuting.
     Now stand up! For I have come to you to appoint you as
     my servant and my witness. You are to tell the world about
     this experience and about other times I will appear yo you.
     And I will protect you from both your own people and the
     Gentiles. Yes, I am going to send you to the Gentiles, to
     open their eyes that they may turn from darkness to the
     light, and from the power of satan to God. Then they will
     receive the forgiveness for their sins and be given a place
     among God's people, who are set apart by faith in
     me.'
     And so, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to that
     vision from heaven. I preached first to those in Damascus,
     then in Jerusalem and throughout all Judea, and also to the
     Gentiles, that all must turn from their sins and turn back
     to God - and prove they have changed by the good things they
     do. 
     Some of the Jews arrested me in the Temple for preaching
     this and they even tried to kill me. But God has protected
     me so that I am still alive today to tell these facts to
     everyone from the least to the greatest. 
     I teach nothing except what the prophets and Moses said
     would come to pass - that the Messiah would suffer and be
     the very first to rise from the dead, as a light to the Jews
     and to the Gentiles, alike" (verses 1-23).

     When Paul said Jesus was the first to rise from the dead, he
was meaning that Jesus was the first human to ever gain eternal
life in glorious immortality. Not one other human as ever be
raised or given immortal like. No not Enoch, not Moses, not
Elijah, not any other human. That is made clear in Hebrews 11,
where we are told that all of God's children from the beginning
have died, and they without us will not be made perfect, or given
immortal glorious perfect life. Jesus, Paul said in his writings,
has PREEMINENCE in ALL things, and one of those all things, is
the first human to gain everlasting immortal life.

     It was at this point in Paul's speech that Festus shouted
out with anger, "Paul, you are insane! Too much study has made
you a crazy man!"
     But Paul replied, "No, I am not insane, Most Excellent
Festus, I am speaking the truth soberly. And King Agrippa knows
about these things. I speak frankly, for I am sure all these
events are familiar to him, for they were not done in a secret
corner! King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that
you do...."
     King Agrippa interrupted Paul, "Do you think you can make me
a Christian so quickly? A little more of your arguments and you
would probably make me a Christian I think." 
     Paul cried out at these words for Agrippa,  
"Whether quickly or not, I pray to God that both you  
and everyone here in this audience might become the same  
as I except with no chains, as I have at this time."
     
     Then the king, the governor, Bernice, and all the others
stood and left. As they talked it over they agreed, "This man has
not done anything worthy of death or imprisonment." 
     And it was Agrippa who said, "He could be set free if he had
not appealed to Ceasar" (verse 24-32).

                      .................

Written November 2004
Posted by at No comments:

Monday, January 19, 2026

PAUL'S USE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT-- SURPRISES INDEED!!!

 Get  ready  for  some  surprises


PAUL'S USE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT


From The Book by E. Earle Ellis


All Emphasis is by Keith Hunt


FROM CHAPTER 0NE.........PAUL AND HIS BIBLE


     The writings of the apostle Paul reveal a person immersed in

the content and teaching of the OT.  H.A.A. Kennedy, after a

study of Paul's religious terminology, found that practically

every leading conception in this field of Paul's thought had its

roots definitely laid in OT soil (H.A.A. Kennnedy, St. Paul and

the Mystery Religions, London, 1913, pp. 154-60).  Whether he is

giving a dogmatic proof (e.g. Rom.3:10-18), an analogy

(e.g. Rom.2:24), or an illustration (e.g. Rom.10:6-8), or merely

using language with which to clothe his own thoughts (e.g.

Rom.12:20; 1 Cor.15:32; 2 Cor.10:17; 13:1), the OT

appears frequently throughout the Pauline epistles.........

     The Pauline use of the OT appears in THREE DISTINCT forms: 

QUOTATIONS PROPER,  INTENTIONAL AND CASUAL 

ALLUSION, and DIALECTIC AND THEOLOGICAL THEMES.  

     The task of defining "quotation" in the Pauline literature

is rather difficult, and the decision in the end is somewhat

arbitrary. The apostle probably did not have OUR CONCEPT of

quotation marks; he certainly did not give it the sanctity which

characterises our literary usage.  Some references which are

introduced with an explicit citation formula echo only the TENOR

OF THE PASSAGE (e.g. 1 Cor.14:31); others, not given even the

dignity of an introductory conjunction, follow the OT text

verbatim ac literatim (e.g. 1 Cor. 15:32). 

     The gradation from quotation to illusion is so imperceptible

that it is almost impossible to draw any certain line.........


                THE NATURE OF THE QUOTATIONS


GENERAL ANALYSIS


     Paul quotes the OT NINETY-THREE TIMES (About one-third of

all New Testament quotations are cited by Paul)........

     Although the quotations are drawn from SIXTEEN OT books, 

THREE-FOURTHS of them are from the PENTATEUCH (thirsty-three),

ISAIAH (twenty-five), and the PSALMS (nineteen).

     The citations appear both SINGLY and in COMBINATION........


     FIFTY-ONE of Paul's citations are in ABSOLUTE or VIRTUAL

agreement with the LXX,  TWENTY-TWO of these are at VARIANCE with the Hebrew.  In FOUR passages Paul follows the Hebrew AGAINST the LXX;  THIRTY-EIGHT times he DIVERGES from BOTH.  Combined quotations show a much greater variation than the others.......


     The PRIORITY of the LXX in Pauline quotations has long been

recognised.......Swete affirms that more than HALF of the Pauline

QUOTATIONS were taken from the LXX without MATERIAL 

CHANGE and that, by any test, the LXX "is the principal source from which the writers of the New Testament derived their Old Testament

quotations........Affinities with the LXX are not only evident in

Paul's quotations but EXTEND to his GENERAL STYLE and VOCABULARY as well........"The careful student of the Gospels and St. Paul," concludes Swete, "is met at every turn by words and phrases which

cannot be fully understood without reference to their earlier use in the Greek Old Testament.


     The quotations show considerable distribution among the LXX

TEXT-FORMS, none of them being followed CONSISTENTLY.  Sometimes they agree with LXX-B, more often with LXX-A and LXX-F........In general, LXX-A appears to be more in accord with Paul's

quotations than the other manuscripts.......


     As noted above, there are a considerable number of

variations from the LXX in Paul's quotations.  To account for

them several hypotheses lie at hand:  a direct use of the Hebrew

or its employment to correct the LXX,  citations from an Aramaic

Targum or translation,  the use of the Greek translations,  or

free quotations from memory.

     Paul often gives the impression of quoting from memory, yet

the memory which was the storehouse of more than one language,

and one trained in Jewish methods of bringing together passages

from different books of the OT.  From a psychological viewpoint

it might be expected that one who knew the Scriptures in several

languages would be less ties to any text-form.........


     One of Paul's quotations shows remarkable resemblance to

Greek texts OTHER than the LXX.......It is probable that Paul was

acquainted with other Greek texts; however, the evidence is not

sufficient to draw any final conclusions......Nevertheless,

Aramaic texts of some type probably lie behind some of the

citations.......The variant in Eph.4:8 may also reflect a Targum,

but its immediate source is more probably an interpretive

rendering known to Paul and perhaps used in the early

Church.......


     As the above observations indicate, the text behind Paul's

quotations is a most DIFFICULT PROBLEM. While the Alexandrian

version probably had the character of an official translation for

the diaspora in certain areas and plays an important part in

Paul's usage, it CANNOT be regarded as the apostle's SOLE textual

source.  His fluency in Aramaic and Greek might, on first

observations, favour an ad hoc rendering.  However, affinities with other Greek texts and the familiar manner in which the quotations are often introduced SUGGEST that Paul made use of variant translations or renderings known to his readers.  Whether these were independent 

texts or merely revisions within the LXX family cannot be determined with certainty, but the EVIDENCE DOES NOT point to any great number of independent textual traditions or to a great abundance of Greek Targums. 

Some of Paul's variants show the influence of the Hebrew; other

can to traced to NO TEXT AT ALL - they are Paul's OWN RENDERING

in which he interprets and applies as he quotes.  

     The nature of the problem and the incomplete state of the

textual ecidence preclude any final adjudication of the matter;

the words of Stanley still remain relevant for several Pauline

passages: "(There is) not sufficient evidence to say whether this

(variation) arises from a reminiscence of the Hebrew text.....,

or from an Aramaic Targum, or from the use of an earlier form of

the LXX text."

     The inconclusive character of results obtainable from

textual criteria leads one to consider a solution, or at least a

partial solution, on other grounds.  There is always a

temptation to relieve oneself of textual difficulties by taking

recourse in "free paraphrase" or "interpretive rendering." 

Nevertheless, several factors, both in the textual analysis and

in the overall Pauline hermeneutics, INDICATE that the answer to

many of these problems MAY LIE in THIS direction.


                PAUL'S ATTITUDE TO SCRIPTURE


General Considerations


     Paul's use of the OT cannot be understood apart from his

attitude towards it.  To him the Scriptures are holy and

prophetic (Rom.1:2; 4:3); they constitute the very oracles

of God (Rom.3:1-2), and they "were written......for our learning"

(Rom.15:4).  All his important doctrines are buttressed by an

appeal to his Bible; to place the origin of Scripture in God,

Paul's phrase "God-breathed" (2 Tim.3:16) could hardly be

improved upon.  In his view of the OT the apostle is in agreement

not only with Christ and the other NT writers but also with the

whole of Judaism and the early Church.

     Although the OT is sometimes referred to by Paul as "the

law" (e.g. 1 Cor.14:21 with Isa.28:11-12),  "the writings"

(Col.2:14; cf 2 Tim.3:15),  or "the law and the prophets"

(e.g. Rom.3:21),  "the scriptures" is the prevailing usage. 

These designations probably stemmed from the three divisions of

the Jewish canon (Cf. Luke 24:44)............


     The essential difference between Paul and the Jews in their

employment of Scripture was an INTERPRETIVE one......In Paul's

eyes the Jews stood ON the Scriptures; though they extolled it,

they ERRED because they did not KNOW it (Cf. Matt.22:29).........


     In First and Second Corinthians Paul teaches expressly that

a correct understanding of Scripture is impossible without the

Holy Spirit (Cf. 1 Cor.2; 2 Cor.3:14)......The place of the

Spirit does not lesson the authority of the OT for Paul; nor

is there any antithesis between the Scripture and the

Spirit........


The Relation....To Other Authorities


     Besides the Scriptures there are several other authorities

to which Paul appeals to support his assertions.  There are the

law of nature, the conscience of the individual, his own

revelation from Christ or the Holy Spirit, and the teaching of

Christ as received through oral or written apostolic tradition. 

Although the natural order is the source of many analogies, it is

evoked only a few times as an AUTHORITY (Analogies of law -

Rom. 7:1-3; Gal. 3:15; 4:1ff,  occupations - Rom.9:21; 1

Cor.3:7,24ff, and natural phenomena - Rom.11:16-24; 1 Cor.12:14,

are common. The Ot is used in this manner as well, e.g. 

2 Cor.4:6,13, as is the example of Christ, e.g. 2 Cor.8:8-9. 

They serve only as illustrations, however, and not as an appeal

to authority; their propriety depends upon the authority of the

user or their appeal to the logic of the hearer);  in Rom.1:18ff

(cf. Rom.2:14ff) God's power and Deity are declared to be taught

by nature;  distinction between the sexes in manner of appearance

and dress is also in the very nature of things (1 Cor.11:14). 

The authority of the individual conscience plays an important

part for Paul:

Regarding the eating of food offered to idols, one's own

conscience is to be obeyed, and the conscience of others are not

to be offended (1 Cor.8:7ff; 10:25ff; cf. Rom.14:23. Also

Rom.2:15; 13:5 may be viewed as referring to a sort of universal

conscience);  by disobeying the voice of conscience the faith of

some has been made shipwreck (1 Tim.1:19). 

     Writing to the Galatians, the apostle grounds the very

nature of his Gospel in a personal revelation from Jesus Christ

(Gal. 1:12, 16ff; 2:5, but contrast Rom.1:2; cf. 1 Thes.4:15. 

The instances in Rom. 14:14, cf. 1 Cor.7:40, seem to be more in

the nature of a "witness of the Spirit" than specific revelation;

cf. Col.3:16);  it is only after citing this authority and the

witness of their own experience that the evidence of the OT is

brought to bear (Gal.3:1-5, 6ff).  

     The condemnation of the Corinthians for their desecrations

of the Lord's Supper is founded upon Christ's own words as to the

nature of that service (1 Cor.11:23ff);  Paul's command against

divorce is similarly based upon the known teaching of the Lord

(1 Cor. 7:10 with Matt.7:31; cf. 1 Cor.9:14 with Matt.10:10;

Gal.6:2 with John 13:34).  These appeals to other authorities are

not inconsistent with the apostles appeal to scriptural authority

(There are authorities inconsistent with Scripture which Paul

condemns: any authority contrary to his Gospel - Gal.1:8f - and

the wisdom of this world - 1 Cor.1-3; cf. Rom.1:22; Col.2:23. The

touchstone for judgment is not to go "beyond that which is

written" - 1 Cor.4:6).........


     This appeal to different authorities is at times found in

close combination though there seems to be no consistent pattern

of association.  For example, in 1 Cor.9:7-14 Paul proceeds from

the analogy of nature to the witness of the OT; immediately he

returns to another analogy, the practice of the temple, and

clinches the whole argument citing the command of Christ directly

bearing on the subject.  

     1 Cor.15:3-11 is even more noteworthy:  Christ's

resurrection is grounded in the OT, the apostolic tradition, and

Paul's personal revelation........

     Paul's OWN authority plays a MUCH LARGER role in his

epistles than is usually assigned to it.  A few times it is of a

very much qualified nature (Cf. 1 Cor.7:12, 25, 40), but for the

MOST PART it is ASSERTED with no indication of being anything

LESS thanb ABSOLUTE. He does not often state its basis, but it

appears to arise from his firm conviction of guidance from the

Holy Spirit and from his authority as an apostle. Paul

concludes his discussion of GLOSSOLALIA with the words: "If

anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should

acknowledge that what I am writing to you is a command of the

Lord" (1 Cor.14:37. The verse may refer to a teaching of Christ;

but the words imply primarily the guidance of the Spirit....).  

     With reticence but firmness he warns the Corinthians in his

second letter of the AUTHORITY he has from the Lord (2 Cor.10:8;

13:10).  

     Instructions concerning the Christian's relation to the

State are enjoined WITHOUT CITING an authority (Rom.13:1-7 but

cf. Matt.22:21), as are his COMMANDS regarding spiritual gifts (1

Cor.12-14).

     MANY OTHER themes are developed at least in part WITHOUT

reference to ANY RULE apart from his OWN. It is true that

sometimes OT texts (e.g. Rom.2:13; cf. Rom. 10:5; Gal.3:12 with

Lev.18:5), and his former instructions (Former instructions from

Scripture or the apostolic traditions appear implied.....

1 Cor.6:3, 9, 15, 16; only the last instance is followed by an OT

citation, cf. 1 Cor.3:16; 2 Cor.6:16. It may, however, only

refer to their Christian commonsense), underline the words, but

they do not account for all of his paragenetic and doctrinal

teachings.

     It is impossible, of course, to know just how much knowledge

of the OT and the apostolic traditions Paul assumes on the part

of his readers; but his OWN apostolic jurisdiction is

UNMISTAKABLE in a number of passages.......


     But the OT was not one of those things which Paul counted

loss for the sake of Christ; indeed, it could be understood ONLY

in the LIGHT of CHRIST.

     There are many explanations for Paul's infrequent use of the

OT in the shorter letters.....The use of an authority other than

the Jewish Scriptures may well have been more suitable for many

questions which arose, especially in a young Gentile assembly.

But it DOES NOT FOLLOW that thereby the OT was set aside or

subordinated, any more than a citation from Isaiah implies a

lower view of Jeremiah........

     For Paul, Jesus was ABOVE ALL the CHRIST; to divorce the

Messiah from the "book-religion" of the OT was hardly a task for

a Jew - even one converted through personal revelation.


The Extent.....Paul's Canon


     ........There are a few quotations in the Pauline epistles

which do not appear on first observation to be derived from the

OT.  The passages most often questioned in this regard are  

1 Cor. 2:9.....Eph. 4:8.....Eph. 5:14.....1 Cor. 15:45b.....1

Tim. 5:18b......... 


     1 Cor. 2:9 has been attributed to:


     1. An apocryphal writing;  2. an apocryphal phraseology of

the OT texts; 3. a Jewish anthology of OT passages;  4. and a

free paraphrase of the OT by Paul.

     Eph. 4:8 is generally taken to be a Pauline use of a common

Jewish interpretation of the OT passage.....

     Eph. 5:14, older commentators have generally assigned it to

an exegetical paraphrase or summary of Isa.60:1, 19ff

(cf.Isa.9:2; 26:19; 52:1).......Recent writers have suggested a

verbum Christi or, more often, an early Christian hymn giving a

messianic paraphrase of several OT passages.......


     The quotations in 1 Cor. 15:45 and 1 Tim. 5:18, both cited

as Scripture, suggest another answer to the whole problem (Cf.

also 2 Tim.2:11-13, 19;  2 Cor.6:2; 1 Tim.3:16). The latter

clause in each of these passages seems logically and

grammatically within the quotation (e.g. the argument in 1 Cor.15

partly rests on that portion of the "quotation"), yet neither is

from the OT.  

     1 Tim. 5:18b is a saying of Jesus (Matt.10:10; Luke 10:17;

cf. Acts 20:35); the former passage (1 Cor. 15:45b) is of

undetermined origin........


     Christ was regarded as the Word of God by Paul, and 2 Peter

3:16 appears to equate the Pauline writings WITH SCRIPTURE;

furthermore, the exercise of the gift of prophecy was no less

from the Holy Spirit than the oracles of the OT prophets (Cf.

Acts 2:17ff;  19:6;  21:4, 9ff;  1 Cor.14. These Spirit-inspired

utterances evidently included hymns as well; cf. 1 Cor.14:15).  

     If these observations are correct, and if Eph.5:14 does not

find its ultimate source in the OT, the most probable alternative

source is a saying either of Jesus or of a Christian

prophet.......


So I end quotations from chapter one.


Chapter two is titled "PAUL AND JUDAISM" and contains a large

amount of instructive wealth for those wanting a full study on

that part of Paul as it pertains to his background in Judaism. 

For our purposes in this article the following few passages will

be enough for the average reader.


Quote:


     .......... Without doubt the apostles understanding of the

OT was completely REVOLUTIONIZED after his conversion;

nevertheless his Jewish heritage remained of fundamental

IMPORTANCE for his understanding and use of the Bible. His

reverence for and study of the Scriptures LONG PRECEDED his

knowledge of Christ.......Having recognized the place of Judaism

in Paul's thought, a note of CAUTION should be added.  From that

day on the Damascus road, the home of Paul's heart and of his

mind NEVER AGAIN lay in Judaism.......The commonly used

fragmentary quotation, with the continuance of given portion

sometimes implied (e.g. 1 Cor.2:9.....), the insertion of

hortatory, ethical sections, and other procedures more

distinctively Jewish, were probably acquired by Paul in his

training as the rabbinate.  It is most natural, and not in the

least derogatory, to find these methods in his epistles.  As Prat

well states, "the interests of truth did not require him to

unlearn all that he had been taught."


.......In Rom.9-11 and Gal.3 Paul employs the ancient MIDRASHIC

form of commentary; but his incisive manner and compact,

integrated treatment is quite at odds with the rabbinic system. 

Often to support an opinion the rabbis quote the Law, Prophets

and Hagiographa in succession and Paul also adopts this custom on

occasion (Cf. Rom.11:8- 10; 15:9-12......The custom is evident in

Christ as well; cf. Luke 24:44; Mark 12:3-8; Luke 16:16,29).  It

is not HABITUAL with the apostle, however, and probably 

represents only an incidental reminiscence. Hillel's principles

of a fortiori and analogy are implicit in MANY Pauline passages

(e.g. Rom.4-5. Paul's exposition in 1 Cor.7 is an example of NT

Halacha; the allegory in Gal.4 is Haggada).......


     .....certain other Pauline practices may be compared with

Jewish usage; his INTRODUCTORY FORMULAS (IF), his COMBINED

QUOTATIONS, and his use of ALLEGORY.........


     Warfield's words are apropos: "There is probably not a

single mode of alluding to or citing Scripture in all the NT

which does not find its exact parallel among the Rabbis. 

The New Testament so far evinces itself a THOROUGHLY JEWISH book" (Warfield, op. cit., pp. 118f)


Combined Quotations


     .........The apostle never introduces his haraz in the

explicit rabbinical manner, i.e. The Law says....., the Prophets

say......, the Writings say.....  However, the rationale

behind the Jewish usage, "not as though the words of the Law need

confirmation, but to show how the Scriptures emphasises the

lesson by iteration," IS EVIDENTLY operative also in Paul's

mind.......

     Examples of the haraz, so frequent in Rom.9-11, 15, are

NUMEROUS in the TALMUD.......In the haraz, then, Paul follows the

PRACTICE of the rabbis, but for the SOURCE of his frequently used

MERGED quotations one must look elsewhere.


Allegory


     .......the method is employed by the apostle in connexion

with a DIVINELY DESIGNED type (e.g. 1 Cor.10:4: "The Rock was

Christ") or with the ILLUSTRATIVE use of an OT passage (Cf.

Gal.4:25: "this Hagar is Mt.Sinai"......)


     .......The whole of Paul's TYPOLOGICAL exegesis has more in

common, as a method, with the Alexandrian school than with the

rabbis.......


     .......In conclusion. Paul's treatment of the OT often finds

much in common with the methods of his day as reflected in Jewish

literature; his IF and haraz are especially to be noted in this

regard.  In other respects Pauline methods find FEW parallels in

contemporary Jewish writings.  The use of MERGED quotations is

LITTLE found in the rabbis.  In contrast to PHILO, Paul's use of

ALLEGORY is VERY MINOR and its character altogether DIFFERENT

from that of Alexandrian writers; and his TYPOLOGICAL view of OT

history is a RARE, if not unknown, element in contemporary

Jewish exegesis.  In all things but allegorical interpretation,

Paul's Jewish methodology reflects a Palestinian milieu, and even

in that the Alexandrian contact does not appear to be close or

direct.  

     The apostle is NOT averse to using methods from his Jewish

training as they suit his purpose; ON THE OTHER HAND, some of his

methods seem to arise from a Christian hermeneutic and from the

practice of the apostolic community and CANNOT be explained by

his Jewish background.......


Messianic Consciousness


     .......In the rabbis it was a standing principle to refer to

the predictions of the prophets as to the "days of the Messiah," 

and this principle is almost always in evidence in Paul's

interpretations.......Almost a century ago Westcott examined the

question and found that of NINETY-FOUR passages quoted

messianically in the NT only FORTY- FOUR were interpreted in the

same manner in Jewish writings; there are FEW revisions

of that estimate to be made today.......the main sources for

Paul's messianic interpretations of the OT are the principles and

emphases received from the apostolic tradition and his own

exegesis of the OT as a Christian,  One would find it hard to

root this element of his thought immediately in Judaism........


The Beggarly Elements


     When Paul warned Timothy and Titus to beware of Jewish

FABLES and commandments of MEN (1 Tim.1:4; Titus 1:14; 3:9), NO

DOUBT HE HAD IN MIND MANY OF THE THINGS exemplified in the

rabbinic literature. Although some of their exegesis is 

praiseworthy.....nevertheless its essential character is indeed

"weak and beggarly."  Prat has well summarised it: "In the slough

of Apocryphal and rabbinical writings a few particles of gold can

sometimes be met with, but with how much dross they are

combined."  To realize the GREAT GULF which separates Paul's use

of the OT from that of the rabbis, one need only observe a FEW

examples from talmudic literature:


     1. "The dust of the first man was gathered from all over the

earth because Ps.139:16 says God saw the unformed substance, and

Zech. $:10 says the eyes of the Lord run to and fro through the

whole earth" (Sanh. 38b; SBT, p.241).


     2. "Why did Obadiah hide fifty prophets in the cave" (1

Kings 18:4)?  "Because the cave would only hold fifty" (Sanh.

39b; SBT, p.253).


     3. "The first man had two faces because Ps.139:5 says, 'Thou

hast formed me behind and before' " (Ber.61a; SBT, p.381).


     4. "The first man reached from earth to heaven because it

says (Deut.4:32), 'since the day God created man upon the earth

and from one end of the heaven' " (Sanh. 38b; SBT, p.243).


     5. "Whoever places his bed north and south will have male

children because Ps. 17:14 says, 'Whose belly thou fillest with

treasure, who have sons in plenty' " Treasure, also means north

(Ber. 5b; SBT, p.22).

     Although there are exceptions, and the above examples are

graphic, they are by no means UNTYPICAL or EXTREME and can be

adduced AD INFINITUM ET AD NAUSEAM from almost any section of the Talmud.  The ruling principle of rabbinic exposition of Scripture

is well expressed in Sanh. 34a (SBT, p.214):  "A verse is capable

of as many interpretations as splinters of rock crushed by a

hammer, for Jer.23:29 says, 'Like a hammer that breaketh a rock

in pieces.....' "

     Their SPLINTERING, purposeless, speculative musings....have

not the REMOTEST kinship with Paul's theology or hermeneutical

principles........


     The rabbis worshipped the LETTER and sought to justify their

TRADITIONS by arbitrary exegesis; Paul's usage, on the other

hand, is NOT arbitrary or AGAINST the LITERAL sense if the

typological usage be granted.  Toy sums up the rabbinic exegesis

in the principle "that EVERY SENTENCE and EVERY WORD of the

Scripture was credited with ANY MEANING that it could possibly be

MADE TO BEAR......"

     Concerning Paul's relation to Jewish thought Kennedy has

given a better evaluation than most: "........His writings reveal

every here and there affinities with his native environment. But

the remarkable FACT REMAINS that these affinities are largely

SUPERFICIAL, that they disclose themselves at the CIRCUMFERENCE

rather than at the CENTER of his thought" (H.A.A.Kennedy,

St.Paul's Conception of the Last Things, London, 1904, pp. 43ff).



Paul's Use of Non-Canonical Literature


General


     The question of Paul's knowledge and use of Jewish Apocrypha

has been debated since.....1795, and it continues to be a matter

of dispute.  His knowledge of Palestinian writings in general

circulation may be presumed; as for the literature of the

diaspora the problem becomes more complex......What writings were

in general circulation?  Which ones would be seen and used by a

student of the rabbinate?  To what extent does the extant

literature represent the really "important" literature of Paul's

day, and for his party?

     Paul's ONLY non-canonical citations are from GREEK

literature........


     Paul's relation to Philo is best explained.......as mutual

dependence upon a common tradition........Philo arrives at a

position regarding the law which approximates to that of St.

Paul.....Each in his own manner has come to realize the

accomplishments of Jeremiah's epoch-making utterances: "I will

put in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts"

(Jer.31:33).

     Philo also resembles Paul in making salvation totally

dependent upon the word of God........serves to strengthen the

hypothesis of a common tradition underlying certain Philonic

concepts which appear in CLEARER LIGHT in the NT, but there is NO

GROUNDS for assuming a DIRECT connection.

     Jowett's essay on "St.Paul and Philo" sums up the relation

of Christianity to Alexandrian Judaism:  "(Alenxandrianism) was

MYSTICAL and dialectical, NOT MORAL and SPIRITUAL......it was a

literature not of LIFE......It spoke of a Holy Ghost; of a Word;

of a divine man; of a first and second Adam; of the faith of

Abraham; of bread which came down from heaven; but knew NOTHING

of the God who had made of one blood all nations of the earth; of

the VICTORY over SIN and DEATH; of the CROSS of Christ.  It was a

picture, a shadow, a surface, a cloud above, catching the rising

light ere He appeared.  It was the reflection of a former world,

not the BIRTH of a NEW ONE. It lifted up the veil of the temple,

to see in a glass only dreams of its own creation" (p.454).


Conclusion


     The importance of Paul's Jewish heritage cannot be ignored

if his writings are to be fully understood........The significant

conclusion, however, is the great CHASM separating the writings

of Paul from the rabbis.  The apostle's OT exegesis was not just

an adoption of current traditions but reveals a VITALITY and

UNDERSTANDING  totally FOREIGN to rabbinical literature.  

     If Paul used Jewish interpretations, he CULLED and MOULDED

them to a Christological understanding of the OT; if he was a

"child of his times," they were for Paul the times of the MESSIAH, 

His CROSS and RESURRECTION, and His REVELATION of the 

TRUE meaning of Scripture. Paul was a disciple of Christ NOT of

Gamaliel......


     The Pauline use of the OT cannot really be understood in

terms of his Jewish contemporaries.  This is ESPECIALLY true

where principles of INTERPRETATION are involved.  The affinities

which occur are in PERIPHERAL areas and never reach the HEART of

his thought.  After his conversion the OT became a NEW book for

Paul; all that went before now stood only as a prelude - a

prelude set QUITE APART from all that was to follow. Although

echoes of the prelude remain, the REAL MEANING which the OT has

for him lies at a DIFFERENT source.  And to find it one MUST GO

to Christ and to the apostles.


     The end of quotes from chapter two.


     Chapter three covers in some depth Paul and the Apostolic

Church. The author spends some interesting time with the NT

parallels between Paul and the teachings of Christ. And in a

second section some parallels of Paul with other NT writers.


     The FOURTH and last chapter of the book is titled "PAUL'S

EXEGESIS."


     The author lists the various topics Paul expounded upon,

which include:


     The fall of mankind into sin and its effects.

     The Universality of sin.

     The Coming of Christ and the Gospel.

     Justification by Faith.

     Forgiveness of sin.

     Faith and Works.

     Divine Election.

     Calling of the Gentiles.

     The Gifts of the Spirit.

     Christian Conduct.

     The Resurrection of Christ and the Saints.

     The Return of Christ.

     The Final Overthrow of Death.


     Covered in this chapter is the very important Pauline

subject of the Jew and the Gentile, and the NT Israel of God, and

how Paul ties it all in with the OT.  Then there is the often

used "Typology" of Paul. And Earle Ellis shows that Paul chiefly

used THREE OT period with his use of typology, they are: the

Creation, the Age of the Patriarchs, and the Exodus.

     This fourth chapter also expounds on Paul's exegesis with

regards the NEW Covenant. 

     Mt. Ellis gives a reasonably lengthy discourse on what may

be some of the answers to the quotations by Paul that vary from

the LXX and the MT texts.

     Towards the close of this chapter the author has some

interesting and very true comments about Paul in how he

understood the "historial" aspects of the OT.


     Quote:


     ......The apostle does not ignore the historical

significance of the text......Paul would probably begin by

saying, "The OT Scripture has a wider meaning than its IMMEDIATE

historical application (Cf. Rom.15>4; 1 Cor.10:11); even OT

history is God-moulded history whose significance does NOT LIE

MERELY in the event but in the MEANING of the event FOR ITS LATER FULFILMENT.......If Paul's presuppositions as to the nature

of the OT and of its history are accepted, little fault can be

found with his handling of the individual texts........


     In conclusion, the significance of the OT for Paul's theology can hardly be OVERESTIMATED......Rather, his knowledge of Christ opened to him a NEW WAY in which he found the true

meaning of the Scriptures.......


End of quote.


     The APPENDIX of the book is very useful as a reference to

the OT as used by Paul. There is a list of quotations as

pertaining to the agreement or not with the LXX and Hebrew. All

the ALLUSIONS and PARALLELS used by Paul as listed. There is a

list of all the COMBINED quotations that Paul used. And there is

a list of Paul's PARALLEL quotations.


     The book "PAUL'S USE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT" by 

Earle Ellis, published by Baker Book House, Grand Rapids,  

is well worth having in your personal library, especially if you 

are an elder or leader in the Church of God.


                 ..........................


Written February 1998 


by Keith Hunt

Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)