There is no other book in the Bible like the Acts of the Apostles or Acts for short. The Wesley Study Bible commentary says that Acts provides “a bridge between the Gospels and the letters of the New Testament. Here one finds fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel, which also extends to all nations. The result is a redefinition of the ‘people of God,’ so that all peoples are included in God’s work of salvation.”

Dr. Matthew L. Skinner wrote a book about Acts and gave it this title: Intrusive God, Disruptive Gospel. That gives you an idea of what we’ll encounter while reading this book.

Jesus ascends into heaven in chapter 1 and chapter 2 is the story of Pentecost- the giving of the Holy Spirit. The rest of the book is about what the followers of “the Way” of Jesus do as they spread the message of Jesus.  Skinner writes, “Frequently those who announce the gospel of Jesus Christ do things that create or lead to large-scale disturbances. In one instance, a complaint ominously accuses them of ‘turning the world upside down’ (Acts 17:6). What they teach about Jesus Christ asks people to embrace new religious, social, political, and economic values, sometimes putting both the proclaimers and their audiences at odds with the established social order.”

Acts is the second of two books written by Luke.  Luke writes both his gospel and Acts to “Theophilus” which means lover of God. I chose Acts for the season of Easter (the 50 days after Easter Sunday) because Acts happens after the resurrection of Jesus.  I also chose Acts because the stories contained in this book are often unfamiliar to us.  Acts doesn’t come up often in the Lectionary and very few of the stories in Acts are covered by children’s curriculum or vacation Bible school.

Skinner gives us an idea of what the situation for the church was like when Acts was written: “During the final decade or two of the first century CE, more than fifty years after the ministry, crucifixion, and resurrection of Jesus, many churches were thriving, even as most of them were navigating fresh and conceivably worrisome challenges…

“By and large the church had become mostly a gentile phenomenon.  Jews were largely unpersuaded by its messianic preaching, and in some settings strains and even contempt were intensifying between this emerging movement with Jewish origins and Jews who did not embrace Jesus as the Christ.

“Finally, Jesus had not returned in glory, despite traditions that taught believers to expect he would soon.  The perceived delay might have stoked confusion, disillusionment, or attrition.  Just one of those dynamics carried, at the very least, a potential to undermine the convictions and outlooks held by people committed to following Jesus.

“In that environment of change, discernment, and possible instability, the author of the Gospel according to Luke wrote a second narrative that might bolster the faith of his fellow believers, just as he expected his previous Gospel would. Eventually the wider church came to call this second narrative the Acts of the Apostles.”

The first verses of chapter 1 clue us into the fact that this is a second volume, the first being the Gospel according to Luke.

In Luke Jesus tells the disciples to stay in Jerusalem. In Luke 24 Jesus meets them in Jerusalem and in verse 49 Jesus tells them, “And see, I am sending upon you what my Father promised; so stay here in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”

What do they mean when they ask, “is this the time when you will restore the kingdom to Israel?” The disciples are still stuck on the idea that Jesus’ Messiahship means that he will lead an army to kick Roman out of the Promised Land. Remember Messiah in Hebrew means ‘anointed one.’ The way you made someone a king in ancient Israel was to anoint them with oil.  Christ means ‘anointed one’ in Greek. We get glimpses of this misunderstanding throughout the gospels and now in Luke. It was what the people longed for and what they expected of a Messiah.  But Jesus does things differently. You can see this clearly on Palm Sunday, when the people welcome Jesus to Jerusalem like they would a successful General.  But instead of a horse and sword Jesus comes on a donkey.

There has been great expectation for a Messiah since the exile and Luke helps that expectation along in the first chapter of his gospel. When the angel Gabriel comes to Mary to ask her to participate in God’s plan Gabriel says to her, “you will bear a son… he will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his ancestor David.” This can be interpreted in the traditional way- with a Messiah coming with military might, or the way Jesus came, preaching about the Kingdom of God and turning the world upside-down in unexpected ways.

So the eleven disciples and the other followers of Jesus get together and ask Jesus if it’s time to restore the kingdom to Israel and Jesus deflects and says, “It’s not for you to know. But the Holy Spirit is coming and you will be my witnesses.” So the followers of Jesus know who they are – they are empowered by the Holy Spirit to witness to Jesus and his teaching.

The eleven disciples and other followers of Jesus, women and men, stay together and pray.  There are about 120 people together.  They decided they need another disciple to take Judas’ place among the twelve.  They cast lots between Matthias and Joseph. We know from our reading of Exodus and Nehemiah that casting lots was a common way to discern the will of God. Matthias was chosen to replace Judas.

Judas is, understandably, cast in a negative light. He takes the money he received from betraying Jesus and buys a field.  The property somehow kills him as he falls and is disemboweled. Matthew Skinner writes, “Acts repeatedly signals that greed goes hand in hand with impure motives or a longing for power.” We must remember, as Willie James Jennings reminds us, “The last word on Judas will not come from Peter. It will come from Jesus. Judgement belongs to Jesus, not us.”

This may be a familiar story – the story of the giving of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.  Pentecost was a Jewish holiday, one that required all Jewish men to be in Jerusalem. It means “fiftieth day” as it was the fiftieth day after Passover.  It was a harvest celebration associated with covenant renewal. Because this is the holiday when the Holy Spirit was given, we celebrate it seven Sundays after Easter, marking the end of the Easter season.

After the action of receiving the Holy Spirt, the speaking in all languages so everyone could understand, and the reaction of the Jewish folks outside- they were amazed, perplexed, disbelieving, Peter stands up and preaches.  He draws on Joel 2:28-32a while reshaping that scripture to fit the current situation.

The crowd asks, “what does this mean?” Skinner writes, “Peter replies: the unleashing of God’s Spirit indicates the beginning of a new day in human history. Here, in the days immediately following Jesus’ death, resurrection, and exaltation, a new and ultimate chapter begins in the story of God’s interactions with humanity… Peter tells the crowd that the Spirit marks Jesus’s followers—each one—as belonging to God… Peter boldly answers that the foreign languages are not an instance of trickery or mass hysteria. God is present, equipping people to communicate truth about God’s deeds… The community of faith is a community of prophets here to speak, act, and interpret.”

The next question the crowd asks is, “what should we do?” Peter tells them to repent. When you hear the word “repent” or “repentance” what first comes to mind? What does repentance mean to you? Skinner writes, “‘Repentance’ refers primarily to adopting a new way of thinking or a new perception of reality. A changed mind might eventually lead to reformed behavior, but Peter instructs the crowd to follow his sermon’s argument and therefore understand Jesus differently than they did previously. He is the expected Christ who has been exalted to God’s ‘right hand’ and thus possesses authority to pour out the Holy Spirit.”

Starting in verse 42 we learn how the community of believers or followers of the Way of Jesus spend their time and resources.  What do you think of this vision of community – where they sell their possessions to distribute the money to all, as any had need? How is our church community like this? How does our community differ?

Chapter 3 begins with a healing story.  It reminds us of the healing stories of Jesus. It echoes Luke 4 when Jesus reads that bit of Isaiah that says, “the spirit of the Lord us upon me because God has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. God has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recover of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.”

The disciples carry on Jesus’ mission.

Peter links what has happened – the healing of the man born lame – to Jesus and Jesus to God, God as in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of Jesus.

In his sermon Peter also has some harsh words for the folks gathered in Solomon’s Portico. Skinner writes, “the sermon’s introduction of Jesus also calls attention to what the crowd did to him.  With an emphatic and plural ‘you,’ Peter tells his listeners that they bear responsibility for handing Jesus over for prosecution, rejecting him, and killing him. Indicating the crowd distorts the story that the gospels tell, and it misrepresents the historical and political realities to hold a random gathering of Jews to account for killing Jesus. Furthermore, it makes no sense for Peter to suppose that his entire audience in Solomon’s Portico was, many weeks previously, somehow ‘in the presence of Pilate’ and demanding that the Roman prefect release Barabbas the insurrectionist instead of Jesus.”

Peter quotes Moses. What he “quotes” is similar to Deuteronomy 18:19, but that verse has nothing about people being rooted out. Skinner writes that Acts portrays ‘Jesus as a divisive figure among first-century Jews.” The rhetoric used was probably harsh to get the people to respond decisively.

We get some conflict here as the priests, the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees are annoyed with Peter and John. Peter and John are arrested and the next day they stand before the rulers, elders, scribes, Annas the high priest, Caiaphas, John, and Alexander.  They ask Peter and John, “By what power or by what name did you do this?”

Peter is filled with the Holy Spirit and gives a speech giving glory to Jesus for the healing of the man born lame.

Of verse 12 Skinner writes, “it is important to clarify that Peter is not treating the ‘name’ of Jesus as a secret code or talisman. The statement should not generate pride in calling oneself ‘Christian,’ for it is about the power of Jesus, a power to save that he extends to benefit anyone in the world. No one can designate themselves the final arbiter of where and how that power operates. It’s up to Jesus. Peter’s statement rightly expands our imagination about the accessibility, breadth, and wonder of God’s salvation instead of limiting it.”

The apostles go unpunished, not because the rulers are convinced, but because of the people. Wall writes that verse 21-22 reveal a deep division between the people and the rulers as well as a deep theological division between the rulers and God.

In verses 23-31 we get a prayer that the believers pray together. What do you make of this prayer? How does this prayer reflect your own prayers? What can you learn about prayer from reading how these early disciples prayed? After the prayer there is a sort of mini-Pentecost – the place where they were was shaken and they were filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God with boldness.  What must that have been like? Spend a few moments imagining what that must have been like.

Chapter 4 closes with another look at how the community did life together. Skinner writes, “In following the resurrected and ascended Jesus Christ believers discover the need and the power to break down whatever creates divisions between them. People choose to lay down their wealth and advantages not to earn their salvation or to achieve prestige but because they are beginning to grasp the strangeness of the divine economy that corresponds to the church’s Easter proclamation which promises a transformed future that is already under way.”

We move from hearing all about how the disciples held everything in common to the story of Ananias and Sapphira. They sold a piece of property and instead of bringing the total proceeds to the apostles they kept some back for themselves. For some reason this story isn’t covered at Vacation Bible School.

Their story contrasts with Barnabas who we read about in chapter 4.  He was a Levite from Cyprus who sold a field and gave all the money to the apostles. His is a positive example of how to live in community.  Ananias’ and Sapphira’s story is a negative example.

Ananias deceives the community and Ananias is deceived, as Wall writes, “because he remains ignorant of the participatory nature of God’s ‘great grace.’ Peter tells him that the believer retains ownership of property and the personal freedom to do with it what he wants. Thus, if surrendered to the apostles it is by voluntary action and the result of an individual choice rather than by apostolic coercion. Ananias is not charged with failure to sell his property or to place the proceeds at the apostles’ feet, but with deception.”

Is deception a big part of your life?  Where do you see deception in your daily life or out in the world? How does deception cut one off from God’s great grace?

Skinner writes that Ananias and Sapphira’s offense, “entails misrepresenting the sale price for the purpose of fostering an impression that they are graciously handing over the full amount. Evidently, they want to appear to be making a greater sacrifice than they are, or to seem to be committing themselves to the ethos of mutual interdependence more fully that they really are.”

Peter’s question to Sapphira gives her an opportunity to confess and be restored to the community, but instead she chooses deception.

What do you think of this story? It feels extreme and out of place. Skinner writes, “This passage offers a vision of a church that many would be disinclined to join.” Including it might show how dangerous Luke thinks deception in the church community can be. Why do you think Luke includes this story in Acts?

Verses 12-17 remind us once again of Jesus ministry when we hear that people were bringing out the sick into the street in the hopes that Peter’s shadow might fall on them and heal them. Verse 16 sounds like it could be from a gospel- “A great number of people would also gather from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing the sick and those tormented by unclean spirits, and they were all cured.”

We pick up today where we left off last week.  The apostles are doing “many signs and wonders.”  People are being healed, in fact, folks are placing people who are sick and those with unclean spirits along Peter’s path so that his shadow might fall on them and heal them.

The high priest takes action. Earlier in chapter 4 the high priest, the chief justice of the Sanhedrin, and the leader of the Sadducees demand the apostles be silent. But they do not comply.  They gather in Solomon’s Portico and do those signs and wonders, and more and more people are added to their number.  So, the high priest has the apostles arrested and put in public prison.  But then an angel lets them out in the middle of the night. Wall writes, “The ‘prison escape’ is a literary theme that symbolizes the futile attempt to subvert the redemptive purposes of God by silencing God’s prophetic word.”

Luke makes the Sadducees into a caricature. They use their power to arrest the apostles.  When they show up to the prison expecting victory they come off as fools, as their prisoners are nowhere to be found.  Wall writes, “Indeed, at the very moment of humiliation, the apostles are teaching the people of Jerusalem in the Temple—the one place the Sadducees presumed to have control!”

What do you make of the advice given by Gamaliel in verses 35-39 especially, “So in the present case, I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone, because if this plan or this undertaking is of human origin, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them—in that case you may even be found fighting against God!”

They decide to release the apostles but flog them first. They are once again ordered not to speak in the name of Jesus.

The apostles do not follow the orders— “every day in the temple and at home they did not cease to teach and proclaim Jesus as the Messiah.”

Luke tells us the apostles “rejoiced that they were considered worthy to suffer dishonor for the sake of the name.” What a generous and gracious way to look at what they’d been through. We can only imagine what it must have been like to be thrown in prison and then later, to come before these powerful men and present a united front in what they say, so much so that the council became “enraged and wanted to kill them.” And then looking back on this experience to rejoice. It’s all in how you see things, isn’t it? How we decide what an experience means can affect so much of how we experience life. How else could the apostles have interpreted their experience?

Chapter 6 opens with a conflict in the church. There are some in the community, Hellenistic widows, who are not being served as they ought to be. To ensure they get what they need would mean the apostles would be bogged down with administrative duties and not free to minister in the way they are called – chiefly to prayer and to serving the word (Acts 6:4).

Wall writes, “Rapid growth imperils the performance of the biblical injunction to take special care to meet the material requirements of the community’s most vulnerable members—widows, orphans, resident aliens, the destitute, and the powerless (see Lev 19, Lev 25, Deut 16:11, Mal 3:5, 1 Tim 5:3-16, Jas 1:22-2:17). The prophets make clear that the treatment of its poor and powerless effectively gauges Israel’s relationship with God (Mal 3:5; Zech 7:10) and heralds repentant Israel’s renewed covenant with God (Isa 47:8). For this reason, the Hellenists were right to lodge their complaint.”

Who are the Hellenists?
The uses of the terms “Hellenist” and “Hebrews” can make us think there were two distinct groups, but Wall is quick to point out that they, “‘were of one heart and soul’ and in principle shared equally in the blessings of a restored Israel. The present complain stems from the realization that one group in practice has not yet fully participated in the community of goods according to its rule of faith.”  Probably these labels had to do with the language spoken.  Hellenists spoke Greek and Hebrews, Aramaic. The language barrier may be to blame for the poor distribution of food.

This is the first place we see the word “disciple” in Acts. A disciple is a follower or student of Jesus.

The apostles ask for nominations for seven men to be in charge of food distribution. Wall writes, “The number seven is not arbitrary but reflects the Jewish practice of choosing seven members to provide oversight to local congregations.” There are three character-traits that are most important for these seven to have – good standing, full of the Spirit, and full of wisdom.

It is interesting how Luke phrases verse 7, “The word of God continued to spread.” This highlights the fact that the message is spreading, not who is spreading it. Wall writes that this phrasing shifts, “the reader’s focus from the power and authority of those who preach it (the apostles) to the power and authority of what is preached (the word of God.)”

Acts 6:8 is the beginning of a section that will last until Acts 8:3. This is the last episode set in Jerusalem. It centers on Stephen, one of the seven chosen for the food distribution. Interestingly enough, he’s doing signs and wonders like the apostles. Many argue with him, which suggests he is called to ministry of the Word.

We’ll see the phrase “signs and wonders” repeated throughout this episode which brings us back to Acts 2- when Peter preaches after Pentecost and quotes the prophet Joel about “signs and wonders.”

Stephen’s opponents are described as belonging to the synagogue of the Freedmen.  This was a religious movement and here synagogue refers not to a building, but a way of thinking.  Stephen’s opponents stir up the people against Stephen, they say he is guilty because of “blasphemy against Moses” (which is not illegal), and they install false witnesses again Stephen.

Almost all of chapter 7, which we’ll read tomorrow, is Stephen’s speech during his court appearance.  What’s interesting is right before he speaks his face is like the face of an angel. This reminds us of Moses, in Exodus, when he would meet with God in the Tent of Meeting his face would glow. Wall writes that this shows “the irony that it is Stephen, accused of blasphemy against Moses, and not the Sanhedrin, who is Israel’s authorized interpreter of Moses.”  We’ll see this interpretation of Moses in Stephen’s speech tomorrow.

Stephen tells the story of Israel starting with Abraham. He summaries the stories as he puts his interpretive spin on them.

Verses 2-16 are a brief summary of Genesis.
Verses 17-44 are a brief summary of Exodus.
Verse 45a is an incredibly short summary of what happened in Joshua.
Verses 45b-50 summarize the Davidic Covenant, when David tries to build God a house (the Temple) but God says, no, God will build David a house (a dynasty) and will have a Davidic King rule Israel forever.  It’s left to Solomon, David’s son, to build the Temple. To read more about this go to 2 Samuel 7.

If you were summarizing Genesis or Exodus what would you include? What would you leave out?

Skinner writes, “Stephen’s speech has earned its reputation as a meandering piece of oratory. He devotes the majority to retelling and slightly embellishing episodes from biblical stories about Abraham, Joseph, Moses, David, and Solomon without always making it clear why he lingers over certain details—especially the passage of time in those stories—at the expense of others. As a result, interpreters find it difficult to agree about the speech’s specific rhetorical intentions. At least two general themes nonetheless anchor what Stephen says: God’s presence and faithfulness in places beyond the land of Israel, and the people’s inclinations toward disobeying God.”

Acts doesn’t go into the legal case against Stephen really.  All we know is that the mob is cruel. They take issue with Stephen’s interpretation, and they lash out and kill him.

At verse 54 Stephen’s speech is over, and we see the crowd and Stephen speak with one another.  Wall writes, “Nowhere in Acts is the contrast between those who disobey and those who obey God’s will more sharply drawn. The effect on the reader is to experience more concretely Stephen’s biblical retelling of Israel’s story as a history of disobedience.” All the while Saul stands by and watches.

Stephen’s last words make us think of Jesus’ words from the cross. Stephen says, “receive my spirit” and “do not hold this sin against them.”

Stephen’s death is a turning point in Acts. Things are different now- “that day a severe persecution began” (8:1). Now all the disciples are scattered throughout the countryside of Judea and Samaria, all except the apostles.

In Acts 1:8 Jesus tells the disciples, “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” We see that happening here.  But the reason the message is spreading, and the followers of Jesus are scattered around, is due to persecution.  Skinner writes, “the widened geographical scope Jesus promises in 1:8 becomes a reality, although not in a manner anyone would choose.”

If you were a disciple at Jesus’ ascension and heard that you would be Jesus’ witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and to the ends of the earth, how would you picture that going?

Skinner continues, the persecution of the church and the subsequent scattering of the church, “urges readers to see that apparent setbacks may provide opportunities for people to experience growth and new discovery, which is a theme Acts returns to frequently.”

What “setbacks” have you experienced? What did they lead to?

In my reading on this chapter, I was really struck by a quote from Matthew Skinner.  When we read the Great Commission Jesus gives his disciples in Acts 1:8 about being witnesses to the ends of the earth, I’ve always read it and heard it interpreted as instructions Jesus gives us- “I’m telling you to go and make this happen.”  But listen to what Skinner writes, “As the story unfolds, Jesus’s words from 1:8 begin to look like a description of the ordinary consequences of following him as opposed to instructions for deliberately shaping the church’s day-to-day plans. In other words, bearing witness is what nearly everyone in the story seems to do, no matter where they end up.”  What do you think of that reframing? How do you interpret the Great Commission? How have you interpreted it?  If we go with Skinner’s reframing, it would follow that our job is to follow Jesus and see what happens as opposed to trying to make the world bend to our will (even if what we’re willing is the following of a commission from Jesus).

Among the seven selected to assist with food distribution are Stephen and Philip. We’ve heard Stephen’s story and now turn to Philip’s.

Philip ends up in Samaria.  We’ve got the region of Galilee in the north—that’s where Nazareth is, Jesus’ home region. We’ve got the region of Judea in the south—that’s where Jerusalem is. In between is Samaria.  Samaritans and Jews did not get along, which is why the story of the Good Samaritan is so subversive. A good Samaritan?! Unlikely! And that’s just where Philip ends up following Jesus. Skinner writes, “Philip’s willingness to go to Samaria and preach therefore expresses his willingness to cross profound divides of culture, identity, and historical grievances. Similar to the Pentecost events in chapter 2, when the Holy Spirit creates new expressions of connection and community among a multicultural collection of Jews from different lands, the Spirit’s work among Samaritans will enlarge the church but also have centripetal effects.”

Why doesn’t the Spirit show up at the Samaritan’s baptism?
Good question! It’s not clear why. Acts doesn’t tell us.  Elsewhere in Acts the Holy Spirit will show up before someone is baptized (in chapter 10) and sometimes new converts are not baptized, or at least we don’t get to know about it. There is no clear first you do this, then you do this, then the Holy Spirit arrives.
Skinner writes, “No rules or rituals constrain God’s Spirit. The church bears witness and responds to what it discerns to be God’s leading. The Spirit occasionally injects surprise. As a result, nothing appears to be wrong in this scene.  There is nothing inherently defective about either the Samaritans’ baptism or Philip’s ministry. The Holy Spirit has simply not shown up yet.”

And it does when Peter and John get there. Do they have some sort of special power? No.  It all goes back to creating a community of believers. The original church is in Jerusalem and it’s expanding.  But it’s not making other communities, there is one community.  It’s not the Jerusalem church and the Samaritan church; it’s the church in Jerusalem and the church in Samarian. Peter and John’s visit connects the Samaritans to the Jerusalem church, and to Jesus, who Peter and John are eye-witnesses to. Their visit and the Holy Spirit’s arrival is mutually beneficial for the apostles and the Samaritans.  Skinner writes, “Through Peter and John’s presence, the Samaritan believers encounter the original community of Christ-followers to whom they are connected in their new identity. When the two apostles experience the Spirit’s arrival in such a tactile manner, they witness firsthand God’s action of including the Samaritans as full beneficiaries of salvation.”

What do you make of Simon the magician? Does his story remind you of others we’ve read so far in Acts? Peter rebukes him and Simon’s response is to ask Peter to pray for him. We do not know how his story ends. It reminds me of the story of the rich young ruler from Matthew 19. The rich, young ruler asks Jesus “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?” After some conversation Jesus tells him, “If you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.” When the young man heard this word, he went away grieving, for he had many possessions. We know as much about how it turned out for the rich, young ruler as we do about Simon the magician.

We finish out chapter 8 with Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch. Of their encounter Skinner writes that it shows that the gospel, “really does have potential to disrupt the whole world, one interaction at a time.”

What is a eunuch?
Skinner tells us, “his genitalia have been mutilated or removed, probably to prevent him from fathering children, hinder his sexual desire, keep him from becoming too strong, or limit his ability to amass honor. A combination of those reasons is possible.”
“His identity as a eunuch  could have made him widely despised or mocked by the ancient readers of Acts, even as it also appears to accentuate his status as a trusted insider in the Candace’s realm, for eunuchs could be counted on to fulfill certain duties with little rise of defiling royal bloodlines.”

For the ancient people in Judea, Samaria, and Galilee “Ethiopia” represented the far reaches of the world. Skinner writes, “if anyone in Acts represents, from the perspective of certain cultural stereotypes, the ‘other’ or someone who dwells at the ‘edges,’ it is this figure.”

Their conversation goes so well, and they see water and the eunuch asks, “What is to prevent me from being baptized?” probably worded that way because the implied answer is, “Nothing!”

Take a minute to read another part of Isaiah- chapter 56:3-8. How does this relate to our eunuch?

And then all of a sudden Philip is taken by the Holy Spirit to Azotus, continuing to spread the good news as he goes.

Saul, later called Paul, moves from persecutor to proclaimer in this half of chapter 9.

Is this a familiar story to you? So often familiar Bible stories are hard to study because we come with preconceived notions about them.  We’ve heard so many sermons on them, so many Sunday School lessons, what more is there to say? To learn?

If it is a familiar story to you, maybe write down what you know about it, what God is doing with the call of Saul. Do you have any ‘baggage’ around this story?

This is the first time we get this story in Acts. Paul (the name Acts uses for Saul after chapter 12) retells this story in chapters 22 and 26. Skinner writes, “what happens to Saul during his journey to Damascus stands at the center of his understanding of who God is and what God expects from him.”

What stand at the center of YOUR understanding of who God is and what God expects from YOU?

We first heard about Saul at Stephen’s stoning. He is behind the persecution that drives the disciples out of Jerusalem. And now he goes out of Jerusalem to bring followers of Jesus back to Jerusalem in chains.

Damascus is a city in Syria over one hundred miles to the northeast of Jerusalem. As he goes there is a blinding light and Jesus asks why Saul persecutes him, not the church, but Jesus himself.

What follows shows a theme that is prevalent throughout Luke and Acts which is reversal.

Skinner writes, “Saul embodies reversal; or reversal happens to him when Jesus disrupts his expectation. Saul changes from seeing to being blind. His confident persecutor’s zeal gives way to confessed ignorance about the ‘Lord’ he cannot recognize on his own.
He changes from a man intending to lead captives to Jerusalem in chains to one forced to be led into Damascus by others. His authority over others’ bodies transforms into his own dependence.
He changes from a man on a mission to one who must wait to learn what to do next. Previously he actively petitioned the high priest in Jerusalem to endorse his plans, but now he fasts in anticipation of receiving further instruction.
He changes from a man exercising great power over the church to one overpowered by Jesus.
In what ways can such reversals enact the gospel?”

Look over this list of reversals.  What do the befores have in common with each other and what do the afters have in common with each other? Do you see any themes? What are they?

Have you ever experienced a reversal in strong conviction? What was it? What reversed your opinion/beliefs? What is all of a sudden like Saul or was it a gradual coming to understand?

What do you think of Ananias? If you’re familiar with this story, what have you been taught about him and his role in Saul’s story?

We pick up here where we left off last week. Saul had his extraordinary, life-transforming experience on the road to Damascus.  His life is turned upside down.  Now, instead of breathing threats and murder against the disciples he is a disciple of Jesus. He stays in Damascus to spend time with the disciples there, instead of taking them back to Jerusalem in chains.  Then he starts to preach in the synagogues about Jesus saying, “He is the Son of God.” Everyone is very confused and points out the reversals in Saul’s life.

This sharp transformation opens Saul up to claims of hypocrisy. Where do you see hypocrisy in daily life? Who is accused of hypocrisy and why?  What do you think when others have one opinion and then later take the reverse opinion?  Is this good or bad or does it depend? What does it depend on?

We started reading when Saul escapes Damascus because some Jewish folks plot to kill him.  Very often Acts will refer to “the Jews.”  This sounds like Acts is referring to all Jewish people everywhere, but really this means a group of people who happened to be Jewish.

When Saul gets to Jerusalem the followers of Jesus there are afraid of him. Why is this? How would you react to Saul all of a sudden wanting to be considered a disciple? Barnabus steps in and vouches for Saul.

We read about Hellenists last week.  The Hellenists referred to here are Greek-speaking nonbelievers. Because of this conflict Saul is sent to Tarsus and the focus shifts to Peter.

Peter heals a paralyzed man and raises a woman from the dead in Lydda and Joppa, two cities northwest of Jerusalem.

Notices the words Peter says during the healing of Aeneas, “Jesus Christ heals you.” Wall writes, “Peter removes himself as a broker of the Lord’s healing grace and asserts that the Lord heals Aeneas.”

Then Peter is called to Joppa. A prominent disciple there has died, Tabitha or Dorcas. Both names mean “gazelle” in Aramaic and Greek respectively. Tabitha was “devoted to good works and acts of charity.” The widows around her deathbed show the clothes Tabitha made for them. In the raising of Tabitha, Acts is careful to communicate that it is not under his own power that Peter brings her back from the dead, but the power of Jesus. Peter prays before telling her to get up. Skinner writes, “Peter does not replace Jesus; he acts as a channel through whom Jesus’s ministry continues.”

Acts shows Peter and Saul/Paul in similar stories to Jesus.  This story is similar to when Paul brings a dead person back to life in Acts 20 and when Jesus does in Luke 7 and 8. Skinner writes, “The work of the church in Acts is not a new thing; it is a continuation. Jesus continues to be active in the world through the deeds of his followers…Jesus remains present, then, through the church. Yet Acts refuses to imply that the church or its prominent members replace Jesus or stand on par with him.”

On healing stories
Skinner writes, “The Bible’s miracle stories elicit various reactions from us. Because they evoke wonder, they occupy prominent places in children’s Sunday school curricula and children’s Bibles. They can encourage people who have lost hope or who cling to fading faith in God’s ability to illuminate a way out of suffering and powerlessness. They make others skeptical, wondering how much the stories stem from legends, superstitions, or ancient ignorance about how the world really works. Sometimes, honestly, they worry us, making us wonder if the comparatively bland Christianity we practice today bears enough resemblance to what the Christian life might have been like back in the day, when apostles healed the sick and raise the dead.”

What do you think about healing stories? Are they a source of comfort, disappointment, confusion, or anger? Why do you think that is?

We continue with the theme of reversals, this time with Peter as the main character.  All of Peter’s life he has taken scripture seriously. When he’s having the vision on the roof and is told to kill and eat he says, “By no means Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is profane or unclean.”

I’ve not ever gone into a trance and had a vision on top of a roof, but I think if I did, I don’t know that I would argue with what I was being told to do.  That is how strong Peter’s conviction is that he cannot eat unclean food. Food prohibitions were deeply ingrained in Peter.

Dietary laws are found in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14. What does it mean that Peter is ordered to completely disregard these laws? What does that mean for us?

Matthew Skinner’s chapter on Acts 10 in his book Intrusive God, Disruptive Gospel is called Old Boundaries Obliterated. In it he writes, “Certainly the most dramatic, formational, and unexpected thing that happened during the first three decades of the Christian church’s history was the movement’s transition from communities comprising Jews and proselytes to Judaism into communities that included gentiles on equal terms and with no preconditions as fellow members and co-beneficiaries of God’s grace.”

Is this a familiar story to you? Because we do not share the same symbolic worldview as Peter and other Jewish folks at the time, we do not feel how scandalous and outrageous it was to order a practicing Jew to eat unclean food. It would have felt wrong, wrong, wrong to Peter and any Jewish readers or listeners of this story. Peter even says to Cornelius, “You yourselves know that it is unlawful for a Jew to associate with or to visit a Gentile.” As outsiders to this law and expectation, how does that boundary strike you?

If this sort of situation were to happen today, what would Peter be ordered to do? What boundaries are currently set up that do not serve the mission of the Kingdom of God?

In this story we see both Cornelius and Peter putting God at the center of what they do. Cornelius falls at Peter’s feet to worship him, but Peter makes him stand up and says, “I am only a mortal.” When Cornelius tells the story of why he called for Peter, he frames it in a way that shows Cornelius responding to God, not Cornelius as the main actor. Peter comes to a fuller understanding of who God is through this experience.  He says, “I truly understand that God shows no partiality.”

We end the chapter with a sort of Gentile Pentecost.  The Spirit descends on them and it sounds a lot like what happened in chapter 2 to the disciples. Here the Holy Spirit is given before they are baptized. Reminding us that the Holy Spirit cannot be controlled by human action.

Skinner writes, “How did the early church come to realize that gentiles could be full members without having to become Torah observant? Acts answers that complicated historical question with simplicity: Jewish Christ-followers share the word of God with gentiles, and the Holy Spirit shows up. Acts also tells the story as one of divine prompting. In other words, members of the church view the phenomenon as a new reality God introduces. They obediently bear witness to Christ, but the Spirit bestows true belonging and urges the church to expand its sense of its boundaries and possibility.”

What an interesting response the apostles and believers have who heard that the gentiles had also accepted the word of God. Instead of greeting this news with rejoicing and celebration they are wary.  It makes them uncomfortable and hesitant, not sure if this is will please God or not. When Peter gets back to Jerusalem they say, “Why did you go to uncircumcised men and eat with them?”
If you were Peter, how would you receive that question, as the first thing they say to you? You’d have just been part of something miraculous, inclusive, and wonderful – a second Pentecost! and your fellows start out by saying, “Why did you even go there?”

Maybe Peter could understand where they are coming from because Acts tells us he, “began to explain it to them, step by step.”

Peter summaries what we read yesterday and adds his thoughts about when the Holy Spirit descended on the gentiles. He tells those in Jerusalem that when the Holy Spirit descended he remembered what Jesus said-how John (the Baptist) would baptize with water, but that they will be baptized with the Holy Spirit. He finishes by saying, “If then God gave them the same gift he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could hinder God?”  And they were all silent.  And then we get the rejoicing and celebration! “They all praised God, saying, ‘Then God has given even to the Gentiles the repentance that leads to life.’”  I love how their response is phrased, it’s as if as they say it, they are realizing how much bigger God and God’s purposes are than they ever imagined.

How do we hinder God today?

Skinner writes, “If God’s Holy Spirit is present among gentiles, they are holy. God drives away any impurity that could stand in the way. Cornelius and other gentiles deserve, consequently, to be recognized as full participants in God’s salvation through Jesus Christ.”

In verse 19 we’re drawn back to the followers of Jesus who were scattered due to the persecution described in chapter 8. These Jesus followers speak to Greek-speaking gentiles in Antioch and they become followers of Jesus. Barnabus is sent there and rejoices at their belief.  He goes to Tarsus and gets Paul and the two of them stay in Antioch for a year.  Acts tells us, “It was in Antioch that the disciples were first called ‘Christians.’”

I wonder, without Peter’s vision of the sheet and his experience at Cornelius’ house and his report of it to the Jerusalem church, how would Barnabus have reacted to the gentiles in Antioch following Jesus?

Have you ever changed your mind about an issue? Did anyone pave the way for your change of mind?

At the end of chapter 11 we have a little note about a prophet announcing a food shortage (relatively common in that time and place).  The church in Antioch makes plans to support the church elsewhere with food. This shows how interconnected the church is in both places.

We have the second prison exit in Acts, the first one being the apostles put in prison by the high priest in Acts 5.

Chapter 12 opens with Herod having James, the brother of John, killed. Skinner writes, “This James was one of the original twelve apostles whom Jesus chose. Why would Herod engage in state-sponsored persecution? Presumably to weaken or destroy the church in Jerusalem by eliminating its leadership, a move that, Acts says, ‘pleased the Jews’ referring to the Jewish leadership in the city, the aristocratic, temple-based officiants who troubled the believers in Acts 4-5.”

Herod next plans to make Peter a martyr but his plans are thwarted by God. The time of year is meaningful- during the Festival of Unleavened Bread leading into the Passover.  This was the time when Jesus was executed.  These festivals also celebrate the liberation of the people by God from a “tyrant’s oppressive hand.” We remember this from our Rooted Reading in February, when we read Exodus and saw how God liberated the people from slavery in Egypt under Pharoah.

The church gathers to pray fervently for Peter.  When have you prayed fervently? Were you by yourself or with others? Is gathering together for the sole purpose of praying something you are interested in? Is it something you already do?

Peter is freed from prison through miraculous action.  Skinner writes, “not until Peter passes through the city gate, which opens on its own, and the angel leaves does he recognize what is happening. His entire outlook changes in verse 11, when at last he ‘came to himself.’ His new outlook is an overtly theological discovery: ‘the Lord has sent his angel and rescued me.’ Nothing else can explain how he moved from such peril to the middle of a Jerusalem street.”

What in your life can you look back on and attribute what happened to God’s hand?

The incident with Rhoda reminds us of the women coming to the disciples to tell them the tomb is empty on Easter morning and being met with disbelief. Luke tells us about that in chapter 24 of his gospel, “They remembered his words, and returning from the tomb, they told all this to the eleven and to the rest…but these words seemed to them an idle tale, and they did not believe them.”

How interesting that the people in Mary’s house are praying for Peter, presumably for his deliverance, and they do not believe when Rhoda tells them it’s happened!

So much of chapter 12 has to do with recognition. How do you help yourself to notice and recognize all that God is doing in the world?  Skinner writes, “As with Peter, Cornelius, and company in Acts 10-11, recognizing God takes time and usually happens after the fact, when we have better perspective on a situation. We make and declare such recognitions with healthy doses of fear and uncertainty, acknowledging we may be disappointed in the end. We might be wrong. Circumstances might change. When the church in Mary’s house opens the gate for Peter, they open themselves to the possibility of embracing a new or unexpected reality. They act more on a hunch than on settled confidence, on longing more than certainty.  This is never easy. Our ability to take such steps depends much on who we imagine God to be. We gain more strength and courage if we believe that God delights in surprises or that God is willing to reorder our expectations into greater conformity with the gospel.”

Who do you imagine God to be?

Chapter 12 ends with a dramatic death for Herod. His death makes us feel like there is some order in the world – the good guy (Peter) escapes death while the bad guy (Herod) meets death. We are on Peter’s side, so it feels good and fitting for our opponents to be squashed. But doesn’t that sound like what Herod was working for? Skinner writes, “Some of us, when faced with conflict and competing visions of what’s possible, think it’s up to us to rush in and fix everything. As a result, we sometimes respond more like Herod than like the prayerful believers in Mary’s house. And the Rhodas in our midst, those who can actually see what’s going on, still have a hard time getting our attention.”

Our focus shifts to Paul and Barnabus in Acts 13. These two are sent out, commissioned, with the laying on of hands.  Have you ever been commissioned to do something? Churches will commission a group of people leaving for a mission trip, new Sunday school teachers, or members of the Leadership Board.

If you were commissioned, what was it like? Have you ever experienced the laying on of hands during prayer? What was that experience like? Have you ever prayed for someone and laid your hand on their should or head or hand?

Paul and Barnabus sail to Salamis and meet a magician Bar-Jesus (also called Elymas) with Sergius Paulus. The magician did not want Sergius Paulus to believe the message of Paul and Barnabus. Paul calls him out and says he’ll be blind for awhile. The magician does become blind, and Sergius Paulus believes. It’s interesting that the consequences for Bar-Jesus are the same as they were for Saul/Paul (see chapter 9), temporary blindness.  Why do you think that is?

Bar means Son. Jesus was a common name among first-century Jews, so there is no reason to assume the Jesus in his name has anything to do with Jesus Christ. Skinner writes, “In a narrative that places such value on prophecy as a hallmark of Christ’s followers the entrance of a ‘false prophet’ looks all the more sinister, especially since Bar-Jesus, like Paul and Barnabus, is a Jew. Acts implies that Bar-Jesus’s wickedness stems not from spiritual ignorance, then, but from his desire for influence and spiritual authority over the one true God, making his ways an especially vivid and repulsive contrast to the power of the Holy Spirit that animates Jesus’s followers.”

How do you tell the difference between a prophet and a false prophet?

Paul and Barnabus go to the synagogue in Antioch. During the service, after the scripture is read, the officials ask Paul and Barnabus if they have any word of exhortation to please share it. Paul walks them through scripture, arriving at the stories of John the Baptist, Jesus, and Jesus’ death and resurrection.  He proclaims that Jesus offers forgiveness of sins.

Their message is well received, and the people ask them to come back next week.  They do and, “almost the whole city gathered to hear the word of the Lord.”

Jealousy among the Jewish leaders creates conflict.  This cements for Paul and Barnabus their calling to preach the good news to the gentiles.  Skinner writes, “the Jewish leaders’ objections might dissuade the curious masses, and so they provoke Paul and Barnabas’s ire.  That would explain why Acts refers to the Jewish leaders as ‘blaspheming’ in this instance; evidently in opposing Paul and Barnabus they are effectively opposing the Holy Spirit.”

As we’ll see in the following chapters, the Jewish leaders in Pisidian Antioch continue to work to discredit Paul and Barnabus.

Skinner writes about the ongoing conflict between Jewish leaders and those who spread the message of Jesus, “The prophetic perspective of Acts understands the good news about Jesus to be divisive, which is not the same thing as condemnatory. The book’s theological rhetoric does not stage the preaching of ‘the word of the Lord’ as a duel in which no more than one party can survive intact. Any theology, wherever its origins, that understands divine blessings and curses to operate on a zero-sum calculus shows itself to be out of step with a story that, on the whole, otherwise insists on God’s unshakable fidelity and on the church as an expansive, inclusive society that experiences God-given salvation.”

The Kingdom of God is marked by abundance, after all- more than enough for everyone!

The opening verses of chapter 14 remind us that while Paul and Barnabus can do signs and wonders, through the Holy Spirit, the life of discipleship isn’t 100% positive. Some folks in Iconium plan to stone them. They hear of the plan and leave and continue to preach the good news where they end up.

When Paul and Barnabus arrive in Lystra Paul heals a man, making him able to walk for the first time in his life. The people who witness the healing assume Paul and Barnabus are Greek gods – Zeus and Hermes. The people bring them offerings, but Paul and Barnabus refuse and use this situation to share the good news.

Notice, the speech does not mention Jesus.  Skinner writes, “The speech offers a basic introduction to the God of Israel (and of Jesus Christ), accentuating divine goodness and God’s commitment to nourish creation. That commitment to ‘doing good’ strikes a contrast to the more mercurial and sometimes menacing personalities of the gods in much Greek and Roman mythology…[Paul and Barnabus] are trying to rebuild the Lystrans’ foundational religious imagination. They start at the beginning: what kind of god(s) do people believe in.”

What kind of God do you believe in? It would have felt foreign and strange to the Lystrans that God wants good for the people. Does that feel strange to you? What do you think God wants for you?

Paul and Barnabus tear their clothing as a way of expressing their sorrow- they want people to understand it is not by their power, but by God’s that the man was healed.  Even though the Lystrans get it wrong and interpret what is going on through their Greek-god lens, Paul and Barnabus make it clear that the good news of Jesus is for them too.

Then Jewish leaders from Antioch and Iconium speak to the crowd, stone Paul, and drag him away. Skinner writes, “Paul recovers astonishingly quickly from terrible violence against him, with Acts refraining from explaining how that happens and why he would want to return to the city immediately after being pelted with rocks there. The narrative almost implies that the presence of ‘disciples’ encircling him as he lies like a corpse empowers him. His incredible survival may remind readers of Jesus’ unexplained ability to evade a crowd that tries to throw him off a cliff because his teachings upset them (Luke 4).”

Paul and Barnabus circle back to Lystra, Iconium and Antioch to encourage the followers of Jesus there.  They appoint elders for each gathering of the church. Skinner writes, although Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch, “were places of opposition, conspiracy or outright violence against Paul and Barnabas during their previous visits this time no new persecution erupts. Their willingness to return to potentially dangerous sites may appear foolish or brashly courageous, but the reality is likely less dramatic, for mobs disband and peril dissipates over time. If risks nevertheless remain in these cities, the travelers’ decision to return could stem from their willingness to forgive their antagonists or from the magnitude of their concern for new friends who still reside there.”

Remember, back in chapter 10 when Peter has the vision of the sheet and then he goes to visit Cornelius, a gentile, and the Holy Spirit descends on the gentiles gathered in Cornelius’ house? And then in chapter 11 when Peter reports to the church in Jerusalem about the experience, he says, “If then God gave them the same gift that he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could hinder God?” Then everyone who heard it was silent, and they praised God, saying, “Then God has given even to the Gentiles the repentance that leads to life.”

The message of Jesus continues to spread amongst the Gentiles. And now there is discussion about what to do with the gentile Christians.  Must they be converts to Judaism first to be accepted into the church? Or can they enter the community without the markers of Judaism – like circumcision and following the laws of Moses (like dietary restrictions). Skinner writes, “No one disputes that gentiles can be saved, but some argue that there are terms or preconditions that matter for how their salvation becomes complete and makes them fully integrated with the rest of the church. The question boils down to whether gentile converts are obligated to observe Jewish law in its entirety. Acts implies that Jewish members of the church remain at least partially Torah observant, and so it makes sense that some of them would expect the same from gentiles.”

Paul and Barnabus are sent to Jerusalem to discuss what to do with the apostles and the elders. Notice, the criteria for making their decision – is it what’s best for them? What’s best for the community? What are their motivations?
Skinner writes, “Despite the controversy that marked that period in the ancient church’s history, Acts tells us the story of the decision as a relatively uncomplicated one, ironed out without much sweat during a conference. The narrative urges readers to view the decision as the church’s recognition of God’s purposes, not simply a result of cerebral deliberations. When believers gather to consider the issue and hear from specific church leaders, they conclude with statements about what God intends and what God has revealed.”

Their conversations at this council are more concerned with discerning the will of God then presenting their own opinion.

Notice that the only arguments Acts presents us are those who advocate for gentiles not having to be circumcised or follow the law of Moses. Skinner writes, “Again we observe that Acts is not a comprehensive accounting of ancient believers’ deliberations. The book is better understood as an ex post facto celebration of the church learning to follow God’s leading.  Discernment often looks clearer after time passes.”

Peter testifies about his experience at Cornelius’ house at the council. Paul and Barnabus testify about the signs and wonders God did through them among the gentiles. Then James speaks.  Acts doesn’t tell us James’s role or give us any other details about who he is.  Probably he is the same James Peter refers to in chapter 12 when he is set free from prison and goes to Mary’s house. James is presumably a leader in the Jerusalem church. Skinner writes, “other New Testament passages identify him as a brother of Jesus (Mark 6:3; Gal 1:19).” James refers to a Simeon in his speech to the council.  Simeon is the Aramaic equivalent of Simon, Peter’s given name.  Also, when we hear the name Simeon we hear an echo from Luke chapter 2, Jesus is being presented in the temple and here comes a man, Simeon, who holds baby Jesus while describing God’s salvation as “a light for revelation to the gentiles and for the glory to your people Israel” (Luke 2:32).

James draws from a Septuagint version of Amos 9:11-12.  The Septuagint is the translation of the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament into Greek. Skinner writes, “James implies that since the Davidic reign now continues anew and forever through the resurrected Jesus, no one should be surprised that gentiles are responding to Christian preaching and receiving divine confirmation of their full inclusion through the Holy Spirit. Their inclusion is part of God’s ancient plan, as Amos foresaw, and evidence of the Messiah’s reign.”

After all that, James suggests gentile followers of Jesus abstain from four things: food that has been offered to idols, fornication, food that has been strangled, and meat containing blood. Skinner writes, “Neither James’ speech nor the outcomes that follow it describes obedience as a necessary condition of gentiles’ salvation. James’s decree, instead, has at least two other likely purposes. It offers instructions to gentiles about the dangers of idolatrous practices and appearances, with directives meant to steer believers away from ceremonies common within the wide constellation of cultic activity in Greco-Roman religions. It also erects a protective barrier for the church at large by asking gentiles to eschew particular actions that could disgust the gentiles’ Jewish neighbors, both inside and outside the church. It urges gentiles to limit their freedom for the sake of promoting unity.”

Skinner continues, “The ease with which this scene reaches a conclusion that seems to satisfy everyone can elicit incredulous laughter from anyone who has sat through meetings with church leaders and theologians trying to negotiate controversial topics. That does not mean we cannot appreciate the narrative’s respect for gently treating the church’s growing pains and its confidence in God’s faithfulness as the church finds its way.”

So James suggests these four guidelines, the apostles and elders agree, and they’re sent out via letter. The letter ends, “If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well.” What do you think of that wording? Is that how you expected the letter to conclude?

We’ve spent all this time in chapter 15 talking about unity and making concessions for the cause of unity and the very next story is how Paul and Barnabus separate. Skinner writes, “At the least it reminds readers that differences of opinion, personality clashes, and strategic disagreements inevitably exist within Christian fellowship, as within any human community or organization. Let no one ever pretend that unity, cooperation, and forgiveness are easy.”

Barnabas and John Mark and Paul and Silas go to existing church communities to strengthen them as well as cross into new territory to bring the good news to folks who have not yet heard it.

One of the first things we read about after the Jerusalem Council, is Paul having Timothy circumcised. How interesting since after that meeting the gentile Christians were simply asked to avoid those four things (see Tuesday’s notes on Acts 15) not to promote circumcision. What do you think Paul’s motives were for having Timothy circumcised?
Skinner writes, “Evidently Paul thinks that circumcision will protect Timothy and the rest of the travelers from local Jews who are not part of the church and who might take offense, perhaps the same groups of Jews who trouble Paul at an earlier time when he preaches to gentiles in Lycaonia (see chapter 14)… We receive no explanation, however, of either Paul’s rationale or grounds for why the locals would take offense at Timothy… the passage provides many questions that resist clear answers.”

Timothy joins Paul on his travels to strengthen the church, preach the good news, and disseminate the letter from the Jerusalem Council. Skinner writes, “those decisions communicate more than legal prescriptions and expectations. They create space for Jewish and gentile disciples in this region to coexist and build mutuality in their communities.”

Paul crosses over into Macedonia.

The narrative switches from third person to first person for a bit here in chapter 16.  It is unclear why.

They arrive in Philippi and meet Lydia.  She’s a dealer in purple cloth and may be the head of her household since there is no reference to a male head of house.

 Is Lydia’s story a familiar one for you? What do you know about her? Why do you think her story is included in Acts?

Philippi is a Roman colony. Paul and his companions have been focusing on preaching the good news to Jews and gentiles who worship Israel’s God (like Cornelius and Lydia).  They’re more ready to understand about the Messiah. As they go to the place of prayer they are met by someone who recognizes their message and the God they serve- a young woman who is enslaved and earns money for her masters by seeing the future. Skinner writes, “The spirit within her sees clearly, for she speaks as if she has already read the book of Acts.”

Paul gets annoyed with her and orders the spirit to leave her.  This angers the masters who have them beaten and arrested. That night, as Paul and Silas were singing hymns and praying there is an earthquake, the doors are all opened, and everyone’s chains were unfastened, not just Paul and Silas’s. The jailer’s life is transformed, he hears the good news and he and his entire family are baptized. Skinner writes, “The jailer’s question, ‘What must I do to be saved?,” carries a delicious double meaning. He wants to know how he can survive every prison guard’s worst nightmare with his life intact, but Paul and Silas speak of a different kind of salvation. Within minutes, the one who locked up the missionaries hosts them in his house.”

We do not know why the magistrate decides to free Paul and Silas. Perhaps because of the earthquake? Paul and Silas do not cooperate with the magistrate’s plan to free them in secret. Skinner writes, “Paul’s public shaming warrants a public restoration, and he won’t leave the wrecked prison without an apology and a public gesture. Paul wants no one to assume he and Silas escaped. Even more, he wants no one to miss the officials’ acknowledgement of his God’s power; no human authority can restrict the activity and influence of these ‘slaves of the Most High God.’

When they hear Paul and Silas are Roman citizens they are afraid, apologize, and set them free.   Roman citizens were not supposed to be bound, beaten, or tortured.

Is this story a familiar one to you? If so, when did you learn about it? What does it have in common with Peter’s escape from prison in chapter 12?

Chapter 17 opens with Paul and Silas preaching the good news in the synagogue.  This reiterates that the Jesus movement is not just for gentiles or Jews, but for all. Skinner writes, “As is his general pattern throughout Acts, in Thessalonica Paul begins his preaching among Jews gathered in synagogues.  They, along with gentiles who are familiar with Jewish teachings would be the people most primed to hear a message about the Messiah and the Jewish hope of resurrection from the dead.”

The mob scene reiterates the danger that comes from following Jesus.

Once again when Acts says “Jews” it means Jewish leaders.  They recruit some ruffians and form a mob.  They take out their jealousy and anger on Jason, who apparently hosted Paul and Silas. Skinner writes about the jealousy experienced by the group of Jewish leaders, “their response is not petty, as if it arises from envy over Paul and Silas’s popularity. It expresses a religious zeal because they object to the evangelists’ claim that Jewish Scriptures support the notion of a Messiah who suffers.”

After being separated from Silas and Timothy Paul finds himself in Athens and is deeply distressed to see all the idols. He debates with Epicureans and Stoic philosophers.

They take him to the Areopagus which means Mars Rock or Mars Hill. Centuries before Paul, this is where the Athenians judged court cases. The official governing authorities of the city no longer met there, but the authorities were named after the place.  So probably they didn’t take Paul up to this hill, they brought him before the city officials.
 
Skinner writes, “the zealous crowd wants the city’s most powerful people to hear what he has to say… Paul finds himself facing an ancient equivalent of the Harvard University faculty and fellows. This distinguished group politely ask him to explain his ‘strange’ new religious message.” And so he does.

He describes getting to know their city – he’s been all over looking at all the altars to all the idols. As readers we know he does not care for these.  He’s deeply distressed over them- he’s angry over the junkyard of idols. But it is without distress or anger that Paul speaks before the governing officials.  Paul has been observing, listening, living among the people of the city.  Because of his commitment to knowing them, he happened across an altar with the inscription, ‘to an unknown god.’ Paul tells them – I know this unknown god.

And Paul quotes two Greek poets. The line “in him we live and move and have our being” is probably a quote from Epimenides from the sixth century BCE. “For we too are his offspring” is probably a quote from Aratus from the third century BCE. Paul uses language familiar to his audience to communicate his message. In other places and other times in Acts and in his letters, we see Paul quote much of the Hebrew Scripture, the Old Testament, to help his audience understand what he’s saying. But not so here. Or earlier in Acts 14 when Paul and Barnabus where in Lystra.  Skinner writes, “In Lystra [Paul] sticks to common ground he shares with his hearers, since appeals to Jewish Scripture or the life of Jesus would make little sense to them.”

Same in Athens.  After he helps them understand that it’s not two idols he’s speaking about, but the resurrection of Jesus, sent by the God who is creator of everything, he builds his preaching on a foundation of shared understanding. The living God Paul is coming to tell them about is the same god who they themselves built an altar to. And this God isn’t an idol, it’s not a statue, carved of wood or stone. This God doesn’t need human shrines, doesn’t need propping up by people. It’s the other way around – this God gives life to all people – to ALL people all over the world. God put a desire in all people to long for relationship with God – just as your own poets have said.

After Paul’s speech there are different reactions- some scoffed, some said they’d hear more from Paul, some became believers. It is good to remember these various reactions when we talk about or share our faith with others.  The main thing is to do it – to talk and share about our experiences of God and the church community.  So often sharing our faith can feel scary, vulnerable, like there is a lot of risk associated.  But this story helps us to see that people will respond how they will respond.  It’s not our job to change minds or hearts. Our job is to share our lives with others, our whole lives, including our faith.

Are you comfortable sharing your faith? Can you put into words the difference being a Christian makes in your life? If not, spend some time thinking about it. Maybe write something down. At this point in his ministry Paul had a ton of practice preaching and proclaiming the good news of God.  The way you get better at something is through practice.  So practice this skill with yourself—thinking or writing it out. Practice with someone who loves you.  Say, “I want to feel more comfortable sharing my faith.  Can I tell you a story of feeling loved by God/of feeling transformed by God/of a time when my faith made a difference?” and then do it!  And then, when you’re feeling a bit more practiced, I imagine the Holy Spirit will show you opportunities you may have missed before, to share your faith.  Because if you’re not confident about what you will say, or it feels so vulnerable that you’re uncomfortable, you may miss the opportunities the Holy Spirit provides.

In chapter 18 we learn that Paul’s occupation is a tentmaker.  He stays with Aquila and Priscilla who are Jewish tentmakers. Priscilla is the diminutive form of Prisca.  Paul references Aquila and Prisca often in his letters – see Romans 16:3-5; 1 Corinthains 16:19; 2 Timothy 4:19.

What should we know about Corinth?
Skinner writes, “Corinth was a significant city for commerce and culture. Because it was situated beside a narrow isthmus [a narrow strip of land connecting two larger land areas, bordered by water on both sides], anyone traveling overland between northern Greece and the Peloponnese (southern Greece) had to pass through or near Corinth. It also had easy access to two different ports… Geography and economics made Corinth a quintessential meeting place, known for attracting many kinds of people from many lands, including a considerable community of Diaspora Jewish. It was a Roman colony, like Philippi, although like most of the other colonies Paul visits, Acts does not explicitly identify it as one.”

Paul argued in the synagogue that the Messiah is Jesus. He gets so frustrated that they will not agree he says, “From now on I will go to the Gentiles.” This sounds final and like it’s a decision that will affect his entire life, but Paul means while he’s in Corinth, he’ll only speak to the Gentiles about Jesus. This is when Paul goes to the house of Titius Justus who Acts calls “a worshiper of God” meaning a gentile who worships the God of Israel.

Why does Paul “shake out his clothing?”
Shaking out one’s clothing is a symbolic gesture meaning you’re dissociating yourself from your conversation partners. It’s even more extreme than ‘shaking the dust from your feet” as it implies you do not share in common even the dust from the ground.

Skinner writes, “The best way to understand the flow of the narrative after verse 7 is to conclude that Paul either immediately or sometime after his departure from the synagogue finds a friendly and faithful reception from Titius Justus, who allows the itinerant preacher to use his house to gather people and teach them about Jesus Christ.”

There’s a short line about Crispus, a leader of the synagogue becoming a believer as well as other Corinthians. Skinner writes, “Acts does not tell us whether Paul’s eruption in verse 6 plays a part in opening people to the good news, prompts his antagonists to escalate their opposition, or has no real impact among those who hear about it.”  What do you think? How would Paul’s eruption play a part in opening people to the good news? Have you ever witnessed something like that in your own life?

While in Corinth Paul has a vision of the Lord saying to him that he will be safe in Corinth. This comes after Acts makes clear that it feels like not many people in Corinth are convinced about the good news. This vision must have been a comfort when a group of Jewish folks plan to create legal trouble for Paul.

Why is Sosthenes beaten?
Skinner writes, “the syntax and context suggest that Paul’s Jewish accusers are the group that beats Sosthenes. They blame him for Gallio’s dismissal of the charges, believing that their leading representative has failed to make the strongest case he could. If so, their violence speaks to the extremity and senselessness of their frustration, that they would punish a colleague if they cannot see Paul punished. They are thus determined to make someone suffer their wrath.”

Where in your life or in the world do you see this happen- people taking out their anger on someone other than the person who they are mad at?

Paul leaves Corinth on his way to Syria and other places along the eastern edge of the Mediterranean Sea. He goes with Priscilla and Aquila.  When they get to Ephesus the couple stays and Paul travels on.

Priscilla and Aquila or Aquila and Priscilla?
Earlier in chapter 18 the couple is introduced with the husband’s name first, this was usual according to ancient patriarchal conventions.  Here we see Priscilla’s name first.  Skinner writes, “The order of names plausibly signals that Priscilla possesses greater social status than Aquila or that Acts remembers her as the more prominent or gifted of these leaders in the ancient church.”

What’s up with Paul’s hair cut?
Skinner writes, “we learn that Paul has left his hair uncut for a while in accordance with a vow. Most likely Paul is nearing the completion of a nazirite vow. The detail calls attention to Paul’s piety and by extension, his ongoing embrace of Jewish practices, which is significant in light of the tensions between him and members of the Jewish community in Corinth. Paul’s vow also prepares readers to be skeptical about future accusations against Paul in Jerusalem, when other Jews claim he disparages Torah (in Acts 21).

What’s a nazirite vow?
We get the details in Numbers 6:1-21. A post on Enter the Bible about Nazirites says, “Men or women could consecrate themselves in special service to the Lord for a period of time through this “Nazirite” vow. While all Israel was called upon to serve God, people could voluntarily “separate themselves to the LORD” in a special way through the Nazirite vow on a temporary or permanent basis. “Nazirite” comes from the Hebrew nazir, meaning to separate or consecrate.
The Nazirite vow was specifically open to women as well as men (although see Numbers 30:3-16 for limitations). After the description of the role of the Levites, the Nazirite becomes a sort of counter-priesthood, open to all, if they will obey special holiness requirements. Avoiding grapes and fermented drinks, avoiding death, and growing hair allow the Nazirite to become a witness in the camp, around their fellows, to God’s desire for the holiness of the whole camp Famous Nazirites include Samson (Judges 13:5), Samuel (1 Samuel 1:11), and Paul (Acts 18:18, 21:20-24). ”

Back in chapter 9 the movement of Jesus’s followers is given the name “the Way.” Skinner writes, “the expression evokes memories of Jesus’s own ministry and journey to death and resurrection.” Apollos, and Egyptian Jew, is preaching about the Way in Ephesus. He’s missing some information though – he speaks about baptism according to John the Baptist’s teachings and not baptism in the name of Jesus. Apollos receives the instruction from Priscilla and Aquila well and the church is further strengthened.

When have you received constructive criticism? How did you receive it?

Paul meets some followers of the Way in Ephesus who apparently took their instruction from Apollos for they were baptized with John’s baptism, not in the name of Jesus. Then Paul lays hands on these disciples and they receive the Holy Spirit.  

As we’ve seen previously in Acts the Holy Spirit comes as it may.  There is not a special formula for getting the Holy Spirit to descend, rather it comes when it comes- after baptism, before baptism, not connected to any baptism. Skinner writes, “Acts as a whole is not strictly consistent in how it describes relationships among baptism, the Spirit’s arrival, and placing hands on others. There is no fixed sequence or process. The baptized disciples’ newfound linguistic and prophetic gifts give evidence of the Spirit’s presence.”

ALL the residents of Asia?
Paul stays in Ephesus for two years. Acts says, “all the residents of Asia, both Jews and Greeks, heard the word of the Lord.” Skinner writes, “Even though Acts means the Roman province of Asia (in western Turkiye) and not the massive continent we call Asia today, hyperbole is obviously part of the narrative rhetoric. About a quarter million peopled lived in Ephesus alone. Within the Roman Empire, only Rome, Alexandria, and Syrian Antioch were more populous. Ephesus was a major city, an economic hub known for banking, commerce, and its proximity to valuable natural resources.”

The divine power is strong that works through Paul to heal those who are sick. It reminds us of chapter 5 when we learned about the healing power of Peter’s shadow or in Luke 6 and 8 when people are healed by touching Jesus or his clothing. People try to use the name of Paul for their own purposes.

We have a morality tale in verse 11-20 about the sons of Sceva.  Sceva is a Latin name which is confusing and no sources about Jewish high priests record such a person. Acts depicts the sons of Sceva as charlatans. Skinner writes, “The name of Jesus does not function as a talisman, as if its power will work in any setting, especially on the lips of people who are opportunistic magicians, not would-be disciples.” This is an “us verses them” sort of story. This story reminds us that Acts is not a history book. It’s not an unbiased glimpse into life in the early church. As we’ve seen Acts uses hyperbole, exaggeration, and humor throughout.  Skinner writes, “The scene’s violence has a slapstick air to it. Vulgar comedy usually works only if an audience is not granted reasons to feel sympathy for those who suffer harm, as is the case with these exorcists.”

The power of Jesus is contrasted with those sons of Sceva when the magicians decide to burn their books.  They don’t sell them, but burn them, destroying their influence forever.

Verse 20- “so the word of the Lord grew mightily and prevailed” is a reminder that this is God’s story, not the story of Paul or Peter or any other prominent figure.

Verse 21 gives us a sense that Paul’s story is wrapping up, heading toward its conclusion. He “resolves in the Spirit” to make this journey.  We do not get to see what Paul’s discernment process looked like.  When you’re discerning something – a change in career, a move, whether or not to do something – how do you go about your decision-making process? Is it about feelings or facts or a mix of both? How do you invite God into your discernment process?

A silversmith named Demetrius is living in a paradigm of scarcity and worries for his livelihood. He talks with other artisans about the loss of business if this Jesus thing takes off – there will be no market for idols any longer. Demetrius uses the argument that Ephesus will lose its status in the empire. The city is thrown into chaos, and the people chant about their goddess for two hours. Skinner writes, “No rescue arrives explicitly from God or other believers. Instead an anonymous civil administrator (a position more plausible and weighty than the translation ‘town clerk’) manages to quiet and disperse the volatile crowd. He reasserts Ephesus’s majesty as if it is unimpeachable. Surely, he notes, the goddess can preserve her glory on her own. He refers to ‘the statue that fell from heaven,’ referring either to legends about the otherworldly origins of an Artemis statue or to a meteorite that was considered a heaven-sent gift. He reminds everyone that they have a legal system at their disposal, if they choose to use it, and warns about the consequences of rioting, an activity that the Roman Empire roundly punished.”

 Where do you see Demetrius today? What economic markets does the good news of Jesus endanger?

The story of Demetrius reminds us to ask what people are worried about when they bring their objections.  Is he really concerned with the reputation of his city or his own economic gain?

We hear about Paul’s journey in just a few words, but think about how long any journey would have taken in the ancient world – how much time was spent simply walking or on boats? We don’t enjoy that much margin today.  We rarely travel anywhere by foot and if we do we have the opportunity to fill our ears and minds with information and sound – music, podcasts, audiobooks, etc. We also have the opportunity to text or email or talk on the phone while we walk.

When do you experience margin in your life – to simply walk or sit or be without consuming or producing or being available or reachable? How do you think Paul spent his time on his journey – on foot or on boats? Not listening to podcasts! (There is nothing wrong with podcasts of course.)

Paul gets together with other believers for a Sunday night gathering and speaks so long someone falls asleep and falls out a window! Luckily he is brought back to life through the power of God through Paul. Skinner writes, “while it is hardly an ordinary scene, it nevertheless depicts the church as a community still discovering the power and wonder of new life. It also makes Paul’s ministry further resemble Peter’s and Jesus’s, in that all three participate in restoring someone from death back to life. Details in Eutychus’s narrative inject humor into a story about an avoidable death. Paul is long-winded enough to speak past midnight and then eagerly resume the conversation for additional hours as soon as Eutychus is restored.”

Even though Paul is in a hurry to get to Jerusalem before Pentecost he takes time to speak with the church in Ephesus. He sort of preaches a farewell sermon. Skinner writes, “because of this scene, Paul goes into the next chapters as a person with the expectation of death and suffering hanging over his head. As he continues to bear witness to Jesus Christ, he does so under very different circumstances than he has faced thus far... the farewell speech urges readers to regard him as faithful in every respect—in his past efforts, in his current obedience to God, and in his incarceration to come.”

On the journey to Jerusalem Paul has many opportunities to change his mind and go elsewhere but he does not. When they get to Tyre they encounter believers.  Acts never tells us how the good news gets to Tyre which reminds us that there is so much that happened in the early church that Acts does not record.  It sort of reminds me of what it says at the very end of the gospel of John 21:25, “But there are also many other things that Jesus did; if every one of them were written down, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.”  There are many other things that happened in the early church at this time that we are simply no privy to.

The disciples in Tyre urge Paul not to go to Jerusalem.  This is confusing because Paul decided to go there with the help of the Holy Spirit.  And now, these folks are telling him not to go there after discerning this through the Holy Spirit. Skinner writes, “It appears the Tyrians discern the will of the Spirit differently. Complicating the matter is the ambiguity of the expression through the Spirit, which does not appear often in Acts. In general, Acts gives very little information about how people discern the voice or will of the Holy Spirt, so the ambiguity of this expression is no more or less remarkable than ‘in the Spirit’ in 19:21 or the Spirit’s instructions in 13:2. No one should construct a pneumatology based on the perceived semantics of a single preposition, nor should anyone be too quick to define what the Holy Spirit can and cannot do.”

 Paul stays at Philip’s house. We last heard from him in chapter 8. While there Agabus doesn’t have very exciting things to say about what awaits Paul in Jerusalem. Paul accepts his fate.  This reminds us of Jesus praying in the garden before his crucifixion. Skinner writes, “Acts depicts Paul—representing the church at large, perhaps—walking a road eerily similar to the one Jesus walked. The road culminates in new life and new discoveries in a new community. Theologies that glorify victimhood or consign people to abuse and misery as though all suffering must be embraced as the acceptance of God’s will distort biblical scenes like this one.”

 The end of our passage connects us back to the Jerusalem Council in chapter 15, when they decide how to include gentiles in the church – the abstain from those four things and the Jewish followers of Jesus are free to continue their Jewish practices.  Paul is accused of abandoning these practices, but we know he’s maintained them through his missionary journey.

Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem reminds us of the chaos of the riot in Ephesus in chapter 19. Some Jewish folks from Asia accuse Paul of going into the Temple with a gentile – Trophimus from Ephesus. Depending on which part of the Temple you brought a gentile, the punishment could include death. These accusations stir up the crowd to chaos. The accusations sound a lot like those against Stephen in chapter 6.  They say Paul turned his back on the Jewish people, Torah, and the temple. Skinner writes, “Proclaiming Jesus as the Christ does not figure explicitly in the charges; the offence appears to reside in Paul’s fellowship with gentiles and unsubstantiated rumors about his reputed eagerness to see Jewish Christ-followers forsake Torah observance.”
The mob attacks Paul, drags him out of the temple, and shuts the temple doors. Paul is isolated from the Jewish community figuratively and literally. He also moves through this section alone – the church in Jerusalem does not show up nor do Paul’s traveling companions.

Roman soldiers save Paul from those who are actively trying to kill him. They order that he be bound with chains, and they carry him away when the violence of the mob becomes too great.

Paul courageously asks for a favor from the tribune- to speak to the people. Skinner writes, “The narrative avoids characterizing Paul’s experience as suffering. He remains a man with significant agency, sharing a message whose potential to transform people’s lives exceeds the empire’s ability to subdue it.” The tribune is confused when Paul speaks Greek.  He assumed Paul was an Egyptian who recently started a revolt.

Paul speaks to the people in the Hebrew language, probably Aramaic. Hearing him speak in this language made them quiet down and listen. Today we read the beginning of his testimony – how he persecuted the church and had permission to go to Damascus and bring followers of the Way to Jerusalem in chains. He says this even as he stands before the people in chains. We read the story of Paul on his way to Damascus earlier in Acts 9.

Paul speaks to the crowd and frames what he says as a defense, like in a court room. Skinner writes, “Paul interprets the crowd’s ire against him as an expression of religious intensity comparable with his own zeal for God and God’s ways. The same zeal that provoked Paul, when he was known as Saul, to persecute the nascent church in Jerusalem and beyond.”

Paul then moves on to show how his zeal was misguided. Skinner writes, “Faith in Christ and the creation of communities in which gentiles and Jews worship together and share friendships are consistent with Jewish hopes, Paul insists.”

We’ll have to wait until tomorrow to hear the rest of Paul’s story and speech.

Compare Paul’s retelling of his experience on the road to Damascus with the story in Chapter 9.  How do they differ?

One thing we don’t get here is Ananias’s side of the story.  In chapter 9 we get his fear and apprehension and his eventual decision to courageously go to Saul who was “breathing threats and murder.” We only get Paul’s experience – that while he was in Damascus, unable to see, a follower of the Way and a devout Jew came to him and called him “Brother Saul” and helped him to regain his sight. Only hearing Paul’s experience helps us to see what a difference Ananias’s visit made to Paul.

Have you ever had a similar experience? Did anyone show up for you when you were suffering? Who do you show up for?

Paul basically gives his testimony- he tells his experience and how that made a difference in his life.  The Wesleyan Quadrilateral includes experience as one of the four components.  In the book A Dictionary for United Methodists Alan K. Waltz writes, “The phrase, the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, which has relatively recently come into use to describe the principal factors that John Wesley [co-founder of Methodism] believed illuminate the core of the Christian faith for the believer. Wesley did not formulate the succinct statement now commonly referred to as the Wesley Quadrilateral. Building on the Anglican theological tradition, Wesley added a fourth emphasis, experience. The resulting four components or "sides" of the quadrilateral are (1) Scripture, (2) tradition, (3) reason, and (4) experience.

“For United Methodists, Scripture is considered the primary source and standard for Christian doctrine. Tradition is experience and the witness of development and growth of the faith through the past centuries and in many nations and cultures. Experience is the individual's understanding and appropriating of the faith in the light of their own life. Through reason the individual Christian brings to bear on the Christian faith discerning and cogent thought. These four elements taken together bring the individual Christian to a mature and fulfilling understanding of the Christian faith and the required response of worship and service.”

How does your own experience affect your faith?

The way Paul frames his speech and his example of his vision of Jesus (a story not recorded anywhere else in Acts) communicates to the crowd that Paul finds their rejection of Jesus inevitable. This enrages the crowd, and they call for Paul’s death. Skinner writers, “…they take deep offense at Pauls’ intimation that God has hardened the hearts of Jews in Jerusalem against him and he attempts to persuade them. The whole thing sounds to them too much like the call God issues to Isaiah to prophesy to people who will not respond (Isaiah 6:9-10, which Paul explicitly cites later in Acts 28). No one wants to be lumped together with Isaiah’s obdurate audience.”

We must remember that this is not an argument between two separate religions at this point, but an intra-Jewish conflict. Skinner writes, “Today, Jews who choose to follow Jesus  as the Messiah are usually considered to be no longer Jewish. Faith in Jesus Christ has become a clear dividing line for what it means to be Jewish or not. In the first century, however, as Christian communities were emerging within and eventually out of Jewish communities, and Judaism was changing after the destruction of the Jerusalem temple, such distinctions were not so absolute.”

The Roman Tribune steps in and brings Paul back to the barracks where they plan to flog him. Throughout Acts we’ve seen Paul use his privilege as a Roman citizen to his advantage. Roman citizens enjoyed certain advantages- it was illegal to flog a Roman citizen without trial, illegal to bind them, etc.  Paul’s privilege is highlighted when the Tribune discloses that he had to buy his citizenship while Paul (seemingly flippantly) states he was born a Roman citizen.

We begin this section with the Roman Tribune wanting to find out what Paul is accused of by the Jews in Jerusalem. Remember, Paul was speaking in Aramaic when he made his speech, so the Tribune would not have understood what he was saying. The whole reason he had Paul bound was in order to interrogate him.

Paul is in and out of the barracks as he makes speeches, the crowd goes wild, and he is taken away to preserve his safety. Back and forth, in and out. The Tribune calls Paul in front of the temple leadership to get an idea of why the crowd attacked Paul in the Temple in chapter 21.

Paul declares he has a clear conscience- he maintains his Jewish identity while declaring Jesus is the Messiah. Ananias, the high priest, orders Paul be hit in the face- showing Ananias has already made up his mind about Paul and/or that he does not agree that Paul can maintain his Jewish identity while declaring Jesus is Lord. Paul calls Ananias a “whitewashed wall” as a way of accusing him of hypocrisy.  This is an illusion to Ezekiel 13:8-16, one of Ezekiel’s oracles against untrustworthy prophets.

 Paul turns the Pharisees and Sadducees in the crowd against one another, playing on the stark difference in belief between the two groups- Pharisees believe in the resurrection of the body, Sadducees do not.  Skinner writes, “Jesus’s resurrection therefore still remains at the theological heart of Acts; Paul’s legal jeopardy may change the narrative settings, but it does not shift the narrative focus. The resurrection of Jesus is the event that vindicates God’s faithfulness to past promises.”

Paul is safe in the barracks while a plot to kill him develops among the Jewish folks in Jerusalem.

The plotters take an oath to not eat until they have killed Paul.  I wonder when they decided to eat again? Did they ever eat again? It’s an interesting detail to wonder about.

 Paul’s nephew, his sister’s son, hears the plot and finds a way to tell Paul. Skinner writes, “Prisoners in Paul’s time usually relied on care and supplies from family members, so the nephew’s access to Paul is not strange. It is striking, however, that Paul’s social standing allows him to summon a centurion and instruct him to shepherd the nephew directly to the Tribune. It is as if Paul has inserted himself into the chain of command.”

Paul is protected and sent with a large entourage to Felix the governor. It’s interesting how Claudius’s order of events differ from what we’ve read in Acts. He frames the story so that he is viewed in a more flattering light than the order of events in Acts. He lets Felix know that Paul is accused based on Jewish law, nothing that is a danger to Rome.

How does this compare to Jesus’ trial?

Paul is detained, but not in prison.  He’s in the ‘headquarters’ or the praetorium which housed provincial governors. Skinner writes, “a theme is emerging through all the extraordinary aspects of Paul’s survival: his prolonged custody is not a story of his suffering but a story of his new opportunities for bearing witness.  Housed in the praetorium and scheduled to defend himself before the Roman procurator, Paul has arrived literally in the halls of imperial power.”

Coming soon

Coming soon

Coming soon

Coming soon

Coming soon