Go to the Introduction again.
Back to Christian
Resources
Back to The Moose's Lair.
The last few chapters of Acts, while containing the final part of the tale and being illuminating and entertaining as a whole do not readily lend themselves to abstraction of specific examples. We are treated to three variations of the same speech before different authorities (the Sanhedrin, the Roman authorities, and King Agrippa) and some snapshots of Paul and his companions continuing journeys'.
(i) Concerning Paul's Leadership and his vision of the future.
20 : 17 - 38
This section is reminiscent of the prophet Samuel's message to the people of Israel upon the appointment of Saul as their first king (cf. 1 Sam 12). It forms a passage holding farewells and also the traditional Jewish idea of declaring a work completed in clear conscience. We find Paul hurrying back to Jerusalem (v.17), without the time to visit all the elders of the Ephesian church, but with enough time to summon them to meet him as a group. This group may perhaps represent several constituent churches which would fall under a summary title of the Ephesian Church.
He sets out a summary of his work, both in his concern for the needs of others (v.19 - 20) and the basic content of his teaching (v.21). Even at this time it appears (v.22ff) that Paul has some leading from God as concerns his future. While he is not a captive yet he clearly sees that that may become the case in the near future. He cannot, or will not attempt to, escape the will of God.
Aware that these elders may never hear from him again Paul warns of the sorts of troubles that may be ahead. Why, when he has met trouble and persecution should such not come upon the church and its leaders? He already sees the dangers of internal dissent (cf. 1 Cor 1: 10-17 ) and heresy, stressing that he has worked long and hard for the Gospel (v.31). The clear implication is that he worked hard for the truth, rather than falsehoods that others would seek to bring.
v.33 - 34 form more of the same defence, ready against the time when he may be attacked in his absence. In effect he is saying "You have seen this. Bear witness when the time comes". v.35 has been his example and it is to be theirs (and by extension, ours). The quote ascribed to Jesus is not recorded in any of the Gospels, but bears the ring of truth (cf. Jn 21: 25).
(ii) On the nature of prophecy
21: 7 - 15
Caesarea (v.8) is a place full of historical reminders of the events of Acts. Peter preached to Cornelius' household there (marking the first major Gentile conversion), Philip who now lived there preached to the Ethiopian eunuch, and now the third of the three, Paul, arrives there.
No significance should be attached to the singleness (v.9) of Philip's daughters. There are no reason to believe that Luke is trying to make a theological point. Rather this is another case of eye-witness evidence from someone who'd actually been there; inconsequential to the larger tale but an indication of historicity.
The actions of Agabus (v.11) would have been totally familiar to Jewish Christians: the prophecy being given in actions rather than just words (cf to Jeremiah buying a linen belt and Micah being ordered to go further and marry a prostitute!) The message is not one of 'avoid Jerusalem', but rather is along the lines of being a warning of what to expect - like saying 'God knows this, and will not prevent it'.
The rest of Paul's companions are naturally somewhat concerned for his safety and try to persuade him not to visit Jerusalem (v.13). Just because we are told that this is going to happen doesn't make it inevitable, though. It is in the nature of prophecy that God may relent, such as in the case of Jonah. Nevertheless Paul already knows that it is a call of God that he visit Jerusalem (20: 21b).
(iii) Jerusalem & Jewish Uproar.
21: 17 - 36
v.17 Paul's first priority is to report to authority - and James can be called the first bishop. The discussion with James and the other Elders (v.20ff) leads to how to deal with problems and accusations presented by the Jews. Note how the Jews who became Christians did not cease to act, culturally, as Jews. In the light of this v.21 is potentially very damaging propaganda. Nevertheless there is a grain of truth within the accusations: Justification by faith alone does ultimately free all people from obedience to the Jewish Law. We have seen before, however, that most of Paul's recommendations were intended to free Gentiles from the need to convert to Judaism before becoming Christians. Even so a natural consequence of salvation by faith is that the law is simply redundant, replaced by a higher imperative. (Rom 2: 25 - 29).
v.22 reveals the elders' fears for Paul's safety; the very real fear that he might be lynched. Thus the idea of the plan in v.23 is to demonstrate Paul's integrity and Jewish identity in meeting the quite considerable expenses allied to the completion of the Nazirite vow, while v.25 reminds us that the Gentiles already have been told what is appropriate behaviour that will not cause offence to Jewish Christians.
The details of v.26 are a little obscure, not seeming to follow the usual details of the Nazirite vow (Numb. 6). Possibly the un-named Christian men had been unavoidably 'contaminated' and had to extend the vow, undertaking extra purification.
v27ff. The fear of a lynch-mob was well justified, and those who wish to incite such a mob will use any means to achieve its ends. In the end Paul's arrest is at least partly for his own protection, as well as an attempt to keep, or rather to restore, the peace.
(iv) Trials & Testings.
22: 37 - 28: 16
The chapters that follow chronicle Paul's life in comfortable detention, and some uncomfortable sea-travel! Firstly we are treated to three variations of the same speech before different authorities (the Sanhedrin, the Roman authorities, and King Agrippa), each of which is cleverly tailored to the hearers.
Before the Jews he is a loyal Jew, obeying the commands of God - and God had sent him to the Gentiles. In front of the Sanhedrin he makes a similar point, and brings a near-riot into being by setting the Pharisees against the Sadducees. and some snapshots of Paul.
Before Felix, the governor he argues a similar line, and while charges never appear to be brought he remains in custody, while Felix waits for a bribe. His replacement, Festus, wants to return Paul to Jerusalem for trial, while Paul, knowing of the plans of the Jews to murder him, appeals to Caesar: the right of a Roman citizen for trial before the Emperor's tribunal. (He incidentally appears to get a free journey to Rome!) The only reason that Paul went to Rome was because of his appeal to the highest court of justice (rather like the House of Lords).
Paul's final hearing is before Agrippa, who is greatly amused (or cynical, or both). Compare Agrippa's reaction to those of his great-uncle Herod, who wanted to meet Jesus as if He was some conjuror or entertainer). Festus and Agrippa both see no reason why he could not have been released, But since he has appealed to Rome so he must go.
After an eventful journey of danger, miracle and preaching Paul and his companions finally get there. The entire section is worth reading as a whole, even if time forbids our studying of it here.
(v) Rome at last!
28: 17 - 31
Paul knows that his trial must come up sooner or later and so attempts to establish good relationships with the local Jews, and the story that he tells is as a Jew (v.21). Since they have no news about him one way or the other they ask him to tell his story, although all they have heard about the 'sect' of Christianity is in the negative. Since Paul is under house arrest and would have always been accompanied by a guard they have to come to the one who has always taken the news first to the Jews (v.23). The message would probably been like the one of 13: 15 - 41 in Psidean Antioch and comparable in content.
The quotation (v.26) is from Is 6 : 9 - 10 and the reaction Paul receives are fairly normal, forming a reasonable summary of the entire book - that the message is for all, yet God's own chosen nation will not hear. Sadly the same seems true today.
Epilogue to Acts.
Just as Luke begins and ends his Gospel in Jerusalem, so he ends Acts full of prospects for the future, just as it started. The road may be a little further revealed, but the great scope remains. So Acts ends, with Paul under house arrest, well looked after and under legal protection in the capital of the world. It appears that Paul was released after about two years (compare to 24: 27), probably for lack of evidence (this is the tale handed down by tradition), in one of Nero's known occasional acts of clemency. (Phm 22 mentions Paul's hopes for release). Tradition also says that he returned to the east, but he may have reached Spain, as he'd hoped (Rom. 15: 24, 28). He was arrested again, although on what charges is unknown, and the letters to Timothy and Titus were probably written then. The same tradition tells the he was executed (by beheading, as was his right as a Roman citizen), probably about AD67. The next stage of Church history rests with the Early Church Fathers, whose work is outside the canon of scripture.
This page last updated November 2001. The Bibliophobe's Guide to Acts is ©Dr S N Mousir-Harrison.
|
|
|