We usually identify the preaching of the Gospel with the quiet rural villages of Palestine where the Lord Jesus ministered. For this reason, many Christians are surprised to learn that the church in the Book of Acts was almost entirely urban. Historian Wayne A. Meeks writes that "within a decade of the crucifixion of Jesus, the village culture of Palestine had been left behind, and the Greco-Roman city became the dominant environment of the Christian movement" (The First Urban Christians, p. 11).

The church began in Jerusalem, and then spread to other cities, including Samaria, Damascus, Caesarea, and Antioch in Syria. At least forty different cities are named in Acts. From Antioch, Paul and his helpers carried the Gospel throughout the then-known world. In fact, the record given in Acts 13-28 is almost a review of ancient geography. About the year 56, the Apostle Paul was able to write, "So that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the Gospel of Christ" (Rom. 15:19). What a record!

In the next two chapters, Dr. Luke described Paul’s ministry in six different cities, beginning and ending at Antioch. We have already seen that Barnabas and Saul had labored one whole year together in the city of Antioch, and we now learn that at the close of this period there were other inspired teachers associated with them.

That sainted missionary to India and Persia, Henry Martyn, once said, "The Spirit of Christ is the spirit of missions, and the nearer we get to Him, the more intensely missionary we must become." Paul (Saul) and Barnabas had that experience as they ministered in Antioch and were called by the Spirit to take the Gospel to the Roman world.

Until now, Jerusalem had been the center of ministry, and Peter had been the key apostle. But from this point on, Antioch in Syria would become the new center (Acts 11:19ff), and Paul the new leader. The Gospel was on the move!

Luke listed five different men who were ministering in the church: Barnabas, whom we have already met (Acts 4:36-37; 9:27; 11:22-26); Simeon, who may have been from Africa since he was nicknamed "Black"; Lucius, who came from Cyrene and may have been one of the founders of the church in Antioch (Acts 11:20); Manaen, who was an intimate friend (or perhaps an adopted foster brother) of Herod Antipas, who had killed John the Baptist; and Saul (Paul), last on the list but soon to become first.

These men were serving as "prophets and teachers" in a local church. The prophets helped lay the foundation for the church as they proclaimed the Word of God (Eph. 2:20; 1 Cor. 14:29-32). They were more "forth-tellers" than "foretellers," though at times the prophets did announce things to come (Acts 11:27-30). The teachers helped to ground the converts in the doctrines of the faith (2 Tim. 2:2).

God had already called Paul to minister to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15; 21:17-21), and now He summoned Barnabas to labor with him. The church confirmed their calling, commissioned the men, and sent them forth. It is the ministry of the Holy Spirit, working through the local church, to equip and enlist believers to go forth and serve. The modern mission board is only a "sending agency" that expedites the work authorized by the local church.

Barnabas and Paul took John Mark with them as their assistant. He was a cousin to Barnabas (Col. 4:10), and his mother’s home in Jerusalem was a gathering place for the believers (Acts 12:12). It is likely that it was Peter who led John Mark to faith in Christ (1 Peter 5:13). John Mark no doubt helped Barnabas and Paul in numerous ways, relieving them of tasks and details that would have interfered with their important ministry of the Word.

It will be observed that, in this catalogue of names, that of Barnabas stands first, and that of Saul last. As it was customary at that period to arrange names in the order of their notability at the time contemplated, we may infer that Barnabas still occupied a position of pre-eminence, while Saul was as yet comparatively undistinguished among the inspired teachers. Nothing more is known of Simeon, Lucius, and Manaen than is here stated; but this is enough to show that the future instruction of the congregation might be safely committed to their hands. [156]

(13:1) Church: the first missionaries were members of a great church, a church that reached out to all. The greatness of the Antioch church is seen in two facts.

1. The Antioch church was God’s choice to become the mission and evangelistic center of the world. God was now ready to send His Word to the whole world. The first three phases of the great commission had been launched. The disciples of Christ had borne and left a witness in Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria. Now it was time for a witness to go into all the world, reaching out even to the uttermost part (Acts 1:8).

But note a significant fact, a fact that stands as a warning to every church: God had to choose some church other than the Jerusalem church to launch the world-wide mission. The Jerusalem church was too narrow and traditional to do the job. Too many of its members (Jews) were too prejudiced and held too many feelings against the rest of the world (Gentiles). They refused to freely and wholeheartedly commit themselves to world missions and evangelism. They refused to repent of their exclusiveness and their traditional, formal approach to God. God had to bypass the Jerusalem church and raise up another church to become the center of His mission upon earth.

Note what this means, for it is a warning to every believer. Some leaders other than the Jewish leaders had to be chosen to launch God’s purposes on earth. The Jewish leaders had proven too slow in launching out in the full liberty and freedom of God’s Spirit. They, too, had waited too long to repent of their sins. God was ready to move out into the world and the leaders in Jerusalem were not ready. God had no choice but to raise up other leaders who would commit their lives fully to the gospel and to carry the gospel to the whole world in an uninhibited and free spirit.

2. The Antioch church was diverse, a church that reached out to everyone. This is clearly seen in the men mentioned.

a. Barnabas: he was a wealthy Cyprian, a man born and reared on the island of Cyprus.

b. Simeon or Niger: the name "Niger" means black, referring to the complexion of his skin. He was probably from Africa. The name is also a Roman name which shows that he moved about in Roman society. Some commentators suggest he was the Simon of Cyrene who carried the cross for Jesus (cp. Mark 15:21).

c. Lucius of Cyrene: he was probably one of the poor persecuted believers who had fled to Antioch for safety. If so, he was one of the founders of this great church. When he arrived in Antioch, he and the others began to share Christ immediately (cp. Acts 11:19-20).

d. Manaen: he was of the higher class of society, being a foster brother to Herod Antipas. This is the Herod who had tried Jesus and murdered John the Baptist.

e. Saul of Tarsus: he was one of the religionists of society. He is mentioned last as though he was considered least important among the leaders. However, Saul’s deep love for the Lord and his driving commitment to the Lord’s cause would soon lead God to use Saul beyond imagination.

The point is this: these men, with their diversity of backgrounds and social standings, show just how much the church at Antioch reached out to everyone throughout the community. It reached out to all classes of people, all needs, all nationalities and races. No one was excluded; everyone was invited to Christ and welcomed into the fellowship and ministry of the chuch. The church at Antioch was a ministering church, a great outreach church, just the kind of church God needed to launch and support the first missionaries to the world.

Teaching is a high calling, one of the greatest of callings. Teaching is ranked second only to the spiritual gifts of apostle and prophet (Acts 13:1;1 Cor. 12:28; Ephes. 4:11). Every apostle and prophet and pastor has the gift of teaching, but every teacher is not an apostle or prophet or pastor. The gift of teaching bears one of the largest responsibilities given by God; therefore, the teacher will be required to give a strict account to God for his faithfulness in using his gift.

The spiritual gift of teaching is the gift of understanding and communicating the Word of God, of edifying believers in the truths of God’s Word. It involves understanding, interpreting, arranging, and communicating the Word of God. The gift of teaching is given to the believer who commits his life to the Word of God, to sharing its glorious truths with God’s people.

(2) "As they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, Separate for me Barnabas and Saul to the work to which I have called them. (3) And when they had fasted and prayed and laid hands on them, they sent them away."

This command of the Holy Spirit is not the call of Barnabas and Saul to their peculiar work, but refers to a call which had been previously given. It shows that Barnabas as well as Saul had received a special call to labor among the Gentiles. They had, hitherto, most probably, been associated together mainly through geniality of spirit. This geniality may also have furnished the main reason why they were directed by the Holy Spirit to continued their labors together.

The second, and doubtless the true interpretation, is this: That the imposition of hands, accompanied by fasting and prayer, was, in this case, as in that of the seven deacons, merely their formal separation to the special work to which they had been called. This, indeed, is sufficiently evident from the context. What they did was doubtless [157] what they had been told to do by the Holy Spirit. But the Holy Spirit simply said to them, "Separate me Barnabas and Saul to the work to which I have called them." The fasting, prayer, and imposition of hands was, then, merely their separation to this work. It was a ceremony deemed by infinite wisdom suitable to such a purpose; and, therefore, whenever a congregation has a similar purpose to accomplish, they have, in this case, the judgments and will of God, which should be their guide.

The solemn simplicity of this apostolic ceremony stands in striking contrast with the pompous mummery which often characterizes "ordination" services in modern Churches. No less striking is the contrast between the humility of Saul and the ambitious spirit of many modern clergyman who are extremely exacting in reference to the punctilios of ecclesiastical rank. Though an apostle by special commission, he was "ordained" by his humble fellow-laborers in Antioch. This fact shows that the idea of superior rank and authority had not then begun the work of ruin which it has since accomplished, in filling the minds of preachers with the same lust of office and power which characterizes the intrigues of political partisans.

4, 5. We now follow Barnabas and Saul to their new field of labor. Their departure from Antioch is thus announced by Luke: (4) "So they, being sent forth by the Holy Spirit, went down to Seleucia, and thence sailed into Cyprus. (5) And when they were in Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues. And they had John as an assistant." Seleucia was the seaport nearest to Antioch, distant some fifteen or eighteen miles, and near the mouth of the river Orontes, on the bank of which Antioch is situated. Embarking upon some trading vessel, they sailed to the port of Salamis, which is at the eastern end of the island of Cyprus.

It was logical to go first to Cyprus, for this was the home of Barnabas (Acts 4:36). Luke gives us no details of the ministry in Salamis, the great commercial center at the east end of the island. We trust that some people did believe the Gospel and that a local assembly was formed. The men then moved ninety miles to Paphos on the west end of the island, and there they met their first opposition.

Paphos was the capital of Cyprus, and the chief Roman official there was Sergius Paulus, "an understanding man" who wanted to hear the Word of God. He was opposed by a Jewish false prophet named "Son of Jesus [Joshua]." It is unusual to find a Jewish false prophet and sorcerer, for the Jews traditionally shunned such demonic activities. The name Elymas means "sorcerer" or "wise man" (cf. the "wise men" of Matt. 2).

This event is an illustration of the lesson that Jesus taught in the Parable of the Tares (Matt. 13:24-30, 36-43): wherever the Lord sows His true children (the wheat), Satan comes along and sows a counterfeit (the tares), a child of the devil. Paul recognized that Elymas was a child of the devil (John 8:44), and he inflicted blindness on the false prophet as a judgment from God. This miracle was also evidence to Sergius Paulus that Paul and Barnabas were servants of the true God and preached the true message of salvation (Heb. 2:4). The Roman official believed and was saved.

Acts 13:9 is the first place you find the familiar name Paul in the New Testament. As a Jewish Roman citizen, the apostle’s full name was probably "Saul Paulus," for many Jews had both Jewish and Roman names.

Luke is entirely silent in reference to the effect of the apostolic preaching in Salamis, leaving us to suppose that it was not great. After stating that they preached in the synagogues of the Jews, he [158] follows them in their further progress through the island. (6) "And having passed through the whole island as far as Paphos, they found a certain magician, a false prophet, a Jew whose name was Bar-Jesus, (7) who was with Sergius Paulus the proconsul, a prudent man, who called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the word of God."

Every reader of ancient history has observed that statesmen and generals were in the habit of consulting oracles and auguries, and that they generally kept about them some one supposed to have the power of interpreting the signs of approaching good or evil. In this particular period, the educated Romans had become skeptical in reference to their heathen oracles, but Jewish pretenders still had access to their confidence on the credit of the ancient Jewish prophets. With a knowledge of the true God superior to that of even the greatest philosophers among the Greeks, because derived from the Jewish Scriptures, this Bar-Jesus very naturally gained the confidence of even the prudent Sergius Paulus.

When, however, two other Jews appeared in Paphos, claiming to bring additional revelations from the God of Israel, the same prudence which had prompted the proconsul to reject the heathen oracles in favor of the Jewish pretender, now prompted him to send for Barnabas and Saul, that he might hear the word of God from them. Such a mind as his could not fail to hear with profit.

1. He was a prudent, intelligent man, that is, a man of understanding and reason. He was controlled more by his mind than by feelings and emotions.

2. He was a man seeking truth. Apparently he had been seeking the truth in philosophy, science, and religion. This explains why a man of his understanding had Elymas in his palace. As shall be seen, Elymas was an unusual breed, a unique mixture of truth and error that would appeal to a man who was seeking truth.

Note: Sergius Paulus sent for Barnabas and Saul. He had heard about the Word of God these preachers were proclaiming and he wanted to hear it for himself.

8-12. While listening to the gospel, there were some indications that he was inclined to believe it. (8) "But the magician Elymas, for so is his name translated, withstood them, seeking to turn aside the proconsul from the faith. (9) Then Saul, who is also Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, fixed his eyes on him, (10) and said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, son of the devil, enemy of all righteousness, will you not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? (11) And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon you, and you shall be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell upon him a mist, and darkness, and he went about seeking persons to lead him by the hand. (12) Then the proconsul, seeing what was done, being astonished by the Lord's teaching."

This is the only miracle wrought by an apostle to the injury of any one's person. It is to be accounted for, not by supposed resentment on the part of Saul, nor by a desire to make a special example of Bar-jesus. But the case was such that some display of power over the person of the false prophet was the readiest way to convince the proconsul. When Moses went into Egypt he found it necessary to impose many personal inflictions upon the priests, in order to destroy Pharaoh's confidence in them. The present case was similar to that. The conflict in the mind of Sergius Paulus was between the claim of Bar-jesus to prophetic powers, and that of the apostles.

The best way to settle this question was to denounce him in his true character as a son of the devil and an enemy of all righteousness, and then prove the justice of the denunciation, by exerting miraculous control over his person. As he groped about, calling upon one and another of the frightened bystanders to lead him by the hand, the falsity and iniquity if his pretensions stood confessed, and the divine mission of the apostles was demonstrated. The proconsul was fully convinced, and astonished at teaching which was attended by such power.[159]

There are only two suppositions worthy of notice, by which to account for this change of name. First, that he had both the Hebrew name Saul, and the Latin name Paul, before this time, and perhaps from his infancy; but the conversion of the proconsul Paulus led to the exclusive use of his Latin name thereafter. This supposition, however, can not account for the entire absence of the name Paul previous to this event. Moreover, while it is true that many Jews of that day had both a Hebrew and a Latin or Greek name, there is no evidence that such had been the case with Saul.

The other supposition is, that he received this new name by common consent, in commemoration of the conversion of Paulus. This conversion was a signal triumph; it was accomplished by his intrumentality alone, and was the beginning of the pre-eminence which he afterward maintained over Barnabas and all subsequent follow-laborers. So bold and startling an incident, though it might have been regarded as common-place in his subsequent career, attracted attention now, because it was the first of the kind in his history, and because it secured a conversion of which even Barnabas, under the circumstances, might have despaired. Surprised by the event, and observing the extreme similarity between his name and that of his distinguished convert, which differed only in a single letter, and sounded very much alike, his friends very naturally conceived the idea of changing his name, as they did. It was in perfect harmony with a prevalent custom of the time. Its universal reception soon followed as a matter of course.

It argues no vanity in Paul that he adopted this name; for he could scarcely avoid the adoption into his own use of a name by which he had become universally known. There is nothing in the event, therefore, to encourage men in pompously sounding abroad their own achievements, but much to encourage us in honoring a brother whose boldness and success are worthy of praise.

Most believers would never pronounce judgment upon another person, not like Paul did. But judgment is pronounced by the Word of God and judgment is to be declared upon all who reject and oppose God.

1. Elymas was the official title of a sorcerer. It probably means "wise man," His name was Bar-Jesus, which means son of Jesus or Joshua. Remember Jesus was a common name among certain nationalities. The sorcerer was a religious priest, a Jew who was teaching the truth of monotheism, that there is only one God. But he was mixing the truth with philosophy, science, astrology, and the magic of eastern religions.

2. The one thing that brought immediate judgment upon the man is clearly stated. He "withstood them," stood face to face against the preaching of God’s Word. The idea is continuous and persistent opposition. He tried his best to keep the governor from turning to Christ.

3. The judgment is from the Holy Spirit, not from Paul. What Paul did was not of himself: not of his emotions, not of personal resentment. The judgment came from the Holy Spirit. God had tolerated enough of the man’s sin, hostility, and destruction. His sins were great. There was...

Note the word "all." The false prophet was totally depraved, giving himself over to all sin.

4. The judgment upon the man was by "the hand of the Lord." It was God and His power that executed the judgment. And note: the judgment was judicial, a just judgment. It was blindness for blindness; darkness for darkness. The false prophet had blinded himself to the truth all his life, choosing to walk in darkness instead of the light. (He was a Jew, possessing the privilege of the Scriptures.) And not only this...

Being stricken blind and having to be led about by others would silence his claim to be a minister of light. It would also be a sign to him that he must repent or be condemned to an eternal hell of darkness without the presence of the living and true God.

Without his name even being mentioned this verse pays the greatest of all tributes to Barnabas. So far the order has always been Barnabas and Saul (Acts 13:2). It was Barnabas who had set out as the leader of this expedition. But now it is Paul and Barnabas. Paul has assumed the leadership of the expedition; and the lovely thing about Barnabas is that there is from him no word of complaint. He was a man prepared to take the second place so long as God's work was done.

The main interest of this verse is that it is a strand in the biography of John Mark-for the John mentioned here is the man we know better as Mark-who was a deserter who redeemed himself.

Paul’s attitude seemed to indicate that Mark just did not have the stamina. He could begin things but could not finish them. He feared and shrank from the dangerous and hard trip up the rocky mountain pass to Antioch of Pisidia. The pass was infested with thieves and the terrain was a barren, rocky, forsaken place subjected to flash floods. The point is this: every servant of the Lord experiences some disciples deserting the ministry of the Lord. They are just unwilling to pay the price of discipleship (Luke 9:23).

Mark was very young. His mother's house seems to have been the centre of the church at Jerusalem (Acts 12:12) and he must always have been close to the centre of the faith. Paul and Barnabas took him with them as their helper, for he was kinsman to Barnabas; but he turned and went home. We will never know why. Perhaps he resented the deposition of Barnabas from the leadership; perhaps he was afraid of the proposed journey up into the plateau where Antioch in Pisidia stood, for it was one of the hardest and most dangerous roads in the world; perhaps, because he came from Jerusalem, he had his doubts about this preaching to the Gentiles; perhaps at this stage he was one of those many who are better at beginning things than finishing them; perhaps-as Chrysostom said long ago-the lad wanted his mother. At any rate he went.

For a time Paul found it hard to forgive. When he set out on the second missionary journey Barnabas wanted to take Mark again but Paul refused to take the one who had proved a quitter (Acts 15:38) and he and Barnabas split company for good over it. Then Mark vanishes from history, although tradition says he went to Alexandria and Egypt and founded the church there. When he re-emerges almost 20 years later he is the man who has redeemed himself. Paul, writing to the Colossians from prison in Rome, tells them to receive Mark if he comes to them. And when he writes to Timothy just before his death, he says, "Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is very useful in serving me" (2 Timothy 4:11). As Fosdick put it, "No man need stay the way he is." By the grace of God the man who was once a deserter became the writer of a gospel and the man whom, at the end, Paul wanted beside him.

Some students think that John Mark’s return to Jerusalem helped start the opposition of the legalistic Judaizers who later opposed Paul (see Acts 15 and the Epistle to the Galatians).

Another possibility is the fear of danger as the party moved into new and difficult areas. But whatever the cause of his defection, John Mark did something so serious that Paul did not want him back on his "team" again! (Acts 15:36ff) Later, Paul would enlist Timothy to take John Mark’s place (Acts 16:1-5). John Mark did redeem himself and was eventually accepted and approved by Paul (2 Tim. 4:11).

Paul and Barnabas traveled 100 miles north and about 3,600 feet up to get to this important city on the Roman road. As you follow Paul’s journeys in Acts, you will notice that he selected strategic cities, planted churches in them, and went on from the churches to evangelize the surrounding areas. You will also notice that, where it was possible, he started his ministry in the local synagogue, for he had a great burden for his people (Rom. 9:1-5; 10:1), and he found in the synagogue both Jews and Gentiles ready to hear the Word of God.

This is the first of Paul’s sermons recorded in the Book of Acts, and it may be divided into three parts, each of which is introduced by the phrase "men and brethren."

Without pausing to give more detailed accounts of the success of the gospel in Cyprus, our historian now hurries us away with the [160] two apostles upon the further prosecution of their tour. (13) "Now those about Paul set sail from Paphos, and went to Perga of Pamphylia. But John, departing from them, returned to Jerusalem."

So completely has Paul now become the central figure on the pages of Luke, that here, instead of following his former phraseology, and saying that "Barnabas and Saul" set sail from Paphos, the whole company are described as "those about Paul."

14, 15. Luke does not longer to recount the dangers through which the two travelers may have passed in crossing the mountains, but describes their progress in these few words: (14) "But they, having departed from Perga, arrived in Antioch of Pisidia, and entering into the synagogue on the Sabbath-day, they sat down. (15) And after the reading of the law and the prophets, the rulers of the synagogue sent to them, and said, Brethren, if you have any word of exhortation for the people, say on."

This is a very life-like description of the order of worship in a Jewish synagogue, and of the readiness with which the apostles gained access to the ears of their Jewish kinsmen upon their first advent in a new field of labor. The direct invitation given them to address the people was doubtless prompted by some vague knowledge of their characters as public speakers, furnished, perhaps, by themselves.

One of the amazing things about Acts is the heroism that is passed over in a sentence. Pisidian Antioch stood on a plateau 3,600 feet above sea-level. To get to it Paul and Barnabas would have to cross the Taurus range of mountains by one of the hardest roads in Asia Minor, a road which was also notorious for robbers and brigands.

But we are bound to ask, why did they not preach in Pamphylia? Why did they leave the coast with the word unproclaimed and set out on that difficult and dangerous way? Not so very long afterwards Paul wrote a letter to the people of Antioch in Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe. It is the letter called the Letter to the Galatians for all these towns were in the Roman province of Galatia. In it he says, "You know it was because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at first" (Galatians 4:13). So when he came to Galatia he was a sick man. Now Paul had a thorn in the flesh which in spite of much prayer remained with him (2 Corinthians 12:7, 8).

Many guesses have been made as to what that thorn was-or stake as it probably should be translated. The oldest tradition is that Paul suffered from prostrating headaches. And the most likely explanation is that he was the victim of a virulent recurring malaria fever which haunted the low coastal strip of Asia Minor. A traveller says that the headache characteristic of this malaria was like a red-hot bar thrust through the forehead; and another likens it to a dentist's drill boring through a man's temple. It is most likely that this malaria attacked Paul in low-lying Pamphylia and that he had to make for the plateau country to shake it off.

Note that it never struck him to turn back. Even when his body was aching Paul never ceased to drive on and to be an adventurer for Christ.

In this section, Paul reviewed the history of Israel, climaxing with the ministry of John the Baptist and the coming of their Messiah. He made it clear that it was God who was at work in and for Israel, preparing the way for the coming of the promised Messiah. He also reminded his hearers that the nation had not always been faithful to the Lord and the covenant, but had often rebelled. Every pious Jew knew that the Messiah would come from David’s family, and that a prophet would announce His coming beforehand. John the Baptist was that prophet.

To this invitation Paul responded, by immediately arising and addressing the audience. It need not be supposed, in order to account for the leadership which he now assumes, that he had laid formal claim to superiority over Barnabas; for when two men, of generous spirit, are co-operating together under trying circumstances, he who possesses the greater courage and promptness will eventually assume the foremost position, even without a special agreement to that effect. Such was the constant danger and embarrassment of the two missionaries, that the question was, who is willing to go forward, rather than, who has the right to be heard first. Paul's manner, in arising to open the gospel message among these strangers, was bold and commanding. It is thus described by Luke: (16) "Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand, said, Men of Israel, and ye who fear God, give audience." This gesture, described as beckoning with the hand, was characteristic of Paul's manner, as well shall have occasion to observe frequently hereafter, and was well calculated to arrest the attention of an audience. It is the manner of one who knows what he is about to say, and feels confident of its importance. [161]

This is an extremely important passage because it is the only full-length report of a sermon by Paul that we possess. When carefully compared with the sermon of Peter in Acts 2 the main elements in it are seen to be precisely the same.

God has been working throughout all history. He suffered and bore with the ways of Israel and of the world (cp. Acts 13:18). The message preached by Stephen just about covers the same points Paul proclaimed. It is helpful to look at Stephen’s message for development of Paul’s points. Note how Paul’s emphasis was God Himself...

The thrust of Paul’s message (Acts 13:18) was that God had suffered and put up with the behavior of man from the very beginning. The words "suffered he their manners" (etropophoresen) mean...

Note the emphasis again: it is upon God Himself and how He has borne and suffered with man all through history.

1. God chose Israel.

2. God delivered Israel. They had stayed in Egypt too long, becoming complacent and worldly, perfectly satisfied with the pleasures of Egypt. In fact, they stayed so long that an evil Pharaoh arose who enslaved them. But God loved and cared and delivered them
3. God put up and suffered with Israel through the wilderness. God gave Israel glorious provision, the pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (Exodus 13:21-22) and manna for food (Exodus 16:15, 33-35). Yet they grumbled and murmured and rebelled against Him. But He still "suffered" and put up with them, nourishing them right along.

3. God led Israel to conquer Canaan. He constantly protected them, leading and guiding them to victory after victory despite their lack of trust and constant disobedience (Deut. 17:1; Deut. 20:17. Cp. Numbers 13:26-33 for an example of Israel’s distrust in taking the land. Cp. Acts 7:5-6 for God’s promise that He would give the land to Israel.)

4. God gave Israel judges. Once the land was conquered, Israel slipped into complacency, selfishness, and sin, forgetting God and His call. Nations marched against Israel. But despite Israel’s sin, God heard the cry of the faithful few and raised up deliverers called judges.

5. God gave Israel a man who was not only a judge, but the first of the great prophets, Samuel (cp. 1 Samuel 7:6, 15-17; 1 Samuel 3:20; Acts 3:24; Acts 13:20). Yet Israel was dissatisfied with God’s choice and leadership. They looked at the world and desired what the world had—a king.

6. God gave Israel a king of their own choosing, a man named Saul. Saul was everything that men would choose, a very physical man who stood head and shoulders above everyone else (1 Samuel 9:1-2, 16; 1 Samuel 10:17-25).

7. God raised up a special king of His own choosing. Man’s (Israel’s) choice failed: Saul mismanaged God’s will and the government that God wanted established. God removed him and set His own choice upon the throne, a man named David.

(i) Paul insist that the coming of Jesus is the consummation of history. He outlines the national history of the Jews to show that it culminates in Christ. The Stoics believed that history simply kept on repeating itself. A modern cynical verdict is that history is the record of the sins, the mistakes and the follies of men. But the Christian view of history is optimistic. It is certain that always history is going somewhere according to the purpose of God.

(ii) Paul states the fact that men did not recognize God's consummation when it came in Jesus Christ. Browning said, "We needs must love the highest when we see it." But a man, by taking his own way and refusing God's way, can in the end afflict himself with a blindness which is unable to see. The misuse of freewill ends not in liberty but in ruin.

(iii) Although men, in their blind folly, rejected and crucified Jesus, God could not be defeated and the resurrection is the proof of the undefeatable purpose and power of God. It is told that once on a night of gale, a child said in awe to his father, "God must have lost grip of his winds tonight." The resurrection is the proof that God never loses grip.

(iv) Paul goes on to use a purely Jewish argument. The resurrection is the fulfilment of prophecy because promises were made to David which were obviously not fulfilled in him but which are fulfilled in Christ. Once again, whatever we make of this argument from prophecy, the fact remains that history is neither circular nor aimless; it looks to that which in the purpose of God must come.

(v) The coming of Christ is to one kind of people good news. Hitherto they had tried to live life according to the Law but no man could ever fulfil that Law completely and therefore any thinking man was always conscious of failure and guilt. But in Jesus Christ men find that forgiving power which sets them free from the condemnation that should have been theirs and therefore restores real friendship with God.

(vi) But what is meant for good news is in fact bad news for another kind of people. It simply makes worse the condemnation of those who have seen it and have disobeyed its summons to belief in Jesus Christ. There is excuse for the man who has never had a chance; but there is none for the man who has seen the splendour of the offer of God and has rejected it.

17-24. After thus arresting the attention of his hearers, he approaches his main theme, by a rapid glance at some of the most cherished events in Jewish history. This glance at the history of history, from their departure out of Egypt to the reign of David, is a very circuitous method of approaching the announcement of Jesus as a Savior; but, instead of being a defect in the speech, it is one of its chief excellencies. Every speech must be judged with reference to the special character of the audience addressed. The Jews had a glorious history, of which they were justly proud; and any happily expressed allusions to its leading facts always awakened in their hearts the most lively emotions. These incidents furnished the inspiration of their songs, the themes of their orators, the foundation of their national pride, and their comfort in persecution. Whoever, of their own people, appeared most deeply touched by their memories, had the readiest access to their sympathies, and he who would treat them with indifference or contempt, incurred their utmost hatred.

Before such an audience, if Paul had abruptly introduced the name and the new doctrine of Jesus, he might have appeared an apostate from the Jewish faith, seeking to supplant it by something entirely new, and would therefore have kindled the resentment of his Jewish hearers at once. But, beginning with a happy reference to the history of the chosen tribes, and the reign of their most glorious king, and catching up the promise made to David, on which their own most cherished hopes were based, he leads them, by almost imperceptible steps, to the favorable consideration of the fulfillment of that promise in the appearance of Jesus as a Savior to Israel. The reference to John, whom all the Jews now accredited as a prophet, served the same purpose, while it designated more specifically the period in which Jesus had first appeared as a Savior. [162]

The commentators have all noticed the striking similarity between this introduction of Paul's speech and that of Stephen before the Sanhedrim, of which Paul was probably a hearer. But the attentive reader of our comments upon the two speeches will observe that the similarity is merely in the facts referred to, not in the purpose for which the reference is made; Paul's object being merely to favorably introduce his main theme, while Stephen was gathering up a bundle of misdeeds in the history of the fathers, with which to lash the backs of sons who were so wickedly imitating their resistance to the Holy Spirit.

25. Having alluded to John's preparatory ministry, he next introduces the direct testimony which he bore to the Messiahship of Jesus. (25) "Now as John was fulfilling his course, he said, Whom think ye that I am? I am not he, but behold, there is coming after me one whose sandal I am not worthy to loose from his feet." This was a habitual saying of John, well known to all who heard his preaching, or had heard of it, and brought to bear the whole weight of his testimony in favor of Jesus.

As Paul addressed both the Jews and the Gentile "God-fearers" in the congregation, he changed his approach from third person ("they") to second person ("you"). He explained to them why their leaders in Jerusalem rejected and crucified the nation’s Messiah. It was not because they had not read or heard the message of the prophets, but because they did not understand the message. Furthermore, the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth was even promised in the prophets. (Peter took this same approach in his second message, Acts 3:12-18.)

It was the resurrection of Jesus Christ that was the crucial event: "But God raised Him from the dead" (Acts 13:30). (See Acts 13:33-34, 37, and note that "raised" in Acts 13:22-23 means "brought.") Paul has declared the Gospel to them, "the word of this salvation" (Acts 13:26) and "the glad tidings" (Acts 13:32). Christ died, He was buried, and He arose again!

Since Paul was addressing a synagogue congregation, he used the Old Testament Scriptures to support his argument. In Acts 13:33, Psalm 2:7 is quoted; and note that it refers to the resurrection of Christ, not to the birth of Christ. The "virgin tomb" (John 19:41) was like a "womb" that gave birth to Jesus Christ in resurrection glory.

Then he quoted Isaiah 55:3, referring to the covenant that God made with David, "the sure mercies of David." God had promised David that from him the Messiah would come (2 Sam. 7:12-17). This was an "everlasting covenant" with a throne to be established forever (2 Sam. 7:13, 16). If Jesus is the Messiah, and He died and remained dead, this covenant could never be fulfilled. Therefore, Jesus had to be raised from the dead or the covenant would prove false.

His third quotation was from Psalm 16:10, the same passage Peter quoted in his message at Pentecost (Acts 2:24-28). The Jews considered Psalm 16 to be a messianic psalm, and it was clear that this promise did not apply to David, who was dead, buried, and decayed. It had to apply to Jesus Christ, the Messiah.

Those who have been accustomed to watch the sympathy between a speaker and his audience can readily perceive, in the change of Paul's manner just here, evidence that he discovered some favorable emotions at work in his audience. He interrupts the thread of his argument, by warmly remarking: (26) "Brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and those among you who fear God, to you is the word of this salvation sent."

But his impetuosity was not so great as to make him forget, altogether, the deep-seated prejudices to be overcome in his audience, or to waive the convincing and persuasive proofs he had yet to present. He proceeds, therefore, with renewed deliberation, to a fuller statement of the argument.

27-29. After claiming that the Messiahship of Jesus was so well authenticated, it was necessary to give some explanation of the singular fact, that the Jews, who knew him well, had put him to death as an impostor. This he does in a way that not only removes all objection, but furnishes additional evidence in his favor. (27) "For they who dwell in Jerusalem, and their rulers, not knowing him and the voices of the prophets which are read every Sabbath-day, fulfilled them in condemning him. (28) And though they found not the least cause of death in him, they requested Pilate that he should be put to death. (29) And when they had completed all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree and laid him in a sepulcher." Thus, his rejection and death at the hands of Jews, which might have appeared to Paul's hearers an argument against his claims, are made to tell mightily in his favor, by the fact that this was but the fulfillment of what the prophets had written concerning the Messiah.

In this brief statement of the death and burial of Jesus, Paul makes no distinction between those who put him to death and those who "took him down from the tree, and laid him in the sepulcher." But this omission is entirely justifiable; for, although his friends, Joseph and Nicodemus, performed the last two acts, they did it by the express permission of Pilate, and it may be regarded as, in a proper sense, the act of his enemies. [163]

30-33. The speaker proceeds to the climax of his argument; a proof of the Messiahship still more conclusive, if possible than the testimony of John, or the fulfillment of prophesy. (30) "But God raised him from the dead; (31) and he was seen many days by those who came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses to the people. (32) And we declare to you glad tidings concerning the promise made to the fathers, (33) that God has fulfilled it to us, their children, by raising up Jesus; as it is written in the second Psalm, Thou art my son; to-day have I begotten thee." The fact of the resurrection of Jesus, so well attested by competent witnesses, is introduced, not only as the final proof of his Messiahship, but as happy tidings to these Jews, being no less than the fulfillment of the promise to the fathers, and the realization of their most cherished hopes.

In applying the quotation from the second Psalm, therefore, to the resurrection, and endeavoring to cheer the Jews in Antioch, with the thought that a long-cherished and familiar promise was thereby fulfilled, Paul was giving his real understanding of the passage quoted, and it is one as much more cheering than that which many commentators have gathered from it, as the exaltation of Christ from the grave to his throne in the heavens was a more glorious birth than that which brought him into this sinful world.

34-37. That we have given the true explanation of the clause last quoted is confirmed by the course of the argument in that which follows, in which the speaker continues to quote from David, to prove that, according to his prophesies, the Messiah should rise from the dead. (34) "Now that he did raise him from the dead, no more to [164] return to corruption, he spoke thus: I will give to you the sure mercies of David. (35) Wherefore he also says in another psalm, Thou wilt not suffer thy Holy One to see corruption. (36) For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell asleep, and was added to his fathers, and saw corruption; (37) but he whom God raised up did not see corruption."

The only objection which his hearers would be likely to raise against the argument is, that in the words, "Thou wilt not suffer thy Holy One to see corruption," David spoke of himself. But this objection is anticipated by the remark that David had fallen asleep and seen corruption, whereas he, Jesus, whom God raised up, as was proved by the witnesses who saw him alive, did not see corruption; hence to him the words must refer. According, therefore, to the only possible application of David's words, and to the admitted reference of the words quoted from Isaiah, they were bound to admit that Jesus was the Messiah.

Paul had declared the Good News to them (Acts 13:32), and now all that remained was to make the personal application and "draw the net." He told them that through faith in Jesus Christ, they could have two blessings that the Law could never provide: the forgiveness of their sins and justification before the throne of God.

Justification is the act of God whereby He declares the believing sinner righteous in Jesus Christ. It has to do with the believer’s standing before the throne of God. The Jews were taught that God justified the righteous and punished the wicked (2 Chron. 6:22-23). But God justifies the ungodly who will put their faith in Jesus Christ (Rom. 4:1-8).

The Law cannot justify the sinner; it can only condemn him (Rom. 3:19-20; Gal. 2:16). God not only forgives our sins, but He also gives us the very righteousness of Christ and puts it on our account! This was certainly good news delivered by Paul to that searching congregation of Jews and Gentiles who had no peace in their hearts, even though they were religious.

Paul closed his message with a note of warning taken from Habakkuk 1:5 (and see Isa. 29:14). In Habakkuk’s day, the "unbelievable work" God was doing was the raising up of the Chaldeans to chasten His people, a work so remarkable that nobody would believe it. After all, why would God use an evil pagan nation to punish His own chosen people, sinful though they might be? God was using Gentiles to punish Jews! But the "wonderful work" in Paul’s day was that God was using the Jews to save the Gentiles!

What was the result? Many Jews and Gentile proselytes believed and associated with Paul and Barnabas. The Gentiles were especially excited about Paul’s message and wanted him to tell them more, which he did the next Sabbath. The people had done a good job of spreading the news, because a great crowd gathered. They were probably predominantly Gentiles, which made the Jews envious and angry.

Paul’s final message in the synagogue declared that God had sent the Word to the Jews first (Acts 3:26; Rom. 1:16), but they had now rejected it. Therefore, Paul would now take the Good News to the Gentiles; and he quoted Isaiah 49:6 to back up his decision. (Note also Luke 2:29-32.) He was ready to go to the ends of the earth to win souls to Christ!

Acts 13:48 gives us the divine side of evangelism, for God has His elect people (Eph. 1:4). The word translated ordained means "enrolled," and indicates that God’s people have their names written in God’s book (Luke 10:20; Phil. 4:3). But Acts 13:49 is the human side of evangelism: if we do not preach the Word, then nobody can believe and be saved. It takes both (see 2 Thes. 2:13-14 and Rom. 10:13-15).

The unbelieving Jews were not going to sit back and let Paul and Barnabas take over. First, they disputed with them, and then brought legal action against them and expelled them from their borders. The missionaries were not discouraged: they shook off the dust of their feet against them (Luke 9:5; 10:11) and went to the next town, leaving behind them a group of joyful disciples.

Having now established, by brief, but unanswerable arguments, the Messiahship of Jesus, Paul proceeds to offer the audience the benefit of his mediation. (38) "Be it known to you, therefore, brethren, that through this man is preached to you the remission of sins; (39) and in him every one who believes is justified from all from which you could not be justified in the law of Moses." The expression en touto, in him, not by him as rendered in the common version, indicates that the parties to be justified must be in Christ, that is, in subjection to his authority; as the expression en to uomo, in the law, applies to those who were under the law, and not to uncircumcised Gentiles who were not under it. The benefits of the Jewish law extended only to those who were born in, or properly initiated into the body of people to whom the law was given; and just so, the remission of sins is preached only to those who shall be in Christ by being properly initiated into his body.

By the antithesis here instituted between the law and the gospel, Paul assumes that there was no remission of sins enjoyed by those [165] under the law. For he asserts that there were some things "from which they could not be justified in the law of Moses;" and in the expression "justified from all from which you could not be justified in the law," the true supplement after all is sins, taken from the preceding clause. He announces that remission of sins is preached through Jesus, and from these he assumes that under the law there was no justification. This point, indeed, would need no argument, even if the context did not settle it; for certainly, if there was any thing from which under the law could not be justified, it was sin; and, on the other hand, in Christ we are justified from nothing but sin. The assumption is not, that justification can not be procured by works of law, for this is equally true under Christ; but that those under the law of Moses did not obtain remission of sins at all.

This redemption was not effected till the death of Christ; therefore, till his death their transgressions remained unforgiven. Though they had the promise of pardon, and rejoiced in the full assurance that it would yet be granted, they were compelled to regard it as blessing of the future and not of the present. Their enjoyment, as compared with that of the saints under the new covenant, was as that of one who has from God a promise of pardon, compared with him who has it already in possession. Their happiness, like ours, depended upon their faith in God's word.

40, 41. This passage in Paul's speech was most unwelcome to his Jewish hearers. It was an express disparagement of the law of Moses such as always fell harshly upon Jewish ears. We consequently see in the next and last paragraph of the speech an indication of a change in the aspect of the audience. It is only an audience in whom a most unfavorable change is discernible, that so watchful a speaker could address in these words: (40) "Beware, then, lest that which is said in the prophets come upon you; (41) Behold, ye despisers, and wonder and perish; for I do a work in your days, a work which you will not believe though one should fully declare it to you."

No doubt some evidence of their incredulity was visible in their countenances, if it was not exhibited by audible murmurings. The force of the quotation was to show, that if they did reject the gospel, they would only be identifying themselves with a class of whom this conduct had been predicted.

The surprise expressed by the prophet, that they would not believe though one should declare it to them, does not assume that they should believe facts so astounding upon the mere assertion of an individual; but the object of surprise is, that they would not believe though one should declare it fully to them, that is, with all the incontestable evidences of its reality. Undoubtedly the work referred to by the apostle, in his application of the prophet's language, is the work of raising up a savior to Israel in the person of Jesus.

Jesus Christ, Savior—History, Pivotal Point: God has consummated history. He has given the Messiah to the world—given the Savior Jesus Christ. Note that Paul...

Paul launched right into his major thrust: the Savior is Jesus. The name Jesus is significant to the Jews. It means Savior, God will save. The Hebrew form is Joshua (yasha), which means Jehovah is salvation; He is the Savior. The idea is that of deliverance, of being saved from some terrible disaster that leads to perishing (cp. John 3:16; Romans 8:3; Galatians 1:4; Hebrews 2:14-18; Hebrews 7:25).

From this point on the sermon Peter preached on the day of Pentecost should be read. Paul’s points are about the same as Peter’s

. Paul’s message about Jesus Christ includes seven points.

1. The Savior was proclaimed by a forerunner, John the Baptist (Acts 13:24-25). The world was not caught off guard. God prepared the world for the coming of the Savior. He sent John the Baptist, the forerunner, to proclaim...

2. The Savior is "the word of salvation" being proclaimed to you (Acts 13:26). Salvation means deliverance from both the power and penalty of sin, death, and judgment. Paul declared that Jesus is "the word of salvation." He Himself is the salvation of man, the salvation which God sent to man (cp. Acts 13:23).

a. Jesus is the One whom "God raised from the dead" (Acts 13:30-33).

b. Jesus is God’s Son, the One begotten of God (Acts 13:33).

c. Jesus is the "Holy One" who did not suffer corruption (Acts 13:35, 37).

d. Through Jesus is "the forgiveness of sins" (Acts 13:38).

e. By Jesus "all that believe are justified from all things" (Acts 13:39).

 

3. The Savior was rejected and crucified (Acts 13:27-28). The outline above with the following notes covers this point adequately.

4. The Savior was raised from the dead by God (Acts 13:31-37).

a. There was the proof of eyewitnesses and of close associates who could not be deceived or mistaken.

b. There was the purpose of Jesus’ resurrection, the glad tidings of resurrection and incorruption for believers. God’s promise has been fulfilled (Acts 13:32-37). Believers shall be raised from the dead just as Christ was.

5. The Savior forgives sins (Acts 13:38). The only Person who can forgive sins...

6. The Savior justifies all who believe, justifies apart from the law.

7. The Savior brings judgment upon men. Since He has come, men must beware lest what the prophet declared come upon them (Habakkuk 1:5).

42, 43. When Paul's speech was concluded, the synagogue was [167] dismissed and the apostle had an opportunity to learn what particular effects had been produced. The people, candid and outspoken, let him in no doubt on the subject. (42) "Now as they were going out, they entreated that these words should be spoken to them the next Sabbath, (43) and, the synagogue being dismissed, many of the Jews and devout proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, talking to them, persuaded them to continue in the favor of God."

On the next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of God. When the Jews saw the crowds they were filled with envy and they argued against what Paul said, making blasphemous statements. Paul and Barnabas, using the boldest language, said, "It was necessary that the word of God should first be spoken to you, but since you reject it and since you have proved that you are unfit for eternal life, look you, we turn to the Gentiles; for thus has the Lord enjoined us, 'I have appointed you for a light to the Gentiles so that you may be for salvation even to the utmost bound of the world.'" When the Gentiles heard this they were glad and they glorified the word of God; and all who were appointed to eternal life believed. And the word of the Lord was carried throughout the whole district. But the Jews incited the devout women who were women of position and the chief men of the city and raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas; and they ejected them from their bounds. But they shook off the dust of their feet against them and went to Iconium. And the disciples were filled with joy and the Holy Spirit.

Antioch in Pisidia was an inflammable city. It was a very mixed place. It had been founded by one of Alexander the Great's successors about 300 B. C. Jews very often flooded into new cities in order to get in on the ground floor, to use a modern phrase. Since Antioch was a road centre it had become a Roman colony in 6 B. C. In the population there were therefore Greeks, Jews, Romans and not a few of the native Phrygians who were an emotional and unstable people. It was the kind of population where a spark could cause a conflagration.

The one thing that infuriated the Jews was that any of God's privileges could be for the uncircumcised Gentiles. So they took action. At this time the Jewish religion had a special attraction for women. In nothing was the ancient world more lax than in sexual morality. Family life was rapidly breaking down. The worst sufferers were women. The Jewish religion preached a purity of ethic and cleanness of life. Round the synagogues gathered many women, often of high social position, who found in this teaching just what they longed for. Many of these women became proselytes; still more were God-fearers. The Jews persuaded them to incite their husbands, who were often men in influential positions, to take steps against the Christian preachers. The inevitable result was persecution, Antioch became unsafe for Paul and Barnabas and they had to go.

The Jews were intent on keeping their privileges to themselves. From the beginning the Christians saw their privileges as something to be shared. As has been said, "The Jews saw the heathen as chaff to be burned; Jesus saw them as a harvest to be reaped for God." And his Church must have a like vision of a world for Christ.

Thus, notwithstanding the majority of the Jews in the audience gave such evidence of incredulity as to extort the warning with which Paul closed his speech, some of them were ready to believe; while the Gentile proselytes, less affected by Jewish prejudices, and, therefore, better prepared to do justice to the speaker, were most deeply interested. The picture which Luke gives of their following Paul and Barnabas in a crowd away from the synagogue, and keeping up an earnest conversation, is a striking exhibition of the simple habits of the people, as well as of the interest which they felt in the new and thrilling theme of the discourse.

44. So deep an interest kindled in the synagogue, and taking hold of Gentile minds, could not fail to spread widely through the city during the following week, and its progress was doubtless furthered by the most active private exertions of Paul and Barnabas. The result was seen in the next assemblage at the synagogue. (44) "On the next Sabbath almost the whole city were gathered together to hear the word of God."

The people’s response to the gospel was fourfold.

1. Some non-religionists (Gentiles) desired to hear more. The non-religionists were Gentiles. They were heathen men and women who had become sick of the immoralities and injustices of their society. And their empty religions had left them empty. In their hunger for something more they were attracted by the Jew’s morality and worship of One Supreme Being. Therefore, they sometimes attended Jewish services. However, they understood little about the Scripture. This is the point of what happened now. They had understood little about what Paul had preached. Their childhood had not included the teaching of Scripture.

But their hearts had been touched by the gospel. The Holy Spirit was working within them, stirring them to crave...

Note the word "besought" (parekaloun). It is continuous action: the heathen continued to beseech. The picture is that they begged and begged Paul to share more about the forgiveness of sins which is in Jesus.

Thought 1. Note two significant points.

1) There are many who are ignorant of the Scriptures, who know little about what we preach. They did not have Christian parents nor have they ever been exposed to genuine Christian believers. They just have never had the opportunity and exposure to the gospel that some of us have had. Because of this, their hearts are fertile and soft to the gospel. When they hear the truth, the Holy Spirit is able to convict and convert them much more easily then He is a gospel-hardened heart.

2) This is great encouragement to the witnessing believer. It should challenge every one of us to get to the task, for the world is full of such people. They may be steeped in religion, but they are ignorant of the truth about Christ. They are soft and ready to respond, to hear more and more of the glorious truth that Jesus saves, forgives, and justifies (Acts 13:23, 38, 39).

2. Some who were hungry for God desired to hear more immediately. These were mainly proselytes, heathen Gentiles who had become so impressed with Judaism they had actually become converts to the Jewish religion. Many of these and many of the Jews (genuine religionists) followed Paul and Barnabas from the preaching service. They could not wait until next week. They were too convicted, too drawn to Christ and the hope of forgiveness. They had to hear more right then.

3. Some who never attended came to hear the Word of God (Acts 13:44). They came to the worship service on the next Sabbath. What brought them?

4. Some rejected and opposed. There were three primary reasons for their rejection and opposition (Acts 13:45).

48. In the next paragraph we have a statement, the meaning of which has excited no little controversy. (48) "On hearing this the Gentiles rejoiced, and glorified the word of the Lord, and as many as were determined for eternal life believed." The controversy turns upon the meaning of the clause osoi eoan tetagmenoi eis zoen aioniou, rendered, in the common version, "as many as were ordained to eternal life." The Calvinistic writers united in referring it to the eternal election and foreordination taught in their creeds. They contend, therefore, for the rendering "were ordained," or "were appointed." If their interpretation were admitted, it would involve the passage in some difficulties which none of them seem to have noticed. If it be true that "as many as were foreordained to eternal life believed," then there were some of the foreordained left in that community who did not believe. Hence, all those who did not then believe, whether adults or infants, were among the reprobate, who were predestinated to everlasting punishment. Now it is certainly most singular that so complete a separation of the two parties should take place throughout a whole community at one time; and still more singular that Luke should so far depart from the custom of inspired writers as to state the fact. Again, the same statement implies that all who believed on that occasion were of the elect. For, if the parties who believed were those who had been foreordained to eternal life, then none of the non-elect could have been among the number. Here is another anomalous incident: that on this occasion all who believed were of the number who would finally be saved, and that Luke should be informed of the fact and make it known to his readers. Certainly we should not adopt an interpretation involving conclusions so anomalous, unless we are compelled to do so by the obvious force of the words employed.

It is worthy of more that the efforts of Calvinistic writers to prove that this is the meaning of these words consist chiefly in strong assertions to that effect, and in attempts to answer the feebler class of the objections urged against it. Thus Dr. Hackett asserts: "This is the only translation which the philology of the passage allows." But he makes no effort to prove that the New Testament usage of the principal word involved allows this translation. The word rendered ordained in this passage is tasso--a term which is not employed in a single instance in the New Testament in the sense of foreordained. Where that idea is to be expressed, other words are uniformly employed.

We scarcely need observe, after the above remarks, that the specific meaning attached to the generic term in question, in any particular passage, is to be determined by the context. In the passage we are now considering, the context has no allusion to any thing like an appointment of one part, and a rejection of the other; but the writer draws a line of distinction between the conduct of certain Gentiles and that of the Jews addressed by Paul in the closing paragraph of his speech. To render the contrast between the two more conspicuous, he throws his words into antithesis with those of Paul. Paul had said to the Jews, "You put the word of God from you;" Luke says of the Gentiles, "They glorified the word of the Lord." Paul said, "You judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life;" Luke says, many of the Gentiles "were determined for everlasting life." It is an act of the mind to which Paul objects on the part of the Jews, and it is as clearly an act of mind in the Gentiles which Luke puts in contrast with it. At some previous time in their history, these Gentiles, like [170] all others, had been undetermined in reference to everlasting life, either because they were not convinced that there was such a state, or because they hesitated to seek for it. But now their minds were set in order upon the subject, by being determined to labor for the eternal life which Paul preached.

It now remains, in order to full eludication of the passage, that we account for the connection indicated between their being determined for everlasting life, and their believing. The former stands as a cause which led to the latter. Let it be noted that everlasting life is not contemplated as the object of their belief, for, if it was, they would have had to believe in it, before they could determine for it; so that the order of the two mental acts would be reversed. But, in common with the Jews, who had been their religious instructors, they already believed in a future state, and what they now learned to believe by Paul's preaching was the gospel of Christ. Those of them who had, either through previous religious instruction, or through the influence of Paul's preaching, heartily determined for eternal life, were in a better frame of mind to appreciate the evidence in favor of that Christ through whom alone it could be obtained, than the others who were so undetermined upon the subject that they appeared to judge themselves unworthy of such a destiny. Such was the difference between the two classes in the audience, and Luke's object is to declare the result of the difference in the fact that the one class believed, and the other thrust the word of God from them. To say that the difference had been wrought in them exclusively by divine agency would be to rob them of responsibility. Or to say that the favorably-disposed party had become so exclusively by their own self-determining energy would be to deny the influence of divine truth. Neither of these positions can be true; but, while it was an act of their own minds to determine for eternal life, it was God who had induced them to do so; at the same time, the other party determined against eternal life, in despite of the same divine influence exerted upon them.

49-52. The animosity of the Jews, excited by the success of the apostles, finally resulted in their expulsion from the city. The account is given in brief terms: (49) "And the word of the Lord was published throughout the whole region. (50) But the Jews stirred up the devout and honorable women, and the chief men of the city, and raised a persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them from their borders. (51) And they, shaking off the dust of their feet against them, went into Iconium. (52) But the disciples were full of joy and the Holy Spirit."

The means by which this persecution was brought about serves to illustrate the relation which the Jews who were settled in Gentile cities sustained to the surrounding society. They had no political power in their own hands, and dared not lay violent hands upon the apostles. But certain "honorable women," wives of the "chief men of the city," had come under their influence by attending the synagogue worship, and through them they gained access to their unbelieving husbands so as to induce them to expel Paul and Barnabas.

It is a suggestive fact, that the women who were made instruments of a transaction so discreditable are styled "devout women." It shows that devotion in the worship of God, like zeal when not [171] according to knowledge, may be made to do the devil's own work. The more devout one's feelings, while his mind is corrupted by false conceptions of duty, the greater mischief he is likely to do; so far is it from being true, that to make the heart right is to make the whole man right. No man is safe without a proper understanding of his duty, derived from the word of God.

We would imagine that the young disciples, from whom their religious teachers were thus violently driven away, would have been overwhelmed with grief and fear. But we are told, as quoted above, that they were "filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit." The full assurance given by the gospel of that everlasting life which they had "determined for," and the belief that the Spirit of God dwelt in their mortal bodies, supplied them with a joy which was no longer dependent on human agency, and of which human power could not deprive them.

(13:46-52) Ministers, Response to Persecutors: the preachers’ response to the people was fourfold.

1. The preachers rejected the rejecters of the gospel. It is important to note why the rejecters were rejected.

a. The Word of God had been clearly proclaimed to them. They had received every opportunity.

b. They had pushed the Word away. They vigorously and strongly reacted; they rejected the Word.

c. They judged themselves unworthy of everlasting life. It was not God who counted them unworthy. God actually counted them worthy. He had the gospel taken to them. It was they who condemned themselves; they who brought judgment upon themselves.

2. The preachers turned to willing hearers. Note several significant points.

3. The preachers were persecuted and forcibly expelled from the city and surrounding areas. Religious leaders stirred up some prominent women (honorable) who were also very devout or religious. Apparently the women were either wives of city officials or prominent in society and business. In either case they had enough influence to turn the city officials against Paul and Barnabas. The preachers were persecuted rather severely. Paul referred to this later when writing Timothy.

4. The preachers dramatically turned away from the rejecters. This was exactly what Christ had said to do when people rejected the gospel. It was a symbol that people were unworthy of the gospel because of their obstinacy, their continued rejection and hostility to the gospel.

5. The preachers were sustained by God, filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit—despite terrible rejection and persecution.