Today, I am reading and commenting on  Acts 14-16.

The first thing which struck me today was that Paul was stoned in the city of Lystra, drug out of the city, and left for dead.  A short time later, he got up, re-entered the city, then the next day he left and traveled to Derbe.  Now, I have never been stoned, but I have been hit by rocks thrown at me (the thrower didn’t intend to hit me) and that hurts, a lot.  I also have some understanding of what happens when a crowd stones someone.  Paul would have been pretty seriously injured.  The other thing that stood out to me is that travel in the first century A.D. was not like it is today.  Travel then was comparatively difficult.  You didn’t just get in a car, or hop on a bus.  Even travel by carriage was considerably more strenuous than most travel today.  Later in today’s passage we see an account of where Paul and Silas were beaten with rods and thrown in prison.  Their injuries were such that their wounds still warranted washing many hours later.   Which brings me back to something Paul and Barnabas said to those who followed their teaching: “We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God.”  We see that Paul knew what he was talking about when he said that.  And throughout the Book of Acts he shows that those hardships did not diminish his enthusiasm for preaching the Gospel.  Let us follow his example.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  Acts 14-16.

Today’s passage contains two disputes which could have easily led to division in the early  Church.  The first dispute was doctrinal, do Gentile converts to Christianity need to follow the Law of Moses and be circumcised?  The second dispute was a character judgement, Paul and Barnabas disagreed about whether to take John Mark with them on their second missionary journey.  In the first dispute those involved appealed to the central Church in Jerusalem.  I would like to note that part of the reason for appealing to the Church in Jerusalem resulted from the fact that those claiming Gentile converts needed to follow the Law of Moses implicitly claimed to be speaking on behalf of the Church in Jerusalem.  Interestingly enough, the delegation from the Church in Antioch to the Church in Jerusalem did not present the dispute for resolution.  Instead, they merely recounted the events which led to the dispute in the first place.  And sure enough,  objections to Gentiles not being circumcised arose immediately, something which would seem to validate the point of those wishing to have Gentiles be circumcised.  However, the leaders of the Church in Jerusalem gathered together and, after much debate, sided with the delegation who thought Gentile converts should not be required to obey Mosaic Law.

In the second dispute, Paul and Barnabas saw no reason to involve anyone else, and because they could not agree as to whether they should invite John Mark on their second journey, chose to go their separate ways.  Barnabas went on his journey with John Mark, and Paul recruited Timothy to accompany him in a similar role.  This dispute resulted in two men who would have covered the same territory instead preaching the Gospel in two separate areas, and in both John Mark and Timothy being mentored to become leaders in the Church.  We have two different disputes with two different resolutions.  In one, the Church debated the issue and reached a decision which maintained unity within the Church.  In the second, two men divided over it and went their separate ways.  In both cases the Church was better off as a result of the dispute.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  Acts 14-16.

I want to start out by looking at the way in which “the crowd” in Lystra shifted from wanting to offer sacrifices to Paul and Barnabas as gods to stoning Paul.  While “the crowd” which stoned Paul was almost certainly not the same group of people as the one which acclaimed Paul and Barnabas as gods, the shift does serve as a warning about the fickleness of crowds.  In both cases the crowd followed their emotions rather than careful thought.  And in both cases the crowd was encouraged in their emotional response by those who stood to benefit from their incorrect reaction to circumstances.  I take two lessons from these events.  We should not follow the crowds when emotions are running high, and we should not stoke those emotions in order to gain advantage for ourselves.

On the subject of emotion getting the best of us, I want to look at the disagreement between Paul and Barnabas about taking John Mark with them on a second journey.  Paul approached Barnabas about going back to visit the places they had preached the Word on their previous trip.  Barnabas thought that was a good idea and wanted to take the young man, John Mark (who we know primarily as Mark) with them.  Paul resisted that idea because Mark had left them early on the previous journey.  Barnabas insisted that they give Mark a second chance and Paul refused.  Leading the two men to go their separate ways.  Luke’s wording in saying the Mark had deserted them on the first journey suggests that he thought that Paul had a valid point.  However, I also think that Luke recognized at the time of writing that Barnabas was right to give Mark a second chance (based partly on the fact that in his account of Mark leaving them on the first trip he downplays it).  We cannot know how things would have worked out if Paul and Barnabas had resolved their differences and travelled together this time, but we do know that God used their separation to enrich the Church.  Mark travelled with Barnabas and became a pillar of the next generation of Church leaders, writing one of the four Gospels which we have to this day (and being such assistance to Paul later that Paul refers to him in his letters).  On the other side, Paul took Timothy under his wing on his travels and Timothy also became a pillar of the next generation of Church leaders.  It seems unlikely that if Mark had been travelling with Paul that Paul would have recruited Timothy to travel with them.  So, the dispute between Paul and Barnabas led them to each train a young man for leadership in the Church.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

I am using the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on Acts 14-16

I want to look at the dispute between Paul and Barnabas over John Mark accompanying them on their second trip.  The more I think about this disagreement, the more I think that they were both right.  We do not know for sure, but Paul’s position seems to be that John Mark was too immature and did not have enough “stick it out”.  Barnabas, based on his earlier mentions in the Book of Acts, seems to have taken the position, “everybody deserves a second chance”.  We know from John Mark’s role in the Church later, including writing one of the four Gospels, that Barnabas was right to give him a second chance.  However, there is a good chance that part of what brought about the change in John Mark was Paul’s unwillingness to travel with him.  Further, this disagreement between Paul and Barnabas led to them each conducting separate trips to build the Church and encourage the Believers.  As a result, they reached more people for Christ than they would have if they had continued to work together.  God’s work was furthered by this disagreement between two men.

I am using the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on Acts 14-16

Luke makes a point that when Paul and Barnabas (and later Silas, I assume Barnabas continued to follow this practice after he went his separate way) arrived in a new town, they first went to the synagogue and preached the Gospel to the Jews, and converts to Judaism, there.  Only after some of the Jews began to object to their message, or the crowds grew too large for the synagogue, that they preached outside of the synagogues.  The exception to that was Philippi, which apparently did not have a synagogue.  I think that there is an important lesson for those seeking to spread the Gospel.  We should work with established groups who share our faith until they demonstrate an unwillingness to listen to the Holy Spirit.

I think it is worth a bit of time to look at what happened with the Jerusalem Council, as Luke describes it, because some of what happened is not obvious.  The process starts with a doctrinal dispute in Antioch of Syria: some Jewish believers were teaching that Gentiles needed to be circumcised, others, including Paul and Barnabas, disagreed.  The two groups argue and cannot reach agreement.  So, the church in Antioch sent a delegation to Jerusalem for guidance from the church there.

However, when they got there, no one really knew how this should be handled.  So, Paul and Barnabas reported to the whole congregation on how Gentiles had come to the Lord in Antioch and on their mission trip.  At this point, some of the believers stated that the Gentiles needed to be circumcised and follow the law of Moses.  This lead the Jerusalem church leaders to have a meeting to discuss the issue.  The meeting was clearly not cut and dry.  After everyone had a chance to have their say, Peter spoke up and brought up his experience with Cornelius.  Then Paul and Barnabas testified about the signs and wonders God had performed among the Gentiles.  Finally, James, the brother of Jesus, summarizes the conclusion the group had agreed upon.   I think it is noteworthy that the most prominent speakers spoke last, after everyone had a chance to have their say.