PresbyterJon's very own blog

Introduction: The Jerusalem Council removed the last theological barrier to evangelizing Gentiles and welcoming them as full partners and brothers in Christ. They did not have to become Jews first, and Christians second. The decision also removed whatever racial or prejudicial hangups Gentiles might have had about coming to Christ. While all peoples become one in Christ (Colossians 3:11), becoming a Christian did not mean giving up one’s own ethnic and cultural heritage. You could remain a Greek, Roman, Barbarian, Scythian or any other nationality and still be a Christian. This set the stage for worldwide evangelism. As Paul had already discovered, Gentiles could be approached directly with the Gospel.

From now on, the biggest impediment to evangelism would be human factors.

I. Peer Pressure And Loyalty (Galatians 2:11-16, Acts 15:36-41)

Peer pressure is a very powerful force, whether for good or for ill. We all want to be liked and accepted. Therefore, we are inclined to do things which we think will win the approval of those we want to accept us. Conversely, we will tend to avoid doing those things which will mark us as misfits or different from the group we want to be part of.

There was a case of peer pressure which almost split the early church. We’re not certain whether it occurred before or after the Jerusalem Council but, some time or other, Peter visited Antioch of Syria. The church at Antioch was an integrated church. Jews and Gentiles got along together in unity. They fellowshipped and ate together as one body.

Peter joined right in and everything was going well until some men showed up from James in Jerusalem. When they arrived, Peter began to distance himself from the Gentile converts. Unfortunately, his example influenced the other Jewish members of the church, who started to do the same thing. It got so bad that even Barnabas, one of the men who had been instrumental in building the church up to what it was, was led astray (Galatians 2:13).

That was the last straw for Paul. He publicly confronted Peter with his hypocrisy and got the church on an even keel again. To his credit, Peter accepted the correction. As far as we know, this was his last moral lapse. Even more to his credit he did not hold Paul’s calling him on the carpet against him. Years later, Peter was able to describe Paul as his “dear brother” (2 Peter 3:15).

Question: Does our behavior change depending on who is watching? Do we act differently when someone from a particular church, or when a particular leader, is present? Do we put a higher priority on impressing someone than doing what’s right? Are we more concerned about our reputation than what is good for the church as a whole? Are we open to correction? Do we hold grudges against those who correct us?

Another point of friction came to a head at Antioch. Paul suggested to Barnabas that they go and visit the churches they had planted to see how they were getting along (Acts 15:36). That sounded good to Barnabas, but he wanted to take John-Mark along again. Paul was adamantly opposed to that idea because John-Mark had deserted them on their prior journey. Also, though this is speculation, if John-Mark’s report to Jerusalem was partially responsible for precipitating the crisis about whether Gentiles had to obey the Mosaic Law, it’s understandable why Paul would be hesitant to take him along again.

On the other hand, Barnabas was a man who looked beyond people’s past and saw their potential. I can imagine him saying to Paul, “I was the man who saw what you could become in spite of your past. I befriended you and gave you a chance when no one else would. I’m the guy who brought you into this ministry. I’m the one who trained and mentored you. On the basis of what I did for you, you, of all people, ought to be willing to give a second chance to someone else!”

Unfortunately, Paul and Barnabas could not see eye-to-eye on this. The argument escalated to the point where they parted company (Acts 15:39). It was tragic that two people, both of whom were wholeheartedly trying to serve the Lord, could no longer work together. God was able to bring much good out of the situation, but one wonders what might have happened if the rift had not taken place. Who was at fault?

Scripture does not assign blame and we should be slow to assign it where Scripture does not. However, it’s hard not to view Paul as ungracious in the way he treated John-Mark. There is a possible, implied criticism of Barnabas as well. The account says that “...Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord.” (Acts 15:40 NIV) It merely records that “...Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus...” (Acts 15:39 NIV) In other words, it seems that Paul and Silas had the blessing of the church for their missionary tour, while Barnabas and Mark may not have.

Whether Barnabas went with the blessing of the church or not, his confidence in John-Mark was not misplaced. After maturing and seasoning under Barnabas’ mentoring, he became an outstanding figure in the early church. Among other things, we owe the Gospel of Mark to him.

It’s also significant that, as mentioned in the previous lesson, Paul and John-Mark were able to work together in the future. It also seems that the rift between Paul and Barnabas was healed, too. Paul mentions Barnabas in 1 Corinthians 9:6. It is obvious that Paul was familiar with Barnabas’ work and approved of it.

II. All Things To All Men (Acts 16:1-5)

Figure 7: Paul’s 2nd Missionary Journey (Map drawn by Jonathan Turner using The Generic Mapping Tools by Paul Wessel and Walter H. F. Smith, School of Ocean & Earth Science & Technology, University of Hawai’i. Topographic data are distributed by the Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Center (LP DAAC), located at the U.S. Geological Survey’s EROS Data Center http://edcdaac.usgs.gov)

Paul and Silas traveled overland to the churches he and Barnabas had planted earlier in Derbe and Lystra. It spite of Paul’s break with Barnabas, it seems that he had learned from Barnabas’ example. In Lystra he saw a young man with outstanding potential and recruited him to be part of the team. Timothy proved not only to be a tremendous help to Paul, but an outstanding evangelist in his own right.

Before taking him along, however, Paul had Timothy circumcised. Why do that? Wasn’t it inconsistent with, or a contradiction of, Paul’s teaching that we are saved by faith and not by observing the Law of Moses? Why circumcise Timothy, while not doing it to Titus?

No, it was not a contradiction. There was another principle at work. Titus was a Gentile. After the Jerusalem Council, nobody (except the false teachers) expected Gentiles to be circumcised. But Timothy’s mother was a Jewess. In the thinking of the Jewish people, that made Timothy a Jew, too. For a Jew to be uncircumcised was unthinkable. Though Paul was an Apostle to the Gentiles, he still tried to win Jews as well. For Timothy to remain uncircumcised would have destroyed all credibility among Jews and would have made evangelizing among them almost impossible. So, Paul circumcised him. It was a practical application of a principle Paul articulated in his letter to the Corinthians. As far as possible, he removed cultural and other artificial barriers so that he could win people to Christ (see 1 Corinthians 9:19-22).

Question: It says a lot about Timothy that he was willing to go through a very painful, humiliating and, in those days, dangerous, operation in order not to become a stumbling-block to the people they were trying to introduce to Christ. How committed are we? What are we willing to do, or to sacrifice, so others can hear the Gospel?

III. Jail Ministry (Acts 16:11-40)

After visiting the churches in Galatia and delivering the decision reached at the Jerusalem Council, Paul and his companions tried to go west into the Roman province of Asia. The Holy Spirit would not allow them to go there (Acts 16:6). Since the way west was blocked, they next tried to go north into Bithynia. Again, the Spirit would not allow them to go there. So, they ended up going north-west, between the two forbidden territories.

When they got to Troas, Paul had a vision in which a man begged him to come to Macedonia (Acts 16:8-9). Believing this was a directive from God, he and his companions sailed for Macedonia. Upon arriving, they traveled to Philippi. Based on the use of the word ‘we’ in the text, it seems that Luke had joined the mission at Troas. What is significant about this journey is that, up till now, all of Paul’s ministry had been in the Middle East or Asia Minor. Now, for the first time, he crossed over into Europe.

Note: Contrary to what you might have heard, this was not the first time the Gospel reached Europe. Among those who heard the Gospel on the day of Pentecost were visitors from Rome (Acts 2:10-11). Apparently, some of them were converted and established the church in Rome not long afterwards. Aquila and his wife Priscilla had recently come from Italy before Paul met them in Corinth, and apparently were already Christians (Acts 18:1-3). Later, when Paul was taken to Rome to stand trial, he met believers in Puteoli and Rome (Acts 28:13-15). Further, Paul wrote his letter to the church in Rome a few years before he got there in person (Romans 1:8-13). While this was not the first time the Gospel reached Europe, it was the first time an Apostle had reached there.

In Philippi, on the Sabbath, Paul and his companions went to a place of prayer down by the river, presumably, because there wasn’t any synagogue. Paul preached the Gospel to the women gathered there. As a result, a business woman named Lydia, and her whole household, came to Christ. She insisted that Paul use her house as his base of operations in Philippi.

They spent some time in Philippi, and things were going well until Paul’s ministry touched some people in the pocketbook. He cast a demon out of a slave girl who had the ability to tell fortunes. Far from being grateful that the girl had been healed, her owners were furious that they could no longer make money off her. They had Paul and Silas arrested under a false charge, flogged and jailed.

Sleep was probably impossible, not only because of the pain but, because they were fastened in stocks. While most of us would probably have been moaning and feeling sorry for ourselves, Paul and Silas spent the time praying and singing hymns while the other prisoners listened (Acts 16:25). (Think of this as the first jail ministry!) As a result of their witness, none of the prisoners ran away when an earthquake broke the jail open and loosened everyone’s chains. This so impressed the jailer than he and his household listened to the Gospel and were converted.

Question: How would we use our time if we were thrown in jail? What would the effect of our witness be?

In the morning the magistrates told the jailer to release Paul and Silas. But Paul refused to go quietly. For the first time, he stood on his rights as a Roman citizen. The magistrates were forced to eat humble pie. However, they asked him and Silas to leave Philippi. They did so, but in their own time. They first went back to Lydia’s house and encouraged the brothers before they left.

IV. True Nobility (Acts 17:1-15)

Thessalonica was the next place they ministered. A large number of people responded to the Gospel. However, the Jews became jealous and stirred up a mob against them. When the mob were unable to locate Paul and Silas, they dragged Jason and some of the other converts before the city officials. The officials made these men post bond before they let them go. Presumably, the bond was a pledge that Paul and Silas would leave town and stay away in the future. In other words, if Paul and Silas had remained in Thessalonica, or come back, it would have caused a major financial loss to the Christians there.

The brothers sent Paul and Silas on to Berea. In Berea they encountered people whom the account describes as “more noble” than the Thessalonians (Acts 17:11). In this context, what does it mean to be noble?

It means to have a superior character. Nobility, in this sense, might be recognized by actions, but it is not good or right actions, themselves, which make one noble. It is the good, true, honest and upright character which produces good and right actions that makes a person noble. Jesus said, “No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. People do not pick figs from thornbushes, or grapes from briers. The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For out of the overflow of his heart his mouth speaks.” (Luke 6:43-45 NIV) As an example of true nobility, consider the wife described in Proverbs 31:10-31. It is not her works, per se, which make her noble, but the character which produces what she does.

What was it that demonstrated the noble character of the Bereans?

1) They received the message of the Gospel with great eagerness. They were not cynical or looking for fault. They weren’t looking for an excuse to reject the message. They had the attitude of wanting to hear and to know what God says. They didn’t deny the need to change.

2) They examined the Scriptures to see if what they heard was true. In spite of their eagerness to hear and accept what Paul said, they were not gullible. They had an objective standard by which to measure what they heard, and they used that standard to verify Paul’s message. It’s also worth noticing that Paul was not offended or intimidated by this. We should welcome it when people look into the Word for themselves to check what we say.

Question: Based on the example of the Bereans, how noble are we? Do we have the same character traits as they did?

The Jews in Thessalonica demonstrated that they were not as noble as the people in Berea, because when they heard that Paul was preaching in Berea, they came down and stirred up the crowd against him (Acts 17:13). As a result, Paul had to leave town again. Brothers from Berea escorted him down to Athens (Acts 17:15).

V. Confrontation With Philosophy And Culture (Acts 17:16-18:22)

In Athens Paul faced a new set of challenges.

1) For the first time since Barnabas had brought him from Tarsus, Paul was alone. His support group was absent. This, no doubt contributed to his sense of isolation and loneliness. Though Timothy apparently joined Paul in Athens, Paul sent him, almost immediately, back to Thessalonica to see how the Christians there were doing. (Compare Acts 17:15 and 1 Thessalonians 3:1-2.)

2) Though Paul had encountered idolatry before (for example at Lystra where they wanted to sacrifice to him), it had never before been so pervasive and “in your face”. He was distressed to see the city full of idols (Acts 17:16).

3) While Paul was not persecuted in Athens, it must have been almost worse to be greeted by indifference. Even worse, was to have the Gospel treated as just another philosophy or quaint idea. The Athenians liked to talk about new things but seldom actually applied what they heard (Acts 17:21).

4) Always before, Paul’s message had been taken seriously, if not always welcomed. In Athens he encountered philosophers who dismissed him and the Gospel, at best, as incomprehensible (Acts 17:18).

Eventually, Paul got the opportunity to address a meeting of the Areopagus – a council of former rulers of the city. When preaching to Jews, Paul tried to develop rapport with them by reciting Jewish history and showing how Jesus fulfilled the hopes and desires of the Israelites. Before this Gentile audience, he talked about their common humanity and how something in the human spirit reaches out to the Creator. While a few people believed, others mocked when Paul mentioned the resurrection of the dead (Acts 17:32). Not long after this, Paul left and went to Corinth.

If the major challenge in Athens was Greek philosophy, the major challenge in Corinth would prove to be Roman culture. (At this stage of history, Corinth had been rebuilt and resettled as a Roman colony.) In another sense, however, Paul was back on familiar ground – the Gentiles were receptive to the Gospel while Jewish opposition was strong.

In Corinth, Paul received help from an unexpected source. He met Aquila and Priscilla, a Jewish husband and wife who had been expelled from Rome (Acts 18:2). It is highly likely that they were already Christians by the time Paul met them. If so, they must have been a great encouragement to him. They also provided employment and a place to stay (Acts 18:3). From this we can deduce that Paul had reached the end of whatever funds the Christians from Berea had given him when they brought him to Athens.

Silas and Timothy caught up with Paul in Corinth. After they came, Paul devoted full time to evangelism (Acts 18:5). Presumably, they brought funds from Macedonia so he could, or they found work in Corinth.

Paul stayed in Corinth for a year and a half (Acts 18:11). Many were baptized into Christ during this time (Acts 18:8). One of the converts was Crispus, the synagogue ruler. In spite of his conversion, Jewish opposition became so fierce that Paul had to abandon the synagogue altogether (Acts 18:6).

At some point, the Jews tried to bring legal action against Paul. However, the Roman proconsul, Gallio, dismissed the case as a waste of the court’s time (Acts 18:14-16). Sosthenes had replaced Crispus as synagogue leader and, presumably, it was he who had instigated the lawsuit. When the Jews were ejected from court, they turned on Sosthenes and beat him up (Acts 18:17).

After some time, Paul left Corinth to return to Antioch. On the way he made a brief visit to Ephesus, where he left Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:19-20). From there he sailed to Caesarea. Then he traveled to Antioch (Acts 18:22).

VII. Two Letters To The Thessalonians

While Paul was in Corinth he wrote two letters to the believers in Thessalonica. Remember that Paul had been forced to leave there after only a short time. He could not go back without causing major financial harm to the Christians who had had to post bond. Not only had Paul not had time to give the new converts much teaching, the church had suffered persecution. Naturally, he was worried about whether the Christians had remained faithful.

From Athens, Paul sent Timothy back to Thessalonica to check up on the situation (1 Thessalonians 3:1-3). Timothy brought back an encouraging report (1 Thessalonians 3:6). The converts had remained faithful and remembered Paul with affection. However, the Christians had some lifestyle problems and they were confused about the resurrection.

Paul wrote his first letter to address these issues. He praised the believers for their faith in the face of persecution. He reminded them of his own example of righteous living. He dealt with the specific problem of sexual immorality. He talked about the need to earn a living.

The believers in Thessalonica apparently had the idea that only those who were still alive when Christ returned would live with Him forever. They did not understand that the dead would rise. So, Paul instructed them about the resurrection and that we will be reunited with those who have died in Christ before us.

Unfortunately, somebody apparently forged a letter in Paul’s name claiming that the resurrection had already taken place (2 Thessalonians 2:1-2). Naturally, this upset the Christians in Thessalonica. Others, got the notion that Christ’s return was just around the corner and so it was pointless to go to work.

Paul addressed both of these problems in his second letter. He pointed out that certain things had to happen before Christ’s coming. Therefore, His return was not eminent. He also restated, but much more forcefully, the necessity for people to work and earn an honest living. If a person wouldn’t work, then he could go hungry (2 Thessalonians 3:10).

In addition to instruction and admonition, Paul also gave comfort and reassurance. Remember that this church was suffering persecution. Paul reminded them of the reward they would receive at Christ’s coming (2 Thessalonians 1:5, 10). He also assured them that God is just and He would repay their persecutors (2 Thessalonians 1:6-9).

Where does this leave us? Do we believe in the resurrection of the dead? Are we looking forward to Christ’s return? Is our lifestyle holy? Do we believe that God is just and that He will reward us for our faith and perseverance in trials and hardship? Do we have an honest occupation or do we have the attitude that the world owes us a living?