Sabbath Afternoon
Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 1:6–8, Luke 24:25, Luke24:44–48, Deut. 19:15, Acts 1:9–26, Prov. 16:33.
Memory Text: “You will receive power when the Holy Spirithas come upon you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem,in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8,NRSV).
Jesus’ mission on earth was finished. God soon would send theHoly Spirit, who—ratifying their efforts with many signs andwonders—would empower and lead the disciples on a missionthat would reach the ends of the earth. Jesus could not stay with themforever in human flesh. Not only did His incarnation impose uponHim a physical limitation in the context of a worldwide mission, butHis ascension and exaltation in heaven were necessary in order forthe Spirit to come.
Until Jesus’ resurrection, however, the disciples did not clearly knowthese things. When they left everything to follow Him, they believedthat He was a political liberator who would one day drive the Romansout of the land, reinstate David’s dynasty, and restore Israel to its pastglory. It was not easy for them to think otherwise.
This is the primary issue of Jesus’ final instructions to the disciplesin Acts 1. The promise of the Spirit comes in this context. The chapteralso describes Jesus’ return to heaven and how the early church prepareditself for Pentecost.
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, July 7.
There are two kinds of Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament,one that anticipates a kingly Messiah who would rule forever (Ps.89:3, 4, 35–37; Isa. 9:6, 7; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; 7:13, 14), andone that predicts that the Messiah would die for the sins of the people(Isa. 52:13–53:12; Dan. 9:26). Such prophecies do not contradicteach other. They just point to two consecutive phases of the Messiah’sministry: first He would suffer, and then become King (Luke 17:24,25; 24:25, 26).
The problem with first-century Jewish Messianic expectation, however,was that it was one-sided. The hope of a kingly Messiah whowould bring political deliverance obscured the notion of a Messiah whowould suffer and die.
At first, the disciples shared this hope of a kingly Messiah. Theybelieved that Jesus was the Messiah (Matt. 16:16, 20) and weresometimes caught bickering among themselves about who wouldsit on either side of Him when He was enthroned (Mark 10:35–37,Luke 9:46). Despite Jesus’ warnings about the fate that awaited Him,they simply could not understand what He meant. So, when He died,they became confused and discouraged. In their own words, “We hadhoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel” (Luke24:21, NIV).
Read Acts 1:6. What does this question say about what they still didn’tunderstand? In Acts 1:7, how did Jesus answer them?
If Jesus’ death represented a fatal blow to the disciples’ hope, theresurrection revived it, raising their political expectations perhaps toan unprecedented level. It seemed natural to conceive of the resurrectionas a strong indicator that the Messianic kingdom would finally beestablished.
In His reply to their question, however, Jesus gave no directanswer. He did not reject the premise behind the disciples’ questionof an imminent kingdom, but neither did He accept it. He left theissue unsettled, while He reminded them that the timing of God’sactions belongs to God Himself, and as such it is inaccessible tohumans.
According to Luke 24:25, what was the real problem of the disciples?Why is it easy to believe what we want to believe, as opposedto what the Bible really teaches? How can we avoid this trap?
Read Acts 1:8. Instead of indulging in prophetic speculations, whatwere the disciples expected to do?
There are four important elements in this passage concerning thedisciples’ mission:
1. The gift of the Spirit. The Spirit always had been active among God’speople. According to the prophets, however, there would be a specialendowment of the Spirit in the future (Isa. 44:3; Joel 2:28, 29). As JesusHimself was anointed with the Spirit, the Holy Spirit was already at workduring the time of His ministry (Luke 4:18–21) but officially was notinaugurated until Christ’s exaltation in heaven (John 7:39, Acts 2:33).
2. The role of witness. A witness is a firsthand account. The discipleswere fully qualified to give such a witness (Acts 1:21, 22; 4:20; comparewith 1 John 1:1–3) and were now commissioned to share with theworld their unique experience with Jesus.
3. The plan of the mission. The disciples were to witness first inJerusalem, then in Judea and Samaria, and finally to the ends of theearth. It was a progressive plan. Jerusalem was the center of Jewishreligious life, the place where Jesus had been condemned and crucified.Judea and Samaria were neighboring areas where Jesus also hadministered. The disciples, however, were not to limit themselves to thislocale alone. The scope of their mission was worldwide.
4. The orientation of the mission. In Old Testament times, it was thenations that should be attracted to God (see Isa. 2:1–5), not Israel that should“take” God to the nations. The few exceptions (for example, Jonah) do notinvalidate the general rule. Now the strategy was different. Jerusalem wasstill the center, but rather than staying and building roots there, the discipleswere expected to move out to the uttermost ends of the earth.
Read Luke 24:44–48. What was the core message that the disciplesshould preach?
In the forty days He spent with the disciples after the resurrection(Acts 1:3), Jesus must have explained much truth to them about thekingdom of God, even if there was still much they didn’t understand, astheir question in Acts 1:6 showed. They were familiar with the propheciesbut could now see them in a new light, a light shed from the Crossand the empty tomb (see Acts 3:17–19).
Read Acts 1:9–11. How does Luke portray the ascension of Jesus?What is the significance that there were two angels speaking tothem (see Deut. 19:15)?
Luke’s account of the ascension is rather brief. Jesus was with thedisciples on the Mount of Olives, and while still blessing them (Luke24:51), He was taken up to heaven. The language, of course, is phenomenological;that is, the scene is portrayed as it looked to humaneyes, not as it really was. Jesus was leaving the earth, and there is noother way to do so in a visible form than by going up.
The ascension of Jesus was a supernatural act of God, one of manyall through the Bible. This is implied by the way Luke describes it, withthe passive eperthe(“He was taken up,” Acts 1:9, NKJV). Though usedonly here in the New Testament, this verbal form is found several timesin the Greek version of the Old Testament (the Septuagint), all of themdescribing actions of God, which suggests that God Himself was theOne who took Jesus up to heaven, as He was the One who raised Himfrom the dead (Acts 2:24, 32; Rom. 6:4; 10:9).
After Jesus already had been hidden by a cloud, Luke reports—onlyin Acts—the episode of the two figures dressed in white who stoodbeside the disciples. The description coincides with that of angels intheir bright robes (Acts 10:30, John 20:12). They came to assure thedisciples that Jesus would come back the same way He had gone up,and it is also only Acts that informs us that Jesus went up “before theirvery eyes” (Acts 1:9, NIV).
Thus, the visible ascension became the guarantee of the visiblereturn, which also will happen in a cloud, though “with power andgreat glory” (Luke 21:27), no longer as a private event, as “every eyewill see Him” (Rev. 1:7, NKJV), and He will not be alone (Luke 9:26,2 Thess. 1:7). The glory of the Second Coming will far exceed that ofthe ascension.
How can we learn to keep the reality, and promise, of the SecondComing always before us? How should this great truth impact allareas of our life, such as finances, priorities, and moral choices?
In His reply in Acts 1:7, 8, Jesus made no commitment with regardto time. Yet, the natural implication of His words was that right afterthe Spirit came and the disciples completed their mission, He wouldreturn (see also Matt. 24:14). The angels’ remark (Acts 1:11) also didnot answer the question as to when the kingdom would come, but itcould be understood as if it would not be long. This seems to explainwhy the disciples “returned to Jerusalem with great joy” (Luke 24:52).The promise of Jesus’ second coming at an unspecified time, whichshould give them extra encouragement for their mission, was taken tomean that the end was close at hand. Further developments in Acts willdemonstrate this idea.
Read Acts 1:12–14. Who else was in the upper room, and how did theyprepare themselves for the coming of the Spirit?
Having returned from the Mount of Olives, the disciples gathered inthe upper guest room (in Latin, cenaculum) of a two-story private housein Jerusalem. Some women followers (Luke 8:1–3, 23:49, 24:1–12), aswell as Jesus’ mother and brothers, were there with the disciples.
Jesus’ brothers (Mark 6:3) were either younger sons of Joseph andMary (Matt. 1:25, Luke 2:7) or, more likely, sons of Joseph’s first marriage,in which case Joseph would be widowed when he took Maryfor his wife. Their presence among the disciples comes as a surprise,as they had always been rather skeptical toward Jesus (Mark 3:21,John 7:5). Yet, the resurrection and Jesus’ special appearance to James(1 Cor. 15:7) seem to have made all the difference. Later on Jamesapparently would even replace Peter in the leadership of the Christiancommunity (Acts 12:17; 15:13; 21:18; Gal. 2:9, 12).
Constantly in prayer (Acts 1:14), and constantly in the temple praisingGod (Luke 24:53), they all were no doubt involved in a time of confession,repentance, and the putting away of sin. Even if in their mindsthe coming of the Spirit would immediately lead to Jesus’ return, theirspiritual attitude was in full harmony with what was about to happen,as the Holy Spirit comes in response to prayer.
In our daily choices, what are ways we help prepare the way forthe work of the Spirit in our lives?
The first administrative action of the early Christian community,which numbered about 120 believers (Acts 1:15), was to choose a successorto Judas.
Read Acts 1:21, 22. What qualifications was the successor to Judasexpected to have? Why would these be so important?
The need was for a witness of Jesus’ resurrection (compare with Acts4:33); this is crucial because time and again the resurrection is viewedas powerful evidence for the Messiahship of Jesus and the truth of thewhole Christian faith.
The choice, however, was to be made from among those who hadaccompanied the apostles throughout Jesus’ ministry. Paul would laterinsist that, despite not having been with the earthly Jesus, he was neverthelessentitled to the apostolic office because his encounter with Jesuson the road to Damascus qualified him to bear witness to His resurrection(1 Cor. 9:1). Though admitting to be as “one untimely born” (1 Cor.15:8, ESV), Paul refused to consider himself less qualified than the otherapostles (1 Cor. 9:2, Gal. 2:6–9). Only the Twelve and Paul, then, were“apostles” in the technical, authoritative sense (Acts 1:25, 26); yet, in itsbasic, general sense as envoys or messengers, the term also could be usedfor other gospel workers (Acts 14:4, 14; Gal. 1:19).
Read Acts 1:23–26. How was Matthias chosen?
The method they used to choose Matthias may seem strange, butthe casting of lots was a long-established way of making decisions(for example, Lev. 16:5–10, Num. 26:55). In addition, the choice wasbetween two previously recognized candidates of equal qualifications,not a step into the unknown. The believers also prayed to God, believingthat the result would reflect His will (compare with Prov. 16:33). Thereis no evidence that the decision was ever challenged. After Pentecost,the casting of lots became no longer necessary due to the direct guidanceof the Spirit (Acts 5:3, 11:15–18, 13:2, 16:6–9).
If someone were to come to you and ask, “How can I know whatGod’s will is for my life?” what would you answer, and why?
Friday July 6
Further Thought: “The whole interim period between Pentecost andthe Parousia [Second Coming] (however long or short) is to be filled withthe world-wide mission of the church in the power of the Spirit. Christ’s followerswere both to announce what he had achieved at his first coming andto summon people to repent and believe in preparation for his second coming.They were to be his witnesses ‘to the ends of the earth’ ([Acts] 1:8) and‘to the very end of the age.’ . . . We have no liberty to stop until both endshave been reached.”—John R. W. Stott, The Message of Acts: The Spirit, theChurch n the World (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1990), p. 44.
“The Saviour’s commission to the disciples included all the believers.It includes all believers in Christ to the end of time. It is a fatal mistaketo suppose that the work of saving souls depends alone on the ordainedminister. All to whom the heavenly inspiration has come are put intrust with the gospel. All who receive the life of Christ are ordainedto work for the salvation of their fellow men. For this work the churchwas established, and all who take upon themselves its sacred vows arethereby pledged to be co-workers with Christ.”—Ellen G. White, TheDesire of Ages, p. 822.
Discussion Questions: Acts 1:7 recalls Mark 13:32: “Concerning that day or that hour,no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but onlythe Father” (ESV). Ellen G. White says: “There will never again bea message for the people of God that will be based on time. We arenot to know the definite time either for the outpouring of the HolySpirit or for the coming of Christ.”—Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 188.She adds: “Any one who shall start up to proclaim a message toannounce the hour, day, or year of Christ’s appearing, has taken upa yoke and is proclaiming a message that the Lord has never givenhim.”—Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Sept. 12, 1893. What isthe relevance of such statements for us today?
Someone once said: “God needs witnesses more than lawyers.”What do you think of this statement?
What was the role of prayer in the early church? Is it a coincidencethat at almost every decisive moment in its life, we find a referenceto prayer (Acts 1:24; 8:14–17; 9:11, 12; 10:4, 9, 30; 13:2, 3)?What is the role of prayer in our lives?
Sabbath Afternoon
Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 2:1–4, John 14:16, Acts2:5–13, Joel 2:28–32, Acts 2:22–39, Ps. 110:1–3.
Memory Text: “This Jesus God raised up, and of that all of us arewitnesses. Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and havingreceived from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he haspoured out this that you both see and hear” (Acts 2:32, 33, NRSV).
Pentecost” is from the word pentekoste,the Greek name for theJewish Feast of Weeks (Exod. 34:22); it is also known as theFeast of the Firstfruits (Num. 28:26). The term means “fiftieth”and owes its usage to the fact that the feast was celebrated on thefiftieth day from the offering of the barley sheaf on the first day afterthe Passover. It was a day of joy and thanksgiving, when the peopleof Israel brought before the Lord “the firstfruits of the wheat harvest”(Exod. 34:22, NIV).
The feast then became a fitting symbol for the first spiritual harvestof the Christian church, when the Holy Spirit was poured out moreabundantly than ever before, and three thousand people were baptizedon a single day (Acts 2:41). Following the ascension of Jesus and Hisexaltation in heaven, this outpouring of the Spirit was a sudden, supernaturalevent that transformed the apostles from simple and obscureGalileans into men of conviction and courage who would change theworld.
Pentecost often is called the birthday of the church, the time thatChrist’s followers, Jews and (later) Gentiles, were legitimized as God’snew community on earth.
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, July 14.
In obedience to Jesus’ command, the believers waited in Jerusalemfor the promise of the Spirit, and they waited amid fervent prayer, sincererepentance, and praise. When the day came, they “were all togetherin one place” (Acts 2:1, ESV), probably the same large upper room ofActs 1. Soon, however, they would move to a more public area (Acts2:6–13).
Read Acts 2:1–3. What supernatural elements accompanied the outpouringof the Spirit?
The scene was intense. There was first a sudden noise from heavenlike the roaring of a violent windstorm that filled the entire place, andthen what looked like flames of fire appeared and rested upon thosethere.
In Scripture, wind and fire frequently are associated with a “theophany,”or a divine manifestation (for example, Exod. 3:2, 19:18, Deut.4:15). In addition, wind and fire also may be used to represent theSpirit of God (John 3:8, Matt. 3:11). In the case of Pentecost, whateverthe precise meaning of such phenomena, they were signs introducinga unique moment in the history of salvation, the promised outpouringof the Spirit.
The Spirit always had been at work. Its influence on God’s peoplein the Old Testament times was often revealed in a notable way, butnever in its fullness. “During the patriarchal age the influence of theHoly Spirit had often been revealed in a marked manner, but never inits fullness. Now, in obedience to the word of the Saviour, the disciplesoffered their supplications for this gift, and in heaven Christ added Hisintercession. He claimed the gift of the Spirit, that He might pour itupon His people.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 37.
John the Baptist foretold the baptism with the Spirit by the comingMessiah (Luke 3:16; compare with Acts 11:16), and Jesus Himselfreferred to it several times (Luke 24:49, Acts 1:8). This outpouringwould be His first intercessory act before God (John 14:16, 26; 15:26).At Pentecost, the promise was fulfilled.
Although the baptism with the Spirit at Pentecost was a unique eventrelated to Jesus’ victory on the cross and exaltation in heaven, beingfilled with the Spirit is an experience to be continuously repeated in thebelievers’ lives (Acts 4:8, 31; 11:24; 13:9, 52; Eph. 5:18).
What evidence do you have of the Spirit’s working in your life?
In Acts 2:4, the gift of the Spirit was manifested through speaking intongues. Yet, this gift was only one of many different manifestations ofthe Spirit (Acts 10:45, 46; 19:6). Others include foretelling the future(Acts 11:28), visions (Acts 7:55), inspired speech (Acts 2:8, 28:25),healing (Acts 3:6, 12; 5:12, 16), and qualification for service (Acts6:3, 5).
The gift of tongues at Pentecost did not occur because it is the typicalor the most important evidence of the endowment of the Spirit. Itwas manifested in order to launch the church’s world mission. That is,the calling given in Acts 1:8 required the gift of tongues. If the apostleswere to cross cultural barriers and reach the ends of the earth with thegospel, they would need to be able to speak in the languages of thosewho needed to hear what they had to say.
Read Acts 2:5–13. What is the evidence that at Pentecost the apostlesspoke in existing foreign languages?
It is estimated that in the first century there were eight to ten millionJews in the world and that up to 60 percent of them lived outside theland of Judea. Yet, many who were in Jerusalem for the feast were fromforeign lands and could not speak Aramaic, the language of JudeanJews at that time.
There is no question that most converts at Pentecost were Jews fromvarious lands who could now hear the gospel in their own native languages.That the apostles spoke in existing foreign languages, ratherthan in unknown ecstatic languages, is evidenced by the term dialektos(Acts 2:6, 8), which means language of a nation or a region (comparewith Acts 21:40, 22:2, 26:14). Clearly, then, they were speaking inthese different languages. The miracle was that simple Galileans couldnow speak a language that, even hours before, they did not know. Forthose local Jews who witnessed the scene but were not acquainted withthese languages, the only possible explanation was that the apostleswere drunk, uttering strange sounds that made no sense to them.“Some, however, made fun of them and said, ‘They have had too muchwine’ ” (Acts 2:13, NIV).
A powerful manifestation of God is happening before their eyes,and yet these people think it is just drunkenness? How can we becareful not to be so spiritually blind ourselves?
The charge of drunkenness gave Peter the opportunity to explainwhat was happening. In his speech, the apostle first pointed to Scripture(Acts 2:16–21), describing the outpouring of the Spirit as the fulfillmentof prophecy.
Compare Acts 2:17 with Joel 2:28. How did Peter understand thetime of fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy?
Joel’s prophecy was about the future age of salvation (Joel 2:32),which would be characterized by several signs in the natural worldand a lavish outpouring of the Spirit (Joel 2:28–31). By interpretingthe Pentecost event in light of such prophecy, Peter intended to stressthe historical relevance of that moment. But there is an importantdifference in the way he quotes Joel. Instead of Joel’s introductory“afterward” (Joel 2:28), which pointed quite generally to the future,Peter said “in the last days” (Acts 2:17), indicating that the final act inthe great drama of salvation had just begun. This is not, of course, afull description of last-day events but an evidence of the high sense ofurgency that distinguished the early church. They did not know whenthe end would come but were convinced it would not take long.
Read Acts 2:22–32. What was the main point in Peter’s presentationof the gospel?
After highlighting the prophetic significance of Pentecost, Peterturned to the recent events of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. It isthe resurrection, however, that received greater emphasis, as it representedthe decisive factor in the gospel story. For Peter, the resurrectionwas the ultimate vindication of Jesus (Acts 2:22, 27), and he quotedScripture to help make his point about the meaning of the resurrection.
Because Jesus was the Messiah, He could not be detained by death.So for Peter and for all the writers of the New Testament, the resurrectionof Jesus had become powerful evidence, not only of Jesus as theMessiah but for the whole Christian message of salvation.
With death all around us, always threatening us or our lovedones, why is the resurrection of Jesus such an important truth?
“Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and havingreceived of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shedforth this, which ye now see and hear” (Acts 2:33).
In the third part of the speech, Peter went back to the issue oftongues, which had attracted the people in the first place. Instead ofbeing drunk, which would have been strange at nine o’clock in themorning (Acts 2:15), the believers were speaking in tongues becausethe Holy Spirit had just been poured out from heaven.
Read Acts 2:33–36. What is the connection between Jesus’ exaltationat the right hand of God and the outpouring of the Spirit?
The right hand of God is a position of authority (Ps. 110:1–3).Peter’s argument, which he based on Scripture, is that it was becauseJesus had been elevated to such a position in heaven that He pouredout the Spirit upon His followers. The exaltation did not grant Jesusa status He did not have before (John 1:1–3, 17:5). Instead, it representedthe Father’s supreme recognition of His prerogative as Lordand Savior (Acts 2:36).
This event actually brings us to one of the most important themesin Scripture: the cosmic conflict between good and evil. The point isthat the Spirit could not fully come if Jesus were not exalted (John7:39), and Jesus would not be exalted if He had not triumphed on thecross (John 17:4, 5). In other words, Jesus’ exaltation was the conditionfor the coming of the Spirit because it signified God’s approval ofJesus’ accomplishments on the cross, including the defeat of the onewho had usurped the rule of this world (John 12:31).
The entrance of sin into the world cast a shadow upon God. Jesus’death was necessary, not only to redeem human beings but also tovindicate God and expose Satan as a fraud. In Jesus’ ministry, theage of salvation was already at work (Luke 4:18–21). When He castout demons or forgave sins, He was releasing Satan’s captives. Yet, itwas the Cross that would give Him full authority to do that. So, whenChrist’s self-sacrifice was authenticated in heaven, Satan had receiveda decisive blow, and the Spirit was being poured out to prepare apeople for the coming of Christ.
Peter’s hearers were cut to the heart by his words. Some of themmight have been among those who asked for Jesus’ crucifixion afew weeks before (Luke 23:13–25). But now, persuaded that Jesus ofNazareth was indeed God’s appointed Messiah, they cried out in sorrow:“ ‘What shall we do?’ ” (Acts 2:37).
Read Acts 2:38. What are the two basic requirements for forgiveness?
Repentance means a radical change of direction in life, a turningaway from sin (Acts 3:19, 26:20), rather than simply a feeling of sadnessor remorse. Together with faith, true repentance is a gift of God,but like all gifts, it can be rejected (Acts 5:31–33, 26:19–21, Rom. 2:4).
Since the time of John the Baptist, repentance was associated with baptism(Mark 1:4). That is, baptism became an expression of repentance,a rite symbolizing the washing away of sins and the moral regenerationproduced by the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38, 22:16; compare with Titus3:5–7).
Read Acts 2:38, 39. What special promise is given to those who repentand are baptized?
The people at Pentecost were offered not only forgiveness of sins butalso the fullness of the Spirit for personal growth, for service in thechurch, and especially for mission. This was perhaps the greatest ofall blessings, for the main reason the church exists is to share the goodnews of the gospel (1 Pet. 2:9). So, from this point forward, they wouldhave assurance of salvation and the power of the Holy Spirit, whichwould enable them for the mission to which the church had been called.
Why is the realization that we have “the remission of your sins”so important for anyone who wants to proclaim the gospel? Afterall, what hope can you offer to others in Jesus if you don’t haveit yourself?
Friday July 13
Further Thought: The outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecostrevealed a crucial truth about what happened in heaven and about howGod the Father accepted Christ’s sacrifice for the sins of the world. Theoutpouring of the Spirit showed, too, that Christ’s work in heaven in ourbehalf, based on His sacrifice on earth, was now inaugurated. Theseastonishing events are more manifestations of the wonderful truth thatheaven and earth are connected in ways that we just can’t fathom now.
“Christ’s ascension to heaven was the signal that His followers were toreceive the promised blessing. . . . When Christ passed within the heavenlygates, He was enthroned amidst the adoration of the angels. As soonas this ceremony was completed, the Holy Spirit descended upon thedisciples in rich currents, and Christ was indeed glorified, even with theglory which He had with the Father from all eternity. The Pentecostal outpouringwas Heaven’s communication that the Redeemer’s inaugurationwas accomplished. According to His promise He had sent the Holy Spiritfrom heaven to His followers as a token that He had, as priest and king,received all authority in heaven and on earth, and was the Anointed Oneover His people.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, pp. 38, 39.
Discussion Questions:
What of Pentecost can the church expect to experience in itslife today? What is repeatable, and what is not?
Dwell more on the fact that Peter made the resurrection ofJesus such an important part of his Pentecost message. Whatmade the resurrection even more astonishing is that whateverJewish Messianic expectations had existed at the time, no one wasexpecting a Messiah to be resurrected from the dead. That wasnot on anyone’s spiritual radar; it was not what those awaiting thecoming of the Messiah had anticipated. What lessons can we learnfrom this about how we need to know what the Bible teaches, asopposed to whatever the latest popular teachings are?
Acts 2:38 talked about the need of baptism. Does this meanthat anyone who believed in Jesus but died before being baptizedmust, of necessity, be lost? Justify your answer.
Sabbath Afternoon
Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 2:42–46; Acts 4:34, 35;Acts 3:1–26; Acts 4:1–18; Acts 5:1–11; Acts 5:34–39.
Memory Text: “Every day they continued to meet together in thetemple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate togetherwith glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor ofall the people” (Acts 2:46, 47, NIV).
The early church’s sense of urgency could not have been stronger.The way that Jesus had answered the question concerning theestablishment of the Messianic kingdom, leaving the issue oftime open (Acts 1:6–8), could be understood to mean that everythingdepended on the coming of the Spirit and the completion of the apostolicmission. So, when Pentecost came, early believers thought that everythingwas fulfilled: they had received the Spirit and shared the gospelwith the whole world. Not that the apostles had left Jerusalem and hadgone out to the world, but the world had come to them (Acts 2:5–11).
What happened next was the church’s detachment from materialgoods. Sensing that the time was short, they sold all they had anddevoted themselves to learning and to fellowship while continuing towitness about Jesus, but only in Jerusalem. The communal life theydeveloped, though effective in helping the poor, soon became a problem,and God had to intervene to keep the church united. This was alsothe time when they began to find themselves facing opposition. Yetamid it all, their faith remained unshakeable.
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, July 21.
After Pentecost, Luke shifts the narrative to a general description ofthe inner life of the church in Jerusalem. “And they continued steadfastlyin the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread,and in prayers” (Acts 2:42, NKJV). The four items noted appear to bebasically teaching and fellowship. According to verse 46, the teachingwas carried out in the temple, while the fellowship was in privatehomes.
The temple court was surrounded by roofed porches that were frequentlyused for rabbinic instruction. That the believers devoted themselvesto the apostles’ teaching shows that the gift of the Spirit did notlead them to a contemplative religion but to an intense learning processunder the apostles, whose authoritative teaching was authenticated bywonders and signs (Acts 2:43).
Spiritual fellowship was another distinctive mark of early Christianpiety. The believers were constantly together, not only in the templebut also in their homes, where they shared meals, celebrated the Lord’sSupper, and prayed (Acts 2:42, 46). By having such daily celebrations,the early Christians expressed their hope in Jesus’ soon return, whenHis fellowship with them would be restored in the Messianic kingdom(Matt. 26:29).
Private homes played a key role in the early church’s life. The believersstill attended the temple’s daily ceremonies (Acts 3:1), and onSabbaths they presumably were in the synagogues with their fellowJews (James 2:2), but the distinctive elements of Christian devotionwere performed in homes.
Read Acts 2:44, 45; 4:34, 35. What was an important aspect of earlyChristian fellowship?
Believing that the end was near, they decided that their material possessions,“private property” (to use a more up-to-date term), was notthat important anymore. A common use of their material resources,therefore, seemed appropriate. There was no reason to worry abouttomorrow, as the Messiah Himself would provide for their needs in theMessianic kingdom (Luke 22:29, 30). This sharing allowed them toexperience a deeper sense of unity, besides becoming an extraordinaryexample of Christian generosity.
How generous are you with what you have been given from theLord?
In Acts 3:1, Peter and John went to the temple for the three o’clockprayer service. This indicates the essentially Jewish character of thechurch’s faith at this early period. That is, the apostles did not go tothe temple only to instruct or make new converts but because Peter andJohn were still Jews and, as such, were still committed to Jewish religioustraditions (Acts 20:16, 21:17–26), at least up to this point. Therethey performed an astounding miracle (Acts 3:1–10), which gave Peterthe opportunity to preach another sermon.
Read Acts 3:12–26. What are some of Peter’s main emphases in hissermon?
Five main points characterized early Christian preaching: Jesus wasthe suffering Messiah (Acts 3:18); God resurrected Him (Acts 3:15);Jesus was exalted in heaven (Acts 3:13); He will come again (Acts 3:20);and repentance is necessary for the forgiveness of sins (Acts 3:19).
In many ways, this is the same message we are taking to the world,even if the context has changed. The apostles were still in a Jewish setting,when instead of changing religions the people basically just hadto “migrate” from the old covenant to the new one. As part of God’speople, they had to accept the Messiah and experience the new birththat follows a true acceptance of Jesus.
Now, though the situation is different, the message is still essentiallythe same: Christ died for our sins, was resurrected, and He will return.This means, then, that we can find salvation in Him. Even in the contextof the three angels’ messages of Revelation 14, Jesus Christ crucified,Jesus Christ risen, and Jesus Christ returning must be the centerof how we proclaim those messages.
“Of all professing Christians, Seventh-day Adventists should be foremostin uplifting Christ before the world. The proclamation of the thirdangel’s message calls for the presentation of the Sabbath truth. Thistruth, with others included in the message, is to be proclaimed; but thegreat center of attraction, Christ Jesus, must not be left out. It is at thecross of Christ that mercy and truth meet together, and righteousnessand peace kiss each other. The sinner must be led to look to Calvary;with the simple faith of a little child he must trust in the merits of theSaviour, accepting His righteousness, believing in His mercy.”—EllenG. White, Gospel Workers, pp. 156, 157.
It was not long until the church’s success aroused opposition fromsome Jerusalem leaders. The Jerusalem temple was run by the highpriest and his associates, most of whom were Sadducees. The highpriest was also the president of the Sanhedrin council, which in thosedays was composed mostly of Sadducees and Pharisees. Because theSadducees did not believe in resurrection, they were greatly disturbedthat Peter and John were teaching that Jesus had been raised from thedead. Arrested by the temple guards, the apostles were put in custodyuntil the following day, when they were brought before the council(Acts 4:1–7).
Read Acts 4:1–18. When asked by what authority they had been acting,how did Peter reply? What was the underlying message in whatPeter said that the leaders would have found so threatening?
The challenge about authority posed by the Jewish leaders suggestsa concern for power. Peter, however, declared not only that the miraclehad been performed in the name of Jesus but also that salvation comesfrom Him only. The apostles were before the highest Jewish body; yet,they were in the service of a much higher authority. These men weresimple, unschooled Galilean fishermen; thus, their courage and eloquencestruck those who were there. Although the leaders did not realizeit, the point was that the apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit,exactly as Jesus had foretold (Matt. 10:16–20).
Without being able to deny the miracle—the healed man was alsopresent so that all could see him—the Sanhedrin commanded theapostles to stop preaching. They feared the message as much as theincreasing popularity of the movement. Failing to evaluate the evidenceproperly, they allowed prejudice and desire for self-protection to dictatetheir actions.
Peter’s final words are among the most precious gems of the bookof Acts: “ ‘Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you morethan to God, you judge. For we cannot but speak the things which wehave seen and heard’ ” (Acts 4:19, 20, NKJV).
Think about the desire for power and how potentially dangerousit can be, at any level and in any context. As Christians calledto be servants, why must we be careful about the lure of power?
The pooling of goods in the early church was not compulsory; thatis, it was not a formal condition of membership. Yet, there certainlywere several examples of voluntary generosity that inspired the wholecommunity. One such example was Barnabas (Acts 4:36, 37), who willplay an important role later in the book.
However, there were also negative examples that threatened the unityof the church from within, right at a time when attacks from withouthad just begun.
Read Acts 5:1–11. What are the lessons of this story?
Though Luke has not given us all the details, there is no question thatthe fundamental problem of Ananias and Sapphira was not the attemptto keep the money, but the practice of deceit within the community.Their sin was not the result of an impulsive act but of a carefully laidplan, a deliberate attempt “to test the Spirit of the Lord” (Acts 5:9,ESV). They were not under the obligation to sell their property andgive the money to the church. Thus, when they committed themselvesto doing so, perhaps they were acting in their own interest only, maybeeven trying to gain influence among the brethren with what appearedto be a commendable act of charity.
This possibility may help to explain why God punished them so severely.Even if the church’s communal life resulted from the conviction that Jesuswas just about to come, an act like that of Ananias and Sapphira at such anearly stage could disparage the importance of loyalty to God and becomea bad influence among the believers. The fact that there is no mention ofAnanias’s being given the chance to repent, as in the case of Sapphira (Acts5:8), may be due only to the shortness of the account.
The bottom line is that, from the beginning to the end, they had actedsinfully, and sin is a serious matter in God’s eyes (Ezek. 18:20, Rom.6:23), even if He does not always punish it immediately. In fact, thatpunishment is often deferred should constantly remind us of how graciousGod is (2 Pet. 3:9).
Why must we be careful about pushing the limits of grace, asthese two early members of the church did?
If the apostles could be used to bring God’s judgment on sin, as inAnanias and Sapphira’s case, they could also be used to bring God’sgrace on sinners. Their powerful healing ministry (Acts 5:12–16) wastangible evidence that God’s Spirit was working through them. Thateven Peter’s shadow, it was believed, could heal people is striking.The closest parallel in the Gospels is that of a woman who was healedby touching Jesus’ garment (Luke 8:43, 44). Luke, however, does notsay that Peter’s shadow actually had healing power but that the peoplethought so. Yet, even if popular superstition was involved, God wouldstill dispense His grace.
Notwithstanding, the more the apostles were filled with the Spirit,and signs and wonders multiplied, the more the religious leaders werefilled with jealousy. This led them to arrest the apostles a second time(Acts 5:17, 18). It was only after their miraculous escape (Acts 5:19–24) and another bold speech by Peter, stressing that they should “obeyGod rather than men” (Acts 5:29), that some of the authorities began toconsider the possibility that supernatural influences could be at work.
Read Acts 5:34–39. How did Gamaliel try to dissuade the Sanhedrinfrom killing the apostles?
The Sanhedrin was controlled by the Sadducees, with the Phariseesforming an influential minority. Gamaliel was a Pharisee and a doctorof the law. He was so highly regarded among the Jews that he becameknown as “Rabban” (“our teacher”), rather than simply “Rabbi” (“myteacher”). Paul was one of his disciples (Acts 22:3).
Gamaliel recalled two other rebel movements in Israel’s recent historythat had also attracted followers and caused turmoil. The leaders,however, were killed and their followers were completely dispersed.The lesson he drew was that if the Christian movement was of humanorigin, it would soon disappear. On the other hand, if it was a divinemovement, as claimed by the apostles, how could they hope to withstandit? Gamaliel’s advice prevailed. The apostles were flogged andonce again commanded not to speak in Jesus’ name.
What does this story tell us about how needful and helpful good counselcan often be? How can we learn to be more open to getting counseleven when it may consist of what we don’t necessarily want to hear?
Friday July 20
Further Thought: “We are stewards, entrusted by our absent Lordwith the care of His household and His interests, which He came to thisworld to serve. He has returned to heaven, leaving us in charge, and Heexpects us to watch and wait for His appearing. Let us be faithful toour trust, lest coming suddenly He find us sleeping.”—Ellen G. White,Testimonies for the Church, vol. 8, p. 37.
“The people need to be impressed with the sacredness of their vowsand pledges to the cause of God. Such pledges are not generally heldto be as obligatory as a promissory note from man to man. But is apromise less sacred and binding because it is made to God? Becauseit lacks some technical terms, and cannot be enforced by law, will theChristian disregard the obligation to which he has given his word? Nolegal note or bond is more obligatory than a pledge made to the causeof God.”—Ellen G. White Comments, The SDA Bible Commentary,vol. 6, p. 1056.
Discussion Questions:
Among many other things, Jesus left two immediate legacies tothe disciples: the expectation of His soon return and a worldwidemission. How should these two factors impact our sense of missionand the call to preach the gospel to the world?
Someone once said: “We should be ready as if Jesus wouldcome today but continue working [in the mission of the church] asif He would take another hundred years to come.” What wisdomis found in this sentiment, and how can we apply it to our callingin life?
Why must the life, death, resurrection, and return of Jesus becentral to all that we preach? Or look at it like this: What good isanything we preach without these events?
What should the story of Ananias and Sapphira teach aboutjust how difficult it is for us to know the hearts of others, eitherfor good or for evil?
Who are some modern-day Gamaliels whom you know? Or,perhaps, are you in a position to play that role for others? Eitherway, in class share examples about how the giving or the receivingof wise counsel did some good. What lessons can we learn fromthese accounts?
Sabbath Afternoon
Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 6, Acts 7:48, Heb.5:11–14, Micah 6:1–16, Acts 7, Acts 8:4–25.
Memory Text: “The word of God continued to spread; the numberof the disciples increased greatly in Jerusalem, and a greatmany of the priests became obedient to the faith” (Acts 6:7, NRSV).
Many converts at Pentecost were Hellenistic Jews; that is,Jews from the Greco-Roman world who now were living inJerusalem (Acts 2:5, 9–11). Despite being Jews, they weredifferent from Judean Jews—the “Hebrews” mentioned in Acts 6:1—inmany respects, the most visible difference being that usually they werenot acquainted with Aramaic, the language then spoken in Judea.
There were several other differences, too, both cultural and religious.For having been born in foreign countries, they had no roots in JudeanJewish traditions, or at least their roots were not as deep as those ofJudean Jews. They were presumably not so much attached to the templeceremonies and to those aspects of the Mosaic law that were applicableonly to the land of Israel.
Also, for having spent most of their lives in a Greco-Roman environmentand having lived in close contact with Gentiles, they naturallywould be more willing to understand the inclusive character of theChristian faith. In fact, it was many Hellenistic believers that God usedto fulfill the command of bearing witness to the entire world.
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, July 28.
Read Acts 6:1. What was the complaint of the Hellenistic believers?
“The cause of complaint was an alleged neglect of the Greek widowsin the daily distribution of assistance. Any inequality would have beencontrary to the spirit of the gospel, yet Satan had succeeded in arousingsuspicion. Prompt measures now must be taken to remove all occasion fordissatisfaction, lest the enemy triumph in his effort to bring about a divisionamong the believers.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 88.
The solution proposed by the apostles was that the Jews choose sevenmen from among themselves to “serve [diakone -o] tables” (Acts 6:2),while they would spend their time in prayer and the “ministry [diakonia]of the word” (Acts 6:4). Since diakone -o and diakonia belong tothe same word-group, the only real difference is between “tables” inActs 6:2 and “the word” in Acts 6:4. This, together with the adjective“daily” (Acts 6:1), seems to point to the two main elements of the earlychurch’s daily life: teaching (“the word”) and fellowship (“tables”), thelatter consisting of the communal meal, the Lord’s Supper, and prayers(Acts 2:42, 46; 5:42).
That is, as the authoritative trustees of Jesus’ teachings, the apostleswould occupy themselves mostly with the believers’ doctrinal teachingand with prayer, while the seven would be in charge of the fellowshipactivities, in the several house-churches. Their duties, however, werenot limited to those of deacons as this term is understood today. Theywere in fact the first congregation leaders of the church.
Read Acts 6:2–6. How were the seven chosen and commissioned toservice?
The candidates were to be distinguished by moral, spiritual, and practicalqualities: they should have an honorable reputation and be filledwith the Spirit and wisdom. With the community’s approval, the Sevenwere selected and then commissioned through prayer and laying on ofhands. The rite seems to indicate public recognition and the bestowalof authority to work as deacons.
It’s so easy to sow dissension in the ranks, isn’t it? How can we doall in our God-given power to keep peace among us and to focus,instead, on mission?
After their appointment, the Seven engaged not only in church ministrybut also in effective witnessing. The result was that the gospel continuedto spread, and the number of believers kept increasing (Acts 6:7).This growth started, of course, to bring opposition to the early church.The narrative then focuses on Stephen, a man of rare spiritual stature.
Read Acts 6:8–16. What do these verses teach us about Stephen andhis faith and character? Also, what was Stephen preaching that soenraged his opponents?
As a Hellenistic Jew, Stephen shared the gospel in the Hellenisticsynagogues of Jerusalem. There were several such synagogues in thecity; Acts 6:9 probably refers to two of them, one of southern immigrants(Jews of Cyrene and Alexandria) and one of northern immigrants(those from Cilicia and Asia).
Jesus was no doubt the central issue of the debates, but the chargesraised against Stephen indicate an understanding on his part of thegospel and its implications that perhaps surpassed that of the Judeanbelievers. Stephen was accused of speaking blasphemies against Mosesand God; that is, against the law and the temple. Even if he was misunderstoodon some points—or his words were deliberately twisted—andfalse witnesses were induced to speak against him, the charges may nothave been totally false, as in the case of Jesus Himself (Mark 14:58,John 2:19). Stephen’s explicit condemnation of the Sanhedrin for theidolatrous veneration of the temple (Acts 7:48) reveals that he understoodthe deeper implications of the death of Jesus and where it wouldlead, at least in regard to the temple and its ceremonial services.
In other words, while perhaps many Jewish believers of Judean originwere still too attached to the temple and other ceremonial practices(Acts 3:1; 15:1, 5; 21:17–24) and were finding it difficult to abandonthem (Gal. 5:2–4, Heb. 5:11–14), Stephen, and perhaps the otherHellenistic believers as well, quickly understood that Jesus’ death signifiedthe end of the entire temple order.
Why must we be careful not to be so locked into some of our cherishednotions that we close out new light when it comes?
Read Acts 7:1–53. What was Stephen saying to his accusers?
The charges raised against Stephen led to his arrest and trial bythe Sanhedrin. According to Jewish tradition, the law and the templeservices were two of the three pillars upon which the world rests—thelast being good works. The mere insinuation that the Mosaic ceremonieshad become outdated was truly considered an assault on thatwhich was most sacred in Judaism; hence, the charge of blasphemy(Acts 6:11).
Stephen’s response is the lengthiest speech in Acts, which by itself isan indication of its significance. Though at first sight it seems nothingmore than a tedious recital of Israel’s history, we should understandthe speech in connection with the Old Testament covenant and the waythe prophets used its structure when they stood up as religious reformersto call Israel back to its requirements. When that happened, theysometimes employed the Hebrew word rî-b, whose best translation isprobably “covenant lawsuit,” to express the idea of God as taking legalaction against His people because of their failure to keep the covenant.
In Micah 6:1, 2, for example, rî-b occurs three times. Then, followingthe pattern of the Sinai covenant (Exodus 20–23), Micah reminds thepeople of God’s mighty acts on their behalf (Micah 6:3–5), the stipulationsand violations of the covenant (Micah 6:6–12), and finally thecurses for the violations (Micah 6:13–16).
This is probably the background of Stephen’s speech. When askedto explain his actions, he made no effort to refute the charges nor todefend his faith. Instead, he raised his voice in the same way the ancientprophets did when they brought God’s rî-b against Israel. His longreview of God’s past relationship with Israel was intended to illustratetheir ingratitude and disobedience.
Indeed, by Acts 7:51–53 Stephen is no longer the defendant butGod’s prophetic attorney presenting God’s covenant lawsuit againstthese leaders. If their fathers were guilty of slaying the prophets, theywere even more so. The change from “our fathers” (Acts 7:11, 19, 38,44, 45) to “your fathers” (Acts 7:51) is significant: Stephen broke hissolidarity with his people and took a definite stand for Jesus. The costwould be enormous; yet, his words reveal neither fear nor regret.
When was the last time you needed to take a firm and uncompromisingstand for Jesus? Did you, or did you waffle instead? If thelatter, what needs to change?
Since by definition a prophet (in Hebrew, nabî)is someone whospeaks for God, Stephen became a prophet the very moment he broughtGod’s rîb against Israel. His prophetic ministry, however, was rather short.
Read Acts 7:55, 56. What was the meaning of Stephen’s vision?
“When Stephen reached this point, there was a tumult among thepeople. When he connected Christ with the prophecies and spoke ashe did of the temple, the priest, pretending to be horror-stricken, renthis robe. To Stephen this act was a signal that his voice would soon besilenced forever. He saw the resistance that met his words and knew thathe was giving his last testimony. Although in the midst of his sermon, heabruptly concluded it.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 100.
While Stephen stood before the Jewish leaders discharging God’s caseagainst them, Jesus was standing in the heavenly court—that is, in theheavenly sanctuary, next to the Father, an indication that the judgment onearth was but an expression of the real judgment that would take place inheaven. God would judge the false teachers and leaders in Israel.
This explains why the call to repentance, a common feature in the previousspeeches in Acts (2:38, 3:19, 5:31), is missing here. Israel’s theocracywas coming to an end, meaning that the world’s salvation would no longerbe mediated through national Israel as promised to Abraham (Gen. 12:3,18:18, 22:18), but through the followers of Jesus, Jew and Gentile, whowere now expected to leave Jerusalem and witness to the world (Acts 1:8).
Read Acts 7:57–8:1, 2. How does Luke report Stephen’s death?
Stoning was the penalty for blasphemy (Lev. 24:14), though it is notclear whether Stephen was sentenced to death or lynched by a crowdof fanatics. At any rate, he was the first recorded believer in Jesus tobe killed because of his faith. That the witnesses laid their garments atSaul’s feet suggests he was the leader of Stephen’s opponents; yet, whenStephen prayed for his executioners, he prayed for Saul, as well. Onlya person with a superior character and unwavering faith could do sucha thing, a powerful manifestation of his faith and the reality of Christin his life.
The triumph over Stephen ignited a massive persecution against thebelievers in Jerusalem, no doubt instigated by the same group of opponents.The leader of the group was Saul, who caused no small damageto the church (Acts 8:3, 26:10). The persecution, however, was turnedto good effect.
Indeed, scattered throughout Judea and Samaria, the believers wentabout preaching the gospel. The command to witness in those areas(Acts 1:8) was then fulfilled.
Read Acts 8:4–25. What lessons are revealed in this account?
The Samaritans were half-Israelites, even from the religious standpoint.They were monotheists who accepted the first five books ofMoses (the Pentateuch), practiced circumcision, and expected theMessiah. To the Jews, however, Samaritan religion was corrupted,which means the Samaritans had no share whatsoever in the covenantmercies of Israel.
The unexpected conversion of Samaritans astounded the church inJerusalem, so the apostles sent out Peter and John to assess the situation.God’s withholding the Spirit until the coming of Peter and John(Acts 8:14–17) was probably meant to convince the apostles that theSamaritans were to be accepted as full members of the community offaith (see Acts 11:1–18).
It didn’t stop there, however. In Acts 8:26–39, we have the story ofPhilip and the Ethiopian, a eunuch, who after a Bible study requestedbaptism. “Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the waterand Philip baptized him” (Acts 8:38, NIV).
First there were the Samaritans, then the Ethiopian, a foreigner whohad come to Jerusalem to worship, and was now on his way home. Thegospel was crossing the borders of Israel and reaching the world, aspredicted. All this, though, was just the beginning, as these early Jewishbelievers would soon travel all over the known world and preach thegreat news of the death of Jesus, who paid the penalty for their sins andoffers everyone, everywhere, the hope of salvation.
Peter told Simon that he was “poisoned by bitterness and boundby iniquity” (Acts 8:23, NKJV). What was the solution for hisproblem, and for anyone who might be in a similar situation?
Friday July 27
Further Thought: “The persecution that came upon the church inJerusalem resulted in giving a great impetus to the work of the gospel.Success had attended the ministry of the word in that place, and therewas danger that the disciples would linger there too long, unmindfulof the Saviour’s commission to go to all the world. Forgetting thatstrength to resist evil is best gained by aggressive service, they beganto think that they had no work so important as that of shielding thechurch in Jerusalem from the attacks of the enemy. Instead of educatingthe new converts to carry the gospel to those who had not heard it,they were in danger of taking a course that would lead all to be satisfiedwith what had been accomplished. To scatter His representativesabroad, where they could work for others, God permitted persecutionto come upon them. Driven from Jerusalem, the believers ‘wenteverywhere preaching the word.’ ”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of theApostles, p. 105.
Discussion Questions:
Read carefully the Ellen G. White quote above about thedangers the early church faced in regard to being satisfied withthemselves and what was accomplished through them. First, itmeans that, contrary to popular notions, many Jews did indeedaccept Jesus as the Messiah. But even more important, what warningshould we as a people take away from this today? How can webe sure that we aren’t getting too caught up in protecting whatwe already have, as opposed to doing what we really should bedoing—reaching out to the world?
By the time of the apostles, the relations between Jews andSamaritans were marked by centuries of fierce hostilities. Whatcan we learn from the fact that Philip, likely a Jew, bore witnessof Jesus in Samaria? Even as Seventh-day Adventists, we are notimmune to cultural and ethnic biases. What should the Crossteach us about how we are all the same before God? What, too,should the universality of Christ’s death teach us about the infinitevalue of every human being?
How did Philip approach the Ethiopian (8:27–30)? How can webe more open to opportunities to share the gospel with others?
What have we learned from Acts 6–8 that might help us tofulfill the church mission more effectively?
Sabbath Afternoon
Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 26:9–11, Deut. 21:23,Acts 9:1–20, 1 Cor. 9:1, Gal. 1:1, Acts 9:20–30.
Memory Text: “ ‘Go! This man is my chosen instrument to proclaimmy name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel’ ”(Acts 9:15, NIV).
The conversion of Saul of Tarsus (who became Paul) was oneof the most remarkable events in the history of the apostolicchurch. The importance of Paul, however, goes way beyond conversionitself, for Paul is certainly not the only enemy of the church tohave become a genuine Christian. The issue, instead, relates to what heended up doing for the sake of the gospel. Paul had been an incorrigibleopponent to the early believers, and the harm he could have done to theinfant church was enormous. He had both determination and officialsupport to destroy the church. Yet, he responded faithfully to God’scall on the road to Damascus and became the greatest of the apostles.“From among the most bitter and relentless persecutors of the churchof Christ, arose the ablest defender and most successful herald of thegospel.”—Ellen G. White, Sketches From the Life of Paul, p. 9.
Paul’s previous actions in persecuting the early church always wouldbring him a deep sense of his own unworthiness, though he could saywith a still deeper sense of gratitude that God’s grace to him had notbeen in vain. With Paul’s conversion, Christianity changed forever.
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, August 4.
Paul was a Hellenistic Jew. His birthplace was Tarsus, the capital ofCilicia (Acts 21:39). Notwithstanding, to a certain extent he deviatedfrom the Hellenistic stereotype, for he was brought to Jerusalem, wherehe studied under Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), the most influential Pharisaicteacher at the time. As a Pharisee, Paul was strictly orthodox, thoughhis zeal bordered on fanaticism (Gal. 1:14). This is why he led Stephento his death and became the key figure in the ensuing persecution.
Read Acts 26:9–11. How did Paul describe his actions against thechurch?
Paul says elsewhere that the gospel was a stumbling block to theJews (1 Cor. 1:23). Besides the fact that Jesus did not fit the traditionalJewish expectation of a kingly Messiah, they could by no means acceptthe idea that the One who had died on a cross could be God’s Messiah,for the Scripture says that anyone who is hung is under God’s curse(Deut. 21:23). To the Jews, therefore, the crucifixion was in itself agrotesque contradiction, the clearest evidence that the church’s claimsabout Jesus were false.
Acts 9:1, 2 shows Saul of Tarsus in action against believers.Damascus was an important city about 135 miles north of Jerusalem,and it had a large Jewish population. The Jews living outside Judea wereorganized in a kind of network whose headquarters were in Jerusalem(the Sanhedrin), with the synagogues functioning as supporting centersfor the local communities. There was constant communication betweenthe Sanhedrin and such communities through letters normally carriedby a shaliah, “one who is sent” (from the Hebrew shalah, “to send”).A shaliah was an official agent appointed by the Sanhedrin to performseveral religious functions.
When Paul asked the high priest, the Sanhedrin’s president, for lettersaddressed to the synagogues in Damascus, he became a shaliah, withauthority to arrest any followers of Jesus and bring them to Jerusalem(compare with Acts 26:12). In Greek, the equivalent to shaliah isapostolos, from which the word apostle derives. Thus, before being anapostle of Jesus Christ, Paul was an apostle of the Sanhedrin.
When was the last time you were zealous for (or against) somethingyou later changed your mind about? What lessons shouldyou have learned from that experience?
Read Acts 9:3–9. What happened when Paul was approachingDamascus? What is the significance of Jesus’ words in Acts 9:5 (seealso Acts 26:14)?
As Paul and his companions neared Damascus, the unexpected happened:about noon they experienced an intensely bright light fromheaven and a voice speaking. This was not merely a vision in the propheticsense but a divine manifestation, aimed somewhat exclusivelyat Paul. His companions saw the light; yet, only Paul was blinded;they heard the voice; yet, only Paul understood it. The light was thedivine glory of the risen Jesus, who personally appeared to Paul at thatmoment (Acts 22:14). Elsewhere Paul insists that he had seen Jesus,which made him equal to the Twelve as a witness of His resurrectionand apostolic authority (1 Cor. 9:1, 15:8).
The ensuing dialogue with Jesus struck Paul infinitely more than thelight itself. Paul absolutely was convinced that, by attacking the followersof Jesus of Nazareth, he was doing God’s work in purifying Judaismfrom that dangerous and dreadful heresy. To his dismay, however, helearned not only that Jesus was alive but also that by inflicting sufferingon His believers he was attacking Jesus Himself.
When speaking to Saul, Jesus used a proverbial saying supposedly ofGreek origin that Paul certainly was familiar with: “ ‘It is hard for youto kick against the goads’ ” (Acts 26:14, NKJV). The image is that of ayoke ox trying to move against the sharp stick used to guide it. Whenthat happens, the animal only hurts itself even more.
This saying may point to a struggle in Paul’s mind—the Bible refersto this as the work of the Spirit (John 16:8–11)—that could go backto what happened with Stephen. “Saul had taken a prominent part inthe trial and conviction of Stephen, and the striking evidences of God’spresence with the martyr had led Saul to doubt the righteousness of thecause he had espoused against the followers of Jesus. His mind wasdeeply stirred. In his perplexity he appealed to those in whose wisdomand judgment he had full confidence. The arguments of the priests andrulers finally convinced him that Stephen was a blasphemer, that theChrist whom the martyred disciple had preached was an impostor, andthat those ministering in holy office must be right.”—Ellen G. White,The Acts of the Apostles, pp. 112, 113.
Why is it wise to pay heed to your conscience?
When he realized he was talking to Jesus Himself, Saul asked thequestion that would give Jesus the opportunity He was looking for:“ ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ ” (Acts 22:10, NKJV). The question indicatescontrition in view of his actions up to that moment, but more important,it expresses an unconditional willingness to let Jesus guide his life fromthen on. Taken to Damascus, Saul was to wait for further instructions.
In Acts 9:10–19, the Bible reveals how the Lord was working toprepare Saul of Tarsus for his new life as the apostle Paul. In a vision,Jesus gave Ananias the assignment to visit Saul and lay his hands onhim for the restoration of his sight. Ananias, however, already knewwho Saul was, as well as how many of the brethren had suffered andeven lost their lives because of him. He was also well informed of thevery reason why Saul was in Damascus, and so, surely, he did not wantto become Saul’s first victim there. His hesitation was understandable.
Yet, what Ananias did not know was that Saul had just had a personalencounter with Jesus that changed his life forever. He did not knowthat, instead of still working for the Sanhedrin, Saul—to Ananias’sastonishment— just had been called by Jesus to work for Him, whichmeans that Saul was no longer an apostle of the Sanhedrin but Jesus’chosen instrument to take the gospel to both Jews and Gentiles.
Read Galatians 1:1, 11, 12. What special claim does Paul make withregard to his apostolic ministry?
In Galatians, Paul insists that he received his message and his apostleshipdirectly from Jesus Christ, not from any human source. Thisdoes not necessarily contradict the role performed by Ananias in hiscall. When visiting him, Ananias just confirmed the commission Saulhad already received on the Damascus road from Jesus Himself.
In fact, the change in Saul’s life was so dramatic that no human causecan be assigned to it. Only divine intervention can explain how Jesus’most obsessive opponent would suddenly embrace Him as Savior andLord, leave everything—convictions, reputation, career—behind, andbecome His most devoted and prolific apostle.
In what ways does Saul’s conversion illustrate the operationof God’s wonderful grace? What can you learn from his storyconcerning those in your life whom you doubt will ever come totrue faith?
Acts 9:19–25 gives the impression that after his conversion, Paulremained in Damascus for a while before returning to Jerusalem (Acts9:26). In Galatians 1:17, however, Paul adds that, before going toJerusalem, he went to Arabia, where he apparently lived in seclusionfor a certain period. “Here, in the solitude of the desert, Paul had ampleopportunity for quiet study and meditation.”—Ellen G. White, The Actsof the Apostles, p. 125.
Read Acts 9:20–25. How does Luke describe Paul’s ministry inDamascus? How well did it go?
Paul’s original target when he left Jerusalem with letters from thehigh priest was the Jewish believers who had presumably sought refugein the synagogues of Damascus (Acts 9:2). Now, after coming backfrom Arabia, he finally made it to the synagogues, not to arrest believersbut to increase their number; not to slander Jesus as an impostor butto present Him as the Messiah of Israel. What must have gone on in theminds of those who, having heard of him only as one of their persecutors,now hear him witness about Jesus? What could they do but marvelat what Saul of Tarsus had become and at what he was doing for thechurch? (They probably had no idea of the influence this new convertwould eventually have!)
Not able to contradict Paul, some of his opponents conspired togetherto take his life. Paul’s account of the episode (2 Cor. 11:32, 33) suggeststhat his opponents denounced him to the local authorities in order toachieve their intent. However, with the believers’ help, Paul was ableto escape in a basket, possibly through the window of a house built onthe city wall.
Paul knew from the start that he would face challenges (Acts 9:16).Opposition, persecution, and suffering from various sources would bea constant in his ministry, but nothing would shake his faith or sense ofduty, despite the hardships and trials that he faced practically at everystep of his new life in Christ (2 Cor. 4:8, 9).
Despite struggles and opposition, Paul didn’t give up. How canwe learn to do the same when it comes to faith—that is, how topersevere amid discouragement and opposition?
Having escaped from Damascus, Paul returned to Jerusalem for thefirst time since he had left as a persecutor. This happened three yearsafter his conversion (Gal. 1:18). It was not an easy return, as he facedproblems both inside and outside the church.
Read Acts 9:26–30. What happened to Paul when he arrived inJerusalem?
In Jerusalem, Paul tried to join the apostles. Though by that time healready had been a Christian for three years, the news of his conversionsounded so incredible that the apostles, like Ananias before them, wererather skeptical. They feared it was just part of a carefully elaboratedplot. It was Barnabas, a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36, 37), thus aHellenist, who broke the apostles’ resistance and introduced Paul tothem. They, too, must have marveled at what God had done to Paul;that is, once they realized that he was genuine.
Such resistance, however, would never entirely disappear, if notbecause of Paul’s past actions in persecuting the church, then at leastbecause of the gospel he preached. As in the case of Stephen, theJudean believers, including the apostles, were quite slow to understandthe universal scope of the Christian faith, a faith no longer based in theOld Testament ceremonial system, especially in the sacrificial system,which had lost its validity with Jesus’ death on the cross. Paul’s closestcircle of relationship within the church in Judea would always be theHellenistic believers: besides Barnabas himself, it included Philip, oneof the Seven (Acts 21:8), and Mnason, also from Cyprus (Acts 21:16).Several years later, the Jerusalem church leaders would still accuse Paulof preaching basically the same doctrine Stephen had preached before(Acts 21:21).
During the fifteen days he stayed in Jerusalem (Gal. 1:18), Paulapparently decided to share the gospel with the same nonbelievingJews whom he had incited against Stephen some time before. As withStephen, however, his efforts met with strong opposition, posing athreat to his own life. In a vision, Jesus told him to leave Jerusalem forhis own safety (Acts 22:17–21). With the help of the brethren, he wentdown to the city port of Caesarea and from there to his hometown inCilicia, where he would stay for several years before starting his missionaryjourneys.
Friday August 3
Further Thought: “A general slain in battle is lost to his army, buthis death gives no additional strength to the enemy. But when a manof prominence joins the opposing force, not only are his services lost,but those to whom he joins himself gain a decided advantage. Saul ofTarsus, on his way to Damascus, might easily have been struck dead bythe Lord, and much strength would have been withdrawn from the persecutingpower. But God in His providence not only spared Saul’s life, butconverted him, thus transferring a champion from the side of the enemyto the side of Christ.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 124.
“Christ had commanded his disciples to go and teach all nations; butthe previous teachings which they had received from the Jews made itdifficult for them to fully comprehend the words of their Master, andtherefore they were slow to act upon them. They called themselves thechildren of Abraham, and regarded themselves as the heirs of divinepromise. It was not until several years after the Lord’s ascension thattheir minds were sufficiently expanded to clearly understand the intentof Christ’s words, that they were to labor for the conversion of theGentiles as well as of the Jews.”—Ellen G. White, Sketches From theLife of Paul, p. 38.
Discussion Questions:
Dwell more on Jesus’ question to Paul on the Damascus road:“ ‘Why do you persecute me?’ ” (Acts 9:4, NRSV). For Paul, thisquestion was an indication that Jesus of Nazareth had indeed beenresurrected from the dead. But, more than that, it was also an indicationof the spiritual identification that exists between Jesus andHis church (see also Matt. 25:34–45). The implication is obvious:any harm done to the church is harm done to Jesus Himself. Inpractical terms, what does this mean to us today?
Witnessing for Jesus involves suffering for Jesus. It is not bychance that the Greek word for “witness” (martys) came to beassociated with “martyrdom.” What does it mean to suffer forJesus?
There’s an old Latin saying, Credo ut intelligam, which means,“I believe in order that I may understand.” How does this ideahelp us understand what happened to Saul of Tarsus? That is,before his conversion, before Paul became a believer in Jesus, hedidn’t understand. Only after his experience was he able to comprehend.What lesson can we draw from this for the times whenwe may find ourselves frustrated with those who don’t believe intruths that seem so clear to us?
Sabbath Afternoon
Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 9:32–43, Acts 10:9–16,Eph. 2:11–19, Acts 11:1–26, Acts 12:1–18.
Memory Text: “Then Peter began to speak to them: ‘I truly understandthat God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone whofears him and does what is right is acceptable to him’ ” (Acts 10:34,35, NRSV).
With Paul’s departure to Tarsus, Peter is again the main characterin Luke’s narrative of the early days of the Christian church.Peter is portrayed in a sort of itinerant ministry throughoutJudea and the surrounding regions. Acts here tells two brief miraculousstories, the healing of Aeneas and the resurrection of Tabitha (Dorcas),which are then followed by the story of Cornelius in chapter 10.
The conversion of Gentiles was the most controversial issue in theapostolic church. Though the discussions that followed Cornelius’sbaptism were far from solving all the difficulties, the outpouring ofthe Spirit, reminiscent of what had happened at Pentecost, helped toconvince Peter and the brethren in Jerusalem that the blessings of thegospel were not restricted to Jews. Meanwhile, the church in Antiochhad already started moving toward the Gentiles, as well.
This week’s study also includes the rise of a new, short persecution—this time under King Herod—and its impact on the apostles, who hadbeen spared in the persecution carried out by Paul.
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, August 11.
Peter was visiting the Christian communities through the coastalregion of Judea. His purpose was probably to give them doctrinalinstruction (Acts 2:42), but God used him powerfully to perform miraclesin the same fashion as those performed by Jesus Himself.
Read Acts 9:32–35. What similarities do you see in the miracle of Jesusin Luke 5:17–26 and the healing of Aeneas?
Despite the brevity of the account, the miracle reminds us of thewell-known story of the Capernaum paralytic healed by Jesus (Luke5:17–26). Even the detail about the bed is similar. More important,however, was the impact of Aeneas’s cure, not only in Lydda but also inthe coastal plain of Sharon. Having verified for themselves the realityof the miracle, many people turned to the Lord.
Read Acts 9:36–43. Review the story of Tabitha’s resurrection. Whatwas so special about her?
Tabitha—the Aramaic for “gazelle;” in Greek, Dorcas—was abeliever very dear in her neighborhood because of her works ofChristian charity. The story of her resurrection also parallels a miracleperformed by Jesus, the resurrection of Jairus’s daughter (Luke 8:41,42, 49–56), which Peter had witnessed. Following Jesus’ example, heasked everybody to leave the room (see Mark 5:40). Then he kneltdown and prayed, after which he called to the dead woman, “ ‘Tabitha,get up’ ” (Acts 9:40, NRSV).
The apostles performed many miracles; yet, in fact, these were God’sactions through the apostles’ hands (Acts 5:12). The similarities withJesus’ own miracles were perhaps to remind the church, including ustoday, that what matters most is not so much who the instrument is butthe measure of his or her surrender to God (see John 14:12). When wefully allow God to use us for the gospel’s cause, great things can happen.Peter not only resurrected Tabitha, but the miracle also led to manyconversions in Joppa (Acts 9:42).
Some people think that if only they could see a real miracle, suchas what happened here, then they would believe. And though attimes miracles helped lead some people to faith, the Bible is filledwith stories of those who saw miracles and still didn’t believe. Onwhat, then, should our faith be based?
In Joppa, Peter stayed with a certain Simon, a tanner by trade (Acts9:43). Meanwhile, in Caesarea, about 25 miles (40 kilometers) fromJoppa, there lived a Roman centurion named Cornelius. He and hishousehold were devout worshipers of God, though they had not yetformally adhered to Judaism, meaning that Cornelius was still anuncircumcised Gentile. In a God-given vision, he was instructed tosend messengers to Joppa and invite Peter to visit him (Acts 10:1–8).
Read Acts 10:9–16, 28, 34, 35. What did Peter experience, and how didhe interpret it?
It is important to know that Peter’s vision was not about food butabout people. Yes, it was around noon, Peter was hungry, and the voicetold him to kill and eat; yet, God used the vision, not to remove thedistinction between clean and unclean animals but to teach Peter aboutthe inclusive character of the gospel.
The vision was explicitly intended to break Peter’s resistance againstGentiles. Peter’s view was that if he entered Cornelius’s house and fellowshipedwith him, he would defile himself and so become unfit toworship in the temple or to come before God’s presence. First-centuryJews from Judea and the surrounding areas did not associate withuncircumcised Gentiles.
The problem was with the contemporary theology, which excluded theGentiles from the commonwealth of Israel, even though this view hadbecome a perversion of the whole point of Israel’s existence as a nation,which was to reach out to the world with a knowledge of the true God.
Because circumcision was the sign of the Abrahamic covenant,uncircumcised Gentiles came to be segregated and treated with contempt.They could have no part whatsoever in the blessings of thecovenant unless they accepted circumcision and became Jews. Such aconcept, though, was incompatible with the universal scope of Jesus’death, as the early believers, over time, were coming to understand.
Read Titus 2:11, Galatians 3:26–28, and Ephesians 2:11–19.What do these texts teach us about the universality of the gospelmessage? What should they tell us about how wrong it isfor Christians to harbor prejudice against any group based onethnicity?
Acts 10:44–48 reveals a critical moment in the early church’shistory. It was the first time that the gospel was being preached touncircumcised Gentiles by one of the apostles. Unlike the Hellenisticbelievers, the apostles and other Judean believers were not ready toreceive Gentiles in the church. Since Jesus was the Messiah of Israel,they thought that the gospel was to be shared only with Jews from nearand far. The Gentiles would first have to be converted to Judaism andthen be accepted into the community of faith. In other words, beforeGentiles could become Christians, they first had to become Jews. Thatwas the thinking that needed to be changed among these early Jewishbelievers.
The gift of tongues given to Cornelius and his household was addedas a clear, observable sign that such a concept was mistaken, that Godhas no favorites, and that in terms of salvation both Jews and Gentilesstand on equal footing before Him.
Read Acts 11:1–18. How did the church in Jerusalem react to Peter’sexperience at Caesarea?
The long-established Jewish prejudice concerning Gentiles led thebelievers in Jerusalem to criticize Peter for having eaten with uncircumcisedpeople. It seems that they were more concerned with Jewishceremonial scruples than with the salvation of Cornelius and his family.They might have feared that if the church broke with such practices itwould represent a denial of Israel’s faith; they would lose God’s favor,and become liable themselves to the same accusations—from their fellowJews—that had led to Stephen’s death.
“The time had come for an entirely new phase of work to be enteredupon by the church of Christ. The door that many of the Jewish convertshad closed against the Gentiles was now to be thrown open. Andthe Gentiles who accepted the gospel were to be regarded as on anequality with the Jewish disciples, without the necessity of observingthe rite of circumcision.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles,p. 136.
As at Pentecost, here, too, they spoke in languages previouslyunknown to them, rather than in ecstatic or heavenly languages. Onlythe purpose was different: while for the apostles the gift aimed at thechurch’s world mission, for Cornelius it functioned as a confirmationthat God’s grace was operating even among the Gentiles.
Motivated by Cornelius’s conversion, Luke briefly interrupts hisaccount of Peter’s ministry to show the gospel’s initial progress amongthe Gentiles.
Read Acts 11:19–26. What happened when some Jerusalem refugeescame to Antioch?
This section of Acts 11 refers back to Paul’s persecution in chapter8. Thus, while the previous developments were taking place in Judeaand elsewhere, some of the Hellenistic believers who were forced toleave Jerusalem were spreading the gospel way beyond the bordersof Judea.
Luke gives special attention to the great city of Antioch, in Syria,where refugees began to preach to their fellow Jews and to theHellenists, and many of them were accepting the faith. Jesus’ commissionin Acts 1:8 was then being realized through the efforts of theseHellenistic Jewish Christians. They were the ones who became the realfounders of the mission to the Gentiles.
Because of the church’s success in Antioch, the apostles in Jerusalemdecided to send Barnabas to evaluate the situation. Noticing the greatopportunities for the advancement of the gospel, Barnabas sent for Paulin Tarsus, feeling he could be a vital helper.
Barnabas was right. During the year he and Paul worked together,large crowds, mostly Gentiles, heard the gospel. The enthusiasmwith which they spoke about Jesus Christ made the believers therebecome known for the first time as “Christians” (Acts 11:26). Thatthey “were called” Christians indicates the term was coined by thoseoutside the church, probably as a form of mockery, while the believerspreferred to refer to themselves as “brethren” (Acts 1:16), “disciples”(Acts 6:1), or even “saints” (Acts 9:13). By the time Acts was written,“Christian” had become a common designation (Acts 26:28),and Luke seems to approve of it. “Christian” means a follower or anadherent of Christ.
What does it mean to you to be called a “Christian”? What aboutyour life is truly Christian? That is, how differently do you livefrom non-Christians in the things that really matter?
Turning again to Judea, we are faced now with the account of KingHerod’s executing James, the brother of John and son of Zebedee (Mark1:19). He also wanted to do the same with Peter.
Read Acts 12:1–4. What does this teach about the challenges the earlychurch faced?
The King Herod mentioned here is Agrippa I, the grandson of Herodthe Great (Matt. 2:1); he ruled Judea from a.d. 40 to 44. As a resultof his show of piety, he earned popularity among his Jewish subjects,especially the Pharisees. His attempt to win the favor of the Jews byattacking some apostles fits perfectly with what we know of him fromother sources.
Because James’s execution was effective in fulfilling Agrippa’sagenda, he planned to execute Peter, as well. Peter was arrested anddelivered to four squads of four soldiers each to guard him, one squadfor each of the four watches of the night. Peter had four soldiers at atime with him: he would be chained to two soldiers, one on each side,and two would guard the entrance. Such extreme precaution was certainlytaken to try to avoid what had already happened to Peter (andJohn) some time before (Acts 5:17–20).
Read Acts 12:5–18. What happened in response to the brethren’sprayers?
The night before the day that Agrippa had planned to put Peter on trialand execute him, Peter was once again miraculously released by an angel.
Next, we find the story of Agrippa’s death at Caesarea (Acts 12:20–23). Attempts have been made to identify the cause of his death (peritonitis,an ulcer, even poison); yet, Luke is clear in saying that the kingdied because of a divine judgment.
James is killed, Peter is delivered, and Herod faces divine judgment.In some cases, we see justice; in others, it doesn’t appearthat way. What should this teach us about how we just don’t haveall the answers to all our questions and why we need to live byfaith regarding what we don’t understand?
Friday August 10
Further Thought: “In the tenth chapter of Acts we have still anotherinstance of the ministration of heavenly angels, resulting in the conversionof Cornelius and his company. Let these chapters [8–10] be read,and receive special attention. In them we see that heaven is much nearerto the Christian who is engaged in the work of soulsaving than manysuppose. We should learn through them also the lesson of God’s regardfor every human being, and that each should treat his fellow man as oneof the Lord’s instrumentalities for the accomplishment of His work inthe earth.”—Ellen G. White Comments, The SDA Bible Commentary,vol. 6, p. 1059.
“When the church prays, the cause of God will go forward, and Hisenemies will come to naught, even if this does not exempt the churchfrom suffering and martyrdom; Luke’s belief in the victory of thegospel is thoroughly realistic and recognizes that though the word ofGod is not fettered, its servants may well have to suffer and be bound.”—I. Howard Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids:Eerdmans, 1980), pp. 206, 207.
Discussion Questions:
Cornelius is described as “a devout man who feared Godwith all his household; he gave alms generously to the people andprayed constantly to God” (Acts 10:2, NRSV). It is evident thatGod’s Spirit was already working in Cornelius long before he metPeter. Could it be that his devotional life was an opportunity forGod to reach him with the gospel message? What lesson is therefor us in his story?
In class go back to Monday’s final question and ask yourselvesthis question: What is the cultural, social, and political contextin which you live that breeds the kind of ethnic tension thatChristians are not supposed to harbor? In other words, when weneed to, how can we all as Christians rise above our culture andbackground?
Despite their damage, Paul’s efforts to persecute turned out togood effect: the refugees who came to Antioch started preachingto Jews and to Hellenists. In class share a personal experience ofpain and suffering that God turned into a blessing.
James was one of Jesus’ closest disciples (Mark 5:37, 9:2,14:33); yet, he was the first of the Twelve to suffer martyrdom.What other examples do we find in the Bible of faithful people sufferingunfairly? What lessons should we draw from these accountsfor ourselves about the whole question of suffering?
Sabbath Afternoon Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 13, 2 Cor. 4:7–10, Rom.10:1–4, Rom. 3:19, Acts 14:1–26, Romans 9–11.
Memory Text: “ ‘Therefore, my friends, I want you to know thatthrough Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Throughhim everyone who believes is set free from every sin, a justificationyou were not able to obtain under the law of Moses’ ” (Acts 13:38,39, NIV).
Most certainly, the gospel was to go to the Gentiles as well asthe Jews. This was a message that, slowly but surely, the earlyJewish Christians were starting to grasp.
Our first explicit report of Gentiles joining the faith in large scalerelates to Antioch. In other words, it was in Antioch that the firstGentile church was founded, even if it also had a substantial contingentof Jewish believers (Gal. 2:11–13). Due to the missionary zeal of itsfounders and the new impetus provided by the arrival of Barnabas andPaul, the church there grew rapidly, and it became the first importantChristian center outside Judea. In fact, in some aspects it even surpassedthe church in Jerusalem.
With the apostles still stationed in Jerusalem, Antioch became thebirthplace of Christian missions. It was from there, and with the initialsupport of the local believers, that Paul left on all three of his missionaryjourneys. It was because of their commitment that Christianitybecame what Jesus had intended: a world religion, one in which thegospel would be spread to “every nation, tribe, tongue, and people”(Rev. 14:6, NKJV).
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, August 18.
In Acts 13, Luke shifts the scene back to Antioch in order to introducePaul’s first missionary journey, which occupies two entire chapters(Acts 13, 14). From here through the end of the book, the focus isset on Paul and his Gentile missions.
This is the first missionary endeavor in Acts that is intentional andcarefully planned by an individual church; yet, Luke is careful in highlightingthat such endeavor originated in God, not in the believers’ owninitiative. The point, however, is that God can operate only when wewillingly place ourselves in a position where He can use us.
Read Acts 13:1–12. What main points does Luke want to stress concerningBarnabas and Paul’s activities in Cyprus?
A period of intercessory prayer and fasting preceded the departure ofthe missionaries; in this context, the laying on of hands was basicallyan act of consecration, or a commendation to God’s grace (Acts 14:26)for the task at hand.
The island of Cyprus is in the northeastern corner of the MediterraneanSea, not far from Antioch. It was a natural place to start, as not onlywas Barnabas from Cyprus but the gospel had also already reached theisland. Yet, certainly there was still much to be done.
Once in Cyprus, Barnabas and Paul—and John Mark, Barnabas’scousin (Acts 15:39, Col. 4:10), who was with them—preached in thesynagogues of Salamis. This was Paul’s regular practice: to preach firstin the synagogues before turning to Gentiles. Because Jesus was Israel’sMessiah, it was more than natural to share the gospel with Jews first.
After Salamis, they moved westward, preaching (we can assume) asthey went, until they came to the capital, Paphos. The narrative thenrevolves around two individuals: a Jewish sorcerer named Bar-Jesus,also known as Elymas, and Sergius Paulus, the local Roman governor.The story provides a good example of how the gospel was met withcontrasting responses: on one hand, open opposition; on the other,faithful acceptance even by highly prestigious Gentiles. The languageof Acts 13:12 clearly implies conversion.
Think how, in this case, it was a Jew who resisted the truth whilea Gentile accepted it. How might this help us understand whysometimes those of other Christian denominations are harder toreach with “present truth” than are those of no faith at all?
From Cyprus, Paul and his companions sailed to Perga, in Pamphylia,on the southern coast of modern Turkey. Before they moved on toPisidian Antioch, Luke reports two significant incidental changes: Paulbecomes the leading figure (up until here, Barnabas always is mentionedfirst) and Luke stops using Paul’s Jewish name (“Saul”) and starts referringto him only as “Paul” (Acts 13:9). This is probably because fromnow on Paul finds himself mostly in a Greco-Roman environment.
Acts 13:13 records John Mark’s going back to Jerusalem. We are notinformed in the texts themselves of the reason for John Mark’s desertion.Ellen G. White wrote that, faced with fear and discouraged because ofthe hardship ahead of them, “Mark was intimidated and, losing all courage,refused to go farther and returned to Jerusalem.”—The Acts of theApostles, p. 170. God never promised it would be easy. On the contrary,Paul knew from the very beginning that his service for Jesus wouldinvolve much suffering (Acts 9:16), but he learned to rely entirely onGod’s power, and in that lay the secret of his strength (2 Cor. 4:7–10).
Read Acts 13:38. What was the essence of Paul’s message in theAntioch synagogue?
Acts 13:16–41 contains the first of Paul’s sermons recorded in the NewTestament. It was not, of course, the first sermon Paul gave, and thereis no question that it represents only a brief summary of what he said.
The sermon is divided into three main parts. It begins with sharedbeliefs about God’s election of Israel and the kingship of David (Acts13:17–23); this part is intended to establish a point of contact with hisJewish audience. Next, it presents Jesus as the fulfillment of God’spromises of a descendant of David who could bring salvation to Israel(Acts 13:24–37). The concluding part is a warning against rejecting thesalvation that is offered through Jesus (Acts 13:38–41).
The climax of the sermon is verses 38, 39, which enclose the core ofPaul’s message on justification. Forgiveness and justification are availableonly through Jesus, not through Moses’ law. This passage does notsay that the law has been abrogated. It only highlights its inability toperform what the Jews expected it to do; namely, justification (Rom.10:1–4). Such prerogative rests solely with Jesus Christ (Gal. 2:16).
What does it mean that salvation is only through Jesus? How doyou reconcile the necessity to keep God’s moral law with the factthat the law is unable to justify?
Acts 13:38, 39, presents the issue of the law’s inability to justify, animportant doctrinal concept. Despite the binding character of its moralcommandments, the law is unable to bring justification because it cannotproduce perfect obedience in those who observe it (Acts 15:10,Rom. 8:3). Even if the law could produce perfect obedience in us, thatperfect obedience cannot atone for past sins (Rom. 3:19; Gal. 3:10,11). This is why justification cannot be earned, not even partially. Wecan receive it only by faith in Jesus’ atoning sacrifice (Rom. 3:28, Gal.2:16), a gift that we do not deserve. However central it may be to theChristian life, obedience cannot earn us salvation.
Read Acts 13:42–49. How did the synagogue receive Paul’s message?
Notwithstanding the harsh way Paul ended his message, the reactionof most in the synagogue was highly favorable. The followingSabbath, however, things changed drastically. It is highly probable that“the Jews” who were rejecting the gospel message were the synagogueleaders, those who represented official Judaism. Luke ascribes theirruthless attitude toward Paul to jealousy.
In the ancient world, several aspects of Judaism, such as monotheism,lifestyle, and even the Sabbath, exerted a strong attraction amongnon-Jews, and many of them joined the Jewish faith as proselytes.Circumcision, however, was a serious hindrance, as it was considereda barbaric and disgusting practice. Consequently, many Gentiles wouldattend the synagogues to worship God but without formally convertingto Judaism. These were known as “God-fearers,” and it might have beenthe God-fearers, as well as the proselytes, of the Antioch synagogue(Acts 13:16, 43) who helped to spread the news about Paul’s messageamong the people in general, and they came in great numbers. Thepossibility to experience salvation without first having to adhere toJudaism was no doubt particularly attractive to many.
This may help to explain the jealousy of the Jewish leaders. In anycase, by rejecting the gospel they were not only excluding themselvesfrom God’s salvation but also liberating Paul and Barnabas to turn theirfull attention to the Gentiles, who rejoiced and praised God for includingthem in His saving plan.
Under the instigation of the Jewish leaders in Antioch, the localauthorities incited a mob against Paul and Barnabas and ran them outof town (Acts 13:50). The disciples, however, were filled with joy andthe Holy Spirit (Acts 13:52). The missionaries then headed to the cityof Iconium.
Read Acts 14:1–7. What was the result of Paul and Barnabas’s activitiesin Iconium?
In Iconium, Paul and Barnabas continued their practice of addressingfirst the Jews before turning to the Gentiles. Paul’s sermon in Antioch(Acts 13:16–41) offers the main reason behind the Jewish priority intheir ministry: the election of Israel, with all that it involved (Rom. 3:2;9:4, 5), and God’s fulfillment of His promise of a Savior from David’slineage. Despite the fact that many Jews were rejecting the gospel, Paulnever lost hope of a substantial Jewish conversion.
In Romans 9–11, Paul makes it clear that “not all who are descendedfrom Israel are Israel” (Rom. 9:6, NIV) and that it is only because ofGod’s mercy that some of the Jews believe at all. God has not rejectedHis people, but “at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace”(Rom. 11:5, NIV). Paul continued to preach the gospel to Gentiles,though he believed that one day more Jews would come to faith inJesus.
“Paul’s argument in Romans 9–11 offers a further explanation ofthe mission strategy he pursues in the narrative of Acts and confrontsevery generation of Christians with the theological importance of bearingwitness to unbelieving Jews.”—David G. Peterson, The Acts of theApostles (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), p. 401.
The situation was not much different from that in Antioch. The firstreaction of both Jews and Gentiles to Paul’s gospel was highly positive,but again the unbelieving Jews, possibly the leaders of the localJewish community, stirred up the Gentiles and poisoned their mindsagainst the missionaries, causing a division among the people. As theopponents were planning to attack and lynch Paul and Barnabas, thetwo missionaries decided to leave the town and move to the next one.
More than just hearing the gospel, Jewish people need to see itlived among those who profess the name of Jesus. If you haveJewish acquaintances, what kind of witness are you presentingto them?
The next place Paul and Barnabas visited was Lystra, an obscure villagesome 18 miles (about 29 km) southwest of Iconium. Though theyspent some time there (Acts 14:6, 7, 15), Luke reports only one storyand its developments: the healing of a lame man, probably a beggar,who suffered from that malady from birth.
Read Acts 14:5–19. What did their reaction to Paul reveal about justhow steeped in ignorance the people were?
The crowd was so impressed by the miracle that they mistook Pauland Barnabas for gods—Barnabas for Zeus, the supreme god of theGreek pantheon, and Paul for Hermes, Zeus’s attendant and spokesman.In fact, the people wanted to offer them sacrifices.
Latin poet Ovid (43 b.c.–a.d. 17/18) had earlier recorded a legend ofthese same two gods disguised as humans visiting a town in the samearea (“the hills of Phrygia”) and seeking a place to rest. According tothe legend, a humble, elderly couple treated them kindly and with hospitality;the rest of the people were indifferent. Because of their kindnessand hospitality toward the incognito visitors, the couple had theirhouse transformed into a temple and themselves into priests, while therest of the town was completely destroyed (Metamorphoses 611–724).
With such a story circulating in this region, the reaction of the peopleto Paul’s miracle comes as no surprise. The story also helps to explainwhy the crowd assumed that the missionaries were those two gods, andnot Asclepius, for example, the god of healing. Paul and Barnabas,however, were able to stop their false worship of themselves. In the end,some opponents from Antioch and Iconium caused a complete reversalof the situation, and Paul was stoned and left for dead.
Read Acts 14:20–26. Where did Paul and Barnabas finish their journey?And what did they do on their way back?
Paul said: “ ‘We must through many tribulations enter the kingdomof God’ ” (Acts 14:22, NKJV). What does that mean? Howhave you, perhaps, experienced what he is saying there? Mostimportant, how can you learn to grow in faith from whatever“tribulations” you are facing?
Friday August 17
Further Thought: “During the life of Christ on earth he had soughtto lead the Jews out of their exclusiveness. The conversion of the centurionand of the Syrophenician woman, were instances of his direct workoutside of the acknowledged people of Israel. The time had now comefor active and continued work among the Gentiles, of whom whole communitiesreceived the gospel gladly, and glorified God for the light of anintelligent faith. The unbelief and malice of the Jews did not turn asidethe purpose of God; for a new Israel was grafted into the old olive-tree.The synagogues were closed against the apostles; but private houses werethrown open for their use, and public buildings of the Gentiles were alsoused in which to preach the word of God.”—Ellen G. White, SketchesFrom the Life of Paul, p. 51.
“In all their missionary endeavors Paul and Barnabas sought to followChrist’s example of willing sacrifice and faithful, earnest labor forsouls. Wide-awake, zealous, untiring, they did not consult inclinationor personal ease, but with prayerful anxiety and unceasing activity theysowed the seed of truth. And with the sowing of the seed, the apostleswere careful to give to all who took their stand for the gospel, practicalinstruction that was of untold value. This spirit of earnestness and godlyfear made upon the minds of the new disciples a lasting impressionregarding the importance of the gospel message.”—Ellen G. White,The Acts of the Apostles, p. 186.
Discussion Questions:
Dwell more on the story of John Mark’s fleeing when thingsgot hard. Paul and Barnabas later had an argument over JohnMark, when Barnabas wanted to use him again and Paul didn’t(see Acts 15:37). Years later, however, Paul wrote: “Get Mark andbring him with you, for he is useful to me for ministry” (2 Tim.4:11, NKJV). What lessons are here for us regarding those who, incertain circumstances, prove unfaithful to their calling?
Review Paul and Barnabas’s response to the Lystrians whenthey were mistaken for gods (Acts 14:14–18). How can we respondwhen tempted to take credit for what God has done?
Read Acts 14:21–23. Based on Paul and Barnabas’s example,what can we individually and as a church do to nourish orstrengthen the faith of new converts?
How can we make sure that we don’t let man-made traditions,or even beliefs that we have held for a long time, get in the way ofadvancing in truth, as did the religious leaders who opposed Paul?
Sabbath Afternoon
Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 15; Gal. 2:11–13; Exod.12:43–49; Rom. 3:30; Lev. 18:30; Rev. 2:14, 20.
Memory Text: “ ‘We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesusthat we are saved, just as they are’ ” (Acts 15:11, NIV).
After more than two years, Paul and Barnabas returned to SyrianAntioch. Because the whole church there had been involvedin sending them out as missionaries, it was natural that theywould give a report to the church. The report’s emphasis, however, wasnot on what they had accomplished but on what God Himself had donethrough them.
The object of the report, of course, was the success of the missionamong the Gentiles, though many Jews had also come to faith. Sincethe episode of Cornelius, however, the conversion of uncircumcisedGentiles had become an issue (Acts 11:1–18), but now that largenumbers of them were being admitted to church membership, thingsbecame particularly complicated. Many believers in Jerusalem werenot happy. For them, Gentiles would need first to be circumcised, thatis, to become Jewish proselytes in order to become part of God’s peopleand have fellowship with them.
Acts 15 is all about the Gentile problem reaching a critical level andabout the church working together to find a solution. The JerusalemCouncil was a turning point in the history of the apostolic church inrelation to its worldwide mission.
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, August 25.
From the beginning, the church at Antioch consisted of both(Hellenistic) Jews and uncircumcised Gentiles (Acts 11:19–21, Gal.2:11–13) who apparently lived in peaceful fellowship with each other.That fellowship, however, was shattered by the arrival of a group ofbelievers from Jerusalem.
Read Acts 15:1–5. What was the problem the church was facing?
Traditionally called Judaizers, those individuals from Judea werepossibly the same ones identified in verse 5 as believing Pharisees.The presence of Pharisees in the church should not surprise us, asPaul himself had been a Pharisee prior to his conversion (Phil. 3:5).This group seems to have gone to Antioch on their own initiative (Acts15:24), though another episode that also took place in Antioch sometime later shows that most Jews, including the apostles, were not verycomfortable with the presence of uncircumcised Gentiles in the church(Gal. 2:11–13).
In his Epistle to the Galatians, Paul does not speak positively aboutthe Judaizers, dubbing them as troublemakers (Gal. 1:7, 5:10, ESV)and “false brothers” (Gal. 2:4, ESV) whose real motive was to underminethe spiritual freedom of the gospel and bring the Gentile convertsinto the slavery of legalism.
Their point was rather simple: unless the Gentiles were circumcisedand kept all the other Jewish ceremonial laws, they could not be saved.Salvation—so they believed—was to be found only within God’scovenant community and, according to the Old Testament, there wasno other way to become part of God’s chosen people except throughcircumcision (Gen. 17:9–14, Exod. 12:48). In short, Gentiles could besaved only if they first became Jewish proselytes.
Paul and Barnabas, of course, could not agree with such requirements,which went against the very nature of the gospel. The aggressiveapproach of the Judean visitors, however, generated a heated discussion;the word in Acts 15:2 (stasis) has the sense of “conflict” or “dissension.”Yet, the matter was too important to be dealt with at the locallevel only. The unity of the church was at stake. The brethren of Antiochthen decided to send a number of delegates to Jerusalem, includingPaul and Barnabas, to find a solution.
Put yourself in the position of the Judaizers. What argumentscould you make for your case?
Read Exodus 12:43–49. In addition to Israelite males, who else wassupposed to be circumcised?
The blessings of the covenant were not restricted to born Israelitesbut were extended to any slave or sojourning stranger who wished toexperience it, as long as he were to be circumcised. After circumcision,the stranger would have the same status before God as the bornIsraelite: “He shall be as a native of the land” (Exod. 12:48, NKJV).
Circumcision, therefore, was indispensable (for a male) to be a fullmember of God’s covenant community. And because Jesus was theMessiah of Israel, it seemed natural that the Judaizers would insist that noGentile could benefit from His salvation without first becoming a Jew.
Read Romans 3:30, 1 Corinthians 7:18, and Galatians 3:28, 5:6. Whatwas Paul’s understanding of circumcision?
By saying that no Gentile could be saved without first joiningJudaism, these men were mixing up two distinct concepts: covenantand salvation. Being a member of God’s covenant community did notguarantee salvation (Jer. 4:4, 9:25). In addition, Abraham himself wassaved (justified) by faith, which happened before, and not because, hewas circumcised (Rom. 4:9–13). Salvation has always been by faith,whereas the covenant was a gracious provision through which Godwould make Himself and His saving plan known to the entire world.Israel had been chosen for this purpose (Gen. 12:1–3).
The problem, however, was that by too closely associating covenantand salvation, these believers came to view circumcision as meritorious.God’s saving grace, however, does not operate where human worksoperate. So, to impose circumcision on believing Gentiles as a meansof salvation was to distort the gospel’s truth (Gal. 1:7, 2:3–5), nullifyGod’s grace (Gal. 2:21), and make Jesus of no benefit (Gal. 5:2).Furthermore, it was a denial of the universal character of salvation(Col. 3:11, Titus 2:11). Paul could never agree to this type of thinking.
What’s the danger of thinking that salvation comes from merelybeing a member of the right church?
Luke, of course, does not report all the proceedings of the meeting.It would be interesting to know, for example, the supporting argumentsof the Judaizers (Acts 15:5), as well as Paul’s and Barnabas’s responses(Acts 15:12). The fact that we have only Peter’s and James’s speechesshows the importance of these men among the apostles.
In his speech, Peter addressed the apostles and elders, remindingthem of his experience with Cornelius years before. In essence, hisargument was the same one that he had used before the brethren inJerusalem (Acts 11:4–17). God Himself had shown His approval ofCornelius’s conversion (even though he was an uncircumcised Gentile)by giving him and his household the same gift of the Spirit that He hadgiven the apostles at Pentecost.
In His divine providence, God had used no less a person than Peterto convince the Judean believers that He makes no distinction betweenJews and Gentiles with regard to salvation. Even if they lacked thepurifying benefits of Old Covenant rules and regulations, the believingGentiles could no longer be considered unclean, because God Himselfhad cleansed their hearts. Peter’s final statement sounded very similar towhat we would expect from Paul: “ ‘We believe it is through the graceof our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are’ ” (Acts 15:11, NIV).
Read Acts 15:13–21. What solution to the Gentile problem did Jamespropose?
James’s speech suggests he was in a position of authority (comparewith Acts 12:17; 21:18; Gal. 2:9, 12). Irrespective of what he mighthave understood by the rebuilding of David’s tabernacle, which inAmos’s prophecy refers to the restoration of David’s dynasty (Amos9:11, 12), James’s main purpose was to demonstrate that God hadalready provided for Gentiles to join, in a sense, a reconstituted “peopleof God,” and thus they could be incorporated into Israel.
Because of this, his decision was that no further restrictions shouldbe imposed on Gentile converts, other than those that normally wouldbe required from foreigners who wished to live in the land of Israel.
The main issue for which the council had been convened was satisfactorilyresolved. Because salvation is by grace, believing Gentiles wereexempted from circumcision when they joined the church. Yet, they shouldabstain from four things: (1) meat offered in sacrifice to idols in paganrituals and then served in a temple feast or sold in the market; (2) bloodconsumption; (3) meat of strangled animals, that is, meat whose blood hadnot been drained; and (4) sexual immorality in its various forms.
Most Christians today treat the dietary prohibitions (prohibitions 1–3)as temporary recommendations. Because those things were particularlyrepulsive to Jews, the prohibitions—they argue—were intended onlyto bridge the gap between Jewish and Gentile believers. It also often isclaimed that all other Old Testament laws, including the Levitical foodlaws (Leviticus 11) and the Sabbath commandment (Exod. 20:8–11),which are absent from the list, are no longer binding for Christians.
The so-called apostolic decree, however, was neither temporary nora new code of Christian ethics that excluded everything else related tothe Old Testament. In fact, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (Acts15:28), the apostles and elders of the church reproduced the regulationsof Leviticus 17–18 only concerning Israel’s resident aliens.
In the context of Leviticus, these prohibitions mean the renunciationof paganism. Any foreigner who wished to live in Israel had to abdicatethose pagan practices to which he or she had grown accustomed (Lev.18:30). Likewise, any believing Gentile who wished to join the churchwas required to take a firm stand against paganism.
This, however, was just the first step. Once in, he or she naturallywas expected to do God’s will by obeying those commandments thatare universal, pre-Mosaic, and not intrinsically ceremonial, such as theSabbath (Gen. 2:1–3) and following the differentiation between cleanand unclean food (Gen. 7:2).
That the decree was not temporary is clear, for example, fromRevelation 2:14, 20, where the first and the last prohibitions arerepeated, implicitly contemplating the other two, as well. In fact, historicalevidence shows that the decree was still considered normativeby Christians long after the New Testament period.
When disputes arise, how can we learn to sit together, to listen toeach other, and in a spirit of respect and humility work throughthe issues?
Read Acts 15:22–29. What additional measures were taken by theJerusalem church concerning the council’s decision?
The first measure was to write a letter to the Gentile believers inorder to inform them of what had been decided. The letter, writtenin the name of the apostles and elders of Jerusalem, was an officialdocument that reflected the ascendancy of the Jerusalem church—certainly because of the apostles’ leadership—over the other Christiancommunities. Written in a.d. 49, which is the most probable date ofthe council, this letter is one of the earliest Christian documents wehave.
The Jerusalem church also decided to appoint two delegates, JudasBarsabas and Silas, to accompany Paul and Barnabas to Antioch; theirassignment was to carry the letter and confirm its content.
Read Acts 15:30–33. How did the church in Antioch react to the letter?
When the letter was read, the church was filled with great joy becauseof the encouraging message: circumcision was not to be required fromGentile converts. They also raised no objection to the demands of theletter (the fourfold apostolic decree). The first most serious division inthe early church was thus reconciled, at least in theory.
At the close of the council, Paul’s gospel was fully recognized by thechurch leaders in Jerusalem, who extended to him and Barnabas theright hand of fellowship as a sign of acceptance and trust (Gal. 2:9).Yet, those Jewish Christians who continued to live by the Jewish lawwould still find it highly problematic to have table fellowship with theGentiles, who, for all intents and purposes, did remain ritually unclean.
This issue is shown, for example, by the incident involving Peter inGalatians 2:11–14. “Even the disciples,” says Ellen G. White, “were notall prepared to accept willingly the decision of the council.”—The Actsof the Apostles, p. 197.
Be honest with yourself: how difficult is it for you to have fellowshipwith believers from other races, cultures, and even socialclasses? How can you be purged of this decidedly anti-gospelattitude?
Friday August 24
Further Thought: “The Jewish converts generally were not inclined tomove as rapidly as the providence of God opened the way. From the resultof the apostles’ labors among the Gentiles it was evident that the convertsamong the latter people would far exceed the Jewish converts in number.The Jews feared that if the restrictions and ceremonies of their law werenot made obligatory upon the Gentiles as a condition of church fellowship,the national peculiarities of the Jews, which had hitherto kept them distinctfrom all other people, would finally disappear from among those whoreceived the gospel message.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles,p. 189.
“The Jewish Christians living within sight of the temple naturallyallowed their minds to revert to the peculiar privileges of the Jews as anation. When they saw the Christian church departing from the ceremoniesand traditions of Judaism, and perceived that the peculiar sacrednesswith which the Jewish customs had been invested would soon belost sight of in the light of the new faith, many grew indignant with Paulas the one who had, in a large measure, caused this change. Even thedisciples were not all prepared to accept willingly the decision of thecouncil. Some were zealous for the ceremonial law, and they regardedPaul with disfavor because they thought that his principles in regard tothe obligations of the Jewish law were lax.”—Page 197.
Discussion Questions:
In class, go back to Monday’s final question. How do weunderstand the fact that belonging to the “right” church does notguarantee salvation? For example, certainly ancient Israel was the“right church,” but that does not mean everyone in it was saved. Ifbeing in the true church does not guarantee salvation, then whatis the advantage of being a part of it?
How to accept uncircumcised Gentiles into the community offaith was one of the first most important administrative issuesfaced by the early church. What might be some comparable issuesin our church today, and what does the example of Acts 15 teachus on how to deal with them?
In class, have some people take the position of the Jews whoinsisted that Gentiles must become Jewish proselytes first beforejoining the church, which they saw (and rightly so) as an extensionof the covenant promises made to Israel. What are their arguments,and how can you respond? How could a debate like thisshow us why issues that today seem so clear-cut could, in a differenttime, seem much more difficult than they do to us now?
Sabbath Afternoon
Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 16, Rom. 3:28, Gal. 2:16,Acts 17, 1 Cor. 1:23, Acts 18:1–10.
Memory Text: “ ‘Do not be afraid; keep on speaking, do not besilent. For I am with you, and no one is going to attack and harm you,because I have many people in this city’ ” (Acts 18:9, 10, NIV).
Back in Antioch, Paul and Barnabas nurtured the church andengaged in further evangelistic work. This was seemingly thelast time they worked together, as a sharp disagreement led totheir separation. The reason for Paul and Barnabas’s disagreement wasMark, Barnabas’s cousin (Col. 4:10). When Paul invited Barnabas toreturn to the places they had evangelized in their previous journey,Barnabas wanted to take his cousin along, but Paul was against itbecause of Mark’s past failure (Acts 13:13).
Paul and Barnabas’s separation, however, was turned into a blessing,because in dividing their efforts they could cover a wider area thanthey had first planned. Barnabas took Mark and returned to Cyprus,Barnabas’s homeland (Acts 4:36). Meanwhile, having invited Silasto join him, Paul went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening thechurches there. Before coming to Antioch the first time, Paul had spentseveral years in Tarsus (Acts 9:30; 11:25, 26). Now he had the opportunityto revisit the congregations he had established there. Nevertheless,God’s plan for him was much greater than Paul first conceived.
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, September 1.
Luke’s selective choice of events brings Paul almost straight to Derbeand Lystra. About Syria and Cilicia, the only thing he says is that Paulwent through those regions confirming the churches (Acts 15:41).
Read Acts 16:1–13. What does Paul’s action here teach us about howsensitive he was in seeking to reach others?
Though Timothy’s father was a Gentile, his mother was a JewishChristian; her name was Eunice. Despite being uncircumcised, Timothyknew the Scriptures from childhood (2 Tim. 3:15), implying he was alsoa pious person. As a Christian, he already had earned the respect andthe admiration of all the local believers.
Because Jewish identity was passed on through the mother’s linerather than the father’s, Timothy was a Jew. He had not been circumcisedon the eighth day after birth, perhaps because his father, a Greek,viewed circumcision as barbaric.
Wishing to have Timothy as a co-worker and knowing that, as anuncircumcised Jew, he would be forbidden to enter the Jewish synagoguesunder the charge of apostasy, Paul had him circumcised. Paul’smotivation for doing so, therefore, was entirely practical and should notbe seen as a contradiction to the gospel he preached.
After revisiting the places that he had been in his first journey, Pauldecided to go southwest, possibly to Ephesus, in the province of Asia,but the Holy Spirit prevented him from doing so. He then moved north,trying to go to Bithynia, but again in some undisclosed way the Spiritprevented him from going there. Because he already was passingthrough Mysia, Paul’s only option was to go westward to the seaport ofTroas, from where he could sail in a number of directions.
In a night vision, however, God showed him he should sail acrossthe Aegean Sea to Macedonia. When his companions learned about thevision, they concluded that God had indeed called them to share thegospel with the Macedonians.
Think about why Paul circumcised Timothy. What should thisteach us about being willing to do certain things that we mightnot always agree with or deem necessary, but that will serve agreater cause?
Monday August 27 Philippi Once in Macedonia, Paul and his companions traveled to Philippi,where they established the first Christian congregation in Europe.
Read Acts 16:11–24. Where did the missionaries go on Sabbath, andwhy? What ultimately happened to them there?
Whenever Paul arrived in a city, his practice was to visit the localsynagogue on Sabbath in order to witness to the Jews (Acts 13:14, 42,44; 17:1, 2; 18:4). That in Philippi he and his group went to a riversideto pray—together with some women, both Jewish and Gentile worshipersof God—probably means there was no synagogue in the city. Thesignificance of this is that Paul did not go to Jewish synagogues onSabbaths only for evangelistic purposes, but also because this was hisday of worship.
Read Acts 16:25–34. Review the story of the jailer’s conversion. Whatdid he need to do to be saved?
Paul and Silas’s answer to the jailer’s question is in full harmony withthe gospel, since salvation is entirely through faith in Jesus (Rom. 3:28,Gal. 2:16). What we cannot conclude from the episode, however, is thatbelief in Jesus is all that is necessary for baptism, at the expense of theproper doctrinal and practical instruction.
What do we know about the jailer? Was he a Jew or a Jewish proselyte?In either case, what he needed was to believe in Jesus as Lord andSavior. What if he were a Gentile who already knew and worshipedGod, such as Cornelius, Lydia (Acts 16:14), and several others in Acts?What if he previously had attended Paul’s evangelistic meetings in thecity? Whatever the facts about him, the brevity of the account shouldnot be used as an excuse for quick baptisms.
Read Acts 16:31–34. What does this teach us about just how completeand full Christ’s sacrifice was for us? How can you learn,day by day, to rest in the assurance of Christ’s righteousnesscovering you as your only hope of salvation?
When Paul and Silas were released from prison, the missionariesdeparted from Philippi (Acts 16:35–40). From Philippi, Paul and hiscompanions went straight to Thessalonica, the capital city of Macedonia.
Read Acts 17:1–9. How did the Thessalonian Jews react to Paul’s successfulpreaching among the Gentiles?
Once again we see Paul looking for the synagogue where he couldshare the gospel. Many devout Greeks and not a few prominent womenwere persuaded by Paul’s message. That these converts “joined Pauland Silas” (Acts 17:4, NKJV) seems to mean they formed a separategroup and met apart from the synagogue, probably in Jason’s house.
Moved with jealousy, their opponents started a riot. Their intentionwas to bring Paul and Silas—Timothy is not mentioned—before thecity’s assembly and accuse them. As they could not find the missionaries,Jason himself and a few other new believers were dragged to thelocal authorities under the charge of sheltering political agitators.
Read Acts 17:10–15. What was the response of the Berean Jews incomparison to that in Thessalonica?
The term eugenes(Acts 17:11) originally meant “well born” or “ofnoble birth” but came to denote more generally a “fair-minded” attitude,which is likely the case here. The Jews from Berea are praisednot simply because they agreed with Paul and Silas but because of theirwillingness to examine the Scriptures for themselves and on a dailybasis to see if what the missionaries were saying was correct. A merelyemotional response to the gospel, without the necessary intellectualconviction, tends to be superficial and short-lived.
Before long, however, persecution interrupted Paul’s productive ministryin Berea, compelling him to move farther south, to Athens.
When was the last time you diligently searched the Scripturesin order to find out “whether these things [whatever they were]were so”?
Wednesday August 29 Paul in Athens Athens, the intellectual center of ancient Greece, literally was givento idols. Marble statues of persons and gods were found everywhere,especially at the entrance of the agora (public square), which was thehub of urban life. Paul was so distressed about such dominant idolatrythat he changed his usual practice of going first to the synagogue, andpursued a dual course of action: he disputed weekly in the synagoguewith Jews and devout Gentiles, and daily in the public square with theGreeks. (See Acts 17:15–22.)
As the Athenians were always ready to hear something new, somephilosophers took interest in Paul’s teaching and invited him to addressthe Areopagus, the high council of the city. In his speech, Paul did notquote from the Scriptures or recap the history of God’s dealings withIsrael, as he did when speaking to a Jewish audience (compare withActs 13:16–41); this approach would not make much sense with thisaudience. Instead, he presented some important biblical truths in a waythat cultured pagans could understand.
Read Acts 17:22–31. In his Areopagus speech, what great truths aboutGod and salvation and history and humanity did he preach to thesepeople?
Most of Paul’s words sounded ridiculous to that sophisticated paganaudience, whose concepts about God and religion were distortedgreatly. We do not know how Paul intended to end his message, for heseems to have been interrupted the very moment he referred to God’sjudgment of the world (Acts 17:31). This belief collided head on withtwo Greek concepts: (1) that God is utterly transcendent, having nodealings whatsoever with the world or concern in human affairs, and(2) that when a person dies there can be no resurrection at all. Thishelps to explain why the gospel was foolishness to the Greeks (1 Cor.1:23), and the number of converts in Athens was small.
Yet, among those who came to believe were some of the most influentialpeople of Athenian society, such as Dionysius, a member of theAreopagus, and Damaris, whose mention by name implies she was ofsome status, if not also a member of the council herself (Acts 17:34).
Paul’s different approach before the Areopagus shows his awarenessof social and cultural differences. He even quoted a paganpoet (Acts 17:28) in order to make his point. What should thisteach us about how we can use different methods to reach differentpeople?
Thursday August 30 Paul in Corinth Acts 18:1–11 recounts Paul’s experience in Corinth, where he wouldstay for one and a half years. Aquila and Priscilla would become Paul’slifelong friends (Rom. 16:3, 2 Tim. 4:19). The account implies theywere already Christians when they came to Corinth, probably becauseof the deportation of Jews from Rome by the Emperor Claudius. Romanhistorian Suetonius seems to indicate that the deportation occurred dueto disturbances in the Jewish community associated with the name of“Christ” (Claudius 25.4), which would perhaps be the result of thepreaching of the gospel by local Jewish believers. Thus, it is possiblethat Aquila and Priscilla themselves had been involved in such activities.In any case, besides sharing the same faith and the same Jewishbackground, Paul and his new friends also shared the same trade.
Read Acts 18:4–17. What was the result of Paul’s missionary activitiesin Corinth?
When Silas and Timothy arrived from Macedonia, they broughtsome financial support from the churches there (2 Cor. 11:8, 9), whichallowed Paul to devote himself entirely to preaching. Paul’s policy wasto live at his own expense during his ministry, though he also taughtthat “those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel” (1 Cor.9:14, NKJV).
Despite the strong Jewish opposition to Paul’s message, some Jewsdid believe, as well as some Gentile worshipers of God. Among theconverts were Crispus, the synagogue leader, and his entire household.Many Corinthians also believed and were baptized. The situationamong the Jews, however, was rather tense, as the following episodedemonstrates (Acts 18:12–17), and Paul possibly was planning to leaveCorinth soon, but in a night vision he received divine encouragementto stay on (Acts 18:9–11).
On his way back to Antioch, Paul took Aquila and Priscilla with himand left them in Ephesus, where he spent a few days before resuminghis trip. While there, he had the opportunity to preach in the localJewish synagogue, whose positive response made him promise that,God willing, he would come back (Acts 18:18–21). This happened rightin his next journey.
Paul, frustrated by his reception, needed encouragement fromthe Lord in regard to the salvation of souls in Corinth. What dothe Lord’s words to him (Acts 18:10) say to us when we might feelsomething similar to what Paul felt?
Friday August 31
Further Thought: “Those who today teach unpopular truths neednot be discouraged if at times they meet with no more favorable reception,even from those who claim to be Christians, than did Paul and hisfellow workers from the people among whom they labored. The messengersof the cross must arm themselves with watchfulness and prayer,and move forward with faith and courage, working always in the nameof Jesus.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 230.
“If, in the closing scenes of this earth’s history, those to whom testingtruths are proclaimed would follow the example of the Bereans, searchingthe Scriptures daily, and comparing with God’s word the messagesbrought them, there would today be a large number loyal to the preceptsof God’s law, where now there are comparatively few. . . .
“All will be judged according to the light that has been given. TheLord sends forth His ambassadors with a message of salvation, andthose who hear He will hold responsible for the way in which they treatthe words of His servants. Those who are sincerely seeking for truthwill make a careful investigation, in the light of God’s word, of thedoctrines presented to them.”—Page 232.
Discussion Questions:
In the context of the last paragraph of Monday’s study, discussin class the implication of the following statement: “There is needof a more thorough preparation on the part of candidates for baptism.. . . The principles of the Christian life should be made plainto those who have newly come to the truth.”—Ellen G. White,Testimonies for the Church, vol. 6, pp. 91, 92.
Dwell more on Wednesday’s final question. How can we as achurch show the same understanding Paul had of cultural differencesand the same willingness to meet the people where they arewithout compromising the gospel or our own religious identity?
Read Acts 17:32–34. What can we learn from the three responsesthat met Paul’s message in Athens? “(1) Some mocked. They wereamused by the passionate earnestness of this strange Jew. It is possibleto make a jest of life; but those who do so will find that whatbegan as comedy must end in tragedy. (2) Some put off their decision.The most dangerous of all days is when a man discovers how easy it isto talk about tomorrow. (3) Some believed. The wise man knows thatonly the fool will reject God’s offer.”—William Barclay, The Acts ofthe Apostles, rev. ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976), p. 133.
Paul actually quoted a pagan writer (Acts 17:28) in order tomake his point with the Athenians. What should that tell us abouthow, at times, using sources like this could be of value? What dangersare there, as well?
Sabbath Afternoon
Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 18:24–28; Acts 19; Acts20:7–12, 15–27; 2 Cor. 4:8–14; Acts 21:1–15.
Memory Text: “I do not count my life of any value to myself, if only Imay finish my course and the ministry that I received from the LordJesus, to testify to the good news of God’s grace” (Acts 20:24, NRSV).
Luke’s account of Paul’s third journey starts rather abruptly. Thetext says only that after spending some time in Antioch, thecenter of Paul’s missions, the apostle set out on another journey,passing successively “through the region of Galatia and Phrygia,strengthening all the disciples” (Acts 18:23, NRSV). So, the first 1,500miles of the journey are covered in one sentence.
This is because the focal point of the journey was Ephesus, wherePaul spent more time than in any other city in the course of his journeys.From the evangelistic standpoint, the ministry in Ephesus wasvery fruitful; the impact of Paul’s preaching reached the whole provinceof Asia (Acts 19:10, 26). It was probably during this time that thechurches of Colossae, Hierapolis, and Laodicea were founded, perhapsthrough Epaphras (Col. 4:12, 13), one of Paul’s co-workers (Col. 1:7,Philem. 23).
A remarkable thing about this journey is that it is the last one ofPaul’s recorded in Acts. Paul undertook it as a free man. Luke recordsyet another journey, this time to Rome, but as a prisoner.
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, September 8.
Sunday September 2 Ephesus: Part 1
Acts 18:24–28 records that while Paul was still on his way to Ephesus, aJewish believer named Apollos came to that city. He was an eloquent manand well-versed in the Scriptures. That Apollos was a follower of Jesus isclear from the way Luke describes him: “he had been instructed in the wayof the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately”(Acts 18:25, NIV). Yet, he knew only John’s baptism. Having beenbaptized by John the Baptist, Apollos became acquainted with Jesus duringJesus’ earthly life, but he must have moved away from the area—probablyback to Alexandria—before the Passion/Pentecost events.
This explains why Aquila and Priscilla would give him furtherinstruction. Though being able to show from the Scriptures that Jesuswas the Messiah of Israel (Acts 18:28), Apollos needed to be updatedas to the developments of Christianity since Jesus’ ministry. However,Aquila and Priscilla did more for Apollos: with the other believersin Ephesus, they gave him a recommendation letter addressed to thechurches in Achaia (Acts 18:27), which allowed him to have an effectiveministry in Corinth (1 Cor. 3:4–6, 4:6, 16:12).
Read Acts 19:1–7. What happened to Paul when he arrived inEphesus?
Apollos’s story is connected to the account of the twelve men Paulmet in Ephesus upon his arrival in that city, because their situation wasvery similar. Their description as “disciples” (Acts 19:1) and Paul’s questionto them (Acts 19:2) clearly indicate that they were already believersin Jesus. At the same time, their answer to Paul shows that, similar toApollos, they were former disciples of John the Baptist who had becomefollowers of Jesus without having experienced Pentecost. They were tohave an opportunity to enjoy a deeper experience with the Lord.
“On his arrival at Ephesus, Paul found twelve brethren, who, like Apollos,had been disciples of John the Baptist, and like him had gained some knowledgeof the mission of Christ. They had not the ability of Apollos, but withthe same sincerity and faith they were seeking to spread abroad the knowledgethey had received.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 282.
We should view their new baptism in light of this unique situation. Theywere not coming from another Christian denomination, nor were theyexperiencing conversion. They were only being integrated into mainstreamChristianity. That they received the Spirit and spoke in tongues probablymeans they, like Apollos, were Christian missionaries who now were beingempowered fully to witness about Jesus Christ wherever they went.
Monday September 3 Ephesus: Part 2 In Ephesus, Paul followed his practice of preaching in the synagoguefirst. When opposition arose, he and the new believers moved to thelecture hall of a certain Tyrannus, where Paul preached daily for twoyears (Acts 19:8–10). Luke’s summary of Paul’s Ephesian ministry isthat the entire province was intensely evangelized (Acts 19:10, 26).
In Acts 19:11–20, Luke adds a few miracle stories describing thetriumph of God’s power in a city where magic and other superstitiouspractices were rather common. There is no doubt that God could healthrough Paul, but that even handkerchiefs and aprons touched by theapostle had healing power (Acts 19:12) may sound strange to some,though this bears resemblance to Jesus’ healing of the woman with thehemorrhage (Luke 8:44). The Ephesian superstitious beliefs may haveled God to perform “extraordinary” miracles, as Luke says (Acts 19:11,NIV). This is, perhaps, an example of God’s meeting the needs of thepeople at their own level of understanding.
Satisfied with the results of his mission in Ephesus, Paul decidedto go to Jerusalem (Acts 19:21). Luke does not give a reason for thistrip, but we know from Paul’s own writings that he wished to deliverthe funds he had collected to relieve the poverty of the Jerusalemchurch (Rom. 15:25–27, 1 Cor. 16:1–3). The pooling of goods of thefirst years, and a severe famine in the days of Claudius, impoverishedthe Judean believers, and Paul saw in their appeal for help (Gal. 2:10)an opportunity to strengthen both their trust in his apostleship and theunity of a now transcultural church, despite knowing the risks to whichhe would be exposed (Acts 20:22, 23; Rom. 15:31).
Read Acts 19:23–41. What was the real reason for the opposition toPaul that arose in Ephesus at the end of his stay there?
The opposition had to do with pagan worship, which severely wasthreatened by Paul’s ministry. Demetrius’s real motivation was clearlyfinancial, but he was able to turn it into a religious matter because thetemple of Artemis (or Diana), reckoned as one of the seven wonders ofthe ancient world, was located in Ephesus.
Read Acts 19:27. Notice how artfully Demetrius was able to bringin religious “piety” in his attempt to keep the money flowing in.Why must we as Christians be careful not to use our faith, or apretended piety in regard to our faith, in the same way?
Tuesday September 4 Troas After the riot (Acts 19:23–41), Paul resolved to leave Ephesus. Buthe took an extended detour through Macedonia and Achaia instead ofgoing straight to Jerusalem (Acts 20:1–3). On this journey, representativesof some Gentile churches were with him (Acts 20:4).
Read Acts 20:7–12. What’s wrong with the common argument thatthese verses help prove the Sabbath was changed to Sunday?
Paul’s stopover in Troas ended with a church meeting “on the firstday of the week” (Acts 20:7). They gathered together “to break bread,”which probably refers to the Lord’s Supper, with or without the fellowshipmeal that often was combined with it since the early days of theJerusalem church (Acts 2:42, 46). That there is no mention of a cup norof any prayers does not rule out this possibility. The point, however, isthat this episode often is mentioned as evidence that in Paul’s time, atleast Gentile churches already had replaced Sabbath with Sunday as aday of worship.
Yet, before making such a claim, it is necessary to establish theprecise day on which the meeting took place, as well as the nature ofthe meeting. The reference to the use of lights (Acts 20:8), togetherwith the fact that Paul’s message continued until midnight (Acts 20:7),and then until daybreak (Acts 20:11), not to mention the deep sleep ofEutychus (Acts 20:9), makes it clear it was a night meeting.
The question, though, is whether it was the night before Sunday orthe night after Sunday. The answer depends on what system of timereckoning Luke is using, whether the Jewish system from sundownto sundown or the Roman one from midnight to midnight. If it is theformer, then it was Saturday night; in case of the latter, it was Sundaynight.
Either way, the context of Acts 20:7–12 indicates that, even if themeeting was on a Sunday night, it was not a regular church meeting buta special one due to Paul’s departure the following morning. It is hardto see, then, how this isolated and exceptional episode affords supportfor Sunday keeping. The fact is, it doesn’t.
Dwell more on all the reasons for the validity of keeping theseventh-day Sabbath. How does the powerful biblical supportfor the Sabbath help affirm us in our identity as Seventh-dayAdventist Christians and the calling that we have been given tospread the three angels’ messages to the world?
Wednesday September 5 Miletus On his way to Jerusalem, Paul made another stop, this time atMiletus, where he had the opportunity to convey his farewell addressto the Ephesian church leaders.
Read Acts 20:15–27. What was Paul’s emphasis in the introductorypart of his speech?
Since he already had made plans for a new journey, which includedRome and Spain (Rom. 15:22–29), Paul believed that he would neverreturn to Asia. So, he started his speech with a kind of accountabilityreport of the years spent in Ephesus. Such a report, however,aimed not only at the past, that is, the way he had lived among theEphesians, but also at the future, for he feared what could happen tohim in Jerusalem.
Paul’s fear was not unfounded. The Jerusalem church viewed himwith some skepticism, if not hostility, due to his past as persecutorand the circumcision-free gospel he preached (Acts 21:20–26). To theJewish authorities, he was nothing but a traitor and an apostate fromtheir religious traditions (Acts 23:1, 2). By mid-first century, especiallyon account of Roman misrule, Judea also was gripped by revolutionaryand nationalistic ideals. This atmosphere influenced all segmentsof Jewish society, including possibly the church. In such context, theactivities of that former Pharisee among the Gentiles must have madehim a figure of notoriety (Acts 21:27–36).
Paul also had more concerns. In Acts 20:28–31, Paul focused onhow the church leaders in Ephesus should handle the subject of falseteachers, whom he compared to savage wolves who would try to misguideand pervert the flock. So even in the church itself, and even inthe earliest days of the church, the danger of false teachers was real.As Solomon said in another time and another context: “There is nothingnew under the sun” (Eccles. 1:9, NKJV). A history of the Christianchurch reveals the incredible damages that false teachers have broughtto the church. The problem will exist until the end (2 Tim. 4:3), too.
No question, Paul had a lot of things on his mind, a lot of concerns;and yet, his faithfulness and his diligence never wavered.
Read 2 Corinthians 4:8–14. What is Paul saying here that weneed to apply to ourselves, especially when trials come? Wheredoes Paul put his ultimate hope?
Thursday September 6 Tyre and Caesarea After Miletus, Luke records Paul’s journey in some detail. Still enroute to Jerusalem, the apostle spent a week in Tyre, on the Phoeniciancoast, where the ship was to be unloaded (Acts 21:1–6). However, whilehe was there, the believers urged him not to go to Jerusalem. That thebelievers were led by the Spirit to warn Paul not to go to Jerusalem isnot necessarily in contradiction to the apostle’s earlier guidance. TheGreek etheto en topneumati in Acts 19:21 likely should be renderedas “resolved/purposed in the Spirit” (ESV, NRSV, NKJV), rather than asif Paul had come to this decision all by himself. The point is that theSpirit may have shown the Tyrean Christians the dangers that lay aheadof Paul; and so, out of human concern, they recommended that he notproceed with his intent. Paul himself was not sure about what wouldhappen to him in Jerusalem (Acts 20:22, 23). Divine guidance does notalways make everything clear, even for someone like Paul.
Read Acts 21:10–14. What special incident took place in Caesareaconcerning Paul’s trip to Jerusalem?
Agabus was a prophet from Jerusalem who had already been introducedin the famine episode in Acts 11:27–30. In a way similar to someOld Testament prophecies (for example, Isa. 20:1–6, Jer. 13:1–10),his message was an acted one; it functioned as vivid illustration ofwhat would happen to Paul when he arrived in Jerusalem and how hisenemies would hand him over to the Gentiles (the Romans).
Those who were with Paul apparently took Agabus’s message as awarning, not as a prophecy, and so they tried by all means to convince theapostle he should not go up to Jerusalem. Though deeply touched by theirreaction, Paul was determined to accomplish his mission, even at the costof his own life. For him, the integrity of the gospel and the unity of thechurch were more important than his own personal safety or interests.
“Never before had the apostle approached Jerusalem with so sad aheart. He knew that he would find few friends and many enemies. Hewas nearing the city which had rejected and slain the Son of God andover which now hung the threatenings of divine wrath.”—Ellen G.White, The Acts of the Apostles, pp. 397, 398.
Misunderstood, maligned, mistreated, and often reviled, Paulnevertheless pressed on in faith. How can we learn to do the samein discouraging circumstances?
Friday September 7
Further Thought: “The success attending the preaching of the gospelaroused the anger of the Jews anew. From every quarter were comingaccounts of the spread of the new doctrine by which Jews werereleased from the observance of the rites of the ceremonial law andGentiles were admitted to equal privileges with the Jews as children ofAbraham. . . . His [Paul’s] emphatic statement, ‘There is neither Greek norJew, circumcision nor uncircumcision’ (Colossians 3:11), was regarded byhis enemies as daring blasphemy, and they determined that his voice shouldbe silenced.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 390.
“And he could not count upon the sympathy and support of even hisown brethren in the faith. The unconverted Jews who had followed soclosely upon his track, had not been slow to circulate the most unfavorablereports at Jerusalem, both personally and by letter, concerning himand his work; and some, even of the apostles and elders, had receivedthese reports as truth, making no attempt to contradict them, and manifestingno desire to harmonize with him.”—Page 398.
Discussion Questions:
The twelve disciples Paul met in Ephesus were former followersof John the Baptist who already had become disciples ofJesus (Acts 19:1–7). Why do you think that it is correct to use thispassage to require rebaptism of Christians—already baptized byimmersion—from other denominations who join the Adventistfaith? Is there any significance in the fact that Apollos was notrebaptized?
Think about Paul’s situation. He is rejected by his own countrymenwho don’t believe in Jesus. Even of the Jews who dobelieve in Jesus, many view Paul with great suspicion, even distrust,because they think he is perverting the “landmarks.” Manyof the pagans hate the gospel he is proclaiming. And yet—what?Why did Paul press on, despite all this opposition? Though we arenot Paul, what can we take away for ourselves from his story?
Think about some of the other arguments that people use totry to prove either that the Sabbath was changed to Sunday or thatit is no longer binding. How do we answer those arguments and doit in a way to show that obedience to the Sabbath is no more legalismthan is obedience to any of the other nine commandments;that is, if we obey by faith and with the understanding of whereour only hope of salvation lies?
Sabbath Afternoon Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 21; Rom. 2:28, 29; Gal.5:6; Acts 22; Acts 23:1–30; Matt. 22:23–32.
Memory Text: “The following night the Lord stood near Paul andsaid, ‘Take courage! As you have testified about me in Jerusalem, soyou must also testify in Rome’ ” (Acts 23:11, NIV).
Soon after Paul’s first missionary journey, it became clear that therewas a fundamental disagreement in the church on how the Gentileswere to be admitted into the faith (Acts 15:1–5). Perhaps sensing agrowing conflict, Paul conceived a plan to promote unity in the church.Because at the council he was asked to remember the poor (Gal. 2:10),he decided to invite the Gentile churches to provide financial aid to thebrethren in Judea, the “collection for the saints” (1 Cor. 16:1), perhapshoping that it could help build bridges between the two groups.
This could explain his determination to go to Jerusalem at the endof his third journey, despite the risks. On one hand, he had a genuinelove for his fellow Jews (Rom. 9:1–5); on the other, he longed for aunited church (Gal. 3:28, 5:6). As Jews and Gentiles were equallysaved through faith, not through the works of the law (Rom. 3:28–30),any social alienation between them based on the ceremonial requirementsof the law was against the inclusive nature of the gospel (Eph.2:11–22).
Let’s follow Paul as he enters this new phase of his life and mission.
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, September 15.
When Paul arrived in Jerusalem, he warmly was received by believersassociated with Mnason, with whom he was to stay (Acts 21:16,17).
In Acts 21:18–22, James and the Jerusalem elders expressed theirconcerns about Paul’s reputation among local Jewish believers zealousof the Mosaic law. They had been informed that he was teachingthe Jewish converts who lived abroad to forsake Moses, telling them“not to circumcise their children or observe the customs” (Acts 21:21,NRSV).
This, of course, was not really true. What Paul did teach was that,in terms of salvation, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision meantanything, as both Jews and Gentiles were equally saved by faith in Jesus(Rom. 2:28, 29; Gal. 5:6; Col. 3:11). This is different from explicitlyencouraging Jews to disregard the law and its requirements. Obedienceis not, of course, in itself a synonym for legalism, though it could deliberatelybe twisted to mean just that.
Read Acts 21:23–26. How was Paul to demonstrate he still was a faithfulJew?
Paul was advised to be politically correct. He should show the falsityof the rumors about him by doing something very Jewish: sponsor theNazirite vow of some Jewish believers. This vow was a special act ofpiety through which a Jew would consecrate himself to God.
Unfortunately, Paul yielded. Heroes, including the biblical ones, havetheir flaws, as we can see in the lives of Abraham, Moses, Peter, andseveral others. It could be argued that Paul was just following his principleof behaving like a Jew when dealing with Jews (1 Cor. 9:19–23),or that he himself is reported to have taken a vow not long before (Acts18:18), though the precise nature of this vow is not clear. This time,however, it was a compromise, as it signified his endorsement of thelegalistic motives behind the recommendation. The implication of suchan attitude was exactly the one the apostle vigorously tried to oppose:that there are two gospels, one for Gentiles, of salvation by faith, andanother for Jews, of salvation by works. “He [Paul] was not authorizedof God to concede as much as they asked.”—Ellen G. White, The Actsof the Apostles, p. 405.
In our attempts to be relevant, how can we be careful not to makea similar kind of error?
Monday September 10
Riot in the Temple
Having accepted the church leaders’ suggestion, Paul would need toundergo a seven-day ritual purification to assist the completion of themen’s vow (Num. 19:11–13). At the same time, Jewish tradition stipulatedthat any person coming from Gentile lands would be unclean andso unable to enter the temple. This is why Paul had to purify himselfbefore going to the priests to give notice of his purification processrelated to the Nazirites (Acts 21:26).
Read Acts 21:27–36. What happened to Paul at the end of his sevendayperiod of purification?
A riot ensued, caused by those who stirred up the crowd against Paul,accusing him of attacking the most sacred symbols of Jewish religion,in particular of having desecrated the temple. As one of Paul’s travelcompanions was a Gentile believer from Ephesus named Trophimus(Acts 21:29), they thought the apostle had introduced him into thetemple’s inner court, where only Jews could enter. If the accusationwere legitimate, Paul would be guilty of a most serious offense. Alongthe wall that separated the outer from the inner court, there were signsin Greek and Latin warning Gentile visitors not to enter farther in,otherwise they would be personally responsible for their ensuing death.
“By the Jewish law it was a crime punishable with death for an uncircumcisedperson to enter the inner courts of the sacred edifice. Paulhad been seen in the city in company with Trophimus, an Ephesian, andit was conjectured that he had brought him into the temple. This he hadnot done; and being himself a Jew, his act in entering the temple was noviolation of the law. But though the charge was wholly false, it servedto arouse the popular prejudice. As the cry was taken up and bornethrough the temple courts, the throngs gathered there were thrown intowild excitement.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 407.
When the news of the riot reached a Roman fortress, the Romancommander, Claudius Lysias (Acts 21:31, 32; 23:26), came with troopsand rescued Paul before the crowd could kill him.
As the target of the attacks, Paul was arrested and bound with chainswhile the commander tried to inquire about what was going on. At thehysteric shouting of the crowd, he ordered the apostle to be taken tothe fortress.
Rumors, false ones at that, helped start this riot. Why must webe so careful with the kinds of rumors we listen to or, even worse,spread?
Tuesday September 11 Before the Crowd
Acts 21:37–40 tells what happened next. As Paul was being takeninto the Roman fortress for interrogation, he asked the commander forpermission to address the people, who were still frantically clamoringfor his death.
As he addressed the commander in the Greek language, the latterthought Paul might have been a certain Jew from Egypt who hadsome three years before initiated a revolt in Jerusalem against Romanoccupation. The revolt, however, was put down by the Roman forces;many of his followers were either killed or arrested, while the Egyptianescaped.
After saying that he was from Tarsus, not from Egypt, Paul wasgranted permission to speak. In his speech, he did not offer a detailedresponse to the accusations raised against him (Acts 21:28) but toldthem the story of his conversion, highlighting his devotion to Judaism,to the point of having persecuted believers in Jesus. When confrontedwith a number of revelations from the Lord, he had no choice but tofollow them. This explained the complete turnaround in his life and hiscall to preach to the Gentiles. Rather than get into a theological discussion,Paul recounted to them his own experience and why he was doingwhat he did.
Read Acts 22:22–29. How did the mob react to Paul’s statement thathe was an apostle to the Gentiles?
The decision to let Paul speak did not work out well. By referringto his commitment to the Gentiles, Paul seemed to be confirming thetruth of the charges against him (Acts 21:28), and the crowd got riledup again.
The Roman commander may not have understood everythingPaul said; so, he decided to have him examined by flogging. Yet,besides being a pure-blooded Jew (Phil. 3:5), Paul also had Romancitizenship, and when he mentioned this, the commander had toback down. As a Roman citizen, Paul could not be subject to thatkind of torture.
Read Paul’s speech (Acts 22:1–21). What evidence do you see thatbesides defending himself Paul was also preaching to his fellowJews? Why would he tell his conversion story? What is it aboutconversion stories that can have so much power?
When the Roman commander realized that Paul did not represent anythreat to the empire; that is, that the issue involved internal disputes ofthe Jews, he asked the Sanhedrin to take up the case (Acts 22:30; 23:29).
Read Acts 23:1–5. How did Paul start his defense before the Sanhedrin?
Paul’s introductory statement was met with a slap on the mouth, perhapsbecause, as a prisoner, his reference to God sounded blasphemous.His impulsive reaction gives us a glimpse of his temperament. By callingthe high priest a “whitewashed wall” (Acts 23:3), he could be echoingJesus’ condemnation of the Pharisees’ hypocrisy in Matthew 23:27.Yet, since Paul did not really know he was addressing the high priest,the possibility that he had bad eyesight is not to be entirely ruled out.
Read Acts 23:6–10. How did Paul ingeniously try to disrupt the proceedings?
The Sanhedrin was composed of both Sadducees and Pharisees whowere opposed to each other on a number of issues, doctrine being oneof them. The Sadducees, for example, whose scriptural canon includedonly the first five books of Moses (the Pentateuch), did not believe inthe resurrection of the dead (Matt. 22:23–32).
Paul’s statement (Acts 23:6), however, was more than a clever tacticto distract the Sanhedrin. Since his encounter with the resurrected Jesuson the Damascus road lay at the foundation of his conversion and apostolicministry, belief in the resurrection was the real issue for which hewas being judged (Acts 24:20, 21; 26:6–8). Nothing else could explainhow he had changed from his former zeal to become what he was now.If Jesus had not been raised from the dead, then his ministry was pointless,and he knew it, too (1 Cor. 15:14–17).
That night, as Paul was in the fortress, the Lord appeared to himwith this encouragement: “ ‘Be of good cheer, Paul; for as youhave testified for Me in Jerusalem, so you must also bear witnessat Rome’ ” (Acts 23:11, NKJV). Given the circumstances, sucha promise might have been particularly meaningful to Paul. Hislong-cherished wish to preach in Rome (Acts 19:21, Rom. 1:13–15,15:22–29) would still come to pass.
Upset with the fact that they had not yet gotten rid of Paul by legalmeans, a group decided to orchestrate a plan through which they wouldambush and kill him on their own.
Read Acts 23:12–17. What was their plan, and how was it thwarted?What does this teach us about how passionate people can be forcauses that are wrong?
That more than forty Jews conspired together against Paul and boundthemselves with an oath reveals how much hatred the apostle hadaroused in Jerusalem. Luke does not give us the identity of these men,but they were extremists willing to do whatever it took to protect theJewish faith from its alleged traitors and enemies. Such a level of religiousfanaticism, coupled with a revolutionary and nationalistic fervor,was not uncommon in first-century Judea and its environs.
In some providential way, however, the news about the plot reached theears of Paul’s nephew. It is somewhat disappointing that we know almostnothing about Paul’s family, but apparently he and his sister had beenbrought up in Jerusalem (Acts 22:3), where she married and had at leastone son. Anyway, Paul’s nephew—the diminutive neaniskos (Acts 23:18,22) and the fact that he was taken “by the hand” (Acts 23:19) imply he wasstill a teenager—was able to visit him in the fortress and tell him the story.
Read Acts 23:26–30. What message did commander Lysias send governorFelix about Paul?
The letter provided Felix with a fair report of the situation. In addition,it shows how Paul was benefited by his Roman citizenship. TheRoman law fully protected its citizens, who had the right, for example,to have a legal trial, in which they could appear before the court anddefend themselves (Acts 25:16), and the right to appeal to the emperorin case of an unfair trial (Acts 25:10, 11).
Irrespective of Felix’s reputation, he treated Paul in the proper legalmanner. After a preliminary interrogation, he ordered him to be keptunder guard until the accusers arrived.
Think about God’s providence in Paul’s life. How often have youhumbly acknowledged God’s providence in your own life despitethe trials and suffering you might have gone through?
Friday September 14
FurtherThought: “On this occasion, Paul and his companions formallypresented to the leaders of the work at Jerusalem the contributions forwardedby the Gentile churches for the support of the poor among theirJewish brethren. . . .
“These freewill offerings betokened the loyalty of the Gentile convertsto the organized work of God throughout the world and should have beenreceived by all with grateful acknowledgment, yet it was apparent to Pauland his companions that even among those before whom they now stoodwere some who were unable to appreciate the spirit of brotherly lovethat had prompted the gifts.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles,pp. 399, 400.
“Had the leaders in the church fully surrendered their feeling of bitternesstoward the apostle, and accepted him as one specially called of Godto bear the gospel to the Gentiles, the Lord would have spared him to them.God had not ordained that Paul’s labors should so soon end, but He did notwork a miracle to counteract the train of circumstances to which the courseof the leaders in the church at Jerusalem had given rise.
“The same spirit is still leading to the same results. A neglect to appreciateand improve the provisions of divine grace has deprived the church ofmany a blessing. How often would the Lord have prolonged the work ofsome faithful minister, had his labors been appreciated! But if the churchpermits the enemy of souls to pervert the understanding, so that they misrepresentand misinterpret the words and acts of the servant of Christ; ifthey allow themselves to stand in his way and hinder his usefulness, theLord sometimes removes from them the blessing which He gave. . . .
“After the hands are folded upon the pulseless breast, when the voice ofwarning and encouragement is silent, then the obdurate may be arousedto see and prize the blessings they have cast from them. Their death mayaccomplish that which their life has failed to do.”—Pages 417, 418.
Discussion Questions:
By going to Jerusalem despite knowing he would not be welcome,Paul put the interests of the church above his own personalinterests. To what extent should we follow his example?
What can we learn from Paul’s compromise in Jerusalem?How can we be politically correct without surrendering the principleswe live by? Or can we?
Church unity is always so important. How can we learn to worktogether, unified, even when we have different views of things?
Sabbath Afternoon
Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 24, Acts 25, Acts 26, 1 Cor.1:23.
Memory Text: “ ‘Whether quickly or not, I pray to God that not onlyyou but also all who are listening to me today might become such asI am—except for these chains’ ” (Acts 26:29, NRSV).
Paul’s transfer to Caesarea began a two-year imprisonment in thatcity (Acts 24:27), more precisely in Herod’s praetorium (Acts23:35), which was the official residence of the Roman governor.During those years, he had several hearings in which he would appearbefore two Roman governors (Felix and Festus) and a king (AgrippaII), thus further fulfilling the ministry that God gave him (Acts 9:15).
In all the hearings, Paul always claimed innocence, alleging that noevidence could be produced against him, as the absence of witnessesdemonstrated. In fact, the whole narrative is intended to show that Paulhad done nothing worthy of arrest and that he could be released had henot appealed to Caesar (Acts 26:32). These hearings, though, did offerhim opportunities to witness about Jesus and the great hope found inthe promise of the resurrection.
Yet, those were still years of deep anxiety, as well as of tediousconfinement in which the apostle seems to have had no support ofany kind from the church in Jerusalem, whose leaders “still cherisheda feeling that Paul should be held largely responsible for the existingprejudice.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 403.
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, September 22.
Sunday September 16 Before Felix Five days after Paul’s transfer to Caesarea, a group of importantJewish leaders—the high priest, some members of the Sanhedrin, and aprofessional lawyer named Tertullus—came down from Jerusalem andformally laid before Felix their case against the apostle (Acts 24:1–9).
This is the only trial in Acts in which the accusers employed a lawyer.In his speech, Tertullus tried an interesting strategy to win thegovernor’s favor. It was simply not true that, under Felix, the Jews hadenjoyed a long period of peace. In fact, no other governor had beenso repressive and violent, and this repression generated an enormousantagonism among the Jews toward Roman rule. With a lot of ingenuity,Tertullus used the governor’s own administrative policy to convincehim that he would achieve political stability in this case also onlyby means of severe repression.
Then, he went on to press three specific charges against Paul: (1) thatPaul was an agitator who constantly was fomenting unrest among Jewsthroughout the empire (Acts 24:5); (2) that he was a ringleader of theNazarenes (Acts 24:5), which implicated Christianity as a whole as akind of disruptive movement; and (3) that he had attempted to defilethe Jerusalem temple (Acts 24:6).
Read Acts 24:10–19. How did Paul answer each one of the charges?
Two further points raised by Paul were devastating to the accusers’case: (1) the absence of the Asian witnesses (Acts 24:18, 19), which hadthe potential of rendering the trial invalid, and (2) the fact that the Jewsthere could speak only about Paul’s hearing before the Sanhedrin the weekbefore (Acts 24:20), and as such they had nothing to accuse him of exceptthat he believed in the resurrection of the dead (compare with Acts 23:6).
Felix immediately understood the weight of Paul’s arguments, alsobecause he was somewhat acquainted with Christianity, probablythrough his Jewish wife, Drusilla. The fact is that he decided to adjournthe proceedings until further notice (Acts 24:22).
Felix’s response (Acts 24:24–27) revealed much about his character:he procrastinated, he was able to be bribed, and he was opportunistic.Paul had little chance of a fair hearing with someone like Felix.
Read Acts 24:16. Paul said that he strove always to have a “consciencevoid of offence toward God, and toward men.” What doesthat mean? What, if anything, would you have to change in orderto say the same thing?
Monday September 17
Before Festus After two years holding Paul in prison just to win the favor of theJews, Felix was replaced by Porcius Festus as the governor of Judea(Acts 24:27). Festus ruled from a.d. 60 to 62.
Read Acts 25:1–5. How does this help reveal the hatred that preachingthe truth can cause in those who don’t want to believe it?
Probably because they already had failed once in their attempt toconvince Felix of the charges against Paul, the leaders did not want totake any chances again. In what appears to have been Festus’ first visitto Jerusalem, they requested, as a favor to them, a change of jurisdiction,asking him to hand Paul back to them so he could be tried by theSanhedrin in accordance with Jewish law.
Yet, the request was only a camouflage to conceal their real intent:to kill Paul. Although Festus was willing to reopen the case, he saidthat the hearing would take place in Caesarea, not in Jerusalem, whichmeans that Paul would be tried by Roman law.
As soon as Festus was back in Caesarea, he convened the tribunal,and Paul’s opponents started laying out the charges against Paul (Acts25:7). This time Luke does not repeat the charges, but based on Paul’sanswer (Acts 25:8) we can see that they were similar to the onesbrought two years before, perhaps with the further emphasis that, forbeing an agitator, Paul also represented a threat to the empire.
Read Acts 25:9–12. When sensing that Festus could use him for politicalreasons, how did Paul react?
In the end, Festus turned out not much different from Felix withregard to his political strategies (Acts 24:27). Unwilling to lose theJews’ support so early in his administration by declaring Paul innocent,he thought of granting them their original request: to have the apostletried by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem.
This, however, was not acceptable to Paul, who knew he could notexpect to be treated fairly there, left to the whim of his enemies. So,capitalizing on his Roman rights, he insisted that he was entitled tobe tried by a Roman tribunal, and envisaging no other way out of thatprecarious situation, he resolved to appeal to the highest instance ofRoman justice, which was the emperor himself.
Tuesday September 18 Before Agrippa Festus agreed to grant Paul’s request to be sent to Rome (Acts 25:12).Meanwhile, the governor took advantage of a state visit by HerodAgrippa II to consult him concerning Paul’s case, in particular regardingwhat kind of information he should send to the emperor in his officialreport. Festus was not yet acquainted enough with Jewish affairs,and Agrippa could certainly help him (Acts 26:2, 3).
Read Acts 25:13–22. What did Festus tell Agrippa about Paul, and howdid the king respond?
Agrippa II, the last of the Herodians, cameto Caesarea with his sisterBernice to salute the new governor.
In his description of Paul’s case, Festus revealed his surprise that thecharges against him were not related to any capital offense, whetherpolitical or criminal. Instead, they had to do with matters concerningJewish religion, in particular a certain Jesus, “who was dead, but whomPaul asserted to be alive” (Acts 25:19, ESV). Paul had already statedbefore the Sanhedrin that he was on trial because of his belief in Jesus’resurrection, and now Festus made it clear that this was indeed the realpoint at issue.
Read Acts 25:23–27. How does Luke describe the ceremony in whichPaul appeared before Agrippa?
“And now Paul, still manacled, stood before the assembled company.What a contrast was here presented! Agrippa and Bernice possessedpower and position, and because of this they were favored by the world.But they were destitute of the traits of character that God esteems. Theywere transgressors of His law, corrupt in heart and life. Their courseof action was abhorred by heaven.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of theApostles, p. 434.
What should this story teach us about how outward appearances,which may be pleasing to human sight, can often be deceptiveabout the reality behind the appearance? What about ourselves,too? How different is the appearance from the reality?
Wednesday September 19 Paul’s Defense With the scene set and the royal guests seated alongside the governor,the prisoner was brought in to present his defense, which wasaimed primarily at Agrippa, as Festus had already heard it before (Acts25:8–11).
Read Acts 26:1–23. What was Paul doing in his speech before Agrippa?
Paul’s speech was in fact an autobiographical report of his life bothbefore and after his conversion. In terms of content, it recalls the one inActs 22:1–21, which he spoke before the crowd in Jerusalem.
The apostle began by trying to secure Agrippa’s favor. He acknowledgedhis gratitude for the opportunity to state his case before such aneminent person, all the more so because Agrippa was well acquaintedwith all the customs and issues related to Jewish religion. For thatreason, Agrippa could be of great assistance in helping the Romangovernor understand that the charges brought against him had no meritand were false.
The speech can be divided into three parts. In part one (Acts 26:4–11), Paul described his former Pharisaic piety, which was widely knownamong his contemporaries in Jerusalem. As a Pharisee, he believed inthe resurrection of the dead, which was essential to the fulfilment ofIsrael’s ancestral hope. The Jews, therefore, were being inconsistent inopposing his teaching, for there was nothing in it that was not fundamentallyJewish. But he understood their attitude quite well, and thatwas because he himself had once found it so incredible that God couldhave raised Jesus that even he persecuted those who believed that way.
In part two (Acts 26:12–18), Paul reported how his perspective hadchanged since his encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus andthe call that he received to take the gospel message to the Gentiles.
Paul says, finally, that the impact of what he had seen (Acts 26:19–23)was such that he had no choice but to obey and to carry out his missionaryactivity, the only reason that he was now on trial. The real issuebehind his arrest, therefore, was not that he had violated the Jewish lawor desecrated the temple. Rather, it was because of his message of Jesus’death and resurrection, which was in full harmony with the Scripturesand allowed believing Gentiles to have an equal share in salvation.
Read Acts 26:18. According to that text, what happens to thosewho have salvation in Christ? How have you experienced thisreality?
Thursday September 20 Paul Before the Leaders Although Paul was speaking to Agrippa, Festus was the first to react,as seen in Acts 26:24. Festus would have had no problem if Paul hadspoken about the immortality of the soul, but even the ancient GrecoRomansknew that both concepts—immortality and resurrection—donot go along well with one another. Thus, they kept the former andrejected the latter. This is why Paul says elsewhere that the gospel wasfoolishness to Gentiles (1 Cor. 1:23).
In a respectful manner, Paul defended the sanity of his ideas andturned to Agrippa, a Jew who could not only understand him but alsowho could confirm that what he was saying was in agreement with theHebrew prophets (Acts 26:25, 26).
Read Acts 26:27, 28. What was Agrippa’s response to Paul’s pressingquestion?
Paul’s question put Agrippa in a difficult position. As a Jew, hewould never deny his belief in the Scriptures; on the other hand, if hegave an affirmative answer, there would be no option but for him toaccept Jesus as the Messiah. His reply was a clever escape from thelogical trap he was in: “ ‘Are you so quickly persuading me to becomea Christian?’ ” (Acts 26:28, NRSV; compare with ESV, NIV)—this is abetter translation of the Greek than the traditional, “ ‘You almost persuademe to become a Christian’ ” (NKJV).
Paul’s rejoinder reveals an impressive level of commitment to the gospel:“ ‘Whether quickly or not, I pray to God that not only you but alsoall who are listening to me today might become such as I am—except forthese chains’ ” (Acts 26:29, NRSV). In his last words in that hearing, theapostle did not plead to be free, as were those listening to him. Instead,he wished they could be like him, except for the chains that bound him.Paul’s missionary zeal greatly surpassed his care for his own safety.
Read Acts 26:30–32. How did Agrippa express his conviction of Paul’sinnocence?
Festus needed Agrippa’s help only to fill in the report (Acts 25:25–27). Paul’s appeal to Caesar had already been formally granted (Acts25:12). The prisoner was no longer under the governor’s jurisdiction.
Read Acts 26:24–28. What did Paul ultimately appeal to, andwhat should this tell us about what our final authority in mattersof faith should always be?
Friday September 21
Further Thought: “Did the mind of Agrippa at these words revert tothe past history of his family, and their fruitless efforts against Himwhom Paul was preaching? Did he think of his great-grandfatherHerod, and the massacre of the innocent children of Bethlehem? of hisgreat-uncle Antipas, and the murder of John the Baptist? of his ownfather, Agrippa I, and the martyrdom of the apostle James? Did he seein the disasters which speedily befell these kings an evidence of thedispleasure of God in consequence of their crimes against His servants?Did the pomp and display of that day remind Agrippa of the time whenhis own father, a monarch more powerful than he, stood in that samecity, attired in glittering robes, while the people shouted that he was agod? Had he forgotten how, even before the admiring shouts had diedaway, vengeance, swift and terrible, had befallen the vainglorious king?Something of all this flitted across Agrippa’s memory; but his vanitywas flattered by the brilliant scene before him, and pride and selfimportancebanished all nobler thoughts.”—Ellen G. White Comments,The SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 6, pp. 1066, 1067.
Discussion Questions:
In class, discuss Paul’s decision to appeal to Caesar. Was thisdecision correct (compare with Acts 25:25; 26:31, 32)? To whatextent can we legitimately make strategic decisions to protect ourselvesinstead of relying entirely on God’s care?
Reflect on Paul’s statement to Agrippa: “ ‘Therefore, KingAgrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision’ ” (Acts26:19, NKJV). What does it tell us about Paul? How faithful arewe to our missionary calling as Christians (1 Pet. 2:9, 10)?
Paul had a passion for people—not for numbers, but forpeople. In his final hearing in Caesarea, he said to his audiencethat his heart’s desire was that all of them would be like him; thatis, saved by God’s grace (Acts 26:29). He did not wish his ownfreedom or justice more than he wished them to experience God’ssalvation. What can we learn from his example here? How muchare we willing to sacrifice in order to see the gospel spread?
Agrippa had a chance to hear the gospel right from the mouthof Paul. And yet, he rejected it. How can we be careful not to missgreat opportunities when they appear right before us? That is,how can we stay spiritually attuned to the realities around us?
Sabbath Afternoon
Read for This Week’s Study: Acts 27, Acts 28, Rom. 1:18–20.
Memory Text: “ ‘Do not be afraid, Paul; you must stand beforeCaesar’ ” (Acts 27:24, ESV).
Paul had long wished to visit Rome, but his arrest in Jerusalemchanged everything. By giving in to the legalistic pressure ofthe Jerusalem church leaders, he ended up in Roman custodyfor almost five years, including the time he spent on the sea journey toItaly. This change represented a severe blow to his missionary plans.
Despite the setback, Jesus Himself promised that the apostle wouldstill testify of Him in Rome (Acts 23:11). Even when we fail Him,God may still give us another chance, though He does not always spareus from the consequences of our actions. Not only was Paul taken toRome as a prisoner, but there is no biblical evidence that he ever wentto Spain, as he had hoped to do (Rom. 15:24). After being releasedfrom what is known as the first Roman imprisonment, Paul would bearrested again, this time to suffer martyrdom (2 Tim. 4:6–8) under Neroin a.d. 67.
Yes, Paul made it to Rome, and while waiting in his house-prison tobe tried before the emperor, he spoke, despite his chains (Eph. 6:20,Phil. 1:13), without hindrance to whoever came to him (Acts 28:30,31), including important figures from Caesar’s household (Phil. 4:22).
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, September 29.
Sunday September 23 Sailing to Rome After about two years of confinement in Caesarea (Acts 24:27), Paulwas to be sent to Rome. Judging by the first person plural and the richnessof details used to describe the long and turbulent sea journey toItaly (Acts 27:1–28:16), Luke was accompanying Paul, as was anotherChristian named Aristarchus (Acts 27:2). Another important characterin the story was the Roman centurion, Julius, who had other prisonersas well in his charge (Acts 27:1).
It was late summer when they departed. The Fast (Acts 27:9) refersto the Day of Atonement, in the second half of October. Because of thewinter conditions, travel in the Mediterranean was normally avoidedbetween November and March. This time, however, they faced difficultiesfrom the beginning, and only after much delay they reached thesmall bay of Fair Havens, in the island of Crete (Acts 27:8).
Read Acts 27:9–12. While in Fair Havens, how did Paul intervene inthe story, and how was his intervention received?
Paul’s warnings went unheeded, and so they decided to sail westwardanother 40 miles to a harbor (Phoenix) where they could winter with safety.Unfortunately, with a sudden change in the weather, they were caught in sucha violent tempest that the crew had no option but to let the ship be drivensouthwest by the wind, away from land. Soon they began to throw the cargooverboard and even some of the ship’s gear in a frantic attempt to lighten it,as it was already taking on water. The situation was dramatic. After severaldays of scant daylight, poor visibility, heavy rain, and raging winds, withoutknowing where they were and in complete exhaustion, they “finally gave upall hope of being saved” (Acts 27:20, NIV).
Read Acts 27:21–26. What was Paul’s second intervention in the story?
In prophetic words, Paul told the crew a message he had just receivedfrom God. There was no reason to despair or lose hope. There wouldstill be danger and loss, but all of them would survive.
Why would such a faithful and dedicated servant of the Lord likePaul have to suffer through so much? What lessons can we learnfrom his experiences?
Monday September 24 The Shipwreck In his second intervention in the story, Paul assured all who were onboard—276 people altogether (Acts 27:37)—that, though not everythingwould come out fine, there would be no casualties; only the shipwould go down (Acts 27:22). Fourteen days later, the apostle’s wordswere fulfilled. Still under a terrible storm and with the ship completelyadrift, the sailors sensed land was near, possibly because they couldhear the noise of breakers (Acts 27:27). After a series of soundings,and fearing the ship would be driven against the rocks along the shore,they dropped four anchors from the back of the ship in order to reducetheir speed; meanwhile, they desperately asked their gods for daylightto come (Acts 27:28, 29).
Read Acts 27:30–44. What lessons are here for us in this story?
In the beginning of the journey, the centurion treated Paul well buthad no reason to trust the apostle’s nautical judgment earlier in thetrip. After two weeks, however, things were different. Paul had alreadygained the centurion’s respect with his prophetic intervention about theshipwreck (Acts 27:21–26), which was heading now to its fulfillment.
Paul urged the people on board to eat, otherwise they would nothave the strength to swim and get ashore. Divine providence does notnecessarily exempt us from doing what would normally be our duty.“Throughout this narrative a nice balance is maintained between God’sassurance of their safety and the efforts of the people involved to ensureit.”—David J. Williams, Acts (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990), p. 438.
As morning approached, the sailors came in sight of land; it wasa bay with a beach, where they decided to run the ship aground. Theship, however, never reached the beach. Instead, it struck a sandbar andended up breaking apart by the force of the waves. The soldiers’ planto kill the prisoners to prevent them from escaping was stopped by thecenturion, mainly because of Paul. In the end, as God had promised, nota single life was lost.
What should it say to us about the power of Paul’s witness, andhis character, that in a desire to keep Paul alive the soldiers wereforbidden to kill any of the prisoners?
Tuesday September 25 In Malta It was only upon reaching the shore that the survivors learned theywere in Malta, a small island in the center of the Mediterranean, justsouth of Sicily. In the two weeks they had been adrift in the sea, yieldedto the force of the wind, they had covered about four hundred seventyfivemiles since Fair Havens, in Crete. Now they would have to wait outthe three months of winter before continuing their journey (Acts 28:11).
Read Acts 28:1–10. What happened to Paul on the island of Malta, andhow was God able to use him?
The people of Malta were very friendly and hospitable, and their firstaction toward Paul and his group, who were all wet and cold, was tolight a fire to warm them up; the temperature in Malta at this time ofthe year would not be higher than about 50°F.
The incident of the snake drew the people’s attention to Paul. At first,the local pagans viewed the fact that he was bitten as an act of divineretribution. They thought Paul was a murderer who had managed toescape from death by drowning but was still caught by the gods, orperhaps the Greek goddess Dik -e, the personification of justice and vengeance.Because the apostle did not die, he was hailed as a god, as hadhappened in Lystra several years before (Acts 14:8–18). Though Lukedoes not dwell on the episode, it is probably safe to assume that Paultook advantage of this situation to bear witness of the God he served.
Publius was either the Roman procurator of Malta or just a local dignitary,but he welcomed Paul and his companions for three days untilthey found a more permanent place to stay. At any rate, the healing ofthis man’s father gave Paul the opportunity to engage in a sort of healingministry among the Maltese people.
In Luke’s account, there is no mention of a single convert or of anycongregation Paul left behind when he departed from Malta. Suchomission might be entirely coincidental, but it illustrates the fact thatour mission in the world goes beyond baptisms or church planting; italso involves concern for people and their needs. This is the practicalaspect of the gospel (Acts 20:35; compare with Titus 3:14).
How fascinating that these islanders, who were ignorant aboutGod’s law, had a sense of divine justice. Where, ultimately, didthat come from? See Rom. 1:18–20.
Wednesday September 26 Paul in Rome, Finally After three months in Malta, Paul and his companions were finallyable to continue their journey (Acts 28:11). They arrived in Puteoli(Acts 28:13)—modern Pozzuoli, in the Bay of Naples—from wherethey would travel to Rome by road (see Acts 28:11–16).
The news of Paul’s approach quickly reached Rome, and from therea group of believers traveled several miles south to welcome him.Though he had never been to Rome, the apostle had numerous friendsin the city: co-workers, converts, relatives, and many others who werevery dear to him (Rom. 16:3–16). The meeting on the Appian Way musthave been particularly moving, especially in view of the shipwreckand the fact that Paul was now a prisoner. As a result of such a uniquedemonstration of love and care on the part of his beloved friends, theapostle thanked God and felt deeply heartened as he was about to facetrial before the emperor.
In his official report, Festus certainly must have written that accordingto Roman law, Paul was not guilty of any significant crime (Acts25:26, 27; 26:31, 32). This probably explains why he was allowed torent a private dwelling (Acts 28:30) instead of being sent to a regularprison or military camp, though after Roman fashion he was chainedto a soldier the whole time. That Paul was at his own expense implieshe was able to carry on his own trade (Acts 18:3).
Read Acts 28:17–22. What did Paul do as soon as he settled down?
Though Paul could not go to the synagogue, the synagogue couldcome to him. So, soon after his arrival, following his policy of goingfirst to the Jews (Rom. 1:16), he called together the local Jewish leadersto state his innocence and explain, as he had done before, that he hadbeen arrested for no reason other than the hope of Israel (Acts 23:6,24:15, 26:6–8). His intention was not so much to defend himself asto create an atmosphere of trust that allowed him to preach the gospel,showing how Jesus’ resurrection was the fulfillment of Israel’s ancestralhope. Surprised that they had not received any information fromJerusalem about Paul, the Jews decided to hear him.
Read Acts 28:22. What does this tell us about the hostility againstthe believers still at this time? How can we stay faithful evenwhen others are talking against our faith?
Thursday September 27 The Victory of the Gospel On a set day, the Jews came in large numbers to hear Paul’s presentationof the gospel (Acts 28:23).
Read Acts 28:24–31. What was Paul’s point in quoting Isaiah in thiscontext?
The quotation from Isaiah 6:9, 10 describes what happens when peoplerefuse to accept the divine message. Though some Jews believed,others didn’t, and so, because of this great dispute, the apostle had nochoice but once again to turn to the Gentiles (Acts 13:46, 47; 18:6).
Paul had to wait two years to be tried by the emperor. Meanwhile,though restricted to his house-prison, he was still able to share thegospel without hindrance with those who came to him. The last sceneof Acts is one that emphasizes the victory of the gospel, as no force,whether Jewish or Roman, had been able to stop its progress.
It is not clear why Luke finishes his book at this point, as there isevidence that, due to the weakness of the case against Paul, he wasreleased from this imprisonment, went on another missionary journey,and was again taken to Rome and executed (2 Tim. 4:6–8). Perhaps,from the standpoint of Luke’s literary purpose, by having preachedeven in distant Rome, the gospel already had reached the “ends of theearth” (Acts 1:8, NIV).
“Paul’s patience and cheerfulness during his long and unjust imprisonment,his courage and faith, were a continual sermon. His spirit, sounlike the spirit of the world, bore witness that a power higher thanthat of earth was abiding with him. And by his example, Christianswere impelled to greater energy as advocates of the cause from thepublic labors of which Paul had been withdrawn. In these ways werethe apostle’s bonds influential, so that when his power and usefulnessseemed cut off, and to all appearance he could do the least, then it wasthat he gathered sheaves for Christ in fields from which he seemedwholly excluded.”—Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 464.
From the standpoint of the church’s mission, however, it could be saidthat the book of Acts—or the history of the spreading of the gospel—is not yet finished, and it is here that each one of us enters the picture.Many more exciting and dramatic chapters have been written throughoutthe centuries, sometimes with the blood of God’s faithful witnesses.Now it is our turn to add one more chapter, the last one (we hope!), andbring the mission Jesus left with the disciples to its full completion—“and then the end will come” (Matt. 24:14, NKJV).
Friday September 28
Further Thought: “Christ has given to the church a sacred charge.Every member should be a channel through which God can communicateto the world the treasures of His grace, the unsearchable riches ofChrist. There is nothing that the Saviour desires so much as agents whowill represent to the world His Spirit and His character. There is nothingthat the world needs so much as the manifestation through humanity ofthe Saviour’s love. All heaven is waiting for men and women throughwhom God can reveal the power of Christianity.”—Ellen G. White, TheActs of the Apostles, p. 600.
“Long has God waited for the spirit of service to take possession ofthe whole church so that everyone shall be working for Him accordingto his ability. When the members of the church of God do theirappointed work in the needy fields at home and abroad, in fulfillmentof the gospel commission, the whole world will soon be warned and theLord Jesus will return to this earth with power and great glory.”—Page111.
Discussion Questions:
How does Luke portray Paul’s faith in God throughout thewhole journey to Rome? How were others affected by such unconditionalfaith?
Despite everything he had gone through, Paul never gave uphis faith or his mission. In Rome, he continued to preach despitehis limited freedom. What can we do when tempted to give up onour proclamation of the gospel to someone?
Read Romans 1:14, 15. Why did Paul feel himself underobligation—or a debtor—to preach the gospel to everybody? Arewe less obligated than he was? Consider this statement: “To savesouls should be the lifework of everyone who professes Christ.We are debtors to the world for the grace given us of God, for thelight which has shone upon us, and for the discovered beauty andpower of the truth.”—Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church,vol. 4, p. 53.
Read again the passage from Isaiah that Paul used. How couldthis idea apply to us? Yes, we have been given a great deal of truth,but if we harden ourselves to it, or even to aspects of it that mightconflict with our own wishes or desires, what danger could we facespiritually?
Imagine being the soldier chained to Paul. What do you thinkhe saw in the man to whom he was so closely tied?