Chapter 13
2021 Opens with this verse:
1 Now there were in the church at Antioch prophets and teachers, Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen a lifelong friend of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. [Act 13:1 ESV]
Spiritual Gifts, given by the Holy Spirit, are in full operation in the church at Antioch, a church with probably a large majority of Gentiles. If we go by MacArthur's book on Spiritual Gifts, then I think what we are talking about here are gifted men, and not the gifts themselves. I think so because the men are named, the men are in view here and not the gifts themselves. Again, based on references from MacA's book, "prophets and teachers" are a single office, and corresponds to those called pastors and teachers elsewhere. Pastors and teachers are today's "preachers", so prophets and teachers were what we today would call the "staff ministers" at the church in Antioch. It is quite an interesting list when viewed in that light.
While Saul is still in Antioch, the church there, in prayer and fasting, receives direction from the Holy Spirit to set Saul and Barnabas apart, and send them off on to the work God has for them. So they pray some more, lay hands on them, and send them off.
2021 - Note that ESV puts it "and the Holy Spirit said", while they were worshiping the Lord and fasting". While they may have been seeking God's direction, it does not say that they had a problem that needed solving, nor were they trying to decide whether or not to send Paul and Barnabas off. They were worshiping, and fasting - that is, depriving themselves of earthly things in order to be more in the spirit. We don't do this anymore. I am thinking that we most certainly should.
They set off, going first to Seleucia, and take a ship to Cyprus. In Salamis, a city of Cyprus, they preach in the synagogues. Note that it is synagogues, plural. Also remember that there were several synagogues mentioned in the stoning of Stephen. The beginning of denominations? Or just differences in language? Likely some of both by this point. John Mark is there to assist them. He wasn't "sent", but went anyway.
2021 - ESV does not say "John Mark", it just says John. Twice previously we have seen John and Peter travel together, and I believe the first time was when they went to Antioch together to see the converted Gentiles? Why do we not think this is the apostle John? MSB note here refers us back to Acts 12:12, where the phrase used is "John who was also called Mark. John Mark is Barnabas' cousin (Col. 4:10). There are many other references to John Mark listed in this MSB note. So a "preponderance" of the information we have indicates that this was John Mark. And I suspect that as we read further, it is going to get even more obvious who he is.
They get to the other end of the island and the proconsul there - a Roman official - wants to hear what they have to say. But a Jewish false prophet named Bar-Jesus (Elymas) opposes them and tries to prevent this. ESV says Bar-Jesus was a magician - implying that his "power of prophecy" was an imitation derived from Satan and his angels, and not a Spiritual gift. It is interesting to see this contrast, and the different labeling applied to it. These men - Paul, Barnabas and John - recognized that Bar-Jesus was a fake right away.
vs 9:
9 But Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him [Act 13:9 ESV]
Is this the first place Saul is called Paul? Right after Bar-Jesus is also called Elymas? Did a search and this is indeed the case. Just kind of slips it in there, no big deal. This verse:
8 But Elymas the magician (for that is the meaning of his name) opposed them, seeking to turn the proconsul away from the faith. [Act 13:8 ESV]
By his actions, even if you didn't have a gift of discernment, you would identify this Elymas as false because he is opposing the gospel. I doubt it is always so obvious, but in this case, as an example for us perhaps, it was.
(Found this map at https://www.christianbiblereference.org/imagefiles/PaulsTravels.jpg)
Came back and added this from MSB on 1/23/21:
1st Missionary Journey: Acts 13:1 - 14:28
2nd: Acts 15:36-18:22
3rd: Acts 18:23-21:16
Journey to Rome: 27:1-28:31
Paul calls the man a son of the devil, full of all deceit and villainy. Paul tells him he won't be able to see for a while, and the man is blind and has to have someone to lead him around. The Pro-consul believes over this miracle. This is very different from any previous miracle. Jesus never did a "negative" sign.
They get on another ship and sail from Paphos to Perga. Here, John left them and returned to Jerusalem. Not to Antioch where they'd left from, but to Jerusalem, where his mother lived. This comes up later, because Paul no longer feels he can count on John, after he abandons them here. It will be a long time before the two resolve this, and Barnabas will take John's side, perhaps because being cousins, he knows John better. At any rate, after he leaves, they arrive in Antioch in Pisidia. Is this the same Antioch they left from? (The map above indicates not.) They go to the synagogue there and are offered a chance to speak. Paul does so.
Paul recounts God's choosing of Israel, their growth in number while in Egypt, the conquest of Canaan, the progression of their governments, and then speaks of Jesus, son of David. He says John came proclaiming a baptism of repentance, but John said he was not "the One".
2024 - These verses:
24 Before his coming, John had proclaimed a baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel. 25 And as John was finishing his course, he said, 'What do you suppose that I am? I am not he. No, but behold, after me one is coming, the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to untie.' [Act 13:24-25 ESV], or like this in NASB95:
24 after John had proclaimed before His coming a baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel. 25 "And while John was completing his course, he kept saying, 'What do you suppose that I am? I am not [He.] But behold, one is coming after me the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to untie.' [Act 13:24-25 NASB95].
This is worded as if the whole baptism of repentance BEGAN with John. It implies that this had never been done before - this identification of people with a teaching by public immersion. But then that phrase "while John was completing his course" makes it clear that baptism of repentance ended with John. We know that Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ continued - or was adopted as a sort of continuation of the immersion ritual that John had started. I think that word "course" is important. It is the "dromos", and the same word Paul uses here: 7 I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course,[G1408] I have kept the faith; [2Ti 4:7 NASB95]. It means "career", or perhaps "life's work". We know that as that message of John goes on, it says "He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire". So John told them that another baptism would replace the one he was doing. I believe John referred only to the baptism accompanied by signs that we see on the day of Pentecost and on a few other occasions. John was not talking about continued water baptism. Water baptism in the NT church was an identification of those who did it as having received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and fire...even though those physical manifestations seen earlier did not always, and with time never, accompanied that baptism. So water baptism said publicly that even though we don't speak in tongues, and we don't heal people with a touch as they did in the beginning, WE TOO have received the Holy Spirit, and we too have received gifts from God according to His purpose for our lives in Him. This is our testimony that the Spirit is already within us, and that we have gifts according to the Spirit.
2024 - After all these years, this explanation, based on these two verses, seems to clearly and concisely explain why baptism continued into the church age, though it is not a necessity for salvation.
2021 This verse is part of Paul's sermon:
27 For those who live in Jerusalem and their rulers, because they did not recognize him nor understand the utterances of the prophets, which are read every Sabbath, fulfilled them by condemning him. [Act 13:27 ESV] What a good verse. Though ignorant of the full meaning of what was right in front of them every day, they still were "players" in that script. As are we. This is a FB post!
2021 - And another verse from the sermon:
30 But God raised him from the dead, [Act 13:30 ESV] This earth-shaking, mind-boggling statement of the event so foundational to Christianity is just "inserted" right into the chronological retelling of events in Jerusalem. Then Paul begins to prove that this should have happened, was predicted to happen by the old prophets, and that in Jesus those predictions were fulfilled. So it does become the core of the sermon. Paul's audience were the members of the synagogue and those who feared God. So they would have been familiar with the OT prophecies. That is why Paul's statement of his being raised from the dead was so innocuous. He says it, then he immediately proves it with OT prophecy. If someone is unfamiliar with the OT, how do you present the gospel? That is what I'll be paying more attention to when I get to Mars Hill! That is why it is in here!
Then he tells them about Jesus, and sets about proving by the scriptures that events surrounding Jesus were the fulfillment of OT prophecy, and showing that Jesus was the Messiah. He also warns them using OT references that they should not reject Jesus, though the old scriptures say that many will.
2025 - Wednesday nights Dr. Jordan is teaching from Habakkuk. Because of that, I recognized this verse:
41 "'Look, you scoffers, be astounded and perish; for I am doing a work in your days, a work that you will not believe, even if one tells it to you.'" [Act 13:41 ESV]. Paul is preaching and he quotes Habakkuk. Paul's point is that the resurrection of Christ - really the incarnation and life of Christ in total, is a work that many will not believe. When Habakkuk said it, it was about the coming Chaldean invasion. So even though Paul is quoting Habakkuk here, he is not saying that the current situation is like what Habakkuk was a part of. Paul is saying that the magnitude, the almost incomprehensible complexity and perfection in all its aspects of the incarnation of Christ, of the arrival of the Messiah at the precise point in history required for all those prophecies to play out exactly as written, will be just as difficult for some to believe as was the coming Chaldean invasion, predicted at a time when it was Assyria that dominated the world. But the rise of Babylon was prophesied, and few there were who believed it when Habakkuk began to preach it, just as few among the Jews were going to believe that Jesus was the Messiah. The stone, the tiny stone that appeared so inconsequential at the beginning that it was more likely to be discarded than incorporated, turns out to be the chief corner stone.
For a change, they are invited back to the synagogue the next week so they can hear more. Many believe. The next Sabbath, almost the whole city gathers to hear them. But jealous Jews, seeing that their authority is undermined by the message of Christ, contradict and revile Paul and Barnabas. Paul says fine, we talked to you first, but since you choose to reject Jesus, we will go to the Gentiles. This is Paul's statement that if the Jews will treat him this way, then he and Barnabas will return to the Gentiles:
46 And Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly, saying, "It was necessary that the word of God be spoken first to you. Since you thrust it aside and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles. 47 For so the Lord has commanded us, saying, "'I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.'" [Act 13:46-47 ESV]
And again he quotes OT scripture to them, combining Isa 42:6 and 49:6. I have often wondered why this is "ok". Jesus also did this on at least one occasion that I remember and probably several - I am just not positive how many. What are the rules about doing this? The MSB note on this says that Paul is turning to the Gentiles to preach because the Jews have rejected the gospel, but based on these verses he quotes, this is not just Paul leaving in a huff. It was always intended that salvation be offered to the Gentiles.
The Gentiles are overjoyed at this turn of events. This verse:
48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed. [Act 13:48 ESV]
As many as were appointed....You don't have to like this, but this verse is not arguable without sounding like you're trying to overturn the truth. Proof test for limited atonement, irresistible grace maybe, unconditional election. I would say this verse is foundational to Calvinism
The Jews mount a strong opposition, and manage to run Paul and Barnabas out of the region. They shake the dust off their feet and go to Iconium.
2021 - I believe this is still talking about Antioch in Pisidia. It seems odd that after receiving such a strong positive response from the Gentiles in this place, and after saying they are turning to preaching to the Gentiles, they don't just leave, but they shake off the dust, as if they intend never to return. But looking at the map above, they do return and do so twice. Looking at the last verse of this chapter, vs 52, we see that many disciples, certainly saved if filled with the Spirit, were left here. I wonder if it is this Antioch, or the other one, that was home to Luke?
2025 - Reading this chapter about Antioch of Pisidia, seeing that the Gentiles converted in great numbers and began to preach themselves and to evangelize that whole region, we have to wonder why there is no NT Book called Antiochians. This surge of Gentile conversion was a huge event as Luke relates it to us, and yet we find no letters to them from Paul.