The Sanhedrin, the ruling body of the Jews in Jerusalem, had been confronted by the gospel at least five times in the past 25 years. They had anxiously deliberated over the growing popularity of Jesus after the raising of Lazarus, determining that He must die (John 11:47-53). In a hasty and sub rosa meeting, they determined Jesus was guilty of blasphemy and must die (Luke 22:66-71). After the resurrection of Jesus, they arrested Peter and John and warned them not to preach in the name of Jesus any longer, wishing that they had some legal grounds to deal more severely with them (Acts 4:1-22). When the preaching didn’t stop, they arrested a larger group of the apostles and had them beaten to underscore what would happen if they continued to preach in the name of Jesus (Acts 5:17-42). Under pressure from the Hellenistic Jews, Stephen was tried (on eerily similar charges to those made against Paul (Acts 6:8—7:60). The Council hardly seems to have reached a verdict, when the mob drug Stephen out and stoned him. Now, more than 20 years later, Paul stood before the Council. The issues hadn’t changed much through the years. The charges against Paul are virtually the same as those against Stephen and not unlike those against Jesus. You think they would have learned something in all that time, but apparently, they hadn’t.

As the Sanhedrin assembled for the trial, Claudius Lysias was probably eagerly standing by, not so much to keep order (that was a typical Roman duty), as to hear the precise charges against Paul, so that he could then have some basis for dealing with Paul under Roman law, or an explanation for allowing his case to be handled by the Sanhedrin.

“Paul looked directly at the council and said, “Brothers, I have lived my life with a clear conscience before God to this day.” At that the high priest Ananias ordered those standing near Paul to strike him on the mouth.”

 Acts 23:1-2

Paul felt a strong sense of conviction before this Council as evidenced by his direct eye contact and his strong statements. This so incensed Ananias, the high priest, he ordered Paul’s mouth slapped. Why? 

I had to be honest with my own reaction to Paul’s words, which I have always glossed over when reading them in the past. Paul could, in the flesh, never say he had lived his life with a pure conscience. After all, he wrote that he was “chief of sinners” (1 Timothy 1:15)?  He admitted, with much regret, the suffering he had caused Christians before his conversion (Acts 22:4, 19).  How could his conscience be clear when he had done so much wrong?

Paul was speaking primarily of his conduct as a citizen. He had been civilly obedience, keeping the laws of the land. (This is, I’m told, borne out in the Greek, where the phrase used refers to civil conduct in most instances). If they charged that he was conducting himself contrary to Jewish and Roman civil laws, Paul knew he could stand the charges as false.

Additionally, Paul had a clear conscience regarding his past sins because the cross of Jesus Christ had absolved those sins. The death, burial and resurrection of Jesus had cleansed him. This was something Ananias could not claim, which might have been one reason for his pique of rage.

Ananias was one of the wickedest men who ever held the position, guilty of many of the things of which Paul was accused. Ananias had received his office from Herod of Chalcis (younger brother of Herod Agrippa I) in AD 47; he held it 11 or 12 years. Josephus, the Jewish historian, recorded that Ananias’ servants went to the threshing floors to seize the tithes that were to have gone to the common priests. A bold, insolent and temperamental man, he made himself wealthy on the ill-gotten gain of his office, sheltered a wicked “hit squad” of his own and collaborated with the Assassins of the country. He was instrumental in the persecution of Christians in Jerusalem.

“Then Paul said to him, “God is going to strike you, you whitewashed wall!  Do you sit there judging me according to the law, and in violation of the law, you order me to be struck?” Those standing near him said, “Do you dare insult God’s high priest?” Paul replied, “I did not realize, brothers, that he was the high priest, for it is written, ‘You must not speak evil about a ruler of your people.’”  Acts 23:3-5 

Having a defendant struck in the course of a trial was itself a violation of the law, something Ananias, a long-standing member of the Sanhedrin surely, knew. Paul hotly retorted to this flagrant disregard of the law, calling Ananias a “whitewashed wall” and indicating that God would strike him in due time. The expression “whitewashed wall” may have come to Paul’s mind from Jesus’ own dealings with Jewish authorities or from Ezekiel 13:10-16.  They were certainly prophetic, for Ananias was to be violently killed a few years later.

I think Paul, in a stressful situation, merely lost his temper when he was struck illegally. He admitted, when confronted, that he had not known that this was the high priest and he seems to confess it as sin. Although a lot of commentaries make much of Paul’s reaction, Luke does not really indicate the goodness or badness of the act. It was a human action and Paul was a human. Nothing we do, including our acts of obedience and worship, is entirely pure. Our purity comes from our identification with Jesus. Regardless of all the factors entering into Paul’s words, he did acknowledge error on his part. This was all a part of the divine plan. God’s will is not accomplished because we do the right thing, for all the right reasons. God’s will can be accomplished by evil men, acting out of evil motives, or by good men, acting out of mixed motives (Philippians 1:15-18).

Though the high priest had no regard for the law, Paul did. He knew the words and the intent of Exodus 22:28 and cited them to those nearby. For all of Paul’s freedom from the law, Paul still endeavored to live in accordance with the precepts and standards set by the law; he was obliged to show respect to this man, Ananias, not for his personal piety, but due his position.

“Then when Paul noticed that part of them were Sadducees, and the others Pharisees, he shouted out in the council, “Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. I am on trial concerning the hope of the resurrection of the dead!” When he said this, an argument began between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. (For the Sadducees say there is no resurrection, or angel, or spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all.)”  Acts 23:6-8

Paul probably realized at this point that he would not receive a fair trail before the Sanhedrin. His people were beyond listening to him. Even his testimony made them angry enough to kill him. All they sought was the legalization of his execution. Anything which Paul said would be used against him, if possible, or ignored. The words of our Lord, spoken to Paul in his “temple vision” many years before (Acts 22:18, 21), were even more relevant to Paul now. He must leave Jerusalem or be killed, and he must go to the Gentiles.

I don’t think Paul received divine instruction at this point as to his next move. He knew God’s will and he knew the people he was dealing with. If the decision of the Sanhedrin was definitely going to be unfavorable, he must seek to prevent a decision from being reached. The Sanhedrin was made up of warring factions and Paul knew how to exploit that by setting the Pharisees against the Sadducees. He declared “Hey, I’m a Pharisee, the son of Pharisees, on trial for the hope and resurrection of the dead!” (Acts 23:6).

The Pharisees strongly held to some beliefs that the Sadducees scorned and rejected. The Pharisees believed in the resurrection of the dead, angels and spirits, while the Sadducees reject all of these. Jesus had been immediately opposed by the Pharisees because of His willingness to associate with sinners and even Gentiles. Despite of their many differences with Jesus, many of their theological presuppositions were in agreement.

The Sadducees were not only more “liberal” theologically and doctrinally, but they were more “the establishment.” More willing to cooperate with the Roman government for their own gain, they held many of the positions of power and prestige, and did not wish to lose them. The Sadducees disagreed with Jesus more than the Pharisees on theological issues and they also strongly opposed Him because of the threat He posed to their position, power, and privileges. As Jesus took a public role in Jerusalem, the Sadducees took a more aggressive role in opposing Him, finally joining forces with the Pharisees to put Him to death.

Much changed with the resurrection. The Pharisees became gradually less aggressive in their opposition to the apostles, culminating in Gamaliel’s speech (Acts 5:33-39).  The Sadducees took the leading role in opposing the apostles and Christianity. As the gospel was based upon the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, they could not allow such teaching to go unchallenged, especially when they were accused of instigating the death of Jesus. The fragile alliance between the Sadducees and the Pharisees disintegrated at Paul’s trial into open disagreement and debate because he identified himself with the Pharisees in their belief in the resurrection from the dead and in the hope which stems from this belief. The Pharisees found they had more in common with Paul than they did with the Sadducees. What Paul claimed and taught was, by their own system of belief, believable. The Sadducees, on the other hand, found Paul’s experience and teaching totally unacceptable and unbelievable. Chaos ensued.

Presuppositions either open the door to other revelation or slam it shut. The presuppositions of the Pharisees (with which Paul agreed) inclined them to at least acknowledge the possibility of what Paul claimed. The presuppositions of the Sadducees closed the door to any consideration of anything Paul said, for they did not believe these things were in the realm of possibility. It is not that such people cannot be saved, but that their presuppositional foundations must first be shaken. This can only be done by the Holy Spirit.

“There was a great commotion, and some experts in the law from the party of the Pharisees stood up and protested strongly, “We find nothing wrong with this man. What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?” When the argument became so great the commanding officer feared that they would tear Paul to pieces, he ordered the detachment to go down, take him away from them by force, and bring him into the barracks.  The following night the Lord stood near Paul and said, “Have courage, for just as you have testified about me in Jerusalem, so you must also testify in Rome.” Acts 23:9-11 

Things hadn’t turned out well in the courtroom, but Jesus knew what the future held. On that night, He appeared to Paul and encouraged him, assuring him that His plans were coming together nicely.

We can learn from this passage that even the most faithful servants of God will suffer discouragement and despair, but God is the source of all comfort and encouragement. Paul was not told anything he did not already know, but he was assured that he was exactly where God wanted him to be. God had promised this would happen. Things looked bad, but God measures success differently than we do. We are successful in His eyes when we are faithful and obedient to the tasks He has given us. Paul hadn’t netted a lot of fish when he gave his testimony, but he’d accomplished his assigned task and how he was moving on to the next one.

While Jesus was encouraging Paul, it seems that some of the Jews were holding a meeting and conspiring to kill him. More than 40 Jews bound themselves in solemn oath to neither eat nor drink until Paul was dead. If they could not get the Roman authorities to kill him, they would use less savory means.

The Sanhedrin knew and approved of this plot because it could not have worked without the Roman commander being convinced to release him for another trial before the Sanhedrin. On the way there, Paul would simply disappear.

Make no mistake; God was in complete control here as well. What seems like a worsening of the situation was actually Paul’s ticket to safe conduct out of Jerusalem. Think about it. Paul’s nephew suddenly appears and is given access to Paul and then is received and taken seriously by the commander. Sovereignty at work! The commander was not about to lose a prisoner to the Jews. He took strong measures to assure Paul’s safe conduct from Jerusalem to a fair trial. He ordered 200 soldiers, 70 horsemen, and 200 spearmen to escort Paul safely to Caesarea and the custody of Felix the governor. They traveled in the darkness to Antipatris, a city about half way (about 35 or 40 miles) to Caesarea. We’ll study Paul’s trial before Felix later.

 My study of Acts has caused me to conclude that it doesn’t really matter whether or not we are perfectly correct in our actions, decisions and motives. None of us are ever completely pure, which is why we need a Savior. God does not need perfect followers to achieve His will. He doesn’t even need Christians to carry out His purposes. God used the apostles, Paul, the elders in Jerusalem, Roman officials, and unbelieving Jews to spread the gospel to the Gentiles, all the way to Rome and beyond. Some Christians spend agonized hours lamenting that our understanding of God’s will and our obedience to it is imperfect when God’s will in Acts is clearly never frustrated by sinful men or unfavorable conditions. We should strive to have a clean conscience before God. That is available to the worst sinner who trusts in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sin. Paul had been no different than his accusers a couple of decades before, yet his conscience was clean because of Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross.

Do you have a clear conscience before God? It can be, if you will personally trust in Jesus for the forgiveness of your sin. This salvation is not due to any good you have done or will do, but only due to what Jesus Christ has already done. Set aside all presuppositions about your own ability to draw near to God and allow Him to draw near to you.

The most embarrassing moment of my life was in Junior High School when the fire alarm went off while I was in the shower after gym class.  I had, uh, matured a bit earlier than my peers so that at 13, I had the body of an 18-year-old girl. This is not a problem when one is wearing clothes. Just select clothing that covers everything that should be covered. No problem! However, I wasn’t wearing anything in the shower and the teacher only allowed me enough time to grab my towel, which did not cover me adequately, something the boys’ gym class noticed right away.

Thus, I think I understand how Paul felt on those barracks steps as he addressed the Jewish crowd. He wanted to slip away into the stone, somehow fall through the cracks. I don’t think Paul was different from other men. He would gladly have accepted being carried off by the soldiers. However, God had other plans, so Paul asked the commander if he could speak to the crowd and, amazingly, the commander gave him permission.

It had been 25 years since the stoning of Stephen, when Saul had held the cloaks for those who executed him. At the time of his conversion, God made it clear that Paul had been saved for the purpose of proclaiming the gospel, not only to his fellow-Israelites, but to Gentiles and to kings (Acts 9:15). Though there had been a long passage of years, Paul was that day faced with the same situation that Stephen had been faced with. He was falsely accused for threatening the temple by Hellenistic Jews. Unlike Stephen, Paul had a defense rather than an indictment.

“Brothers and fathers, listen to my defense that I now make to you.” (When they heard that he was addressing them in Aramaic, they became even quieter.)  Then Paul said, “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus in Cilicia, but brought up in this city, educated with strictness under Gamaliel according to the law of our ancestors, and was zealous for God just as all of you are today. I persecuted this Way even to the point of death, tying up both men and women and putting them in prison, as both the high priest and the whole council of elders can testify about me. From them I also received letters to the brothers in Damascus, and I was on my way to make arrests there and bring the prisoners to Jerusalem to be punished.” Acts 22:1-5

While Stephen had shown that the Sanhedrin were very far from God, Paul sought to achieve commonality with his audience. He did not address the Hellenistic Jews who are accusing him or the Roman guard that was protecting/holding him. He addressed the Hebraic Jews in Aramaic. Perhaps he sensed that there was no reasoning with the Hellenistic Jews; perhaps he recognized that he had more in common with the Jerusalem Jews. I think, though, that Paul merely sought to share the gospel one last time to his own people.

His defense was that he was a Jew, born in Tarsus, but raised in Jerusalem under one of their most revered rabbis, Gamaliel. He had been zealous for God in the same way that they were now, even persecuting the church, arresting men and women, putting them in prison, even killing them. The High Priest and the Sanhedrin could testify to Saul’s zealotry for they had given him letters of introduction to Damascus where he was supposed to arrest Christians and bring them to Jerusalem for punishment.

So far so good.  I can imagine the crowd whispering among itself – do you think that’s Saul of Tarsus? Remember, he was an up-and-coming rabbi before he went a little nuts.

“As I was en route and near Damascus, about noon a very bright light from heaven suddenly flashed around me. Then I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?’ I answered, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ He said to me, ‘I am Jesus the Nazarene, whom you are persecuting.’ Those who were with me saw the light, but did not understand the voice of the one who was speaking to me. So I asked, ‘What should I do, Lord?’ The Lord said to me, ‘Get up and go to Damascus; there you will be told about everything that you have been designated to do.’ Since I could not see because of the brilliance of that light, I came to Damascus led by the hand of those who were with me. A man named Ananias,  a devout man according to the law, well spoken of by all the Jews who live there,  came  to me and stood beside me and said to me, ‘Brother Saul, regain your sight!’ And at that very moment I looked up and saw him. Then he said, ‘The God of our ancestors  has already chosen  you to know his will, to see the Righteous One, and to hear a command  from his mouth, because you will be his witness to all people  of what you have seen and heard. And now what are you waiting for?  Get up, be baptized, and have your sins washed away, calling on his name.’^” Acts 22:6-16

I will submit that Paul’s audience at this point had no problem with his testimony. This was his personal experience, telling about his encounter with God. It’s very hard to argue with someone’s personal experience. It was what he said next that would upset the Hebraic Jews as much as the false accusations had upset the Hellenistic Jews.

“When I returned to Jerusalem and was praying in the temple, I fell into a trance and saw the Lord saying to me, ‘Hurry and get out of Jerusalem quickly, because they will not accept your testimony about me.’ I replied, ‘Lord, they themselves know that I imprisoned and beat those in the various synagogues who believed in you. And when the blood of your witness Stephen was shed, I myself was standing nearby, approving, and guarding the cloaks of those who were killing him.’  Then he said to me, ‘Go, because I will send you far away to the Gentiles.’” Acts 22:17-21

Paul spoke of having a vision while in the temple praying. Jesus has spoken to him and told him to leave Jerusalem. We know from other accounts of his conversion that Paul was told by the Jerusalem saints to leave Jerusalem. My guess is he refused to go until this vision convinced him he must.  He thought he was safe because the Jerusalem Jews knew he had persecuted Christians. God assured him that he was not safe!

Yet it was not this admission that threw Paul’s audience into a rage. What set them off was Paul’s sharing that God intended to send him away from Jerusalem and the Jews to the Gentiles. This, they could not tolerate!

“The crowd was listening to him until he said this.  Then they raised their voices and shouted, “Away with this man from the earth! For he should not be allowed to live!” Acts 22:22-23 

Paul’s speech did not convince the crowds that they were mistaken. Instead, Paul’s words sent the crowds into an even greater frenzy, throwing dust into the air and yelling for his blood. It was not just that God had commanded Paul to go to the Gentiles with the gospel. The words of the Lord to Paul went beyond this. The command to “go to the Gentiles” was linked with a parallel command to “forsake the Jews in Jerusalem, who would not believe the gospel.” Distressing enough for a Jew to think of God’s blessings being shared with the Gentiles (Jonah had difficulty with this, remember), but this statement, quoted by Paul and made by the Lord, goes to the limit, by saying that God’s blessings will be taken from Jerusalem and sent to the Gentiles. This is exactly what Paul described in Romans 9-11, but it was the most horrifying thought a Jew could entertain. Jerusalem was in the midst of economic hard times and Jews were being expelled from Rome. Paul was telling his peers that the time of their blessings was coming to an end, due to their unbelief, and that times of blessings were coming to the Gentiles. If the nation Israel would not believe and obey God and take the “light to the Gentiles” God would use their unbelief as an instrument to proclaim the “light to the Gentiles.” God’s purposes would not be frustrated by Jewish unbelief and disobedience. But the times of refreshing for which every devout Jew looked forward were to be postponed to a later time, a time after the Gentiles had heard the good news of the Gospel.

We were told by Jesus, early in the Book of Acts (1:8) that the gospel would be proclaimed abroad, beginning at Jerusalem and extending to the remotest part of the earth. God was making that happen, not only through faithful men and women, trusting in Jesus and committed to doing His will, but also through the mistakes of a Roman commander, who probably should never have allowed Paul to speak, through the Hellenistic Jews who accused and opposed Paul, and through the “native Hebrew” Jewish leaders of Jerusalem. The gospel was bound for Rome! The harder the Jews work to resist and overcome it, the more the proclamation of the gospel expanded.

We also see here the power of a testimony. We don’t know that any were saved immediately, as a result of this testimony. Some might have been. The power of Paul’s testimony partially rested in his similarity to them, how Paul in his lost state resembled those whom he was addressing. When people know what we use to be, and see what God has done to change us, the power of the gospel is evident and we need not be ashamed to proclaim it.

Because of the length of this passage, I am going to ask folks to read it for themselves. I will synopsize the events.

Advice can be a wonderful thing … or a disaster. A friend of mine was advised to build his cabin on a shelf on a mountain side with a lovely cliff behind. The soil was deep and easily worked and the ground was already level. Unfortunately, a large earthquake occurred after his cabin was completed that caused the lovely shelf to complete its downward slump toward the valley floor. Seems that some thousands of years before, that shelf had been part of the cliff and now it, and the debris of my friend’s cabin, divert the stream at the bottom of the valley.

In Acts 21, Paul was given advice by two groups with considerable influence. Paul knew the first fairly large group, who urged him not to go to Jerusalem because bonds and affliction awaited him there. This he ignored. Later, Paul was advised by the elders of the Jerusalem church to do as they suggested because it would convince the Jewish saints that Paul had not utterly renounced his Judaism and was not advocating that other Jews who came to faith in Jesus do so. He followed this advice.

First impressions might have us conclude that Paul made the wrong choice in both cases. Going to Jerusalem when prophesy said he’d be bound and handed over to the Gentiles seems foolish and certainly if Paul had stayed away from the temple, it seems he would not have been wrongly accused of taking a Gentile into the inner temple courts. We later see him make the “mistake” of appealing his case to Caesar, which assured him a trip to Rome. These apparent mistakes were God’s means of proclaiming the gospel to “Gentiles and kings,” as God had purposed and foretold (Acts 9:15). The advice of Jerusalem elders was intended to enhance the gospel in one way, but God used it in a very different way to propel Paul and the gospel to the court of Caesar, in Rome.

Christians are just as inclined to give advice today as they were in the 1^st Century. Unfortunately, much of the advice given by Christians today is like that the saints gave Paul along the way to Jerusalem —well-intentioned, but wrong.

Paul left the Ephesian elders in Miletus with tears and set sail for Jerusalem, knowing that suffering and bondage waited him. In Tyre, Paul received a prophesy concerning his fate in Jerusalem. The Holy Spirit apparently revealed to one or more prophets there that Paul would suffer in Jerusalem, but that it was not God’s will for him to do so. Thus, they urged him not to go to Jerusalem. However, later revelation in this chapter suggests that it was God’s will for Paul to undergo this suffering. We are left with three possibilities. The prophets could have been right on all counts and Paul was outside of God’s will in going to Jerusalem. The Holy Spirit tested Paul’s obedience and faith by having these saints suggest he could save himself. The saints were correct in understanding that Paul would face persecution in Jerusalem, but wrong in their conclusion that Paul should not go; Paul was therefore correct to continue forward.

I think we must conclude that the Holy Spirit only revealed Paul’s fate and that, in their love for Paul, these saints drew their own conclusion about what he should do about it. This sounds very familiar. I believe Jesus had a similar experience and ended up rebuking Peter for speaking Satan’s words. Like Peter, these saints were well-intentioned and loving and completely mistaken. Paul chose to continue to Jerusalem against their advice.

In Caesarea, Paul encountered Philip, who apparently lived there in Caesarea with his four daughters and wife. It was at his home that Agabus, who had given the prophesy concerning the world-wide famine to the Antioch church years before, prophesied to Paul that he would be bound by the Jews in Jerusalem and delivered into the hands of the Gentiles. This was not news to Paul, but it did take the Caesarean saints by surprise. They urged Paul to avoid arrest by avoiding Jerusalem. No doubt motivated by love and concern for the apostle, they reasoned that he could die in prison and that his ministry would certainly come to an end, and it just seemed best to avoid persecution and not run toward it.

 Paul was not about to change his mind. Convinced that he was to go to Jerusalem, Paul sought to fulfill God’s will for his life, even if that meant suffering for the sake of the gospel. This was not the first time he had suffered for the gospel; why would he shrink from it now? He rebuked those who were trying to turn him from his appointed course because he saw suffering more as a privilege than a problem. It was an inseparable part of his ministry since his conversion. It drew him into a more intimate understanding of Jesus (Philippians 3:10), seeing it as God’s way of encouraging the spiritual walk of other Christians and of promoting the proclamation of the gospel (Philippians 1:12-18).

Although the text doesn’t state it, I think Paul understood that somehow God would use this for the benefit of the saints. God was telling these people something important by this prophesy. As I read Acts, I recognized that the Holy Spirit wasn’t informing Paul of his fate in Jerusalem. Paul already knew. The Holy Spirit was informing the Christians of Paul’s fate. Clearly it was not so they could prevent Paul from going to Jerusalem. So what was the Holy Spirit up to? Well, with each public revelation and each attempt to divert Paul from Jerusalem, Paul was given the opportunity to explain his attitude toward suffering to many of those saints. Suffering was coming to them as well; they just didn’t yet know it. How they handled it would be paramount to the advancement of the gospel. Paul’s example would be paramount to their handling of persecution in the future. The prophesies revealed that Paul would suffer for his obedience to God, not for any sins he had committed. (How this contrasts with many Christians’ view of suffering for wrong-doing).

I think that the prophesy also showed that Paul was a hero of the faith, willing to suffer and to die for the sake of the gospel. A man who is sent to prison for a crime is not a man whose “prison epistles” would be sought, read, and preserved down through the ages. Paul was imprisoned for his faith and his obedience to the command of Christ, thus was a man worth listening to. These prophecies along the way to Jerusalem were both publicity and a divine commendation, paving the way for an even greater ministry from behind prison bars.

Once more, we also see the sovereignty of God at work. Prison bars would not be able to contain the gospel and would become the means for Caesar to hear the gospel. These saints were wrong that prison would end Paul’s ministry. God would use Paul’s imprisonment to enhance His ministry.

Paul was not turned from the course which God had appointed for him. Paul was warmly greeted in Jerusalem. No mention is made of the gift from the Gentile churches to the poor in Judea, but this was certainly delivered at some point in time. The following day, a meeting was arranged between Paul’s group and James and all of the elders of the Jerusalem church. Paul reported how his ministry had resulted in the salvation of many Gentile believers. They responded to this report with great joy, glorifying God for the salvation of these Gentiles saints. It was at this point that they recommended that Paul assuage the distress of Jewish believers living in Jerusalem. It seems they’d received false reports that Paul had been teaching Jewish converts to turn from the law and their Jewish practices and rituals. The Gentile practice of Christianity does not seem to have been the issue. The Jerusalem Council had spoken. Gentiles believers could worship God as Gentiles. It seems that the Jerusalem elders had been encouraging Jewish believers to continue in their Jewish practices, not as a means for salvation, but as an expression of love and devotion to God. Did Paul agree with this position or did he teach that Jewish Christians should discard the law? This was the rumor, of course. James and the elders suggested Paul show his remaining devotion to the Judaism while he was in Jerusalem. The elders did not ask Paul to do something against his doctrinal beliefs or his convictions. Paul was only encouraged to practice publicly that which he already did. Remember the quick comment in Acts 18:18, about Paul’s haircut? He still kept those portions of the Jewish law that were possible when working among Gentiles.

So what happened? If going to Jerusalem was the right thing to do, if worshipping in the Temple was the right thing to do, why did it all fall apart and lead to Paul’s arrest? Even when Paul attempted to demonstrate his continued commitment to (true) Judaism, his unbelieving brethren would have no part of him, of his teaching or his practice. It was not Jerusalem Jews, believers or unbelievers, who caused this trouble, but “Asian Jews” (verse 27) who created the uproar, hastily concluding that Paul had brought a Gentile into the Temple, thus defiling it. Paul participated with four men who were “under vow” in some sort of temple worship. When the seven days of this ritual were nearly completed, some of the Asian Jews, who were familiar with Paul and Trophimus, recognized them both, and falsely concluded that Paul had brought him into the temple. This was a horrifying thought to them, and stirred them to drag Paul out of the temple and bar him from readmittance. They felt his death was appropriate for such evil and were in the process of carrying it out when the Roman commander and his cohort came on the scene. He was there to quell a riot, not to rescue Paul, but his presence served to stop the beating. The commander quickly recognized that Paul was at the center of the disturbance and assumed it must be his fault. The crowd was no help, so the commander removed Paul to the barracks for further interrogation. On the way, Paul spoke to the commander in Greek, assuring him that he was a Jew, not an Egyptian revolutionary. He granted Paul permission to speak to the hostile crowd. Though Paul was being handed over to the Romans by the Jews, the gospel would not be silenced.

Once more, the sovereignty of God is evident in Acts. There are those who will insist that Paul did teach that which he was falsely accused – the utter rejection of the law by the Jews and everyone else. This is simply untrue! Paul fought against legalism and the use of the law as a means of earning God’s favor. He loved the law and found great joy in observing its commands and rituals as an expression of worship, not as a means of salvation. We would do well to re-think our view of the law if it does not agree with the view of the elders of the church of Jerusalem and Paul.

There! I’ve given advice, which brings us back to the central theme of Chapter 21. Good advice cannot be hastily given. I offered my advice based upon study of the Bible. The Jerusalem elders, addressing a problem that had plagued them for quite some time, gave well-thought-out advice to Paul. The saints in the churches, however, gave their advice immediately after the prophet spoke. Paul seems to have needed to interrupt them to give them his perspective. They were too hasty to speak and slow to hear. The elders in Jerusalem based their advice upon principle rather than subjective emotion. The saints cared for Paul and they did not wish to see him suffer. The advice of the elders was rooted in truth. How easy it is to let our well-intentioned concern carry us to ill-conceived advice. The saints sought to help Paul avoid suffering while the elders sought to urge Paul to do the right thing. There is a world of difference between advice that is self-serving and that which puts others first. The elders were encouraging Paul to follow God’s guidance in his life while the saints were discouraging Paul in a course of action that might have hindered the gospel.

Christians should perhaps, based upon a reading of this text, give far less advice than we currently do. We can only advice people to the degree that we have a clear Biblical principle to base our advice on, for our counsel should always rest upon the Bible and not preference or self-interest. Each individual Christian must decide what the will of God is for his/her life. Even Holy Spirit-inspired prophesy must be applied to our lives in practical terms and we see here that we can misinterpret prophesy. Christians can give bad advice for well-intentioned and loving reasons. Good advice and good prophesy will always stand on Scripture and not apart from it. 

It is sometimes hard for us to understand, that Christians can and do act in very human ways against God’s counsel. Christians are not called to live autonomous lives without accountability to other Christians, but ultimately, we are the only ones who can determine God’s will for our lives.

Paul knew he was meant to go to Jerusalem and onto Rome. God meant for him to do it on Caesar’s expense account. God used Paul imprisonment to advance the gospel and to secure it in writing for two millennia. We cannot, looking back with 20-20 hindsight, say that the arrest of Paul was a bad thing, thus we must conclude that he knew God’s will for his life far better than the saints who begged him not to go to Jerusalem.

Today’s passage is one of the outstanding texts in Acts, recording the impassioned final words of Paul to the leaders of the Ephesian church. In this message Paul looked at his past and his future. He had spent a great deal of time with the Ephesians and he reminded them of his conduct and teaching and of the work of God in their midst. He also addressed his own fate and the dangers awaiting the Ephesian church and its leaders. In deep affection, speaking to those who care greatly for him, Paul felt comfortable in speaking intimately, frankly and out of love. Throughout the message, he buoyed the strength of his teaching with the affirmation of his conduct while he lived among them. In this, I think his ministry should be a pattern for all churches and Christians.

“And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church. And when they had come to him, he said to them: “You yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in Asia, how I was with you the whole time, serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials which came upon me through the plots of the Jews; how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly and from house to house, solemnly testifying to both Jews and Greeks of repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.” Acts 20:17-21

Paul began his message by reminding them of his practice during his three years in Ephesus. With intimacy and transparency over an extended period of time, they had seen his consistency in lifestyle. Without pretention and in complete humility, he had served Jesus among them with great love and concern (as evidenced by tears) against much opposition from the Jews. Paul evangelized, proclaiming the gospel to Jews and Gentiles alike, always calling men to repent of their sins and have faith in Jesus as their Savior. Additionally, he taught those who already believed, both in public and in private.  Paul did not avoid telling men what they needed to hear nor did he selectively proclaim what men wanted to hear. He sought all that was profitable to the saved and the unsaved and did not allow opposition to silence him or limit what he had to say.