Deeper Commentary
ACTS CHAPTER 19
19:1
And it came to pass, that while Apollos was at
Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper country, came to Ephesus and
found some disciples- Jn. 1:41,43,45 use the same words for how
the Lord Jesus at the start of His ministry 'found disciples', who were
likewise students of John the Baptist. We note that despite their
misunderstandings and gaps in knowledge, they are still referred to as
'disciples'; they were committed to learning, which is the essence of the
word 'disciple'. We also observe that Paul, like us, was manifesting the
style and actions of the Lord's ministry in his own. The connection with
the Lord's calling of the first disciples on the shores / coasts of the
lake is strengthened by considering how Paul is described as having passed
along the meros, translated "coasts" in the AV ["upper country"]
to find those disciples.
19:2
And he said to them: Did you receive the Holy
Spirit when you believed? And they said to him: No. We have not even heard-
The aorist implies 'we did not hear', i.e. at the point of baptism.
That there is a Holy Spirit- As followers of Moses and John
the Baptist, they were surely aware of the concept of Holy Spirit. We must
fill in the ellipses surely required by the context- "there is [gift of]
the Holy Spirit", remembering that the Spirit was not poured out until the
Lord's glorification. Jn. 7:39 likewise says that "the Holy Spirit was not
yet", i.e. the [outpouring of] Holy Spirit. Perhaps what they meant was
that they were aware that John had spoken of an outpouring of the Spirit
as a result of the Lord's work, but they had not heard whether this had
yet happened. After all, they had encountered John some years ago in
Palestine and were now in Ephesus, maybe cut off from news of the progress
of Christianity.
19:3
And he said: Into what
then were you baptized? And they said: Into John's baptism?-
The Acts record presupposes that baptism is part and parcel of belief.
Paul has spoken of "When you believed" (:2) as if this was a one time
specific event in the past, rather than a drift of interest towards
Christianity. That one time point of "belief" was their baptism.
19:4
And Paul said: John baptized with the baptism of
repentance, saying to the people- How could Paul so confidently
quote John's words? Admittedly it could have been the result of a flash of
Spirit inspiration. Or it could also have been that he had heard John
preaching, which would have been the source of the goads sticking into his
conscience... and he constantly alludes to John's words and personality
throughout his letters.
That they should believe in him that should come
after him, that is, on Jesus- On hearing this, they were
baptized (:5); again we see baptism as being part and parcel of belief.
Faith was not and is not a position we drift into; God in His wisdom
introduced the rite of baptism so that there is a conscious, specific
moment of accepting that faith as our own.
19:5 And when they heard this, they were baptized into the name of
the Lord Jesus-
These men had not been baptized with Christian baptism, which is into
the death and resurrection of Christ. The command for baptism into His
death and resurrection was given after Christ had risen from the dead. It
could be argued therefore that this is not an example of adults once
baptized [by immersion] into the Lord’s death and resurrection being
rebaptized. That approach would appear to be the correct line of
interpretation once due weight is given to the fact that they had not
received the Holy Spirit; surely there is an intended allusion to Jn.
7:39: “He spoke of the Spirit, which they that believed in him were to
receive. For the Spirit had not yet been given, as Jesus had not yet been
glorified”. The Greek idea behind “not yet been given” is similar to the
men’s words in the Greek of Acts 19:2, where “We did not hear whether
there be any Holy Spirit” carries the idea ‘We didn’t hear that
the Holy Spirit is present / has been given’. The men had surely heard of
“Holy Spirit”, but they were unaware it had been given. The connection
with Jn. 7:39 could suggest they were actually ignorant of the death,
resurrection and glorification of Jesus- hence their need for Christian
baptism. Their ignorance of the coming of the Spirit is painted, according
to the connection with Jn. 7:39, as ignorance of the fact Christ had been
glorified. If these men had been baptized by John but were now in Ephesus,
it’s quite possible they had left Palestine soon after their baptisms and
were ignorant of what had subsequently happened to Jesus until Apollos had
now told them. “Into [Gk. ek] what were you baptized?” (Acts
19:3) would therefore carry the implication that they had not been
baptized into the death and resurrection of Christ; their answer comes
across rather lamely: “Into John’s baptism”. The necessary answer was
“Into Christ’s death and resurrection”, but they are forced to reply
somewhat ungrammatically- that they had not been baptized into
anything much at all, apart from into John. There could even be the
implication that they had not been baptized by John himself, but “into
John’s baptism” by some disciple of John. Acts 19:5,6 sounds as if they
were unaware that John had taught the people that they must believe [and
be baptized] “into Christ”; and when they understood that this had been
his message, then they were baptized into Christ. They had had the idea in
their minds that they must make a change, but it would seem they were
ignorant of what John had actually taught about Jesus.
Again and again it must be remembered here that John’s baptism wasn’t
Christian baptism; it was to prepare the way for Christ and baptism into
Him. Paul explains that John’s teaching was intended to lead men to
believe “in” or “into” Christ [Gk. ek again- he stresses this
twice in Acts 19:4]. When the men understood that, they were “baptized
into [Gk. ek] the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 19:5). Baptism
into Christ is here presented as part and parcel of belief in
Him. Baptism is assumed in the New Testament as being part of belief. This
incident leaves us with the clear impression from the use of the term
ek , into, that they had been baptized into John and had been
ignorant of Christ’s death and glorification. Their immersion “into John’s
baptism” had not therefore been Christian baptism at all.
The connection between baptism and receipt of the Spirit also cries out to
be understood within the context of Acts to the great opening example of
baptism in Acts 2:38: “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the
name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the
gift of the Holy Spirit”. I have elsewhere suggested that the “gift” in
view there was that of forgiveness and spiritual blessing in Christ. The
baptism [or, rebaptism] of Acts 19 did not of itself give the Holy Spirit
gifts; these came as a result of Paul laying his hands upon the newly
baptized people. This would’ve been a situation analogous to that in Acts
10, where the Gentiles who were baptized exercised miraculous Spirit gifts
straight afterwards in order to demonstrate that the decision to baptize
them had in fact been correct.
19:6
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the
Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied-
What foreign language did they speak? I have mentioned previously the
possibility that the gift of languages was in order to cement unity
between Jews and Gentiles by enabling them to speak in each other’s
languages. One therefore wonders if these men were in fact all full Jews,
or whether the gift of languages in this case was the ability to converse
in pure Hebrew.
19:7
And they were in all about twelve men-
Being twelve of them, and called disciples, they could be presented as a
kind of parallel brotherhood to the community of Christian disciples.
19:8- see on Acts 18:6.
And he entered into the synagogue and spoke boldly
for the space of three months-“Boldly”
is a common word in the New Testament. We are to be bold before the throne
of grace, and our confident assurance of salvation means that we are bold
in our witness to others about that good news.
Reasoning and persuading as to the things
concerning the kingdom of God- We wonder why there is no
mention of the things concerning the Lord Jesus, as these two elements
seem to go together in the Acts account. Perhaps this group were already
persuaded that Jesus was Messiah, but were ignorant of the things of the
Kingdom. Those "things" were surely the same "things concerning the
Kingdom" which the Lord Himself had taught; and those things were found in
His parables of the Kingdom, which were about life now under God's
kingship, rather than information about the physicalities of the Messianic
Kingdom to be established on earth at His return.
19:9 The Western text here adds that Paul preached in Ephesus from
11a.m. to 4 p.m.- the siesta period. Whilst working with his own hands to
support himself, he somehow persuaded men and women to break their usual
sleep pattern to come and hear him. F.F. Bruce has commented that more
Ephesians were awake at 1a.m. than 1 p.m.
But when some were hardened and disobedient-
Paul maybe recalled this case when he wrote to the Romans of how some Jews
were hardened when they rejected the message of the Lord Jesus (Rom. 9:18
cp. Heb. 3:8,15).
Speaking evil of the Way before the crowd, he
departed from them- This is typical of how when men cannot
answer the truth of Christ presented to them, they then attack the
messengers on a personal level. Paul's way of dealing with this slander
campaign was to just remove the converts as far as he could from exposure
to it.
And separated the disciples- The same ones as in :1?
Reasoning daily
in the school of Tyrannus- First century preaching
wasn’t merely bald statement of facts nor a pouty presentation of
propositional Truth. A very wide range of words is used to describe the
preaching of the Gospel. It included able intellectual argument, skilful,
thoughtful use and study of the Scriptures by the public speakers,
careful, closely reasoned and patient argument. Their preaching is
recorded through words like diamarturesthai, to testify
strenuously, elegcho, to show to be wrong, peitho, to win by
words, ekithemi, to set forth, diamar, to bear full
witness, dianoigo, to open what was previously closed,
parrhesia, to speak with fearless candour, katagellein, to
proclaim forcefully, dialegesthai, to argue, diakatelenchein,
to confute powerfully. The intellectual energy of Paul powers through the
narrative in passages like Acts 19: “Disputing and persuading… disputing
daily… Paul purposed in the spirit… this Paul has persuaded and turned
away much people”.
19:10
And this continued for the space of two years, so
that all those who lived in Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and
Gentiles- Because Ephesus was visited by many from the
surrounding area and was a transport hub.
19:11 And God did special miracles by the hands of Paul- The
idea is 'uncommon miracles'. All true miracles are "special" and far from
common; so the idea would be that his miracles far outclassed any done by
the idol cults, rather like the miracles performed by Aaron outclassed
those of Pharaoh's magicians.
19:12 So
that even handkerchiefs or aprons that had touched his skin were carried
away to the sick- Perhaps during the course of his work as a
tentmaker, otherwise the choice of the word 'apron' is hard to understand.
The point is perhaps that it was out of spirituality in his daily working
life that blessing came to others.
And their diseases left them and their mental
illnesses were cured- This reflects the language of the day,
presumably shared even by doctor Luke, which held that disease was caused
by some internal beings which could enter or leave the human body.
19:13 Then some of the itinerant Jewish exorcists undertook to
invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had manic illnesses,
saying: I command you in the name of Jesus, whom Paul proclaims- It
was common in the first century for there to be travelling preachers.
Hence 2 John speaks of welcoming the itinerant Christian preachers if they
shared the belief that the Lord “came in the flesh”. “Manic illnesses”
suggests that it was mental illness in view; and it is these which were
generally referred to as the work of demons in the first century, and
therefore cure of mental illness came to be described in terms of spirits
departing or being cast out. The incident demonstrates that simply the
name “Jesus” is not powerful of itself (:15); it has come to be used as a
kind of talisman in some Pentecostal circles. It is His power to heal
hearts which is of the essence here. The form of pronunciation of a name
is irrelevant.
19:14
And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, a
chief priest, who did this- There is no historical record of
any chief priest called Sceva, and it seems unlikely that his seven sons
would all be itinerant exorcists, equivalent of modern day Roma in parts
of Eastern Europe. Again, as with the language of evil spirits, things are
being recorded from the perspective and understanding of people at the
time, without correction.
19:15
And the maniac answered and said to them: Jesus I
know and Paul I know, but who are you?- The sick man on one
level 'knew' Jesus and recognized Paul; on that level of personality, the
man was a believer.
19:16
Then the man who had the mania jumped on them and
subdued and overpowered all of them, so they fled out of that house naked
and wounded- “Overpowered”
is the same word used in :20 about how God's word, the Gospel, "grew in
power". This confirms the impression that the man was representative of
believers who had identified themselves with the word of the Gospel.
19:17
And this became known to all that dwelt at
Ephesus, both Jews and Gentiles; and fear fell upon them all.
And the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified- The name of
the Lord Jesus had been used by the exorcists, but it was lacking in power
unless pronounced in faith by Paul. So humanly, it was more the case that
Paul was magnified over the exorcists; they both used the same formula and
name of Jesus. But it only 'worked' when Paul used it. But it is a major
theme of Acts that all glory was given not to the preachers but to the
Lord Jesus whom they served and were identified with.
19:18 Many also of those that had believed came- After seeing
what happened to the sons of Sceva, it would appear that some who had
‘believed’ went up to a higher level of commitment. This would seem to
imply that despite having ‘believed’, perhaps with the same level of
shallow conviction as some ‘believed’ in the teaching of Jesus during His
ministry, their faith wasn’t so deep. They were taken up to an altogether
higher level of commitment, resulting in ‘confessing and declaring’, and
quitting their involvement with magic. “Many that were now believers"
there (RSV) "came and confessed and shewed their deeds. Many of them also
which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them
before all men... so mightily grew the word of God, and prevailed" (Acts
19:18,19). The language here seems to be intended to connect with the
description of baptism in Mt. 3:6, where converts confessed and shewed
their deeds at baptism. The way the Ephesians made their
statement "before all men" again recalls the concept of baptism as a
public declaration. Yet the Ephesians did all this after they had
believed. It would seem that we are being invited to consider this as a
re-conversion, a step up the ladder. The context is significant. Some who
had pretended to be believers and to have the Holy Spirit are revealed for
who they are: "they fled out of that house naked and wounded. And this was
known to all... dwelling at Ephesus. And fear fell on them all, and the
name of the Lord Jesus was magnified". The fact that the Lord Jesus is so
essentially demanding, the way in which ultimately He will judge insincere
profession of His Name- this motivated the new Ephesian converts to take
their relationship with Him seriously (compare how the Lord's slaying of
Ananias and Sapphira also inspired a great desire to associate with Him,
Acts 5:11-14).
Confessing- There are many connections between Luke's Gospel
and his second volume here in Acts. The reference here would be to the
Lord's comment recorded only by Luke that whoever confesses [s.w.] Him
before men will be confessed before the Father in Heaven (Lk. 12:8). Note
that their confession was before all men (:19). Luke saw that confession
as not simply at baptism; because these were believers who were now
'coming out' at a higher level of conversion. Here, they confess their
sins; in Lk. 12:8 they confess 'Jesus'. To confess Him therefore involves
confessing sin. Perhaps Paul had this incident in view when he later wrote
of how confession is made unto salvation (Rom. 10:10).
And declaring their sinful deeds- God seems to have recognized
with pleasure the degree to which Paul modelled his life on John, in that
Paul's experiences of life were over-ruled to have connections with those
of John. These connections simply could not have been engineered by Paul;
e.g. the way in which they both died in prison at the behest of a crazy,
woman-influenced despot. The Spirit also seems to make connections between
John and Paul in the manner in which it describes them (e.g. Lk. 1:14 =
Acts 15:13; 13:52; Lk. 1:15 = Acts 9:17; 13:9; Lk. 3:18 = Acts 13:15-19;
Jn. 1:7,8,15 = Acts 23:11; 26:22; Jn. 3:27 = 1 Cor. 2:8-16). And the
Spirit in Acts 19:18 seems to portray Paul in the language of John: "they
came (to Paul) and confessed, and shewed their deeds" - just as men had to
John.
19:19 And not a few of those that practised magical arts-
Grammatically, the "those" would refer to those of :18 who were believers
who now 'came out' in confession of sin after their conversion-
perhaps two years after conversion (:10). It would
therefore appear that some were baptized who still continued practicing
magic, but now they were persuaded to break with it. We again see here the
openness of the apostles towards baptizing people, even when their
lifestyles were less than perfect.
Brought their books together and burned them in the sight of all;
and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of
silver- See on :18 Confessed.
The Greek word here for "price" is elsewhere always translated 'to profit'
(16 times). The loss was their profit, in spiritual terms.
19:20 So the word of the Lord-
In contrast to the word of all the books they had just burnt.
Spread widely and grew in power- The same word used about the
growth of the seed of the word on good ground (Mk. 4:8) and the growth of
the tiny mustard seed of the Gospel (Lk. 13:19). This is Luke's way of
signalling that there was good ground in Ephesus, and the burning of the
expensive books was a sign of the fruit and power of the tiny seed of the
Gospel in practice.
19:21 When these things were accomplished- Gk. 'fulfilled'.
Perhaps we are intended to understand that these things had fulfilled the
parables of the seed of the Gospel growing.
Paul purposed in the Spirit- This could mean that he in his
own spirit decided to go to Rome via Jerusalem (although "the
Spirit" is hard to interpret like this); and the Beza codex confirms this
approach: "He resolved, or determined in himself". But it could be that he
conceived the idea [that is a valid translation of the Greek], and the
Spirit of God confirmed him in it. The intentional ambiguity of the text
is perhaps to lead us to the conclusion that Paul's spirit and God's
Spirit were in agreement over the idea Paul had conceived. And yet the
Spirit likewise warned him in every city of the consequences of this
course of action. We see here how God is prepared to confirm us in
whichever course of action we ourselves choose. In our early days in
Christ, we agonize over which decision to take. But so often, it's not the
decision but the motives behind the choice which are important; and God
can equally confirm us in the choices made, whatever they are. It could be
argued that all the drama he had in his life as a result of appealing to
Caesar could have been avoided if he had chosen the freedom made possible
for him. But he appears to have become almost obsessed with the idea of
getting to Rome to witness there. His desire to go via Jerusalem first was
in order to take the collection money there for the Jews- money raised
from collections amongst the Gentile churches. It would likewise seem from
2 Corinthians that this plan was obsessive with Paul, and it badly
backfired in Corinth; and his plans for visiting Corinth had to be changed
because they simply hadn't raised the funds (1 Cor. 16:5-9 cp. 2 Cor.
1:16,23). And yet God worked with all this, with the Lord Jesus assuring
Paul that he would get to Rome (Acts 23:11); although Paul observes that
his desire to "see Rome" had been frequently hindered (Rom. 10:13). Maybe
this was God working to try to stop Paul, as the Spirit so often warned
him not to go there. And so we see how the Spirit can work on two poles,
as it were, in the lives of His servants; on one hand confirming us in the
way we choose, on another, seeking to preserve us in a better way.
To go up to Jerusalem after he had passed through
Macedonia and Achaia, saying: After I have been there, I must
also see Rome- But actually he had written to the Romans that he
would drop in to see them on his way to Spain (Rom. 15:23). Spain was his
real ambition, to preach the Gospel in "the regions beyond" (2 Cor. 10:16
and context)- not Rome. But Acts 19:21 gives the impression that Rome was
the end of his vision.
19:22 And having sent into Macedonia two of those that assisted
him, Timothy and Erastus, he stayed in Asia for a while- Perhaps to
prepare the way for his coming there (:21). Or perhaps Paul sensed the
terrible persecution which was to break out in Ephesus, and sent timid
Timothy away from a situation which could have been unbearable for him.
Perhaps this was the visit to Corinth by Timothy which Paul wrote about in
1 Cor. 4:17; 16:10. In which case Paul's love for the Corinthians was such
that he allowed himself to be without personal assistants in order for a
pastoral trip to be made to them. Maybe he needed personal assistants
("that ministered unto him", AV) because of failing health.
19:23 And about that time there arose no small stir concerning the
Way- "The way" was an accepted description for Christianity (9:2;
22:4; 24:14). The allusion was perhaps to "the way to the tree of life",
which had been guarded by the Cherubim since Adam's expulsion from Eden.
In this case, unlike many religions both ancient and modern, Christianity
is not an end in itself. There is in Christianity the most clearly
articulated and emphasized end point, far more definitely stressed than in
any other religion. The end of the Way is the tree of life, partaking of
God's fullness for eternity, seeing good and evil with His eyes of love
and grace. We already partake of these things, but the way stretches so
much further ahead.
19:24 For a certain man named Demetrius, a silversmith, who made
silver shrines of Diana, brought no little business to the craftsmen-
These icons were bought by visitors and worshippers and placed in homes as
good luck charms. The usage of icons in the Catholic and Orthodox churches
is clearly the result of such paganism getting mixed with Christianity. I
have explained on 1 Timothy that the Artemis / Diana cult came to
influence the Christian church in Ephesus, and much of the language used
there and the issues addressed must be understood in the Diana cult
context.
19:25 He gathered them together, with the workmen of similar
occupation, and said: Sirs, you know that by this business we have our
wealth- He admitted that their religion was nothing less than a
business. Those working in the shrine and icon business were a numerical
minority within the city; but we see here how a disaffected minority can
make huge trouble for the Lord's people. We see too how self-preservation
and the basic love of wealth and stability of income can lead men to do
deeply evil things.
19:26 And you see and hear, that not only at Ephesus but throughout
most of Asia, this Paul has persuaded and led astray many people, saying
that they are no gods that are made with hands- Note the irony, that
they 'turned away' (2 Tim. 1:15) from the one who had 'turned them away'
from idols (Acts 19:26). There is a tacit recognition here of the extent
of Paul's witness. He was seen as the ringleader of the Christians (24:5),
a man who had turned the world upside down (17:6); and here he is known as
one who had persuaded people of the Lord Jesus "throughout most of Asia".
The claim of the Roman Jews never to have heard of him was therefore
untrue. Although Paul was empowered in his ministry by the Lord, he also
on the human level still had to achieve it all by his own freewill. And he
was in no way forced to do what he did. He chose to. "The power of one" in
his case was remarkable. And we each have far greater potential than we
like to admit.
19:27 And not only is there a danger that this our trade will come
into disrepute, but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana will
be made of no account, and that she whom all Asia and the world worships
should even be deposed from her magnificence- Evidence of Diana
worship has been found in Egypt and Eastern Europe; so the idea is that
[people from all] "the world" worshipped her. Again, they admit that their
religion is no more than "our trade". Religion was and is big business.
19:28
And when they heard this, they were filled with
anger and cried out, saying: Great is Diana of Ephesus!-
Because Paul's preaching 'despised' the goddess Diana, her worshippers
perceived that she and they were somehow thereby shamed; and so they were
angry. It's perhaps possible to understand the wrath of God in this way,
too. For His wrath is upon those who break His commands; and by breaking
them we shame God (Rom. 2:23); we despise his desire for
our repentance (Rom. 2:4). We note how pagan gods were local in worship
and supposed sphere of influence- Diana was “of Ephesus”, and the Jews
considered Yahweh the God of Israel alone, and the likes of Jonah even
thought that His presence was limited outside the land of Israel. The
Christian message of a loving Father involved with “all men” as their
saviour was therefore radical in its huge, global scope.
Their anger was related to shame [being 'despised', :27] that their god had been exposed as a
fake. There's a definite link between shame and anger. Take a man whose
mother yelled at him because as a toddler he ran out onto the balcony
naked, and shamed him by her words. Years later on a hot Summer evening
the man as an adult walks out on a balcony with just his underpants on. An
old woman yells at him from the yard below that he should be ashamed of
himself. And he's furiously angry with her- because of the shame given him
by his mother in that incident 20 years ago. Shame and anger are clearly
understood by God as being related, because His word several times
connects them: "A fool's anger
is immediately known; but a
prudent man covers his shame" (Prov. 12:16); A king's
anger
is against a man who shames him (Prov. 14:35). Or consider 1 Sam.
20:34: "So Jonathan arose from the table in fierce anger, and did
eat no meat the second day of the month... because his father had done him
shame". Job's anger was related to the fact that he felt
that ten times the friends had shamed him in their speeches (Job
19:3). Frequently the rejected are threatened with both shame and anger /
gnashing of teeth; shame and anger are going to be connected in that awful
experience. They will "curse [in anger]... and be ashamed" (Ps. 109:28).
The final shame of the rejected is going to be so great that "they shall
be greatly ashamed... their everlasting confusion shall never be
forgotten" (Jer. 20:11). Seeing they will be long dead and gone, it is us,
the accepted, who by God's grace will recall the terrible shame of the
rejected throughout our eternity. Their shame will be so terrible; and
hence their anger will likewise be.
19:29
And the city was filled with confusion; and they
rushed with one accord into the theatre, having seized Gaius and
Aristarchus, men of Macedonia, Paul's companions in travel- The
archaeological remains suggest it would have held up to 56,000 people.
19:30 But when Paul wished to go in among the crowd, the disciples
would not let him- Such a huge audience [up to 56,000- see on :29]
was seen by Paul as a supreme opportunity for preaching. He did not count
his life dear to himself, so that he might obey the ministry he had
received, to preach to the Gentiles. The disciples blocking of his desire
is to be read along with the various times the disciples bundled him away
from a city where persecution had broken out, when he himself was clearly
minded to remain. Their motivation was not simply because they wanted him
to survive to fight again another day, but because they feared for their
own safety if Paul continued to provoke things by his continued public
witness.
19:31 And some also of the Asiarchs, being his friends, sent word
to him, pleading that he not venture into the theatre- The Gospel had
won friends in high places, even among the Asiarchs. The Lord Jesus is the
representative of all men, and therefore appeals to all. This is why
Christianity was and is unique in its appeal to people from all social
strata and backgrounds. See commentary on the list of names in Romans 16.
In Paul’s inspired thought, on the cross the Lord “gave himself” for us
(Gal. 1:4; 1 Tim. 2:6; Tit. 2:14). And yet he uses the same Greek words to
describe how are to ‘give ourselves’ for our brethren (2 Thess. 3:9), to
‘give ourselves’ in financial generosity to their needs (2 Cor. 8:5), and
in Acts 19:31 we meet the same phrase describing how Paul ‘gave himself’
into the theatre at Ephesus, filled with people bent on killing him,
taking the conscious choice to risk his life in order to share the Gospel
with others. In this I see a cameo of how the choice of preaching the
Gospel is in fact a conscious living out of the Lord’s example on the
cross. Paul was discouraged from doing so by his friends and brethren; and
yet surely he had his mind on the way the Lord ‘gave himself’ for us in
His death, as a conscious choice, and so he brushed aside his reserve,
that human desire to do what appears the sensible, safe option… in order
to bring others to the cross of Christ. And day by day we have the same
choice before us.
19:32 Therefore, some cried one thing and some another. For the
assembly was in confusion and most did not know why they had come together-
"Most" or "the majority" were shouting in passion but were unaware of the
real issues behind it. Majorities are often like this; which is why
democracy is not something advocated in the Bible [but rather good
leadership].
19:33
And they brought Alexander out of the crowd, the
Jews putting him forward; and Alexander beckoned with the hand, and would
have made a defence to the people- Perhaps the
coppersmith of 2 Tim 4:14 who later did Paul much evil by turning against
him.
19:34 But when
they perceived that he was a Jew, all with one voice about the space of
two hours cried out: Great is Diana of the Ephesians!- One side of the
theatre was steep rock, and this would have added a distinct audio effect
to their voices, making them as it were one voice.
19:35 And when the town clerk had quieted the crowd, he said: You
men of Ephesus, what man is there who does not know that the city of the
Ephesians is temple-keeper of the great Diana and of the image which fell
down from Jupiter?- Religion and locality were connected in the
ancient world. The town clerk was arguing that all Ephesians were of
course worshippers of Diana by reason of being Ephesians. The whole city
kept Diana's temple. Hence he addresses them as [Gk.] "Ephesians!".
Indeed, most people even today are born into a religious position. This is
where the call of Christ is so radical, making all things new in the minds
of those who break out of their natural, birth positioning on spiritual
issues.
19:36 Seeing then that these things cannot be denied, you ought to be
quiet and do nothing rash- The town clerk was arguing, very cleverly
and diplomatically, that the commotion was an indication that they were in
doubt about their religion. He wanted them to calm down by all means, and
hence argues that the relationship of Diana with the Ephesians cannot be
sensibly denied and so they should stop getting so agitated as if it could
be denied.
19:37 For you have brought here these men, who are neither robbers of
temples nor blasphemers of our goddess- Perhaps the talk on the
street was that this was what Paul had done; especially as Jews had a
reputation as temple robbers, justifying themselves with the thought that
the gods didn't actually exist (see on Rom. 2:22). The town clerk wanted
by all means to calm the situation and so he saw the need to make it clear
that Paul had not robbed the Diana shrine. Paul had criticized "gods made
with hands" (:26); but the clerk reminds them that their belief was that
Diana had fallen down from Jupiter, and her image was therefore
'obviously' not made with hands. And so Paul was not blaspheming Diana.
19:38
Therefore, if Demetrius and the craftsmen that are
with him have a matter against anyone, the courts are open and there are
proconsuls. Let them accuse one another- The court days were
right then in session.
19:39 But if you seek anything about other matters, it shall be
settled in the regular assembly- The clerk was eager to calm things
by taking the sting out of the situation; so he suggests they raise the
matters in the correct legal manner. The clerk acts with the sagacity we
would expect of such a leading figure; and Luke's record reflects that. It
really has the ring of truth to it; this is exactly how a smart town clerk
might try to defuse such a situation.
19:40 For we really are in danger of being charged
with rioting today, since there is no cause that
we can give to justify this commotion- The local authority was
in fear that there could be questioning of what had happened, and so they
wanted there to be peace- which meant, the new church being left alone.
Likewise, Demetrius was in danger for his life if the matter were
investigated further- for raising a mob and making an illegal such
gathering was a capital offence. So he too would drop the issues against
the Christians. The same happened in Philippi- Paul manipulated the
situation to mean that the local authorities would be worried about being
charged with wrongly treating a Roman citizen, and therefore they just
wanted the Christians to exist quietly and without persecution or fuss
made about them. And that of course is what the Lord wants for us too.
19:41
And when he had thus spoken, he dismissed the
assembly- The ekklesia could as well be translated
"church". And apoluo ("dismissed") has a wide range of meaning;
it is elsewhere translated to release or set at liberty. There may be the
possibility of understanding this as meaning that as in Philippi, events
worked out to mean that the ecclesia was at least initially not persecuted
by the local authorities.
Wrestling Wild Beasts at Ephesus
In the context of talking about our hope of bodily resurrection at
Christ’s return, Paul says that this hope was what had given perspective
to his wrestling with wild beasts at Ephesus (1 Cor. 15:32). The context
surely requires that we understand this as referring to how he had been in
danger of losing his physical life because of this wrestling, but he
endured it with a mindset which looked ahead to the resurrection of the
body. The wrestling with wild beasts, therefore, appears to be a literal
experience which he had, rather than using ‘wrestling with wild beasts’ in
a figurative sense. There was at Ephesus an amphitheatre, and we also know
that there were cases where convicted criminals were forced to fight wild
animals; if they killed the animal, then they went free. It seems this is
what happened to Paul. He speaks in 2 Cor. 1:8-10 of an acute crisis which
he faced in Asia (and Ephesus was in Asia) which involved his having been
given a death sentence, and yet being saved out of it by “the God who
raises the dead”. This emphasis on bodily resurrection is the same context
we have in 1 Cor. 15:32. As he faced his death in 2 Tim. 4:17, Paul
reminisced how the Lord had earlier saved him “out of the mouth of the
lion”; and the context there is of literal language, and we are therefore
inclined to consider that he was literally saved from a lion in the arena
at Ephesus. This also helps us better understand his earlier reference in
Corinthians to having been exhibited as a spectacle, as a gladiator at a
show, “appointed unto death”, in the presence of God and men (1 Cor. 4:9).
Note that despite this traumatic experience, Paul chose to continue at
Ephesus even after that, because he saw a door had been opened to him for
the Gospel, despite “many adversaries” (1 Cor. 16:8,9). We who are so shy
to put a word in for the Lord in our encounters with people ought to take
strength from Paul’s dogged example in Ephesus.
But when Paul speaks in 2 Cor. 1:8-10 of his death sentence experience in
Ephesus, he does so in the context of having reasoned in the previous
verses of how whatever we experience, we experience so that we may comfort
others: “[God] comforts us in all our affliction, so that we may be able
to comfort those who are in any affliction, with the comfort with which we
ourselves are comforted by God. For as we share abundantly in Christ's
sufferings, so in Christ we share abundantly in comfort too. If we are
afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation; and if we are comforted,
it is for your comfort, which you experience when you patiently endure the
same sufferings that we suffer”. These verses are profound in their
implication. Whatever we experience is according to God’s plan, so that we
might use that experience in order to strengthen others. We all share in
Christ’s afflictions, but “in Christ” we experience comfort, insofar as
others within the body of Christ mediate His comfort to us. However, the
whole process only functions if we open ourselves up to others,
understanding their experiences and sharing with them the strength which
we received when we went through the same things in essence. No life is of
course identical; few believers have experienced what Paul did in Ephesus.
And yet he says that he wanted to use that experience in order to comfort
those in Corinth who in essence were going through the same thing. We live
in an age where mankind is in retreat, retreat back into himself. The
online life tempts us to interact only as far as we wish and as often as
we wish, and this has led many to retreat into themselves. Likewise
interaction at meetings of the body of Christ can so often focus only
around surface level issues. We don’t expose ourselves, and others don’t
expose themselves to us. Within such a spirit of isolationism, we can
never allow the body of Christ to function as God intends. We will fail to
find ultimate meaning in our experiences; for Paul teaches clearly that
they happen to us in order that we may share the fruits of them with
others. This is why so many alcoholics and other addicts who do the 12
step courses tend to fail on the very last step- that they hereafter vow
to spend the rest of their lives sharing what they have learnt with
others. And so they retreat back into the mire of mediocrity and into the
old patterns of existence and coping.
This line of thought explains why within Biblical history, it’s apparent
that circumstances repeated in essence within the experience of God’s
children. Ezekiel was asked to eat unclean food by God, and he found it so
hard to get his legalistic head around it; Peter likewise. Jesus was led
by the Spirit into the wilderness and was tempted there for 40 days to
reveal what was in His heart- just as Israel had been for 40 years. It
also explains why once and if we can dig beneath the facade of normality
which we all tend to cover our faces with, we find there are others who
have experienced amazingly similar experiences to ourselves. And the
extraordinary similarity of experience is in fact designed by God; because
these are meetings and connections made in Heaven. We are here for each
other, and all we experience is in a sense for others. This opens another
window onto the meaning of personal suffering; another take on the eternal
question “Why?”. There’s an element to it which isn’t for our benefit at
all, but for others. Take Job. That man was “perfect” and solidly with the
Lord at the start of the book, and he is the same at the end of the book.
The purpose of his sufferings was perhaps not therefore simply for his own
personal development; but for the conversion of the three friends. The
palsied man was palsied and was healed so that others might learn that the
Son of Man had power to forgive sins (Mt. 10:6-9).
We too easily assume that nobody else could ever understand our life path,
the way we have taken. We too quickly consider that others have a charmed
life. Some seem to have great health and family relationships, money,
security and spirituality. But in fact beneath all that veneer there
simply has to be in every life lived in Christ an awful co-suffering with
Him. People in Christ go through the most awful, unspeakable agonies.
Every one of us does. Nobody gets off light. It just seems to our limited
vision that some do. We all wrestle with wild beasts at Ephesus, and are
saved out of the mouth of the lion. Whatever the Corinthians were
enduring, it was in essence “the same suffering” as Paul endured in that
arena. And there should therefore have been a meeting of minds; the basis
of our fellowship is largely intended to be our common experience
in Christ. Ideas and theories tend to divide; experience unites. And what
people need far more than anything else, than any smart expositions or
mental gymnastics with Scripture, more than money, is the simple comfort
of Christ’s love. We have each received that comfort ourselves in our life
experiences; and we are to make the functioning of Christ’s body effective
by getting out there and sharing that comfort with others. For this is
how, mechanically as it were, on the ground, in reality, “we [who] share
abundantly in Christ's sufferings, in Christ share abundantly in comfort
too”.
Previous Chapter
Next Chapter 
