First Missionary Jounrey Archives - Page 2 of 2

Acts 13 – Paul and the Interpretation of Scripture

Paul’s use of scripture in Acts 13 is a complicated issue, but it gives us insight into the way the early Christians used the Hebrew Bible. I want to focus on the description of David in verse 22. Paul combines several verses to describe David. This combination is significant since Isaiah 44:28 is clearly messianic. 1 Clement 8:1 uses the same texts together; it is unclear whether Clement is using them because he knows Acts 13, or that these texts were drawn together as messianic texts prior to Paul. This is possible, since there is reasonable warrant for the texts to be interpreted together in the rabbinic method of exegesis. To my knowledge, there is no evidence outside of Christian sources for this collation of texts.

Psalm 89:20– “I have found David…” In this verse David is described as the servant of the Lord who has been anointed with “sacred oil” by the Lord himself. In this Psalm, David is described as the one who is sustained by the Lord’s mighty arm verse 21), the one who will call out to God as father (verse 26), and the one who is appointed as the Lord’s firstborn (verse 27).
1 Samuel 13:14-“…a man after God’s own heart.” This description of David occurs in the context of Saul’s failure as king. Samuel states that the Lord as already sought out the man after his own heart; his kingdom will endure in contrast to Saul’s kingdom.
Isaiah 44:28– “…who will do all I want him to do.” The servant of the Lord in Isaiah 44 is Cyrus the Great, the man who allowed the Jews to return to Judea after the exile. This text calls him a shepherd and the Lord’s anointed.
Possibly 1 Sam 16:1, David as the son of Jesse.

By blending these three texts together, Paul is setting up his declaration that Jesus as the Messiah ultimate fulfills the messianic prophecy of the Hebrew Bible. he is the one who is in fact the son of God, anointed not with sacred oil, but with the Holy Spirit in power, and will be the ultimate fulfillment of the suffering servant anticipated by Is 53.

The Lord “raises up” David, Paul uses the word in verse 30 for the resurrection of Jesus. Just as The Lord raised David up to be the king, so too Jesus was raised up from the dead to be the ultimate king.

The reason Paul includes the preaching of John may be that there were disciples of John the Baptist in Asia Minor. We will return to this idea in Acts 19, but for now we can simply observe that there were disciples of John who did not follow Jesus. The reasons are unclear, but perhaps they simply left Judea for their homes in Asia Minor before Jesus began his ministry, and were therefore unaware of the ministry of Jesus. Paul’s point here is that John was not the messiah himself, but rather a witness to the coming Messiah. The words of this sermon reflect a knowledge of John’s words as recording in Luke 3 as well.

This weaving of texts to make a point is common in the Second Temple Period and shows that Paul’s way of thinking about scripture is not all that different than other contemporary Jewish scholars. In fact, the reason Paul gained a hearing in the Synagogue is that he read the same texts from the Hebrew Bible and offered a fresh perspective. Whether the Jewish audience agreed with Paul or not, they would have been impressed with his exegesis.

This is a good place to stop and think about applying the book of Acts once again. Few pastors would think of weaving texts together they way Paul does here. In fact, most Seminary exegesis professors would probably fail a student that tried to get away with this sort of thing. Yet here the method is in Scripture, modeled for us by the Apostle Paul. What are we to make of this?

Let me make a simple suggestion – Paul used the method of communication which was best for a Synagogue sermon. When he speaks on Mars Hill, his communication style is different, so scripture is cited although much of the theology of the Hebrew Bible is present. There is a certain pragmatism here, Paul uses his training in order to effectively communicate in the synagogue, the marketplace, or Mars Hill. Yet in each context, the message of Jesus is clear. The method of communication is adaptable, the message is not.

Acts 13:12-43 – At the Synagogue in Pisidian Antioch

Acts 13 contains the first of several “sermons” given by Paul. Luke is clearly summarizing since the sermon is a mere 25 verses long, taking no more than a couple of minutes to read. Since the sermon follows the blinding of Bar-Jesus, it is likely that the sermon serves as an explanation of the events on Cyprus, but it is also a representative “synagogue” sermon for Paul.

Schnabel points out that there are three movements in the sermon (Paul the Missionary, 158-9). Paul first reviews Israel’s history from the Patriarchs through John the Baptist (v. 16-25). In the second movement, Paul declares the importance of Jesus in the light of this history (v. 26-37). It is in this section that Paul carefully weaves several texts form the Hebrew Bible together to make the point that Jesus fulfils the promise made to Abraham. The final part of the sermon is the call to repentance (verse 29-41). Like Peter and Stephen, Paul calls his listeners to respond to the message that Jesus is the Christ, although the repentance here in Paul’s sermon is not related to the killing of Jesus, nor does he declare that the “times of refreshing will come.” Now repentance is connected with justification and forgiveness of sins (verses 38-39).

This is a significant development. In Acts 2 and 3, Peter’s sermon was directed at people who had themselves witnessed the events of the crucifixion and resurrection, and even participated in those events (cf. 2:23). No one in the synagogue at Antioch would have been at Jerusalem so they could not be accused of participating in the crucifixion. Paul’s sermon adds a new element – forgiveness of sins. But there is a radical element here: Paul says that through Jesus one can have forgiveness of sins in a way that the Mosaic Law could not provide (37-38).

While the first parts of this sermon were quite similar to that of Peter and Stephen, Paul now calls for a much different response than Peter did. Peter declared that those who repent will be a part of the coming kingdom. In Acts 2 and 3 the repentance is of a sin of ignorance, the sin of killing the Messiah. Since the people acted in ignorance, they may repent and find forgiveness.

Now Paul says that the “one who believes is justified,” but in a way that the Law could never justify. There is a great deal of “Pauline theology” in this verse, since the Mosaic Law allowed for “sins of ignorance” to be forgiven through a sacrifice. If one sinned intentionally (“with a high hand”) then a sacrifice could not be made. Deliberate, premeditated breach of the Law could not find “justification” through a sacrifice. Paul is not talking about the sin of killing the Messiah, but rather of deliberate sins done with forethought and intention, and he is saying that one who believes is the one that receives justification.

Is this a development away from the Law? I think so, Paul is declaring that God granting forgiveness in a new way, one that might very well have been unanticipated in the Hebrew Bible.

Acts 13:8-12 – Symbolic Blindness

Barnabas and Saul arrive at Paphos they are challenged by a “sorcerer and false prophet” named Bar-Jesus, or Bar-Joshua. Bar-Jesus was a counselor for Sergius Paulus, the Roman proconsul on Cyprus. Thus Bar-Jesus was a very powerful man in the government. His name means “son of the Savior,” but he is also known as Elymas, meaning “Wise” in Arabic.

Sergius Paulus wishes to meet with Saul, but Bar-Jesus opposes this meeting. Paul is described as “full of the Spirit” as he condemns Bar-Jesus. Paul accuses him of trickery and deceit, and perverting the ways of the Lord. Paul then blinds the man, and he had to be led away. This is in itself a rather unique event in the New Testament, but the miracle is also a symbolic act. There are a number of miracles in the New Testament which are more or less “prophetic acts.” Jesus heals a blind man in Mark 8:22-26 who begins to see, then sees fully. This is a picture of the understanding of the disciples at that point in the gospel of Mark. The result is that the Gentile man who is not a God-Fearer believed and was amazed at the teaching about the Lord.

Luke uses the blinding of Bar-Jesus at this point in Acts to signal a major shift to Gentile mission. Luke begins to refer to Saul and Paul. The change occurs in the middle of the conflict with Bar-Jesus. Saul was always also known as Paul, but it is at this critical part of the story when Luke chooses to begin using the Roman name in his narrative. This is a hint of a major shift in the progress of salvation history, from the Jews to the Gentiles.

Luke also switches the order of the names from this point on in the book. Until this prophetic judgment speech, “Barnabas and Saul” traveled together, now “Paul and Barnabas” travel on to Antioch. The only exception is at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15, likely because Barnabas took the lead in speaking with James. On a literary level, Paul is the main human character for the rest of the book. The blinding of Bar-Jesus is the literary and theological transition point in the whole book of Acts.

Paul and Bar-Jesus are in many ways similar: both were blind and both encounter the truth of the Gospel of Jesus. Craig Keener points out at least five clear parallels between Paul and Elymas (2:2009). Both twisted the way of the Lord and were struck blind as a result. But Saul was Pharisee who kept the Law with a clear conscience, Bar-Jesus is “sorcerer” working for a Roman official.

While he condemns Elymas for his twisting the way of the Lord, Paul is also symbolically condemning all of the Jews who have resisted the Holy Spirit. Many commentators find the name “Bar-Jesus” ironic, since Elymas is not a “son of Jesus” but rather a “son of the devil” (v. 10). Jesus used the same verb “twist” (διαστρέφω) in Luke 9:41, a clear literary parallel in Luke/Acts as a whole. After declaring the present generation to be “faithless and twisted,” Jesus immediately predicts his own execution, (9:42-45) and then “resolutely sets out to Jerusalem” (Luke 9:51). Virtually everyone recognizes 9:51 as a major transition in Luke, a similar transition occurs in Acts 13.

It is critical to observe that Bar-Jesus is blind only for a time, not permanently. So too, Israel is only set aside in the progress of salvation, they are not “cut off forever.” If this is a symbolic miracle indicating that the Jews are “blinded” to the gospel, it also promises a restoration of the Jewish people in the future.

What other indications in Acts 13 would support the suggestion Luke is using the blinding of Elymas as a literary and/or theological transition in the book?

Acts 13:4 – Why Cyprus?

Barnabas and Saul set out from Antioch to Seulcia, a port about 16 miles from Antioch. From there they sail to Cyprus, an island in the Mediterranean about 100 miles from Selucia.

Why Cyprus? As Keener says, is simply makes sense for Barnabas to begin a mission by going to Cyprus since that was where he was from (2:1998). On the other hand, Cyprus had a large Jewish community dating to the second century B.C. (1 Mac 15:23). Both Josephus (Antiq. 18.31) and Philo (Legat 282) describe a large and wealthy Jewish population. Herod the Great was given half the income of Cyprus copper mines by Augustus (Antiq. 16.127-129). The Talmud indicates that Cypriot Jews regularly donated wine used for the incense offering on the Day of Atonement (y.Yoma 4:5; Schnabel, Early Christian Mission, 2:1078).

Acts 11:19-20 indicates there were early Jewish Christians from Cyprus who began to do ministry in Antioch. Barnabas himself was from Cyprus (4:36-37). All this implies a Jewish-Christian presence on Cyprus before Acts 11:19, and possibly as early as Pentecost. Barnabas and Saul were going to an area already prepared for the Gospel.

Cyprus is also central to travel to the Mediterranean world. The island was a prosperous and many good harbors (Strabo 14.2.10, 14.6.6, Keener 2:1999). Salamis was a major port city on Cyprus. It was destroyed by an earthquake in 15 B.C., and rebuilt by Augustus and renamed Sebaste Augusta. Paphos was about 93 miles (150 km) from Salamis and was the seat of the Roman government on the Island. The old city was home to the most famous temple of Aphrodite in the ancient world, still attracting pilgrims even in the first century (ECM, 2:1082).

Luke tells us Barnabas and Saul visit synagogues in Salamis and Paphos, but they likely visited other locations as they traveled the length of the island. This is Paul’s regular missionary method, going to the synagogue first. While this may reflect Romans 1:16 (“to the Jew first, and then to the Greek,” it is also a practical strategy. By going to a synagogue first, Rabbi Saul will meet people who are already well-educated in the Scripture and (perhaps) anticipating the coming of the Messiah.

Paul will also find a few Gentile God-fearers in most of the synagogues. It is possible Paul targeted these Gentiles who want to worship the God of Israel without fully keeping the Law. His Gospel would have been very attractive to these Gentiles.

There is no report of success (or lack thereof), but we know that Barnabas and John Mark return to Cyprus later, perhaps indicating some churches had been established. A bishop from Cyprus attended the council of Nicea; by A.D. 400, Jerome reports that there are 15 bishops on Cyprus (ECM, 2:1080).

Are there any other motivations for this trip to Cyprus? What is Luke doing on a literary/theological level by describing a pair of missionaries going out from Antioch?