Commentary on Acts 16.19-28

By Bob Myhan

¹⁹But when her masters saw that their hope of profit was gone, they seized Paul and Silas and dragged them into the marketplace to the authorities. ²⁰And they brought them to the magistrates, and said, "These men, being Jews, exceedingly trouble our city; ²¹and they teach customs which are not lawful for us, being Romans, to receive or observe."

This marketplace was an “open square where meetings were held and the magistrates held their courts.” The magistrates were “Roman officers, two in number, called duumviri, or prætors... Roman law sternly forbade one not a Jew to be circumcised.—Howson” (Johnson's Notes on the New Testament). Not willing to reveal the real reason for their consternation—because the multitudes would most certainly have sympathized with the girl who had been possessed—and noticing the Jewish features of Paul and Silas, “her masters” concocted the false charge regarding Jewish customs.

²²Then the multitude rose up together against them; and the magistrates tore off their clothes and commanded them to be beaten with rods. ²³And when they had laid many stripes on them, they threw them into prison, commanding the jailer to keep them securely. ²⁴Having received such a charge, he put them into the inner prison and fastened their feet in the stocks.

 Jews were pretty much loathsome to Rome, their customs being tolerated only in their own homeland. It was the thought that Paul and Silas were teaching unlawful customs that “the multitudes rose up” as one in their indignation and the magistrates tore off their clothes and ordered them beaten. The Jews by Law could administer no more than forty stripes (Dt. 25.3) and the custom among Jews was to give only thirty-nine in case they lost count (2 Cor. 11.24). The Romans had no such law and no such custom. They even beat them unlawfully on this occasion, not stopping to inquire about the possibility of their being Roman citizens or possibly innocent of the charges. The “many stripes” were doubtless more than forty for reasons mentioned already. This was one of three times Paul would be beaten with rods before the end of his third missionary journey (see 2 Cor. 11.25). Receiving the charge to keep them securely, the jailer not only placed them in a cell but secured their feet in stocks.

²⁵But at midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the prisoners were listening to them.

By the time the two preachers were thrown into prison, they would have been bruised, bloody and fatigued in mind and body. Considering not only their physical and mental condition but the likely prison conditions as well, it is a wonder they had either the physical strength or the presence of mind to do anything but sleep. But Paul was probably sustained (and helped sustain Silas) by the recollection of having watched the coats of those who stoned Stephen and others to death (Acts 7.54-60; 26.9-10). While people are often in a frame of mind to pray when in distress, they usually sing when happy (James 5.13) but the apostles and other early Christians generally seem to be looking for and taking advantage of opportunities to evangelize. These prisoners did not complain of the praying and singing by the two but were listening to them. This shows intent; they didn’t merely “hear” but “listened.” If not for the providence of God, they would not have been exposed to such. It had to have made a positive impression.

²⁶Suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison were shaken; and immediately all the doors were opened and everyone's chains were loosed. ²⁷And the keeper of the prison, awaking from sleep and seeing the prison doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about to kill himself. ²⁸But Paul called with a loud voice, saying, "Do yourself no harm, for we are all here."

This is reminiscent of two earlier earthquakes—one at the time of the crucifixion and the other at the time of the resurrection. There was no miracle evident at the conversion of Lydia, who was most likely familiar with the Old Testament scriptures. But the jailer was a Gentile and knew nothing of the sacred writings. There is no indication that he heard the praying or the singing but he both heard and felt the earthquake. Knowing that his life would be forfeit if his prisoners escaped, he did not want to die at the hands of his superiors. He had rather fall on his own sword and die quickly. But the earthquake not only opened the prison doors but the stocks, as well. This would serve as confirmation that the preaching he is about to hear is indeed from the one true and living God. Paul stopped him from suicide by shouting that he, Silas and the other prisoners had not escaped.

(To be continued)

A Study of the Holy Spirit (Part 31)

By Bob Myhan

The letter written by the Jerusalem church (the first inspired document during the church age) gives further evidence of the difference between inspiration and revelation. Remember that nothing new had been revealed at the meeting of Paul and Barnabas with the apostles and elders. But the Holy Spirit bore them along in their thinking and reasoning much as He had done for the Old Testament prophets.

And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 1.19-21) 

Thus, the Holy Spirit aided Peter in his recollection of the events in the home of Cornelius. Even then, Peter had preached a message that was already known to his audience (“...that word you know” - Acts 10.37). He recalls—at the meeting in Jerusalem—that he had not been led by the Spirit to say anything about circumcision. Hence, he knew by inspiration—not revelation—that circumcision was not binding on Gentiles. The same is true of Barnabas and Saul as they recounted, no doubt by the Holy Spirit’s help, the events of their first missionary journey. They had not preached circumcision as binding and had necessarily inferred from that fact that the rite was not to be bound on the Gentiles who were turning to the Lord. James concluded the same thing in quoting Amos 9.11-12. There was no specific mention of circumcision by the prophet but the implication was clear. The “tabernacle of David” would include uncircumcised citizens.

Which brings us, again, to the letter. The only reference to circumcision is the statement, “Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, "You must be circumcised and keep the law"--to whom we gave no such commandment….” It was implied, though, that circumcision was a “greater burden” than “seemed good...to lay upon” them. When those in Antioch read the letter, “they rejoiced over its encouragement,” for they inferred what was implied—there was no need for physical circumcision.

The apostles and others were “carried along by the Holy Spirit” in their recollections, their reasoning and their writing. But, again, there was no new revelation.

(To be continued)