Commentary on Acts 16

Commentary on Acts 16.14-18

By Bob Myhan

^{14Now a certain woman named Lydia heard us. She was a
seller of purple from the city of Thyatira, who worshiped God. The Lord opened
her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul.}

As discussed in the last issue, the Lord did not open Lydia’s or anyone else’s heart through a direct operation. Rather, it was always done through the word of God, whether written or spoken. (See, again, Luke 24.13-32). Paul later wrote of the necessity of hearing the gospel in his epistle to the Romans.

For "whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved." How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, Who bring glad tidings of good things!" But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our report?" So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. (10:13-17)

To "heed the things spoken" is to give one’s attention to carrying out whatever commands might be issued, such as the command to be baptized (Mark 16.15-16; Matt. 28:18-20; Acts 2:38; 8:5,12; 10:44-48; 19:1-6; 22:12-16; Rom. 6:2-7; 1 Peter 3:20-21). Though he didn’t personally baptize many "lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name," Paul certainly taught and commanded baptism. (Acts 18.1-8)

^{15And when she and her household were baptized, she
begged us, saying, "If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my
house and stay." So she persuaded us.}

It should be observed that Luke does not here tell Theophilus directly that Lydia was baptized but takes it for granted that he and we will infer it from the statement that "the Lord opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul." Paul everywhere commanded water baptism, as we have seen. Thus, Luke says "when she and her house were baptized, she begged us…." For some reason, Paul and company were reluctant to accept the invitation, resulting in her having to persuade them to do so. But they acquiesced implying that they had judged her "to be faithful to the Lord." Thus, we infer necessarily that she believed in Jesus, repented of her sins, confessed her faith and was baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, as God requires of all alien sinners.

^{16Now it happened, as we went to prayer, that a certain
slave girl possessed with a spirit of divination met us, who brought her masters
much profit by fortune-telling. ¹⁷This girl followed Paul and us, and
cried out, saying, "These men are the servants of the Most High God, who
proclaim to us the way of salvation." ¹⁸And this she did for many
days. But Paul, greatly annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, "I command you
in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her." And he came out that very hour.}

A spirit of divination is a demon. Demons are angels of the devil (Mt. 12.22-28; 25:41), the angels who sinned (2 Pet. 2:4). Divination is fortunetelling. Whether fortunes told by this girl proved true is not stated. Fortunetelling, palm reading and phrenology are all means used even today to separate people from their money. They, along with card reading, Ouija boards, horoscopes and necromancy are contrivances of the occult. Occultism leads away from God. Dabbling in these arts was strictly forbidden in the Old Testament (Ex. 22:18; 1 Sam. 15.23) and in the New (Gal. 5:19-21). It is identified as witchcraft and sorcery. Such has no rightful place in the life of a Christian. Having been created before mankind, these angels once lived in heaven but "did not keep their proper domain" and "left their own abode" (Jude 6). Having known the Word before the fall, they recognized Him in His earthly body (Luke 8.26-28). They also acknowledge the authority of the twelve (Mt. 10.1-8), the seventy (Luke 10.1, 17-20) and Paul (Acts 19.13-17).

Paul cast out the demon because he neither needed nor desired that kind of testimony on his behalf. Continuing to give the appearance of accepting the testimony of a demon would also give the appearance of being in league with them. When Paul commanded the demon to come out of the girl, the demon acknowledged the authority of Jesus Christ and "came out of her that very hour" (v. 18). Demon possession is no longer possible, inasmuch as the power to cast them out is no longer available. This writer is convinced that the only reason demons were permitted to possess people in the first century was to demonstrate the authority and superior power of Jesus and His apostles over them. There was never a failed attempt by Jesus during His ministry or by the apostles after the Day of Pentecost.

(To be continued)

A Study of the Holy Spirit (Part 30)

By Bob Myhan

In Acts 15, Luke details a meeting between the representatives of the church in Antioch of Syria with the apostles, elders and brethren of the church in Jerusalem on the subject of whether circumcision was to be bound on Gentile converts. The teachers of this doctrine had come from Jerusalem and gave the impression that what they taught was apostolic doctrine or "the doctrine of Christ." It is for this reason that the church in Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas to the Jerusalem church. This was not a general convention of churches with delegates from all over the Roman Empire. There is not now and was not then any authority for such a delegation.

No new revelation was given on the subject of physical circumcision at this meeting. There was no need for revelation on this because the Holy Spirit had revealed the truth by His silence on the matter. When He spoke through the mouth of Peter to those in the home of Cornelius He said nothing about them needing to be circumcised; when he spoke to the Gentiles by Barnabas and Paul and confirmed their word as "God’s honest truth," He said nothing about the Gentiles needing to be circumcised. And it was prophesied in the Old Testament that "the tabernacle of David" (AKA the kingdom of God) would be for all nations, not just the Jews, implying there would no need to circumcise Gentiles as a condition of salvation.

Notice the double use of necessary inference in each of the three arguments. Peter does not directly state but implies that he necessarily inferred from the events at Caesarea that Gentiles did not need to be circumcised. Though Luke’s account of the argument of Barnabas and Paul is abbreviated (he had just given a somewhat detailed account of their preaching to the Gentiles), Luke implies by referring to their argument that they had also necessarily inferred, from the inspired preaching they had done, the same thing as Peter. They had inferred it and were now implying it. James, likewise, necessarily inferred from the prophets the same thing the others had necessarily inferred from their respective experiences. Thus, physical circumcision had not been mentioned by any of them, insofar as Luke’s account is concerned. Thus, we have apostolic precedent for using necessary inference to establish truth. Notice, also, the letter they wrote does not directly state but implies that Gentiles do not need to be circumcised in order to come into the Lord’s church. Yet the letter said, "…it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us…." (Acts 15.28) They reached their decision to write the letter with the aid of the Holy Spirit but there was no new revelation.

(To be continued)