Deeper Commentary
ACTS CHAPTER 16
16:1
And he went also to Derbe and to Lystra; and a
certain disciple was there, named Timothy- Being half Jewish
and having a Gentile name, this was a typical case which would have been
hard to legislate over given the legalistic mindset of the Judaizers which
has just been brought before us in chapter 15. And 'Timothy' means 'Dear
to God'; the Gentiles were equally beloved.
The son of a Jewess that believed; but his father was a Greek-
Her name was Eunice, and his grandmother Lois also had believed before her
(2 Tim. 1:5). Lois and Eunice are Gentile names, so we might conclude that
they were not very observant Jews, indeed Eunice had married a Gentile
which would have severed her from orthodox Judaism, neither had she
circumcised her son; and yet from a child they had taught him the Old
Testament Scriptures (2 Tim. 3:15). They loved the word of God but were
not seen as having made the grade in terms of their religion. So many of
the Lord's people are like that.
16:2 Well reported of by the believers that were at Lystra and
Iconium- This would imply Timothy was from Lystra (:1 is unclear
whether he was from Derbe or Lystra).
16:3
Paul wanted Timothy to
accompany him- Literally 'to go forth', the word used about
missionary endeavour in fulfilment of the great commission to 'go forth'
(Lk. 9:6; 3 Jn. 7).
And he took him and circumcised him because of the
Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a
Greek- Remember that this follows hard on the decision made in
chapter 15 not to demand circumcision. But an agreed position can still
not be followed because of the higher principles of not causing others to
stumble. There are several examples in the NT of where Paul could have
taken a certain course of action, or insisted on acceptance of a certain
doctrinal position, knowing that Truth was on his side. But he didn't.
Thus the council of Jerusalem established that Gentiles didn't need to be
circumcised, but straight afterwards Paul circumcised Timothy in Lystra
out of consideration to the feelings of the Jewish believers (Acts
16:1-3). He could have stood on his rights, and on the clear spiritual
principles involved. But he stepped down to the lower level of other
believers (e.g. by keeping some of the redundant Jewish feasts), he made
himself all things to all men that he might try to save some, and by so
doing stepped up to the higher level in his own spirituality.
16:4
And as they went on their way through the cities,
they delivered to them the decrees to keep, which had been determined by
the apostles and elders at Jerusalem- Presumably just the four
forbidden things related to idol worship. Or were there more?
16:5
So the churches were strengthened in the faith,
and increased in number daily- Implying baptisms were being
done daily, immediately a candidate was ready (not left to the weekend for
convenience!). The same reference to daily increase is to be found earlier
in Acts. The increase in number was related to the [temporary] resolution
of the tensions within the community over the question of the Gentiles.
Schism between believers is the greatest disadvertisment for the Gospel,
and contrariwise, as the Lord laboured in His prayer of John 17, our unity
should be enough to convert the world.
16:6
And they went through the region of Phrygia and
Galatia, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in
Asia- Paul writes to the Corinthians of how he had
been given areas in which it was potentially possible for him to preach in
(2 Cor. 10:13), and he didn’t enter into those areas which had either
already been preached in, or which were another brother’s responsibility.
This seems to suggest that God does indeed look down from Heaven and as it
were divide up the world amongst those who could preach in it. This is why
Paul perceived that he had been ‘forbidden’ from preaching in some areas
[e.g. Macedonia] and yet a door was opened to him in Achaia. Likewise he
felt he had been forbidden [s.w.] to preach to Rome until the time of Rom.
1:13. This language is allusive to the way in which the Lord forbad Israel
to conquer certain areas on their way to the promised land (Dt. 2:37). The
point is, between us, our preaching is a war of conquest for Jesus,
pulling down strong holds and fortresses as Paul put it; or, as Jesus
expressed it, taking the Kingdom by force, as storm troopers. How the
Spirit achieved this 'forbidding' isn't clear, although the same word is
used in 1 Thess. 2:16 about how Jewish opposition 'forbad' Paul preaching
to Gentiles. But even this, for which the Jews were culpable, was used by
the Spirit in the bigger picture of God's purpose.
16:7
And when they came to the border of Mysia, they
attempted to go into Bithynia- The Greek really means to put to
the test. Having been forbidden or hindered from preaching in Asia, they
realized they were being led to some areas but not others. And so when
they thought of preaching in Bithynia, they set up various tests to see if
their way was to be made prosperous there or not. The spirit of Jesus,
perhaps their own spiritual mindedness, didn't permit them to go there.
Perhaps they learnt the lesson and therefore likewise purposefully didn't
preach in Mysia (see on :8).
But the Spirit of Jesus did not permit them- Living according
to the spirit / mind / example of Jesus will mean that we naturally find
the answers to some of the practical dilemmas which may arise in our
lives. Could it not be that the spirit of Jesus, a life lived after His
pattern, compelled them to (let’s imagine) go to visit a sick child and
this meant they missed the transport leaving for Bithynia?
16:8
So passing by Mysia, they came down to Troas-
They could not have avoided it, seeing it was impossible to get to Troas
without passing through Mysia. Presumably the idea is that they did not
preach there. Perhaps the Spirit forbad them, as in Bithynia (see on
16:7).
16:9
And a vision appeared to Paul in the night. There
was a man of Macedonia standing- Having been led away from two
areas and realizing they should learn the lesson and leave a third one
alone (see on :8), they were now directed to where the Lord wished them to
work. He could have sent them there immediately, but He wanted them to
work out and reflect upon His will and processes (see on :7 attempted);
and once they had got through that, He gave them clear direction. This
would explain the immediacy of their response once they finally received
clear direction (:10). The same sort of thing happens in our lives if we
allow ourselves to be led by Him and be in relationship with Him.
Urging him
and saying: Come into Macedonia and help us!-
Parakleo is literally 'to call
near', AV 'praying him'. The man was standing- the position of begging and
pleading in intercession (as the Lord Jesus for Stephen). "Help" is the
same word used in Heb. 2:18 for the help provided by the Lord Jesus in
prayer as our intercessor. The language is of prayer- and it's as if Paul
and Timothy are in God's place being prayed to and begged by the Lord
Jesus. In a sense, we manifest God in our preaching; we are Him to this
world. And the need is the call; we too encounter such calls, if we are
sensitive to them.
16:10
And when he had seen the vision, immediately-
Paul and the apostles were urgent in their preaching. When Paul
received the go ahead to preach in Macedonia, he “immediately endeavoured”
to go there, even not waiting for Titus to join him, such was his urgency
(Acts 16:10; 2 Cor. 2:12,13). And the response of people to these urgent
preachers was therefore quick too. Men who began doubting and cynical were
pricked in their heart, they realized their need, and were baptized within
hours (Acts 2:12,37).
We sought to go into Macedonia- This could mean that Luke was
now present with Paul; or it could be that he is including here the
inspired diary of another companion of Paul.
Concluding that- The idea is of proving, putting together (s.w.
Acts 9:22). By assessment of evidence and testing situations and
hypotheses, Paul drew a conclusion. And we are likewise required to
interpret God's actions in our lives, rather than expecting a bolt of
revelation or specific calling. Although at times Paul did have this kind
of thing, in his preaching work he was clearly left to join the dots
himself in many ways. See on :7 attempted and :9 A vision.
God had called us to preach the gospel to them- Paul
'assuredly gathered' that "the Lord had called us for to preach the Gospel
unto them" (Acts 16:10 AV). The Lord calling is usually used concerning
His calling of men to understand and obey the Gospel. Perhaps Paul is
saying that the reason why we are called is to preach, and in this context
he realised that the people he was to preach to, were the
Macedonians. He later reminisced: "As we were allowed of God to be put in
trust with the gospel, even so we speak (i.e. preach)" (1 Thess. 2:4).
If we don't shine forth the light, both in the world and in the household,
we are not fulfilling the purpose for which we were called. Perhaps this
is the meaning of Acts 16:10, where Luke says that they preached in
Macedonia because they perceived that "the Lord had called us for
(in order that) to preach the gospel (in this case) unto (the
Macedonians)". Whether such an interpretation appeals or not, there are
many passages which teach that our salvation will be related to the extent
to which we have held forth the word both to the world and to the
household (Prov. 11:3; 24:11,12; Dan. 12:3; Mk. 8:38; Lk. 12:8; Rom.
10:9,10 cp. Jn. 9:22; 12:42; 1:20; 1 Pet. 4:6 Gk.).
16:11
Setting sail therefore from Troas, we made a
straight course to Samothrace and the day following to Neapolis-
A nautical term for sailing before the wind. But wind is the same Hebrew
idea as 'spirit'. They were as it were led directly by the Spirit on their
journey, confirming the process of 'concluding' we discussed on :10.
Recall too how they had been forbidden to preach in two or three places
before this; now, everything is going so directly and clearly under the
Lord's direction by the Spirit. The allusion may be to the way the
cherubim of Ezekiel's vision moved in a straight manner. And the account
of Saul's conversion is replete with reference to the commissioning of
Ezekiel. The Spirit, working through Angels, cherubim and all manner of
means, confirmed Paul in the direction he had worked out as being
necessary to take.
16:12 And from there to Philippi, which is a city of Macedonia, the
first of the district, a Roman colony; and we stayed in this city for some
days- The teaching, conversion and baptism of the Philippians took
only "some days"; the jailer would have at best only had a brief exposure
to Paul's message before meeting him in prison. Likewise Paul was only in
Thessalonica "two Sabbath days" and in that time he had to work night and
day to support himself and his team. The impression is that the
pre-baptismal teaching was brief. Colonies were "another Rome transferred
to the soil of another country" (Vine). This explains some of the language
in the letter to the Philippians, emphasizing that our citizenship is a
heavenly one (Phil. 3:20), when Philippi had been established as a
"colony" for Roman citizens.
16:13
And on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate by
a river, where we supposed there was a place of prayer, and we sat down
and spoke to the women that had gathered- When Paul is
described as going “forth without the gate” to preach in Philippi (RV),
this is the very language of Heb. 13:12 about the Lord going forth without
the gate, carrying the cross, and bidding us follow Him. For Paul, to
preach was to carry the cross of Christ, and so it must be for us. A river
was an attractive place for Jews to worship because of their need to
perform ritual washing. Paul's message of baptism was therefore
particularly appropriate.
16:14
And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of
purple of the city of Thyatira, one that worshipped God- Or, a
Lydian. Perhaps she was a Jewess from Lydia, or a Gentile from Lydia who
had become attracted to Judaism. Archaeological remains indicate
a guild of dyers and purple traders there. She would have been accustomed
to the use of baptizo in her work.
Heard us- The imperfect, 'was hearing', could suggest she
overheard the preaching rather than sat attentively purposefully listening
to it. Otherwise we would expect the Greek word for 'listening' to be used
here; but it isn't.
Whose heart the Lord opened to give heed to the things which were
spoken by Paul- This is clear enough evidence that the Lord works
directly on the human heart / perception, quite above the power of His
written word itself. The Old Testament has several similar
examples of God 'opening eyes' of perception (Gen. 21:19; Num. 22:31; 2
Kings 6:17,20; Is. 42:7; 50:5), and David asks for his eyes to be open to
behold wonderful things in God's word (Ps. 119:18). There would be no need
for that prayer, nor for God to open eyes, if intellectual effort alone is
required. This is why in our times, the Holy Spirit is provided to
'enlighten the eyes of your understanding' (Eph. 1:18). Her 'giving heed' to the Gospel was because the Lord
had opened her heart. It's not as if the Lord faces off against man over
an open Bible, leaving us the choice of responding to what we read / hear
or not. He goes further than that, reaching across the table, and
compelling some to have open hearts to His word. Luke has spoken earlier
of how the Lord opened the hearts of the disciples / apostles to
understand the word of God (Lk. 24:31,32,45). Indeed the parallels between
the Emmaus disciples and Lydia are strong. All had their hearts opened by
the Lord, and responded by opening their homes to the Lord or His people.
That again is evidence
enough that God's word is not simply self-explanatory; the eunuch rightly
observed that he couldn't understand it unless a man guided him, and the
Spirit operated by sending Philip to do this; the disciples had their
hearts opened by the Lord to understand the Scriptures, and Lydia's heart
was opened to give heed to the Gospel. This 'extra' factor is reflective
of God's grace; without it, salvation would simply be for those
intellectually astute enough to correctly interpret the theology of the
Bible. But the presence of that 'extra' factor (in the Lord opening hearts
to the Gospel) is the mechanism by which He calls. And as Romans
demonstrates, the fact He calls one but not another is a parade example of
His grace, and how salvation is by grace and now by theological prowess.
The same word for “to give heed” is in Acts 8:6 about how people gave heed
to the Gospel which Philip preached. Presumably it would be fair enough to
conclude that the Lord likewise assisted their hearts to this end.
16:15 And when she was baptized-
The conversion of Lydia is spoken of in a sub clause: “And when
she was baptized…”. There is no statement that she believed what Paul had
spoken; merely that she listened with interest and was baptized. The
implication is that belief and baptism are part and parcel of the same
thing. There is certainly the impression that the period of Lydia’s
teaching was quick. To argue that she may have been instructed for several
days is an argument from silence. The impression given by all the accounts
of baptism is that it was the initial response made by people once they
believed a basic outline of the Gospel.
And her household- The way of the world was that the whole
household converted to the religion of the head of the house. And yet the
call of Christ was to individuals. Therefore when we read of whole
households converting (Acts 16:15, 31-34; 18:8; 1 Cor. 1:11,16; 16:15 Rom.
16:10) we must assume that they had resisted the temptation to mass
convert, and that Masters had the humility to not demand of their
slaves and family members that they just blindly follow them. This request
would have been axiomatic to their preaching of the Gospel; and yet it
would have been a radical departure from how family heads around them
behaved.
She urged us, saying: If you have judged me to be faithful to the
Lord, come into my house and stay. So she persuaded us- Entering
houses and eating together was seen as having a religious dimension to it,
as Peter mentioned when accepting Cornelius' invitation. There were
present at least Paul, Silas, Timothy and Luke, as this is a 'we' passage.
For a woman to invite a group of previously unknown men into her house was
scandalous and would have begged all kinds of gossip. But the culture in
Christ was and is at radical variance with that of the surrounding world.
16:16
And it came to pass, as we were going to the place
of prayer, that a certain slave girl met us- See on 16:15. We
can imagine the gossip this provoked as Lydia, her family and the foreign
men walked to the river. Note that after baptism, she continued to attend
the religious meeting place she had attended previously. The Lord spoke of
how the time would come when His followers would be cast out of the
synagogues, but following Him did not immediately require ceasing
attendance at synagogue, despite the terribly wrong theologies preached
there.
Who had a spirit by which she predicted the future
and who brought her masters much gain by fortune-telling-
Acts 16:16–18 are the words of Luke, under inspiration: “a certain
damsel possessed with a spirit of Python met us” (Gk.). As explained in
the footnote in the Diaglott version, Python was the name of a false god
believed in during the first century, possibly the same as the god Apollo.
It was believed that the ‘spirit’ of Python took over the ‘immortal soul’
of the person being possessed. Seeing that the Bible strongly opposes the
idea of an immortal soul, there is no way that a spirit of Python can
possess anyone. So Python definitely did not exist, but Luke does not say
the girl was ‘possessed with a spirit of Python, who by the way, is a
false god who does not really exist…’. In the same way the Gospels do not
say that Jesus ‘cast out demons which, by the way, do not really exist, it
is just the language of the day for illnesses’. The demons cast out of
Legion went “into the abyss” (Lk. 8:31 Gk.); the pagan concept of the
abyss is a nonsense, yet if we believe that the record of Legion’s cure
teaches the existence of demons, then we must logically believe in ‘the
abyss’ too.
16:17
The same following after
Paul and us was crying out, saying: These men are servants of the Most
High God, who proclaim to you the way of salvation!- There was
clearly a literal element to this, because Paul turns and addresses the
girl (:18). But the language of following Paul is elsewhere used to mean
that people accepted his teaching (Acts 13:43). It may be that we are
intended to understand that she accepted the Gospel.
16:18
And this she did for many days. But Paul, being
greatly disturbed by it, turned and said to the spirit: I order you in the
name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And it came out that very moment-
Paul didn’t allow himself to be irritated. The tragedy of mental illness
grieved him; the tragedy of the way in which some people have an all too
partial knowledge of Gods truth. And his grieving for her didn’t
merely result in him preaching the Gospel to her; he did something
concrete to help cure her.
16:19
But when her masters saw that the hope of their
gain was gone, they laid hold of Paul and Silas- Circumstances
repeat within our lives, as they did for Paul. Because exactly the same
complaint was made at Ephesus, with the same persecution; and the same
Greek words are used to describe it (19:24,25). Paul was intended to learn
from the events at Philippi so he could cope with those at Ephesus.
And dragged them into the marketplace before the
rulers- Paul was likewise 'dragged' in Jerusalem (21:30). Yet
he had himself 'dragged' Christians out of their house churches, along the
streets and into prison (8:3). He would have been enabled to feel for
those he had thus treated. We too are brought to realize how others felt
as a result of our actions, not so much as a punishment for us, but in
order to lead us closer to the spirit of Christ and to His Kingdom.
16:20 And
when they had brought them to the magistrates, they said: These men, being
Jews, are disturbing our city- This disrespect was rooted in
the fact that these Jews had probably only recently arrived, as a result
of Jews being cast out of Rome (Acts 18:2).
16:21 And advocate customs which it is not lawful for us to receive,
or to observe, being Romans- In both Thessalonica and Philippi,
strong opposition arose to the preaching of the Gospel because it was held
that it was preaching another King, Jesus, in opposition to Caesar, and
that the obligations of this new religion were at variance with the
Imperial Cult (Acts 16:21; 17:7). In a sense, these allegations were true.
Christianity taught that the convert became a member of a new, spiritual
Israel. It was irrelevant whether he or she was a Jew, Roman or Gentile.
And the convert had to act inclusively rather than exclusively towards
other converts. It must have been hard for a Roman citizen to willingly
become as it were a ‘citizen’ of ‘spiritual Israel’, a ‘member’ of the
despised and captive Jewish race. To not participate in the cult of
emperor worship was serious indeed; Roman citizenship could be lost over
this matter. Pliny wrote that Christians were therefore “unable by
temperament or unwilling by conviction to participate in the common
activities of a group or community”. They were seen as any true living
Christian is: a bit weird, unsociable, aloof from worldly pleasure, and
thereby a silent critic of those who indulge. “The Christian would not
attend gladiatorial shows or games or plays. He would not read pagan
literature. He would not enlist as a soldier, for then he would come under
orders that might conflict with his standards and with his loyalty to
Jesus Christ. He would not be a painter or sculptor, for that would be to
acquiesce to idolatry. Nor would he be a schoolmaster, for then he would
inevitably have to tell the immoral stories of the pagan gods. The
Christian had better steer clear of business contracts, because they
required the taking of oaths, which the Christian abjured. They had better
keep out of administrative office because of the idolatry involved… and so
on”. The Romans considered anyone outside the Roman world or who rejected
Roman manners and laws as being a barbarian; and yet the Gospel appealed
to Roman citizens to reject these very manners and laws. Thus Ramsay
comments: “To the Romans genus humanum meant not the human race
in general but the Roman world, men who lived according to Roman manners
and laws; the rest were enemies and barbarians. The Christians, then, were
enemies to civilised man, and to the customs and laws which regulated
civilised society… they introduced divisions into families and set
children against their parents”.
Jews were allowed to make proselytes of other nations, but not Roman
citizens, who were not to be religiously preached to by any other group
within the empire. Therefore the command to take the Gospel to literally
all men, including Roman citizens, was hard to obey. This explains the
double complaint that the Roman citizens were being asked to both receive
and obey the message of Christ. Receiving them, being preached
to, was also a matter of offence, as well as the content of the message.
16:22 And
the crowd rose up together against them; and the magistrates
ordered them to be stripped and beaten- The obvious question is
why Paul didn't reveal his Roman citizenship at this stage in order to
avoid the flogging. He does reveal if afterwards, but seeing flogging
could be fatal, there must have been a major reason why Paul went through
with it when he didn't need to. One can only speculate: he wanted to show
solidarity with Silas; he wanted to put the authorities in a position
where they were in his debt and would allow the fledgling ecclesia to meet
unhindered; he was simply stubborn and angry and wished to embarrass his
enemies.
16:23
And when they had laid many stripes upon them-
This doesn't mean that they personally flogged them. They
'laid' in the sense of laying a penalty upon them. The actual flogging was
likely done by the jailor; hence his desire to wash their damaged bodies
after his conversion, and his deep sense of fear before them afterwards.
When we read that the jailor "having received this order" (:24) put them
into the inner prison, the "order" was the sentence of flogging which he
was ordered to inflict, and he may well have carried it out in the inner
prison.
They threw them into prison- Exactly
what Paul had done to Christians, after flogging them (26:10).
Ordering the jailor to guard them carefully-
Especially securely. There seemed to be a fear that Paul would seek to
escape; hence having received such a charge, the jailor put them in the
inner prison, the most secure zone, probably underground with no access to
the outside. Or it could be that the magistrates wanted these men to die
in custody, and 'guard them extra carefully' could have been a nod to
abuse them. See on :24 Shackles.
16:24 Having received this order, he put them into the inner prison and fastened their feet in shackles- The Greek is literally "the wood". This was an instrument of torture having five holes, four for the wrists and ankles and one for the neck. The same word is used for the cross (Acts 5:30; 10:39; Gal. 3:13; 1 Pet. 2:24). Again we see how the experiences of believers in Acts, and Paul especially, were a sharing in the sufferings of their Lord. Just as ours are. Perhaps it was perceiving that connection with the crucified Jesus which led them to burst into praise. "The inner prison" was commonly known as 'the underworld'; dark, with no windows, no sense of day or night, filled with the smell of decaying humanity. It was as if they were sharing the Lord's death.
"The holes being pierced at different distances, the legs might be
separated or divaricated to a great extent, which must produce extreme
pain".
16:25 But about midnight-
The stocks were an instrument of torture which would have made sleeping
impossible. It could have been that they might have died that night in
that dark cave... if the earthquake had not happened.
Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God-
Literally, they were praying in singing hymns. Let's not forget that hymns
are prayers being sung. The musical issues surrounding them can so easily
distract from this realization.
And the prisoners were listening to them- The fact no
prisoners ran away (:28) may mean that they were converted by that evening
of witness. See on :26.
16:26
And suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that
the foundations of the prison were shaken; and immediately all
the doors were opened and everyone's bonds were unfastened-
The work of the Lord Jesus is described in exactly these terms, of opening
the prisons and releasing those who are bound (Lk. 13:16; Is. 42:7; 49:9;
61:1; Zech. 9:11; 1 Pet. 3:19). The fact all the prisoners had their bonds
unfastened would maybe suggest they were all converted, at least
potentially they were given freedom in Christ; see on :25 The
prisoners.
16:27
And the jailor, being roused out of sleep and
seeing the prison doors open- More language
appropriate to the saving work of Jesus in opening the prison doors.
Drew his sword and was about to kill himself, supposing that the
prisoners had escaped- If prisoners escaped during an earthquake, it
wasn't a foregone conclusion that the jailor would therefore be executed
for negligence of duty. He had a fair chance of survival. We are therefore
left with the impression that this man was perhaps very proud, or
committed to his job to the point that he was his career and his career
was him, with his family meaning little to him; or perhaps just overly
emotional; or maybe new to the job and reacting poorly in a crisis. We
meet all these types of people in life, and tend to assume they would not
be good candidates for the Gospel. But this man was.
16:28
But Paul cried out with a loud voice, saying: Do
not harm yourself! For we are all here!- Every other
usage of the phrase 'to do harm' is always in a moral sense, of sinning
(Rom. 7:19; 9:11; 13:4; 2 Cor. 5:10). We can therefore in this case
conclude that suicide would have been a sin; although God's forgiveness of
that sin is another issue.
16:29
And he called for lights and rushed in, and
trembling with fear, he fell down before Paul and Silas-
He had now no fear of judgment by his superiors nor by society.
The prisoners hadn't escaped. So this was fear of Divine judgment. Just as
"Felix trembled" when he considered judgment to come. Fear
of his fate before God for having tortured His servants, and having all
the same been shown such grace in that his prisoners hadn't run away.
16:30 And
brought them out and said: Sirs, what must I do to be saved?-
He doesn't ask for baptism, suggesting he was unaware of the need for it.
This was a highly emotional situation; anyone at the very point of suicide
is in a very unstable position. Many today would have told the man to calm
down and consider the issue of baptism once things were a bit calmer in
his life, urging him not to take such a decision on the cusp of emotion
and perceived desperation. Let alone to baptize all his family when he
himself was taking the decision under such psychological and
circumstantial pressure. But the Biblical example here is quite the
opposite to how many would judge today. "What must I do?" is a common
phrase recorded by Luke [Acts 2:37; and the crowd ask John "What
then shall we do", Lk. 3:10]. All encounter with the Lord Jesus and His message
provokes this sense, that we can no longer be passive, but must do
something in response. "Sirs" translates kurios, and maybe we are
to perceive that Paul and Silas were manifesting the Lord Jesus to the
jailor.
There is no record of his apology or desire for forgiveness from them
for what he had done to them (see on :23). He rightly perceived that the
essence of his sin was against God and he needed to be right before Him,
knowing that what he had done required judgment, which he now realized he
needed to be 'saved' from.
16:31 And they said: Believe on the Lord Jesus and you shall be saved- We note the humility. When addressed by the Philippian jailor "Sirs (kurion), what must I do to be saved?'", Paul answers "Believe in the Lord (kurion) Jesus".
In :34, he believed in
God. A theme of Acts is that the work of the Father and Son are paralleled
(e.g. 16:31 cp. 34; 15:12; 26:17 cp. 22). They are working together
to achieve our final redemption. The concept is wondrous.
You and your household- This focus on his family may have been
to psychologically assist him to get over his suicidal thoughts.
16:32 And they spoke the word of the Lord to him, and to all that
were in his household- The "household" would have included children,
slaves and distant relatives. The man was wealthy. "The word of the Lord"
was the message of the Lord Jesus; the kind of material eventually
transcribed and published as the Gospels of the Lord Jesus. Paul clearly
had in mind that his "household" could respond; for he commands the jailer
that if he believed, then he and his household could be
saved. This makes us wonder whether this man and his household had been
known to Paul previously. Or it could be that Paul perceived that because
of the faith of one individual, a whole family could be saved- although
they too had to respond to the Gospel. Hence he preached it to them.
16:33 And
at that hour of the night he took them- The earthquake
occurred at “midnight” (Acts 16:25); Paul and Silas spoke “the word of the
Lord” to the jailer, and “that same hour” (Acts 16:33 AV) he washed their
stripes and he and his family were baptized. The exact referent of “that
same hour” is difficult to determine, but the grammar would seem to imply
that within one hour the jailer heard the word of the Lord from Paul and
Silas, washed them, and he and his family were baptized. All in the midst
of the aftermath of a major earthquake. The record seems to be using “that
same hour” to highlight the urgency of baptism [it should be done even in
the midst of an earthquake, at night]; and the speed at which it could
occur [“that same hour”]. After this, the jailer took Paul and Silas into
his home and prepared a celebratory meal; and then day broke, the
magistrates sent an urgent message requiring Paul and Silas to be released
(Acts 16:34,35).
And washed their wounds; then immediately he and
all his family were baptized- The Greek louo
specifically refers to complete washing of the body, rather than anointing
just some parts of the body, for which the NT uses a different word.
Literally, he washed them from their wounds, i.e. the blood and damage
from the stripes was over their entire bodies. Their baptizing of him
after this is another example in Acts of deep connection and mutuality
between the convert and the converter.
16:34 And he brought them into his house- Therefore the teaching
of the Gospel to his family in :32,33 was done outside the house;
presumably in the ruins of their house and yard. The house they entered
would have been severely damaged.
Set food before them, and rejoiced greatly with
all his family-
Literally, 'set a table'. As if there is a hint of it being a
breaking of bread communion meal. From this slender beginning would
develop a church with bishops and deacons, to whom Paul wrote so
positively. The theme of "great joy" in the later letter to the
Philippians shows that this joy was not merely on the cusp of
circumstance, but was to be an abiding experience. Whole households were converted (Acts
10:2; 16:34; 18:8; Col. 4:15), and the earliest Christian meeting places
unearthed were rooms in the homes of rich believers. And with us too, the
success of our community depends upon God’s Truth first and foremost being
the centre of family life, with the joy of faith permeating it. Household
conversions were a major feature of the first century spread of the Gospel
(e.g. Lydia- Acts 16:15; Crispus- Acts 18:8; Priscilla and Aquila- Rom.
16:3-5; 1 Cor. 16:19; Nymphas- Col. 4:15; Onesiphorus- 2 Tim. 1:16; 4:19;
Philemon- Philemon 2; “the elect lady”, 2 Jn. 10; the home at Troas- Acts
20:6-8). Clearly ‘house’ was used in the first century as a kind of
shorthand for ‘house church’. They knew no other pattern of gathering.
There was almost an assumption that if a man converted to Christ, his
‘house’ also would. Hence we read that Cornelius would be told words
“whereby thou and thy house shalt be saved” (Acts 11:14). The same phrase
was repeated to the jailor at Philippi (Acts 16:31). It’s emphasized four
times in three verses that the Gospel was preached to his house, and his
whole house responded (Acts 16:31-34). The Lord likewise rejoiced in
Zacchaeus’ conversion, that salvation had come to that man’s house (Lk.
19:9). He assumed that Zacchaeus would quite naturally persuade his
‘house’.
Having believed in God- He was unlikely to have been an
atheist [atheism wasn't very common in the 1st century]. But he grasped
for the first time the real import of a real and relevant faith in the one
true God as a personal being. See on Jn. 14:1. We probably need to read in
an ellipsis here: He believed in God's grace and salvation, which is in
His Son Jesus.
16:35
But when it was day, the magistrates sent their
officers, saying: Let those men go- Word may have got to them
from Lydia or other converts, that Paul was a Roman citizen. But note :38
" they feared when they heard that they were Romans". So perhaps news of
the strange security of the prisoners and conversion of the jailor had
already reached them and they didn't wish to as it were get in trouble
with God.
16:36
And the jailor reported the words to Paul, saying:
The magistrates have sent word to let you go. Therefore come out and go in
peace- After baptizing the jailor and eating at his home, Paul
and Silas had returned to jail. The temptation to flee must have been very
great, and in the aftermath of the earthquake they could well have got
away. The fact they returned to the jail indicates Paul had another agenda
here, and he doggedly stuck to it. His subsequent usage of the situation
would confirm this- he allowed himself to suffer so much in order that the
ecclesia there could get off to a good start in terms of being shielded
from legal persecution. Our efforts for the newly converted are made in
this same spirit.
16:37- see on Acts 22:25.
But Paul said to them: They have beaten us
publicly, uncondemned men that are Roman citizens, and have thrown us into
prison, and now they want to throw us out secretly? No!- Silas
also was a Roman citizen, and so we must note too his willing submission
to suffering he could otherwise have avoided. We note too the absence of
Timothy and Luke, who were apparently also in the area at the time;
perhaps Paul allowed them to slip away, fully intending to uses his
citizenship to establish a situation in which the new converts would be
left alone by the authorities. We may learn from that that needless
suffering was avoided in such a case.
Being beaten uncondemned made them sharers in the Lord's crucifixion sufferings. One of multiple examples of how His people share the essence of His cross, and how He there shared the essence of all our experiences.
Let them come themselves and bring us out- This may have been
said with a fleck of pride and annoyance; and yet the evidence provided
above indicates that this was exactly according to Paul's game plan. He
wanted to be flogged so that he could then pull out the card of his Roman
citizenship. He almost did the same in Acts 22:29. And God confirmed him
in that plan by bringing about the earthquake that very night, something
which Paul in no way could have contrived. Likewise the conversion of the
jailor was all a strengthening of that plan- to get the authorities
relatively onside with the Christian movement. Or perhaps the jailor had
earlier expressed interest in the Gospel and Paul was by all means seeking
to witness to him, and again his plans were confirmed by the sending of
the earthquake. In these things we learn how God operates with men to this
day- we make plans in His service, and He confirms and enables them by
sending situations [like the earthquake] which are well beyond any human
contrivance.
16:38
And the officers reported these words to the
magistrates- As the jailor reported words in :36. All this
sending of verbal messages by the hand of messengers would mean that in
accordance with Paul's intention, the word about the situation was
spreading around.
And they feared when they heard that they were Romans- See on
16:35 Let those men go.
16:39
And they came and pleaded with them, and when they
had brought them out, they asked them to go away from the city-
Paul doesn't obey immediately; he goes to Lydia's house. This
could be read as his native argumentative, awkward temperament shining
through; or additionally, as also part of his game plan to demonstrate
that the house church at Lydia's home was to be openly connected with the
Christian movement, and now to be left well alone by the authorities, in
case they made a formal complaint about the treatment of the men whom they
had lodged.
16:40 And they went out of the prison- Luke, or the inspired
companion, was not in the prison with them and may have bravely remained
in Philippi to provide support to the fledgling ecclesia.
And entered into the house of Lydia; and when they
had seen the believers- The New Testament speaks of
households run by women: Mary (Acts 12:12), Lydia (Acts 16:14,40); Nympha
(Col. 4:15) and Chloe (1 Cor. 1:11). These women were presumably wealthy
widows or divorcees who hadn't remarried. We are left to speculate whether
they were in some way the 'leaders' of the house churches which met in
their homes. Women are described as ruling households in 1 Tim. 5:14; Tit.
2:4,5. The woman of Prov. 31 clearly had autonomy within the private
sphere of the household, even though the husband was the public leader.
Seeing Christianity was initially a house-church, household religion, we
are left to wonder how much women actually led house churches, especially
seeing that the majority of early Christian members appear to have been
women. The wall paintings [frescoes] found in the Christian catacombs
around Rome are highly significant for our present study. The significant
ones for our purposes are the catacombs of Priscilla on the Salaria Nuova,
Callixtus on the via Appia Antica, and that of Domitilla on the via
Ardeatine. They feature in places scenes of female Christians raising
cups, with the inscription agape over them. Some show a woman occupying
the central place in the meal, with a large cup in her hand, with the
other women looking at it intently. Some of the frescoes [there are many
of them] show women dressed as slaves doing this in what appears to be a
wealthy home. These frescoes seem to me indicative of how groups of slave
women formed house churches, and faithfully kept the breaking of bread.
Some frescoes show the women sharing the bread and wine with children
around the table; one shows a woman holding a scroll, as if she is reading
Scripture to the others. One fresco features a woman holding a cup of wine
inscribed nobis- 'for us'. Some frescoes show men in the group,
but the woman in the centre, as if she is leading the meeting, or as the
host of the household.
They comforted them and departed- We naturally think that it
was Paul and Silas who were in need of comfort, with their lacerated backs
and aching muscles after hours in the "stocks". But here we see Paul's
spiritual greatness; he comforted them, probably not
least over the material losses they had suffered as a result of the
earthquake.
Previous Chapter
Next Chapter 
