Click Here to see Lesson 15 Photos

Click Here to return to CBS Home Page

Paul’s 2^nd Missionary Journey (Part 2)

As Acts 17 begins, Paul, Silas, Timothy, and Luke have completed a successful visit to Philippi, a city in Macedonia (modern Greece). A strong church was established, and Paul learned how best to preach in cities with few Jews. Nevertheless, in the end Paul and Silas were beaten and jailed—and asked to leave.

From Philippi they again travel the Roman military superhighway, the Via Egnatia. They bypass Amphipolis—a city larger than Philippi—and push on to Thessalonica, capital of Macedonia, which has a substantial Jewish population. Reading from the text:

This story makes us feel like "deja vu all over again," because it reads like the script of Paul’s visit to the Galatian cities of Pisidian Antioch and Iconium. Paul goes into the synagogue, and for three weeks argues fulfillment of Messianic prophesy in Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. Some Jews believe, as do lots of God-fearing Gentiles—apparently so many that the Jewish leaders become jealous of their positions of influence. They arrange a mob-for-hire, and start a riot. The mob looks for Paul and Silas . . . but when they can’t be found, it grabs local believers, most notably Jason, who is probably a Jew and Paul’s most prominent supporter. It seems the plan was for the mob to attack Paul and Silas . . . but with local citizens they decide it best to follow the legal route and take them to the municipal authorities. The charges? . . . they sound familiar:

• Jason is harboring "men who have caused trouble all over the world" (Acts 17:6-7a). They may be exaggerating, but they seem to know trouble follows Paul’s preaching.

• The Christians are committing sedition by saying Jesus—not Caesar—is king (Acts 17:7b). This is the same charge the Jewish leaders lodged with Pilate against Jesus.

The authorities may be confused . . . but the charges are serious, so they require Jason and the others to post bond before releasing them. The "bond" sounds like a security to guarantee Paul and Silas will appear later—but some commentators say it was an agreement to drop the charges if the "agitators" leave town. Whatever . . . before sunrise Paul, Silas, Timothy, and Luke are hustled out of town—avoiding the main highway—down a secondary roadway to Berea: a smaller, quieter place, but one with a synagogue and a Jewish population which is both "noble" and thoughtful. As Luke writes:

Bob often quoted that verse . . . which reminds us not to automatically believe what others say, but to read what the bible says ourselves. That’s one reason God gave us a brain. (To this I will add we also need to read the bible enough to understand the "big picture" of scripture, because lots of cults are built on verses taken out of context.)

And when the Bereans studied scripture, it seems they found Paul was right! "Many of the Jews believed, as did also a number of prominent Greeks" (Acts 17:12). But, the Jews of Thessalonica pursued Paul to Berea and "agitated the crowds" against the Christians (Acts 17:13).

Now we see the root of problem is Paul’s powerful preaching and irrefutable logic. If he leaves Berea, it’s OK for Silas and Timothy to stay. So Paul is packed up and taken to the coast . . . then on to Athens, where he will wait for Silas and Timothy to join him after they finish the ministry in Berea.

Since these experiences in Thessalonica and Berea are so much like Paul’s 1^st Missions Trip to Galatia, one lesson we are learning may be perseverance! Each time they go into the synagogue and find early acceptance by people whose hearts are prepared to receive the good news of Jesus. But those whose hearts aren’t prepared strongly oppose Paul’s preaching; they poison the minds of most of the others, force Paul and his team to leave town, and even pursue him to the next town. The same net result occurs in cities like Philippi without a synagogue: Paul and his team find some believers, but in the end they are run out of town. Paul is founding churches . . . but he’s making enemies, too.

Actually, the reaction of the people is just what Jesus predicted in the Parable of the Sower (Matt 13). But is Paul right to be making so many enemies? Consider what he says in his letter to the Romans: "If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone" (Rom 12:18). And Hebrews says: "Make every effort to live in peace with all men" (Heb 12:14). Should we criticize Paul for ignoring this advice . . . for failing to "make every effort to live in peace with all men"?

Some might say that . . . but I think it’s more correct to say Paul is giving us an example of understanding "the ‘big picture’ of scripture." We mustn’t forget that—in addition to His message of love—Jesus said: "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. . . . Great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you" (Matt 5: 11-12). "All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved . . . I did not come to bring peace, but a sword" (Matt 10:22, 34b).

And looking as the situation logically . . . what will it take for Paul to live at peace with those who so strongly oppose him? For the Jews, Paul must stop saying Jesus is God, and that salvation comes by believing in Jesus (apart from observing the oral law). Jews say this is blasphemy and contrary to their tradition; and they demanded Jesus’ crucifixion because He made these claims! For the Gentiles, Paul must stop saying their Greek gods are worthless idols. Pagans rely on these gods to protect and prosper them; and they expected divine retribution when their idols were torn down . . . even in the 4^th century, when the Roman Empire was had become Christian. But can Paul stop saying these things to make fewer enemies? No! These are fundamental Christian beliefs!

Our study of Acts has included visits to 8 cities so far. It’s clear Paul has been learning and modifying his approach . . . but his concessions have been on minor points; Paul is not compromising on substantive issues, despite a strongly negative reaction; and that may be another lesson we learn from these stories.

Someone has called 21^st century America a "Vallium-based" society . . . focussed on being "cool" and not upsetting anyone. We are urged to compromise and negotiate on anything and everything . . . and what is now going on about Iraq in the U. N. is a good example of that. But as far as the fundamentals of the gospel message is concerned, Jesus and 2000 years of Christian martyrs, won’t allow us to compromise. Martin Luther was excommunicated and condemned to die. John Wesley was "locked out" of so many pulpits he had to preach outdoors. Yet, as John Calvin said: "One man with God is a majority." We must—like Paul—be faithful and persevere.

Returning to the story . . . Paul is in Athens. We know by now Paul has lots of energy. He can’t sit quietly and wait for his colleagues! . . . especially not when he is "distressed" by finding rampant idolatry in the city . . . (and some of the altars to pagan gods still stand in the agora—the marketplace—today; photos are on the web site). Paul goes to the synagogue—as usual—and presents Jesus to Jews and God-fearing Gentiles. He normally finds support there, but Acts does not say that happens this time . . . and neither of the two church leaders mentioned in verse 34 is Jewish. Why is this? Are the Jews of Athens so Hellenized they just go through the motions of Jewish ritual . . . not believing anything strongly enough to support or oppose Paul? We may never know.

So after what may be a lukewarm reaction in the synagogue, Paul’s extreme "distress" causes him to go to the agora on the days after the Sabbath and talk to Gentiles directly. Casting aside memories of being stoned when he did this in Lystra earlier, Paul preaches to anyone "who happened to be there" (Acts 17:17). Here Paul is protected by the culture of Athens, in which an intellectual elite "spent their time doing nothing but talking about and listening to the latest ideas" (Acts 17:21). Far from considering Paul a threat, they want to debate him! . . . "a group of Epicurean and Stoic philosophers" step up to the plate and "began to dispute with him" in the agora (Acts 17:18).

Luke has given us—in verse 18—the short version of the debate, which assumes the reader knows about Epicurean and Stoic philosophies. Most of us don’t, so a thumbnail sketch of these two competing doctrines in the context of Paul’s message—"the good news about Jesus and the resurrection"—might help understand the rest of the chapter.

The Epicureans were the first evolutionists, and regarded the world as the result of random motion. They believed the gods were no longer involved with man’s life on earth, and there was no life after death. They sought a life of serene detachment and limited desire. It is easy to see why they could not accept Paul's teachings about the One True God who sent His Son as a Savior for mankind . . . or about the resurrection. The Epicureans are the ones who "asked, ‘What is this babbler trying to say?’"

The Stoics believed there is an inherent logic to the universe which they called "Logos." They sought to get in sync with this natural order and be happy with things as they are. They helped others out of a sense of disinterested virtue, believing this was "natural" for man; goodness was it’s own reward. It’s clear some Stoic beliefs could be adapted into a Christian context with natural order attributed to a loving Creator-God; nevertheless, they are the ones who "remarked, ‘(Paul) seems to be advocating foreign gods.’"

But the bottom line is that, although the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers in the agora disagreed, both knew Paul was presenting an interesting new philosophy, which merited further deliberation. They invite him to discuss it with an elite debating society which meets on Mars Hill: the Areopagus.

Paul’s Mars Hill discourse—verses 22-31—is quite different from his previous speeches . . . with only remnants of what he told the pagans of Lystra. Furthermore, since Paul realizes nothing he can say will please the Epicureans, he adopts a "divide and conquer" technique, like he uses later in Jerusalem with the Pharisees and Sadducees. He appeals to the Stoic philosophers, perhaps hoping they will defend him against the Epicureans.

Paul starts by saying: "You guys are pretty close to the truth . . . missing just a few details; let me fill in the gaps." He identifies the One True God as the "Unknown God" to whom the people of Athens have erected an altar—just to cover all the bases. Then, as Paul describes the attributes of this great Creator-God, we can sense elements of the natural order of the "Logos" of the Stoics. I’m oversimplifying, but we might say Paul presents God as "Logos-Plus," who made man, and guides his destiny. Paul describes God as a loving father—who wants man to seek Him and get to know Him—and he supports this claim with Greek poetry which characterizes man as the offspring of gods. Then he turns this argument around by saying: "So, if we agree man is the offspring of God, it’s not possible for god to be a manmade idol" (cf Acts 17:23-29). Bingo!

Paul hopes at least some of his hearers will buy this: that according to Greek philosophy, a "god" can’t be an idol. So on this foundation, Paul launches into the story of Jesus. "Up until now, God let people go their own way . . . but no more. He sent his son, Jesus the Messiah, to call mankind to repentance; and God will judge the world by the standard preached by Jesus. And as proof . . . God raised Jesus from the dead (cf Acts 17:30-31).

But in this argument, Paul goes too far for most of the philosophers on Mars Hill. As expected, the Epicureans "sneered" at Paul’s claim about the resurrection of Jesus. But the Stoics did not stand up to defend him. Even if they agreed with Paul’s logic about idols not being gods, the story of Jesus is just too big a bite to digest at one sitting; the best they can do is to say, "We want to hear you again on this subject" (Acts 17:32).

There must be more to this than it appears . . . because Paul immediately left Mars Hill and never returned (Acts 17:32); and he left Athens for Corinth. This doesn’t seem like Paul: to leave when challenged the first time. In the past, whenever he speaks in a synagogue, he comes back again and again as long as people will listen—or until he is forcibly run out of town . . . and the philosophers on Mars Hill have asked him back. Moreover, Silas and Timothy were told to meet Paul in Athens, and the prospect of "misconnecting" must at least cross his mind. We’ll probably never know the real story. The only explanation I find semi-satisfying is Paul is discouraged to the max because he realizes the objective of the philosophers on Mars Hill is only to talk and debate; they are so intent on looking at every issue from every point of view and challenging everything that they can’t reach a conclusion. And their so-called tolerance masks minds closed by a smug air of know-it-all superiority, often characteristic of those who consider themselves the intellectual elite . . . an attitude which can be so maddening to those on the receiving end of it. It’s hard to have a real discussion with people like that; at least the legalist Jews debated Paul out of a mutual respect of scripture!

Only "a few men became followers of Paul and believed" on Mars Hill (Acts 17:34). Yet Paul leaves a church behind—led by the two Gentiles mentioned in verse 34—as he departs Athens. Paul feels his Mars Hill speech was a failure; he later told the Corinthians he came to them "in weakness and fear, and with much trembling" (1 Cor 2:3) Yet his technique is ingenious in showing an excellent way to bring to the gospel to those of a different culture, and/or those not familiar with the bible. Paul begins with something his hearers understand and agree with . . . and he tries to use this foundation to build the story of Jesus.

We may need to revisit this idea to evangelize 21^st century America. Earlier American revivals occurred when the King James Bible was the only book in the home of most people; the Maguffey Reader taught our ancestors to read with bible stories. By contrast, in 2003 we have had over 40 years of keeping the bible out of schools and keeping expository preaching out of our mainline churches; we can no longer evangelize by assuming bible familiarity? Perhaps we need to follow Paul’s Mars Hill technique to communicate with today’s unchurched . . . to begin by seeking common ground upon which we can build the story of Jesus.

Yet we can’t leave the bible out of the equation . . . because God’s promises in the bible are the basis of salvation through Jesus, and the record in Acts seems to show that early believers—Jew and Gentile—came because of these bible promises. Nevertheless, as we talk about modern evangelism, one thing hasn’t changed: God must prepare a person’s heart before s/he can become a believer. Evangelists brag about "leading someone to Jesus" . . . but it’s really God who does the leading!

Next week we’ll talk about the third and last portion of Paul’s 2^nd Missionary Journey. It begins in Corinth, a bustling coastal boom town . . . a very sinful city. It’s the last place we’d expect Paul to go . . . yet it’s such a good place to troll for sinners that he stays for 18 months, along with coworkers he meets: Priscilla and Aquila. Then he returns to Antioch, and prepares for his 3^rd Missionary Journey, which begins in Ephesus. In the meantime we meet Apollos, a Jewish Christian from Alexandria, who ministers in Ephesus and Corinth with the assistance of Priscilla and Aquila.