BIBLE IN TEN

Acts 12:13

Sunday, 31 December 2023
 
Now there were more than forty who had formed this conspiracy. Acts 23:13
 
The Greek more literally reads, “And they were more than forty having made this joint oath” (CG).
 
The previous verse noted the Jews who had banded together under an oath, saying they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul. Next, Luke records, “And they were more than forty having made this joint oath.”
 
It seems like overkill, but there are a couple of reasons why it is not at all unreasonable. First, anytime people gather to do evil (or supposed good, but with harmful intentions), others will naturally want to join in. In this case, they were doing evil by desiring to commit murder, but they were doing it to supposedly be pleasing to their God.
 
As such, people will want to participate simply because of wanting to be part of the heroic movement that is taking place. Also, because there were Romans involved, they could plot better plot diversions or surprise attacks. With forty men banded together in such a vow, they felt that they had an excellent chance of prevailing, especially in the surprise manner that they would certainly conduct the task.
 
The word translated as “joint oath,” sunómosia, is found only here in the New Testament. It comes from two words signifying “together” and “swear.” Thus, it means “a swearing together” and thus, a joint oath. They had mutually vowed to participate and to see the matter through.
 
Life application: In the Proverbs, it says, 
 
“My son, if sinners entice you,Do not consent.11 If they say, ‘Come with us,Let us lie in wait to shed blood;Let us lurk secretly for the innocent without cause;12 Let us swallow them alive like Sheol,And whole, like those who go down to the Pit;13 We shall find all kinds of precious possessions,We shall fill our houses with spoil;14 Cast in your lot among us,Let us all have one purse’—15 My son, do not walk in the way with them,Keep your foot from their path;16 For their feet run to evil,And they make haste to shed blood.17 Surely, in vain the net is spreadIn the sight of any bird;18 But they lie in wait for their own blood,They lurk secretly for their own lives.19 So are the ways of everyone who is greedy for gain;It takes away the life of its owners.” Proverbs 1:10-19
 
When there are people who want to do evil, depending on who it is, getting others to join them is often a hard to refuse enticement. If they are notable in school, others may want to be esteemed in their eyes. If they have influence in some other type of setting, it may be hard to say “No” to their advances.
 
But the wise person will refuse to participate. Solomon’s words have been borne out innumerable times in history. What seems enticing or too good to pass up can often lead to a death sentence. Be wise and discerning and hold fast to what is good, right, sound, and godly. The momentary temptations that you stand against will most probably save you from a lifetime of grief.
 
Lord God, give us wisdom to know what is good and right. And then give us the fortitude to stand up against the temptations that arise, asking us to do what is wrong. May we hold fast to what would be honoring in Your eyes at all times. To Your glory, we pray. Amen.
 

Acts 23:12

Saturday, 30 December 2023
 
And when it was day, some of the Jews banded together and bound themselves under an oath, saying that they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul. Acts 23:12
 
The Greek more literally reads, “And day having come, certain of the Jews having made a conspiracy, anathematized themselves, saying neither to eat nor to drink until they might kill Paul” (CG).
 
Paul was just told by Jesus that as he had testified for Him at Jerusalem, so he must also do so in Rome. With that note of assurance, a plot is next revealed in an attempt to stop this, saying, “And day having come.”
 
This is the same day that started at evening following his standing before the council. The thought here is probably that those involved in the plot twisted and turned in anger all night long, stewing over Paul and his proclamations concerning Jesus. Eventually, their thoughts welled up into murderous desires. Therefore, “certain of the Jews having made a conspiracy.”
 
One can see them coming together and saying, “That Paul is a real problem. He needs to be dealt with.” They went to bed angry, and by morning, their thoughts had turned into a conspiracy to deal with their enemy.
 
These Jews may be zealots. They are noted in the Apocrypha and in the writings of Josephus as following this course of action at several points in Jewish history. They honestly believed what they were doing was for the honor of the name of God, and they felt that they were rightly serving Him at such times. Therefore, they planned, and then they intended to execute the plan. In order to do so, they “anathematized themselves.”
 
This Greek phrase corresponds to the Hebrew idea of kherem, where a person, thing, or even an entire city, was devoted to God. The destruction of Jericho was such an instance. Likewise, the account in 1 Samuel 15:1-9 met this standard.
 
It is seen at other times in the Old Testament. Paul uses the term “anathema” to describe what should occur towards those who do not love the Lord Jesus Christ in 1 Corinthians 16:22. And in Galatians 1:8, 9, using this idea of anathema, he says –
 
“But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.”
 
The same word used to describe this oath is used in Mark 14:71, where Peter called down curses on himself. This is a solemn obligation that these Jews have placed upon themselves. To show the binding nature of this, it next says, “saying neither to eat nor to drink until they might kill Paul.”
 
It seems like these men would have perished from their oath because it would be unsuccessful. However, Lightfoot shares this from the Talmud, “He that hath made a vow not to eat anything, woe to him if he eat, and woe to him if he do not eat. If he eat he sinneth against his vow; if he do not eat he sinneth against his life. What must such a man do in this case? Let him go to the wise men, and they will loose his vow.”
 
This type of shenanigans in their theology is not uncommon. It was expected that if a person made a vow, he was to keep it at all costs. As Solomon says –
 
“When you make a vow to God, do not delay to pay it;For He has no pleasure in fools.Pay what you have vowed—5 Better not to vow than to vow and not pay.” Ecclesiastes 5:4, 5
 
Life application: When a vow is made to God, it is expected that it will be paid. Obviously, if one is saved and in Christ, he will not lose his salvation if he fails to fulfill a vow he has made. However, the wisdom of simply not vowing is obvious.
 
There are times when a vow cannot be fulfilled. If it was spoken, how foolish the person will look when he cannot fulfill what he has promised to God? We are expected to be people of integrity. Again and again, believers are told that they are to perform what they speak and that one’s Yes is to be Yes. How much more should we be honoring a vow we utter to the Lord?
 
For best happiness, refrain from making vows. Simply fulfill the words that you speak and be people who can be trusted. This is the wise course to take.
 
We praise You, Lord God, because we know that You are ever-faithful to Your word. What You have said, and what is recorded for us to read in Your word, will come about. We know with all certainty that You will never fail to perform. Help us to emulate You and to be people of integrity towards the things we say. To Your glory, we pray. Amen.

Acts 23:11

Friday, 29 December 2023
 
But the following night the Lord stood by him and said, “Be of good cheer, Paul; for as you have testified for Me in Jerusalem, so you must also bear witness at Rome.” Acts 23:11
 
More literally, it reads, “And the following night, the Lord, having stood by him, said, ‘Fortify! For as you fully testified about Me at Jerusalem, so you must also testify at Rome’” (CG).
 
Paul was removed forcibly by the Roman guards from the out-of-control crowd in the council he stood before. Luke now continues the narrative, saying, “And the following night.”
 
This probably means that same night. If Luke is using the Jewish way of reckoning time, the following day begins at sundown. Thus, this would be the evening of the same day, but the start of the new day. From there, it says, “the Lord, having stood by him, said, ‘Fortify!’”
 
This is the seventh and last time that the word tharseó is seen in Scripture. It means to take heart, be of good courage, etc. HELPS Word Studies notes that its root signifies “emboldened from within.” As such, and to use a single verb that catches the meaning, fortify gets the point across. The Lord is telling Paul to strengthen himself from within to prepare himself for what was ahead.
 
If Paul is in the same chambers as that which the Lord was in, then this is a return visit for Jesus. It is an amazing thought to consider. How much more in the content of the two stays! Christ was harassed and brutalized in the same place where He now stands and gives Paul words of comfort and even renewed vigor. His words to Paul now are reflective of His words to the other apostles in Matthew 14:27, “Be of good cheer! It is I; do not be afraid.”
 
As for His word to Paul to “Fortify!” That is then explained with the next words, “For as you fully testified about Me at Jerusalem, so you must also testify at Rome.”
 
Paul had already told those in Rome of his desire to travel there (Romans 1:13; Romans 15:23). Now, he is given the assurance that this will come about exactly as he had hoped. Further, this conversation surely lets him know that his service has been acceptable. Were it not so, then he would not be tasked with further work. The Lord’s presence, His words, and His approval of Paul surely worked like an elixir in him.
 
Life application: The last time the Lord appeared to Paul was in Acts 18:9, where He said, “Do not be afraid.” Paul was probably less afraid at this time and yet more weary and downtrodden. Hence, the word “Fortify!” is appropriate to the mood in which he found himself.
 
The Lord never fails to meet us in exactly the condition we are in and the circumstances we are facing, and then give us exactly the comfort we need at the moment. This doesn’t mean He is going to physically appear before us. But we still have Him with us through His word. When we are in some sort of difficulty, trial, pickle, conundrum, etc., we can find comfort, strength, emboldening, and so forth right in the word He has given us.
 
If you are a faithful reader of the word, how many times has this been the case in your own life? The Lord’s words to Paul were just what was needed. The word of the Lord is just what is needed for us at just the right time, every time. Keep in the word. It will carry you through the many trials, troubles, and tribulations that you are facing or will face as you continue on life’s path. Don’t neglect this comforting and necessary resource that God has lovingly set before you.
 
Heavenly Father, Your word is a gloriously wonderful light for our times of darkness. It is a calming hand in our times of distress. It is a soothing balm in our times of tribulation. Give us the wisdom as Your people to read it and carefully consider it all the days of our lives. Thank You, O God, for Your precious word. Amen.

Acts 23:10

Thursday, 28 December 2023
 
Now when there arose a great dissension, the commander, fearing lest Paul might be pulled to pieces by them, commanded the soldiers to go down and take him by force from among them, and bring him into the barracks. Acts 23:10
 
The Greek more literally reads, “And great dissension arising, the commander, having feared lest Paul should be torn apart by them, commanded the detachment – having descended – to seize him from among them and bring into the barracks” (CG).
 
In the previous verse, the scribes of the Pharisees protested Paul’s treatment, defending the fact that he could have been spoken to by a spirit or an angel. This upset the apple cart, and things immediately devolved, as seen in the next words, “And great dissension arising.”
 
It is the same word just used in verse 7 that indicated a dissension between the Pharisees and Sadducees. Now, the entire council is in an uproar. This was so much the case that “the commander, having feared lest Paul should be torn apart by them.”
 
Here is the second and last use of the word diaspaó in Scripture. It was only seen elsewhere in Mark 5:4, where it noted that the demon-possessed man tore apart the chains that bound him. This is now what the commander feared would happen to Paul.
 
This argument between the two parties grew to such a state that each side was probably grabbing onto Paul and pulling him in either direction – one to rescue him and one to pummel him. In the tugging, he could actually be ripped apart. But, being a Roman citizen, the commander was responsible for him. Therefore, he “commanded the detachment – having descended – to seize him from among them and bring into the barracks.”
 
The soldiers would be necessary by this time because of the violence of those who meant Paul harm. This included the high priest himself, and it shows the level of depravity that they had fallen to, despite being the supposed representatives of the Lord on earth.
 
In securing Paul and taking him to the barracks, it could be that Paul had been in and out of the very same room that had been used for Jesus on the night before His cross. In contrast to the sufferings He faced, Paul would be kept safe in that same location.
 
Life application: The conduct of the council seems entirely out of place, and it is. However, it is not uncommon. Innumerable fights have broken out in parliaments, congresses, and other bodies that rule the people. Many of them are recorded and can be seen on YouTube.
 
It is not unlikely that if you pick a country at random and do a search for a fight in that country’s government, you will find a video of a fight breaking out. An arbitrary search immediately brought up a lively brawl in Kosovo’s cabinet, including men and women, older and younger, etc. Following that came a long list of similar videos. The Indian parliament went full throttle, into chaos throwing microphones and lamps; the Taiwanese were throwing chairs; and there was a lot of slapping and punching in the Jordanian parliament.
 
Anytime you deal with religion or politics, tempers are bound to get out of control. In the council where Paul stood, it was a mixture of both. Thus, it was an explosive environment that Paul was able to successfully divide, taking the focus off of him and demonstrating the hypocrisy of those who stood over him with their accusations.
 
If you attend any large gathering to defend your rights as a Christian, such as a state or local meeting, you should be prepared to have accusations fly, angry people demanding your silence, and possibly fighting to break out. In the place where civility is most expected, it often is not. Thus, it is a clear indication that things will only continue to devolve in the world around us.
 
The message of Christ is the only true hope and saving message in the world. And yet, it is becoming less and less tolerated because it deals with the underlying problem in man: sin. Because it does, in highlighting this defect, people will continue to strengthen their enmity toward the message it proclaims. Be aware of this as you head out and speak about the goodness of God in Christ. Many will find it offensive.
 
Glorious Lord God, we were all at enmity with You at some point. But because of Jesus, we were reconciled to You. Help us to be willing to share this message, even if it brings about trouble in our lives. Without addressing the problem of sin, all people remain Your enemies. Give us the ability to explain this and to effectively speak about the goodness of what You have done in sending Jesus to fix the problem. Amen.

Acts 23:9

Wednesday, 27 December 2023
 
Then there arose a loud outcry. And the scribes of the Pharisees’ party arose and protested, saying, “We find no evil in this man; but if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him, let us not fight against God.” Acts 23:9
 
The Greek more precisely reads, “And there was a great clamor. And having arisen, some of the scribes of the part of the Pharisees were contending, saying, ‘We find nothing evil in this man. And if a spirit spoke to him, or an angel, let us not fight against God’” (CG).
 
Luke just included an explanatory sentence to detail why the reaction in this verse now came about, “For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection—and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both.” Because of this division of thought between the sects, it now says, “And there was a great clamor.”
 
The loud outcry mentioned here was probably a lot of “harumphs” from one side and “here here’s” from the other. The word is kraugé. It is used, for example, to describe the loud cry in Matthew 25:6 and the crying noted in Revelation 21:4.
 
It indicates loud crying done with great emotion. Each side defended what they believed was possible based on Paul’s words. As it was a cry among many, the word “clamor” is well-suited to the intent. Next, it says, “And having arisen, some of the scribes of the part of the Pharisees were contending.”
 
The scribes are the learned men, whether from the Pharisees or the Sadducees. They were not an independent group but were simply those who were well educated and performed a scribal role. Being educated, they would be more disposed to protesting over the din of others and getting them to quiet down while they made their case.
 
In this situation, they probably sided with Paul more on a theological basis than on whether they agreed with him personally. In this case, they were saying, “We find nothing evil in this man.”
 
He had said nothing that was impossible from their worldview, and so, they defended his right to present his case based on that. Their protesting then shows they had a greater disdain for the opposing party than they did towards Paul’s misdirected (as they perceived) faith in Christ. Therefore, as a jab in the eyes of the Sadducees, they next called out, “And if a spirit spoke to him, or an angel, let us not fight against God.”
 
It should be noted that the final words of this verse, “let us not fight against God,” are disputed as to whether they are original or not. Many scholars see them as an insert to match what was said by Gamaliel in Acts 5:39. For this reason, they are not included in many translations.
 
Despite this, Paul’s diversion was successful. Their words, “And if a spirit spoke to him, or an angel,” are likely referring to Paul’s claim in Acts 22:17-21, of which they would be aware by now.
 
Unless they accepted that Paul’s vision was real and from a divine source, the words “let us not fight against God” seem to be out of place. Demons can speak as well as the Lord. And so, for them to include God in the statement would imply that they accepted his words, including being sent off to the Gentiles. This seems less likely, and the words may have been inserted at a later time by someone attempting to give additional credence to Paul’s case.
 
Life application: The old saying, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend,” seems to apply to this verse. The Pharisees stood against Jesus, and they continued to stand against those who followed Him. However, the theology behind the Sadducees’ religion was so aberrant to them that they were willing to use Paul as an ally to poke at what they perceived as a completely misguided approach to Scripture.
 
This is not uncommon in Christian circles. There may be two completely divergent approaches to a particular concept, and yet adherents to one or the other may join together to defend a third, unrelated issue.
 
For example, Dispensationalists and Calvinists may be at odds over the state of Israel, but they may be united in their dismissal of evolution. Therefore, they may put aside their unhappiness concerning the former issue and unite in a letter to a Christian college that has recently hired an evolutionist professor.
 
Some things are worth setting aside differences over in order to secure an intended goal in another area. Looking for common ground in this manner is not caving to one side or another. And yet, protestations by others may rise to a crescendo, calling out charges of apostasy or compromise – “I didn’t get a harumph out of that guy!” This is inevitable. Some people feel so passionately about a particular issue that it will cloud their thinking in other areas.
 
Be on the lookout for such things and be ready to defend why you take particular actions. If feelings are hurt, or charges of apostasy are thrown at you, for standing up for the truth, so be it. You can’t please everybody, and some seed pickers will never be pleased with anything. Ignore them, and you will do well.
 
Heavenly Father, may we be willing to stand up and speak out when it is right to do so. Help us not to be timid or pusillanimous in our approach to sound doctrine and right conduct before You. Strengthen us in our resolve to stand for what is right. To Your glory, we pray. Amen.
 

Acts 23:8

Tuesday, 26 December 2023
 
For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection—and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both. Acts 23:8
 
Luke just noted that a dissension had arisen between the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Now, as an explanatory thought concerning why, he records, “For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection.”
 
Although it has been said in a jillion sermons over the years, this commentary would be remiss if it didn’t include the words, “This is why they are sad, you see.” Like evolutionists today, the Sadducees believed that this life was all one got, and thus, they were to personally make the best of it.
 
The difference between Sadducees and evolutionists would be that Sadducees believed that there is a God, and He rewards men in this life for right conduct. Thus, it would have been a religious expression filled with self-righteousness and works of the law to justify oneself before God. Along with this failed view, Luke continues describing their theology, saying, “and no angel or spirit.”
 
The doctrine of the Sadducees is hard to reconcile with the writings of Moses. As the rest of the Old Testament is an extension of the dispensation of the law, their doctrine is simply irreconcilable with what God had been doing in the stream of time concerning Israel’s history. It is generally believed that they believed, as described by Charles Ellicott –
 
“For them the ‘angels’ of the Pentateuch were not distinct beings, but evanescent manifestations of the divine glory.”
 
In other words, when an angel is referred to in the books of Moses, it was to the Sadducees actually God manifesting Himself in a supernatural way to those He encountered. It is true that, at times, this is the case. The angel of the Lord appeared in human form to Abraham in Genesis 18, for example. However, this doesn’t explain the two who came with the Lord.
 
Their explanation of such things was certainly out of line with a right reading of the words of Moses and later biblical writers. To complete the explanation of why the dissension arose, Luke next says, “but the Pharisees confess both.”
 
As for the word ‘both,’ it shows that the Sadducees are denying two things: 1) the resurrection and 2) any non-corporeal being. Hence, this stand lumps in angels, spirits of dead men, etc. It also, by default, means that they would not be able to accept God as Spirit. Their entire theology was twisted, just as Jesus demonstrated in Matthew 22:23-33.
 
Because of this, there was a great divide between these two camps. Both would have been extremely passionate about their view, and it is surprising they could even stand to be in the same room with one another at times. Such was the case now. Paul had effectively separated the two through his masterful use of understanding the layout of things and then taking advantage of the situation at hand.
 
Life application: The doctrine of the Sadducees is hard to reconcile with the writings of Moses or of any of the rest of the Old Testament. It took a great deal of presuppositional bias and cognitive dissonance to come to such views and then stand by them.
 
However, the doctrines of the Catholic Church, the Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses, and many other sects and cults are just as convoluted today. It shouldn't be surprising that there are those who claimed to follow Moses and yet denied or allegorized his words.
 
In saying that this is the only life, they would then have a special type of control over those whom they taught: “If you want God to bless you and make you rich and comfortable, you will do what we say.”
 
When the Roman Catholic Church teaches works, they have far greater control over man than when grace is proclaimed. Understanding grace means understanding that Christ has done all the work necessary to be saved and to keep being saved forever. This obviously leads to the understanding that wielding monetary control over people is wrong, as is having control over their afterlife.
 
An acceptance of, and then gratefulness for, God’s grace should alone direct where one gives. And a confident anticipation of glory because of faith in Christ should alone direct the steps of those who have been bestowed that grace through Him.
 
The doctrine of the Sadducees was one of bondage and denial, just as all heretical doctrines are. They are manipulative. They are set up to serve those who are in positions of power within the particular expression.
 
Lord God, please keep us from the twisting and manipulative minds of those who would lead us away from grace and toward bondage and self-righteousness. With grace, there can be no bondage because it is bestowed freely and without conditions. Simple faith alone results in the eternal blessings promised in Your word. Thank You, O God, for Your word and for Jesus who is revealed in it. Amen.
 

Acts 23:7

Monday, 25 December 2023
 
And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided. Acts 23:7
 
In the previous verse, Paul, standing before the council, had called out in the assembly that he stood before them because of “the hope and a resurrection of the dead.” With that remembered, it next says, “And when he had said this, a dissension arose.”
 
His words had the exact effect he intended. The council had the hope that he would be quickly voted as an offender of the law and punished according to the law. Before such a decision was rendered, the congregation instead had divided right down the middle of the two parties. As Luke said, the dissension was “between the Pharisees and the Sadducees.”
 
Rather, the Greek literally reads, “and there was a dissension, the Pharisees and the Sadducees.” Therefore, rather than “between,” it should say, “and there was a division of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.” In other words, there was always a theological disagreement between the two. However, this separated their ability to sit and reason together any longer.
 
One can see the same effect today in various situations. For example, if there is a gathering of Christian leaders to discuss the state of the nation of Israel, there will be obvious disagreements during the discussion. However, as long as the main subject, that of the state of the nation of Israel is addressed, things will normally go well.
 
However, if an instigator wants to start a division, he might inject something – such as the doctrine of the rapture – into his discussion. By doing this, he will uncover an underlying disagreement that will divert the attention away from the original topic. As it was not the main point being addressed, people will passionately divide into factions. With that, the dam will break loose, and a complete lack of control over the gathering is bound to ensue.
 
This is just what Paul did, knowing what the outcome of such a proclamation as his would bring about. And just as he had hoped, Luke records, “and the assembly was divided.”
 
The word translated as divided comes from the Greek schizo. It is where our modern word schism is derived. The rending of the veil in the temple at Jesus’ death uses this same word. In this case, it signifies that a complete division of thought on the subject was the result.
 
Life application: The example of introducing the rapture into a discussion about the state of the nation of Israel is bound to cause trouble because the two issues are actually interconnected. If someone thinks Israel has been replaced by the church, then he will normally dismiss the doctrine of the rapture.
 
In Paul’s case, he was originally accused of violating the Law of Moses. However, if his hope is in the risen Messiah, Jesus, then that means the words of Jeremiah 31:31 have been fulfilled in Jesus’ work. As such, the Law of Moses – which is a part of the Mosaic Covenant – has been superseded by the introduction of the New Covenant.
 
Therefore, Paul could not be a violator of the law. He had moved from Moses to Jesus. The council could still charge him and have him punished, but it would be based on a faulty rendering of their own law, which foresaw and planned its own obsolescence.
 
Even if the Pharisees disagreed with him over this, their own doctrine was still sided with Paul’s overall worldview. If one wants to get to the heart of a matter in such a forum, by knowing the underlying reason for holding onto the various views being discussed, that knowledge can be used to one’s advantage.
 
On the other hand, if one wants to avoid getting trapped in someone else’s machinations in such a situation, it can be done by quickly noticing the ploy and stating something like, “You may have a point on that issue, but this is not the time or place for it to be addressed. It is a red herring. We need to get back to the main issue of discussion.”
 
If you are on social media, this type of diversionary ploy is brought in with almost every topic that is introduced as a main matter of discussion. Within a very short time, matters completely irrelevant to the original topic will be introduced, cyber punches will fly, and friendships can quickly be destroyed.
 
Pay attention to such things, and you can easily weed out miscreants who love to stir the pot by watching how they sneakily enter into any given discussion.
 
O God, we often fail to think logically about matters we are involved in. People may want to divide others for their own perverse purposes and so they introduce a fallacious argument, hoping it will take root and cause a schism. Help us to identify such things and work to quash their intentions before they become established. Yes, Lord God, give us wisdom in such things. Amen.

Acts 23:6

Sunday, 24 December 2023
 
But when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, “Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee; concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead I am being judged!” Acts 23:6
 
Paul just proclaimed that he was unaware that the one who ordered him to be struck was the high priest. Now, before anyone else could chime in, he continued his words. Luke notes, “But when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees.”
 
We are not told how Paul perceived some to be Sadducees and some Pharisees. It is possible that they maintained certain seats Just as Congress does for those on the right and those in the wrong. It could be that they wore garbs that identified them. He also may have recognized some of them, even after these many long years.
 
What may be more probable, based on what had just occurred, is that the attack by the High Priest prompted the Pharisees to react negatively towards him in their words or demeanor: “Is this how Sadducees act in the Sanhedrin?” Whatever brought the fact to his attention, he was ready to act quickly in order to take advantage of the situation. Perceiving this division as he did, “he cried out in the council.”
 
Paul was not the timid sort. He obviously had a quick temper. Jesus was also not timid, but His time before the rulers was markedly different. Isaiah prophesied that Jesus would stand before His accusers and not open His mouth. That is confirmed in the gospels –
 
“Now Jesus stood before the governor. And the governor asked Him, saying, ‘Are You the King of the Jews?’
Jesus said to him, ‘It is as you say.’ 12 And while He was being accused by the chief priests and elders, He answered nothing.
13 Then Pilate said to Him, ‘Do You not hear how many things they testify against You?’ 14 But He answered him not one word, so that the governor marveled greatly.” Matthew 27:11-14
 
Other than responding to direct questions, Jesus remained silent. Paul, however, openly spoke out at his trial. His words to them are next recorded by Luke, saying, “Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee.”
 
His declaration is given with express intent and purpose. He first cordially addressed all. This would help him gain the upper hand through his gracious address. Those disposed to his coming words will feel the fraternal bond more closely.
 
He then carefully noted his position within the society. Not only was he a Pharisee, but the tradition in his family preceded him. This was intended to bind him directly to one party while separating him theologically from the other. This was the Roman tactic known as divide et impera, divide and rule.
 
The words “son of a Pharisee” can have one of a few meanings. It could mean that his father was literally a Pharisee, or it could mean that he was a student of the Pharisees, just as a “son of the prophets” indicates one who was in the school of the prophets. It would then indicate an adherence to the tenets and traditions of the body.
 
The latter seems likely, as any Pharisee standing there could make the latter claim. However, it is still possible that he was claiming that his present doctrine matched that of the Pharisees, even if he had diverted from a future messianic hope to a hope that was fully realized in the coming of Christ Jesus. That is something that would sync with his next words, “concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead.”
 
In order to fully identify with the Pharisees, he openly avowed one of the tenets to which they ascribed but which the Sadducees denied, meaning this hope and resurrection of the dead. The fact is that most or all of the Pharisees probably didn't have a full understanding at this point of what he was being questioned about.
 
He was accused of certain things while in the temple. He was then arrested by the Romans. When the commander of the Roman contingent couldn’t fully determine how to handle Paul’s situation, he was brought before the council. Paul, without fabricating a thing, says that he was standing there before the council because of this hope.
 
This is a true statement because it was the sole purpose of his apostolic ministry. Jesus had become the reason for everything he did. Therefore, regardless of the surface reason why he was arrested, it ultimately came back to the thought in these words. It was for this that he proclaimed, “I am being judged.”
 
In proclaiming his hope and the resurrection of the dead, he would completely divide the assembly down party lines. At this, no other tenet would matter to the Pharisees. At the same time, it would be objectionable to the Sadducees who stood against any such notion.
 
As for Paul’s status before them, it is debated whether his words were actually correct in the fullest sense. Was he really a Pharisee at this point? The answer is that he was no less a product of his training than a graduate of a university.
 
A person with a degree from Yale is an alum of Yale, regardless of whether he continued to accept the tenets of his training or not. Paul cannot be said to have lied or even stretched the truth in his claim, at least from the perspective of the tenet concerning the resurrection. His masterful proclamation here can be tied back to Jesus’ words in Mark 13:9-11 –
 
“But watch out for yourselves, for they will deliver you up to councils, and you will be beaten in the synagogues. You will be brought before rulers and kings for My sake, for a testimony to them. 10 And the gospel must first be preached to all the nations. 11 But when they arrest you and deliver you up, do not worry beforehand, or premeditate what you will speak. But whatever is given you in that hour, speak that; for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit.”
 
Life application: Paul was in a bit of a pickle until he avowed his faith in the hope and resurrection of the dead. In this, he made a clear delineation between what he believed and what he rejected. If you are willing to speak about your faith, you must be prepared to do the same.
 
Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe Jesus is God. Do you? If you do, you need to be willing to state this, correcting their deceit. In his second epistle, John writes –
 
“Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; 11 for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.” 2 John 1:9-11
 
We are not to greet such people or welcome them because when we do, we implicitly condone their evil deeds. However, this does not mean we cannot stand in the same doorway and speak against their false doctrine.
 
There are churches that do not support the modern nation of Israel. In fact, they openly speak against it. What is your stand on this issue? One thing is for sure: if you openly express what you believe, either way, you will be initiating a divide.
 
Some will claim, “We shouldn’t talk about such matters. Rather, we should focus on love.” That is simply an attempt to make the issue, which actually exists, and which is theologically important, go away. Theology, by its very nature, is divisive. There is a right way and a wrong way in all major biblical themes.
 
Decide now what points of doctrine you will stand on and whether you are willing to debate them or not. That way, you will be prepared to either pass on the issue or defend it.
 
One more point to consider is the timing of such a debate. If you are evangelizing someone who knows nothing about the Bible, it would be important to defend the deity of Christ right then and there. And yet, it would not be profitable to get into the details of why you support Israel or not unless that was the reason you got into the conversation in the first place. The first issue is of paramount importance in gospel-related discussion. The second is not. Learn to use tact and prudence, remembering the forum in which you are currently speaking.
 
Lord God, give us wisdom in our discussions about our theology and particular points of doctrine that we ascribe to. May we speak when it is necessary and refrain from speaking when it is not. Our goal should be to be helpful and productive in whatever situation we find ourselves in. So, Lord, help us in this. Amen.
 

Acts 23:5

Saturday, 23 December 2023
 
Then Paul said, “I did not know, brethren, that he was the high priest; for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.’” Acts 23:5
 
In the previous verse, those in the council questioned Paul’s words to the high priest, saying, “Do you revile God’s high priest?” In response, it next notes, “Then Paul said, ‘I did not know, brethren, that he was the high priest.’”
 
Rather, Luke records it exactly as Paul would speak, first using a pluperfect verb and then a present tense verb, “I had not known that he is the high priest.” He is indicating that at the time he said his words, he was unaware of the fact that he was addressing the high priest. However, he now sees, based on their response, that he is the high priest.
 
There are various ways that his words might be taken. They may have been a note of sarcasm, stressing his words as if he was fraudulently appointed as high priest. Or it could be that he didn't know who had made the statement as his attention was elsewhere. It could also be that he couldn't identify who it was that had spoken because of bad eyesight.
 
No matter which is correct, he immediately pulls back from his impulsive response and cites the law which had been ignored by them, saying, “for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.’”
 
His words provide the substance of a portion of Exodus 22:28 –
 
“You shall not revile God, nor curse a ruler of your people.”
 
If the high priest was legitimate, calling him a plastered wall might be taken as a curse. If so, they could have legitimate charges brought against him. By his response, this was no longer the case. Also, in citing the law that they ignored, Paul has gained the upper hand in the matter, regardless of how the situation turns out. He will have shown that he is aware of the law and is able to properly apply its precepts when situations arise that require him to do so.
 
The high priest, on the other hand, either didn’t know the law or he flippantly disregarded it. Either way, it demonstrated his unworthiness to be in the position he filled.
 
Life application: When reading words, there are times when it is hard to know what a person is saying. By placing the stress on one word or another within a sentence, we can come to a completely different conclusion about what is being said.
 
Quite often, this will not be the case in the original language. Therefore, precision of translation is necessary. However, this is often lacking. Hence, reading multiple translations may provide clarity for the reader. However, there are times when vagueness or ambiguity may lie in the original. Thus, the words must be taken in the greater context of what is being said.
 
Therefore, knowing the Bible through constant reading is necessary to know where there is an error in thinking about how a set of words should be translated. Be sure to keep reading the word, keep referring to other translations before coming to unfounded conclusions, and check with commentaries when you are still not sure.
However, it is still common for those fully trained in the original languages to come to completely opposite conclusions about what is being said. Therefore, it again may be up to you to know what they have missed by knowing the rest of the word. Be sure to read the word, pray for the Lord to be with you in your study, and don’t be quick to come to conclusions or accept the conclusions of others.
 
What a large and complicated word You have given us, O God. It is filled with things that are often quite complicated or hard to understand. And yet, it is a word that gives a simple overall message of love, reconciliation, and our need for Your grace. Help us to have the basics down properly. From there, we can pursue the rest of the word in its proper light. Help us in this, O God. Amen.
 

Acts 23:4

Friday, 22 December 2023
 
And those who stood by said, “Do you revile God’s high priest?” Acts 23:4
 
In the previous verse, Paul rebuked the person who ordered him to be struck, saying that God would strike him for his hypocrisy. Now, it says, “And those who stood by said, ‘Do you revile God’s high priest?’”
 
In the response, the word “God” is in the emphatic position. According to their words, the high priest was the one who sat as God’s representative to the people. There are two views on this statement. Either he was actually ordained as the high priest and was qualified to act in that capacity, or he was an illegitimate high priest who didn’t possess the ordination necessary to execute the duties of this job.
 
If he was legitimate, the Law of Moses indicated that he was, in fact, the one to mediate between God and the people. He was due honor and respect because of the position he held. If he was illegitimate, then he was not worthy of the title or respect of the job. However, Paul could still be punished for not giving it simply because of the power held by those who supported the high priest.
 
As for Paul’s response to this charge, it can also be taken then in more than one way, as will be seen.
 
Life application: In the 2020 elections, an incredible amount of fraud took place. To this day, a sizeable portion of the electorate feels the election was stolen away from President Donald Trump.
 
The power of the progressive left has tentacles that extend to every corner of society, deviously and cunningly doing things that are outright illegal. However, they also possess the power to allow themselves to get away with almost anything, no matter how egregious the violation of law.
 
At the same time, people who have committed no crime at all have been paraded before the public and charged with serious offenses, such as insurrection. They have been incarcerated, and their lives have been ruined. Joe Biden has committed great crimes against the nation and against its people. And yet, after three years in office, nothing continues to be done about these things.
 
This is a fallen world, and such things are to be expected. Christians must use wisdom in how they approach such matters. While being responsible for upholding the laws of the nation, they should also work within the framework of those laws to root out wickedness and stand against evil. Pray for wisdom in how to conduct your affairs in times such as this.
 
But also know that the wicked shall have their end. A day lies ahead for the redeemed of the Lord where righteousness will rule forever and ever. God will remove all that is unclean and defiled, and life without the wicked will be our eternal state. Thank God for Jesus, who makes these things possible.
 
Heavenly Father, thank You for Your wondrous plan of redemption. You have brought a people out of this fallen, sin-stained world and back to Yourself. We praise You for what You have done. Be glorified forever and ever, O God! Amen.

Acts 23:3

Thursday, 21 December 2023
 
Then Paul said to him, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! For you sit to judge me according to the law, and do you command me to be struck contrary to the law?” Acts 23:3
 
The Greek more literally reads, “Then Paul said to him, ‘God is set to strike you, you plastered wall. And you, you sit judging me according to the law, and law-transgressing command me to be struck?’” (CG).
 
In the previous verse, the high priest Ananias commanded that Paul be struck on the mouth. Now, in response to that, it says, “Then Paul said to him, ‘God sets to strike you.’”
 
The verb melló gives the sense of “about to happen.” It is variously translated, but it carries with it the idea of expectation. Being in the present tense, and as a single word to define it, “sets” get the idea across. With that, Paul next says, “you plastered wall.”
 
This is the second and last use of the word koniaó in Scripture. It is derived from konia, dust. Its only other use is found in Matthew 23:27 –
 
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness.”
 
The word, though coming from dust, also signifies lime used to plaster something over. Paul uses this expression to describe this terrible person. It was either an idiom of the time which was used by Jesus, or it was something that Jesus coined and became known among the disciples.
 
If coined by Jesus, it was now idiomatically used by them. In essence, it means a hypocrite or having a hypocritical attitude. The reason for this is seen in Paul’s continued words, “And you, you sit judging me according to the law, and law-transgressing command me to be struck?”
 
Paul cites the intent of the law in his defense, though not a particular passage. In what he says is a word found only this one time in Scripture, paranomeó. It is a single noun derived from para, by or alongside, and nomos, law.
 
In the sense used by Paul, it means law-transgressing. This is justification for using the idiomatic expression. The high priest was giving a law in violation of the law. His actions were hypocritical. It was as if he was a dirty wall that was simply plastered over to hide the defilement below.
 
In John 7, in his words to the Pharisees, Nicodemus said, “Does our law judge a man before it hears him and knows what he is doing?” (John 7:51). This was understood and taken as an axiom within Israel. Before a judgment for guilt and/or punishment was rendered, there had to be a trial to determine the facts. Paul was denied this and given a punishment before he had even spoken in his defense.
 
As for Paul’s words to Ananias, although extra-biblical, Josephus says that he was eventually killed by the Sicarii. (Flavius Josephus, Wars ii 17 2-9).
 
Life application: Our world today is becoming more and more corrupt. Unlawful renderings of judgment permeate the nations of the world. Set laws are flagrantly ignored, and those in positions of legal authority demonstrate overt biases against particular ideologies. And yet, they refuse to recuse themselves. Instead, they convict the innocent and acquit the guilty.
 
This type of corruption will only increase as the world continues to devolve into anarchy and chaos. As this occurs, decent people are harmed, Christian rights are removed, and unrighteousness will eventually permeate the world.
 
It is frustrating and even maddening to behold, but it is not the end of the story. Just as Paul said to Ananias, we can rightfully assert that God will strike them as well. Their teeny little victories will not be remembered when they are brought to an end. Someday, they will be raised before God at the Great White Throne. There, they will be judged and condemned. Their destiny is the Lake of Fire.
 
We shouldn’t rejoice that they will be condemned, but we should be comforted that their actions will be judged and the people of God will be vindicated. From that point on, righteousness will rule for God’s people for all eternity. Don’t look at what is happening now as a failure of God. He is allowing what shouldn’t be saved to destroy itself. What is of value will be purified and will then go forth in perfect goodness forever and ever.
 
Thank You, O God, for the precious hope we possess. This fallen world is perishing and will pass away. But those who have called on Jesus shall be raised to live in a state of perfection and glory forever and ever. May that wondrous day be soon, O God. Amen.

Acts 23:2

Wednesday, 20 December 2023
 
And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth. Acts 23:2
 
Chapter 23 began with Paul telling the council that he had citizened in all good conscience before God, even until that day. With that, a violent reaction occurs. What Luke records begins with, “And the high priest Ananias.”
 
This Ananias would have been the son of Nebedæus. He had been suspended from his office during the reign of Emperor Claudius for an offense. At that time, he was sent to Rome (Josephus Ant. xx. 6, 2).
 
The Pulpit Commentary says, “He was a violent, haughty, gluttonous, and rapacious man, and yet looked up to by the Jews.”
 
Vincent’s Word Studies says, “He is described as a revengeful and rapacious tyrant. We are told that he reduced the inferior priests almost to starvation by defrauding them of their tithes, and sent his creatures to the threshing-floors with bludgeons to seize the tithes by force.”
 
This repugnant man then “commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth.”
 
The words more exactingly read, “to strike his mouth.” It is referring to Paul’s mouth. He was brought before the council to state his case. With his opening words, this violent reaction from the vile high priest of Israel was to strike the place from which his words uttered.
 
The conduct of the high priest bears out that he was at least a law-breaker and a violent man. Paul had done nothing wrong, and he had not been convicted of any wrongdoing. And yet, he was punished in violation of the law. There was first to be a conviction before any punishment could be meted out.
 
Life application: In once Christ-honoring countries of the world, the radical and violent left, just like Ananias, has taken over to the point that laws are flippantly disobeyed. Those who commit horrendous crimes are given little or no sentences at all, and those who defend themselves and their families are counted as criminals.
 
Violence in the left-leaning cities is completely out of control, the citizens live in fear, and God is mocked at every meeting of the city councils. Nations are becoming ripe for judgment because of these ungodly people. And what is worse is that they are only getting worse with each passing day. They have lost any sense of moral reason and have become like those described by Jude –
 
“But these speak evil of whatever they do not know; and whatever they know naturally, like brute beasts, in these things they corrupt themselves.” Jude 1:10
 
Various translations say, “unreasoning animals,” “irrational animals,” “unthinking animals,” “wild animals,” “creatures without reason,” etc. The point is that they have devolved in their thinking to the point where they no longer carry any sense of human cognition, morality, care for others, etc.
 
And more, these people have moved into the pulpit and the classroom. They are rearing a generation of people just like them, spiritually dead and morally without care or cognition. This cannot end well.
 
It is incumbent on all to do their utmost to stand against this unholy tide of violence and perversion, even if it means being ostracized or labeled in a manner that is untrue concerning the faith they possess. We cannot remain silent about our convictions or in our votes without being guilty of allowing these things to devolve further.
 
O God, help us to be strong in our resolve as we stand against the moral perverseness of those who have taken over much of our societies in the world today. If we must pay a cost for our speech, may it be to Your honor and glory that we do so. Help us to be fixed and firm in our doctrine, standing on Your word as we conduct our lives before You. Amen.