Faith without religion.
Welcome
Prayer
Sing the Word
Silence
So last week Paul stood and addressed the audience of zealous Jews who sought to kill him for his ministry and its message to the world.
I want to suggest something I personally believe is very important to our faith. Where other approaches to Jesus have historically included hatred and violence for those who differ in opinion, practice or doctrine, true Christians will others to the faith by love and yes, tolerance (I used the term).
Where most organized religions – Christian and not – that have any sort of time under their belt – have used violence to some degree or another on others:
Catholic inquisitions, Protestant purity persecutions, Mountain meadow Mormonism . . .
Those who truly follow the King and His ways treat people – even perceived enemies with longsuffering, love and patience, knowing that it is the goodness of God that leads people to repentance.
I just read the most disturbing article that should not have surprised me. It’s title?
“Man kills another over bible verse dispute.”
There is something wrong with the spirit of this no matter how it is played out.
In any case, Paul is facing some of this violent, zealous fanatical religious venom himself here.
Makes some sense – He used to operate off the same zeal toward others.
Having made his speech in an attempt to appeal to their reason, we will now read how the crowd reacted (beginning at verse 22).
Acts 22.22-23.11
July 23rd 2017
Milk
Acts 22:22 And they gave him audience unto this word, and then lifted up their voices, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live.
23 And as they cried out, and cast off their clothes, and threw dust into the air,
24 The chief captain commanded him to be brought into the castle, and bade that he should be examined by scourging; that he might know wherefore they cried so against him.
25 And as they bound him with thongs, Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?
26 When the centurion heard that, he went and told the chief captain, saying, Take heed what thou doest: for this man is a Roman.
27 Then the chief captain came, and said unto him, Tell me, art thou a Roman? He said, Yea.
28 And the chief captain answered, With a great sum obtained I this freedom. And Paul said, But I was free born.
29 Then straightway they departed from him which should have examined him: and the chief captain also was afraid, after he knew that he was a Roman, and because he had bound him.
30 On the morrow, because he would have known the certainty wherefore he was accused of the Jews, he loosed him from his bands, and commanded the chief priests and all their council to appear, and brought Paul down, and set him before them.
Okay, back to verse 22:
22 And they gave him audience unto this word, and then lifted up their voices, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live.
The phrase that they gave him audience mean that they “heard his words about his experience patiently.”
And at the conclusion of hearing all he had to say they were not one bit different and said, as they had said when we began, “Away with such a fellow from the earth.”
Greek, “Take such a man from the earth” (meaning, “put him to death”) as that was the only way to accomplish such a thing in that day.
We might know that they did not seek to have Paul killed for reaching out to the Gentiles.
Jesus said of these same Jews that they would “compass sea and land to make one proselyte” so that wasn’t the problem.
So they must have hated the fact that he was making disciples who believed that they could be right with God without conforming to the law of Moses which included abandoning the practice of circumcision and the rest.
Mine has been a long hard journey in the search for some general truths upon which all can stand.
I began at the hand of my parents with Mormonism and tried hard to make that work.
Turning from it I embraced all of cultural and traditional Evangelicalism to try and make that work.
Along the way I’ve sampled most other approaches. In the end most groups will compass land and sea to make disciples unto themselves and the net result is division – and even attempted murder of those who do not comply – not so much of the body in this day and age, but of the individual soul.
You may not agree, and I accept your resistance as an inalienable religious right, but from what I have seen, Christians are not so much known by their doctrines or practices, not by their water baptisms, their dress, or their approaches to worship but true Christians are known by
Their humility
Their love and adoration for God through Christ
And the lives they lead in agape love.
Forget what they say or profess.
Forget where they express their religious affinities or affiliations. Show me a woman or a man who is
Humble before God and Man
Adores God through Christ Jesus, and
Lives their life by and through agape love and I will show you a member of the Kingdom of Heaven.
Notice I did not say perfection in the flesh?
Notice I did not say membership in or mention any theology.
(Beat)
So back to Paul – before the mass of soon to be renewed hysteria (verse 23 and 24):
23 And as they cried out, and cast off their clothes, and threw dust into the air, the chief captain commanded him (Paul) to be brought into the castle (Tower of Antonia), and bade that he should be examined by scourging; that he might know wherefore they cried so against him.
If you haven’t witnessed religious zeal before, this is a great description of it – the crowd first began to disrobe – probably shedding their outer garment so as to be able to stone Paul to death.
Not having access to him or perhaps to stones they reached for the next best thing – the dirt and dust – which they grasped with their shaking hands and tossed in the air to evince utter frustration with Paul and his person and to sort of display what they would like to do to him (if they could).
We are reminded that the fruit of the Spirit – of the Spirit of God – is
love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance
So, if we ever find ourselves moving speaking or acting in ways that are counter to this we might remember to tread forward lightly – it may just be out flesh acting in what we have said is righteous indignation.
Believe me, I have learned first-hand how this looks and it can be a beguiling factor in our Christian walk.
So Paul was guarded by Roman soldiers, so much so that the crowd could not injure him; and their only way of expressing their wrath was by menaces and threats, and by these tokens of furious indignation.
This type of reaction was culturally reinforced for the Jews. When a man named Shimei expressed his indignation against David we read in 2nd Samuel 16:13
“And as David and his men went by the way, Shimei went along on the hill’s side over against him, and cursed as he went, and threw stones at him, and cast dust. “
Apparently, seeing how furious the crowd was even after Paul attempted to reason with them he decided to take him into custody and decided to “examine him by scourging.”
(which to me sounds like an inferior way to get to the truth of a matter – unless, perhaps someone is guilty and hates pain). (Verse 24) So . . .
The Greek word for examined is “ANET ADZO which means to test or examine and was commonly used in testing metals by fire to see what they are made of.
Anciently this was done through various kinds of tortures – the rack, near-drownings, and here scourging.
Remember, Paul address the group in Hebrew and the Chief Captain apparently only understood Greek so he was unable to hear Paul’s witness.
Seeing the uprising he just assumed that Paul was guilty of something and decided to put him under the lash.
25 And as they bound him with thongs (cords), Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned?
Paul was a Romans citizen by birth and maintained all the rights of a Roman that a non-Jew born in the Emporer’s family bore.
This, as we have learned, was taken very very seriously. And we can see how Paul appealed to the laws of the land to protect himself.
26 When the centurion heard that, he went and told the chief captain, saying, Take heed what thou doest: for this man is a Roman.
27 Then the chief captain came, and said unto him, Tell me, art thou a Roman? He said, Yea.
28 And the chief captain answered, With a great sum obtained I this freedom. (In other words, I bought my Roman citizenship, is that how you have yours too?) And Paul said, But I was free born.
(Look out!) (verse 29)
29 Then straightway they departed from him which should have examined him: and the chief captain also was afraid, after he knew that he was a Roman, and because he had bound him.
The act of binding a Roman citizen, with such an intent, untried and uncondemned by a proper court was highly illegal. This is known by and through what was declaration in Cicero, which reads:
“It is a heinous sin to bind a Roman citizen; it is wickedness to beat him; it is next to parricide to kill him; and what shall I say to crucify him?” (verse 30)
30 On the morrow, because he (the Chief Captain) would have known the certainty wherefore he was accused of the Jews, he loosed him (Paul) from his bands, and commanded the chief priests and all their council (of the Jews) to appear, and brought Paul down, and set him before them.
We might wonder why they still held Paul after he revealed that he was a born-free Roman?
Perhaps to set him free would have risked his life and/or perhaps to set him free would have created a total uproar in the City. So the Chief Captain chose to retain him overnight.
So the Chief Captain summoned a meeting of the sanhedrim or the great council of the nation.
And this moves us into chapter 23 where Paul will now address the Sanhedrim.
We have talked a bit about religious zeal, about the passions that rifle through us for God when injustices are done in his name.
We have suggested that peaceably approaching each situation is the way.
But as with EVERYTHING in scripture, there are always exceptions – even paradoxical exceptions – and we find one here in the this event.
I have to admit, there are a number of stories in scripture that really hit me emotionally –
Samson in the temple of the Philistines,
David before Goliath, Joseph before His brothers in Egypt – and this is right up there with them.
It gets my emotional zeal for right flowing.
So let’s read from verse 1 through 11.
Acts 23:1 And Paul, earnestly beholding the council, said, “Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.”
2 And the high priest Ananias commanded them that stood by him to smite him on the mouth.
3 Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law?
4 And they that stood by said, Revilest thou God’s high priest?
5 Then said Paul, I wist not, brethren, that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.
6 But when Paul perceived that the 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: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
7 And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided.
8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.
9 And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees’ part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.
10 And when there arose a great dissension, the chief captain, fearing lest Paul should have been pulled in pieces of them, commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by force from among them, and to bring him into the castle.
11 And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome.
Acts 23:1 And Paul, earnestly beholding the council, said, “Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.”
The Greek suggests that Paul looked earnestly at the group, fixing his eyes on them and examining their faces.
Remember, this man was called by Jesus to preach. He was taught by Jesus. He had done miracles in Jesus name, and he knew the Law and the prophets like no other.
The first words he says to them is that over the course of his entire life he has tried to be genuine before God, that he
had “lived in all good conscience.”
I have done what I believed to be right.
In Acts 4:16 Paul said: “And herein do I excuse myself, to have always a conscience void of offence toward God and toward men.”
And even in his persecution of Christians, we will read Paul say in chapter 26 of Acts:
“I verily thought with myself that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.”
Perhaps this is what Jesus was speaking to when He says he would rather people be hot or cold but if they are Lukewarm He would spit them out of his mouth.
My friends of the faith, there is something very, very important for us in this.
God judges the hearts, the motives, the intentions. If the heart is duplicitous and manipulative and seeks its own, it is has evil ambitions, God knows it – no matter what is professed with the lips.
I cannot help but believe that God will judge the content of a person’s heart (relative to their mistakes) much more than he will ever judge the mistakes themselves.
It’s not that Paul should glory in his persecution of Christians but by golly, the man believed within himself that he ought to act in that way.
This being the case he was able to say, before this religious tribunal:
“I stand with good conscience before God.”
See, to not have good conscience before God would mean that hypocrisy was present. That a person was feigning, that they acted out of improper motives that were not true to their real beliefs.
That is dangerous territory. If you are going to be right before God be real before men. He will work with you on your errors and failures.
I can honestly say, before all of you but more importantly before God, when it comes to what I teach I do teach what I believe with all my heart and mind.
If I don’t believe it I won’t teach it and if I do believe it I will – come what may. This is in large part due to factors like these before us in scripture – I honestly believe and maintain that God cares more about the intent, the motive, the consistency between our heart and mouths than the absolute correctness of our words or acts.
What Paul says here is really remarkable in that he stood before them as an accused man.
And here, in the gap between Paul the accused and this profession of standing before God with an honest heart and religion that tells us we have no right to think and speak and act before God honestly and openly, we find the masters of religious oppression and those who forced religious subjugation imposing silence on one they believed to be an apostate from the truth. (verse 2)
2 And the high priest Ananias commanded them that stood by him to smite Paul on the mouth.
It is one thing to be confronted with a person who disagrees with our position it it quite another to face someone who used to support our position and to then not only turn from it but to oppose it.
You want to feel the animus of a people publicly renounce what they hold dear, and then defend yourself before God to them.
It brings out the worst, or as a kind little old grandma once said to her granddaughter about me:
“I’d like to just pinch his mouth shut.”
To hit Paul on the mouth was to stop him from speaking and to to express their indignation at what he had said.
They could not bear to hear this man claim that his conduct was done with a good conscience before God.
Of course, they did the same thing to Jesus in John 18:22.
What is interesting and ironic, is that Paul here confessed to a good conscience before God in all he had ever done, but what had just taken place in his being slapped revealed that the high priest did not operate with the same integrity. So being smacked on the mouth Paul says (Verse 3)
3 “God shall smite thee, thou whited wall: for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law?”
Here we had someone whose heart behaved contrary to what they knew was right, and so Paul, knowing the law, was justified in telling him, “You smite me with such hypocrisy? God will smite you due to the hypocritical nature of your heart.”
That is why he called him a whited-wall, a phrase related to the practice of painting over a wall that was corrupted by the elements, age, poor construction or some violation but the white paint made it look nice and new.
God is not a fan of whited walls, whited sepulchers full of dead men’s bones, or aprons made with fig leaves to cover our nakedness.
He wants the real deal – and that is what He gets from those who are his.
Punishment was clearly described on how it was to be distributed in the Law.
For instance, Deuteronomy 25:1-3 the High Priest would have known that it says:
“If there be a controversy between men, and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them; then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked.
And it shall be, if the wicked man be worthy to be beaten, that the judge shall cause him to lie down, and to be beaten before his face, according to his fault, by a certain number.
3 Forty stripes he may give him, and not exceed: lest, if he should exceed, and beat him above these with many stripes, then thy brother should seem vile unto thee.”
Instead of proper jurisprudence, this High Priest let the contents of his religious heart reign and act out upon Paul unjustly.
So Paul tells him God will smite YOU, you hypocrite. You sit there to judge me of the law and ignore the law in your actions.
Big trouble.
According to Josephus, by they way, Paul was correct in his prediction against Anaias.
When some robbers, under the leadership of one Manahem invaded Jerusalem, Ananais and his brother Hezekiah ran and tried to hide themselves in an aqueduct but were located and murdered. (see Josephus, Jewish Wars, b. ii. chap. xvii. 8.)
4 And they that stood by said (to Paul), Revilest thou God’s high priest?
Before reading how Paul responds to this question/accusation, let’s briefly learn about this high priest named, Ananais:
Ananias was the son of one Nedebaeus and reigned from A.D. 48 to 58 or 59 (so we have a time frame for our place in Acts here in chapter 23).
He was known for his avarice and liberal use of violence. Josephus, in his Antiquities, says he confiscated for himself the tithes given the ordinary priests and gave lavish bribes to Romans and also Jews.
He was a brutal and scheming man, hated by Jewish nationalists for his pro-Roman policies. When the war with Rome began in A.D. 66, the nationalists burned his house and he was forced to flee to the palace of Herod the Great in the northern part of Jerusalem.
He later came to his fate described by Paul.
Anyway, after speaking this way to Ananais, Paul is asked, “Do thou reproach or abuse the high priest of God in this manner?” (Verse 5)
5 Then said Paul, I wist not, brethren, (I wasn’t aware) that he was the high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.
There have been some disagreements on the meaning of Paul’s words, “I wasn’t aware that he was the high priest.”
Some have suggested that Paul said it sarcastically as if to say,
“Pardon me, but it never occurred to me that such a man could be the high priest.”
Others have thought that Paul was saying,
“I acknowledge my error for I did not consider that I was addressing him whom God had commanded me to respect.”
And they suggest that perhaps Ananais was not dressed in the typical robes or that he was not sitting in the typical high priest seat.
Others also suppose that since Paul had not been in Jerusalem for so long that he really didn’t know that Ananais was the high Priest.
Finally, it is believed that Ananais was simply filling in for the real high priest and therefore Paul did not regard him as the legitimate ruler.
In this case Paul would have been saying,
“I did not address the man as such since that of the High Priest is not his true character. If he was truly the high priest I would not have used the language which I did.”
Whatever the reason, Paul acknowledges that according to the law (Exodus 22:28) that he should have been restrained to use the language that he did.
At this point the wisdom and skill of Paul – especially of the ways of the Jews – came into play. Pretty remarkable. (Verse 6)
6 But when Paul perceived that the 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: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
How did Paul perceive that some were Sadducees and some were Pharisees? We don’t of course know but he could have had recognized some former acquaintance with the men who composed the council.
Having been brought up in Jerusalem and acquainted with the sanhedrim, he could have had some acquaintances though he had been absent from them at this point for fourteen years.
And as you are all well aware, the Sanhedrim was divided into two parties, Pharisees and Sadducees, though we have no idea where the majority lay.
No matter, Paul was well aware of the tenuous temperament that existed between these camps and used it to his advantage, as he used his Roman nationality to his advantage.
And he “cried out.”
I think we can be assured that Paul knew there was no possible way he would receive a just hearing before them.
He also sought to be exonerated by the Chief Captain of the Roman guard and perhaps there would be no better way then to get the actual leaders of the Nation to show how incapable they were of even getting along with each other!
So recognizing that the Saducees did not believe in the resurrection and the Pharisees did, Paul cries out and says:
“Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.”
Now, was this a true statement?
Yes and no.
Paul was called into question for bearing witness against the Law among people in Asia minor.
But the reason Paul bore witness against the Law to those in that area was due to the fact that He was a first- hand witness, an apostle, of the hope and resurrection that the dead had in Christ Jesus!
From his birth Paul had belonged to sect of the Pharisees and, it seems, still regarded himself as such, at least in agreement with them over matter that distinguished them from the Sadducees – (which were relegated to resurrection, and the reality of angels and that of spirit or soul).
7 And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided.
8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.
In other words the Pharisees were supportive of the metaphysical beliefs of Paul but the Sadducees were really just materialists – to them there was nothing but matter.
Speaking of the Sadducees Josephus wrote (Jewish war, b. ii. chap. viii. &. 14,) that they “take away the belief of the immortal duration of the soul, and the punishments and rewards in hades.”
Later he wrote:
“The doctrine of the Sadducees is this,” says he, (Ant: b. xviii, chap. i. & 4,) “that souls die with the bodies.”
Amazingly enough, the ruling class at this time over the Nation of Israel, prior to its destruction just twelve years later, were not much different than total materialists of our day who totally deny any spiritual or metaphysical reality in the world.
This position stemmed from one Greek influence which states that even the human soul is material, and that there is nothing but matter in the universe, a belief picked up by founder of Mormonism, Joseph Smith.
The result? Verse 9
9 And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees’ part arose, and strove, saying, “We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.”
Isn’t this an amazing outcome. And it was all over doctrine – pet doctrine and long lasting arguments between the two parties.
And talk about frustration for the Chief Roman Captain – even taking Paul before the leaders of the Nation didn’t help. Verse 10
10 And when there arose a great dissension, the chief captain, fearing lest Paul should have been pulled in pieces of them, commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by force from among them, and to bring him into the castle.
11 And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said, “Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome.”
We’ll leave off here in this fascinating story of how God used Paul to spread the Good News among the people of that day and age.
Q and A
Prayers
