13:1–3 The commissioning. Up to this point in the book, whenever the church has sent someone out on a mission, that mission seems to have been not to evangelize, but to check up on evangelism (8:14; 11:22). The evangelism itself seems to have taken place spontaneously, usually in the local synagogue, or else in specific circumstances under the leading of the Holy Spirit (through the ‘scattering’ as in 8:4–5, or directly from a divine messenger as in 8:26). 1 Even now, it was not so much a case of the church with an over-abundance of prophets and teachers sending some of them out to do mission work. Rather the church, called by the Holy Spirit, recognized and endorsed God’s previous claim on Barnabas and Saul: Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them. It was not by their own initiative, but by God’s. 3 Here the recognition of Christian unity of fellowship and purpose in the Holy Spirit was expressed by the congregation placing their hands on the apostles.
Paul’s missions to Galatia and Greece.
13:4–12 Barnabas and Saul on Cyprus. 4 The island of Cyprus is in the north-eastern ‘corner’ of the Mediterranean Sea and had already been evangelized (11:19–20). This part of the journey may, therefore, have been intended as a follow-up visit (see 8:14; 11:22; and also 15:36 and 18:23). 5 Proclaiming the word of God in the Jewish synagogues is probably best understood, at this stage in the book, as evangelistic work among Jews who were not yet believers. Paul’s missionary pattern involved starting with the Jews, but moving to the Gentiles in each community (see on 13:46). Barnabas was from Cyprus originally (4:36), and John Mark, who was his cousin (see on 12:12–17), accompanied them.
Salamis was the port city on the east where the party landed, and the tour of the island seems to have passed without notable incident until they came to the other end, Paphos. The name Bar-Jesus (‘son of Jesus or Joshua’) had no connection with Jesus of Nazareth; Jesus was a common name at the time. The phrase Jewish sorcerer (6) seems like a contradiction in terms, given the Jewish laws against sorcery and magic, but Bar-Jesus was not a law-abiding Jew but a false prophet, a self-styled revealer, perhaps along the lines of Sceva. Both seemed to use the title ‘chief priest’ without any real credentials to authenticate their alleged control over magical and spiritual entities (see on 19:13–14; see also Philip and Peter’s encounter with the Samaritan magician Simon Magus, 8:9–24). 7 Like the Ethiopian eunuch (ch. 8) and the centurion Cornelius (ch. 10), it would seem that the Gentile proconsul Sergius Paulus had some respect for and connection with some form of Judaism, since he had a Jew (albeit a Jewish heretic) as one of his advisers, and showed interest in Barnabas and Saul. A proconsul was a governor, appointed by Rome, of a senatorial province such as Cyprus.
8 Bar-Jesus also used the semitic name Elymas for himself, and Luke tells us that this word meant sorcerer. As Sergius Paulus listened to the word of God, Elymas used his influence against it and tried to turn the proconsul from the faith. 9 (From this point in the book, the name ‘Paul’ is introduced, and ‘Saul’ is not used again, except for the re-tellings of the earlier Road to Damascus incident in chs. 22 and 26. This change to the Greek name from the Hebraic probably reflects the fact that Paul’s sphere of work was more specifically among Gentiles and in Gentile territories. In the argument before Sergius Paulus, God intervened, and the Holy Spirit inspired Paul to announce, rather than to ‘call down’, God’s judgment: the hand of the Lord is against you. You are going to be blind … for a time. The form this judgment took, of course, is strikingly similar to Paul’s own experience when he too needed to be led away by the hand. What Jesus did to Paul he will now continue to do through Paul. 12 The proconsul had his interest in the teaching about the Lord turn to belief as a result of observing the judgment.
13:13–52 Paul and Barnabas in Pisidian Antioch. This section of the chapter contains the first recorded sermon or speech by the apostle Paul (see on 2:14 regarding Luke’s use of speeches in Acts). It was not, however, the first sermon that Paul gave. The reason that the author gives us a summary of the contents of this one, rather than the simple statement as in 9:20–21 points to the pattern for so much of the later missionary experience of Paul. On entering a community, the Christians spoke first in the synagogue, and only after trouble arose there did they begin work among the Gentiles (see e.g. 14:1–6; 18:4–17; 19:8–9) until opposition (usually, but not exclusively, from the Jews) forced them to leave entirely.
13 The narrator here refers to the party as Paul and his companions, whereas prior to this, even in the message to the Antioch church from the Holy Spirit (13:2), Barnabas seems to have been reckoned as the leader and Paul as the companion. The fact that John left them, recorded here very simply, was to cause some disagreement later (15:36–41). That the parties became reconciled again is clear from Col. 4:10–11 and 2 Tim. 4:11, both written after the events here recorded.
14 One of the many ancient cities with the name Antioch, Pisidian Antioch was so called because it is nearer Pisidia than the Antioch in Galatia. 15 It was perfectly natural for the synagogue ruler to invite a visiting rabbi to give the homily. One almost feels sorry, however, for these particular synagogue rulers, who had no idea what would come of their unsuspecting offer.
The speech itself can be thought of as revolving around the themes of displacement of people and choice. It is often thought that this sermon was preached from the text 2 Sa. 7:6–16, although the context does not demand it.
16–25 This speech was addressed not only to Jews but also to Gentiles who worship God, who were apparently also present in the synagogue service (see on 10:1–8 for a discussion of ‘God-fearers’). The first and longest section of the speech is a rehearsal of the events leading up to the coming of the Messiah. The first paragraph concerns God’s choice of Israel and the displacement of the nations of Canaan in favour of God’s chosen people (even though they did not earn it by their behaviour which God merely endured). The second section is the displacement of Saul with David, the king of God’s choice. A third, contemporary, theme is John the Baptist, introduced with reference to Jesus. The modern reader may miss the revolutionary fact that John preached repentance and baptism to all the people of Israel. Repentance was one thing, but Jews of his day would have seen baptism as part of converting to Judaism—the speech implied that those who thought of themselves as Jews already also stood in need of ‘conversion’. Thus the ‘chosen people’ now had themselves to choose or perhaps be displaced. John was revered by Jews, and his fame had spread widely (see Lk. 20:5–7, in which the Pharisees are not afraid to oppose Jesus, but shied away from making any statement against John; and Acts 19:1–7 where Paul ran across disciples of John in Ephesus, far from Palestine). For this reason, John’s own statements about being ‘displaced’ by someone greater bore great significance. It is very possible that Paul’s hearers would have known more about John than about Jesus.
26–31 Having gone over some history, Paul emphasized that it is to us that the message had been sent. Jesus’ apparent failure in Jerusalem is faced squarely, and the reversal that features in Peter’s speeches (see e.g. 2:23–24; 3:15; 4:10–11) comes in here as well. Yes, Paul said, the human decision about Jesus was one thing, but God’s was quite different: his enemies had him executed, but God raised him from the dead.
32–37 This was good news, and it was related to the promises given to David. As in Peter’s speech in 2:25–32, the argument here revolves around the promise in Ps. 16:10 that God would not let his Holy One see decay. David did in fact ‘see decay’, which must mean that he was speaking in the Psalm of someone else who could not be defeated by death. But although Peter used a similar argument (which may have been widely used by early evangelists), the difference in style of the arguments is striking. Paul here showed his rabbinic training by using strings of citations, and also by the variety throughout the speech. Once again, the theme is displacement: the promises of David were not fulfilled until Jesus.
38–41 All this could be good news for the hearers (thus Paul says to his audience: I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you), but it was also an occasion for a stern warning: Take care that what the prophets have said does not happen to you. The themes of choice and displacement thus lead to the clear demand for the hearers to make a choice about Jesus in order to avoid being displaced as God’s people. This was more easily seen as good news by the ‘Gentiles who worship God’ and who were looking for a way in to God’s promises and community, than it was for those who were born Jews and now found themselves being threatened with exclusion from something they always regarded as theirs by gift and right. The quotation of warning is from the Greek version of Hab. 1:5, where the word ‘scoffers’ replaces the phrase from the Hebrew text ‘among the nations’. Whichever translation one uses, it is probably no coincidence that the context of the prophecy concerns not only the judgment of God’s chosen people Israel but also the way that God can and will work through the Gentiles.
42 Despite the harshness of Paul’s tone at the end of the message, the reaction was extremely favourable: the people invited them to speak further and many of the Jews and devout converts to Judaism followed Paul and Barnabas. The apostles urged them to continue.
If this was the reaction of the people, however, the reaction of their leaders was less warm. 45 As in Jerusalem, the Jews (by which Luke must mean the more influential people in the Jewish community, judging by v 43 above) were filled with jealousy by the sight of the crowds that Paul and Barnabas were attracting.
Their abusive talk and opposition was answered (46–48) along the lines that the speech suggested: the choice these people made led to their displacement as God’s people: Since you reject it … we turn now to the Gentiles, who were glad to receive it. This ‘turning’ had to do with this particular community rather than to the Jews as a race. In 14:1 (as in every town after) Paul went first to the Jews in that community if it had a synagogue (see 9:20–25; 13:5, 14; 14:1; 17:1–2, 10; 17:17; 18:4, 19; 19:8). Luke’s phrase all who were appointed for eternal life believed is to redress a balance. For it is never merely a person’s own choice that saves them, it is always God’s love and mercy. As with all the passages dealing with the conversion of Gentiles, Luke is at pains to show that what happened was at God’s initiative and had God’s approval. The acceptance of the Jewish Messiah by the Gentiles was sometimes a surprise and sometimes an offence to the early Christians, but none of it took God by surprise; he had always planned it just this way, as the quotation in v 47 shows.
49 That the word of the Lord spread through the whole region should probably also be seen as part of Paul’s missionary strategy. He seems to have done his work mainly in urban areas and allowed the local people to take the message to the surrounding towns and villages (perhaps because of the location of local synagogues, perhaps partly because of language constraints; see 14:11, 18). 50 Again, despite the fact that so many Jews had followed the apostles, the opponents are simply called the Jews, suggesting that these were influential people who in some sense ‘spoke for the community’. These people used all their influence in high places to stir up persecution against the brothers and eventually had them expelled. A later example of a woman of high standing was Drusilla, the Jewish wife of the Roman governor Felix (24:24). 51 Shaking the dust from their feet was an insult of sorts. In its strongest sense it implied that the people that they were leaving behind were ‘contaminated’ in some way, but was probably no stronger than the modern ‘Good riddance!’ 52 This rejection affected neither their spirit nor the Spirit; they remained filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit.
14:1–7 Paul and Barnabas in Iconium. The pattern that manifested itself in Pisidian Antioch above was repeated in Iconium, and Luke recounts it only in summary form (see also 17:1–11; 18:4–17; 19:8–10; 28:17–30). 1 Despite the simplest reading of 13:46, it is clear that Paul and Barnabas did not turn their backs on all the Jews to go directly to Gentiles but allowed each local congregation of Jews to make a decision before going to the Gentiles there. Thus the apostles went as usual to the Jewish synagogue. Paul and Barnabas told the good news, and with great effect, but their address is not recorded. 3 Again, those Jews who did not believe stirred up opposition (see 13:50). Miraculous signs and wonders confirmed their message to the people in Iconium, but the inhabitants remained divided about the apostles (here and v 14 are the only places that Luke explicitly uses the term ‘apostle’ for Paul or Barnabas), and eventually Paul and Barnabas were forced to flee to Lystra and Derbe.
14:8–20a Paul and Barnabas in Lystra. This remarkable story is one of two that show how the apostles dealt with pagan Gentile audiences (here simple village folk, and in 17:16–34 sophisticated Athenians), and it is perhaps significant that in both cases the gospel was initially misunderstood. We may guess from vs 8–11 that Paul’s initial preaching (which is not recorded in detail) took place in the open air, perhaps near the city gates (13). From this and the fact that Jewish opposition was from Antioch and Iconium rather than from locals, we may further guess that there was no synagogue for the apostles to begin at.
8–10 In Lystra lived a man who had been lame from birth. The seriousness of his affliction, the fact that the apostle is said to have looked directly at him and the way in which the man jumped up is probably intended to remind the reader of the way that Peter and John healed a lame man in Jerusalem (3:4–8). In this story, however, we are told that when the apostle looked directly at the man, he was able to tell that he had the faith to be healed.
11–13 The preaching, and especially the healing, impressed the crowd, but they had the wrong idea and mistook the apostles for gods. There is an ancient story about these same two gods visiting a town in the area. They were not recognized and received only a cool reception. In anger they destroyed the town that had been so inhospitable. With such a folk-tale circulating in this region, it is hardly any wonder that the crowd reacted in the way that they did, bringing forth a bull and wreathes and wanting to offer sacrifices to Paul and Barnabas after a simple healing. The legend also helps to explain why they assumed the visitors were those particular gods rather than a god of healing, as might have been expected from the events themselves. The crowd, when excited, spoke in their native Lycaonian language. The language barrier may in part explain why the people so easily misunderstood the apostles’ message and why the apostles had so much trouble discouraging the sacrifice (18).
14 Language difficulties may also be why Barnabas and Paul were so slow to understand what was going on. Once they did they tore their clothes, which throughout the ancient world was understood as a gesture of deep sorrow or self-humiliation. 15 Their cry of protest was We too are only men, human like you (cf. 3:12). That the living God was the one who made heaven and earth and sea and everything is also the way that Paul described and argued for God in more detail at Athens (17:16–34), where the fact that he let all nations go their own way is described as ‘the times of ignorance’.
19–20a A group of Jews from Antioch and Iconium swayed the crowds against Paul and Barnabas. It is not hard to imagine the disillusioned crowd being embarrassed at their foolishness and turning against the innocent apostles. That they thought Paul was dead does not of course mean that he was dead. If this were a resurrection, we would expect Luke to have made more of it (see 9:40–43; also 20:9–12).
14:20b–28 Paul and Barnabas reach Derbe and make the return voyage to Antioch. 20b–21 The mission work in Derbe is told with even more brevity than the Iconium account, even though Paul and Barnabas won a large number of disciples. That they were able to make brief return visits to places from which they had specifically been expelled is not impossible, but this opposition was undoubtedly part of their thinking in saying We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God (Paul gives similar warnings in his letters; see 2 Thes. 1:5). In each of the churches that they revisited, Paul and Barnabas appointed elders (see 1 Tim. 3:1–13 and Titus 1:5–9 for the qualifications they looked for) and committed them to the task with prayer and fasting, just as they themselves had been set aside for their task by the church in Antioch (13:1–3).
28–28 Having returned to Syrian Antioch, there is a real sense of fulfilment provided by recalling their sending out and by pronouncing the work completed. They gathered the church together to share with them all that God had done through them, including especially how God had opened the door of faith to the Gentiles.
D. A. Carson, New Bible Commentary : 21st Century Edition, 4th ed. (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994). Ac 13:1-14:20.
Sermon - Audio
