Monday: Ephesus – Part 2
In Ephesus, Paul followed his practice of preaching in the synagogue first. When opposition arose, he and the new believers moved to the lecture hall of a certain Tyrannus, where Paul preached daily for two years (Acts 19:8-10). Luke’s summary of Paul’s Ephesian ministry is that the entire province was intensely evangelized (Acts 19:10, Acts 19:26).
Image © Steve Creitz Goodsalt.com
In Acts 19:11-20, Luke adds a few miracle stories describing the triumph of God’s power in a city where magic and other superstitious practices were rather common. There is no doubt that God could heal through Paul, but that even handkerchiefs and aprons touched by the apostle had healing power (Acts 19:12) may sound strange to some, though this bears resemblance to Jesus’ healing of the woman with the hemorrhage (Luke 8:44). The Ephesian superstitious beliefs may have led God to perform “extraordinary” miracles, as Luke says (Acts 19:11, NIV). This is, perhaps, an example of God’s meeting the needs of the people at their own level of understanding.
Satisfied with the results of his mission in Ephesus, Paul decided to go to Jerusalem (Acts 19:21). Luke does not give a reason for this trip, but we know from Paul’s own writings that he wished to deliver the funds he had collected to relieve the poverty of the Jerusalem church (Rom. 15:25-27, 1 Cor. 16:1-3). The pooling of goods of the first years, and a severe famine in the days of Claudius, impoverished the Judean believers, and Paul saw in their appeal for help (Gal. 2:10) an opportunity to strengthen both their trust in his apostleship and the unity of a now transcultural church, despite knowing the risks to which he would be exposed (Acts 20:22-23; Rom. 15:31).
Read Acts 19:23-41. What was the real reason for the opposition to Paul that arose in Ephesus at the end of his stay there?
The opposition had to do with pagan worship, which was severely threatened by Paul’s ministry. Demetrius’s real motivation was clearly financial, but he was able to turn it into a religious matter because the temple of Artemis (or Diana), reckoned as one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, was located in Ephesus.
| Read Acts 19:27. Notice how artfully Demetrius was able to bring in religious “piety” in his attempt to keep the money flowing in. Why must we as Christians be careful not to use our faith, or a pretended piety in regard to our faith, in the same way? |
(22)
I thought that the Apostle Paul had already decided to stop his evangelizing to the Jews and was now focusing on the Gentiles. Why then does he go back to preaching in the Synagogue of the Jews?
He knew he had to preach to them
Remember that the only place with ready access to the scriptures was usually the local synagogue. Paul did not have a Bible in his luggage. He probably had a good memory, but access to the written word was always useful.
Very interesting, Maurice, but what do you base your information on, that the Apostle Paul "did not have a bible in his luggage?" My understanding is that Paul had scribes that would write his expositions of scripture for him, so then why would he not carry THE SCRIPTURES with him at all times?
The Bible in New Testament times comprised a set of scrolls that occupied quite a bit of space. Furthermore, they were expensive to produce. There is a lot of evidence about the copying process and how it was done. You could not go down to the book store and buy one. A synagogue usually had the Torah if that was all they could afford. Scriptures were regarded as sacred objects, owned by the community of the synagogue. The purchase and installation of a scriptural scroll was a very special event, as was the disposal of a worn or damaged one. It was not something that you carried around casually. The Ethiopian reading the scriptures in the chariot is a special case but one only has to visit the Ethiopian Coptic Church to understand the sacredness they apply to the scriptures.
So the books and parchments in 2 Timothy 4 were acquired later?
There is a fair bit of speculation about what is meant here. The fact that Paul does not specifically say scripture is significant. The one thing we can be sure of is that it was not a full OT. That would have involved many scrolls. The general consensus about the parchments is that they were writing materials. That is consistent with Paul’s ministry at the time. He was clearly into letter writing.
I need to reiterate that for the general populace, the Synagogue was the only source of Scripture. Much of the learning of the time consisted of learning the scriptures off by heart, and Paul as an educated Jew would have been through that learning process. We can conclude that he probably knew a fair bit of it off by heart.
Had he decided to stop preaching to them? I agree that he shifted his focus but I don't believe it meant no longer preaching to the Jews
I believe the statement in Acts 13:46 was directed to the Jews in Antioch Pisidia who rejected them and shook off the dust of their feet against them Acts 13:51 as Jesus instructed. Luke 10:10-11.
Thank you, Maurice, and thank you for mentioning the Ethopian Eunoch too. So therefore to me, if the Ethopian could carry THE SCRIPTURES and he was just a servant to some Royalty figure that was celebrating an Israelite Feast how much more so the Apostle Paul who was now an Apostle of Jesus and a very important one to the Gentile Christian Community.
I think that the Ethiopian was in charge of a scroll purchased by his rich masters, rather than a personal copy. There is an interesting connection between Ethiopia and Israel that gives background here. But you need a history lesson to appreciate that.
The Ethiopian was an official of considerable authority of the kingdom of Candace. He was not just a servant.