Verse by Verse

³¹ Now as they were seeking to kill him, news came to the commander of the garrison that all Jerusalem was in an uproar.

³² He immediately took soldiers and centurions, and ran down to them. And when they saw the commander and the soldiers, they stopped beating Paul.

³³ Then the commander came near and took him, and commanded him to be bound with two chains; and he asked who he was and what he had done.

³⁴ And some among the multitude cried one thing and some another.
So when he could not ascertain the truth because of the tumult, he commanded him to be taken into the barracks.

³⁵ When he reached the stairs, he had to be carried by the soldiers because of the violence of the mob.

³⁶For the multitude of the people followed after, crying out, “Away with him!”

³⁷ Then as Paul was about to be led into the barracks, he said to the commander, “May I speak to you?”  He replied, “Can you speak Greek?

³⁸ Are you not the Egyptian who some time ago stirred up a rebellion and led the four thousand assassins out into the wilderness?”

³⁹ But Paul said, “I am a Jew from Tarsus, in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city; and I implore you, permit me to speak to the people.”

⁴⁰ So when he had given him permission, Paul stood on the stairs and motioned with his hand to the people. And when there was a great silence, he spoke to them in the Hebrew language, saying,

garrison (v.31) — The cloisters or colonnades in the Court of the Gentiles communicated at the northwest corner by a flight of steps with the fortress of Antonia, which was built on a rocky eminence close by and commanded a view of the temple and what went on there. It had originally been built as a fortress palace by Herod the Great, but was now occupied by the Roman garrison. The near presence of this fortress was a constant source of irritation to the Jews. News of the commotion proceeding in the temple was carried up to the fortress, the soldiers of which were kept in readiness under arms at festival seasons to quell disturbances. — Walker, page 469.

__________

commander (v.31) — The “chiliarch of the cohort. The military tribune in question was in command of a thousand men, of whom 750 would be infantry and 250 cavalry.

centurions (v.32) — Officers subordinate to him, each commanding 100 soldiers. — Walker, page 470

chains (v.33) — In fulfillment of Agabus’ prophecy (Acts 21:11) — He was probably chained by the wrist to two soldiers

violence (v.35) — The mob was so violent, the soldiers had to carry Paul.

Egyptian (v.38) — Josephus tells us that an Egyptian, posing as a prophet, got together 30,000 men and led them to the Mount of Olives, with intent to overpower the Roman garrison and seize Jerusalem, but that Felix forestalled him by attacking him, when the Egyptian ran away and the greater part of his followers were destroyed or taken prisoner.

In another account of the same event, he says that only 400 were slain and 200 taken alive; so that his numbers are clearly unreliable, while the incident itself is authentic.

The event was quite a recent one, so that it was natural for the commander to think that the run-away Egyptian had returned to make a fresh attempt at insurrection.

Assassins (v.38) — The “Sicarii” were a set of fanatics who arose in Judea during the procuratorship of Felix. They were so called because they carried under their garments a short sword or dagger (sicca), with which they stabbed their political opponents as they mingled with the crowd at the festivals. — Walker, page 472

Jew (v.39) — and so he had a right to enter the temple

Tarsus, in Cilicia (v.39) — A city with a renowned university. This would account, in the commander’s eyes, for Paul’s Greek culture.

citizen (v.39) — He was an enfranchises citizen of Tarsus as a Greek municipality, as well as a Roman citizen of the empire.

no mean city (v.39) — In other words “of a distinguished city.” Tarsus ranked high among the intellectual cities of the Roman East, and bore upon its coins the proud titles “metropolis” and “autonomous” (self-governing). — Walker, page 473.

Hebrew language (v.40) — Some commentaries say this was Hebrew and some say it was Aramaic. Whatever the case, it was the language the crowd could understand. Paul could speak Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and maybe Latin.

Several of the commentaries mention the similarity of the words shouted by the mob on this occasion and on the occasion of the arrest of Jesus Christ. They see it as a connection between the ministry of Paul and of the Lord. While there is that aspect, I think the greater point is the consistent rejection of the message by Israel. It underlines, once again, how Acts is the record of the rejection of that message by the Jews.

Paul’s heart for his people is clearly in view. He went to Jerusalem in spite of warnings to try to reach them. He brought them generous gifts from the churches. He agreed to James’ plan to perform the rites in the temple. All of that didn’t work. He was beaten and arrested. He must have been frightened, sore, probably bleeding and yet he sees the gathered mob as yet another opportunity to have his say. I know, beyond doubt, I would have walked away long before.

²⁷ Now when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him,

²⁸ crying out, “Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the law, and this place; and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place.”

²⁹ (For they had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian with him in the city, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.)

³⁰ And all the city was disturbed; and the people ran together, seized Paul, and dragged him out of the temple; and immediately the doors were shut.

James’ compromising attempt to avoid a riot actually resulted in a riot. And there is no record of James or anyone in his assembly standing up with or in defense of Paul.

The riot began with the Jews of Asia (v.27) who had resisted Paul everywhere he traveled, but the local Jews of Jerusalem soon joined in.

The accusations against Paul (v.28) were very similar to those against Stephen (Acts 6:13), in which Paul took part.

all men everywhere (v.28) — The Jews were upset because Paul’s message went to all, not just Jews.

the people (v.28) — Jews

this place (v.28) — the temple

into the temple (v.28) — Meaning the inner portion of the temple. The outer “Court of the Gentiles” was open to all. Beyond that was a raised narrow platform bounded by a lofty wall, through which admittance was obtained by gates to a raised plateau containing the temple proper, with its court of the Women, Court of the Israelites, and Court of the Priests. The actual boundary for Gentiles was a low stone barrier, three cubits [four-and-a-half feet] in height, which ran round the court at the foot of the steps leading to the narrow platform, and therefore down below the lofty wall. Josephus tells us that it contained pillars at intervals with inscriptions forbidding Gentiles to go beyond. One of these has been recovered and reads, “No man of another nation to enter within the fence and enclosure around the temple. And whoso is caught will have himself to blame that his death ensues.” This was the “middle wall of partition” referred to in Ephesians 2:14. Seeing the apostle busy with ceremonies in the company of others in the inner court, the Asian Jews supposed [or pretended to suppose] that he had taken Trophimus beyond the prescribed barrier. — Walker, page 468.

¹⁸ On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present.

¹⁹ When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry.

²⁰ And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law;

²¹ but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.

²² What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come.

²³ Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow.

²⁴ Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law.

²⁵ But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing, except  that they should keep themselves from thing soffered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.”

²⁶ Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.

Peter was the Christ-appointed leader of the Messianic Church in those early days when “they were all filled with the Holy Spirit” (See Matthew 16:19; Acts 1:15; 2:14; 2:37; 5:29, etc.). We have seen too, how James, “the Lord’s brother” (not even one of the twelve) gradually gained the ascendancy over Peter, probably because of his physical relationship to our Lord. Thus we find Peter reporting to “James and to the brethren” in Acts 12:17. Later Paul mentions James alone as present with Peter at Jerusalem during an earlier visit there (Galatians 1:19). Next we find Peter merely testifying at the council at Jerusalem while James presides and brings the council to close with the words : “Wherefore, I decide” (Acts 15:19). Still later, at Antioch, we see Peter intimidated by “certain who came from James,” so that he separates himself from Gentile believers with whom he has been enjoying fellowship (Galatians 2:11-12). And now Paul and his companions go in unto James, and so final is his authority that the record states merely that “the elders were present” (Acts 21:18). At the council, some 14 years previous, “the apostles and elders” had gathered together to discuss Gentile liberty from the law (Acts 15:6). Now there is no trace of evidence that any of the apostles are even present; the record mentions only “James and the elders.” If any of the twelve apostles are to be included among the “elders,” but are not even designated as apostles, we have still further evidence of the secondary character of their position at this time. James, whose very name means “Supplanter,” has wholly taken over Peter’s position. — Stam, pages 13-14.

forsake Moses (v.21) = apostasy from Moses

Years before, at the great Jerusalem council, Peter had stated that God had put “no difference” between them and the Gentiles, purifying the Gentiles’ hearts by faith. He had further urged his brethren to to place a yoke upon the neck of the Gentile disciples which neither the Jewish fathers nor their children had been able to bear (Acts 15:9-10). He had even gone so far as to say: “But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they” (Acts 15:11).

As a result of this magnificent testimony, James, Peter, John and the whole church had given solemn and public recognition to Paul as the apostle of the uncircumcision and the apostle of grace (Acts 15:23-29; Galatians 2:7-9). The church at Jerusalem should have gone on from there, as Peter did (2 Peter 3:15-18) and should have now accepted Paul in accordance with that agreement. But under James and his party they had declined and gone backward, rather than forward, spiritually. — Stam, page 17.

__________

Paul did teach that the law had been fulfilled in Christ and that it was therefore unnecessary to observe its ceremonial rites — and he taught this not only to the Gentiles but also to the Jews which were among them.

“After the reading of the law and the prophets” in the Pisidian synagogue, the rulers asked Paul for a “word of exhortation.” In response the apostles gave them a word of exhortation in respect to each. With respect to the law he exhorted them not to trust in it, but to trust in Christ, saying: “Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this Man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: And by Him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses” (Acts 13:38-39). — Stam, page 23.

must certainly meet (v.22) — a meeting in opposition to Paul

pay their expenses (v.24) — It was considered meritorious among rich Jews to pay the expenses for sacrifices for poor Nazarites

shave their heads (v.24) — upon accomplishing their vows during which they were forbidden to do so

Their proposition, therefore, was this: Paul himself was evidently not under a vow at this time, but they had four men who were, and Paul could join publicly with them in their vow by purifying himself and paying for the sacrifices marking the consummation of their vow — a considerable amount, since two doves or pigeons, one he-lamb, one ewe lamb and a ram had to be offered for each of the four (Numbers 6).

This procedure was evidently not uncommon at that time. Indeed, Josephus tells how Agrippa I courted Jewish favor by thus financing Nazarite vows. — Stam, page 29

__________

Why should he try to prove to the Jews that he “walked orderly and kept the law” when he certainly had not done so among the Gentiles?

He had come to Jerusalem to bring an offering to the poor saints there and to “testify the gospel of the grace of God.” There is no record that the offering was gratefully received, and surely he could not “testify the gospel of the grace of God” by offering blood sacrifices. But even the sacrifices were not actually offered. So far from James’ plan succeeding, a great commotion and Paul’s arrest “When the seven days were almost ended,” prevented him from having any part in the offering of the proposed sacrifices. — Stam, pages 35-36.

written (v.25) — in response to the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:20)

announce (v.26) — declare to the officiating priests

What to make of all this? I think Paul made a huge mistake. He made it because of his love for his fellow Jews, but it was a huge mistake nonetheless. The Holy Spirit had warned him, and even told him directly, not to go to Jerusalem. Paul went, and it only led to more error.

James and his elders obviously had come up with a plan in advance. Worst case scenario, they were trying to undermine Paul’s message. Even best case scenario — that they were trying to prevent a riot — was a dismal failure. But weren’t these Jews who were so upset by Paul’s teaching under James’ leadership? Isn’t it likely that they held the views they held because, to some extent, James held the same views. We can see in Galatians 2 that he certainly did.

What of James statement that if Paul took the vow, “all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law (v.24)? Those “things” weren’t nothing. Paul had said exactly those things, and written them under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in Romans and Galatians.

So Paul, under pressure from those he had come so far to help, made a last-ditch effort to work things out apart from the Holy Spirit’s leading. He went along with the four men to the temple and prepared to offer sacrifices. Ironside goes so far as to say: “It would have nulified to a large extent the testimony of the apostle Paul in the days to come. Imagine him stepping up with them to the altar and offering animal sacrifices — a virtual denial of the one sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ.”  To prevent this, the Holy Spirit saw to it that Paul was arrested and physically made unable to complete the vows.

To sum up, here’s why I’m sure Paul was wrong:

1) He rejected repeated warnings and instructions by the Holy Spirit not to go to Jerusalem.

2) He didn’t defend himself when James misrepresented his (Paul’s) ministry.

3) He submitted to the leadership of the Jerusalem church whom he had previously called “those who seemed to be something—whatever they were, it makes no difference to me” (Galatians 2:8).

4) He went to the temple with the four men and observed the dead rituals of the law.

As a result, his ministry to the Gentiles was hindered, the Jerusalem church was no further along in seeing the truth of grace, and Paul was arrested and thrown in jail.

God in His grace, comforted Paul and allowed him further ministry. If He didn’t deal with us in our fallen state, He couldn’t deal with us at all.

¹⁵ And after those days we packed and went up to Jerusalem.

¹⁶ Also some of the disciples from Caesarea went with us and brought with them a certain Mnason of Cyprus, an early disciple, with whom we were to lodge.

¹⁷ And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.

packed (v.15) — probably means “saddled our horses,” which explains how they got the 70 miles to Jerusalem in two days.

up to Jerusalem (v.15) — almost 70 miles. The journey took two days, so they lodged with Mnason. He probably didn’t travel with them; the disciples of Caesarea took Paul and his companions to Mnason’s house, then went home. Lodging would have been difficult to find because of all the pilgrims on the way to Jerusalem for the feast.

Mnason (v.16) — a Greek name — probably a Hellenistic Jew — He was from Cyprus (like Barnabus)

early (v.16) — He’d been a disciple for a long time.

⁸ On the next day we who were Paul’s companions departed and came to Caesarea, and entered the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, and stayed with him.

⁹ Now this man had four virgin daughters who prophesied.

¹⁰ And as we stayed many days, a certain prophet named Agabus came down from Judea.

¹¹ When he had come to us, he took Paul’s belt, bound his own hands and feet, and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man who owns this belt, and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’”

¹² Now when we heard these things, both we and those from that place pleaded with him not to go up to Jerusalem.

¹³ Then Paul answered, “What do you mean by weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.”

¹⁴ So when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, “The will of the Lord be done.”

unto Caesarea (v.8) — about 35 miles south by land

Philip … one of the seven (v.8) — Philip had originally been one of the seven treasurers who had had oversight of “the daily ministration” in Pentecostal days when the believers at Jerusalem had had “all things common” (See Acts 6:1-5). Since that time, however, the Jerusalem church had been scattered by a “great persecution” and Philip had been used rather as an evangelist (See Acts 8:4-40). But while Philip was perhaps no longer actively a treasurer of the Church at Jerusalem, the fact that in addition to being called “Philip the evangelist” here, he is also designated as “one of the seven,” may well imply that he still had enough association with, or knowledge of, financial matters in the Church at Jerusalem to have relieved Paul of the necessity of personally delivering the collection he had gathered for its poor. — Stam, page 263.

daughters who prophesied (v.9) — in connection with the kingdom (Acts 2:17)

many days (v.10) = more days. It might not have been any longer than a week.

Agabus (v.10) — Acts 11:28

took Paul’s belt (v.11) — in the symbolic manner of Old Testament prophets

breaking (v.13) = weakening — Paul found his resolve weakening

The question, of course, is whether the Spirit thus warned him to deter him from his purpose or to prepare him for the ordeal. We believe the former is the case. Has it ever been God’s way to prepare His servants for testings by warning them about them? Has He not rather done this by encouraging them as to His faithfulness? Certainly this is so in the case of Paul himself (See Acts 18:9; 23:11; 27:23-25).

Certainly all those present understood Agabus’ prophecy as a warning to Paul that he should not proceed, for both his co-workers, including even Luke, and the believers at Caesarea began to plead with him, with tears, to abandon his purpose (vs. 12-13). — Stam, page 265.

__________

And if the Holy Spirit had so solemnly warned him, and he rejected these warnings, the Lord in His own gracious way over-ruled it all to His own glory and to foreshadow what might be termed “the captivity of the Gospel.” God permitted it all for His own wise purpose. He knows the end from the beginning. The blessed Gospel of the Grace and Glory of God committed to the Apostle Paul was soon to be set aside by man and the judaistic form, that perverted gospel, to gain the victory. And Paul himself arrested in Jerusalem given over into the hands of the Gentiles and sent to Rome. — Gaebelein, pages 362.

I think Stam’s point is interesting. Did God arrange it so that Paul’s final warning came at the home of Philip, a man highly qualified and absolutely to be trusted to take the money Paul was carrying to Jerusalem for him? Not only did Paul get warnings in every city along his way, but the final, strongest warning came in the presence of man ready-made to carry out Paul’s mission.

I hadn’t heard Gaebelein’s take before — that Paul’s refusal to listen to the Spirit’s warning and his subsequent imprisonment is symbolic of — and the cause of — the loss of Paul’s grace message for almost 2,000 years. My first response when reading this was, “Wow! Really?” It seems like a leap, but it makes for interesting thinking.

¹ Now it came to pass, that when we had departed from them and set sail, running a straight course we came to Cos, the following day to Rhodes, and from there to Patara.

² And finding a ship sailing over to Phoenicia, we went aboard and set sail.

³ When we had sighted Cyprus, we passed it on the left, sailed to Syria, and landed at Tyre; for there the ship was to unload her cargo.

⁴ And finding disciples, we stayed there seven days. They told Paul through the Spirit not to go up to Jerusalem.

⁵ When we had come to the end of those days, we departed and went on our way; and they all accompanied us, with wives and children, till we were out of the city. And we knelt down on the shore and prayed.

⁶ When we had taken our leave of one another, we boarded the ship, and they returned home.

⁷ And when we had finished our voyage from Tyre, we came to Ptolemais, greeted the brethren, and stayed with them one day.

departed (v.1) = were torn away

Cos (v.1) — A fertile island off the coast of Caria, 40 nautical miles distant to the south of Miletus, at the southwest corner of Asia Minor. It was important as a commercial center, lying, as it did, on a trade route; as also for its famous temple of Aesculapius (the Greek god of medicine) and for its medical school. It was incorporated in the Roman province of Asia.

Rhodes (v.1) — The isle of roses, as its name implies. It lies off the coast of Caria, southeast of Cos. It is 43 miles long, with a maximum breadth of 20 miles — and is 12 miles from the mainland at its nearest point. In the pre-Roman period, it was politically paramount in that part of Asia Minor, the greater portions of Caria and Lycia being subject to it. Under the Romans, however, it lost most of its greatness, though its geographical position still rendered it commercially important.

Patara (v.1) — A city on the coast of Lycia, almost due east of Rhodes. It was near the mouth of the river Xanthos, and was the harbor for the towns lying inland in the valley of Xanthos, besides forming an important station for coasting ships. It was a highly prosperous city. Paul’s ship would have a straight run, at that time of the year, across from Rhodes to Patara. — Walker, pages 454-455.

sailing (v.2) — It was about 400 miles from Patara to Tyre.

The prevailing wind in the Levant throughout the summer months is from the west, so that sailing vessels could run direct from Lycia to the Syrian coast. Those traveling in the opposite direction, however, i.e. from Syria to Lycia, had to hug the coast of Asia Minor past the east end of Cyprus, as the wind was contrary, and they could not make the cross-sea passage. — Walker, pages 455-456.

finding (v.4) — The Greek word involves some degree of searching. They knew the disciples were there.

said (v.4) = said repeatedly

Ptolemais (v.7) — Called “Acco” in Old Testament times (Judges 1:31), having been formerly a Philistine town. It is now well known as Acre. It is at the northern extremity of the Bay of Acre, which bends round to Mt. Carmel in the south. Its name was derived from Ptolemy I Philadelphus, when it passed into his possession. Under the Romans, it received special colonial privileges. It shared with Tyre, Sidon, Antioch, and Caesarea the trade of that coast. It is about 30 miles south of Tyre. — Walker, page 458.

__________

It was not mere concern for Paul’s welfare that constrained these disciples to urge him not to continue on his way to Jerusalem; they spoke “by the Spirit.” We have also shown that the phraseology, in the Greek, does not indicate a direct prohibition, but rather a warning and a plea. It is probable, further, that Paul understood that this warning was from the Spirit, for he had already said: “the Holy Spirit testifies in every city, saying that chains and tribulations await me” (Acts 20:23).

His responses to such pleas and warnings indicate strongly that he did not regard them as a divine prohibition against his going to Jerusalem, but considered them rather as a challenge and a test of his faithfulness (See Acts 20:24; 21:13).

Thus, while the apostle’s motives and purposes were noble indeed, it cannot be said that he was in the directive will of God in going to Jerusalem. Surely the Spirit’s persistent warnings against going to Jerusalem were not to be construed as His leading to go there. — Stam, page 261.

While it is possible, as Stam believes, that the Holy Spirit did not expressly forbid Paul to go to Jerusalem, I think that it’s very clear that He did not want Paul to go and, therefore, that Paul was wrong to go, however noble his motives might have been. There is no record of any fruit resulting from Paul’s ministry on this visit, and it resulted in his imprisonment. Later, Paul testified that on an earlier visit: I … was praying in the temple …  and saw Him saying to me, ‘Make haste and get out of Jerusalem quickly, for they will not receive your testimony concerning Me.’ So I said, ‘Lord, they know that in every synagogue I imprisoned and beat those who believe on You. And when the blood of Your martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by consenting to his death,  and guarding the clothes of those who were killing him.’ Then He said to me, ‘Depart, for I will send you far from here to the Gentiles’ (Acts 22:17-21).

It’s obvious that Paul felt himself responsible for the rejection of the Messiah by the Jews in Jerusalem because of his earlier opposition to Jesus Christ. It was evidently eating at him so that he couldn’t get it out of his head. He thought that maybe one more visit, one more appeal, would convince them to change their minds. The Holy Spirit’s repeated warnings, and indeed, the entire history of Israel, indicated otherwise, but Paul’s love for his people overruled his judgment.

³² “So now, brethren, I commend you to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified.

³³ I have coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel.

³⁴ Yes,  you yourselves know that these hands have provided for my necessities, and for those who were with me.

³⁵ I have shown you in every way, by laboring like this, that you must support the weak. And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’”

³⁶ And when he had said these things, he knelt down and prayed with them all.

³⁷ Then they all wept freely, and fell on Paul’s neck and kissed him,

³⁸ sorrowing most of all for the words which he spoke, that they would see his face no more. And they accompanied him to the ship.

The Word of His grace (v.32) was, of course, the particular message which Paul had been commissioned to proclaim. It was the message for the dispensation now dawning, and it was this message that God would use to establish them in the faith, especially as its glories were further revealed to Paul and through him in his epistles.

How similar is this benediction to that found in a letter the apostle had so recently written: Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began (Romans 16:25). — Stam, page 253.

inheritance (v.32) — This word is used three times in Ephesians.

these hands have provided (v.34) — Paul had paid his own way and that of his companions by working as a tentmaker.

I have shown you in every way (v.35) — I was an example in all things …

laboring (v.25) = fatiguing toil

It is more blessed … (v.35) — This quote is not recorded in the Gospels. It’s the only direct quote from Jesus Christ’s ministry on earth that is recorded somewhere other than the Gospels.

²⁸ Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.

²⁹ For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock.

³⁰ Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves.

³¹ Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears.

take heed (v.28) — Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you (1 Timothy 4:16).

overseers (v.28) — Throughout the New Testament, the terms [elder and overseer] denote two aspects of the same office, the former pointing to the minister’s weight of years and standing, and the latter to his work of supervision. — Walker, page 448.

purchased (v.28) = made His own — acquired for one’s own possession. It doesn’t include the idea of buying something from another.

with His own blood (v.28) — The blood was Christ’s, but as Christ was God, it is right to speak of it as God’s blood. Some say it should be translated “with the blood of His own.”

men will rise up (v.30) — We are given ample confirmation of the truth of his warning. It was not long before Hymenaeus and Alexander had “made shipwreck” of the faith and had become blasphemers (1 Timothy 1:19-20). And this Hymenaeus, along with another, Philetus, succeeded in “overthrowing the faith of some” (2 Timothy 2:17-18). Indeed, in his last letter the apostle had to write to Timothy: “This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me” (2 Timothy 1:15).

It is granted that the “all” here may refer to a certain company which Timothy would recognize, or to the believers in Asia as a body. In any case it is evident that there was serious and widespread defection. — Stam, pages 251-252.

watch (v.31) = sleepless alertness

²² And see, now I go bound in the spirit to Jerusalem, not knowing the things that will happen to me there,

²³ except that the Holy Spirit testifies in every city, saying that chains and tribulations await me.

²⁴ But none of these things move me; nor do I count my life dear to myself, so that I may finish my race with joy, and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God.

²⁵ “And indeed, now I know that you all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, will see my face no more.

²⁶ Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men.

²⁷ For I have not shunned to declare to you the whole counsel of God.

spirit (v.22) — Paul’s own spirit of determination, not the Holy Spirit

This term is an idiom [“bound in the spirit”] meaning to feel one’s self responsible. The “spirit” here … is his own, not the Holy Spirit, which is distinguished from Paul’s spirit in the next verse by the addition of the word “Holy” and (in the original) by the familiar repetition of the definite article: “the Spirit, the Holy.” — Stam, page 250.

dear (v.24) = precious, valuable

shall see my face no more (v.25) — Paul’s expectation. He may, in fact, have returned to the region (2 Timothy 1:15).

innocent of the blood of all men (v.26) — Paul never missed an opportunity to preach the gospel

There is very little consensus among my commentaries on this passage. Most think Paul was wrong to go to Jerusalem (Ironside, Gaebelein, Stam), but not all (Walker). I think that the Holy Spirit didn’t want him to go but stopped short of ordering him not to go.

As to his preaching the “kingdom of God,” here’s what Stam says:

He still speaks of “inheriting” the kingdom of God in Ephesians 5:5 and of his “fellow workers unto the kingdom of God” in Colossians 4:11, both of which passages were written considerably after the close of Acts.

It must be remembered that this term, unlike “the kingdom of heaven” (found only in Matthew), is a very broad one. We find it used in both the opening and closing verses of the Acts and in each case the context must be kept in view.

When our Lord, before His ascension, taught the eleven “the things pertaining to the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3)  He dealt with the earthly establishment of that kingdom, which the apostles hoped for and which Peter was soon to offer to Israel (Acts 3:19-21). But when Paul, in bondage in Rome, preached the kingdom of God (Acts 28:31) he would, of course, tell what had become of the offer of its establishment on earth, and explain how this was now being held in abeyance (Cf. Romans 11:25-27).

Above all let us observe carefully that “the ministry” which Paul had “received of the Lord Jesus,” was the proclamation of “the gospel of the grace of God” (v.24) — Stam, page 249.

While not disagreeing with what Stam says here, I don’t think he says enough. He says that the “kingdom of God” is a broad term which Paul uses in Ephesians and Colossians, then goes on to show that in Acts 1 and Acts 28 it refers specifically to the earthly kingdom of Israel. But he never explains what the broader term, as used here, means.

The KJV Commentary holds this view:

This preaching must refer to the gospel proclamation of the church which he was establishing. Again, we see that the present-day form of the kingdom is the church. This in no way denies the literal nature of the coming millennial kingdom, but clearly indicates that the church is the mediatorial form of the kingdom at the present. Otherwise, this reference would have to be looked upon as if Paul were still preaching a Jewish kingdom message (so, hyper-dispensationalist). — KJV Commentary, page 1377

While I’m glad they affirm a still-coming, literal millennial kingdom, I think this is taking a lot out of a very brief passage. If, as Stam says, the “kingdom of God” is a broad term, then it must refer to God’s general rule over humanity in all dispensations, including law, kingdom, and grace. And if that’s the case, then claiming that this verse proves the church is the kingdom today, while not being totally wrong in one sense, is somewhat overstepping the facts. I don’t agree with his “Paul … still preaching a Jewish kingdom message” statement.

Finally, Gaebelein:

And faithfully he had labored preaching both the Gospel of Grace and the Kingdom of God, not shrinking from declaring all the counsel of God and therefore he was pure from the blood of all. — Gaebelein, page 352

I must admit that there is part of me that wants to buy into this view. It’s the tidiest, for sure. Paul preached grace to the Gentiles and kingdom to the Jews and, therefore, declared all the counsel of God. Except that the verse clearly says that he preached the kingdom to the Ephesians church, which pretty much eliminates this view as a possibility.

So what is the right interpretation? First, I think we need to keep context in mind and not make it mean more than it was meant to mean. Paul isn’t explaining in detail the content of his ministry here — he’s simply stating that he served the Lord diligently. He was about to encourage the Ephesian elders to stay the course and he began by reminding them that he had done just that. As for “kingdom of God,” my best guess is that he was using it as a general term to refer to God’s rule over humanity which, in this time (and now) was grace. That doesn’t mean that the church is the kingdom. It simply means that God’s rule over humanity is now exercised by grace.

¹⁷ From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called for the elders of the church.

¹⁸ And when they had come to him, he said to them: “You know, from the first day that I came to Asia, in what manner I always lived among you,

¹⁹ serving the Lord with all humility, with many tears and trials which happened to me by the plotting of the Jews;

²⁰ how I kept back nothing that was helpful, but proclaimed it to you, and taught you publicly and from house to house,

²¹ testifying to Jews, and also to Greeks, repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

when they had come (v.18) — It was 70 miles by land from Ephesus to Miletus. The elders probably took a 12-mile boat trip and then came 25 miles by land.

serving (v.19) — as a bond-servant — a word used in Scripture only by Paul

kept back (v.20) — a term often used of a cowardly soldier holding back in battle

repentance (v.21) = turning the mind

Repentance is just the sick man’s acknowledgement of his illness. It is simply the sinner recognizing his guilt and confessing his need of deliverance. Do not confound repentance with penitence. Penitence is sorrow for sin …

Do not confound repentance with remorse. Remorse generally consists in grieving because you are found out. How many a man in prison is filled with remorse, because he got caught! Remorse is not real repentance.

Repentance is not penance. It is not trying in some way or other to make up for the wrong things of the past. Repentance is far more than that. It is judging oneself in the presence of God; turning right about face, turning to God with a sincere, earnest desire to be completely delivered from sin. And when a man takes that attitude toward God and puts his faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, he finds salvation. — Ironsides, pages 475-476.

__________

In Acts 20:24 of the apostle makes it clear that the particular ministry he had received of the Lord Jesus was “to testify the gospel of the grace of God.” This was his special ministry. But this does not mean that he would not confirm what Peter and the twelve had taught about the Messiahship of Christ. Could anyone suppose that those who persisted in denying that the crucified Jesus was the true Messiah could possibly trust Him as their personal Savior? Assuredly not! And thus it was that Paul sought first to convince the Jews everywhere that “Jesus is the Christ.”

So it is also that in the passage before us he declares that he had testified to both Jews and Greeks, “repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ” (v.21).

Now it is quite true that as repentance was the message of John the Baptist, Christ and the twelve, so grace is the message for today. But this does not mean that repentance has no place today. Repentance is not penitence; much less is it penance. it is rather a change of mind and attitude. Grace had been Paul’s special message up to this time yet repentance was a part of that message, as was also faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ. — Stam, pages 248-249

I have never personally heard anyone take issue with verse 21, but I included the quotes from Ironsides and Stam because they, and some other commentaries, indicate that some dispensationalists do. They apparently hold that, since repentance was the message of the 12 apostles to the Jews, Paul shouldn’t be preaching it because his message was one of grace. I think Stam covers it pretty well. I pretty much agree with Ironside regarding the meaning of repentance, although he takes it further and concludes that the message to both Jews and Gentiles was identical.

I think (at this point in my studies — I am willing to be convinced otherwise if further study warrants it) that, at this point, there still was a different message for the Jews. The kingdom of heaven was still being offered and would continue to be offered until Acts 28. That was the message for the Jews, and grace was the message for Gentiles. But (and I think this is important), there were many aspects of those two messages that were the same. Among these aspects were repentance toward God and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ. Whomever Paul was speaking to, the members of his audience needed to realize that they were sinners, that they could not save themselves by any attitude or effort of their own, and that they had to acknowledge their “lostness” before God. That is repentance —a change of mind from trusting that they were OK and capable of taking care of themselves to one of realizing they were sinners condemned to death before God’s righteousness.

And whoever Paul was speaking to needed to realize that the only way of salvation was to place his or her faith in the Lord Jesus Christ — for the Jew, as Messiah; for the Gentile, as Savior.

I don’t think Paul was saying here that the message to both Jew and Gentile was identical. That wasn’t the purpose of his discourse. What he was doing was making the point that he had been faithful in his ministry wherever he went, preaching the essential truths whoever he was speaking to no matter the opposition. It’s a danger to take a verse like this and separate it from its context and make it mean more than it was intended to mean. I think that’s what’s happening with both those who have dispensational issues with this passage and those who take it to mean there were no distinctions between Jews and Greeks at this time.

One further note: After Acts 28, I think the Jews were set aside and their prophetic, kingdom program was postponed (until after the rapture) and, from that point and still today, there is no Jew or Gentile — we all stand before God equally guilty and in need of His grace.