40<\/strong>. being recommended<\/em> ] The more usual word in this sense in modern English is commended<\/strong>. ( R. V.<\/em>)<\/p>\n unto the grace of God<\/em> ] The best MSS. have “grace of the Lord.”<\/p>\n Being recommended – <\/B>Being commended by prayer to God. See notes on Act 14:26<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n Verse 40<\/span>. Being recommended – unto the grace of God.<\/B><\/I>] Much stress has been laid upon this, to show that Barnabas was in the wrong<\/I>, and Paul in the right<\/I>, because “the brethren recommended Paul and Silas to the grace of God; but they did not recommend Barnabas and John Mark: this proves that the Church condemned the conduct of Barnabas, but approved that of Paul.” Now, there is no proof that the Church did not recommend Barnabas to the grace of God, as well as Paul; but, as St. Luke had for the present dropped the story of Barnabas, and was now going on with that of Paul and Silas, he begins it at this point, viz. his being recommended by the brethren to the grace of God; and then goes on to tell of his progress in Syria, Derbe, Lystra, c., &c. See the next chapter. And with this verse should the following chapter begin and this is the division followed by the most correct copies of the Greek text.<\/P> <\/p>\n The favour of God, as Act 14:26<\/span>, which the wisest and holiest men stand in need of in all their undertakings; as also his gracious conduct and assistance. <\/P> <\/p>\n 40. and departed, being recommended. . . to the grace of God<\/B>(No doubt by some solemn service; seeAc 13:3<\/span>), as in Ac14:26<\/span>. It does not follow from the historian’s silence thatBarnabas was not so recommended, too; for this is the last mention ofBarnabas in the history, whose sole object now is to relate theproceedings of Paul. Nor does it seem quite fair (with DEWETTE, MEYER,HOWSON, ALFORD,HACKET, WEBSTERand WILKINSON, &c.) toconclude from this that the Church at Antioch took that marked way ofshowing their sympathy with Paul in opposition to Barnabas.<\/P><\/p>\n And Paul chose Silas<\/strong>,…. To be his companion and assistant; this being the design of the Holy Ghost in influencing his, mind to stay longer at Antioch, after he, with Judas, was dismissed by the church to go to Jerusalem, Ac 15:33<\/span><\/p>\n and departed<\/strong>; that is, from Antioch:<\/p>\n being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God<\/strong>;<\/p>\n [See comments on Ac 13:26]<\/span>. The apostle having such a recommendation by the brethren of the church at Antioch, when he departed from them, and nothing of this kind being said with respect to Barnabas, have induced some to think, that the church took the part of the apostle against Barnabas, in the dispute between them; since the one went away saluted by them, and the other not.<\/p>\n Chose <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>). First aorist middle (indirect) participle of <\/SPAN><\/span>, choosing for himself, as the successor of Barnabas, not of Mark who had no place in Paul’s plans at this time.<\/P> Commended <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>). First aorist passive of <\/SPAN><\/span>, the same verb employed about Paul and Barnabas (14:26<\/span>) on their return from the first tour. It is clear now that the sympathy of the church at Antioch is with Paul rather than with Barnabas in the cleavage that has come. The church probably recalled how in the pinch Barnabas flickered and went to the side of Peter and that it was Paul who for the moment stood Paulus contra mundum<\/I> for Gentile liberty in Christ against the threat of the Judaizers from Jerusalem. Silas had influence in the church in Jerusalem (verse 22<\/span>) and was apparently a Roman citizen (16:37<\/span>) also. He is the Silas or Silvanus of the epistles (1Thess 1:1<\/span>; 2Thess 1:1<\/span>; 2Cor 1:19<\/span>; 1Pet 5:12<\/span>). It is remarkable that Peter mentions both Mark and Silas as with him (1Pe 5:12f.<\/span>) at the same time. <\/P> <\/p>\n Recommended. Which was not the case with Barnabas, leading to the inference that the church at Antioch took Paul ‘s side in the dispute. <\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “And Paul chose Silas, and departed,”<\/strong> (Paulos de epileksamenos Silan ekselthen) “Then Paul, having chosen Silas, went forth,” of his own accord, on a mission itinerary as he himself sought to follow the call of his Lord; He went forth with Silas a missionary of the Antioch church and Jerusalem church, in the place formerly filled by Barnabas.<\/p>\n 2) “Being recommended by the brethren,”<\/strong> (paradotheis te chariti tou kuriou) “Being given or commended by the brethren,” the brethren of the Antioch church. In commending Paul as he went forth with Silas from the Antioch church, Barnabas’ attitude was explicitly and tacitly disapproved by the same church brethren, as an example of what Paul later admonished as a public rebuke before all, 1Ti 5:20<\/span>.<\/p>\n 3) “Unto the grace of God.”<\/strong> (te chariti tou kuriou) “To the grace of the Lord.” Prayers, good will, and support, seem to have been pledged to Paul and Silas by these Antioch church brethren, as Paul set forth on his second major mission journey, Gal 6:6<\/span>; Act 13:3<\/span>; Act 14:26<\/span>.<\/p>\n (40) Paul chose Silas.<\/strong>It is clear from this, even if we reject Act. 15:34<\/span> as an interpolation, that Silas had remained when the other delegates from the Church of Jerusalem went back. This in itself was a proof of his interest in the mission-work among the Gentiles, and no one, perhaps, could be found so well fitted to fill the place of Barnabas. He too had the gift of prophetic utterance, and, as we have seen (Note on Act. 15:22<\/span>), was probably able to speak as one who had followed the Lord Jesus, and could bear witness of the Resurrection.<\/p>\n Being recommended by the brethren.<\/strong>See Note on Act. 14:26<\/span>. This obviously implied a full gathering of the Church and a special service of prayer on the departure of the two Apostles. Silas, as thus sent forth by the Church, might now claim that title no less than Barnabas.<\/p>\n 40<\/strong>. <\/strong> Chose Silas<\/strong> Deliberately remained; made a most wise choice; received the benediction of the illustrious Church of Antioch, and started forth on his second and greater mission, the most important Christian missionary enterprise ever undertaken and accomplished.<\/p>\n Act 15:40<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>Being recommended by the brethren<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> St. Luke designing here to drop the history of Barnabas, and pursue that of St. Paul alone, says nothing of the former’s being recommended to the grace of God; <\/em>but there can be no doubt that as the church of Antioch wished them both success, so they recommended both of them, together with their assistants, unto God for his blessing, before they set out upon so great an undertaking. <\/p>\n Act 15:40-41<\/span> . ] after he had chosen Silas<\/em> as his apostolic companion. It is accordingly to be assumed that Silas (Act 15:27<\/span> ), after he had returned to Jerusalem (Act 15:33<\/span> ), and had along with Judas given an account of the result of their mission, had in the meantime returned to Antioch. But the interpolation, Act 15:34<\/span> (see the critical remarks), is incorrect, as the return of Silas to Jerusalem was a necessary exigency of the commission which he had received. , in the sense sibi eligere<\/em> , only here in the N.T.; often in Greek writers, the LXX., and Apocr.<\/p>\n . . . ] committed to the grace of Christ<\/em> (see the critical remarks). Comp. Act 15:11<\/span> . Not different in substance from Act 14:26<\/span> , but here expressed according to a more specifically Christian form. Moreover, the notice, compared with Act 15:39<\/span> , leads us to infer, with great probability, that the church of Antioch in the dispute before us was on the side of Paul.<\/p>\n . . .] as Barnabas (Act 15:39<\/span> ), so Paul also betook himself to his native country;<\/em> from their native countries the two began their new, and henceforth for ever separated, missionary labours. Barnabas<\/em> is unjustly reproached (by Baumgarten) with repairing to his own country, instead of to the wide fields of heathenism; in point of fact, we know not the further<\/em> course which he adopted for his labours.<\/p>\n XXIII<\/p>\n<\/p>\n PAUL’S SECOND MISSIONARY TOUR,<\/p>\n OR THE GOSPEL CARRIED INTO EUROPE<\/p>\n Act 15:40-16:40<\/span><\/strong> .<\/p>\n <\/strong> The second missionary tour of Paul includes all of that part of Act 15:40-18:22<\/span> . Let us trace on the map this entire tour. Starting at Antioch they passed through a part of Syria, Cilicia (following the line on the map), then to Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, Pisidia, and then to the Galatian churches proper, Pessinus, Ancyra, and Tavium, then over against Mysia, where an attempt was made to go into Bithynia and into Mysia, but the Spirit forbade, and they came on down to Troas, across from Troas, having passed Mysia to the seaport to Philippi, then from Philippi they went to Thessalonica and to Berea. There Paul leaves his company, part of which comes to Athens by sea; from Athens he goes to Corinth, and from Corinth he sails to Ephesus, from Ephesus he returns to Caesarea, to Jerusalem, and then to Antioch again. That outlines the tour.<\/p>\n Luke’s account of this tour is found in Act 15:40-18:22<\/span> . There are many parallel accounts in Paul’s letters, which will by the tour was about three and a half years, about A.D. 51-54. The great general event of the tour is the carrying of the gospel into Europe. The preceding events, though of great moment and covering much time, are briefly sketched that the author may hasten to his chief theme. We are dependent on Paul’s letters for a knowledge of those details, otherwise we could not construct a connected narrative, and even these do not supply details for much of the tour.<\/p>\n A striking characteristic of this tour is the addition to Paul’s party from time to time of famous fellow workers, each of whom will be noticed in proper connection. Equally striking is the fact, developed in this tour, and everywhere manifest in the next tour, that the questions decided at Jerusalem and Antioch, while authoritatively settled, were not practically settled. It was a bitter and desperate fight throughout Paul’s life, and in some form had persisted through all Christian history, and is a living issue today of very great magnitude.<\/p>\n In the study of this tour, we must also decide in some way or other, and as well as may be, certain historical questions involving no little textual critics, relative to the work in Galatia. The decision depends upon the weight of probabilities, and leaves room for honest differences of judgment. We cannot hope to consider all the matters of this tour in one chapter. This would be to leave the reader without a clear understanding of some of the most important matters in the Bible. We must take time for study sufficiently thorough to enable one to teach a Sunday school class at least in this part of the New Testament.<\/p>\n This tour originated in a suggestion of Paul to revisit the brethren in all the cities evangelized on the first tour to see how they fared (Act 15:36<\/span> ). We have already noted (Act 14:21-23<\/span> ) a return visit to all the churches established then, to confirm them; to exhort them to continue in the faith, to warn them to expect tribulation, and to provide them with a local ministry. This he did not consider sufficient. They were babes in Christ, without experience or training enough to safely care for themselves. And the lesson has already been emphasized that convert culture was stressed by Paul as an essential and important part of missionary work. He did not consider missions to be like marking and branding cattle, and then turning them out to scatter over a fenceless range. They needed to be horded, fed, and rounded up enough to know where home was. It was economy to strengthen weak churches.<\/p>\n All mission work, in order to become permanent and self-sustaining, calls for general evangelists, not free lances given to sentimental slush, but men of character, mighty in doctrine, and sound in church polity.<\/p>\n Moreover, Paul was eager to carry to these churches the decision of the Jerusalem conference; to hedge against similar trouble on his beloved mission field. It was this care for all the new churches established that constituted the bulk and weight of Paul’s crushing burden. Two fires burned unquenchable in his soul: “I must go forward to the regions beyond; I must go back and see how they fare behind me.”<\/p>\n The reader will observe that Paul, when he started on this tour, had no thought of Europe. But Luke, writing afterward, barely glances at this confirming work, and rushes the narrative into Europe. How little do any of us know when we start out where we will land! Be like Paul; let the Spirit guide. Hold your life loosely in his hands.<\/p>\n What was accomplished in Syria and Cilicia is given in Act 15:40-41<\/span> . In two verses Luke disposes of the work in Syria and Cilicia, “confirming the churches.” These churches were probably planted by Paul in his early ministry (Act 9:30<\/span> ; Act 26:20<\/span> ; Act 11:26<\/span> ). What was accomplished in the churches of Lycaonia and Phrygia, viz.: Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch, is given in Act 16:1-5<\/span> . In two verses (Act 16:4-5<\/span> ) Luke tells us that as they went through these cities, they delivered to them, to be observed by them, the decision of the Jerusalem Conference, and so the churches were established in the faith, and increased daily. But one far-reaching event at Lystra he notes more particularly Paul’s finding of Timothy, the good report of him by two churches, his circumcision by Paul, and his accession to the mission band. Both Titus and Timothy were fruits of the first missionary tour. From Paul’s letters we gather very important additional matter about this great evangelist, who was nearer to Paul’s heart than any other co-laborer of his life. Let us sum up the general facts about him: His father was a Greek; his mother was a Jewess (Act 16:1<\/span> ). His mother’s name was Eunice and his grandmother’s name was Lois. They were devout people, and had carefully instructed the child in the Holy Scriptures (2Ti 3:15<\/span> ). When Paul preached at Lystra, on the first tour, the grandmother was first converted, then the mother, then the boy (2Ti 1:5<\/span> ). Paul calls Timothy “my beloved child,” “my true child in faith” (2Ti 1:1<\/span> ; 1Ti 1:2<\/span> ). “My beloved and faithful child” (1Co 4:17<\/span> ).<\/p>\n On his return to Lystra, Paul finds Timothy very active in Christian service in his own home church (Act 16:1-2<\/span> ). Certain prophets in the church had foretold by inspiration that he would be a great preacher (1Ti 1:18<\/span> ). The churches at Lystra and Iconium, where he had labored, united in his commendation (Act 16:2<\/span> ). As Paul had long desired a companion to take the place vacated by Mark, he selected Timothy for this place, and that his ministry might not be handicapped among the Jews, he circumcised him (Act 16:3<\/span> ). And on the approval of the churches, he was ordained by a regular presbytery, Paul participating, to the office of an evangelist (2Ti 4:5<\/span> ). As the hands of the presbytery were laid upon him, the gift of the Holy Spirit came upon him. There is no New Testament evidence that he ever became a pastor, notwithstanding the postscript to 2 Timothy in the common version, or did other work than that of an evangelist, often, however, acting in this capacity as the apostolic delegate, with all the authority of such delegation, as at Ephesus (1Ti 1:3<\/span> ). He was a kingdom preacher rather than pastor of a particular church. From this ordination till Paul’s death, he was the most beloved, the most faithful, and the most efficient of all, Paul’s co-laborers. Paul’s love toward him, care for him, and appreciation of him were unbounded, and bear this testimony: “As a child serveth a father, so he served with me in the gospel” (Phi 2:22<\/span> ).<\/p>\n The modern young preacher cannot do better than to study Timothy, and Paul’s exhortations to him, to find a model of ministerial character and fidelity. An orderly summary of his further connection with Paul is as follows:<\/p>\n 1. Becoming Paul’s inseparable companion, except as directed elsewhere by Paul, he labored with his great leader in that trying period of sickness and success among the Galatians, described in Gal 4:15-20<\/span> .<\/p>\n 2. At Philippi (Phi 2:22<\/span> ; Act 16:12-40<\/span> ).<\/p>\n 3. At Thessalonica and Berea and was left at Berea (Act 17:14<\/span> ).<\/p>\n 4. Rejoins Paul at Athens, and was sent back to Thessalonica (Act 17:15<\/span> and 1Th 3:2<\/span> ).<\/p>\n 5. Rejoins Paul at Corinth (Act 17:15<\/span> ; Act 18:5<\/span> ; 1Th 3:2<\/span> ), and brings the news from Thessalonica that occasions the first letter to that church, Timothy being associated with him in sending the letter. The second letter follows.<\/p>\n 6. Timothy remains with Paul throughout the rest of this tour, and on the third tour till he was sent to Corinth during the great meeting at Ephesus (1Co 4:17<\/span> ; 1Co 16:10<\/span> ).<\/p>\n 7. From Corinth he returned to Ephesus with the news that led to the second letter to the Corinthians.<\/p>\n 8. Near the close of the Ephesian meeting, Paul sends Timothy to Macedonia (Act 19:20<\/span> ), where Paul joined him.<\/p>\n 9. At Corinth he sends salutations in Paul’s letter to the Romans (Rom 16:21<\/span> ).<\/p>\n 10. With Paul, Timothy returns from this third tour (Act 20:4<\/span> ), yet Timothy went ahead as far as Troas, and they were there together.<\/p>\n 11. From Troas, Timothy and the rest of Paul’s company go by sea to Assos (Act 20:13-14<\/span> ), and take up Paul, who had traveled thither by land from Troas.<\/p>\n 12. It is probable that Timothy did not go with Paul beyond Miletus on this return trip, as intimated in Act 20:4<\/span> , but he was with Paul in his first Roman imprisonment and joined in the letters to the Philippians, Philemon, and Colossians (Phi 1:1<\/span> ; Phi 2:10<\/span> , Phm 1:1<\/span> ; Col 1:1<\/span> ). But was arrested there, and so not associated with the letter to the Ephesians. Shortly, however, he was liberated, as mentioned in the letter to the Hebrews (Heb 13:23<\/span> ).<\/p>\n 13. In the last tour of Paul (not mentioned in Acts) Timothy was left at Ephesus (1Ti 1:3<\/span> ), while Paul went the last time into Macedonia.<\/p>\n 14. Paul was again arrested, taken to Rome and there, just before his martyrdom, wrote the second letter to Timothy (2Ti 1:2<\/span> ).<\/p>\n In considering the work in Galatia, we are bound to take up that historical question that involves some textual criticism, viz.: Where were the churches of Galatia to which Paul wrote his letters, and when did he establish those churches? Dr. Ramsay’s contention is that Paul in speaking of Galatia, simply means a Roman province, not confining it to the ethnological founders; that it covered Galatia proper, part of Pisidia, and a part of Lycaonia, and, therefore that the churches of Galatia to which he wrote the letters were the churches of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch in Pisidia, and hence the work done there, if that contention be correct, is the work that we have already discussed in the first tour.<\/p>\n That is a new contention, and a whole book of great research is devoted to sustaining that proposition, and one of the texts cited to support it is this passage in Act 16:6<\/span> . We do not get the thought from the King James Version. The Greek of that is this: “When they had gone through the Phrygian [an adjective] and Galatian country.” Dr. Ramsay says that that text proves his contention; that to call it the Galatian country some people might think it meant ethnological Galatia, that is, Galatia, according to the population; but to call it the Phrygian and Galatian country, it would mean that part of Phrygia which Galatia was made to include under the Roman Empire, and would prove that the churches of Phrygia and Galatia were the churches of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch.<\/p>\n That is a strong point, but my objection to it is that Luke does not follow, even half the time, the names according to a map of the Roman Empire. He follows one according to peoples. His Galatia is Galatia proper; hence he has his Lycaonia, and he has his Mysia, following the ethnological peoples of the places. Nearly all commentators contend that the churches of Galatia were churches in Galatia proper. Here are the three great towns: Pessinus, Ancyra, and Tavium; they belonged to Galatia proper. If those commentators were right, and I think they were, then Paul’s whole work in Galatia is summed up here by Luke in half a verse: “When they had gone throughout Phrygia and Galatia.” That is all he says about it. He doesn’t tell what is done. He doesn’t belong to the party then, but he joins the party a little later, just before they go over to Philippi. He just touched the most important points until they got to this place, where Luke joined the party. From that time on he puts the bulk of the work in Europe.<\/p>\n Galatia is the same as Gallia. When Caesar says, “Gaul is divided into three parts,” that is the same as if he had said, “All Galatia is divided into three parts.” The inhabitants of this body of country were genuine Gauls. In modern times we would call them French. They were Celts, a very different class of people from the Germans. They are a lively, cheerful, dancing, singing, mercurial people. They are the people that settled Wales, and they have these characteristics there today. They also settled Ireland, and that’s the Irishman of today lively in imagination, but not stable. They are quick to take up a thing, and just as quick to turn it loose.<\/p>\n What led Paul to preach to those people? An overwhelming sickness took possession of him, probably that acute disease of the eyes. His suffering was very great. He tells about it in his letter to these churches, and he says that they were very good to him. They received him as though he was an angel from heaven he says, “You were so compassionate with me that you would have taken out your own eyes and given them to me, so that I could have seen better.” The meeting there was attended with all those demonstrations that signified the recent meetings in Wales great enthusiasm. People came up shouting; they may have had some shakes, as in the early Methodist meetings; surely it was a regular storm meeting over there. That is the way they received him. Another fact is that some Judean people teachers came over and told these people that Paul was not an ordained apostle; that he never saw Jesus Christ in the flesh; that he was subordinate to others, and to the Jews, and there were a great many who said, “His gospel is not first-class. If you want to get the right thing, you hear James, or Peter.” And those Galatians mercurial fellows that they were went over to that other crowd. Paul hears about it, and he writes his letter, saying:<\/p>\n “O foolish Galatians, who did bewitch you, that you should turn away from that which I have preached unto you, and turn to the weak and beggarly elements of the world? I would like to ask you a question: Did you receive the Holy Spirit by works of the law, when I was among you, or did you receive it by faith, and having commenced in the Spirit, is it right now to try to consummate it in works according to the old ceremonial Mosaic law? That is incongruous. If you commence in the Spirit, you must go on in the Spirit!” He says, “These people have made merchandise of you. When I was among you, I set Christ before you, as evidently crucified, and you accepted it as if an angel from heaven had preached it. Now I stand in doubt; it looked as though you were converted people, but I am not sure of it now. If you were converted people, how could you turn back so quickly?” Gal 4<\/span> shows us what his work up there was, which Acts doesn’t mention at all. Luke just puts it in half of a verse.<\/p>\n Timothy was with him there. The letter to the Galatians is a flashlight from heaven. It contains more parts of the history of the New Testament than any other equal amount of the Word of God. That is the reason Luther hugged that book to his heart. He based his reform on the letter to the Galatians. So Paul had great success in Galatia.<\/p>\n There is a strange guidance of the Holy Spirit on this tour. The record of it is set forth in Act 16:6-8<\/span> . Physically, Paul was nearly dead. He had been very sick, almost unto death, in that Galatian meeting. Now he starts from it to come down to Proconsular Asia. The Spirit says, “No, you can’t go there this time.” He will go there next time, but he does not let him go there this time. Then when he gets up to the province of Mysia, he says that his mind inclined him to go into Bithynia. The Spirit barred the way, saying, “Not now.” And so passing from Mysia without stopping, not knowing where he will go, they come down to Troy.<\/p>\n There was a time when Greece invaded Troy and wiped it off the face of the map. See Homer and Vergil. Now Paul goes to Troy, very sick, and he sees in a dream-vision away across the Aegean Sea a colossal, gigantic figure Macedonia. It is Greece appealing to Troy; it is Europe calling to Asia for the gospel; and he sees that figure with outstretched hands and hears him say: “Come over into Macedonia and help us. We belong to the human race; we have had no gospel.” Maybe that is why the Spirit would not let him go into Bithynia and would not let him go into Asia, but brought him to the edge of the sea, across which is Macedonia.<\/p>\n It was the most stupendous event in history, apart from the crucifixion of Christ the carrying of the gospel into Europe. After the work in Asia and Africa had surely passed away, Europe took up the work until “the course of empire took its way” across the ocean and brought the gospel to America, and now America is taking it up and is carrying it into all parts of the world. This event revolutionized history.<\/p>\n There was a remarkable accession to the party at Troas. It was Luke, who was a physician. Paul calls him “the beloved physician.” Unquestionably he also was an evangelist. Paul wants him to join the party to take care of his broken down body. Luke becomes a traveling surgeon with Paul, and we know that he went with Paul over to Philippi; that he remained there till Paul comes back there to return to Asia, and that Luke went with him all the way to Rome, the physician still with him with him when arrested in Jerusalem, with him in Caesarea, and probably at Caesarea Luke wrote his Gospel. Paul was there two years with him. Luke was with him on that voyage to Rome.<\/p>\n Take your Bible and look up the word “Luke” and, gathering all together, sum it up. But the books do not follow in order of time. For instance, Romans, then 1 and 2 Corinthians; they come first in the Bible, but 1 and 2 Thessalonians come first in time, then 1 and 2 Corinthians, then Galatians, and next Romans. If you can get your books arranged right, and connect them on that plan, you will get the order. There is no difficulty in that question, except the order. Now you see from that a very important accession to the party is Luke. They cross the sea and come to Neapolis, the seaport, and then come on to Philippi.<\/p>\n The Romans, having conquered the Greek Empire, divided this country into provinces, making Philippi one of the chief cities. Achaia represented that part of Greece that is the Peloponnesus, almost an island, where Athens and Corinth are. Philippi was a city of some importance before the Romans got possession of the country, but after they had conquered it, the Romans themselves had a big fight with each other after Julius Caesar was assassinated. Augustus Caesar became emperor, but not until the downfall of the other triumvirate. Augustus Caesar associated himself with men to help him gain the empire. When Julius Caesar was assassinated, Brutus and Cassius (who were among the conspirators) raised a war in order to make Rome a republic, as it used to be, and the last fight for the republic was at this town called Philippi. After the battle was lost, Brutus and Cassius committed suicide on the field of battle, and on account of the great triumph, the Romans made that city a colony.<\/p>\n I have already described a Roman colony thus: It consists of a body of citizens of the people of Rome, who, in a body, retain their names on the muster rolls of Rome, and the city is governed just exactly like the city of Rome. That accounts for the fact here that magistrates governed the city, and they were followed by lictors, who executed the will of the magistrates, and each lictor carried a bundle of rods. When they punished, they did not bother with scourging. When you see the account of being punished with rods, that is Roman; when forty stripes save one are given, that is Jewish. Philippi was a Roman city, then, and very few Jews were there. How do we know? Because no synagogue was there. All that they had was a little prayer chapel, just outside of the city on the river bank. The King James version says, “Where prayer was wont to be made.” The Greek says, “Where was a prayer-chapel.” There were not enough people to have a synagogue, and they had to content themselves with a little prayer-chapel outside the city. This shows that very few Jews were there. It was like a little mission station, away out of the city, with about one and a half men in it, and twelve women. That explains how that, when they went to the first meeting, they found women there.<\/p>\n There were some marvelous events in connection with the work in Philippi. The first event is the first conversion in Europe. Paul went to that prayer meeting and found some women there, and commenced talking to them, and the record says that the Lord opened the heart of Lydia so that she attended to the things spoken by Paul. Lydia was a visitor from Thyatira, over in Asia. She was a fine business woman, and her business took her there. She was a Jewish proselyte. Let the preachers please notice:<\/p>\n “Whose heart the Lord opened to give heed unto the things which were spoken by Paul.”<\/p>\n That shows that our greatest need in preaching is to get attention. When a colonel gives out his first word in drilling a battalion, it is, “Attention, battalion!” We have to get good attention before we can get them to do anything. A preacher goes into a city immersed in politics, or business, or pleasure; they do not know anything about him; he gets no attention. Here comes the antecedent work of the Holy Spirit. Where does Lydia’s attention come from? The Lord opened her heart. Here we see just how it was done. Do not say that because Lydia attended to Paul that the Lord opened her heart, as so many want to construe that other scripture, saying, “All that believe are ordained to eternal life,” which reads: “And as many as were ordained to eternal life, believed” (Act 13:48<\/span> ). Take notice that God hits first every time that grace, from its incipiency to its consummation in glory, carries out the work of salvation. It does not start with us.<\/p>\n If salvation had waited for us to start it, it never would have been started. It always starts with God.<\/p>\n And Lydia was baptized. The work looked like it would stop just on the fringe of the town, in a little Jewish prayer meeting. If the devil had not been so big a fool, it would have stopped right there. But the devil had possession of a maiden who was demon-possessed, and this maiden was a fortuneteller, a sorceress, a diviner, and seeing the value of her power, no matter who did the work, they did not care about that whether God or the devil they saw that money could be made out of that maiden. They formed a syndicate and bought her, and her value to them was that the demon possessed her mind. Oh, the greed of money! That men would form a company, patronizing the work of the devil to rake in a big pile of shekels! For under the devil’s influence this maiden wanted to be associated with such men as Paul, Luke, Silas, and Timothy, and as they would go to prayer meeting, she would follow along after them. The people would see them, and she would turn to the people and say, “These men just ahead are the great power of God.” She wanted to be associated in mind with these workers. And there is not a business on the earth that will not call you a good fellow if you just stand before the people as if you were a “hail, fellow, well met.” If you wink at whiskey-selling, at gambling, at the vices, at the sabbath-breaking, they will cover you with flowers, and the newspapers will notice you, saying, “There is a broad preacher.”<\/p>\n But Paul was not willing to be associated in the public mind with the devil, and he commanded the devil to come out, and when the demon came out she was not worth a cent to them. Their capital that they had invested was all gone. When men see their capital going, no matter what kind of evil business it is invested in whenever they see that business knocked in the head by the gospel they are going to fight and not be very scrupulous. So they grabbed these preachers and took them before the magistrates. They did not say a word about casting that demon out of the maiden, but they came and made this accusation: “These men, being Jews, have greatly disturbed this Roman city, and teach customs not lawful for us to observe, being Romans. The grass will grow in Philippi if you let these men go on; the whole business of the town will be killed.” You get a city stirred up on that, and it will howl. And the magistrates had the lictors to take Paul and Silas and beat them whip them like slaves. They then put them in jail, charging the jailer to keep them safely. That night, at midnight, with no light, their feet in the stocks, their backs bruised, death coming tomorrow, they prayed. That is a time for men to pray. They can do nothing. God can do anything. They pray, and right in close connection with that prayer comes an earthquake. The infidel will tell you that it was a coincidence; faith will tell you that the earthquake was God’s answer to the prayer. That is the way he had of answering it. The prison doors were all thrown open, and that jailer, supposing all the prisoners were gone, put his sword toward his heart. He was a Roman, and had received a charge; his prisoners were gone; he would kill himself when all hope was lost: “Brutus and Cassius committed suicide right out there on the battlefield and why may not I?” and with the point of the sword on his heart comes the word of the gospel “Do thyself no harm.” Man has no right to harm himself. Other people may harm you, then you cannot help it. A man may set fire to your house while you are away, but don’t you go home and set fire to it. Some vile whisperer may put shame on the honor of your wife or sister, but don’t you do it. Never put your signature to your own dishonor. Let the world do what it will, but don’t you be the author of your own shame.<\/p>\n I took that as a text in the prohibition campaign of 1887, and preached all over Texas on it: That a man had no right to harm himself, because of his relations to other people; because he could not make it stop in himself. That jailer had a family, and if he had killed himself, that family would have waked up that night and stood barefooted in his blood. The jailer, trembling and astonished, came in and fell down before Paul and Silas. “Since I may not harm myself . . . what must I do to be saved?” And as quick as lightning comes the answer to the question, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and your family can come in at the same door, if only they believe.” “Come in and all thy house, into the ark,” said God to Noah.<\/p>\n I have thought a thousand times of that scene. At midnight, that man was lost. At midnight, he was saved. At midnight, salvation came to him, and to every member of his family. They all believed; they all rejoiced; they were all baptized. What a mighty change since they went to bed that night. Went to bed lost woke up next morning everyone in the kingdom of God. I suppose that if the devil had known what was going to happen, he never would have pestered those people, but would have let the meeting fringe just outside the city with a few Jewish women.<\/p>\n This is the only place in the Bible where the question is plainly asked: “What must I do to be saved?” And there is the answer: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.” Be saved, right there and then, and forever. I note also that this was not a Jewish persecution. There were very few Jews there, and they had no influence. It was a Roman persecution.<\/p>\n The church established here was the dearest to Paul of all the churches he established. It sent contributions to him more than once. So I say that it was really a missionary church.<\/p>\n Just here the question arises, how do you account for Paul being beaten with rods? His Roman citizenship would have saved him if he had claimed it. Sometimes he claimed it, and sometimes he did not. If he had just said, “I am a Roman citizen,” they would not have dared to beat him with those rods; but he did not claim half of his rights, and it was best for the gospel that he did not. That finishes chapter 16. From there they went to Thessalonica.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n QUESTIONS<\/strong> 1. What are the scriptures for Paul’s second missionary tour?<\/p>\n 2. Trace on the map this entire tour.<\/p>\n 3. What the time covered by this tour, what the great event of this tour, and from what source do we get the details of this tour?<\/p>\n 4. What striking characteristic of this tour?<\/p>\n 5. What equally striking fact developed in this tour and everywhere manifest in the next tour?<\/p>\n 6. In the study of this tour what historical question must we decide, and upon what does the decision depend?<\/p>\n 7. What was the object at the outset, and what real distinction between this and his former missionary tour?<\/p>\n 8. What was accomplished in Syria and Cilicia?<\/p>\n 9. What was accomplished in the churches of Lycaonia and Phrygia, viz.: Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch?<\/p>\n 10. What great accession to this party at Lystra, and what the history of this great evangelist?<\/p>\n 11. Give an orderly summary of his further connection with Paul.<\/p>\n 12. What was the work in. Galatia, what Dr. Ramsay’s contention, and what the author’s objection to it?<\/p>\n 13. Who were the Gauls, the inhabitants of Galatia; what their traits?<\/p>\n 14. What Paul’s rebuke to this people found in his letter to them?<\/p>\n 15. What can you say of this letter, and what use made of it by Martin Luther?<\/p>\n 16. Give an account of the strange guidance of the Holy Spirit on this tour.<\/p>\n 17. What is the real meaning of Paul’s “Man of Macedonia?”<\/p>\n 18. What remarkable accession to the party at Troas, and what the New Testament account of this man?<\/p>\n 19. Give a history of Philippi.<\/p>\n 20. What can you say of its government?<\/p>\n 21. How may we know that there were few Jews there?<\/p>\n 22. What are the marvelous events in connection with the work in Philippi?<\/p>\n 23. What is the infidel’s explanation of the earthquake at Philippi, and what the Christian’s explanation?<\/p>\n 24. Is a man ever justifiable in committing suicide, and why?<\/p>\n 25 What pointed question here as to the plan of salvation, and how did Paul answer it?<\/p>\n 26. Was this a Jewish persecution, and what the proof?<\/p>\n 27. What was the character of the church established here, and how was it regarded by Paul?<\/p>\n 28. How may we account for Paul being beaten with rods, since he was a Roman citizen?<\/p>\n 40 And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 40. Being recommended by the brethren<\/strong> ] Whereby it appeareth that the Church took Paul’s part, and God blessed his labours wherever he came; whereas Barnabas lies buried, as it were, and little more is henceforth recorded of him, unless it be that his temporizing with Peter, Gal 2:9<\/span> . So Lot is no more heard of after his incest,Gen 19:36<\/span>Gen 19:36<\/span> . If we commit such things we deserve but a short story. (Babington in locum.<\/em> ) <\/p>\n 40. <\/strong> <\/strong> ] He may perhaps have come down again to Antioch (see Act 15:33 ) in Peter’s company<\/em> . We find (see above on Act 15:22 ) a Silvanus in 1Pe 5:12<\/span> , the bearer of that epistle to the congregations of Asia Minor.<\/p>\n Act 15:40<\/span> . . . .: not in the place of Mark, but in the place of Barnabas, Ramsay, St. Paul<\/em> , p. 171; having chosen, i.e.<\/em> , for himself: sibi eligere<\/em> ; only in N.T. in this sense, but in classical Greek and in LXX, 1Sa 2:28<\/span> A, 2Sa 10:9<\/span> R, Sir 6:18 , Est 9:16<\/span>Est 9:16<\/span> , 1Ma 1:63 R, Act 5:17<\/span> , etc.; “elegit ut socium, non ut ministrum” (Blass). If Silas had not returned to Jerusalem, but had remained in Antioch (see above on Act 15:35<\/span> ), he had doubtless recommended himself to Paul by some special proof of fitness for dealing sympathetically with the relations of the Jewish Christians and the Gentile converts. This sympathy on the part of Silas would be the more marked and significant as he was himself almost certainly a Hebrew; otherwise we cannot account for his high position in the Jerusalem Church, Act 15:22<\/span> , although his Roman citizenship is implied in Act 16:37<\/span> ; perhaps this latter fact may account for his freedom from narrow Jewish prejudices. If we may identify, as we reasonably may, the Silas of Acts with the Silas (Silvanus) of the Epistles, 2Co 1:19<\/span> , 1Th 1:1 , 2Th 1:1<\/span> , 1Pe 5:12<\/span> , the last mention of him by St. Peter becomes very suggestive. For St. Peter’s First Epistle contains the names of the two men, Mark and Silvanus, who had originally been members of the Jerusalem Church, Act 12:12<\/span> ; Act 15:22<\/span> , and moreover the two oldest of St. Paul’s associates, whose brotherly Christian concord had been broken for the time (when Paul chose the latter in the place of Barnabas, and rejected Mark’s services altogether), but who are now both found at St. Peter’s side in Rome (assuming that Babylon is Rome), evidently at one with him and with each other; the one the bearer of a letter, the other the sender of greetings, to Pauline<\/em> Churches. If St. Paul had passed to his rest, and the leader had thus changed, the teaching was the same, as the names of Silvanus and Mark assure us, and St. Peter takes up and carries on the work of the Apostle of the Gentiles, see Dr. Swete, u. s.<\/em> , pp. 87, 88. , cf.<\/em> Luk 9:6<\/span> , Luk 9:3<\/span> John, Act 15:7<\/span> , where the word is used of going forth for missionary work. , cf.<\/em> Act 14:26<\/span> . Possibly we may infer that the Church took Paul’s view of the point at issue between himself and Barnabas, but on the other hand we cannot prove this, because the writer’s thoughts are so specially fixed upon Paul as the great and chief worker in the organisation and unification of the Church.<\/p>\n chose . . . and = having chosen. Greek. epilegomai. Only here and Joh 5:2 (called). <\/p>\n recommended. See Act 15:26. <\/p>\n God. The texts read “the Lord”. <\/p>\n 40. ] He may perhaps have come down again to Antioch (see Act 15:33) in Peters company. We find (see above on Act 15:22) a Silvanus in 1Pe 5:12, the bearer of that epistle to the congregations of Asia Minor.<\/p>\n Act 15:40. , Silas) instead of Barnabas: and soon after Timothy instead of Mark.-, being recommended) The best provision for the way; one which even an inferior can impart to a superior.<\/p>\n chose: Act 15:22, Act 15:32, Act 16:1-3 <\/p>\n being: Act 13:3, Act 14:26, Act 20:32, 1Co 15:10, 2Co 13:14, 2Ti 4:22, Tit 3:15, 2Jo 1:10, 2Jo 1:11 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Exo 31:6 – I have given Ecc 4:9 – are Act 16:3 – would Act 17:4 – Silas 2Co 11:26 – journeyings 2Co 11:28 – the care 1Th 1:1 – Silvanus<\/p>\n 0<\/p>\n Act 15:40. Silas had come with Judas from Jerusalem (verses 22, 34) and had remained. That made him available for the work with Paul on the next journey. Being recommended means they started on this journey with the good wishes of the brethren. Nothing is said on that subject about Barnabas, either for or against him. That is because the writer is continuing only with his report of Paul’s work.<\/p>\n Act 15:40. And Paul chose Silas. Silas was one of the deputies chosen to accompany Paul and Barnabas by the Jerusalem Council. He was eminently fitted for the work to which Paul appointed him. A leader in the Jerusalem Church, and one who stood high in the opinion of the apostles and elders of the mother Church, he was able, from his own personal knowledge, to bear his testimony to the perfect accord which reigned between Paul and the older apostles.<\/p>\n Being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God. The feeling of the majority of the Antioch Christians in the matter of the dispute between Paul and Barnabas was evidently with the former; for, when Paul had selected his companion, and was ready to start on his great work, he was especially commended by the brethren to the grace of God, thus receiving a solemn official sanction to his mission.<\/p>\n See notes on verse 36<\/p>\n Verse 40 <\/p>\n Silas; one of those who had been sent from Jerusalem with the letter. (Acts 15:27.)<\/p>\n Paul and Silas departed from Antioch with the church’s blessing. This time they travelled by land north through Syria and Cilicia where Paul had been born and had previously labored. They strengthened the young churches in those Roman provinces. [Note: See the map of Paul’s second missionary journey in Longenecker, p. 249, or in Toussaint, "Acts," p. 397.] <\/span><\/p>\n And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God. 40. being recommended ] The more usual word in this sense in modern English is commended. ( R. V.) unto the grace of God ] The best MSS. have “grace of the Lord.” Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 15:40”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-27441","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27441","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=27441"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27441\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=27441"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=27441"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=27441"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"