Squeezing Paul

  

   I was reading in the book of Acts this week and came upon something that fascinated me.  The scene is approximately 17 to 18 years after the resurrection.  Saul (soon to be Paul), who had apparently decided that having his membership at the Jerusalem church was not for the best, has been at a church in the city of Antioch.  The time is right for the Holy Spirit to send another team on a missionary journey and Saul is paired up with the great hearted Barnabas.  Off they go and spend a lot of time traveling from one end of Cyprus to the other with a minimum of conflict. Then, after sailing to the mainland, they work their way back toward home.

   When the two men arrive in Antioch of Pisidia (not their hometown of Antioch in Syria) the writer of Acts shows us what developed as their missionary method from this point on in their journey.  When invited to give a word of encouragement, Saul elaborates on the truth of the gospel that is based firmly on the resurrection of Jesus, the Messiah, and son of David (Acts 13:16-41). In so doing, he repudiates his own heritage and Pharisaical preference as a son of Saul the first king of Israel.  In doing this, he casts off the burden of using the epistle of the Hebrews that was developed by the early church to be used under these same circumstances at synagogues in Judea. 

   The thing that caught my eye in Paul’s word of encouragement was that he uses the name “David” four times.  I read through the entire book of Hebrews to see how often “David” is used: two times. It is easy to discount the first usage (Heb. 4:7) as euphemistic (something found “in David” would be a reference to finding it in the Psalms) and not indicative of the writer’s attitude toward David.

   We are left with the one instance of “David” being used in 11:32. Notice that the author of Hebrews has written largely of the patriarchs and other figures in Hebrew history. When he comes to the closing part of this section, he names some of the judges and lumps David in with them, contrary to the historical order. This contrary position is made worse by the fact that David is placed in a subordinate relationship to Samuel and not included in the prophets. He is never given due honor as King David. This position could have no function other than to soften the message and make it palatable to the party of the Pharisees (note the political power of the Pharisees within the church in Acts 15:1-5).

   My point here is not to impugn the Epistle to the Hebrews as being inferior to Paul and his method.  My point is to demonstrate that Paul was being saddled with something that would not work for him in the places where he was to minister the Word (clearly an inversion of the ancient story of David being saddled with the armor of King Saul! 1Samuel 17:38-39).  The great bible scholar, F.F. Bruce, points out that this homily of Saul/Paul in Acts 13 has the same homiletic character as the Epistle to the Hebrews (NICT revised, p.25). What Bruce misses is that Paul’s rejection of using Hebrews, even though it had been so effective throughout the synagogues in Judea and possibly Samaria, is the mandate of the Holy Spirit to launch a new mission method that shakes off the work of the Jerusalem church as the guiding force for the future. Something like what Hebrews 5 describes as moving from milk to meat.

   Paul and Barnabas have a new experience based on the new approach to the gospel. The Gentiles flock to the Synagogue and many of the Jewish people side with Paul and the gospel.  Paul and Barnabas are persecuted and, in the uproar, a new church is founded.  When they move to the next city, the same thing happens (Acts 14).  The missionary team arrives in their hometown for rest, only to be confronted with Pharisees demanding foreskins.  Everyone goes to the Jerusalem church to get a judgment on whether the Gentiles are required to be circumcised.  Paul takes Titus along (Galatians 2:1-3) and adamantly refuses to have him endure circumcision.

   When Paul finally makes his case to the apostles in Jerusalem, notice the judgment given by James in Acts 15:13-21. Quoting scripture (Amos 9:11-12), James introduces the position of David as being the highest consideration.  The movement of the Holy Spirit in foreign lands is directly linked to David, not Moses. The subordination of David in the earlier church document, the “epistle” to the Hebrews, is reversed and the attitude of the Pharisees is officially declared to be untenable. Paul and Barnabas have won the day on behalf of their approach to “foreign missions.”  Paul claims his apostolic office and moves to fulfill the promise of Jesus concerning him; “I will show him the many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.” (Acts 9:16)