Koinonia Bible Studies

Paul’s travels during his second journey to spread the news of the gospel of Jesus Christ covered much of the known ancient world. Over the course of his ministry, he traveled more than 10,000 miles, establishing at least 14 different churches. Paul’s journeys play a critical role in the formation and development of the early Christian church.

The Book of Acts records three separate missionary journeys of the man known as the “Apostle to the Gentiles.” Parts of the New Testament seem to hint at other events and places visited by Paul. Scholars debate that Paul may have taken a fourth, or even fifth, journey after the close of the book of Acts.

Acts follows Paul’s journeys through Syria, Turkey, Greece and several other regions that are no longer in existence. Sometimes it is difficult to tell the difference between ancient cities, provinces and regions. Occasionally several names are used to describe the same area. In other instances, the same name may describe a city and a region.

Paul took trips, but they could hardly be called “vacations.” Each journey was rough and challenging. Listen to how Paul describes the experiences:

^23-27 I’ve worked much harder, been jailed more often, beaten up more times than I can count, and at death’s door time after time. I’ve been flogged five times with the Jews’ thirty-nine lashes, beaten by Roman rods three times, pummeled with rocks once. I’ve been shipwrecked three times, and immersed in the open sea for a night and a day. In hard traveling year in and year out, I’ve had to ford rivers, fend off robbers, struggle with friends, struggle with foes. I’ve been at risk in the city, at risk in the country, endangered by desert sun and sea storm, and betrayed by those I thought were my brothers. I’ve known drudgery and hard labor, many a long and lonely night without sleep, many a missed meal, blasted by the cold, naked to the weather.

^28-29 And that’s not the half of it, when you throw in the daily pressures and anxieties of all the churches. When someone gets to the end of his rope, I feel the desperation in my bones. When someone is duped into sin, an angry fire burns in my gut (2 Corinthians 5:23-29 MESSAGE).

Paul’s second journey started with the thought to return to the cities of the first journey. “Let’s go back and visit the brothers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord as see how they are doing (Acts 15:36 NIV). Considering the troubles that Paul had endured on the first journey, Paul would have been concerned that Jewish influences came to stir trouble, that Roman officials may have stepped in and imprisoned some of the believers, or that their understanding of the Scriptures may have been confused or weak.

But before they could begin the journey, a disagreement arose between Paul and Barnabas. The Greek word that is used for “disagreement” has an interesting flavor. Most theologians see this as such a disagreement that Barnabas and Paul’s friendship was broken. Many see them as having a sharp and bitter conflict between them.

The verb form of the Greek word means “to sharpen,” and was used to describe the process of sharpening knives and other tools. The noun form – which is found here – came to mean “a sharp difference of opinion.” The sharpness did not refer to how they treated one another, as they “fought like cats and dogs.” Rather it referred to their opinions and the disagreement: they were “miles apart.”

Can you disagree with someone without being mad at them?

The culture today has difficulty understanding this concept. When we disagree strongly, it is assumed that we will no longer be friends. It is easy to read that into what happened with Paul and Barnabas because they went their separate ways. As far as we know, the two never traveled together again.

What we do know is that later in Paul’s life, he writes, “Only Luke has stayed with me. Mark can be very helpful to me, so please find him and bring him with you” (2 Timothy 4:11 CEV). Perhaps old age softened Paul’s heart, or maybe he was never as mad and upset with Mark as we read into the passage.

Mark had been with them on the first journey and something along the way caused him to return home (Acts 13:13). Most commentators assume that Mark got homesick and wanted to return home. It is difficult to imagine that Paul would be so unforgiving and petty that he would chose to part company with such a close companion as Barnabas – someone to whom Paul owes much of his Christian experience (Acts 9:27-30; Acts 11:22-26).

Could their disagreement have been something deeper, something physical or maybe even spiritual? Might Paul have been wanting to spare John Mark from enduring the pain again – since they were going back to the very same area?

Something happened before Mark left that changed things. Let’s look at the Acts 13:13 verse again where Mark leaves.

Now Paul and his companions set sail from Paphos and came to Perga in Pamphylia. And John left them and returned to Jerusalem, (Acts 13:13 ESV)

Almost 75 English translations render the Greek “Paul and his companions” or “company” or “those with Paul.” A new sentence then describes John Mark leaving the group. The Greek gives just a little different flavor to the setting.

οἱ περὶ Παῦλον – οἱ (hoy, the ones) περὶ (peree, around, peri- is the word from which we get “perimeter”) Παῦλον (Paul). The ones around Paul.

The passage contrasts those around Paul – the circle – with John who is now outside the circle. It is an image that speaks to people not being on the same page in beliefs and thus in actions. Something happened before John Mark left. Let’s read the passage before.

So, being sent out by the Holy Spirit, they went down to Seleucia, and from there they sailed to Cyprus. ⁵ When they arrived at Salamis, they proclaimed the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews. And they had John to assist them. ⁶ When they had gone through the whole island as far as Paphos, they came upon a certain magician, a Jewish false prophet named Bar-Jesus. ⁷ He was with the proconsul, Sergius Paulus, a man of intelligence, who summoned Barnabas and Saul and sought to hear the word of God. ⁸ But Elymas the magician (for that is the meaning of his name) opposed them, seeking to turn the proconsul away from the faith. ⁹ But Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him ¹⁰ and said, “You son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, full of all deceit and villainy, will you not stop making crooked the straight paths of the Lord? ¹¹ And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon you, and you will be blind and unable to see the sun for a time.” Immediately mist and darkness fell upon him, and he went about seeking people to lead him by the hand. ¹² Then the proconsul believed, when he saw what had occurred, for he was astonished at the teaching of the Lord (Acts 13:4-12 ESV).

The team was on the island of Cyprus. Their plans may have been to preach the gospel on the island and then return home. In this passage we are introduced to two men who may have changed the circumstances and the mission in the eyes of John Mark.

Mention is made of Elymas a Jewish sorcerer who was also a false prophet. The terms “Jewish” and “sorcerer” are usually not found together, as Jews were prohibited from practicing magic and such behavior. The fact that he was also a false prophet and also named “Bar-Jesus” probably also speak to his strong Judaistic teachings, a problem that plagued Paul throughout his journeys.

Perhaps John Mark had particular problems with this individual. While Mark most likely would not have leaned toward Law-keeping, there may have been something that developed in this area that made John Mark’s position differ.

Sergius Paulus is the proconsul in the area. According to Strabo, a geographer and historian, Cyprus was a senatorial province of the Roman Empire in the 1^st century AD. This meant that the entire Roman senate appointed a proconsul to rule the island each year. Other ancient records show that the capital of Cyprus was the city of Paphos, which was also its religious center.

Several inscriptions have been found connecting the name Sergius Paulus and the area. Many of the findings give the appearance that Sergius Paulus was a man of both prominence and wealth. One stone connects the man with Pisidian Antioch as his hometown.

The great Galatians scholar William Ramsay connects Perga, Mark’s hasty departure and the quick travel to Pisidian Antioch. Ramsay also connects the time with Paul’s infirmity of the flesh (Galatians 4:13-14). Ramsay concludes the infirmity was malaria. Paul had to leave the hot, mosquito infested low-lands to a higher area without delay. Nearby Antioch rests at about 3600 feet above sea level.

Did Mark also fall to the disease and have to be sent home? Was there another ailment which made him severely at risk? Could that have also been the reason Paul did not want to have Mark return to the same area on the second journey? While the answers are speculation, it opens up a wider range of possible explanations for the strong reaction by the Apostle.

Let’s look at the context for the second missionary journey taken by Paul.

Judaizers – people who taught that you must become Jewish, including circumcision, before becoming a Christian – had come down to Antioch from Jerusalem. It was summer of the year 49_AD and their teachings had been circulating for over a year. They had been chasing Paul from town to town during the first missionary journey. If this was not really required by God, this teaching would become a stumbling block to many Gentile believers.

Despite their contrary teaching, the efforts of Paul, Barnabas, Titus and others were being thwarted by the teaching of the Judaizers. Leaders of the Christian movement needed to address the issue and offer an accepted teaching. People gathered in Jerusalem (Galatians 2:1-2) to discuss the relationship between circumcision and salvation. The conference takes place in the Fall of 49_AD around the time of the Feast of Tabernacles (Acts 15:2).

The interesting thing in this passage is the term “no small dissension” (Acts 15:2). It is similar to the concept that is presented later in the chapter (Acts 15:39). What happens when there are disagreements between Christians? More importantly, what happens when Christians have different opinions on matters addressed by Scriptures? It appears to me that this very real issue of our day is addressed in the first century.

How does a Christian handle disagreements with other Christians? Do all Christians have to agree on everything? It seems that doctrine falls into one of three categories. One level of teaching touches things that are of “first importance.” These doctrines are such that to disagree with them alters the very nature of the Christian faith. The resurrection would be one of those teachings. To deny that Jesus was raised from the dead defeats the foundation of Christian belief.

The “council” held in Jerusalem to address the issue raised by Judaizers is an example. People gathered (Acts 15:6) and debated the issue (Acts 15:7). Finally a decision was made (Acts 15:13). Paul’s second missionary journey occurs to help people understand the decision.

There is a second level of doctrine that dictates fellowship. My understanding of such a doctrine alters whether we can worship together. Many of these doctrines need not be issues of fellowship, but we make them such. Take music as an example. Some Christians believe that musical instruments should not be used in the church service. Other Christians affirm teaching that allows instruments. Some may not have a preference in worship music, but others would rather gather to worship with believers who share their preference. The doctrine of communion and baptism may fall into this category.

There is a third level of teaching that seems to always rest as a “matter of opinion” and should never be used as a doctrine of division. Should a church hold a worship service on a Thursday evening? Will the Lord’s second coming be premillennial or postmillennial? The Bible does not make the answer clear, or it teaches that no one will know the exact answer.

When disagreements occur, it is vital how Christians handle the conflict. Respectful disagreement needs to occur. The ultimate answer comes from leaders and others searching the Scripture honestly and settling on an understanding what the Bible teaches. It does not require compromise, but consensus. “You know, I thought the Scripture said this, but after studying it with you, it is obvious this is what is taught.”

How does a person of Christian faith and morals function in a culture that does not understand it, nor apply the same faith and moral? Do you see similarities to our culture today? Can you understand the importance of these journeys for our own time?

How does a Christian react and respond to those who persecute them because of their faith and behavior? If the persecution becomes severe, how does one keep from abandoning the faith? As culture is confronted by the truths of Christianity, culture may be told it is wrong and that it needs to change. The result is often persecution and violence.

But notice when truth is communicated with love, the result is positive. When Christians heard what the truth from Scripture was, they rejoiced because they were encouraged (Acts 15:31). The result was peace (Acts 15:33).

“And Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, teaching and preaching the word of the Lord” (Acts 15:35). We open the doors to problems when we don’t teach the Word because we are afraid of how people will react (you have no control over that, by the way). Problems exist when we teach matters of opinion as a matter of first importance (the difficulty here is deciding which is which). Problems arise when we fail to teach truth with love. Finally, problems occur when we fail to use the Bible as the agreed-upon standard.

Understanding the context of a passage places God’s truth in a human time and place. The English word “context” comes from the Latin “contextus” which means “a joining together.” The word originally meant “to weave together” in such a way that taking one thread from the others would destroy the fabric.

How does our passage of Scripture fit into the tapestry of God’s entire message to humanity?

The Bible encourages us to be together.

The author of the book of Hebrews – possibly the Apostle Paul – challenges Christians toward “not forsaking our own assembling together” (Hebrews 10:25 NASB). Holman Standard translates the phrase, “not staying away from our worship meetings” (Hebrews 10:25 HCSB). The Contemporary English Version proposes, “Some people have gotten out of the habit of meeting for worship” (Hebrews 10:25 CEV).

Being Together Means More than Being in the Building at the Same Time

At face value, preachers and teachers today have used the verse to challenge us to be in church, to attend worship and to participate in Sunday school. And Wednesday prayer meeting. And Sunday evening church. And now small groups. And now online community.

Making these applications are not wrong – but are relatively shallow. You have heard preachers and teachers admonishing you to examine the context of a verse of Scripture. Often we teach context means what comes before and what comes after the passage. It does, but context means so much more. For a more thorough understanding of context, see our helpful article on context.

Mediterranean Context

This section of our studies in called “Mediterranean Moments” to help us understand that context is a picture as big as the Mediterranean Sea and the culture it contains. Context included the historical setting – what was going on in the communities around the Mediterranean at the time the book was written. Context also includes the literary background of the passage – is the passage a record of history, is it poetry (remember Hebrew poetry is different than American poetry), or is it anyone of a number of other literary conventions?

A third area of context is theology. Many passages of Scripture teach us about God and about what is involved in having a relationship with Him. Doctrine falls into a category all itself. It is a jargon – technical talk that is only used and understood by a select group of people. There is nothing wrong with jargon. Most of us have those kind of words in our vocabulary that not everyone else understands. Medical professionals have a jargon. Attorneys have a jargon. There is even a jargon for the members of your family. Christians have a jargon.

Context and You

Finally, the context of the Bible involves you. The meaning of a passage of Scripture is critically tied to how it applies to you today. The context of the Bible involves the culture of the time in which it was written, but it involves the culture today because it speaks to the times today. Paul was unaware of the COVID pandemic when he penned the book of Philippians. If Jesus is the same “yesterday, today and forever” (Hebrews 13:8), then the context must include how it applies to the COVID crisis.

The danger in my writing those words and you reading them is that it seems very subjective. The meaning of the Bible cannot be totally dependent upon what it means to you. The absolute nature of an unchanging God prohibits that. But the context of a passage of the Bible must blend the other three things. To focus only on one of these four critical areas of context and ignore the others does the Bible a disservice.

Fellowship and Together

The historical context of fellowship and assembling together does not include “going to church.” Church buildings were non-existent for the first century church. The first Christian church building recorded was a house church founded sometime between 233 and 256. But it wasn’t until the 11^th through the 14^th centuries when Western Europe saw a mass emphasis toward church construction.

How did Paul stay connected with all the churches he started throughout the Mediterranean world? Can we learn lessons from Paul’s methods that would help us in today’s culture?

Understanding the context in which a passage from the Bible is written is important because it helps prevent wrong interpretations, which would result in bad theology and confusion. The [popup_anything id=”3076″] provides the complete meaning of Scripture as it is studied. The English word “context” was developed in the early 1400’s meaning a composition, a chronicle, the entire text of a writing. It comes from the Latin contextus which means “a joining together” The word was originally used “to weave together” in such a way that taking one thread from the others would destroy the fabric.

How does Nehemiah 8:2-8 fit into the tapestry of God’s entire message to humanity?

The government dictates our behavior by passing laws that support equality amidst diversity. But a law of the government cannot change the heart. Taking God out of society has emasculated the power from the law.

Are there practical things we can do to make sure we can keep our word? Does it help to know that all of God’s promises are “Yes” in Christ? Here are some important lessons to be found in the continuing story of Nehemiah.

The last verse of chapter nine prompts us to summarize the last lesson and to look forward to the events and activities of this lesson.

“Because of all this . . .”

Consider for a moment the scene painted in the earlier verses of chapter nine. The phrase “all the people gathered as one man” into the square is identical to Ezra 3:1, which also refers to an assembly on the first day of the seventh month. The object of the meeting in Ezra was to restore the altar of burnt offerings and sacrificial worship. This was key to the entire structure of Jewish worship, from daily activities to annual festivals.

The men and women who were gathered were people “who could understand what they heard” when the Torah was read. Ezra read the Law while standing on a raised platform that had been constructed for the event. Pomp and circumstance were a part of the ceremony. It is quite possible that the books read were not only the Torah, but also the Prophets and the other Writings. This would be practically the entire Old Testament which we know today. The reading lasted from early morning until midday.

The people bowed their heads as the Scripture was read and placed their faces on the ground. We are even told that the people wept as they heard the words of the Law. Because of this, the people responded.

We have separated ourselves from the people of the land

Verse 28 is telling. The rest of the people signed the contract as well. This was not just the decisions of the religious leaders or the government. The rest of the people – along with their wives, sons, daughters and all who have knowledge and understanding – joined in the contract.

The people of faith were called to be different than the people of the world. Peter tells us that “you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His own possession, that you may proclaim the excellence of Him who called you out of darkness and into His marvelous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are God’s people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy” (1 Peter 2:9-10 ESV).

The people agreed they would be different than the world. They would keep themselves separate. They would not marry with those outside their faith. They would not dabble with the religious philosophies of others. In the world, but not of it. The idea is consistent with biblical teaching, even if it isn’t a direct quote.

The people … enter an oath

The declaration is made by the entire company of people, filling in the blanks that are implied in Nehemiah 9:38. Everyone, from the oldest down to the youngest who could understand, was standing before God and sharing in this oath. They reinforced the oath with a curse, in essence calling down disaster if they should go back on their word.

They agreed …

To Walk

We often speak of the life of faith as “walking with God.” Henry Ford once said, “Those who walk with God always reach their destination.” Leonard Ravenhill claimed, “Smart men walked on the moon, daring men walked on the ocean floor, but wise men walk with God.”

The people of faith signed a covenant to live their lives with God. This certainly affirmed the teachings of both the Old Testament (Micah 6:8, Deuteronomy 8:6, 2 Chronicles 7:17-18, Genesis 5:21-24, Genesis 6:8-9) and the New Testament (John 8:12, Romans 13:13, Ephesians 2:10, 1 John 2:6, 1 John 1:6-7, Galatians 5:16).

William Ritter once said, I recently found 382 biblical references to various forms of the word “walk.” There are a multitude of references that suggest how we are supposed to walk as Christians: walk in love; walk in wisdom; walk in the light; walk in the path; walk in the Spirit; walk in the law of the Lord; walk in the way of the Lord; walk in the fear of the Lord; walk in the peace of the Lord; walk honestly, forthrightly, courageously, worthily and humbly.

To Observe …

They were agreeing to observe and do all the commandments of the Lord. Don’t you love how Nehemiah writes the phrase “the commandments of the Lord our Lord?” We see things all the time, but there are times when we pay attention and times that we don’t.

“I am sorry officer. I didn’t see the speed limit sign.” We may have “seen” it – we just didn’t pay attention to what the limit was, or we understood what it was and we just didn’t heed the command.

And Do

So the people pledged to observe – to always know what the Lord wanted accomplished. Then they pledged to obey, to actually do what the Law had said. Verse 35 uses the word translated “obligate.” We take on ourselves the obligation (Nehemiah 10:32). We obligate ourselves (Nehemiah 10:35). The word implies being compelled by a legal or moral duty, but it is actually a term used in biology. It describes something that is restricted to a particular function because of its purpose and design. The lungs are made to breathe air, not water. We are obligated to be faithful and obedient to God by design.

It is interesting that a part of the obligation they accepted was to take care of the Lord’s work in the Temple, for the service of the house and for the care of the people who officiated.

I raise my Ebenezer. I will obey. I promise.

Click on this image to return to the main page for Lesson Four: Promises to Obey