Each one of us reads the bible with our own presuppositions. We can't help it. If you've been around church for very long, you will have to sift through your own ideas to get to the purity of the text. Today is one of the difficult days for me. Everything in me wants to believe that Paul was so committed to the calling God had placed on his life that he was willing to go through beatings and imprisonment to see it accomplished, and I think he was. But there is another part of me that struggles with the text I read today. In verse 4, Luke tells us "Their (the Tyrenian believers) message to Paul, from insight given by the Spirit, was "Don't go to Jerusalem." In verse 10-12, we are told that a prophet from Judea named Abagus told Paul, "This is what the Holy Spirit says: The Jews in Jerusalem are going to tie up the man who owns this belt just like this and hand him over to Godless believers." When those traveling with Paul heard this, they begged him to stay, but he wouldn't budge.
Now, some people will say that the Paul probably didn't trust the Tyrenian believers to really hear from the Holy Spirit and that Abagus wasn't telling him not to go, but simply warning him of the dangers ahead. Others would say that the Tyrenian believers were not saying to abort the mission, but that through the Spirit of unity with Paul, they too were in essence warning Paul about the dangers. Still others would say that Paul disobeyed the Spirit of God in this instance.
What do you think? What have you been told? Is there a difference?
There is a third instance that pushes me toward my conclusion of disobedience. When Paul gets to Jerusalem, he isn't completely honest. He cuts corners here...at the urging of the church leaders, too! He sneaks into the group of men who have taken the vow of ritual purification. When he pays their expenses, then everyone concludes that he is one of them and is just as scrupulous in his reverence for the laws of Moses. But he is not! Maybe it's just me but it seems like they are manipulating the circumstances to deceive the zealots so they won't attack Paul.
So here is the deal. Paul was not Jesus - he sinned before meeting Christ and he sinned after meeting Christ. This chapter is important to me because it warns me of a great danger I have to avoid as a church leader. I cannot be so committed to my vision that I miss the Master's voice. When I am, I miss the Spirit, I ignore my friends and it leads me to do things I shouldn't do. This is good for me because I also see that God is big enough to still work His plan, in spite of my disobedience. I may miss the Spirit's prompting, I may disregard my friends and I may do stupid things, but God still has a plan that is bigger than my mistakes. He will continue to build Himself in me and His plan in us. I have to be sensitive to this and keep my eyes and ears open as I seek Father. I cannot assume that His directions won't change over the course of my life. If they do, I want to hold my vision so lightly that I can accept His change without too much questioning.
I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this one. You are always free to disagree with my conclusions. My feet aren't in cement, remember?
As I read this (especially 17-26), I didn't get the idea that he was cutting corners or being dishonest. I got the idea that Paul submitted to the request of the leaders of the church in Jerusalem to show that he was not doing what was being falsely said of him: namely that he was teaching converted Jews to disregard the Law. From other scripture references we learn that Paul follows the Law, so he can be "all things to all men", keeping the lines of communication open to those of the Jewish faith, even to the point of circumcising Timothy. I see the picture of a man willing to go the 2nd mile here, so as to keep the lines of communicatino open, not a sneak.
ReplyDeleteI hope I am not quibbling about word choice and semantics here, but I read your words, "I cannot be so committed to my vision that I miss the Master's voice. When I am, I miss the Spirit, I ignore my friends and it leads me to do things I shouldn't do.", and the question arises for me: is it your vision, or the vision that God has given you? And if it is the vision that He has given you, then how can you miss His voice by holding to it?
The question that came to me in this passage was: Is God using others, through prompting by the the Spirit, to test Paul's resolve to hold to the vision/course of action that He had given him? My own experience in how I came to League City prompts me to view it this way.
I hear you Pete, but my sticking point is verse 25. "In asking you to do this, we're not going back on our agreement regarding non-Jews who have become believers..." To me it sounds like they felt the need to clarify their request, thus making the whole request seem a little fishy. This was Paul's loudest message and he seems to compromise for these believing Jews. It doesn't seem like he would have done that a few chapters back. It's like knowing you're going to a fight if you go to the alley, then getting to the alley and pretending to be one of the enemies to get out of the fight. It just doesn't sit well with me.
ReplyDeleteAs for the testing of Paul's resolve, that is what I've heard before, but if God is going to use the "thus saith the Holy Spirit" card to test us, that just seems out of character. If it were just his friends urging him down another path, that's one thing. But when the name of the Holy Spirit is invoked, that brings it to another level for me.
When I refer to my vision, that would be my interpretation of the plan God has for me - as a man and as a leader. God is the same yesterday, today and forever, but his plan for me may change. My interpretation of the plan has to be flexible enough to change when He changes the plan, right? The goal for me is to stay within earshot of His voice, in case His plan takes a turn that I wasn't aware of 2 years ago.
I still like what you are saying too. It wouldn't shock me too much if God were to say, "Go with Pete on this one."