An Atheist Explores the Bible Part 212: Paul makes trouble on a grand scale (Acts 21-25)

Acts 21-25
Paul makes trouble on a grand scale.

Welcome to another instalment of An Atheist Explores Sacred Texts (Bible version).

In this series I work my way chapter-by-chapter through the King James Bible, commenting on it from the point of view of the text as literature and mythology.

For more detail, see the introductory post http://bit.ly/2F8f9JT

For the online KJV I use, see here http://bit.ly/2m0zVUP

And now:

Acts 21

“Then Paul answered, What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart? for I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.”

My word but this chapter is badly written. It reads like one of those child’s stories that runs “and then we had breakfast and it was cornflakes and then we went to school and went on the trip and the man said that it was a dinosaur…”. Run-on sentences, unattached pronouns, all over the shop.

The disciples go on a tour of the Mediterranean, calling in at Cos (I guess that’s what “Coos” is), Rhodes, Cyprus and Tyre. On the way they are met with other followers with wives and families, and there is the tantalizing mention of Philip the disciple’s four virgin daughters “who did prophesy”. Prophesy what, exactly, we aren’t told, and I want to know more!

Following this, another prophet tells Paul that if he goes to Jerusalem he will be bound, but Paul decides to go anyway. This really feels like Paul trying to emulate Jesus and do the same kind of noble (stupid?) self-sacrifice thing. And why the four virgin daughters didn’t prophesy this, I don’t know.

Anyway, eventually after more wanderings, Paul and co. go to Jerusalem. There then follows some debate about what rules the Gentile converts need to follow (no circumcision required, just avoid idols, blood, “strangled” and fornication. I think the middle two refer to particular methods of animal slaughter). After this, Paul goes to the temple where the Jewish traditionalists stir up a mob against him (see, it really is the same story elements again). This time, however, the Romans show up, disperse the mob and arrest Paul, taking him to be questioned. They ask him “Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers?”. Paul says no, but I’m intrigued. Who is this mystery Egyptian revolutionary? Some kind of Sicarii?

The chapter ends with an implied ellipsis. Paul speaks to the Romans, saying …. Tune in next time to hear what he says!

Acts 22

“And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.”

Paul recounts the story of his conversion on the road to Damascus, which we’ve already heard and there’s little new here, except this time there is a bright light, which everyone sees, and the voice of Jesus, which only Saul hears, and it is the bright light that blinds him. It’s odd, looking at this, that of all the converts and disciples that occur in this chapter that only Saul gets a personal visit from Jesus – my guess would be that the scriptural explanation is that Paul is the one to spread the gospels to the Gentiles and so needs the special treatment.

Anyway, the story doesn’t seem to impress the crowd who, for some reason, take their clothes off and kick dust in the air. The Romans decide to have Paul scourged to get the truth from him, but stop when he tells them that he is a Roman citizen.

Acts 23

“But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.”

Paul really stirs up a hornet’s nest. He gets punched by the high priest Ananias, and then stirs up division between the Pharisees and the Saducees, whom I guess to be different sects within the Jewish religion of the time. Interesting here is that Paul identifies as a Pharisee, who believe in resurrection of spirit, whereas the Saducees do not. And yet in the gospels it is the Pharisees who are the implacable enemies of Jesus.

The Romans take Paul away to prevent further trouble, and meanwhile forty Jewish zealots swear an oath not to eat or drink until Paul is dead. Paul’s nephew hears of this and passes on the information to Paul and his Roman captors. Now, with an oath like that you’d just need to stay out of the way for a week and the problem would sort itself out when your oppressors died of dehydration. However, the Roman captain, whom we learn here is Claudius Lysias, writes to the governer Felix of Caesearea and sends Paul out in secret with an escort of 200 solders, 70 horsemen and another 200 spearmen (it’s not clear if these are the first 200 soldiers or another 200). That’s a big investment for a man preaching a new and still volatile yet obscure Jewish cult. It’s all quite exciting in a way.

Acts 24

“For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes”

Paul is called before Governer Felix, and a man called Tertullus speaks against him, saying that Paul is a rabble-rouser, of the rebellious Nazarene sect and that he spoke blasphemy and gathered a crowd in the temple.

Paul says “I ain’t done nuffink”, which is a bit of a lie since we are told in previous chapters that a large crowd comes to hear him speak. He also says that “But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets”, in other words as far as Paul is concerned, everything in the Old Testament still stands. Paul says that his only point of disagreement with Tertullus is in the matter of resurrection, of which “there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust”. Hm. Seems to me at this point that if the unjust get resurrected anyway, why bother being just? I thought this only happened through accepting Jesus as the way to God? Presumably at some point later Paul will elaborate on this.

Felix lets Paul go, under a kind of house arrest, and Felix and his Jewish wife Drusilla listen to Paul’s teachings. The chapter suddenly ends with a visit from a Porcius Festus, and Felix has Paul bound again because he’s suddenly afraid of what it looks like to the Jews. Who is Porcius Festus (apart from sounding like joke Latin for a festive pig)?

Acts 25

“While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.”

Who Festus is, is still not fully explained, but evidently he’s some important factotum of the Roman Emperor, since King Agrippa and Queen Berenice come to pay him homage. There is otherwise more of the same, with the Jews accusing Paul of blasphemy and the Romans finding no fault in Paul’s responses. The matter is referred to a higher authority, Caesar himself, who is named here as Augustus; therefore these events must have happened before AD14 whilst Augustus was still alive. Uh-oh. Paul had better hope that he gets heard before the paranoid and vengeful Tiberius become emperor…(and, wait, wasn’t there mention of Emperor Claudius before? That’s two emperors down the line).