This is the thirty-fourth
entry in the Bible Junkies Online Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. In this
entry the narrative turns to the origin and development of the Church at
Antioch.
For previous entries, please now go to the Complete Acts of the Apostle Commentary, where you can find links to each of the
entries updated after each new blog post.
3. Contents:
E) Preparation for
the Gentile Mission: the Conversions of Paul and Cornelius (9:1-12:25): The
Church in Antioch (11:19-30):
19 Now those who were scattered because of
the persecution that took place over Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus,
and Antioch, and they spoke the word to no one except Jews. 20 But
among them were some men of Cyprus and Cyrene who, on coming to Antioch, spoke
to the Hellenists also, proclaiming the Lord Jesus. 21 The hand
of the Lord was with them, and a great number became believers and turned to
the Lord. 22 News of this came to the ears of the church in
Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas to Antioch. 23 When he came
and saw the grace of God, he rejoiced, and he exhorted them all to remain
faithful to the Lord with steadfast devotion; 24 for he was a
good man, full of the Holy Spirit and of faith. And a great many people were
brought to the Lord. 25 Then Barnabas went to Tarsus to look
for Saul, 26 and when he had found him, he brought him to
Antioch. So it was that for an entire year they met with the church and taught
a great many people, and it was in Antioch that the disciples were first called
“Christians.”
27 At that time prophets came down from
Jerusalem to Antioch. 28 One of them named Agabus stood up and
predicted by the Spirit that there would be a severe famine over all the world;
and this took place during the reign of Claudius. 29 The
disciples determined that according to their ability, each would send relief to
the believers living in Judea; 30 this they did, sending it to
the elders by Barnabas and Saul. (NRSV)
The opening verse of this section states that the disciples of Jesus
began to spread throughout the Mediterranean world (Phoenicia, Cyprus, and
Antioch) due to “the persecution that took place over Stephen,” but that the
message of Jesus was spoken to “no one except Jews” (11:19). It is an important
point for Luke to stress that the Gentile mission just described in Acts 10 with
Peter and Cornelius is the beginning of the missionary outreach to Gentiles, by
pointing out that the scattered missionary outreach of the persecuted Christians
went only to diaspora Jews. That they would speak the message only to Jews seems
odd, though, coming as it does on the heels of the message being brought by
Peter to the Gentile Cornelius and his household, but it is also odd in the
context of this passage.
Craig Keener notes that the material in 11:19-30 most likely reflects
historical data that the Gentile mission “stemmed from many dispersed Hellenists
(8:4) rather than his {Luke’s} heroes Peter or even Paul” (Keener, Acts: An
Exegetical Commentary, Volume 2, 1831). Richard Pervo agrees that this section
restarts a source broken off previously at 8:4 – “now
those who were scattered went from place to place, proclaiming the word.” (Pervo,
Acts, 290).
The next verse tells us that those who were scattered and preaching
included “men of Cyprus and Cyrene who, on coming to Antioch, spoke to the
Hellenists also, proclaiming the Lord Jesus. The hand of the Lord was with
them, and a great number became believers and turned to the Lord” (11:20-21). Elsewhere
in Acts we learn that two leaders in the Antioch church are from Cyprus (Barnabas
- 4:36; 13:1) and from Cyrene (Lucius - 13:1), but Luke needs to have Barnabas come
from Jerusalem for his narrative, which he does in 11:22. Pervo believes that Barnabas is a founder of
the church in Antioch or the founder, but he (and Lucius) remain anonymous
in 11:20 “because the narrator chose to have Barnabas sent from Jerusalem. The
source probably assumed these persons sought gentile converts from the
beginning” (Pervo, Acts,
290-91).
That the scattered disciples sought gentile converts initially seems
most likely. In Acts 6, I argued that Hellenists were Greek-speaking Jews who
followed Jesus. But it is a strange use of Hellenists here if that is the case,
since people of Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, including Jews, would all have
been Greek speakers. How would “Hellenists,” noted by name in 11:20, be
different from any other Jews in Antioch? It is possible it means they were
native Greek speakers, as opposed to Jews from Judea, but it seems more likely
that Gentiles are intended here. T.E. Page’s note on this problem is that even
though “Hellenists” (Greek-speaking Jews) is found here the preferred word
ought to be “Hellēnas” (Greeks) (Page, Acts, 152-53). He, like Keener and Pervo, think that the
issue is Luke’s desire to have the Gentile mission start with Peter, not these
other disciples, but says, “although the case of Cornelius was first in importance (as Luke clearly indicates by the position and length of his
narrative) it is not necessary to assume that it was first in point of time” (Page, Acts, 153). This seems correct.
Richard Pervo goes farther, arguing that “few doubt that gentile
converts are in view” in this section of Acts, but the passage does not explain
the process in Antioch among the disciples of Jesus, “leaving readers to wonder
why the policy changed in Antioch and how Saul accepted this momentous shift without
objection. Nothing is said about Torah – whether male converts had to be
circumcised and all had to observe kashrut. The historical Barnabas was a, if not the,
founder of the Antiochene community, but he was not an official envoy from
Jerusalem, nor is it likely that he hit upon the idea of recruiting Paul and
made a personal journey to do so. What this account does is relieve Paul from
responsibility for innovation” (Acts, 290). Pervo might impute too much to this source,
and to the attempt to relieve Paul “from responsibility for innovation,” since
the accounts of Peter with Cornelius already have done that, but it would be
nice to know how the church in Antioch came to their decision to accept
Gentiles as disciples. This is, in fact, data that we can only glean in general
from Paul’s own letters at this early stage in the church, but he never speaks
specifically about the situation in Antioch.
Certainly, Luke sees God active in this mission since the phrase “hand
of the Lord” (11:21) is found in the Septuagint (LXX) - 1 Sam 5:3, 6, 9; 2 Sam
3:12 - as Luke Timothy Johnson notes, and it is a phrase indicating “the
presence of divine power that validates their testimony” (Johnson, Acts, 203). A more interesting question is who is meant by the “Lord” (kyrios) here in 11:21? Or in 11:23? 11:24? Pervo thinks the first refers to
Jesus, the second to the Lord God, and that the third usage is uncertain, but
it is a difficult question to resolve with certainty (as I think that the third
instance in 11:24 might refer to Jesus) (Acts, 293).
The way in which the missionary activity in Antioch receives support
from the Jerusalem church is to have “news” filter up to Jerusalem and then
have Barnabas sent to Antioch from Jerusalem, though many scholars, as noted
above, believe he might indeed have been there from the start (11:22). Barnabas, when he arrives, “saw the grace of
God” and subsequently “he rejoiced, and he exhorted them all to remain faithful
to the Lord with steadfast devotion” (11:23). One would expect apostles here,
as in chapter 10 and earlier in chapter 11, to verify the work of the Holy
Spirit, but Barnabas is their substitute. In 11:24, we are told “he was a good
man, full of the Holy Spirit and of faith.” His qualifications are his faith
and evidence of the Holy Spirit. His mission is a great success since “a great
many people were brought to the Lord.”
It is at this point that “Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, and
when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch.” (11:25-26). Saul had been sent
back to his home town in 9:20, but is now brought back into the picture, once
again by Barnabas (though Pervo believes that Saul too was probably already
active in Antioch when Barnabas arrived or, more likely, with Barnabas already
in Antioch). Saul will now be central to the development of the narrative in
Acts. Joseph Fitzmyer dates all of these events around 44 CE (Fitzmyer, Acts,
477).
The two of them met with the church in Antioch for a whole year “and it
was in Antioch that the disciples were first called ‘Christians’” (11:26). The
success of the mission in Antioch must have been great for them to earn this “Greek
word of Latin form and Semitic background” (Pervo, Acts, 295). This
title seems to have been applied to them from outside of the disciples (Pervo, Acts,
295)[1] and is
a means to distinguish them from other Jews, or perhaps from everyone else. The
whole question of when we may begin to think about the “Christians” as separate
from other Jews, even when the disciples of Jesus start to draw Gentiles into
their communities, is a complicated one. The “parting of the ways” is by no
means accomplished at this early point. The "Christians" represent a particular
Jewish position regarding the identity of the Messiah and the entry of Gentiles into the Jewish community, but
this does not mean they are no longer consider themselves or that others no longer
consider them Jews. They are Jews who believe the Messiah has come among them
and that the Messiah Jesus has shown the way for Gentiles to be invited into
the messianic community.
The second unit of this section reflects prophets coming to Antioch from
Jerusalem (11:27). The prophet Agabus “predicted by the Spirit that there would
be a severe famine over all the world; and this took place during the reign of
Claudius” (11:28). Claudius reigned from
41-54 CE, so this certainly fits in this general time frame. Johnson says that “there were widespread
famines during the reign of Claudius, and there was a particularly severe one
in roughly the same period in Palestine” (Johnson, Acts, 208). Though
Luke has a “worldwide” famine it most likely indicates the Roman Empire, since Luke
would know little of the world beyond that of the Roman Empire. Pervo suggests
that “one possible source for the account of the famine relief is Josephus, Ant.
20.51-53, 101, which praises Queen Helena of Adiabene for her efforts to provide
famine relief during the reign of Claudius” (Pervo, Acts, 295).
On the other hand, it is possible that Agabus is giving an end of the world
prophecy (famine which strikes the whole world), which would certainly fit with
the apocalyptic tenor of the early church, but is impossible to determine from
the limited data.
Whatever sort of famine Agabus predicted, the Antiochenes turn to help
Jerusalem practically instead of themselves – an oddity which Pervo thinks is solved
by tracing this narrative tradition to Paul’s collections from his Gentile
churches for the Jerusalem church which we know of from his letters (Pervo, Acts,
290, 295). This is compelling, since the text itself says that the disciples in
Antioch sent their relief “to the elders by Barnabas and Saul” (11:29-30). Pervo
believes the story of the prophet Agabus comes from a separate “collection
source” utilized here in this second unit (11:27-30) of 11:19-30 (Pervo, Acts,
295-8). Apart from here and in 21:10-11 Agabus is otherwise unattested in the
NT, as is his personal name anywhere else (Pervo, Acts, 295). What we
can say, though, is that both this second unit and the first indicate strong
connections between Antioch and Jerusalem, in terms of people, prophetic
inspiration, and charitable activity (Pervo, Acts, 295), even if some of
the details have been shaped in light of Luke’s grander narrative schemes.
Next entry, James,
brother of John, and Peter face the wrath of the authorities.
John W. Martens
I invite you to follow me on Twitter @Biblejunkies
I encourage you to “Like” Biblejunkies on Facebook.
This entry is cross-posted at America Magazine - The Good Word
[1]
Pervo, however, thinks that it did not emerge in Antioch in the 30s or 40s, but
in the 90s, probably in Rome Acts,
295.
0 comments:
Post a Comment