Acts 16, Part 1

Remembering back to last week, Paul and Barnabas have had an unsettling disagreement. So much so that they chose to part companionship and go their separate ways. Remember - it did not change their overall outlook of the need of salvation for everyone. They still wanted to see the churches they had established thrive and grow in their knowledge of Jesus. They would just now be doing it a two groups instead of one. Can you imagine the type of grace that would have to take? To have differences but still work towards the same goal.

Acts 16:1–5 ESV

1 Paul came also to Derbe and to Lystra. A disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek. 2 He was well spoken of by the brothers at Lystra and Iconium. 3 Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. 4 As they went on their way through the cities, they delivered to them for observance the decisions that had been reached by the apostles and elders who were in Jerusalem. 5 So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and they increased in numbers daily.

According to plan, Paul proceeded northward, this time on foot, through the Cilician gates to the cities where he and Barnabas had established churches on the first mission tour. This time they went from east to west and so reached the towns in the reverse order from their first visit—Derbe first, then Lystra, and finally Iconium. At Lystra they found a disciple by the name of Timothy. Evidently Timothy’s conversion dated back to Paul and Barnabas’s first witness in that city (cf. 14:20). Luke added that Timothy was well spoken of by the Christians in Lystra and Iconium. Derbe is not mentioned because it lay some sixty miles southeast of Lystra. Lystra was only twenty miles or so from Iconium, and a close relationship between the Christians of the two cities would have been natural.

Luke’s note that Timothy’s mother was Jewish and his father Greek (v. 1) is essential to understanding why Paul had Timothy circumcised (v. 3). Many scholars have argued that Paul would never have asked Timothy to be circumcised, since he objected so strenuously to that rite in Galatians (cf. 6:12f.; 5:11). That, however, is to overlook the fact that Galatians was written to Gentiles and Timothy was considered a Jew. There was no question of circumcising Gentiles. The Jerusalem Conference agreed on that. Gentiles would not be required to become Jews in order to be Christians. The converse was also true: Jews would not be required to abandon their Jewishness in order to become Christians. There is absolutely no evidence that Paul ever asked Jews to abandon circumcision as their mark of membership in God’s covenant people. According to later rabbinic law, a child born of a Jewish mother and a Greek father was considered to be Jewish. The marriage of a Jewish woman to a non-Jew was considered a nonlegal marriage; and in all instances of nonlegal marriages, the lineage of the child was reckoned through the mother.

According to this understanding, Timothy would have been considered a Jew. His father, however, being a Greek, would not have had his son circumcised; and the local Jews were aware of this (v. 3). Thus Paul had Timothy circumcised. Paul always worked through the Jewish synagogues where possible. To have had a member of his entourage be of Jewish lineage and yet uncircumcised would have hampered his effectiveness among the Jews. It was at the very least a matter of missionary strategy to circumcise Timothy (1 Cor 9:20). It may have been much more. Paul never abandoned his own Jewish heritage. He may well have wanted Timothy to be true to his (cf. Rom 3:1f.). In any event, Paul had no missionary companion more thoroughly involved in his subsequent work than Timothy. Paul considered him a “son” (cf. 1 Cor 4:17; 1 Tim 1:2). Not only did he address two letters to him, but he also listed him as cosender in six others (2 Cor 1:1; Phil 1:1; Col 1:1; 1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1; Phlm 1). He considered him his “fellow worker” (Rom 16:21; cf. 1 Cor 16:10) and, indeed, as much more—“as a son with his father” in the work of the gospel (Phil 2:22). Now three, the missionary group continued along the way, visiting the churches “from town to town.” Luke did not specify the towns they visited, but one would assume they were Iconium and Pisidian Antioch and any other villages where there may have been a Christian community resulting from the first missionary tour. They shared the decrees from the Jerusalem Conference. All of these churches were in the southern part of the Roman province of Galatia and not a part of Syro-Cilicia, to which the decrees were addressed. Perhaps they felt that these churches were involved because they were the product of the Antioch mission. Luke did not mention Paul’s promulgating them in any other cities after this, and Paul never mentioned them in his letters.

Verse 5 concludes the narrative of Paul’s return visit to these churches of his first mission. This summary statement is not perfunctory, however. It underlines the importance of Paul’s concern to fortify and nurture the churches of his prior missionary efforts. He was not only concerned with planting the seed but also to see them grow and bear fruit. This led him to undertake the rigorous trip to southern Galatia through rugged terrain and mountain passes. He accomplished what he sought: the churches were strengthened. They flourished. They were more prepared than ever to carry on when he left.

Called to Macedonia

Acts 16:6–10 (ESV)

6 And they went through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia.

7 And when they had come up to Mysia, they attempted to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them.

8 So, passing by Mysia, they went down to Troas.

9 And a vision appeared to Paul in the night: a man of Macedonia was standing there, urging him and saying, “Come over to Macedonia and help us.”

10 And when Paul had seen the vision, immediately we sought to go on into Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to preach the gospel to them.

16:6 Having completed their visit of the churches established on Paul’s first mission, the three now headed north, probably from Antioch in Pisidia. Somewhere along the way they determined to go to “Asia.” Just what is intended by “Asia” is uncertain. The term was used in various ways. It could refer to the Roman province of Asia, which included Lycia, portions of Phrygia, and Mysia, as well as ancient Asia. It could be used in a much narrower sense as the cities along the Aegean coast, with Philadelphia as the eastern limit. It probably is in this narrower sense that Paul determined to go to Asia, perhaps to the major city of Ephesus, where he eventually did spend the greater part of his third mission. At this point he was stopped from so doing by the Holy Spirit. The medium of the Spirit’s revelation is not given. The important point is that he was stopped. God had other plans for him at the time.

16:7 The route of the missionaries from this point is anything but clear. They obviously traveled northward because they eventually came to Mysia. The questionable point is how far eastward they traveled. To what does “the region of Phrygia and Galatia” refer? The most natural reading would give a consecutive travel narrative, starting from Antioch, moving into northern Phrygia, and then evidently swinging eastward into portions of northern Galatia before arriving in the northeast corner of Mysia where it bordered Bithynia. A good guess is that it was somewhere around Dorylaeum, where they were stopped in their travel plans a second time. Their intention was to go into Bithynia, probably to witness in the populous cities along the Marmara Sea like Nicomedia, Nicea, and Byzantium. Again they were prevented, this time by “the Spirit of Jesus,” possibly a special vision of the risen Jesus but more likely a variant expression of the Holy Spirit. The third expression of the divine leading is indicated in terms of God’s calling (v. 10). The geographical scheme is certainly not the dominant motif in this section: the divine leading is. Father (v. 10), Son (v. 7), and Spirit (v. 6) together led Paul to the decisive new breakthrough—the mission to Macedonia, the witness on European soil.

16:8 The missionary group must have been thoroughly perplexed as they were led away from the cities of Bithynia through the wild backwoods country of Mysia over to the coast and down to Troas. Troas lay in the region associated with Troy, some thirty miles to the south of the ancient city. It had been founded in the fourth century B.C. by Antigonus and from the start was primarily a port city. An artificial harbor constructed there provided the main sea access to Macedonia and was a significant harbor for sea traffic to and from the Dardanelles. Having been given the status of a colony city by Augustus, Troas had a sizable population and would itself have been a suitable candidate for a major mission.

16:9 But God had other plans and sent a vision to Paul, perhaps in a dream in the middle of the night. A man of Macedonia appeared to him begging him to come and witness to the Macedonians. Scholars have often speculated about whether this person might be defined more closely. Ramsay suggested he may have been Luke himself, that possibly Paul had needed a physician’s aid and consulted him in Troas. This is based on the fact that the “we” narrative first occurs in verse 10, indicating Luke’s presence. It is an attractive view, but ancient tradition connects Luke with Antioch, not Macedonia, and the Philippian narrative contains not the slightest inkling that he was on home territory. Somewhat more fanciful is the view that the man in the vision was that most famous of all Macedonians, Alexander the Great. Alexander had a vision of “one world”; Paul would make it a reality through the gospel. Luke gave us no basis for such speculations. The identity of the man as a Macedonian was all that counted.

16:10 Paul realized that this vision was God’s medium for calling him to a mission in Macedonia (v. 10). Timothy and Silas readily agreed, once Paul had shared the experience with them. Since the text states that “we got ready,” the first certain occurrence of the narrative first-person speech in Acts, the most likely assumption is that Luke joined the missionary party at this time. Now four shared the vision of evangelizing Macedonia.

Call to Witness in Philippi

Acts 16:11–15 ESV

11 So, setting sail from Troas, we made a direct voyage to Samothrace, and the following day to Neapolis, 12 and from there to Philippi, which is a leading city of the district of Macedonia and a Roman colony. We remained in this city some days. 13 And on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate to the riverside, where we supposed there was a place of prayer, and we sat down and spoke to the women who had come together. 14 One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul. 15 And after she was baptized, and her household as well, she urged us, saying, “If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay.” And she prevailed upon us.

16:11 Verses 11–12 relate the journey from Troas to Philippi. The weather must have been good and the winds favorable because their ship sighted Samothrace the first day. Samothrace was a mountainous island with a peak rising 5,000 feet above sea level. It lay off the Thracian coast on a direct line between Troas and Neapolis, the port of Philippi. The next day they arrived at Neapolis. In Acts 20:6 the voyage from Philippi to Troas took considerably longer—five days in all.

16:12 The group would have taken the Via Egnatia the ten miles or so to Philippi. This route was the main east-west highway through Macedonia, beginning at Dyrrhachium on the Adriatic coast, traveling through Thessalonica, Amphipolis, and Philippi and terminating at Neapolis. Paul often traveled this road.

Philippi was settled from ancient times largely because of the copper and gold deposits in the region. Formerly known as Krenides, it was seized in the fourth century B.C. from the native Thracians by Philip of Macedon, the father of Alexander the Great. Philip renamed the city for himself and enlarged the gold-mining operations. It came under Roman domination in 168 B.C. and was enlarged in 42 B.C. when Antony and Octavian defeated Brutus and Cassius on the plains southwest of the city. In 31 B.C., after defeating Antony at the battle of Actium, Octavian granted the city the status of a colony. Subsequently a number of military veterans were settled there. The Roman influence was particularly strong in Philippi as reflected in Paul’s Letter to the Philippians and in the present narrative. When Macedonia had first come under Roman influence, it had been divided into four administrative districts. Although these were later dissolved into a single provincial structure with Thessalonica as capital, the distinction between the four districts seems to have persisted. This is perhaps reflected in Luke’s designating the city as “the leading city of that district of Macedonia” (v. 12). Actually, Amphipolis was the larger city and had been capital of the district before the provincial reorganization. Perhaps Luke reflected a local claim that Philippi was Macedonia’s “foremost city,” a claim not totally unjustified when one considers its illustrious history.

16:13 The four missionaries evidently set themselves up in the city and waited until the next Sabbath before beginning their witness. According to Paul’s usual pattern, they sought out the Jewish place of worship first. In this instance there does not seem to have been a Jewish synagogue at Philippi. Instead, they learned of a place of prayer outside the city gates. It was by a river, probably the Gangites, which lies about a mile and a quarter from the city gates. The Romans were sometimes uneasy about foreign cults. Judaism was a recognized religion; but perhaps because there was no formally constituted synagogue, the women had to meet outside the city. If there were no Jews present and all the women were Gentile “God-fearers” like Lydia, this may have made their gathering even more suspect in the city. In any event, the gathering of women was the closest thing to a synagogue at Philippi; and Paul took the usual posture a speaker assumed in a synagogue, sitting down, to address the women. Most likely the event took place in the open air beside the river.

16:14 Among the women gathered there, one stood out. Her name was Lydia, the same as the ancient territory in which her native city of Thyatira was located. She is described as a dealer in goods dyed purple, a likely occupation since Thyatira was indeed a center of the purple dye trade. Lydia’s business is not an incidental detail. It marks her as a person of means. Purple goods were expensive and often associated with royalty; thus the business was a lucrative one. Lydia’s invitation to the four missionaries to stay in her home in itself indicates that she had considerable substance, such as guest rooms and servants to accommodate them adequately. Of all Paul’s churches, the Philippians’ generosity stood out. They continued to send him support in his missionary endeavors elsewhere (Phil 4:15–18; cf. 2 Cor 11:8). One is tempted to see Lydia as a principal contributor. It is surely to go too far with such speculations, however, to argue that Paul married Lydia and that she was the “loyal yokefellow” of Phil 4:3. Women like Lydia were particularly prominent in Paul’s missionary efforts in this portion of Acts—the women of Thessalonica (17:4) and of Berea (17:12), Damaris in Athens (17:34), and Priscilla in Corinth (18:2). Priscilla and Lydia took an active role in the ministry of their churches. This was in part due to the more elevated status of women in the contemporary Greek and Roman society. This was particularly true in the first century when women were given a number of legal privileges such as initiating divorce, signing legal documents, even holding honorary public titles. The prominent role of the women in Acts is perhaps due even more to the message Paul brought them: “In Christ Jesus, there is neither male nor female” (Gal 3:28).

Lydia was a “worshiper of God” (16:14), one of those devout Gentiles like Cornelius who believed in God but had not become a full convert to Judaism. There was an extensive Jewish community at Thyatira, and she had perhaps first come to her faith in God there. As he had with Cornelius, God responded to her faith and “opened her heart” to receive the gospel of Jesus Christ which Paul proclaimed. As always with divine grace, it was God’s Spirit moving in her heart that led to faith.

16:15 Lydia made the missionaries’ acceptance of her hospitality the test of whether they really believed she had become a believer, “Come and see for yourself if the Lord has come to rule in my life” (author’s paraphrase). It was an offer they could not refuse. But she did not merely open her home to the missionaries; she allowed it to become the gathering place for the entire Christian community (v. 40). Perhaps the wealthiest member of the Philippian church, Lydia embraced the ideal of the early church, not laying claim to what was hers but freely sharing it with her sisters and brothers in Christ (4:32).

Not only did Lydia share her goods, but she shared her faith as well. As the leader of her household, she led them to join her in commitment and baptism (16:15). This is the first time the baptism of a “household” is narrated in Acts. Another will follow shortly (v. 33). There is no evidence whatever that this included infants, and it cannot be used in support of infant baptism. Previous references to Cornelius’s household indicate that those who were baptized both heard and believed the message (10:44; 11:4, 17). Throughout Acts baptism is based on personal faith and commitment, and there is no reason to see otherwise in the household baptisms.

Polhill, John B. 1992. Acts. Vol. 26. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.