Acts 18:18-? Bible Study

προσμείνας, prosmeinas (prosmeno) - “stayed,” indicates that Paul was not driven out of the city by force

“accompanied by Priscilla and Aquila” (refer to 18:2)

the order of the names used here may indicate a prominent role of Priscilla or a higher social position...

&

“Before he sailed, he had his hair cut off at Cenchreae because of a vow he had taken”

Indicates a temporary Nazarite-type vow ()

Different vows were often taking taken to express thanks for deliverance from grave dangers…

...counted as a meritorious work;

one could be released from it only at the Temple

Cutting the hair was not done at the time of release from the vow

Certainly nothing would have prevented having one’s hair cut before the vow as well, however Luke, however, thinks of the cutting of the hair as an element of the vow itself.

Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 18:18–23; The Journey to Palestine via Ephesus and Return

note about Priscilla’s and Aquila’s remaining behind there is no concrete data

Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 18:18–23; The Journey to Palestine via Ephesus and Return

note about Priscilla’s and Aquila’s remaining behind there is no concrete data

Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 18:18–23; The Journey to Palestine via Ephesus and Return

note about Priscilla’s and Aquila’s remaining behind there is no concrete data

Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 18:18–23; The Journey to Palestine via Ephesus and Return

note about Priscilla’s and Aquila’s remaining behind there is no concrete data

Ephesus

Leading commercial city of Asia Minor…the capital of provincial Asia

Asia Minor was the area between the Black Sea, Aegean Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea

Present Day Turkey

Location of the temple of Artemis (Diana)

Note about Priscilla’s and Aquila’s remaining behind, there is no other concrete data

Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 18:18–23; The Journey to Palestine via Ephesus and Return

only the familiar schema of Paul’s initial visit to the synagogue, without details, coupled with a brief statement by Paul, which Luke has composed. If αὐτός … τοῦ θεοῦ θέλοντος, “but he … if God wills” (19b–21b*), is bracketed, then the matter becomes clear. This insertion makes the course of events seem curious, but it also permits a glimpse of Luke’s intention. He knows that there were already Christians in Ephesus when Paul arrived there (as the following episodes indicate), but he wants to have Paul appear as the first Christian preacher in the city. In objecting to this analysis one could argue that Priscilla’s and Aquila’s remaining behind in Ephesus and Paul’s resolution to return belong together. That would imply that this passage should not be removed from its context. But this connection was first made by Luke; 19:1* proves that it was not present in the source material—when Paul returns, Priscilla and Aquila are not mentioned.

Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 18:18–23; The Journey to Palestine via Ephesus and Return

only the familiar schema of Paul’s initial visit to the synagogue, without details, coupled with a brief statement by Paul, which Luke has composed. If αὐτός … τοῦ θεοῦ θέλοντος, “but he … if God wills” (19b–21b*), is bracketed, then the matter becomes clear. This insertion makes the course of events seem curious, but it also permits a glimpse of Luke’s intention. He knows that there were already Christians in Ephesus when Paul arrived there (as the following episodes indicate), but he wants to have Paul appear as the first Christian preacher in the city. In objecting to this analysis one could argue that Priscilla’s and Aquila’s remaining behind in Ephesus and Paul’s resolution to return belong together. That would imply that this passage should not be removed from its context. But this connection was first made by Luke; 19:1* proves that it was not present in the source material—when Paul returns, Priscilla and Aquila are not mentioned.

Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 18:18–23; The Journey to Palestine via Ephesus and Return

only the familiar schema of Paul’s initial visit to the synagogue, without details, coupled with a brief statement by Paul, which Luke has composed. If αὐτός … τοῦ θεοῦ θέλοντος, “but he … if God wills” (19b–21b*), is bracketed, then the matter becomes clear. This insertion makes the course of events seem curious, but it also permits a glimpse of Luke’s intention. He knows that there were already Christians in Ephesus when Paul arrived there (as the following episodes indicate), but he wants to have Paul appear as the first Christian preacher in the city. In objecting to this analysis one could argue that Priscilla’s and Aquila’s remaining behind in Ephesus and Paul’s resolution to return belong together. That would imply that this passage should not be removed from its context. But this connection was first made by Luke; 19:1* proves that it was not present in the source material—when Paul returns, Priscilla and Aquila are not mentioned.

What is common for many of Paul’s initial visits to the synagogue,

Here without details,

We have a brief statement made by Paul, which Luke has composed. If αὐτός … τοῦ θεοῦ θέλοντος, “but he … if God wills” (19b–21b*), is bracketed, then the matter becomes clear.

Note about Priscilla’s and Aquila’s remaining behind there is no concrete data

This insertion makes the course of events seem curious, but it also permits a glimpse of Luke’s intention....

He knows that there were already Christians in Ephesus when Paul arrived there (as the following episodes indicate),...

but he wants to have Paul appear as the first Christian preacher in the city. In objecting to this analysis one could argue that Priscilla’s and Aquila’s remaining behind in Ephesus and Paul’s resolution to return belong together.

this connection was first made by Luke; 19:1* proves that it was not present in the source material

—when Paul returns, Priscilla and Aquila are not mentioned.

Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 18:18–23; The Journey to Palestine via Ephesus and Return

only the familiar schema of Paul’s initial visit to the synagogue, without details, coupled with a brief statement by Paul, which Luke has composed. If αὐτός … τοῦ θεοῦ θέλοντος, “but he … if God wills” (19b–21b*), is bracketed, then the matter becomes clear. This insertion makes the course of events seem curious, but it also permits a glimpse of Luke’s intention. He knows that there were already Christians in Ephesus when Paul arrived there (as the following episodes indicate), but he wants to have Paul appear as the first Christian preacher in the city. In objecting to this analysis one could argue that Priscilla’s and Aquila’s remaining behind in Ephesus and Paul’s resolution to return belong together. That would imply that this passage should not be removed from its context. But this connection was first made by Luke; 19:1* proves that it was not present in the source material—when Paul returns, Priscilla and Aquila are not mentioned.

The details raise difficulties:

Syria is given as the destination,

but Paul arrives at Caesarea, “goes up,”

and only then arrives in Antioch.

This is usually explained, on the historical level, as pragmatic: initially the goal of the trip was Antioch, but the wind drove the ship to Caesarea

If Luke had meant that he would have so indicated

“And when he had landed at Caesarea, and gone up, and saluted the church, he went down to Antioch.” - KJV ( & also ESV) ....NIV & NRSV inserts “Jerusalem”

Landing at Caesarea makes sense only if Paul intended to visit Jerusalem.

Landing at Caesarea makes sense only if Paul intended to visit Jerusalem. ἀναβάς, “he went up,” points toward such a visit (one “goes up” to Jerusalem). The vow points in the same direction. Unfortunately it can no longer be determined what the material from which Luke constructed these notes looked like. One might ask whether this trip between the Apostolic Council and the bringing of the collection is historically probable. The piece of source material which may be detected in 21:18–25* is unaware of such a trip, and the evidence from the letters of Paul (1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Romans) plainly rules it out. On the other hand, this passage cannot be explained as a doublet to chapter 15, basing this hypothesis on the parallelism between vs 23* and 16:6*.6 Haenchen assumes that Paul had initially intended to travel to Antioch, in order once again to improve relations after the unfortunate dispute with Peter and Barnabas (Gal 2:11–14*; cf. on vs 18* above). Conzelmann, H. (1987). Acts of the Apostles: a commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. (E. J. Epp & C. R. Matthews, Eds., J. Limburg, A. T. Kraabel, & D. H. Juel, Trans.) (p. 156). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

ἀναβάς, (anabas, anabaino) “he went up,”

points toward such a visit (one “goes up” to Jerusalem).

The vow points in the same direction.

Unfortunately it can no longer be determined what the material from which Luke constructed these notes looked like. One might ask whether this trip between the Apostolic Council and the bringing of the collection is historically probable. The piece of source material which may be detected in 21:18–25* is unaware of such a trip, and the evidence from the letters of Paul (1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Romans) plainly rules it out.

On the other hand, this passage cannot be explained as a doublet to chapter 15, basing this hypothesis on the parallelism between vs 23* and 16:6*.6

Haenchen assumes that Paul had initially intended to travel to Antioch, in order once again to improve relations after the unfortunate dispute with Peter and Barnabas (*; , & cf. on vs 18* above).

Conzelmann, H. (1987). Acts of the Apostles: a commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. (E. J. Epp & C. R. Matthews, Eds., J. Limburg, A. T. Kraabel, & D. H. Juel, Trans.) (p. 156). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Conzelmann, H. (1987). Acts of the Apostles: a commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. (E. J. Epp & C. R. Matthews, Eds., J. Limburg, A. T. Kraabel, & D. H. Juel, Trans.) (p. 156). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

The return journey seems to be a doublet to 16:6*.

Conzelmann, H. (1987). Acts of the Apostles: a commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. (E. J. Epp & C. R. Matthews, Eds., J. Limburg, A. T. Kraabel, & D. H. Juel, Trans.) (p. 156). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

In favor of the historicity of two visits to Galatia reference is made to * (τὸ πρότερον, “at first”); the wording, however, cannot provide conclusive proof.

Verses 21b–23* give an even stronger impression of being an epitome (summary) than 16:6–10*.8 T

he details are understandable only to the author of the epitome, no longer to his readers.

This impression is reinforced if one takes 19:1* into consideration as well.

Of course there is also the possibility here that Luke himself took scattered reports and from them fashioned a journey.

There is a remarkable parallel with the preceding journey, though in this latter case there is no “tendency” governing Luke’s presentation.

And 19:1* could belong wholly to the Lukan redaction (the process of editing text for publication).

Conzelmann, H. (1987). Acts of the Apostles: a commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. (E. J. Epp & C. R. Matthews, Eds., J. Limburg, A. T. Kraabel, & D. H. Juel, Trans.) (p. 156). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Conzelmann, H. (1987). Acts of the Apostles: a commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. (E. J. Epp & C. R. Matthews, Eds., J. Limburg, A. T. Kraabel, & D. H. Juel, Trans.) (p. 156). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

The New International Version. (2011). (). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Conzelmann, H. (1987). Acts of the Apostles: a commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. (E. J. Epp & C. R. Matthews, Eds., J. Limburg, A. T. Kraabel, & D. H. Juel, Trans.) (pp. 155–156). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Conzelmann, H. (1987). Acts of the Apostles: a commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. (E. J. Epp & C. R. Matthews, Eds., J. Limburg, A. T. Kraabel, & D. H. Juel, Trans.) (p. 155). Philadelphia: Fortress Press. Conzelmann, H. (1987). Acts of the Apostles: a commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. (E. J. Epp & C. R. Matthews, Eds., J. Limburg, A. T. Kraabel, & D. H. Juel, Trans.) (p. 155). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

...

Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 18:18–23; The Journey to Palestine via Ephesus and Return

note about Priscilla’s and Aquila’s remaining behind there is no concrete data