The End of the Earthly Life of Paul – Acts 28:30-31

Jan 17, 2015 | Acts

 

In this last message in regard to the Book of Acts, I am going to make a break with tradition.

Actually, it’s not so much a break with tradition as it’s a break with principle.

I hope that you all know my love and respect for the Word of God and for the sacred nature of the services of the church of the Lord Jesus Christ.

You have every right to hear a message from the Bible whenever you attend Calvary Baptist Church, and I have the basic responsibility to teach you what the Bible says.

But for the service this evening, our theme is extra-Biblical – outside the Bible.

Although we will refer to some scriptures, we’ll be thinking more about tradition and secular history.

So, if I need your forgiveness, I will ask for it now and get that out of the way.

Our theme is this: What ever happened to the Apostle Paul?

Before we go there, I need to remind you of a couple of things.

First, the Book of Acts is not a biography of the Apostle Paul.

Its common title is: “The Acts of the Apostles,”

but its more accurate title ought to be: “The Acts of the Lord Jesus Christ.”

 In this book we have learned about some important events in the life of the Apostle Peter.

And there was Philip, Stephen and a few others.

Yes, there is a lot of biographical information about Paul, but it’s in the context of the establishment of many of the early Western churches.

A second thing to keep in mind is that the Book of Acts is a sequel to the Gospel of Luke.

And when it comes to sequels, there are often sequels to sequels.

Although some people disagree, I think that Acts 28 has a definite conclusion,

but it’s the kind of conclusion that leaves the door open for more.

In fact it’s the kind of conclusion that leaves the reader hungry for more.

The book ends, and it ends with a period, but not with an exclamation point.

So why isn’t there more? Why isn’t there a chapter 29 or a third volume?

At this point just about everything turns to speculation or tradition.

For example, it is speculated by some that Luke did write another book, but that it was somehow lost.

That would mean that it wasn’t written under inspiration; it wasn’t the inspired Word of God.

But that isn’t something bad in itself.

We all own a great many good books, religious and non-religious, which are not scripture.

Another speculation is that Paul’s expected release was dashed and that he was executed.

Some people say that without Paul, there wouldn’t have been any reason to continue writing.

But that is forgetting that Acts was essentially a record of the work of God, not the work of Paul.

Even if Paul was executed, then we would expect that to be mentioned by Luke either here or elsewhere.

But others answer that perhaps Theophilus and the Christian world had already learned about the death of Paul, and Luke was too distraught to write down the gruesome details.

And yet another explanation for the apparent unfinished story is the death of Luke himself.

But again, all of this is speculation.

There are two basic opinions about what next happened in the life of Paul.

There is one which suggests that Paul was executed shortly after the two years expired.

They say that tradition and history tell us that Paul died at Rome.

Well, there he is in Rome, and he is on trial for his life; Paul died shortly after Acts 28:31 some say.

Well, the facts are undoubtedly true, but their conclusion is not the only one available.

Some of these people then reach way back in the Book of Acts in order to bolster their argument.

Turn to Acts 20:17 and Paul’s visit with the elders from Ephesus.

“And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church.

And when they were come to him, he said unto them, Ye know, from the first day that I came into Asia, after what manner I have been with you at all seasons.”

Verse 22: – “And now, behold, I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there:

Save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me.

But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.

And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more.”

The Holy Spirit had been telling Paul that he would encounter bonds and afflictions in Jerusalem. Amen?

That was a direct revelation – that was through several direct messages from God.

But what about the last statement in that passage: “I know that ye all shall see my face no more”?

Was this too uttered by the command of God.

Did Paul never see any of those men or the churches in Asia again because it was the decree of God?

I don’t think so..

I tend to think that Paul never expected to see those brethren again, but that was not something that the Lord had revealed to him.

And if it be argued that Paul said, “I KNOW that ye all shall see my face no more,”

It needs to be pointed out that in Philippians 1:25 he uses the same word to suggest that he would see the brethren of Achaia, Macedonia and Asia again.

“For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.

But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not.

For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better: Nevertheless to abide in the flesh is more needful for you.

And having this confidence, I KNOW that I shall abide and continue with you all for your furtherance and joy of faith.”

Some Christian scholars argue that there was only one Roman trial and that Paul was executed shortly thereafter.

But tradition and most scholars think that Paul was released shortly after his two year imprisonment.

It is interesting to learn that most ANCIENT scholars say that there were two trials,

while most who argue for one trial are MORE MODERN (in perhaps more ways than one).

There are two sources of information which suggest that Paul was freed but arrested a second time.

First there is direction from tradition and two thousand year old history.

Generally speaking we listen to tradition very cautiously.

But just because something comes from ancient oral history, that doesn’t mean that it’s automatically inaccurate.

For example, there are ancient traditions from every corner of the world about a world-wide flood.

Most of the details and the names of survivors of that flood are often very different, but where do you suppose those traditions came from?

Couldn’t those traditions come from old, oral histories of the real thing?

Should the statements about Paul, from the early Christians be considered as history or tradition?

Clement of Rome, is said to have been the pastor of the church of Rome about the year 100, and that he was a personal disciple of the Apostle Paul.

He is quoted to have said that “Paul preached the gospel in the East and in the West,

that he taught the whole world righteousness, and that he came to EXTREMITY OF THE WEST

and bore witness before the rulers.”

“The extremity of the West” was a common way at the time to speak about Spain.

And to the Romans, the “whole world” was basically confined to Europe and the Mediterranean.

Is the statement of Clement tradition or historically accurate?

And what about Eusebius the often quoted historian.

In his “Ecclesiastical History,” he tells us that

“Paul, after pleading his cause, is said to have again gone forth to preach the gospel, and afterwards came to Rome a second time, where he finished his life with martyrdom.”

When Eusebius says “it is said,” is he reporting a tradition or an historical fact?

Is there a difference between the two in this case?

Chrysostom said, “Paul after a residence in Rome, departed for Spain.”

And Jerome tells us that “Paul was dismissed by Nero that he might preach the gospel in the West.”

But to be thoroughly honest, Irenaeus argued that Chrysostom and Jerome lived too long after the fact to be sure of the facts, and that Eusebius was just stating the tradition.

As I say tradition is not necessarily a very good source of information.

But then we have more Biblical material.

Last week we read some of the statements about Paul’s condition, ministry and hopes, which he included in his so-called prison epistles: Ephesians, Colossians, Philippians and Philemon.

And even though there were suggestions of periodic depression, it appeared that Paul expected to be released.

Philippians 2 – “I trust in the Lord Jesus to send Timotheus shortly unto you, that I also may be of good comfort, when I know your state. For I have no man likeminded, who will naturally care for your state. For all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ’s. But ye know the proof of him, that, as a son with the father, he hath served with me in the gospel. Him therefore I hope to send presently, so soon as I shall see how it will go with me. But I trust in the Lord that I also myself shall come shortly.”

Philemon 21-22 – “Having confidence in thy obedience I wrote unto thee, knowing that thou wilt also do more than I say. But withal prepare me also a lodging: for I trust that through your prayers I shall be given unto you.”

In these letters it seems that Paul was very confident of his immediate release.

But in his three pastoral letters to Timothy and Titus the language and details are very different.

I Timothy ends with the notation: “The first to Timothy was written from Laodicea, which is the chiefest city of Phrygia Pacatiana.”

Laodicea was inland about a hundred miles of Ephesus.

And I Timothy begins with the words:

“Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope; Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.

As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine.

Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.”

It is impossible to find a point in the Book of Acts around which to explain these words.

In II Timothy, which we said last week was written from Rome, Paul said that he had left Trophimus at Miletum, the town down the coast from Ephesus, where he had met with the Ephesian pastors.

We have the note that the Book of Titus was sent from the city of Nicopolis in Macedonia.

The letter begins: “To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.

For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee.”

The implication is that Paul had been in Crete with Titus, but then the Apostle moved on.

Then in chapter three he said, “When I shall send Artemas unto thee, or Tychicus, be diligent to come unto me to Nicopolis: for I have determined there to winter.”

Wednesday, I mistakenly left the impression that II Timothy was written during Paul’s two years in Rome.

I know now that is the wrong assumption.

And that explains the confusion between II Timothy & confident words to Philemon & to the Philippians.

Turn to I Timothy 1 and see if these don’t sound like the words of a condemned man:

“Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus, To Timothy, my dearly beloved son: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers night and day;

Greatly desiring to see thee, being mindful of thy tears, that I may be filled with joy; When I call to remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice; and I am persuaded that in thee also. Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands.

For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God;

Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:

Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.

For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day. Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.

That good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us.”

Chapter 2:1 – “Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also. Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.”

2:8-13 – “Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:

Wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil doer, even unto bonds; but the word of God is not bound.

Therefore I endure all things for the elect’s sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him:

If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:

If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.”

Chapter 4:5 – ” But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry. For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand.

I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:

Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.” Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me:

For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus unto Dalmatia. Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry.

And Tychicus have I sent to Ephesus. The cloke that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments.

Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works:

Of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words.”

Notice 4:16 – “At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me: I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge”.

This appears to refer to a day when he was first returned to Rome.

When the charges were laid against him, there was no one, not Luke, not Aristarchus, there was no one to stand with him.

Putting the pieces of the puzzle together, this is what I see:

Paul was released from Rome sometime after the two years of Acts 28.

He returned to Macedonia and Asia, visiting the saints and churches there.

At some point he visited Crete as well.

I believe that it is very likely that he traveled all the way to Spain preaching the gospel.

Perhaps he went first to Spain first, before returning to Macedonia.

During that time, Nero set fire to the city of Rome and accused the Christians of having done it.

It is likely that Paul was arrested for nothing more than being a ring-leader of the sect of the Nazarenes.

He was returned to Rome and after a very quick trial, for which Paul had no defense, because the charges this time were very different, he was condemned.

Shortly after that he was beheaded, apparently out on the road that lead to Ostia.

What about those stories which say that Paul traveled as far as England preaching Christ?

There is much less evidence of that than his preaching in Spain, but there is some tradition.

I can’t say that he did, but neither can I say with absolute assurance that he didn’t carry the gospel to Britain.

But whether or not he did travel all that way, it is certain that he was one of the greatest missionaries of all time.