Remedy for Riot – Acts 19:35-41

The Mather family exerted a great deal of influence on what eventually became the United States of America.

Not only did they love unusual Christian names, they were somewhat unusual Christians – Puritans.

INCREASE Mather was the father of the family, born in Dorchester, Mass, in 1639.

Increase was one of the first presidents of Harvard college.

He became pastor of the famous, or infamous, North Church in Boston.

His son, born in 1663, with the equally unusual first name of COTTON Mather, was also a preacher.

In fact, the son became the associate and successor to the father at North Church.

He got the name “Cotton” from his mother – her dad’s name was John Cotton.

Cotton Mather is generally pictured as the perfect representative of a cold, unsympathetic, intolerant, narrow Puritan.

For example, he was at the heart of the Salem Witch trials.

Although he didn’t exactly approve of the trials themselves, it was his writing and preaching which fostered them in the first place.

Cotton Mather used to say that there was a man in Acts 19, to whom he was greatly indebted.

Whenever there was a really difficult decision to be made, Cotton would say, “Let us consult with the town-clerk of Ephesus.”

Why? Because it was the advice of that town-clerk “to do nothing rashly.”

That is very good advice no matter how bad the source – an Asian town-clerk or a puritanical Puritan.

I’ve mentioned a couple of times that I don’t think that this town-clerk was a Christian.

He was not brought into the Ephesian amphitheater because he was a friend of Gaius or Aristarchus.

He was a politician.

He was probably an up and coming young man, who had his eye on the office of Proconsul some day.

But just because he was not a Christian that doesn’t mean that he couldn’t have something to teach us.

There once was a day, when Jehovah taught a donkey to speak and to instruct a professed prophet of God.

And on another occasion, the Lord Jesus said that if He didn’t keep the stones at the side of the road quiet they would have taken up voice to shout His praises.

How is it that so many of the Children of God are so quiet about their Saviour, when asses and pebbles are willing to testify of Christ?

Something isn’t right here.

In this, our last message from Acts 19, I’d like us to consider the wisdom of this unnamed politician.

It was short-sighted, flawed and almost silly in some ways,

but at the same time it was appropriate for the moment,

and it pointed a finger to a much more important situation and judgment.

This incident was all about judgment;

and judgment is something that everyone of us needs to consider,

because it is appointed unto men – all men, women & children – once to die & after this the judgment.

As I say, the theme of these verses relates to judgment: two or more different kinds of judgment.

We see wise, or semi-wise, judgment in the arguments of the town-clerk,

And we hear references to Roman judgment if the crowd doesn’t quiet and settle down.

But beyond that there is implication of the last and highest of all judgments.

For the sake of our message this morning, I’d like you to consider SUPERSTITIOUS judgment, LEGAL judgment and DIVINE judgment.

First, SUPERSTITIOUS judgment or superstitious logic.

At some point, before or during the two hours of chanting “Great is Diana of the Ephesians” this town-clerk came into the area.

We don’t know if he had the help of soldiers, other politicians, or if he acted alone, but eventually he got the mob to quiet down sufficiently that he could be heard.

You’ll notice the word “appeased” in verse 35: “And when the town-clerk had appeased the people.”

This is the same word that he uses in the next verse where it is translated: “quiet.”

He appeased the people in the sense that he was able to get them calmed down enough to hear him.

If I can paraphrase him, this is what he said:

“Good people of Ephesus, what is all this noise about?

‘Great is Diana,’ We all know that Diana is great.

If a wretched wandering Jew, half out of his mind, comes here and says otherwise, what does it matter?

Everyone here, and everyone in Asia knows that the image which we worship over there in the Temple came straight down from Jupiter.

Nobody doubts that, so what is all this ruckus about?

You don’t really think that our temple, celebrated through the world, can be in any danger from the windy chatter of this half-blind Jew and his crew.

These men may be deluded, but they haven’t committed any particular sacrilege against Diana, and they aren’t any more blasphemous than any other non-believers.”

First, we need just a couple words of clarification.

The reference to Jupiter is to the Roman god “Jupiter” and not to the planet which was named after him.

For some people that clarifies things, but then for others it does just the opposite.

Jupiter and Diana were a Roman deities, but they had been worshiped in Ephesus even before the establishment of the GREEK Empire.

In the Greek culture Jupiter had been called “Zeus” and Diana was known as “Artemis.”

Somehow their names had been conveniently upgraded from the Greek to the Roman versions.

Something else that might confuse people is the reference to “robbers of churches” in verse 37.

This has nothing to do with the usual word “church” in the New Testament – it is not “ecclesia.”

And the words “robbers of churches” is one single Greek word.

The idea is that someone who robs sacred places whether temples, churches, synagogues. mosques or chapels has committed a “sacrilegious act.”

He has profaned, contaminated or otherwise ruined the sacred nature of that place of worship.

This man was saying that Paul and the Christians had not polluted any of the sacred sites of Ephesus.

Neither had they been speaking any more slanderously of Diana than hundreds of other people had been doing throughout the centuries.

So what was this man’s superstitious logic?

“We have been worshiping Diana or Artemis for over 600 years.

And our worship has NOT ONLY withstood the test of time, but also the test of persecution.

About 400 years ago, our first temple was destroyed by arson, but the great emperor Alexander built this current beautiful building, creating one of the seven wonders of the World.

And now, not only does Ephesus worship Diana, but so does all the province of Asia,

and people from around the Mediterranean come here to pay homage to our goddess.”

The superstitious logic was this:

“You and I think that Diana is a goddess and worthy of worship, so it must be true.

And our fathers, grandfathers & forebears for 15 generations have worshiped Diana or Artemis.

Furthermore, people from all over the world acknowledge her,

Therefore, our religion must be right, and the bite of this little mosquito of a Christian preacher isn’t going to do our goddess any harm.”

This kind of logic is alive and well and living in the 21^st century.

Just because a Pontifex Maximus has been in office since the beginning of the 3^rd century doesn’t mean that he ought to have been.

Neither Catholicism, nor our faith for that matter, is true just because it is old.

Just because some people hold in their hands copies of scriptures dating back 3500 years to the days of Moses, doesn’t mean that they are reading and understanding those scriptures properly.

Just because a large group of people all agree that some hunk of stone or wood is a goddess that doesn’t change that stone or wood into a goddess.

In other words, a majority decision doesn’t turn error into truth.

And a pile of money supporting some heresy doesn’t prove that it isn’t heresy.

An army of priests in the fanciest regalia doesn’t mean that they aren’t ministers of Satan.

Numbers, money, power and prestige don’t prove something, anymore than the lack of these things does.

This town-clerk calmed the crowd with superstitious and improper logic.

It worked in the context in which it was offered, but it was still a crock of malarkey.

Unfortunately, it is still working today.

We need something more substantial than human ideas and opinions.

Thankfully, the Lord has given that to us in the pages of the Word of God.

But this superstition was not the only judgment or logic which this man had to offer.

There was also the potential LEGAL judgment – ROMAN judgment.

The Roman Empire made a contribution to humanity, the importance of which has been debated ever since.

It is the majority opinion that the Romans laid the foundation for modern Western government.

Our laws here in America evolved from a combination of Roman law, Hebrew law, and a few others.

Our congressional government goes back to the conflicts between the Caesars and senates of Rome.

And even though Rome ruled the Mediterranean world with a rod of iron, it was done with rules which were standard in every province.

For example, as we saw with Roman deputy of Achaia, Gallio,

Roman law did not necessarily judge a man for his faith.

Just because someone didn’t like the religion of another person, that was not a punishable offence.

But if that man burned the other man’s temple or synagogue, that was something worthy of judgment.

And in regard to what was taking place in Ephesus, the city was on the verge of breaking Roman law.

Just as we shall see when the Jews create a riot in Jerusalem over Paul’s presence in the temple, and the Roman army rushed in,

the Romans didn’t tolerate riots of any kind, and would send troops in to quell things like this.

Notice what this town-clerk said in verse 40:

“We are in danger to be called in question for this day’s uproar, there being no cause whereby we may give an account of this concourse.”

Notice the word “uproar.”

It is the Greek word “stasis” which is often translated “sedition” and “insurrection.”

If this uproar had continued much longer, the Romans would have been forced to send in troops and the ring leaders would have been arrested.

Of course, from our perspective, that is as it should have been.

That is similar to our law here in the United States.

This town-clerk said that Paul and the Christians had not robbed churches.

But Demetrius and his co-workers had said that they were being robbed.

Paul had been taking money out of their pockets.

Of course this takes us into the area of the legality of free-enterprise.

It is very likely that this man’s business really had taken a beating during the previous two years.

And his fiscal projections for the future didn’t look good.

He couldn’t see his business turning around.

But all that Paul had done, in the language of the business world, was to offer the citizens of Ephesus a better product.

The Lord Jesus Christ is far superior to Diana, and any observant, logical person could see that.

Why live in a cave when you can live in a mansion for the same price?

Why eat okra and sweet-potato pie when you can have t-bone steak smothered in mushrooms followed by strawberry-rhubarb pie?

Why worship an inert hunk of wood or marble, when you can worship and serve the living, and loving blessed Lord Jesus?

If Demetrius and his friends want to lay charges against Paul, there were courts available to try the case.

But this riot was not the proper legal venue for venting such disagreements.

And besides the whole city might have to answer to Rome for what it might call “insurrection.”

The town-clerk’s arguments are like the current campaign to get everyone to wear their seat-belts while in the car.

Not only is it the safest thing to do for you as the driver.

But because you love your kids and your spouse, you insist that they buckle-up as well.

But then there is that little added incentive: a $101.00 fine if you are caught not belted in.

There are the moral and filial arguments, and then there is the big, powerful legal argument.

So this city official convinced the mob to go home.

He used arguments based upon their silly superstitions and from the more tangible Roman power.

He told the people that they should be quiet, and that they should do nothing rashly.

He told Demetrius that if he really had a legal case against Paul, then it should be brought to court.

And if not a court-room then perhaps it should be brought before the city council – a lawful “ecclesia” or “assembly,” verse 39.

With these arguments, he effectively broke up the mob, and saved the city some problems with the Roman government.

My last point this morning takes this man’s words into a court which he had not intended.

He said, “We are in danger to be called in question for this day’s uproar.”

He was absolutely right in more ways than he realized.

To borrow some words from the Apostle Paul back in Acts 17:

“Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.

And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.”

The Greeks, the Romans and most of the people of the world today seem to think that they are at the apex of creation.

They have the idea that their achievements, their decisions, and their judgments are final.

And so when the next man’s achievements, decisions and judgments clash with theirs, there is conflict.

Local ordinances are often overturned by state decisions.

And when state’s rights are infringed by federal laws, those states sometimes try to secede.

Governments pass laws which are overturned by so-called “SUPREME courts”.

And when the decisions and judgments of one nation clash with the will of another nation there is sometimes war.

So in the world of humanity, as we see here in Ephesus, there are levels of judgment and authority.

Eventually, we come to the will and authority of sovereign nations.

Each of those nations appear to be equal,

and the only thing which says that they are not equal is their military or economic power.

Does that mean then there are is no absolute authority and there is no judgment above them all?

Well, there is the laughable attempt to create a universal government with the United Nations, but that experiment proves that man cannot make a truly absolute law or authority.

But there IS a true and absolute government.

Logic demands one, and the Bible reveals it.

Way back in the earliest days of humanity, Enoch used to preach about it.

“And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”

This is a theme permeating the Old Testament.

And not only did Paul preach it in the New Testament, so did the Apostle Peter.

“The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished.

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.”

This town-clerk was absolutely correct: “We are in danger to be called in question for this day’s uproar.”

There is not a man on earth who will not have to stand before God to give an account of Himself.

And the standard of judgment which will be used against him, will be Jehovah’s, not man’s.

Even the fact that this town-clerk did not mention God’s judgment seat, will be brought up when he must face the Lord.

Now, my point is this:

There is something of more practical importance than the judgment at Ephesus or these other men’s judgment before God.

It’s the question of YOUR judgment before the Lord.

YOU are going to have to stand before Him, and it may be sooner than you are expecting.

What will the charges and judgment be against you?

Will you have an Advocate on your side, or will you stand alone?

Will you be able to plead the grace God, and that your sins have been covered by the blood of Christ?

Will you be able to argue that you are one of the lawful citizens of the Kingdom of God, and will you be able to prove it with a record of service and worship of Him?

Are you ready to be judged by God?

If Paul had the privilege of standing where that town-clerk had been standing that day, he would have urged that mob to repent and to bow before the King of Kings, the Lord Jesus Christ.

He would have pled with those rebels to submit to the Lord.

He would have preached the cross, where God made a way for sinners like these to meet Him in peace.

He would have preached repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus.

And that is just our message to you this morning.

You are going to stand before God to be judged.

But will you stand there as a saint or as an unforgiven sinner?