Paul, the Wrecking Ball

Prayer for Study and Opening Questions

Let's pray and then we will get into our study today. Heavenly Father Almighty and Everlasting God, we come before you in humble awe. You are the one true God, there is no other like you. Come, we pray, bless our hearts and minds as we study your word.

Send your Holy Spirit into our lives so that we may grow in love and grace and that we may go forth into all the world, proclaiming the good news, so that others may learn of your saving grace through Jesus Christ our Lord, amen.

All right, as is our practice, any questions as a result of the sermon today? We looked at the Mount of Transfiguration. He's learning, he can be taught. It was pretty straightforward.

No telling how long that'll last.

We'll get two minutes into the study and you never know where we're gonna go.

I make no promises. I personally enjoyed the lesson.

I know, I know, I saw it.

And it turns that slight shade of gray.

And it's like, uh-oh.

Yeah, and then when you start to see smoke, you know you're in trouble. Well, I have to go back to my house soon.

I'm sitting too close to my house.

Okay, let's do this. If you remember when we last left off in the Old Testament, number six, we were looking at the Mosaic Covenant's requirements as it relates to those who take a Nazirite vow. We did an excursus into the story of Samson who is the worst Nazirite ever.

I'm scared.

What just happened?

It's a little tiny apologetics question.

Oh boy.

And thus it begins.

No, I'm kidding.

Eyewitness Testimony and Differences in the Gospel Accounts

Okay, so in the epistle reading for the day, Peter said in his eyewitness account that in the epistle reading, Peter says that he heard the voice of the Lord say, this is my son with whom I am well pleased.

But that was God's pronouncement at the baptism of Christ. The gospels record, this is my son, listen to him. Is this just one of those, we assume God said both at both places and it got written down differently?

So the idea here is what we don't do with the scripture is we don't woodenly take eyewitness testimony and force it into this kind of stiff, wooden, word processor precision type of language. So for instance, when you read the gospel accounts, so you got four gospel accounts.

We know that Matthew is an eyewitness account. We know that John is a straight up eyewitness account. Church tradition tells us that the gospel of Mark is, these are the preaching notes of the apostle Peter as he's traveling around.

And then Luke, Dr. Luke who wrote Luke Acts, he interviewed the eyewitnesses and composed his gospel together. And you're gonna note something here is that each of them has a different audience in mind and different bits of Jesus's healings, miracles, teachings that they're trying to emphasize in what they're doing, which was what you would expect.

And so there are critics of Christianity who will sit there and say these things don't, they do not dovetail perfectly in their language. The reality is is that that's what you would expect in eyewitness testimony because when in a court case, you have eyewitnesses and they're all saying the exact same thing verbatim, word for word, you know they've cooked the testimony.

The fact that there are, that each eyewitness account will pull in what they're trying to emphasize and they'll say it in their own words, but restate the truth of what they heard, that does not mean that one account is true, the other account is false.

That's just a consistent pattern you see in eyewitness testimony. If it were not the case, then you would know that these guys had sat down and cooked their stories together to make everything jive, right?

And so these tiny little differences that you will see, you'll note that what Peter is emphasizing here is the focus on Christ, where if you look at Matthew's gospel, the voice of the Father ends with listen to him, all right?

And then Luke's account is the only account that in the Greek actually says that Moses and Elijah were talking with Jesus regarding his exodus. And so each of them have little details that they're putting in and other details that they're omitting, but again, that's to be expected in eyewitness accounts.

Does that make sense, all right? And that's your apologetic answer for the day.

Well, those snarky atheists who aren't seeking the truth, they just wanna tear it and destroy your faith.

Correct.

This is exactly the kind of line they throw at you.

Right. Have you read Haley's work, Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible? No, but I'm writing it down. It's in the public domain, and that's the classic work on this. Haley's Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, you can grab it from Google Books.

It's also available if you wanna purchase it. Some people have republished it. That and Gleeson Archer's Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, those two together combined are the greatest works that are available as it relates to so-called alleged discrepancies in the Bible.

You're referencing faster than I can Google faster.

We're recording it.

Oh, yeah, technology.

Yes, ma 'am. Sure, sure. I can do that. Like that? Or the other one, the other one.

This one?

Hebrew, that is Hebrew. Yeah, and it reads this way.

Yeah, yeah.

The Nazirite Vow in Numbers and Its Requirements

Okay, so in numbers then, we're back in numbers. I just wanna remind you of the requirements regarding an Azarite vow, and I wanted to show you signs in the scriptures in the New Testament of this practice as it relates to taking an Azarite vow.

Again, number six, Yahweh spoke to Moses saying, speak to the people of Israel. Say to them, when either a man or a woman makes a special vow or the vow of the Nazarite to separate himself to Yahweh, he shall separate himself from wine and from strong drink.

So during the time of your Nazarite vow, you can't be drinking. Now, again, I always point out, and this makes the Norwegians uncomfortable, that if you're gonna have some time that you're separating yourself from wine and strong drink, that means that you can rejoin it later, and that's not a sin.

So I just point that out, because some people, they say, it's a sin no matter what. No, actually, it's not. And if it was a sin to drink alcohol, then Christ himself is a sinner, because he came eating and drinking, and they said of him that he was a glutton, a drunkard, and a friend of sinners.

You know, that Jesus, man, he drank. So he shall, what was the question?

That blows the kind of modern fad of saying that all references to wine are just grape juice.

Yes. Okay, again, historically, grape juice is an impossible thing to make until the technology of pasteurization. Again, if you, in the summertime, or you can do it now, I guess, they do sell grapes year-round because they ship stuff up from Argentina during the wintertime here.

But the next time you buy a cluster of grapes, look at the outside of the grape skin. You'll see this really fine, powdery-looking white glaze on the outside of the grapes. What is that?

That's yeast.

And to make wine in the ancient world, all you had to do was stomp on a bunch of grapes, take what was created from that, put it in a bin, and keep it at a particular temperature, and the yeast was already added because it's in the wine skins.

And that yeast takes root, and it grows, and it feeds off the sugars that are in the grape juice, and that creates the fermentation. That's the fermentation process. The only way to stop that, and I mean the only way to stop it, is pasteurization.

You have to take that juice, and you have to get it up to a boiling temperature, and then drop the temperature very quickly just to kill off that yeast in order to make grape juice. Grape juice is a modern-day invention.

It was not possible until pasteurization. So when people try to tell you, oh, all references to wine, it's grape juice, you don't know what you're talking about. You just don't know what you're talking about.

And I always like to point out along these lines, too, that you'll note, when we read in 1 Corinthians, there's a lot of correctives that Paul has to give to the church at Corinth. This was a church that had some issues.

Their church council meetings, I'm sure, were really fun. But one of the things that was going on at the church at Corinth was that the wealthy were despising and mistreating those who were not wealthy, who were poor, within the congregation, or were part of the slave class.

And the way they did it is they kept them from having the Lord's Supper, and the way they did it is they consumed all the elements. And Paul even points out that some of them were getting drunk on the communion wine.

Well, I would note, it's pretty hard to get drunk on Welch's grape juice, all right? I notice inebriation is never a thing that I'm suffering from when I have Welch's grape juice. But I just point that out.

So it's definitely wine, it's definitely wine. So you note here, in the Mosaic covenant, then, that a Nazarite can separate himself from wine and strong drink, which means he can come back to it later while he's having his Nazarite vows not to drink.

He shall drink no vinegar made from wine or strong drink, shall not drink any juice of grapes, or eat grapes fresh or dried. Again, you can't do it without the yeast. And the days of his separation, he shall eat nothing that is produced by the grape, by not even the seeds or the skins.

No raisins for you. So, which, by the way, I think is a holy thing, because I can't stand raisins. I think they're from the devil, but that's a different thing altogether. Worst thing ever was like when my mom would serve me raisin bread for breakfast when I was a kid.

It's like, oh, this is horrible.

I'd rather have liver. Anyway. All the days of his vow of separation, no razor shall touch his head till the time is completed for which he separates himself to Yahweh and he shall be holy. He shall let the locks of his head grow long.

All the days that he separates himself to Yahweh, he shall not go near a dead body, not even for his father or his mother or his brother or his sister. If they die, shall he make himself unclean? Because his separation to God is on his head, and all the days of his separation, he shall be holy.

If any man dies very suddenly beside him and defiles his consecrated head, then he shall shave his head on the day of his cleansing. On the seventh day, he shall shave it. And you're gonna note, again, the point here, and this is the point we made in the story of Samson, is that with the Nazarite vow, it's kind of a sacramental theology, and as long as Samson had hair, he was still considered, the Lord still operated through him.

When he had no hair, there was nothing for the promises of God to hang on to, if you would, because the sacrament is the taking of the word of God and combining it with actual earthy things, water. For instance, we can't baptize somebody with dirt, okay?

Baptism is a washing of water in the word. That's kind of the idea. So when Samson had his head shaved down to the nubbins and there was nothing there, he lost his strength, but then when he had razor stubble on his head, he was able to once again, because again, his head is where the consecration is.

So on the eighth day, he shall bring two turtle doves, two pigeons, and we notice then that coming out of the Nazarite vow can be quite an expensive thing because of not only the sheer number of sacrifices, but also particular sacrifices that are, how shall we say, expensive in nature.

These are not cheap animals. So coming out of a Nazarite vow is expensive. And it's in that context, and I would like to take a look at a couple of things. In Acts chapter 18, it says this regarding the apostle Paul.

After this, Paul stayed many days, this is 1818, stays many days longer and took leave of the brothers and set sail for Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila. If you remember Priscilla and Aquila, these were believing Jews who the apostle Paul became fast friends with, and it was Aquila and Priscilla who corrected the false baptismal theology that Apollos had.

So when Apollos shows up on the scene, he is able to refute the Jews from the scriptures and prove to them that Jesus is the Messiah, but he didn't even know about Christian baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and he only knew of the baptism of John the Baptist, and it was Aquila and Priscilla who took him aside and corrected him privately, and let's say, took his baptismal theology, which was originally all wet, and then cleaned it right up for him.

So I write my own humor. I'm just glad you groaned, because I was thinking that was just gonna fly over everybody without a response. I was so thankful you did that.

It is the glory of love to overlook an offense.

Paul’s Nazarite Vow and His Missionary Travels

Okay, so it then says this. At Sancreia, Paul had cut his hair, for he was under a vow. So you're gonna note kind of an interesting thing. In the time of the apostles, so all of Jesus' apostles, they're Jewish, and in this kind of moving from the Old Testament into the New, that they felt freedom to be able to exercise parts of the Mosaic Covenant as Jews, and to exercise that freedom from the Mosaic Covenant, and do so in such ways, and they were using that for the purpose of assuring the Jews that Christianity wasn't a break from the Old Testament, but was the fulfillment of it, and then the moving on of where Christ was going with things.

So that's kind of the idea. And so you're gonna note that Paul uses this, uses the Nazarite vow here, kind of in that way, and he himself let his hair grow out, and he had been under a vow, and he himself breaks that Nazarite vow.

And it's in that context, and I would consider a different text along these lines. And that is that when you read the book of Acts, you have all the missionary journeys of Paul, and then when you get into the later chapters, you have Paul arrested, and the ordeals that he is going through as a result of the false accusations being leveled against him by those who are vehemently opposing Christianity, and opposing the message that Jesus is the Christ, that Christ rose from the grave, and that God himself, the Messiah, would suffer, bleed, and die on the cross.

And for the Jews, this is a scandalous thought, and Paul lays it out. One of the reasons why is because the idea of the Messiah being cursed, because scripture says, "'Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.'".

And that's the way in which Christ dies. So that's the way Christ dies. He hangs on a tree. And so for them, it's a stumbling block. It's a scandal. It's difficulty. And so when Paul goes on his missionary journeys, and he preaches the gospel, what ends up happening is he goes to the synagogues first, and he reasons with them on the Sabbaths, you know, Saturday after Saturday, until they don't put up with him anymore.

And what ends up happening is that you always have a group of people who are believing, and then you've got another group who are like really incensed. And so what Paul has successfully done on his missionary journeys, aside from planting churches all throughout the Mediterranean and the Roman Empire, he's also, well, how should I say this?

Created enemy synagogues against him, all right? And it makes me wonder if this is kind of Luther's idea, where Christ sets up a church, the devil sets up a chapel, you know? And so a good way to think about it, wherever Paul planted a church, wherever the gospel goes out, in that same town, there was probably left a very angry and upset synagogue, because their synagogue has now been split between those who believe that Jesus is the Messiah and those who don't.

And the guys who are not believing in Jesus, the Jews who are not believing in Jesus, they owe Paul a grudge. And the things that they're willing to do in the name of getting this guy dead is actually quite fascinating, because there are so many commandments of God that they're willing to break for the purpose of getting Paul arrested and killed.

That's really kind of the idea. And so as Paul is heading towards Jerusalem at the end of one of his missionary journeys, we'll pick up in Acts 21 .7, and again, this has to do with a view of the Nazarite vow, but I wanna actually pick up on the story itself because it's helpful.

Paul in Jerusalem: False Accusations and the Temple Riot

Acts 21 .7, when we had finished the voyage from Tyre,.

Who's the we?

That would be Luke.

Luke, okay.

So you'll notice in the book of Acts, there are sections called the we sections. Luke is the author of the book of Luke, the gospel of Luke. He's also the author of Acts. And in the book of Acts, when he says we, Luke is along for the ride.

And because of Paul's close association with Luke, the evangelist, church tradition in history tells us that the gospel that Paul favored in his preaching was Luke's. So the gospel of Luke is the one most associated with the preaching ministry of Paul.

That's good to know. So the next day, when we had finished the voyage from Tyre, we arrived at Ptolemaeus and we greeted the brothers and stayed with them for one day. And the next day we departed and came to Caesarea.

And we entered the house of Philip, the evangelist, who was one of the seven and stayed with him. He had four unmarried daughters who prophesied. While we were staying for many days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea and coming to us, he took Paul's belt, bound his own feet and hands and said, thus says the Holy Spirit.

This is how the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles. When we heard this, we and the people of there urged him not to go up to Jerusalem.

All right?

So Paul answered, what are you doing? Weeping and breaking my heart, for I am ready not only to be in prison, but even to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus. And since he would not be persuaded, we ceased and said, let the will of the Lord be done.

And after these days, we got ready and went up to Jerusalem and some of the disciples from Caesarea went with us, bringing us to the house of Nason of Cyprus, and an early disciple with whom we should lodge.

And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brothers received us gladly. On the following day, Paul went in with us to James and all the elders were present. So you know, at this time, James is really kind of the head of the church in Jerusalem.

Not Peter, but James. And all the elders were present and after greeting them, he related one by one the things that God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified God and they said, you see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed.

They are all zealous for the law and they have been told about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or walk according to our customs.

So here we get a picture then of the narrative that was created. There's some truth to it and there's some stuff that shows a complete lack of understanding of what Paul is preaching and teaching. And so they see Paul as a renegade Jew who's basically saying, forsake Moses, leave Moses, all that kind of stuff.

But here's the thing, does Paul require Gentiles who are believers in Christ to be circumcised? Nope, not at all. Does Paul require Gentiles who are believers in Jesus to observe the Sabbath, to travel to Jerusalem for the Passover?

Does he require them to celebrate the Feast of Booths, the Feast of Weeks? The answer is no. So Paul rightly understands that the ceremonial laws of the Mosaic Covenant are all fulfilled in Christ and he says so.

He doesn't require circumcision because he recognizes that circumcision has its ultimate fulfillment in baptism. That's teaching that we see in Colossians chapter two. And so the idea then, those who hear the gospel from Paul and believe, they rejoice.

Those who refuse to believe, persist in sin and unbelief and refuse to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, they've created this narrative that Paul is just a wreck and preaches against Moses. And so they know the false narrative and so what James and the elders are gonna recommend he do is by his actions demonstrate that their false narrative isn't true.

But that's not gonna really work. It's not gonna really work at all. You gotta note something and that is that when somebody believes a false narrative, the thing they will not allow to be challenged is the false narrative in either word or deed.

And so this is kind of the setup here. And by the way, in Christian history, early on the first heresy that Christianity faced was the Judaizing heresy and that was to mix works and grace. That, the Judaizing heresy comes up with regularity in Christian history and the next real iteration of it was a heresy called the Ebionite heresy.

And the Ebionites had an interesting name for the Apostle Paul. They called Paul the man of lawlessness. Which is interesting when you think about it. Okay, that's all into this narrative. So what then is to be done?

They will certainly hear that you've come. Do therefore what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow. And so you're gonna note there in the church in Jerusalem under James, you got four men who are under a Nazirite vow.

Four guys. And they're gonna break their vow, but for these four guys to be able to break their vow, the monetary requirements are gonna be huge. And so they're gonna need some help. So take these men, purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads.

And so here we can see what kind of vow they're under. They're under a Nazirite vow. There's an appearance of it. Thus, all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance of the Torah.

So there it is. We want you to, by your actions, challenge their false narrative. Which is based on half-truths and misrepresentations. Now we all know what happens. This doesn't go well. Let's keep reading.

But as for the Gentiles who have believed, we have sent a letter with our judgment that they should abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality.

Yes.

Can you reconcile that with the teaching about meat sacrificed to idols in Romans?

Okay.

Because there's an apparent contradiction.

So what's the context here?

So the church in Jerusalem is writing.

To the Gentiles, the Gentile-believing diaspora.

That has spread out, that they should abstain.

From food sacrificed to idols.

For what purpose?

Doesn't say, well, okay, in context, the purpose is to not offend the Jews.

There it is.

Which is the, thank you, never mind.

There it is.

I'm good.

Because that's the other part of the teaching in Romans.

Yeah, the teaching in Romans, and also you see it in 1 Corinthians, the idea here is that I have freedom in Christ. If I live in a town where the only food that is available is food sacrificed to an idol, I have complete freedom in Christ to go to the grocery store and purchase that meat.

Where does that freedom end? When somebody makes it an issue, either believer or unbeliever. So if somebody were to invite me to their house, and let's say they worship Vishnu or something like that, you know, they're Indian, all right?

And so they invite me to their house. And we're sitting down, we're having a meal together, and of course, me and curry don't get along that well, but I'm gonna suffer through this. And in the midst of the meal, halfway through, my host says, oh, and by the way, that steak that you're having, we sacrificed that animal to Vishnu three days ago.

Bummer.

Man, now I can't have any of it.

Why?

I was free up to that point to consume, and at that point, I was no longer free.

Why?

Because he's the one who made it an issue, okay? Then for his sake, I can't, all right? Now, conversely then, the New Testament also teaches, let's say, same scenario, we're living in a town where people, the only food you can get is, meat that you can get is from food that's sacrificed to idols so we've got somebody new to the Christian faith and they wanna go out and have a meal and ask questions and as they're kind of wrestling with the Christian faith, and in that situation, they're still very kind of new and weak in their faith.

If I were to have a steak from that meat market, it would cause their conscience grief and cause them to stumble, and in that situation, although I have freedom to eat that steak, I do not have freedom to destroy the conscience of a fellow believer.

So, the kingdom of God is not about food or drink. So, in the same way then, there is no absolute prohibition against alcohol, but if it's gonna cause your brother to stumble for real, and it's gonna destroy his faith, save it till when you get home, you know?

Yeah, you should.

Yeah. I will.

Join me.

Yes, right. So, here's the issue. It says in the text about those who are like this, and Paul uses the analogy of meat eaters versus those who eat vegetables, okay? That the man who eats vegetables, he has a weak faith, but what can happen then is that somebody sits there and goes, well, I have a weak faith, you can't eat meat.

You just better stop it altogether. Now, we have the tyranny of the weak conscience, okay? And the tyranny of the weak conscience brings in a different set of rules altogether. When somebody's using the tyranny of their weak conscience to then domineer over you, to take away your Christian freedom, you are required to disobey them.

Let no one take you captive, right, all right? So, and this is the kind of thing that Paul called Peter on the carpet for. In the early part of Galatians, he talks about how Peter had visited a group of Gentiles, and he had no problem eating with them, until.

Until some guys from James came, and then he withdrew and came back. And of course, he doesn't have a toothbrush, so he has bacon on his breath, you know? And James shows up, the guys from James show up, and he's withdrawing, and what does Paul do?

I mean, Paul calls Peter, the first pope, out on the carpet in public, okay? And basically says, you know, I got a question for you, Peter, you know, we who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners, you know, we know these things.

He says, how come you, a Jew, are requiring Gentiles to do the things that we can't even do, right? And it's like, he calls him out on the carpet, and it's like, one of those awkward moments, but, you know, which, again, sets an example for us.

But I digress.

All right, let's keep working our way through this text, though. So, let's see here. Where am I? All right, so, all right, so. So, the idea here, then, the prohibition against food sacrifice for idols is so that their freedom doesn't become a stumbling block to people who are Jewish, and the blood from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality.

Sexual immorality is part of the moral law, though. That's gonna be your sixth commandment. So then, Paul took the men. The next day, he purified himself along with them, went into the temple, giving notice.

When the days of purification would be fulfilled, an offering, and the offering presented for each one of them. So, he's doing Jewish Nazarite vow-breaking duty here when seven days were almost completed.

So, you can see, he goes to the temple, and it's like, first day, mission accomplished. There was no turmoil. Maybe, just maybe, the false narrative against me is gonna blow over. And when seven days were almost completed, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd, laid hands on him, crying, men of Israel, help, help!

This is the man who is teaching everyone, everywhere, against the people, and the law, and this place. Moreover, he even brought Greeks into the temple, and has defiled this holy place. That's just straight out a breaking of the eighth commandment.

He didn't do nothing of the sort. Now, a little bit of a note here. From the first century, there's very few artifacts that remain from Herod's Temple. The whole thing, the Romans in 70, I mean, they sieged Jerusalem.

They were lobbing 100-pound stones from their trebuchets into the city itself. I mean, that was the ancient world's version of artillery. And when they finally broke through the wall, got in, the Herod's Temple that was there had a lot of gold in it, and they set fire to the temple, and the flame burned so hot, all the gold in the temple ran like a river out of the temple, and then it ended up getting into the cracks in the stones on the temple mount, and within the temple itself.

So they tore that temple down piece by piece in order to get at that gold. And then, all of that being said, there's nothing that remains of that temple except for off to one side of the temple mount in Jerusalem.

There's just a rubble heap today, and that used to be Herod's Temple. Those stones are still there. Well, I should say what's left of them, because a lot of them, people would go, you know, that's a good-looking stone.

I'm gonna use that on my house. But the good ones got, to say, repurposed. They got repurposed. But one of the things we have as an artifact from that time, we actually have, I think, at least two of the signs that were used in Herod's Temple regarding the outer gates.

And the signs basically said, if a Gentile crosses this portal, they enter this gate, they will be killed, all right? And so, I mean, that is an immediate death penalty on-the-spot kind of offense. If a Gentile comes into, if they go past a particular gate that you're not supposed to go into.

Only Jews are supposed to be in that one section. And so the claim that they're making is, is that Paul has completely, he lost his mind. He's so opposed to the Mosaic Covenant and the traditions of our people that he's even brought a Gentile, he's crossed the threshold, he's brought them into the very midst of this.

And so they're stirring up everybody for the purpose of having this guy killed.

Didn't they circumcise, was it Timothy who went with him?

Yeah, but not in the, yeah.

But I thought Timothy actually got circumcised going.

Later, yeah, later.

That's after this?

Yeah, I think so. Okay. Now, I don't know if it was after this, later than it was mentioned, so. Yeah, because at one point he says that not even, you know, was it Titus was, yeah, I'd have to look. But Timothy eventually was, for the purpose of him not being an offense.

Because he had to serve a mixed congregation in Ephesus. So. So here we got it. So here's the lie. He's even brought Greeks into the temple. He's defiled this holy place. For they had previously seen Trompheus, the Ephesian with Paul in the city.

And so they suppose that Paul had brought him into the temple. It's like, so their false narrative now is that every little thing that they see, it gets woven into the narrative. He's completely opposed to Moses.

And he's now brought Gentiles into the temple. So all the city was stirred up. The people ran together. They seized Paul, dragged him out of the temple. And at once the gates were shut.

Why?

Because the goal here is, he's about to assume room temperature. And they were seeking to kill him. Word came to the tribune of the cohort that all of Jerusalem was in confusion. So Roman garrison there gets a phone call.

You better get over to the temple quick. There's a riot breaking out. So he at once took soldiers and centurions, ran down to them. And when they saw the tribune and the soldiers, they stopped beating Paul.

I'm surprised he was lucid after that. I mean, it doesn't take too much of a beating. So the tribune came up and arrested him and ordered him to be bound with two chains. He inquired who he was and what he had done.

Some of the crowd were shouting one thing, some another. And as he could not learn the facts because of the uproar, he ordered him to be brought into the barracks. And when he came to the steps, he was actually carried by the soldiers because of the violence of the crowd.

For the mob of the people followed crying away with him. And as Paul was about to be brought into the barracks, he sat, he said to the tribune, may I say something to you? And he said to him, do you know Greek?