Author: Charlie Garrett

Nifty lighting in marble halls. Washington State Capitol.

Sunday, 2 July 2023

Then Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his household. And many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed and were baptized. Acts 18:8

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

In the previous verse, Paul moved his teaching to the house of Justus who lived directly next to the synagogue. With that remembered, it now continues with, “Then Crispus.”

The name Crispus means Crisp in its original sense which is Curly or Bent. Abarim explains –

“The name Crispus is identical to the Latin adjective crispus, curled (of hair), or uneven and wrinkled. From this adjective comes the verb crispo, to curl or to cause to swing — hence our English word crisp for curly potato slices; a crispy leaf is not a leaf that crunches and crackles but a leaf that’s curled up on the edges. Our adjective, in turn, comes from the Proto-Indo-European root ‘s)ker-’, to bend or turn, from which also stems the verb κειρω (keiro), to shear or shave off (as ostensibly used in ACTS 18:18).”

A pun is likely being made by Luke. In the previous verse, Paul entered the house of Justus (Just or Upright as in being straight). Now, Curly is being noted. He is next noted as “the ruler of the synagogue.” Despite having the article before “ruler,” it does not mean he was the only ruler. Synagogues have more than one at times, as is seen in the gospels where the same word is used, such as –

“Now when Jesus had crossed over again by boat to the other side, a great multitude gathered to Him; and He was by the sea. ²² And behold, one of the rulers of the synagogue came, Jairus by name. And when he saw Him, he fell at His feet ²³ and begged Him earnestly, saying, ‘My little daughter lies at the point of death. Come and lay Your hands on her, that she may be healed, and she will live.’ ²⁴ So Jesus went with him, and a great multitude followed Him and thronged Him.” Mark 5:21-24

Therefore, he may have been one of several rulers or he could have been the only ruler. If one of several, the use of the article would be to distinguish him from any other person who had the same name. Of him, the NKJV says that he “believed on the Lord.”

It is incorrect. Most translations say something similar to this, but there is no preposition in the Greek. It simply says, “he believed the Lord.” What may be the case is that he had heard the word about Jesus and he, like a Berean, checked the word directly. This seems like a sound conclusion because his conversion is specifically mentioned after the note concerning Paul’s entrance into the house of Justus. If he had heard directly from the Lord, Luke would certainly have included that. Rather, “faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17). He heard, he verified, and he believed the Lord who gave the word.

Therefore, the pun continues. Next door was Justus who was straight. Now, Curly has been made just, having been straightened out. Isaiah prophesied of such things –

“Every valley shall be exalted
And every mountain and hill brought low;
The crooked places shall be made straight
And the rough places smooth;
⁵ The glory of the Lord shall be revealed,
And all flesh shall see it together;
For the mouth of the Lord has spoken.” Isaiah 40:4, 5

Along with Crispus, it also says, “with all his household.” As in Acts 10 and Acts 16, the whole house has believed. This does not mean that everyone is saved through one, nor can that be inferred. It means any who believed were saved. It is the belief that is highlighted and which is then responded to: belief = salvation. Because of this new faith in the household of Crispus, it next says, “And many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed.”

This is a testimony to the fact that one conversion can lead to many. It does not mean that the belief was in the faith of Crispus. However, it does indicate that the faith of Crispus led to belief in what had been proclaimed concerning the gospel. In other words, seeing the faith of another, especially one who would otherwise be diametrically opposed to what was presented – as indicated by the opposition and blaspheming of the Jews of verse 18:6 – led these people to consider and accept the gospel.

How this happened is not stated, but one possibility is that Crispus was a known figure. Upon his conversion, he took time to explain to those Corinthians who knew him that he had checked his own Scriptures and realized that they foretold exactly what Paul proclaimed. His faith led to the trust of those Corinthians in the truth of the matter and thus to their conversion as well. From there, it says, “and were baptized.”

This means first Crispus and his household who believed and then also those Corinthians who also believed. This is recorded in 1 Corinthians 1 –

“I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, ¹⁵ lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. ¹⁶ Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other. ¹⁷ For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.” 1 Corinthians 1:14-17

Paul personally baptized Crispus and Gaius along with the household of Stephanas. What can be inferred is that Crispus may have then had the honor of baptizing his own household.

Life application: The ridiculously inane teaching of hyperdispensationalists is that Christians today do not need to be baptized. 1 Corinthians 14:17 is used as one of their crazy “proofs” that this is so. Twisting Paul’s words, they say that Paul was not sent to baptize, stopping right there and using those words as validation of their nutty theology.

Paul’s point was not that believers did not need to be baptized. Throughout Acts, Paul baptizes people as do others. Conversion after conversion, when someone believes, he or she is then noted as being baptized. It sets up a normative affirmation that baptism is something that was both practiced and accepted as proper because it is in accord with Jesus’ words of Matthew 28:18-20.

Paul’s baptism of Crispus, Gaius, and others demonstrates that baptism was appropriate, but that was not his main line of work. His job was that of an apostle. Someone had to baptize the first converts. Being several in number, Paul did some and it is likely that those who traveled with him did others. From there, the now-converted and baptized Crispus could baptize others. This would leave Paul free to continue his apostolic ministry without interruption.

A problem with the thinking of the hyperdispensational heretics is that it clearly says that the Corinthians who believed were baptized. As this is so, and as they are Gentiles, then there is no logical point in Scripture or in church history where this was no longer the case. In other words, who is the decider of when the practice of baptizing was to end. There is no point for it to be so and there is no instruction in Scripture to override the clear words of Jesus in Matthew 28. The thinking is crass and illogical.

Don’t get duped into ridiculously presented arguments like those of hyperdispensationalists. They take verses out of their intended context, form pretexts, and then run with them. This is similar to those who use Jesus’ words concerning the law and claim we are still required to observe Moses when He said, “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets” (Matthew 5:17).

“See! You must observe the law and the prophets!” No! Rather, Jesus continued speaking, “I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.” And fulfill it He did. Now, His work can be imputed to anyone who will believe and accept that fulfillment on his behalf. For those who do not, they will not be saved. They can wallow in their own mire of law observance and be rejected by God for their insolent pride against His offer of grace.

Lord God, help us to think clearly on issues of such great importance as those presented in this commentary. May we never be duped by those who wish to pull us away from either salvation by grace through faith or from obediently following the Lord Jesus via the rite of believer’s baptism. These things are not hard to discern, but they are easily twisted by those who hate what You have set before them. May we not be included with such people. May our hearts be directed toward You in faithful obedience. Amen.

Super fancy chandelier. Washington State Capitol.

Saturday, 1 July 2023

And he departed from there and entered the house of a certain man named Justus, one who worshiped God, whose house was next door to the synagogue. Acts 18:7

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

The translation is more correctly rendered, “And having departed thence, he came to the house of someone by name Justus, worshiping God, whose house was adjoining the synagogue” (CG).

Paul had just notified the Jews that he would henceforth go to the Gentiles. True to his word, it next says, “And having departed thence.”

He left their presence, knowing that he had done his duty by going to his Jewish brethren first, and also knowing that he was wasting his time by staying with them any longer. Therefore, in having departed from there, “he came to the house of someone by name Justus.”

The name Justus is Latin for Just (or Upright, as in being or straight). The name is used by Jews in Acts 1:23 and Colossians 4:11. Some manuscripts say, Titus Justus. It is then said that he is the same person referred to in 2 Corinthians and/or Galatians. There is no reason to make this leap as both names were not uncommon at that time. Regardless of that, it notes of him that he was “worshiping God.”

It is the same word used five times already in Acts, including of devout women such as Lydia in Acts 16. The meaning is that Justus was either a proselyte or he was a convert to Christianity. The main point concerning him is that he is a Gentile. Paul had gone straight from the Jews to engaging the Gentiles, including entering a Gentile house.

In this, he was clearly demonstrating his convictions that the Gentiles were not to be considered “common or unclean” (Acts 10:28). Concerning the location of the house of Justus, it next says, “whose house was adjoining the synagogue.”

It is a word found only here in the Bible or any other ancient Greek literature, sunomoreó.

It signifies to border on or be next door to. What is probably the case is that the ministry was moved to the house of Justus, but Paul continued to live with Aquila and Priscilla. There would be no need for Paul to cut himself off from them just to make a point about going to the Gentiles. Rather, he was simply moving his ministry to a location where the Jews could see his freedom each time they went to the synagogue.

It is a purposeful act on the part of Paul that his teaching would continue within earshot of them, but in a place that they would have been loath to enter because of their attitude concerning Gentiles.

Life application: Despite his statement that he would go henceforth to the Gentiles, he still left the door open to evangelizing the Jews, even in the area of Corinth. He will continue to engage the Jews, having both positive and negative interactions with them. He knew that he could not beat his faith into someone else. He had said what he had to say. They were belligerent against his words, and so he moved on.

This is a good lesson for us as well. We may be extremely passionate about a family member or a friend that we want to see come to Christ. If they have been told the gospel and turned it down, you have done your job. In continuing to harp on someone about their need for Christ, it is not unlikely that you will alienate the very person you hope will convert.

State your words, offer to be there to answer questions in the future, and then be a proper example to them of what you have told them about by living as a faithful Christian, praying for them as it comes to mind. You cannot beat your faith into them, but you can act in a manner that may – someday – remind them of their need for Jesus. When their lives hit a bump or a brick wall, you can reengage them in a manner that may be just what they need at that moment. If you had alienated them through constant nagging, that would not come about. So be patient and be a positive representative of Jesus in the meantime.

Lord God, help us to be wise in our evangelism of others, including those close to us. Help us to faithfully proclaim the gospel and then allow those who hear to make up their minds accordingly. Give us the wisdom to understand that it is not up to us to convert their hearts. It is our job to present the gospel that can. From there, they have a choice to make. Give us wisdom in this regard. Amen.

Fancy chandeliers at Washington State Capitol.

Friday, 30 June 2023

But when they opposed him and blasphemed, he shook his garments and said to them, “Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean. From now on I will go to the Gentiles.” Acts 18:6

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

The verbs are in the wrong tense in the NKJV. The verse reads, “And they opposing and blaspheming, having shaken out the garments, he said to them, ‘Your blood upon your head. I am clean. From now, to the Gentiles I will go’” (CG).

In the previous verse, it noted that Paul was compelled by the Spirit, and so he testified to the Jews about Jesus being the Christ. Now Luke continues saying, “And they opposing and blaspheming.”

The word translated as opposing signifies strong opposition such as opposing the entire makeup of something, organized resistance such as a particular battle array during warfare, people being opposed to something in both principle and in practice, etc. Because the verb is plural, it reveals that this was not an isolated instance. Rather, it was a concerted effort that was brought against him.

The word translated as blaspheming, blasphémeó, signifies the refusal to acknowledge good or to speak profanely of sacred things. In this case, they opposed Paul’s message by treating his word about Jesus with contempt. TheJews took Jesus’ sacred name and the gospel and vilified them. Because of this, Paul’s response was, “having shaken out the garments.”

To understand the meaning of this act, a short passage from Nehemiah will explain –

“Then I said, ‘What you are doing is not good. Should you not walk in the fear of our God because of the reproach of the nations, our enemies? ¹⁰ I also, with my brethren and my servants, am lending them money and grain. Please, let us stop this usury! ¹¹ Restore now to them, even this day, their lands, their vineyards, their olive groves, and their houses, also a hundredth of the money and the grain, the new wine and the oil, that you have charged them.’
¹² So they said, ‘We will restore it, and will require nothing from them; we will do as you say.’
Then I called the priests, and required an oath from them that they would do according to this promise. ¹³ Then I shook out the fold of my garment and said, ‘So may God shake out each man from his house, and from his property, who does not perform this promise. Even thus may he be shaken out and emptied.’” Nehemiah 5:9-13

The act by Paul would have been perfectly understood by them. He was symbolically asking the Lord to shake them out of their offered inheritance among the saints. This act is not unlike that directed by Jesus in the synoptic gospels. When the message was rejected in a particular city, He told His disciple to shake the dust off their feet and move on. They were symbolically indicating they would have nothing further to do with such a group of people. Along with Paul’s symbolic act, “he said to them, ‘Your blood upon your head.’”

This would also have been perfectly understood by his hearers. In Matthew 27, at the crucifixion of Jesus, it said –

“Then the governor said, ‘Why, what evil has He done?’
But they cried out all the more, saying, ‘Let Him be crucified!’
²⁴ When Pilate saw that he could not prevail at all, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took water and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, ‘I am innocent of the blood of this just Person. You see to it.’
²⁵ And all the people answered and said, ‘His blood be on us and on our children.’
²⁶ Then he released Barabbas to them; and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered Him to be crucified.” Matthew 27:23-26

The idea then is that of blood guilt. The Jews who condoned the crucifixion of Jesus had His blood guilt upon them. Those in Corinth had their own blood guilt upon them because of sin. By rejecting the offering of God through the giving of Jesus, their blood guilt remained. This is what Jesus was referring to in John 8 –

“Then Jesus said to them again, ‘I am going away, and you will seek Me, and will die in your sin. Where I go you cannot come.’
²² So the Jews said, ‘Will He kill Himself, because He says, “Where I go you cannot come”?’
²³ And He said to them, ‘You are from beneath; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. ²⁴ Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.’” John 8:21-24

Understanding this, Paul next proclaimed, “I am clean.” The meaning is, he did not bear any responsibility for their blood guilt. It was his task to share the message of Jesus. He did that but they rejected the offer of reconciliation. He could not force the matter upon them. As such, their guilt remained while Paul was clean in regard to their coming torment. This is not unlike the word of the Lord to Ezekiel –

“Again, when a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and I lay a stumbling block before him, he shall die; because you did not give him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he has done shall not be remembered; but his blood I will require at your hand. ²¹ Nevertheless if you warn the righteous man that the righteous should not sin, and he does not sin, he shall surely live because he took warning; also you will have delivered your soul.” Ezekiel 30:20, 21

With his proclamation of being clean stated, he then turned to the most degrading thing that could alight upon their ears, saying, “From now, to the Gentiles I will go.” The words are similar to those of Acts 13 –

“Then Paul and Barnabas grew bold and said, ‘It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles. ⁴⁷ For so the Lord has commanded us:
“I have set you as a light to the Gentiles,
That you should be for salvation to the ends of the earth.”’” Acts 13:46, 47

The Jews had counted themselves unworthy of eternal life through acceptance of God’s offer of reconciliation. Paul, still adamant that this was the true message, said he would now carry it to the Gentiles. The implication is that the Gentiles who received the word would be accepted by God while these Jews would be rejected. The word would be unconscionable to them. But it was already a word spoken out by Jesus concerning Gentiles –

“Now when Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to Him, pleading with Him, ⁶ saying, ‘Lord, my servant is lying at home paralyzed, dreadfully tormented.’
⁷ And Jesus said to him, ‘I will come and heal him.’
⁸ The centurion answered and said, ‘Lord, I am not worthy that You should come under my roof. But only speak a word, and my servant will be healed. ⁹ For I also am a man under authority, having soldiers under me. And I say to this one, “Go,” and he goes; and to another, “Come,” and he comes; and to my servant, “Do this,” and he does it.’
¹⁰ When Jesus heard it, He marveled, and said to those who followed, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, I have not found such great faith, not even in Israel! ¹¹ And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. ¹² But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ ¹³ Then Jesus said to the centurion, ‘Go your way; and as you have believed, so let it be done for you.’ And his servant was healed that same hour.” Matthew 8:5-13

As for Paul’s words now, they don’t mean that he wouldn’t go to the Jews at all anymore. Rather, he would no longer go to them in Corinth. He had proclaimed, they had rejected, and he was through with them.

Life application: The opposing and blaspheming of Jesus by the Jews continues to this day. His name is generally held in contempt by Jewish society and especially so among the more religious sects. However, this does not mean that we shouldn’t at least attempt to evangelize them.

As will be seen in the coming verses, just because the Jews of Corinth rejected the message of Jesus, this was not a universal rejection. Some will hear and heed. So be sure to tell the good news to any person that may come across your path. The Lord will deal with those who reject Him. There is no need to feel the guilt of not at least trying on that day.

Precious Lord God, so many are opposed to the wonderfully good news of Jesus. Sometimes, it seems like it isn’t worth the effort to engage a certain group or family because of their resistance to You, but we don’t know if there is a tender heart among them unless we step forward and speak. So, Lord, help us to do this. It is never a wasted effort. Yes Lord, embolden us for the task. Amen.

Some spot in the Washington State Capitol.

Thursday, 29 June 2023

When Silas and Timothy had come from Macedonia, Paul was compelled by the Spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus is the Christ. Acts 18:5

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

The words of this verse should read, “And when both Silas and Timothy came down from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the Spirit, fully testifying to the Jews: Jesus is the Christ” (CG). The previous verse noted Paul having reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, persuading both Jews and Greeks. With that stated, Luke now records, “And when both Silas and Timothy came down.”

Paul was in Corinth, living with Aquila and Priscilla. He had gone to the synagogue and reasoned with those who attended each Sabbath. However, with the coming of Silas and Timothy, there is a notable change in the dynamics of what takes place. These two had come down “from Macedonia.”

The actual movement of Silas and Timothy is a bit hard to follow. Although unlikely, they may have met Paul and returned to Macedonia or they may have remained in Macedonia. The last time the two of them were mentioned were in Acts 17:14, 15 while they were in Berea. It is probable that both remained in that area until this point. Once they found that Paul had gone to Corinth, they went there to meet him.

It is believed that 1 Thessalonians was probably written around this time and was then carried back to Thessalonica with whoever accompanied Silas and Timothy. The letter would have been spurred on by the report received by Paul from these two. It is of note that there are some similar thoughts presented in 1 Corinthians 15 and in 1 Thessalonians 4 concerning the return of the Lord and the glorification of the saints. Similarities concerning spiritual gifts are also notable between the two epistles.

With the arrival of these two, it next says that “Paul was pressed in the Spirit.” This seems to indicate that the arrival of Silas and Timothy is what urged Paul to a more direct approach concerning his words about Jesus. He had been in the synagogues reasoning from Scripture, but now with his two companions at hand, he became more emboldened than ever to simply proclaim Christ.

It seems that up to this point, he had tried to reason with his audience, but now he felt that they simply needed to hear the proclamation. Enough reasoning from Scripture had taken place and it may have devolved into an academic study rather than a gospel presentation. Their arrival seems to have changed this. This is probably because of the words of Silas and Timothy about the state of the believers in Macedonia.

In other words, those in Macedonia had readily accepted the words of Paul and they had also remained strong in their faith after his departure. Paul was pressed in his spirit to have the same zeal grow within this congregation as well. The word used to describe this is sunechó. It signifies to press together, confine, compel, afflict, etc. The actual meaning will depend on the context. However, it conveys a very strong emotion or feeling.

In this state, it next says he was “fully testifying to the Jews.” The word diamarturomai means more than to testify, but to testify all the way through. Paul bore witness and fully defended his stand on the matter that “Jesus is the Christ.”

Some translations, such as the KJV and others, unfortunately read “Jesus was Christ.” Jesus was, is, and ever will be. Saying “was” completely eradicates the idea of the eternal nature of what is presented. The verb is present tense in the Greek and should be rendered as such. And more, various translations, the KJV included, leave off the article by saying, “Jesus was Christ.”

The definite nature of the proclamation by Paul indicates that Jesus wasn’t just a Christ, but the Christ. He is the fulfillment of the messianic expectations and the One who had fulfilled them all. He continued in that position at the time of Paul’s words, and He continues in that position to this day.

Life application: The subtleties of the word require careful study. Although most translations get the point across about what is being conveyed, they can easily be twisted if someone really wanted to press a matter. Saying “was” in this verse can lead someone to make a faulty statement about the nature of Christ. This is especially so when it is claimed that the translation is perfect and exactly as God intended (as claimed by KJV adherents).

The thought can be rectified by reading other statements in the Bible, but not everyone is going to be so diligent to study the word. This is why there are so many aberrant cults and sects out there. People trust without verifying. When this happens, anything can be injected into their minds concerning what the word is conveying. Read the word! Study the word! Be willing to spend your time researching things from the word that catch your eye.

Don’t implicitly trust. Instead, verify! Show yourself approved. With this, the Lord will be pleased.

Great and awesome God, Your word is so very precious. Help us to seek it out and contemplate it day and night. Even when we are working or on a vacation, we can still think about what Your word told us during our morning study. There is always time to think about what You are telling us. Thank You, O God, for Your precious word. Amen.

Skylight, Washington Stae Capitol

Wednesday, 28 June 2023

And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded both Jews and Greeks. Acts 18:4

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

The verse more literally reads, “And he was reasoning in the synagogue on every Sabbath, persuading both Jews and Greeks” (CG). The previous verse noted the fact that Paul and Aquila were tentmakers. It may seem a sudden diversion to go from that thought directly into this one, but it really isn’t.

Luke is conveying to his reader that Paul didn’t just lounge around all week waiting for the Sabbath. Rather, when he was not involved in telling people about Jesus, he faithfully worked with his hands to support himself. When he wasn’t working, however, Luke records, “And he was reasoning in the synagogue.”

The verb, being imperfect, reveals the ongoing nature of the matter. He made this his usual practice. He worked when it was time to work and then he went to the synagogue and reasoned with those there “on every Sabbath.”

The Sabbath is the Jewish day of rest. It is the end of the week, falling on Saturday. When Paul wasn’t making tents, he was taking the day off and going to the synagogue, reasoning with those there and “persuading both Jews and Greeks.”

As the synagogue was open on the Sabbath, that is the time when the Scriptures could be opened and searched out. It was the time when the Jews were gathered, along with any proselytes and even any Greeks Paul may have encountered and told about Jesus. The word used to describe the Greeks means any Greek speaking person, not just proselytes.

Nothing is said about this synagogue being like those in Berea. There, they were said to have “searched the Scriptures daily” to find out if what Paul was saying matched what the word of God said.

Despite this, at least in Corinth they reasoned once a week when the synagogue was opened.

Life application: It is not uncommon for Jews and Judaizers to point at verses like this one and say, “See, Paul always kept the Sabbath and so should you.” That is not a well-thought-out argument and it does not pass the smell test. First, the place where the scrolls of Scripture were kept was at the synagogue. Therefore, it was necessary to meet there on the Sabbath. But Paul would also have met there any other days when they were open, as was evidenced already with the synagogue in Berea.

Second, the Book of Acts is a descriptive account of what occurred. It does not prescribe anything. As this is so, it is an illegal move in hermeneutics to impose a standard on believers based on what is recorded there. It is true that one can determine from some accounts what is normative and likely to be continued apart from Acts, but going to the synagogue on the Sabbath, though recorded time and again, cannot be considered a normative practice if that is the only day that the Scriptures can be reasoned over.

Third, and most importantly, Paul clearly refutes this inane argument numerous times in his prescriptive epistles. He does this in Romans 14:5, throughout the book of Galatians, Colossians 2:16-19, etc. If you want proper instruction on what is prescriptive, go to the epistles. If you don’t want to get drawn away into the cult of works, know what is said in those epistles and stay away from Judaizers and Hebrew Roots Movement adherents, along with any others who would impose mandates from the Old Testament Scriptures.

Heavenly Father, You have given us freedom to worship You in spirit and in truth. Please keep us far from those who would put us back under the bondage of legalism and false worship. Thank You that we have an intimate connection with You, anytime and in any place, because we are in Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen.