Author: Charlie Garrett

Artwork by Douglas Kallerson

Friday, 28 April 2023

This girl followed Paul and us, and cried out, saying, “These men are the servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to us the way of salvation.” Acts 16:17

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, the girl with the spirit of Python was introduced. Of her, Luke now continues with, “This girl followed Paul and us.”

Depending on the Greek text, the verb is either an aorist or a present participle – “having followed” or “following.” The narrative is being carefully described by Luke to show the action as if it is occurring while being read.

In his words, Luke continues with the first person, including himself with the others. It is apparent that he wasn’t just with the group, but that they were often together as they headed out for prayer and evangelism. As they went, the girl had followed them, “and cried out, saying.”

Now, the verb is imperfect. She cried out and kept crying out. One can imagine how annoying it would be to have someone constantly following behind and yelling out the same thing as they continued along. In this case, Luke says that she was crying out, “These men are the servants of the Most High God.”

Luke doesn’t give the reason for her constant crying out. Nor can we infer from the words where the emphasis of them was. Placing the stress on various words within the statement changes the meaning and intent of what was being said –

* THESE men are the servants of the Most High God. This might be the girl’s way of ridiculing the men.

* These MEN are the servants of the Most High God. As everyone around was probably aware of her spirit of Python, she may be comparing her known abilities to the unproven abilities of the men, as if the feminine had proven itself whereas they had not.

* These men are the SERVANTS of the Most High God. In this, she could contrast the authority she supposedly possessed in herself with the lowly nature of being a servant to someone else, even if it is the Most High God.

* These men are the servants of the MOST HIGH God. Such a statement would contrast her proven abilities to a supposed God above all gods, challenging Him to prove himself.

One of these, or any other of such stresses can change our perception of the intent of what is being conveyed. Without hearing the words or having a suitable description, it is hard to be dogmatic. Likewise, the overall purpose for her calling these things out cannot be known for sure. Albert Barnes gives several possible reasons –

(1) That as she prophesied for gain, she supposed that Paul and Silas would reward her if she publicly proclaimed that they were the servants of God. Or,

(2) Because she was conscious that an evil spirit possessed her, and she feared that Paul and Silas would expel that spirit, and by proclaiming them to be the servants of God she hoped to conciliate their favor. Or,

(3) More probably it was because she saw evident tokens of their being sent from God, and that their doctrine would prevail; and by proclaiming this she hoped to acquire more authority, and a higher reputation for being herself inspired. Compare Mark 5:7.

A fourth reason could be that a war waged within her and, unlike Barnes’ second reason, she may actually have been hoping that Paul and Silas would expel it from her. No matter what, she annoyingly followed after them repeatedly crying out her message.

As for the message itself, she was calling out that they were servants of the Most High God “who proclaim to us the way of salvation.”

Again, this could be mocking, provoking, being dismissive, etc. Without knowing the emphasis in the words and in her voice, it is very hard to know exactly what her intent was. No matter what, the message she proclaimed was the truth regardless of how she presented it in her crying out.

It is of note that in the Greek, there is no article before “way.” More rightly, it says “a way of salvation.” It appears that the spirit within her does not want it to be known that there is a single avenue to salvation.

Life application: It is often asked if a believer can be possessed by a demon. Although the Bible does not directly answer the question, the answer still seems obvious. If a person is in Christ, that person cannot be possessed by a demon. The thoughts are incompatible. Having said that, believers can certainly be afflicted by the devil and his demons. That is made clear in many verses, two are –

“…give no place to the devil.” Ephesians 4:27

“Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.” Ephesians 6:11

Such verses would be pointless if we could not be afflicted by the devil. In order to keep from being so afflicted, it is our responsibility to apply the word of God to our lives. In doing this, we will be prepared and protected against him and his demons. But we cannot do this without knowing the Bible.

KNOW YOUR BIBLE.

Glorious God Almighty, thank You for the surety of our salvation in Christ. And thank You that we are secure from being possessed by the enemy because of that. And thank You for Your word that can keep us from even being afflicted by him when we apply its precepts to our lives. How grateful we are to You. Amen.

Artwork by Douglas Kallerson

Thursday, 27 April 2023

Now it happened, as we went to prayer, that a certain slave girl possessed with a spirit of divination met us, who brought her masters much profit by fortune-telling. Acts 16:16

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).

Note: The verbs in the NKJV don’t give the sense of the Greek. A closer rendering would be, “Now it happened of us going to the prayer, a certain girl, having a spirit of Python, met us, who was bringing her masters much gain by fortune-telling” (CG). This will be used for the analysis.

In the previous verse, Lydia asked Paul and those with him to stay at her house. The events that now take place occur during that time. Luke’s words say, “Now it happened of us going to the prayer.”

The meaning of “the prayer” is argued whether it means a specific place of prayer, such as “to the place of prayer,” or if it is simply a way of saying they were going out to pray as we might say, “we are going to the church” or simply, “we are going to church.” Either way, the point is that they were heading out and were going for the purpose of prayer. On their way, it next says, “a certain girl, having a spirit of Python, met us.”

The Greek word puthón is seen only here. It comes from Putho, the region where the famous oracle of Delphi was located. Thus, it is a spirit of Python. Of this spirit, Vincent’s Word Studies gives a detailed explanation –

“Python, in the Greek mythology, was the serpent which guarded Delphi. According to the legend, as related in the Homeric hymn, Apollo descended from Olympus in order to select a site for his shrine and oracle. Having fixed upon a spot on the southern side of Mount Parnassus, he found it guarded by a vast and terrific serpent, which he slew with an arrow, and suffered its body to rot (πυθεῖν) in the sun. Hence the name of the serpent Python (rotting); Pytho, the name of the place, and the epithet Pythian, applied to Apollo. The name Python was subsequently used to denote a prophetic demon, and was also used of soothsayers who practised ventriloquism, or speaking from the belly. The word ἐγγαστρίμυθος, ventriloquist, occurs in the Septuagint, and is rendered having a familiar spirit (see Leviticus 19:31; Leviticus 20:6, 27; 1 Samuel 28:7, 8). The heathen inhabitants of Philippi regarded the woman as inspired by Apollo; and Luke, in recording this case, which came under his own observation, uses the term which would naturally suggest itself to a Greek physician, a Python-spirit, presenting phenomena identical with the convulsive movements and wild cries of the Pythian priestess at Delphi.”

Of this girl, it next says, “who was bringing her masters much gain.” As such, this made her a valuable asset to them. The source of the ability to make a profit from her was less important to them than the profit they made. How that source was able to make this profit through her was “by fortune-telling.”

The Greek verb is only found here, manteuomai. The word is derived from the word mainomai, raving mad, or to speak as a madman. One can see the root of the modern word mania or maniac. Of this word, Cambridge states –

“The word is only found here in the N. T., and wherever it occurs in the LXX. it is always used of the words of lying prophets (Deuteronomy 18:10; 1 Samuel 28:8; Ezekiel 13:6; Ezekiel 13:23; Micah 3:11); so that here we are constrained to take it in the same sense ‘by pretending to foretell the future.’”

This is an incorrect analysis. The account in 1 Samuel 28 is that of the witch of En Dor. There, the text is clear that the prophet Samuel was raised. Whether the witch raised him or whether the Lord allowed it to happen can be debated. She certainly seemed surprised when it occurred. Also, when the practice is forbidden in Deuteronomy 18, it makes no distinction between a lying prophet or one who truly taps into the supernatural realm –

“There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, ¹¹ or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead.” Deuteronomy 18:10, 11

These words of Deuteronomy simply forbid the practice, but they do not speak as to whether these things are false or not. In this case here in Acts, the words of the girl will be true. How she determined what to say can be debated, but what happens as a result of her continued words demonstrates that the spirit she possessed, had possession of her.

Life application: Whether such a spirit is real or not is less important than the fact that the matter is not of God. If it is the act of a charlatan, it is not of God. If it is a true evil spirit, it is not of God. Debating which spirit is real and which is false is pointless. What matters is that we are not to seek out such things. Their purpose is to direct people’s attention away from what is good. This is why the law of Moses forbids them. Likewise, Paul warns against associations with such things as well. For example, he says –

“Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? ¹⁵ And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? ¹⁶ And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God.” 2 Corinthians 6:14-16

Our allegiances are to be directed to Jesus Christ. Our thoughts are to be centered on Him and His word. To mix our lives with any other supposed spiritual realm, whether true or false, can only lead us away from a sound walk with Him. The Lord, through Isaiah, says it beautifully –

“And when they say to you, ‘Seek those who are mediums and wizards, who whisper and mutter,’ should not a people seek their God? Should they seek the dead on behalf of the living? ²⁰ To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” Isaiah 8:19, 20

Let us pay heed! Let us focus on God’s word. In this, we will do well.

Heavenly Father, help us to keep our focus on that which is right and proper. May we not get distracted by those things which can never profit our walk with You. In all things, may our lives be filled with You and Your goodness. Amen.

War history, Virgina.

Wednesday, 26 April 2023

And when she and her household were baptized, she begged us, saying, “If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay.” So she persuaded us. Acts 16:15

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 last verse, Lydia heard the word. The Lord, through that hearing of the word, opened her heart to believe. With that recorded, the next words immediately jump into obedience to the Lord’s command given in Matthew 28 concerning baptism –

“And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. ¹⁹ Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ²⁰ teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.’ Amen.” Matthew 28:18-20

In compliance with that command, Luke next records, “And when she and her household were baptized.” What is apparent, without it being recorded, is that she explained to her household the words that she had heard and accepted. In turn, they likewise believed. In their belief, those who believed were baptized according to the command of the Lord.

The word translated as “household” simply means “house.” It is a general word that can mean a person’s literal house where he dwells; the family in a home; the house of God, meaning the temple; a genealogical house, such as the house of David; etc. This can extend to any in one’s house, such as servants.

This is important to know because nothing is said about what “household” means in relation to Lydia. If she had children, nothing is said of their age much less hers. Maybe she had no children. Maybe they were grown up. It could be her and her husband, a married son with two children, and two servants. The account leaves no hint of her situation.

The reason this is important is because, incredibly, scholars have used this verse as a justification for infant baptism. This, despite there being no evidence that children were even in the house. There is not an instance in Scripture where baptism is conducted apart from belief by an individual. Any such notion must be inserted into the text.

Further, in saying that her household was baptized does not mean that “all” of her house was baptized. If she dwelt with ten people or two, nothing is said of who was included in the rite. It cannot be assumed that everyone she dwelt with was baptized. It is a general statement without being further defined.

With that considered, it next says, “she begged us, saying, ‘If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord.’” The words here are telling. Unlike the faulty analysis that the verse justifies infant baptism, the words now do reveal something quite clearly. Paul had spoken, she had believed, and immediately after belief, baptism is recorded.

The implication is clear. When she avowed her faith in the Lord, it is obvious that Paul or one of the others then told her something like, “As a sign of your faith, it is commanded by the Lord that you be baptized.” Luke’s recording of this act of baptism as the very next words after her belief indicate nothing less. And her words now fully confirm this. She was told to be obedient to the command, she followed through with it, and then she appealed to that act of obedience by saying, “If you have judged me faithful to the Lord.”

Luke is precisely communicating that what occurred was an act of obedience to the Lord’s command to be baptized. This is what is precisely being intimated in the account as it is presented. Though the account is descriptive, it follows directly upon the prescriptive words of Jesus as recorded in Matthew 28:19 noted above. She believed, she was faithful to the Lord to obey His prescription, and now as a hoped-for sign that this was sufficient to demonstrate her faithfulness, she next says, “come to my house and stay.”

She immediately felt the bond of faith and was then willing to extend herself to those who so willingly gave of themselves to share the word of truth with her. She felt the onus was on her to respond by welcoming them into her home as guests. With that, Luke records, “So she persuaded us.”

Again, Luke has included himself directly into the narrative, demonstrating that he was there and observed what had occurred. His precise wording, despite being a descriptive account, has markedly pointed out that baptism is something that is prescribed by the Lord, and it is to be instructed for those who, by faith, come to Him.

Life application: It is not just what has been said in the conversion of Lydia that is telling. Things that have not been said give us insights into doctrine as well. There is nothing recorded, which certainly would have been if it occurred, concerning the speaking of tongues by Lydia. Though this has been recorded elsewhere, it has also been left out of other accounts. This tells us that speaking in tongues is something that occurred for special reasons in specific circumstances but that it is not something to be expected upon belief.

Also, Luke did not record what Paul said when he spoke, but it is certain he spoke the gospel concerning Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. Luke records nothing about baptism being mentioned by the missionaries. And yet, it is certain that the matter was raised. The record of her being baptized proves this. Logical inferences can and must be made concerning these things.

When you are presented with a false gospel, you should be able to spot it. After hearing it, you should then question the person presenting it concerning where what they say is to be found in Scripture. If it is not openly stated, and if it cannot be logically inferred, then it is to be rejected.

The same is true with other doctrinal matters. If someone presents an argument for infant baptism based on a verse such as this one from Acts, be prepared to logically explain why the thinking is faulty. Just because something is not explicitly stated, it does not mean that it is incorrect. However, making inferences from the text must be supportable. If they cannot be defended, they are to be rejected.

The more well-versed you are with Scripture, the more soundly you will be able to logically defend what is right and appropriate. Keep reading the Bible, keep studying it, and keep meditating on it. This is how you will be able to settle yourself into sound doctrine.

Lord God, may we be careful about what we accept concerning various teachings that are presented to us. Help us to fully consider what we have heard, compare it with Scripture, and make logical deductions or inferences based on what we know. Help us not to get caught up in strange doctrines that are not in accord with Your word. Amen.

Melon stand in Virginia. Good stuff.

Tuesday, 25 April 2023

Now a certain woman named Lydia heard us. She was a seller of purple from the city of Thyatira, who worshiped God. The Lord opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul. Acts 16:14

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).

Note: The tenses of the verbs used by the NKJV are not in accord with the Greek. An accurate rendering is, “And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple of the city of Thyatira, worshiping God, was listening. The Lord opened her heart to attend to the things being spoken by Paul” (BLB). This will be used.

In the previous verse, the group of missionaries went to the riverside of the city at Philippi, sitting down and speaking to the women who met there. Next, Luke records, “And a certain woman named Lydia.”

As often happens in Scripture, a figure is introduced, highlighting him or her. Even though there was an unknown number of women gathered, as evidenced by the previous verse, one is especially highlighted. Her name, Lydia, is believed by some to be connected to the Ludim recorded as early as Genesis 10:13. The Ludim were descended from Mizraim, the son of Ham. From there, Lydia would mean something like From Lud.

Abarim provides details on how this came about, saying, “Someone from לוד (Lud) would be called לודי (Luday). A female Ludite would be called לודיה (Ludyah), which transliterated into Greek would form Λυδια (Luddia). That name transliterated into Latin forms our familiar name Lydia.”

The name Lydia was apparently popular among the Greeks, and so it may or may not be that she was named this because she was a descendant of the Ludim.

Of this woman, possibly from this ancient people group descending from Ham, it next notes she was “a seller of purple.” Purple, or porphura in Greek, was considered a highly valuable color. It was very difficult to obtain, coming from shellfish. A person wearing such a color would normally be quite wealthy. It was the color often worn by royalty. HELPS Word Studies notes that there were three familiar shades of purple in the ancient world: deep violet, deep scarlet, and deep blue.

Being a dealer in this fabric meant that she would be well-connected and of good means. She is next noted as being “of the city of Thyatira.” This was a city found in the old district of Lydia which was in the Roman province of Asia. It will be mentioned three more times in Revelation 1 and 2. Albert Barnes notes the following –

“This was a city of Lydia, in Asia Minor, now called Akhisar. The art of dyeing was early cultivated in the neighborhood of Thyatira, as we learn from Homer (Iliad, iv. 141), and as is confirmed by inscriptions found in that city – a circumstance which may be referred to as confirming the veracity of the statements of Luke even in his casual allusions.”

Of this woman, Lydia, it next says she was “worshiping God.” Being a present participle, it indicates that this was her regular conduct. Being a Sabbath, and being present with others who met, it may be that she was a proselyte. However, this may not be the case.

In Acts 10, it said that Cornelius was a devout man who feared God. This does not mean he was a proselyte. Like him, Lydia may have simply gone and worshipped God without knowing anything directly about Him from a Jewish context. However, with the arrival of these missionaries, it notes that she “was listening.”

The verb is imperfect. She listened and continued to listen. Her ears were attentive to what was being said, taking it in and processing it. During this time, Luke notes that, “The Lord opened her heart.”

Of this, the Cambridge commentary states, “St Luke recognizes that without this the word would have made no entrance.” There is no reason to assume this at all. They equate the reception of the word to an active participation of the Lord in opening her heart. This is completely contrary to what Paul writes elsewhere, such as, “So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17).

Rather than an active zapping of the heart of Lydia by the Lord as suggested by Cambridge, it is a passive action resulting from hearing the word of the Lord. The Lord opened her heart through the message proclaimed. This is perfectly evident from Luke’s next words. He says that her heart was opened by the Lord “to attend to the things being spoken by Paul.”

It clearly says through the use of an imperfect verb that she was listening and continued to listen. It then says that her heart was opened by the Lord. How? Through listening to the word of God being spoken forth. The word of God is an extension of who God is. He is presenting Himself through the word. If Paul and the others accurately presented the word of God to Lydia, which is what occurred, then the Lord was speaking through them. Thus, her heart was passively opened by the Lord through the process.

Life application: The Calvinistic thinking that God must actively and supernaturally intervene in each person who comes to Him dismisses the notion that the word of God is sufficient to do what it is purposed to do. Further, it dismisses the fact that the word of God is, in fact, a supernatural tool, given by God. To them, the word is insufficient to do what it was given to do. But the word itself says that it is sufficient –

“So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth;
It shall not return to Me void,
But it shall accomplish what I please,
And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it.” Isaiah 55:11

The claim of Cambridge that without the Lord’s personal intervention in the process the word would have made no entrance is exactly the opposite of what is said by Jesus to the Jews in John 5. First, He says –

“Yet I do not receive testimony from man, but I say these things that you may be saved.” John 5:34

The point of Jesus speaking was for those who heard to be saved. He makes that perfectly obvious in His statement to them. A few verses later, He says –

“But you do not have His word abiding in you, because whom He sent, Him you do not believe. ³⁹ You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. ⁴⁰ But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.” John 5:38-40

Jesus ties their rejection of Him to their failure to accept the word, not God’s failure to actively change their heart through external stimulation.

God does not provide a zap with a cosmic defibrillator to suddenly jump-start a person’s heart, opening it so that His word will suddenly be palatable to a person. The word is like a defibrillator all by itself. It provides all the zap a person needs to be opened so that they can respond to the call of God.

Some hearts, however, are un-zappable because they are predisposed to dismissing what the word says. The Calvinistic model of regeneration fails because it dismisses the purpose of why the word was given, and it dismisses the power of the word to do what it is set forth to accomplish.

Whether you are saved or not, if your life is currently not geared towards the things of God, you need to have an attitude change. With that, pick up the word, read it, and receive the necessary zap to get you into the game or back into the game. The word is active and alive. It is ready to change you and mold you to the image of God in Jesus Christ. Let it do so!

Lord God, thank You for the wonderful word You have given us. It will make a difference in our lives if we simply allow it to do so. It is that powerful and it is that wonderful! Help us also to convey it properly so that others may hear and be saved. To Your glory, we pray. Amen.

St. Thomas Parish Church, Founded 1833.

Monday, 24 April 2023 

And on the Sabbath day we went out of the city to the riverside, where prayer was customarily made; and we sat down and spoke to the women who met there. Acts 16:13

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, Luke noted the group’s arrival in Philippi, saying that they “were staying in that city for some days.” He now begins to detail things that occurred during that time, saying, “And on the Sabbath day,

It could be that there was a local synagogue and that these men went there as was the usual custom. Not being mentioned by Luke does not mean it didn’t occur. Understanding that, Luke next says of this particular Sabbath, “we went out of the city.” In these words, is a very small change in some Greek texts –

Pylēs – (city) gate.
Poleōs – city.

The meaning is unchanged because by going out of the city gate one goes out of the city. With that noted, it is also seen that Luke continues to include himself in the narrative, meaning that he and all the team went together “to the riverside.” As noted, there may have been a local synagogue and this visit to the river is coming after a visit to it. However, Charles Ellicott notes the following based on a variation in some Greek texts –

“…where an oratory (i.e., a place of prayer) was established. The word, which was the Greek equivalent for the Hebrew ‘house of prayer’ (Matthew 21:13), is used in this sense by Josephus … and was current among the Jews at Rome. Where they had no synagogue, and in a military station like Philippi there was not likely to be one, the Jews frequented the river-banks, which made ablutions easy, and often succeeded in getting a piece of ground assigned for that purpose outside the walls of the city.”

Whether this is simply a visit to a riverside or to a specific place, it was a place “where prayer was customarily made.” It is these words in the Greek that are again slightly different in some texts. Regardless of whether it was a specific place for prayer or a place to simply stop and pray, the fact that it is by a river is the main point. Of this, the Pulpit Commentary says –

“The river is not the Strymon, which is a day’s journey distant from Philippi, but probably a small stream called the Gangas or Gangites, which is crossed by the Via Eguatia, about a mile out of Philippi. The neighborhood of water, either near a stream or on the seashore, was usually preferred by the Jews as a place for prayer, as affording facility for ablutions.”

It is at this place by a river, and which was set aside for prayer, that Luke says, “we sat down and spoke to the women who met there.” The Greek more literally reads, “having sat down, we were speaking to the women having gathered there.” They were gathered and then continued in their discourse for some time. Charles Ellicott provides a well-reasoned explanation for Luke’s careful detail of this situation –

“The fact that there were only women shows the almost entire absence of a Jewish population. Possibly, too, the decree of Claudius, expelling the Jews from Rome (Acts 18:2), was enforced, as stated above, in the colonia, which was as a part of Rome, and as Jewesses would not be likely to have settled there without their husbands or brothers, it is probable that the women whom St. Paul found assembled were, like Lydia, proselytes who desired to remain faithful to their new faith, even in the absence of any settled provision for their instruction. Women thus placed would naturally welcome the presence of strangers who, probably, wore the garb of a Rabbi, and who showed when they sat down (see Note on Acts 13:14) that they were about to preach. We note that here also the narrator speaks of himself as teaching. (See Note on Acts 16:10.)”

Life application: Everything recorded in the Bible is given to tell us something about what God wants us to know. Sometimes, that even includes what is not said, such as referring to women but not to men as in this verse. If there was a synagogue, there was no fruit that came from a visit to it. If there was only this place of prayer, noting only the women tells us something else. Ellicott’s analysis would make sense based on the situation in the Roman Empire at the time.

We can’t be dogmatic about what the Bible is silent on, but we are being told to focus on the details and consider them. This is what we should be doing as we read the Bible. Stop and ask “why” from time to time. Think about what is being said (or omitted). If you cannot think of any reason for a particular statement, then read some commentaries. There is usually a suitable answer or two that may help explain why things are recorded.

Keep studying! The Bible is a treasure waiting to be uncovered with every page.

Lord God, thank You for these delights to our minds that are found in Your word. With each verse, we have things that we can consider and then add to our ever-growing knowledge of Scripture. Help us to be faithful in our study and contemplation of this precious gift You have given to us! Amen.