Acts 14
LenskiCHAPTER XIV
THE FIRST MISSIONARY JOURNEY: ICONIUM, LYSTRA, DERBE, AND THE RETURN
Acts 14:1
1 Luke intends to give us only a brief account of the work in Iconium. Into the present short chapter all the rest of the work that was done on this missionary journey plus the return to Syrian Antioch is compressed. His plan seems to be to picture characteristic experiences encountered in this first effort to extend the gospel from the synagogue into the Gentile world in general. In Iconium great success is paralleled by strong opposition. Yet the work is accomplished, and before the opposition comes to its climax, Paul and Barnabas prudently leave.
Besides the remarks made in connection with 13:51 let us note that some of the former pictures of Iconium must be revised. A colony of Jews was prominent in the city; it had only one synagogue which was not as large as the one at Antioch but had men in it who were influential enough at last to enlist the aid of the magistrates in taking violent measures against the gospel messengers. The rest of the population was divided between Greeks and the older Phrygian stock of natives. There were, however, no Roman officials in it at this time. The greater prominence of the city when it became a Roman colony and outshone Pisidian Antioch was achieved at a later date. Several Roman roads entered the city, and the great highway that extended east and west passed through it.
Paul and Barnabas had come about forty-five miles from Antioch and considered Iconium a city that was sufficiently important for the planting of a Christian congregation. It was Paul’s constant policy to enter the greater centers from which the gospel might spread into neighboring territory. But on this first journey Antioch is the largest place which he visits. He grew as he worked until he eventually fixed his heart even on Rome.
Now it came to pass in Iconium that together they went into the synagogue of the Jews and spoke so that a great multitude of both Jews and Greeks believed.
It should be well noted at the outset that all the verbs of this paragraph that refer to Iconium are aorists. We have a recitation of facts from the time of the arrival to the time of the summary departure. Another feature is that Paul and Barnabas are indistinguishably combined; from κατὰτὸαὑτό onward they speak and act “together.” Paul did not always do the speaking, Barnabas undoubtedly did his share of it. Paul would see to it that he did.
R., W. P., thinks that these aorists covered only one Sabbath’s speaking and calls it “a tremendous first meeting.” But Luke does not say “on the day of the Sabbath” as he did in 13:14, and does not say “God-fearing Greeks” but “Greeks” in general. The claim that these were only proselytes is met by the fact that in the preceding chapter Luke always used the distinctive terms when he referred to proselytes and does not use one of them here. Some of the Ἕλληνες, to be sure, were proselytes of the gate, but by no means all of them. This view is not affected by the use of τὰἔθνη in v. 2; it is rather upheld, for these “Gentiles” were the unbelievers, not only unbelieving Greeks but Phrygians as well, who were placed in opposition to the ἀδελφοί, “brethren” or believers.
Nor, on the assumption that all was accomplished by one Sabbath day’s preaching, should we stress οὕτως to mean that the missionaries preached “so” exceptionally as to produce a phenomenal result: “so plainly, so convincingly, with such an evidence and demonstration of the Spirit, and with such power; so warmly, so affectionately, and with such a manifest concern for the souls of men; so from the heart, so earnestly and seriously, so boldly and courageously.” This is overdoing a good thing as though at other times and in other places Paul and Barnabas did not speak so and so and so and hence had no such phenomenal results. We cannot thus separate and emphasize οὕτως which has no emphatic position but is to be combined with ὥστε: “so that.”
All these “Greeks” were not in the synagogue on that day, and certainly not those who were not proselytes. These aorists are constative. Luke is giving us a summary. He first describes the success without saying how long it took to achieve it. Yet we may regard the aorist πιστεῦσαι as ingressive, “came to faith.” As the missionaries spoke Sabbath after Sabbath, more and more Greeks were attracted until a crowd of both Jews and Greeks came to faith. This infinitive shows what was spoken, namely the gospel of Jesus the Savior (13:23).
How Paul, for instance, preached it Luke has reported in 13:17, etc. Luke does not need to report that again; and he certainly cannot mean that at Iconium the preaching was better than it had been at Antioch. Look at that sermon delivered at Antioch and ask yourself how it could be improved. While the chief purpose of the account in regard to Antioch is to relate how Paul and Barnabas for the first time turned to the Greeks in general (13:46), the secondary purpose is evidently to exhibit the manner of Paul’s preaching on his missionary tour. In order to understand what occurred in Iconium we should not forget Antioch. We must especially note that here “Greeks” is to be considered in the light of 13:46, namely Greeks in general, also such as were not proselytes.
Acts 14:2
2 But the Jews who came to be disobedient stirred up and embittered the souls of the Gentiles against the brethren.
This is the second effect of the preaching, a party of Jews “fixed in disobedience”; the aorist ἀπειθήσαντες conveys the idea that they had come to this fixed state. The participle itself means to be unpersuaded, thus to refuse belief, and thus to refuse to obey. The two latter meanings merge. Faith is at times called obedience; and unbelief disobedience. This is due to the fact that the Word demands faith, consequently responding with faith is to obey, refusing faith is to disobey. The point to be noted in this characterization is the fact that these Jews had heard the gospel in their synagogue and yet rejected it; the participle could not be applied to men who had not yet heard the Word or had not heard it sufficiently.
Another noteworthy point is the observation that, as was the case in Antioch, Jews were again the opponents of the gospel and offered violence to its ministers. They have this unenviable distinction; the Gentiles are only drawn into it through the agency of these Jews. We note that in 26:19 Paul says with reference to himself and his own conversion: “I was not disobedient”; note also Heb. 12:25: “See that ye refuse not him that speaketh.” This is the sad feature especially in regard to missionary preaching, that some become fixed in disobedience and, though salvation is knocking at their doors, deliberately turn to perdition.
Fixed unbelief is ever morally vicious. It does not always go to the extreme, but when the circumstances are favorable, it ignores every moral consideration in vilification of the gospel and in taking base measures against its adherents. So these Jews did not content themselves with rejecting the gospel, the devil plagued them to such an extent that “they stirred up and embittered the souls of the Gentiles against the brethren.” These Jews started an agitation against the converts by stirring up the Gentile population with slanderous reports about the brethren. Here κακόω has the non-classical, later, and rarer sense of “to embitter,” to make evil-minded against someone. A uniformly used weapon against the gospel and its true believers is this process of poisoning the minds of those who as yet do not know the gospel.
A discrepancy has been found between what Luke here states that the hostile Jews succeeded in doing (the aorists imply success) and what the next verse states, namely that Paul and Barnabas spent much time in Iconium working openly. In order to remove this supposed difficulty some would eliminate v. 3 or dispose of it as a marginal remark. Reference is also made to the reading of the Codex Bezae which speaks of “a persecution” and of how “the Lord quickly gave peace.” Let us say in general about this codex and the many additions it offers to the accredited text that it is a late effort to improve on Luke and is taken too seriously by certain interpreters. Luke knows of no “persecution” that was followed by a sudden providential “peace” which then enabled Paul and Barnabas to continue their work. The romance regarding Thecla is introduced with a trial for Paul and Barnabas in which the magistrates discovered the falsity of the charges and acquitted the prisoners, and thus the Lord provided peace; Thecla is regarded as a convert who was gained in Iconium.
These views are answered when we note that the Jews succeeded in embittering only the souls of the Gentiles. Beyond that they were not successful. Again, this viciousness was directed “against the brethren” and not against Paul and Barnabas in particular. This phrase excludes an arrest and a trial of Paul and of Barnabas. The attack took in all the believers; we may say it “bit off more than it could chew.” In regard to tangible results, this general attack furnished none that Luke could record. The effort put forth dissipated itself largely because it tried to take in too much territory. The feeling that was temporarily aroused subsided.
Luke writes that the Jews worked on “the Gentiles,” he does not say on “the magistrates,” he does not even say on “the Greeks,” those who had Greek culture and education. These Jews wasted their efforts in trying to stir up too many people. They tried to set too many against too many and so accomplished nothing. And that is exactly what Luke implies in v. 3. The work of Paul and Barnabas was not stopped. Where, then, is the discrepancy? There is none in Luke’s account.
What Luke tells us is that in Iconium, too, a hostile party of Jews soon formed and vented its hostility by turning the Gentiles generally against the Christians. Under this handicap Paul and Barnabas labored, but it did not hinder them to any notable degree. They worked right on. Read what Luke says. He does not refer to “a first explosion” in v. 2, to be followed by the “second” in v. 5. Luke knows of only one.
Acts 14:3
3 A sufficient time, therefore, they spent boldly speaking in the Lord, he bearing witness to the Word of his grace by granting signs and wonders to occur through their hands.
The close connection of this verse with the two preceding verses is shown by οὗν, which means that, with the situation as indicated, many Jews and Greeks turned into believers. Because other Jews stirred up the Gentiles, Paul and Barnabas spent a considerable amount of time in Iconium, meaning enough time fully to establish a permanent Christian congregation. “Boldly speaking” does not mean “copious and commanding eloquence.” Paul always spoke with boldness, the participle implying free and open speaking that holds nothing back. He later asked the Christians to pray that he might speak thus, Eph. 6:19, 20. Luke notes that Paul and Barnabas spoke thus here in Iconium because the Jews had embittered the Gentiles. That did not make the preachers timid and hesitant lest they say too much; they spoke with utmost freedom, held nothing back, cared not who heard them. Warmth and eloquence there may have been also, but Luke says nothing about that.
The gospel will cause offense—let it. So many try to preach it with an eye to their personal interest by toning down unpopular doctrines, flattering themselves that they are up-to-date, progressive, even wise. Not so these two great heralds.
We have no smooth translation for ἐπὶτῷΚυρίῳ, really, “on the basis of the Lord,” and thus render “in the Lord.” The Lord was the reason of their courageous freedom of utterance. But not merely in general as inspiring them with confidence that by relying on his commission and promise they had nothing to fear; here in Iconium the Lord “was bearing witness to the Word of his grace” in a signal manner. He was testifying that the Word preached by his messengers was, indeed, his Word, and at the same time, by the manner in which he bore this testimony, he made plain who he really was—not a Jesus dead and buried, his body gone, no one knowing what became of it (this is the gospel of many today)—but a Jesus risen and glorified, the Savior in heaven, exercising the divine power and majesty as the great Head of the church.
There is no καί preceding διδόντι so that it describes the manner of μαρτυροῦντι: “he testifying by granting.” A precious name is here used as a designation for the gospel. In Paul’s sermon in Antioch he called it “the Word of this salvation” (13:26); and Luke, “the Word of God” and “of the Lord” (13:44–49). It is also “the Word of grace,” which the Lord’s grace uses as its tool and instrument for reaching the sinful and guilty souls of men in order to bestow itself upon them, free them from sin, guilt, and all condemnation, and unite them to the Lord as his own. The Word is thus the means of grace, the divine channel through which grace flows to the sinner. 1 Cor. 2:1–5. Χάρις is here, as throughout, the Lord’s favor and love which is shown to those who, because of their sin and guilt, do not deserve it. The word always connotes guilt and signifies the love which would remove that guilt.
This Word of grace the Lord attested as what it was, the bearer of divine grace to the sinner, by means of miracles of gracious healing and deliverance from fearful ailments. These “signs and wonders” (see 2:19 on the terms) the Lord appended as seals and credentials to the Word; it was like signing his own name to it. All those credentials stand to this day and are for this very reason not repeated; for genuine seals need no further seals to prove them genuine. If seals must have still other seals, this would prove only that none of them are sufficient, which is the claim of those who deny the reality of miracles.
Luke reports no signs that might have occurred in Antioch, and in the case of Paphos only that of striking the magus blind. Let us note this when Luke writes that here in Iconium Paul and Barnabas wrought miracles, the Lord “granting,” “giving” them. No apostle or other Christian ever wrought a sign at will but only when the Lord so willed and by his Spirit prompted and directed the act (see 9:40). Compare Heb. 2:4: “signs and wonders … according to his own will.” Here the signs and wonders were a tremendous testimony regarding the Word for Paul and Barnabas and for all who saw them and all who heard them. The hostile Jews might agitate all they pleased, the Lord made his Word only the stronger. “Through their hands” does not necessarily imply the laying on of hands although this symbolic gesture may have been used (on its significance see 6:6). Διά is important, for it makes Paul and Barnabas the Lord’s media and nothing more. The Lord used their hands when and where he desired.
Acts 14:4
4 Now the multitude of the city was split, and some were with the Jews, some with the apostles.
Note how δέ corresponds to μέν in v. 3 and balances the two statements: the long stay—the whole city split. But v. 4 says more, it goes back to v. 2. Those wicked Jews were the rallying point of the one party (οἱμέν), and the apostles the center of the other (οἱδέ). The entire Gentile population was divided into two opposing camps; σύν is used exactly as when we say, “I am with you” on any question. A point not to be overlooked is the fact that Paul and Barnabas filled the entire city with the sound of the gospel, filled it so that practically no person remained neutral. In this they had the aid of the hostile Jews. The more these agitated, the more the gospel became known. People simply had to go and hear what these men were teaching and doing.
Paul never went off into a corner, gathered a handful, and then thought his task done. Even in Athens he had the philosophers of the city around him. So he thoroughly evangelized Iconium. Warneck says: “It is not rhetorical hyperbole when Paul says of himself that he filled the world with his gospel, Rom. 10:18; 15:19; Acts 17:6.” “But thanks be unto God, which always leadeth us in triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest through us the savor of his knowledge in every place,” 2 Cor. 2:14. In those days all sorts of exotic religious wares were offered (see the samples in 8:9, etc.; 13:6, etc.), but Paul never failed to lift the gospel above everything human and filled entire cities and districts with his message.
Here Luke uses the word “apostles” with reference to both Paul and Barnabas; the term is used in the wider sense. So James, the Lord’s brother, is an apostle (Gal. 1:19); Epaphroditus (Phil. 2:25); Sylvanus and Timothy (1 Tim. 2:6); Andronicus and Junia (Rom. 16:7); and there are false apostles (2 Cor. 11:13). The gospel always causes a division, one that is at times sharp and painful. Jesus himself said it would do so, Matt. 10:34, etc., and elsewhere. Sometimes Christians do not like this, and the children of unbelief constantly reproach us for bringing about this disharmony or whatever they are pleased to call it. But this is the very nature of the gospel.
The only way to avoid it is to preach and to believe some sham gospel, and even that may cause division. When light comes, darkness resents it; when righteousness appears, the unrighteous assail it; when life comes, the powers of death bestir themselves to destroy it.
Even without becoming polemical the gospel interferes with what the heathen regard as their dearest treasures. Many heathen religions are syncretistic, but in the case of Jesus there is either the acceptance of faith or the rejection of unbelief. Warneck is right: “Over against the Son of God indifference is impossible; no one can erect an altar for him at the side of the idols he may have in his pantheon.” Many religious errors are unionistic; they tolerate and fraternize each other. But the gospel and its truths cannot compromise nor fraternize with a single error.
Acts 14:5
5 Luke has described the situation which at last came to a climax. Paul and Barnabas did not avoid or fear the issue and did, of course, not provoke it although in all probability they expected it in some form or other (13:50). And when there occurred an onset of both the Gentiles and Jews with their rulers to outrage and to stone them, having become aware of it, they fled for refuge to the cities of Lycaonia, Lystra, and Derbe, and the region round about; and there they continued proclaiming the good news.
Real persecution at last raised its head. Here there was fulfilled what the Lord had told Paul in advance: “I will show him how many things he must suffer for my name’s sake” (9:16). There was an actual “onset” or “assault,” (Luther, Sturm) and not a mere plot. A mob was formed and got under way in order to locate Paul and Barnabas in order to heap insults upon them and to stone them. It was composed of both Gentiles and Jews plus the rulers of the latter. We cannot understand how B.-D. 393, 6 can translate ἐγένετοὁρμὴ … ὑβρίσαι sie beschlossen, beabsichtigten; this was not a meeting that passed a resolution of intentions.
The other view is that the mob actually seized Paul and Barnabas and began to revile and to pelt them with stones, and that συνιδόντες, on considering the matter, Paul and Barnabas took to flight—to be sure, a wise consideration. The participle, however, does not mean “considering” or “having considered,” but, as in 5:2 and 12:12, to know something together with somebody else. Somebody rushed in and warned the intended victims; the mob never found them.
We should note that this time the animosity was not directed against the brethren, but that it concentrated upon the two principals alone. Those Jews had no success when they endeavored to embitter the city (v. 3); this time they sought an objective they could quickly reach. These considerations indicate that it is difficult to determine who the “rulers” were, whether these were the Jewish elders or these together with the city magistrates. Some think of the latter. But what about the stoning? We are told that this was to be only a pelting with stones in order to drive the victims out of town.
Nor does 13:50 decide the question. There the city magistrates did have a hand but did not join a mob and yet got rid of Paul and Barnabas. It is asking rather much of us to believe that the city magistrates joined the Jewish elders in a mob. This was a large and important city, and the dignity of the magistrates was accordingly. If they had taken a hand, we should have had a repetition of the events which occurred at Antioch and not a mob. Luke uses the inverse order because the Gentiles (again he does not use “Greeks,” v. 3) formed the larger crowd, the Jews were a smaller number, their elders were the real leaders, and stoning was to be the method of summary execution in regular Jewish style.
Acts 14:6
6 Κατέφυγον means “to flee for refuge.” Paul and Barnabas are not cowardly but prudent. When it was necessary, Paul risked his life, otherwise he did not. His work had been completed in Iconium, the whole city knew about the gospel. The missionaries did not flee because they were defeated; they merely left one victory behind in order to start winning another. They acted in accord with Matt. 10:23.
Lystra and Derbe belonged to the ethnographic section of Lycaonia. The old native languages were still spoken in these ethnographic sections, and so the old names survived. Lycaonia was, however, Roman territory only in part, namely in that part containing Lystra and Derbe. One might call it “Roman Lycaonia.” But the old name was Galatica Lycaonia because it was incorporated into that Roman province. The other part was not Roman because it was being ruled by King Antiochus and hence was called Lycaonia Antiochiana. Paul confined himself to Roman territory.
“The region round about” is added to show that the gospel penetrated into the entire section as this had been the case in 13:49. The imperial road from Antioch to Iconium passed on to Lystra and Derbe. Zahn makes Lystra a Roman colony, and also Derbe which was located near the passes that crossed the Taurus range. It was a high honor for a provincial city to be made a colonia, for this demonstrated the interest of the emperor who regarded the city as worthy of the residence of Roman citizens, the aristocracy of the empire. About 300 Roman citizens were placed into such a city, which did not itself have citizenship. The city thus became a military outpost of Rome, an advance guard of the mother city, a small edition of Rome itself.
In times of peace the military feature was not prominent. The most important feature of the transfer of the work to Lystra and Derbe is that neither place had a synagogue of Jews. Paul and Barnabas were now in completely Gentile and pagan cities—a most important step in their work.
Acts 14:7
7 Now at last we have an imperfect tense (periphrastic) which indicates that the two continued preaching the gospel. In v. 20 Paul and Barnabas reach Derbe. The view that they had taken along disciples from Antioch and Iconium on account of the Lycaonian language is untenable, because such disciples could themselves not have spoken Lycaonian—the natives of Iconium spoke Phrygian. Greek was spoken everywhere. In the Orient it is today a simple matter for men to speak several languages, they seem to grow up that way.
Acts 14:8
8 And in Lystra there was sitting a man, impotent as to his feet, lame from his mother’s womb, who never yet did walk. This one was listening to Paul speaking; who, on earnestly looking at him and seeing that he had faith to be made whole, said with a great voice, Arise on thy feet upright! And he leaped up and began to walk.
In v. 6 we have the feminine singular Λύστρα, here the neuter plural Λύστρα: both are names of the city. Luke intends to narrate an experience in an entirely pagan city: first Paul and Barnabas are treated as gods, next as devils. This is only a glimpse into the work done in Lystra, one that is significant in every way. The miracle is almost a duplicate of that wrought by Peter and John. In the former instance there are two companions, Peter and John; here two, Paul and Barnabas—both times there is congenital lameness of the worst type—both times unsolicited healing—both times great results. But withal there are also great differences: the one man is a Jew, the other a pagan—the one is minus faith, the other has faith—in the one case many believers are the result, in the other a great manifestation of pagan idolatrous ideas. The fact that Luke was aware of the parallel should not be disputed, but the claim that Luke invented this miracle in order to make Paul the equal of Peter is unwarranted.
This man was not a beggar as was the one healed by Peter and John. Luke carefully notes the begging of the latter yet says not a word to that effect about this man. So he says nothing about a synagogue because none existed in Lystra. The man is described as sitting (imperfect), for he could not even stand. The description continues in v. 9, the tenses holding us in suspense until the aorist relates what Paul did. Luke’s detailed description of the man’s condition has been noted.
We may say that Luke’s interest as a physician is evident in this. First, we learn that the trouble lay in his inability to use his feet, the dative “as to his feet” being a dative of specification which is often used in place of the accusative; R. 523 regards it as the locative with adjectives. Secondly, this condition was congenital, “from his mother’s womb,” he was probably injured at birth. Finally, the man had never walked, the aorist merely stating the past fact as such whereas we should use the past perfect. Here was a case that was absolutely beyond human help.
Acts 14:9
9 The cripple was listening to Paul’s speaking. In this respect he differed from the beggar in the Temple. It is entirely probable that Paul was recounting some of the miracles of healing wrought by Jesus. The cripple was thinking of himself and of how Jesus might have healed him, too, if he only had been there. But the idea to be expressed is by no means that by casually looking at him Paul saw that he had this faith τοῦσωθῆναι, “to be made whole” (“saved” from his condition, the infinitive after a noun with the idea of complement, R. 1076). This ἀτενίσας is the same as that occurring in 3:4, the result of an intimation of the Holy Spirit that a miracle was to be wrought upon the man.
The thesis is sound that no man wrought a miracle without this specific direction on the part of the Spirit. Miracles were never wrought promiscuously at the will of the apostles. Paul saw that the cripple had this faith by observing the eyes and the bearing of the cripple. Or did the man voice this faith? It is often assumed that Peter, too, looked and saw faith in the beggar; but the opposite is true, he saw the beggar expecting and thinking of nothing but a good-sized gift of money, wherefore Peter also told him he had no money to give. Faith sometimes preceded the healing (here), sometimes followed (Peter’s beggar).
Acts 14:10
10 As he had done in Iconium and had not done in Antioch, the Lord intended to attest the gospel by signs and wonders in this city (v. 3). So “with a great voice” that expressed the great divine authority and the great divine power now to be manifested Paul commanded this cripple to arise on his feet. And he leaped up at once (the aorist of ἅλλομαι expressing the one act) and did not only stand upright but “began to walk” (the imperfect to indicate the action that continued indefinitely).
Acts 14:11
11 Luke’s interest does not lie in this cripple’s personal story, for not another word is said about him. The miracle is described for the sake of the strange result it produced. And the multitudes, on seeing what Paul did, lifted up their voice, saying in Lycaonian, The gods, having become like to men, did come down to us! And they began to call Barnabas Zeus and Paul Hermes, since he was the one leading the speaking. And the priest of the Zeus that was before the city, after bringing bulls and garlands to the portals, together with the multitudes was intending to sacrifice.
Peter had encountered the superstitions of Simon Magus in Samaria, Paul a lesser magus in Paphos; it is now that Paul and Barnabas encounter the idolatrous Greek mythology that was prevalent in the Roman world. From the narrative one gathers that the cripple was one of a large audience to whom the gospel was preached and that the healing occurred at the conclusion of the preaching. It is not stated where the gathering occurred save that it seems to have taken place outdoors in some square of the city. We note incidentally that the missionaries seem to have had no trouble whatever in reaching multitudes of the general population, entirely pagan though they were. Only incidentally we learn that converts were made and that a congregation was organized and that elders were appointed (v. 22, 23).
The crowds that witnessed the miracle were native Lycaonians; there were perhaps some Greeks among them. They at once called to mind their old mythology and in their excitement in a natural way reverted to their native Lycaonian language and declared that once more the gods had taken on the likeness of men and had come down to them from Olympus. Did not Ovid in his Metamorphoses VIII, 626, tell the story that Zeus and Hermes had appeared in the form of men in the neighboring region of Phrygia? And now the story of Baucis and Philemon was being re-enacted in a new way in Lycaonia! Our versions use the Latin names Jupiter and Mercury instead of the Greek Zeus (genitive Διός) and Hermes. But this does not justify the assumption that Luke substituted Greek gods for what were actually Phrygian divinities and the claim that the main god’s name was Papas or Pappas and that there was a secondary god Mēn.
Acts 14:12
12 But Luke himself answers this claim. He states that Paul was called Hermes because he led in the speaking. It was the Greek god Hermes and he alone who was thus indicated. In the Greek mythology Hermes was the messenger of the gods, the spokesman of Zeus, who was eloquent in speech and the legendary inventor of speech. What Phrygian god fits this description? Hermes was beautiful and graceful. The statues show him in the position of a swift runner bearing messages. Paul scarcely fits that description, wherefore also Luke indicates that it was not his form and figure but his ability in speech that suggested the identification.
Nothing is said as to why Barnabas was thought to be Zeus. But we may say that he was older and may venture the suggestion that he was of a more imposing stature. Perhaps because the people feel certain that Paul was Hermes, Barnabas was made Zeus without further question. It is not likely that afterward, in Gal. 4:14, Paul had this episode in mind when he wrote that the Galatians had received him “as an angel of God.” A Greek god and a divine angel are rather different; besides Paul adds “even as Christ Jesus.” His letter was written to all the churches in Galatia and not to Lystra alone. Analogous to Paul’s comparison with an angel are II Sam. 19:27; Zech. 12:8; Mal. 2:7, and not the idea of his being a Greek god.
Acts 14:13
13 Acting on the extravagant surmise that the two gods are disguised as men, preparations are made to offer sacrifices in the temple of Zeus. “The Zeus that was before the city” was the temple dedicated to this god which contained his statue and was probably situated on some eminence just outside of the city. Most ancient cities were walled so that their boundaries were very definite. The Codex Bezae has the plural “the priests,” but the preferred reading has but one priest. Luke speaks of “the priest” as the chief priest by whose order alone things could go forward; and it is self-evident that this lone man could not have brought several bulls with their garlands and himself slaughtered and cut them up for the sacrifice.
These ταῦροι were “bulls” and not “oxen,” and they were decorated with “garlands” of flowers while being led to the sacrifice. This was good Greek custom and indicates that this was the temple of Zeus and not that of some Phrygian god. It is not the plural “gates” that indicates that these belonged to the temple or rather to its surrounding court instead of to the city; but the nature of the case. Yet it is held that the city gates are referred to for the reason that Paul and Barnabas, the supposed gods, were in the city. But where was the altar at the city gates, where all the other things that were necessary for a regular Greek sacrifice and celebration? Why would a sacrifice before a city gate honor Paul and Barnabas more than one at the temple’s altar?
This answers also the other question as to how sacrifice at the temple of Zeus could honor Paul as Hermes. A sacrifice to the chief god was intended also for any other god, especially if no temple of that minor god was at hand. And was not Hermes the messenger of Zeus? The pressure for this sacrifice came from the ὄχλοι, the crowds; hence they were present when the sacrifice was now about to be made. The presence of Paul and Barnabas was not required, for did not gods know when sacrifices were being offered to them? The proximity of Paul and Barnabas was enough. Codex Bezae again has the variant ἐπιθύειν which means, “to sacrifice in addition,” to bring an extra sacrifice.
Acts 14:14
14 Paul and Barnabas were blissfully ignorant of what was under way. By calling this temple and its statue “the Zeus before the city,” just as many temples so situated bore names accordingly (as today “St. Paul’s outside of the walls,” the great Roman Catholic church outside of Rome) Luke implies that Paul and Barnabas were in the city.
But having heard it, the apostles Barnabas and Paul, having rent their garments, sprang forth into the multitude, yelling and saying, Men, why do you do these things? We, too, on our part are human beings of like sensations with you, proclaiming as good news for you on your part to turn from these useless ones to God alive, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and all the things in them. He who in the generations gone by let all the Gentiles go their own ways and yet he did not leave himself witnessless, working good by giving to you rains from heaven and fruit-bearing seasons, filling your hearts with nourishment and happiness.
How the apostles learned what was in progress is left unsaid. Luke would have used a different participle than the one employed in the text if they had been summoned or invited. Barnabas is named first because of the order followed in v. 12. The act of tearing the garment consisted in grasping the tunic at the neck with both hands and giving a downward pull and tearing a rent of four or five inches in the tunic. It was always the tunic (χιτών) which was worn next to the body that was thus torn and not the long, loose outer robe (ἱμάτιον). In the expression “to rend τὰἱμάτια,” the noun is used in the wider sense of “garment.” The robe was made of heavy material that was too solid to be torn and hung loosely upon the body.
This act symbolized grief and pain at seeing or hearing anything that was actually blasphemous or sacrilegious. The whole idea and the act of these Lystrians were sacrilege. To go about with a torn tunic thus was evidence of what the wearer had experienced. Already the news caused the apostles (see v. 4) to rend their garments. “They sprang out into the multitude” (ἐκ in the verb and εἰς corresponding) means simply that the apostles rushed out from the place where they were into the crowd at the temple in the most violent agitation and at the top of their voices (κράζοντες, “shouting”) stopped the proceedings then and there.
Acts 14:15
15 Luke records what amounts to a brief address which was probably spoken by Paul. Shouts of, “Stop! stop!” may well have preceded this little address. When the apostle says “men” he is abrupt and not discourteous; we use “men” in the same way. The τί means “why” and is not predicative, could not be with a transitive verb (R. 736). This question bids these people consider why they are doing these things in order that, realizing why, they will at once cease and regret their undertaking.
We must note the strong correspondence between the emphatic pronouns ἡμεῖς and ὑμᾶς: “we on our part.” “you on your part.” Why treat the apostles as gods when they are only men, yea, men engaged in telling the good news that these their hearers are to turn from these very gods to the one who really is God and has long proved even to them that he is? Καί is scarcely adversative “and yet” but simply “also”: “Men, we also are (only) human beings,” ἄνθρωποι, Menschen.
This fact is intensified by the addition “of like sensations with you,” ὁμοιοπαθεῖςὑμῖν. This word does not mean “of like passions” or “of like nature.” The gods were considered ἀπαθεῖς, unlike human beings. In these adjectives the verb πάσχω refers to suffering the vicissitudes connected with human existence. Paul and Barnabas suffer all such vicissitudes just as these men do and are not exempt, lifted to a plane above them as gods were suposed to be. This statement directly denies the notion of these pagan people that the apostles were gods in the likeness of men (v. 11).
But that is not all; the apostles are here in Lystra “engaged in proclaiming as good news that you, you Lystrians, given to idols, turn from these useless ones to God alive,” etc. It is the greatest good news in the world to learn that all idols are μάταιοι (masculine, supply θεοί), that there is a “God living” who is attested as such even to the pagan world, and that we should turn from the useless to the genuine. We construe ὑμᾶς with the infinitive and not with the participle, for the infinitive calls for a subject, the participle needs no object.
In order to appreciate the full force of what is said we must note that μάταιος is used specifically with reference to heathen gods and idols. The adjective refers to that which does not accomplish its purpose and thus disappoints, while κενός is that which is empty. These heathen gods fail utterly in what their worshippers expect of them as gods. The adjective goes no farther. Of course, they are “useless” as gods because they are in reality οὑδέν, “nothing” (1 Cor. 8:4). Recall the famous passage Isa. 44:10–17, which describes how a man cuts down a tree and with part of it cooks his dinner and makes a fire to warm himself and out of some of this wood manufactures a god for himself and worships it.
Isa. 37:19; Hab. 2:18, 19. No wonder such gods are absolutely useless! It is pure fiction that actual supernatural beings exist which correspond to such images. All this applies to the fictions which men today call “God,” using the capital letter, although no material image is made; such fictional images are also μάταιοι.
Over against them is set Θεὸςζῶν, “God alive,” “God living.” No article is necessary because only the one exists. The contrast between “useless ones” and God “living” brings a great advance in the second designation. Instead of saying “useless” and then “useful,” the apostle at once states the full reason that makes God useful: God is alive, living, is and does all that the term “God” implies even far beyond the expectation of his worshippers. The evidence for his living existence is before the eyes of even the pagan world: it is he “who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and all the things in them” including men themselves, the four terms spreading out his mighty creations so the mind may grasp them the better. Ps. 19:1; Rom. 1:20
Acts 14:16
16 In addition to this evidence in creation the living God attested himself by means of the constant benefactions of his providence. He did this even in the case of the Gentiles whom “in the generations that have passed” (perfect participle) he permitted to go their ways. There is a contrast with the present and God’s work of now sending the gospel to the Gentiles. “Their ways” gives ὁδοί an ethical sense just as “the Way” is used with reference to Christianity in 9:2 (see the explanation). The plural signifies that the Gentiles followed many different ways, their very multiplicity revealing that they were wrong ways.
No effort is made to show why God permitted the Gentiles to wander thus, for the point to be made here is that he had nevertheless not cast off the Gentiles When we now ask why this was done in regard to the Gentiles we must, first of all remember that Gentiles and their pagan ways should never have come into existence. God destroyed the godless race of Noah’s time. Was that not judgment enough? Noah began a new race, began it with the true God, bequeathed that knowledge to his descendants, even the knowledge of the judgment of God through the Flood. How could paganism then begin? The answer is plain.
If God accepted the fearful defection that developed into idolatrous cults and let the Gentiles go on in these cults he at the same time prepared universal salvation in and through Israel until he could now send the gospel to all men. Compare 17:30. The real story is that because of their own fearful guilt men lost the true God and the true religion, and that God prepared to restore it to them and in due time did so.
The contention that τὰἔθνη refers to “the nations” in the sense that the Jews and the Samaritans are included because “in their ways” does not mean “in their own ways,” ἐαυτῶν instead of merely αὑτῶν or ταῖςἰδίαιςὁδοῖς is not in keeping with the context. In spite of their defections and their idolatries the Jews are never included with the Gentiles as forming one class of men. God gave more than the evidence of creation and providence to the Jews; he used the Jews alone as a means for eventually spreading the gospel to the Gentiles even to the ends of the earth. God shaped the way of the Jews in a manner in which he did not shape “the ways” of the Gentiles.
Acts 14:17
17 Although v. 16 begins with ὅς, it is really an independent sentence, and v. 17 is its second part. The printing should be according: “He it was who, indeed, permitted … and yet did not leave himself unattested,” etc. He had not turned forever from the Gentiles although his displeasure rested upon them because they had abandoned him and the true religion, and although in just judgment he let them go on in their ways. During the entire time of their abandonment of him he kept on attesting himself to them in the most effective manner. The second participle depends on the first, and the third on the second: “working good (in the sense of what benefits) by giving and by thus filling,” etc. All good things of this earthly life are wrought by God.
Some think that “rains” are mentioned because Lystra often suffered drought; but “rains” are mentioned especially because they came “from heaven” and thus from God. Through them he gives fruit-bearing seasons with all their rich abundance. The miracle of the seasons and of their abundance of fruit, which is repeated year after year, is one of the great attestations of God to himself that is fit for all men to see: “The eyes of all wait upon thee,” etc., Ps. 145:15. Thus God “fills your hearts with nourishment and happiness.” The expression is concentrated. It is the body that is filled with the nourishment so that the heart is made glad; instead of mentioning both body and heart, the latter is selected because the food is the means for the heart’s delight. Here “heart” means the seat of thought, feeling, and will, the center of the being.
Paul is preaching natural theology as he does in 17:24–29; Rom. 1:19–23. We may add the great passages found in the psalms. It was the direct way to the heart of Gentiles. In Antioch, in the case of Jews and proselytes of the gate he referred to God in Israel’s history (13:17) as the direct way to their hearts. True natural theology leads to a correct knowledge of God; we need it even in the case of Christians. It contains no gospel yet is a step toward revealed theology with its gospel fulness. In the face of God’s revelation and self-attestation in nature it should be impossible to believe in gods and idols (17:27, 28).
Acts 14:18
18 And by saying these things hardly did they restrain the multitudes from sacrificing to them. The sincerity which went to the length of inaugurating this sacrifice was because of its very nature strong and hard to turn from its course, which makes what follows the more striking. After a verb of hindering μή with the infinitive is called pleonastic.
Acts 14:19
19 Now there came to them Jews from Antioch and Iconium, and, having persuaded the multitudes and having stoned Paul, they were dragging him out of the city, supposing him to be dead. But the disciples having surrounded him, after arising, he went out with Barnabas to Derbe.
Luke adds a dramatic touch by placing these two clashing incidents side by side, first making pagan deities of Paul and Barnabas and then stoning Paul and dragging him out as dead. There is no need for the textual additions that the apostles spent some time in Lystra before this attack on Paul occurred. The hatred of the Jews both in Antioch and Iconium was so intense and persistent as to pursue him to Lystra. The impression is not left on the reader that these were Jewish merchants who had come to Lystra on business and accidentally found the apostle at work in this city. This was a combination of Jews from the two cities in which Paul had worked and from which he had been driven out. He had left many converts behind, and that circumstance kept the Jewish hatred alive.
In some way Jews from both cities got together and planned to follow the apostles to Lystra. Yet we do not read about any Jews in Lystra with whom they joined hands.
Luke relates only the facts that occurred and does this in the briefest way. So we are unable to say why Paul alone became the victim of stoning and not Barnabas also. These Jews persuaded the multitudes. There is no need to ask by what means when the basest lies were used even against Jesus. As far as the city crowds were concerned, it was not difficult to persuade them, for were not the apostles attacking their gods as being “useless”? How easy, too, to brand the entire story of Jesus as nothing but an invention in spite of the miracle wrought on the lame man, the effect of which had begun to wane.
The upshot was a mob that somehow got hold at least of Paul and stoned him. They certainly would have included Barnabas if they could have caught him. To say that they passed him by is a grave injustice to this noble companion of Paul’s. In Iconium the plan included the stoning of both Paul and Barnabas.
Since Jews were back of the original plan and now its execution, this stoning was the Jewish idea of doing away with Paul. Pagans would probably have beaten him to death. This is corroborated by the procedure of dragging the victim outside of the city after they thought he was dead (perfect “has died” used for “is dead”). That pagan mob could not be persuaded to perform the execution in proper Jewish style, to wait until Paul was first dragged out and then stone him; they stoned him on the spot and then dragged him out. These pagans would have permitted Paul to lie in the street; but the Jews had to have him thrown outside of the city. The imperfect ἔσυρον conveys the thought that this was not the end of the matter.
Acts 14:20
20 The aorist that follows brings the outcome. Paul lay somewhere along the road beyond the city gate. The mob had finished its work and had dispersed. Thus the disciples finally reached him and stood around his battered body with torn hearts. Incidentally we learn that there were “disciples” in Lystra. Luke seems to regard it as a matter of course that the apostles had succeeded also in Lystra. To be sure, they had! Nor have we any reason to think that the number of converts made was small. They had been won directly from paganism.
Was Timothy in this circle of disciples who were grouped around Paul? Luke introduces him in 16:1, but at that time he was already a disciple. In 1 Cor. 4:17 as well as in 2 Tim. 1:2, Paul calls him “my beloved child” (τέκνον), which makes it rather certain that Paul had converted him, and that would of necessity have occurred on this first visit of Paul’s to Lystra. When R., W. P., writes: “Timothy, a lad of about fifteen, would not soon forget that solemn scene,” Timothy’s age is estimated too low, for in 16:1–3, only a year later, Paul takes him along as one of his assistants; he must have been past twenty.
The disciples had come to give Paul a decent burial as devout Jews had once buried Stephen after his stoning. But, as Luke states with astonishing brevity, “after arising, he went into the city.” Was this a miracle? Luke does not even hint that it was a miracle. This would have been the place to invent one in order to glorify Paul as the only apostle who had returned from death to life, but the Scriptures contain no invented miracles. It is not difficult to see what had happened: a stone had rendered Paul unconscious, and he remained so until this time. That was, indeed, providential preservation.
But we must not understand Luke’s brevity to mean that Paul simply got up and walked off. He regained consciousness, showed signs of life, was finally assisted to his feet, and so went painfully into the city. Was it under cover of night as Zahn thinks on the basis of some readings? Those readings are valueless. In 2 Cor. 11:25 Paul recalls this experience: “once was I stoned.” But the next morning he and Barnabas left for Derbe. Paul did not spare his poor body although it was bruised and sore.
He suffered violence, but again as one who moves on to new conquests. He had come to Lystra and left a Christian church behind.
Acts 14:21
21 And having evangelized that city and made many disciples, they returned to Lystra and to Iconium and to Antioch, making firm the souls of the disciples by exhorting them to remain in the faith and that through many tribulations we must go into the kingdom of God.
Two participles dispose of the work done in Derbe (see v. 7), both are constative aorists; they evangelized the city, which means just what it says, filled the city with the gospel news; and again they labored with success, they “discipled” a goodly number; this word is explained by the noun μαθηταί which occurs in 6:1. Nothing that was of exceptional import occurred. Derbe was on the Roman frontier so that no new cities were visited in this territory. The two apostles retraced their steps in spite of the hostile Jews and the painful experiences they had had in those three cities.
Acts 14:22
22 It was wise, indeed, to return to the young congregations they had founded so that they might confirm them in the faith and help them to organize and to elect elders. The present participle does not express future action (R. 892); since it follows a constative aorist, the present participle serves as a complement by spreading out the action (B.-D. 339, 2). Returning does not refer merely to arrival in these cities but to a return that was at the same time an official visit that included the activity of making “the souls of the disciples” firm. The word ψυχαί is here not a contrast to or a distinction from πνεύματα but denotes man’s entire immaterial part as the seat of the spiritual life.
The second participle modifies the first and shows how this firmness was achieved. The apostles exhorted the disciples to remain in the faith (present durative infinitive), and “the faith” is objective, fides quae creditur, the infinitive denoting subjective faith, fides qua creditur. The thought is the same as that expressed in 2:42, “remaining steadfast in the teaching of the apostles.” That was the essential point. Beginners who have not been made firm as yet are in danger of falling away. A good beginning is a great achievement, but a good continuation is its normal and essential result. Conversion must pass on to preservation.
When Luke follows the infinitive with a ὅτι clause instead of a second infinitive, this is not an example of zeugma (one verb with two objects, only one of which fits the verb). The participle παρακαλοῦντες fits both (contra B.-D. 479, 2), and both are indirect discourse without supplying λέγοντες before ὅτι (contra B.-D. 397, 6). The danger these disciples faced was the persecutions they might have to suffer, compelling examples of which they had in the case of the apostles who had suffered in all these cities except Derbe. The one thought that had to be impressed upon them was that persecution belonged to the normal state of Christians. The world always hates them; moreover, tribulations are to help to develop their strength of faith.
Δεῖ expresses any type of necessity, here the one that is due to the nature of discipleship in a wicked world: “it is necessary that we enter the kingdom of God through tribulations,” θλῖψις, the pressure that squeezes painfully. On the kingdom in general see 1:3; here, as also the aorist infinitive shows, the kingdom of glory is referred to, God’s and Christ’s eternal glorious, heavenly rule. The thorns prick us as we climb upward to that kingdom, but the roses await us there. Here the cross, yonder the crown. Rationalism urges us to forget the hereafter, makes this life the whole of religion, accuses us of otherworldliness and of disregarding what we ought to do in this life. But take away the glorious Christian hope, and what have we to live for? Let the full hope of the blessedness to come shine out, and all our earthly days are lighted with heavenly light and filled with highest purpose, courage, and strength.
Acts 14:23
23 Moreover, after by vote appointing for them elders from church to church, by praying after fastings, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed.
As in 2 Cor. 8:19, χειροτονέω means to vote by stretching out the hand. In 10:41 the compound with πρό has God as the agent; but even when it is thus used with reference to an individual and not to an assembly, the idea of a vote is not removed from this verb. We may translate “designate,” “elect,” “appoint”; but the one designating or appointing voted to do so. Luke would make an important point by using this verb here. For the question at issue is whether Paul and Barnabas chose these elders without congregational participation or whether they conducted a congregational meeting in which a vote was taken by show of hands, the congregation choosing with participation of the apostles and under their guidance. The latter is undoubtedly correct, just as the praying with fastings by no means includes only the two apostles but each congregation as well.
The method used is fully explained in 6:2–6. The point to observe is that both participles refer to the subject of παρέθεντο, to Paul and Barnabas, and are thus used in a wide sense. The apostles presented the matter, had the eligible men named, had the vote taken, and thus appointed those chosen and ordained them as the elders. The ceremony of laying on of hands was certainly used, for in 1 Tim. 5:22 the very act of putting a man into the ministry is called “laying on hands”; compare 1 Tim. 4:14; 2 Timothy 1:6. On this ceremony see 6:6.
We have discussed “elders” in 11:30. The apostles followed the pattern of the Jewish synagogues with their elders and had them elected in the same way. There is nothing hierarchical whatever throughout the New Testament. Only one advance must be noted in the case of these Christian elders, namely the ability to teach. See the qualifications as these were laid down a few years later by Paul in 2 Tim. 3:1–7, and in Tit. 1:5–9. The choice was thus narrowed to a very few men.
It is fair to conclude that these were Jews even in these Galatian congregations, including Derbe and Lystra where no synagogues existed. Jews alone were sufficiently versed in the Old Testament, the sole Scriptural basis of the Christian teaching. No deacons in addition to elders are mentioned at this ear y time, and we conclude that this office was introduced later.
While these historical points regarding the first organization of the apostolic church are of utmost interest, they constitute no law for the Christian Church which binds us to repeat every feature and method. But the example of the apostles stands for all time as having been given under the direct influence of the Holy Spirit. Some of the various types of organization found in the church today reflect the spirit of the gospel and of its apostles less than others, and we decline to adopt the former, namely those that are hierarchical and monarchial and that curtail the rights of the congregations.
The κατά is distributive: “church by church.” Each was an ἐκκλησία by itself that was independent of a Jewish synagogue, a distinctive Christian body. All the members were μαθηταί, “disciples,” believers, and in that sense “saints” (see 9:11); on “church” see 5:11. The work of securing “elders” was of the highest importance and was hence accompanied “by praying with fastings” as was done in 13:3. But we see that fasting was secondary to praying, “with fastings” meaning as an aid to praying. On the general practice of fasting see 13:2; it was used as a spiritual aid on special occasions. Cooking and eating and all that these entail were set aside for the day in order to be entirely free for the higher things.
The prayers were spoken before the vote and at the time of the ordination of the elders. The plural “fastings” scarcely implies repeated fasts but fasts on the part of the disciples.
After the congregation had been properly organized and spiritually fortified, the apostles said good-by. They had done all that they could do and thus “committed them to the Lord on whom they had believed.” The verb means “to place at someone’s side.” This Jesus did with his spirit when he was dying (Luke 23:46). All these converts belonged to the Lord; he would take care of them in the days to come. Luke seems to be quoting from words that were uttered at the parting services. So we still part and commit each other to the Lord.
The relative clause is relative only grammatically and in reality states the reason for committing these disciples to the Lord: they had put their trust in him the moment they had become disciples. That they should now be placed into the Lord’s care in a special way was what their own hearts desired. Having been deposited at the Lord’s side by the prayer of the apostles, they did not feel themselves in a strange or in a false position, and when the Lord saw them thus placed at his side he did not regard them as people whom he had never known. Since they had believed and trusted in him, he would reward their confidence in him and in the commitment of the apostles.
Acts 14:24
24 And having gone through Pisidia, they came to Pamphilia. And having spoken the Word in Perga, they went down to Attalia; and thence they sailed away to Antioch whence they had been given over to the grace of God for the work which they fulfilled.
The return is made by the same route by which they had come. The time consumed on this first missionary journey is estimated at about eighteen months; no exact figures can be given. On the geography of Pisidia, etc., see 13:13, 14.
Acts 14:25
25 The reasons that induced Paul to hasten away from Perga on first landing there have been stated (13:13, 14) Luke’s brevity is here like that employed in the case of Derbe (v. 21) and must not deceive us as to the work accomplished by “speaking the Word.” We must understand that here, too, a congregation was established. Ships came up the Kestros River to Perga, but when the two missionaries were ready to return they went down to the regular seaport Attalia and found passage there. Luke likes to name the harbors.
Acts 14:26
26 So they sailed back to Syrian Antioch and landed at the harbor Seleucia. When Luke writes “whence they had been given over,” etc. (periphrastic past perfect tense), he is most exact, for that was exactly what had been done (13:2). The Holy Spirit had required their services, and the church at Antioch had given up these two teachers for this work. They had been given over “to the grace of God for the work,” etc. God’s grace was to use them as its tools and instruments. This is a true and expressive description of all missionaries: they are the instruments through whom God’s grace works.
Not they work, in the last analysis, but grace. What a blessed position to be thus used by grace! And now the work was fulfilled; grace had accomplished what was to be done on this first journey into heathendom. What elation must have filled the hearts of the two returning missionaries! Victories, even great victories, could be reported.
Acts 14:27
27 Now having come and having brought together the church, they went on reporting what great things God did in their company and that he opened to the Gentiles faith’s door. And they continued to spend not a little time with the disciples.
Imagine this scene: the entire congregation and these two, the first Christian missionaries who went forth into heathendom, and their long report of which the assembly could not hear enough. Significantly they tell not of what they did but of what God did. Luke 19:16: “Thy pound hath gained ten pounds!” The glory belonged wholly to God. So it is still, and let us not make this a mere phrase of the lips. With μετὰαὑτῶν they say that they only accompanied God when he did all these great things. And that was the literal fact.
Καί is epexegetical and among “what great things” God had done specifies the one that was of such vast importance and of such far-reaching consequences at that time: “and in particular that he opened to the Gentile faith’s door,” letting them in through the door that bore only the one sign, “Faith,” above it. The figure of the door is frequently used and simple. But “faith” was epoch-making in this connection. The genitive is appositional: faith is the door. The fact that it leads into the kingdom of God, and that this is faith in Jesus, is understood. This is salvation by faith alone without any of the Old Testament ceremonialism, neither as connected with the gospel in its Old Testament form of promise, nor with the legalism which the Jews and especially the Pharisees had built up in their own false way. Luke, of course, gives his reader only the briefest summary, but despite its brevity we see that the result of the apostles’ labor was immense.
Acts 14:28
28 Paul and Barnabas had a strenuous time behind them. Paul bore marks of it in his body for life (Gal. 6:17). So they spent some time in Antioch “with the disciples,” Luke using the term that was most current among the Christians themselves. It has been estimated that they remained in Antioch from the fall of 51 to the spring of 52. In v. 27, 28 Luke uses imperfect tenses, both of them intimating to the reader that more is to follow.
B.-D Friedrich Blass’ Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch, vierte, voellig neugearbeitete Auflage, besorgt von Albert Debrunner.
R A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research. 4th edition.