Acts 19:1-10
“He entered the synagogue and for three months spoke out boldly, and argued persuasively about the kingdom of God. When some stubbornly refused to believe and spoke evil of the Way before the congregation, he left them, taking the disciples with him, and argued daily in the lecture hall of Tyrannus” (Acts 19:8-9)
Been arguing with anyone about politics lately?
It’s inevitable. We’re six weeks out from an election. Emotions run hot and passions run deep. Yet I’m intrigued by Paul’s strategy here. He’s no snowflake. I mean, “for three months [he] spoke boldly, and argued persuasively about the kingdom of God.” Three months of arguing and persuasion is far too much heat for a snowflake. Neither is he a “keyboard warrior,” trying to change the world from a safe, depersonalized space. I mean, “he entered the synagogue,” which is to say, he went straight to the people, to the interpersonal conflict.
Paul is a role model of conviction. When he believes something, wow!, he believes it. First, he believed all Christians were heretics who were profaning God, so he oversaw their persecution, including one recorded instance of capital punishment. Then, after Jesus reveals Himself to Paul, Paul believes in Jesus and so, we get stories like the one above. He seems intrinsically bold, inherently idealistic, and thoroughly zealous. But even Paul has a breaking point. Once those gathered “spoke evil of the Way,” Paul dusts his sandals and moves out of the synagogue and into the Roman marketplace of ideas. In other words, he switches his audience.
Naturally, once he’s there, the same faith, conviction, and zeal remain with him. Indeed, they even seem to grow, because we’re told he spends three months with his fellow Jews, but two years(!!!) with this Gentile audience. I sometimes wonder if we all shouldn’t model these character traits in Paul. The faith and zeal are laudable and should be imitated, but so too is the wisdom to take his holy teaching to a different audience. Maybe we should just stop trying to convince our closest kin or next-door neighbor about what we believe and start looking for the unlikely audience. To be sure, it is natural enough for Paul to start with his kin, but when they prove intractable, he leaves them behind.
And I suspect, if anything, this is the part that scares us the most. We don’t want to just break ties with someone over a disagreement, but maybe that’s inevitable. I mean, what we witness Paul do here is exactly in keeping with Jesus’ own guidance to the 70 when He sends them out, which was earlier alluded to with the “dusts his sandals” reference above. So, if not inevitable, at least faithful.
At the end of the day, the Christian church (and some philosophers would say this is true for America as a country, too; though that’s a different discussion for a different time) is founded upon its shared confession of faith; it’s shared vision. It’s why we include an affirmation of faith with each worship service. The Church is rooted in its substantive agreement on the substantive issues before it. Without this, we do not have a true community, whatever else our history might be. And the fact of this is precisely why it is essential that we, as a community of faith, continue to strive to learn and grow together. Because, to be clear, there is nothing written above that would say a minor disagreement is worthy of schism (Paul labors for months!), but rather that once obstinance and profanity enter the scene, the faithful recourse is to refocus energies in new directions. For when we do this – as the story shows – those who may never have heard the words of life are given access and opportunity. Thanks be to God. Amen.
