# Paul ignores the Spirit?



## JennyG (Jul 16, 2011)

Acts 21 v 4:
_And finding disciples, we tarried there seven days: who said to Paul through the Spirit, that he should not go up to Jerusalem.
v 12-15:
...both we and [other disciples] besought him not to go up to Jerusalem.
Then Paul answered,... I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.
And when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, the will of the Lord be done.
And after those days we....went up to Jerusalem._

Does this mean that Paul disobeyed the Spirit? Or otherwise, what does it mean that some of the disciples told him *through the Spirit* not to go up?


----------



## MarieP (Jul 16, 2011)

Very interesting question!

I thought verses 5-11 would help:


> 1 Now it came to pass, that when we had departed from them and set sail, running a straight course we came to Cos, the following day to Rhodes, and from there to Patara. 2 And finding a ship sailing over to Phoenicia, we went aboard and set sail. 3 When we had sighted Cyprus, we passed it on the left, sailed to Syria, and landed at Tyre; for there the ship was to unload her cargo. 4 And finding disciples, we stayed there seven days. They told Paul through the Spirit not to go up to Jerusalem. 5 When we had come to the end of those days, we departed and went on our way; and they all accompanied us, with wives and children, till we were out of the city. And we knelt down on the shore and prayed. 6 When we had taken our leave of one another, we boarded the ship, and they returned home.
> 7 And when we had finished our voyage from Tyre, we came to Ptolemais, greeted the brethren, and stayed with them one day. 8 On the next day we who were Paul’s companions departed and came to Caesarea, and entered the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, and stayed with him. 9 Now this man had four virgin daughters who prophesied. 10 And as we stayed many days, a certain prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. 11 When he had come to us, he took Paul’s belt, bound his own hands and feet, and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man who owns this belt, and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’”
> 12 Now when we heard these things, both we and those from that place pleaded with him not to go up to Jerusalem. 13 Then Paul answered, “What do you mean by weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.”
> 14 So when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, “The will of the Lord be done.” 15 And after those days we packed and went up to Jerusalem.



I would say it's inconclusive. Was Paul told not _ever_ to go to Jerusalem? Luke and his other companions probably thought this was the case, especially because of the prophecy of Agabus. Paul might have responded that they had spent seven days in Tyre and made stops in Ptolemais and Caesarea, and thus had not gone directly to Jerusalem. Although those two cities are on the direct route to Jerusalem. Whatever the case, Luke and the others gave him up into the will of God (but not without much pleading).

When my pastor gets to that chapter, I'll post what he said...

Now to look at a few commentaries...


----------



## py3ak (Jul 16, 2011)

I would suspect that "he should not go up" is not to be taken as a command, but as a warning. Throughout this time you see Paul being warned about what awaits him at Jerusalem, and being encouraged not to go; I would take this as another warning about what is coming. And you notice how they stop dissuading him - they resolve it into the will of the Lord. That seems like they didn't feel that what they had _through the Spirit_ was such a commandment that Paul was morally wrong to be firm in his resolution: they aren't rebuking him for sin, they are exhorting him to avoid a dangerous situation; but Paul feels he has warrant for walking into it, and the upshot would seem to prove that to be the case.


----------



## Jack K (Jul 16, 2011)

None of this was news to Paul at the time. Earlier, the Spirit had already told him that trouble awaited him in Jerusalem, but he should go anyway. From his speech to the Ephesian elders:

"And now, behold, I am going to Jerusalem, constrained by the Spirit, not knowing what will happen to me there, except that the Holy Spirit testifies to me in every city that imprisonment and afflictions await me. But I do not account my life of any value nor as precious to myself, if only I may finish my course and the ministry that I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God." (Acts 20:22-24)

The messages received through the Spirit along the way are not to be taken as evidence that Paul should have listened and stayed out of Jerusalem. To the contrary, they are confirmations of what Paul had already been told. And they are evidence that hardships suffered by God's people are no surprise to God, nor are they reason to hesitate in completing the task he gives us, even when he warns us what that will mean. Paul shows that he understands this exceptionally well.


----------



## JennyG (Jul 16, 2011)

I don't know when I ever saw a question answered with three so thoroughly satisfactory replies!!
Thank you, Marie, Ruben and Jack


----------



## Rev. Todd Ruddell (Jul 16, 2011)

From the commentary series edited by JP Lange:

The Christians at Tyre desired that the Apostle should not go to Jerusalem, ver. 4; they spoke διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος, by the inspiration and the illumination of the Spirit. It is here, however, necessary to make a distinction. That Paul would be exposed to severe sufferings in Jerusalem, they knew by the illumination of the Spirit. The prophecy of Agabus, ver. 11, and the language of the apostle himself in ch. 20:23, show that it was simply the knowledge of such an issue, in case Paul went to the city, which was conveyed to them by the illumination of the Spirit. The entreaty itself, that Paul should not visit Jerusalem, where such dangers awaited him, was not dictated by the Holy Ghost, but was prompted solely by human opinions and affections. That which was human here at once connected itself with that which was divine, error with the truth, the flesh with the Spirit. So, too, the well meant, but unholy, dissuasion of Peter, connected itself with the Redeemer’s first prophecy of his sufferings, Matt. 16:21–23. Nothing is more apt to lead us astray, or is more dangerous, than that _mixtela carnis et Spiritus_ which may so easily and so insidiously occur in our thoughts, feelings, and actions.


----------



## fredtgreco (Jul 16, 2011)

Derek Thomas makes a similar point when he preached on this passage:



> *I. The disciples at Tyre - right knowledge – wrong conclusion.*
> * In the first place, you have the disciples at Tyre. *And we read in verse 4,
> “After looking up the disciples, we stayed there seven days;
> and they kept telling Paul through the Spirit not to set foot in Jerusalem.”
> ...



I believe that this is the correct answer to the question also.


----------



## Rev. Todd Ruddell (Jul 16, 2011)

See also Conybeare and Howson: (The Life and Epistles of Saint Paul)

There were not only disciples at Tyre, but prophets. Some of those who had the prophetical power foresaw the danger which was hanging over St. Paul, and endeavoured to persuade him to desist from his purpose of going to Jerusalem. We see that different views of duty might be taken by those who had the same spiritual knowledge, though that knowledge were supernatural. St. Paul looked on the coming danger from a higher point. What to others was an overwhelming darkness, to him appeared only as a passing storm. And he resolved to face it, in the faith that He who had protected him hitherto, would still give him shelter and safety.


----------

