But from Miletus having sent to Ephesus, he called over [to him] the elders of the assembly.
Paul is hurrying to Jerusalem, so he sails past Ephesus, the city where he had worked longest. From Miletus he still sends inland for its elders, which raises two questions: why avoid a church he loved, and why call only its leaders?
This was not coldness. Love for those believers would have cost him time he did not have.
He had a strong affection for the many saints at Ephesus, and many ties with them. If he had gone into the city itself, he could not have left again without a long delay. So he chose to sail past Ephesus, rather than frustrate the purpose of his journey to Palestine.
The elders had to travel to reach him, and none of them grudged the trip. That meeting also left us something we would not otherwise have.
They came at once, even though the journey was thirty-six miles. But which of them would not have been glad to take that trouble when the apostle asked for them? … It is the only speech of the apostle on this third journey that has come down to us. … We can see why it was worth keeping. It shows us the spirit in which Paul worked, and the different lines of teaching he handled.
Paul sends for the elders of one church at Ephesus, not for leaders from the whole region — though some later readers assumed he did.
This does not fit the usual habits and thoughts of men — not to say their selfishness. So from ancient times the idea slipped in that he meant the elders of all the churches round about. But we must not tamper with the word of God like that for a moment. The apostle sent to Ephesus and called to himself the elders of the church there, not of the churches around. There may have been many meeting-places in Ephesus. But Scripture never speaks of the assemblies in a city, always of the assembly, or church, in it.
Later in the same speech Paul gives these men another name. The change settles a long argument about church office.
Paul called for the elders of the church at Ephesus, Acts 20:17, and in Acts 20:28 he called them "overseers." … These two passages prove something. Today, in the Christian world, one bishop usually takes charge of a large district, with what men call lower clergy under him. It was not so then. Each city had more than one bishop or overseer, and at that time there was only one assembly in a city.
He chose his audience to fit his message. The warning he carried was for the men who watched the flock.
He did not call all the saints over, only the elders, who had the care of the saints. He had warnings to speak to them about the days that were coming, warnings that would do them much good. So, while these words are for all the saints, those who have the interest of Christ's saints at heart should heed them most of all.
Yet Paul's heart reached past the men standing in front of him.
It is evident that in sending for them he had on his heart not only those elders, but all the Christians of the place, and even of the whole province. … When he speaks to them of "you all," he does not mean the elders only.
Paul warned these overseers that the danger would come from among themselves. So he pointed them past their own office to something that outlasts it.
Elders were appointed to give godly care in the undivided local assembly — to shepherd the flock. Any attempt to appoint them now would not only lack the necessary apostolic authority; it would also ignore the divided state of the church. … The elders were no security for the church. The apostle warned that from among them men would rise up, speaking perverse things. So he commended them, not to some church authority or council, but "to God and to the word of his grace" — a resource that all Christians still have. Happily, there are servants of God today who care for the saints … and who devote themselves to the work of the ministry without any apostolic appointment, as the household of Stephanas did.
- The detour. Paul sailed past Ephesus because love for those believers would have delayed him. His schedule set the route, not his feelings.
- The summons. He called the shepherds, because the words he carried were warnings about the flock they guarded.
- The title. Paul later calls these same men "overseers" — one office, several men, one city.
- The reach. He sent for elders, but his "you all" takes in the whole assembly, and the speech has come down to us for everyone.
- The resource. No one can appoint elders now, so the flock still stands where Paul left it: not with an authority or a council, but with God and the word of His grace — which every Christian still has.
And when they were come to him, he said to them, *Ye* know how I was with you all the time from the first day that I arrived in Asia,
Paul's ship has stopped at Miletus, and he sends to Ephesus for the elders of the assembly there. He does not open with teaching. He points to their own memory of how he lived among them — which raises the question of why a farewell should begin with himself.
This address survived when the rest of Paul's preaching on that journey did not.
From Miletus he sent to Ephesus to summon the elders of the assembly there to meet him. They came at once, though it meant a journey of thirty-six miles for them... It is the only address of Paul's from this third journey that has come down to us... We are familiar with it, and we can see why it was right to preserve it. It shows us the spirit in which Paul worked, and the different lines of teaching he handled.
Paul called one assembly's elders, and he called them with authority.
It is certain that neighbouring towns or churches are completely ignored here. Only the elders of Ephesus were summoned, and only they are addressed... Notice that the apostle summoned the elders with authority, and that they responded to his call without question.
The word Paul uses for their knowing is not guesswork or hearsay.
epistamai means, first of all, to know something with the knowledge that comes from being near it... it is therefore the knowledge gained by experience — like that of an expert.
So he is not asking them to take his word for it. They had watched him themselves.
Talking about his own service did not come naturally to him. Need forced it out of him.
Here the apostle does not hold back from reminding them of his own service among them. This was a habit of his, as we see clearly in the First Epistle to the Thessalonians and elsewhere. Only burning zeal and a good conscience before God account for it. Nothing could be further from his character than liking to speak of himself... They knew very little of what the glory of Christ demands, of what the walk and service and devotedness of a Christian should be... They needed not only teaching, but — what is so much more powerful along with it — a living example to form and fashion the ways of Christ in them.
Paul had authority to command, yet he rests his charge on how he lived among them at every point. The order of these opening verses matters.
Paul could speak to them with apostolic authority, but he bases his instructions on what he had been among them at all seasons... In Acts 20:18 he speaks of his manner of life, and in Acts 20:19 of his service to the Lord. In Acts 20:20 he speaks of his service to the saints, and in Acts 20:21 of his testimony to all men. Is this order not especially important in days of wholesale departure from the truth? Nothing can be right if the manner of life is inconsistent with the word ministered; everything takes its character from this.
What Paul can do here, not every worker can do. Two sets of eyes have been watching.
The work of every servant is under the eye of God. It is also, to some extent, under the eyes of those among whom he works. He is happy when, as in this case, he can remind the saints of its character with a good conscience.
A life and a message must match, or the message loses its force.
Our teaching and our appeals have no more value than our lives give them. Of the scribes and Pharisees of our Lord's day He had to say, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice"... How deeply solemn! The teaching was good, but the teachers did not match the teaching. Happy is the man — Samuel, Paul, or anyone else — who can honestly point those who know him best to his manner of life from first to last, as his service draws to a close.
- Known — Paul's word for their knowing means knowledge gained by nearness and experience, not by report. He rests his case on what they had watched themselves.
- Manner — He speaks of his manner of life first, before his service, his care of the saints, or his preaching. Nothing else can be right if the life contradicts the message.
- Motive — He disliked speaking of himself. He did it only because these believers needed a living example as well as teaching.
- Measure — Every servant's work lies under God's eye, and partly under the eyes of those he serves. Our teaching is worth only what our lives make it worth.
- Moment — Paul reviews a consistent life as his service closes. That order — life first, then work — matters most in days of wholesale departure from the truth.
serving the Lord with all lowliness, and tears, and temptations, which happened to me through the plots of the Jews;
Paul's farewell to the elders of the Ephesian church does not open with a list of results. It opens with the spirit in which he had worked among them — lowliness, tears, and the plots of enemies — and that order is itself part of the lesson.
One writer traces the sequence running through the whole address.
In Acts 20:18 he speaks of his manner of life. In verse 19 he speaks of his service to the Lord. In verse 20 it is his service to the saints, and in verse 21 his testimony to all men. Is this order not of special importance in days of wholesale departure from the truth? Nothing can be right if the way a man lives contradicts the word he preaches. Everything takes its character from this. Then all true service must have the Lord Himself in view. It is from Him and to Him. He must be the source, the motive, and the object of all done in His Name... So that God's order was, first the Lord, then the saints, then the world.
Paul names the One he served, and the choice of words matters. It also rules out a humility that is only skin-deep.
Then he says, "Serving the Lord" — not, strictly speaking, serving the saints. The Lord was before him, not the service of humanity. If we serve according to this pattern, we keep the Lord as the sole Object of our service. And we serve "with all humility" — humility of mind, not of behaviour. A man may be only a hypocrite, humble on the outside but not in mind.
Paul could have pointed to learning or results. He puts forward something else, and the hardships named in the verse help produce it.
It is not learning or success in ministry which he puts before them, but serving the Lord with all lowliness of mind. How often that service puffs up the novice! What dangers surround even the most experienced! Lowliness of mind is of all moment in it, and the Lord helps by the very difficulties and griefs which accompany it.
The tears were not weakness or breakdown. They put Paul in the footsteps of the One he served.
The Lord Himself was a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. He wept over hardhearted sinners, and wept with broken-hearted saints. Paul, following in His steps, was a man of tears. He watered his service with tears, for he speaks of "serving the Lord with all lowliness and with many tears." Moreover, he wept over the saints as he foresaw the failure and sorrows that would overtake the Church after his death.
Older translations read "with all lowliness of mind" and "with many tears." The ESV has "with all humility and with tears."
The third mark is one no ministry report would list — the trials that came through the plots against him.
A pattern ministry does not mean one that leads from success to success in a continual round of triumph. Because our own circumstances are easy, we must not imagine that Christian service is a triumphal procession of large meetings and eager crowds... He had all kinds of testings and trials, and those very testings proved what he was made of spiritually. If you hear that someone is serving and running into endless difficulties, you need not always shake your head and say he is no good. He may be good in extraordinary measure.
Kelly points out who stood behind those plots, and how Paul spoke of them.
Paul was not ashamed to speak of his tears, any more than of the trials which came upon him through the plots of the Jews. They were the constant opponents of the gospel, filled with special bitterness against Paul.
The small words "all" and "many" carry weight here. And the closing question turns Paul's example into an invitation.
So he served not only humbly but with "all humility of mind"; and not only with tears but with "many" of them. He served with a tender heart and one from which the curse of pride, which ruins so many, was wholly absent. He went out weeping as he scattered the precious seed, and he will come again rejoicing, bringing his golden sheaves. What a pattern servant! And why should we not follow his example?
- Order — Life first, then the Lord, then the saints, then the world. Nothing later in the list can be right if the manner of life contradicts the message.
- Object — He served the Lord, not humanity and not a congregation. The Lord is at once the source, the motive, and the goal of the work.
- Spirit — Humility "of mind," not of behaviour, since a hypocrite can wear outward lowliness. Paul's credential is not learning or success but a lowly mind.
- Cost — Tears mark a servant who feels what he handles. He follows the One who wept over hard hearts and with broken ones.
- Proof — The plots and trials were not signs of failure. They proved what he was made of, and the Lord used them to keep him low.
how I held back nothing of what is profitable, so as not to announce [it] to you, and to teach you publicly and in every house,
Paul is giving the elders of Ephesus a last account of how he worked among them. Two claims stand out: he held back nothing useful, and he taught in two settings — in public and in people's homes.
Holding nothing back has a cost. One writer names what it takes.
Further, he could say that they knew how he kept back nothing that was profitable. This needs faith, and without faith, faithfulness will fail. The apostle was completely above the fear of man. He withheld nothing that was for their good. He announced it to them and taught them publicly and in their houses, testifying to both Jews and Greeks about repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.
So what counts as profitable? One writer says the apostle owed his hearers everything he had received — and that every truth needs its right place.
The apostle knew very well that what he received he had to pass on; he was a steward "of the mysteries of God" (1 Cor. 4:1). He later wrote to this very assembly a letter that unfolds the highest truth, and that subject was no doubt part of his spoken teaching. So he counted it, no less than the other parts of revelation, profitable to his hearers. The fact is, under the Spirit's guidance, it is impossible to turn to any part of revealed truth that is not profitable. "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable," the same writer says in another letter (2 Tim. 3:16). There is need to emphasise that word all. No doubt there are chapters in God's word — as well as doctrines — of special importance, but the point to keep in mind is that all are necessary. We would think a face sadly deformed if any feature were missing. Giving the other features extra prominence would not make up for it; and so not only should every truth find a place, but its right place, and that in proper proportion.
Paul limits his claim to what was profitable. One writer draws out what that implies.
He kept back no ministry that was profitable, which means that he did keep back what was unprofitable. That is a further example to follow honestly. From house to house and publicly, to the few or the many, he had the good and the profit of all at heart.
Two verbs are used, not one, and commentators read the first differently. One takes "showed" as demonstration that then has to be driven home:
He was not content with showing; he explained and enforced what he had shown. A teacher may fully understand a mathematical problem and be able to work it out on the blackboard. Passing that knowledge on to his pupils is another thing. Now this is what the apostle, the "teacher of the Gentiles," sought to do... To this end the apostle, not content with public ministry, went from house to house. He no doubt found on his visits that much he had said in his public address had not been grasped. Are we not often surprised, when we question our hearers, to find how little they have retained?
Another writer takes the showing as the life Paul lived in front of them.
We only teach effectively if our own lives match what we say. The apostle Paul illustrated this well. He referred to it twice when speaking to the elders of Ephesus: "I have showed you, and have taught you," and again, "I have showed you all things" (Acts 20:20, 35). He illustrated in his life what he taught with his mouth. This is the effective way of teaching, in Paul's day or in ours.
The verse names two settings, and one writer sees two kinds of work joined in one man.
The teacher unfolds truth; the pastor applies it. The teacher enlightens the understanding; the pastor looks to the state of the heart. The teacher supplies the spiritual food; the pastor sees what use is made of it. The teacher's work is mostly public; the pastor's work is mostly private. When the two are joined in one person, the teaching gift gives the pastor immense moral power. The pastoral element gives the teacher a tender affection.
The same writer notes which half tends to be dropped, and what is lost with it.
A man may perhaps give us a short address on the Lord's day, or a lecture on a weekday; but where is the "house to house" side of the question? Where is the close, earnest, diligent looking after individual souls day by day? Very often the public teaching shoots completely over the head; it is the house to house teaching that is sure to come home to the heart. How often something said in public is entirely misunderstood and misapplied, until the loving pastoral visit during the week supplies the true meaning and the right application.
For one writer, private visiting is not the lesser half. It is what keeps public ministry sound.
I think the visiting part quite as important, if not the most important part of the work: it is said, "publicly, and from house to house."... The clock strikes the hours, and that serves the passers-by. But the works inside make the good clock, and make the striking and the hands right. I think it should be your main work; indeed, I do not believe anyone can minister well without it. The springs of love, and the use and application of doctrine, are fed there; minds are understood. Otherwise we are apt to get essays, theories or thoughts... I dread much public testimony, and altogether so, if there is no private work.
- Faith first. Holding nothing back takes faith. Without faith, the fear of people wins.
- All is profitable. Every part of revealed truth is useful. Each truth needs its right place and proportion; what a servant holds back is the unprofitable.
- Show, then teach. Showing is not enough. The truth has to be explained, pressed home, and matched by the teacher's own life.
- Two settings, two gifts. Public teaching unfolds the truth; house-to-house work applies it to the individual heart. Much of a public address is not grasped until a visit follows it up.
- Inside the clock. Private work feeds public ministry. Without visiting we get essays and theories; the works inside make the striking right.
testifying to both Jews and Greeks repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ.
Paul is saying goodbye to the leaders of the church at Ephesus. He sums up everything he preached among them in two words: repentance and faith. What is repentance? Why does it point to God, while faith points to Christ? And does one come before the other?
Paul names two groups. One writer notes how that message would land on the first of them:
The Jew would strongly resent that message. He would say it was obvious that the Greek should be told to repent, but to come and tell them, the people of God, to repent was very objectionable. But Paul calmly and plainly told the truth of God in both directions.
Repentance is not what many people assume. One writer clears away the wrong ideas, then defines it and explains the word "toward":
It is not a mere change of mind on certain points (this would confuse it with faith); for the Lord preached, "Repent and believe in the gospel" (Mark 1:15). It is not simply a conviction of having done wrong; for when the crowd were cut to the heart, Peter urged them to repentance (Acts 2:38). It is not sorrow for sin, for "godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret" (2 Cor. 7:10)… But it is a change of mind, a judgment of self, of one's ways and sins, shown by a changed life. It is God's gift; the risen and ascended Christ gives it (Acts 5:31)… It gives God His right place in the conscience of His creature, so it is "toward God."
Why is repentance directed one way and faith another? The answer lies in two different needs. The name Paul uses matters too:
It is against God we have sinned, and it is He who has passed judgment on our sins. So when we are convicted of our guilt, it is to Him we turn with confession and self-judgment. In this state our one need is to learn the way of salvation, just as the jailer, conscience-stricken, ran to Paul and Silas and cried, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" They answered by presenting Christ… But they used the full title — the Lord Jesus Christ. That shows they preached a full gospel: the gospel about His person, His death and resurrection, and His present exaltation as Lord at the right hand of God.
The verse names two things. Where God is at work, each one guarantees the other:
Repentance and faith are inseparable where there is reality… As there is no genuine repentance without faith, so there is no faith of God's elect without repentance. Repentance toward God is the soul judging itself and confessing its ways as in His sight. Faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ is the soul receiving the good news God sends concerning His Son.
Does the order of the words set an order of events? One writer says repentance cannot come first:
But people badly abuse that sentence (Acts 20:21), putting repentance before faith. If it means faith in the full efficacy of Christ's work, then of course it can and will come after repentance. Repentance cannot go before faith. When a man brings a testimony, it produces no effect unless people believe it.
Two opposite errors twist this verse. Neither one is of God:
The low views which make repentance a human work as a preface to faith are no less objectionable than the so-called high views which merge everything in faith, making repentance no more than a change of mind. Neither legalism nor antinomianism is of God, but the grace and truth which came by Jesus Christ.
If both must be present, must they be equally strong? The answer is no. Here is what repentance sounds like when it speaks:
Peter repented when he said, in the presence of the Lord, "I am a sinful man." The tax collector repented when he said, "God, be merciful to me, a sinner!" The prodigal repented when he said in the presence of the father, "I have sinned against heaven and before you." The thief repented when he said, "We are receiving the due reward of our deeds." There may be different measures of repentance, just as there are different measures of faith… but wherever there is a work of God in the soul, these two things will be found.
- Same message. Paul told Jews and Greeks the same two things. The religious hearer needed to repent as much as the Greek did.
- Repentance is Godward. Not regret, not sorrow, not a mere shift of opinion — it is self-judgment that gives God His right place in the conscience.
- Faith is Christward. Once we turn to God in confession, our one need is the way of salvation. The answer is a person: the Lord Jesus Christ, in His death, resurrection and present exaltation.
- Never separated. No genuine repentance exists without faith, and no faith without repentance. Repentance cannot come first, since a message nobody believes does nothing.
- Real, not uniform. The depth varies from soul to soul, yet where God works, both are always there.
And now, behold, bound in my spirit *I* go to Jerusalem, not knowing what things shall happen to me in it;
Paul's farewell to the Ephesian elders turns from his past work among them to the road ahead. He is going to Jerusalem, held by something he cannot shake off. Two questions follow. What was binding him? And how could he be so sure of the destination while knowing nothing of what waited there?
The phrase behind "constrained by the Spirit" can be read two ways, and translations still divide over it. One writer weighs the older reading against the usual sense of the words.
Some of the older writers take the phrase to mean that Paul went "led captive by the Spirit." But the usual sense of the words, and the way the following verses say "the Holy Spirit" instead, both point to his own spirit. Paul was not free in his spirit for any other direction than Jerusalem, whatever it might cost.
Reading it as Paul's own spirit does not leave God out of the story. It changes how He is at work in it.
Paul (Acts 20:22) was not, I believe, bound "in the Spirit," but in spirit, his own. It was the overruling hand of God upon him, not the actual guidance of the Spirit of God. God so ordered it for His own divine purposes. Morally, Paul was not going for testimony; he was going with the collections for the saints.
If it was his own spirit, something had gripped it. One writer traces that grip to Paul's love for his own people, and to the words he wrote about them to the Romans.
Behind his burning desire to go up to Jerusalem stood the mighty constraint of love for his own beloved people. His heart, filled with the love of God, yearned over them. He expresses this love so fully in his letter to the Romans. "I am speaking the truth in Christ — I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit — that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh" (Romans 9:1-3).
The verb itself carries a shadow. One writer sets Paul's tone here beside his tone elsewhere, and hears the difference.
He is going to Jerusalem, bound in spirit. Surely this is not the Holy Spirit, since the word he uses could not apply to Him. Nor does it speak of the sweet and happy constraint of love, though love is in it — deep and constraining love. But along with that love there is certainly a foreboding which casts a shadow over him. The word "bound" reminds us of a sacrifice tied for the altar. Yet if that were all, and he felt the Lord was leading him this way, his spirit would be brighter. Contrast his words to the Philippians. There he writes: "Even if I am to be poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrificial offering of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all" (Philippians 2:17).
Paul had been warned, and more than once. What he did with the warning is the question.
The apostle had no lack of warning. He said so himself to the elders from Ephesus: the Holy Spirit testified to him in every city that chains and afflictions were waiting for him. Yet he clearly treated this as a note of the danger ahead, not as personal direction he had to obey. His mind was made up. Whatever the danger, whatever the suffering, he would go through with it.
Even those who question the journey refuse to belittle the man who made it.
But none of these things could move him from his purpose. His devotedness itself is precious, though we may question if it was rightly directed on this occasion.
The chains came, exactly as forecast. So did something no one forecast.
Still, God was in it all. During these very bonds Paul wrote the letters which give us — as we are glad to know — the fullest and brightest light of Christ and on heavenly things ever given for the lasting instruction and comfort of the saints of God.
- Bound — most writers here read it as Paul's own spirit, not the Holy Spirit. Some earlier writers read it the other way, and translations still differ.
- By love — his longing for his own people tied his spirit. That same longing made him wish himself cut off from Christ for their sake.
- With a shadow — "bound" carries foreboding. It lacks the brightness he shows in Philippians, where he speaks of being poured out as an offering.
- Past warning — the Spirit's testimony in every city told him the cost. He went with his eyes open, treating it as danger to face, not a route to change.
- Under God's hand — the chains came as promised. Out of them came the letters that give the church its clearest light on Christ.
only that the Holy Spirit testifies to me in every city, saying that bonds and tribulations await me.
Paul is saying goodbye to the elders of the church at Ephesus, and he does not know what waits for him in Jerusalem. He knows only what the Holy Spirit keeps telling him in city after city: chains and hardship.
The verse just before this says Paul went "constrained by the Spirit." Which spirit is meant? One writer answers by looking at what was pushing him to Jerusalem.
When he speaks of going "bound in the spirit" to Jerusalem, it is his own spirit he is speaking of, not the Spirit of God. His love for Israel was so deep and so real that it urged him forward. He went despite warnings from the Holy Spirit "in every city" that going there would end in imprisonment and suffering. Notice that he fully believes that it was the Holy Spirit who was giving these warnings.
The wording of the two verses points the same way.
Normal usage, and the separate naming of "the Holy Spirit" in the verses that follow, point to his own spirit... Paul was not free in his spirit to go in any direction but Jerusalem, whatever it might cost.
Paul did not know the shape of what was coming, only its character. One writer traces both the cost of it and what God did with it.
He did not know the exact shape of what was coming. Still, he lets them know that he went in with open eyes to the weight of trouble ahead. That trouble paused only for a short time, and then it all ended in a martyr's death. He knew as well that, whatever the end might be, chains and hardships came first. To a heart that loved the church, what could be more serious for the testimony of the Lord and for the saints? Yet God was in it all. During these very chains Paul wrote the letters that give the fullest and brightest light on Christ and on heavenly things ever given. And we are glad to know it: that light was given for the lasting teaching and comfort of God's saints.
Commentators differ here. Some point to how Paul himself took the testimony: as news about the road, not as an order to change route.
Certainly the apostle did not lack warning, as he said himself to the elders from Ephesus... But he clearly took it as a note of the danger waiting for him, not as a personal order he had to obey. He had made up his own mind to go through with it, whatever the danger and whatever the suffering. The Master had done the same, in a perfection no one can match, for His infinite work, at any cost.
Others find the repeated warnings unusual. Even so, they do not conclude that Paul was outside God's will.
The Holy Spirit does not usually warn of danger. He leads in the path of the Lord, and if persecution comes, He gives strength to endure it. Here the warnings came to Paul again and again. His friends beg him not to go up. Nothing changes his mind. They fall silent, far from satisfied, and say, "The will of the Lord be done." I do not doubt that it was His will. But it was His will in order to work out purposes Paul did not know through the understanding the Holy Spirit gives. He only felt pressed in spirit to go, and ready to suffer all things for the Lord.
Kelly goes further elsewhere. He holds that Paul went past a warning from God — and then he turns the lesson away from Paul and onto us.
He had gone where God had warned him not to go. And if this is true of him, what shall we say of ourselves? Do not allow your lips to say strong things about the apostle Paul; but let your own conscience, and let mine, take heed to our own ways, and above all beware of this — that we are not found slighting one word that comes to us from the Holy Spirit. Let us weigh and treasure every expression of God's mind.
Whatever the warnings meant, Paul's own answer to them was settled devotion.
"Now," he has to add, "the Holy Spirit testifies to me in every city that imprisonment and afflictions await me." There was more trouble for the pattern servant, but he says, "None of these things move me." He was a man of extraordinary steadiness and faith... Here was a man devoted to death for the name and the service of the Lord.
- Bound — What pushed Paul to Jerusalem was his own spirit, moved by love for Israel. The voice naming chains and hardship was the Holy Spirit's.
- Warned — He believed the warnings came from God. He took them as news of what the road held, not as a fence across it.
- Disputed — Commentators differ on whether he read them rightly. Some see a servant walking into the cost with open eyes. Others see a check he pressed past.
- Weighed — The best use of the passage is not to judge Paul. It is to watch our own ways and never brush aside a word from the Spirit.
- Fruitful — God was in the chains. Out of that prison came the letters that give the brightest light on Christ and heavenly things the saints have ever received.
But I make no account of [my] life [as] dear to myself, so that I finish my course, and the ministry which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the glad tidings of the grace of God.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone about preaching the kingdom [of God], shall see my face no more.
Paul is saying goodbye to the elders of the church at Ephesus. In one sentence he tells them they will never see him again, and names the one theme of all his years with them: the kingdom.
One commentator notes that the manuscripts differ over how this verse names what Paul preached.
It is his farewell. His work, as far as being present among them, was ended. The best and oldest manuscripts and versions, apart from the Vulgate and others, read simply "the kingdom." Others add "of God," which is meant even if not expressed; others "of Jesus," and "of the Lord Jesus."
One writer reads this parting as the close of Paul's public work, with lasting effects on the church he left behind.
Solemn departure, the end of the apostle's public work. He speaks of it as a finished work. He announces that from now on, because he is gone, evil would prevail in the outward assembly of God on the earth. But he assures the faithful that God and the word of His grace would be enough to build them up and give them an inheritance among those who are sanctified.
Paul preached grace, and one writer notes he pressed the Lord's authority just as firmly.
Though Paul emphasised the gospel of the grace of God, he insisted just as much on the authority of the Lord Jesus. That authority belongs to the kingdom of God. And that kingdom has an important present aspect that we cannot ignore. Now he tells the Ephesian elders that he knows they will not see his face again. That fact gives more solemn weight to his message for them.
Paul names one theme for all his work among them. One writer argues that this theme has dropped out of much preaching since.
Here we have another and distinct topic, one that modern preaching easily overlooks — "the kingdom." Anyone who examines the Acts of the Apostles will find how large a place it holds in the preaching, not of Peter only but of Paul. We may be sure it filled the preaching of all the other servants of the Lord in those early days. It is a grave blank where the kingdom is left out as it is now. Unfaithful preachers today rob the saints of the future as God has planned it. And the gospel of God's grace suffers by it too.
Commentators differ on which kingdom Paul was announcing. One writer, asked which he meant, ruled out the options put to him and pointed to what is still to come.
Neither, as I believe. It is that coming intervention of God to change the heavens and the earth. The Lord will start and establish it when He comes in visible power and glory, to the joy of all the earth, of Israel and all the nations… Neither the gospel nor the church wiped out the apostle's value for this grand truth. That truth has faded from the testimony of many who were once zealous.
Another writer holds that Paul was not pointing only to the future.
This clearly has a present bearing. When he spoke of the things to come, no doubt he spoke of the kingdom that will one day be set up for all to see. But he also kept before them that in receiving Christ as Lord they had already come under the authority of God. He showed them what it meant in practice to be subject to God's holy will.
The kingdom is not the starting point. It follows what he has just said about the gospel of the grace of God.
If we are to learn the truth of God, we must first receive the gospel of the grace of God (Acts 20:24). Grace having met our deep need, our souls are then helped on by the preaching of the kingdom of God (Acts 20:25). We learn that God has marked out our course down here under the authority of His dear Son. As we live in subjection to the Lord Jesus, righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit mark all our ways.
- Farewell. Paul's work among them was finished. His absence would let evil spread, yet God and the word of His grace would still build them up.
- Weight. He will never speak to them again, so every word of this charge carries added weight.
- Kingdom. Paul sums up his whole ministry among them in one word: the kingdom. It fills the book of Acts. One writer warns that dropping it leaves "a grave blank."
- Two readings. Commentators differ. One takes the kingdom here as God's coming intervention in visible glory. Another sees the present authority of Christ over His people.
- Order. Grace first meets our need; the kingdom then teaches us to live under the authority of God's Son.
Wherefore I witness to you this day, that I am clean from the blood of all,
Paul is saying goodbye to the elders of the church at Ephesus. Before he goes, he calls them as witnesses: no one's blood is on his hands.
The wording is formal, like a man swearing to his record in front of witnesses. One writer points out what Paul twice refuses to do:
"Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all. For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God" (verses 26, 27). The apostle could in this way solemnly attest his faithfulness to the trust the Lord had given him. (Compare Ezekiel 3:18-20). At least twice (verses 20, 27) he plainly disowns such holding back. Some who bear the Christian name have not been ashamed to claim it as a virtue. They say they learned it from Him whose death tore the veil. And He puts all His true followers in the light of life, the light that makes everything visible.
Behind the phrase stands an image from Ezekiel: a watchman whose one job is to warn. If the warning is ignored, the guilt is not his.
So he could say he was "innocent of the blood of all." He was like the faithful watchman of Ezekiel 33:4. That watchman's duty was to warn when the enemy or the sword was coming, but he himself was clear if no one heeded his warning. A solemn thought! The watchman would expose himself to harsh criticism, ridicule, contempt, and danger. But, the apostle adds, "I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God."
Another writer ties the two roles together: Paul had been faithful both as a servant and as a lookout.
Along with this, having told them they would see his face no more, he called them in as his witnesses that he was innocent of the blood of all, for he had not shrunk from declaring to them the whole counsel of God. As a watchman, as well as a servant, he had been faithful to God and to their souls.
His claim rests on what he said a few verses earlier: he kept back nothing useful. The stress falls on the word all.
First of all, in verse 20, he says, "I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable." The apostle thought of his hearers and of their profit... It was to this very assembly that he later wrote a letter unfolding the highest truth. Its subject was surely part of his spoken teaching too. So the apostle counted it no less profitable to his hearers than any other part of revelation. The fact is, under the Spirit's guidance it is impossible to turn to any part of revealed truth that is not profitable. "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable," the same writer says in another letter (2 Timothy 3:16). There is need to emphasise that word all. No doubt there are chapters in God's word — and doctrines — of special importance, but the point to keep in mind is that all are necessary. A face with any feature missing we would think sadly deformed.
"Counsel" here is not advice. It is what God planned and has now let us in on.
He says in effect, "You have all this blessing. The gospel has brought you into this favoured place of nearness and relationship. God's authority is settled in your hearts. You are under His rule. You obey His word. But remember that everything God has done, He has done with certain great counsels or purposes in mind." He has made those purposes known to us. They have not yet come to fruition. They are not yet carried out as they will be in the ages to come. But He has shown them to us now, so that we may live our whole lives on earth in the light of what God purposed before the foundation of the world.
The word "shrink" implies there was a reason to. Telling the whole of God's purpose is what made Paul's life difficult.
This theme of his ministry — the whole counsel of God — was the one that stirred up such furious opposition from many of his Jewish hearers. In the end it led to his imprisonment. So he says, "I did not shrink from declaring." If only he had avoided this part of his ministry, he might have had a far more peaceful time in his service and escaped many troubles. For God's counsel involved bringing in the Gentiles, according to the truth of the church. He knew this, yet he did not flinch.
Declaring everything meant declaring the hard things as well as the welcome ones.
He could say, in front of people who knew his ministry well: "I am innocent of the blood of all; for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God" (Acts 20:26-27). He was no one-sided preacher. He delighted to tell people of the love of God, but with all due seriousness he also warned them of the wrath of God.
- Posted. Like Ezekiel's watchman, Paul had to sound the warning. If people ignored it, the guilt was theirs, not his.
- Warned. He held back nothing profitable. Note the word all: a face missing a feature looks deformed, and so does a partial ministry.
- Whole. "The counsel of God" is His purpose from before the foundation of the world. He has made it known so we can live in its light.
- Costly. Leaving that part out would have bought him a quieter life. The whole counsel brought opposition, and he did not flinch.
- Clear. He told people of God's love and God's wrath alike. So he could call witnesses and say no one's blood stained his hands.
for I have not shrunk from announcing to you all the counsel of God.
Paul is saying goodbye to the elders of the church at Ephesus, knowing he will not see them again. His words raise two questions: what does "the whole counsel of God" cover, and why would anyone hold back from declaring it?
The phrase is often read as a synonym for the gospel message. One commentator keeps apart three things Paul names in this speech: grace, the kingdom, and the counsel of God. They are not one and the same.
It is a mistake to think that "all the counsel of God" means no more than God's plan for saving men, unfolded in the gospel. "The gospel" is indeed the preaching of salvation in a dead and risen Saviour. "The kingdom," whether in its moral form or in its full display, has its own distinct force in God's reign, as we have seen. "All the counsel of God" rises still higher. It takes in His purpose to its utmost extent.
The difference is not just theory. Grace deals with our state as sinners. God's counsel goes higher.
It is of the greatest importance to see this. There is the counsel of God's will for believers, as well as the grace of God that brings salvation for all men. We usually know His saving grace better than the counsels of His heart. The saving grace of God meets our condition as sinners, and we must of course begin with what meets our need. But the counsels of God reveal what God has purposed to bring about for the satisfaction of His own heart.
Paul lists his themes in an order. One writer reads that order as a lesson for anyone who teaches.
First, in dealing with souls, conscience work has to go forward. So he begins with repentance and faith. Either one without the other might drive a soul to despair. God does not want that, so an object — the Lord Jesus Christ — is set before them. With that, the gospel of the grace of God comes in season… Then, alongside the gospel, he preached the kingdom… After these great subjects comes, last in order, the whole counsel of God. This teaching suits only Christians.
Paul's words admit there was a pull to hold back. The reason was not the difficulty of the subject. It was the cost.
Why should he have shrunk from it? We might have thought Paul would have felt nothing but delight in explaining such wonderful truths. But it was exactly this that brought on him the anger of the orthodox Jew. Why did trouble follow him everywhere? Because he did not shrink from declaring the whole counsel of God. This lifts the Christian into heavenly blessings far beyond anything made known to the Jewish people.
The verse opens with "for." It gives the reason for what Paul had just said: he is clear of everyone's blood. One commentator sets this beside Ezekiel.
So the apostle could declare, in all seriousness, that he had been faithful to the trust the Lord gave him (compare Ezekiel 3:18-20). Twice at least (verses 20 and 27) he plainly disowns such holding back. Some who bear the Christian name are not ashamed to call that reserve a virtue learned from Christ. But His death tore the veil, and He puts all His true followers in the light of life — the light that makes everything visible.
Because Paul declared all of it, no later generation waits for more. One writer uses this verse to explain why the letters to the seven churches in Revelation hold no new doctrine.
Suppose these letters had brought fresh doctrinal revelations. They were written after the deaths of Paul, Peter, James and others of the apostles and prophets. That would have proved that God had not given, in their day, all the truth needed for building up the body. In that case Paul could not have declared all the counsel of God (Acts 20:27)… These letters in fact confirm what both Peter and Paul said. They call those they address to be faithful to the truth already received, and to expect nothing more.
God tells us His purposes now, long before He carries them out.
He has made those purposes known to us. They are not yet carried out as they will be in the ages to come. But He has made them known to us, so that we may live our whole life on earth in the light of what God purposed before the foundation of the world.
- Whole — "All the counsel of God" is not the gospel under another name. It rises higher, to the full extent of God's purpose.
- Ordered — Paul moved from repentance and faith, to grace, to the kingdom, to the counsel of God. That last part is teaching for Christians.
- Costly — Declaring it is what drew hostility on him. That is why he calls it not shrinking.
- Clear — He held nothing back. So he could say he was clear of their blood.
- Complete — He declared all of it, so nothing more is owed us. God made His counsel known so we can live now in the light of what He purposed before the world began.