THE BOOK OF ACTS
Lesson 45, Chapter 20
Acts chapter 20 finds Paul leaving the tense situation of Ephesus after being caught up in a riot
started by the Silversmith guild over his teaching about idols not being real gods. What is
important to remember about this event is what it teaches us about how the gentile world
viewed Judaism and The Way, and how The Way and Judaism viewed one another. When we
are misinformed about this, that’s when all sorts of wrong minded Christian doctrines and anti-
Jewish attitudes are born.
We saw in chapter 19 that the Silversmiths perceived the members of The Way as simply a
peculiar group of Jews practicing their own brand of Judaism (never mind that a few gentiles
had joined that group). And whereas the local Jews that the Ephesians were used to dealing
with showed an acceptable degree of respect and tolerance for the gods typically worshipped
in Ephesus (their most import god being the goddess Artemis), Paul as the highly visible
spokesman for The Way was considerably less cordial in his very public denunciation of idols
in general. The Ephesian gentiles didn’t have enough knowledge about Jews to make
nuanced distinctions between the various sects of Judaism, so they just saw all Jews as
basically the same, and all factions of Judaism as various parts of the same religion. Thus the
Ephesian riot was aimed at Jews in general.
The Way also considered themselves as a faction of Judaism. Yes, they had some gentile
converts to the faith of Jesus Christ; but Judaism had always attracted gentile converts. In fact
we can go back to the exodus from Egypt and see that thousands upon thousands of non-
Hebrews joined up with Israel (the Bible calls them a mixed multitude) as they began their trek
to the Promised Land. The Way as of this point in the Book of Acts was still majority Jewish,
and still being led by Jewish leadership.
Mainstream Jews also agreed that The Way was a faction of Judaism; there is no recorded
claim by Rabbis that The Way was not Jewish. Rather, in time the Rabbis claimed that The
Way was heretical (although that accusation was something regularly tossed back and forth at
each other by various Rabbis and the factions that they led). However there eventually was an
effort among the more mainstream sects of Judaism to excommunicate The Way. By that time
gentiles may have represented the majority of Believers and gentile leadership began to
surpass Jewish leadership. So sometime just before 100 A.D. the Birkat ha-Minim was
enacted; this is a better known in English as the Benediction Against the Heretics. Essentially
this prayer became part of a group of Jewish benedictions called Shemoneh esrei that was
practiced in synagogues throughout the known world. If you look this term up in an
Encyclopedia or on the Internet or read about it in Christian commentaries, it will inevitably say
that it is essentially a curse against Christians. But in fact that gives us entirely the wrong
impression. The Jews had little interest in religions outside of Judaism; religions that gentiles
practiced. Rather the Birkat ha-minim was directed at Jews who followed Yeshua as Messiah;
not gentiles who followed Yeshua. So this was not a benediction against “the Church” as we
1 / 9

typically think of it. Rather, this was a benediction directly aimed at the Jewish membership
and Jewish leadership of The Way.
Bottom line: as of the time of Acts chapter 20, The Way and its membership (Jew and gentile)
were seen universally as but one of the several factions of Judaism. This would change but not
until after the close of the New Testament writings, which would not occur for a few more
decades from the time of the Book of Acts.
Let’s read Acts chapter 20 together.
READ ACTS CHAPTER 20 all
Other New Testament books in addition to Acts deal with Paul’s missionary journeys and as
such the information they have often intertwines and fills in blanks that Luke hasn’t chosen to
report. Sometimes, however, it can be challenging to exactly correlate an event in Acts with
one in (for instance) 2
nd
Corinthians. Therefore various scholars can have differing views on
their conclusions. Usually, however, there is a general consensus of opinion because often the
differences among the Bible scholars are not based on the substance of the information, but
rather whether or not the Bible commentator BELIEVES that the Biblical information is
accurate. So assuming the Bible is accurate, here is what we see happening as Acts chapter
20 opens.
Paul has left Ephesus and is intent on traveling through Macedonia. He traveled not by ship,
but probably on foot, and visited a number of Believers he had previously established (this was
Paul’s custom). When we weave what is written in 2
nd
Corinthians 2 into what we read in the
first few verses of Acts 20, then it seems as though Paul intended on meeting up with the
disciple Titus in Troas. Paul didn’t stay in Troas very long, opting instead to go to Corinth. But
Titus didn’t come to Troas when he was expected, so Paul began journeying through
Macedonia, and in fact did meet up with Titus there. Titus had been in Corinth, and brought
good news with him that some disquieting situation that had been happening there (the
situation that made Paul think he needed to go to Corinth), had been resolved.
It seems that Paul spent a fair amount of time in Macedonia but we don’t know for exactly how
long. Next he went to Greece where he spent 3 months (likely this was in the winter when
traveling was usually suspended, or until the shipping lanes reopened). He probably spent a lot
of this time in Corinth since that seemed to be where he was determined to go. The gathering
of funds for the benefit of the poor Believers in Jerusalem was still going on and so as winter
was giving way to spring, elders from the various congregations who were contributing funds
gathered at Corinth so that they could sail with Paul to the Holy Land to deliver them.
Let me flesh out the issue of the funds that were being collected because not all of these funds
were about charity to the poor Believers in Jerusalem. Rather there was a half-shekel Temple
tax that all Jews (whether living in the Holy Land or in the Diaspora) were expected to give to
help maintain the operation of the Temple. Since the Diaspora Jews resided a long distance
from the Temple they would bring those taxes (which were thought of as an offering) on one of
the pilgrimage feasts. It seems that Shavuot had (for whatever reason) become the customary
2 / 9

time to deliver those collected funds. Since only a relative few of the Diaspora Jews came to
the Temple on these occasions due the extensive time and expense of making such a journey,
the collected Temple tax of several synagogues might be entrusted to a representative who
was able to make the trip. So the bulk of the funds that Paul was instrumental in collecting
would have been more about the Temple tax than as actual charity for the poor.
As they were all onboard a ship (or getting ready to board) Paul heard about a plot to kill him
and so he decided it best to alter his plans; he went back to Macedonia and would sail on a
different ship from there to foil the assassins. The group of Elders however went ahead with
their plans, sailed to Troas, and would meet up with Paul there. The plot is said to have been
hatched by unbelieving Jews. So now Paul and the Elders from the several congregations are
at Troas and we learn that the group hadn’t set sail from Philippi in Macedonia until after the
Days of Matzah were completed. This is of course speaking about the spring season Biblical
festival of Unleavened Bread, which comes the next day after Passover. We need to get not
too technical about the mentioning of these festivals because the New Testament talks about
them in the common manner of speaking they used in that era. Technically Passover is a one
day festival that starts on Nisan 14. Then on Nisan 15 begins the 7 day festival of Matzah. In
this era (and for many years before it), the terms Passover and Unleavened Bread became
interchangeable because out of practicality the 2 feasts really combined to be one 8 day long
event. So Jews tended to speak of the season as Passover or Unleavened Bread even though
they were referring to both. What is important for us to understand is that the first and last days
of Matzah were festival Sabbaths so no traveling and no regular work was done by Jews.
Pretty much all travel plans were put on hold during that 8 day period so this delayed Paul and
the Elders’ departure even though the shipping lanes had recently re-opened.
Of course this meant that in 7 weeks another Festival would arrive: Shavuot (Pentecost in
Greek). And like the Feast of Matzah, Shavuot was a pilgrimage festival. That meant that
according to the Torah all Jews were required to present themselves before God at the Temple
in Jerusalem (Deut.16:10 – 12). As we discussed before, relatively few Diaspora Jews made
that trip; it was long, arduous, expensive, and risky. But it broke the Law of Moses to not go. In
fact we see that neither did Paul make that trip. Later in verse 16 we’ll hear about Paul’s great
desire to get to Jerusalem in time for Shavuot. That is, he’d already broken the Torah
command to be at the Temple for the Feast of Matzah and he didn’t want to break another law
by failing to show up for Shavuot. So the timing of his journey clearly had much to do with the
timing of the Biblical Feasts.
Now we come to a passage that has had an enormous impact on Christianity (although you’d
have to be a Bible commentator or an exceptional Bible student to notice it). Verse 7 says that
on the first day of the week the Believers gathered together to break bread and Paul kept
teaching this group until about midnight. What is so impactful about this, you might ask? Here
is the verse that is foremost among institutional Christianity that declares that Paul left behind
Sabbath worship and instituted Sunday worship. Why was that conclusion drawn? Because it
says that this group of Believers met there in Troas on a Sunday (the first day of the week). But
it goes further than that; it is also standard Christian doctrine that Paul also instituted
Communion as a part of every Sunday service for Christians because it says that the group
“broke bread”. That is, breaking bread is referring to the sacrament of Communion. This is a
3 / 9

most delicate subject but we cannot just bypass it.
Notice that in the CJB the author, David Stern, inserts the word Motza’ei Shabbat in place of
“first day”. First, the word Motza’ei Shabbat indeed is NOT there in the original Greek;
however I do think he is on to something. Motza’ei Shabbat means “departure of the
Sabbath”; it refers to Saturday night. Remember that in the Bible Hebrews counted days as
from sunset to sunset. So the 7
th
day, Shabbat, Saturday, ended at sundown. Then the first
day (that we call Sunday) began immediately. After sundown, which ended Shabbat, Motza’ei
Shabbat was celebrated either at home or in the synagogues as a way to extend the joy of the
Sabbath. This is not a Biblical Torah commandment; it is Tradition. So it was a practice
recognized by the synagogue but not by the Temple authorities. However it was the common
practice in this era among Jews.
Since each new day began at sundown, and sunlight was essential for most tasks (especially
tasks in agriculture) people tended to work until the sun set to make the most of daylight hours.
Thus they ate their evening meal after dark when the work day was over because work could
no longer be accomplished. So upon Motza’ei Shabbat, which occurred once the sun set
ending Shabbat, the evening meal was eaten. For one reason, since Shabbat was now over,
meal preparation and cooking could commence. The common term in that day for eating
(especially when referring to the evening meal) was breaking bread. Part of the reason that the
term breaking bread was adopted is because at the start of the meal a barakah (a standard
blessing) was recited, and it involved literally breaking the bread and passing it in pieces
around the table. So; breaking bread has nothing to do with Communion in Jewish practice. It
just refers to the standard blessing to begin the meal.
But this brings up another issue; was Paul instituting Sunday worship for Believers and
abandoning the customary Jewish day of communal worship, Saturday? Let me begin by
quoting from the well known Messianic Jew who has authored many books about the
importance of rediscovering our Jewish Roots. He has also created a wonderful Bible
commentary on the New Testament, and he wrote the Complete Jewish Bible: Dr. David Stern.
He says this:
“I do not find the New Testament commanding a specific day of the week for worship.
There can be no objection whatever to the practice adopted later by a gentile-dominated
Church of celebrating the Lord’s Day on Sunday, including Sunday night; but this
custom must not be read backward into New Testament times. On the other hand,
Messianic Jews who worship on Saturday night rather than Sunday can find warrant for
their practice in this verse.”
Paul wasn’t changing anything or instituting anything new. He was simply engaging in a typical
Jewish custom of gathering after the setting sun brought an end to Shabbat, and then eating
(breaking bread) with his group of disciples. This custom was called Motza’ei Shabbatand
Judaism has retained it to this day. By definition 1
st
day comes immediately after the 7
th
day, so
indeed Paul was meeting and teaching on the 1
st
day, Sunday. But this wasn’t “Christianity”; it
was standard Judaism.
4 / 9

This also brings up the sensitive issue of whether it is right before the Lord to have a
communal meeting of Believers on Sunday, or should it only occur on Saturday (Shabbat)? I
addressed this extensively in our study of the Book of Nehemiah and you can read it or hear it
if you want to review what I had to say about it in detail. I will, however, briefly summarize
because little has divided Christianity from Judaism, and Christianity from Messianic Judaism,
and traditional Christianity from Hebrew Roots Christianity, more than this issue.
1.There is no such concept in the Bible (OT or NT) of a designated “day of worship”.
God has not singled out any one day of the week as a special or set-apart day for
personal or communal worship above any of the other days; nor has God prohibited
any particular day of the week as off-limits for personal or communal worship.
2.Sabbath (Shabbat) is one thing only: the God ordained day of rest. The Bible describes
Shabbat as having no other purpose than ceasing from our regular labors (again, OT
or NT). Sabbath is NOT the Biblical day of worship because there is no such thing.
3.The Jewish practice of having a weekly communal day where everyone goes to
synagogue for prayer and worship on Shabbat is Jewish Tradition; it is not a Biblical
commandment. Nowhere in the OT will you find either a Law to meet together on
Shabbat, or will you find mention of the Jews having a regular worship meeting on the
7
th
day. This is because it was a custom developed by the synagogue system; and the
synagogue system didn’t come into existence until well after the Babylonian Exile and
the close of the Old Testament.
4.The common accusation by some Messianic Jews towards Christians is that meeting
for worship on Sunday is meeting on a pagan day. There is no such thing as a “pagan
day” in the Bible; God created all seven days. Further, the common Jewish practice of
Motza’ei Shabbat is meeting on Sunday (the first day); it happens at the close of
Saturday (Shabbat) after sundown, meaning the day has changed to Sunday.
Motza’ei Shabbat is Sunday worship.
5.It is claimed that the Roman Emperor Constantine in concert with the Roman Church
changed Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday for Christians. That is incorrect.
Constantine abolished Sabbath altogether for Christians, and instituted a new day
called “The Lord’s Day”, which was to be held on Sundays. As the historical record
clearly states, he did this precisely to refute Jews whom he saw as wicked and having
no place in Christianity (that is, from his standpoint Christianity was a gentiles-only
faith). Since Jews met by custom on Saturdays, then Christians would henceforth meet
by custom on Sundays. The difference is that Sunday worship was an imperial decree
and a Church law. So Christians ceased celebrating Sabbath and instead saw it as a
dead law thanks to Constantine. However it was also no co-incidence that the Mithrain
Sun worshipping religion, the most dominant religion in the Roman Empire at the time,
was already using Sunday as its day of worship (hence the name sun-day), and so
Constantine found it convenient and politically expedient to declare a Christian day of
worship (where none had existed before) to be on Sunday, the same day as the Sun-
god worshippers assembled.
6.There is nothing wrong about meeting in worship in synagogue on Saturday, nor
meeting for a Christian service on Sunday; one has no more merit than the other. Both
are designated days of worship created by manmade traditions and not by God.
Further, these days are neither better nor worse for meeting for worship than any other
5 / 9

day of the week. Therefore if one wants to make Shabbat your day of worship to go
along with God’s day of rest, that is perfectly fine. But; if one wants to make Sunday
your day of worship as well as God’s day of rest, your Sabbath, that is NOT fine.
Sunday worship is acceptable but Sabbath is only the 7
th
day; not any day we choose.
What day we choose to meet in communal worship is our choice; but Shabbat is a
permanent ordinance of God, not something humans can change at our whim.
What I just told you is a combination of Scripture and recorded, verifiable history; it is not my
speculation. So once again: Paul and his disciples were merely meeting immediately following
Shabbat as was a standard custom of Judaism; he was not instituting a new Sunday worship
service. And he and his followers were eating a typical evening meal together; they were not
having Communion.
Picking up again in Acts 20 verse 8; it seems that Paul was doing what he does best:
preaching. He went on and on until around midnight a young man named Eutychus was sitting
on the window ledge; he dozed off and fell out the window. It might have been funny except for
one thing: he was on the 3
rd
floor. The streets of Troas were paved with stones so when he hit,
the fall killed him. We’re told that Paul of course ran downstairs whereupon he threw his body
on top of him, embraced him, and then said not to worry, he’s alive!
A few things about this event: first, Luke (the writer of Acts) was present. Recall that Luke was
a physician; I don’t know how good of a doctor he was but let’s hope he knew how to tell a
dead person from a live one. We know Luke is present because back in verse 5 we start to
encounter more of the “we phrases”. That is, the author of Acts begins to talk about “we” and
“us”, making himself part of the action. So Luke was in Troas with the group of Elders and
Paul. Even more, verse 7 says that “we” were gathered to break bread; Luke was there in that
upper room. Thus we have eye witness verification from a doctor that the boy was indeed
dead, and we have the testimony of a resurrection from the dead by this same doctor.
Verse 11 once again mentions breaking bread and says this happened after the incident of the
boy falling out of the window. It is difficult to reconcile this with verse 7 except that apparently
for whatever reason the eating didn’t actually happen until around midnight. That could make
sense because meal preparation couldn’t even begin until dark. And perhaps the group
became so engrossed in hearing Paul that food wasn’t on their minds. That doesn’t matter as
far as reckoning what day it was. Midnight is not when days change, rather sunset is; so
regardless this was occurring on the 1
st
day of the week, Sunday.
After a few days in Troas it was time to leave. At daybreak everyone went to the docks and
boarded a ship for Assos but Paul didn’t go with them. There was a maintained highway
between Troas and Assos; it was a 20 mile distance and so Paul walked it. Why did Paul walk
instead of ride on a ship? All we’re told is that essentially he decided to do it; perhaps he just
wanted a day to be lost in his own thoughts.
In Assos Paul met up with the others and boarded another ship to take them to Mitylene. This
was the largest city on the island of Lesbos. From there they sailed to Chios; the following day
to Samos and then finally to Miletus. Paul decided to bypass Ephesus (although I’m sure his
6 / 9

curiosity ate at him after the riots and all), because he needed to get to Jerusalem in time for
Shavuot in order to observe the commandment. Thirty miles north of Miletus was Ephesus and
Paul sent a messenger there asking some of the congregation elders to come to Miletus to
meet with him. Paul had some things he felt he needed to say to these faithful leaders of the
Ephesus congregation because he didn’t think he’d ever see them again.
Starting in verse 18 Paul declares the faithfulness of his ministry to the Elders not because he
is bragging, but in order to teach them how a minister should serve. Paul did as we should do:
he lived it more than he talked about it. A good example is far more powerful than good words,
and one of the examples he gave them was how he set his own personal risk aside in order to
minister to them. Ephesus was perhaps the roughest test he had faced thus far; the
unbelieving Jews there were the most adamantly opposed to him and the unbelieving gentiles
had a vested economic interest is squashing Paul’s viewpoint of the idols they made as not
real gods.
Paul recalls that he taught in public that others might listen even though that invited retaliation;
and he taught in private to both Jews and gentiles. He taught the same beneficial message to
each group: repentance and faithfulness. He taught that these two elements must both happen
in order for there to be redemption so I’ll then emphasize it as well. It is said (and I have said it
myself countless times) that salvation in Christ is a free gift from God; it comes from grace plus
nothing. Yet that is true only to the point that we acknowledge that there is FIRST, before
grace, an eligibility test. And the eligibility test is that we must sincerely repent to God for our
sins against Him. John the Baptist spelled it out; we have seen this same requirement spelled
out (and played out) all throughout the Book of Acts. We’ve even seen some new so-called
Believers that were baptized based on repentance of sins (Acts 19:1 – 7), but had not been
baptized based on the saving grace of Yeshua. Paul did not accept them as saved. So the
elements of both repentance from sins and trust in Christ are needed.
I have read numerous articles from Pastors explaining that repentance and faith in Christ is the
same thing. That is, repenting is also asking Christ into your heart. This is the answer to how
one can agree with the doctrine that says that salvation comes from Christ alone by grace, but
to somehow avoid the issue of repentance as an active ingredient of salvation. I would think
by this point in Acts that you’ve seen that this in no way lines up with Holy Scripture.
Repentance means that you not only acknowledge that you are a sinner, but that you sincerely
intend to stop sinning. The truth is that you don’t need Yeshua to see that; all you need is the
Law of Moses. And you don’t need Yeshua in order to repent (John the Baptist was our best
example of this). But once you repent and determine to live righteously, you still owe God a
debt for the sins you committed. Repentance does NOT pay for your sins; repentance only
admits your sins and forces you to face the consequences.
So the next step after repentance is to find the way to pay for those sins. We learn in Leviticus
that God says the only means to pay for sins in a way that provides divine forgiveness is that a
sinless creature must die; that leaves out the sinner, doesn’t it? The only solution is an
innocent substitute. For centuries innocent animals were killed and laid on the altar as
substitutes for sinners. With the advent of Messiah, He became the innocent substitute for us
all. But we have to acknowledge that and accept what He did for us, in dying on the cross, in
7 / 9

order for it to become effective. Then when we are immersed into that reality, we are saved.
Yet Scripture makes it certain that we can’t skip over the repentance and go straight to the
salvation. But I can tell you that I have run across many people who are convinced that they
can do just that; they can pray to receive Jesus and just intentionally go right on sinning as
before……because they are saved! These are the ones that are often labeled in modern times
as un-victorious Christians. To my way of thinking, and according to Scripture, the term un-
victorious Christian is an oxymoron. When we repent, and we are saved, we are handed a
victory of eternal magnitude. Un-victorious means one of those elements is missing. Verse 21
repeats Paul’s formula for salvation: he says to turn from sin AND to put your trust in the Lord.
He does not say that turning from sin IS putting your trust in the Lord. Turning from sin is an
act of the human will; trust in the Lord for forgiveness of sins is an act of divine grace. So both
elements are required.
With that out of the way Paul announces to the Ephesian Elders that he is going to Jerusalem
but he has trepidation about it. He is expecting something bad to happen along the way
because, he says, in every city he visits the Holy Spirit keeps warning him about going to
Jerusalem. Very probably what this means is that there are Believers who prophecy to him that
they see trouble ahead for him and the message is so consistent wherever he goes that he’s
taking it seriously. Paul is looking to the future; but what he couldn’t reckon was the timing.
That is perhaps one of the biggest frustrations that Believers face. We sense in our spirits that
something is coming; it is the “when” of it that is usually not clear. And that “when” could be
sooner, or years beyond, what we’re thinking. In fact, even though Paul was so certain that
he’d never return to Ephesus, his Epistles show us that he did.
Because Paul felt that he wouldn’t be coming back to Ephesus, he wants to declare that he
has given everything the Lord has told him to give to the people of Ephesus. He has told them
how to be forgiven and if they want to ignore it, then it’s not his responsibility. Or, in the
common Hebrew expression of that day: their blood is on their own heads. But now, a warning:
the Elders need to pay attention and take constant heed because evil is coming. Paul is
speaking directly to the leadership. He lapses into metaphors that Yeshua often used: those of
the sheep and the shepherd. Paul says that he is certain that wolves will come in and attack
the flock. These Elders before him are the shepherds of the flock; it is their job to be vigilant
and to deal with the wolves however it must be done. In fact the attacks won’t always come
from outsiders; sometimes members of their own group will betray themselves and become
perverse. They will teach deviance and corruption as truth with the goal of pulling the disciples
away for themselves.
I have little doubt that the Torah scholar Paul has Yeshua’s exhortation in mind as he pours
out his heart and his fears to these leaders of the congregation of Ephesus.
John 10:14-17 CJB
14
I am the good shepherd; I know my own, and my own know me-
15
just as the Father knows me, and I know the Father- and I lay down my life on behalf
8 / 9

of the sheep.
16
Also I have other sheep which are not from this pen; I need to bring them, and they
will hear my voice; and there will be one flock, one shepherd.
17
"This is why the Father loves me: because I lay down my life- in order to take it up
again!
We’ll finish chapter 20 and get well into Acts 21 next time.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
9 / 9