Introduction
Under the correct conditions, opposition backfires, causing increased interest in the issue being opposed. Consider the rise of Donald Trump in the 2016 Republican Presidential primaries. Trump’s campaign spent little money on political advertising with no political action committee aid, yet he still won the Primary (Clark 2016). Trump won because the media constantly opposed him on their platforms. Although they spoke negatively about Trump, as a result of all the free press, Trump secured the nomination and eventually the presidency. This phenomenon can be called the opposition paradox, and it is actually an important theme in the book of Acts.
Luke recorded how the Holy Spirit led the disciples to utilize opposition and persecution to increase dissemination of the gospel message. Paul exemplified this theme in his evangelistic work, especially in his voyage to and work in Rome as a prisoner of the state. Opposition to Paul’s ministry led to the successful accomplishment of the task that Jesus assigned to Paul, preaching the gospel to the Gentiles. Luke’s record of Paul’s response to opposition serves as a model for Christian evangelists of any era.
Opposition Paradox as a Theme of Luke-Acts
Luke emphasized standing against opposition as an important theme of his two-part work. Luke recorded how Jesus taught this principle. Jesus described His mission when he stated, “I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to the other towns as well; for I was sent for this purpose” (Luke 4:43, ESV). He also understood the ramifications of His mission. Jesus informed His followers, “Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division” (Luke 12:51). When Jesus preached, opposition ensued. Luke noted, “He was teaching daily in the temple. The chief priests and the scribes and the principal men of the people were seeking to destroy him” (Luke 19:47). Jesus knew that His work would be polarizing, but the polarization ultimately made His work effective because it led to His crucifixion. Jesus explained after His resurrection that it was “necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory” (Luke 24:26). Jesus used the opposition to accomplish His mission.
Jesus taught His disciples to use the opposition in the same manner. “And he said to all, ‘If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me’” (Luke 9:23). All who followed Jesus would face opposition as He did. Jesus continued, “They will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors for my name’s sake. This will be your opportunity to bear witness” (Luke 21:13–14, italics added). The opposition would create opportunities to witness—the opposition paradox.
Peter, John, and Stephen preceded Paul in fulfilling Jesus’ prediction. As the Jewish Council opposed their preaching, Peter and John continued to gain converts (Acts 4:22; 5:14, 42). Peter even preached the gospel in front of the hostile Jewish Sanhedrin on two occasions (Acts 4:8-12; 5:29-32). Stephen also preached the gospel in front of the Sanhedrin (Acts 7). After the Jews murdered Stephen, “there arose on that day a great persecution against the church in Jerusalem, and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria…Now those who were scattered went about preaching the word” (Acts 8:2, 4, italics added). As a result of the Jewish opposition, the gospel spread outside Jerusalem for the first time.
Luke emphasized Paul’s particular role in the opposition paradox when he recorded Paul’s commission. The Lord said, “He is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel. For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name” (Acts 9:15–16).
The predicted opposition arose wherever Paul ministered. Arthur Glasser correctly commented, “We cannot trace the Apostle Paul’s missionary career without being impressed with the fact that his whole life was marked by suffering” (2009, 152). Paul faced opposition from all sorts of people. He and Silas faced opposition from the Gentiles in Philippi. Luke recorded, “When they had inflicted many blows upon them, they threw them into prison” (Acts 16:23). Hellenistic Jews opposed him. According to Luke, “Jews came from Antioch and Iconium, and having persuaded the crowds, they stoned Paul and dragged him out of the city, supposing that he was dead” (Acts 14:19). Paul also met opposition from his former allies on the Jewish council in Jerusalem. After being arrested on false charges, Paul testified before the council, and “the dissension became violent” to the extent that “the Jews made a plot and bound themselves by an oath neither to eat nor drink till they had killed Paul” (Acts 23:10, 12). In a surprising twist, this violent plot by the Jews resulted in Paul preaching the gospel to soldiers, governors, kings, and eventually the citizens of the eternal city of Rome (Acts 24-28).
Opposition Paradox Exemplified in Paul’s Journey to Rome
Luke utilized sixty verses to document Paul’s voyage to Rome. Brian Rapske wondered “what Luke’s intention may have been in relating at such considerable length the shipwreck of Paul” (1994, 283). Luke carefully selected the material he included in his book, so Rapske’s question is a good one. Two reasons explain Luke’s inclusion of this material.
First, Luke desired to demonstrate God’s providence despite opposition. Luke began, “When it was decided that we should sail for Italy, they delivered Paul and some other prisoners to a centurion of the Augustan Cohort named Julius. And embarking in a ship of Adramyttium, which was about to sail to the ports along the coast of Asia, we put to sea” (Acts 27:1–2). God used Jewish persecution to get Paul to Rome. The voyage itself was arduous, and its difficulty was compounded by poor choices. When the ship stopped to resupply at Fair Havens, safe sailing season had already ended (Acts 27:9). Hence, Paul advised Julius and the captain to wait until Spring to finish the journey. They rejected his advice, which resulted in the ship getting caught in a storm (Acts 27:12, 14). The storm continued until “all hope of…being saved was at last abandoned” (Acts 27:20).
However, the bad choices which resulted in the ship caught in the storm allowed God to display His power. Ben Witherington observed, “God’s plan and providence were such that even severe obstacles were overcome in getting Paul to Rome and his appearance before the emperor” (1998, 758). Instead of wrecking in the Syrtis, as the sailors feared, they “were brought safely through” to the island of Malta and ultimately arrived in Rome (Acts 27:17; 28:1, 16). God saved them (Acts 27:24).
Second, Luke described how Paul utilized the hardships during the voyage as ministry opportunities. During the storm, the sailors exhibited a “decline into despair and hopelessness” (Witherington 1998, 766). Paul alone retained hope. He exploited the opportunity to proclaim God’s greatness, the reason for his hope. Paul proclaimed, “I urge you to take heart, for there will be no loss of life among you, but only of the ship. For this very night there stood before me an angel of the God to whom I belong and whom I worship, and he said, ‘Do not be afraid, Paul; you must stand before Caesar. And behold, God has granted you all those who sail with you’” (Acts 27:21–24). Paul exuded hope and comforted the other sailors because he trusted God. Hence, Paul the convict became the spiritual leader of his captors (Witherington 1998, 770). When God affirmed Paul’s faith by saving them, it served as a strong apologetic for Paul’s God, but this affirmation could not have occurred without the storm, without the opposition.
In spite of the opposition, Paul arrived in Rome. When they arrived, “Paul was allowed to stay by himself with the soldier who guarded him” (Acts 28:16). Much has been made about Paul’s relative freedom while in Rome (Witherington 1998, 788). However, he was on house arrest—he still faced opposition. Despite limitations, he kept preaching boldly to whomever would listen. Luke recorded how Paul continued to evangelize the Jews, despite the persecution he had suffered from them (Acts 28:17–20). Following the opposition paradox theme, Jewish persecution led to Paul’s ministry to the Roman Jews; “and some were convinced by what he said, but others disbelieved” (Acts 28:24).
Apparently, the majority of the Roman Jews rejected the gospel (Keener 1993, 164), so Paul quoted Isaiah against them (Acts 28:26–27). Witherington posited, “What is important to notice about the citation of this Scripture here is that it did not signal a total rejection of the Jews in Isaiah’s day, nor does it do so in this context for Paul’s day” (1998, 802). The remnant accepted the gospel of the Kingdom. The rejection by the majority of Jews allowed Paul to pivot his attention to the Gentiles in Rome, as he had done in so many other places throughout the empire; however, he still “welcomed all who came to him,” including Jews (Acts 28:28, 30).
Many readers have wondered why the book of Acts ended without Paul being vindicated or speaking to Caesar. Witherington suggested, “Luke was not writing a biography of Paul, he was writing a historical work about the spread of the good news from Jerusalem to Rome” (1998, 792–793). Although Witherington is correct that Luke was not writing a biography of Paul, his assertion regarding the book of Acts being about the spread of the gospel from Jerusalem to Rome seems incomplete. James Scott noted, “Acts 1:8 is often understood as broadly programmatic for the structure of Acts” (1994, 294). If Acts 1:8 is programmatic, then the book does appear unfinished. At this point in history, the gospel had not reached “the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8). Luke concluded his book in this manner intentionally.
Applications for Evangelism Today
The book of Acts appears unfinished because the mission is ongoing. Luke concluded with Paul still “proclaiming the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness and without hindrance” (Acts 28:31). Luke implied that future Christians should do likewise. Paul did not let opposition hinder him. Despite being on house arrest for his ministry, he continued to preach the gospel. Neither should Christians today allow opposition to stop them.
The American culture may be turning away from God, but as He did with the Jews, God continues to preserve a remnant. According to J. P. Moreland, “Even though the early Church was a minority movement that faced intellectual and cultural ridicule and marginalization it maintained internal cohesion and a courageous witness, thanks in no small measure to the powerful role…of the philosophically trained apologists…The same point applies with real force to our current condition” (1996, 124). In this increasingly secular culture, Christians must continue to proclaim the gospel. The arguments from Scripture and the arguments from the book of nature still point to the validity and power of the Christian worldview, as well as the inconsistency of the secular explanations. Although their position has become unpopular, Christians have a responsibility to assert the validity of Christianity in the marketplace of ideas.
Persecution and opposition emboldened Paul. When society claimed that he should be silent, he preached louder because he knew that he was correct and that the Lord supported his mission. Glasser suggested, “Were he among us today, he would call for our active resistance to all that hinders the ongoing missionary purpose of God—the powers in religious structures, in intellectual structures…in moral structures…and in political structures” (2009, 153). Christians must not allow the opposition to make them shrink back and become insular. Instead, they must continue to engage the culture with biblical truth.
As Christians engage the opposition, God will bring them success. It may not always look like success. Sometimes, it may look like a storm or house arrest. Yet, as the storm presented an opportunity for God to display His power, opposition presents the same types of opportunities today, although they may be difficult to identify. Hence, evangelism is a partnership between the Holy Spirit and the Christian. The Spirit reveals the opportunities that the evangelist must be prepared to seize as Paul did during the storm, as well as during his time on house arrest. Paul transformed opposition into opportunities for evangelism, and modern Christians should as well.
Conclusion
An important theme of Lukan theology was the Christian response to opposition. First, Luke wanted his readers to know that opposition to the gospel exists. As long as God sends His people on missions, Satan will oppose them. However, opposition does not mean lack of success. When the evangelist accepts the Holy Spirit’s leadership, He can convert opposition into opportunity. Paul utilized his opposition to bring Christianity to the center of the Roman Empire. How can we utilize the opposition today?
[You can view more articles from God’s Honest Truth or subscribe (if you haven’t already) to get all God’s Honest Truth articles sent to your email by visiting the site godshonesttruth.substack.com.]
Reference List
Clark, Dan. 2016. “Trump Was Outspent by His Closest Primary Opponents.” Politifact. Accessed April 17, 2021. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/jul/01/michael-caputo/trump-was-outspent-his-closest-primary-opponents/.
Glasser, Arthur F. 2009. “The Apostle Paul and the Missionary Task.” In Perspectives on the World Christian Movement: A Reader. 4th ed., edited by Ralph D. Winter and Steven C. Hawthorne, 149–153. Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library
Keener, Craig S. 1993. “The IVP Bible Commentary: New Testament.” In Acts as History and Theology: Reading and Resource Materials. 2nd ed., edited by Global University. 175–202. Springfield, MO: Global University.
Moreland, James Porter. 1996. “Philosophical Apologetics, the Church, and Contemporary Culture.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39, no. 1 (March): 123–140. https://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=21&sid=e14feb43-c730-4524-b2ab-e94f27be32ff%40sdc-v-sessmgr01.
Rapske, Brian M. 1994. “Acts, Travel and Shipwreck.” In Acts as History and Theology: Reading and Resource Materials. 2nd ed., edited by Global University. 253–288. Springfield, MO: Global University.
Scott, James M. 1994. “Luke’s Geographical Horizon.” In Acts as History and Theology: Reading and Resource Materials. 2nd ed., edited by Global University. 289–312. Springfield, MO: Global University.
Witherington, Ben, III. 1998. The Acts of the Apostles: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans