article48

§43 Lydia’s Conversion in Philippi (Acts 16:11–15)

The story that begins here and runs through to 21:16 covers the greatest years of Paul’s life—years that saw the foundation of the churches of Macedonia, Achaia (Greece), and Asia and the writing of some of his most important epistles. The story is told by means of a few typical pictures (see disc. on 3:1–10) by which Luke is able to show both the power of the gospel and the effect of its meeting with the other powers of that day: philosophy, religion, and the Roman state. At a number of points the story is corroborated and filled out by Paul’s letters. However, some of the details of Luke’s narrative have been questioned, especially his account of Paul and Silas’ imprisonment and the earthquake that interrupted it. Parallels have been adduced from other literature in proof that the story is a fabrication or at least a highly embellished account of what really happened (cf., e.g., 5:17ff.; 12:7ff.; the Testament of Joseph 8:4; the Acts of Thomas 154ff.; Euripides, Bacchae 443ff., 586ff.; Epictetus, Lectures 2.6.26). Haenchen complains that Luke has told the story “with the full array of Hellenistic narrative art, so that the glory of Paul beams brightly” (p. 504). And there may be something in this as far as its telling is concerned—Luke was an artist. But again we must insist that the form of the story is no guide to its essential historicity (see disc. on 5:19f.). A charge has also been brought against Luke that the rest of the town seems not to have been affected by the earthquake that set the two missionaries free. But we do not know that this was the case, and to argue from Luke’s silence on the matter is a hazardous proceeding. Indeed, their release the next day may have been due precisely to a fear inspired in the magistrates by the earthquake. It is certainly hard to imagine why Luke should have invented the story if nothing happened at all, whereas there is much in the topographical and political details of the narrative to suggest that in fact he had access to firsthand information. The whole account has a ring of truth about it.

Luke seems to have been struck by the strangely representative nature of what happened at Philippi. There were other conversions, we know, but three are made to stand out in particular: Lydia’s, the slave girl’s (by implication), and the jailer’s. Together these three epitomized all whom the Jews held in contempt—women, slaves, and Gentiles—and if anything marked the divergence of the new faith from the old it was these conversions at Philippi. Not only had the gospel crossed the Aegean, but it had bridged the far more difficult gulf of sexual, social, and racial distinction (cf. Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11). The suggestiveness of these details may account for the space that Luke has devoted to the mission in Philippi. But it is also possible that this place had a special interest for Luke, in that it may well have been his home for a number of years until he rejoined Paul at the close of the “third missionary journey.”

16:11 / From Troas, Paul and his companions (Silas, Timothy, and now, apparently, Luke) sailed to Samothrace, an island off the coast of Thrace about halfway between Troas and Neapolis. They made Samothrace in one day and the mainland the next (cf. 20:6). Luke may have seen this good crossing as a sign of God’s approval. Neapolis was their port of disembarkation. They were now in Macedonia.

16:12 / When the last of the Macedonian kings fell to the Romans at Pydna in 168 B.C., the country was annexed by Rome, but in the settlement made the following year was declared free. Nevertheless, to curb the free spirit of the Macedonians, the country was divided into four republics, each under a separate jurisdiction. This arrangement lasted until 148 B.C. In that year a Macedonian uprising was crushed, and the country was made a province of Rome. From A.D. 15 to 44 it was combined with Achaia and Moesia into one large imperial province, but from A.D. 44 was again a separate senatorial province (see note on 13:7). Through all of this, the old fourfold division of the country appears to have been retained, and Luke demonstrates his local knowledge by referring to it in this verse (see Sherwin-White, p. 93; cf. also 13:49ff.). The Greek of this verse is confused, but the reading adopted by GNB probably represents what Luke intended, namely, that Philippi was “a city of the first district of Macedonia.” It was certainly not “the leading city of the district of Macedonia” (RSV) nor even of this particular subdivision (NIV). That distinction belonged to Amphipolis, and Thessalonica was the capital of the whole province.

The missionaries appear not to have lingered in Neapolis, but to have gone straight to Philippi, about ten miles to the west. Originally a small mining town founded to exploit the gold deposits of the nearby Pangaeus Mountains, Philippi had survived the failure of the lodes because of the commercial importance of its position astride the Via Egnatia, the chief route between Asia and the West. Its name derived from Philip II of Macedon (359–336 B.C.), who took the town from the Thasian Greeks. Following the battle of Philippi (42 B.C.), the town was enlarged by the settlement of a number of veterans. It was in Antony’s mind to make it a colony, but it was only after his defeat by Octavius in the battle of Actium (31 B.C.) that Philippi was granted that status. With it came more Italian settlers. The most cherished possession of such a colony was its “Italian right” (the ius Italicum) “by which the whole legal position of the colonists in respect of ownership, transfer of land, payment of taxes, local administration, and law, became the same as if they were upon Italian soil; as, in fact, by a legal fiction, they were” (BC. vol. 4, p. 190). The colonists themselves have been fairly described as “a miniature likeness of the great Roman people” (J. B. Lightfoot, St Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians [London: Macmillan, 1868], p. 51), and in both Luke’s account of Paul’s visit to Philippi and Paul’s own letter to the Philippians, we are constantly brought face to face with the political life of Rome, in particular, with the power and pride of Roman citizenship (vv. 21, 37; Phil. 1:27; 3:20). This is not the first colony to have appeared in the narrative, nor will it be the last, but Luke makes a point of noting its status—Philippi, a Roman colony—partly, perhaps, because of his own interest in Philippi, but also because it helps to shed light on the narrative.

16:13 / On the Sabbath the party went outside the city gate to the river in search of any Jews who might have met there for worship. The Greek text has them simply going “out of the gate,” and as long as we understand “the gate” to be that of the city, NIV has given the sense of it. But another identification is possible. A little over a mile to the west of the city, on the Via Egnatia, stood a Roman arch, now in ruins; and a little beyond this ran the river Gangites, a tributary of the Strymon. The erection of an arch of this sort often accompanied the founding of a colony and was intended to symbolize the dignity and privileges of the city. It could also mark the pomerium, a line encircling an empty space outside the city within which no buildings or burials were permitted or strange cults allowed to be introduced. The Jews may therefore have been obliged to hold their meetings at this distance, beyond this gate. Here the missionaries expected to find their place of prayer. The Greek has only the one word, proseuchē, which can mean either the act of praying or the place in which it is done, in the latter sense sometimes denoting a building (e.g., a synagogue). But Luke’s use of the word here probably means that there was no building, just a regular meeting spot in the open. When Jews were obliged to meet in this way, as far as possible they would do so near a river or the sea to facilitate their ceremonial washings, and so at Philippi, it would seem. Here Paul and his companions found some women—the absence of men may explain the lack of a synagogue, since at least ten men were needed before a synagogue could be established. They sat down [the usual posture for teaching among Jews, though in this case it may simply indicate informality] and began to speak to the women who had gathered there. Considering the small regard ancient Jews had for women as people to be taught, we are again reminded of how important a part women play in the story of Acts by comparison (see disc. on 1:14).

16:14–15 / At least one of these women was converted, though not necessarily at their first meeting. The imperfect tense of the verb “to hear” in verse 14 suggests that she heard the missionaries on more than one occasion. Her name was Lydia, and that was also the name of her country—though it no longer existed independently, but had long since been absorbed into the province of Asia—for she was from Thyatira, a city of Lydia. Dyeing was one of the stable industries of that city, and it was probably from there that Lydia bought her purple cloth (v. 14). It was a luxury trade, and Lydia must have been a relatively wealthy woman to be engaged in it. She may have been a contributor, therefore, to the several gifts that Paul later received from this church (Phil. 4:10ff.; 2 Cor. 11:18f.). She is described as a worshiper of God (v. 14, i.e., a God-fearer; see note on 6:5), and it may have been in Thyatira that she was introduced to the Jewish faith, for there is evidence that the Jews of Thyatira were especially involved in the dyeing trade. Thus the way had been prepared in her for the gospel. But Luke attributes her readiness to respond (v. 14) to something more than her background. The Lord opened her heart (v. 14; cf. Luke 24:45; see disc. on 2:47). This must always be the case. Without in any way diminishing the importance of repentance and faith and of preaching the faith of Christ, there can be no life in Christ unless the gospel comes “not simply with words, but also with power, with the Holy Spirit” (1 Thess. 1:5; cf. Eph. 1:18). But Luke mentions it now perhaps to show that just as God had called them to this work, so he confirmed that calling by working with them (cf. 14:27). They had all “spoken to the women” (v. 13), but Luke attributes Lydia’s conversion, insofar as it lay in human hands, to Paul, who was no doubt the chief speaker. So Lydia became a believer in the Lord (v. 15), and in that faith she and the members of her household, that is, of her whole establishment, home and business, were baptized. Possibly Euodia and Syntyche and the other women of Philippians 4:2f. were among them (see note on 2:38 for baptism and note on 10:48 for the inclusion of the household). Lydia gave expression to faith with good works (cf., e.g., 10:46; 19:6), persuading the visitors to accept her hospitality for as long as they remained in the city (see disc. on 9:6ff. for Luke’s habit of naming Paul’s hosts). No doubt her home became the first “church” in Philippi (tradition places it in the village that has taken her name, not far from the ruins of Philippi; see disc. on 14:27 and notes). Some have identified her as Paul’s “loyal yokefellow” of Philippians 4:3.