Scholars have been debating this fact about Eutychus for years so it comes as no surprise that folks who study the scriptures still come to the table with the very same issue of did Eutychus die or didn‘t he? This is why I kept pointing all of you to prove it with scripture; which no one can, including me. The scholars can’t either. So my question to all of you is this: What does this story tell us?
Aside from what appears to be obvious with out saying so, (a miracle) we find the Apostle Paul still observing the Feast’s of the Lord even after his conversion on the road to Damascus and obviously many many years after the crucifixion. I am really rather disappointed that there was no discussion about this but I suppose it is because the facts support themselves and can be proved ‘with’ scripture unlike the fate of Eutychus.
For those who do not believe Paul to be a true apostle, this will not work for your theology but that’s ok, it isn’t meant too. God did not ordain the scriptures so that ‘everyone’ could understand them. He certainly is not going to ordain His truth to work with ours when His truth is the only truth whether we believe it or not. Either we believe or we do no believe in the whole of the scriptures because God in all of His wisdom ordained every single sentence in all sixty-six books.
God is the One Who instilled the Feast’s and says that they are His. In His honor if for no other reason, we should ‘not’ call them Jewish Feast’s. As the Lord say’s it, ‘even these are My feasts‘.
Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, Concerning the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are my feasts. ~ Leviticus 23:2
Some folks think and teach that the feasts were only meant for Israel. One then has to determine for themselves, who is Israel?
In this story, Acts 20: 1-16 Paul is passing through Troas on his third missionary journey. Paul (vs. 3) had stayed in Greece and Corinth for three months. He was on the point of setting sail for Syria, but changed his mind and decided to make his way back (by land) through Macedonia because the Jews were plotting against Paul. He obviously felt safer with Gentiles.
This sets my mind to ask why? If Paul being raised a Jew was now having the Jews plot against him, it causes me to ask why? It is clear that Paul was teaching repentance toward God, and faith toward Yahushua, so what was their beef?
Why were the Jews trying to blast his reputation? He was after all teaching that Yahushua be made manifest in the mortal flesh by means of the Spirit yet they were bitterly hostile towards Paul, trying to interrupt his work and endangering his life.
I believe that Paul stirred up strong reactions when he preached that salvation was not only for the Jews but for the Gentiles as well. There is certainly enough scripture to support this belief. Acts 13:50, Acts 14:2-5, and Acts 17:13. In Acts 18:12-17 Paul was accused by the Jews that he was trying to persuade men to worship God. They claimed that this was contrary to the law.
There is even an account written when the Jews tried to stone Paul, claiming that he was an imposter. These folks were not true worshipers of God because before trying to stone Paul, they witnessed him shake off the viper. At this point, they were ready to worship Paul as a god. If these Jews believed in the true God, the God of Israel, they would not have turned their back so quickly on a man who shook off vipers without being poisoned.
The gospel that Paul preached was for anyone who would believe and were called. It appears that the Jews did not like their legalistic perversion of the law being interrupted by the Apostle Paul who was chosen by God to bring folks into the knowledge of repentance and turning away from sin, those who had transgressed the law of God.
For those of you who still do not believe that Paul was chosen by God, please see the next comment: For the rest of you still interested in the truth revealed, skip to the comment following the comment regarding Ananias.
Acts 9:10-16 ¶ And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord. And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth, And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight. Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem: And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name. But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name’s sake.
Acts 22:12 And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there,
#1. Ananias was a ‘devout man according to the law’.
#2. Ananias had a good report (reputation) of all the Jews, which dwelt there (In Damascus)
#3. Ananias was ‘the’ man that the Lord spoke to about Paul. The Lord told this devout man of the law, that Paul was His chosen vessel to bear His name before the Gentiles. If you don’t believe in Luke’s report then you gotta call Luke out as an imposter as well as Paul.
#4. Ananias called Paul his brother the minute he met him. (Acts 9:17)
Two witnesses (Yah and Ananias) and Luke who wrote the book of Acts make three witnesses that Paul was a man of God, chosen by God.
Ananias, a ‘devout man according to the Law,’ was obviously a believer in Yahushua. Yah used Ananias to pray for Saul ( Name later changed to Paul) to receive his sight. Ananias led Saul in the baptism of forgiveness of sin (22:16) and was the instrument by which Saul was filled with the Holy Spirit.
Need I say more? I think not!
The Jews for the most part, those who saw themselves as teachers of the law were trying to stop Paul’s ministry. More importantly, we need to recognize that it was Satan who was working behind the scenes to stop the ministry of Paul. However, those that were being manipulated by Satan were afraid that if Paul were successful in his ministry that they would loose the attention and respect that they ‘thought’ that they deserved and frankly demanded through their own legalistic mindset. It is kind of like being a drug lord keeping his druggies supplied with free drugs to keep them attached to the drug lord.
In Macedonia, Paul met up with his comrades who then accompanied him to Asia. These companions include representatives of various churches taking gifts to Jerusalem – Sopater from the town of Berea, Aristarchus & Secundus from Thessalonica, Gaius from Derbe (or possibly Doberus in Macedonia), and Tychicus & Trophimus from Ephesus. Since Paul intended to leave on the following day, he began to speak to them and prolonged his address into the midnight hour. This is when we come across the part of the story with Eutychus.
What is Paul doing? Paul is not only still observing the Feast’s of the Lord, we find him preaching his speech to the Gentiles at Troas until midnight at the end of a Sabbath day. What is going on here is that his is the first Sabbath of the seven Sabbaths that are counted from the days of unleavened bread (vs. 6) to Pentecost. (Vs. 16) where Paul is trying to get to in Jerusalem. Paul was teaching on ‘mia sabbaton’ meaning first Sabbath of the week.
Believe it or not, Gentiles way back then were figuring out because of what the Disciples taught that God’s law still existed. This bothered the Jews. I often wonder why folks have not figured out on their own that if Sabbath for instance had been done away with, why wasn’t this a huge argument at the council about the Sabbath. It is the silence on this matter that should astound everyone.
Most people choose not to believe this because they cannot get it through their minds that God simply does not change like a shifting shadow. You just gotta ask your self, why would God bring folks out of bondage and slavery from Egypt just to put them back into slavery and bondage to His laws, as most general audience have been taught. It just does not make any sense at all.
Why is Paul teaching too Gentiles on an already established Sabbath if he had been converted to first day of the week keeping? That is the problem in solving the issue. Paul didn’t teach on the first day being Sunday, as most folks would like to believe. As I pointed out, the Greek word for ‘first’ is mia and the Greek would for ‘day of the week’ is sabbaton. If you know nothing about the Feast’s of the Lord, you will certainly not understand what I just said here.
Acts 20:7 ¶ And <de> upon <en> the first <mia> day of the week, <sabbaton> when the disciples <mathetes> came together <sunago> to break <klao> bread, <artos> Paul <Paulos> preached <dialegomai> unto them, <autos> ready <mello> to depart <exeimi> on the morrow; <epaurion> and <te> continued <parateino> his speech <logos> until <mechri> midnight. <mesonuktion>
Paul is also still keeping sacred the Sabbath as was commanded by God. The Gentiles who came along later would join in the already established practice of keeping Sabbath and the Feast’s of the Lord, especially since many of them would have been God fearers (Chapter 10- vs. 2) just like Cornelius who was already accustomed to following the lead of the practice of the Messianic Jews in whose company they had chosen to place themselves. By Messianic Jews, I am talking about those Jews who did place their trust and faith in Yahushua. The numbers grew daily and continued to multiply after the Feast of Weeks when the Spirit of God fell upon the people on the day we know as Pentecost.
I don’t know if any of you have ever been in a discussion about this incident before but the discussion most generally goes towards whether or not Eutychus died and was or was not raised from the dead, when the scriptures clearly do not state this. Hinted…. yes. Written…. no., when in reality, there is always more to the story.
I learned long ago from I think it was the writings of Matthew Henry, that we should never make more of the scriptures than what is there. Scripture confers with scripture just the same as the Spirit in one, confers with the spirit in another.
Love to all …. Many blessing be upon you.