Paul-A Victim Of Slander Series

When Irving Berlin visited London as a young man he gave the doorman at the station the largest

tip of his life. He did it because when he held the door open for him he was whistling, "Alexander's

Ragtime Band." That was Berlin's first big hit. That doorman was in the right place at the right time

doing the right thing.

On the other hand, there was Mike Maryn in Chicago who had been mugged 83 times in 5 years.

He had been mugged by men, women, and by youth. The police didn't know why. All they could

say was, "He happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Paul gives us a picture of another possibility, and that is of being in the right place at the wrong

time. He was in the temple doing good, but he was recognized by an enemy who started a riot. Paul

got into serious trouble even when he did everything right. There are those who dispute whether Paul

was right in coming to Jerusalem. Ray Stedman, for example, is convinced that Paul made a major

mistake in his stubborn determination to come to Jerusalem. He was warned by people led of the

Spirit, and he should have given heed to their warnings. He didn't do so, and it led to two years of

imprisonment in Caesarea and three years imprisonment in Rome. It was all unnecessary waste says

Stedman, and so Paul's problems could have been prevented had he been open to friendly advice.

The problem with such criticism of Paul is that is ignores the fact that Acts 20:27 says that Paul

was compelled by the Holy Spirit to go to Jerusalem, and that he was fully aware of the risks that

awaited him. We have to accept the testimony of God's Word and see that Paul was in the center of

God's will. He was doing what was good and right, and yet was nearly buried under an avalanche of

problems. Joseph Parker feels that the church leaders were the ones making a mistake in expecting

Paul to have to prove himself to the Jewish Christians. Paul was God's man, and the Holy Spirit had

used him mightily to open up the Gentile world to the Gospel. What business was it of there's to

impose their ceremonial nonsense on Paul?

It is easy to feel this way for us who are Gentiles, but the fact is, Paul did not present one word of

resistance. This man of deep conviction, who withstood Peter to his face on an issue where Peter was

falsely compromising, did not say a word to this proposal for peace, but he calmly cooperated. Who

has the authority to call this a mistake? Paul was seeking unity with the largest Christian church in

the world, and the headquarters of Christianity. It was a sensible move. Paul recognized when there

were times when you have to cooperate with fellow Christians on issues over which you disagree, but

which are not vital to salvation.

I think of Billy and Ruth Graham. Here is the world's most famous Baptist married to a

Presbyterian. Many of Billy's friend urged Ruth to be re-baptized by immersion. In spite of the

pressure she declined. So Billy has had to live with love, and cooperate with a wife who has a

different conviction from his own. It is probably led to some problems, but it has also opened up

doors for him in different denominations. Problems are not a valid criteria by which we judge the

rightness or wrongness of actions, or the success or failure of a plan. You cannot say that if you do

all that God wills that there will be no problems. That does not fit reality.

Paul's life was problem oriented from the moment he stepped on to the stage of history. He was

a major problem to the Christians as he persecuted them. He then became a major problem to the

Jews when he was converted. He was always somebody's problem, and so he had problems wherever

he went. He was in Jerusalem as a peacemaker, and he was in the temple proving he was a lover of

the Jewish heritage, and still he became the center of a vicious riot that almost ended his life. He was

trying to solve a problem and became the cause of a larger problem. Erick Sevareid was right when

he said, "The chief cause of problems is solutions."

Paul was not causing a problem because he was a proud and presumptuous Christian who thought

he was above the law. He was not like the one who was driving an evangelist down the streets of Los

Angeles when the evangelist shouted, "You are going down a one way street the wrong way!" He