Day 335

P. Paul's trip home completing his third journey (winter) - Acts 20:4-38; 21:1-26
Q. Arrest and Trials of Paul
1. Paul before the Jews at Jerusalem - Acts 21:27-40; 22:1-30; 23:1-22

My attention was caught on 20:4 where the writer notates the companions:

Berea ~ Sopater (of a safe father);
Thessalonica ~ Aristarchus (best ruling) and Secundus (second);
Derbe ~ Gaius (lord, an earthly man);
Asia ~ Tychicus (fortuitous or fortunate) and Trophimus (nutritive); and...

...Timotheus (dear to God).

Most of these definitions were pulled from E-Sword, however I did use the site Bible Study Tools, Hitchcocks Bible Names Dictionary as well.

And we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days; where we above seven days.  (Acts 20:6)

I made a notation:  Marking time by feasts?  The Jews and Gentile converts would have been aware and instructed in the feasts.  They would have readily been able to determine the month and day that this event occurred.  If they were not still keeping the feasts, why mention them?  They knew that Jesus was the fulfillment for the 3 spring and 1 summer feast.  Is it possible that they continued to keep the feasts as a remembrance?

For Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia: for he hasted, if it were possible to be at Jerusalem for the day of Pentecost.  (Acts 20:16)

Another reference to time by the feasts.  And Paul's desire to be in Jerusalem for the day of...in essence keeping the feast?  Gill, Henry and Poole all state that Paul's intention (?) was to avail himself of the opportunity to witness to a great number of people (Jews and Gentile converts) which would have been in Jerusalem for the feast.

I would like to note that if this was Paul's intention to preach to a greater number of people and/or a combination of that and a desire to keep a feast which Jesus had fulfilled, in no way sets a precedent for Christians to take a pagan holiday, white wash it and try to use it to evangelize the lost.

Note, the feasts were a foretelling of what the Messiah would do, did and will do (the fall feasts do not appear to have been fulfilled).  Not borrowing from the pagan nations around them, which was strictly prohibited and caused Israel to suffer much because they continued to incorporate pagan practices into the worship of the holy God.

I put a question mark by their interpretation of Paul's intentions.  If there theory is correct then we are under no obligation to explore further.  However, if Paul and/or the other apostles were continuing to keep the feasts as remembrance that opens up a whole new area of consideration.

I am, at this juncture, not for or against keeping the feasts.  I can see both sides and am thus fence sitting.  :-)  I can see where people could get caught up in 'doing' the feasts and become legalistic about it, especially since Jesus fulfilled 4 of them.  I can also see how if one did participate it would be an awesome opportunity to explain their purpose and how Jesus fulfilled them.  Which brings these verses to mind:

1Co 13:12  For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

Pro 25:2  It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.