Acts 28:1

Saturday, 1 June 2024   Now when they had escaped, they then found out that the island was called Malta. Acts 28:1   A literal rendering of the Greek would be, “And, having been saved, then they knew that the island is called Malta.” (CG).   The last verse of the previous chapter noted that all had come to shore safely. With that, Chapter 28 begins with, “And, having been saved.”   The same word that was used to end Chapter 27 is again used here, diasózó. In that verse, it was an aorist verb, now it is an aorist participle –   And thus it was all were saved upon the land. And, having been saved...   The task is complete, all having been brought safely and securely to the shores of the island. With that now complete, it next says, “then they knew that the island is called Malta.”   The Alexandrian text (NIV e.g.) says “we” rather than “they.” At the end of the previous chapter, the NIV says “everyone” instead of “they.” As Luke was present and he obviously survived, one would think that he would include himself in this and say “we.” However, he may be making himself an outside evaluator of the events at this time. Or he may still be referring to Julius and the other soldiers who were in charge of ensuring that all came to the island safely.   Either way, and regardless of this, all made it ashore and came safely to what they found out was the island of Malta. Although it is evident this is the true spot of landing, there is one other claim to the location of the wreck. In order to give all of the details, the lengthy commentary of Charles Ellicott is provided -   “There is no ground for questioning the current belief that this was the modern Malta, It was the only island known as Melita by the Greeks and Romans. The gale, which had been blowing for fourteen days since the ship left Crete, would drive her in that direction. The local features of St. Paul’s Bay agree closely, as has been seen, with the narrative in the Acts. There has from a very early date been a local tradition in favour of the belief. The Bay bears St. Paul’s name. A cave is pointed out as having given him shelter. There has, however, been a rival claimant. In the Gulf of Venice, off the coast of Illyria, there is a small island, Meleta (now Meleda), which has been identified by some writers with the scene of St. Paul’s shipwreck. The view is first mentioned by Constantino Porphyrogenitus, a Greek writer of the tenth century, and was revived in the last century by Padre Georgi, an ecclesiastic of the island. There is, however, not a shadow of evidence in its favour, beyond the similarity (riot identity) of name, and the mention of Adria in Acts 27:27. It has been shown, however, that that term was used with far too wide a range to be decisive on such a question; and against the view there are the facts (1) that it would almost have required a miracle to get the ship, with a north-east gale blowing strongly, up to the Illyrian coast of the Gulf of Venice; (2) that a ship would not naturally have wintered on that coast on its way from Alexandria to Puteoli (Acts 28:11); (3) that there has been no local tradition in its favour, as at Malta. The island of Malta was originally a Phoenician colony. It came under the power of Carthage in B.C. 402, and was ceded to Rome in B.C. 242. Its temple, dedicated to Juno, was rich enough to be an object of plunder to Verres, the Prætor of Sicily (Cic. In Verr. vv. 46).”   Life application: People naturally want things to apply to themselves if they are notable in some manner. It is certain that Malta is where the ship ran aground and there are few who would question this. And yet, there is a challenge to this because someone wanted to appear to have discovered something others didn’t know, or maybe because there was pride in those in a different location that they were the focus of the biblical narrative.   This happens all the time. People in various cultures claim that they are the true Israelites who were exiled from the land. This is claimed by Mormons. It is claimed by British Israelism. It is claimed by various sects of the Church of God. And so forth. None of these are even close to reality, and yet the claims are made.   Also, it is often argued, even vehemently, that the New Testament was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic despite there being no sound reason to claim this. And more, internal clues abound that it is not so.   These and ten thousand other such claims are made because people want to identify with one thing or another that they want to be true. This is unsound. It causes real problems with doctrine, and it causes divisions that should not exist.   We should be willing to objectively evaluate such things and come to reasonable conclusions concerning them. If we do, for sure our doctrine will be more properly aligned with God’s intent, and we will not grow into the cult-like mentality that so easily permeates our minds, our lives, and even controls our destinies.   Be wise and discerning and check out the things you hear, lest you get caught up into the strange doctrines that are warned against in the word (see Hebrews 13:9).   Heavenly Father, may we not be led astray by odd, goofy, and irregular teachings that have no bearing on reality. Rather, may we be guided by Your Spirit and willing also to check all things and test them for accuracy. May it be so to Your glory! Amen.