Syria – Written Exposition

Ezekiel 23:1-49 – The Oracle Concerning Aholah and Aholibah (Part 2)

Posted on 13th Nov 202518th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

11-21 – AHOLIBAH (JERUSALEM) JUDAH

(11) Verse 10 ends with Aholah (Israel) having suffered punishment for her infidelities and having become a byword among other women (‘the nations’). This section (vv.11-21) makes the point (11, 14, 19) that Aholibah (Jerusalem) saw her sister Aholah’s fate but did not learn from it. Judah did not heed the warning from the past.

(12-13) Just as her sister had done (vv.5-6) Aholibah ‘lusted after’ (doted upon) the impeccably dressed young Assyrian cavaliers. She became more corrupt in her lust than her sister; her pattern of behaviour escalating as time progressed.

This may include a historical reference to Judah under Ahaz (735-715 BCE), a king who submitted to Assyrian rule – see 2 Kgs 16 and Isa 7.

Notice that in the oracle there are three objects of Aholibah’s admiration – the Assyrians v.12, the Chaldeans v.16 and Egypt’s concubines v.20.

(14-21) Judah’s fascination with the Chaldeans (Babylonians) is depicted as lust for ‘men portrayed upon the wall’ (probably a reference to Babylonian wall reliefs). Aholibah was attracted by these brightly coloured engraved images (possibly using ochre) of soldiers wearing red uniforms as well as broad waistbands and flowing turbans. This was the typical dress of high-ranking Babylonian military officers.

Having only heard reports of Babylonian might Judah sent ambassadors to seek an alliance. It is possible, but not certain, that Hezekiah first contacted the Babylonian king Merodach-Baladan who then sent an embassy to Jerusalem (2 Kgs 20:12-21; Isa 39:1-8). The point in these verses is not so much idolatry as unnecessary and ill-advised political alliances.

(17-18) The Babylonians came to Judah in bed and made her unclean but afterwards her soul abhorred them. The expression (mind is alienated KJV) occurs in Ezek 23 :17, 18, 28 and Jer 6:8. The verb yāqa‘ means to turn away or alienate and in a different context is used for the dislocation of Jacob’s hip in Gen 32:25.

Ezekiel is reminding his audience that after a time relations with the Babylonians soured. For example: Jehoiakim revolted against Babylonia c. 598 BCE. Jehoiakim died during the revolt and his eighteen year old son Jehoiachin (also known as Jeconiah or Coniah) succeeded to the throne of Judah but surrendered to Nebuchadnezzar after three months. Jehoiachin, along many leading Judahites, was then deported to Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar installed Zedekiah as a puppet king but nine years later he too rebelled against Babylonian rule (See 2 Kings 24).

Thus Aholibah (Jerusalem) revealed her nakedness and her harlotries with the result that YHWH turned away from her in disgust just as he had with her sister Aholah (Israel).

(19-21) Having been unfaithful to YHWH with powerful men like Assyria and Chaldea Aholibah did not return to the Lord but instead ‘called to remembrance’ the early days in Egypt. The verb means ‘to search for.’ The idea is that she reverted to an earlier pattern of behaviour; in this case the idolatry of her youth in Egypt.

She therefore sought a relationship with Egypt; longing to be one of Egypt’s concubines. Egypt, a world power at the time, is metaphorically described in graphic, animalistic terms as being sexually potent. Ezekiel employs coarse language in order to emphasise Aholibah’s excessive, unrestrained lust for foreign powers and also to evoke a feeling of revulsion in his audience.

The prophets of YHWH disapproved of Judah’s political flirtations with Egypt. Like Ezekiel, Isaiah and Jeremiah viewed Egypt as an unreliable ally (Isa 30:1-7; 31:1-3; Jer 2:18; 37:5-10).

Notice that until v.21 the verbs are in the third person (‘she’) but now change to the second person (‘you’). This anticipates YHWH directly addressing Aholibah in vv. 22-35 when announcing her punishment.

22-35 – AHOLIBAH’S PUNISHMENT

(22) ‘Therefore’ (i.e. because of her infidelities), followed by the prophetic messenger formula (‘thus saith the Lord God’), is followed by a direct message from YHWH to Aholibah (Jerusalem) stating his intention to punish her. He will accomplish this by bringing her former ‘lovers’ (the nations that she once courted) against her to attack her. Those with whom she was once allied but from whom she has turned in disgust (‘mind is alienated’ see on v.17 above) will become her deadly enemies.

(23-24) They include the Babylonians and various other groups, described as ‘desirable young men,’ ‘governors and officials,’ ‘cavalry officers and men of renown’ (lit. persons summoned to a meeting, Num 1:16; 16:2), who will come against her with military might. The list specifies:
– the Babylonians (sons of Babel) – the Neo-Babylonian empire under Nebuchadnezzar II, the superpower at that time
– the Chaldeans – a people group in the south of Babylonia – dominant in the Neo-Babylonian empire
– Pekod – possibly an Aramean tribe – from Syria
– Shoa – unknown
– Koa – unknown
– all the Assyrians (sons of Asshur) – possibly defeated Assyrian army units that had been pressed into military service by the Babylonians.

This confederation of Babylonian allies and vassals will attack Judah with an impressive array of the latest military equipment – weapons, chariots, wagons, large and small shields and helmets. YHWH will punish Judah by allowing these forces to judge her by their own inhumane laws rather than by biblical laws.

(25-27) Aholibah (Jerusalem) will therefore suffer the atrocities of ancient warfare. This will include brutal mutilations such as rhinotomy (nose-cutting) and ear cropping. In those ancient honour-shame cultures mutilations had to do with shame. They asserted the domination of the aggressor and indicated a change in the victim’s status. For biblical examples of wartime mutilations see Judg 1:6-7; 1 Sam 11:2; 31:9-10; 2 Sam 4:7,12; 2 Kgs 25:7; Jer 39:6-7.

Many who survive mutilation will be killed and others taken into captivity. Jerusalem will be stripped and plundered and the properties left empty (‘thy residue’) by those slain or deported will be consumed by fire. These agonies will be deliberately instigated by YHWH; in them Aholibah will experience his jealousy (intense fervour). The judgement will be so severe that her lewdness and the harlotries learned in Egypt will cease. She will no longer look amorously at Egypt, i.e. seek a political alliance or military help. ‘Look amorously’ is conveyed by the expression ‘lift up thine eyes unto’ – this is how Potiphar’s wife looked at Joseph in Gen 39:7.

(28-32) Beginning with ‘For,’ followed by the prophetic messenger formula ‘thus saith the Lord God’ (as v.22), Aholibah’s punishment is further described using the indecent image of YHWH handing her over to her former lovers, whom she has come to abhor, to be made a public spectacle. They will strip her stark naked, expose and violate her. This imagery of being left exposed symbolises not only physical vulnerability but also spiritual disgrace. This is due to her unfaithfulness to YHWH in the form of idolatry and alliances with ungodly nations (v.30).

It is ironic that the very nations with which Jerusalem sought an alliance for protection will become her oppressors. The language of v.29 emphasises the depth of betrayal and the resulting shame: they shall deal with thee hatefully, and shall take away all thy labour, and shall leave thee naked and bare. ‘Take away all thy labour’ reflects one of the curses promised for covenant unfaithfulness in Deut 28:33: The fruit of thy land, and all thy labours, shall a nation which thou knowest not eat up; and thou shalt be only oppressed and crushed always.

Verse 28 echoes vv.17, 22 and 16:37. Verse 29 echoes v.26 and 16:39. Verse 31, looking back to v.13, states that Jerusalem has walked in the way of her sister, Aholah (Israel), and thus will drink from the same cup of judgement.

(32-35) Verses 32-34 develop the thought of drinking from the same cup as her sister Samaria had drunk from (in 722 BCE, see 2 Kgs 17:6). This takes the form of a poem:

This is what the Lord GOD says:
“You will drink your sister’s cup,
which is deep and wide.
You will be an object of ridicule and scorn,
for it holds so much.
You will be filled with drunkenness and grief,
with a cup of devastation and desolation,
the cup of your sister Samaria.
You will drink it and drain it;
then you will gnaw its broken pieces,
and tear your breasts.
For I have spoken.”
This is the declaration of the Lord GOD. (Ezek 23:32-34 CSB)

The cup is large (deep and wide) and people will laugh at the fact that it is so great and has to be drained completely. Aholibah will be the object of derision and scorn because when she drinks the toxic contents she will stagger about, as if drunk, stunned by the severity of the judgement. The cup will be one of intoxication and grief, of ruin and desolation. The contents of the cup will drive Aholibah mad. Overcome by self-loathing, she will break it in pieces and self-harm with the fragments of pottery. Ortland Jnr (2016, p.129, footnote 82) explains:

The image is that of a cup filled to the brim with a powerful potion, to make the one who drinks it reel with an exaggerated drunkenness. Yahweh holds this cup in his hand and forces it to the lips of the nation to be judged. It represents, in real terms, the breakdown of order, the loss of control and good judgment, the panic and disarray, as a nation staggers like a drunk toward divinely ordained destruction. Cf. Ps. 75:9 [EVV 8]; Is. 51:17; Je. 25:15-16, 28; 51:7; La. 4:21; Hab. 2:16. The figure makes vividly clear to the Judahites ‘the compulsion there is to accept destiny, the impossibility of rejecting it, the trepidation at its death-dealing effects, the bitterness of the suffering it involves, and how it has to be tasted to the full’, to quote Eichrodt (1970: 331).

In v.35 YHWH emphasises that Aholibah (Jerusalem) will bear the consequences of her lewdness and whoredoms because she has forgotten him and cast him aside (‘KJV ‘behind thy back’ cf.1 Kgs 14:9; Neh 9:26).

36-45 – INDICTMENT OF AHOLAH AND AHOLIBAH

YHWH instructs Ezekiel to judge both Aholah (Samaria) and Aholibah (Jerusalem). He is to ‘declare’ (explain, make plain) to them their abominations (detestable acts) of idolatry and bloodshed. They have been spiritually unfaithful to YHWH by worshipping other deities. ‘Blood is in their hands’ refers to child sacrifice. They have offered their own children to pagan gods like Molech, burning them as sacrifices. To add insult to injury they would worship Molech and then, on the same day, go to the Temple to worship YHWH; thus placing Molech on a par with YHWH (cf. 2 Kgs 21:4-7). Their presence at the Temple profaned the sanctuary.

Verses 40-44 resume the adultery metaphor and describe the activities of the two harlots with the image in vv.40-42a of one woman (notice the singulars- ‘ye,’ ‘thou,’ ‘thy,’ ‘thyself,’ her’), probably Aholibah (Jerusalem), preparing herself for adulterous liaisons with foreign lovers. These liaisons represent political alliances with pagan powers like Egypt, Assyria and Babylonia. The washing, painting the eyes, decking with jewellery, sitting on an opulent divan in front of which is a table spread with lovely food and on which is set oil and spices to perfume the bed all symbolise seduction. These actions represent international diplomacy.

Many men came to carouse with her/them – in 42b the plural (‘their’) is resumed – these are described as ‘men of the common sort’ and ‘drunkards from the desert;’ probably a reference to the Assyrians and the Chaldeans. The latter were not desert-dwellers but came ‘from the desert’ in the sense that their route from Babylon to Judah would have involved skirting the top of the Arabian peninsula and travelling through Syria. These lovers put bracelets upon Aholah and Aholibah’s arms and beautiful crowns on their heads, i.e. alliances with foreign nations brought great wealth to both Israel and Judah.

In v.43 YHWH (or is it Ezekiel?) asks himself if these men will still engage with Aholah and Aholibah, two women who are ‘old (worn out, used up – used of the Gibeonites’ clothes in Josh 9:4-5) in adulteries.’ Sure enough, as Samaria and Jerusalem willingly play the harlot – i.e. are accessible to anyone, – the foreigners do ally with them.

Verse 45 is difficult in that it appears that YHWH describes the Assyrians and Babylonians as ‘righteous men’ who will judge and punish the women as adulteresses and murderers. The likely idea is that these conquerors are viewed as the instruments of YHWH and he will use them to enforce his justice and divine retribution. The standard penalty of the Law for adultery (Lev 20:10) and murder (Exod 21:12; Lev 24:17; Num 35:31) was death. This imagery suggests that the capital punishment of Samaria and Judah will be lawful and deserved.

46-49 – SENTENCING OF AHOLAH AND AHOLIBAH

This section concludes the allegory of Aholah (ISamaria) and Aholibah (Jerusalem) and describes their judgement for adultery (idolatry) and political alliances with pagan nations.

Staying with the metaphor of judgement for adultery the Lord YHWH states that he will summon a crowd (i.e. armies, see vv. 23-24) to come up against ‘them’ (Israel and Judah) to which he will hand them over to suffer the atrocities and violence of war and to be plundered. These armies will pelt them with stones, cleave them with swords, kill their offspring and burn down their properties.

At v.44 there is a change from ‘them’ to ‘your.’ YHWH directly informs Israel and Judah that their fate will serve as a warning to ‘all women’ (i.e. the surrounding nations) not to ‘do after your lewdness’ i.e. behave like the metaphorical Aholah and Aholibah. He announces that they will bear the punishment of their evil-doing and idolatry and, because of this discipline, will recognise that he is the Lord YHWH. Notice that in this allegory delivered by Ezekiel the punishment of Samaria (Israel) and Jerusalem (Judah) is viewed as simultaneous whereas in real life Israel’s had already taken place c. 722 BCE and Judah’s was yet to come – a few years later – in 586 BCE.

This oracle shows us the importance of remaining faithful to God and of placing our confidence in him for daily guidance and protection rather than trusting in human power and politics which can easily turn against us. God views persistent sin as a personal betrayal and it therefore has inevitable and severe consequences.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Eichrodt, W. (1970). Ezekiel; a Commentary. Philadelphia, Westminster Press.

Ortlund Jnr, R.C. (2016). God’s Unfaithful Wife. InterVarsity Press.

Roman names

SILVANUS

Posted on 21st Dec 20202nd Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

Roman name: Silvanus

Greek form of a Jewish name: Silas

‘And some of them [Thessalonian Jews] were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a great many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women.’ Acts 17:4 ESV

‘Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ…’. 1Thess 1:1 ESV

Silvanus/Silas was one of the most influential figures in the early Christian church and yet he seems to have maintained a low profile; perhaps preferring to work quietly and effectively without drawing undue attention to himself. The Bible gives few personal details; only that he was a leading member of the Jerusalem assembly (Acts 15:22), that he was a prophet (Acts 15:32), and that he had Roman citizenship (Acts 16:37–38). His name occurs 17 times. He is called Silas in the Acts of the Apostles (15:22, 27, 32, 34, 40; 16:19, 25, 29; 17:4, 10, 14, 15; 18:5) and in the Epistles he is referred to by his Roman name Silvanus ( 2 Cor 1:19; 1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1; 1 Pet 5:12).

THE EARLY SPREAD OF THE GOSPEL: A SURVEY

The first half of the Acts of the Apostles details the gradual spread of Christianity from Jerusalem. Acts 2:1-8:3 records phenomenal growth accompanied by persecution, mainly from the Jews as they did not regard Jesus as the Messiah and were angry that the Christians were undermining their beliefs. Luke viewed the stoning of Stephen in chapter 7 as a catalyst for the widespread ill-treatment of Christians. As a result, they dispersed throughout the empire, which, ironically, helped accelerate the spread of the gospel (Acts 8:3-4,11:19). Herod Agrippa 1 (King of Judea 41-44 CE) co-operated with the Jewish authorities in persecuting the early believers (Acts 12:1-2) and had John’s brother James put to death. He also made a failed attempt to execute Peter (Acts 12:1-19). Acts 8:4-13 tells of a successful preaching campaign by Philip in Samaria and a visit there by Peter and John also (8:14-25). Philip continued to Gaza (8:26) and from there to the seaside town of Azotus (8:40). After leaving Azotus he preached in various locations as he travelled 60 miles up the coast to Caesarea Maritima (8:40), the provincial capital of Roman Palestine.

In chapter 9 we learn that Paul preached to the Jews at Damascus shortly after his conversion, but having met with antagonism, left for Jerusalem where he joined the church. He preached to Grecians (Greek-speaking Jews) but, after again experiencing opposition, left and returned to his home town of Tarsus in Asia Minor. By that time, according to a summary by Luke (Acts 9:31), there were Christian churches throughout Judea, Galilee, and Samaria. Meanwhile, Peter was busy evangelizing away from Jerusalem. He travelled to the coastal area where he healed Aeneas at Lydda, and then to Joppa to raise Dorcas from the dead before proceeding to Caesarea where he met the Roman centurion Cornelius (Acts 9:32-11:18) who, along with other Gentiles, believed and was ‘baptized in the name of the Lord’ (10:47-48).

Acts chapters 11:19 – 15:35 focus on Antioch, where believers were first nicknamed ‘Christians’ (11:26). Luke is careful to emphasize the strong connection between the Gentile church at Antioch and the older Jewish church at Jerusalem. People from Cyprus and Cyrene left Jerusalem as a result of the persecution following Stephen’s death and brought Christianity to Antioch (11:19-20). The Jerusalem church, receiving news of this outreach to Gentiles in Antioch, sent Barnabas to support and encourage the believers. He then brought Paul to Antioch to spend a year helping him teach the Christians (Acts 11:19-26). Later the assembly at Antioch commended Barnabas and Paul to missionary service (Acts 13:1-5; 14:26) and sent them to Cyprus, Lycaonia and Pamphylia (Acts 13–14) on what is traditionally called Paul’s ‘First Missionary Journey.’

THE JERUSALEM COUNCIL

Paul and Barnabas returned to Antioch and remained there ‘a long time’ (Acts 14:28) until, about 49 CE, a problem arose when ‘certain men… came down from Judea’ teaching that: ‘Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved’ (Acts 15:1). These men thought that the promises of salvation were to the Jews as a nation. Just as Judaism allowed for a few individual exceptions (proselytes) so too, they must have thought, did the Christian faith (e.g. Gentiles like the Ethiopian Eunuch and Cornelius). It would not have occurred to them that the gospel could be for the Gentiles as a group. They, therefore, considered it necessary that the few believers from a pagan background observe the Mosaic law, including the rite of circumcision.

One can imagine that this teaching must have caused uncertainty in the minds of Christians of non-Jewish origin. Paul and Barnabas, however, who had already preached in Gentile areas without imposing Jewish rites upon the believers, would have none of it. They realized that the very essence of Christianity was at stake. The gospel was not just for Jews but was a universal message of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, without additional demands. They had presented this same message to Jew and Gentile alike. After much discussion, the assembly at Antioch decided to send Paul, Barnabas and a few others to Jerusalem to meet the elders and apostles and seek a resolution of the problem. The issue boiled down to this: ‘Is anything more needed for salvation than faith in Jesus Christ?’

At the meeting, presided over (15:13) by James the Lord’s brother (Gal 1:19), Peter described how converted Gentiles had received the Holy Spirit just as Jewish Christians had (Acts 15:9-11). Paul and Barnabas also reported (15:12) the signs and wonders that God had performed through them among the Gentiles. James made the concluding speech (15:13-21).

Realizing that the issue was highly significant, the apostles and elders decided to write not only to the church at Antioch but also to the Gentile churches in Syria and Cilicia, which had been established by missionaries (Paul and Barnabas) sent out from Antioch. The striking thing in the letter is that the Jewish leadership of the Jerusalem church officially addressed the Gentile converts as ‘brothers:’

‘The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.’ Acts 15:23

For Jews to call Gentiles ‘brethren,’ not because of blood relationship but because they shared the same faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, was hugely significant. The Jerusalem Council did not require Gentile believers to observe the rituals of the Mosaic law but requested that they avoid idolatry, unchastity and murder. The ‘brothers’ were not only to believe but also expected to behave.

The content of the letter was so weighty that oral confirmation was thought necessary. Two ‘chosen men’ (15:25) accompanied Paul and Barnabas to explain the conclusions reached by the Jerusalem Council and handle questions from the Gentiles. One of these delegates was Judas Barsabas. The other was Silas.

SILVANUS/SILAS

Silas appears on the scene at this crucial stage in the history of the church. He and Judas Barsabas seem to have been involved in the composition of the letter (15:23), which they then delivered to Antioch and taught the believers there. Silas ‘exhorted the brethren with many words and confirmed (strengthened) them’ (15:32). This approach contrasts sharply with the harmful legacy of the legalists who had ‘troubled [the believers] with words, unsettling [their] minds’ (15:24 ESV). People like Silas, who can preach Jesus Christ clearly (2 Cor 1:19), teach believers to distinguish truth from error and encourage them in their faith, are much needed in today’s church.

After a while, Judas returned to Jerusalem while Silas stayed on at Antioch, teaching alongside Paul and Barnabas. Paul suggested to Barnabas that they ought to go and visit the assemblies in Syria and Cilicia which also were addressees of the Jerusalem letter. Unfortunately, Paul and Barnabas had a disagreement that resulted in each going his separate way. Paul then chose Silas to accompany him on the proposed trip.

SILVANUS THE MISSIONARY

Silas was a suitable choice because he was equally at ease with the Jewish and the Gentile wings of the church. He was a Jew with impeccable credentials as a leader (15:22) of the Jewish church at Jerusalem which had sent him as one of two trusted delegates to Gentile believers following the Jerusalem Council. On the other hand, he was a Roman citizen (16:37), had a Roman name (Silvanus) and spoke fluent Greek. He functioned well in Gentile churches (15:32-35), with his ministry among them much appreciated. Although Jewish, he welcomed the idea of missionary activity in pagan areas and was willing to endure persecution and hardship for the sake of the gospel (16:22-23). Together with Paul, he visited the assemblies in Syria and Cilicia (15:41), thus completing the instructions of the Jerusalem Council. Again, Silas produced good results as ‘the churches [were] established in the faith and increased in number daily’ (Acts 16:5).

This tour of Syria and Cilicia turned out to be just the initial stage of what we usually refer to as ‘Paul’s Second Missionary Journey.’ Paul, Silas and Timothy (16:1-3) then began to receive divine route guidance (16:6, 7, 9-10) which directed them away from Asia and caused them to take the Christian message to Europe.

They set sail from Troas and landed in Macedonia where they preached the gospel in the cities of Philippi, Thessalonica and Beroea. Silas and Timothy remained at Beroea while Paul continued to Athens, from where he sent for them to join him (17:14-15). Timothy arrived at Athens with news of persecution in Thessalonica, so Paul sent him back there with a message of encouragement (1 Thess 3:1-6). Paul then left Athens and went to Corinth (18:1). Silas must also have gone back, perhaps to Philippi, for he and Timothy met up in Macedonia before re-joining Paul in Corinth (18:5). The three missionaries preached the gospel in Corinth (2 Cor 1:19), from where they jointly wrote two letters to the assembly at Thessalonica (1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1).

Paul eventually left Corinth and sailed to Ephesus, then on to Syria (probably landing at Tyre) before taking a short voyage down the coast to Caesarea. He went up from there and ‘greeted the church’ (at Jerusalem?) before returning to his base at Antioch (Acts 18:18-22). We do not know at what point Silas left Paul.

SILVANUS AND PETER

We do know that Silas/Silvanus continued to work for the Lord because there is a reference to him in 1 Peter, a book written about ten or twelve years after the end of the Second Missionary Journey:

‘By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand.’ 1 Pet 1:5

After leaving Paul’s mission team, Silas must have joined forces with the apostle Peter, eventually working with him in Rome (1 Pet 5:13 – if ‘Babylon’ is a code word for ‘Rome’). Peter held him in high regard and accounted him ‘a faithful brother’, considering Silas/Silvanus qualified to write on his behalf. That Peter wrote ‘by Silvanus’ could mean several things:

a) That Silvanus was responsible for drafting the letter on Peter’s behalf. Peter would have told him what he wanted to say, and Silvanus would have set out Peter’s thoughts and ideas in writing.

b) Silvanus was the amanuensis who wrote down what Peter dictated.

c) Silvanus was the person who would act as the bearer of the letter.

A) is the most likely meaning because of the literary nature of the Greek of 1 Peter. Some scholars consider it too refined to have been written by a Galilean fisherman who had not had a formal education. Silvanus may have managed Peter’s correspondence, presenting Peter’s spoken Greek in a more polished and technically correct written form. Peter was writing this letter to Christians in Asia Minor (1 Peter 1:1) whom he had not met. Silvanus would therefore have been an ideal helper as he had been to that area (Acts 15:41; 18:5) and had previously co-written two apostolic letters (1 & 2 Thessalonians).

SUMMATION

i. Silvanus was well-known and respected as a leader in the early church (Acts 15:22). He was not only highly esteemed by the assembly at Jerusalem but also by those in Antioch, Philippi, Thessalonica, Beroea and Corinth. Perhaps he was known to Christians in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia (1 Peter 1:1) as well.

ii. As evidenced by his performance as a delegate of the Jerusalem church after the Jerusalem Council and in his later service as a missionary, Silvanus was a level-headed person and endowed with wisdom and tact. He was able to fit in with Christians of different backgrounds and outlooks yet had strong convictions and the ability to preach and explain the doctrines of the gospel to others.

iii. Although he was recognized as a leading brother in the Jerusalem church, we do not read that Silvanus forced his ideas upon the Jerusalem Council. Once it made its decision and appointed him as a delegate, Silas simply got on with the job. Later, when Paul ‘chose’ him as his missionary companion Silvanus was willing to ‘play second fiddle’ to Paul for the sake of the gospel. He was, therefore, a humble-minded Christian who was happy to work alongside and serve others in the Lord’s work.

iv. Silvanus was willing to endure hardship for the sake of the gospel. Along with Paul, he was brutally (1 Thess 2:2) and illegally (Acts 16:38) treated at Philippi. Despite the insults and injuries received, he was able to pray and sing praises to God in the gaol and willing to point the prison officer to Christ.

We must not forget that, despite his humble attitude, Silvanus was an important man in his own right. As a NT prophet, he was with the apostles in the front ranks of importance in the church (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 2:20; 3:5; 4:11) and, exercising his gift, spoke words of exhortation and encouragement from God before the completion of the New Testament scriptures. Silvanus, in fact, was co-author of at least three (1 & 2 Thessalonians; 1 Peter) of the inspired books in that collection. We can never match his achievements for the Lord, but it would be worthwhile to emulate his humble attitude, his flexibility towards other Christians with a different theological outlook and his dedication to the gospel ministry.