Rick Strelan, «Who Was Bar Jesus (Acts 13,6-12)?», Vol. 85 (2004) 65-81
In Acts 13, Bar Jesus is confronted by Paul and cursed by him. This false prophet is generally thought to have been syncretistic and virtually pagan in his magical practices. This article argues that he was in fact very much within the synagogue and that he had been teaching the ways of the Lord. He was also a threat to the Christian community of Paphos and may even have belonged inside of it. Luke regards him as a serious threat to the faith because of his false teaching about righteousness and the ways of the Lord.
70 Rick Strelan
mavgoi. And Hananiah is a typical false prophet (Jer 35,1 [LXX])
because he stood in the Temple, but proclaimed falsely the intention of
Yahweh. Bar Jesus has been proclaiming the word and will of God in
Paphos, but from Luke’s perspective, he has interpreted the ways of
God falsely. That is the point of this whole episode. The authoritative
prophetic word of God comes to Cyprus, according to Luke, only
through Paul and Barnabas, the true prophets (13,1). Only they have
been validly commissioned by the holy spirit to announce the word of
God (13,2-3). And so the ‘teaching of the Lord’ (13,12) is seen in its
full power and authority only when it comes through prophets and
teachers validated by the holy spirit (13,9). Without that validation,
one is a son of the opponent, the slanderer (diavbolo", 13,10), not a son
of Jesus, despite the man’s name.
Secondly, while early Christian writers used the term ‘false
prophet’ of those outside the Christian pale (presumably in Rev 16,13;
19,20; and 20,10, for example), they also used it quite clearly to refer
to someone within the broad Christian tradition. Christian communities
were warned to be on their guard against false prophets who come in
sheep’s clothing (Matt 7,15; compare also 24,11; 24,24). Both 2 Pet 2,1
and 1 John 4,1 imply that the false teachers and prophets come from
within the community. Paul does not refer specifically to false prophets,
but he is well aware of false apostles (yeudapovstoloi, 2 Cor 11,13)
and false brethren (yeudadevlfoi, 2 Cor 11,26; Gal 2,4), again,
obviously internal to the communities concerned. The same is also true
of the prophets in Rev 2,2, and of the false teachers of the Pastorals
(e.g. 2 Tim 3,6-8). And when the term ‘false prophet’ is used in the
Didache, it distinctly refers to those within the Christian communities
(11,5-10; 16,3). The only other time Luke himself uses the word ‘false
prophet’ is in his Gospel (6,26) where he refers to those prophets who
are clearly ‘insiders’ to Israel, not outsiders.
In Acts 13,8, the false prophet is said to have withstood
(anqistato) Barnabas and Saul. It is precisely that verb that is used in
jv
2 Tim 3,8 to describe the opposition of Jannes and Jambres to Moses,
and that of the false teachers to the truth of the Pauline tradition. Those
men are described as ‘men of corrupt mind and counterfeit faith’, a
description not dissimilar to that given by the Lukan Paul of Bar Jesus
(13,10). The same verb is used again in 2 Tim 4,15, where Alexander
is said to have ‘strongly opposed our message’ (livan ajntevsth toi'"
hJmetevroi" lovgoi"), and, as with other false teachers, ‘the Lord will
requite him for his deeds’. In other words, the verb ajnqivsthmi is used