After Paul participated in the vow with the Jewish Christians, Asian Jews stirred up trouble for Paul. These Jews begin by spreading the common misunderstanding of Paul's teaching, that he is anti-Jew. Paul is not anti-Jew in the sense that he wants Jews to stop being Jewish, he wants them to stop relying on the Law for salvation. To the orthodox Jews, this is worthy of death. The charge the bring against Paul is that he brought a Gentile into the Temple. This would be a serious offense, worthy of death (for the Gentile, as well!) The Jews did not allow women or Gentiles into the central courts of the Temple, believing them to be unclean.
If this is true, there is a hint here that the Jews from Ephesus were anti-Paul and quite willing to stir up trouble for him in Jerusalem. I have speculated earlier that Paul's time in Ephesus was more troubled than Luke lets on; this is another bit of evidence in that regard. Perhaps Paul was in prison on Ephesus after all!
Factionalism was a problem for the Roman congregations before Paul. Romans 14:1-15:7 indicates that there are some in Rome who considered food laws important enough to be a matter of contention, while others are not taking the food laws as applicable in Christ.
Romans 14:5-7 One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God.
This may indicate divisions between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians we have seen already by Acts 15 and Galatians. Given the small size of congregations and immense population in Rome, it is likely that the churches functioned as islands of believers (to use Lampe's word), perhaps initially ethnic enclaves.
Assuming that Philippians was written while Paul was in prison in Rome, it is possible to learn several things about the state of Christianity in Rome in the early 60's.
Philippians 1:12-14 Now I want you to know, brothers, that what has happened to me has really served to advance the gospel. 13As a result, it has become clear throughout the whole palace guard and to everyone else that I am in chains for Christ. 14Because of my chains, most of the brothers in the Lord have been encouraged to speak the word of God more courageously and fearlessly.
Philippians 4:22 All the saints send you greetings, especially those who belong to Caesar's household.
We know that Paul was influential in the household of Caesar. He states that the whole palace guard has heard the gospel, presumably from solders converted while they were guarding him. These guards would have been gentiles converted from paganism, as opposed to Jews converted within the synagogue. This indicates that Paul is continuing his two-part mission, to the Jew first and then to the Gentile.
This may indicate that they disagree with the more radical elements of Paul's theology, that Gentiles come to Christ apart from the Law, without converting to Judaism. It may be that these rivals opposed Paul and perhaps even disagreed with the Jerusalem council (or, were ignorant of it; or, did not feel that they ought to be bound by it). That there are Jews who would still oppose Paul in Gentile inclusion may indicate an earlier date for Philippians, or that the issue of Gentile inclusion remained a major sticking point for the early church.
It may be something of a surprise to find that there were some congregations in Rome that were openly hostile to Paul, that seems to be the evidence of the book of Philippians.
There is a bit more evidence of factionalism in 1 Clement. This letter was written A. D. 95-97 by Clement, a bishop in Rome. The church of Rome was undergoing persecution when the letter was written (1:1, 7:1) but still felt it important to contact the Corinthian church. According to tradition, Clement was the third bishop of Rome, although it is not at all clear that there was a single unbroken line of bishops who exerted any kind of authority over all of Roman Christianity before the year A. D. 200.
Clement wrote this letter on behalf of the church of Rome to the church of Corinth for the purpose of advising them on certain church matters. The letter was considered to have had some level of authority, although we do not know how it was received by the Corinthians. For our purposes here, 1 Clement 5 is the key text, although Clement returns to Paul in chapter 47.
While Clement's evidence is a bit later than Paul's time, there is at least some evidence of the fact that Paul face opposition in those two years he was in Rome under house arrest.
The riot in Ephesus (Ats 19:23-41) is an important story in the developing plot-line of Acts, although Paul is not really a part of the story. We are told that the silversmiths fear the rise of Christianity in Ephesus, Paul's companions are arrested, and the city manager calms the crowd. The reader does not know what happens to Paul during and after the riot.
For this reason, some speculate that he was arrested and imprisoned in Ephesus, a time reflected in 1 Cor 15:32, "if I fought the wild beasts in Ephesus…" The implication is that Paul was forced into some sort of gladiatorial punishment, although the text may refer to his opponents rather than literal animals. If Paul was in prison in Ephesus, then he may very well have written Philippians, Colossians and Philemon while under arrest, rather than from Rome. This is all argument from silence and not particularly persuasive, but it does solve some problems with those books.
The main point, however, is that Christianity has made such an impact on the culture of Ephesus that the culture attempts to "fight back." At the end of this attack on Paul's mission in Ephesus, we are told that what Paul preaches is not against Rome nor is it illegal according to Roman Law. This seems to be a major sub-text in the unit; Luke wants to inform us that the Romans found Christianity compatible with Roman Law.
A second problem addressed by this section of Acts is the "parting of the ways" – when did Christianity become distinct from Judaism? As far as the Romans are concerned, in Acts 19 Christianity is still the same thing as Judaism. In Acts 18 the Jews in Corinth argued that Paul was not one of them. In the riot at Ephesus the crowds do not make a distinction between Alexander (a Jew) and the Christians. At this point in the development of Christianity, any decision about the Christians may have had an indirect impact on the Jewish community.
Perhaps the most important theme of this incident is the fact that Christianity challenged the greatest pagan cult in the ancient world and was seen as a serious threat to that cult. I think that this is the challenge of the story – how has contemporary Christianity impacted culture?
The answer is (sadly) either "not at all" or as something which secular society mocks and then promptly ignores.