I. Jesus Christ, the Founder of the Church

The Universal Church.--Jesus Christ is the founder of the universal church; first, in the sense that it is the whole assembly or family of God, stretching from Adam to the second coming of the Lord; and second, in the particular sense of the church since His incarnation. It is in the second of these senses that the church universal is considered here.

Jesus Christ did not come in the unspeakable glory of Deity to found the Christian church. He came in the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom. 8:3), and therefore was gravely misunderstood. Neither did He come in the panoply of human royalty. He came rather as a plain man of the people, thereby disappointing the Jews, to whom the coming of the Messiah was to be a greater occasion than any ever before seen.

The Messiah.--Yet Jesus Christ was the Messiah. The Jews did not understand the twin truths (1) that the Messiah must be Himself God, and (2) that there must be, in the nature of things, two comings of the Messiah. The first advent must give the Messiah opportunity to condemn "sin in the flesh" (Rom. 8:3), and to "taste death for every man" (Heb. 2:9). The second advent must be in the triumph of the glory of heaven, to gather in the fruitage of the labors the church should perform in the Holy Spirit through the centuries of time that must separate the two grand appearances of the Lord. At His first coming Christ fulfilled perfectly the Messianic prophecies. This He set forth from Isaiah (ch. 61:1, 2^a) in His declaration on a stirring Sabbath in the synagogue at Nazareth (Luke 4:16-22). By ending the reading where He did, He separated the saving work of the first coming from that of "the day of vengeance of our God" (Isa. 61:2^b), not to be accomplished until the second advent (DA 240, 241).

The Teacher.--Jesus came to teach. He taught primarily by the example of an unsullied life. While He lived thus blamelessly, there fell from His lips words of truth, uttered in simplicity, that reached the minds of the most unfortunate, the most darkened sinners; even the demon-possessed heard His words. He taught also in parables for those who might wish to delve and analyze, but He left such to choose frustration if they cared to let their thinking be less than clear and open-minded. "I thank thee ... because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes" (Matt. 11:25).

The Revelation of God.--The pagans feared their gods--those they still believed in--and placated them with hecatombs and holocausts. The Jews, conscious of their shortcomings, had come to see God, not as the Creator-Father that He is, but as an offended Deity, seeking opportunity to avenge Himself upon the disobedient. They thought they could placate Him with a strict regimen of living, a binding and restricting legalism, a public show of religiosity. Their conscience demanded that they seek to gain His divine favor by the endless round of sacrifices required by the law, but the search was frustrated by the lack of spirituality in their own hearts. They sought to offer to God a righteousness of their own making.

Jesus came, not to show what God is like in respect to His power and His visible glory, but to show the people those attributes proclaimed to Moses in the mount (Ex. 33:18 to 34:9)--wisdom, mercy, and righteousness, and the all-inclusive attribute of love. This revelation God, and He alone, could and would give to men who had so far departed from Him that they could not endure the blazing effulgence of His glory. Righteousness must come from God.

So Jesus manifested the kindly love and the other quiet virtues of the gracious character of a tender and merciful Father. He talked of glory, and He spoke of doom, but He emphasized the joy of the Lord and the beauty of holiness. He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life." "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:6, 9). Not the visible glory--not yet--but everything else that He could set forth of God while in human frame, was lived and taught by Jesus.

The Work.--With His deity veiled by humanity, Jesus performed great miracles in the power of the Holy Spirit. He raised the dead; He healed the sick; He stilled the turmoils of nature; He rebuked and exorcised demons, casting them out of men's lives as once before He had cast them out of heaven. He fed the hungry bodies of men by a miraculous multiplication of bread and fish, as He fed their souls through the multiplication of spiritual truths.

He worked quietly, without undue show. Constantly misunderstood, often maligned, He showed caution, frequently bidding the beneficiaries of His goodness not to reveal who had helped them. But His work was nonetheless publicly done, and could but attract attention.

The Public Gospel.--It had to be thus. The people must know Jesus' cause and His message. They must be drawn to Him. And they were. Not only twelve, but seventy, put themselves directly under His leadership, and there were times when thousands followed Him about.

The witness was closed in Judea. The Samaritans would not hear, because "his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem" (Luke 9:53). In Galilee He preached and worked again and again, but in Nazareth itself and other places the people refused His ministry.

As the time drew near for the close of His ministry on earth, He permitted more and more attention to be drawn to Himself. The hill of Calvary was looming on the horizon of time, and the people must be watching when He should climb that little mountain to die upon the cross. He fed five thousand, besides women and children, and again four thousand, while His disciples were hoping that He might be made king. When He raised Lazarus from the dead, the whole countryside knew of it. He rode triumphantly into Jerusalem while the common people hailed Him, and again a royal crown was in the disciples' minds. When the end came all Jewry knew of it.

The Church.--For a founder of a movement, Jesus said little enough for posterity to read about His church. But He founded one. The gospel writer put into His mouth the word ekkleµsia, translated "church," and meaning very literally, "called out"; it has the sense of "called out and gathered." It was the name used for the popular assemblies in the government of Greek city-states. In the LXX it takes on a religious meaning as the "congregation" of Israel, and in the New Testament it is applied to the spiritual assembly of the saints of Christ. The wellcity-statesknit fellowship that made of the church an organization can be seen as Christ committed to it a program of service.

Christ said that He would build His church, and that it would be built through men of sincere faith in Himself as the Son of God, men who would confess His name (Matt. 16:15-19). This would necessarily involve the teaching mission, and the resulting acceptance into fellowship of those who would hear the word preached. Into His general teachings He wove the details of the process of forming the church.

However, the church was to possess authority. The member of the assembly of saints who would refuse opportunity to be reconciled to his brethren must be expelled, and the expulsion should occur with the approval of Heaven itself and in line with Heaven's decisions (Matt. 18:15-18).

The Gospel Commission.--Before the close of His earthly experience, Jesus laid upon His disciples the task of a great commission, the accomplishment of which would take them into all the world. The disciples must teach the gospel message and perform baptism as an initiatory service for each one who should come into the church. Instruction in the will and words of Christ must, of course, go with the baptizing by which the church marked its new members. To illustrate the work and to familiarize the disciples with it, Christ sent out, first twelve, then seventy, two by two. They were permitted a minimum of equipment, but a maximum of spiritual power.

The sending out of these men could not have been hit or miss, for Jesus was a man of order. Indeed, on the resurrection morning, before Jesus reported to His Father, He paused to put His graveclothes in order (John 20:5-7). The sending out of the Twelve and the Seventy, and the plan of the Great Commission itself, could have been prosecuted only in good order and method. The church was founded in system and organization.

The Close of Jesus' Ministry.--Jealousy of Christ, on the part of the leaders, and misunderstanding of the status and work of the Messiah, on the part of the people, finally reached a climax. The Jews insisted that the Romans should crucify Him. A timeserving, political-minded Roman procurator, Pontius Pilate, complied. He sought to wash his hands of responsibility in the matter, but no water could remove his guilt. The Jews took the responsibility upon themselves by their fearful declaration, "His blood be on us, and on our children" (Matt. 27:25).

The Vicarious Atonement.--Speculation is unnecessary as to who, whether the Jews or the Romans, caused the death of Christ. For "he was wounded [or, "tormented"] for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities" (Isa. 53:5); "who his own self bare [or, "carried up"] our sins in his own body on the tree" (1 Peter 2:24). Ever in the mind of God had been the plan He had arranged for meeting sin: that His Son should live sinless on earth, thus proving that His law could be kept; and that He should die, though innocent, and condemn "sin in the flesh" (Rom. 8:3), fulfilling the meaning of the Old Testament sacrifices and showing that there must be death for the breaking of the law. Ever in the mind of Christ was compliance with this counsel, and therefore He was incarnated, lived blamelessly, and set an example which in His power all might follow (1 Peter 2:21-23). He tasted "death for every man" (Heb. 2:9), taking upon Himself in vicarious atonement the sins of all who should accept "so great salvation" (v. 3). He died as though He were Himself a sinner, exchanging His righteousness, freely given, for the sins of men, ungrudgingly received, and His life for the sinner's death, uncomplainingly accepted (2 Cor. 5:21). "Remove this cup from me," He prayed; "nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done" (Luke 22:42).

There is no need to assign divided guilt to Caiaphas, Herod, or Pilate! Sin, which controlled them all, killed Christ, when in the thick darkness on the cross He experienced separation from the Father (Matt. 27:46), and died of a broken heart (John 19:34, 35). He died for us.

The Resurrection.--"The wages of sin is death" (Rom. 6:23). But death could not hold the Lord (Acts 2:24): because He had divine life in Himself (John 5:26; 10:17, 18; DA 530); because the Father called Him (Matt. 28:2-4; DA 780, 785); and because, since He was Himself sinless (1 Peter 2:22), death had no claim upon Him.

When He arose, having tasted death for every man and having been victorious over the tomb, He provided life for every man. "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive" (1 Cor. 15:22). So complete and efficient was the victory of Christ, the Sinless One, over death, that His resurrection became the theme of the apostolic church, and Paul, looking forward to the second advent, exclaimed "O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?" (1 Cor. 15:55). Life, the gift of Christ to Adam in creation, became now again His particular gift, offered freely to every child of Adam, who, otherwise doomed to death, could accept life from the risen Saviour (Rom. 5:10; 8:11).

The Forty Days.--During the forty days following the resurrection, Christ made Himself available to the disciples, occasionally meeting with them. Mary, who greeted Him in the garden early on the resurrection morning, was not permitted to touch Him until He had ascended to the Father. A little while later, having made His way to heaven and returned, Christ accepted graciously the reverent touch of the women. (John 20:16, 17; Matt. 28:9; DA 789-793.) He also met Peter (1 Cor. 15:5).

Toward the end of the day He walked with two disciples, not of the Twelve, as they returned home to Emmaus from Jerusalem. Deeply troubled, they listened while Jesus, His identity concealed, showed from the Scriptures that it behooved "Christ to have suffered these things" (Luke 24:26). Comforted, and curious as to the identity of this seeming Stranger, they invited Him to sup with them. As He was giving thanks He permitted them to know Him by the nailprints in His hands (Luke 24:31; DA 800). At that moment, for reasons He knew best, He disappeared from view, but did not absent Himself. The two disciples hastened to Jerusalem to tell the brethren there that they had seen the Lord. Unseen, Christ accompanied them back to Jerusalem (DA 801).

The sun had now set and the moon was rising. The two from Emmaus reached the upper room where the disciples were gathered for "fear of the Jews" (John 20:19). They knocked at the door, and it was cautiously opened to them. As they entered, Jesus also entered, unseen (DA 802). Then He made Himself visible and reassured His followers.

He made other appearances. A week later He showed Himself again, and Thomas, who had not been present at the previous appearance, was convinced that his Lord had risen (John 20:24-29).

Then came for the disciples a time of waiting. They returned to Galilee, and Peter said very practically, "I go a fishing" (John 21:3). Six of the disciples joined him. They fished all night with no results. In the morning a Stranger on the beach commanded them to cast on the right side of their boats, and so heavy was the catch that they could not take it in. John identified the Lord, and Peter waded ashore to worship Him. Later these men were to catch huge draughts in the gospel net by the same divine power that furnished the remarkable catch of fish.

Again Jesus appeared to the Eleven in Galilee (Matt. 28:16, 17). He met with a company of five hundred believers (1 Cor. 15:6). He showed Himself to James (v. 7). Then He returned to Jerusalem and met with the disciples there (v. 7). At Jerusalem, Christ gave to the Eleven the gospel commission:

1. To go into all the world. The failure of the Hebrew chosen people to be a nation of priests, ministering the truth of God to the world (Ex. 19:6; PP 369-373), was to be corrected by the church (1 Peter 2:9).

2. To instruct. The work of the church was to be basically a teaching mission. The matter of the teaching was to be what Jesus taught (Matt. 28:20), based, as He based His teaching, on the revelation of God in the Old Testament (Luke 24:27, 44). To suppose, as some profess to do, that Jesus gave to the church during the forty days a body of instruction not recorded in Scripture, which gives authority to every practice that emerges in any segment of the church in later years, is to adopt in its totality the theory of the "traditional" church. To do so removes any definitive boundaries from the body of Christ's revealed teachings and provides a wide-open area for placing under the supposed aegis of Christ's teaching doctrines and practices for which there is only human authority.

3. To baptize into the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit the converts gained. Here again emerges the church as it was in Jesus' thinking. There must be a church to implement the commission; there must be a church to incorporate the results of the execution of the commission. Baptism, the initiatory rite for converts, was to illustrate and make functional the motives Jesus had in being Himself baptized, and by immersion to express the meaning of death to the old life and resurrection into the new life.

Then Christ, about to leave the disciples, promised them His continuing fellowship. Always He would be with them, from that moment until the end of the age, an end which the ascension angels would shortly define as the moment of Christ's return.

The Promise of the Holy Spirit.--The Lord told them, "Behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high" (Luke 24:49). They must await the gift of divine power. They must not attempt so formidable a task as world evangelization in their own pitiful insufficiency and weakness. When the power should come, they must go, but not until then.

The disciples had already experienced the Holy Spirit's presence and something of His power. The Spirit had been the moving force in the work of their incarnated Lord (Luke 2:27; 4:1, 18). Without the Spirit, the disciples could not have done the great things performed on the missionary tours they had conducted under Christ's supervision. But they had had a remarkable experience in the upper room with Christ on the night following His resurrection. He had breathed upon them, and the Holy Spirit had come unto them (John 20:22). What joy must have been theirs, what a thrill must have resulted, electric in its effect on them, as the Divine Presence entered every fiber of their beings! Thus they must have understood something of the significance of Christ's instructions to tarry, that the power of the Spirit might come upon them in fullness.

With the inbreathing of the Spirit came a promise of spiritual authority. As the church performed on earth the work of preparing men for heaven, the Spirit of God on earth would cooperate with heaven. The acceptance or rejection of candidates for heaven, when directed by the all-pervading Spirit, would affect both earthly and heavenly registers (John 20:23). To claim the promised power of the Spirit without evidence of the Spirit's presence and control is ecclesiastical presumption.

The Ascension.--After promising the Spirit's power, Jesus led His followers out upon the Mount of Olives, whence He was taken up into heaven. As the disciples watched Him ascend, their feeling of sorrow at the separation must have been far different from the grief and frustration they had experienced at the cross. They knew now, because of the resurrection, that Jesus had the power of life. They understood now from Jesus' instruction what His death had meant (Luke 24:25-27). They had a pledge of power that would be fulfilled through the Spirit by the heavenly Father Himself.

The Promise of the Second Advent.--A further assurance was given them when Jesus disappeared from their view. "This same Jesus," said angels who stood on the spot from which Jesus had ascended, "shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven" (Acts 1:11). Upon this definite threefold pledge the disciples could and did build a hope for the future: (1) He would come again; (2) He would be the very same Jesus, the One whom they had known and loved on earth, who would come again; (3) He would come as they had seen Him go, visible to everyone, not secretly or uncertainly. All this was a dramatic and reassuring renewal of what Jesus Himself had told them a few days before the crucifixion (Matt. 24:27).

II. The Emergence of the Church

The Day of Pentecost.--All the events that had occurred thus far were needed for establishing the church on earth as an instrument in God's hands. The one thing indispensable, the power, came at the close of the waiting period Christ had defined, a period of ten days in which the disciples had intimate fellowship with one another and with their Lord through prayer. On the day of Pentecost, fifty days after the resurrection day, when Christ the first fruits had been offered (Lev. 23:15, 16), the Spirit of God was poured out, and the church was inaugurated.

There was a sensory side to the coming of the Spirit. The sound of His coming was as the sound of a mighty wind borne along, sufficiently loud to draw crowds of people from different parts of the city to the place where the disciples were. The disciples, all 120 of them, gathered together, saw resting upon one another the appearance of fire. The Spirit filled the building and each one of the disciples (Acts 2:2-4).

The infilling of the Spirit was permanent; the effects, immediate. The disciples were drawn together in a corporate self-consciousness they had not before felt. They had a gift of courage in complete contrast with "fear of the Jews," which had kept them cowering together on the day of the resurrection (John 20:19), a courage which enabled them to step forth and face the very Jews who had crucified their Lord and driven them into hiding. This was a power that produced results vastly different from those that were possible through forces latent within themselves.

The Gift of Tongues.--The apostles preached, supernaturally aided by the gift of tongues. Later they were to learn more concerning gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:1-11; Rom. 12:6-8; Eph. 4:11, 12). On the day of Pentecost they received a gift sorely needed on this festival day of witnessing, when so many diverse dialects were being spoken in the city. They received the gift of tongues. Peter's speech was the most noteworthy. At the end of the day, three thousand earnest seekers for salvation were baptized. See The Diaspora.

The Emergent Church.--This day's events formed a vital part of the church's history. Now the groundwork was laid. Now the newborn church was equipped spiritually and psychologically for its tasks. What followed was the organizational filling in and the operational extension of a noble and efficient beginning.

Christ the High Priest.--Christ, the Author of salvation, had made His sacrifice, and had achieved complete victory. He had proved His qualifications to be High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary by His conquest of sin and by His victory over death. The Captain of our salvation had been made "perfect through sufferings" (Heb. 2:10). He who was the offering for sin (Heb. 9:11-14) had become the priestly offerer of His own blood on the sinner's behalf (chs. 8:1, 2; 9:23-28) at the right hand of the Father (Acts 7:56; Heb. 10:11, 12). He ministered atoning grace on behalf of sinners (Heb. 10:19-22). See Heb. 12:1, 2; DA 819.

The priests of the pagan religions had never been valid intercessors. Theirs was not only a usurpation but a falsification of the great truth of intercession between God and the sinner. With Christ's assumption of the high priesthood, to which His church witnessed, the vanity and falsity of the old pagan system of priesthood and its sacrifices were most fully revealed.

But the priesthood of the Hebrew economy also must now come to an end. It had served a magnificent purpose until Christ the High Priest, having made His preparation on earth, entered into His sacred work above. The typical priesthood, and the typical sacrifices which that priesthood offered, no longer had any place. The shadow must give way to reality.

More than this, there would be no longer any place for a priesthood on earth among men. Dedicated and well-instructed men had failed in representing adequately the priesthood of Christ prior to the cross. It would be impossible, as well as unnecessary, for any man to make the intercession necessary between God and men after the cross. With Christ as priest in the heavenly sanctuary it would be impossible for any man, no matter how sincere his purpose might be or how lofty his claims, to be priest on earth.

Relationship With the Jewish Church.--The disciples did not separate from the Jewish church. They considered themselves a reforming element that would revamp and revitalize the older, decadent body. Converts, the apostles thought, would find a specialized loyalty centering in Jesus as Messiah and Saviour, but would serve with an increased zeal for the betterment of Judaism.

It was therefore a normal thing for Peter and John to go to the Temple at the time of the evening prayer and sacrifice, as they had always done whenever they had been in Jerusalem. Such a visit, soon after Pentecost, was accompanied by a very unusual circumstance. At the Gate Beautiful of the Temple Peter and John healed a lame man in the name of the crucified and risen Saviour and by the power of the Spirit (Acts 3:1-10). But this additional and striking fruitage of Pentecost was rejected by the elders of the Jews. Inquiry resulted in the Jewish leaders' pressing a prohibition against any further work in Jesus' name--a prohibition the disciples, of course, ignored. Persecution now began. This further rejection by the Jews of Christianity was to lead to a separation between conservative Judaism and reforming Christianity.

The Common Purse.--While in fellowship with their Lord before the ascension the disciples had subsisted from a common purse, maintained by contributions (Luke 8:2, 3) and drawn upon for food and alms (John 4:8; 6:5-7), with Judas as the treasurer (ch. 13:29).

The same economy was used in the infant church. There was a common treasury, contributed to by all who wished, in any amount they desired. Fellowship among these early Christians was spiritual, theological, fraternal, and economic. It was effective throughout all the relationships of the believers with one another.

This ability of the church to find, under God, its own means of supporting itself, put Christ's followers in the position of being no longer dependent upon the Jewish economy. the church became self-sufficient. It had an all-absorbing purpose, to witness to its risen Lord. It had the power, the gift of the Holy Spirit. It quickly developed an organization, the rudiments of which had been created by Jesus Himself while on earth.

III. The Early Organization of the Church

The Apostolate.--Very naturally, for the supervision of the economy of the early church and for the organization it required, as well as for all other matters pertaining to the church and the welfare of its members, the latter looked to the apostles for leadership. These were the men whom Jesus had accepted, from the hundreds who from time to time followed Him, to be His pupils. They were His "apostles" (from the Gr. apostelloµ, "I send forth," and apostolos, "one sent forth"), or "missionaries" (from the Latin mitto, "I send," and missus, "one sent"). There were eleven now, for Judas Iscariot had proved a traitor: Simon, or Simeon, surnamed Peter, and his brother Andrew, fishermen by trade; James and his younger brother John, sons of Zebedee, called Boanerges, the sons of thunder, fishermen also; but John was somehow known in the high priest's house (John 18:15) and according to a tradition written down a hundred years after, was entitled to priestly rank (Polycrates of Ephesus, in Eusebius Ecclesiastical History v. 24. 3); Philip of Bethsaida; his friend Nathanael, known also as Bartholomew; Matthew Levi, the publican; Thomas, known as the doubter, also as Didymus, "the Twin"; James the Less, of the family of Alphaeus; Jude, known also as Lebbaeus Thaddaeus, of the family of one named James; and Simon the Zealot (Matt. 10:2-4; Mark 3:14-19; Luke 6:13-16; Acts 1:13). Probably the most brilliant disciple, the one best equipped to make a success in life, was Judas Iscariot, the greatest failure. The others were great only because of the greatness of their Lord; wise only in the wisdom of their Lord; successful only in the success of their Lord, who had promised to work in and through them.

These men, with Matthias, who replaced Judas Iscariot, were the agents of the Holy Spirit in administering the church. They led the new converts into higher spiritual life and directed the distribution of funds from the common purse. This ministration was no light task. It carried serious responsibility. It meant the giving of needed care to people thrown out of line with their accustomed environment because of their new religious convictions. It also presented temptations. Ananias and Sapphira had pledged a certain sum of money to be placed in the common purse. They sold a piece of property to meet the pledge. When Ananias came to Peter to give the money, he professed to be giving the entire proceeds of the sale. But he lied to the Holy Spirit, and when Peter pointed this out to him, he died. A little later on the same day his wife, Sapphira, sought to perpetuate the same deception. She also died. "Great fear came upon all the church" (Acts 5:11).

This incident and the miracles that followed (Acts 5:12-16) gave Peter and the other apostles the opportunity to preach Jesus. Their unfaltering persistence in witnessing to Christ in defiance of the orders of the Jewish leaders resulted in their arrest and imprisonment. When the angel of the Lord released them, they returned to their preaching, and were arrested again. At this point Peter laid down an abiding principle for regulating the public relations of the church in a time of challenge: to "obey God rather than men" (v. 29). The apostles might have been put to death, had God not used Gamaliel to intervene in their behalf. That great teacher of the Jews urged tolerance. The apostles were then flogged, ordered to be silent, and released. Within only a few months they had experienced the second serious persecution.

The Deaconate.--Various difficulties attended the communal arrangement. The story of Pentecost indicates that many non-Palestinian Jews, called Hellenists, or "Grecians," joined the church. Among these were widows, who soon complained that they were not receiving from the common purse adequate funds for their support.

The complaints became pressing, distracting the apostles from their work for the spiritual good and advancement of the church. A proposal was made and adopted that seven men of good reputation be selected to administer the material side of the church's affairs. Since there were no church buildings in that early day, nor indeed until nearly two centuries later, and since no money was needed yet for the salaries of ministers or the dispatching of missionaries, the funds donated were used for the support of the poor and needy. In any congregation of five thousand to ten thousand, there would ordinarily be a large number of such members. But the transitional difficulty of entering the Christian fellowship, in a city as prejudiced against the Nazarene as Jerusalem was at that time, must have meant to many a dislocation in employment and serious social and economic disabilities. Doubtless the seven men had much work to do in taking care of the needs of the poor and the deprived in the congregations.

The names of the seven men were: Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas (Acts 6:5). Judging from the names, which are Hellenistic, these were non-Palestinian Jews. At least one, Nicolas, was evidently a Gentile, for he is called a proselyte. This group was the prototype of a later order of deacons. It must be noted, however, that the elders (called "presidents") are found in the 2d century handling the funds of the church (Justin Martyr First Apology 67), and it is possible that the seven elected administrators provided an organizational basis both for the deacons and for the elders or presbyters, whose office Paul fostered (Acts 14:23).

The Men of the Gifts.--The election of the seven administrators was a noteworthy feature of the development of church organization. Heretofore the church had functioned under men distinguished by having gifts of the Spirit, clearly defined as "apostles," "prophets," "evangelists," "pastors," and "teachers" (Eph. 4:11). These guides in the church, functioning for the church's spiritual upbuilding (vs. 12-15), were not appointed by the church membership, but by the Holy Spirit as He imparted the gifts.

The apostles were, of course, at the head of these men, called pneumatikoi, or "spiritual" men. The term as applied to these men of special gifts generally designates them as men of changed nature, in contrast with the nature common to humanity; but technically it refers to men possessed by the Holy Spirit and exhibiting His special gifts (1 Cor. 2:15; 14:37; Gal. 6:1). Their authority is seen exercised in the case of the rebuking of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-10), the selecting of the seven (ch. 6:1-6), the dispatching and supervising of Philip, Peter, and John (ch. 8:5, 14). This was the administrative work, and it was quite in line with both Jewish and Greek practice to call the apostles, who were operating in this way, "elders" (chs. 11:29, 30; 15:2). Prophets seem also to have functioned administratively, as in the commissioning of Paul and Barnabas (ch. 13:1-3).

The Eldership.--Apparently there was in each congregation a plurality of elders. The example of the first appointment of officers at Jerusalem (Acts 6) makes this clear, as does the fact that Paul had not one elder, but "elders," appointed in each congregation (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5).

In the New Testament the Greek has two words that describe the office of elder. One is presbuteros, "older [man]," implying a position of dignity and respect, and corresponding to the English "presbyter," or "elder," originally as in modern times a functionary chosen from among the laymen. The other title is episkopos, meaning "overseer," or "superintendent," rendered "bishop" in English. That these words are both applied to the office of elder may be seen by comparing Acts 20:17 with v. 28, and also from their use in such passages as Titus 1:5-9.

The Episcopate.--It happened presently in the church, however, that these two Greek words took on different meanings as applying to different offices. Though at first the "bishop" served more as a sort of chairman, or first among equals, he gradually assumed more and more authority over those associated with him in the administration of the affairs of the local church. The term episkopos thus came to designate a "bishop" as the presiding elder, and eventually, in the 2d and 3d centuries, as a sort of overlord in the church. Such an officer of the church in the early centuries is now commonly known as a monarchial bishop. See p. 38.

IV. The Sundering of Christianity and Judaism

The Stoning of Stephen.--The seven men appointed to care for "tables," as recorded in Acts 6, did not confine themselves to material work. They were vigorous evangelists. Philip, led by the Spirit to Samaria, was so blessed in his labors there that the apostles in Jerusalem sent Peter and John to aid him. The Spirit then took Philip southward into the desert, where he met and baptized the eunuch, perhaps the first Christian in Ethiopia.

Stephen busied himself evangelizing in the synagogues of the Hellenistic Jews in Jerusalem (Acts 6:8-10). He argued effectively and convincingly, and there were many converts. But bitter opposition arose, and Stephen so angered the Jews that he was sentenced by the Sanhedrin to be put to death. He was stoned, while Saul of Tarsus held the garments of those who cast the fatal stones. The Romans were bribed not to investigate the matter (AA 101).

The Close of an Era.--This event, which so shocked the church and so crystallized the opposition of the Jews to Christianity, was climactic. The Jews had killed Jesus. Now it was evident that they had not changed their attitude toward the truths revealed by Jesus' ministry. The further opportunity given them by the apostles was refused, and the stoning of Stephen is significant of their final rejection, as a nation, of the true Messiah and of His message of salvation. On the relationship of this to the prophecy of the 70 weeks see on Dan. 9:27.

The Persecution.--The stoning of Stephen opened a flood of persecution by the leaders of the Jews in Jerusalem against the Christian sect. Strangely enough the apostles, who remained in Jerusalem, did not appear to have suffered personally, but there was a general scattering of the church throughout Judea and Samaria. There had been persecution before, some of it arising from the excitement attendant upon the healing of the lame man by Peter and John, but now the persecution was general and severe. It forced upon the church an opportunity to put into exercise over a wider area the power received at Pentecost, and to put their Lord's commission more fully into effect.

A leader in the persecution was Saul of Tarsus, a young Pharisee who had studied under the great Jewish theologian Gamaliel I. Much was expected of Saul by the Jewish leaders. He showed himself fanatically bitter against the Christians (Acts 22:4, 5; 26:9-12). While they were going "every where preaching the word" (ch. 8:4), Saul secured from the Sanhedrin a letter to the Jewish leaders in the city of Damascus, authorizing him to lead the Jews in a sweeping attack upon the Christians in that important city. He was nearing Damascus to accomplish the task when the voice of the Lord spoke to him from heaven, and challenged him to change his ways. Saul (Hebrew for "asked" one), or as better known, Paul (Latin for the "little" one), was converted completely to the Lord Jesus Christ, and became an untiring missionary-evangelist.

V. The Expansion of the Church

Paul's Early Evangelism.--Paul preached for "many days" in Damascus and subsequently spent three years in study and meditation in the wilderness of Arabia (Gal. 1:17). Eventually he returned to Damascus, but barely escaped with his life, being let down one night over the city wall in a basket. He proceeded to Jerusalem, where Barnabas, a converted Jew from Cyprus, persuaded the apostles to receive him. Paul worked there with unfailing courage and vigor among the Jews, in the name of Christ, but when it was learned that the Hellenistic Jews were determined to kill him, the disciples sent him down to Caesarean. From there he proceeded to his native city of Tarsus, in Cilicia.

Peter's Early Evangelism.--A time of temporary peace now followed for the church, and the apostles in Jerusalem were not slow to use the opportunity. In the course of itinerant work Peter, who had been helping Philip in Samaria, found himself in Joppa. Here the community was in mourning because of the death of Dorcas, one of the helpful women in the church. Peter now showed that he still possessed the power that had been with him on the day of Pentecost and when he had healed the lame man before the Beautiful Gate of the Temple in Jerusalem. At his bidding Dorcas was brought back to life, with the result that many accepted the gospel (Acts 9:42).

From there Peter was summoned by the miraculous intervention of an angel to interview Cornelius, a centurion in the "Italian" Cohort. Cornelius was sympathetic to the Jews, a believer in the true God of the Hebrews, and generous with his gifts to the cause of religion. Peter met with him, his family, and his friends, with the result that Cornelius accepted the gospel. When he asked for baptism, Peter hesitated, because Cornelius was a Gentile, but the Holy Spirit fell upon all those in the house, and Peter then baptized them (Acts 10:48).

Cornelius, however, was not a full proselyte. He had not yet been admitted into the Jewish communion. Therefore the report came to Jerusalem that Peter had baptized a Gentile into the Christian church. This aroused a great deal of criticism; Peter had to answer to the apostles in Jerusalem for what he had done. When he explained that the Holy Spirit had come upon these new converts the apostles had no further criticism, but justified Peter in his action.

The Death of James.--It was not long after this that the apostles Peter and James were thrown into prison by King Herod Agrippa I. Although Peter was released through the intervention of an angel, James was put to death.

The Gospel to the Gentiles.--At the same time the Holy Spirit was causing something else to happen in Antioch in Syria. During the persecution that had arisen in the case of Stephen, some of the believers had gone as far as Phoenicia and antioch in Syria, and even to the island of Cyprus, but they had proclaimed the gospel only to Jews. However, when some of the converts from Cyprus and Cyrene came to Antioch, they did not restrict themselves to the Jews, but preached the gospel also to the Greeks. They were greatly blessed in this, and a large number believed (Acts 11:19-21).

This is noteworthy. It is the first time that Gentiles, men not already touched somewhat with the religion of the Jews, accepted the message of Christ the Lord. The Ethiopian whom Philip met had been in Jerusalem worshiping with the Jews; Cornelius was already a "God-fearer"; but now Greeks in Antioch, men previously untouched by the religion of the Scriptures, came into the Christian church. Here the believers in Christ were first called Christians.

When word of this remarkable development came to the brethren in Jerusalem, they sent Barnabas, himself a man of Cyprus, to see what had taken place. Barnabas was delighted with what he found at Antioch, and after a time set off to Tarsus to find Paul. He brought him to Antioch, and he and Barnabas were together for a year there, teaching the converts and reaching out for others. The results of this evangelistic campaign were excellent.

Paul's Missionary Journeys.--In the book of Acts there is no mention of elders or deacons in the church in Antioch, but there is given a list of names of men who had the gifts of the Spirit, particularly the gifts of prophecy and of teaching. Barnabas and Saul are so listed, along with Simeon, called Niger, Lucius the Cyrenian, and Manaen, who is mentioned as a foster brother of Herod the tetrach, who had put John to death. These men were moved by the Holy Spirit to plan a far more extensive missionary program than had yet been attempted in the church. Upon their invitation, Barnabas and Paul consented to enter upon this program. Under the leading of the Holy Spirit the prophets and teachers of Antioch ordained Barnabas and Paul and sent them out on what was to become known as Paul's First Missionary Journey. See Paul's First Missionary Tour.

The First Journey.--On the first of the three missionary tours for which Paul is noted, he had for his companions Barnabas of Cyprus, who had befriended Paul when he first came to Jerusalem to meet with the church there and who had been responsible for calling Paul to Antioch from Cilicia; and a nephew of Barnabas, John Mark. The missionary company sailed from Antioch in Syria to Cyprus, where they witnessed both through healing and through preaching, and then proceeded to visit certain cities in south-central Asia Minor, now Turkey. Before their tour of southern Asia Minor, however, Mark withdrew. Here, their efforts were attended with remarkable success. Their spiritual gifts were manifested in acts of healing and in successful preaching. They invariably went first to the Jews and then to the Gentiles, and with both classes their work was attended with good fruitage. Churches were organized in the cities visited, and elders were appointed to preside over these companies (Acts 14:23). In spite of the severe opposition of the Jews in every place, Paul and Barnabas returned over the route they had followed, strengthening the churches, and then set sail for Antioch in Syria from Attalia, the seaport of Pamphylia. See Paul's First Missionary Tour.

The Second Journey.--The Jerusalem Council, record of which is found in the fifteenth chapter of Acts, took place following their return. Afterward Paul and Barnabas planned to make another tour. Barnabas wished to take with them again John Mark, but since John had early deserted them on the former tour, Paul refused to permit him to go along the second time. So severe was the difference on this issue between the two evangelists that Paul and Barnabas went separate ways: Barnabas to Cyprus, accompanied by John Mark; and Paul by land northward through Syria into Cilicia, his own native province, accompanied by Silas. See Paul's Second Missionary Tour.

From there Paul and Silas proceeded to visit some of the inland churches that Paul had raised up on the first journey. They then journeyed westward, planning to go into the province of Asia adjoining the Aegean Sea, but were forbidden by the Holy Spirit. When they sought to enter Bithynia, the Spirit again forbade them. These two provinces seem to have been evangelized by the apostle Peter (1 Peter 1:1).

Moving on to Troas, Paul and Silas were instructed in a vision to continue to Macedonia. From there they went through Greece, preaching the gospel, and came as far south as Corinth. Paul sailed from there to Ephesus, then proceeded to Caesarea in Palestine and thence to Antioch in Syria.

The Third Journey.--Having spent some time at Antioch, Paul again set off, on what is known as his Third Missionary Journey, proceeding through Galatia and Phrygia and spending a period of three years in Ephesus. When opposition eventually necessitated his leaving the city he proceeded to Macedonia and then on into Greece. He had thought to sail from there to Syria, but instead, with quite a company of disciples, he returned through Macedonia, crossed to Troas, and then sailed along the Aegean coast toward Jerusalem. At Miletus he met the elders of the church of Ephesus, then continued to Tyre, and sailing to Caesarea, proceeded from there to Jerusalem. Paul was welcomed by the brethren, in a reception quite different from that of twenty years before, after his conversion at Damascus. However, the brethren felt that Paul should indicate his loyalty to things Jewish. They suggested that he take with him into the Temple four other men, and there perform the rituals required by Jewish law.

Paul's First Imprisonment.--Paul consented, but when the Jews saw him in the Temple they raised such an outcry that it was necessary for Roman soldiers to intervene, and Paul found himself under protection of the soldiery. For the next two years Paul was a prisoner in Jerusalem and in Caesarea. He was interviewed by Felix and by Festus, Roman procurators, and by Herod Agrippa II and Berenice. In the meantime, having given up hope that he would receive relief from the governor and wishing to avoid trial before the Sanhedrin, Paul appealed to Caesar and was transported to Rome. No charges were placed against Paul there. Accordingly, he was acquitted and released, after having been there two years.

The Intervening Years.--Immediately Paul took up his missionary work again. According to Clement of Rome, perhaps the friend to whom Paul referred in Phil. 4:3, Paul preached in both East and West (The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians 5). He had expressed his intention of once more visiting the Christians at Philippi (Phil. 2:24) and at Colossae (Philemon 22; cf. Col. 4:9; Philemon 10). He may have visited Ephesus, after leaving Macedonia, and perhaps also Colossae and Laodicea. Clement states that Paul went to the "limits" of the West, which probably meant Spain. If this visit was made, it was in keeping with the intention he had earlier expressed to the Romans (Rom. 15:28). The Muratorian Fragment (a.d. 170) plainly states that Paul went to Spain. The pastoral epistles suggest that he went also to Crete, Ephesus,and to Nicopolis and Troas in Macedonia.

Paul's Second Imprisonment and Death.--Probably at Troas Paul was placed under arrest again, was taken to Rome, and according to legend was confined in the Mamertime dungeon near the Roman Forum. Sometime about the years a.d. 66-68 he was put to death as a martyr. Luke and, possibly, Timothy and Mark appear to have been his only human companions in those last dark hours (2 Tim. 4:11).

VI. Judaism in the Christian Church

The Problem.--It was inevitable that, as soon as the church engaged in worldwide missionary work, a serious difficulty and misunderstanding should arise within its membership. The first Christians were Jews. They knew the Jewish faith as the only true faith, and the God it worshiped as the only true God. They believed thoroughly in the inspiration and spiritual authority of the Scriptures that had come down to them from their fathers. They knew of proselyting, but that meant bringing Gentiles into the Jewish church, with the understanding that such converts should observe all things required of the Jews.

Jesus had based His program and teachings upon the Scriptures. While He had criticized the traditional accretions, formalities, externalities, and hypocrisies of the religious leaders He met, Jesus insisted that He had not come to change the Law or the Prophets, but rather to make their teachings successful as a spiritual fact in the experience of the people. The Jews who followed Christ mistakenly concluded that those who were brought in line with Jesus' teachings would also follow the practices of the Jewish church. If they were to become members of the Christian sect, they must also become members of the great body of Judaism.

The leaders of the Christian group were therefore very watchful concerning what their colleagues would do in respect to the Gentiles. Philip baptized the Ethiopian, but this man was already a worshiper, having gone up to Jerusalem to worship the true God in His holy Temple. When Peter baptized Cornelius and his family, he had to give an account to the brethren in Jerusalem for what he had done. Even though Cornelius was already a recognized believer in the true God, Peter was able to clear himself with his brethren only on the basis that the Holy Spirit had already accepted Cornelius before Peter proceeded to baptize him.

Requirements for Gentile Converts.--Until mention of a difference in Acts 15:1, 2, we do not have information concerning any problems in Antioch when pagan Greeks there were brought into the church by the missionaries from Cyprus and Cyrene. But when Paul and Barnabas went out on their far-flung missionary journeys, the question as to the treatment of the Gentiles who should become Christians came very definitely to a head. Barnabas and Paul baptized pagans into the Christian church. Should these pagans undergo the age-old tribal sign of circumcision, the pledge of allegiance to the Hebrew covenant with God, coming down from Abraham, "the father of the faithful"? Should they come to Jerusalem to observe the three principal feasts, attendance upon which was required of all male Jews (Ex. 23:14-17; Deut. 16:16, 17)? Should they look to the sacrifices as a means of expressing their faith in salvation?

Paul and Barnabas felt that the answer to these questions was definitely and emphatically No. Certain Palestinian Jewish Christians were equally clear that the answer should be Yes. This was the background and occasion for the Council of Jerusalem, recorded in the fifteenth chapter of Acts.

The Council at Jerusalem.--How wide a representation from various churches was gathered at Jerusalem for the council is not clear. Paul and Barnabas were delegates from Antioch. They also represented the interests of the churches they had just raised up in the distant provinces they had visited. The elders mentioned (Acts 15:6) may have represented various churches in Palestine (see AA 190, 196).

The discussion was full and earnest, and perhaps warm. There were members of the Christian brotherhood who were still Pharisees, and these insisted that "it was needful to circumcise" the Gentile converts, "and to command them to keep the law of Moses" (Acts 15:5). After the disputation had gone on for some time, Peter rose and spoke, and to good effect. He recalled his experience, with the vision he had had, before going to instruct Cornelius, the centurion of the Italian band. He recalled that the Holy Spirit had fallen upon Cornelius and his household even before they had received the baptismal rite. He knew that God "put no difference between" Jews and Christians, "purifying their hearts of faith" (vs. 8, 9). "Now therefore," Peter demanded, "why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they" (vs. 10, 11).

Barnabas and Paul then made a full report of the work they had done on their recent tour, reciting their experiences, indicating the converts they had won, and describing the miracles God had enabled them to perform. It must have been a convincing recital indeed, because the council then seemed ready to reach a decision.

The Council's Decision.--The presiding elder, James (see Acts 15:13), made the concluding speech. Confirming Peter's view, James declared that the prophets had spoken of the rebuilding of the house of David in order that men everywhere might call upon the name of the Lord. "Wherefore," said James, "my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: but that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood" (vs. 19, 20).

In response to James's suggestion, a letter was drawn up setting forth the fact that although there were those who had insisted that the converted Gentiles must keep the requirements of the law, the brethren at Jerusalem had given no such commandment. Therefore, said the letter, Barnabas and Paul were returning with the decision of the council, accompanied by Judas Barsabas and Silas. "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well" (Acts 15:28, 29).

The Jerusalem Council was one of the great events in the history of the Christian church. The decision of the council was to all effects a great proclamation of emancipation. One can only speculate as to what would have been the effect upon the Christian church had the emissaries of Christ, as they went over the world, sought to impose upon their non-Jewish converts all the requirements of the Jewish law. On the surface of things, it would have necessitated these converts' taking upon themselves in a non-Jewish world all the peculiar problems from which Jews were suffering in that day. It would have enforced upon them a program of ritual that would undoubtedly have hampered their growth at the beginning of the movement. It must in the nature of things have obliterated the clear picture of Jesus Christ dying on the cross, and substituted for it ceremonies which at their best were but a type of the sacrifice of the Son of God. The continuance of circumcision would have linked the Gentile Christians to a peculiarly racial and theocratic rite. In contrast, the genius of Christianity must emphasize the individual relationship with Jesus Christ. This personal fellowship must be a reality on the basis of faith, a faith that could not be had in infancy, when the Jews applied the tribal sign of circumcision, but at an age of intelligent accountability.

The decision of the council at Jerusalem set the church free to grow, with no racial or national trammels to hamper it in reaching all men. The emancipation the early church received at the council was a most significant factor in its steady growth among the Gentiles during the apostolic era, and was reflected also in its spirit of freedom and power in Christ.

Paul's Letters to the Thessalonians

Events Associated With the Writing of Paul's Letters to the Thessalonians, Written From Corinth During Paul's Second Missionary Tour, c. A.D. 51

The Work of the Judaizers.--But this noble decision of the council, conceived so clearly and enunciated at a time so vital in the church's history, was not accepted without a struggle on the part of those who wished to maintain Judaism in the church. Peter has spoken in defense of Gentile liberation. When he followed the emissaries of the council to Antioch, he fellowshiped freely with the Gentile converts there. But the Pharisaic party among the Christians in Jerusalem were not content. They also sent representatives to Antioch, professing to come in the name of James and with the authority of the church at Jerusalem (Gal. 2:12).

Paul Versus Peter.--Under the pressure they brought to bear, Peter "dissembled," ceased to fellowship with the Gentiles, and allied himself with the ritualistic party from Jerusalem. Even Barnabas was "carried away," and stood against Paul (Gal. 2:13). But Paul was not willing to let the victory won at Jerusalem become fruitless. He "withstood" Peter "to the face" (v. 11), and challenged him with "knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ" (v. 16), adding that "we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."

This controversy caused Paul to write the Epistle to the Galatians some years later to counteract the influence of the Judaizers who followed Paul's route and worked among his converts. This situation must be recognized also as the background for the Epistle to the Romans, which Paul wrote probably about the same time that he wrote to the Galatians. In fact, the problem of Judaism continued to perplex and trouble the Christian church for more than two centuries.

Indeed, a literature arose over a supposed lifelong controversy between Peter and Paul on the question of Judaizing. Typical of this are the so-called Recognitions of Clement and the Clementine Homilies. In these romances Peter is portrayed as having a struggle with Simon Magus; again and again he conquers his foe, both in disputation and in wonders performed. It is possible that these documents are a product of the Judaizing group, who, recognizing Peter as the apostle to the circumcision, made him the hero in the struggle to preserve Judaism in the Christian church, and used Simon Magus as a figure of opposition to Peter, when they really had the apostle Paul in mind.

However this may be, the contest was very real and resulted in increasing bitterness between the two factions in the church. Indeed, it is likely that the Judaizing party passed on some of their feeling to the Jews in general. This doubtless increased the animosity with which the Jews looked upon the Christian sect. An illustration of this was the attack made on Paul in Jerusalem upon his return to that city after his third journey, which resulted in his arrest, imprisonment, and transportation to Rome. A natural reaction in the Christian church was an endeavor on the part of the Gentile Christians to escape as far as possible from Judaistic influences and from being confused with the Jews. As will be pointed out later, this desire to escape from similarities with the Jews brought about marked changes in the beliefs, forms, and practices of Christianity as tides of Gentiles, lacking sympathy with Judaism, came sweeping into the church.

VII. The Later Work of the Apostles

Peter's Later Service.--Because of Luke's industry as a historian, far more is known of Paul's work than of Peter's. Luke records some facts regarding Peter, and Paul also makes a few passing references to his later career.

Soon after James the son of Zebedee was put to death by Herod Agrippa I, that king also imprisoned Peter, but did not succeed in executing him, since the apostle was delivered miraculously by an angel (Acts 12:3-19). Inasmuch as this appears to have occurred shortly before Herod's own death, it may reasonably be dated in a.d. 44 (see p. 97). Peter next appears at the Jerusalem Council, where his speech opened the way for the decision to relieve Gentile Christians from following the Jewish ritual (Acts 15:7-11). Thereafter Peter disappears from the narrative in Acts. Paul mentions him as having been at Antioch apparently shortly after the Jerusalem Council (Gal. 2:11), and Eusebius, writing almost three centuries later, indicates that he was the first bishop of Antioch (Ecclesiastical History iii. 36. 2). It would seem evident from his introduction in his first epistle (ch. 1:1) that Peter had labored among the inhabitants of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, an area that covers much of the northern and western parts of Asia Minor.

There is a tradition that Peter spent many years at Rome in the leadership of the church there. Eusebius, according to the Armenian version of his Chronicle, states that Peter went to Rome in the third year of Caligula, which would be a.d. 39. Later in the same document he places Peter's martyrdom at Rome in the thirteenth year of Nero, a.d. 66, thus giving Peter some twenty-seven years at Rome. Jerome, writing a few decades after Eusebius, declares that Peter went to Rome in the second year of Claudius, a.d. 42, and remained there for twenty-five years, until the fourteenth year of Nero, a.d. 67 (De Viris Illustribus i). It is highly improbable that either of these traditions is correct, for Peter could hardly have spent so long a period at Rome. If he did go there as early as these traditions indicate, he must necessarily have broken his sojourn for some considerable period, both for his presence at the council at Jerusalem and subsequent visit to Antioch, and for his probable missionary activities in a wide area of Asia Minor. Furthermore, the fact that Peter nowhere appears in any of Paul's correspondence to or from Rome, where Paul mentions many believers who were in the city, is an indication that Peter most probably was not at Rome in the winter of a.d. 57/58, when Paul wrote Romans, nor during the years from about a.d. 61 to 63, when Paul was imprisoned there the first time.

The tradition of Peter's early arrival at Rome may have arisen in connection with reports concerning Simon Magus. Justin Martyr (c. a.d. 150) reports that one Simon, a Samaritan, came to Rome in the reign of Claudius (a.d. 41-54) and did "mighty acts of magic" (First Apology 26; ANF, vol. 1, p. 171). Irenaeus (c. a.d. 185; Against Heresies i. 23. 1-4) repeats this story and identifies this Simon with Simon the sorcerer whom Peter had rebuked at Samaria (Acts 8:9-23). A legendary document called The Acts of Peter With Simon, probably from about a.d. 200, tells an elaborate tale of how, by a vision of Christ, Peter was sent to Rome to oppose Simon. Since Simon was understood to have arrived there during the time of Claudius, it would be a logical conclusion that Peter must have gone to Rome about the same time. However, such a legend as this concerning Simon Magus is quite insufficient evidence for placing Peter's arrival at Rome so early.

The foregoing evidence does not mean, however, that Peter never was in Rome. Early Christian tradition is strong that Peter was a leader in the Roman church and died there. Ignatius (c. a.d. 116) indicates that Peter had taught at Rome (To the Romans 4), and Irenaeus (c. a.d. 185) declares that Peter and Paul, "having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate" (Against Heresies iii. 3. 3; ANF, vol. 1, p. 416). Although it is clear from the New Testament that Paul did not found the Roman church (see Rom. 1:13; 15:23, 24), and in view of the evidence given above, it is likewise doubtful that Peter did, nevertheless these strong early traditions make it probable that Peter died at Rome. As early as c. a.d. 200, Gaius, a Roman Christian, declared that Peter's "trophy," probably either his grave or the place of his martyrdom, was known to be in the Vatican, at that time not a building, but a cemetery (see AA 537).

The question of Peter's stay at Rome is quite apart from that of the primacy of the popes, who trace their office to him. Their claim must finally stand or fall, not in terms of whether Peter was at Rome, but on the quite different questions of Peter's position in the church and the true nature of apostolic succession. For further discussion of this problem see Vol. IV, p. 836, and on Matt. 16:18.

The Apostle John. Even less is known of the apostle John than of Paul or Peter. In the beginning years John worked with Peter. He was accompanying Peter when the two of them, on their way into the Temple for worship, healed the lame man (Acts 3). He was sent with Peter by the apostles in Jerusalem to help Philip in his evangelization of Samaria (Acts 8). This was not many years after Pentacost. Except for Gal. 2:9, the next record we have of him in Scripture is his own statement that he was "in the isle that is called Patmos," a "companion in tribulation" to those who also were suffering persecution (Rev. 1:9). A credible tradition (Irenaeus Against Heresies v. 30. 3) puts John's writing of the Revelation toward the end of the reign of the emperor Domitian, who died in a.d. 96. There is no inspired record of what happened to John during the sixty years between Samaria and Patmos.

Recognizing that John, having seen the extraordinary and significant visions unfolded to him at Patmos, would wish to record them immediately, one can readily understand how he would eagerly write out the visions. Then he would dispatch into hands safer than those of a prisoner on Patmos. That he was swept back into the atmosphere and emotion of the earlier prophets during his writing of the Apocalypse is evidence by the fact that a large part of the vocabulary and even phraseology is closely parallel to those of Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel.

John gives no indication in his Gospel as to where he was when he wrote it, but Irenaeus (ibid. iii. 3. 4) states that John was at Ephesus until the reign of Trajan a.d. 98-117), and it is considered likely that he wrote the Gospel from there.

According to Polycrates, who presided over the church at Smyrna about a.d. 200, John was a priest "wearing the breastplate" (Eusebius Ecclesiastical History v. 24. 3; Loeb ed., vol. 1, p. 507). An apocryphal document, Acts of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist John the Theologian, whose authorship and reliability are impossible to determine, describes in great detail John's arrest and his appearance before Domitian, at which time the apostle bore witness of the gospel. In the presence of Domitian, it is said, he drank a cup of poison with out harm, and raised up from the dead a servant of the king. According to Tertullian, who wrote early in the 3d century, John was cast into a vat of boiling oil and was removed unhurt, just before his exile to Patmos (On Prescription Against Heretics 36; cf. AA 570).

John had a strong conviction concerning truth, as is borne out again and again in his Gospel, and a corresponding dislike for heresy ( 1 John 2:18, 19, 22, 23; 2 John 7-9). This dislike is illustrated in a story told of him. When he was about to enter a certain bathhouse at Ephesus he learned that a so-called Christian Gnostic and Cerinthus was there. Upon hearing this, John is supposed to have fled, crying out that the walls of the bathhouse might fall because Cerinthus was within (Irenaeus Against Heresies iii. 3. 4). Out of all this it is difficult, however, to separate fact from fancy.

John's leadership of the church at Ephesus must inevitably have made it a great evangelistic center. Indeed, the centers of the church may well have changed with the emergence and disappearance of great Christian leaders. In the opening years of the gospel economy, the center was unquestionably Jerusalem, where at least some of the apostles dwelt, where the great council was held, and from which the "sent ones" set forth upon their missions. This could well have been the case until a.d. 50, after the council.

In the meantime the Cypriote and Cyrenian missionaries had initiated an active and successful missionary endeavor among the Gentiles in and around Antioch, and from here Paul and Barnabas were sent on their daring missionary enterprise among the Gentiles. At least for the reaching of the Gentiles, Antioch must have been a center for Christian service beginning about a.d. 44, and continuing so until Paul's death, or later.

Paul's years of residence at Ephesus made the city important to Christians. He assigned his disciple Timothy to that place, apparently after his first Roman imprisonment. Doubtless the leadership of this gifted young man kept it a hub of activity for Christ. When John assumed leadership there, the importance of Ephesus must have been enhanced even more.

The Other Apostles.--There is no reliable information concerning the other apostles. Their activities and final end are in even more obscurity than John's or Peter's. Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, is said to have preached the gospel in Scythia and in Thrace, north of Greece, and to have been crucified in Greece on an X-shaped cross, hence called St. Andrew's cross. Nothing certain is known of the fate of James the Less. Jude, the author of the Epistle, is said to have preached in Palestine, Syria, and Arabia. Tradition assigns Matthew to Parthia and Persia and suggests that he did not suffer martyrdom. Matthias, chosen, according to the record of the first chapter of Acts, to fill the vacancy left by Judas, is said to have been one of the Seventy whom Christ sent out to preach (Luke 10:1), and to have preached in Cappadocia, north of Paul's home province of Cilicia, and to have been martyred, perhaps in Judea. According to Josephus (Antiquities xx. 9. 1), James the brother of our Lord was stoned to death in the courts of the Temple.

The tradition is strong that Mark, the author of the Gospel by that name, thought to be the young man who refused to continue on the First Missionary Journey with Barnabas and Paul and whom Paul asked to join him while a prisoner in Rome (2 Tim. 4:11, preached in Egypt. It is supposed that he founded the church in Alexandria and was its presiding elder. He is said to have been martyred there during the Neronian persecution. Nathanael, or Bartholomew, is thought to have preached in Arabia, and perhaps in the lands adjoining what is known as Ethiopia. However, tradition maintains that he was crucified head downward in one of the provinces of Armenia.

It is obvious that tradition confuses Philip the apostle and Philip the deacon. As far as the Bible record is concerned, nothing is known of Philip the apostle after the record of the Gospel of John, where he is spoken of more than in the other gospel records, Philip of the book of Acts is the deacon. Tradition maintains that Philip the apostle preached in Phrygia.

Simon the Zealot is said to have preached in North Africa and to have been martyred in Palestine under Domitian, the emperor who sent John to the island of Patmos. Tradition assigns Thomas to Parthia and Persia, and in his later years to Edessa, where he is said to have been martyred. However, there is also a tradition that Thomas preached the gospel in India, and there is in India today a group of native Christians who call themselves the Thomas Christians. The probability is that Thomas' labors did not reach that far.

VIII. Developing Church Organization

The Exercise of Supervision.--For most of the activities of the church for which there is inspired record, there are strong indications of planning and administrative supervision. The apostles were at first in Jerusalem, and remained there even during the persecution arising from the stoning of Stephen. From there they sent Peter and John to help Philip in Samaria. When Peter dealt with Cornelius, the brethren in Jerusalem were troubled, and asked Peter to give an accounting. When the grave matter of the extent to which ritual was to be required of the Gentiles had to be settled, the brethren called a more or less representative council in Jerusalem and felt free to send word out from there to the churches as to the decision reached. All of this indicates that the apostles recognized the validity of referring problems of general concern to an authority more central than that of the local congregations.

The Spirit's Guidance in Administration.--There did not seem to be direction by any particular group to send the men from Cyrene and Cyprus to Antioch in Syria to engage in evangelism there. But their work was reviewed with approval by Barnabas, and when it was found advantageous to profit by the success of their endeavors, Barnabas journeyed to Cilicia and brought Paul to labor in Antioch.

Elders and deacons are not mentioned in the church in Antioch. It was prophets and teachers, men with specific gifts of the Spirit, who sent Paul and Barnabas on their famous First Missionary Journey. It is not indicated to what extent the brethren at Antioch laid out for Barnabas and Paul the route they were to follow. Rather, one has the impression that they operated under the leadership of the Spirit. Certainly Paul on his second journey knew this leadership, because he was prevented from entering certain provinces while on that journey. As a matter of fact, the Holy Spirit is the over-all divine Guide for the church.

The men of the Spirit, the apostles, prophets, teachers, and evangelists, were active in leading the church. The deacons, as such, were appointed to supervise the distribution of goods and food to the members of the church in Jerusalem. This was essentially an administrative function. Under the blessing of the Spirit, they proved also to be successful evangelists. Therefore no sharp division in this early day between the elders and deacons as administrative officers, and the apostles, prophets, teachers, and evangelists as men of the Spirit, can be pressed. However, the distinction grew in later years between these two classes of functionaries in the church. The elders and deacons increased in administrative power and influence, and the men of the Spirit not only became less numerous but, as is evident from later Christian writings, actually fell into disrepute.

The Presbytery.--For the official leadership in the local congregations two terms were used. One, presbuteros, literally, "older," indicates one in a position of respect. The word has come into English as "priest" and "presbyter," although the medieval and modern Christian priests have ritualistic and sacerdotal functions that the presbyter of the early church never thought of exercising. The other term is "bishop," from the Greek episkopos, "an overseer." It must be noted that in the early church these two titles did not designate two different offices. The fact that they were applied interchangeably to the same office is shown clearly in Acts 20:17, 28, where the elders of Ephesus who met Paul at Melitus are called both elders and bishops or "overseers." The same exchange of terms is found in Paul's letter to Titus, ch. 1:5-9, where in describing the qualifications for the leaders of the church, the terms "elder" and "bishop" are used synonymously. The differentiation that emerges between the term "bishop" on the one hand and "presbyter," or "priest," on the other, is of a much later time than either the apostolic or the subapostolic church. Indeed, Clement, the leader of the church at Rome just before the close of the 1st century, in writing his First Epistle to the Corinthians, knows only "presbyters" (chs. 44 and 47), and uses for the presbyterial office the term "episcopate," that is, "oversight" (ch. 44). Even more striking is the fact that Irenaeus, leader of the church of Lyons in Gaul about the year 185, still speaks of the predecessors of Victor, leader of the church at Rome, as presbyters (Eusebius Ecclesiastical History v. 24. 14).

Why then the two terms? It is clear that they designate the same activity. "Elder," or "presbyter," is evidently the title of the office; "overseer" is used to name the function of the office.

The Episcopate at Antioch.--The episcopate evolved out of the chief eldership (see p. 26), though not at the same rate everywhere. The monarchical episcopate seems to have emerged earliest at Antioch in Syria. It is not known what happened there after Paul's imprisonment about the year 60 or 61. Eusebius names the leaders of the church at Antioch as Peter, Euodius, and Ignatius (Ecclesiastical History iii. 36. 2; 22).

This tradition of Peter's primacy at Antioch, however, does not accord with the record of the book of Acts. Peter was in Antioch "dissembling" in the matter of Judaism, and was challenged by Paul for so doing (Gal. 2:11-21). The church was, of course, already organized at Antioch, and Peter was scarcely its leader then.

In Acts 13:1, 2 it is revealed that the early leadership of the Antiochene church was furnished by men of the spiritual gifts, the pneumatikoi. It may have been that vigorous men, coming to leadership there later, hastened the decline of the power of the men of the gifts, who as a class fell under suspicion. If this kind of leadership developed, the episcopate might well have crystallized into a commanding ecclesiastical order by Ignatius' time.

The Monarchical Episcopate of Ignatius.--Ignatius of Antioch was martyred about a.d. 116, in persecution under the emperor Trajan. Information concerning him comes from biographical material contained in the martyrological tradition of the church and dated some hundreds of years after his death. Also, there are epistles attributed to Ignatius, as though written while he was on his way, a prisoner, to Rome, but these are of very doubtful authenticity. Philip Schaff, church historian, says of them: "These oldest documents of the hierarchy soon became so interpolated, curtailed, and mutilated by pious fraud, that it is today almost impossible to discover with certainty the genuine Ignatius of history from the hyper- and pseudo-Ignatius of tradition" (History of the Christian Church, vol. 2, p. 660).

In the martyrology of Ignatius, and in several of the epistles, the bishops of the churches are spoken of in terms of the highest sanctity and ecclesiastical authority. There occur in the Epistles such expressions as: "Live in harmony with the will of the bishop," "Your ... presbytery ... is attuned to the bishop as the strings to a harp" (To the Ephesians 4); "We must regard the bishop as the Lord himself" (ibid. 6); "Be zealous to do all things in harmony with God, with the bishop presiding in the place [eis topos] of God and the presbyters in the place of the Council of the Apostles. ... Be united with the bishop" (To the Magnesians 6); "Be subject to the bishop and to one another" (ibid. 13); "in subjection to the bishop as to Jesus Christ. ... Do nothing without the bishop" (To the Trallians 2); "Let all respect the deacons as Jesus Christ, even as the bishop is also a type of the Father, and the presbyters as the council of God and the college of Apostles" (ibid. 3); "Let no one do any of the things appertaining to the Church without the bishop" (To the Smyrnaeans 8); "He who does anything without the knowledge of the bishop is serving the devil" (ibid. 9). (See Loeb ed., The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1, pp. 177; 181; 201, 203; 209; 213, 215; 215; 261; 261, 263.)

Contemporary Testimony.--Taken at their face value, these statements from the extant Ignatian documents require us to conclude that the episcopate had already evolved into a monarchical authority at Antioch by the time of Ignatius' death. But these statements cannot be taken so seriously. One reason is that contemporary documents from the same region do not show the elevation of the episcopate that the Ignatian epistles indicate. For instance, a document produced sometime in the 2d century, called Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (Didache), gives no such elevation to the bishops. The document is not apostolic; its author is unknown. Since it is generally agreed to be Syrian in background it comes from the same environment and conditions as those of the supposed Ignatian letters.

But the Didache says of the episcopate only: "Appoint therefore for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord. ... Do not despise them, for they are your honourable men together with the prophets and teachers" (15; Loeb ed., The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1, p. 331). The bishops are not here classed above the men of the spiritual gifts.

About the same time Clement of Rome, and Irenaeus of Lyons some ninety years later, show that the leaders in the church in Rome were still being called "presbyters" at the very time Ignatius was martyred, and for seventy years thereafter. Therefore either the Ignatian bishop is a creation of a later hand or the men of the Spirit in Antioch were very quickly deprived of their leadership, an elected ecclesiastical leadership taking their place and developing a strong episcopate with the most remarkable rapidity.

Apostolic Succession.--A little before a.d. 200, Irenaeus, leader of the church in Gaul, developed a clear-cut theory of the episcopate. This he sets forth in book iii of his treatise Against Heresies. His thesis is that the apostles handed down the true Christian teaching to the bishops, who were supposed to have succeeded them. He holds that the bishops of churches founded by the apostles were the preservers of sacred tradition. In this thesis is the beginning of the theory of apostolic succession.

The Established Episcopate.--The first clear evidence of the bishop as the authoritarian leader of the various congregations is shown in the writings of Cyprian, bishop of the churches centering in Carthage in North Africa. Cyprian was martyred in a.d. 258. Eusebius, the church historian, calls all church leaders "bishop" from the very earliest times, but in doing so he is, of course, speaking from the point of view, and using the terminology, of a.d. 324, at which time the bishops were fully monarchical in authority virtually everywhere.

Causes for Elevation of the Bishop.--In reality, the successors to the apostles in terms of ecclesiastical authority were the presiding elders. It took years for the office of elder to evolve into the monarchical episcopate. The causes of its evolution are recognizable:

1. The City Bishop. The presiding elders in the largest city acquired in the church a prestige in proportion to the importance of the cities where they were. Although the group of believers in a given place was considered one church, there would be several congregations meeting in different places within the municipality. Since Christianity was an illegal society, incapable of owning property, each group made use of homes or hired halls for gathering places. Over this aggregation of small meetings the chief elder presided. The larger the city, the more honored was his position.

2. The Bishop and Scripture. The presiding elder was the custodian of Scripture and of the truths it contained, as well as purveyor of the apostolic "rule of faith." Copies of the Scriptures must have been relatively scarce, since they were produced by hand. The better and more complete portions of Scripture would be put into the hands of the chief elder as custodian. Thus he became an embodiment of orthodoxy, an exponent of the "faith which was once delivered unto the saints." Later persecution was directed against the bishop as custodian of the Scriptures, and those who surrendered the Scriptures under duress were branded in the judgment of the church as "traditors."

3. The Bishop and Orthodoxy. Since he possessed the Scriptures, the presiding elder became a standard of orthodoxy. As his office evolved into the later bishopric, he was looked upon as the successor of the apostles (Irenaeus Against Heresies iii. 3. 3) and the interpreter of truth. Hence his was the responsibility of protecting the church from the intrusions of heretics. The apostolic concern of John and Paul in opposing heresies has already been pointed out. (See pp. 33, 36 concerning the subject of early heresy). As shepherds of the flock, the chief elders of the churches used their rising authority to meet those who sought to divert the believers, and their success in so doing enhanced their power and influence.

4. The Bishop and Church Finance. The finances of the church were in the hands of the presiding elders. Just how the transition was made in respect to this item of administrative care, from the "seven men of honest report" of the early apostolic days to the chief elder and incipient bishop, is not clear. But by the middle of the 2d century the "president" was receiving the offerings and dispensing them, largely to the poor. This gave him great standing in the church, and thus enhanced the power of the rising episcopate. Justin Martyr says of the offering taken on the "day of the Sun": "What is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows, and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds, and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need" (First Apology 67 ANF, vol. 1, p. 186).

A letter written by the bishop of Rome, Cornelius, about the year a.d. 251, shows the extent of the charitable work of the church and the influence of the bishop who dispensed the largesses. The letter states that in the church at Rome "there are forty-six presbyters, seven deacons, seven sub-deacons, forty-two acolytes, fifty-two exorcists, readers and door-keepers, above fifteen hundred widows and persons in distress, all of whom are supported by the grace and lovingkindness of the Master" (Eusebius Ecclesiastical History vi. 43. 11; Loeb ed., vol. 2, p. 119).

5. the Bishop and Persecution. In times of persecution the leaders of the church became not infrequently veritable heroes in guiding the people, counseling them in their struggle against harsh civil authority, and setting an example of fortitude and courage. Concerning later bishops who, having survived the persecution of Galerius and Diocletian, were assembled at Nicaea for the great council of a.d. 325, the church historian Theodoret remarks that they "looked like an assembled army of martyrs" (Ecclesiastical History i. 6; NPNF, 2d series, vol. 3, p. 43). Bishops were there who had lost their right eye, which, for some, had been burned out with a hot iron; whose limbs had been crippled by various kinds of tortures; or whose right arm had perhaps been torn from its socket. This type of steadfastness under persecution, and the leadership it demonstrated, enhanced the power of the officials of the church.

6. The Decline of the "Pneumatikoi." There was a negative cause for the increase in power on the part of the official church leaders. This was the decline in the effectiveness and influence for good of the pneumatikoi, the men of the spiritual gifts. It cannot now be determined whether the decline came more from deterioration within the group or from pressure on the part of aggressive church officers, who may have felt interference with their executive functions on the part of men who traced the origin of their powers and gifts to the Holy Spirit Himself. Both factors doubtless worked together to produce the decline.

The decay among the men of the gifts is suggested as early as the time of the Didache, previously referred to. This document warns the believers what to do "if the teacher himself be perverted and teach another doctrine." The apostle [missionary] is to be received, "but let him not stay more than one day, or if need be a second as well; but if he stay three days, he is a false prophet. ... If he ask for money, he is a false prophet. ... Not everyone who speaks in a spirit is a prophet. Every prophet who teaches the truth, if he do not what he teaches, is a false prophet. ... Whosoever shall say in a spirit, `Give me money, or something else,' you shall not listen to him" (11; Loeb ed., The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1, pp. 325, 327). It is scarcely to be thought that such warnings would be uttered without a cause--the deterioration of the men of the Spirit.

The same situation is revealed in a sort of novel, produced probably in Rome, by Hermas, reputedly a brother of Pius, leader of the church in Rome about mid-second century. His writing, called The Shepherd, or Pastor, purports to be the visions and admonitions of one who claimed the gift of prophecy. It had high standing among 2d and 3d century Christians; there were those who pressed a claim for it to be included in the canon of the New Testament.

While Hermas claimed to be a prophet of God, he did not hesitate to point out the falsity of some who in his day were claiming to have spiritual gifts. For instance, "he who sits on the chair is a false prophet. And he, the false prophet, not having the power of a divine Spirit in him, answers them according to their inquiries, and according to their wicked desires, and fills their souls with expectations, according to their own wishes. ... He who inquires of a false prophet in regard to any action is an idolater, and devoid of the truth, and foolish" (The Pastor of Hermas ii, Commandment xi; ANF, vol. 2, p. 27).

Then follows a discussion of the qualifications of a true prophet, and a comparison with the characteristics of a false prophet. Again: "They praise themselves as having wisdom, and desire to become teachers, although destitute of sense. On account, therefore, of this loftiness of mind, many become vain, exalting themselves" (ibid. iii, Similitude ix, 22; ANF, vol. 2, p. 51, 52). In contrast, Hermas says of the true teachers: "And they who believed from the eighth mountain, where were the many fountains, and where all the creatures of God drank of the fountains, were the following: apostles, and teachers, who preached to the whole world, and who taught solemnly and purely the word of the Lord, and did not at all fall into evil desires, but walked always in righteousness and truth, according as they had received the Holy Spirit. Such persons, therefore, shall enter in with the angels" (ibid. 25; ANF, vol. 2, pp. 51, 52). A tribute is paid to the bishops: "Bishops given to hospitality, who always gladly received into their houses the servants of God, without dissimulation. And the bishops never failed to protect, by their service, the widows, and those who were in want, and always maintained a holy conversation" (ibid. 27; ANF, vol. 2, p. 52).

On the basis of the foregoing evidence, the 2d century is to be understood as the time when the effectiveness and influence of the men of the spiritual gifts were steadily declining, owing to abuses among their number and to the rising power and influence of the elected officers, especially the chief or presiding elder. This function of overseer was becoming so emphasized that the bishop developed as a distinct kind of ecclesiastical official. The Pastor of Hermas is to be understood as an effort on the part of someone in the church to reestablish the authority of the gift of prophecy. But the effort was vain. With the eclipse of the spiritual gifts and the taking over in the church of all authority by the regular officials, there came a decline in the spiritual strength and doctrinal purity of the early church.

There was another reaction against the decline of the pneumatikoi, in terms of a reform movement called Montanism (see p. 52). But the Montanists went to extremes, and fell under the condemnation of the church. Therefore their influence was hurtful to the cause of the men of the spiritual gifts, and worked rather to hasten their deterioration.

IX. From Ordinances to Sacraments

Baptism.--Baptism is the first ordinance that greets the reader of the gospel record. It was practiced by John the Baptist and by the disciples under the guidance of Jesus Christ, who was Himself baptized, and it was administered by the later apostles under the Great Commission.

But baptism has a more ancient history. Bathing was practiced upon those who were placed by the priests under a regimen of cleansing. In later Jewish times, at least, these ablutions were performed by immersion (see Mishnah Mik\waoth, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, pp. 423-462). Also, proselytes to the Jewish faith underwent a baptism by immersion as they were brought into the church of the Israelites. The Essenes seem likewise to have laid emphasis on ceremonial washings.

Therefore when John the Baptist came preaching his message of repentance, it was natural that he should offer a laving ceremony to those who responded to his challenging message of repentance. Much of his preaching took place in rural areas, indeed in the "wilderness," where there were few people dwelling. When the people came to John in repentance, confessing their sins, he led them into the river Jordan.

Jesus Himself submitted to baptism at the hand of His cousin John, not in repentance for His own sins, for He had none, but in connection with His work as Redeemer. It was His "to fulfill all righteousness" (Matt. 3:15), to enter into every step of Christian experience, not for His own salvation but for that of the world. By entering into this ordinance Himself, Christ provided his followers with an example, and at the same time in His own person He united the ordinance with the fact of salvation. Here also for the first time the gift of the Holy Spirit accompanied the rite of baptism.

After He began His public work, Jesus Himself did not baptize; His disciples performed this rite. The practice of baptism became a standard institution in the Christian church, and has continued ever since to be a means of initiating new members into the church, either at infancy, at an age of accountability, or at adulthood, according to the differing practices of various groups of Christians at different times.

That the baptism of John was not enough for those who became outright followers of Christ is evidenced by the fact that Paul rebaptized some who came to him at Ephesus, who had been baptized only with John's baptism, and, as Paul discovered, knew nothing of the Holy Spirit. He instructed them further in the Christian way, explained to them concerning the Holy Spirit, and rebaptized them. Thereupon they received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues (Acts 19:1-7).

Jesus, in His Great Commission to His disciples, commanded them to baptize converts in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. But baptism is frequently recorded as having been administered in the name of Jesus, as the central figure of the unfolding plan of salvation. This does not mean that the regular baptismal formula of the commission was not used; it means that the name of Jesus was emphasized in the work of the gospel. The baptism was by immersion, and from the early records, such as the baptism of the Ethiopian at the hands of Philip, and of Cornelius of Caesarea at the hands of Peter, it was a simple ceremony without any elaboration of ritual. In every recorded case of baptism, instruction was given before the rite was administered.

However, the church had not proceeded very far past the apostolic age until marked changes came into the rite of baptism. Not only was an elaboration introduced in connection with the administration of baptism, but its meaning and even the form of the ordinance underwent a change. By the middle of the 2d century, the writer of the Didache suggests that only living--that is, running--water be used for the baptism; and if baptism in either running or still water is not feasible, he suggests that pouring the water upon the head of the candidate is permissible (Didache 7). Here is a change in the understanding of the significance of the institution, because pouring never could represent properly the death to the old man of sin or the rising to newness of life that immersion portrays, as called for by Paul (Rom. 6:3, 4). The Didache also calls for trine immersion, apparently an elaboration that early became attached to the ceremony. Tertullian, about a.d. 225, speaks of the trine immersion of his day as an "ampler pledge" of the baptismal vow, and accompanies his assertion with a description of a most elaborate baptismal ceremony (De Corona 3; ANF, vol. 3, p. 94).

At about this same time there was taking place a far more significant change in the practice and meaning of baptism. Early in the 3d century Tertullian had maintained that there was no need for baptizing infants, because baptism was not necessary for their salvation. He preferred a baptism "when they have become able to know Christ" (On Baptism 18; ANF, vol. 3, p. 678). However, the very fact that he opposed baptism of infants indicates that it was being practiced at that time. Tertullian's younger contemporary, Origen (died c. 254), declared that baptizing children was a "tradition from the apostles" (Commentary on Romans, v. 9; Migne, Patrologia Graeca, Vol. 14, col. 1047). Almost at the same time Cyprian urged that baptism should not be withheld from an infant "who approaches the more easily on this very account to the reception of the forgiveness of sins--that to him are remitted, not his own sins, but the sins of another" (Epistle 58, To Fidus; ANF, vol. 5, p. 354). Particularly in the West, this concept that baptism washes away original sin inherited from Adam became the dominant reason for giving the rite to infants. Baptism came to be considered a saving ordinance. Without the application of the baptismal waters, the sinner, it was believed, was damned. Thus baptism was changed from a simple, symbolical ordinance, with a deep inner spiritual significance, to a sacrament.

It had become the practice for the chief elder, as his office evolved into that of a monarchical bishop, to have the sole right of administering baptism or of authorizing its administration. As baptism became sacramental, it enhanced the power of the bishop as one who had a supernatural power not possessed by other Christians. The simultaneous development of the Lord's Supper as a rite involving supernatural power (see below) also promoted this same trend in the elevation of the clergy. The bishop became a necessary agent in saving sinners; without his ministration there could be no salvation. This meant the re-establishment in the Christian church of a priesthood, an institution which had, however, become unnecessary with the inauguration of Jesus Christ as the High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary.

Thus there was unfolded a triple succession of errors: (1) the false doctrine of the inheritance of original guilt; (2) the perversion of baptism by changing the rite from a single immersion of an adult to a triple pouring of water upon the head of an infant; (3) the investing of baptism with sacramental significance, and the making of the bishop a sacramental priest--a travesty on the plan of salvation, a substitution for the priesthood of Christ, and an apostasy from the true Christian way. By the close of the 3d century this apostasy had become a fact in the church.

The Lord's Supper.--A parallel development took place in the case of the Lord's Supper. The fellowship meal was a commonplace among both Jews and pagans. The Hebrews were required to use the peace offerings in such a meal. The Passover supper was a meal whose elements were carefully prescribed, and that was eaten in the family group or in a group of friends who had come up together to Jerusalem for the feast. As the last Passover of Jesus' ministry approached, He expressed a desire to eat it with His disciples (Luke 22:15). Arrangements were made for it, and on Thursday night of the crucifixion week, the eve, or beginning dark part, of the 14th of Nisan, Jesus Christ ate the Passover with His disciples (see Additional Notes on Matt. 26 Note 1).

Probably early in the ceremony Jesus washed His disciples' feet. Later, He inaugurated the Lord's Supper. Taking the flat, thin, unleavened loaf of the Jewish Passover supper and the flask containing the "fruit of the vine," as the gospel writers invariably call the beverage of the supper, He shared these elements of the meal with His disciples. According to information provided by the apostle Paul (1 Cor. 11:23-26), Christ instructed them to partake of the bread and the "fruit of the vine" as representative of His body, which was wounded unto death as He bore the sins of the world, and the blood that He shed in dying for men. These emblems were to show Christ's death until he should return the second time.

However, abuses crept in. Within 25 years of Jesus' death, apparently it had become a custom, at least at Corinth, for the members of the church to bring to their meeting food to eat and wine to drink (see 1 Cor. 11:20, 21). For clannishness and selfishness manifested at these feasts, Paul rebukes the people. The feast accompanying the Lord's Supper was called the agapeµ, or love feast. Jude refers to it (v. 12) and at the same time indicates that there were adverse elements in the love feast. Doubtless, his and Paul's criticism of the love feast, and probably Christian feeling in general concerning the abuses, caused this feature of the rite to pass out of the experience of the church, and there was left the simple Lord's Supper. Early in the 2d century in the epistles of Ignatius (To the Philadelphians 4; To the Smyrnaeans 7, 8) the Greek word eucharistia, "thanksgiving," is used for the Lord's Supper. From this word is derived the English "eucharist," a technical term for the Lord's Supper.

With the ordinance of the Lord's Supper, still further developments appeared. As early as the 2d century the Didache called the Lord's Supper a sacrifice (14), and from the time of Gregory of Nyssa (In Christi resurrectionem, Oratio I) this expression becomes increasingly frequent. Thus the conviction grew that the Eucharist involved a repetition of the sacrifice of Christ.

Notice the transition: At first the Lord's Supper was a thanksgiving service, as the term "eucharist" clearly indicates. It was a memorial service, partaken of by those who believed they had already received the gift of salvation, for which they were manifesting their gratitude by partaking of the prescribed emblems. But gradually, through the steps indicated, the supper became a means of salvation, as a repeated sacrifice of the Lord. Thus the supper, like baptism, became a saving ordinance, and in the same way required an intercessor to administer it as a sacramental process. In the case of the Eucharist, as with baptism, the officiating intercessor was the bishop, who became a priest in the Old Testament sense or even almost the pagan sense. This shift from the supper as a recognition of salvation received to a ritual performed as a means of salvation, and from a thanksgiving service to a sacrament, was by no means an innocent development. It was an apostasy. Through this unauthorized and unscriptural change in the understanding of the nature of baptism and of the Lord's Supper, a Christian intercessory priesthood--a veritable contradiction in terms--became an ecclesiastical and sacramental necessity. Ambition for place, ever latent in human nature, made men in ecclesiastical authority all too eager to fill the necessity. A human priest in the Christian church became an accomplished fact by the middle of the 3d century.

X. Christian Worship

Nowhere in the New Testament is a Christian worship service described. There are hints in Acts 2 and 20, and in 1 Cor. 11 and 14, but for the program of worship, reference must be made to extra-Biblical sources.

Pliny and Christian Worship.--The earliest description given of a Christian worship service is from the pen of a pagan writer. Pliny the Younger was governor of Pontus, on the southern shore of the Black Sea. He had been appointed to the position by the emperor Trajan. Pliny is best known as a man of letters, who wrote such exquisite Latin that his epistles have been preserved. Among these is found an extensive correspondence with the emperor. Included is a letter he wrote describing his experience in Pontus with the rising sect of Christians (Letters x. 96), and telling the emperor what he was doing to stop the growth of the sect. In the course of his report he described a Christian worship service, using information he secured from some whom he had placed under arrest because they were accused of being followers of the Christ.

Christian Sources.--There also are two Christian sources that tell what happened when the Christians gathered to worship their Lord. One of these is the anonymous document Didache, already cited. While this does not give a sequence or program for a formal exercise of worship, it does give considerable information as to what Christians of the mid-second century were doing. The other source is Justin Martyr's First Apology (67), addressed to the reigning Roman emperor Antoninus Pius (a.d. 138-161). This gives a clear, sequential description of Christian worship as it was conducted at that time in the city of Rome, which was probably similar to that conducted elsewhere.

As earlier stated, the Christians, being an illegal sect, could own no property, and met in the homes of members (Rom. 16:5; 1 Cor. 16:19; Col. 4:15) or in hired halls. The meetings, at least in times of persecution, were held early in the morning (Pliny), probably to avoid detection. The weekly meetings were designed primarily for church members or for those sincerely interested. In the early days there was probably very little open advertising of Christian meetings and no endeavor to have a general public gathering. Pliny describes the meetings for worship as held "on a certain fixed day" (Letters x. 96; Loeb ed., vol. 2, p. 403), without identifying the day.

The Order of Service.--The service was very simple, with a minimum of elaboration or formality. The meeting opened with congregational singing, doubtless using the psalms (Eph. 5:19), and probably chanting or reciting some sort of simple formulary of Christian belief, as suggested perhaps by such passages of Scripture as 1 Tim. 3:16; 2 Tim. 2:11-13. Pliny reports that they "bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to do any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust" (ibid.). According to Justin Martyr there was a reading from the Scriptures, which by the 2d century included at least parts of the New Testament. This Scripture reading was evidently not merely a passage or two but rather lengthy excerpts. The need for this is easily understood when it is remembered that all copies of the Scriptures at that time were handmade, and comparatively few of the members of the church would have copies in their possession. The scriptural knowledge possessed by the rank and file of Christians would be gathered from what they heard read. The reading was followed by comments on the portions selected, by one appointed for the day--doubtless usually the chief elder, if he were present at that particular congregational meeting, or one of the associate elders. When the sermon was ended, the congregation rose together and prayed.

A comparison of this early Christian service with that of the Jewish synagogue (see Vol. V, pp. 57, 58) reveals such striking similarities that it is safe to conclude that in many respects the Christian order was patterned after the Jewish.

It appears from Pliny that after this part of the service had taken place the congregation was dismissed. After a brief recess only those reassembled who were baptized members of the church. These then celebrated the Lord's Supper. According to Justin Martyr, at this point offerings were taken.

To what extent the materials brought as offerings were used for the fellowship meal it is difficult to tell. It appears from 1 Cor. 11:18-22 that the members brought their own food to eat at the agapeµ preceding the Lord's Supper. Justin Martyr seems to hint that some of the materials brought as offerings were used in the Lord's Supper itself.

Portions of the bread and wine from the supper were taken to the sick; money, food, and clothing that had come in the offerings were distributed to the strangers, the poor, and those in prison for their faith. The responsibilities for the distribution rested with the presiding elder.

It seems that for many years some, at least, of the Jewish Christians continued also to meet Sabbath after Sabbath in the Jewish synagogues (Acts 15:21). Understandably, they would be reluctant to separate themselves from their non-Christian brethren in Judaism.

Further elaborations of the Christian service of worship are found in later documents, as in Tertullian's writings and in the anonymous Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, all of the 3d century and later.

XI. Days of Observance

The Sabbath.--Neither the inspired writers of the New Testament nor the writers of the 2d century focus on the matter of the day for Christian worship. Paul indeed admonishes Jewish Christians not to forsake their assembling together (Heb. 10:25). However, at this point in his writings Paul does not refer to any particular day of observance.

Christ attended the synagogue while He was on earth (Matt. 13:54-58; Mark 1:21-29; 6:1-6; Luke 4:16-38). His presence in the synagogue on the Sabbath was an act of personal worship on His part, "his custom," and not merely the seeking of an opportunity to instruct the Jews. This is evident from the whole tenor of His life and from the facts of the gospel record. It was not due to any disregard of the seventh-day Sabbath that Jesus did things displeasing to the Jewish leaders, such as healing the sick, and refusing to rebuke His disciples for gathering handfuls of grain, on the Sabbath. Rather it was in order to lead the Jewish people away from the unreasonable traditional practices that were making Sabbath observance a burden.

It is clear from the gospel record that Jesus Christ died just before sunset preceding the seventh-day Sabbath, rested in the grave over the Sabbath (DA 774), and rose early on the first day of the week. It was evidently in the divine plan that He should remain at rest in the grave over the Sabbath day of that last eventful week. While He was resting in the grave His followers were keeping the Sabbath "according to the commandment" (Luke 23:56).

Again and again it is mentioned of the apostle Paul that in the cities where he found himself in his missionary journeys he went to the synagogues on the Sabbath day. Doubtless he went there, not only to evangelize, but also to worship. On his First Missionary Journey, when he attended the synagogue on the Sabbath in Antioch of Pisidia, he spoke to the people there, and then found the Gentiles of the city requesting that he give them a service in the synagogue on the following Sabbath, which he did (Acts 13:14-16, 42-44). On the Second Missionary Journey, in Thessalonica, "Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them [the Jews], and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures" (Acts 17:2). In Corinth, where Paul spent eighteen months, he supported himself by working at his trade along with this fellow tentmakers Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2, 3). It is impossible to think that Paul, living with Jews, labored with his hands on the seventh-day Sabbath while there. Rather it is recorded that he was "in the synagogue every sabbath" (v. 4) until, because of the opposition of the Jews to his evangelizing, he withdrew (v. 7). There is every reason to believe that Paul would continue to observe the Sabbath after his expulsion from the synagogue, as before.

The gospel writers know only the Sabbath day as weekly day of worship. John records of himself that he was in the Spirit on the "Lord's day" (Rev. 1:10). But the day over which Jesus Christ is Lord is the seventh-day Sabbath (Matt. 12:8; Mark 2:28). This is the Lord's "holy day" (Isa. 58:13) and the Sabbath day of the Lord of the commandments (Ex. 20:10). Furthermore, the writer of the Gospel of John, who wrote the Revelation also, knows but one weekly holy day, the seventh-day Sabbath. The only other day John mentions is known by the simple title "first day of the week" (cf. John 5:1-9 and John 9:6-14 with John 20:1, 19). Since John wrote the Gospel about the same time as, or perhaps after, the Revelation, he had ample opportunity to give to the first day of the week a special title, or even to say that it should be especially observed by Christians. This he did not do. The very fact that the New Testament writers did not discuss the question of which day to keep is the best evidence possible that there was no question in their minds. Christians kept the seventh-day Sabbath during the time of the apostles. As ample evidence shows, many of them kept it for centuries.

The Annual Sabbaths.--After Christ died upon the cross, certain elements in the requirements in the law of Moses ceased to be operative. This is clearly foretold in Dan. 9:24-27, where it is prophesied that "in the midst of the week he [the Messiah] shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease." When the veil of the Temple was rent from top to bottom at the moment Christ died upon the cross, the Lord indicated thereby that the way to the true, the heavenly, sanctuary was open through the intercession of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the sacrifices that had been brought daily by the Hebrew people need no longer be offered (Matt. 27:50, 51).

At the Jerusalem Council Paul fought out the question of what should be required of the Gentile converts to Christianity, and won the case for a glorious Christian liberty (Acts 15). However, as already pointed out, this became a serious controversy in the church, and Paul had to fight his battle again and again. In his Galatian epistle he lays down the dictum plainly, under inspiration, that salvation cannot come by the works of the law (Gal. 2:16).

Paul also warned the Galatians against the observance of days. "Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years" (Gal. 4:10), is his mournful accusation. Whether he had in mind pagan ceremonies or Jewish holydays he did not say. Possibly it was both. There can be no question, however, as to what he meant concerning observance of days in the Colossian letter when he counseled, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come" (Col. 2:16, 17). Here he made it clear that the days of celebration that were typical of certain phases in the work of Christ and in the Christian experience to follow, were abolished as required observances with the coming of the Lord at His first advent. Paul spoke only of the "shadow" sabbaths, without further defining differences among sabbaths. However, Paul knew perfectly well the distinction made by Moses, found in Lev. 23:37, 38: "These are the feasts of the Lord, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, every thing upon his day: beside the sabbaths of the Lord, and beside your gifts, and beside all your vows, and beside all your freewill offerings, which ye give unto the Lord." Here are plainly pointed out two kinds of sabbaths: (1) the weekly Sabbath, belonging peculiarly to the Lord, the observance of which is commanded in the eternal moral law of Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:8-11); (2) the annual ceremonial sabbaths: two sabbaths related to the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the sabbath of Pentecost, the sabbath of the Feast of the Trumpets, the sabbath of the Day of Atonement, and two sabbaths connected with the Feast of Tabernacles. These annual sabbaths are described in Lev. 23. That they were specifically called sabbaths is clear from v. 11.

Therefore it must be concluded that there were certain performances abrogated at the cross:

1. The sacrifices of various kinds that were offered as part of the unfolding of the plan of atonement for the Hebrews.

2. Circumcision, a tribal sign administered before the age of accountability upon males of the Hebrew tribe, and upon male proselytes. This rite had to give way at the first advent of the Lord, because after Christ came there was no longer a tribe of people representing Christ. The family of Christ is made up of individuals drawn from every nation and from among men of every condition (Gal. 3:28, 29).

3. The annual feasts, with their ceremonial sabbaths, "a shadow" of the things of Christ to come, no longer required after the inauguration of the Christian church on earth.

However, just as the disciples did not fully understand that they need no longer remain connected with the Jewish church after the resurrection, or that they need no longer bring any animal sacrifices, so they evidently did not fully understand that the annual sabbaths were abolished at the cross. Not only is there evidence that the Christians of the book of Acts used these annual sabbaths as calendrical data, for gauging their days of travel and their appointments; there is a hint that some of the apostles were still participating, in a degree, in the ceremonies of the annual sabbaths. Thus Paul did not find it best to stop at Ephesus at the close of his Third Missionary Journey, for he felt that he must hasten on to Jerusalem in order to be there for the day of Pentecost (Acts 20:16). Paul wrote to the Corinthians that he would tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost (1 Cor. 16:8). On the other hand, in the admonition he inserted in 1 Cor. 5:8, "Let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth," he was evidently not talking about an actual observance of the feast of the Passover.

Easter.--However, the keeping of Passover and Pentecost, with a changed emphasis, became embedded in the practices of the Christian church. This provided the basis for a serious controversy in the church of the 2d, 3d, and 4th centuries. There emerged a sect, principally in the East who were called the Quarto-decimans. The word is of Latin origin and means literally, "Fourteenthers." These Christians insisted that the day of Christ's crucifixion must be celebrated annually in the spring by special observances, and always on the day corresponding to the one upon which Christ died. This day was the 14th of Nisan, hence the name "Fourteenthers." Thus they celebrated annually the same day the Jews observed as the Passover, but for a reason entirely different from that of the Jews, and without the particular ceremonies attaching to the Jewish Passover. However, Christian observance of the 14th of Nisan meant that they would be in their Christian meetings on the same day the Jews would be in their synagogues celebrating their feast. As a result of persecutions by the Jews, and the serious controversy within the church over continuance of Jewish rites, there developed, particularly in the West, a feeling against having any celebration in the Christian church come at the same time as a Jewish festival.

This reaction crystallized into a definite movement in the city of Rome about the time of the second Jewish war, in the reign of the emperor Hadrian, that is, about a.d. 130. The leader of the church at Rome at this time, occupying in simplicity an office later elaborated into the papacy, insisted that the Christian church must celebrate annually, not the crucifixion, but the resurrection of Christ, and that this annual celebration must fall always on the first day of the week, because that was the day of the resurrection. From this grew the practice of having an annual spring festival of the resurrection.

About a.d. 150 it was merely a matter of quiet discussion between East and West. But at the close of the 2d century Victor, the head of the church at Rome, insisted that all the churches must line up with the practice of the church at Rome, no longer celebrating the crucifixion but the resurrection, and avoiding meeting on the same day as the Jews by having the spring celebration of the Christians fall on the first day of the week, commonly called Sunday. So intense did Victor become in the matter that an attempt was made to excommunicate all the churches that would not line up with the Roman practice. When there was vigorous protest against this, the excommunication was withdrawn. But from then on the practice of celebrating the resurrection on Sunday in the spring became fixed in the Christian church, and eventually developed into the celebration now popularly called Easter.

Sunday.--Apparently, this annual celebration of the resurrection on the first day of the week played a part in the establishment of weekly worship on Sunday. The first indubitable evidence of regular Sunday worship is found in the writings of Justin Martyr (c. a.d. 155), who describes Christian meetings as taking place on the morning of "the day of the Sun" (First Apology 67; ANF, vol. 1, p. 186). The sect of astrologers was already giving recognition to the sun on the first day of the week of their weekly cycle, and the Mithraists probably by this time were using Sunday for the special worship of Mithra. How much inducement there was for the Christians to set up a day for celebrating the triumphant resurrection of Christ on the same day as the sun was being worshiped is now impossible to know. Some inducement, some borrowing, there must have been. In any case, by the middle of the 2d century Sunday was a weekly observance of many Christians, particularly at Rome.

This was by no means a keeping of Sunday as a sabbath. After the morning service Christians seem to have gone about their regular duties. It was apparently some time before the church sought to make Sunday into a sabbath. Tertullian, about a.d. 225, suggested avoiding worldly matters on Sunday, but the first record of a serious attempt in this direction was not made until the 4th century after Christ.

Thus there is no need to look in Scripture for the origin of Sunday. It came into the Christian church about a half century after the last of the apostles had died. Apparently it was the astrologers of the ancient East who first gave to the days of the week the names of certain pagan deities such as the sun, the moon, and Saturn. Historians describe this as the astrological week. This method of marking time slowly became popular among the Roman people. Evidences of such a week are found in the records of the wars of the Romans in the 6th decade before Christ, where the day Saturn is mentioned; in the ruins of the cities of Herculaneum and Pompeii; and in the writings of the Christian Justin Martyr, about a.d. 150, who speaks of Christians worshiping "on the day of the Sun" (First Apology 67; Migne, Patrologia Graeca, vol. 6, col. 429). See on Dan. 7:25.

At the same time the early church did not dispense with the Sabbath. Sabbath and Sunday were observed together for centuries, particularly in the East. Probably because Western Europe was evangelized largely from Rome, there is almost no evidence of Sabbath observance in that area. Sundaykeeping was the common practice wherever the influence of Rome extended.

Fast Days.--Besides these practices there grew up in the early church the observance of certain fast days. These are mentioned in the Didache (8) as the "fourth of the sabbaths" and the preparation, that is, Wednesday and Friday. Christians were admonished not to fast on the second and fifth days of the week--Monday and Thursday were Jewish fast days. Wednesday was supposedly the day on which Judas sold Christ, and Friday was the day of His crucifixion and burial.

XII. Divisive and Competing Sects

To the Jews, Christianity was a "heresy" (Acts 24:14). Just so, Christianity had its heresies, and the apostles warned against these, either as current dangers or as dangers to be guarded against in the future (cf. 1 Cor. 11:19; Gal. 5:20; 2 Peter 2:1).

The Montanists.--The Montanists were a sect whose spiritual objectives were of a very high order. The reason for the rise of the sect is to be found in the decline of the influence of the pneumatikoi, the men of the spiritual gifts. Evidences for the deterioration among these men have already been presented. Montanus was a man of strong spiritual influence who began preaching a message of reform in the province of Phrygia. He claimed for himself and his immediate associates the gifts of the Spirit, particularly the spirit of prophecy. They preached a revival and reformation, challenging the church to lay aside the worldliness that the Montanists realized had taken possession already in the subapostolic age.

Filled with reforming zeal, the sect appears to have spread rapidly. It seems to have gained the interest and attention of Hippolytus, who was leader of the stricter group in the church at Rome in the early part of the 3d century. Some gauge of the success of Montanism may be found in the fact that Tertullian, the great Latin writer and leader of the church of North Africa, accepted Montanism and entered wholeheartedly into its reforming spirit.

The Montanists used Paul's terminology to describe themselves as well as those who opposed them. They called themselves the pneumatikoi and their opponents the psuchikoi. They condemned second marriages, considering wedlock a spiritual union and expecting this union to be renewed after death. They insisted that all who were guilty of crimes be expelled from the church. They imposed rigid fasts, advocated celibacy, praised extravagantly those who had gone into martyrdom, and even encouraged the experience, holding it unlawful to flee from it in time of persecution. The Christian experience was to them not only the result of a miraculous beginning but a miracle constantly repeated; for them, nothing that arose out of natural living or normal processes of mental and spiritual development counted for Christian progress. They seem to have believed that the development of religious experience in the total community was to go through four stages: (1) natural religion, or the innate concept of God; (2) the religion of the Old Testament; (3) the incarnation of Christ and the gospel He demonstrated; (4) the coming of the Paraclete with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit of Pentecost, and particularly, with the coming of the gifts of the Spirit in Montanus. Thus they believed that their own particular experience was to mark the culminating experience of the church, and that the perfection of their message in the church would bring about its triumph on earth, at the second coming of Jesus Christ their Lord. This second advent they expected very soon after their rise and the propagation of their message.

The sect was at the beginning, and not infrequently afterward, called the Phrygian heresy. It was still in existence in the 5th century. Its impact on Christendom modified somewhat certain of the beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church. Montanist views reappeared in several different manifestations among the sects of the Middle Ages.

Partly because of their firm belief in the indwelling dynamic presence of the Holy Spirit, and partly because of opposition to them and their work by the administrative authorities in the church, the Montanists were critical of the growing Catholic view that the church consists of the bishops. Tertullian said, "`The Church,' it is true, will forgive sins: but (it will be) the Church of the Spirit, by means of a spiritual man; not the Church which consists of a number of bishops" (On Modesty 21; ANF, vol. 4, p. 100).

The Ebionites.--Attention has been called to the severe division that sprang up in the apostolic church between two groups: (1) Jewish Christians who insisted that all in the church, whether Jew or Gentile, should follow the law of Moses; (2) Jewish Christians like Paul, and the large majority of the Gentile converts who accepted Paul's teaching and welcomed the decision of the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15). The latter held that the Gentiles should accept salvation through Jesus Christ by faith, and were under no necessity of paying any attention to Jewish ritual. As the number of Gentiles in the Christian church increased, and the Jewish Christians tended to become a minority, those who were particularly zealous of the law became self-conscious as a group. They formed one or more sects, occupying in thought and practice the boundary area between Christianity and Judaism. The Ebionites are spoken of by Christian writers as the chief, if not the only, one of these Jewish-Christian groups.

The name of the sect was from a Hebrew word meaning "poor," and may have been a term applied at first to Christians in general, as Epiphanius insists. Later it was used to designate Jewish Christians (Origen Against Celsus ii. 1). It is entirely possible that the Epistle to the Hebrews was written to hold the Jewish Christians, who were willing to listen to Paul, faithful to the acceptance of Jesus Christ as Saviour and High Priest, in contradistinction to a group of Jewish Christians who insisted on retaining connection with the Jewish priesthood and rituals. If so, the Epistle to the Hebrews might well have signalized a split between the two types of Jewish Christians, with the result that the Ebionites crystallized into a legalistic and ritualistic sect, dependent upon the preservation of the external forms of Judaism. Schaff describes the movement as "a Judaizing, pseudo-Petrine Christianity," or "a Christianizing Judaism" (History of the Christian Church, vol. 2, p. 429).

The Ebionites must have been for the most part Pharisees. They were the natural successors of the Judaizers, whom Paul so vigorously opposed, as revealed in his Epistle to the Galatians. They accepted Jesus as the promised Messiah, the son of David, but only as a man, like Moses and David, and as the product, by natural generation, of the union of Joseph and Mary. According to their belief, He became conscious of His Messianic status at His baptism by John, at which time a divine spirit was given to Him. This teaching the 19th-century Unitarians recognized as similar to their customary beliefs concerning Jesus. Therefore some of them said that the Ebionites were the true early Christians, and that the early Christian movement was Unitarian. The Ebionite understanding that at His baptism the human Jesus received a divine spirit may constitute them the progenitors of later adoptionism (see Vol. V. pp. 912, 913).

They insisted upon maintaining circumcision and the whole ritual law of Moses as necessary to men's salvation. Eusebius notes that the Ebionites observed both the Sabbath and the Lord's day, Sunday (Ecclesiastical History iii. 27. 5). Inevitably, the Ebionites classified Paul as an apostate and a heretic. Some even maintained that Paul was a non-Jewish heathen, converted to Judaism, from which he fell away in later life from impure motives. They expected a soon return of Christ, to introduce a millennial reign of glory on earth, with a restored earthly Jerusalem as its seat.

Certain evidences indicate Gnostic tendencies among the Ebionites. These are probably traceable to an Ebionite group of far less influence and reputation than the main body, a class that represented a curious mingling of Jewish-Christian and Gnostic teachings.

The Ebionites are not known after the 4th century.

The Nazarenes.--This sect is not mentioned by the early writers in the Christian church, but only by men of the 4th and 5th centuries, such as Epiphanius, Jerome, and Augustine. These speak of the Nazarenes as a Jewish-Christian sect, represented by the Christians who fled to Pella at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem (see Epiphanius Against Heresies i. 2, Heresy xxix. 7). They are said to have believed in the universal obligation of the law and to have denounced Paul as a transgressor. However, in contrast with the Ebionites, they seem to have accepted Jesus Christ as the Son of God in the unique sense.

Although it is difficult to make a clear-cut distinction between the Nazarenes and the Ebionites, the Nazarenes may have stood somewhat closer to orthodox Christianity than did the Ebionites.

Gnostics.--What is known of Gnosticism is gained largely from early Christian writers who were hostile to it. Such men as Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, and Origen wrote against it because they saw in it teachings dangerous to Christianity. However, there have been found recently among the Dead Sea scrolls, documents that are thought by some scholars to contain evidences of early Jewish Gnostic thought. An even more direct discovery bearing on Gnosticism was made at Chenoboscium (Nag Hammadi) in Egypt, in 1946, where a library of Gnostic works constituting almost 1,000 pages of papyri was discovered. When fully published, this collection should greatly increase our detailed knowledge concerning Gnosticism.

Actually there was no Gnostic cult, but only Gnostic cults, under leaders with a following sometimes small, sometimes large. It was not a movement so much as a way of thinking. It had no over-all organization, and little consciousness concerning itself. Apparently it became a problem to the leaders of Christianity in the latter years of the apostolic age, and was still to be reckoned with in the closing years of the 3d century. See Vol. V, pp. 912, 913.

The Old Testament speaks of a knowledge of God (see Jer. 9:23, 24), but this is not a speculative knowledge. Rather it is an acquaintance with God resulting from an acceptance by faith of that which He reveals concerning Himself. Similarly the New Testament also knows a spiritual gnosis, or "knowledge," but it is no abstract philosophy. It is first of all practical: a spiritual knowledge of God, based on His own revelations and working in the experience of the Christians. "To know" may be taken as the theme of the Gospel of John. The apostle stresses the knowledge of God and records Jesus' statement that to know God and His Son is life eternal (John 17:3). John stresses the reality of Jesus, and the joy of fellowship in the knowledge of Him, in terms of actually seeing and touching the Lord (1 John 1:1-7).

To Paul, knowing Christ is a simple fact of experience, available to all. But there is also a deeper wisdom, the privilege of the mature, "perfect" Christian, which in turn develops perfection. "We speak," he says, "the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom ... : which none of the princes of this world knew" (1 Cor. 2:6-8). There is a "word of knowledge," a gift of the Spirit, concerning which Paul speaks (1 Cor. 12:8). For instance, the Jerusalem Council had ruled that the Gentile Christians should avoid any contact with idols, even to abstaining from the use of food offered to them. Paul points out that those of mature knowledge will understand that the heathen gods are spirits of devils, and that the idols set up to represent them are nothing. Therefore, it is a matter of no moment whether food has been offered to idols or not, and such food might be eaten except that its use would distress the conscience of the scrupulous (1 Cor. 8).

Besides the practical everyday knowledge of God essential to Christian experience and the deeper insight of the "perfect," there is false gnosis, which the leaders of the church are to avoid, and to help their people to avoid (1 Cor. 3:20, 21).

There are then two kinds of knowledge, the gnoµsis aleµthineµ, the true knowledge; and the gnoµsis pseudoµnumos, false knowledge. These are to be distinguished, because one leads to salvation, and the other to deception and damnation. The true knowledge (gnosis) submits to the authority of Scripture and is a kind of developed, perfected faith.

The false gnosis was pretentious and supercilious, claiming to be intellectual and quite beyond the reach of the vulgar. It propagated itself, not by logical proofs, but by asserting its intuitional authority. Having set forth its ideas, it then attempted to systematize them and to make of them a sequential way of thinking concerning the spiritual world.

From what is known of ancient Gnosticism, it can be seen that its roots struck deep and were widespread and various. Several theories of its origin have been proposed, but it is probably best seen as a product of the religious syncretism that was such a characteristic feature of the Hellenistic world. Its debt to Oriental thinking is apparent in its pronounced dualism, which set forth a perpetual struggle between light and darkness. In this, Gnosticism showed a parallel to Parsiism, which in turn was rooted in the older Zoroastrianism. Gnosticism's contempt for the corporeal and material is reminiscent of certain features of Platonism and of the older nature philosophies of Greece. The Judaism of the Maccabean and early Christian periods had in it strong speculative elements, which tended to move away from the delimitations of authoritative Scripture. Jewish Essenism and cabalism seem to have had some relationship to Gnosticism. As Gnosticism overran the boundaries of Christian thought it made use of the Christian Scriptures and borrowed Christian terminology to clothe Gnostic modes of thought.

With these complex backgrounds and relationships, and the spiritual and intellectual environments in which Gnosticism arose, there inevitably resulted a wide variety in the Gnostic system (if system it can be called), with strange combinations of compatibilities and repulsions. There were forms of heathen Gnosticism. There was a Gnosticism in which heathenism and Christianity sought to combine. There were combinations of heathenism and Judaism. Some types of Christian Gnosticism exhibited themselves as anti-Judaistic, and other types as antiheathen. Gnosticism was a speculative attempt at a philosophic method of explaining the unseen world; of accounting for the perplexities and frustrations of life; and of offering some sort of hope for a successful fruition to the whole program of existence.

It is difficult to know which Gnostic ideas were held in particular sections and which were generally professed. It is almost as difficult to find a common denominator applicable at once to all forms of Gnosticism, as for all forms of Hinduism or of Christianity. But the following ideas seem to have been representative:

1. Back of everything that might be known or imagined was a supreme god, a divine spirit. This god was a completely spiritual, noncorporeal essence. Some Gnostics indeed taught that their god was without essence or person. They applied to the concept such terms as abussos, "abyss," and buthos, "depth."

2. From this supreme god there were said to have proceeded, through uncountable ages, a succession of emanations, called aioµnes, aeons, which were expressions of the originating principle and served to make it less incomprehensible. Taken all together, these emerging emanations were called the Pleµroµma, "fullness."

3. All of this to which the divine essence was giving expression contained in perfection the divine principle of Light. But there was also a principle of Darkness, contesting with the Light, seeking to find a place in the universe of Light, and expecting eventually to conquer it. If such a thing were to happen, it would be an unimaginable eclipse of all things. Finally one of the aeons fell from the Pleroma.

4. Out of this appalling situation there resulted the creation of matter from the mingling of the fallen aeon with the lower world of darkness. The matter was formless, shapeless, chaotic, impregnated with darkness and therefore evil. The Demiurge, an almost unconscious cosmic force, identified by some Gnostics with the Jehovah of the Old Testament, gave form to this evil matter, and the material world resulted. The world, then, being material, was essentially evil, and was ruled by a more or less mechanical force.

5. The fall of the aeon and the formation of an evil world necessitated an act of salvation. This was undertaken by another aeon, identified as Christ. He descended to the level of the imperfect world, united temporarily with the man Jesus, probably at His baptism, and remained with Him until shortly before His death. The Christ-aeon accomplished the work of salvation by rescuing the fallen aeon, gathering out the light from the darkness of this world and revealing through Jesus hidden knowledge (gnosis) by which men may be set free from darkness and attain the sphere of light.

The Gnostic view of Jesus varied. Some taught as outlined above. Others declared that He had no material body at all, but that He was only an appearance. Consequently these are known as Docetists (Gr. dokeoµ, "to seem").

Some Gnostics taught that through the work of Christ, matter would be freed from darkness; others, that matter would be conquered and disappear, the spirits of men being liberated to be reabsorbed into the buthos or to become free spirits in the noncorporeal universe.

There were many forms of Christian Gnosticism, under a like number of leaders. Cerinthus was a Gnostic contemporary with the apostle John, whom John is said to have disliked particularly (see p. 36). The Docetists (see p. 58), against whom John seems unquestionably to be writing, were a serious problem to orthodox Christianity. Basilides, although later than the apostle Paul, presented a teaching similar to that against which the apostle wrote in his letter to the Colossians. Tatian, the composer of the first harmony of the Gospels, was a 2d-century Gnostic. Saturninus and Valentinus were troublesome Gnostics in the 2d century, as were Manes and Bardesanes in the 3d. A Gnostic group called Ophites is combated in the writings of Origen. By a.d. 200, some 65 different forms of Gnosticism were identifiable.

These Gnostic thinkers made free use of Scripture, interpreting it to suit their theories. They gathered up traditions that had grown up in the church and bent them to their purposes. They borrowed one another's writings, and built upon writings of any preceding thinkers they found useful. They used contemporary Jewish speculative writings, besides borrowing frankly from heathen philosophies, both contemporary and earlier.

The Gnostic way of thinking made an impact upon Christianity during the formative years of the church, and therefore influenced it greatly. By its speculations and distortions Gnosticism stimulated Christian thought to resist it and compelled Christian thinkers to seek to crystallize a theology. The Gospel of John must be considered an attempt at an early theology, probably written to resist nascent Gnosticism. Origen, however, is the first Christian writer to set down a fairly systematic theology.

In a parallel way, Gnosticism stimulated the Christian church to accelerate its formation of an authoritative organization, to develop a sacerdotal hierarchy, and to reach a measure of agreement regarding the canon. Its emphasis upon the spirits in the unseen world undoubtedly strengthened the Christian church in its borrowing of pagan ideas concerning the conscious state of the dead. It is very likely that its hierarchy of spirits helped the church to develop its veneration of the saints. Gnosticism led the church into a speculative and highly allegorical method of interpreting the Bible, to say nothing of causing Christianity to embrace tradition as a companion authority to Scripture. In so far as Gnosticism was anti-Judaistic, it accelerated anti-Judaism in the Christian church.

Because the Alexandrian school of Christian theology, under the leadership of Clement and Origen, used the term "Gnostic" in speaking of its way of Christian life and thought, stressing intuitive knowledge of divine matters, it has been thought that these leaders and their school were Gnostic in the sense of those just discussed. This was not true. The Alexandrian school was a speculative and philosophic school, heavily influenced by Platonism, and therefore known later as the Platonic school of Christianity. But the Alexandrian Christians fought the highly speculative Gnostics, rejected the theory of emanations and of the conquering darkness, and insisted upon the personality of God the Father, the deity of Jesus Christ, and, to a considerable extent, the personality of the Holy Spirit. They identified the Jehovah of the Old Testament, not with the Demiurge, but with the God of the New Testament, and gave to Scripture a place of supremacy. The Alexandrian school helped to develop the apostasy of the later centuries, but not through the channel of extreme Gnosticism.

The Docetists.--The Docetists (Gr. Doketoi, from the verb dokeoµ, "to seem," "to appear") were a group of Gnostics who held that the first coming of Christ to earth must be explained only as an "appearance." Docetism taught the evil of matter, and particularly of the flesh, and therefore could not entertain the idea that the divine could form a union with the human as long as men were in the fleshly experience. As a movement the Docetists denied the humanity of Christ entirely, regarding what was seen as a mere vision. Thus it was directly opposed to the highly practical, activistic Ebionism. Subtle in both thought and methods, Docetism was already a serious problem to Christian leaders in the time of Paul and John. Paul may have been dealing with some forms of Docetism in his epistle to the Colossians. It is impossible to doubt that John had the Docetists in mind when he wrote the challenge to his Christian brethren to recall that Jesus Christ could be touched and handled, and that He dwelt among men as a reality (1 John 1:1-3). Whatever later developments of heresy one includes under the term "antichrist," certainly it must be recognized that John here is speaking primarily about the heresy of the Docetists.

Nicolaitans.--The name Nicolaitan is first used in the message to Ephesus in the book of Revelation (ch. 2:6), where the "doctrine of the Nicolaitanes" is made the counterpart in apostolic times of the "doctrine of Balaam," which led the people of Israel into idolatry and fornication in the time of Moses (cf. Num. 24:1, 25; Rev. 2:14; PP 450-455). There is no history of this "doctrine," but, in the message to Thyatira, the woman Jezebel is said to produce the same sort of evils (Rev. 2:20) as were attributed to the "doctrine of the Nicolaitanes."

Later Christian writers concerned themselves with the term "Nicolaitans." Irenaeus, the earliest to discuss it (Against Heresies i. 26), named as the founder of a sect of that name, Nicolas, one of the seven appointed to care for the material administration in the early church (Acts 6:1-3, 5), who is described as a "proselyte of Antioch." Tertullian, Hilary, Gregory of Nyssa, and Epiphanius (Against Heresies i. 1, Heresy xxv) agreed in involving Nicolas, but with varying degrees of blame. One story is that Nicolas was extremely jealous of his beautiful wife, and to conquer this wicked feeling, he was led into the more repulsive sin of advocating promiscuity. From this, it is supposed that a segment of the church, apparently Judaeo-Christians, were led into sins parallel to those into which Balaam's scheming led the Hebrews.

It must be noted that the very trespasses against which the Lord warned in His writings to Pergamos and Thyatira were among those forbidden by the Jerusalem Council: "that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, ... and from fornication" (Acts 15:29). It would seem that the Nicolaitan problem may have already emerged at the time of the council, perhaps in an incipient form. Facing similar issues at Corinth, Paul apparently did not see them as features of a definite movement (1 Cor. 5:1-6, 8; 10:5-11), although in ch. 10:8 he referred specifically to the experience of Israel with Balaam.

But Peter (2 Peter 2:9-22) and Jude (vs. 4-13) spoke bitterly of members of the Christian community who in early times were guilty in the love feasts (agapeµ), then connected with the Lord's Supper, of the evils ascribed to the Nicolaitans. See on Rev. 2:6.

It is a strange coincidence that under the instigation of the Jews in the latter part of the 2d century and the early part of the 3d, charges of repulsive misconduct were brought against Christians in connection with their feasts. These charges, similar to those attributed to the Nicolaitans, were leveled by the pagans (Origen Against Celsus vi. 27; Tertullian Ad Nationes i. 14) against the Christians. Aside from these accusations, there can hardly be a doubt that the transgressions attributed to the Nicolaitans existed within a certain group in the early church. The question to be answered concerns the extent to which the Nicolaitans constituted an organized, self-conscious movement. Concerning this there are only the hints given in the Bible references cited.

For the prophetic implications of the Nicolaitan experience in the churches of Pergamos and Thyatira see on Rev. 2:6, 14, 20.

XIII. Relation to the State

Tribal Religions.--It was in the nature of heathen religions to be essentially local or tribal. There were gods of the town and gods of the country, gods of the hills and gods of the valleys (1 Kings 20:22-30). As families, clans, and tribes formed what today would be called nations, certain gods or groups of gods came to be considered national deities.

The Romans clearly recognized this situation; as they expanded their empire, they were wise enough to apply the principle of toleration. Just as they permitted local peoples to retain as far as possible local forms of self-government, so they permitted them to retain their gods. They must, indeed, include in their lists of gods the chief gods of Rome, lest those gods be angry, and they must not be led by their religion to any restiveness against Roman rule. But with these stipulations they were allowed to continue their own forms of worship. In fact, the Romans, seeing an advantage in having more and more gods looking with favor upon Rome and its progress through the world, actually added foreign gods to their Pantheon.

The Roman and Jewish Religions.--When the Romans came in direct contact with the Jewish religion, particularly with the conquests of Pompey in the East, where he subjugated Syria and the Jews during the years 65-63 B.C., they encountered a religious problem. They were willing to tolerate the Jewish religion, but it was so completely intertwined with Jewish life, and so obviously made the Jews unwilling to yield to Roman domination, that they found toleration very difficult to maintain. Then too, the Romans could not understand the Jewish religion. Because the Jews talked about their God, but did not represent Him in any way, it seemed to the Romans that the Jewish religion was merely a creation of their own imagination. The Jews refused resolutely to have anything to do with the Roman gods, consenting only to pray for the Roman state. However, the Romans accepted this compromise and permitted the Jews to retain their worship. They installed Herod as king of the Jews. He was professedly Jewish, although only through a compulsion exerted upon his family by the Maccabean Jews years before.

There were a number of sects among the Jews (see Vol. V, pp. 51-53). These the Romans recognized as part of the Jewish religion, because the Jews included these sects in their religious economy. A sect like the Zealots was looked upon with suspicion because of its rebellious tendencies, and was frequently dealt with in a disciplinary way, but it was not outlawed except as a last resort.

Jewish Rejection of Christianity.--From the first, the Jewish leaders had rejected Jesus. After Christ had been put to death, they in turn rejected His followers and the church they formed. Hence Christianity had no legal position. There was therefore no logical way for the Romans to include Christ in their Pantheon, had they desired to do so. They could not accept Christianity through Jewish channels, because the Jews themselves repudiated it. Thus from the first it was an illegal religion with no status in law.

Roman Attitude to Christianity.--But there was something in Christian teachings that put it in a worse plight in the eyes of the Roman government. It was bad enough that the Jews were a proselyting people--the Romans found it necessary in the 2d century to pass laws forbidding Jews to proselyte. But the Jews did not claim to have a universal faith. They offered membership to the heathen on the basis of privilege. Not so Christianity. From the beginning Christianity claimed to be the only true religion, declared that it had a worldwide message, invited all to join who would meet the conditions of faith and rectitude, and insisted that it was universal in its scope. It gave no place to rivals, and was itself essentially intolerant of other cults. Hence Christianity presented itself to the Roman words as an imperial and conquering faith. It was at first scorned as ridiculous and then feared as a threat to Roman life.

The Jews had said, "We have no king but Caesar" (John 19:15). Not so with the Christians. They had only one Lord, the Lord Jesus Christ, and they would not apply the term "Lord" to the Roman Caesar. They taught boldly that their Lord Christ would return as King of kings and Lord of lords and conquer the universe. Whether or not they said so plainly, it was implicit in their teaching that no earthly empire, even that of Rome, could stand in the presence of such a King (cf. Dan. 2:34, 35, 44, 45). The Roman Empire was a state, self-conscious and secure in its feeling. It had no successful competitors near its Mediterranean heartland. The state must be the chief concern of every citizen. The emperor, no matter how weak, silly, or evil he might be, personified the power and glory of the Roman state. On the part of such a state there could be no toleration of any sect, however sane, which had at the center of its teaching a belief in a supreme and divine King who would sometime overthrow all states, all dominions, and all powers.

Christianity challenged Roman society to a better way of life and thereby irritated that society. The ancient Romans, who understood the value of morality, had a stern ethic. But Christian morality was not of the Roman type, nor was it a development of the Roman thesis concerning values in life. Furthermore, the Romans of New Testament times were not living consistently with their older ethic. Therefore the life of the Christians was a constant rebuke to the Romans. They did not understand the Christian way of life; while they might have a grudging respect for what they did not understand, they hated it.

Christianity an Illicit Religion.--The Jews resented Christianity for numerous reasons. They feared lest the Christians would bring the wrath of the Romans down upon the Jews themselves. They hated the Christian's Christ as a rival to their expected Messiah. They hated Christians the more because they took Gentiles into their fellowship. Hence, at every opportunity the Jews made trouble for the Christians, in so far as it was in their own power to persecute them in the land of Palestine, and elsewhere, by stirring up mobs to riot against the Christians. A number of instances of this are seen in the book of Acts. A document, Martyrdom of Polycarp, tells the same story of the city of Smyrna in the 2d century. In the 3d century Tertullian calls the Jewish synagogues "fountains of persecution" (Scorpiace x; ANF, vol. 3, p. 643).

Relationships being what they were, it is needless to search Roman law to find any decree against the Christians. No decree was needed. The Christians simply had no legal standing. In later years policies were developed against the Christians, and these policies became increasingly severe. The first attacks of Roman officialdom against the Christians were sporadic, the result, not of policy, but of whim or spite on the part of emperors. Such were the persecutions levied against the Christians by Nero (c. a.d. 64) and Domitian (c. a.d. 95).

Roman Policies: Persecution From Whim.--The Roman historian Tacitus (Annals xv. 44; cf. Suetonius Nero vi. 16) recounts that justly or otherwise, Nero was blamed for burning the city of Rome. To divert the accusation from himself, he laid the blame at the door of the Christians. Numbers of the followers of Jesus were burned to death in the city of Rome, some being used as torches to light the night parties held in the gardens of Nero. The persecution doubtless extended somewhat through the provinces, although of this there is little record. As has been pointed out, Peter and Paul both perished in the city of Rome as a consequence of Nero's persecution (see pp. 30, 35).

The next persecution of the Christians at the hands of the Romans probably arose out of the spite of the emperor Domitian, an unstable and capricious man. He may have found Christians even in his own household. For this or other reasons, he turned upon the sect. It has already been noted that John was exiled to the Isle of Patmos during the reign of this emperor. Persecution under Domitian was probably not widespread nor too destructive, but it was a trouble to the church, and agony to those who suffered directly.

Exercise of Police Power.--The first clear-cut policy laid down by a Roman emperor in dealing with the Christians was enunciated by the emperor Trajan (a.d. 98-117). Trajan's friend and client, Pliny the Younger, was governor of Pontus, on the southern shore of the Black Sea. Pliny was deeply concerned over the spread of Christianity in his province. Temples were being neglected; merchants who dealt with sacrificial animals and materials for the temple worship were complaining that their business was suffering sadly. Pliny began therefore to deal with the Christians. When he found those who were willing to admit that they were members of that faith, he put them to death. To be sure of himself, he wrote to his friend the emperor and asked him to approve what he was doing. Pliny's letter is found in the standard collection of his writings (Letters x. 96). In this letter he gives an interesting description of Christian worship, already referred to, and then tells how he has been dealing with the Christians. Supplicium, the Roman sentence of death, has been executed upon them.

Trajan wrote back (Pliny Letters x. 97) approving what his representative had done in Pontus. But the emperor, generally a good and fair man, made this stipulation: No one should be put to death as a Christian unless he freely admitted that he was such, or unless enough witnesses were at hand to prove that he was. He must not be convicted on hearsay, but witnesses must appear against him, if their testimony was to stand. This policy was nothing more than the application of ordinary police powers to a problem of society. Trajan would not have called this persecution. The Christians, having no place in society, should be eliminated. If this were not done, they might develop into a real danger. Pliny reported that his method with the Christians was successful and that temple worship was being resumed.

This exercise of police power ordered by Trajan continued to be the policy of the Roman Empire in controlling Christianity for the next 150 years. It was a rather contemptuous policy, because the Roman government had not yet learned to take Christianity seriously as a movement. Under it Christians were persecuted during the reigns of the otherwise beneficent emperors Antoninus Pius (a.d. 138-161) and Marcus Aurelius (a.d. 161-180). These persecutions were carried out partly through mob violence, oftentimes at the instigation of Jews, and partly through the pagan zeal of local governors, but with the knowledge and consent of the emperors.

Policy of Extermination.--In the middle of the 3d century the Roman policy changed, and for the worse. The government had learned that it must take seriously the spreading Christian movement. The emperor Philip the Arabian was said to have been a Christian (Eusebius Ecclesiastical History vi. 34). Toward the end of his short reign occurred the thousandth anniversary of the founding of the city of Rome, with a great resurgence of Roman patriotic feeling. Decius, the political rival of Philip and his successor at the crest of that wave, believed that the Christians had favored Philip. Therefore in the year a.d. 250 he inaugurated against them a policy of extermination. His severe and bloody persecution of the Christians was repeated by the emperor Valerian some seven or eight years later.

The Final Persecution.--By this time Christians had grown popular and had increased extraordinarily in number. This increase continued in the years of comparative peace that followed the persecution under Valerian, a peace that was terminated by the severe persecution under Diocletian and Galerius, beginning in the year a.d. 303 and continuing for ten years. This persecution marked another change of policy, in the sense that it represented an attempt at utter extermination; it was a case of war between bitter enemies. In that war the pagan empire lost.

The Policy of Toleration.--Constantine became emperor, and in a.d. 312 emerged as a friend of Christianity. The next year, when he issued his famous edict of toleration, Christianity found itself not only free to propagate but soon to become the exclusive religion of the empire. Constantine inaugurated the extraordinary new policy of union of church and state, the effect of which, although materially beneficial to the church, was more adverse spiritually than any persecution it had ever suffered.

Attitude of Church to State.--In an examination of the attitude of the church toward the state during the centuries when Christianity was an illicit religion, with no official standing in society, it must be remembered that the church was looking in those early years, not for an established place in the world, as was later taught by Origen and Augustine, but for a place in the kingdom of heaven, with Jesus Christ the Ruler. Therefore, the attitude of the Christians was one of patient endurance until Christ should rescue them.

Although Christian writers of the first few centuries are rarely found quoting Christ's significant statement, recorded in Matt. 22:21, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's," they applied the admonition in their relation with the empire. Paul exhorted the church in the same direction when he wrote: "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. ... Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers" (Rom. 13:1-6). Peter says, "Honour the king" (1 Peter 2:17). Hence even when their religion was illegal, the Christians sought to live as good citizens in an inimical environment, applying in everyday living the ethics exhibited in the life of Jesus and contained in the example and teaching of the apostles. They gained a reputation for purity of life and for kindliness to neighbors. While the government hated and eventually dreaded Christianity more and more, the populace appreciated more and more the kind of life that Christianity represented. When haled into court, in response to the query of the judges the Christians often answered simply, "I am a Christian," and went to their death, with smiles amid their suffering, admonishing their fellow Christians to be faithful and appealing to pagan onlookers to walk with them in following their Lord and Master Jesus Christ. Christians who witnessed the death of such martyrs remained amazingly faithful, and Tertullian could say, "The blood of Christians is seed" (Apology 50; ANF, vol. 3, p. 55).

An innumerable host of Christian martyrs died thus because Christ had said, "Render ... unto God the things that are God's." Peter had said, "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29); "If ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled" (1 Peter 3:14); "Think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: but rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings. ... If any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf" (1 Peter 4:12-16). Paul lived out in experience a consistent program for Christ; he listed for posterity a catalogue of his early sufferings for his Lord (2 Cor. 11:23-27).

Christians were, as a matter of principle, law-abiding citizens whenever the government asked of them that which was simple duty to do. But when the demands of government meant to deny Christ, to engage in false worship, and to live the kind of life that would have meant apostasy from Christian principle, they stood for the most part firmly for right, choosing to obey God rather than men, and to take flogging, imprisonment, or death in consequence. The issue was clear cut and the consequences certain: death here, but eternal life with Christ.

Separation of Church and State.--This was a philosophy of separation of church and state by necessity, with the thought that a degree of compliance with the pagan environment should be manifested under the necessity of the moment, until Christ should transport them to a new environment. Tertullian in the 3d century and Lactantius in the 4th insisted that the Christian church should keep separate from the pagan state.

But as Christ did not come, gradually a new philosophy developed. Christianity was becoming popular with the people and was gaining steadily in numbers. Christian teachers were listened to with more and more respect, and hope emerged that presently Christianity might take over the community of the world. Therefore, wherever possible, customs of the world were taken over and "baptized"--given Christian names and garbs. Care was taken to offend the state as little as possible. When the issues were clearly drawn, church leaders and those they led sought to stand firm. But where was the issue to be met? Expediency often postponed the moment of resistance, and more than once the issues were obscured by compromise. It can well be supposed that had the pagan Roman government been more complacent, Christianity would have followed such a program of compromise as to have learned to live content in a pagan environment, and perhaps eventually to have been completely modified by and absorbed into it. Fortunately for the church, the government remained a bitter enemy of the movement and Christianity was compelled to remain distinct, until Constantine led the Roman government into a surrender to the outward forms of Christianity.

XIV. The Impact of Tradition on the Church

The Apostles and Tradition.--The word "tradition" (Gr. paradosis) does not itself carry an adverse connotation. Paradosis means "that which is handed down." Paul urged the Thessalonians to "hold the traditions ... ye have been taught" (2 Thess. 2:15), and warned them not to fellowship with anyone who walks "not after the tradition which he received of us" (ch. 3:6). He gave expression to these sentiments because some had apparently come among the Thessalonians with a letter purporting to be from Paul, concerning the immediate advent of Christ (ch. 2:2). The "traditions" that Paul held praiseworthy were his own verbal teachings, by which the Thessalonians were to test any purported message from him, using also the letters recognizable as his own.

But Paul warned the Colossians not to be spoiled "through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ" (Col. 2:8). Peter reminded those converted to Christ through him that they were saved by the power of Christ from "vain conversation received by tradition" from their fathers (1 Peter 1:18).

Clearer yet is Christ's condemnation of tradition. When challenged because He permitted His disciples to "transgress the tradition of the elders" (Matt. 15:2), Jesus set the authority of the law of God over against tradition and showed where the tradition of the Jews had led them to break God's commandments (vs. 3-6). He quoted Isaiah (in the form preserved today in the LXX of Isa. 29:13) as speaking for the Lord, "In vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men" (v. 9), and enunciated the dictum, "Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up" (Matt. 15:13). He laid it down plainly that the Scriptures "are they which testify of me" (John 5:39), and used the writings of the Old Testament to establish His Messiahship in talking with the disciples after His resurrection (Luke 24:27, 44). Paul understood the Scriptures to be sufficient for salvation and for the building up of the Christian man (2 Tim. 3:15-17). John has a strong warning for anyone who should endeavor to take away from or add to the words of the book of Revelation, given to him by inspiration (Rev. 22:18, 19).

Scripture in a Subordinate Place.--Undoubtedly the misuse of Scripture by the Jews as they opposed Christianity, by the false prophets within the church, by heretics, and particularly by the Gnostics, somewhat weakened the faith of Christians in the authority of Scripture. By the early part of the 3d century Tertullian was writing that the Scriptures are not enough in meeting the attacks of heretics, because the heretics themselves use the Scriptures to support their views (The Prescription Against Heretics 14, 19). Irenaeus, bishop of Gaul, about a.d. 185 produced his remarkable work Against Heresies. In it he faces the same problem Tertullian met a few years later. As already pointed out, Irenaeus laid down the proposition that the truth of Christianity is to be found in the churches as founded by the apostles, who passed on the truth to the bishops who Irenaeus believes succeeded the apostles. This truth, "passed on," he held to be tradition, insisting that this must be a norm of truth, since the heretics were using Scripture (Against Heresies iii. 1-4). In his essay (The Chaplet, De Corona 3, 4) Tertullian makes the most forthright possible claim for the authority of tradition:

"Let us inquire, therefore, whether tradition, unless it be written, should not be admitted. Certainly, we shall say that it ought not to be admitted, if no cases of other practices which, without any written instrument, we maintain on the ground of tradition alone, and the countenance thereafter of custom, affords us any precedent. To deal with this matter briefly, I shall begin with baptism. When we are going to enter the water, but a little before, in the presence of the congregation and under the hand of the president, we solemnly profess that we disown the devil, and his pomp, and his angels. Hereupon we are thrice immersed, making a somewhat ampler pledge than the Lord has appointed in the Gospel. Then, when we are taken up (as new-born children), we taste first of all a mixture of milk and honey, and from that day we refrain from the daily bath for a whole week. We take also, in congregations before daybreak, and from the hand of none but the presidents, the sacrament of the Eucharist, which the Lord both commanded to be eaten at meal-times, and enjoined to be taken by all alike. As often as the anniversary comes round, we make offerings for the dead as birthday honours. We count fasting or kneeling in worship on the Lord's day to be unlawful. We rejoice in the same privilege also from Easter to WhitSunday. We feel pained should any wine or bread, even though our own, be cast upon the ground. At every forward step and movement, at every going in and out, when we put on our clothes and shoes, when we bathe, when we sit at table, when we light the lamps, on couch, on seat, in all the ordinary actions of daily life, we trace upon the forehead the sign.

"If, for these and other such rules, you insist upon having positive Scripture injunction, you will find none. Tradition will be held forth to you as the originator of them, custom as their strengthener, and faith as their observer. That reason will support tradition, and custom, and faith, you will either yourself perceive, or learn from some one who has. Meanwhile you will believe that there is some reason to which submission is due"

(ANF, vol. 3, pp. 94, 95).

Tradition Enthroned.--This is a most interesting argument. It is asserted that tradition must be accepted as authority for certain practices followed in the church of the early 3d century, for which, it is acknowledged, there is no authority in Scripture. Then it is claimed that these practices are authentic because the church is following them. Next, the authority of tradition is asserted because the church is doing them by a traditional authority. Tertullian's bold list of the things the church of his day was doing on the basis of tradition provides some idea of the extent to which the church had moved from the basis of Scripture by the 3d century.

Much more was claimed for tradition thereafter. The acceptance by the church of this extrascriptural authority opened the floodgates for the admission of an almost unending flood of unscriptural ritual and erroneous teaching. These have held the church in their grip not only throughout the Middle Ages but down to modern times, and not only in the older ritualistic churches but also to some degree in the more evangelical churches. It is still true, "In vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."

Veneration of the Saints.--The doctrine of the conscious state of the dead and the everlasting punishing of the wicked in hell are found very early in Christian history. Memorial services at the graves of the martyrs quickly came to be followed by prayers for the martyrs, who were considered to be in a sort of purgatory. Then, as it was believed that the perfect saints had gone on to eternal bliss, prayers were offered to the saints, that they might intercede for those still on earth. The veneration of the saints, and later the worship of the virgin Mary, were logical consequences of a misunderstanding of the doctrine of the nature of man.

The Atonement.--The atonement was also misunderstood. There came to be attached to it an atmosphere of magic. The emblems of the Lord's Supper were endowed, in the thinking of the people, with a kind of magical power. Soon it was supposed that the presence of Christ in the emblems imparted to the partakers the power of Christ Himself. The teaching of the Real Presence, that Christ Himself is personally in the bread and the wine, developed next, and out of it there easily grew the doctrine of transubstantiation--that the bread and the wine become the actual body and blood of Christ, not in outward appearance but in inward nature. As already noted, the emblems had become a sacrifice, whereby Christ was offered anew as the sin offering; the presbyters became priests, needed to perform the sacerdotal function of offering the Christ anew. See pp. 44, 45.

Baptism became a saving work to bring salvation to infants, who, it was believed, had inherited the guilt of their fathers. To administer this allegedly saving ordinance, a priesthood again was needed. Thus there was established, by a misunderstanding of the atonement and the rites that represented it, a human priesthood, which blasphemously took the place--in the belief of the people--of the priesthood of Jesus Christ in the heavenly sanctuary above.

A New Legalism and Asceticism.--With the development of anti-Judaism in the church there came, partly from a misunderstanding of certain statements of Paul (cf. 2 Peter 3:15, 16), a wave of antilegalism. This made the church, particularly in the West, willing to set aside the seventh-day Sabbath and to take a relaxed attitude toward other requirements of Scripture. This lasted in the church only long enough to do harm. It was succeeded by a kind of neolegalism, which brought the church back to an observance of festivals that took the place of the annual sabbaths of the Old Testament and to an observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, as a memorial of Christ's resurrection. Ritualistic trimmings were added to the ceremonies developed in the church, as seen in Tertullian's writings quoted previously, partly under the pressure of borrowings from paganism. From a misunderstanding of what Paul said in 1 Cor. 7, the church came to look upon celibacy as an experience of devotion, and various ascetical practices gave zealous Christians a new standard of zeal. Fasting became a necessity for salvation. Eventually enthusiasts, dissatisfied with the churches, fled to the desert and became hermits, practicing celibacy and other forms of asceticism. They became eventually so numerous that it was necessary to form them into communities. Thus monasticism, with its attendant evils, became an institution of the church.

Under the pressure of anti-Judaism the seventh-day Sabbath fell gradually into disrepute; even more quickly, the distinction between clean and unclean foods was given up completely. With the elaboration of ritual, with the change of the presbyters into priests, and with an over-all massive borrowing from paganism, Christianity so lost its original nature and complexion that had the apostles come back to life, they would scarcely have been able to recognize the system they helped to found. Christianity in its official structure and general nature became by a.d. 400 little more than a pagan mystery cult. Lessons of warning for the remnant church may be found in the experiences of the early church with the state with society.

XV. The Spread of the Gospel

The Church as a Missionary Enterprise.--A view has already been given, in telling of the later work of the apostles, of the extent of gospel preaching by the close of the first century. The records are obscure for the 2d century. There was a thriving Christian congregation in the Rhone Valley of present-day France by the last third of the 2d century. Christianity was prospering in the East at the same time. The opening of the 3d century revealed strong Christian movements in North Africa, and some Christianity in Spain and Britain. By the beginning of the 4th century churches were established along the Rhine. Incidental information in early Christian writings shows a gradual spread of Christianity, with the planting and sometimes the extinction of churches under persecution, and a society slowly beginning to become Christianized. By the time Christianity was legalized, Christians doubtless could be numbered by the millions. Church buildings were in use from the 3d century on. That the churches were not established in the purity of apostolic Christianity, but with the nature and complexion of the apostasies into which the church had fallen, must be obvious. Water cannot rise higher than its source; new churches naturally followed the parent churches that had brought them into existence and nurtured them.

The Gospel Message in Extension.--But there is an arresting statement in the writings of the apostle Paul. He speaks of the "hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven" (Col. 1:23). Here is a strong suggestion that the progress of the missionary work of the church was not measured in the early years by the permanent churches that are known historically. It can well be believed that under the power of the Pentecostal Spirit, and in apostolic zeal and courage, the message of the gospel was quickly carried to the whole known world, and perhaps farther; and that although it did not everywhere result in the establishment of permanent Christian communities, it served the purpose of warning men that they should now turn to the Messiah, who had just been crucified, had risen, and had ascended to heaven, where He was carrying on His mediatorial work for all who would turn to Him. If so, this must be thought of as parallel to the warning message that is to be given to the entire world before the second coming of Christ (Matt. 24:14; Rev. 14:6-12), and which is now in progress.

Bibliography

Sources

The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Translations of the Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325, ed. by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. 10 vols. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1885-1887. A collection of the writings of the early Christians, translated from the Greek and Latin. This is the American edition of the English Library of the Ante-Nicene Fathers.

Ayer, Joseph Cullen. A Source Book for Ancient Church History. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1913. A very useful collection of excerpts from ancient sources of church history, classified, with notes and index.

Hefele, Charles J. A History of the Councils of the Church. 5 vols. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1871-96. An excellent view of the church councils to a.d. 800, with the text of the canons, historical background, and critical notes. Bishop Hefele was a Roman Catholic opponent of the dogma of papal infallibility.

Josephus, Flavius. Works. See Vol. V, p. 81.

Kidd, B. J. Documents Illustrative of the History of the Church (to a.d. 461). 2 vols. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1920-23. A useful collection of source excerpts.

Lake, Kirsopp, tr. The Apostolic Fathers. An English Translation. 2 vols. London: Heinemann, 1912. The writings of the earliest Church Fathers to the middle of the 2d century. A part of the Loeb Classical Library, this edition contains the Greek text with English translation.

Loomis, Louise R., tr. Book of the Popes. New York: Columbia University Press, 1916. An ancient collection of statements concerning the earliest heads of the church in Rome, commonly known by its Latin title, Liber Pontificalis.

Pliny The Younger. Letters. With an English Translation by William Melmoth. 2 vols. London: William Heinemann, 1931, 1935. (The Loeb Classical Library.) These Latin literary masterpieces give the Roman setting in which Christianity arose. They include a short but complete description of early Christian worship, the first one extant.

Schaff, Philip. The Creeds of Christendom. 6th ed. 3 vols. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1890. A valuable collection of the Greek, Latin, and Protestant symbols and creeds.

Shotwell, James T., and Loomis, Louise Ropes. The See of Peter. New York: Columbia University Press, 1927. A valuable collection of every source statement touching upon the theory that Peter founded the church in Rome.

Suetonius. The Lives of the Caesars. See Vol. V, p. 81.

Tacitus. Works. See Vol. V, p. 81.

Authorities

Allen, A. V. G. Christian Institutions. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1987. A thorough presentation, from the sources, of institutional developments in the church and the factors that produced them.

Angus, S. The Mystery Religions and Christianity. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1925. A useful study, giving the pagan religious environment of Christianity and making instructive comparisons.

Beet, W. E. The Early Roman Episcopate to A.D. 384. London: Kelly, 1913. A reliable presentation of the development of the episcopate in the church in Rome.

Bury, J. B. A History of Freedom of Thought. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1913. The idea of freedom in human thinking and its relation to the church as an institution in society.

Canfield, L. H. The Early Persecutions of the Christians. New York: Longmans, 1913. A careful analysis of the sources dealing with the first persecutions with copious quotations from the relevant materials.

Carlyle, A. J. The Christian Church and Liberty. London: Clarke, 1924. This documented work shows the progress of the concept of freedom in the church.

Case, Shirley Jackson. Evolution of Early Christianity Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1914. A discussion by a liberal thinker of the development of Christianity as a movement in history.

Cumont, Franz. The Oriental Religions in Roman Paganism. Chicago: Open Court Publishing Company, 1911. The field of Roman religions is one in which the author is expert, especially Mithraism. This is a thorough discussion of the subject.

Dill, Samuel. Roman Society From Nero to Marcus Aurelius. London: The Macmillan Company, 1904. A readable, scholarly portrayal of the society within which Christianity grew and spread.

Döllinger, John J. I. von. First Age of Christianity and the Church. 2 vols. London: Gibbings and Company, 1906. A good, unbiased presentation by a Roman Catholic.

Duchesne, Louis. Early History of the Christian Church. London: J. Murray, 1909-24. A Roman Catholic abbot of broad mind and independent thinking presents with scholarly care the emergence of the early church.

_______. Christian Worship: Its Origin and Evolution. 2d ed. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1912.

Fisher, George P. History of Christian Doctrine. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1986. A useful history of the development of theological concepts in the church.

Foakes Jackson, F. J. Rise of Gentile Christianity. New York: Doran, 1927. This work shows the contrast between Jewish and Gentile Christianity and how and why the latter developed as it did.

_______, Lake, Kirsopp. The Beginning of Christianity: Part I, The Acts of the Apostles. 5 vols. London: Macmillan & Co., Ltd., 1920-33. A scholarly examination of early Christianity on the basis of the book of Acts.

Frielaender, Ludwig. Roman Life and Manners Under the Early Empire. 4 vols. London: Routeledge, 1908-13. The most detailed and informative work on the subject.

Gwatkin, H. M. Early Church History to A.D. 313. 2 vols. London: Macmillan & Co., Ltd., 1909. A discussion of the early church dealing mainly with the writers.

Hardy, E. Christianity and the Roman Government. London: Longmans, 1894. An old but still usable discussion of relations between the early church and the Roman imperial government.

Harnack, Adolf von. Constitution and Law of the Church in the First Two Centuries. London: Williams & Norgate, Ltd., 1910. A series of essays analyzing developments in the organization of the early church.

_______. History of Dogma. 7 vols. London: Williams & Norgate, Ltd., 1894-1903. A thorough discussion of the beliefs of the church as they have emerged in history.

_______. Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries. 2d ed. 2 vols. London: Williams & Norgate Ltd., 1908. A careful, full discussion of the geographic spread of the church, thoroughly documented.

_______. What Is Christianity? London: Williams & Norgate, Ltd., 1901. An attempt to find out what is the real "being" of Christianity, by analyzing the historic experience of the church.

Hatch, Edwin. Influences of Greek Ideas and Usages Upon the Christian Church. London: Williams & Norgate, Ltd., 1890. This work portrays the environment of the early church and its effect.

_______. The Organization of the Early Christian Churches. London: Longmans, 1881. A frank treatment which shows the importance of the early presbytery.

Kidd, B. J. A History of the Church to A.D. 461. 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1922. A scholarly treatment.

Klausner, Joseph. From Jesus to Paul. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1943. A scholarly discussion of the world of Jesus and Paul from the Jewish point of view, stressing Paul as the real founder of the church in its Gentile progress.

Krüger, G. History of Early Christian Literature in the First Three Centuries. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1897. A treatment of the sources for early church history and theology, of a higher critical tendency.

Latourette, Kenneth Scott. A History of the Expansion of Christianity. 7 vols. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1937. A sympathetic history of Christian missions by a missionary and scholar.

Lea, Henry C. History of Sacerdotal Celibacy in the Christian Church. 2d ed. 2 vols. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1907. A useful treatment of asceticism and its effect upon the later church.

McGiffert, A. C. History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age. 2d ed. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1899. This book keeps to the 1st century of the Christian Era, bringing in what there is from extra-Biblical sources.

Newman, John Henry Cardinal. Essays on the Development of Christian Doctrine. London: B. M. Pickering, 1878. A convert to Roman Catholicism frankly shows how its environment shaped the belief and formation of the Western Church.

Rainy, Robert. The Ancient Catholic Church (A.D. 98-451). New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1902. A careful, informative tracing of developments, mainly institutional, in the church, East and West, immediately after the apostles.

Ramsay, William Mitchell. The Church in the Roman Empire. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1893. An expert in the life of Paul presents the Roman environment of the church, and the reciprocal effects.

_______. The Cities of St. Paul. New York: A. C. Armstrong and Son, 1908. Presents a wealth of background material regarding the cities and provinces in which Paul accomplished his missionary tasks.

_______. St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1906. A discussion of Paul and the political and social world in which he moved.

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. 7 vols. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1882-1910. One of the best histories of the Christian Church; scholarly, understanding, and spiritual. Excellent for the early period (vols. 1 and 2).

Schürer, Emil. History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ. 5 vols. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1891. A still indispensable work, in full detail, with copious notes.

Thompson, R. E. The Historic Episcopate. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1910. The development of the eldership in the early church and the use of the episcopate, from the Presbyterian point of view.

Workman, H. B. Persecution in the Early Church. London: Kelly, 1906. A popular presentation, with useful notes leading to the sources.

I. From Republic to Empire

About 500 B.C. Rome became, at least nominally, a republic. From time to time strong leaders arose, but an ever-present fear of autocratic power preserved intact the form, and to a surprising extent the fact, of republican government. However, during the two centuries prior to the birth of Christ social and political problems that followed in the wake of conquest made the far-flung empire ever more difficult to administer on the basis of a form of government that had proved at least more or less satisfactory in the days when Roman interests were confined to Italy.

By the first century b.c., these social and political complexities called for a change in the political structure of the state and thus paved the way for a contest of power among the national leaders of the day. But, as yet, none of the contestants dared assume the title of a monarch. It was popular fear that Julius Caesar aspired to assume the title and prerogatives of that office that led to his assassination on the ides of March, 44 B.C. That event precipitated a state of anarchy that continued for nearly fifteen years and that, at other times, would have been the signal for the collapse of Roman power. That such a result did not follow must be attributed to the fact that there remained no tributary people or foreign foe energetic enough to rebel against Roman authority. The provinces remained supine in this moment of political prostration. Though impaired by a thousand buses, the Roman financial structure remained intact during this crucial period. What was left of the ancient, solid Roman character and of Roman legal and administrative skill on the lower levels, particularly in the municipalities, must be credited with saving Rome as a nation and as a world government. In spite of internal turmoil, the iron republic stood.

The Second Triumvirate.--A Second Triumvirate--that is, a government by three men--was formed in the vacuum left by the First Triumvirate (see Vol. V, p. 37), or, more particularly, by the death of Julius Caesar. Antony, a partisan of Caesar's, took possession of his dead colleague's wealth and the leadership of his troops in the vicinity of Rome. Caesar's grandnephew and heir, Octavian, then a youth of eighteen, asserted his rights, and by an unexpected display of political acumen succeeded in counteracting the growing power of Antony. Eventually, these men accommodated their differences and formed an alliance which included Lepidus, another rising political figure. This alliance became known as the Second Triumvirate. By mutual agreement Octavian, who had taken the name Julius Caesar Octavianus, was granted control of Italy and some western provinces. Lepidus was assigned other provinces in the West, while Antony received Greece and the East. This arrangement was functioning by 42 B.C., and was legalized by a docile and helpless Senate.

The political maneuvers which followed were of no benefit to Rome, and did not achieve a monopoly of power for any of the rivals. Lepidus was rendered politically impotent in 36 B.C., and the struggle for power narrowed down to Octavian in the West and Antony in the East. Antony made his headquarters in Egypt, which was still under the rule of the ancient house of Ptolemy, in the person of the beautiful Cleopatra. The queen governed Egypt as her own personal property, and was rearing, for an uncertain future, her children by a younger brother-husband, and a son by Julius Caesar. The rift between Octavian and Antony was widened by the latter's divorce of his wife Octavia, Octavian's sister, and his subsequent marriage to Cleopatra. It was now feared that Antony purposed to make himself king of Rome, with the foreign Cleopatra as his queen.

The Supremacy of Octavian.--When Octavian felt himself strong enough he moved against Antony and soundly defeated him in the great naval battle of Actium, off the western coast of Greece, in 31 B.C. During the battle Cleopatra withdrew her ships and returned to Egypt. Antony followed her, leaving his generals to extricate themselves as best they could.

The way to supreme power now lay open to Octavian, a young man of about thirty. He invaded Egypt the following year and defeated Antony's forces. Antony committed suicide, and Cleopatra, failing in the effort to bring Octavian, in turn, under the power of her charms, later did likewise. Following the example of the Pharaohs and Ptolemies before him, Octavian took over Egypt as his personal estate. Victory over the last of his competitors raised him to an unassailable position of power, and the stage was set for the formal transition from republic to empire.

II. Octavian, Emperor Augustus (27 B.C.--A.D. 14)

As Octavian gathered together the strands of empire, he took care to legitimize every step in his rise to political power. He maintained the forms of republican government and at first made no attempt to claim the imperial dignity, though he now was emperor in fact. In January, 27 B.C., he was granted the title of Augustus, a term that expressed both awe and gratitude for his remarkable achievements. In the same year he received a ten-year imperium over the provinces that made him commander in chief of Roman military forces, and inasmuch as control of the army constituted the actual basis of imperial power (see Vol. V, p. 38), historians date the beginning of the imperial phase of Roman history from this year. Until 23 B.C. the Senate voted him the office of consul annually, but in that year he was accorded supreme proconsular command, and received the tribunician authority (see Vol. V, p. 237). These powers were renewed periodically. Thus he gathered the strands of power into his own hands.

Nevertheless, Augustus continued to rule through republican forms. The consulates were retained, as were also the tribunates. The Senate continued the motions of governing, and Augustus left to proconsuls, who were answerable to the Senate, the governing of the more submissive provinces. These proconsuls were the "deputies" of the book of Acts (see chs. 13:7, 8, 12; 18:12; 19:38). But Augustus' consular authority gave him actual power over all the provinces.

The governing of restive areas Augustus kept in his own hand. In these provinces he appointed legates as his agents; the governor of Syria was a legate of Augustus. He also appointed procurators as his financial agents in all the provinces. In some smaller areas a procurator was the administrator. The NT governors of Judea (Matt. 27:2; Acts 23:24) were procurators, answerable to the emperor, but also to some extent responsible to the legate of Syria.

Under the republic the Comitia, or popular assembly, had been intended as a balance to the aristocratic Senate. In practice the Senate came to have the supreme governing power for the provinces, while the Comitia exercised local jurisdiction over the city. Under Augustus, however, the Comitia became only a form, and under Tiberius, his successor, was reduced to a shadow. Legislative power had been reserved for the Senate, but even that body was subservient to the emperor.

Upon the death of Lepidus, in b.c. 13, Augustus became Pontifex Maximus, the chief priest of the state religion. This was a position of great political significance, principally because of its control over the calendar, and hence, indirectly, of the timing of elections. He now held in his hand the most important religious, military, and civil powers; no more were necessary.

The reign of Augustus was prosperous and successful. In fact, it saved Rome from disintegration. The empire was well and firmly governed. The famous Pax Romana, or Roman peace, was maintained in a vast empire of diverse peoples by a standing army of probably not less than 250,000. Concerning this period M. Rostovtzeff comments: "The danger of foreign invasion had disappeared; ... even the frontier provinces ceased to fear the irruption of neighbouring tribes. And thus the prestige of Augustus, as the defender and guardian of the state, rose to an unassailable height" (A history of the Ancient World, vol. 2, p. 197).

Except for the matter of the imperial succession, the civil constitution of Rome was on a firm footing. The extension of citizenship was restricted. The manumission of slaves was put under careful regulation, for the sake of the labor market and of public order. Marriage laws were recodified and bachelorhood was penalized. The various measures Augustus took for the stabilization of society saved Rome, for the time being, from complete moral decay and national dissolution.

During his reign Augustus encouraged a return to religion. This was perhaps not for the benefit of religion itself, nor for the sake of the old gods of Rome, in whom Augustus and his advisers probably had no particular confidence. It was rather the result of a feeling that respect for the gods and the observance of religious rites was good for men individually as well as for society as a whole.

Taxation.--Before Augustus, that is, under the republic, the taxation system of the Roman government in the provinces was through publicani. These were men engaged in collecting tax monies from the municipalities outside Italy. Each publicanus contracted to furnish the provincial government with a certain amount of money from his district. It was then for him to obtain that sum from the district, plus whatever amount he could obtain as his own personal profit and income. Under Augustus the taxation system was reformed so that the direct taxes no longer were farmed out to publicani, although the collection of some indirect taxes may have continued to be at their disposal. The "publicans" mentioned in the New Testament were evidently not Roman officials, but minor tax collectors employed by Herod Antipas. They are classed simply and directly as sinners, men hated and scorned by the populace of Palestine (see Matt. 9:9-11). See Vol. V, p. 66.

Communications.--The history-making quality of transportation must not be overlooked. The power of the Roman Empire, and the magnificent control of the legions over that empire, the largest in area yet seen by men, must be understood in terms of the great Roman system of roads.

Long before Rome was using the sea to reach its captured and allied provinces, it was building roads to connect the city with the towns and provinces of Italy. Local materials were abundantly available. The tufa rock, which proved so efficient for houses and public buildings, was also found useful for road construction. On a deep rough stone base, which was covered with gravel and sand, blocks of tufa were laid and, where the expected use warranted it, were cemented in place. Near the cities, especially Rome, where traffic was heavy, the paving surface was slabs of granite. The middle part of the road was raised like a dyke or terrace, and was used for privileged or rapid transport, whereas the tracks at the sides were for local or slower traffic. The roads cut through hills and even mountains, and passed, by arches, over gorges and narrow valleys, to speed the traveler on his way.

Gaius Gracchus, the leader of the popular revolt of 133 B.C., is credited with building up the roadway system in Italy after he succeeded his brother to power. As the limits of Roman power were pushed through every point of the compass, roads from the city center reached to the very outskirts of the empire.

A system of posts, reserved for use of government agents only, was established by Augustus. The post houses, each with forty horses in it, were some five or six miles apart. By means of the posted horses a messenger could travel the then remarkable distance of one hundred miles or more a day. Under Emperor Nerva (96-98), the posts were opened for general use, and the expense was met by the imperial treasury. Hadrian (117-138) extended this privilege throughout the empire, but later rulers added the care of the roads to the "common duties"--the upkeep of aqueducts, levies for messenger service, and charges for armies passing through--that already lay heavily upon the municipalities.

These far-flung arteries were primarily intended for the swift movement of troops to guard the life lines of the empire or to defend its borders. Consequently, whatever else may have traveled these roads, there was always the heavy tread of the legionaries' feet. In addition, of course, there journeyed the great and the humble, the busy and the leisurely, on horseback or on donkeys, in litters or on foot, in swift chariots or in rumbling wagons. Among such travelers, the first century of the Christian Era must have seen Paul, Peter, and the other apostles employing the convenience of the Roman road, along with the peace of a unified empire, for the fulfillment of their missionary designs.

Rome's Weakness and Strength.--When he contrasts the peace and prosperity of the reign of Augustus with the near anarchy of the whole preceding century (see Vol. V, pp. 36, 37), the student of history is compelled to note how near Rome was to the verge of political, economic, and social collapse when Augustus took the reins of the government firmly into his hands (see Vol. V, pp. 37, 38). Only the Roman legions remained a potent force for unity. Yet the soldiers no longer took their oath of allegiance (sacramentum) to the Roman state, but to their commanding general (imperator), who, by personal magnetism and leadership, led them to victory, with its prospects of plunder and booty. Another stabilizing factor was the basic respect for law on the part of the people, decadent though they were in comparison with their ancestors. Despite the venality and corruption of government officials, they sensed the importance of law and possessed a natural genius for administration.

Undoubtedly the strong rule of Julius Caesar and the reforms he instituted also helped to delay the process of decay. The momentum of his rule carried over until Augustus was able to consolidate his control. Similarly, the momentum of Augustus strength carried the state through the vicissitudes that accompanied a forlorn parade of inefficient emperors, to the brighter periods of such rulers as Vespasian (69-79) and Marcus Aurelius (161-180). The reign of the latter was truly remarkable and may rightly be called a golden age in spite of the progressive decline of Roman civilization. The influence of this golden era helped to carry the empire through the reigns of a series of upstart tyrants until the strong reigns of Diocletian (284-305) and Constantine (306-337) gave Rome a new lease on life.

Little good can be said of most of the men who succeeded to the imperial throne within the century after Augustus' death. One of the reasons for this situation lay in the fact that no clear, consistent plan of succession had been formulated. This lack was inherent in the situation. All of Augustus' governmental powers (see Vol. V, p. 38) were personal. Legally, the office of emperor did not even exist. Augustus sought to perpetuate his accumulation of powers by means of a father-son succession of sorts. Inasmuch as he had no son of his own, and younger relatives who might have succeeded him all died early, he chose to adopt his stepson, Tiberius, in spite of a certain dislike for him.

Augustus' death left Tiberius as the only plausible candidate for the imperial post. The arrangements necessary to secure his enthronement reveal the weakness of the imperial constitution. Later emperors similarly sought to provide for a successor by the adoption of a relative. But this procedure failed to establish a stable imperial line. Instead, during the first century of the empire,it brought pitifully weak men to the rulership of the world. With the beginning of the 2d century the emperors selected successors on the basis of personal merit rather than blood relationship, with the result that more capable men were invested with the imperial dignity.

III. Tiberius (A.D. 14-37)

Augustus' successor, Tiberius,is spoken of favorably by some of his contemporatries, unfavorably by even more of them. Except for some successful military campaigns, which he did not lead in person, his reign must be reckoned as weak. No matter how hard he worked, and no matter how conscientious he sought to be, he shows little evidence that he understood his time. He ruled mechanically, according to set standards borrowed, in part, from his early experience in army camp. He was never able to overcome the besetments of poor advisers and gossips.

One of the unfortunate features of his reign was the was that judicial accusation became a matter of course. There was no process of public prosecution. Accusation became a profession. Any citizen who witnessed or suspected a violation of law, or who wished to involve someone in such a charge, could duly report it and have the offender prosecuted. There grew up under Tiberius a class of professional accusers, called delators, who accused anyone who might happen to offend them. Though it was, of course, a travesty of justice, Tiberius lent his support to the system. Curiously enough, this practice worked against the emperor himself, for he became the victim of the most unpleasant stories. Partly because of this situation his reputation has suffered seriously at the hands of historians.

The Army.--The power of the Roman army was remarkable. For some time the legions had been made up of professional soldiers, who enlisted for twenty years. It has already been noted that the allegiance of the soldiery was centered more in their commanding general than in Roman government. However, the soldiers were well trained and fought devotedly. The morale of the army was excellent, again and again proving superior to the spirit and skill of enemy forces. Under Augustus and Tiberius it became the custom to station legions permanently at strategic points throughout the empire, along the border and in conquered provinces. It is known that in the year a.d. 23 twenty-five legions of regular Roman soldiers held the empire in excellent military control. The upper and lower Rhine regions were each held by four legions, while in Spain there were only three. North Africa, apart from Mauretania, which was a tributary kingdom with its own soldiery, was held by two legions; and Egypt needed only two. In Palestine and Syria there were four legions. Thrace was a tributary kingdom, and had its own soldiers. There were two legions in the lower Danube, two in Moesia, and two in Dalmatia. This total of twenty-five legions was augmented by about the same number of auxiliary troops, making a total of around 250,000 men, based on 5,000 to a legion. These were made up almost entirely of heavy infantry, though a few had cavalry contingents. The also had its engineering corps, for the Romans had developed an efficient type of siege machinery. Each aggregation of legions, comprising an army, was under the command of a general officer, or imperator, and each legion was led by a legate. The legion, in its turn, consisted of some fifty centuries, each of which contained from fifty to one hundred men under the command of an officer known as a centurion.

Religion.--In the early days of his reign Tiberius endeavored to improve the religious life of his people. To this end he expelled the cult of Isis, because of the moral abuses that were a feature of worship in this cult. He also ordered the discontinuance of Jewish worship in Italy, and actually commanded the expulsion of all Jews from that country. (For a discussion of Tiberius and the Jews see Vol. V, pp. 65, 66). He endeavored to destroy the cult of the astrologers. This numerous class studied the sun, the moon, and the five visible planets, and sought by incantations to secure divine aid from the gods who were supposed to inhabit these heavenly bodies (cf. Vol. I, pp. 212, 213, and Vol. IV, p. 763). However, the efforts of Tiberius to suppress the astrologers were unsuccessful, and in the latter years of his reign he himself became a devotee of their mysteries. He consulted them constantly, and became increasingly pessimistic and gloomy under the influence of their counsels.

Civil Administration.--There were no marked accessions of territory under Tiberius, but he did much to consolidate control of the outlying provinces. Thrace was placed under a Roman governor, and was presently annexed. When Archelaus, king of Cappadocia, died in a.d. 17, his kingdom was made a province under a procurator; at the same time, the kingdom of Commagene, on the eastern frontier, was placed under a propraetor. The restless and wealthy dependency of Judea had been put under a procurator by Augustus (see Vol. V, p. 64), and Tiberius allowed this to continue. Judea was, however, under the wider jurisdiction of Syria, and the procurator of Judea was answerable to the governor of that province, whose capital was at Antioch. Syria itself was surrounded by a circle of somewhat autonomous little states, such as Chalcis, Emesa, Damascus, and Abilene. See The Roman World at the Birth of Jesus.

The first nine years of the reign of Tiberius can be rated as good, and his government successful. But about the year a.d. 23 a definite change occurred. Sejanus, minister of Tiberius, was ambitious, and desired to become emperor in the room of his master. To accomplish this he unhesitatingly formed a variety of political alliances, and endeavored to remove any support that Tiberius might find in the immediate circle of his companions. The personal family of the emperor was not exempt, and when his son Drusus died after a lingering illness, historians of the time were free to say that Sejanus had poisoned him.

Last years of Tiberius.--Tiberius began to reap a grim fruitage from his support of the delators, his faith in the astrologers, and the liberty he gave to his unscrupulous minister Sejanus. The palace was filled with rumors, gossip, and vile stories which did not spare the emperor. The dark prognostications of the astrologers were having the worst kind of effect upon his mind, and the intrigues of Sejanus were threatening Tiberius himself. Overcome by gloom,by fears for his personal welfare, and by hatred for the very atmosphere of the capital city, Tiberius withdrew altogether, and never again set foot in the city of Rome. He itinerated, but never went far into Italy, and did not go abroad. He spent most of the remaining thirteen years of his reign on the island of Capri.

But even in retirement he did not find peace. His pessimism and his fears pursued him. He was not free from the machinations of Sejanus, whom eventually he had put to death. Tongues did not cease to busy themselves with the emperor, simply because he had withdrawn to a beautiful island; in fact, the tongues were the busier. Since people could not discover the actual facts of Tiberius' private life, stories became rife that he engaged in wild orgies in his villa of retirement.

The aged Tiberius was on a journey when he became sick. He resisted all efforts to give him medical care, and took part as actively as possible in games that were being played in his honor. Finally, however, he had to take to his bed. There he was denied the privilege of dying a natural death. It is said that Macro, the successor of Sejanus, and the father-in-law of Gaius, who was expected to succeed to the throne, made sure of the old emperor's death by stifling him with bedclothes.

IV. Gaius Caligula (A.D. 37-41)

Tiberius' adopted son, Gaius, generally known as Caligula, or "Little Boots," now became emperor. In his youth he had been a friend of Herod Agrippa, grandson of Herod the Great. (For Rome's relationships with the Herods see Vol. 5, pp. 39-41, 63-66, 69). This Palestinian prince had been educated in Rome with other sons of petty kings whose territories had passed under Roman rule. In the capital city he became a friend of Claudius and his young nephew Caligula, both of whom were destined to be emperors. Caligula was a weak, nervous dissipated young man who all too readily accepted Agrippa's tutelage in the despotic ways of the East, and thereby laid an unfortunate foundation for his future exercise of imperial power.

Nevertheless, he began his reign well. A general amnesty was declared, liberating all prisoners and bringing home political exiles. New members for the Senate were recruited from wealthy members of the equestrian class. Many inhabitants of provincial communities received Roman citizenship. It was a period of remarkable prosperity and was decidedly pleasing to the people.

But after his first year Caligula gave himself over to dissipation. Not only did he give the people expensive amusements, forcing even senators to participate in the games; he himself actually descended into the arena to act the part of a gladiator.

It was during Caligula's first year that he made Herod Agrippa ruler of Palestine, as Herod Agrippa I, but kept him in Rome in order to have him near him. Shortly after Agrippa's elevation to the ethnarchy, his uncle Philip died, and Gaius gave him the tetrarchy of Philip, plus Abilene and Coele-Syria. See Palestine Under the Herodians.

Caligula soon claimed to be a god. He demanded that he should be worshiped by all, and had images of himself set up in various communities, one of which was Alexandria in Egypt, where so many Jews were living. The Jews appointed a deputation, under Philo the philosopher, to go to Rome and plead with the emperor not to compel their people to worship his image, since that would be so completely contrary to their religious conscience. The deputation met with Caligula in vain. None of the pleas of Philo availed. The emperor ordered his image to be set up, and commanded that the Jews worship it. He was on the point of insisting that one be installed also in the Temple in Jerusalem, with the Jews there ready to rebel, when he died in a.d. 41.

Caligula tried to rule. He sought to imitate the Caesars that had preceded him, and to give serious attention to duty. But he had no interest in ruling through republican forms as had Augustus and Tiberius before him. He felt a contempt for the Senate and desired to rule, not as imperator or consul, but as king. He desired to be a builder. He tore down buildings and replaced them with others. He built the huge aqueduct, remains of which still catch the eye of the traveler to the city of Rome. He rebuilt the palace of the Caesars, in truly Oriental extravagance. He began new port facilities for the city of Rome at the mouth of the Tiber, which could have been efficient, but were still unfinished at his death. But he was a spendthrift, and impoverished the treasury, which Tiberius, by his frugality, had kept well filled. He was impetuous, unpredictable, and undoubtedly mentally unbalanced. With his tendency to sportiveness, he showed a cruelty that made him say at one time that he wished the Roman people had but one neck, that he might strike off their common head.

Caligula reigned only four years. His death came through assassination by an officer of the Praetorian cohort whom he had insulted. He was altogether deserted by his friends, and it was left for Herod Agrippa to prepare his body for burial.

When word reached the Senate that Caligula was dead, debate immediately started as to what should be done about the succession. Speeches were made insisting that Rome return to senatorial rule, and that the old ways of the republic be restored. This would have removed the whole problem of imperial succession. There were others, however, who felt that Rome had prospered under the rule of one man, bad as some of the Caesars had been, and that a successor to Caligula should be appointed.

V. Claudius (A.D. 41--54)

Upon hearing of the sudden death of Caligula, the Praetorian soldiers rushed through the palace looking for booty. One of them found Claudius, the uncle of Caligula, now a man of fifty, cowering behind a curtain in the palace, seized him, dragged him out before the other soldiers, and cried with a laugh, "Here is our emperor." The word spread; the idea took hold; and in a little while the whole Praetorian Guard was united behind Claudius as the emperor of the Roman Empire. Thus it became a fact, and the Roman Senate could but comply. From this time the throne of the empire became an object of military dictatorship. Indeed, it was not long before the right to appoint emperors had passed from the Praetorians into the hands of the Roman soldiery in the field. Actually, in the case of Claudius, the people were already outside the Senate house demanding that the Senate appoint a single head to the empire, and when Claudius' name was brought before them by the soldiery, the Senate hastened to accept him as emperor. Rome remained under a single head, as a military dictatorship.

Claudius was an odd personality. He was unhappy in childhood, ridiculed by his associates, and despised by members of his family. Not having normal, pleasant associations with his equals, he was driven to fraternize with menials, and spent most of his life in retirement. He had given his time to study, especially to the study of history; he wrote copiously, was interested in drama, and was an antiquarian of sorts. He knew a great about what had happened to Rome in the past, but was certainly out of touch with the Rome of his own time.

Civil Administration.--Claudius sought to show himself a considerate ruler. He granted amnesty to political prisoners and exiles. Confiscations were relinquished. Temples were restored, and statues that had been taken from them were returned, particularly those that had been removed to make room for the statues of Caligula. He had some troops moved across the borders in places where military strength was needed, and became noted for the Roman colonies he established in various provinces throughout the empire.

One of the important things that Claudius accomplished was a reorganization of the Senate. He had the courage to remove members who were unable to carry the financial burden a senatorship involved. He then filled up the rolls with knights wealthy enough to meet the senatorial standards, many of these knights being drawn from the provinces. This made the Senate a more truly representative body, and helped the empire to be, not the appendage of a great municipality, but a vast political entity, centered in a capital, with associated cities and provinces assisting in imperial government.

A census held in a.d. 47 showed that there were nearly 7,000,000 citizens in the empire. This was a large increase over the census of a.d. 14, which recorded some 5,000,000 citizens. It revealed how the times of comparative peace and prosperity since Augustus had helped the growth of population. It also indicated a wide extension of citizenship throughout the empire. To this figure of 7,000,000, the number of women and children of these citizens must be added, bringing the total of Roman citizens and their dependents to about 20,000,000 souls, according to Gibbon's estimate. Again, to this figure must be added the large, unnumbered body of provincials who did not hold citizenship, and the hordes of slaves who populated the Roman world. Although Gibbon's estimate of 120,000,000 people as the total population at the middle of the 1st century doubtless is too high, the figure probably did stand somewhere between 80,000,000 and 100,000,000 souls (see Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, J. B. Bury, ed., vol. 1, p. 42).

Claudius, because of his antiquarian interests, was a true Roman in heart and spirit. There was around his court less of a foreign atmosphere. His attitude toward foreign peoples, that is, non-Romans, was considerate, but he was on the watch for evidence that these peoples were not thoroughly loyal. The Jews were tolerated, and apparently were treated rather more kindly than they had been under Tiberius. However, revolts broke out among them, and as a result Claudius issued an edict expelling the Jews from Rome (see Vol. V, p. 71). Among those thus displaced were Aquila and Priscilla, Jews with whom Paul became acquainted when he preached in Corinth on his Second Missionary Journey (see Acts 18:2).

The industry of Claudius in his endeavor to be an efficient emperor was amazing. He was at his desk early in the morning and late at night. He spent hours in the Forum, personally acting as judge for his people. They flocked around him, telling him their problems, and demanding his aid in their solution. Oftentimes when he would rise to leave, they would insist that he remain until every case was heard. He was industrious in a building program, largely in completing the works begun by Caligula. The new port at Ostia, so useful to Rome since silt was filling up the mouth of the Tiber, was successfully finished. He completed the huge aqueduct that Caligula had started, and was able to bring to completion a great tunnel for conducting water into Rome. Britain was completely subjugated, and one of its leaders, Caractacus, was brought to Rome in triumph. Druidism was suppressed in Gaul, and to a large extent in Britain.

Claudius spent time and money in the entertainment of the Roman populace, but it was clear to those who knew him, and perhaps was sensed by the multitude, that what he did was from a sense of duty, as though the antiquarian were carrying on the old Roman routine rather than genuinely entering into the life of the people. But the treasury was exhausted. There was a shortage of grain, and the people blamed the emperor for this. The harder he worked to solve his people's problems, the more responsible he became for their troubles, and this prevented him from ever becoming a popular ruler.

Personal Life.--Moreover, he was self-indulgent, and the older he became, the more he was given to intemperance, of both cup and platter. He worked indefatigably, as has been noted, and then would overeat in anxious effort to restore his failing strength. His health gradually deteriorated, and the intrigues and evils of palace life accelerated the process.

Claudius was married four times. His third marriage, that with Messallina, was particularly revolting. Her moral conduct was not above suspicion, and according to a story current at the time, she actually went through a wedding ceremony with one of her paramours. Messallina was put to death as a result of her infidelities. Claudius then married his own niece, Agrippina, who schemed to have her son Nero succeed to the emperorship when his stepfather should die. This meant the setting aside of Claudius' own son, who was shortly put to death. Agrippina soon became tired of waiting for the death of her husband, which would open the way of Nero to take the throne, and finally arranged for Claudius to be poisoned. He swallowed her first poisonous potion, but whether because of his having overeaten or because of the quantity of wine he had drunk, it failed to take effect. A physician called in by Agrippina put a poisoned feather down the emperor's throat, apparently under the pretense of bringing him some gastronomic relief. Claudius gradually sank into a stupor and died from the effect of the venom thus applied., Nero succeeded. The date was a.d. 54.

VI. Nero (A.D. 54--68)

The new emperor's family had long been prominent in the affairs of Rome, having come up from the plebeian class some two hundred years before his time. Among the clan had been consuls, a Pontifex Maximus, and several generals. Nero's own father was charged with many crimes--incest, adultery, murder, and treason. He married Agrippina, sister of Caligula, and their child, Lucius Domitius, is the Nero of history. The father died when Nero was but three years of age, his mother was sent into exile, and an aunt became his guardian. Caligula seized the child's patrimony, but Claudius later restored it.

The boy's education included much that was harmful. He knew good manners, court etiquette, his rights and prerogatives, but he was only too well versed in the vices and corruptions of the day. His was the misfortune of many a well-born Roman youth: his training had been left to poorly supervised menials. An exception to this was his tutelage by Seneca. This tutor, a brother of Gallio, who was proconsul of Achaia when Paul was at Corinth (Acts 18:12), was born into a family of teachers, and grew to be a philosopher, shrewd in material things. He knew how to retain influential friends and benefit by their friendship. His principles were good, obtained from the Stoicism he professed. He knew how to live in an evil day and place, while keeping himself unsullied. That he had upon Nero a good influence, which carried over into the earlier years of the new reign, is evident. It is equally obvious that his influence was neither good enough nor weighty enough. The boy's own bad traits, the pampering he had suffered, and the corruptions around him were more than Seneca had the ability, or perhaps the will, to overcome.

Another of Nero's early favorites was Burrus, a praetorian prefect with long experience at court. Burrus was a man of native shrewdness, of discipline, and of moral sensibility surprising for one in his position.

Nero had obsessions. He feared his mother. He feared Britannicus, the son of Claudius, whom Agrippina had managed to set aside while she pushed forward her own son. But when Nero was presented by Burrus to the Praetorians as the fit successor to Claudius, they acclaimed him, and there was then no power that could dispute that approval, certainly not the supine Senate. Nero was about seventeen years of age when he was made emperor.

Agrippina now took on the role of an empress, in which Nero cooperated. She rode in the imperial litter with her son, gave counsel, received embassies. She engaged poisoners to remove certain ones who seemed to be in her way. She sought completely to dominate the youthful emperor, her son. To counteract this maternal control, Seneca and Burrus agreed to retain their own influence by yielding to Nero's will. They thought that the most effective guidance could be given while they were submitting to his whims. Thus, in the early years, Nero's path went gradually downward.

Many of his acts were deliberately evil. He had Britannicus poisoned. He deserted his wife Octavia for a mistress, whereupon Agrippina took the rejected Octavia under her own protection. He removed Pallas, a freedman who had been minister to Claudius, and a client of Agrippina's. Attracted by the plaudits of the multitude, he exhibited himself carelessly in the circus and the theater, and actually engaged in petty street thievery and brawls while all too poorly disguised. The best thing to be said about Nero is that he left the affairs of government to his ministers. Seneca and Burrus kept the Senate thoroughly informed in all governmental matters, and thus secured a bulwark against the wrath of Nero's mother. Nero sat as a public judge, and actually sought to be fair in his judgments. He ignored the jeers which in recent years had been often directed against the throne by an insolent populace. For such reasons his earlier years seemed tolerable, especially when compared with the latter part of his reign.

The year a.d. 58 marked a change for the worse in the emperor. The first event in this second period was his falling in love with Poppaea, the dissolute wife of his court favorite Otho. When it was seen that Otho would oppose Nero's familiarities with his wife, he was given a post in Lusitania (approximately modern Portugal) in order that he might not interfere. The next event, and one that doubtless was a result of Poppaea's evil influence, was the assassination of Nero's mother Agrippina. The emperor feared what might be the consequences of this horrible act, but when he re-entered Rome after his mother's death, he was received with most extravagant adulation by senators and people alike. Thereafter the emperor showed himself extremely egotistical, but at the same time feeble and vacillating, superstitious and cowardly, self-indulgent and lecherous, and dangerous in temper toward those around him. He yielded himself increasingly to the most flagrant and corrupt dissipations. Into these dissipations he seduced both nobles and commoners by giving public suppers where open immorality was practiced and encouraged. It seemed that the very populace was being seduced into complete corruption.

Burrus and Seneca continued to act as Nero's ministers, but with declining influence. Evil men, one named Tigellinus and another Rufus, were rising in favor. In a.d. 62 Burrus died, perhaps poisoned. Seneca sought unsuccessfully to withdraw to private life. Nero publicly repudiated Octavia, then put her to death most cruelly and married Poppaea. Now, with the treasury empty because of the emperor's debaucheries, men were put out of the way in order that their wealth might be confiscated.

The Burning of Rome.--This tragic holocaust, the best-known event of Nero's reign, occurred in a.d. 64. Of the fourteen regions into which the city was organized, only four escaped, three were completely consumed, the other seven were more or less severely damaged. Some of the most famous edifices of the city were destroyed, both public buildings and palaces. Even Nero's palace was scorched. Thousands of the commoner folks' houses and warrenlike tenements in the poorer districts were wiped out. Priceless works of art were destroyed and writings of great legal and historical value were undoubtedly consumed.

It may be true that Nero had the fire started as a backdrop to his pseudotragic recital of the epic Sack of Troy. There is no particular reason for rejecting the idea. There were other stories. It was said that he had merely prevented efficient efforts to stop the fire. According to another account he had set the fire because he wished an opportunity to rebuild the city magnificently, and to name the restored city after himself.

If Nero had caused or permitted the fire, he overreached himself. He sensed this, and expiation was made in special offerings to the gods. Still the survivors of the fire muttered. "Neither human help," says Tacitus, a Roman historian writing about one hundred years after the birth of Christ, "nor imperial munificence, nor all the modes of placating Heaven, could stifle scandal or dispel the belief that the fire had taken place by order" (Annals xv. 44; Loeb ed., Tacitus, vol. 4, p. 283).

Persecution of the Christians.--What was Nero to do? He must find someone upon whom to blame the disaster. He found the scapegoat in the illegal sect of Christians, who by that time had doubtless arrived at some considerable strength in the city. According to Tacitus: "Therefore, to scotch the rumour, Nero substituted as culprits, and punished with the utmost refinements of cruelty, a class of men, loathed for their vices, whom the crowd styled Christians. Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus, and the pernicious superstition was checked for a moment, only to break out once more, not merely in Judaea, the home of the disease, but in the capital itself, where all things horrible or shameful in the in the world collect and find a vogue" (ibid.). So much for the opinion of Tacitus. He proceeds then to describe Nero's persecution of the Christians:

"First, then, the confessed members of the sect were arrested; next, on their disclosures, vast numbers were convicted, not so much on the count of arson as for hatred of the human race. And derision accompanied their end: they were covered with wild beasts' skins and torn to death by dogs; or they were fastened on crosses, and, when daylight failed, were burned to serve as lamps by night. Nero had offered his Gardens for the spectacle, and gave an exhibition in his Circus, mixing with the crowd in the habit of a charioteer, or mounted on his car. Hence, in spite of a guilt which had earned the most exemplary punishment, there arose a sentiment of pity, due to the impression that they were being sacrificed not for the welfare of the state but to the ferocity of a single man"

(ibid., pp. 283-285).

Peter and Paul.--This persecution by Nero, which began in a.d. 64, was not an expression of any governmental policy concerning the Christians. It arose from Nero's own whim and caprice--and as a way of escape for himself. The persecution was severe, but just how severe it is impossible now to measure. Suetonius, a contemporary of Tacitus, says that "punishment was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition" (Nero vi. 16; Loeb ed., Suetonius, vol. 2, p. 111). There can be no question that hundreds of Christians suffered martyrdom in the city of Rome, and there may also have been outbreaks against them in the provinces. None of the pagan writers refers to Peter or Paul by name, but early Christian authors are united in referring the martyrdom of these apostles to the time of Nero, and in Rome. Among these are Tertullian (died c. a.d. 230; Against Marcion iv. 5), and Eusebius (c. a.d. 325; Ecclesiastical History ii. 25 [5, 6]).

The old Mamertime dungeon on the fringe of the Roman Forum, not far from the old Senate house, is still pointed out to tourists as the spot where Paul is supposed to have been imprisoned. The date of his death can be placed probably between a.d. 66 and 68, the year in which Nero himself died. According to an ancient tradition Peter followed him in martyrdom, crucified head downward (see Eusebius Ecclesiastical History iii. 1; cf. AA 537, 538).

Nero's Death.--While sporadic persecution of the Christians in Rome was continuing, Nero was busy rebuilding the city. Streets were laid out anew, and buildings were erected, with many touches of beauty and artistic development. Vast sums of money were spent on the reconstruction, money which had to come from the wealthy people of the provinces and from heavy taxation.

But this did not pacify the people. Now it was no longer a case of murmuring among the rabble. The nobility, the social and the economic leaders of Roman life, were determined that there should be a change in government. One of the more elaborate plots was detected, the conspirators were brought to trial, convicted, and put to death. Among then was Nero's old friend and mentor, Seneca, who had sought in vain to withdraw from public life and to escape from the city of Rome and its dangers by retirement. Now Nero was able to include him in a list of conspirators, and he died as a criminal.

In the last few years of his life Nero had become more profligate, more undependable, more dissipated, more evil. His baseless egotism seemed to know no bounds. His early pretensions as a poet and artist continued to the end. Even before the burning of Rome he had decided that he would take a trip to the East. His plans in this direction were interrupted by his anxiety to see that Rome was rebuilt. At last, in the year 66, he set out, and was gone for nearly two years. His tour was a public exhibition of depraved and corrupt vanity. Upon his return he made a triumphal entry into Rome, but that did not distract the public, and particularly the nobles, from their discontent.

Nero now received news of serious defections among the provincial generals. Galba, stationed in Spain, was especially mentioned, for Vindex, prefect of one of the Gallic provinces, made overtures to him to become emperor. Galba hesitated to participate in the conspiracy, but Vindex developed the plot. Nero managed to have Vindex declared a public enemy, but by then Galba was determined to go through with the conspiracy. The people were clamoring against Nero, the senators stood aloof from him, and the Praetorians refused him protection. He fled from Rome, whereupon the Senate proclaimed him a public enemy and decreed his death. As Nero lay in a miserable house by the roadside, he held a weapon to his breast, and a slave struck it home. Just as he was dying, the soldiers arrived to take him prisoner. The tyrant perished in disgrace at the age of thirty, after an inglorious reign of fourteen years. The date was a.d. 68.

VII. From Galba to Hadrian (A.D. 68--138)

Nero's Successors, A.D. 68, 69.--Soon Galba, the imperator of Spain, was elected by his soldiers to fill the place of Nero. This was the first time an emperor had been appointed by his soldiers in the field, away from Rome. In this choice also, Rome found itself turning away from the old Julian family, which thus far had furnished all the Caesars. Galba set out for Rome. There were, of course, other aspirants, and he had a number of conspiring nobles put to death, some without a trial. The new emperor was determined not to wield the imperial authority alone, and accepted the nomination of a noted Roman by the name of Piso to be his associate. Acclaimed by the Senate, the appointment of Piso deeply offended Otho, once the husband of Nero's wife Poppaea. Otho, himself a general, won over some of the soldiers, and then was brought before the Praetorian Guard, who hailed him as emperor. The soldiers deserted Galba, and when he and Piso appeared in the Forum, Galba was assassinated forthwith, and, shortly after, Piso suffered the same fate.

Word of this confusion and bloodletting reached Gaul, where the legate Vitellius accepted the pleas of the soldiers that he be emperor. The legions of Gaul and Germany united behind him, and he proceeded toward Rome. Otho met Vitellius in northern Italy, and in the ensuing battle was killed and his army defeated. Vitellius marched on the capital, where the powerless Senate acclaimed him emperor.

In the meantime another candidate had arisen in the person of Vespasian, then serving as legate of Judea. His family was practically unknown, but he himself had successfully fulfilled important responsibilities. He had been legate of a legion in Britain and eventually held a consulship. In the last years of Nero's life severe disorders had broken out in Palestine, and Vespasian had been sent there to crush the Jewish revolt. While he was fulfilling that commission, the army of the East proclaimed him emperor. The armies in northern Italy also offered him their loyalty, began to more toward Rome, and defeated the opposing forces of Vitellius. The Senate willingly declared Vespasian emperor. In less than a year had had three successors.

During these important dynastic changes what had happened to the Roman Empire as a whole? Again it must be remarked that there was no great power outside the empire to take advantage of the confusion in Rome. Parthia, the only possible challenger to Roman power, had just suffered a rebuff at Roman hands. There was within the empire no organized party of the "opposition," to move in upon the disturbances. Consequently, the ordinary life of the empire went on in spite of the turmoils at the capital. True, those years were disturbed through which the armies marched on their way to enthrone their respective generals in Rome. The legates, procurators, and proconsuls in some of the provinces were unseated. There was bound to be disturbance of business, particularly as nobles with invested capital were involved in successive governmental changes. But on the whole, life in the empire proceeded just as it had over a hundred years before, when near anarchy accompanied the assassination of Julius Caesar. Commerce continued to move upon the high seas. The farmers went about their work. Legions continued their guard duty, choosing the generals to whom they would remain loyal. With all the corruption, there was a solid stratum in the populace, homes in which fathers and mothers continued to do their duty by their children and to give, foundation to the vital life of their communities. Priests went about their duties in the pagan temples. Devotees of the mystery cults proceeded with their worship. Christianity continued to grow as a leaven of good among the people.

Vespasian, A.D. 69--79.--Vespasian left Titus, his older son, to continue the subjugation of the rebellious Jews while he proceeded slowly to Rome. His interests in the capital were cared for by Mucianus, legate of Syria, and by Domitian, the emperor's younger son.

Titus ably completed the task begun by his father. Jerusalem was besieged in the spring of a.d. 70, and by the end of August, after bitter resistance, was taken and almost completely destroyed. Titus returned to Rome in triumph, carrying with him thousands of captives and great booty. The Arch of Titus, still standing in Rome, celebrates his victory. (For a detailed description of the Jewish wars and the destruction of Jerusalem see Vol. V, pp. 73-78.)

Just as Vespasian was taking the imperial purple, some of the legions that had supported him in Gaul and lower Germany attempted to sever their relationship with Rome, and form a separate government in the Gallic provinces. However, with a show of force from Mucianus, the legions returned to their duty, and the revolt died out. But since a number of auxiliary legions of a tribal character had entered into this revolt, it became the practice of the Roman government from then on to distribute the tribal auxiliaries in parts of the empire distant from their native lands, in order to minimize the risk of such outbreaks.

When Titus returned from Palestine, Vespasian made him praetorian prefect and gave him the tribunician power--the authority, but not the office, of a tribune. Together they gave sound leadership to the empire. Their main contribution was probably in the realm of finance, where Vespasian's thrift restored the treasury that had been emptied by the extravagances of previous emperors. Several provinces were reorganized, and imperial defense was strengthened as far north as Britain and on the frontiers formed by the Rhine, Danube, and Euphrates rivers. At home impressive building projects lent an air of prosperity to the new regime. The burnt Capitoline Temple was restored, a temple of Peace was erected, and work was begun on the mammoth Colosseum, whose ruins still exist. So stable was Vespasian's rule that when he died in 79 Titus was able to succeed him without disturbance.

Titus, A.D. 79--81.--The son proved a worthy successor to his able father. Unfortunately, his reign was short; thus he was unable to fulfill much of its early promise. Its memory was also darkened by two disasters. In 79, Mt. Vesuvius erupted and buried in its volcanic lava the cities of Pompeii and Herculaneum, whose excavated ruins have provided a rich source of knowledge concerning Roman life in Italy during the 1st century of the Christian Era. One year later Rome again suffered a disastrous fire, which burned for three days and left much of the city in ruins. However, Titus was not blamed for these catastrophes, and when he died in a.d. 81, he was deeply mourned by the empire. His younger brother, Domitian, succeeded without opposition.

Domitian, A.D. 81--96.--The new ruler was genuinely interested in the political, social, and literary life of the empire; but the good he accomplished was hidden under the hatred which his violently autocratic methods aroused. Nevertheless, history records imperial progress under his leadership. He authorized a campaign from Britain into Caledonia (Scotland), and he himself led an army across the Rhine into Germany, where he annexed some of the land lying east of the river. A revolt of two legions stationed at Mainz was easily put down, and led to the policy of not having more than one legion permanently stationed at any point. A revolt of the German tribes across the lower Danube was put down with more difficulty, and the settlement that Domitian made with them was not lasting.

Early in his reign he enforced respect for the deified emperors, and established a priestly college of the Flaviales for the worship of his dead father and brother. He himself took the title of dominus et deus ("lord and god"), and thus intensified emperor worship throughout the empire and contributed to the persecution of the Christian church. It was doubtless at this time that the apostle John was banished to Patmos, and a number of the other disciples are supposed to have been put to death during this reign. How widespread and how severe the persecution was it is impossible now to say, for there is very little about it in the immediate records of the reign. Most of the references to it are in later Christian writings, such as Tertullian's. This persecution does not represent a deliberate imperial policy, but like that of Nero, was a result of the emperor's autocratic attitude, and his resentment toward a body of religionists who refused to come into line with the general conduct of the Roman people. For the same reason he laid his hand heavily upon certain Jews who were still restive from their defeat of a score of years before.

Domitian's reign, which lasted until his assassination in a.d. 96, was marked by increasingly bitter conflicts with the Senate. A number of leading senators were executed on charges of treason, and when the tyrant died, his name was erased from the official records by the Senate and his memory cursed.

Nerva, A.D. 96--98.--The conspirators who put Domitian out of the way in the autumn of 96 chose for his successor an elderly senator known as Nerva. He was a man of high character, but was not strong enough to meet the troubles inherited from his predecessor. He therefore adopted Trajan, the legate of upper Germany, to serve with him. As Vespasian had done with Titus, Nerva gave to Trajan the tribunician authority and the imperium of a proconsul. Apart from the transfer of the costs of the government postal services from the cities to the imperial treasury and a decision to give state aid to orphans, there is little to record in Nerva's reign. When he died in 98 Trajan succeeded him.

Trajan, A.D. 98--117.--The new emperor was a native of Italica in Spain, and was the first ruler to be chosen from the provinces. He proved to be a good choice. His character was sound, he had high administrative talent, was a successful general, and soon gained the respect and affection of his people. Under his rule orderly government flourished, the soldiery were kept under control, poor children were fed, agriculture was encouraged, a lavish building program was undertaken, and highways throughout the provinces were improved and extended. Such plans cost money, but finances were placed on a sound basis, and temporarily proved equal to the strains placed upon them.

Much of Trajan's reign was occupied with military campaigns. In two hard wars he added Dacia, north of the Danube, to the list of Roman provinces. Later, from 113 onward, he undertook the conquest of Parthia. This overstepped the boundaries set by Augustus, and many historians feel that Trajan was unwise to attempt such an expansion of Roman territory.

This otherwise prosperous reign was marred by two events. One of these was a serious rebellion of the Jews in North Africa, Cyprus, Egypt, and Mesopotamia. The revolt was serious enough to demand large numbers of Roman soldiers to conquer it. The loss of life was heavy on both sides. The Jews fought fanatically, and horrible massacres were perpetrated by both the Jews and their enemies, before the revolt was quelled.

The other event was a persecution of the Christians. Trajan enunciated a policy under which they should be suppressed. An interesting and important letter is extant from Pliny the Younger, governor of Pontus, who writes to the emperor that Christianity has so spread in his area that the temples are deserted, and the artisans who are making materials for the worship of the gods find themselves without employment. He states that it has been his policy to call those accused of being Christians before him, and if they admitted their faith, he has been putting them to death. As a result temple worship has been considerably restored.

Trajan replies and approves what Pliny has been doing, but commendably specifies that if anyone is charged with being a Christian, he is not to be prosecuted unless his accuser's name is subscribed to the charge against him, and that those who repudiate their Christian faith are not to be punished. However, death is to be the punishment for one who acknowledges himself, or is proved to be, a Christian (Pliny Letters x. 96, 97).

This is the first of a series of definite policies laid down by Roman emperors for the treatment of Christians. This policy was not superseded for 140 years, and thousands of Christians died under it. Only in a.d. 250, under the emperor Decius, was a new policy enunciated which proved much more severe; it aimed at the extermination of the whole church.

Among the Christians who suffered martyrdom under Trajan is the shadowy figure of Ignatius, the leader of the church of Antioch in Syria. According to traditions embodied in late biographies of him, he was arrested and conveyed to Rome. On his way he is supposed to have written a series of epistles. These epistles have created questions that have long troubled scholars. The letters, if genuine, are remarkable proof of the very early establishment of a strong episcopate.

Historians agree that Trajan's reign was one of the best in Rome's long annals. It was a great loss to the empire when he died in Cilicia, on his way back to the capital, in a.d. 117.

Hadrian, A.D. 117--138.--Just before Trajan died he adopted a cousin who is known in history as Hadrian, and this man succeeded him in the emperorship. He was a person of extraordinary energy, deeply interested in art and literature, with a marked appreciation of Hellenism. He keenly felt the responsibilities of government and spent much of his time traveling over the empire. He was not an expansionist, and withdrew the Roman forces from the territories in the East recently acquired under Trajan. He effected a number of administrative reforms and engaged in an active construction program of roads, buildings, and aqueducts. His most important military undertaking was the suppression of another Jewish outbreak that began when he undertook to establish a colony on the site of old Jerusalem. The revolts were sporadic at first, and were dealt with locally, but in 132 the rebellion became better organized, and the army had to be aligned against it. It was not until 135 that the revolt was finally crushed, with great loss of life to the Jews. (For a more complete discussion of the revolt which occurred under the emperor Hadrian see Vol. V, p. 79.)

Hadrian continued the policy of succession through adoption of worthy men, which had been started by Nerva and maintained by Trajan. But we are already beyond the historical period that is the theme of this article--Roman history in New Testament times.

VIII. Roman Culture, Philosophy, and Religion

Roman Culture.--The culture of Rome was borrowed from Greece. The Romans were not naturally an artistic or poetic people, but rather were practical, legalistic, and militaristic. It was only when they began to experience more leisure in the enjoyment of their territorial acquisitions in the East that they became observant of the Hellenistic culture the Alexandrian Era had lifted out of its Greek setting and spread over most of the Eastern world. This culture pleased the Romans, and they sought to adapt it to their needs. Greek dramatists, poets, painters, sculptors, and philosophers found their way to Rome, were patronized there by senators and men of wealth, and as the years went by Roman intellectuals, stimulated by the beauty and grace of Greek art, began to imitate and Romanize the Greek forms which flourished around them.

Roman Philosophy.--Nowhere was the borrowing of a culture more plainly seen than in Rome's adoption of Greek philosophy. At the dawn of the Christian Era the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle were experiencing a temporary eclipse; but a 3d-century revival of Platonism had a marked effect on the theology of the Alexandrian Christians, Clement and Origen. In its turn, Neo-Platonism became a cultlike rival of Christianity, and gave to Augustine the germ for his doctrine of predestination. Thus paganism's influence continued to reach the world through erroneous teachings in the church.

The Sophists continued to wield their cynical influence. Man, they said, was the measure of all things. Knowledge and truth were therefore relative, and what each man knew became truth to him; hence two opposite propositions could each be true. Pilate's cynical yet pathetic question, "What is truth?" asked of the Lord of truth, and remembered by the theologian John (ch. 18:38), illustrates the predicament of the Sophists. They attracted to themselves large numbers of the pseudo intellectuals who unbecomingly adorned the fringes of Roman higher society.

The Epicurean philosophy was popular in Rome. Its proponents taught that all substance is made up of atoms. Life, mind, soul, and body are formed of atoms. There is, they taught, no past or future for personality, for the atoms of which the soul is constituted are dissipated at death, and continuity of personality is therefore impossible. Hence one should make the most of life while it is experienced. To the stable-minded Epicurean such a teaching meant the satisfaction of goodness and helpfulness, the best in self-expression; to weaker minds it meant self-indulgence and satisfaction of the lowest inclinations. Horace and Lucretius were exponents of Roman Epicureanism.

Woven into the Stoic philosophy was an admirable ethical quality. Its originator was Zeno, a Phoenician, who taught from the Stoa Poikile, the "painted porch" in Athens, about 300 B.C. He reduced all force and matter to a oneness of corporeality. Life, he said, is in the logos, or divine principle, that pervades all matter. This resulted in a pantheistic concept of God and appeared to bring rationality into the material universe. To find a rational way of life was to find the road of godly order and sense. This was what the Stoics called living according to nature. To do so successfully was to attain virtue, the highest objective of human living. Performing one's duty to the state, to men, and to oneself was the highest expression of virtue. A well-ordered society must grow out of this way of life. Hence, a strong state, well governed, leading men into the good way, was the optimum condition of society. Paul had met this philosophy, and Epicureanism, on Mars' Hill in Athens (see Acts 17:16-21).

From Nerva, successor of the domineering Domitian, the emperors for the next seventy years were Stoics, who gave to Rome one of its rare "golden" eras. Marcus Aurelius' Meditations has lived on to the present day as stimulating reading. But because they wanted the best for the Stoical state as they conceived it, the Stoic emperors were rigid in their prosecution of the illicit sect of Christians and of the recalcitrant Jews. The Stoics were an ethical challenge to Christianity.

Greek thought and culture, in their cosmopolitan Hellenistic form, conquered warlike, unphilosophic Rome. But they could not save Rome, for Hellenism had not the qualities of a saving way of life. Rome declined--from age, from overreaching, from lack of self-discipline, from failure to be true to the best in itself, from failure, above all, to find God. It adopted Hellenism, ineffectual as that was, but prostituted it. It finally adopted Christianity, but led it into apostasy. Military, economic, political, and ethical decay resulted--the decay of age and corruption.

Primitive Religion.--Roman religion was, at first, a simple system in which fetishism and magic were mingled. The early Romans were animists, and believed that spirits abode in material things such as trees, stones, and some animals and birds, with power to affect the lives of men. Far down in the history of classical Rome the priests still performed divination by observing birds in flight. The English word "auspices" is from the two Latin words avis, "a bird," and specio, "to behold," referring to the observance of a bird in flight.

This superstitious regard for the things of nature led to the belief that the spirits, or demons, which were generally of an impish nature, must be placated to prevent their mischievous intrusion upon human activities. Accordingly, the rites of religion were performed primarily to secure exemption from interference by demons, and secondarily to secure their help.

The Roman religion therefore developed into a sort of contract between men and the gods. Thus, when the rites of religion were properly carried out, the spirits were supposedly under obligation to protect, or at least not to molest, those who had propitiated them. Roman religion perpetuated this concept long after the spirits toward whom it was directed were forgotten. It is reflected in saint worship.

The spirits of farm and house, lares and penates, were given special attention and were honored by special household rites. Vesta became the goddess of the hearth, and Ceres the goddess of the field. Vulcan was worshipped as the fire spirit. There were, as well, greater and more powerful gods, worshipped on a national basis. Mars, later the god of war, is thought to have been in primitive times an agricultural deity. Jupiter, the sky god, became supreme in the Roman Pantheon.

The Expanded Pantheon.--The pantheon of Roman gods grew as the centuries passed and Roman life became more complex. The tendency was to find objectives for worship in ideas, in concepts, rather than in actual persons. Love, the hearth, maternity, fertility, wealth, political genius, and even the spirit of the city of Rome itself, Roma--all were worshipped. Sometimes these abstractions were personalized, sometimes not.

Foreign influences greatly affected Roman religion. Greek philosophy hastened the destruction of the confidence of the Roman intellectuals in their ancient gods. Skepticism, either agnostic or atheistic, was widespread, particularly in the decades preceding the birth of Christ. At the same time, many foreign gods were adopted as Roman imperial power expanded. If the gods Rome already revered had brought such prosperity, the addition of the gods of allied or conquered states would, it was thought, bring further benefit. By recognizing foreign gods the Romans also found it easier to secure the loyalty of conquered peoples. In fact, as a matter of policy, Rome was remarkably tolerant toward both the political and the religious practices of conquered peoples, and wherever possible she left these intact.

Only in provinces where resistance persisted were local religions stamped out and Roman forms imposed upon the people. An example of this was in Gaul, where the Druidic priests were accused of keeping the people in a state of restlessness under Roman government. Even in restless Judea, with which Rome had been in alliance for a century, the Jews were permitted to retain their local political system until the popular outcry against Archelaus in a.d. 6 necessitated the substitution of an imperial procurator. Even then Jewish religion, strangely atheistic as it seemed to the Romans because of its lack of images, was permitted to function. Although the Jews refused to pray to Roma, the abstract genius of Rome, or to the government, or to the emperor, they were permitted to maintain their worship of Jehovah provided they pray for Rome.

The Mystery Cults.--However, Oriental mystery cults were not accepted so complacently by the Roman authorities. These cults were highly ritualistic and personal. Each mystery cult centered in the worship of a particular deity, such as Dionysus, Bacchus, Isis, the Great Mother (nature personified), or Mithras. The devotee might worship other gods in an incidental way, but most of his devotional activity was directed to the cult god or goddess. After giving needed instruction, the priest of the cult would initiate the devotee, and then step by step and degree lead him deeper into the mysteries of the cult worship. He was supposed to come into more and more intimate knowledge of the god, and, it was believed, would eventually enter the favored experience of mystical union with him. Upon this special deity he would always depend for help in times of difficulty.

Although some of the rites of the cults were of a more quiet kind, and for the most part highly secret, some forms of cult worship were wild orgies. It was because of their highly immoral and socially dangerous nature that the Senate expelled from Rome certain of the cults.

The mystery cults were very popular among the common people in the time of Augustus, and replaced the old Roman nature gods in which the people had to a large extent lost faith. The cult of Mithras, often called the Persian cult, which had been imported from the East by the soldiers of Pompey some seventy years before Christ, gained great vogue in the Roman army, and by the 3d century after Christ, it was no mean competitor of Christianity.

Emperor Worship.--The religion of the Greeks was basically a worship of the great and the beautiful. Such universal concepts as love, beauty, and fertility, or concrete elements such as earth, sea, and sun, were personified and deified. Heroes and heroines who were reputed to have wielded great influence in the distant past were raised to the position of gods. These numerous deified personalities were thought to have joined the even more ancient gods in their home on Mt. Olympus. There they lived, loved, and fought, while supervising affairs in the world, though always isolated by their divinity from any deep personal concern for humanity.

There were, however, three avenues by which the gods were supposed to concern themselves with humankind. It was thought that if a man became very successful he would arouse the jealousy of the gods, and that they would proceed to destroy his wealth, possibly even the man himself. It behooved him, therefore, to conceal his success lest the gods punish him. It was supposed, also, that from time to time the gods became intimate with women--or the goddesses with men--and new generations of remarkable men--or gods--resulted. Thus Heracles, known to Romans as Hercules, was supposed to be the son of Zeus, the Roman Jupiter, by the woman Alcmene. Aphrodite, the Roman Venus, was supposedly a daughter of Zeus by the woman Dione. A third evidence of divine interposition was thought to be seen when anyone achieved striking success in an enterprise or undertaking. Thus it seemed evident to the peoples of the East whom Alexander the Great conquered that he was possessed of a divine spirit, or genius, as the Latins called it, and the Greeks themselves eventually came to share that opinion.

In popular opinion the same was true of Julius Caesar, and when Octavian, his nephew and heir, proved extraordinarily successful in his administration of Rome's extensive territories, he soon became an object of worship, particularly in certain localities of Asia Minor. Even the morose Tiberius, the insane Caligula, and the timid Claudius were accounted divine. Though the despicable Nero laughed at his own supposed divinity, he was nevertheless proud of it with an adolescent pride. Vespasian, who lifted Rome part way out of the pit into which Nero had led it, is supposed to have said as he died, "I am about to become a god." Generally speaking, the cult of living emperors was confined to certain provincial areas and was not encouraged at Rome, where emperors were deified only after their death. Caligula and Domitian, however, actively sought the worship of their subjects.

It is little wonder that when the Romans heard the Jews speak of their Messiah--Deliverer--and the Christians of Jesus Christ as God, and of their expectation of His triumphant return as King, they concluded that both beings must be rivals of their emperor, and both religious groups thus enemies of the empire. This accounts, in part, for the resoluteness with which the Romans crushed repeated Jewish revolts and for their increasing determination to obliterate Christianity. The Christian apologist Tertullian, writing about the year a.d. 225, explained, "`You do not worship the gods,' you say; `and you do not offer sacrifice for the emperors.' Well, we do not offer sacrifice for others, for the same reason that we do not for ourselves,--namely, that your gods are not at all the objects of our worship. So we are accused of sacrilege and treason. This is the chief ground of charge against us--nay, it is the sum-total of our offending" (Apology, 10; ANF, vol. 3, p. 26).

By the time Augustus had become well established in his principate, and about the time our Lord was born in Bethlehem, an intense expectancy arose in Rome that out of the despair of the preceding period of civil war there would come a golden age. It was hoped that Augustus might have a son who would usher in that bright era of permanent peace and security. To this messianic hope various contemporary writers bear witness (see Vol. V,pp. 61, 62).

IX. Christianity and the Empire

Christianity and the State.--It has been pointed out that the Romans were tolerant of religions. As they enlarged their territorial conquests and acquisitions, they accepted the gods of their new subjects and greatly added to the number they already possessed. A religion was declared illegal only when it was hurtful to public morals, as in the case of the cults of Bacchus and Isis, or when the religion was understood to be a party to civil revolt, as with druidism in Gaul.

Even with the determined and religiously tenacious Jew, the Romans sought to be broad-minded. But they could not understand why he objected and rioted when they brought their own gods into Palestine. They could not understand how the Jews could worship a God who could not be visualized; that seemed to them a kind of atheism. They sneered at the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath, which they said was simply an opportunity for Jewish idleness. They resented the fact that the Jews refused to worship either Roma, the divine spirit of the Roman people, or the genius of the emperors. They knew there was a connection between certain tenets of the Jewish faith, especially their Messianism, and their civic restlessness under Roman rule. It was such considerations, added to their rebellious spirit and provocative acts, that eventually brought on wars that almost destroyed the Jewish race.

But in the earlier years of contact the conquerors sought to be understanding. When the Jewish leaders consented to pray for the emperor and his peoples, the Romans accepted the concession. They watched the Jews, and suppressed their sporadic revolts with an iron hand, but tolerated their religion.

Had the Jews accepted Christianity as one more Jewish sect, like Essenism or Pharisaism, the case of Christianity would have been different--in more ways than one, indeed. The Christian Jews started out with the concept that it was a religious reforming movement within Judaism, a saving leaven which would eventually permeate and redeem the whole Jewish race. But the majority of Jews did not share this view. Thousands of them embraced the Christian faith, but the race officially rejected it, for reasons which the Gospels and Acts make clear.

Hence Christianity could not stand before the world as a Jewish sect. It thus had no national roots. In the eyes of Rome, it was an upstart cult, and had no legal standing until the early 4th century. Hence Nero, when he needed a scapegoat for the burning of Rome, found a convenient victim in Christianity. A century later it was easy to blame the illegal sect for the disasters of earthquake and pestilence under which the Roman people suffered during the reigns of Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius, and these otherwise noble and beneficent emperors persecuted the Christians severely.

Roman Citizenship and Christianity.--It is not clearly understood how Roman citizenship extended beyond the confines of privileged classes in the capital city. Under Augustus Caesar it was gradually granted to the provinces, but even then it was restricted to individuals.

Tarsus, the home city of the apostle Paul, is an illustration of how Roman citizenship was probably acquired. For centuries before the apostle's birth it had been an important political and commercial center. There had been the usual mixing of population seen in any commercial city. Besides the original inhabitants, there were Greeks who had settled both before and during the time of Alexander the Great. After many vicissitudes and some decline, the city was reconstituted under Antiochus Epiphanes, and more Greeks, with others from less favored Greek-speaking lands, came into Cilicia and its capital city.

Doubtless there had been Jews in Tarsus for many generations, but many more entered under Antiochus Epiphanes. Perhaps many of these were conservatives, whom Antiochus was only too glad to move out of Palestine, which he was seeking to Hellenize. The result was a large Jewish colony in Tarsus, comparable to, though not as large as, the settlement in Alexandria, at the southern corner of the Mediterranean. As in Alexandria, there were then in Tarsus two main elements in the population--Gentiles and Jews--and the two were more or less uncongenial. See The Diaspora.

Through the years Tarsus had developed into a self-governing metropolis, and the Greeks and Jews were probably full citizens of the community. As in Alexandria, the Jews of Tarsus probably exerted their citizenship as a "tribe," a governmental device commonly used in both Greek and Roman cities. It has been suggested that the "kinsmen" Paul mentions in Rom. 16:7, 11, 21 were fellow tribesmen in the political sense, and came from Tarsus.

But this Tarsian citizenship did not mean Roman citizenship. During the Julian wars of 55-31 B.C. the Tarsians were favorable to the Caesarian party, and this became useful to both Julius Caesar and Octavian. If Roman citizenship had not been extended to favored ones in Tarsus during the era of Pompey or before, it probably was used as a reward for Julian loyalty during these years of bitter partisan struggle. This may have been the time when the family of Paul received Roman citizenship. This would be full citizenship, meaningful in any part of Rome's far-reaching jurisdiction. It is not known what proof of his status a citizen would have to carry when traveling, for credentials of this sort have not yet been identified.

When Paul's family moved to Tarsus it is impossible to know. There is no reason to credit the tradition which Jerome repeats that the family was transported there from Gischala in Palestine during the early Roman wars in Palestine. The fact that Paul was a Pharisee indicates either that the family transferred from Palestine late, after the sect had been formed there, about 150 B.C., or that, having previously settled in Tarsus, it had accepted the tenets of the sect as they spread among the dispersed Jews, the Diaspora.

In any case, Paul, a citizen of Tarsus, and probably belonging to one of the political "tribes," was also a Roman citizen. This position he had from his father, and not by purchase (Acts 22:28). He asserted it more than once, and made telling use of its privileges (chs. 16:37; 22:25-28; 25:8-12, 21-25; 26:30-32; 28:17-20).

Roman citizenship gave to its holder a measure of protection from oppression at the hand of magistrates or police and a firmer claim upon ultimate justice. A citizen under a capital charge could not legally be flogged, or worse, without fair trial, and had the right of appeal to the emperor as the chief magistrate of the Roman state. That this did not always save a man from the carelessness, the indifference, or the tyranny of local authorities is shown by the fact that Paul was flogged without full trial at Philippi (Acts 16:19-24), and at least twice more on other occasions (2 Cor. 11:25). That Roman citizenship could bring a man better hope for justice is witnessed by the care with which the magistrates of Philippi tried to atone for their previous mistake in dealing with Paul (Acts 16:35-39), and by the fact that Paul's appeal to Caesar kept him out of the hands of the fanatical and vengeful Jews in Jerusalem (ch. 25:8-12).

There is evidence to suggest that the time within which an appeal must be met by formal accusation, before it should be quashed, was probably two years. Since, upon the arrival of Paul in Rome as a prisoner, the Roman Jews were found to have no charges against him (Acts 28:17-22), and apparently no accusations came through from Palestine, his case was evidently canceled by default, and he was freed.

Christianity and the Fall of Rome.--In view of the debilitating weaknesses which existed in the Roman constitution and in Roman public and private life, it seems strange that so skilled a historian as Edward Gibbon should have based his great history on a completely false premise. One evening in October, 1764, this author of the famous and still factually reliable History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire was sitting amid the ruins of ancient Rome. As the wreckage of that city stood out before him, Gibbon fell to pondering the cause of the collapse of what had once been a glorious empire, as many a historian has pondered before and since. Well versed as he was in the history of the Church of Rome through the Middle Ages, and in its claim to be Rome's successor and heir, Gibbon thought he identified the basic cause of Rome's downfall: it was Christianity, said he.

Small wonder that evangelical Christians have rejected Gibbon's theory. The truth is that Rome was already in a dangerous condition, lacking only a strong external foe to administer its death stroke, when Julius Caesar rescued it. Again and again Rome was saved, barely in time, by an Augustus Caesar, a Vespasian, a Trajan, a Marcus Aurelius, and a Constantine. Christianity, the saving salt of Rome, gave the empire a prolonged lease of life. Much of the essence of pagan Rome--of its religion, law, and government--was then perpetuated in the Church of Rome, whose historians consider it to be, in certain significant respects, the legitimate successor of the defunct Roman Empire.

Bibliography

Sources

Cicero, Marcus Tullius. [Essays.] Mainly philosophical but with important legal and political data. A standard edition of Cicero's works, with both Latin text and English translation, is in the Loeb Classical Library.

Dio Cassius Cocceianus. Historia Romana. See note, Vol. V, pp. 80, 81.

Josephus Flavius. The Jewish Antiquities; and The Jewish War. See note, Vol. V, p. 81.

Velleius Paterculus, Gaius. Compendium of Roman History. A short sketch of the civil wars and principate to a.d. 30, biased in favor of Tiberius. In the Loeb Classical Library.

Sallustius Crispus, Gaius. [Works.] A source history covering the period 120-65 B.C., fragmentary in the later period, but highly esteemed. Sallust was a partisan of Julius Caesar. In the Loeb Classical Library.

The Loeb Classical Library. A series of scholarly editions of various classical works in the original languages accompanied by English versions by various translators. The volumes are issued at irregular intervals. This series has been issued by various publishers, earlier by William Heinemann, London, and G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York; now by Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. Moral Essays. Philosophic and moralistic essays by Nero's mentor. A valuable edition of Seneca's works, with English translation, is in the Loeb Classical Library.

Livius, Titus. The History of Rome. At the turn of the Christian Era Livy wrote a complete history of Rome down to his own day, from the senatorial point of view. He began with the coming of Aeneas. His work is artistic, patriotic, and moralistic. He lacked the critical attitude and was not always accurate. Important parts of his great work are missing. Standard edition is in Loeb Classical Library.

Suetonius Tranquillus, Gaius. The Lives of the Caesars. See note, Vol. V, p. 81.

Tacitus, Gaius Cornelius. Annals; and Histories. See note, Vol. V, p. 81.

Authorities

Boak, Arthur E. R. A History of Rome to 565 A.D. 4th ed. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1955. 569 pp. A survey, in textbook style, accurate and well balanced, with due attention to social life and art.

Bury, John B. A History of the Roman Empire From Its Foundation to the Death of Marcus Aurelius. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1893. An excellent textbook.

Canfield, Leon Hardy. Early Persecutions of the Christians. New York: Columbia University Press, 1913. A careful, critical history of persecutions directed against the Christians by pagan Rome down to and including the time of Hadrian.

Fowler, William Warde. The Religious Experience of the Roman People. London: Macmillan & Co., Ltd., 1911. 504 pp. A careful summary of the changing religious life of the Romans from earliest times to the age of Augustus.

Friedlaender, Ludwig. Roman Life and Manners Under the Early Empire. Translated from the German, London: G. Routledge and Sons, Ltd., 1908-13. 4 vols. A completely informative work, with remarkably little bias.

Gibbon, Edward. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Ed. by J. B. Bury. 7 vols. London: Methuen and Co., Ltd. Still authoritative after nearly two centuries, compendious and detailed, with more than a slight anti-Christian bias. Bury's is the best edition.

Glover, Terrot R. The Conflict of Religions in the Early Roman Empire. 3d ed. London: Methuen and Co., Ltd., 1909. 359 pp. A view of the various religious developments in imperial Rome.

Merivale, Charles. History of the Romans Under the Empire. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1887. 7 vols. in 4. Written from the sources, detailed and critical in a common-sense way, but verbose and ill balanced.

Mommsen, Theodor. The History of Rome. New York: C. Scribner and Company, 1885. 4 vols. Also in Everyman's Library. A thorough, careful, and unbiased history, with masterly analyses of source information.

_______. Römisches Staatsrecht. Vol. 1 of Handbuch der römischen älterthümer. Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1871-88. A most masterly treatment of the Roman political and legal system.

I. Introduction

Unlike many parts of the Old Testament, which frequently contain a framework of genealogical material and references to dated events, the New Testament is not built upon an exact chronological structure. Its time elements must be determined largely from incidental references to known events in secular history, and from the mention of occasional time periods. The following survey of available evidence is brief rather than exhaustive.

II. Secular Historical Data

There are several historical events mentioned in the Acts and Pauline Epistles that aid in establishing a chronology. However, since almost all of these defy exact dating, any chronological scheme built upon them must remain only approximate. These events are the following: the rulership of Aretas in Damascus, the death of Herod Agrippa I, the famine in Palestine during the reign of Claudius, the proconsulship of Gallio in Achaia, and the accession of Festus as procurator in Palestine. Besides these occurrences, which are all mentioned in the New Testament, there are also certain happenings during the reign of Nero, which, though not referred to in the Acts or the epistles, nevertheless may have some bearing on New Testament chronology.

Rulership of Aretas in Damascus.--In 2 Cor. 11:32 Paul indicates that at the time of his escape from Damascus (see Acts 9:25) Aretas ruled Damascus, or at least the Nabataeans there, through an ethnarch, or deputy. Aretas IV was king of the Nabataeans from about 9 B.C. to about a.d. 40. However, evidence from coins indicates that Damascus was under Roman rule during the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius, so Aretas could scarcely have had authority there before the death of Tiberius in a.d. 37. Consequently the dates of Aretas' rule in Damascus are probably a.d. 37 to 40. Thus Paul's escape doubtless occurred during that time.

Death of Herod Agrippa I.--Acts 12:1-23 apparently places the death of James the son of Zebedee and the imprisonment of Peter immediately before the death of Herod Agrippa I. Agrippa succeeded to the territories of Philip the tetrarch shortly after Caligula became emperor in a.d. 37 (Josephus Antiquities xviii. 6. 10; War ii. 9. 6 [18]). Shortly before his death, in January, a.d. 41, Caligula added Galilee to Agrippa's territories (Antiquities xviii. 7. 2), and soon after the accession of the next emperor, Claudius, Agrippa received Judea as well (ibid. xix. 5. 1; War ii. 11. 5 [215]). Josephus (Antiquities xix. 8. 2) declares that Agrippa ruled over Judea for three years, and that he was completing the seventh year of his reign at the time of his death. This places the death of Agrippa in a.d. 44. Acts 12:3, 19 indicates that it occurred about Passover time, and so in the spring. See Palestine Under the Herodians.

Famine in Palestine.--Acts 11:28 records that Agabus, a prophet at Antioch, foretold a famine in Palestine that occurred during the reign of Claudius(a.d. 41-54). In response to his prophecy, Saul and Barnabas were sent by the church at Antioch to take an offering to the Christians of Judea (vs. 29, 30). Josephus records a famine in Palestine during the procuratorships of Fadus and Alexander (Antiquities xx. 5. 2; cf. ibid. 2. 5) that most probably is to be identified with the famine mentioned in Acts. Inasmuch as Fadus was put in charge of Judea in place of Agrippa I, who died in a.d. 44, it is reasonable to date the beginning of his rule in that year. The exact date of the end of Fadus' procuratorship and the coming of his successor, Alexander, cannot be ascertained. However, Josephus (ibid. 5. 2), in recording the death of Herod of Chalcis as occurring in the 8th year of Claudius (probably fall of a.d. 47 to fall of a.d. 48; cf. Mishnah Rosh Hashanah 1. 1; Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 1), also indicates that this event happened during the procuratorship of Cumanus, who was successor to Alexander. Consequently, Alexander's term must have lasted no longer than a.d. 48. Therefore it appears safe to conclude that the famine mentioned in Acts 11 occurred sometime between a.d. 44 and 48, and since it fell in the periods of both procurators, it appears more than likely that it came earlier rather than later during this period.

Expulsion of Jews From Rome.--When Paul reached Corinth on his Second Missionary Journey, he found there Aquila and Priscilla, a Jewish couple who had recently left Rome when Claudius expelled the Jews from that city (see Acts 18:1, 2). The only ancient writer who mentions a date for this event is the 5th-century historian Orosius (History vii. 6. 15). He gives Josephus as his source for placing Claudius' expulsion of the Jews in that emperor's ninth year (a.d. 48-49). Although no extant text of Josephus records this, there is no reason to conclude that Orosius' statement is necessarily in error.

Gallio's Proconsulship in Achaia.--Sometime during Paul's stay at Corinth on his Second Missionary Journey, Gallio was proconsul of Achaia (see Acts 18:12). As contrasted with the procurators, who held office at the pleasure of the emperor, the proconsuls, who were appointed by the Roman Senate, normally governed only one year, although at times they might stay for two. Consequently, Gallio was probably not long in Achaia. A fragmentary inscription of Claudius from Delphi, in Achaia, refers to Gallio as proconsul; other inscriptions from the same reign help to fix the date as a.d. 51 or 52 (see Lake's chronological note in The Beginnings of Christianity, Part I: The Acts of the Apostles, edited by F. J. Foakes Jackson and Kirsopp Lake, vol. 5, pp. 460-464). Since proconsuls normally took office at the beginning of summer, it appears that Gallio was proconsul of Achaia either from the middle of a.d. 51 to the middle of a.d. 52, or from the middle of a.d. 52 to the middle of a.d. 53. If he was proconsul two years, his rulership might have covered this entire period.

Accession of Festus.--Acts 24:27 to 25:12 indicates that Paul's two-year imprisonment at Caesarea ended not long after Festus succeeded Felix as Roman procurator of Judea. Extant sources do not make possible an exact dating of this transfer of rulership. Its earliest possible date may be determined by the fact that two years before (ch. 24:27), when Paul was arrested at Jerusalem, the Egyptian insurrectionist with whom the apostle was confused had apparently but recently staged his revolt and escaped (see ch. 21:37, 38). Josephus states that this occurred during the rulership of Felix (Antiquities xx. 8. 6; War ii. 13. 5 [263]) and indicates that Nero was emperor at the time (Antiquities xx. 8. 4, 5). Since Nero succeeded to the throne in October, a.d. 54, Paul's arrest, which occurred at the time of Pentecost, could have been no earlier than the early summer of a.d. 55. His commitment to Rome consequently could have been, at the earliest, somewhat more than a year later (Luke's "two years," Acts 24:27; see Vol. II, pp. 136, 137), in the autumn of a.d. 56. As Festus had but recently arrived at that time, a.d. 56 apparently is the earliest possible date for his accession.

The latest possible date for the arrival of Festus is to be derived from the fact that Festus' successor, Albinus, was procurator at the time of the Feast of Tabernacles in the autumn of a.d. 62, "four years before the war" (Josephus War vi. 5. 3 [300]; Loeb ed., vol. 2, p. 463). Since it seems probable that Festus did not rule less than two years, the latest date that can reasonably be assigned for his accession is a.d. 60.

As between the two extremes, a.d. 56 and a.d. 60, for the change from Felix to Festus, a date toward the latter part of this period appears more likely. The appointment of Felix apparently was made sometime before Claudius died and was confirmed by Nero when he succeeded to the throne as emperor (a.d. 54; ibid. ii. 12. 8 [247]; 13. 2 [252, 253]). The fact that Paul, more than a year before the coming of Festus, had referred to Felix as having "been of many years a judge unto this nation" (Acts 24:10) indicates that his rule could hardly have ended much before a.d. 60. Therefore it appears safe to date the arrival of Festus in Palestine about a.d. 60.

III. Data From the New Testament

More than most writers in the New Testament, Luke, in the Acts, is conscious of the chronological framework of his narrative. Consequently, in addition to the events discussed above, which he synchronizes more or less with events of secular history, Luke also provides other time elements in his narrative that aid in the reconstruction of a chronology. In addition, Paul himself makes several incidental statements that give further information.

Paul first appears in the narrative of Acts at the time of the stoning of Stephen. There is no direct historical evidence for the date of Stephen's death. However, certain theological considerations suggest a date. The 70 weeks of Daniel's prophecy began in 457 B.C. (see on Dan. 9:25, and Vol. III, pp. 97-104), and ended in a.d. 34. This time period, according to the angel's statement to Daniel, was "determined upon thy people" (v. 24). It was a special period allotted to the Jews, after which, it is reasonable to assume, the Jews were no longer to be considered the chosen people of God. Of the events recorded in the Acts, the martyrdom of Stephen by the Sanhedrin is perhaps the most clearly representative of the Jews' official rejection of Christianity. Although the apostles continued thereafter to seek and to make Jewish converts, and although they did not go immediately to the Gentiles with the gospel, it was shortly after this event that Paul, the pre-eminent apostle to the Gentiles, was converted. Apparently about the same time Peter baptized the Roman centurion, Cornelius (Acts 10:44-48). All this seems to suggest the stoning of Stephen as dramatically signaling the end of the 70 weeks (see GC 328). On this basis a.d. 34 has been taken by this commentary as a working date for the stoning of Stephen. The conversion of Paul must have occurred soon afterward.

After his conversion, probably in a.d. 35, Paul remained at Damascus "many days" (ch. 9:23). Inasmuch as his next journey recorded in Acts was to Jerusalem after his escape from Damascus in a basket (Acts 9:25, 26; cf. 2 Cor. 11:32), his retreat to Arabia (see Gal. 1:17) must have occurred prior to this event, since at that time he had not yet visited Jerusalem after his conversion. His first visit to Jerusalem came "three years" after his conversion (Gal. 1:18), and so may be dated about a.d. 38. It was probably at that time that the vision recorded in Acts 22:17-21 occurred. Following his visit to Jerusalem Paul went to Tarsus (see ch. 9:30). It was here that Barnabas found him some years later and invited him to assist in the work at Antioch. Paul remained a "whole year" (see ch. 11:25, 26) at Antioch. It was "in these days" that the prophet Agabus foretold the famine in Judea and the church of Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem with gifts (see vs. 27-30). "About that time" (see ch. 12:1; probably while Paul was at Antioch rather than after his visit to Jerusalem with Barnabas; see Additional Notes on Acts 12, Note 2) Herod killed James and imprisoned Peter (see vs. 1-3), and soon after died, in a.d. 44 (see p. 98).

At the end of his one-year stay at Antioch, about a.d. 44-45, Paul and Barnabas set out on the First Missionary Journey. How long this tour lasted is not known, but upon their return, Paul remained at Antioch a "long time" (see Acts 14:28). When dissension arose over Gentiles' having been admitted to the church without circumcision, Paul, Barnabas, and others went to Jerusalem, where the problem was settled at a council with the apostles (ch. 15). This visit to Jerusalem appears most probably to be the same one that Paul mentions in Gal. 2:1 as having occurred "fourteen years after," inasmuch as the issue in each case was circumcision (see Additional Note on Acts 15). However, the context does not indicate clearly the event from which these fourteen years are to be reckoned. They may be understood as beginning either with Paul's conversion (Gal. 1:15, 16) or with his first visit to Jerusalem three years later (v. 18). Consequently, latitude must be allowed in dating the Jerusalem Council, but it may be placed tentatively about a.d. 49.

"Some days" (Acts 15:36) after Paul's return to Antioch, he proposed the Second Missionary Journey to Barnabas, and when dissension arose between the two men, Paul set out with Silas. After preaching in Phrygia, Galatia, and Mysia, they came to Troas. Thence they sailed to Macedonia and preached at Philippi, Thessalonica, and Berea. Then Paul went to Athens, and after his experience on Mars' Hill he settled at Corinth, where he remained "a year and six months" (ch. 18:11). Apparently during the latter part of this period, or possibly at the end of it, the uprising before the proconsul Gallio occurred, which has been dated above as sometimes between the summer of a.d. 51 and a.d. 53. "Paul after this tarried there yet a good while" (v. 18) and then set out for Palestine. In harmony with this evidence Paul's return from the second journey may be dated tentatively about a.d. 52.

Before beginning his Third Missionary Journey, which lasted probably from a.d. 53 to 58, Paul again spent "some time" at Antioch (ch. 18:23). Then he traveled through Galatia and Phrygia and on to Ephesus, where he spent "three years" (ch. 20:31). Next he went through Macedonia to Greece, spending three months there (v. 3), and returned again through Macedonia about Passover time (spring) to Troas in Asia Minor, whence he sailed to Miletus and then to Palestine, arriving in late spring or early summer about the time of Pentecost, probably in a.d. 58. In Jerusalem Paul was attacked by a mob, imprisoned, and soon after taken to Caesarea, where he remained for "two years" (ch. 24:27) until Festus, soon after his arrival (c. a.d. 60, see p. 99), sent him to Rome to appear before Caesar. Paul and his party sailed in the autumn, but did not complete their journey before they were shipwrecked and forced to winter on the island of Melita (see chs. 27:12, 14-44; 28:1). "After three months" (ch. 28:11) they were able to continue their journey, and arrived in Rome probably early the following spring, a.d. 61. Here Paul was a prisoner some two years, which, in view of the fact that Luke gives this period as "two whole years" (ch. 28:30), was probably somewhat more than two years and probably from a.d. 61-63.

At this point the record of Acts comes to an end, and further chronology can be constructed only conjecturally, on the basis of circumstantial evidence found in Paul's later epistles. The two epistles, 1 Timothy and Titus, give a picture of Paul's travels and his traveling companions that does not fit into the framework of the narrative of Acts (see Vol. V, pp. 183-185). Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that Paul was released after "two whole years" of imprisonment at Rome and that the travels recorded in these two epistles took place after that release. How long he was at liberty we cannot determine. If he was released in a.d. 63 he could have been away from the city during Nero's persecution that followed the great fire in that city in July, a.d. 64. His travels during this period took him at least to Crete (Titus 1:5), and to Ephesus (1 Tim. 1:3), probably to Macedonia (1 Tim. 1:3) and Greece (2 Tim. 4:20), and perhaps to Spain (Rom. 15:24, 28; cf. the tradition recorded by Clement of Rome, that Paul reached the "limit of the west" [The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians 5 ANF, vol. 1, p. 6]). Apparently sometime during these travels Paul once more was arrested, perhaps at Troas (see 2 Tim. 4:13), and was taken to Rome. In 2 Tim. he is a prisoner there, and this time he expected to die soon (ch. 4:6). Conceivably his condemnation would not have occurred without another hearing before Nero, and as Nero left Rome in September, a.d. 66, for a visit to Greece, Paul's trial may have occurred about that time. His death may reasonably be placed shortly afterward, perhaps in a.d. 67.

IV. Tentative Chronology of the Acts

A.D.

31

Crucifixion, Ascension, Pentecost (see Vol. V, pp. 251-254).

34

Stephen stoned; church persecuted; gospel carried to Samaria.

35

Paul converted.

35-38

Paul at Damascus and in Arabia.

38

Paul escapes from Damascus during reign of Aretas; visits Jerusalem "after three

years" (Gal. 1:18); goes to Tarsus.

44

James the brother of John martyred; Peter imprisoned at Passover time; Agrippa

dies.

44-45

Barnabas brings Paul to Antioch; Paul remains there "a whole year" (Acts 11:26=rAc 11:26).

45

Barnabas and Paul take famine relief to Jerusalem.

45-47

Paul's First Missionary Journey; on return Paul remains at Antioch "no little time"

(Acts 14:28, RSV).

49

Jerusalem Council, "fourteen years after" (Gal. 2:1).

49

Paul begins Second Missionary Journey; preaches in Phrygia, Galatia, and enters

Europe.

51

Paul arrives at Corinth, staying one and one-half years.

52

End of Second Missionary Journey; Paul "some time" at Antioch (Acts 18:23).

53-58

Paul's Third Missionary Journey: travels through Asia Minor, stays three years

at Ephesus, travels through Macedonia, stays three months at Corinth.

58-60

Paul imprisoned at Caesarea "two years" (Acts 24:27); leaves in autumn.

60-61

Paul's journey to Rome, arriving in spring.

61-63

Paul a prisoner in Rome "two whole years" (Acts 28:30).

63-66

Paul travels in Crete, Asia Minor, Macedonia.

67

Dea

V. Tentative Chronology of Paul's Epistles

The chronology of Paul's ministry constitutes the basis for a chronological arrangement of his extant letters. An absolute chronology of Paul's life and ministry, however, cannot yet be worked out, because the underlying source material is either too fragmentary or ambiguous. Therefore more than one possible date may be suggested for most of the events in his life (see pp. 97-101). Consequently it is equally impossible to date definitely the writing of his various letters.

However, the margin of error with regard to the dates presented in this article cannot be great. While the true dates may lie a few years earlier or later than those suggested here, there can be no doubt that the dates presented herewith, which are based on all available source material, are very nearly correct. If chronological data should be discovered fixing definitely the dates of the administrations of Felix, Festus, or Sergius Paulus, it would be possible to place Paul's chronology on a firmer basis. As long as this cannot be done, any chronological scheme can be only tentative.

Therefore the scheme presented here makes no claim to finality on the chronology of Paul's letters, but it presents the results of an honest effort to find a solution for all available data, inspired and secular, Biblical and non-Biblical, that shed light on the subject under discussion. The epistles are examined in their presumed chronological order. (See also the Introduction to each).

1 Thessalonians.--This is Paul's first preserved epistle, but probably not his first letter to a church, because at that time he seems to have been known already as a letter writer. This is suggested by his warning against false epistles bearing his name, which may have been in circulation shortly afterward, at the time when the second letter to the Thessalonians was written (2 Thess. 2:2). The fact that at the same time Paul draws his reader's attention to his personal signature as a characteristic of "every epistle" (ch. 3:17) of his also suggests that forged letters were circulating among the churches under his name. Such letters could have had success only if Paul was already known as a man who frequently expressed his opinion in letters to various churches or individuals. It seems probable that a number of lost letters preceded 1 Thessalonians.

The church at Thessalonica, to which 1 Thessalonians was addressed, had been founded by Paul during his Second Missionary Journey (a.d. 49-52). Thessalonica, the capital of Macedonia, was governed by seven politarchs under a prefect, and had a population of some 200,000. It is unknown how long Paul stayed there before disturbances incited by the Jews forced him to leave the city and continue his journey. His stay seems to have been rather short, as can be gathered from his desire to return to Thessalonica as soon as possible in order to complete work that he considered as needing his further attention. From Thessalonica Paul went first to Berea and then to Athens, leaving converts behind in each place when he departed. From Athens Paul sent Timothy to Thessalonica, since he found himself unable to go (1 Thess. 2:17 to 3:6). By the time Timothy returned with Silas, Paul had moved on to Corinth (Acts 18:5), where Timothy reported to him concerning the spiritual condition of the church at Thessalonica. Paul, realizing that certain misunderstanding concerning his teachings needed immediate attention there, wrote a letter known as 1 Thessalonians.

It seems, therefore, that 1 Thessalonians was written shortly after Paul's arrival in Corinth. According to the tentative chronology of Paul's ministry accepted in this commentary, this would be in a.d. 51 (see pp. 100, 102).

2 Thessalonians.--This letter cannot have been written much later than the first, because its contents are similar, and the same associates of Paul, Silas and Timothy, are mentioned at the beginning of the letter (2 Thess. 1:1; cf. 1 Thess. 1:1). This second letter was probably occasioned by the return from Thessalonica of the bearer of the first epistle, from whom Paul learned that his words concerning the imminence of the second advent were being misunderstood and misapplied by certain elements in the church. Therefore Paul gave to this new exposition of his teaching concerning the second coming of Christ a strongly prophetic tone, revealing to his readers that certain great events, especially the reign of Antichrist, would precede Christ's return.

These considerations are the basis for dating the second letter to the Thessalonians not long after the first, either in the last months of a.d. 51 or in the early months of a.d. 52, while Paul was busily engaged in building up the Christian church at Corinth, which his labor had brought into existence.

1 Corinthians.--This letter was written from Ephesus (1 Cor. 16:8), where the apostle Paul labored some three years (a.d. 54-57) during his Third Missionary Journey (Acts 20:31; cf. AA 291). Earlier Paul had sent a letter to Corinth, in which he had admonished his readers to have no company with fornicators (1 Cor. 5:9). Hence, the so-called first epistle to the Corinthians is really the second letter addressed to that church. It was occasioned in the first place by reports received by Paul concerning certain deplorable conditions in Corinth (chs. 1:11; 5:1) that urgently required attention (chs. 1 to 6), and in the second place by a number of questions put before the apostle by the Corinthians (chs. 7:1; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1). These required detailed answers.

The letter was written not long before the apostle's departure from Ephesus. Paul had planned to leave the city shortly after Pentecost (1 Cor. 16:8), but the outbreak of the riot described by Luke in Acts 19:23-41 apparently forced him to leave earlier. These historical circumstances alluded to in his letter make it possible to date the epistle in the spring of a.d. 57, on the eve of his departure from Ephesus. Whether it was sent in care of Titus is not certain, but possible.

2 Corinthians.--This letter can be dated easily, since it was written in Macedonia shortly after Paul had left Ephesus in a.d. 57. Inasmuch as Paul's earlier efforts to remedy the evils existing in that church had been without success (2 Cor. 2:1; 12:21), the apostle had decided to make another attempt at reconciliation through Titus, his young assistant in the ministry.

Titus had left Ephesus for Corinth probably in the early spring of a.d. 57, and may have carried the so-called first epistle to the Corinthians. At the departure of Titus, apparently the two men agreed that Titus, after having accomplished his task at Corinth, would proceed to Troas, where Paul planned to meet him (ch. 2:12, 13). Great was the disappointment of the apostle when, upon arriving at Troas, he learned that Titus had not yet arrived. Although he found good prospects for a successful work in Troas, he continued his journey to Macedonia, and was much relieved to meet Titus in one of the Macedonian cities. The joy of meeting Titus was especially caused by the good report Paul received about the change of heart of the erring members at Corinth, who had not only gladly accepted Titus as Paul's representative, but had also accepted his message of rebuke, and had made wrongs right (ch. 7:5-7).

When Paul learned that Titus' tactful work had been successful above expectations, he requested the young man to return to Corinth and continue the good work already begun (ch. 8:16-18, 22-24), while Paul spent more time among the churches of Macedonia. Paul gave Titus another letter, our 2 Corinthians, in which he eloquently expressed his joy over the good reports he had received concerning the church of Corinth. He also announced to them his plan to come to Corinth after a short stay in Macedonia (chs. 12:14; 13:1). Therefore this letter can be dated probably in the summer of a.d. 57.

Galatians and Romans.--Scholars hold two views concerning the date of the Galatian letter. Most scholars believe that this letter was written during Paul's first visit to Corinth, at approximately the same time the two letters to the Thessalonians were written. This dating is based upon Paul's statement of surprise that the Galatians had "so soon" left his gospel in exchange for another (Gal. 1:6). In this epistle Paul apparently recounts his personal experiences only up to the time of the apostles' council at Jerusalem (see Gal. 1:15 to 2:10; Acts 15), which preceded his evangelization of Galatia on the Second Missionary Journey (Acts 16:6). Therefore those who hold this view conclude his reference to their having apostatized "so soon" implies that Paul was writing to them soon after his visit there on the second journey. Between his visit to the churches in Galatia during the initial part of his Second Missionary Journey (Acts 16:6) and his first stay in Corinth, probably less than two years elapsed, a period that he well might characterize as "soon." On the other hand, those who hold to a later date point out that the word "soon" in Gal. 1:6 cannot be construed as placing any definite limit on the time involved. The word "soon" might as well refer to a brief interval after his visit there on the third journey.

An alternate view places the writing of Galatians during Paul's three-month stay at Corinth on his Third Missionary Journey, about a.d. 58. This is based on the fact that the two letters, Galatians and Romans, are so much alike in subject matter as to make it seem likely that they were written at about the same time. Galatians was called forth by a doctrinal controversy that moved Paul's soul strongly. Romans presents an amplification of this same theme, and may therefore have been written soon after Galatians.

The cause for the writing of Galatians lay in the reported apostasy of the Christian churches in the province by that name. Under the influence of Judaizers, these Christians were seeking salvation by works (see p. 33). Paul was so shocked by the gravity of the situation, as reflected by the reports he received on this matter, that he wrote to the Galatians the most stern of his preserved letters. Since he himself had founded the churches in the province of Galatia, they were especially dear to his heart, and their apostasy caused him so much grief that no effort seemed too great to rectify the existing evil. This commentary favors the later date, about a.d. 58.

At about the same time, while Paul's heart was full of the subject of righteousness by faith, he seems also to have written his letter to the Romans (see AA 373, 383).

The Epistle to the Romans contains a number of clear statements concerning the time when it was written. Paul planned to continue his work in the west, especially in Spain (Rom. 15:24, 28), to which country he hoped to go in the near future. However, first he had to make a brief journey to Jerusalem, because he felt honor bound to transmit personally to the poor in Jerusalem the funds he had collected for them in the churches in Greece and Macedonia (vs. 25-27). On his planned journey to Spain he hoped to fulfill one of his desires of many years' standing, by visiting the church of Rome (chs. 1:8-11; 15:23, 24).

The statements concerning Paul's travel plans show clearly that the letter to the Romans was written shortly before his departure from Corinth for Jerusalem. Since Paul left Corinth shortly before the Passover season of the year a.d. 58 (see Acts 20:16), after having spent three months in Greece (v. 3), it may be concluded that the letter to the Romans was written during the early months of a.d. 58. He probably wrote Galatians shortly before, either late in a.d. 57 or early in 58.

The Prison Epistles.--The prison epistles are those to the Ephesians, the Philippians, the Colossians, and Philemon. That these prison epistles were indeed written during an imprisonment of the apostle is clearly indicated by the following passages: Eph. 6:20; Phil. 1:13, 14; Col. 4:18; Philemon 1, 9.

That the letters to the Ephesians, the Colossians, and Philemon were sent approximately at the same time is evident from the fact that Paul names the same individuals in the various epistles. Paul was sending Tychicus and Onesimus with the letters to Ephesus, Colossae, and Philemon (Eph. 6:21; Col. 4:7-9). Onesimus was a runaway slave of Philemon who had been converted by Paul during the apostle's imprisonment and who was now ready to return to Philemon, his master at Colossae (Philemon 10, 11). Paul wrote the Epistle to Philemon as a note of recommendation to Onesimus' master.

From the earliest times Rome has been considered as the place from which the prison epistles were dispatched. They usually have been dated in the latter part of the apostle's imprisonment there, since in them he expresses a hope of being released, for which he must have had some reason (Phil. 2:24; Philemon 22). His imprisonment in Rome lasted two years (Acts 28:30), from the spring of a.d. 61 to a.d. 63, according to the chronology of Paul's ministry adopted in this commentary. Therefore Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon can be dated about a.d. 62.

Some scholars assign these epistles to the two years of Paul's imprisonment at Caesarea (probably spring of a.d. 58 to autumn of a.d. 60), or even in an unknown period of imprisonment in Asia Minor. They hold that the tenor of these letters demands a greater geographical proximity between Paul and his addressees than would have been the case if Paul had written them from Rome. These arguments, however, are not very convincing, and the theories of dating the prison epistles either in the Caesarean captivity or another unknown imprisonment of Paul have found little favorable response from New Testament scholars in general.

The letter to the Philippians is probably the last of the prison epistles. It implies that Paul had been in Rome some time, and already had seen considerable fruitage from his labors (see on Phil. 1:12-14). Furthermore, the whole atmosphere of the letter is one of happiness. Apparently Paul expected a favorable outcome of his appeal to Caesar (Acts 25:10-12), which would allow him once more to visit his beloved church in Philippi (Phil. 2:24). At the same time his words leave no doubt in the mind of his readers that an unfavorable decision would not have found him unprepared (Phil. 1:19, 20, 22-25). It may therefore be concluded that Philippians was probably written in a.d. 63.

Hebrews.--The so-called "Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews" differs from the other thirteen Pauline letters in that the text nowhere contains the name of its author. Paul introduces every one of his other known letters with his name (cf. on Rom. 1:1). From early Christian times there has been much discussion as to whether Paul was really the writer of this epistle. The conclusion of this commentary is that while Paul may not himself have phrased the letter to the Hebrews, it contains, nevertheless, his teachings, and so may be counted among his epistles (for a fuller discussion of this problem see Introduction to the Epistle to the Hebrews, Vol. VII).

However, accepting Paul as author of Hebrews does not solve the problems connected with its place and date of origin. Where the letter was written is not known, although the words, "They of Italy salute you" (Heb. 13:24), though ambiguous, suggest that it originated in Italy.

Concerning the date of Hebrews there is an equal amount of uncertainty. Clement of Rome was acquainted with the letter about a.d. 95, for in writing to the Corinthians at that time he quoted Heb. 1:3-14 (Clement First Epistle to the Corinthians 36). This proves not only that the letter was known in Rome before the end of the 1st century, but also that its origin must be sought in the apostolic era. In fact, there are evidences that suggest that the epistle was written before the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in a.d. 70. Otherwise it would seem that an author who emphasizes the voidness and unprofitableness of the old covenant and its typical service, as the author of Hebrews does, certainly would have pointed to the cessation of the rituals connected with that service if the Temple had already been destroyed. These events, if they had lain in the past, would have underlined the arguments of the author of Hebrews so convincingly that he almost certainly would have used them to prove his point. However, since he implies that the Temple service was still being carried on (see ch. 9:6, where "went" is better translated "are going") and that the old covenant was "ready to vanish away" (ch. 8:13), it appears probable that the Temple had not yet been destroyed when Hebrews was written. These considerations make it possible to date the origin of the letter to the Hebrews in the lifetime of Paul, whose death occurred about a.d. 67.

The year a.d. 63 has been taken as the date of Hebrews and Rome as its place of origin, without prejudice to other dates and places that comport with the pattern of interpretation followed by this commentary. This would place the letter at the close of Paul's first Roman imprisonment.

The Pastoral Epistles.--The letters to Timothy and Titus are called the "pastoral epistles" because in large measure they are concerned with the duties of church officers, and with the problems of church administration. In this sense they can be called the earliest church manuals. They are addressed to two of Paul's younger fellow workers. It seems clear that they originate from the time of the apostle's ministry following his first imprisonment in Rome (see pp. 30, 183-185). Since this part of Paul's life is not included in the Acts, little is known concerning his experiences and journeys during that time.

How long a period Paul's last journeys covered is not known. However, it is quite certain that his life ended under Nero in Rome. Since Nero died in a.d. 68, Paul's death cannot be dated later, and may have occurred the previous year. His last imprisonment, which probably continued through one winter (2 Tim. 4:21), therefore may be dated a.d. 66-67. If Paul first came to Rome in a.d. 61, his two-year imprisonment would have ended in a.d. 63. This leaves about three years for his last journeys, a.d. 63-66.

Since Paul had indicated in his prison epistles that he was anxious to see the churches in Asia and Macedonia as soon as possible (Phil. 2:24; Philemon 22), it may be assumed that he traveled to those eastern lands shortly after his release. He visited Ephesus, the main city of the province of Asia, before he proceeded to Macedonia (1 Tim. 1:3), where the beloved church of Philippi was located. The first letter to Timothy was written after these visits, and so may be dated about a year following his release, probably a.d. 64.

The letter to Titus seems to have been written somewhat later, although it deals with matter very similar to that discussed in the first letter to Timothy. It refers to Paul's work on the island of Crete, which must have taken place also during this last missionary journey (Titus 1:5). However, when the letter was written, Paul had already left the island and had probably gone to Greece, leaving Titus in charge of the work on Crete. Informing Titus of his plans to spend the coming winter at Nicopolis on the western coast of Greece, he requested his young fellow worker to meet him there (ch. 3:12). If a year is allowed for Paul's journey in Asia Minor and Macedonia, and some time for his work in Crete and Greece, his letter to Titus may be dated about a.d. 65.

Paul's further journeys led the apostle probably to Corinth, to Miletus (south of Ephesus), and to Troas (2 Tim. 4:13, 20), and doubtless other cities as well. Troas seems to have been the city where he was again arrested.

After his arrest, probably in a.d. 66, Paul was once more transported to Rome. At the time he wrote his second letter to Timothy, he seems already to have had one hearing but not yet to have been sentenced (2 Tim. 4:17). Although he apparently had little hope of a favorable verdict (v. 6), he seems to have thought that he might spend at least the following winter in Rome (v. 21), possibly because he knew by experience how slowly Roman courts worked. If this expectation proved to be true, and Paul died in a.d. 67, the second letter to Timothy may be dated in the autumn of a.d. 66. As far as is known, this letter brought to a close Paul's literary labors. The extant epistles of Paul cover a period of about 15 years, a.d. 51-66.

INTRODUCTION

1. Title. Since ancient times this book has been known as The Acts of the Apostles, but the title does not appear in the book itself.

In the earliest extant (but incomplete) copy of the book, known as Papyrus 45 (see Vol. V, p. 116), and in the Codex Sinaiticus the title is given simply as "Acts," with no mention of the apostles. This is reasonable, for the book is not a full history of all these men. A few chapters describe the work of Peter and John, while the remainder of the book records the conversion and ministry of Paul until his first Roman imprisonment. Consequently the book does not completely cover the work of any one of the apostles, and, indeed, is silent about most of them. Of the Twelve, only Peter, James, and John play leading parts in the narrative, but much of the book is devoted to Paul, who, though an apostle, was not one of the original disciples. The title "Acts" would therefore seem sufficient.

From the 2d century onward there appeared a stream of tales purporting to give the lives and experiences of the apostles (see The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 8; cf. Eusebius Ecclesiastical History iii. 25. 4-7). These writings were also called "Acts." It was perhaps to distinguish the canonical Acts from these apocryphal imitations that the name of the Biblical book was variously elaborated as "Acting of the Apostles," "Acts of All the Apostles," or "Acts of the Apostles."

2. Authorship. The introduction to the book of Acts (ch. 1:1-4) makes it clear that the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts were written by the same author. For a detailed discussion of the authorship of both Luke and Acts see Vol. V, pp. 175-179, 663-665.

The early church never seriously questioned the canonicity of the book, and it soon gained a secure place among New Testament writings.

3. Historical Setting. The Roman Empire was enjoying its heyday. Augustus had laid a firm administrative foundation on which the better of his successors were able to build, and which the lesser were unable to demolish. The benefits that Roman civilization brought to the empire's inhabitants continued to be enjoyed by them even when the ruler himself was weak or tyrannical or both. Thus, during the period covered by the book of Acts, c. a.d. 31-63, the emperors were Tiberius (14-37), Caligula (37-41), Claudius (41-54), and Nero (54-68). Of these, Tiberius and Claudius used their abilities for the good of their far-flung possessions, whereas Caligula and Nero did little but harm. Yet, in spite of this checkered leadership, the empire maintained conditions that were favorable to the spread of the gospel. A fairly stable government, a common administrative system, Roman justice, an expanding citizenship, peace preserved by disciplined legions, roads pressing into every corner of the then-known world, a language (Greek) that was almost universally understood--these were factors that favored the program undertaken by the apostles.

At first the new religion profited from its connections with Judaism. The chosen race had been dispersed to many corners of the empire, and its basic beliefs were eventually tolerated by the Romans. Christianity, as an offshoot of the older faith, shared in this toleration. But Judaism fell into disfavor. Its adherents were expelled from Rome during the reign of Claudius (Acts 18:2), and intense Jewish national aspirations led to rebellion in Palestine and to the disastrous wars of a.d. 66-70 that culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem in the year 70. As the position of Judaism worsened, the situation of Christianity grew more perilous. It was a religion with no legal standing, and its members were without protection in the eyes of the law. When trouble arose, such as when Rome burned in a.d. 64, it was easy to make a scapegoat of the Christian community, and the subsequent persecution set a terrible precedent that was all too faithfully followed in succeeding years.

It is against this background that Luke prepared his history of the early church, and wrote the Acts of the Apostles. For a fuller discussion of the subject see Vol. V, pp. 46-73, 664, 665, and Vol. VI, pp. 22-33, 71-84, 89-95.

4. Theme. Luke declares (Acts 1:1) that his "former treatise" dealt with "all that Jesus began both to do and teach." With clear historical insight he recognized that the work of Jesus on earth was but a beginning, which beginning he recorded in his Gospel. But he knew that his history would be incomplete without an account of what Jesus did through the infant church after His ascension. He therefore sets his hand to describe the continuation of Christ's work through the ministry of His disciples. He does this in an orderly way by taking Acts 1:8 as the theme around which the acts of the apostles are developed. In obedience to their Master's command, the disciples witnessed (1) in Jerusalem, (2) in all Judea, (3) in Samaria, and (4) in the uttermost parts of the earth. As Luke follows their movements, his record falls naturally into those divisions, and his book thus traces the geographical growth of the early church.

He also records another significant development. The church was Jewish in its origin, but it could never fulfill a worldwide mission if it remained within the limits of an exclusive religion like Judaism. It had to free itself from such exclusiveness. Luke outlines the steps that led to freedom. His narrative describes the growth of Christianity from a Jewish sect to an international religion, until the time when Paul could say that the gospel "was preached to every creature which is under heaven" (Col. 1:23). Luke records that thousands of Jews, including priests, early accepted the gospel (Acts 6:7); and that persecutions soon drove Philip to evangelize the Samaritans and the partly Judaized Ethiopian (ch. 8). He tells how Peter reached the Roman centurion Cornelius (ch. 10). He emphasizes how men of Cyrene and Cyprus preached to non-Jews for the first time (ch. 11); how, the way having been opened, Paul and his associates evangelized the heathen in great numbers (chs. 13; 14); how they were actually able, with the help of Peter and James, to secure for Gentile converts freedom from subjection to Jewish ritual (ch. 15). His record closes with a vivid picture of the gospel's spread throughout the eastern Roman world (chs. 16 to 28). He sees Christianity becoming largely a Gentile religion.

Luke was peculiarly fitted to be the historian of such a movement. He is thought to have been a Gentile. He showed a deep interest in ministry to non-Jews (see Vol. V, pp. 663, 664). How appropriate, then, that he should be chosen to relate the story of the proclamation of the gospel to the Gentile world!

The author of Acts fully recognizes the position of the Holy Spirit in the growth of the infant church. From the day when Jesus "through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles" (ch. 1:2), the Spirit appears as the counselor of the leaders and their associates. By the miracle of Pentecost "they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance" (ch. 2:4). A little later the believers also were "filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness" (ch. 4:31). The seven men chosen as deacons were "full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom" (ch. 6:3), and one of the most prominent of their number, Stephen, was "full of faith and of the Holy Ghost" (v. 5). As the narrative progresses the Spirit continues to guide--in such situations as the ordination of Saul (ch. 9:17), in the acceptance of Gentiles into the church (ch. 10:44-47), in the separation of Barnabas and Saul for missionary work (ch. 13:2-4), in the Council of Jerusalem (ch. 15:28), and in Paul's missionary journeys (ch. 16:6, 7). The book of Acts may therefore be said to stand as a partial record of the Spirit's accomplishments through the apostles and their followers.

5. Outline.

I. Introduction, 1:1-11.

A. Luke's "former treatise," the Gospel, 1:1.

B. The gospel commission, 1:2-8.

C. Christ's ascension, 1:9-11.

II. Ministry in Jerusalem, 1:12 to 7:60.

A. Waiting for the power of the Spirit, 1:12-26.

1. The apostles' return to Jerusalem, 1:12, 13.

2. The prayer season, 1:14.

3. The death of Judas, 1:15-20.

4. The appointment of Matthias to succeed Judas, 1:21-26.

B. The power of the Spirit, 2:1-47.

1. The outpouring of the Spirit, 2:1-13.

2. Peter's sermon, 2:14-36.

3. Results of the sermon, 2:37-41.

4. The devotion and increase of the infant church, 2:42-47.

C. The healing of the lame man, 3:1 to 4:31.

1. The miracle of healing done in Christ's name, 3:1-11.

2. Peter's address, 3:12-26.

a. Accusation against the Jews, 3:12-18.

b. Call for repentance, 3:19-26.

3. The arrest of Peter and John, 4:1-4.

4. The trial and release of the apostles, 4:5-22.

5. The church's praise service, 4:23-31.

D. The early Christian community, 4:32 to 6:7.

1. Community of goods, 4:32 to 5:11.

a. The believers share their possessions, 4:32-37.

b. The deception and death of Ananias and Sapphira, 5:1-11.

2. Official opposition, 5:12-40.

a. Miracles of healing, 5:12-16.

b. The arrest, escape, and rearrest of the apostles, 5:17-28.

c. The defense of Peter, 5:29-32.

d. Gamaliel's plea for moderation, 5:33-40.

3. Preaching from house to house, 5:41, 42.

4. Appointment of deacons, 6:1-7.

E. Arrest and death of Stephen, 6:8 to 7:60.

1. The preaching of Stephen, one of the deacons, 6:8-10.

2. Stephen's arrest and trial, 6:11 to 7:53.

a. The arrest, 6:11-14.

b. Stephen's illumination, 6:15.

c. His defense, 7:1-53.

3. The death of Stephen, 7:54-60.

III. Ministry in Palestine and Syria, 8:1 to 12:23.

A. Scattering of the church under persecution, 8:1-4.

B. Philip, Peter, and John in Samaria, 8:5-25.

1. Philip's successful ministry, 8:5-13.

2. Simon and his simony rebuked by Peter, 8:14-25.

C. Philip's further ministry, 8:26-40..

1. Philip and the Ethiopian, 8:26-39.

2. Philip in Azotus and Caesarea, 8:40.

D. The conversion of Saul, 9:1-31.

1. Saul of Tarsus the persecutor, 9:1, 2.

2. Saul's vision of the Christ and consequent conversion, 9:3-17.

3. His baptism and first preaching, 9:18-22.

4. Jews plot to kill him, 9:23, 24.

5. His escape to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and return to Tarsus, 9:25-30.

6. The church has rest from persecution, 9:31.

E. Peter's later ministry, 9:32 to 10:48.

1. Miracles of healing, 9:32-42.

a. Aeneas cured of palsy, 9:32-35.

b. Dorcas resurrected, 9:36-42.

2. The conversion of Cornelius, 9:43 to 10:48.

a. Cornelius directed to Peter in Joppa, 9:43 to 10:8.

b. Peter's vision concerning clean and unclean, 10:9-16.

c. Peter goes to Caesarea and instructs Cornelius, 10:17-43.

d. Cornelius and his company are baptized, 10:44-48.

F. The gospel to the Gentiles, 11:1-30.

1. Peter defends his Gentile ministry before the apostles, 11:1-18.

2. The gospel to the Jews beyond Palestine, 11:19-21.

3. Barnabas and Paul in Antioch, 11:22-26.

4. Famine in Judea relieved by Christians in Antioch, 11:27-30.

G. Persecution of James and Peter, 12:1-23.

1. Imprisonment and execution of James by Herod Agrippa I, 12:1, 2.

2. Imprisonment and miraculous release of Peter, 12:3-9.

3. Death of Herod Agrippa I, 12:20-23.

IV. Paul's First Missionary Journey, 12:24 to 14:28.

A. Paul and Barnabas at Antioch, 12:24, 25.

B. Paul and Barnabas commissioned by the prophets and teachers of Antioch, 13:1-3.

C. Their ministry, 13:4 to 14:28.

1. Cyprus, 13:4-12.

2. Perga; departure of John Mark, 13:13.

3. Antioch of Pisidia, 13:14-50.

4. Iconium, 13:51 to 14:5.

5. Lystra, 14:6-19.

6. Derbe and return through Pisidia, 14:20-23.

7. The return to Antioch, 14:24-28.

V. The Council of Jerusalem, 15:1-35.

A. Trouble with the Judaizers, 15:1, 5.

B. Delegates to the council, 15:2-4.

C. The discussion, 15:6-18.

D. The decision, 15:19-29.

E. The decision made known in Antioch, 15:30-33.

F. Silas, Paul, and Barnabas remain in Antioch, 15:34, 35.

VI. Paul's Second Missionary Journey, 15:36 to 18:22.

A. Dissension between Paul and Barnabas, 15:36-39.

B. Paul and Silas depart for Cilicia, 15-40, 41.

C. The calling of Timothy at Lystra, 16:1-3.

D. The ministry in Galatia, 16:4-10.

1. The care of the churches, 16:4, 5.

2. The Spirit's restraint concerning Asia and Bithynia, 16:6, 7.

3. Macedonian call at Troas, 16:8-10.

E. The gospel in Europe, 16:11 to 18:17.

1. Philippi, 16:11-40.

2. Thessalonica, 17:1-9.

3. Berea, 17:10-14.

4. Athens, 17:15-34.

5. Corinth, 18:1-17.

a. Paul's labor, 18:1-5.

b. Expulsion from the synagogue, 18:6-11.

c. Intervention of Gallio, 18:12-17.

F. Return to Antioch, 18:18-22.

VII. Paul's Third Missionary Journey, 18:23 to 21:17.

A. Ministry in Galatia and Phrygia, 18:23.

B. Apollos in Ephesus and Corinth, 18:24-28.

C. Paul rebaptizes converts of John the Baptist, 19:1-7.

D. Evangelization of Ephesus, 19:8-41.

E. Ministry in Macedonia and Greece, 20:1-5.

F. The first-day meeting in Troas, 20:6-12.

G. Meeting with the elders of Ephesus at Miletus, 20:13-38.

H. The journey to Jerusalem, 21:1-17.

VIII. Paul's Arrest and Trials, 21:18 to 26:32.

A. Paul's report to the apostles and purification in the Temple, 21:18-26.

B. The riot, 21:27-32.

C. Paul's detention, 21:33-39.

D. His defense before the multitude, 21:40 to 22:22.

E. Paul's first imprisonment, 22:22 to 26:32.

1. Remanded for a hearing, 22:22-30.

2. Defense before the Sanhedrin, 23:1-10.

3. Paul's vision, 23:11.

4. The Jewish plot against Paul, 23:12-22.

5. Paul's removal to Caesarea, 23:23-35.

6. Detention under Felix, 24:1-27.

7. Paul's appeal from Festus to Caesar, 25:1-12.

8. Festus takes counsel with Herod Agrippa II, 25:13-27.

9. Paul's defense before Agrippa and Festus, 26:1-19.

10. His innocence confirmed, 26:30-32.

IX. Journey to Rome and Imprisonment, 27:1 to 28:31.

A. The voyage, 27:1 to 28:16.

1. From Caesarea to Myra, 27:1-5.

2. From Myra to The fair havens, 27:6-12.

3. From Crete to shipwreck, 27:13-44.

a. The storm, 27:12-20.

b. Paul's assurance of final safety, 27:21-26.

c. The shipwreck, 27:27-44.

4. Landing on Melita, 28:1-10.

5. Completion of the journey to Rome, 28:11-16.

B. Paul's defense before the Jews of Rome, 28:17-29.

C. Paul's two years in Rome, 28:30, 31.

Acts Chapter 1

1 Christ, preparing his apostles to the beholding of his ascension, gathereth them together into the mount Olivet, commandeth them to expect in Jerusalem the sending down of the Holy Ghost, promiseth after few days to send it: by virtue whereof they should be witnesses unto him, even to the utmost parts of the earth. 9 After his ascension they are warned by two angels to depart, and to set their minds upon his second coming. 12 They accordingly return, and, giving themselves to prayer, choose Matthias apostle in the place of Judas.

1. Former. Literally, "first," indicating that the present work is the second in a series. The Gospel according to Luke obviously is the "former treatise" (see Vol. V, p. 663).

Theophilus. See on Luke 1:3.

All. The Gospel of Luke is an essentially complete account of "all things from the very first" (Luke 1:3). Luke records principal facts, not all the details (see p. 114). This may be seen by a comparison with John's Gospel, which contains much omitted by Luke. Yet John also omits much (see John 20:30; 21:25). In Scripture the word "all" (or "very") is often used in a general sense (see Matt. 2:3; 3:5; Acts 2:5; Acts 12:11; Rom. 11:26; Col. 1:6; 1 Tim. 1:16; James 1:2).

Began. Gr. archomai, "to begin," is characteristic of Luke's Gospel, in which it occurs some 30 times. Its presence in Acts provides an unstudied evidence of Luke's authorship.

The work of the gospel, begun by Jesus in person, is carried forward in Acts by Jesus through the Holy Spirit in the work of the church.

To do and teach. Jesus was "mighty in deed and word" (Luke 24:19). The deeds referred to are His miracles (Acts 10:38). The words and works of Jesus alike were with "authority" and "power" (see on Luke 4:32). The writer implies that this twofold activity will also be found in the book he is about to write.

2. Until the day. That is, the 40th day after His resurrection (see v. 3).

Was taken up. The passive form of the verb, as used here and in vs. 9, 11 and Luke 24:51, implies that Jesus' ascension was a manifestation of the Father's power.

Through the Holy Ghost. This expression may be understood to mean either that the Holy Spirit was to guide the disciples into all truth (John 16:13), or that Jesus, both before and after His crucifixion, spoke as one possessed of the Holy Spirit. The latter must be intended, for everything pertaining to Christ's life on earth was accomplished by the power of the Spirit: (a) His conception (Luke 1:35); (b) His baptism (ch. 3:21, 22); (c) His justification, that is, the manifestation of His righteous life (1 Tim. 3:16); (d) His guidance in His life of service (Luke 4:1; see on ch. 2:49); (e) His miracles (Matt 12:28); (f) His resurrection (1 Peter 3:18).

Had given commandments. Better, "having commanded," with particular reference to the gospel commission by our Lord (see Matt. 28:18-20).

Apostles. Gr. apostoloi, "those who are sent," from apo, "off," "away," and stelloµ, "to send." In classical Greek apostolos (pl., apostoloi) frequently was connected with the dispatching of a ship or a naval expedition, and it was also used for the commander of a squadron and for an ambassador. These two general applications, to things and to persons, carried over into Koine Greek. Thus an Egyptian papyrus from the 2d or 3d century a.d. speaks of the "account for the ship [apostolos] of Triadelphus" (J. H. Moulton and G. Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, p. 70). The papyri also show that from the ship itself the meaning of the word was transferred to its cargo, for that also was "sent." Not only was the cargo called apostolos, but also the documents that represented the ship and its cargo, so that the word might refer to an order for the dispatch of a vessel, a bill of lading, or even an export license. At the same time, in Koine as in classical Greek, apostolos might refer to a person, as Josephus uses it of ambassadors sent by the Jews to Rome (Antiquities xvii. 11. 1).

None of these usages, however, appear to shed light directly on the origin of the word "apostle" as it was employed in early Christianity. Paul is the first NT writer to use the word (1 Thess. 2:6), and for him it was, apparently, already a technical term designating a specific group of men performing with authority generally recognized functions in the church (see 1 Cor. 4:9; 9:1, 2). The fact that in this very earliest Christian literature such a specific meaning of the word already was taken for granted suggests that it probably had some earlier authoritative inauguration. Writing in Greek, years after Jesus' death, Luke and John used the word apostolos (Luke 6:13; 11:49; John 13:16 ["he that is sent"]). The office of apostle in the early church apparently stems from Jesus' ordination and commission of the twelve disciples.

In terming His disciples "apostles," Jesus probably used the Aramaic word shelicha', the equivalent of the Hebrew participle shaluach, "sent." These words appear to have had a technical use among the Jews as well as among Christians. Rabbinical literature used the term shaluach (or, in another form, shaliach) of various authoritative messengers. Justin Martyr says (c. a.d. 146) that the Jews sent messengers throughout the world telling blasphemies against Christ (Dialogue With Trypho 17, 108). Eusebius, the 4th-century church historian, declares that writings already ancient in his day recorded that the Jewish priests and elders sent men all over the world to warn their people against Christianity. He goes on to call these Jews "apostles," and says that in his own time they traveled throughout the Dispersion with encyclical letters (Commentaria in Isaiam xviii. 1, 2). Epiphanius (d. a.d. 403) records that these "apostles" consulted with leading Jews and traveled among the Jews outside Palestine, restoring peace to disorderly congregations and collecting tithes and first fruits--functions that have striking parallels with the apostolate of Paul (see Acts 11:27-30; Rom. 15:25-28; 1 Cor. 16:1; Epiphanius Against Heresies i. 2., Heresy xxx. 4, 11). The Theodosian Code (a.d. 438) remarks, "It is part of this worthless superstition that the Jews have chiefs of their synagogues, or elders, or persons whom they call apostles, who are appointed by the patriarch at a certain season to collect gold and silver" (Theodosian Code xvi. 8. 14; translation in Adolf Harnack, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity, vol. 1, p. 329).

Therefore, although it cannot be proved that the word apostolos was used in NT times of Jewish messengers to the Dispersion, the evidence suggests that it was, and that particular usage made of this word by the early Christian church was derived from a somewhat similar custom among the Jews.

Whom he had chosen. See Mark 3:13-19.

3. Shewed himself alive. See Additional Note on Matt. 28.

Passion. Rather, "suffering."

Infallible proofs. Gr. tekmeµria, "proofs" which carried with them certainty of conviction, in contrast to what was only probable or circumstantial. These "infallible proofs" were the postresurrection appearances of Christ, not the miracles the disciples had seen Jesus perform (ch. 2:22). They confirmed the crowning miracle of the resurrection. These proofs consisted of: (1) His eating and drinking with the disciples (Luke 24:41-43; John 21:4-13); (2) His real body, which He permitted them to touch (Matt. 28:5-9; John 20:27); (3) His repeated visible appearances to as many as 500 at once (Matt. 28:7, 10, 16, 17; Luke 24:36-48; John 20:19-29; 1 Cor. 15:6); (4) His instruction in the nature and doctrines of the kingdom (Luke 24:25-27, 44-47; John 20:17, 21-23; 21:15-17; Acts 1:8). The certainty of the resurrection gave dynamic power to the message of the apostles (Acts 2:32, 36, 37; 3:15; 4:10; 5:28, 30-33). It was the basis of Paul's magnificent argument on the certainty of the bodily resurrection of the redeemed (see 1 Cor. 15:3-23).

Forty days. Literally, "through," or "during," 40 days. Jesus did not remain with them continuously, but manifested Himself repeatedly during the postresurrection period (see Additional Note on Matt. 28). There is no conflict between these 40 days and Luke's much-abbreviated account in the Gospel (see Luke 1:24).

The things. Here, the expression includes (1) the correct interpretation of the Messianic prophecies (Luke 24:27, 44, 45); (2) the extension of the mission of the church to the whole world and the admission of the saved to the kingdom by baptism (Matt. 28:19); (3) the promise of supernatural power and divine protection (Mark 16:15-18); and (4) the promise of Christ's own perpetual presence in His church (Matt. 28:20). See on Matt. 4:17; 5:3.

4. Assembled together. Gr. sunalizoµ, literally, "to salt with," hence, "to eat with," or "to gather together," "to assemble." This possibly refers to a meeting in Galilee (Matt. 28:16-18), for the last meeting, at which the disciples saw Jesus ascend, is not introduced until v. 6 of Acts 1.

Not depart from Jerusalem. They were to return to the capital, the place where the Saviour had so often ministered and where He finally suffered, was buried, and rose from the dead. There His disciples were to be empowered, and there they were to begin their witness (AA 31, 32).

Wait. Compare Luke 24:49. The task confronting the disciples could not be accomplished by human means alone. They must wait (1) until the time appointed, (2) at the place appointed, Jerusalem, the place of greatest danger and greatest challenge. The disciples were to "wait," not to "go a fishing," as Peter and others had done a little while before (John 21:3). There was to be (1) a devout expectancy of the great power of God; (2) a deep longing for that power, and for fitness to receive it; (3) and earnest, united prayer that God would fulfill His promise.

Promise of the Father. That is, the promise concerning the gift of the Holy Spirit (see John 14:16; 16:7-13).

Of me. That is, from Me. The promise was spoken by Jesus, but its fulfillment was to come jointly from the Father and the Son (see John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7-15).

5. John truly baptized. That is, John the Baptist (see Matt. 3:1-11).

With the Holy Ghost. Such a baptism had been promised by John the Baptist (see Matt. 3:11). The promise (Acts 1:4) called for a baptism, not with water (see on Matt. 3:6, 11), but with the Spirit, "not many days" after the promise had been given--at Pentecost.

6. Come together. That is, in Jerusalem, in obedience to the Lord's will (v. 4) and by agreement with one another. Jesus Himself was with them, though no unexpected, supernatural appearing is mentioned. This was the last meeting of the disciples with their Lord, for it was the day of His ascension (Mark 16:19; Luke 24:50, 51; 1 Cor. 15:7).

They asked of him. The Greek suggests that they asked Him repeatedly.

Wilt thou at this time restore? Rather, "Art thou restoring at this time?" The disciples did not yet understand the nature of Christ's kingdom. He had not promised the sort of restoration they were anticipating (see on Luke 4:19). They thought Jesus "should have redeemed Israel" (Luke 24:21), that is, from the Romans. Peter and the other disciples found a different redemption at Pentecost (Acts 2:37-39). The ascension, and the Pentecostal experience which followed, gave them new understanding; they finally realized the spiritual nature of their Master's kingdom.

The Jews were eager with Messianic hope. In the Psalms of Solomon, an apocryphal work written shortly before the Christian Era (see Vol. V, p. 90), repeated expression is given to this idea. The following prayer is typical: "Behold, O Lord, and raise up unto them their king, the son of David, at the time in the which Thou seest, O God, that he may reign over Israel Thy servant. And gird him with strength, that he may shatter unrighteous rulers, and that he may purge Jerusalem from nations that trample (her) down to destruction.... And he shall purge Jerusalem, making it holy as of old: so that nations shall come from the ends of the earth to see his glory, bringing as gifts her sons who had fainted, and to see the glory of the Lord, wherewith God hath glorified her" (The Psalms of Solomon 17:23-35; cited in R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, pp. 649, 650). Such thoughts may very well have led the disciples to hope that the time had arrived for establishing the promised dominion, and prompted their question.

Israel. Even yet the disciples had not grasped the concept of the spiritual kingdom from all nations (Matt. 8:11, 12), composed of the true Israel of the circumcised heart (Rom. 2:28, 29). Nor did they realize that when the Jewish nation rejected Jesus, it cut itself off from the root and stock of the true Israel, into which the Christian converts, both Jew and Gentile, were not to be grafted (see Rom. 11). Obviously they still expected the Messianic kingdom of David to be set up in the royal nation of Judah, among the literal Jewish people. See Vol. IV, pp. 26-36.

The disciples' use of the term "Israel" to mean "Judah" offers no difficulty. It is true that "Israel" often means the northern tribes in contradistinction to Judah. But it is also often applied to the whole twelve tribes and even to Judah in particular, as well as to the chosen people of God without tribal designation (see, for example, on Isa. 9:8). The context must indicate the usage in any given case. Therefore it is not surprising that we find the NT consistently applying the term "Israel" to the Jewish nation. Although the Jews of that time were predominantly of the tribe of Judah, they were in the direct and legitimate line of succession not only from the postexilic province of Judah (which was the continuation of the earlier kingdom of Judah) but also from the original united nation of Israel.

The Jews of Christ's day were the heirs of the old theocracy that had been governed by the divinely appointed Davidic dynasty, centered in the divinely prescribed Temple worship, and founded on the national covenant between God and His chosen people. Paul called his fellow Jews "Israelites," to whom, after the flesh, pertained "the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came" (Rom. 9:4, 5; cf. v. 3; see also chs. 3:1, 2; 11:1).

These disciples, therefore, were not unreasonable in their belief that the prophecies and promises given to early Israel belonged to the Jews as the successors of the old Davidic kingdom--not to the "Israel" of the ten tribes that had seceded from the house of David. For those tribes had separated themselves not only from Judah, but also from the Temple and the true worship of God, and hence from the national covenant. To the fact of Judah's royal heritage was added the fact that the southern nation had, from the time of the division under Jereboam, included numerous members of the northern tribes who wished to remain true to Jehovah (2 Chron. 11:13-16; 15:9; cf. ch. 16:1). These facts explain the repeated use of the term Israel for both the kingdom of Judah and, after the Captivity, for the Jewish community reconstituted as the province of Judah, to which belonged all those, of whatever tribe, who returned from exile (see Ezra 2:70; 3:1; 4:3; 7:7, 13; 8:29; 9:1; 10:5; Neh. 1:6; 9:1, 2; 10:39; 11:3, 20; Eze. 14:1, 22; 17:2, 12; 37:15-19; Dan. 1:3; Zech. 8:13; Mal. 1:1).

Further, the Jewish nation of Jesus' day represented the other tribes of Israel not only in population (see Luke 2:36) but also in territory (Vol. V, pp. 45, 46). It was referred to as Israel by John the Baptist (John 1:31), by Simeon (Luke 2:32, 34), by Jesus Himself (Matt. 8:10; Luke 7:9; John 3:10), by the disciples and others in Judea (Matt. 2:20-22; 9:33; Luke 24:21; Acts 1:6; 2:22, 23; 3:12; 4:8, 27; 5:31; 21:28), by Gamaliel (Acts 5:35), by Luke (Luke 1:80), and by Paul (Acts 13:16, 17, 23, 24; Rom. 9:4, 6, 31; 11:1; 1 Cor. 10:18; 2 Cor. 11:22; Phil. 3:5).

Thus the Messianic reign prophesied for Israel was still sought by these disciples as a restoration of Jewish national sovereignty. Indeed, the Messiah's kingdom would have belonged to the Jews if they had not forfeited it by rejecting the Son of David because He came offering a kingdom of universal righteousness instead of Jewish conquest. The nation's rejection as the chosen people, a status that had been conditional from the first (Ex. 19:5, 6; Jer. 18:6-10; Matt. 8:11, 12; 21:33-45), was too recent for the disciples to understand. They well knew that the old northern kingdom of Israel had severed itself irrevocably from the true Israel of the covenant except as its individual members might choose to rejoin the chosen people. What they did not yet see was the fact that the Jewish nation likewise, having rejected the rule of the Son of David, was the chosen people no longer, although individual Jews might be grafted into the stock of true Israel, the church of Jesus Christ (see Vol. IV, pp. 25-38), in whom there is no distinction of race, nationality, or position (Gal. 3:28, 29; Col. 3:11).

7. He said. Christ did not give a direct answer to His disciples' inquiry. Instead, He directed them to the work that lay ahead.

Times or the seasons. Gr. chronoi eµ kairoi. Chronoi refers to chronological "time," thought of simply as such, in a general sense, and kairoi to specific, climactic points of time, with emphasis on what takes place. Thus by "times" Jesus here apparently refers to the seemingly endless procession of the ages, and by "seasons" to the climactic events to occur at the end of the age (see on Matt. 24:3). It is as if Jesus said, "It is not for you to know the date, or the precise manner in which the kingdom will be established." Living as a man among men, Jesus knew neither the day nor the hour of His coming (see on Matt. 24:36). Here is a gentle rebuke to men (1) who are not yet ready to receive all knowledge (John 16:12), but (2) who know enough to carry out their Lord's commission (Matt. 28:19, 20), and (3) who will be guided by signs and by the Spirit (Matt. 24:32, 33; Mark 16:17, 18; John 16:13).

Put in his own power. Rather, "fixed by his own authority." The Greek word used here for "power" or "authority" (exousia) differs from that used for "power" (dunamis) in v. 8 (see on John 1:12). God is not the servant of time, but its Master. His knowledge transcends time, for He is omniscient, knowing all things (Ps. 139:1-6; Prov. 15:3; Heb. 4:13). His foreknowledge is a proof of His deity (Isa. 46:9, 10). He shares what He will with those who serve Him (Deut. 29:29; Ps. 25:14; John 15:15; 16:25).

8. Power. Gr. dunamis, "strength," "ability," "power" (see on John 1:12). Our English word "dynamite" is derived from dunamis. Luke here refers to supernatural "power," received only by those upon whom the Holy Spirit comes (see on Luke 1:35; 24:49). This power is for witnessing: it gives (1) power within, (2) power to proclaim the gospel, (3) power to lead others to God. Through the disciples, thus empowered, Jesus would continue the work He began on earth, and even "greater works" than those would be accomplished (John 14:12). This Spirit-given witness was to be a distinguishing mark of the Christian church.

Witnesses. Gr. martures, those who confirm, or can confirm, what they themselves have seen or heard or known by any other means. The word is used 13 times in Acts. As "witnesses" the apostles knew Christ to be the Messiah of prophecy and the Redeemer of mankind. They could also testify of His promise to return. As witnesses, the disciples were the first and foremost link of visible evidence between the crucified, risen, and ascended Lord and the world, which, through their testimony, might believe (see on John 1:12). John writes, "That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you" (1 John 1:3). Followers of Christ today are similarly called to bear personal witness to the works and teachings of Jesus, to the purpose of God to save the world through His Son and to the effectiveness of the gospel in their own hearts. No more convincing testimony can be borne. Without personal experience there can be no true Christian witness. Peter's bold statement following the healing of the lame man (Acts 4:10) is an excellent example of witnessing in apostolic times.

In Jerusalem. It was the divine plan that the chosen people should have the first opportunity to benefit from the apostles' ministry (see on Luke 14:21-24). During this brief time thousands of Jews believed (see Acts 2:41, 47; 4:4, 32, 33; 5:14; 6:1, 7; EGW Supplementary Material on ch. 2:1, 4, 14, 41). When the Jews spurned this privilege, and stoned Stephen (ch. 7), the good news was carried farther afield.

In Samaria. The Samaritans were a mixed race, ever at enmity with the Jews (see on John 4:9). For Jesus' personal ministry to the people of Samaria see on Luke 10:1, 33; 17:16; John 4:39-42. After the stoning of Stephen they were first visited by Philip the deacon (Acts 6:5; 8:5), then by Peter and John, who went to Philip's aid (ch. 8:14). There was a good harvest in Samaria.

Uttermost part. The disciples were to go "into all the world" (Mark 16:15), "unto all nations" (Matt. 24:14). The worldwide work was begun by scattered representatives of the gospel who preached to Jews in Phoenicia, Cyprus, Syrian Antioch (Acts 8:4; 11:19), and by Saul of Tarsus in Syria and Cilicia (Acts 9:15, 30; 11:25; Gal. 1:21, 23). Soon, it was vigorously extended by Paul's great missionary journeys (Acts 13 to 28). Paul was inspired to declare that in his day the gospel "was preached to every creature which is under heaven" (Col. 1:23; cf. Titus 2:11). In contrast with the commission given when Christ first sent out the Twelve (see on Matt. 10:5, 6), this work was to be, not national, but universal. It is the beginning of this worldwide work that Luke describes in Acts. This book is not a miscellany of biographies of the apostles, nor even of certain apostles, nor yet exclusively concerning the apostles, but of what was done by all believers to proclaim the gospel "unto the uttermost part of the earth." When this work is finally completed, Christ will come (Matt. 24:14).

Luke here gives the outline for the book of Acts: The proclamation of the gospel to (1) Jerusalem and Judea (chs. 1 to 7), (2) Samaria (chs. 8 to 10), (3) and the uttermost part of the earth (chs. 11 to 28).

9. When he had spoken. See on Luke 24:50.

While they beheld. No believer had seen the Saviour rise from the dead, but the eleven disciples and the mother of Jesus (EW 191) were permitted to see Him ascend to heaven. Thus they became reliable witnesses to the fact of the ascension.

Taken up. Here the ascension is related as a simple historical fact. Hereafter in the NT it is not often mentioned, but it is implicitly accepted as a cardinal truth of historical Christianity. It had been foretold by Jesus (John 6:62). The event was again related by Peter (Acts 3:21), and was later referred to by Paul (1 Tim. 3:16).

The ascension was a fitting climax to Christ's ministry on earth. Our Saviour had descended from heaven to effect man's salvation (John 3:13, 16). When His earthly work was finished, He planned to return to His heavenly home (John 14:2), to mediate for man (1 Tim. 2:5; Heb. 7:25; 8:1, 2, 6; 1 John 2:1) until His second coming (John 14:3).

A cloud. This cloud was an angelic host (see DA 831). Christ's return will likewise be "with clouds" (Matt. 24:30; 26:64; Rev. 1:7). Vast companies of angels will accompany their Lord when He appears in glory (Matt. 25:31). He will "so come in like manner" (Acts 1:11).

Out of their sight. Literally, "away from their eyes."

10. Looked stedfastly toward. Literally, "were gazing into"--with upturned faces.

As he went up. Rather, "as He was going." Jesus ascended gradually. There was no sudden disappearance as at Emmaus (Luke 24:31).

Two men. Concerning the identity of one of these two angels see on Luke 1:19. Although called "men," because in human form, they were angels (DA 831, 832). Compare the two angels clothed "in white" who greeted Mary at the tomb (John 20:12, 13), one of whom is called "a young man" (Mark 16:5).

Stood by. Rather, "had been standing by"; they were already there when the disciples noticed them.

White apparel. In his Gospel, Luke describes the angels of the resurrection announcement as "two men ... in shining garments" (Luke 24:4). See also Acts 10:30; cf. ch. 11:13.

11. Men of Galilee. Literally, "men, Galileans." All of the disciples, except perhaps Judas (see on Mark 3:19), were natives of Galilee and were distinguished for their Galilean speech (cf. Matt. 26:73; see on Acts 4:13). But the angels knew these men without reference to their speech, even as they knew other men's lives (cf. ch. 10:3-6).

Why stand ye gazing? The rapt disciples seemed unable to take their gaze from the spot where their beloved Master had disappeared from view. The two angels break the spell with a question: The ascended One is God the Son; He has told you His plans, He will come again--"why stand ye gazing?" He has given you work to do in preparation for His return. Compare the question of the angel at the resurrection, "Why seek ye the living among the dead?" (Luke 24:5). There is a sense in which Christians should ever be gazing into heaven (see Phil. 3:20).

This same Jesus. The Jesus whom the disciples had intimately known during the previous three and one-half years. Although He had risen from the dead and ascended to heaven, as the Son of God, He still retained His human nature (see DA 23-25).

Shall so come. The second coming of Christ is indissolubly bound up with the resurrection and ascension as a promised event tied to historical incidents. Scripture reveals (1) Christ the Creator (Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2; see on John 1:1-3); (2) Christ the Incarnate (Phil. 2:7; Heb. 2:14, 15; see on John 1:14); (3) Christ the Crucified (Acts 17:3; 1 Cor. 15:3, 4; see on Matt. 27:31-56; John 19:17-37); (4) Christ the Risen One (Rom. 1:3, 4; 1 Cor. 15:3-22; see on Matt. 28:1-15; John 20:1-18); (5) Christ the Coming King (Matt. 24:30; Rev. 11:15; 19:11-16; see on Matt. 25:31). These revelations, no one of which we dare omit, constitute a unified presentation of the Son of God in successive and related phases of His great work of saving men for His kingdom. In all these phases He is "this same Jesus." "the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever" (Heb. 13:8).

In like manner. By this promise, His return must be (1) personal--"this same Jesus" (see DA 832); (2) visible--"ye have seen him go"; (3) with clouds--"a cloud received him"; (4) certain--"shall so come." This quiet but solemn pledge of the angelic counselors brings to the doctrine of the second coming of Christ an utter certainty, assured by the reality of the ascension. It is all true, event and promise, or none of it is true. Without the second advent, all the preceding work in the plan of salvation would be as vain as the sowing and cultivation of crops without a harvest.

12. Returned they. The disciples turned away from the cross in profound sorrow and utter frustration. After each of the Master's resurrection appearances they were left in perplexed hope. Now, however, having seen their Lord taken up into heaven, they returned in joy, with an unshakable assurance that He would come back again.

Unto Jerusalem. In obedience to the command of v. 4.

Olivet. The place of the ascension, the Mount of Olives, lying east of Jerusalem toward Bethany, and halfway distant toward that village (see on Matt. 21:1). Bethany is 15 furlongs (Gr. stadia, see Vol. V. p. 50), that is, about 2 mi. (c. 3 km.), from Jerusalem (John 11:18). Luke explains that after the last meeting with the disciples in Jerusalem, Jesus "led them out as far as to Bethany" (Luke 24:50), possibly because it was in the old familiar setting He loved so well. From there, a short return walk over "the mount called Olivet" would bring them back to Jerusalem.

Sabbath day's journey. A phrase occurring in Scripture only here, describing the distance from Jerusalem to the Mount of Olives (see on Ex. 16:29; see Vol. V, p. 50). This distance is measured by Josephus as 5 or 6 stadia, or furlongs (Antiquities xx. 8. 6; War v. 2. 3 [70]), or about two-thirds mile (c. 1 km.). The Mishnah agrees with these figures, for it defines the "Sabbath limit" as 2,000 cu. It says: "If a man who was permitted to do so went out beyond the Sabbath limit and was then told that the act [which he intended to do] had already been performed, he is entitled to move within two thousand cubits in any direction. If he was within the Sabbath limit he is regarded as if he had not gone out. All who go out to save life may return to their original places" (ÔErubin 4. 3, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 306).

There were ways provided for overcoming the inconvenience caused by such a "limit." "If a man who was on a journey [homeward] was overtaken by dusk, and he knew of a tree or a wall and said, `Let my Sabbath base be under it,' his statement is of no avail. If, however, he said, `Let my Sabbath base be at its root,' he may walk from the place where he stands to its root a distance of two thousand cubits, and from its root to his house another two thousand cubits. Thus he can walk four thousand cubits after dusk. If he does not know of any tree or wall, ... and said, `Let my present position be my Sabbath base,' his position acquires for him the right of movement within a radius of two thousand cubits in any direction. ... The Sages, however, ruled: The distances are to be squared in the shape of a square tablet, so that he may gain the area of the corners" (Mishnah ÔErubin 4. 7, 8, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, pp. 343, 344).

"The Sages did not enact the law in order to add restrictions but in order to relax them"

(ibid. 5. 5, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 411).

The origin of the 2,000-cu. measurement is said to have been found in the tradition that the distance from the farthest tent in the wilderness camp of the Israelites to the tent of meeting, or tabernacle (cf. Num. 35:5), was the greatest distance a Hebrew might walk without its being said that he had gone "out of his place on the seventh day" (Ex. 16:29). More probably, it was the distance specified by Joshua to lie between the people and the Levites bearing the ark, at the crossing of the Jordan (Joshua 3:4).

Chrysostom (Homily III, Acts 1:12) supposed that the ascension must have been on a Sabbath, to account for the mention here of a "sabbath day's journey." Such a conclusion is not necessary. The ascension probably took place on a Thursday (see Additional Note on Matt. 28).

13. An upper room. Rather, "the upper room." Not in the Temple (Luke 24:53), where the disciples still worshiped (cf. Acts 3:1), but in the upper story of a private house, under the flat roof, where there would be seclusion (see on Matt. 26:18; Mark 14:15; Luke 24:33; John 20:19).

Both Peter. For the list of the apostles see on Matt. 10:2-5; Mark 3:13-19.

14. Continued with one accord. Rather, here and in ch. 2:46, "persevered with one mind." What a contrast to the competitive spirit shown at the time of the Last Supper (Luke 22:24). How different in its calm, solemn joy was this period of waiting. Here is the commencement of the "accord" that bore such dynamic results a few days later (Acts 2:1, 41).

In prayer. Gr. te proseucheµ. This is capable of at least two interpretations: (1) "in prayer"; or (2) "in the place of prayer," in which sense it occurs in ch. 16:16. Some commentators suggest that the disciples did not constantly remain in the "upper room," but went, from time to time, to a synagogue, and that such visits are included in Luke 24:53, "And were continually in the temple."

And supplication. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of these words. The fact of the disciples' unity in prayer, however, remains. During the days before Pentecost the 120 (v. 15) reverently urged the fulfillment of the pledge that the Spirit, the Comforter, would come (John 14:16) with power (Acts 1:8) "not many days hence" (v. 5). See AA 36, 37.

This text contains an excellent formula for effective prayer: (1) The petition--they prayed; (2) the perseverance--they continued in prayer; (3) the unanimity--they prayed with one accord. See on Matt. 18:19, 20 Luke 18:1-8.

With the women. Rather, "with women," which may refer to the wives of the men there assembled. This receives support from the fact that "Mary the mother of Jesus," who was not the wife of any man present, is separately mentioned. However, the usual interpretation is to see in "the women" a reference to those who ministered to Christ, among whom were Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Susanna, "and many others" (see Additional Note on Luke 7; see on Luke 8:2, 3).

Mary. This reference to the mother of Jesus is instructive. Her unique relationship to the ascended Lord justifies her being singled out for special mention, but she is not given any undue pre-eminence. In this, her last appearance in Scripture, she is one of the united group who "continued with one accord in prayer and supplication." Legends concerning her later life and position after death have no Biblical or factual basis.

His brethren. These were James, Joses, Simon, and Judas (Matt. 13:55; see on Matt. 12:46; Mark 6:3). They had stood aloof from Jesus (John 7:5; DA 450, 451), and are not mentioned among those who gathered around the cross (John 19:25-27). But the final scenes in Christ's earthly life had brought about their conversion, and they are now numbered with His adherents. No more is heard of Simon and Joses, but James is probably the one who became a leader in the church (see on Acts 12:17; see Acts 15:13; 1 Cor. 15:7; Gal. 1:19; Vol. V, p. 71), and is thought by many to be the author of the Epistle of James (see Introduction to the Epistle of James, Vol. VII). Judas may be the Jude who wrote the brief epistle that bears his name (see on Mark 6:3; see Introduction to the Epistle of Jude, Vol. VII).

15. Those days. Between the ascension and Pentecost. The ascension came forty days after the resurrection (v. 3). Thus ten days were left until Pentecost, the "fiftieth," the day of the Feast of Weeks (see on Lev. 23:16; Acts 2:1). See Vol. V, p. 233.

Peter. For his calling, position, and character see on Mark 3:14-16. The lessons he had received from Jesus (Luke 22:32; John 21:15-17; see DA 812, 815) now bear good fruit. His natural gifts have been sanctified through conversion, and he emerges as a leader in the church. But there is nothing dictatorial in his guidance. He stimulates his brethren to concerted action, and subsequent decisions come from the whole group and not from one man. He takes a prominent part in early church affairs. His is the only Pentecostal sermon that is recorded (Acts 2:14-40), and other sermons of his receive special notice (chs. 3:12-26; 4:8-12; 10:34-43). He, with John, performed the first miracle of healing recorded in Acts (ch. 3:1-11), and his miraculous powers are specially mentioned (chs. 5:15; 9:32-41). He plays the chief part in rebuking Ananias and Sapphira (ch. 5:3-11). It is clear that he held a leading position in the early church, but he disappears from Luke's record after ch. 15:7, and attention is then focused on Paul. For a discussion of the supposed supremacy of Peter see on Matt. 14:28; 16:16-19.

The disciples. Important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the reading "the brethren" (not to be restricted to Christ's brethren only, as in v. 14, for there were about 120 persons present). The occasion was obviously a formal meeting, called for the election of a twelfth apostle to take the place of Judas Iscariot.

Number of names. Literally, "crowd of names," that is, group of persons.

Hundred and twenty. The word "about" indicates that this was an approximate figure, but the group is large enough to form a firm foundation for the young church in Jerusalem. The number does not include all those who believed, for "above five hundred brethren" saw Christ after His resurrection (1 Cor. 15:6).

16. Men and brethren. Literally, "men, brethren." Some have suggested that Peter particularly addressed the men in the company, and that they alone took part in the election of the twelfth apostle.

This scripture. Rather, "the scripture," which is quoted in v. 20. Note how, from its beginning, the apostolic church appealed to the OT for its authority.

Must needs. Not that events were engineered to fit the scripture, but that scripture, inspired by the Holy Ghost, foresaw the events. Matthew has many somewhat similar uses of OT quotations (see on Matt. 1:22).

Holy Ghost. Here Peter reveals the disciples' convictions concerning the inspiration of David's psalms. They believed that David spoke (or wrote) as the mouthpiece of the Spirit. This teaching accords with 2 Tim. 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:21.

Judas. Note the way in which the apostle uses Scripture. He sees its fulfillment after the event, and boldly applies it to an individual, Judas, although David does not mention the betrayer by name.

Which was guide. Literally, "became a guide" (see on Matt. 26:3, 14, 47). What a fearful change in occupation! He who had been ordained to lead men to Christ that they might be saved, chose to lead men to Christ that the Saviour might be destroyed. But note the restraint in the description of Judas. In spite of the horror that Peter and his fellow apostles must have felt, there are no recriminations. He leaves the judgment of Judas in the hands of God.

17. Numbered with us. Accounted one of the apostolic company (Matt. 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). There is no record of his being called to discipleship; he offered himself for inclusion among the Twelve (see DA 293, 294).

Obtained. Rather, "obtained by lot," or "received by divine allotment," which emphasizes Christ's acceptance of him as a disciple.

Part. Gr. kleµros, "lot," "allotted portion," or "share." From this comes our word "clergy."

Ministry. Gr. diakonia, "service," "ministry," which later came to mean "diaconate." The workers in the early church keenly felt the responsibility of the ministry (diakonia) of the gospel (Acts 12:25; 20:24; 1 Cor. 16:15; Col. 4:17; 2 Tim. 4:5).

18. This man purchased. Verses 18, 19 may be Luke's explanation inserted in Peter's speech; Peter would scarcely need to give to the 120 details concerning Judas' death. It need not be taken from this wording that Luke believed Judas had purchased the "field of blood" before his death. Judas' money, ill-gotten, bought the field, and his burial in it was a reward of his iniquity. Matthew's record is explicit: When Judas saw that Jesus was condemned to be crucified, and was making no effort to save Himself, he felt remorse over his treachery. He returned the 30 pieces of silver to the priests with whom he had made his nefarious bargain and then hanged himself. With the money the chief priests bought a potter's field, where the waste from potteries had been dumped, and there they buried Judas. Because of this, or because the money was the price of "innocent blood," the place was called "the field of blood" (see on Matt. 27:3-10; see DA 722). The difference between the accounts of Matthew and Luke is rhetorical, not factual: all Judas received as his reward was disgraceful burial in a barren piece of ground.

Falling headlong. There is some evidence that the words thus translated should be understood instead to mean "swelling up." However, the evidence is insufficient to clearly recommend such a translation. Judas, perhaps the most personally ambitious of Jesus' disciples, had sought to reach great heights of worldly power by identifying himself with the kingdom he thought Jesus would set up on earth. His horrible death seems strikingly significant of the tragic results of such ambition. Instead of gaining the heights to which he treacherously aspired, "falling headlong," he perished.

19. Known unto all. Rather, "it became know." As the report of the treachery of Judas and his suicidal death spread abroad, it probably influenced the people of Jerusalem in Christ's favor, for they would realize that He was the victim of priestly plots and a disciple's betrayal. Furthermore, the scenes of the crucifixion had been witnessed by crowds (Luke 23:27, 35; John 19:19, 20; DA 741, 775-777). Those who rose from the grave after the great earthquake, appeared to many (Matt. 27:52, 53; DA 786). The events attending the sacrifice of Christ for sinners did not take place secretly; they were not hidden in a corner (Acts 26:26).

Is called. Some have suggested that the use of the verb form "is called" provides unstudied evidence that Luke wrote the Acts before the destruction of Jerusalem in a.d. 70, after which event place names, except the most significant, would be largely lost sight of.

Their proper tongue. Literally, "their own dialect [dialektos]." This would suggest that Aramaic was not Luke's own language, and that he was not a Jew.

Aceldama. A transliteration, through Greek, of the Aramaic, chaqel dema', "the field of blood." Tradition associates it with Hak\k\ ed-Dumm, on the south bank of the Valley of Hinnom, to the south of Jerusalem (see on Matt. 5:22).The field bought with the 30 pieces of silver was used for burying strangers who lacked relatives or friends to inter them (Matt. 27:6-10; cf. Zech. 11:12, 13).

20. It is written. The connection with v. 17 should be noted and maintained. After the explanation of vs. 18, 19 Peter quotes Ps. 69:25 (from the LXX, with some changes) and Ps. 109:8 (also from the LXX). Ps. 69 includes imprecations upon the enemies of David, but also contains prophetic utterances that pertain to the Messiah, as can be seen from vs. 7-21. Verse 25 is primarily a curse upon David's enemies, and in an extended sense upon the enemies of the Messiah, and hence is applicable to Judas. Ps. 109 is also imprecatory, in terms even more bitter than the other, and v. 8 is a plea that the composite foe being imprecated may have a short life, and be removed from his responsibility (see on Ps. 69; 109).

Judas and his dreadful deeds stand as counterparts of what the psalms describe, and his deserved fate corresponds to that of the enemies described in these passages. This is a type of exegesis frequently employed in the NT to interpret and apply the OT (cf. 1 Peter 1:10, 11; cf. on Deut. 18:15).

Here, Peter has taken the quotation and applied it to the filed that Judas bought (see on v. 18), foreseeing that it would not be inhabited.

Bishoprick. Gr. episkopeµ, "oversight," "charge," "office," correctly translating the Heb. pequddah. The word "bishoprick" should read, rather, "overseership." Bishops were the ruling officers in the Church of England in 1611, when the KJV was translated, and it is psychologically understandable that the Anglican translators read into the Greek word, which means "oversight," or "superintendence," a much later and stronger ecclesiastical significance. Compare the mention of "Easter" in ch. 12:4, where the Greek means "passover." The Calvinistic refusal to recognize any church official of higher authority than "elder" (Gr. presbuteros) was not reflected in the Anglican translation of 1611, although it had appeared in the Geneva Bible of 1560, in the translation, "charge." For the NT meaning of the Greek words presbuteros, "elder," and episkopos, "bishop," see pp. 26, 38. In the NT, "elders" were sometimes called "bishops," that is, "overseers," but only here in Scripture are thee apostles even indirectly referred to as "bishops." Hence, the translation "charge," or "office," is preferable here. See pp. 26, 38.

The apostle uses Ps. 109:8 as authority for the election of another to take the place left vacant by Judas.

21. These men. There seem to have been several among the believers who fulfilled the qualification needed by the successor of Judas, although only one was chosen.

Companied with us. Peter describes the qualifications desired of the candidate. He must have been with the disciples throughout the Lord's earthly ministry--from the days of John the Baptist to the day of Christ's ascension.

Went in and out. A Hebraism referring to daily activities, such as Jesus and shared with His disciples.

22. Beginning. Compare "the beginning" (Mark 1:1).

Baptism of John. This can refer either to the days when John was preaching and baptizing or to the specific day when John baptized Jesus.

Must. Gr. dei, "it is necessary" (cf. v. 16). Peter apparently thought that the original number of the disciples should be maintained. The apostles doubtless had a concept of 12 as a full number, after the example of the 12 tribes of Israel. In fact, they had been promised 12 thrones from which to govern the tribes (Matt. 19:28), a promise that calls to mind the 12 stars in the crown of the church (Rev. 12:1), and the 12 foundations of the walls of the New Jerusalem, with the names of the 12 apostles on them (Rev. 12:14). Jesus had ordained a company of 12, one of whom was lost. Peter reasoned: The full number is necessary to give testimony concerning all aspects of the Lord's life and works; a mighty task lies before the apostles, and the full quota of witnesses is needed for its accomplishment.

The number 12 was broken by the martyrdom of James about a.d. 44 (ch. 12:2), but we do not read of the appointment of a successor.

Ordained. Gr. ginomai, "to become." Some feel that the expression "be ordained" too strongly reflects the principles of church government held by the KJV translators. That assumption is not necessary, for the Twelve had been "ordained" by their Master (see on Mark 3:14; see DA 296), and it would be fitting that the elected one should be similarly set aside for the ministry.

Witness. See on v. 8. The emphasis rests on the witnessing to the historical fact of the resurrection (see on Luke 24:48).

23. They. This probably indicates the whole company of 120, though the immediate context of vs. 21, 22 might possibly suggest limiting the reference to the eleven apostles only.

Appointed two. Gr. esteµsan duo; these words may be translated either "they set two forward" or "two stood." In the former sense, this passage would mean that Joseph and Matthias were proposed by the disciples as candidates upon whom the lot might be cast. If the verb is to be understood in the latter sense, it would imply that when Peter had stated the qualifications necessary for the man to fill Judas' place, he asked whether there were any such present, and Joseph and Matthias stood.

Joseph. A common Jewish name (see on Gen. 30:24).

Barsabas. Gr. barsabas, a transliteration from the Aramaic, perhaps bar shabba' meaning, "son of the Sabbath," that is, one who is born on the Sabbath, or bar saba', "son of the aged." Some have tried to identify this Barsabas with Barnabas, the Levite from Cyprus, who became a companion of Paul (chs. 4:36; 9:27; 11:22, 24), but there is no scriptural support for this. It is possible that he was the brother of Judas Barsabas mentioned in ch. 15:22.

Justus. A Latin surname. In Roman times many Jews assumed such names.

Matthias. Perhaps a shortened form of Mattathias, which is from the Heb. Mattithyah, "gift of Jehovah." He is not mentioned again, apart from v. 26, and there is no reliable tradition concerning his career. Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History i. 12. 3; iii. 25. 6) includes him among the Seventy, and mentions an apocryphal gospel attributed to him. He is said to have been martyred in Ethiopia or in Judea (see p. 36).

24. They prayed. What a prayer this must have been, springing fresh from a simple insistent faith. In every great moment of the infant church prayer was spontaneously resorted to. This was not from mere habit, though the habit was good; nor as a ritual, for this had not yet come to formalize the worship of the church, but because it seemed to the apostles as natural to talk, through prayer, to their Lord in heaven as it had been to talk face to face with Jesus on earth. So should it have ever been in the church's experience, and so should it now be.

Lord. Inasmuch as Jesus had instructed His disciples to address their requests to the Father, in His (Jesus') name, it is to be presumed that the word "Lord" here refers to the Father.

Knowest the hearts. Compare 1 Sam. 16:7; Ps. 139:1-4; John 2:25.

Shew. The 120 had used their best judgment in putting forward the names of Barsabas and Matthias. Now they called on the Lord to make the final choice.

25. Part. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) "place."

Ministry and apostleship. The apostles were highly conscious of the spiritual dignity of their calling (see on v. 17).

By transgression fell. Rather, "turned aside." "transgressed."

His own place. The Lord was being asked to choose one to replace him who had chosen apostasy, and who had found "his own place," in disaster and death. Such a place was Judas' own, by his own choice. Events had proved what the Lord had already foreseen (John 6:70, 71; John 13:2, 21, 26), that a place among the Twelve did not properly belong to Judas.

26. Gave forth their lots. Literally, "gave lots for [or, "unto"] them." This can mean either, (1) the company drew lots on behalf of the two men, or, (2) the candidates themselves drew lots. Whichever method was used, it resulted in the election of Matthias. Jews were well acquainted with the lot as a standard OT method of decision: (1) in choosing the goats in the highly significant ceremonies of the Hebrew Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:5-10); (2) in allotting land in Canaan to the tribes (Num. 26:55; Joshua 18:10), and upon the return from exile (Neh. 10:34; 11:1); (3) in settling criminal cases where there was uncertainty (Joshua 7:14, 18; 1 Sam. 14:41, 42); (4) in choosing forces for battle (Judges 20:8-10); (5) in appointing to high office (1 Sam. 10:19-21); and (6) in allotting the cities of the priests and Levites (1 Chron. 6:54-65). The method is seen in operation in 1 Chron. 24 to 26. The Lord was understood to have the final dispensing of lots (Prov. 16:33). Soldiers cast lots on Calvary for the Lord's seamless garment (Matt. 27:35; see on John 19:23, 24). But the choice of Matthias by lot is the only recorded instance among Christians in the NT. For caution against relying on such methods today see on Joshua 7:14; Prov. 16:33.

As far as the record shows, Peter's proposal to use the lot was accepted without challenge or discussion. It appears that after Pentecost the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit made the casting of lots superfluous (Acts 5:3; 11:15-18; 13:2; 16:6-9). An instance of the lot in the postapostolic church is the provision for its use in the selection of a bishop in the third canon of the Council of Barcelona in Spain, in the year a.d. 599.

He was numbered. Gr. sugkatapseµphizomai, from sun, "with," kata, "down," and pseµphos, "a pebble," referring to the ancient method of electing a person by casting a pebble into an urn. The word may be translated as "voted" or "enrolled."

With the eleven. In the eyes of the world, Matthias had succeeded to a very humble position, that of a leader in an insignificant group of humble people who were soon to be persecuted. But to the believers, the position to which Matthias was commissioned held immeasurable possibilities for the future. There is no reason to deny Matthias his dignity as a replacement in the apostolic body. If it be argued that nothing is said in Scripture concerning Matthias' later work, let it be remembered that nothing is said there of the later work of Andrew, Philip (the Philip of ch. 8 was the deacon), Thomas, Bartholomew, Matthew, James the Less, Simon the Zealot, and Judas Lebbaeus Thaddeus.

There is no record that the disciples laid their hands upon Matthias (cf. chs. 6:6; 13:3). Evidently the church believed the Holy Spirit had shown His approval in the election by lot. In this choice of Matthias we have early and significant evidences of church organization: (1) an official meeting of believers, (2) the discussion of an important item of church business, (3) the decision and its execution. The church was organized and now awaited divine power.

Some would make Paul the twelfth apostle. But though Paul called himself an apostle again and again (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor. 1:1, and in other epistles), he never claimed to be one of the Twelve, nor is he ever so designated. In fact, he knew and emphasized a distinction on the point (1 Cor. 15:5, 8). He made it plain that he did not receive his knowledge of the gospel from the Twelve (Gal. 1:11, 12, 15-19). He followed a program separate from theirs (Rom. 15:20, 21). In EW 199 and AA 102 it is stated that Paul took the place of Stephen.

ellen g. White comments

3 AA 26; EW 189; FE 535

5 ML 57

5-7AA 30

6, 7 SR 241

7 Ev 702; TM 55

8 AA 17, 31, 107; GW 273, 284; LS 336; ML 47; TM 65, 198, 267; 7T 273; 8T 15, 56

9 EW 190

9-11DA 831; EW 191

10, 11 AA 33; LS 50; 1T 41; 2T 194

11 EW 110; GC 301, 339

14 EW 191; TM 170; 5T 158; 6T 140; 7T 32, 213

16-18DA 722

21-69T 263

24 1T 333

Acts Chapter 2

1 The apostles, filled with the Holy Ghost, and speaking divers languages, are admired by some, and derided by others. 14 Whom Peter disproving, and shewing that the apostles spake by the power of the Holy Ghost, that Jesus was risen from the dead, ascended into heaven, had poured down the same Holy Ghost, and was the Messias, a man known to them to be approved of God by his miracles, wonders, and signs, and not crucified without his determinate counsel and foreknowledge: 37 he baptizeth a great number that were converted. 41 Who afterwards devoutly and charitably converse together: the apostles working many miracles, and God daily increasing his church.

1. Day. Rabbinic authority allowed Palestinian Jews one day for the celebration of Pentecost, but the Jews of the Dispersion were given two days for the feast.

Pentecost. Gr. penteµkosteµs, from the adjective meaning "fiftieth," a reference to the fifty days between the beginning of the Feast of Unleavened Bread and the Feast of the First Fruits (Feast of Weeks, or Pentecost). The first known uses of this Greek word for the Hebrew Feast of Weeks occur in Tobit 2:1 (written c. 200 B.C. and 2 Maccabees 12:32), showing that the word had been employed among the Jews for many years before the Christian Era. For a fuller discussion of Pentecost and its position in the Jewish calendar see on Ex. 23:16; Lev. 23:16; cf. Vol. I, p. 709; Vol. II, pp. 106, 108; Resurrection to Ascension. A brief summary of relevant facts and their connection with the bestowal of the Holy Spirit at that time, follows:

The dating of Pentecost hinges upon the date of the Passover. The Passover was held on Nisan 14. The 15th marked the beginning of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and on the 16th a sheaf of the first fruits (of the barley harvest) was waved before the Lord (Lev. 23:5-11). From the 16th, seven weeks and a day, 50 days by inclusive reckoning, were counted to the Feast of First Fruits (of the wheat harvest), which was also known as the Feast of Weeks, because of the seven weeks that intervened (Lev. 23:15, 16). It is this feast that came to be known as Pentecost.

Since, in the year of the crucifixion, Nisan 16 fell on a Sunday (see Additional Notes on Matt. 26, Note 1), Pentecost, coming 50 days, inclusive, later (seven weeks and one day), would also fall on a Sunday in that year. There is no scriptural support, however, for assigning sacredness to Sunday on this account (cf. on Matt. 28:1).

Pentecost, of all feasts of the Jewish year, attracted the largest number of pilgrims from distant lands. The dangers of travel by sea and land in the early spring and late autumn (see Acts 27:9) prevented the coming of people from abroad in any large numbers to the Passover or to the Feast of Tabernacles. But the Pentecostal season was favorable, and at no other feast would there have been present at Jerusalem representatives of so many nations. There was no other time in which the gift of the Spirit was likely to produce such direct, immediate, and far-reaching effects. Also, the character of the offerings, which were mainly those of peace and consecration, put a joyous stamp upon the day. Even the bread was leavened, indicating a new spirit of release and fellowship working through the celebrants as they rejoiced together. Pentecost had much of the air of a harvest festival. Even Paul, least interested in observances as such (Rom. 14:5), was eager to celebrate Pentecost at Jerusalem in spite of his missionary journeys in Asia and Greece (Acts 18:21; 20:16).

Each aspect of the old Feast of Weeks presented a symbolic meaning that made it typical of the work now about to be accomplished. As the Feast of First Fruits, it was fitting that it should be the occasion of the first great gathering from the fields that were "white already to harvest" (Ex. 23:16; John 4:35). At this feast the Israelites, remembering that they had been slaves in Egypt, could feel again the liberty the Exodus had given them (Deut. 16:9-12), and be free of servile work (Lev. 23:21). It was therefore a fit time for the outpouring of the Spirit of God; and "where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty" (2 Cor. 3:17). That Spirit was to guide the church into the truth, which makes all who receive it free indeed (John 8:32).

It is interesting to recall that the rabbis, who computed the interval between the first Passover and the giving of the law on Sinai, concluded that God spoke the law to the people (Ex. 20:1) on the day that was later observed as Pentecost. Through this tradition, the feast is thought to have acquired a commemorative character.

Pentecost was a great day in Israelitish experience, and was fittingly a type of the greater day that made the Spirit of God available for all who prepared themselves for Him.

Was fully come. Literally, "was being fulfilled," or "filled up." The words seem chosen to express the fact that the day was in the progress, perhaps to indicate the early morning hour.

They. Probably the 120 and other believers who may have joined them.

With one accord. Important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the reading "together." Here, the writer is merely stating that "they were all together."

However, though the Greek word does not say there was "accord," it is evident that unity existed among the disciples. The jealousies revealed in their failure to heal the demon-possessed boy (Mark 9:14-29; DA 427, 429-431), in their striving for high position (Luke 22:24), and in refusing to wash one another's feet (cf. John 13:3-17; DA 643, 644), had all been swept from their hearts by the agonies of the crucifixion, the glory of the resurrection, and the majesty of the ascension. Their Master had risen on the day of the offering of the wave sheaf of barley, which typified Himself, the First Fruits. Over a period of 40 days He had had repeated contact with them on earth. Ten more days had remained till this day, while they awaited "the promise of the Father." What would this promise bring forth? The ten days of expectancy had been ten days of earnest prayer (Acts 1:14), offered in unity of desire (AA 36, 37). This is the unity that must characterize the people of God whenever they aspire to a special experience with their Lord, or expect of Him a manifestation of power. Whatever interferes with such unity must be removed, or it will obstruct the Spirit, who does the work of God for His people.

In one place. Perhaps the same large upper room in which the Lord's Supper was eaten (Luke 22:11-14), which may have been the same ass that in which the disciples were sheltered after the crucifixion, and to which they returned after Jesus had ascended (see on Acts 1:13). Some hold that the disciples were perhaps meeting in one of the rooms of the Temple, which Josephus (Antiquities viii. 3. 2 [65, 66]) calls oikoi, "houses," and which could be used by groups of friends, or members of an association, at a feast time. But it seems unlikely that the disciples would risk being seen together in so public a place as the Temple precincts.

2. Suddenly. Without warning, unexpectedly. The 120 could have had no inkling of the way in which the Comforter would come.

A sound. Gr. eµchos, "sound," or "noise," whence our word "echo." It is used by Luke in his Gospel (ch. 21:25) to describe the "roaring" of the sea and the waves, and by the writer of Hebrews (ch. 12:19) for the "sound" of a trumpet from Sinai.

From heaven. Literally, "out of the heaven," the place from which the Holy Spirit came to descend on Jesus at His baptism (Matt. 3:16; Luke 3:21, 22).

A rushing mighty wind. Literally, "a violent wind being borne onward." Note that it was not actually a wind, but "as of," or "like to," a wind. The sensory impression made upon those going through the experience was as though it were a wind. The word translated "wind," (pnoeµ) is used in the NT only here and in ch. 17:25 where it means "breath." It is used in this same sense in the LXX. Luke may have chosen pnoeµ here as describing the supernatural "breathing" that the disciples were about to experience, and that must have recalled to them their sensations when the Lord "breathed on them," and said, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost" (John 20:22). Now once more they felt the divine impact of the awe-inspiring, divine "breathing."

It filled. No subject of the verb is given, and the context does not make clear to what the "filling" refers. "It" may refer to the "sound," or to the "wind." Many commentators, however, hold that "it" refers to the wind "wind," that is, to the Holy Spirit (cf. John 3:8).

All the house. Rather, "the whole house," that is, the "one place" of v. 1. Sound or wind has the ability to fill quickly every nook and cranny of a building. Even so did the coming of the Spirit fill the place where these Christians were assembled.

Were sitting. Early in the day (see v. 15), possibly awaiting the hour of prayer.

3. There appeared unto them. Literally, "there appeared to them." They had just received an audible intimation of the Spirit's coming (v. 2); now they had visible evidence of His arrival.

Cloven tongues. Better, "tongues distributing themselves," or "tongues being distributed." The Greek conveys a picture of an initial body of fire that divides itself into many small tongues, which then settle on each member of the waiting assembly. The figure of "tongues" is apt in view of the gift of speech the Spirit bestowed on the believers.

Fire. Not that they were actual flames of fire, but "like as of fire," that is, "resembling fire" (cf. "as of a rushing mighty wind," v. 2). Divinity and fire are often linked in Scripture (cf. Ex. 3:2; Deut. 5:4; Ps. 50:3; Mal. 3:2), doubtless because of the power, glory, and purifying effects of fire. John the Baptist had promised that Christ would baptize "with the Holy Ghost, and with fire" (Matt. 3:11).

The Diaspora: World Dispersion of the Jews, First Century A.D.

It sat. There are two possible interpretations of this construction. The singular subject "it" can either refer to each one of the individual tongues or look forward to v. 4 and refer to the Holy Spirit. The Greek verb for "sat" indicates a settling down upon, while the tense suggests momentary rather than continuous action. Even though the fiery-appearing tongues remained upon the believers for only a brief time, the effects of the visitation lasted for the lifetime of the faithful Christians who received the Spirit.

4. They were all filled. Here is the fulfillment of "the promise of the Father" (see on ch. 1:4, 5), and the fruition of ten days of prayerful waiting. The disciples had been taught to pray for the Spirit (Luke 11:13). On the night following the resurrection, Christ had "breathed on them" and declared, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost" (John 20:22). Suffusing the inner depths of their beings, and stirring their every faculty to intense activity, the promised Spirit came upon them. Now they entered into the experience of the prophets, thinking thoughts and, with the gift of tongues, speaking words that were not their own (cf. 2 Peter 1:21).

It is not to be thought that this filling was confined to the apostles. The words and the context lead the reader to believe that all who were assembled, not excepting the women, were sharers in this distribution of the gift of the Holy Spirit. If this were not so, Peter could scarcely have made of Joel's prophecy the application he did (Acts 2:16-18).

Holy Ghost. There are many clear OT references to the Spirit of God (Num. 24:2; Judges 6:34; 1 Sam. 16:13; 2 Sam. 23:2; 2 Chron. 24:20; Ps. 51:11; Isa. 48:16; Eze. 11:5; Joel 2:28, 29; etc.). But no manifestation of the Spirit in the OT can compare with that made to the disciples on Pentecost: (1) in the unmistakable identification of the Agent, (2) in the fullness of the outpouring, and (3) in the results that followed. Hence that day is often called the birthday of the church. The great episodes in the incarnate life of Jesus, His birth, His baptism and reception of the Holy Spirit, His crucifixion, His resurrection, His ascension, were of supreme importance, and central to the unfolding plan of salvation. But the outpouring of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost followed upon the heavenly acceptance of Christ's great sacrifice, and His enthronement with the Father (see AA 38, 39). By that outpouring the church was empowered to do for Christ what had never before been attempted, the preaching of the good news of salvation to all nations.

This was not a mere "moving" of the Spirit. It was not merely the "breath" of the Spirit. It was an in filling of the disciples, the complete possession of them by the Holy spirit. From that time on the church was the instrument of the Spirit. There is nothing in the later record to suggest that any of those possessed with the Spirit on that memorable day ever lost that possession. Succeeding generations of Christians, ever further removed from the experience of Pentecost, grew less and less receptive to the divine gift, and apostasy resulted. Present-believers believers may profit from this sober fact of early church history.

Began. This marks the immediate effect of the Spirit's descent upon the disciples. There was no waiting, no period of apprenticeship; they "began to speak" immediately.

Other tongues. Or, "different tongues," that is, tongues different from their native speech. The Greek word translated "tongues" (gloµssai) here and in v. 11 refers primarily to the organ of speech, but it is often used with reference to language.

The ability to speak foreign languages was a gift given to the disciples for the special purpose of carrying the gospel message into all the world. Pilgrims from the four corners of the earth (see on vs. 9-11) were assembled in Jerusalem for the Feast of Pentecost. These, being Jews of the Dispersion (see The Diaspora; Vol. V, pp. 59-61), may have understood enough Hebrew to enjoy the Temple services, but they may have been unable to cope with the Aramaic in which the disciples would ordinarily have been speaking. For their sakes, and for those who would receive the message through them, the Holy Spirit enabled the disciples to proclaim the gospel fluently in the pilgrims' home languages. This was a major miracle and fulfilled one of the Lord's last promises (see on Mark 16:17). It facilitated the reaping of a large harvest on that day (Acts 2:41) and had worldwide effects in the years that followed. See also on Acts 10:45, 46; 1 Cor. 14.

The record does not explicitly state that this gift of speaking with other tongues was permanent, but it should be borne in mind that what the Spirit once performed He was well able to repeat whenever there was a need (cf. AA 40).

As the Spirit. The Spirit gave the disciples not only the gift of speaking other languages but also their message. They spoke under the Spirit's direct guidance.

Gave. The tense of the Greek verb suggests "kept on giving," which evokes a picture of the Spirit giving words to each of the speakers as the need arose. It is possible that the disciples addressed the different language groups in turn, and that Peter's sermon (vs. 14-36), given to the whole multitude, summarized their messages.

Utterance. Gr. apophtheggomai, "to speak forth." In the LXX this word is used to describe prophesying (1 Chron. 25:1; Eze. 13:19; Zech. 10:2). Here it is employed to convey the idea of clear, elevated, vigorous speech, which led to the conversion of 3,000 people in one day. For the connection between the day of Pentecost and the "former rain" see on Joel 2:23.

5. Dwelling at Jerusalem. The question has been raised as to how the foreigners enumerated in vs. 9-11 may be considered to have been "dwelling" at Jerusalem. Two explanations are possible. The Jews mentioned here may have come to the city of their fathers for a protracted stay, perhaps on business; or perhaps, like Paul, to study (ch. 22:3), or some may have been men in retirement from active life. On the other hand, it is not impossible to understand their "dwelling" to indicate a temporary stay, particularly in view of the fact that some are called "dwellers in Mesopotamia" (ch. 2:9) and others, "strangers of Rome" (v. 10)

Devout. The word is used of Simeon (Luke 2:25). The primary meaning is one of circumspection, the disposition that handles sacred things carefully, devoutly, worshipfully. With this meaning it could include proselytes as well as Jews by birth. The expression "out of every nation under heaven" makes such inclusion a necessity. The word appears again in Acts 8:2.

Out of every nation. Herod Agripa II, in his famous speech made two generations later in an effort to keep the Jews from rebelling against the Romans, declared that "there is not a people in the world which does not contain a portion of our race" (Josephus War ii. 16. 4 [399]), and James addressed his inspired epistle "to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad" (James 1:1). This dispersion of the Jews was due primarily to the great captivities they had suffered: (1) the ten tribes to Assyria and Media in 722 B.C. (2 Kings 17:6); (2) the tribe of Judah to Babylonia, in three separate transportations beginning in 605 (see on 2 Chron. 36:1-21; Jer. 52:1-30; Dan. 1:1-7); (3) the great numbers to Egypt by the Macedonian Ptolemy Soter (Josephus Antiquities xii. 1. 1 [6, 7]). In addition to the Jews who were dispersed by the captivities, thousands of them were lured to every part of the world by commercial activities.

6. When this was noised abroad. Or, "this noise having occurred." The Greek word for "noise" or "sound," phoµneµ, is often translated "voice." In John 3:8 it is used for the "sound" of the wind to illustrate the movements of the Spirit. Here the word has two possible meanings: (1) the "sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind" (Acts 2:2); (2) the sound created by the mixed speech of the disciples (v. 4). Since phoµneµ is in the singular, it seems most likely to refer to the divine sound, which may well have been heard outside the house where the believers were, but it may also refer to the many voices of v. 4.

The multitude. That is, the crowds of people in Jerusalem, including particularly the visitors from foreign lands.

Were confounded. Gr. sugchunoµ, "to pour together." The word is peculiar to Acts, where it is used five times. It is better translated "confused," or "bewildered." The multitude were naturally surprised, on arriving at the place whence the noise originated, to hear speakers using so many different tongues.

Heard them speak. The question sometimes is raised as to whether the gift operated here upon the apostles, giving them the power to speak other languages, or upon the hearers, giving them understanding of what the apostles said. Although it is true that Paul later recognizes the existence of a gift of interpretation of tongues (see 1 Cor. 12:30; 14:13, 27), the gift at Pentecost seems quite clearly to have been one bestowed on the apostles, because it was upon them that the Spirit came (Acts 2:3, 4; see AA 40; DA 821).

Language. Gr. dialektos (see on ch. 1:19). The list that follows (ch. 2:9-11) refers to language groups. Probably each speaker was using a different language according to the group he was addressing. Latecomers to the assembly doubtless moved about until they found the group where their own tongue was being spoken. In this way many nationalities were served simultaneously.

7. Amazed and marvelled. The Greek word translated "amazed" literally means "to be standing out of oneself," and refers to the first wide-eyed astonishment that overwhelmed those who heard the miracle of tongues. Compare its use in Mark 3:21, "He is beside himself." The Greek word for "marvelled" contains the idea of continuity, "to be marveling," for their wonder grew greater the more they heard.

Galilæans. This description of the gospel messengers may refer primarily to the apostles, who were all from Galilee (see on Mark 3:14), if Matthias be counted as coming from that province. In a general way it may also be true of the 120, many of whom doubtless had come from Galilee.

The title "Galilaeans" seems to have been used scornfully, because the inhabitants of Galilee lacked culture (see on Matt. 2:22; 4:15; 26:73; see DA 232). It was all the more surprising, therefore, to find men of Galilee fluently speaking foreign languages.

8. Hear we every man. Obviously a composite statement, in which the writer embodies numerous remarks from representatives of the various nationalities next enumerated. The fact stated by these amazed listeners was both a foretaste and a pledge of the giving of the gospel to all the world, despite the fact of the many languages involved.

Wherein we were born. Many of those present, although Jews by religion, had been born in other lands and had grown up speaking the languages of their various birthplaces. The list that follows reveals the trained historian, who had inquired carefully as to the nations represented at this great occasion, who himself later attended at least one Pentecost (ch. 21:15), and who therefore knew the kind of crowd that gathered at the Pentecostal season. Luke follows a sequence of sorts in naming the nations, as though he were taking a mental bird's-eye view of the Roman Empire. With Palestine as his center he looks first at the east, then passes north, west, and south in that order. In this way the reference to "every nation under heaven" (ch. 2:5) is justified. The Jews of the Dispersion (see Vol. V, pp. 59, 60; John 7:35; Acts 6:1) seem generally to have been divided into four classes. These classes, together with some of their component parts to which Luke refers, are: (1) those from Babylonia and other eastern areas: Parthians, Medes, Elamites; dwellers in Mesopotamia; (2) those from Syria and Asia Minor: Judea, Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia, Phrygia, Pamphylia; (3) those from northern Africa: Egypt, parts of Libya about Cyrene; (4) those from Rome: strangers of Rome. It appears, therefore, that the list is given according to a generally known scheme. For the geographical positions of the various peoples referred to see, The Roman World at the Birth of Jesus; The Diaspora.

9. Parthians. The list begins at the east with the great Parthian kingdom, which was still, as it had been in the days of the defeated Roman general Crassus a century before, the chief enemy of the Roman government. It lay south of the Caspian Sea, from the Tigris to the Indus. The language was Persian, as was probably also the language of the Medes.

Medes. The country of the Medes lay southwest of the Caspian Sea, east of the region of Assyria. It was to Media that some of the ten tribes had been carried captive (2 Kings 17:6). See on Gen. 10:2; Dan. 2:39.

Elamites. These people lived in a kingdom bounded by Parthia on the east, Media on the north, and Babylonia on the west. The Persian Gulf lay to the south. See on Gen. 10:22; Esther 1:2; Dan. 8:2. The people of Elam are called "Persians" in the LXX, but the Elamite language was different from that of Persia.

Dwellers in Mesopotamia. Mesopotamia lay "between the rivers," that is, between the Tigris and the Euphrates (see on Gen. 24:10). The "dwellers" would include several linguistic groups that would speak variants of Aramaic (see Vol. I, p. 30; see on Dan. 2:4).

Judæa. It has puzzled Bible students that Luke should have named Judea here, rather than leaving it to be taken for granted. Some have supposed it to be a mistake for India or Idumaea. But it would be natural for the Gentile Luke to mention Judea, the focal point of his history. Its presence makes the list the more complete. "Judea" may also be taken in a wider sense to include all Palestine.

Cappadocia. As he moves in his record from east to west, Luke names next the province lying northwest of Mesopotamia. Cappadocia lay in the eastern part of what is now Turkey, bounded by Armenia on the east, with the Black (Euxine) Sea and the province of Pontus on the north, Galatia on the west and Cilicia, the country of Paul (ch. 21:39), to the south. It is not known what language was spoken. Perhaps it was similar to the "speech of Lycaonia" (ch. 14:11).

Pontus. This region lay on the southern shore of the Black Sea, north of Cappadocia. Like its neighbor it was under Roman administration. Its native language is not known.

Asia. This is not the modern Asia, but a Roman province lying in the western end of Asia Minor, embracing much of the western part of modern Turkey. Ephesus was its chief city. The Holy Spirit prevented Paul on his Second Missionary Journey from entering this region. It was frequently called Ionia, and was markedly Greek in population. The seven letters of Rev. 1:2, 3 are addressed to cities in the province of Asia. Although Greek was understood by the majority in this and the following regions, the common people doubtless used their own local tongues.

10. Phrygia, and Pamphylia. Two small districts southeast of Roman "Asia."

Egypt. For more than a millennium and a half there had been a tie between Egypt and the Hebrews. Witness the sojourn there of Jacob and his family, the enslavement of the Hebrew tribes, and the later Egyptian invasions of Palestine (see on 1 Kings 14:25). There was a strong pro-Egyptian party in Judea in the time of Jeremiah, and many, including Jeremiah himself, were taken there while Judea was falling into the hands of the Babylonians (Jer. 42:13 to 43:7). Thousands of Jews were taken to Egypt by Ptolemy, and others went there during the struggles of the Maccabees against the Seleucid kings. Jews constituted about one third of the population of Alexandria in Luke's day, and were ruled by an ethnarch of their own (Josephus Antiquities xiv. 7. 2 [117]). The country was Hellenized, but the local language was Coptic, a development of ancient Egyptian largely written in the Greek alphabet, and modified by Demotic (simplified Egyptian writing) influences.

Libya. A name anciently used for all known Africa, with the possible exception of Egypt, but to be understood here as indicating approximately the same territory as modern Libya, Cyrene being its chief city on the Mediterranean coast. Its culture was highly Hellenistic, but it possessed a large Jewish colony, the result of a deportation from Palestine under Ptolemy I (Josephus Against Apion ii. 4 [44]). From Cyrene came Simon, who had borne Jesus' cross (Matt. 27:32), and it was from there that missionary-minded men were to evangelize Antioch of Syria, having such success that Barnabas and Saul of Tarsus went to help them (Acts 11:19-26). See on Gen. 10:13.

Strangers of Rome. Gr. epideµmountes Rhoµmaioi, "sojourning Romans." Rhoµmaioi, usually means "Roman citizens" rather than "inhabitants of Rome." The phrase "strangers of Rome" would therefore refer to Jews who lived at Rome as sojourners, or to Roman Jews temporarily sojourning in Jerusalem. Jews were so numerous in Rome that when Varus sanctioned their sending an embassy to Augustus, the 50 ambassadors were joined by more than 8,000 of their countrymen resident in the city (Josephus Antiquities xvii. 11. 1). Jews had been banished from Italy by Tiberius in a.d. 19. That edict must have sent several thousands seeking asylum, and naturally numbers of them would return to Palestine. Tiberius revoked this edict, but many Roman Jews might well have lingered in Jerusalem (see Vol. V, pp. 65, 66).

Jews and proselytes. The words may be applied to the whole preceding list, or they may be read like a note, especially emphasizing the prominence of the Roman proselytes in that cosmopolitan multitude of worshipers.

It is natural that the Gentile Luke (see Vol. V, p. 664), writing to the Gentile Theophilus (see on Luke 1:3), should mention visitors from the capital of the Roman Empire. For "proselytes" see on Matt. 23:15.

11. Cretes and Arabians. The two names appear to have been added to the preceding list, and this has been cited as an illustration of the genuine nature of Luke's account, as though Luke were reporting what an eyewitness had informally told him. The island of Crete, south of Greece, held a large Jewish population. Arabia, bordering on Palestine, was the home of many thousands of Jews.

A study of the countries mentioned in vs. 9-11 reveals that many names that might have been expected are missing, and some minor ones are included. This may be taken as further evidence that Luke did not invent the list, but received it from those who had actually witnessed the miracle at Pentecost. The list should not be regarded as an exact inventory of all who were in Jerusalem, however. It is rather an attempt to describe the cosmopolitan nature of those to whom the disciples spoke, and the many different languages thus employed.

The wonderful works. Rather, "the great things," or "the majesty." The term would cover God's providences that were manifested throughout the life and work of Jesus.

12. Amazed. See on v. 7.

Doubt. Gr. diaporeoµ, "to be perplexed." Luke is the only NT writer to use the word.

What meaneth this? The hearers were genuinely puzzled at the phenomenon, and were excitedly discussing its import.

13. Others. Gr. heteroi, "others of a different kind," not alloi, "others of the same kind." This suggests a different class of speakers from those mentioned in vs. 5-12. Perhaps these heteroi were native residents of Jerusalem or Palestine who did not understand any of the languages the disciples were using. They had probably been influenced by many slanderous things that had been said about Christ. The Jews had attributed some of our Lord's miracles to the power of the chief of devils (Luke 11:15), and Festus pronounced Paul mad (Acts 26:24). The priests had mocked Christ on the cross (Matt. 27:41-43), and were capable of instigating base rumors to account for this miracle of tongues lest it weaken their priestly hold on the people (cf. AA 40).

New wine. Gr. gleukos, "sweet wine," not "new wine," since Pentecost fell in June, and fresh grapes were not ripe till August. Apparently, an intoxicating beverage is meant here. The accusation of the mockers would suggest that there was an element of excitement in the manner and tone of the disciples. It would have been strange, indeed, if they had spoken in an altogether calm, or casual, manner. The great power of God was upon them, and their theme one of vast import.

14. Peter. A remarkable change has come over the apostle during the few weeks since his denial. He has been converted. His mind has been opened by the Lord's instruction so that he can understand the Scriptures (Luke 24:45). He has been endued with insight and power by the Holy Spirit. As a result, he stands forth as a sanctified leader of men. Instead of uncertainty, there is conviction; instead of fear, boldness; instead of hasty words, as in the Gospels, there is a detailed, well-reasoned discourse. The prophecies concerning Christ are unfolded with method and clarity. Here is an unstudied proof of genuineness. An inventor of tales would hardly have dared to show such a change in character as Luke shows in Peter.

With the eleven. Peter is not speaking in isolation. He stands as a representative of his brethren. They have been individually addressing the different national groups, but Peter addresses the multitude and binds off this great evangelistic meeting. "The eleven" reveals that Matthias is included among the apostles, and thus has rapidly taken to his responsibilities.

Lifted up. Although this expression is found in the LXX and in classical Greek, it is also a Hebraism (Gen. 21:16; 27:38), and suggests a raising of the voice, a crying out aloud. This was necessary in order for Peter to make himself heard by the large crowd.

Said. Gr. apophtheggomai, "to speak forth" (cf. on v. 4). The use of this word adds color to the fact that Peter was speaking with the Spirit's gift. The apostle was not just "saying"; he was "speaking forth" that which the Spirit gave him.

Men of Judaea. This part of v. 14 reads literally, "Men, Jews, and inhabitants of Jerusalem." It would appear that Peter was first speaking to local Jews (see v. 13), as distinct from the Jews of vs. 5-11, who were of the Desperation.

Dwell at Jerusalem. This phrase may also be taken in the local sense, as referring to those whose home was in the capital. Peter's words, however, would reach the whole assembly, and it is clear from v. 22 that the apostle is eventually addressing the wider company.

Hearken. Literally, "give ear to." This is another Hebraism, and may possibly indicate that Peter was speaking in Aramaic. Opinion on this matter is divided, for many Hebraisms are carried over into the Greek of the LXX, and the scriptural quotations are from the LXX.

15. These are not drunken. Peter appeals to the common sense of his listeners. Were the disciples likely to be drunk on the morning of the Feast of Pentecost, after a night spent in devotion, and when all decent Jews were fasting? Drunkenness belonged to the night (1 Thess. 5:7). It was a mark of extreme grossness for men to "rise up early in the morning, that they may follow strong drink" (Isa. 5:11; cf. Eccl. 10:16, 17). Basing their traditional practice on Ex. 16:8, the Jews ate bread in the morning and flesh in the evening; and no wine was drunk by the Jew of good habits until late in the day.

As ye suppose. The apostle deals tactfully with the unfounded accusation of drunkenness, and assumes they have made a mistake rather than a malicious charge.

Third hour. That is, about 9:00 a.m. For NT reckoning of time see Vol. V, p. 50; see on Matt. 27:45. The third hour was the time of morning prayer.

16. This is that. Peter makes no timid approach to his subject. He boldly identifies the preaching as a fulfillment of prophecy. He can afford to do this, since he has been taught by the Lord and is inspired by the Spirit. Under this twofold guidance he begins the first public exposition of the life and works of the Messiah since His ascension. The verses that follow amply testify to the apostle's new-found ability.

Joel. Peter does not plunge into controversy about Jesus. He first uses the OT Scriptures, which they believed, to sanction the phenomenon they are even then witnessing. This gains their attention, helps them accept his reasoning, and prepares them for his later references to Christ. The prophecy of Joel is thought by some to be the oldest prophetic book of the Bible (see Vol. IV, pp. 20, 21). Under the theme of the coming "day of the Lord" Joel calls Israel to repentance, and promises an outpouring of the Spirit at some future time, identified only as "afterward" (see on Joel 2:28-32; see Vol. IV, pp. 937, 938). The expectation of such an outpouring of the Holy Spirit was strong among devout men of the OT (see on Acts 2:3). Verses 17-21 are quoted from Joel 2:28-32, following quite closely the LXX.

17. Come to pass. The inference is that what was future to Joel is now present. The hearers are having prophecy fulfilled before their very eyes.

In the last days. See on Joel 2:28; cf. on Isa. 2:2.

Saith God. This does not appear in the text in Joel. It is an insertion by Peter for permissible sermonic purposes, and identifies the Giver of the promise that follows.

Of my Spirit. See on ch. 3:19.

Upon all flesh. That is, upon all men, enduing weak humanity with divine ability. The gift is not concentrated upon the Jews or upon any class or sex, although Peter's mind would doubtless limit it to his own people at this stage.

Shall prophesy. Peter's application of Joel's prophecy to the present experience at Pentecost seems to link the gift of prophecy with the gift of tongues (see on Joel 2:28). The prophecy also states that women as well as men are to have the gift. Luke records fulfillments of this promise in Acts 9:10-16; 11:27, 28; 13:1-3; 16:6, 7; 18:9, 10; 21:9-11; 22:17, 18; 27:10, 22-25. See also on Luke 2:36. The gifts of the Spirit have always revealed themselves in the activities of God's successful servants, particularly in crucial times.

Your young men. It has been shown again and again that men still in their younger years have both the ideals and the energy to see ahead and attempt the seemingly impossible. It seems that most, perhaps all, of Jesus' disciples were young. Most religious movements, and many political and civic enterprises, have been set afoot by young men.

See visions. For a discussion of "visions" and "dreams" see on Num. 12:6; 1 Sam. 3:1. The young men are to see Spirit-given visions containing stimulation and instruction for the present and the future.

Old men. In Joel, these are mentioned before the "young men."

Dreams. That is, revelations received in sleep, as contrasted with "visions," which refer to visual revelations in general.

18. My servants. The passage from which this is quoted (Joel 2:29) says simply "servants" or "slaves," both in the Hebrew and the LXX. It gives assurance that God's Spirit is not reserved for the high and the mighty, but is to be received also by men and women on the lowest levels of society (see on Joel 2:28). But in the present context, Peter seems to make an extended application of these words. In v. 17 he speaks of "your sons," "your daughters," "your young men," "your old men." Then at the beginning of v. 18 he makes a subtle change from OT. His declaration, translated literally, is, "and indeed upon my servants and upon my handmaidens." This addition of the words "indeed" and "my" to the OT text would seem to imply that Peter considers "servants" and "handmaidens" not as a further category of those who would receive the Spirit, but rather as a summary of all those who already had been mentioned. Your sons, daughters, young men, and old men, indeed all of Israel (see on v. 17), were to be My servants and handmaidens, true servants of God.

In those days. That is, "in the last days" (v. 17).

Of my Spirit. See on ch. 3:19.

Shall prophesy. See on v. 17. The words here do not appear in the corresponding passage in Joel 2:29.

19. I will shew. Literally, "I will give."

Wonders. Gr. terata, "portents," "miracles" (see Vol. V, p. 208).

In heaven. In Peter's mind the immediate application of this prophecy may have been the gift of the Spirit from heaven. But the quotation also is significant for the last days (see on v. 20).

Signs. Gr. seµmeia, "signs," "prodigies." This word or its equivalent does not appear in the Hebrew or the LXX of Joel, but is frequently used with terata (see above on "wonders") in the NT and always in the plural (John 4:48; Acts 4:30; Rom. 15:19; etc.).

In the earth. This may well refer, immediately, to the speaking with other tongues, but, as succeeding phrases show, its real significance belongs to the last days. Neither "above" nor "beneath" are in Joel; they are words added by Peter to sharpen the contrast between "heaven" and "earth."

Blood. "Blood," "fire," and "smoke," the terrible companions of war.

Vapour. This follows the LXX. Joel's Hebrew has "pillars," or "columns."

20. The Sun. For specific fulfillment of the signs mentioned in this verse see on Joel 2:10; Matt. 24:29.

Before. Intimating that the wonders and signs precede the "day of the Lord" and are not themselves a part of it.

Notable. Gr. epiphaneµs, "manifest," "illustrious," or "glorious." The Hebrew of Joel 2:31, however, literally means "terrible," "bright," "glorious."

The phrase "great and notable day" agrees with the LXX, but the final part of Acts 2:20 may be rendered "before the day of the Lord comes, the great and manifest day" (RSV).

Day of the Lord. See on Isa. 13:6; Joel 1:15; 2:1. The day will be terrible to the enemies of God (Joel 2:1, 2; Amos 5:18-20; Rev. 6:15-17; etc.), but welcome to those who accept the Lord's call (Isa. 25:9; Joel 2:32).

21. Whosoever. This would first apply to Peter's listeners, but in its wider sense it embraces all mankind and stresses the universality of the gospel appeal.

Call. To "call on the name of the Lord" was a common Hebrew phrase connected with those who worshiped God see Gen. 12:8; see on ch. 4:26. Luke and Paul both use the construction (Acts 7:59; 9:14; 22:16; Rom. 10:12; 1 Cor. 1:2). In Acts it is also used in the sense of appealing from a lower to a higher tribunal (ch. 11, 12, 21, 25).

The prayer of faith will result in a spirit of calm assurance amid the terrors of the day of the Lord. It is also true that those who, at any time, sincerely call on the Lord's name thereby find the way of salvation ch. 4:12.

Peter broaches the great conclusion to which he is working, that Jesus is the Lord and Christ ch. 2:36. He has taken an OT prophecy that speaks of Yahweh, Jehovah (see Vol. I, pp. 172, 173), and applied it to Jesus. The title Kurios, "Lord," used in the LXX for Yahweh, is given to the ascended Master. It is a bold step. It shows how the conviction of Christ's deity was the keystone in Peter's thinking and doctrine.

So frequently does the word "name" occur in connection with the Lord in the book of Acts that it constitutes a theme. The name of the Lord became a symbol to the disciples of the glorious character and unlimited power of Him with whom they had walked in Palestine.

Shall be saved. This has a twofold application--saved from sin and from the judgments of God upon the earth. As to judgments, the 1st-century Christians, by obeying the counsel of Jesus as given in Matt. 24:15-20, were saved from the destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Romans (Eusebius Ecclesiastical History iii. 5. 3; see on Matt. 24:16). At the close of time, true Christians, by following the counsels of the Lord as Saviour and coming King, will be saved from the catastrophes of the last days. However, the chief application of the words of this verse is to salvation from sin.

22. Men of Israel. Literally, "men, Israelites." The term "Israel" implies the covenant relationship (see on Gen. 32:28).

Hear these words. An arresting phrase, marking a division in Peter's argument. Peter has given the prophetic background, and now launches into his main theme, the divinity of Jesus.

Jesus of Nazareth. The first part of the title affixed to the cross (cf. John 19:19). Seven weeks later the name is used to introduce Him whom Peter demonstrates to be "both Lord and Christ" (Acts 2:36). The use of the name could hardly have been casual.

A man. Peter begins his argument with the human Jesus, the Man who had lived and moved among them, openly and publicly, and proved by His life and works to be all that Peter is now going to claim for Him.

Approved of God. That is, acknowledged by God.

Among you. Rather, "unto you."

Miracles and wonders and signs. For "miracles" read, literally, "powers," or "mighty works." "Wonders" and "signs" may hark back to Joel's words quoted in v. 19. The three words are synonyms, expressing different aspects of the same fact rather than a meticulous classification of Christ's deeds.

God did. Peter postulates God's authority and approval for Jesus' miracles.

Ye yourselves. The audience could hardly quarrel with Peter's statements, for they knew them to be true, based on deeds done in their midst.

23. Him. Literally, "this one," that is, Jesus of Nazareth (v. 22).

Delivered. That is, betrayed, by Judas. In order to afford Satan the opportunity to demonstrate the evils of his government, God permits many things to happen, contrary to His ultimate purpose. However, in His divine wisdom, He overrules all to His glory.

Determine counsel. Peter has so developed his spiritual insight that he now can see the working out of God's purpose, in harmony with God's foreknowledge, in the tragic events associated with Christ's death (cf. ch. 1:16). See on Isa. 53:10; cf. Luke 22:22.

Ye have taken. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of these words.

By wicked hands. Literally, "by the hand of lawless [men]."

Crucified and slain. Literally, "fastening [to the cross] ye did slay." Peter here includes his hearers among those guilty of his Master's death. This is a terrible indictment in view of his conclusion (v. 36).

24. Whom God hath raised. It is probable that an account of the resurrection of Jesus had found its way among the people, and had been met by the false story recorded in Matt. 28:11-15. But this is the first public witness to that event borne by one of the followers of Jesus.

Pains. Literally, "travail pangs." The word for "pains" is the same as that for "sorrows" in Matt. 24:8.

Not possible. Peter's conviction rests, in part, upon the sure words of prophecy quoted in vs. 25-28, which foretell Messiah's triumph over death. But there are other reasons: (1) Christ's sinlessness (John 8:46; 1 Peter 2:22; see on Matt. 4:1-11; see Additional Note on John 1)--death could not hold the Innocent One; (2) the Life-giver could not be held by death (John 5:26; 10:17, 18).

25. Concerning him. Without this explanation Ps. 16 might seem to present hope only of David's own deliverance from his enemies. The fact of the resurrection gave a new meaning to prophecies that would not of themselves have suggested it, but that were incomplete without it.

I foresaw. This may also be translated, "I saw in front of myself."

The Lord. God the Father.

On my right hand. The reference may be to a battle scene, in which a soldier, standing by his friend's right hand, protects him from attack. It may also represent an advocate by the side of his client. The quotation emphasizes the Father's unfailing support of the Son.

26. Heart rejoice. Oneness with God is the greatest source of happiness.

My tongue. See on Ps. 16:9.

My flesh. That is, "my body."

Shall rest. Literally, "shall tabernacle," or "shall dwell as in a tabernacle" (see on 2 Peter 1:13, 14). The Hebrew of Ps. 16 speaks of David's security in this life, but Peter applies the psalmist's words to the resurrection.

27. Soul. See on Ps. 16:10; Matt. 10:28.

Hell. Gr. hadeµs, "the grave" (see on Ps. 16:10; Matt. 11:23). The death of Christ was an actual death, but His resurrection provided victory over it, a death He had tasted for every man (Heb. 2:9).

Holy One. Gr. hosios, "pure," "pious," "holy." This word conveys the idea of personal piety and godliness (Heb. 7:26; Rev. 15:4), and thereby differs from hagios, which refers to consecration or dedication (see Mark 1:24). See Additional Note on Psalm 36.

Corruption. In the Hebrew text of the verse quoted the word is shachath, "pit," that is, "grave" (see on Ps. 16:10). Luke was doubtless following the LXX of Ps. 16:10, which reads "corruption."

28. Ways of life. This agrees with the LXX, which is a very free rendering of the Hebrew (see on Ps. 16:11).

Joy. Gr. euphrosuneµ, "well-mindedness," "cheerfulness," "gladness."

With thy countenance. God's countenance, that is, His presence, is the source of cheer and gladness.

29. Men and brethren. Literally, "men, brethren." Peter maintains his persuasive forms of address.

Let me freely speak. Rather, "it is permissible for me to speak with freedom." Those to whom the apostle spoke could not contradict the facts of David's death and burial. The prophecy just quoted must therefore have another application.

Patriarch. Used in its primary sense, of the founder of a family or dynasty. In the NT it is also used of the 12 sons of Jacob (ch. 7:8) and of Abraham (Heb. 7:4).

His sepulchre. King David was buried in Jerusalem, "in the city of David" (see on 1 Kings 2:10; 3:1).

30. Being a prophet. An unusual description of King David, but justified because Ps. 16 goes beyond David's personal experience and becomes Messianic.

God had sworn. See on 2 Sam. 7:12-14, 16. The oath is suggested in Ps. 132:11, which Peter quotes.

According to the flesh. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of the words "according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ," so that the passage would read, "God swore to him with an oath to place upon his throne one, of the fruit of his loins." This would agree more closely with Ps. 132:11.

31. Seeing this before. This ascribes prophetic vision to David, but does not mean that he personally understood that the prophecy referred to the resurrection of the Messiah (see 1 Peter 1:11).

Soul. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading, "he was not left unto hades," rather than "his soul was not left in hell." See on v. 27 for comment on "hell," and "corruption"; for "soul" see on Ps. 16:10; Matt. 10:28.

32. This Jesus. Jesus of Nazareth, the Crucified One, of vs. 22, 23.

God raised up. Christ arose at the call of God the Father, who commissioned angels to call upon His Son to come forth from the dead (Matt. 28:2-6; Rom. 8:11; DA 785).

Witnesses. See on ch. 1:8, 22.

33. By the right hand. Or, "at the right hand." Such a position was one of honor (see Matt. 20:21; 25:33), and is portrayed as that taken by Christ upon His glorification (Matt. 26:64; Heb. 1:3; cf. Acts 2:34).

Exalted. See on John 1:1-3, 14; see Additional Note on John 1.

Promise of the Holy Ghost. See on John 14:16, 26; 15:26.

Shed forth. Rather, "poured out."

Now. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of this word.

34. Is not ascended. Rather, "ascended not." Peter's argument is clear. David had died and been buried (see on v. 29). Therefore the statement of Ps. 16:10, "Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell" (see on Acts 2:27), could not refer to him. Here is clear evidence that Peter believed that man does not ascend to heaven at death (cf. 1 Thess. 4:14-17; see on 2 Sam. 12:23; 22:6; Job 7:9).

He saith. Peter quotes Ps. 110:1. This psalm is most quoted in the NT (see Matt. 22:44; 1 Cor. 15:25; Heb. 1:13; 5:6; Heb. 7:17, 21; Heb. 10:13). This psalm was regarded as Messianic by the Jews, and was so interpreted by Jesus (Matt. 22:41-46). See on Ps. 110:1.

The Lord. In terms of the present context this title refers to God the Father (see on Ps. 110:1).

My Lord. In terms of the present context this refers to Christ (see Ps. 110:1).

Sit thou. These words suggest the recognition of Christ as holding a unique position (see Eph. 1:20; cf. Phil. 2:10, 11).

35. Thy foes. Christ is victor in the great controversy with Satan and his hosts. In the ultimate triumph over evil, "the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death" (1 Cor. 15:26).

Footstool. The king seated in power on a secure throne has his foot upon a footstool (see on Ps. 99:5). To put an enemy in the ignominious place of the footstool is a sign of complete triumph (see on Joshua 10:24). Christ will one day completely conquer all His foes, and His kingdom will be established in everlasting glory (Rev. 11:15). At that time of triumph the Son will turn over the universal kingdom to the Father (1 Cor. 15:24-28).

36. House of Israel. Peter intends his words to go beyond the immediate circle of his hearers to "all" Israel. Nevertheless, his vision thus far is evidently limited to the Jewish race, as was true of the other disciples. This is evident from Peter's experience with Cornelius see chs. 10:9-16; 11:1-18.

That same Jesus. Rather, "this very Jesus" (cf. vs. 22, 23).

Ye have crucified. The pronoun "ye" (humeis), not ordinarily given in the Greek, emphasizes the contrast between the Jews' treatment of Jesus and the recognition He had received from the Father. In the Greek the word "crucified" comes at the end of the sentence, and makes a most solemn conclusion. Peter boldly lays the crime at the Jews' door. He unflinchingly presses home their guilt and thus prepares the way for the effects described in v. 37.

Lord and Christ. The word "Lord" reflects the thought of the psalm cited in v. 34. "Christ" identifies Jesus as the Messiah (see on Ps. 2:2; Matt. 1:1). The original word order possesses a force which the English cannot give: "Both Lord and Christ hath God made this Jesus."

37. When they heard. God has ordained that the preaching of His word should be one of the most effective means of bringing conviction--and faith--to man (see Rom. 10:17; 1 Cor. 1:21).

Pricked. Gr. katanussomai, "to pierce," and metaphorically, "to pain mentally." Here is the deep inner sorrow that should accompany true repentance (2 Cor. 7:9-11).

Apostles. They must have been nearby, supporting Peter in his dynamic ministry.

Men and brethren. The very term the disciples used with one another (ch. 1:16), and with which Peter addressed the multitude in ch. 2:29. The Spirit-prompted sermon brought the people into sympathy with the apostles.

What shall we do? The genuine cry of contrite hearts (cf. chs. 16:30; 22:10).

38. Repent. For a discussion of the import of this word see on Matt. 3:2; 4:17. This is the message that Christ commanded to be preached (Luke 24:47).

Be baptized. See on Matt. 3:6; Mark 16:16. This was to be an integral part of the apostles' ministry (Matt. 28:19).

Every one. Peter allows no exemption from baptism. Although it is not a saving act, it is the outward sign of the death of the old life and the beginning of the new, and is required of all.

In the name. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between this and the reading "upon the name," that is, upon confession of the name of Jesus. Such an interpretation would suit the context, which deals with Jesus as "Lord and Christ" (v. 36).

The question arises, Why in this instance, and in chs. 10:48; 19:5, is only the name of Jesus mentioned in connection with baptism, and not the threefold name given in Matt. 28:19? Various explanations have been given. The most satisfactory solution seems to be that Luke is not recording the baptismal formula, but Peter's exhortation to those who are willing to confess Jesus as the Christ. It was only logical that Christian baptism sometimes might be spoken of as if only in the single name, since of the persons of the Godhead, it is Christ particularly to whom baptism points. This is illustrated in early Christian literature, both in the NT and later. Thus the Didache, or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (7; 9), uses both the single name and the three names in connection with baptism. This early attitude is demonstrated by Ambrose (d. a.d. 397), who declared concerning the baptismal formula: "He who says the one signifies the Trinity. If you say Christ, you have designated also God the Father from whom the Son was anointed, and also the Son, the very One who was anointed, and the Holy Spirit by whom He was anointed" (De Spiritu Sancto i. 3; J. P. Migne, ed., Patrologia Latina, vol. XVI, col. 743). Peter's hearers already believed in God the Father; the real test, so far as they were concerned, was whether they would accept Jesus as the Messiah.

As Christ had instructed, baptism was now given "in the name," in vital connection with the person of Jesus Christ. Only by recognizing Him could the convert now come to baptism. The disciples had just experienced the gift of the Holy Spirit, and thus they were in a position to recognize the meaning of John the Baptist's prophecy that Christ would baptize them "with the Holy Ghost, and with fire" (Matt. 3:11). The mystical union between the believer and his Lord, made real by the Spirit, is signalized in the rite of baptism.

Sins. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading "your sins." This makes forgiveness a very personal matter (see on Matt. 1:21; 3:6; 26:28; Luke 3:3).

Gift of the Holy Ghost. These words may be understood as identifying the gift, and so may be read, "gift which is the Holy Ghost." The Greek doµrea, "gift," is a general term, and differs from charisma, a term applied to the more specific gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:4). The apostle promises the presence of the Spirit of God as a personal possession for each believer. He is not here concerned with the bestowal of miraculous powers.

Note the steps in the blessed experience of becoming a Christian, as outlined in this verse: (1) repentance, (2) baptism, (3) remission of sin, (4) reception of the Holy Spirit.

39. Promise. See on ch. 1:4.

Unto you. The very ones who had participated in the crucifixion of the Lord. Their children were also free to benefit from the promise (cf. Matt. 27:25).

Afar off. The Jews of the Dispersion (see Vol. V, pp. 59-61), to whom the apostle afterward wrote (1 Peter 1:1, 2), and possibly also the heathen nations among whom the dispersed Jews lived (cf. Eph. 2:13, 17). By inspiration Peter may here be forecasting the entry of Gentiles into the church (see Matt. 28:19).

Lord our God. God, the Father, whom the Jews professed to serve.

Shall call. Rather, "may call unto Him." The call of God is to everyone. Everyone has an opportunity to be saved. In the sense of invitation, the "called" are many; the "chosen" are those who respond to the call (see on Matt. 22:14); these are the "called" in the ultimate sense. For further comment see on Rom. 8:28-30.

40. Many other words. Now Luke summarizes the remainder of Peter's address, quoting only his final appeal (cf. on John 21:25).

Did ... testify and exhort. Rather, "protested solemnly and kept on exhorting."

Save yourselves. Literally, "be ye saved." Men cannot save themselves; they can only accept or reject God's provisions for salvation.

Untoward. Rather, "crooked," as in Luke 3:5; Phil. 2:15. Compare on Deut. 32:5.

41. Gladly. Important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the omission of this word.

Added. To those who already confessed Christ (see on ch. 1:15).

Three thousand. Because of the largeness of this number it has been urged that the baptism was by pouring or sprinkling, not immersion. Such an assumption is not necessary (see on Matt. 3:6). There were adequate supplies of water in and near Jerusalem to provide for the baptism of large numbers of persons, such as the pools at Bethesda (see on John 5:2) and Siloam (see on John 9:7), and the pools of Solomon. Furthermore, it need not be thought that the administration of the rite was necessarily confined to the Twelve. Succeeding chapters show that many converts were made from among the Hellenistic Jews who were present at the feast (Acts 6:1) and that few if any of the converts were yet of the local ruling class (ch. 4:1). Some of these converts went back to the cities whence they had come, and may have been the now unknown founders of the churches in such places as Damascus, Alexandria, or Rome itself.

Souls. Gr. psuchai, "souls," used here in the sense of "persons," as in Acts 2:43; 3:23; Rom. 13:1; etc.; see on Matt. 10:28.

42. Continued stedfastly. Gr. proskartereoµ, "to persevere," "to give constant attention to." This takes the story beyond the day of Pentecost and includes the believers' conduct in the days that followed (see on ch. 3:1).

Doctrine. That is, "teaching." The newly baptized Christians had heard Peter's sermon, and separate groups had benefited from the messages given in many tongues. In succeeding days that first instruction would be supplemented by further lessons concerning Christ. All such instruction may be included in the term "teaching." It is difficult to believe that the apostles had already formulated anything like a "creed."

Fellowship. Gr. koinoµnia; although this word is translated most often as "fellowship" (1 Cor. 1:9; Phil. 1:5; 3:10; John 1:3, 6, 7; etc.), in 1 Cor. 10:16; 2 Cor. 13:14 it is rendered "communion," and in Rom. 15:26; 2 Cor. 9:13; Heb. 13:16 it refers to charitable contributions. It seems clear that in the present instance the word refers to the brotherhood that developed between the apostles and their converts.

Breaking of bread. Probably this included both the Lord's Supper (see 1 Cor. 10:16) and ordinary communal meals (see p. 45; Acts 2:44, 46).

The expression "breaking of bread," or one similar to it, occurs in Matt. 14:19; 15:36; Mark 8:6, 19; Luke 24:30, 35, of meals that were clearly not celebrations of the Lord's Supper. "To break bread" was a common Jewish idiom meaning "to eat." In Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 10:16; 11:24 it is used specifically of the Lord's Supper. In Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7, 11 either might be indicated. That the cup is not mentioned in connection with the bread does not necessarily exclude the possibility that the Lord's Supper is here referred to. Although the context does not justify a dogmatic conclusion, it may be noted that the expression "breaking of bread" appears in a series descriptive of religious activities. Verse 41 speaks of believers receiving the "word," of being "baptized," and of being "added" to the church. Accordingly, it may be reasonable to conclude that the "breaking of bread" here referred to likewise had specific religious significance. See on Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 11:20, 21.

Prayers. See on ch. 1:14. Here were four basic elements in the life of the new Christian society: (1) The believers grew in knowledge of the truth through the teaching of the apostles. (2) They were conscious of fellowship with Christ, and with one another in acts of common worship and mutual kindness and benevolence. (3) They participated in the "breaking of bread," probably including the Lord's Supper. (4) They engaged in prayer, both private and corporate.

43. Fear. That is, reverential awe.

Came. Rather, "kept on coming."

Every soul. Awe must have fallen upon believers and unbelievers alike. During the previous two months Jerusalem had been through trying times. There had been the climax to the work of Jesus, with public attention focused upon Him. He had been crucified, and had risen from the dead. The disciples had boldly proclaimed His resurrection and ascension. Then had come the remarkable events of the day of Pentecost. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit was presented as proof of Christ's acceptance in heaven. The impact of the Christian community upon the nonbelievers had resulted in the conversion and baptism of thousands. Here was ample cause for awe in the hearts of the people of Jerusalem.

Many wonders and signs. Here was further cause for awe. The Spirit manifested Himself in giving to the apostles great power not only in preaching but in working miracles, even as Jesus had promised them (see on Mark 16:14-18).

Done. Rather, "kept on being done."

44. Together. This may refer either to the physical gathering together of the believers or to their unity of spirit.

All things common. To have things in common was not unusual in Jewish life of the time. Visitors to the yearly feasts often had their needs supplied by their friends in Jerusalem. It is clear, however, that something more than this is implied in Luke's statement. The Christians were thrown back upon themselves, and a new, a Christian, economy was set up. However, this does not mean the institution of what is called Christian socialism. It was probably a continuation and enlargement of the "bag," or common purse, of John 12:6; 13:29. The new converts would be the more ready to share their material possessions because of their new-found love for Christ and for one another, and their earnest expectations of the Lord's soon return (Acts 1:11). There was nothing compulsory about the sharing (ch. 5:4). It was a literal fulfillment of our Lord's words (Luke 12:33), and a very natural act for a society founded, not on the law of self-interest and competition, but on the law of sympathy and self-denial. The Spirit of God was showing His power, not only in the specific gifts, but in the way of love.

There is no evidence that this way of life continued in the church for any length of time, except in the gracious benevolence that the church doubtless showed at every opportunity. At the same time, however, the church learned to discriminate in its economy (2 Thess. 3:10; 1 Tim. 5:8, 16). The church at Jerusalem became repeatedly dependent upon the bounty of the Gentile churches, as seen in Acts 11:29. It need not be thought, however, that the Jerusalem church came to be thus in need because of the extravagance of its benevolence in the earlier years, but rather because of the severe persecution and famine it endured (see on Acts 11:27-30; Rom 15:26; 1 Cor. 16:1-3).

45. Sold. Rather, "were selling," or "used to sell." The sales took place as special occasions of distress called for expenditure of funds to assist those in need.

Possessions. Gr. kteµmata, "possessions," in the sense of fixed property, such as land.

Goods. Gr. huparxeis, "possessions," in the sense of movable property, personal possessions.

Parted. That is, "divided up," "distributed." They distributed the proceeds of the sale of their possessions.

To all. That is, to all the believers.

As every man had need. Rather, "according as anyone had need." The words imply judicious discrimination. Help was dependent upon the degree of need. The was soon prepared for systematic aid (see on ch. 6:1-6).

46. Continuing daily. The new believers were constant in their public devotions.

With one accord. Compare on ch. 1:14.

In the temple. It might be thought that followers of the One the rulers had condemned to death would avoid the Temple. But they were frequenting it even before the day of Pentecost (Luke 24:53). It would be more precious to them than in the days before they knew their Lord as the Messiah. Through Him they had learned truly to know the God of the Temple. It might seem strange, too, that they should be allowed to worship and teach in the Temple. Later on, indeed, they were forbidden to do so. But it must be remembered that the Temple courts were open to all Israelites who did not disturb its peace, partly, perhaps, because there were those in the Sanhedrin, such as Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathaea, and Gamaliel, who were on the borderline of belief. Then, too, the church may have acquired a certain popularity by its holiness of life and its liberal alms giving. As for the disciples, they did not think of their religion as a defection from Judaism, but rather as the fulfillment of it. The Christians therefore worshiped with their Jewish blood brothers (Acts 3:1), not only from habit and desire, but also in the hope of seeing them won to the gospel. See also on ch. 3:1.

Breaking bread. See on v. 42.

From house to house. Or, "at home." The Christians worshiped in the Temple, but the particular features of their communal life, the breaking of bread and the sharing of their food with one another took place in one another's homes.

Did eat their meat. Rather, "were eating food." It is evident that the breaking of bread was closely connected with the daily life of the Christians (see on Acts 2:42; 1 Cor. 11:20-22).

Gladness. Gr. agalliasis, "exultation," "extreme joy." They rejoiced at the privilege of being Christians.

Singleness. Gr. apheloteµs, literally, "free from stones," referring to smooth soil, but here meaning simplicity of character, unalloyed benevolence, generosity. These emotions would naturally be evident in the early Christians.

47. Praising God. A phrase often used by Luke (cf. Luke 2:13, 20; 19:37; Acts 3:8, 9). Joy in their new-found faith naturally led them to praise the Father. The true child of God always finds sufficient cause to praise the Lord.

Favour. Jesus had been popular with the people; the church now enjoyed a similar favor, possibly because they praised God and were benevolent.

The Lord. The church recognized that the great accessions to the faith were due to the Lord and not to themselves.

Added. Rather, "was adding," or "kept adding," giving the idea of continuity beyond the day of Pentecost. This is strengthened by the use of the word "daily."

To the church. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of these words.

Such as should be saved. Gr. hoi soµzomenoi, "those that were being saved." The rendering "should be saved" probably reflected unconsciously the theological belief of the translators, but has no support in the Greek.

Ellen G. White Comments

1 DA 827; Ed 95; ML 58; MM 201; 8T 191

1, 2 AA 37, 39; COL 120; Ed 95; Ev 697; TM 170; 5T 252

1-4GC ix; SR 242; TM 66; 7T 31

1-47AA 35-46; SR 241-247; 9T 196

2 7T 213

2-4ML 60; 8T 15

3-5AA 39

4 DA 821; EW 24; 7T 213; 8T 26

5 AA 87

5-8SR 243

6-8, 13AA 40

13-16TM 66

14-18AA 41

17 EW 78; GC 611

19 PP 110

21 GC 611; ML 62

22-25AA 41

23 FE 535

25-27SR 244

26, 27, 29 AA 42

29 GC 546

30 1T 203

31, 32 AA 42

34 GC 546

36 AA 165

37, 38 SR 245

37-39AA 43

38 SC 23

38, 39 GC ix

39 8T 57

41 AA 22, 44; COL 120; DA 275, 770, 827; Ev 35, 699; ML 61; SR 245; 8T 15, 21, 26

41-47WM 271

43 Ev 35

46 AA 45

46, 47 MB 137; 5T 239

47 COL 121; EW 174; GC 379; 7T 32

Acts Chapter 3

1 Peter preaching to the people that came to see a lame man restored to his feet, 12 professeth the cure not to have been wrought by his or John's own power, or holiness, but by God, and his Son Jesus, and through faith in his name: 13 withal reprehending them for crucifying Jesus. 17 Which because they did it through ignorance, and that thereby were fulfilled God's determinate counsel, and the scriptures: 19 he exhorteth them by repentance and faith to seek remission of their sins, and salvation in the same Jesus.

1. Now. Gr. de, a word implying a logical connection with the preceding, rather than a time element. No account is given as to the interval of time that had passed since the day of Pentecost. Presumably ch. 2:42-47 summarizes a gradual progress without any striking incident, and may cover a period of several months. It is remarkable that Luke, who lays such stress on chronological data in the Gospel (Luke 3:1; 6:1), gives so few in Acts. Evidently, the Holy Spirit, who guided his pen, did not see fit to enlighten his mind on these questions of dates.

Peter and John. This coupling of the two apostles brings the narrative of the Gospels into an interesting connection with that of the Acts. These two men had long been closely associated. They had been partners as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee (see Luke 5:10). Peter with John and James had enjoyed a confidential relationships with the Lord (see Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). Peter and John had been sent together to prepare for the Passover that Jesus wished to eat with His disciples (Luke 22:8). The night of Jesus' trial John, being known to the household of the high priest, took Peter into the high priest's palace (John 18:15, 16). At a later time John and Peter were to be sent to help Philip in the mission to Samaria (Acts 8:14), and with James they were to approve the work done by Paul and Barnabas among the Gentiles (Gal. 2:9). Thus their appearance here is typical of the characteristic comradeship of the two apostles, Peter and John.

Went up. Rather, "were going up." The incident to be related occurred as the two apostles were on their way into the Temple to worship.

Into the temple. Gr. hieron, which included not only the sanctuary, but also the court and the whole complex of buildings connected with the Temple (see on Matt. 4:5). The apostles were "continually in the temple, praising and blessing God" (Luke 24:53; see Acts 2:46). The Jews converted to Christianity had no church buildings in which to meet, and it had not yet occurred to them that the services of the Temple no longer had special spiritual significance for Christians.

The hour of prayer. That is, the ninth hour, about three o'clock in the afternoon (see on ch. 2:15; see Vol. V, p. 50). This was the time of the evening sacrifice (see Josephus Antiquities xiv. 4. 3 [65]). It was known both as "the hour of prayer" and as "the time of incense" (see Luke 1:9, 10). The morning and evening sacrifices were offered with incense at the third and the ninth hours of the day (about 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.), at which times the pious prayed in the courts of the Temple. A prayer at noon seems also to have been customary, at least with some (see Ps. 55:17; see on Dan. 6:10; Acts 10:9). It is known that in the 2d century a.d. a third daily prayer took place about sunset, and this may have been customary earlier. Rabbinical writings indicate that some leeway was allowed in the exact time of these prayers. The practice of praying three times a day appears in the Christian church certainly as early as the 2d century, a practice probably carried over directly from the Jewish synagogue (Didache 8). During the early 3d century three hours of prayer were observed apparently by many Christians (see Clement of Alexandria The Stromata vii. 7).

2. From his mother's womb. The careful record of the duration of the man's suffering is rather characteristic of Luke (see chs. 9:33; 14:8). The cripple was about 40 years old at the time of his healing (see on ch. 4:22).

Was carried. Better, "was being carried," or "used to be carried." The Greek may be understood here as indicating either that the lame man was being carried to his place of begging when he accosted the apostles or that he was already sitting there when Peter and John appeared. In those days there were neither hospitals nor poorhouses; so to be helped, the lame man must be placed where well-disposed folk could see his condition (see Mark 10:46; Luke 16:20; 18:35). The crowds going to the Temple would be inclined to help by the religious feeling of the moment.

Gate ... called Beautiful. No gate by this name is known elsewhere in the Bible or in Jewish literature. The opinion of scholars is divided generally as to whether this gate is to be identified with the Shushan Gate in the outermost wall on the east side of the Temple area, or with the Nicanor Gate, which probably led from the Court of the Gentiles into the Court of the Women. Some have placed this latter gate between the Court of the Women and that of the Men. Whether the Beautiful Gate constituted a part of the outer wall or was between the courts seems to depend largely on the route the apostles are thought to have taken in the present narrative. Luke records that they came to the gate, healed the man, entered the Temple, and apparently after they had offered their prayers, met a crowd of persons in Solomon's Porch who had been attracted by the miracle. Inasmuch as Solomon's Porch appears to have been just inside the eastern outer wall (see on v. 11), the Beautiful Gate may have been the outer, Shushan, gate, for if it were an inner gate between the courts, it would have been necessary for the apostles to go out through it again in order to reach Solomon's Porch. However, it seems rather difficult to account for Peter's and John's having used such a gate in the beginning, for it led from the Mount of Olives and would scarcely have been in the direction from which they would have entered the Temple, living in the city as they were. Compared with other gates leading directly from the city into the Temple, it must have been little used, and would hardly be a place for a beggar habitually to sit. Because of these apparent difficulties, many scholars prefer to suppose that the apostles did go out again through the Beautiful Gate before meeting the crowd in Solomon's Porch, and that this gate is to be identified with the Nicanor Gate, situated probably between the Court of the Gentiles and the Court of the Women. Josephus describes this gate thus: "One, that outside the sanctuary, was of Corinthian bronze, and far exceeded in value those plated with silver and set in gold" (War v. 5. 3 [201]). Concerning this same gate the Mishnah declares: "All the original gates were changed for gates of gold except the gates of Nicanor, because a miracle was wrought to them; some say, however, it was because the copper of them gleamed [like gold]" (Mishnah Middoth 2. 3, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, pp. 7, 8). Taking all the evidence together, it seems probable that the Beautiful Gate is to be identified with the Nicanor Gate.

To ask alms. The approaches of the Temple, like those of a modern mosque and some of the great cathedrals of Europe, doubtless were thronged with the blind, the lame, the deformed, and mendicants of all sorts.

3. Go into the temple. The fact that the apostles were about to enter the Temple, presumably to worship, doubtless recommended them to the lame man's mind as pious men from whom he might expect an alms.

Asked an alms. In his need the lame man could not see beyond visible needs and means. Even the most devout man, which the lame man, when healed, proved to be (v. 8), may not recognize divine sources because of his immediate physical needs. Peter and John had no outward evidence that they were vehicles of divine power. On the other hand, this lame man, a daily witness of the Temple services, and perhaps a purveyor of its gossip, could scarcely have been ignorant of the stirring events accompanying the recent crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus.

4. Fastening his eyes. Or, "after he gazed upon" (see on Acts 1:10; Luke 4:20).

Look on us. Peter and John did not mean to imply that the lame man should think them to have power in themselves to heal him (see v. 6). But they sought to focus his attention on themselves, that they then might direct him to Christ.

5. Expecting. The man's hope rose no further than the temporary meeting of a physical need that a little money might supply.

6. Silver and gold. The accounts in chs. 2:45; 5:2 show that the apostles were the custodians of the funds committed to the leadership of the church by the generosity of the Christian community. One could understand that Peter and John had no money of their own, but why did they not give to the lame man from the treasury of the church? Either they had none of these funds with them at the moment, or for some reason felt that such money must be reserved for the benefit of members of the Christian society. But they had more than money to give, a gift of which the church in its later wealth has not shown itself possessed. A remarkable anecdote is related of Thomas Aquinas, who called on Pope Innocent IV when he had a very large sum of money on the table before him. Said the Pope to him: "You see, Thomas, that the Church cannot now say as the primitive Church could, `Silver and gold have I none.'" "Yes, Holy Father," Aquinas replied, "but neither can she say, as did Peter to a crippled man, `Arise, and walk.'"

Such as I have. Rather, "what I have." Luke already has referred to "wonders and signs" performed by the apostles prior to this incident (ch. 2:43); so this may not have been Peter's first miracle since Pentecost. This passage shows him speaking with firm assurance. In the presence of this great incident every Christian must ask himself, What have I to give? One cannot give what he has not received, nor can he truly give from an ungenerous heart. He cannot give of Christ when he does not possess Christ. But when he has Christ, he knows it, and cannot too quickly share his precious gift with others.

In the name. The name Jesus Christ, the anointed Saviour, contains the description of the personality and character of its divine bearer. The reverent invocation of the name resulted in a demonstration of His power. The recognition and invocation of the power of this name is frequent in the book of Acts (see chs. 4:10, 12; 9:14; 16:18; 19:5, 13; 22:16). The full trust with which the name was spoken by Peter in the healing act was an expression of simple faith in his Master's promise (Mark 16:18). See on Acts 3:16.

Jesus Christ of Nazareth. The name was probably not new to the cripple. There had once been a blind man who received his sight at the Pool of Siloam (John 9:7, 8). Perhaps the healing of the cripple at Bethesda (John 5:2-9) was known also to this sufferer from a like infirmity.

Nazareth was a place of low reputation (see John 1:46). According to John's account, Nazareth was named on the superscription of the cross (ch. 19:19). Not only the Galilean background of Jesus (ch. 7:40-42), but the fact that He came from Nazareth, was a stumbling block to the Jews. It must have been a great test of faith for the lame man to respond to Peter's call. Only a few weeks before, the One who bore this name had come to shame and death upon the cross, as one who had deceived the people. But the utterance of the name in faith opened the way for the operation of the power of God. "No sooner is the name of Jesus mentioned in love and tenderness than angels of God draw near, to soften and subdue the heart" (CM 112).

Rise up and walk. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) as to whether this passage should read as here, or simply, "Walk!" This man had never walked, or if at all, most haltingly, for he had been crippled from birth (v. 2). Peter's command was to be obeyed in the power of God, without regard to conditions. Obedience in faith meant health.

7. Lifted him up. Peter's gesture came as a kindly aid to the childlike and perhaps only now dawning faith of the lame man. It was a transitional aid, spanning the momentary gulf between the last moment of the man's helplessness and the first moment of his acceptance by faith of the fact that a miracle had been performed upon him. As did Peter, so are the children of God to do: "Strengthen ... the weak hands, and confirm the feeble knees" (Isa. 35:3).

Ankle bones. Rather, "ankles." Luke was a physician (Col. 4:14), and thus it is here a writer with medical experience who describes precisely what happened to the lame man.

Received strength. Rather, "were made firm." The weak and flabby tendons and muscles were made strong and active.

8. Leaping up stood, and walked. "Walked" probably is better translated "began walking." As power came to the man there was the upward leap; then he found himself able to stand for the first time in his life. He walked step by step, and alternated the steps with leaps of joy.

Into the temple. How this man must have longed, during the years, for the physical freedom to walk into the Temple to worship as others did. Now, able to do so, he entered at once. At this, the hour of prayer, the courts of the Temple were filled with worshipers. What must have been the amazement of the multitude as they saw him "walking, and leaping, and praising God."

9. People saw him. This miracle was not done "in a corner." Witnesses to the reality of the cure were numerous, and among them must have been many who for years had known this man as a cripple. This the Jewish authorities admitted among themselves (ch. 4:16).

The detailed and circumstantial account that Luke gives here brings conviction as one reads it. It was based doubtless on the stories of eyewitnesses whom he interviewed, and authenticated by Inspiration. The God who created can re-create, and He does so at will.

10. They knew. Rather, "they recognized." The people knew that the man really had been lame, and was no impostor. They knew that now he was healed. They could see that he had entered the Temple, leaping and rejoicing in health and praising God.

At the Beautiful gate. See on v. 2.

11. Held Peter and John. There is some textual evidence (cf. p. 10) for the reading, "As Peter and John went out, he went along holding them; and those who were astonished stood in the porch called Solomon's." Such a reading helps to solve the problem of the location of the Beautiful Gate, and though probably not original, seems to be an early evidence in favor of its being identified as the Nicanor Gate (see on v. 2).

Porch. Gr. stoa, "portico," "cloister." No mention of a porch "that is called Solomon's" is found in the original account of the building of the first Temple. Josephus (Antiquities xx. 9. 7) locates this porch on the east side of the Temple area. He says (War v. 5. 2 [190]) that it was distinguished by two rows of columns approximately 37 ft. (10.6 m.) high. This portico was named for Solomon probably because it included traces of the older building from Zerubbabel's day. When Herod Agrippa I was completing his grandfather's work the people sought to persuade him to raze this porch and to rebuild it, but he refused to do so.

Greatly wondering. It was from Solomon's Porch, only a few months before, at the Feast of Dedication (John 10:22, 23), that Jesus had preached to the people on the works of God. The memory of what He had then said must have remained in the minds of the two disciples. The people had complained because Jesus did not frankly state whether He was the Christ (John 10:24-26), yet they were ready to stone Him when He claimed to be one with the Father (John 10:30-33). Now they hear Him proclaimed as "the Holy One and the Just," as the "Prince of life," as the very Christ, the Messiah of prophecy (Acts 3:14, 15, 18).

12. Why marvel ye? This is similar to the angel's question, "Why stand ye gazing?" (ch. 1:11). In both places the idea is that the witnesses of the miracle should not be so amazed at the event as they obviously were.

Why look ye so earnestly on us? Literally, "on us why do you gaze?" (see on ch. 1:10). No common men like Peter and John, but only a divine power, should be credited with the miracle.

Holiness. Rather, "piety," or "devotion." Peter's words bring to mind the popular theory that if a man is sufficiently devout, God will hear him, and great results will follow (see John 9:31). Here the apostle rejects any such idea. No purity of his own would have availed Peter; only the power of God manifested in the name of Jesus of Nazareth could do the work.

13. The God of Abraham. Here is an echo of our Lord's own teaching and phraseology (see Matt. 22:32), though the phrase is from the OT (Ex. 3:6, 15). By asserting that Jesus was the Son of the God of Abraham, Peter reassured his Jewish hearers that he was not preaching a new God but that he was connecting Jesus with the God of their fathers.

Son. Gr. pais, a word that may mean either "child" or "servant." In the latter sense it is used in the LXX in the later chapters of Isaiah for "the servant of Jehovah." In fact, the present passage is strongly reminiscent of Isa. 52:13. In the NT pais is applied to Christ in Matt. 12:18; Acts 3:26; 4:27, 30. These passages suggest that Matthew and Luke understood the suffering Servant of Isaiah to be a figure applicable to Christ. See on Isa. 41:8.

Ye delivered up. Or, "handed over." Peter is frank and bold in placing the blame for Jesus' death on the Jews, as the apostles always did from this time on.

Denied him. See John 19:15.

Determined. Or, "decided." Pilate had rightly decided to release Jesus as innocent (John 19:4), but the Jews, to their greater shame and blame, persuaded him to condemn Christ to death.

14. The Holy One. This is a striking designation, probably not new to Peter's hearers, for it appears in the intertestamental Jewish literature (see on John 6:69). The demoniac had used it of Christ (Mark 1:24). At His trial Jesus had been found innocent of all charges (Mark 15:10; Luke 23:4). Both Pilate and his wife had borne emphatic testimony to the innocence of Jesus (Matt. 27:19, 24). So did the repentant thief (Luke 23:41) and the centurion (v. 47). See on Acts 2:27.

Just. Or, "righteous" (see 1 Peter 3:18; 1 John 2:1; see on Acts 7:52).

Desired a murderer. That is, Barabbas (see Mark 15:7; Luke 23:19).

15. Prince of life. Gr. archeµgos teµs zoµeµs, which is better translated "author of life" (cf. Heb. 12:2; in ch. 2:10 archeµgos is translated "captain"). Christ is the originator of life. "In Christ is life, original, unborrowed, underived" (DA 530). The "Prince of life," the "captain of ... salvation" (Heb. 2:10), is accordingly the One from whom life and salvation flow. Christ is clearly set forth as the Author of all life. He Himself repeatedly made the same emphatic claim (see John 3:14, 15; 5:26, 40; 6:48, 51). The Jews had chosen to keep alive a murderer, a taker of life, and to put to death the Author and Giver of life.

God hath raised. That it was the Father who raised Christ from the dead is repeatedly stated in the New Testament (Acts 2:24; Rom. 6:4; 8:11). At the same time Jesus declared that He Himself had power to lay down His life and to take it again (John 10:18). These two declarations regarding the resurrection are not contradictory. Though Christ had life in Himself, yet as the incarnate Son who "took upon him the form of a servant" (Phil. 2:7), He could "do nothing of himself" (John 5:19). Jesus exercised His divine power only at the command of the Father. Thus although "the Saviour came forth from the grave by the life that was in Himself" (DA 785), He did so at the call of God His Father.

Whereof. That is, "of whom." Peter attests again the one central fact that the apostles knew of what they were talking. They had known the Lord, they had seen Him die, and they had seen Him risen.

16. His name. Repeatedly in the NT, and especially in the Acts, the name of Jesus is set forth as the means by which miracles are worked and salvation is gained (Acts 3:6; 4:10, 12, 17, 18; 16:18; Mark 9:38; Luke 10:17). The use of the word "name" in this connection is to be understood in terms of the rich connotation it carries in the NT. See on Acts 2:21.

Scholars have pointed out that in ancient times certain names were thought to have special holiness and particular efficacy. Thus among the Jews of the postexilic period, the divine name Yahweh (Jehovah) was kept as a secret known only to the high priest, and its true pronunciation was finally lost altogether. The declaration of other names was thought to be particularly potent in working miracles. Josephus (Antiquities viii. 2. 5 [46-49]) recounts seeing a man named Eleazar allegedly cast out demons by the use of the name of Solomon. The use of the name of Jesus for the same purpose was attempted by the seven sons of Sceva at Ephesus (ch. 19:13, 14). They thought there was magical power simply in the use of the name. Doubtless many of those who observed the miracles that Jesus' disciples worked in His name thought that the efficacy of these miracles lay merely in the employment of a magic name. See Vol. I, pp. 170-173.

However, it is clear beyond question, that the disciples, in working miracles, did not use Christ's name with any idea that magical power resided in the utterance of it. In the OT the Hebrew word shem, "name," is sometimes used in the sense of "character" (see Jer. 14:7, 21), and may be almost synonymous with the person himself (see Ps. 18:49). This close connection between name and character is illustrated by the wealth of names in the OT that indicate the character of their bearers or the anticipation that parents expressed for the personalities of their children. This same idea of "character" is probably the meaning of the word "name" in the apocryphal work, Enoch (ch. 48:7), where of the Son of man it is said: "For in his name they [the righteous] are saved."

A further aspect of this development is seen in NT times when the Greek word for "name" (onoma) might mean "person." Thus in an Egyptian papyrus of a.d. 13 occurs the phrase, "from the name written below," meaning, of course, "from the undersigned person." A similar usage occurs in Acts 1:15; Rev. 3:4; 11:18.

All this indicates that in using the name of Jesus in working miracles and in proclaiming salvation, the apostles were declaring that healing and saving power were exercised in vital connection with the person and character of Jesus Christ. Peter's declaration in the present passage that "his name ... hath made this man strong" was an assertion that it was Christ Himself who had wrought the miracle, not a magical incantation working mechanically upon the lame man. The power of Christ is available to all, but it must be accepted by vital faith in Him.

Ye see and know. There was no obscurity here, no chance of trickery. There was no substitution of a well man, under pretense that a lame man had been healed. Everyone knew the man had been lame, and now they saw him healed.

By him. Or, "through him," that is, Christ. See 1 Peter 1:21. The faith that was both in the healer Peter and in the man healed, was itself wrought in each of them by the power of Christ. Peter was a recipient of the power of God by faith; the man also received faith, which made him capable of accepting bodily healing. Healing faith is itself a gift (Rom. 12:3; 1 Cor. 12:9).

Perfect soundness. Or, "completeness."

17. I wot. An archaic expression meaning, "I know."

Through ignorance. Ignorance is dangerous in spiritual as well as in other matters. Men may sin through ignorance, as in the present instance, but ignorance is not a valid plea in extenuation of sin. Even in human government, ignorance of a law does not excuse its transgression. Sins of ignorance must be repented of as sincerely as any other sins. Particularly guilty are men who are ignorant because they allow prejudice and feeling to prevent them from knowing those things to which reason and conscience give witness. Compare Luke 23:34.

18. Prophets. See Luke 24:25-27. As in Acts 1:16; 2:23, here also Peter stresses the fact that OT prophets foretold Christ's work. The purpose of all Scripture is to set forth the plan for the salvation of men through Christ's redemptive suffering. From the first gospel promise (Gen. 3:15) there has been a continuing thread of testimony through the OT pointing to the vicarious atonement through Jesus Christ. Particularly significant among Messianic OT scriptures are Ps. 22:18 (see Matt. 27:35); Dan. 9:26; Zech. 11:13 (see Matt. 27:9, 10); Isa. 53.

That Christ should suffer. As far as is known the Jews never applied Isaiah's prophecy of the suffering servant to the Messiah. The doctrine of a suffering Messiah was quite at variance with the views of the Jews current in the apostolic age, and was hardly understood even by Christ's disciples until after His resurrection. Peter himself protested when Christ laid starkly before His disciples the sufferings He would endure, and was severely rebuked for his reluctance to accept the prospect (Matt. 16:21-23). The present passage reveals a remarkable change in Peter's understanding. Now he affirms that Christ's sufferings had been in accord with the divine plan. Doubtless this illumination had come to the apostles through Jesus' teaching after the resurrection (see Luke 24:44-48) and through the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Peter later demonstrated again his understanding of this fundamental doctrine as he wrote of the sin-bearing Saviour (1 Peter 2:23, 24).

So fulfilled. These words mark the climax of Peter's argument and the basis for his appeal to repentance. The force of his logic lay in the fact that he was preaching fulfilled prophecy.

19. Repent. Gr. metanoeoµ, "to change the mind," and in a spiritual sense, "to repent" (see on Matt. 3:2). This call to repentance is the logical climax to Peter's stern reproof of his challengers. There would be no point to such reproof if it were not intended to produce repentance. So it is, indeed, with all gospel preaching.

Be converted. Gr. epistrephoµ, "to turn about." In the LXX this word is used frequently to translate the Heb. shub, "to return," a word that often has the spiritual sense of returning to God (see on Eze. 18:30). Epistrephoµ is a peculiarly appropriate word for the change that takes place when one accepts Christ as Saviour and King, and Luke uses it repeatedly in this sense (see Acts 9:35; 11:21; 26:20). Conversion is the basis of a genuine Christian experience. It is distinguished from the new birth (John 3:3, 5) only in that it may be considered as the act of man in turning away from his old life of sin, while the new birth, or regeneration, is the work of the Holy Spirit acting upon man simultaneously with his turning. Neither phase of the experience can be a reality without the Holy Spirit. But the Holy Spirit cannot do His work until a man is willing to let God take hold of his life (see Rev. 3:20).

Blotted out. Or, "wiped away." Repeatedly in Scripture the forgiveness of sin is portrayed as a washing (see John 13:10; Rev. 1:5; see on Rev. 22:14). The thought of wiping away sin is a similar one. The image that may underlie the words here is that of an indictment that catalogues the sins of the penitent, which the pardoning love of the Father cancels (see Isa. 43:25; Col. 2:14; see on Matt. 1:21; 3:6; 26:28; Luke 3:3).

The immediate result to those who accepted Peter's call to repentance was the forgiveness of their sins. In this sense the blotting out of their sins may be regarded as having occurred immediately. In the ultimate sense, however, the final blotting out of sin takes place just before the second advent of Christ in connection with the close of Christ's work as High Priest (see below under "when"). Guilt for specific sins is canceled when they are confessed and forgiven; they are expunged from the record in the day of judgment (cf. Eze. 3:20; 18:24; 33:13; GC 485).

When. Gr. hopoµs an, "so that." Lexicographers and grammarians are unanimous that hopoµs an indicates purpose rather than time. Hopoµs, with or without an (the meaning is not distinguished), occurs 56 times in the NT, and only here is it translated "when." Elsewhere it is translated "how" (Matt. 22:15; Luke 24:20), "so that" (Luke 16:26), "because" (Acts 20:16), but most frequently it is translated "that," or by some other expression of purpose (Acts 8:15; 9:12, 17, 24; Rom. 3:4; etc.). Nowhere do the translators of the KJV introduce a time element except in Acts 3:19. Thus the present passage should read "so that," rather than "when." The reading of the KJV seems to have arisen in the following way: The earliest Latin versions appear to have translated hopoµs an correctly as ut, which in Latin, when used as a conjunction, often means "so that." However, ut is somewhat ambiguous because, in a temporal clause, it may mean "when." Later scribes, reading this passage, apparently were in doubt as to which meaning ut should be given here. Some, thinking that the adverbial meaning was intended, either changed the word to cum, "when," or inserted cum in the margin to guide the reader in interpreting the verse. Thus some Latin texts read cum, "when," instead of it. Others, including the common editions of the Vulgate, have a conflated reading, ut cum, "so that when," which probably arose from incorporating the marginal gloss, cum, into the text without dropping ut. Such a reading, however, does not make good grammatical sense. Nevertheless it is found in most of the later medieval Latin texts, and from these was taken into the earliest English Bible. Thus Wyclif's translation (1382), made from the Vulgate, reads, "That youre synnes be don awey, that whanne the tymes of refreischynge shculn come fro the sight of the Lord." This awkward rendering is also reflected in the Douay-Rheims Version (1582), "That your sinnes may be put out, that vvhen the times shal come of refreshing by the sight of our Lord." Tyndale (1534) made good grammar of the passage, but he produced a wrong translation. "That your synnes may be done awaye, when the tyme of refresshinge commeth which we shall have of the presence of the Lord." This rendering of hopoµs an as "when," went into the KJV. However, the Greek should be translated, "that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord" (RSV).

The conversion of sinners will have a power to accelerate the fulfillment of God's purposes, and accordingly, to hasten the coming of His kingdom in its completeness.

While it is true that the Greek of this passage does not contain the temporal quality that the KJV rendering suggests, nevertheless a study of related scriptures reveals that a certain time sequence is here set forth by Peter. He called on his hearers to "repent" and "be converted." These acts, said he, would be followed by (1) the blotting out of their sins, (2) the coming of the "times of refreshing," and (3) the glorious advent of Jesus Christ.

In any discussion of the time sequence in Peter's words, two points should be kept in mind: (1) In common with the other disciples, Peter did not know "the times or the seasons" (Acts 1:7; cf. John 21:20-23). He had a foreshortened view of the future, and joyously hoped for the very early return of his Lord (see Additional Note on Rom. 13). (2) By divine illumination Peter saw that certain prophecies of "the last days" were meeting a fulfillment in his day. Indeed, his illumination may have enabled him to see only this immediate and what proved to be a limited fulfillment, though that point is not vital to this discussion. For example, on the day of Pentecost he declared that Joel's prophecy that in "the last days" God would pour out of His Spirit on all flesh, was then meeting fulfillment (Acts 2:14-18). Truly there was a limited fulfillment of the prophecy of a divine outpouring. It was also true, as already stated, that in one sense of the word the sins of converted men were then blotted out, for they were covered by the saving blood of Jesus Christ.

But in the perspective of God's unfolding plans, particularly fulfilling prophecy, we can now see that in the most literal and complete sense "the last days" are our present days and that it is now we may rightly expect the coming of Christ. Likewise, we see that the great outpouring of God's spirit, the mighty "times of refreshing," belong most particularly to our days, the days of "the latter rain" (see on Joel 2:23). With equal propriety we may--and indeed, should--view the blotting out of sins as belonging to our time. Why separate it widely from the other two events that Peter said would take place? Indeed, when we study this subject of the blotting out of sins in the setting of Christ's work in the heavenly sanctuary (see on Dan. 8:14), we discover that the actual blotting out of sins takes place in the last days of earth's history, immediately preceding Christ's coming (see PP 357, 358; GC 421, 422; see on Eze. 18:24). That these three events are tied together is made more evident by the RSV: "Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ" (Acts 3:19, 20).

Thus it becomes evident that Peter's statement (v. 19), taken as a whole, contains a most definite temporal element. Evidently, Peter, speaking by inspiration, and thus beyond his own finite understanding, is referring, tersely, to two great events of earth's last days--(1) the mighty outpouring of God's Spirit, and (2) the final blotting out of the sins of the righteous--which are tied to a third climactic event, the second advent of Christ.

From the presence. Literally, "from the face." The "refreshing" comes directly from the throne of God.

20. He shall send. The dominant theme of the NT writers is the return of Christ. See on v. 19.

Before was preached. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the reading "was appointed" rather than "before was preached." Thus the passage would read "who was appointed for you." In the mind of God the plan of redemption was set from eternity (see Matt. 25:34; Eph. 1:4; Rev. 13:8), and was executed in the very face of the resistance of Satan and sinful men. It remains for those concerned in the plan to fulfill its conditions by obedience (cf. Luke 22:42; Heb. 10:7).

21. Heaven must receive. The disciples had witnessed Christ's ascension (ch. 1:9, 10), and they realized He must remain in heaven until His second advent. Jesus had told His disciples that it was necessary for Him to leave them (John 14:1-6), but even they did not understand until they saw Him ascend, and learned that they must look for His return.

Restitution. Or, "restoration." Christ died as the world's Redeemer, and therefore the promised restoration was made possible by His crucifixion.

Here Peter gives in embryo the idea that he develops fully and in a most forthright manner in 2 Peter 3:7-13. The new heavens and the new earth of the latter passage are a recovery, a restoration from the sin and degradation that, as a result of man's fall into sin, destroyed the beauty and perfection of the original creation (see on Isa. 65:17-25; Micah 4:8).

This passage does not teach, as some have thought, that all men ultimately will be saved. That is not promised in Scripture. But it does express the idea of an ultimate state in which righteousness, and not sin, will have dominion over a redeemed and re-created world. It presents a supremely worth-while goal for Christian experience resulting from true repentance and conversion, and offers even a wider hope for the possibilities of growth in wisdom and holiness in the world to come than Christendom sometimes has been willing to emphasize.

Which God hath spoken. This clause may be understood to refer either to the "times of restitution," that is, the divine act of restoration foretold prophetically, or to "all things," in which case it points to the fact of the fulfillment of God's promises through the prophets. Here is a clear assertion that the utterances of the prophets are the messages of God. It was God who spoke through the prophets (see 2 Peter 1:21). The present passage is virtually identical with Luke 1:70.

All. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of this word.

Since the world began. Or, "from of old." These words take in the many unchanging promises exhibited in the prophets that have brightened the hopes of the people of God through the ages. Zacharias saw a beginning of the fulfillment of these promises with the birth of his son John (Luke 1:70). The plan of salvation has been set since before "the foundation of the world" (Rev. 13:8).

22. Moses truly said. Or, "Moses said indeed." The line of true prophets suggested here and in v. 24 reveals the expectation of the coming of some one great prophet who should excel all others, as illustrated in the question put to John the Baptist, "Art thou that prophet?" (John 1:21). None of the leaders following Moses had been altogether "like unto" him (see Deut. 18:15; see below under "like unto me"). His work marked a new epoch, the manifestation of the glory of God through a theocracy, with its divinely ordained law and service of worship. Jesus' coming marked the opening of another new epoch, with His kingdom established in the "new" hearts of individual men (see Jer. 31:31-34; Heb. 8:8-12).

Unto the fathers. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of these words.

Like unto me. Moses quoted the Lord's promise to him that the prophet to come should be "like unto thee" (Deut. 18:18). But the parallel stops short because Moses was neither the only-begotten Son of God nor the vicariously suffering Atoner, both of which Jesus was.

Him shall ye hear. That is, Him shall ye obey (see on John 6:60).

He shall say. Here Peter changes his quotation of Deut. 18:18 slightly to make it a command to his hearers.

23. Soul. Gr. psucheµ (see on Matt. 10:28; cf. Acts 2:41).

Shall be destroyed. The OT passage (Deut. 18:19) that Peter quotes loosely reads at this point, "I will require it of him." The words Peter substitutes echo the familiar OT phrase, "that man shall be cut off from among his people" (see Lev. 17:4, 9; cf. Ex. 12:15, 19).

24. From Samuel. Samuel is named here probably because with him the prophets of Israel first appear as a group, particularly in connection with the schools of the prophets. In the 3d century a.d. Judah ha-Nasi, the compiler of the Mishnah, referred to Samuel as "the teacher of the prophets" (see Strack and Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament, vol. 2, p. 627), and this may well represent a view current in Peter's day.

These days. It is not clear whether Peter refers here to the "times of restitution" (v. 21) or to the remarkable times in which he and his hearers were then living. He may, indeed, have coalesced the two in his thinking, believing that the events he was witnessing would finally usher in the closing scenes (cf. ch. 2:17).

25. Children of the prophets. The prophets, with their messages, were sent especially to the Israelites (see Rom. 3:2).

Of the covenant. Here Peter identifies the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 12:3) with the covenant of salvation in the same way as does Paul (Gal. 3:8). In spite of the spiritual light and privileges the Jews enjoyed, they failed to recognize Jesus as the Messiah. In every age, and particularly now, those who enjoy special spiritual privileges may be guilty of the same failure.

In thy seed. Referring to Gen. 12:3, Paul makes Christ the "seed," and all the faithful in Christ heirs of Abraham (Gal. 3:16, 29). Peter's use of the passage is not so explicit, but in quoting it he plainly refers it to Christ.

26. Unto you first. This precedence of the Jew as recipient of the gospel is noteworthy. Peter did not as yet know the conditions under which the gospel was to be preached to the heathen, but his words imply a distinct understanding that the message was to go first to the Jews. This sequence was also used by Paul: "To the Jew first, and also to the Greek" (Rom. 1:16; cf. ch. 2:9, 10). He followed it so frequently in his gospel preaching that it became a formula (Acts 13:46; see chs. 9:19, 20; 14:1; 17:1-3). Compare Vol. IV, pp. 29, 30.

Son. Gr. pais (see on v. 13).

Jesus. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of this word.

To bless you. The blessing referred to here follows the resurrection and involves the power of Christ that enables a man to turn from sin to the new life that is in Him. This new life of the believer is made possible by the resurrection (see Eph. 2:4-6; Col. 2:12, 13).

Turning away. The Greek verb here, apostrephoµ, like the related verb epistrephoµ, is used frequently in the LXX to translate the Heb. shub (see on v. 19). This passage ambiguous. It may be understood either as meaning that Jesus turns away men from iniquity or that He blesses them when they turn away from iniquity. In a sense both of these are true. The blessings of salvation can come only through the restoring power of the Holy Spirit, following upon the necessary turning away from sin, with repentance and conversion.

ellen g. White comments

1, 2 AA 57

1-6SR 248

1-26AA 57-60; SR 248-250

2 EW 192

4-11AA 58

7-10SR 249

8, 9 EW 192

12 AA 59; SR 249

12-16EW 192

14, 15 TM 268

14-19AA 59

15 AA 61

16-18SR 249

19 Ev 702; EW 71, 86, 271; GC 613; ML 58; MYP 74; PP 358; SC 23; 1T 183, 619; 4T 40; 8T 103; 9T 155, 216, 268

19, 20 GC 485, 612

21 DA 769; GC 301

22 DA 34, 52, 193

22, 23 FE 405

25, 26 AA 60

Acts Chapter 4

1 The rulers of the Jews offended with Peter's sermon, 4 (though thousands of the people were converted that heard the word,) imprison him and John. 5 After, upon examination Peter boldly avouching the lame man to be healed by the name of Jesus, and that by the same Jesus only we must be eternally saved, 13 they command him and John to preach no more in that name, adding also threatening, 23 whereupon the church fleeth to prayer. 31 And God, by moving the place where they were assembled, testified that he heard their prayer: confirming the church with the gift of the Holy Ghost, and with mutual love and charity.

1. As they spake. By this time, and ever afterward, the activities of the apostles were a matter of deep and unfriendly interest to the Jewish authorities. Apparently, news of the healing of the lame man had now spread rapidly through the city, and for the first time since the crucifixion the leaders of the Sanhedrin, who condemned the Lord, had come again in contact with Christianity. Only a few weeks had passed since the crucifixion. During this time the Jewish leaders doubtless had congratulated themselves on having got rid of Jesus for the safety of the nation, as Caiaphas had advised (John 11:49, 50). They knew that Jesus' grave had been found empty, and, refusing to believe in the resurrection, they had busily spread the report that the disciples had stolen His body (Matt. 28:13-15). Whether some of the Jewish leaders had been present during the experience of the day of Pentecost is not known, but certainly they must have heard of the happenings of that day, and of the growth of the new church. Now two main spokesmen of the Christians were found teaching openly in the very portals of the Temple itself.

Priests. In charge, as a class, of the Temple services (see 1 Chron. 24:1-19), and naturally the first to take offense at the multitudes who in astonishment had witnessed the healing of the lame man.

Captain. Apparently one of the same officers present at the arrest of Jesus (see Luke 22:52): The OT mentions an officer whose title was "the ruler of the house of God" (1 Chron. 9:11; 2 Chron. 31:13; Neh. 11:11). A Benjamite is mentioned in 2 Maccabees 3:4 as being "governor of the temple." Luke repeatedly mentions the "captain" of the temple (Luke 22:52; Acts 5:24, 26), and Josephus also refers to this official (War ii. 17. 2 [409]; Antiquities xx. 9. 3). The official mentioned by Josephus is quite evidently the one mentioned by Luke, and may be identical with the ones mentioned in the OT and 2 Maccabees. In later Jewish writings several officials are mentioned who might answer to the "captain of the temple" in the present passage. One of these was the 'ish har habbayith, the "officer of the temple mount" (Mishnah Middoth 1. 2, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 1). This man was not of the soldiery, but had supervision of the guard of priests and Levites who had custody of the Temple, especially at night. As an inspector he made his nightly rounds, visiting all the gates and rousing any slumberers. He seems to have had particular charge of the outer court, the area in which Peter had just made his address. Another official who more probably is to be identified with the "captain" in the present passage, was the segan hakkohanim, the "prefect of the priests." He ranked next to the high priest, assisted him in his official functions, and had general responsibility for the Temple services and the maintenance of order throughout the Temple area.

Sadducees. See Vol. V, pp. 52, 53. The Sadducees are not mentioned frequently in the gospel story. In ch. 23:8 they are described as saying "that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit." It was when the doctrine of the resurrection and the future life was emphasized by Jesus and His apostles that the Sadducees appeared as opponents, as in Matt. 22:23-33 and in the present instance.

When they now found His disciples preaching the resurrection, the Sadducees reacted to them as they had to the Lord Himself and became persecutors of the church. There is no record in the NT of any Sadducee accepting the gospel. Not so with the Pharisees, some of whom professed themselves believers see (Acts 15:5; cf. ch. 23:6).

Came upon them. That is, to arrest them.

2. Being grieved. Or, "being annoyed," "being worked up." This verb is used to describe Paul's feeling when the young woman came crying after him in Philippi (ch. 16:18). The Jewish leaders were annoyed not only because the disciples taught the doctrine of the resurrection, so opposed to the thinking of the chief priests, who were Sadducees, but also because they taught when they were not trained or authorized to do so, even as Jesus had done (John 7:14, 15). It has been no infrequent thing for men in ecclesiastical authority to take exception to the ministry of those who have not been commissioned by themselves. Men with some power in their hands may easily fancy that only they can instruct others how to perform publicly.

That they taught. One of the objections the authorities brought against the apostles was doubtless that they were "unlearned and ignorant men" (v. 13), and so not fit to teach the people.

Preached through Jesus the resurrection. Rather, "proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection." The apostles preached the doctrine of the resurrection "in Jesus," that is, in terms of His resurrection, which served as proof of the general resurrection of the dead, a doctrine the Sadducees rejected. See ch. 23:8. Paul later emphasized that Christ's resurrection was a pledge that all the righteous would rise from the dead (1 Cor. 15:16-23; Phil. 3:10, 11).

3. In hold. Or, "in custody." This experience introduces the first persecution of the apostles.

Eventide. It will be recalled that the story of the healing of the lame man begins at about 3:00 o'clock in the afternoon (see on ch. 3:1). After the healing of this man Peter made his address, and then he and John were arrested. By then it was "eventide," which doubtless began about sunset, or the 12th hour. Since it was forbidden for the Jews to pass judgment in a night session, and their day closed with the 12th hour, it was now too late for a judicial proceeding (see Additional Notes on Matt 26, Note 2). The rabbis placed this restriction on night trials because of Jer. 21:12, "O house of David, thus saith the Lord; Execute judgment in the morning." They applied this even to deliberations concerning the declaration of the newmoon festival (Mishnah Rosh Hashanah 3. 1, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 113).

4. Howbeit. Or, "but." The new believers were not deterred by the arrest of the apostles.

Many ... believed. That is, on Jesus, whom Peter had set forth as the prophet concerning whom Moses had spoken. Each individual who believed, thus made himself part of a growing host of converts moving into the church.

Men. Gr. aneµr, "a male," "a man" as contrasted with a woman. Apparently only the men were counted (see on Matt. 14:21).

Was about five thousand. Or, "became about five thousand." Luke probably means here that this was the aggregate number of the disciples, not just those converted on the day of the healing of the lame man. Three thousand had been converted at Pentecost, and since that time more believers had been added to the church daily (ch. 2:47).

5. On the morrow. This was the first opportunity for the Jewish leaders to hold a judicial investigation (see on v. 3).

Rulers. This is probably a reference to the "priests," or "high priests," mentioned in v. 1.

Elders. The group here mentioned were doubtless those known in Hebrew as zeqenim. They represented the lay element of the Sanhedrin, as contrasted with the scribes and priests.

Scribes. The third constituent group in the Sanhedrin was composed of scribes, who were professional jurists and recognized interpreters of the law (see Vol. V, pp. 55, 56). It is understandable that they would be resentful toward a new teaching presented by seemingly unqualified men (cf. Matt. 7:29).

6. Annas. This man (called Ananus by Josephus), son of Seth, became high priest about a.d. 6 by appointment of the Roman governor Quirinius (Cyrenius), and was deposed about a.d. 14 (Josephus Antiquities xviii. 2. 1, 2). Christ had been brought first before Annas (John 18:13), and was afterward sent by him to the current high priest, Caiaphas. This would indicate that although then not actually high priest, Annas held a place of high influence among the Jews. This is particularly understandable in view of the fact that Caiaphas was Anna's son-in-law. It is probably impossible now to ascertain exactly the functions of the two men Annas and Caiaphas. Apparently it was customary for those who once had held the office of high priest to continue to carry the title after they had ceased to officiate. By the time of Annas' death five of his sons had been high priests (ibid. xx. 9. 1). But his old age was clouded by the atrocities committed in the Temple by insurgents during the war of a.d. 66-73 (see Josephus War iv. 3. 78 [151-157]).

Caiaphas. Caiaphas had been appointed about a.d. 18 or 19, and was deposed about a.d. 36. He is pictured in the Gospels as a man of policy and expediency (John 18:14. See above under "Annas.")

John. This may have been Johanan (that is, John) ben Zakkai, a Jewish leader who is said to have been at the height of his influence 40 years before the destruction of the Temple in a.d. 70. After the Jewish-Roman war he was founder and president of the Council at Jamnia (see Vol. V, p. 78). However, the identification is very uncertain. Another possibility, suggested by one ancient manuscript that reads "Jonathan," is that this man was Annas' son Jonathan, who became high priest for a short time after Caiaphas, and again in the days of Felix (c. a.d. 52-c. 60).

Alexander. No certain identification of this man is possible.

Kindred of the high priest. The Talmud (Pesah\im 57a, Soncino ed., p. 285) mentions several prominent families from which the high priests at this time were commonly drawn. The current high priest, Caiaphas, had several relatives who were highly placed (see above under "Annas"), and probably several of these men were present at the trial of Peter and John recorded here. See on Matt. 2:4.

Were gathered. Evidently the meeting had been summoned, like that of Matt. 26:3, 4, to study what course should be followed in view of the new crisis. This meeting would of course include Pharisees as well as Sadducees, but the Sadducees controlled the Sanhedrin at this time.

7. In the midst. The Sanhedrin sat in a semicircle (see Mishnah Sanhedrin 4. 3, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 230). Apparently Peter and John were placed in the center.

By what power? Gr. en poia dunamei, "in what kind of power?" The word dunamis, "power," used here, is often applied to Christ's miracles, and frequently is rendered "mighty works" (see Matt. 11:20; Mark 6:14; Luke 19:37). The Jewish leaders admitted that the lame man had been healed by a marvelous manifestation of power; that was too obvious to deny (see on Acts 4:16). But their question implied a suspicion that it was the result of a power from below, an implication similar to the accusation once leveled against Jesus (see Luke 11:15; cf. John 8:48).

By what name? Or, "in what kind of name?" See on ch. 3:16. The Jewish leaders doubtless knew that it was in the name of Jesus that Peter and John had healed the lame man. To them, Jesus was a man who had recently been crucified as a criminal. Hence their disdainful question.

8. Peter. A few weeks before this, Peter had trembled before the servants and soldiers in the courtyard of the high priest's house, and had denied his Lord. But since then the Spirit of God had come upon him and had changed him "into another man" (see on 1 Sam. 10:6; cf. Matt. 10:19, 20). Standing now before the highest tribunal of the Jews, he speaks, in a language of respect indeed, but also of unflinching boldness. With bitter weeping Peter had repented his denial of his Lord (Luke 22:54-62). One evidence of true repentance is to seek to repair the evil resulting from the offense repented of. Peter had brought dishonor upon his Master and His cause, in the presence of the Jews. Now, in the same city, in the presence of the same people who had been involved in the condemnation of Jesus, Peter joyfully bore his testimony to the divine mission of the Savior whom he had once denied. Here he demonstrated the validity of his later admonition, "Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear" (1 Peter 3:15).

Ye rulers of the people. Compare this respectful salutation with Paul's more familiar "Men and brethren" (ch. 23:1, 6). Undoubtedly Paul knew personally several members of the court, and stood therefore in less awe of them (see on ch. 9:1). Respect for men of authority is required of the Christian (Matt. 22:21; Rom. 13:7; 1 Peter 2:13-17).

Elders of Israel. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between this and reading simply "elders." See on v. 5.

9. Examined. Gr. anakrinoµ. This word often has the technical sense of a judicial interrogation, as in Luke 23:14. It is used in the NT only by Paul and Luke (Acts 12:19; 24:8; 1 Cor. 2:14, 15; 4:3, 4).

The good deed. This passage may be read, "a good deed done to an impotent man." Both nouns are without articles. Peter emphasized the unquestionably "good deed" the Lord had accomplished through John and him. By so doing he made obvious the unreasonableness of the trial he and John were now undergoing. His words may imply that he anticipated the possibility that some other charge might also be brought against them, arising from his sermon (ch. 3:12-26), as in the case of Stephen, who was accused of blasphemy "against this holy place [the Temple], and the law" (ch. 6:13).

He. Or, "this [man]." The wording implies that the man who had been healed also was present before the Sanhedrin (see v. 14).

Made whole. Gr. soµzoµ, "to save" either physically or spiritually. This word has a strong underlying meaning suggesting spiritual as well as bodily restoration (see Mark 10:52; Luke 7:50).

10. To all the people. Peter would have all men know the important witness he is about to bear to both the leaders and the people (see ch. 2:14).

By the name. Or, "in the name." See on ch. 3:16.

Whom ye crucified. There is a striking boldness in this declaration. Peter does not hesitate to press home the fact that although Pilate had given the formal sentence, it was they, the very men who were examining him, who had crucified their King. He does not shrink now from confessing the Nazarene as the Messiah. Peter proclaims that Christ has been raised from the dead, and continues to heal as when He was on earth.

11. The stone. This verse is a free quotation of Ps. 118:22. Some of the members of the Sanhedrin, to whom Peter was speaking, had heard Christ quote and apply these words to the skeptical Jews (Matt. 21:42-44). In their blindness they had then thought that they could defy Christ's challenge and warning. Although by their calling they were builders of the church of Israel (see on Acts 7:38), they rejected the stone that God had chosen to be the chief Cornerstone (see Eph. 2:20). This same thought is a dominant note in one of Peter's epistles, that the church is built of living stones upon the foundation of Jesus Christ as the "head of the corner" (1 Peter 2:6-8).

12. Neither is there salvation. Peter intimates that the physical cure of the lame man is an outward indication of Jesus' power of salvation for the soul, which the lame man had also received. The eyewitnesses were to conclude from the results produced by the injunction, "Arise, and walk," that the same power could just as surely bring the greater blessing of spiritual salvation (see Matt. 9:5). The salvation of which Peter was speaking was the very thing the rulers were professing to seek. Peter's claim that Christ is the only Saviour is exactly in line with the claims Jesus Himself made as to His uniqueness (see John 3:16; 14:6).

None other name. See on ch. 3:16. Peter had learned to attach to the thought of the name the full personality and power of the possessor of the name. To those who had known and accepted Him, the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth was the one true source of deliverance and salvation.

We must be saved. Christ is the one way through whom we must of necessity seek salvation if we would be saved (see John 14:6; 17:3). The plan of salvation offered through Jesus Christ (1) glorifies God as moral ruler, (2) upholds God's law as the rule of government, (3) shows the mark of its source in divine revelation, (4) provides, through the vicarious atonement, for the needs of men as sinners, who are otherwise under God's condemnation. Christ is the one mediator between man and God (1 Tim. 2:5).

13. When they saw. The Greek implies "considering" as well as "beholding."

Boldness. Gr. parreµsia, from the words pan, "all," and rheµsis, "speech"; thus the word means "freedom of speech," and so, "boldness." The word implies a freedom and readiness of speech such as would not be expected from one untrained in teaching. Parreµsia had been characteristic of the Lord's teaching, which was done "openly" (Mark 8:32). From now on it was also to be a distinctive feature of the work of the apostles, as with Peter here, and with Paul (see Acts 28:31; 2 Cor. 7:4). Parreµsia was a characteristic of John in the confidence he showed in approaching God (1 John 4:17; 1 John 5:14).

Peter and John. As far as is recorded, John had not spoken, but doubtless by look and bearing, and perhaps by words not recorded, he obviously revealed similar courage.

Unlearned. Gr. agrammatos, "unlettered," that is, "uneducated," from the standpoint of the letters and traditions of the Jews. The scribes, on the other hand, were known as grammateis, "letter men." The Jewish leaders, noting that Peter and John had not been educated as scribes, would naturally conclude that such ignorant men were not qualified to be religious teachers.

Ignorant. Gr. idioµteµs, from idios, one's "own." The word here refers to a common man, a private person, in contrast with one in an official position. The disciples held no recognized rank as religious teachers. They were without a particular office or calling, or the culture required for such calling. The word idioµteµs has a curious later history. Latin reproduced idioµteµs, with scarcely an alteration in spelling, as idiota. It passed from this into modern European languages as a term to describe ignorance and the incapacity attached to it. Hence our present word "idiot." As used by Luke, this word did not mean that Peter and John were men devoid of intellect, but rather that they were not public men. That was why the members of the Sanhedrin felt outraged that the apostles attempted to do the work of religious teachers.

Took knowledge. Rather, "recognized," "began to realize." Peter already had made clear to the Sanhedrin that his power came from Jesus of Nazareth. Now, as the Jewish leaders sought to account for the apostles' boldness in teaching in spite of their lack of formal training, they came to realize that Peter's way of speaking was also that of Jesus. Not only his power to heal, but his message and the mode of its presentation, were all derived from Christ. To the Sanhedrin it must have been as though Jesus were again living before their eyes, in the persons of His two disciples. So should it ever be with all those who truly follow the Christ. To the Christian who speaks for his Master today, the most telling conviction and power come from his having been with Jesus in prayer, in meditation, and in companionship in all the activities of life. This sort of fellowship with the divine Lord brings an inestimable privilege, a transforming power, and a grave responsibility in Christ's service.

14. They could say nothing. Literally, "they had nothing to gainsay." The evidence could not be disputed. The leaders of the Jews could not charge deception, as they had tried to do in the matter of the Lord's resurrection, for the very man in question stood before them healed (see v. 16). Judging from subsequent events, probably there were men in that august company who indeed thought that God was working through the apostles. Not long after this event Gamaliel suggested that possibility (see ch. 5:34-39). It is not unlikely that there were others who, though silent, feared lest they also might "be found even to fight against God" (v. 39; cf. v. 40).

15. The council. That is, the Sanhedrin. The two disciples, and probably the lame man, were taken from the council chamber while the members of the Sanhedrin discussed what they ought to do.

16. What shall we do? The question need never have been debated. The Sanhedrin was sitting as a court of justice, and the verdict should have been given for or against the accused, according to the evidence. The lame man had been healed. They had seen him. The two men who had been the human instruments in the healing had stood before them, and were awaiting their decision. The members of the Sanhedrin abandoned their judicial office, and began to discuss what course to pursue, on the basis of expediency. This whole proceeding is eminently characteristic of Caiaphas (see John 11:49, 50).

Miracle. Gr. seµmeion, "a sign," and by extension, "a miracle" (see Vol. V, p. 208; see on Isa. 7:14). The Jewish authorities admitted that a remarkable sign had appeared in their midst.

Manifest to all. Because the crippled beggar at the Temple gate was so widely known, there could be only two bases on which the apostles might have been considered worthy of punishment: (1) if the miracle were an imposture, but this no one in the council believed or dared to insinuate; or (2) if the miracle had been performed by some sort of magic, or other unlawful means (Deut. 13:1-5). The question of the Sanhedrin "By what power ... have ye done this?" might suggest the latter. But from the very beginning (Acts 3:13) Peter had attributed what had happened to the "God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob," and insisted that God through Jesus Christ had made the man whole. Consequently no charge could be brought against them.

We cannot deny it. The very form of the statement betrays not only the desire to deny but also an admission of the lack of any power under the circumstances to do so. They had the evidence, but refused to follow it to its logical conclusion and accept the Christ who had shown the power. Such refusal is worse than never having known the truth.

17. That is spread. The Jewish leaders feared that the story of the miracle would go throughout the city and the countryside, with the result that men might accept Jesus Christ as the Messiah and the divine Son of God. This would be the logical result, and doubtless many were led thereby to faith in Jesus.

Straitly threaten. Important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the omission of the word "straitly."

In this name. Or, "about this name," or "on the basis of this name" (see on ch. 3:16). The disciples were no longer to preach about Jesus or upon His authority.

18. They called them. Peter and John were summoned again into the council chamber to learn the results of the deliberation.

Not to speak at all. Or, "absolutely not to speak." The very name of Jesus was not to pass their lips.

In the name. See on v. 17.

19. Peter and John. Both the apostles now joined in expressing their determination that they would announce the word of Christ's life, death, and resurrection. It is possible that each was appealed to separately by the council to desist, and each pledged his determination to continue in spite of the admonition of the council. For a like firmness compare the experience of faithful Jews in 2 Maccabees 7:30.

Whether it be right. Here an important principle is suggested. These words introduce an assertion of the right of conscience to resist human authority when it conflicts with divine authority. The apostles' appeal, "Judge ye," shows that they claimed this right as axiomatic. In practice, however, a difficulty often arises in establishing whether a man who claims such divine authority really has it. In cases like the present one, where the question is one of testimony to facts, if men believe themselves commissioned of God to declare those facts, they dare not tamper with the truth, even under fear of offending men.

In a dispute with civil authority the man of religious conviction must accept the burden of proof that his convictions arise from divine authority. If he wishes his case to hold, he must convince his hearers that his convictions are sound. Peter and John knew they had the authority of the Holy Spirit, already demonstrated by miracles, and by conversions; and theirs was an abiding conviction of truth, demonstrated in their preaching and its results. In this situation they could not consent to obey man rather than God (see ch. 5:29). The apostles had a command to preach, a command from the Christ who was giving them their power. No other consideration could be valid in such a situation. See AA 68, 69.

Whenever a man faces such a choice between his honest conviction regarding God's will for him, and the commandments of men, he can afford only to follow what he believes to be God's will. If he attempts to serve two masters, he will succeed in satisfying neither and will sell his soul for the sake of expediency. But if he steadfastly recognizes God's prior claim to his full allegiance, no man can call him dishonest, and his soul is safe.

Judge ye. In the face of such indubitable evidence of their innocence, the apostles boldly challenged the Jewish leaders to recognize the facts. That the Sanhedrin released Peter and John without punishing them was tacit recognition that they were guiltless.

20. We cannot but speak. The Greek emphasizes the pronoun "we." They, as Jesus' apostles, had been especially commissioned to bear witness to Him (Matt. 28:19, 20; Acts 1:8).

Have seen and heard. The apostles' testimony was grounded on their personal experiences with Jesus. Many years later, in their epistles, both Peter and John emphasized the importance of their having been eyewitnesses to the truths they taught (2 Peter 1:16-18; 1 John 1:1-3). For the Christian today personal experience with the presence of Christ in his life constitutes one of the most convincing evidences of the practical reality of Christian truth.

21. Further threatened. More than this the Sanhedrin did not dare to venture, because everyone knew the lame man had been healed and that no charge worthy of punishment could be maintained against the apostles. With the healed man known to all, they could not assert that the story of the miracle was untrue. And since it was a good deed unshakably attested, it could not be punished. Neither could they justifiably punish the apostles for claiming that their healing was done in the name of Jesus.

They might punish. Although some of the Jewish leaders doubtless were inclined to favor the apostles (see on v. 14), in general the feeling was one of disappointment that they could find no pretext for administering punishment without enraging the people. Here again expediency seems to have been an important factor in their reasoning and decision (see John 11:49, 50).

Glorified God. Or, "were glorifying God," portraying the current reaction of the people to the miracle. Peter's speech in the Temple had made clear the source of the power by which the man had been healed (ch. 3:12-16).

22. Above forty years old. Comparison with ch. 3:2 shows that the man had been crippled all this time. Such a long-standing incapacity made the miracle all the more remarkable. Repeatedly Luke notes the duration of a disease or of a crippling malady healed miraculously (see Luke 8:42, 43; 13:11; Acts 9:33; 14:8). It is too much to say that all these allusions are attributable to the fact that he was a physician (Col. 4:14), though some may have been, for this same practice was common among other, nonmedical, writers, when recounting miraculous healings (Mark 5:25; 9:21; John 5:5; 9:1). Probably NT writers gave this information chiefly because it helped to show the magnitude of the miracle performed.

This miracle of healing was shewed. Rather, "this sign [seµmeion] of healing had come to pass." For the meaning of seµmeion, here translated "miracle," see on v. 16. The KJV has endeavored to represent the idea of a miracle as a sign by using the word "shewed."

23. Their own company. Gr. hoi idioi, "their own." Jewish authors writing in Greek use this expression for fellow soldiers and fellow countrymen; Paul employs it of relatives (see 1 Tim. 5:8; cf. Acts 24:23), a use that is also attested by the papyri; and John uses this expression for Jesus' disciples (John 13:1). In the present passage, "their own" doubtless refers to the apostles' fellow believers. Apparently they had no permanent place of meeting; at Pentecost they were probably in the upper room (see Acts 1:13; 2:1). As the church grew, they met daily in the Temple and also in one another's houses (chs. 2:46; 12:12). Thus it was not difficult for Peter and John to find their fellow apostles and believers in a group.

Reported all. The report was made for the glory of God, and not for that of the apostles who related the account (see ch. 15:3, 4).

Chief priests and elders. See on v. 1.

24. Lifted up their voice. Upon hearing the apostles' report the assembled Christians raised their voices in praise and adoration to the God who had intervened so remarkably. Phrases that follow suggest a chant of praise, different from ordinary speech. This was probably a hymn, and may have been uttered by Peter while the others joined in saying "Amen," or they may have repeated it phrase by phrase after him. It appears doubtful that the Christian community already would have composed and memorized such a hymn as this as part of their liturgy. This passage has the distinction of being the first recorded utterance of corporate worship in Christian history.

Lord. Gr. despoteµs, a "master," as contrasted with a servant. This word is used but rarely of the Lord in the NT, appearing with such a reference only six times. It is interesting to note that two of these are in the writings of Peter and John (2 Peter 2:1; Rev. 6:10), the disciples who doubtless led out in the present act of praise and worship.

Art God. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of these words. However, the thought of the passage remains the same. The fact that God is Creator is an eternal basis for the praise and obedience of His creatures (see Isa. 44:23-27; Heb. 1:1-5).

Heaven, and earth, and the sea. As do so many of the psalms, this ascription of praise begins by setting forth the glory of God as Creator.

25. By the mouth. The earliest manuscripts of this passage present a difficult Greek text that appears to have been garbled. Later manuscripts contain a number of variants that apparently were attempts by scribes to repair the text. The earliest extant text is probably best translated, "Who through the mouth of our father David, thy servant, through the Holy Spirit, said ...," or perhaps, "Who through our father David, thy servant, the mouth of the Holy Spirit, said ..."

The heathen rage. The quotation in vs. 25, 26 is from Ps. 2:1, 2, which doubtless had its primary application to some revolt against a king of Israel. During David's reign mention is made of such conflicts with Syrians, Moabites, Ammonites, and others engaging in vain revolt (2 Sam. 8). Here the psalm is presented as a parallel to the Jewish leaders' fighting against the Lord of the church. An ancient Jewish application of Ps. 2:1, probably at least from the 2d century a.d., interprets the "heathen" as Gog and Magog, who in Jewish thinking were to oppose the Messiah when He should come (Talmud ÔAbodah Zarah 3b, Soncino ed., pp. 8, 9). If such an application of this verse was current in the apostles' day, as it well may have been, it is understandable that Ps. 2:1 might appropriately be applied by the apostles to those who already were opposing the Messiah.

26. The kings. In this instance the Romans (see on v. 27).

Christ. Gr. Christos, properly, "anointed [one]." The LXX used this word to translate the Heb. mashiach, "anointed [one]," which was applied in the OT to kings (Ps. 18:50; Isa. 45:1), priests (Lev. 4:3), and pre-eminently to the coming Saviour. Consequently He is known by the anglicized form of the word, the Messiah. Those who followed Jesus recognized Him to be this Saviour and consequently called Him Christos, "Christ." Inasmuch as the present passage is a quotation from the LXX, Christos here is probably best translated in its OT sense, "anointed one."

In its primary application in Ps. 2:2, mashiach doubtless refers to the king of Israel. But the fact that the word also might be used of the Messiah made this passage a striking one for the apostles to apply to Christ. That they consciously made this application is indicated by Acts 4:27, where they speak of Christ as the One "whom thou hast anointed."

27. Of a truth. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) adding the words "in this city." Such a statement would be most natural inasmuch as the apostle here applies the language of the psalmist to the events preceding the crucifixion.

Child. Gr. pais, a word that may mean either "child" or "servant" (see on ch. 3:13). The word is the same as that used of David in v. 25, and as it unquestionably means "servant" there, it is probably best taken in that sense here. So understood, it is reminiscent of the servant of the Lord in Isa. 52:13.

Herod. The two civil rulers before whom Jesus was tried, Herod the king and Pilate the governor, are mentioned as noteworthy examples of the "kings" and "rulers" of v. 26 (from Ps. 2:2). For a further discussion of Herod Antipas see Vol. V, pp. 64, 65. It is interesting to note that Luke, the author of the present account, is also the only gospel writer to record the role of Herod in Jesus' trial (Luke 23:7-15).

Pontius Pilate. For a discussion of this Roman governor see Vol. V, pp. 67, 68.

Gentiles. This doubtless refers to the Romans who shared with the Jews the burden of guilt for the crime of the crucifixion.

People of Israel. The sequence Herod, Pontius Pilate, Gentiles, Israel, completes a parallelism with the previous sequence of heathen, people, kings, and rulers (vs. 25, 26). This is an inverted parallelism, a characteristic Hebrew poetic form (see Vol. III, pp. 23-27).

28. Whatsoever thy hand. The apostles had quoted from the second psalm and had applied it to the crucifixion of Christ. Now they recognized that even in their sin against the Son of God, the Jews and Romans had helped to fulfill God's purpose for Christ in His work of salvation. A divine will manifests itself in the government of the world, and the salvation of individual souls. This does not rule out man's free will. History, particularly sacred history, testifies that the will of each agent is free, and that each man stands or falls by the part he has taken in the unfolding plan of redemption. See on Dan. 4:17.

The man who is surrendered to God works to accomplish His divine will. He who is not so surrendered finds himself working against a God, who, in spite of man's disobedience, works out His own divine, ultimate will. Rebellious, evil, and disobedient men play into God's hands. "Surely the wrath of man shall praise thee" (Ps. 76:10).

29. Lord, behold. The context shows that the prayer of the church is addressed to God the Father. Under the threatenings of the Jewish leaders the apostles were not disheartened, but drew nearer to the God who could aid them in whatever danger they faced. The threats of the Jews were ultimately directed against God (see on ch. 9:4, 5).

Servants. Gr. douloi, "slaves."

Boldness. Gr. parreµsia (see on v. 13). The apostles had shown "boldness of speech" before the Sanhedrin (v. 13), and now their prayer, as though showing consciousness of natural weakness, is for a yet further bestowal of that gift of courage (see Luke 21:15). They realized it was now needed more than ever, for both themselves and the entire church.

Speak thy word. It is not enough that the godly life be lived by the Christian, as a testimony to the power of Christ. The doctrine of salvation in Jesus Christ must also be given utterance (see Rom. 10:13-17).

30. By stretching forth. Rather, "while thou stretchest forth." It was God who did the mighty works of which the present miracle was an instance. Nicodemus, himself a member of the Sanhedrin, had said that no one could do such works except "God be with him" (John 3:2).

Signs and wonders. For a discussion of these words see Vol. V, p. 208; see on Acts 4:16; 2 Cor. 12:12.

By the name. See on ch. 3:16.

Child. Rather, "servant." See on chs. 3:13; 4:27.

31. They had prayed. A constantly repeated exercise in the church (see chs. 1:14, 24; 2:42; 6:4).

The place was shaken. In view of further remarkable manifestations of the powerful presence of the Spirit of God, it may be concluded that this shaking was not an earthquake, but a supernatural experience. It was a renewal of the wonder of the day of Pentecost, but apparently without the appearance of the tongues of fire. Thus the Christians knew at once that the God of all nature to whom they had appealed (v. 24) was among them. In view of their direct need God gave them an immediate answer as a token that He had heard their prayers.

They were all filled. See on ch. 2:4. As on the day of Pentecost, the disciples knew again an infilling of the power of the Spirit. It gave them an assurance that they could speak with boldness the words they were commissioned to proclaim. The fact that the disciples had received the Spirit at Pentecost did not mean that further unction in times of special need might not be given. In fact, the primary bestowal of the Spirit had prepared them for such further outpourings. So also with the Christian today; the life begun in the Spirit, as signified by baptism, is dependent for its continuance upon constant communion and continually renewed supplies of spiritual grace.

They spake ... with boldness. Endowed with boldness by the power of the Spirit, for which they had prayed, from now on the apostles proclaimed the gospel whenever and wherever they found opportunity, refusing to be stopped by threats of any kind.

32. Of one heart. Textual evidence may also be cited (cf. p. 10) for the interesting addition, "And there was no discrimination among them whatever." As with similar pairs of expressions, "heart" and "soul" often overlap in meaning and should be taken here to express a totality of character rather than any minute distinctions. Oneness of heart in Hebrew thought indicated complete accord (see Jer. 32:39; cf. 1 Chron. 12:38). It was not only Peter and John and the other apostles, but the entire multitude of believers, who participated in this accord.

Neither said any of them. Each individual felt that his possessions were held by him as though a trust from God, to be given up upon request. This could only be the result of a deep love for one another, foretold by Christ as a mark of His disciples (John 13:35). Idealists who have endeavored to picture in theory a perfect society, as Plato in his Republic and Sir Thomas More in his Utopia, have proposed, as a condition of their perfect commonwealth, a community of goods similar to that practiced in the early church. To succeed, such a commonwealth requires perfection in its participants. Undoubtedly the believers' expectation of their Lord's soon return, together with their unity of thought and feeling, made them willing to part with their material possessions. However, as shown in the case of Ananias (see Acts 5:4), they were under no compulsion to do so.

All things common. This statement is parallel to ch. 2:44, as indeed vs. 32-35 of the present chapter restate generally what has been recorded in ch. 2:43-45. This restatement is probably made by Luke to supply a setting for his story of Barnabas' liberality (vs. 36, 37) and Ananias' selfishness (ch. 5:1-11). Luke is pleased to dwell upon this community of goods as an ideal expression of the equality and fraternity manifested in the early church. The rights of property were voluntarily suspended by the spontaneous conduct of the members of the Christian community, under the operation of the law of love. Their benevolence was free and full, without hope of material reward. They thought of themselves, not as possessors for self, but as stewards for the good of others.

33. With great power. The witness of the apostles was presented, not in their own strength, but in a power they could never have engendered within themselves. Theirs was the energizing of the Divine Spirit.

Gave. Gr. apodidoµmi, "to deliver [that which is due]." The form of the verb used here may be understood to mean that the apostles "continued to deliver" the witness they had already given on Pentecost and in the Temple. The apostles felt themselves under an inner compulsion to bear witness. They had seen the wonderful works of Jesus. They had seen Him die. They had seen what they had not believed could happen--the Lord had risen from the dead. This crowning miracle constituted the climactic point of the apostolic preaching. The apostles could tell the story as eyewitnesses to a resurrected Lord, and tell it they did "with great power."

Grace. Gr. charis (see on Rom. 3:24). Charis here may be taken in the sense of "favour" (as in Luke 2:52), and so indicate that the favor of the people toward the Christians still continued. However, in view of the context, which emphasizes the spiritual gift of power that they received, it is probably better to understand charis in its more technical sense of divine grace (as in Luke 2:40).

34. That lacked. Rather, "that was in need." The Greek seems to connect this verse with the previous one by the conjunction gar, "for," which is not translated in the KJV. Gar suggests the close relationship that existed between the Christians' liberality and the grace they enjoyed (see on v. 33).

Possessorsof lands. Some of the new Christians were persons of substantial means. The genuineness of their brotherly love manifested itself in self-sacrifice for the welfare of their less fortunately situated brethren.

Sold ... brought. The forms of the verbs used here suggest that this was an occurrence that happened repeatedly as one after another the believers parted with their possessions for the common good of the church. In doing this, their motives were love, and the impulsions of benevolence. Although Luke makes no mention of it, the possibility also exists that the Christians were impressed by their Lord's warnings of wars and coming troubles (Matt. 24:5-12), and thus with the fact that earthly possessions are unstable. Certainly land and property in Palestine must often have been valueless when the troubles the Lord prophesied became fact. Just as Jeremiah had shown his faith in the future restoration of his people to Palestine by his purchase of a field at Anathoth (Jer. 32:6-15), so the Christians showed by a reverse process in the sale of their property a proof of their faith in the certainty of the message to which they witnessed.

35. Laid them down. Laying the results of the sales at the disciples' feet was a significant act, showing that they gave the apostles entire control over the proceeds. For a similar use of this expression see Ps. 8:6. Cicero uses the same figure when he speaks of gifts being placed "before the feet of the praetor" (Pro Flacco xxvii. 68). The words apparently reflect the custom that when gifts or offerings were made to a king, or priest, or teacher, they were not placed in his hands, but at his feet.

As he had need. Or, "as any had need." No doubt many of the Christians were not in need and took care of themselves. The beneficiaries would be those who were unable to earn a livelihood because of sickness and perhaps because of loss of employment owing to their change of religious faith (see John 9:22, where those who accepted Christ were threatened with excommunication), widows, and newcomers who had not yet become established in the city. There may also have been those to whom the apostles felt justified in rendering material support because of their spiritual activity in propagating the faith, although Luke makes no specific mention of this. Here was a as wise, planned material ministry to bodily needs, which has ever been a credit to the church whenever it has been thus conducted (see 1 Tim. 5:5-16, 21).

36. Joses. Important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the reading "Joseph."

Barnabas. This is the first reference to Barnabas, the man who was to travel with the apostle Paul on his First Missionary Journey. The name Barnabas is interpreted by Luke as meaning in Greek huios parakleµseoµs, which may be translated, "son of consolation," or "son of exhortation." Scholars are not agreed as to the Hebrew or Aramaic words represented by this name. They may have been bar nebu'ah, "son of prophecy." In any case his surname would imply that Barnabas was characterized by his gift of exhortation (see ch. 11:23). When Barnabas became a Christian is not known. Since he was a Levite, he may have taken part in the service of the Temple, and may have heard the Lord or the apostles preaching there. He was a relative of John Mark (Col. 4:10) who lived in Jerusalem (Acts 12:12). A tradition recorded by Clement of Alexandria (The Stromata ii. 20) lists Barnabas as one of the Seventy sent forth by Jesus (Luke 10:1; see also on Acts 9:27).

Extant is an epistle bearing the name of Barnabas, which the 3d-century Christian writers Clement of Alexandria and Origen believed was written by this apostle. However, the contents of the epistle show this to be untrue. It consists mainly of anti-Judaistic, allegorical interpretations of OT narratives. The epistle takes a position against the seventh-day Sabbath and in favor of the observance of the "eighth-day," Sunday. It was probably written by a now-unknown hand about the middle of the 2d century a.d.

Cyprus. The island still so called, in the eastern part of the Mediterranean Sea. Jews were settled there at least as early as the Maccabean period (1 Maccabees 15:23). Christian teachers were driven there from Jerusalem by the persecution that accompanied the death of Stephen (Acts 11:19). On their First Missionary Journey Paul and Barnabas visited Cyprus, probably at the request of Barnabas.

37. Land. Or, "a field." In the early Hebrew polity the Levites held no private property, but lived in cities and on land held in common and were supported by tithes paid by the people (Num. 18:20, 21). But the case of Jeremiah (Jer. 32:7-12) shows that there was nothing to hinder a priest or a Levite from acquiring land by purchase or inheritance. Also, Barnabas may have held land by marriage. We are not informed as to the location of the field that Barnabas sold. Barnabas' aunt Mary also had property, and although she did not sell her house, she made it available for the use of the Christian community (Acts 12:12).

Barnabas afterward seems to have worked for his livelihood, as Paul also did (1 Cor. 9:6). Barnabas may have been chosen as an example of the liberality of the early Christian body because of something out of the ordinary in the kind of gift or in the nature of the sacrifice which he made.

ellen g. White comments

1, 2 AA 60

1-3SR 250

1-37AA 60-71; SR 250-253

3 AA 61

3-6EW 193

5, 6 AA 62

5-7SR 250

7 AA 63

8 SR 251

10-12AA 63; EW 193; SR 251

11 AA 64

12 AA 594; COL 264; CT 62; DA 175, 806; GC 74; MB 149; MH 179; PP 73, 431; SC 19

13 AA 45, 64, 208, 579; COL 130; CT 478, 509; DA 250, 354; Ed 95; EW 194; FE 242, 456, 514; MB 28; MH 512; SC 75; IT 132; 2T 343; 4T 378, 634; 5T 225, 487; 6T 47, 70, 401, 421; 8T 174, 191; 9T 146

13-16SR 252

16 EW 194

18-20SL 61; 5T 713

18-21SR 253

19 AA 68, 69

19, 20 AA 66; EW 194; 6T 395

21 AA 67

22 AA 57

24-30AA 67

29-31EW 24

31 AA 71

31, 32 GC 379; 6T 140

32 AA 45, 70; Ed 95; Ev 698; WM 271

32, 33 COL 121; 8T 20

32-34DA 551; MB 137

33 AA 48, 68; ML 61; TM 67

34, 35 AA 70

36 AA 166

Acts Chapter 5

1 After that Ananians and Sapphira his wife for their hypocrisy at Peter's rebuke had fallen down dead, 12 and that the rest of the apostles had wrought many miracles, 14 to the increase of the faith: 17 the apostles are again imprisoned, 19 but delivered by an angel bidding them to preach openly to all: 21 when, after their teaching accordingly in the temple, 29 and before the council, 33 they are in danger to be killed, through the advice of Gamaliel, a great counsellor among the Jews, they be kept alive, 40 and are but beaten: for which they glorify God, and cease no day from preaching.

1. But. There is a sharp contrast between the kindly generosity of Barnabas (ch. 4:36, 37) and the cupidity of Ananias and Sapphira (ch. 5:1-11).

A certain man. Only a truthful narrator would tell the story of Ananias and Sapphira at this point. But just as there had been a Judas among the twelve disciples, so in the infant church, pure and zealous though it was, there were found two who preferred meanness to generosity and hypocrisy to honesty. Yet the story is told calmly and dispassionately, and the reader is instructed and moved by a recital of the plain facts.

Ananias. Meaning, "Jehovah is gracious." This is a common name, belonging also to the man who befriended Saul of Tarsus when he was first converted (ch. 23:2; 24:1). It corresponds to the Hebrew Hananiah in Jer. 28:1; Dan. 1:6, 7.

Sapphira. This name probably represents the Aramaic shappira', "beautiful," although some derive it from the Greek sappheiros, "a sapphire."

Possession. See on ch. 2:45. The property was land (see ch. 5:3).

2. Kept back. Gr. nosphizoµ, in the form here used, "set apart for himself." In Titus 2:10 this verb is translated "purloining." It is used in the LXX (Joshua 7:1) for the sin of Achan. The mere retention by Ananias of part of the selling price of the land was not in itself a sin. Actually, he was under no compulsion to give anything. He had professed a willingness to give, but he was not obliged to give any fixed amount. The money was his own, to give in whole or in part. But the part was brought as though it were the whole. This was the deception. It was an acted lie.

The approval with which Luke tells the story of the self-sacrifice of Barnabas must have reflected the approval of the church. Ananias apparently thought that he could gain the same approval, but with less sacrifice on his part. The desire to please was strong enough to gain a partial victory over greed. But greed was strong enough to triumph over honesty. The impulse to sell came from the Spirit of God; the impulse to retain part of the price was evil. The act was an attempt to serve both God and mammon. The sin was in some respects like that of Gehazi (see on 2 Kings 5:20-27), but seen against the background of the miracles of Pentecost and the extraordinary progress of the church under the Spirit's guidance, it was more heinous and was visited with severer punishment.

His wife. Sapphira was evidently a willing accomplice. Theirs was a planned offense.

3. Peter. The spokesman for the church.

Why? If Ananias had wished, he could have resisted the temptation. Had he resisted, the tempter would have fled from him (James 4:7).

Satan filled thine heart. Peter traced evil to its source. His knowledge of what Ananias and Sapphira were doing came from the gift of discernment (1 Cor. 2:14; 12:10). In sad contrast to this, Ananias had opened his heart to Satan until his mind was full of covetous and deceitful thoughts.

Holy Ghost. The Spirit had been given to guide the believers into all truth (John 16:13), but Ananias was trying, vainly, to deceive the Spirit of truth (see on John 14:17, 26; 16:13).

4. Remained. Ananias was not compelled to sell the land; it was expected only that he would honestly bring from the proceeds what he had pledged. The implication is that the church compelled no one to give to the common fund, but if a man did promise to give, he should give what he had promised. At every stage Ananias was free to act as he thought best. The part he tried to retain might not have been large; he could have retained much more, had he done so honestly. But this attempt to obtain a reputation for generosity without the reality of sacrifice made him guilty of sacrilege.

Conceived this thing. Literally, "put this deed." This implies a thought-out plan on the part of Ananias. It was not a matter of yielding to a sudden temptation, but of accepting into his heart a plan which, never right, developed into an evil act. Satan had entered his heart in terms of the scheme, and had not been cast out.

Lied ... unto God. This does not mean that Ananias had not lied at all to men, but that his offense lay primarily in the fact that he had presumed to deceive God. All sin is ultimately against God, although it also gravely affects men. David had recognized this, for he said, "Against thee, thee only, have I sinned" (Ps. 51:4). Ananias had either ignored God or thought he could deceive Him as he had hoped to deceive his fellows. On either count he was sinning against God, and Peter rightly gives this prominence.

The use of the word "God" throws light on the Biblical teaching regarding the Holy Spirit. In Acts 5:3 Ananias' sin is identified as lying "to the Holy Ghost," and here it is described as lying "unto God." This suggests the unity that exists between the Spirit and the Father, and serves to warn the Christian of the heinousness of sanctimonious falsehood (see on Matt. 12:31).

5. Gave up the ghost. Gr. ekpsucho', "to expire," a term that is found in medical literature. Death was not a coincidence. There was a close connection between Peter's denunciation of the sin and the death of the sinner. Any doubt on this point is removed by considering the death of Sapphira (vs. 7-10), which was foretold by Peter after his exposure of the deceit. Compare the judgment on Nadab and Abihu (Lev. 10:2), and on Achan (Joshua 7:20-26); see on 2 Chron. 22:8. Compare on Matt. 27:50.

This was a terrible judgment, but we need not wonder at it. Ananias and Sapphira were members of the infant church. They had drawn near to God. They had undoubtedly tasted some of the heavenly gifts of salvation. Perhaps they had received some of the gifts of the Spirit. But by a false spirit they had committed an act of sacrilege. If not strikingly and visibly met in these early days of the church, such acts of deception might have undermined the work of the apostles. God interposed here to save His church from greater dangers and evils. The experience holds a lesson for us: "If a man attend a convention or a religious service and sing with fervor, `My all is on the altar' when it is not, he is committing the sin of Ananias and Sapphira."--G. Campbell Morgan.

Great fear. Luke often associates miracles with fear in the hearts of the beholders (see Luke 1:12, 65; 5:26; 7:16; 8:37; Acts 2:43; 19:17). But here it is evidently more than the reverential awe of Acts 2:43. In a large company there could well have been other dishonest individuals, upon whom a sort of terror might well have fallen. To the rest must have come a deeper reverence for the God who would thus vindicate His own righteousness. The fear was immediate. It reached out among the believers before Sapphira had heard of her husband's death. Fear of this sort would be a deterrent upon any who were not completely sincere in their profession of Christianity.

These things. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of these words.

6. Young men. Literally, "younger men."

Wound him up. Or, "wrapped him up," probably in the robe he was wearing at the moment. It was customary to wrap the body in a winding sheet, followed by immediate burial outside the walls of a city. Among the Jews contact with a corpse resulted in ceremonial defilement (see on Num. 19:11). This, coupled with the desire to avoid costly embalming methods, required a prompt burial.

Buried him. As is seen from the burials of Lazarus (see on John 11:38) and Jesus (see on Matt. 27:60), the dead were deposited in caves or tombs, which were closed by large stones. Thus little time would be needed for the burial of Ananias. For Jewish attention to funeral rites see on Acts 8:2.

7. Space of three hours. Literally, "an interval of about three hours," possibly until the next hour for prayer. This was time enough for the disposal of Ananias' body, but the news had not yet reached Sapphira.

Came in. To the room where Peter and the rest of the congregation had just witnessed the death and removal of her husband.

8. Answered unto her. Possibly, "addressed her." Peter's question was not to trap a conspirator, but to give Sapphira an opportunity to show repentance. She could have prevented her husband's trespass, but had failed to do so. She now had the chance to clear her own conscience by confession. She had misused the previous opportunity; now she failed again.

Tell me. Peter's forthright question might have warned Sapphira that their scheme was known, but she maintained the lie upon which she and her husband had agreed. She answered glibly, "Yea, for so much." Peter may have mentioned the sum that Ananias had brought in.

9. Agreed together. The offense was particularly heinous because it involved premeditated deception.

Tempt the Spirit. That is, to "try," or to "test," whether the Holy Spirit was really a discerner of the secrets of men's hearts. The expression "Spirit of the Lord" is probably used in its OT sense, as the Spirit of Jehovah (cf. 2 Kings 2:16; Isa. 61:1; etc.). The combination is rare in the NT, occurring only here and in 2 Cor. 3:17.

Shall carry thee out. Peter is speaking not as a judge but as a prophet. The Holy Spirit had already condemned them. In this instance the coming judgment is foretold, and the announcement barely preceded its execution. To Peter his gift of discernment showed that the young men whose footsteps he heard returning from the burial of Ananias would very soon have another task of like nature.

10. Straightway. Her death was as immediate as that of her husband.

Yielded up the ghost. See on v. 5.

Found her dead. In fulfillment of Peter's prophecy.

Buried her. There was no funeral ceremony on the occasion of this double tragedy, whatever care may have been given to the dead at other times (cf. Luke 23:55, 56).

11. Great fear. See on v. 5.

The church. With the exception of the doubtful reading in ch. 2:47, this is the first occurrence of the word in Acts. Its presence indicates a development in organization. See on Matt. 18:17. The startling death of Ananias and Sapphira would give a new significance to the society and its leaders.

As many as heard. These were outside of the church, but they heard of the power being exercised among its members.

12. By the hands. This may be only the Hebrew way of expressing agency (cf. Ex. 35:29; Lev. 8:36; etc.). But in the NT Christ's hands are often shown as the instrument of His miracles (see Mark 6:2, 5; Luke 4:40; etc.). The promise to Christ's followers was: "They shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover" (Mark 16:18). Therefore, the expression here may well be literal, although Acts 5:15 shows that the people believed that cures could also be wrought without the use of the apostles' hands.

Signs and wonders. See on Mark 16:17, 18; John 14:12; Acts 2:22. The early church was born, even as Christ's ministry was conducted, in the setting of the miraculous. The tragedy of Ananias and Sapphira was followed by miracles of healing and blessing.

Wrought. Rather, "were being wrought," in other words, time after time, upon repeated occasions.

With one accord. See on chs. 1:14; 4:24. Luke takes great satisfaction in emphasizing the unity of the disciples. Since Solomon's Porch is mentioned, this description may refer to meetings conducted by the apostles at the usual hours of prayer, about 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.

Solomon's porch. See on John 10:23 and Acts 3:2; 11. This was a favorite place for teachers to gather with their listeners. There is no evidence, however, that the Christians had taken over this portico as a regular place for their exclusive worship (cf. ch. 3:11).

13. And. Or, "but," stressing the contrast between the believers in v. 12 and those who did not believe, in v. 13.

The rest. Commentators have suggested several explanations of this passage. The seeming contrast with "the people" in the last part of the verse suggests that the upper, ruling classes may be meant.

Durst no man. Fear of sharing the fate of Ananias and Sapphira deterred those who were not willing wholeheartedly to follow Christ.

Join. Gr. kollaoµ, "to glue," "to fasten firmly together." Compare on ch. 9:26.

But. That is, on the other hand, emphasizing the favorable reaction of "the people."

Magnified them. More exactly translated, "esteemed them [that is, the apostles] highly."

14. Added. Rather, "kept being added." Conversions occurred almost daily.

To the Lord. Grammatically, in the Greek, these words can be attached to "kept being added," or to "believers," giving "believers in the Lord."

Men and women. The specific mention of women suggests that there were large numbers of them coming into the church. For the prominence of women in Luke's narratives see on Luke 8:2. Luke also mentions women as suffering under the persecution that arose after the death of Stephen (Acts 8:3).

15. Insomuch that. The thought is continued from the first part of v. 12, the intervening sentences being parenthetical.

Brought forth the sick. Compare Mark 1:32-34. It was not enough for the disciples to heal in public places and in the homes; relatives of the sick brought them out into the streets, that they might have attention the more quickly. The whole amazing work of healing was carried on in the most public fashion possible. Not only throughout the city of Jerusalem, but also to the surrounding towns (Acts 5:16) did the news of the extraordinary activities of the apostles and their fellow believers spread, and great was the harvest of souls.

Shadow of Peter. Peter alone is mentioned here, and perhaps he did the major part of the healing work. In v. 12, however, all the apostles are distinctly credited with a share in performing the miracles. The people healed had faith, not in Peter and his companions, but in the Lord, whom the apostles represented.

16. Unto Jerusalem. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of "unto." The inhabitants of the surrounding towns brought out their sick, but did not necessarily carry them into Jerusalem. The verse may cover a fairly long period of time, during which the apostles could have visited a considerable number of "the cities round about" Jerusalem.

Vexed. The Greek verb here translated "vexed" is found in the NT only here and in Luke 6:18, but is used frequently in the works of Greek medical writers. It is therefore just such a word as one would expect Luke the physician to use.

Unclean spirits. See on Matt. 12:43, 44. Christ gave His disciples power to cast out such evil spirits (see Matt. 10:1). The Seventy had already exercised that power (Luke 10:17), and the Twelve had doubtless performed similar miracles. But now, in the full power of the Holy Spirit, they were doing the "greater works" that Jesus had promised (John 14:12; Mark 16:17).

Healed every one. Compare Matt. 8:16; 12:15; DA 241 concerning the similar results arising from Christ's medical ministry. How extraordinary it must have been to see whole families, and possibly whole communities, free from sickness. The fame of the church and its leaders spread far and wide.

17. Then. Rather, "but," pointing out the contrast between the multitudes flocking to the disciples for healing and the high priest preparing to subject the disciples to a second persecution.

High priest. Annas (see on ch. 4:6).

They that were with him. Perhaps a more comprehensive expression than that used in ch. 4:6: "as many as were of the kindred of the high priest" (see on ch. 4:6). The opposition had had time to gather larger forces.

Sect. Gr. hairesis, "choice," hence, "opinion," by extension, "party," or "faction." The word found its way into English as "heresy," but did not originally possess the undesirable meaning soon attributed to it by ecclesiastical authorities. In chs. 15:5; 26:5 hairesis is applied, in a nonderogatory way, to the Pharisees. In chs. 24:5; 28:22 it is applied to the Nazarenes (Christians) in derogation of them.

The Sadducees. See on ch. 4:1.

Indignation. Gr. zeµlos, "zeal," and in a bad sense, as here, "jealousy," or "envy." Either of these meanings could be applied here. Here was an intense outbreak of strong party feeling. There was anxiety as to what the followers of the Nazarene might do. Both Pharisees and Sadducees might experience this feeling. There was resentment because the untutored apostles were presuming to teach the people. Both Pharisees and Sadducees experienced this resentment. But the Sadducees felt a special antagonism because the apostles were teaching that there was a future life--a belief that the Sadducees rejected. The fact that the Pharisees agreed with the apostles on this point did not please the Sadducees (see Vol. V, pp. 51-53).

18. Laid their hands on. the Sadducean authorities were thoroughly aroused, and the apostles--possibly all the Twelve--were seized. This makes it clear that although Luke has been generally mentioning only the speeches of Peter, with some slight notice of the activities of John, the rest of the apostles had been publicly active.

In the common prison. Gr. en teµreµsei deµmosia, which may be translated either "in prison publicly" or "in the public prison." Later, rabbinic use of the word deµmosia as "prison" favors the latter translation.

19. But. Emphasizing the contrast with v. 18. The authorities imprisoned the apostles, the angel released them. It would seem as though this was a divine protest against the actions of the Sadducees, who taught that there was "neither angel, nor spirit" (ch. 23:8).

Angel. Luke is obviously recording what he considers a supernatural occurrence. Those who do not accept that view, and who yet wish to maintain the historicity of the narrative, are driven to suggest that the "angel" was some zealous and courageous disciple; and that the apostles, in the darkness of the night and the excitement of their liberation, mistakenly ascribed their rescue to the intervention of an angel. But there is no possibility of adequately explaining Luke's words in any other terms than a miraculous deliverance. The human aid of Gamaliel, at a later hour, is freely and openly recorded (vs. 34-39). But here the aid is frankly described as supernatural. Although the apostles were arrested again only a few hours later (v. 26), God had demonstrated His power, the apostles had the comfort of heavenly intervention on their behalf, and the Sadducees had been given an opportunity to know that they were fighting against supernatural powers. Surely the angels are "ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation" (Heb. 1:14).

By night. Rather, "during the night."

Opened the prison doors. Doors, even the firmly fastened doors of prisons, are no problem to the angels of God. The apostles were taken out from under the very eyes of the keepers, either under the cover of deep darkness or because the eyes of the guards were "holden" (cf. ch. 12:6, 7). The doors were left secured, or were locked again, leaving everything as it had been before the angel came (cf. ch. 5:23).

Brought them forth. Compare ch. 12:10.

20. Stand. The thought is that they were to present themselves publicly and boldly, for the Temple was the most public of places. There they had first been arrested (chs. 3:1, 11; 4:1-3).

Words of this life. The adjective "this" is significant. It refers to the life the apostles were advocating--life in Christ. This life begins in the present world, and continues into eternity (cf. John 17:3). This teaching was especially unacceptable to the Sadducees because of their disbelief in an afterlife. See Vol. V, p. 53.

21. When they heard. Note the immediate obedience of the apostles.

Early in the morning. Rather, "about dawn." The Mishnah indicates that the sacrifices began to be offered in the Temple in the morning as soon as the sky was light (Yoma, 3. 1, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 131; Tamid, 3. 2, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 18).

Taught. This is what the Sadducees in council had forbidden the apostles to do (ch. 4:17, 18). These haughty rulers were enraged by the fact that the untrained and unauthorized Galileans were teaching, that they taught the resurrection, and that they witnessed to Jesus Christ as the One who, having been crucified, had risen from the dead. But the apostles were under divine orders. The church has a teaching mission to perform, the mission of presenting the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ to a sin-sick world. That task it must never neglect.

High priest came. That is, into the council chamber, to decide what should be done with the imprisoned apostles. The council had not yet learned of their mysterious release.

They that. For comment see on v. 17.

Council. That is, the Sanhedrin (see Vol. V, p. 67). Evidently the case before them was considered so important that no effort was spared to gather together as full a membership as possible. Gamaliel's presence indicates that not only Sadducees but also Pharisees and others were called to this meeting (see v. 34).

Senate. Gr. gerousia, the name of Sparta's assembly of old men, or elders. The word was used for the Sanhedrin at Jerusalem (see Vol. V, p. 67). Here it is an official group of elders, qualified by age and experience to give counsel on special occasions. It may have been a gathering corresponding to "all the estate of the elders" of ch. 22:5.

Prison. Gr. desmoµteµrion, "a place where bound men are kept." This is a different word from that used in v. 18, possibly suggesting that the apostles had been bound soon after their arrest.

22. Officers. Gr. hupeµretai, literally, "underrowers" on a galley; later "servants," and then "officers" serving under the Sanhedrin. See also on Luke 4:20; Acts 4:1.

Found them not. There was no external evidence of their escape from the prison (see on vs. 19, 23).

23. Found we shut. If the angel had unlocked the doors, he locked them after freeing the apostles. The guards at the gates seem not to have been aware that the prisoners had escaped. Compare release of Peter (ch. 12:6-10), but contrast the furor and drama of Paul and Silas' experience in Philippi (ch. 16:25-30).

24. High priest. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of this expression.

Captain. See on Luke 22:4; Acts 4:1.

Chief priests. Probably the heads of the 24 priestly courses, and not to be confused with the high priest.

These things. Rather, "these words," referring to the report that the police had brought back.

Doubted. Rather, "perplexed," "at a loss," and not without reason. The Jewish leaders' repressive efforts had failed, a miracle had liberated their victims, and the Christian way was gaining ground.

25. Then came one. By this time the morning must have been well advanced. The Sanhedrin had been called, and was assembled, yet was still ignorant of the apostles' whereabouts. In the meantime the news of the apostles' activities had spread abroad, and was now reported to the Sanhedrin.

Ye put in prison. This came almost as a taunt to the Jewish leaders: You put them in prison, but they are busy doing in the Temple what you have forbidden them to do anywhere.

Standing. The clause reads literally, "In the temple standing and teaching," referring to the command of the angel (v. 20). They were acting like men who knew what work they must do, a work that had been temporarily interfered with, but to which they came back as quickly as possible. Their teaching of the people was the offense that so much incensed the Sadducees. Had the apostles simply worshiped, keeping their new-found faith to themselves, they might have been left undisturbed. But they had received a commission, and were impelled to carry it out. They must propagate their faith. To suffer persecution for sharing the treasure of faith is far better than to suffer a guilty conscience for hiding it "under a bushel" (Matt. 5:15).

26. The captain with the officers. See on chs. 4:1; 5:22.

Without violence. The apostles set an example of unresisting acquiescence, even though with the tide of feeling evidently in their favor they might easily have raised a popular tumult. The miracles recently wrought through them, and their ideal communal life, had helped to win favor for the new faith. In their attitude of nonresistance they followed the example of their Master. In coming peacefully before the Sanhedrin they had the best opportunity to proclaim the gospel to ears that otherwise might never have heard the saving message.

Feared the people. Compare on Matt. 21:26, 46. There was abundant evidence of the favor in which the people held the believers at this time.

Stoned. Apparently the people were as ready to stone the officers as the priests were to stone the apostles.

27. High priest asked. As far as the record shows, the Sanhedrin avoided the topic of the apostles' release. They either did not believe there was supernatural intervention in this case or demurred referring to it. Their attitude is not surprising, for they had already refused to believe in a greater miracle--the resurrection of the One whom they had crucified.

28. Straitly command you. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading, "we commanded you with a command." This expression is an echo of a common Hebrew idiom, and suggests that Luke may be giving a literal translation of a question originally put in Aramaic. The charge had been given to Peter and John only (ch. 4:18), but word of it had gone to all the Twelve. The apostles had declared that they would not abide by the command, and had continued to preach with boldness (ch. 4:19, 20, 31). They were obeying a higher authority, their Lord (Matt. 28:19, 20; Acts 1:8).

Not teach in this name. Compare on chs. 3:16; 4:17. This was the apostles' great offense. The Jews had commanded that the name should not even be mentioned. It was the name of Him whom they knew they had crucified, who was now being proclaimed as alive, and whose followers were doing mighty works that could not be denied. This name, and the activity centering on it, was the point of the Sadducees' attack.

Filled Jerusalem. Here was an unconscious testimony from their enemies themselves that the apostles had worked faithfully and successfully to fulfill the first part of Christ's command (cf. ch. 1:8), by proclaiming the gospel in Jerusalem.

Doctrine. Rather, "teaching," the same word in the original that is translated "doctrine" in Matt. 7:28. But the "teaching" in general was rapidly taking on the quality and meaning of doctrine in the modern sense, as illustrated in 1 Tim. 4:16.

Intend. Rather, "ye want." This was not true. Peter wanted their salvation, not their condemnation.

This man's blood. They avoided mentioning the name of Jesus. This may have been through scorn, because they despised the crucified Galilean, or through guilt, because they knew their responsibility for His death, or through fear, because they knew how powerful the name had proved to be. Peter had previously and without hesitation charged them with crucifying this Jesus (chs. 2:36; 3:13-15; 4:10), making their scorn empty and their fear reasonable. Had their position been just, these priestly judges would have been dealing out penalties; but they found themselves in the position of culprits who were anticipating accusation. In their ears must have rung the terrible cry they uttered in Pilate's judgment hall, "His blood be on us, and on our children" (Matt. 27:25). They had already brought "this man's blood" upon themselves.

29. Peter and the other apostles. Literally, "Peter and the apostles." The wording "Peter and the apostles" does not imply either that Peter was excluded from the apostles or that he was superior to them. Undoubtedly, he was the most active in all the foregoing scenes, and his name and personality are naturally prominent in the narrative.

We ought to obey God. Rather, "We must," with a sense of moral compulsion (cf. ch. 1:16). This is an even plainer statement of the argument previously used by Peter and John (ch. 4:19), with a yet greater stress upon the fact that they could not do other than choose to obey God, regardless of consequences. They had the command of Jesus in the Great Commission, and the challenge to be witnesses for Him (ch. 1:8), and more lately, the explicit command of the angel (ch. 5:20). Jesus had laid down the principle that both Caesar and God were to be obeyed. Caesar must be obeyed in respect to what is his due, and God in respect to what is His due (Matt. 22:21). But the Christian cannot serve two masters (Matt. 6:24; Luke 16:13). Since only one master can receive ultimate allegiance, that master must be God. This basic principle Peter is making very clear. Just as the leaders of the Sanhedrin had not deigned to mention the name of Jesus, so Peter does not set their names in the wording of this principle. He simply says "men," even such men of authority as those before whom he is standing. He regards the members of the Sanhedrin as men who once were agents of God, but who have now lost sight of their duty to God.

Luther declared at the council of Worms, "My conscience has been taken captive by the word of God, and I am neither able nor willing to recant, since it is neither safe nor right to act against conscience. God help me. Amen" (quoted in E. G. Schwiebert, Luther and His Times, p. 505). These are noble words, illustrating a noble principle, revealing a noble experience. May presentday Christians emulate it.

30. God of our fathers. The apostles did not disassociate themselves from Israel. They were serving the same God as the Sanhedrin claimed to serve (cf. ch. 3:13).

Raised up. There are two possible interpretations of these words. They may refer to God's gift of Christ in the Incarnation (cf. ch. 3:22), or they may refer to God's act in raising Christ from the dead (cf. chs. 10:40; 13:37). Both interpretations are admissible.

Ye slew. In the Greek, "ye" is emphatic, contrasting their action with what the Lord had done. The word "slew" intimates that the guilt of the crucifixion was as strongly upon the Jews as if they themselves had performed the act.

Hanged. The phrase reads literally, "ye slew, having hanged upon a tree." The expression describes the Roman mode of execution, not the Jewish. This wording is found in the LXX of Deut. 21:23, where it is used in a wider sense, including such forms of punishment as hanging or impaling. However, the Jews hanged only those who were already dead (Deut. 21:22, 23; Joshua 10:26). The phrase "hanged on a tree," used once more by Peter (Acts 10:39), does not occur again in the NT. However, in his description of the vicarious atonement (1 Peter 2:24), Peter uses the word "tree" for "cross": "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree." See on Acts 16:24; cf. Gal. 3:13.

But the sinner, seeking his Lord, knows that the blame cannot be fastened on Jew or Roman, but rather that it was his own sins that slew his Lord. Christ, who knew no sin, became sin for us, that by a pricelessly gracious exchange we might receive the righteousness of God through Him (2 Cor. 5:21).

31. Exalted. Gr. hupsooµ, a word used in John 3:14; 12:32 in the sense of "lifted up," and in Phil 2:9 and the LXX of Isa. 52:13, with the meaning "exalted." Peter has referred to these two definitions (cf. Acts 2:33), and now he proceeds to deal with the second.

With his right hand. Or, "at his right hand" (see on ch. 2:33). The right hand is a common Biblical figure for authority and might (cf. Ex. 15:6).

Prince. See on ch. 3:15. The title of sovereignty is closely united with the title that pledges salvation. Christ desires to rule over men that He might be their Saviour. We cannot have Him as our Saviour unless He rules over us, and if He governs our lives He will save us. His two offices are inseparable.

Saviour. For the meaning of this title see on Matt. 1:21.

To give repentance. Note the basic unity of the teaching of the apostles with that of John the Baptist and of Jesus (see on Matt. 3:2; 4:17). The record of apostolic teaching presents a more complete revelation of the way in which forgiveness had been provided--through the vicarious death of the Saviour.

Forgiveness of sins. Rather, "the taking away of sins" (see on ch. 2:38). Repentance is a necessary prelude to forgiveness. Forgiveness is a joint gift from the Father and the Son (see on Mark 2:7-11). A righteous and just God cannot accept a sinner into His presence except as the sinner by faith knows Jesus Christ as the sin bearer (1 Peter 2:24) and accepts Him as his personal Saviour (Rom. 3:23-26). Through His work as sin bearer the sins of the repentant one are remitted, or taken away (see on John 1:29), and he stands justified in His sight.

32. His witnesses. Textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for omitting "his," and also for the addition of "in him" or "to him." See on ch. 1:8. "These things" refers to the great facts of salvation--the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus--as mentioned in ch. 5:30, 31.

Also the Holy Ghost. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) omitting "also." Christ had declared while on earth that the Holy Ghost "shall testify of me" (John 15:26; see on John 16:13, 14). The Holy Spirit did this for the apostles by bringing "all things" to their "remembrance" (John 14:26), and by giving them enlightenment as to how Christ's experience on earth had fulfilled the prophecies. However, the Holy Spirit was also witnessing for Christ through the powers that had possessed the apostles since the outpouring at Pentecost. The Spirit also gave inward witness to the resurrection, in the believers' hearts. See on Acts 4:33.

God hath given. The apostles understood that the Spirit came from the Father (see on John 14:26; 15:26; Acts 1:4).

To them that obey him. Not only to the apostles but to all who sincerely follow God's guidance, and therefore obey Him. The obedience of the creature to the Creator is the foundation and essence of right relations with God. The angels obey God (Ps. 103:20, 21), but in love, not in cold, legal formality (MB 109). Men are to obey (Ps. 103:17, 18; Eccl. 12:13), but in love (John 14:15). Obedience is better than any sacrifice (1 Sam. 15:22). Truth (Rom. 2:8), right doctrine (Rom. 6:17), and the gospel (2 Thess. 1:8; 1 Peter 4:17) are to be obeyed. Eternal salvation, offered by grace and received by faith (Eph. 2:5, 8), is available to those who obey, who are submissive to the will of God (Heb. 5:9). Compare on Acts 5:29. True obedience is revealed by loving obedience to God's holy commandments (1 John 5:3).

33. Cut to the heart. Gr. diarioµ, "to saw asunder," that is, with rage, as in ch. 7:54, the only other place in the NT where this verb is found. Their rage bore eloquent testimony to the truth of the apostles' bold accusations.

Took counsel. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between this and the reading "wished." Already responsible for the blood of Jesus, they now wished to take the lives of His twelve chief followers.

To slay. They wished to put the apostles to death for disobeying the Sanhedrin and for accusing it of Christ's death.

34. Then. Rather, "but" (cf. on v. 13).

Pharisee. In contrast with the high priest's party, which was Sadducean (v. 17). The two religious groups were opposed to each other.

Gamaliel. Derived from the Heb. Gamli'el, "my reward is God." Gamaliel was the grandson of the famous Hillel (see Vol. V, p. 97), and a renowned teacher and prominent Pharisee in his own right. The mantle of Hillel appears to have fallen upon his shoulders, and he exercised leadership in his party from about a.d. 25 to 50. There seems little basis for the claim that he was one of four presidents of the Great Sanhedrin at Jerusalem, since the supreme office was always held by the high priest in the times prior to a.d. 70 (see v. 27). But there is no doubt that he was an influential man and greatly honored by the Jews. He was the first to receive the title of Rabban. This indicates the esteem in which his countrymen held him. Jewish tradition reveals him as the ideal Pharisee, a worthy representative of Hillel's school, which was more tolerant and less legalistic than the opposing school of Shammai. Paul was privileged to study under him (ch. 22:3). The teacher's influence may possibly be traced in the development of his famous pupil. This Gamaliel was known as Haz-Zaqen, "the Older," to distinguish him from his grandson, "the Younger," who flourished about a.d. 90.

Doctor. That is, teacher.

Apostles. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between this and the reading "men," which would accord more exactly with Gamaliel's words. Gamaliel wished them to be out of the council room while he and his colleagues discussed freely what should be done. The practice of thus deliberating in the absence of the accused seems to have been common (cf. ch. 4:15). The report of what occurred while the apostles were out of the room may have come to Luke from some member of the council, such as Nicodemus (AA 104, 105), or directly by inspiration.

35. Men of Israel. A familiar and persuasive form of address, used in speaking to equals (cf. ch. 2:22). Contrast Peter's approach when addressing the same body of men (ch. 4:8).

Take heed to yourselves. Or, "be careful." Not to warn of impending danger, but to indicate the need for thought before action. But compare the Lord's use of the same formula (Matt. 6:1; 7:15; 10:17), and Paul's (1 Tim. 1:4; 4:13; Titus 1:14).

36. Theudas. Possibly a contraction of the Greek name Theodorus, "gift of God." The only known non-Biblical reference to a man of this name comes from Josephus. He tells of an insurrection led by a Theudas who, claiming to be a prophet, persuaded "a great part of the people" to follow him. He promised to divide the Jordan and give them an easy passage. The procurator, Cuspius Fadus (a.d. 44 or 45), quickly suppressed the rising, captured and executed its leader, and sent his head to Jerusalem (Antiquities xx. 5. 1).

Now, according to Gamaliel, who is quoted by Luke, Theudas came before Judas of Galilee (v. 37), who rebelled "in the days of the taxing," that is, in a.d. 6 or 7. It is not possible, therefore, to make the accounts of Luke and Josephus refer to the same event. Few scholars would attribute error to Josephus at this point, and there is no valid reason to accuse Luke of a factual error here. Luke, quoting Gamaliel, speaks of 400 men joining themselves to Theudas, whereas Josephus distinctly mentions that "a great part of the people" followed the false prophet. Some have seen in this a suggestion that the two writers refer to different events.

37. After this man. That is, after the rebellion of Theudas.

Judas of Galilee. There was such a rebel, whom Josephus (Antiquities xviii. 1. 1) calls a Gaulonite, that is, of the country east of Galilee. But in other passages (ibid. xx. 5. 2; War ii. 8. 1 [118]) he is called a Galilean, so there is no conflict between Luke and Josephus here. The insurrection of Judas, which aimed at the complete independence of Israel from Rome, was a serious one. The movement forbade any payment of taxes to Caesar. Any weapons might be used in the cause of freedom. The war was described as a religious war. Judas and his followers were affiliated with the Pharisees, and his movement, although defeated, and the leader killed, gave origin to the sect, or party, of the Zealots (see Vol. V, pp. 54, 55).

Taxing. Rather, "enrollment," or "census." See on Luke 2:1. This was not the one mentioned in Luke 2:2. The revolt of Judas came about seven years later (Josephus Antiquities xviii. 1. 1; cf. Vol. V, p. 241). Judas declared that this taxation was the beginning of slavery, and called on the whole nation to assert its liberty.

Much people. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) among "much people," "many people," and simply "people."

Perished. Josephus does not record the fate of Judas and his party, but Gamaliel could have known his end, and was qualified to give the details preserved in this verse.

38. Refrain. Literally, "stand off." Gamaliel's argument was logical enough. Resistance to the movement represented by the apostles was either needless or hopeless. If needless, why waste the energy? If hopeless, why face the risk?

Come to nought. Rather, "be overthrown." This also serves to emphasize the repetition of the same verb in the succeeding clause in v. 39.

39. Of God. Gamaliel's typically rabbinic advice at least leaves room for the divine origin of the apostles' work.

Fight against God. Gr. theomachoi, "God fighters."

40. They agreed. The Sadducees would probably have preferred a more vigorous course, but there were many Pharisees in the Sanhedrin, and the middle course, which Gamaliel had recommended, was adopted.

Called the apostles. That is, back into the judgment hall.

Beaten them. Probably with 39 stripes (see on Deut. 25:1-3; 2 Cor. 11:24), a painful ordeal. The Sanhedrin evidently judged the apostles worthy of punishment, either for disobeying the command of Acts 4:18, or for disturbing the peace by preaching in the Temple (ch. 5:25), or for having escaped from prison--or on all counts. This appears to be the first taste of physical suffering endured by the church.

Should not speak. The same prohibition as in ch. 4:18, with the added sting of the lash to emphasize it.

In the name. See on chs. 2:38; 3:6, 16; 4:12. The Jewish leaders were learning to dread the power that accompanied this name.

41. Departed. Not back to prison, but to freedom.

Rejoicing. Thus exhibiting the spirit of the final beatitude, Matt. 5:11, 12. In contradiction of the usual emotions, they were glad to suffer; indeed, they felt honored to suffer in Christ's cause. This spirit animated countless martyrs who followed them. The Twelve were not unprepared for such treatment. They must have remembered their Master's warning recorded in Matt. 10:17-20.

His name. Rather, "the name" (see on ch. 4:12).

42. Daily. Literally, "Every day."

In the temple. Note their boldness. They returned to the place in which they had been arrested on two occasions (chs. 3:11; 4:3; 5:26).

In every house. Gr. kat' oikon, "house by house," or "at home," "privately." This probably refers to the Christian assemblies held in private homes.

Ceased not. They needed no urging in their work of witness.

Teach and preach. Rather, "teaching and preaching," with an emphasis on continuity. The word for "preach" is, literally, "evangelizing," as in Acts 8:4, 12, 25; Rom. 10:15.

Jesus Christ. Literally, "the Christ Jesus." They taught and preached that the Messiah had come in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. This was the constant content of the message given by the early church.

Ellen G. White Comments

1, 2 2T 128; 4T 462

1-3GC 44

1-4AA 72

1-11CS 312; SR 255; 1T 529

1-42AA 71-86

3 4T 470; 5T 103

3, 4 4T 463

4, 5, 7-11AA 73

8 1T 221

12 AA 78

14 TM 68

14-18AA 78

16 MH 139

17, 18 TM 68

17-205T 713

18 SL 62

18, 19 EW 194

19 AA 79

19, 20 TM 69

19-21SR 255

20 SL 62; TM 268; 6T 434

20, 21 AA 80

20-23EW 195

20-26TM 71

22, 23 AA 81

25-28AA 81; EW 195; SR 256

27-34TM 72

28 DA 672; GW 284

28-33TM 268

29 AH 293; GC 204, 594; 1T 201, 361

29-32EW 195; SR 257

29-34AA 82

31 COL 120, 264; DA 175; SC 26; TM 20

35-39SR 257

35-41AA 83

38-40TM 72

38-42EW 196

40-42SR 258; TM 73

41 DA 508; 3T 406; 5T 87, 213

Acts Chapter 6

1 The apostles, desirous to have the poor regarded for their bodily sustenance, as also careful themselves to dispense the word of God, the food of the soul, 3 appoint the office of deaconship to seven chosen men. 5 Of whom Stephen, a man full of faith, and of the Holy Ghost, is one. 12 Who is taken of those, whom he confounded in disputing, 13 and after falsely accused of blasphemy against the law and the temple.

1. And. Rather, "but," for the verse points a contrast to ch. 5:42.

In those days. That is, the days of ch. 5:41, 42. Luke handles his historical materials with notable smoothness. He has shown the growth of the church under the power of the Holy Spirit, and the great influx of new believers. He has shown how the economy of the church, for a time at least, took on a communal form. Chapter 6 shows some of the difficulties arising out of that arrangement, but is in turn an introduction to the experience of Stephen, which itself is introductory to the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, and his subsequent missionary activities. The narrative is clearly historical. The account of ch. 6 is closely related to that of ch. 5:14, but the length of the interval between the two events is uncertain.

Disciples. The first time this name is used of Christians in the Acts. The disciples of the Gospels have become apostles, and the term "disciples" has passed to the ordinary believer.

Multiplied. The phrase may be better translated, "when the disciples were increasing in number," that is, by almost daily additions. Such increase naturally would bring new problems. It had been a simple thing to care for the needs of the apostolic family from the purse that Judas carried. It was more complicated, though not impossible, to care for the early group of believers at Pentecost. But the membership in the Christian society had now so increased that the care of the needy took all the time of the apostles, to the exclusion of higher duties.

Murmuring. Not merely a petty complaining, but a protest sufficiently vocal to warrant serious concern. The record places no blame upon the apostles, for they deserved none. The sudden growth in membership had outstripped their resources and precipitated the difficulty.

Grecians. Gr. Helleµnistai, "Hellenists," that is, Greek-speaking Jews, or "Grecian Jews" (RV). NT usage distinguishes carefully between them and Helleµnes, who were Greeks by race (John 12:20). The Hellenists were Jews of the Dispersion (see Vol. V, pp. 59, 60; see on John 7:35; Acts 2:8) who not only spoke Greek but had absorbed Greek culture. They could have been Jews who had been born in lands where Greek was the common language, and so did not know Hebrew or Aramaic, and instead of joining in the Hebrew services in Palestine, had their own synagogues in Jerusalem. They could have been Greek-speaking proselytes. In either case they were converts from Judaism, for up to this time the gospel had not been presented to the Gentiles. Many of the converts of the day of Pentecost must have belonged to this group, as did Barnabas (ch. 4:36) and others whose names are specifically mentioned in the narrative (ch. 6:5).

These Hellenistic Jews read the LXX version of the OT, the version most frequently quoted in the NT. They were usually most zealous, in contrast with many of the local Jews. They came at great sacrifice to worship at the sacred places of Jerusalem, whereas to the Palestinian Jews the Temple precincts too often became commonplace (cf. ch. 21:27, 28). Jewish rabbinical tradition made provision for the saying of the Shema, the Hebrew confession of Jehovah (Deut. 6:4), in Hellenistic Greek. See Vol. V, p. 57.

Hebrews. These were Jews who, in contrast with the Hellenists, had been born in Palestine, and who lived there and spoke the language (Aramaic) that the NT calls Hebrew (see ch. 22:2). See Vol. I, p. 30.

Their widows. That is, of the Hellenists. Since Palestinian Jews were in the majority in the infant church, the needy among the Hellenists might without any ill intent have been left unassisted, because of differences in language and customs. The care of widows is stressed in Scripture (see on Ex. 22:22; Deut. 14:29; Isa. 1:17; Luke 18:3). Here the reference may be to the care of all poor and dependent persons. Obviously the communal economy in the church required some sort of organized supervision of the common fund that had been created (Acts 4:32). Later, the church formulated rules for the care of its widows (1 Tim. 5:3-16).

Ministration. Gr. diakonia, "service," "ministering," translated "distribution" in RSV, and "relief" in ch. 11:29. The word is related to diakonos, "ministrant," or "deacon." This help was given daily. Because of pressing needs and perhaps lack of storage space, it was doubtless necessary to distribute the aid every day, and possibly from various points in the city. Probably there was a continuous stream of gifts coming in and of donations being passed out. The drain upon the apostles' time must have been great. But there is no hint that the apostles were guilty of favoritism or neglect, nor that any resentment was felt against them.

2. The twelve. Matthias was obviously the twelfth apostle (see on ch. 1:24-26).

Called the multitude. When the apostles heard the complaints, and realized their seriousness, they did not pause, apparently, to vindicate themselves. They acted promptly. They may have remembered the precedent set by Moses (Ex. 18:25), and like him, they resolved to delegate authority. By "the multitude of the disciples" it is not to be supposed that every individual Christian in Jerusalem and its environs had to be gathered to a meeting, but that a special meeting was called, to which all came who could, and at which the apostles presented the problem and their plan. The fund concerning whose distribution complaint had arisen, had been contributed to by many, and therefore the many were rightly consulted. From this procedure in a single central place there naturally arose the representative form of church government (AA 96).

Reason. Gr. areston, "pleasing," conveying the idea that it was not "proper" that the apostles should spend so much of their time dealing with material and business matters.

Leave. Gr. kataleipo, "to forsake," "to abandon." The Greek word is an emphatic one, and suggests that much time of the apostles had been taken up in caring for the needy.

The word. The Twelve recognized their prime responsibility--to minister the word of God through preaching and teaching.

Serve tables. In the Jewish synagogues three men were appointed to care for the poor.

3. Wherefore. Rather, "but."

Look ye out. The Twelve placed the responsibility squarely upon the shoulders of the believers, who were to make a choice from among their own number.

Seven men. It was reasonable for the apostles to think of the number seven. There was a general reverence for that number among the Jews. In later times, at least, seven was the number of persons called upon to manage public business in Jewish towns (Talmud Megillah 26a, Soncino ed., p. 157). More simply, it may have been that only seven men were needed at that time.

The men thus appointed are not called "deacons" in the NT. When referred to again, it is as "the seven" (ch. 21:8), almost as though they were a distinct body. But they were the origin of the class called "deacons" (AA 89, 90), and their functions were clearly analogous to those of the deacons later described by Paul (see 1 Tim. 3:8-13). In some churches, as at Rome, the number of deacons was later fixed at seven (Eusebius Ecclesiastical History vi. 43. 11). The council of Neo-Caesarea (a.d. 314; Canon 14) calls for seven deacons in a locality. Many commentators think that the seven men here chosen correspond to the "elders" mentioned in Acts 11:30; 14:23 and onward. See p. 25; AA 89, 90.

Of honest report. Literally, "attested," or "having witness borne them," that is, well reported among their fellows (cf. 1 Tim. 5:10). The word is rendered "of good report" in Acts 10:22. The situation would be in no way bettered, unless men of unimpeachable standing were called to the task of a more equitable distribution. They must be men of honesty and efficiency, and acceptable to their fellows. For the inspired list of qualifications of deacons as well as of elders (bishops) see 1 Tim. 3:1-14; Titus 1:5-11.

Full of the Holy Ghost. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading "full of spirit." However, v. 5 declares that one of the seven, Stephen, was full of the Holy Spirit, so the expression here may also be taken as referring to the Holy Spirit. It was most important that for this first expansion in the organization of the church beyond the apostolate, the right men should be chosen. Next to a good reputation, each was expected to have the infilling of the Holy Spirit. Obviously the apostles conceived of the Spirit's working as being wider than simply the gift of prophecy and of tongues.

Wisdom. Not only must the men be able to look after the spiritual wants of the poor; they were to show prudence, discretion, economy, wisdom in their work. Paul rated wisdom as a gift of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:8). James stressed it as a gift of God (James 1:5), to be accompanied by good conduct or "conversation" (James 3:13). In Acts, apart from this verse, the word "wisdom" is used only of (Acts 6:10) or by Stephen (ch. 7:10, 22). He is also specifically said to be "full of faith" (ch. 6:5).

Whom we may appoint. Literally, "whom we shall set over." The apostles were willing to appoint the men chosen by the "brethren." Such an attitude promoted mutual confidence between leaders and people.

4. But we. In marked contrast with the seven.

Give ourselves continually. Or, "persevere." The same word is used several times in describing earnest conduct on the part of the early Christians (cf. ch. 1:14; 2:42, 46).

To prayer. These godly men, with the memory of Christ's prayer life still fresh in their minds, placed the need for prayer first on their list. But it should be remembered that prayer includes the public worship of the church, as well as private devotion.

Ministry. Gr. diakonia, the same word as used in v. 1. The seven were to minister material blessings while the Twelve were to be left free to minister the spiritual benefits derived from the Word of God. This they would do through preaching and various forms of teaching. This clearly explains what is meant by "leave the word of God" (v. 2).

5. Pleased. There had obviously been no intent to deprive or neglect anyone, and there is now general rejoicing that the problem is recognized and an acceptable remedy suggested.

They chose. See on v. 3. The names of the chosen seven were Hellenistic, and it is possible that the bearers of the names were Hellenists (see on v. 1). However, many Jews bore Greek names, even among the apostles, such as Andrew and Philip (see on Mark 3:18). Furthermore, there is no evidence that the seven limited their ministry to the Hellenistic believers. As to their later work, we hear again only of Stephen and Philip.

Stephen. Gr. Stephanos, "chaplet," "coronet," "wreath of victory." This name was not uncommon, and appears on ancient inscriptions.

Tradition has it that Stephen and Philip were both of the Seventy, sent into every city and village to announce that the Messiah had come (Luke 10:1-11). It is possible that Samaria was the scene of their ministry (see on Luke 10:1). Hellenistic Jews were probably better received in Samaria than were Palestinian Jews, and this might account for the sending of Philip as an evangelist to the Samaritans (Acts 8:5).

Philip. Gr. Philippos, "lover of horses" (see on Mark 3:18). The name was also that of one of the Twelve and of two of Herod the Great's sons. It was frequent in the ruling house of Macedonia in previous centuries. Nothing is known of Philip's previous history, there being only the tradition that he had belonged to the Seventy (see above, under "Stephen"). Paul visited him in Caesarea (Acts 21:8), and he was probably long a leader of the church there. That Philip had four grown daughters at the time of Paul's visit suggests that he was already married at the time of his appointment.

Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas. Of these four nothing is known, nor is there anything upon which to build a conjecture.

Nicolas. Gr. Nikolaos, "master of the people." The first non-Jewish Christian whose name is recorded.

Proselyte. Doubtless Nicolas was a "proselyte of righteousness," one who had completely accepted Judaism. As such he would be well grounded in the Jewish religion. See Vol. V, p. 62. Regarding the tradition that this Nicolas was a founder of the sect of the Nicolaitans see Vol. VI, p. 58; see on Rev. 2:15.

Antioch. This Syrian city, with its many Jews, had close ties with Palestine. Herod the Great had built a splendid colonnade along the whole length of its main street. Special interest attaches to the fact that Nicolas came from Antioch, since it is the place where Christians received their name (ch. 11:26). The city later became the headquarters for the early missionary work of the church (see on ch. 11:19).

6. Whom they set. Probably for examination, instruction, and of course for ordination.

Prayed. The Greek makes clear that it was the apostles who prayed before laying their hands on the seven chosen men. The early church took no major step without first praying (see on ch. 1:14, 24; 2:42).

Laid their hands. This is the first mention of the act in the NT. In the OT, however, it had already been used for the act of blessing (see on Gen. 48:13, 14), in the consecration of the priests (see on Num. 8:10), and in the dedication of Joshua to leadership (see on Num. 27:18, 23). The significance of the act was therefore not unknown to the faithful Jew. To the Christian there was added import in that the Master often healed the sick by laying His hands on them (Mark 6:5; Luke 4:40; 13:13; cf. Mark 16:18). Similarly, He blessed the children (Matt. 19:15). The apostles, then, had good precedent for blessing and dedicating the seven by the laying on of hands. They continued to use this method in similar situations, as may be seen in Acts 8:17; 13:3; 19:6. In the apostolic church hands were laid on men in ordination to the ministry (1 Tim. 4:14; 5:22; 2 Tim. 1:6). It appears from Heb. 6:2 that the practice crystallized into an accepted procedure in church polity. It should signify a close spiritual connection between the Lord and the one on whom the hands are laid (AA 161, 162).

7. Increased. Rather, "kept increasing," indicating gradual but continuous growth. The statement implies more than the numerical increase mentioned in the next clause. It was the word of God that increased. The "word of God" here refers to the teachings of Christ as set forth by the apostles. Subsequent verses show that the seven were active in the work of teaching. The work of the deacons, and especially Stephen, marks a definite expansion and development of the Christian proclamation (see ch. 6:8; 8:5).

Number of the disciples. The growth of the church had been extraordinary: "These were added ... about three thousand souls" (ch. 2:41); "the Lord added to the church daily" (v. 47); "many of them ... believed; ... about five thousand" (ch. 4:4); "believers were the more added" (ch. 5:14). Now the number of church members is "multiplied in Jerusalem greatly."

Company of the priests. The fact here stated is significant. As far as is known, none of Christ's immediate followers was a priest, and no priest is named among the early converts. One would have expected that some of the plain speaking of the apostles and deacons would have aroused the bitter enmity of all the priests. And doubtless many of them did become hostile. But under the power of the Holy Spirit, such preaching drew "a great company" of them to Christ.

Obedient. Rather, "kept being obedient," suggesting a continual flow of priestly converts. For the obedience necessary see on ch. 5:32.

Faith. Opinion is divided about the correct interpretation of the phrase "obedient to the faith." The objective view holds that "faith" refers to the body of Christian doctrine to which the priests gave their assent and by which they ordered their lives (cf. Acts 13:8; 14:22; 16:5; Gal. 1:23). Many commentators, however, believe that "faith" is here used in its subjective sense, and that Luke is speaking of the priests displaying "faith in Jesus Christ." This harmonizes with general NT usage (cf. Acts 24:24; Rom. 1:5; 16:26; Gal. 3:2). Such faith embraces Christian doctrine, for it is such doctrine that enables men to display an intelligent faith in Jesus. Compare on Rom. 1:5.

8. Full of faith and power. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading "full of grace and power," although v. 5 states that Stephen was "full of faith." The "grace" was not only the divine attribute (cf. on John 1:14, 16) but the grace and beauty of spirit with which he presented the gospel message (cf. Luke 4:22). The "power" was that of working miracles. It appears that Stephen had as full a possession of the gifts of the Spirit as had the Twelve.

Wonders and miracles. Or, "wonders and signs" (see on ch. 2:19). These miracles demonstrated the power with which Stephen was filled. There is no way of knowing how long a time passed between Stephen's ordination as a deacon, and his martyrdom, but it could not have been long.

9. Arose. See on ch. 5:17.

Synagogue. See Vol. V, pp. 56, 57. A synagogue could be founded by ten adults. At a later time there were 12 synagogues in Tiberias, and tradition, with great exaggeration, assigned 480 to Jerusalem. Unreliable as this last figure may be, it at least suggests the great number in the capital city.

Libertines. The present passage is ambiguous in regard to the origin of the Jews who made up "the synagogue of the Libertines." The passage may be translated: "the synagogue called [the synagogue] of the Libertines and of the Cyrenians and of the Alexandrians." This may imply that there was only one synagogue, some of whose worshipers were freedmen, the others from Cyrene and Alexandria. However, this translation may be understood to mean that the synagogue was composed only of Libertines, and that the others mentioned were groups of Jews not organized as synagogues but classified by their places of origin. If either interpretation of this translation is correct, the Libertines may have been the children of Jews who had been carried captive from Palestine to Rome by Pompey in 63 B.C., and who had later been made freedmen (libertini) by their captors.

However, another translation of this passage is possible: "the synagogue called [the synagogue] of the Libertines, both of Cyrenians and of Alexandrians." This would identify the Libertines who made up this synagogue as coming from Cyrene and Alexandria, both localities in which there was an unusually large Jewish population.

Archeological evidence indicates that there was at least one synagogue in Jerusalem before a.d. 70 that was specifically for the use of Hellenistic Jews. A Greek inscription has been discovered in Jerusalem telling of the construction of a synagogue by a certain Theodotus, which was intended particularly for the use of Jews from the Dispersion. The inscription reads as follows:

"Theodotus, [son of] Vettenus, priest and ruler of the synagogue, son of a ruler of the synagogue, grandson of a ruler of the synagogue, built the synagogue for reading of the Law and for teaching of the commandments, and the guest-chamber, and the rooms, and the water supplies, for a lodging for those who have need from foreign lands, which [synagogue] his fathers and the elders and Simonides founded"

(see Adolf Deissmann, Light From the Ancient East, pp. 439-441).

Although it cannot be proved, it is possible that this synagogue was that of the Libertines mentioned in the present passage. Whether this is true or not, the inscription witnesses to the existence of such a Hellenistic synagogue in Jerusalem as the one with whose members Stephen came into conflict.

Cyrenians. Rather, "of the Cyrenians." There was a large Jewish population at Cyrene, on the north coast of Africa, between Egypt and Carthage. Josephus (Antiquities xiv. 7. 2 [115]) quotes Strabo, the classical geographer, as stating that there were four classes of citizens in the state of Cyrene, of which the Jews were one. The Cyrenian Jews had been noted for the generous gifts they sent to the Temple in Jerusalem, and had appealed to Augustus Caesar for protection against irregularities in the taxes imposed by governors of the province who had tried to intercept their gifts (ibid. xvi. 6. 5). Simon of Cyrene, who carried Christ's cross, apparently was such a Jew (see on Matt. 27:32). Cyrenian Jews were present at Pentecost (Acts 2:10), and such Jews are mentioned as preaching the gospel to Gentiles in Antioch in Syria (ch. 11:20).

Alexandrians. Rather, "of the Alexandrians." Probably in no city of the empire, except Jerusalem and perhaps Rome, were the Jews more numerous and influential than in the city of Alexandria (see Vol. V, p. 59). The Jewish population there at the time of the apostles is estimated at 100,000. They had their own quarter, made up of one of the five districts into which the city of Alexandria was divided. They were governed by an ethnarch of their own (Josephus Antiquities xiv. 7. 2 [117]), as though they constituted an autonomous republic. Their Roman rulers recognized them as citizens (ibid. 10. 1 [188]). It was in Alexandria that the OT had been translated into the Greek language (see Vol. I, p. 39). Philo, the Jewish philosopher and writer, lived there during the first Christian century, and the city was also the birthplace of Apollos (ch 18:24).

Cilicia. At the southeast corner of Asia Minor, with Tarsus as one of its principal towns, Cilicia was the land of Paul's birth. Here lived many Jews, descendants of 2,000 families whom Antiochus the Great had brought into Asia Minor (Josephus Antiquities xii. 3. 4 [149, 150]) to secure the allegiance of the province for him, and perhaps to aid in its defense. It is obvious from ch. 7:58-60 that Saul of Tarsus was in Jerusalem at this time, and he seems to have been one of those who disputed with Stephen. Doubtless the strong arguments of Stephen led Saul to biter opposition, although there is evidence that he was unconsciously drawn by them (AA 101).

Asia. In the NT this refers to the Roman province located in what is now Asia Minor. It included areas that had formerly been known as Lydia and Ionia, with Ephesus as the chief city. Jews of Asia had been present at Pentecost (ch. 2:9). These Jews later demonstrated their zeal in defense of the sacredness of the Temple (ch. 21:27).

Disputing. Literally, "seeking together," "questioning," "disputing." The dispute was initiated by the Jews of the Dispersion. These were men who had come to Jerusalem in an intense spirit of devotion, for the farther men are from the center of their devotion, the more zealous they sometimes are. There must have been something in the teachings of Stephen that made them feel that he was lessening, if not supplanting, the singular spiritual importance of the Temple in Jerusalem (see on ch. 6:13; 7:1). The disputants, coming from their synagogues, would be well equipped to discuss theological matters with the Christians.

10. Not able to resist. Literally, "were not strong to stand against." This experience fulfilled Christ's promise to His followers (Luke 21:15).

Wisdom. Compare on v. 3. In the Gospels, wisdom is ascribed to the Lord (Matt. 13:54; Luke 2:40, 52), and Matt. 12:42 speaks of "the wisdom of Solomon." But Stephen was the first teacher in the new society to whom wisdom was thus particularly ascribed. With such a careful writer as Luke, the word must have specific significance. It suggests that Stephen possessed a singularly clear vision of truth, and an ability to bring out truths not previously perceived.

Spirit. The primary reference here is to the inspired energy with which Stephen spoke. Compare with John the Baptist, who worked "in the spirit and power of Elias" (Luke 1:17).

11. Suborned. Gr. hupoballoµ, "to put under." The word was sometimes used for the act of employing, instigating, or instructing a secret agent. Compare RSV, "they secretly instigated."

Blasphemous words. See on Matt. 12:31. The charge is made more explicit in Acts 6:13. The charge was built on a distortion of truth, as had been that against Jesus. Christ was accused of blasphemy (see on Matt. 26:65) because He called Himself the Son of God, made Himself equal with God (Matt. 26:63, 64; John 5:18), and allegedly threatened to "destroy the temple" (Matt. 26:61). Each of these counts in the indictment was constructed from words that Jesus had actually spoken. Stephen may have said things that seemed to give foundation for the accusations. He may have taught that the need for a temple had ceased (cf. Acts 7:48), even as Jesus had inferred in talking with the woman of Samaria (John 4:21). This would assail the very foundations of Judaism, and would naturally arouse strong opposition. In the face of such a teaching, Sadducees and Pharisees would unite in opposition. Punishment for blasphemy was death by stoning (Lev. 24:16).

Moses. That is, the systems that Moses instituted, as recorded in the Pentateuch. Note that Moses is mentioned before God. The legalists were more concerned with their ceremonies than with their God.

12. Stirred up. Literally, "they threw into commotion." By means of these false charges they provoked the people among whom Stephen had performed miracles (cf. v. 8).

Elders. These had already been incensed against the apostles (ch. 4:5-7), and would need but little encouragement to turn on Stephen.

Came upon him. Unexpectedly, suddenly, as the scribes and Pharisees came upon Jesus in the Temple (Luke 20:1).

Caught him. Or, "seized him."

Council. As with Jesus, the hearing before the council preceded a violent end (ch. 7:57). Note how closely Stephen's experience of martyrdom parallels that of his Master.

13. False witnesses. See on v. 11.

This man. Spoken contemptuously, probably with a sneer.

Blasphemous words. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of "blasphemous."

Against this holy place. That is, the Temple and its immediate vicinity (see on ch. 3:1).

The law. Stephen must have insisted, as had Jesus (Matt. 5:17-19), and as Paul later did (Acts 24:14-16; 25:8), that Christianity would introduce no change in the basic moral principles of the law that the Jews so loved. Nevertheless, it was clear that the proclamation concerning the Lamb of God implied the end of the sacrificial system as outlined in the law. Such preaching would be interpreted as being destructive of practically everything that the Jews held dear.

14. Have heard him say. Stephen's teachings may have been misunderstood by the honest, and were evidently misapplied by the dishonest. This is not infrequently the case in matters that lead to religious dispute.

This Jesus. Again, a contemptuous reference, though on Christian lips the name must have sounded beautiful (cf. ch. 2:22). Note how the false witnesses credit Stephen with continuing Christ's own preaching.

Shall destroy this place. Compare on Matt. 24:2; 26:61; 27:40. Christ's words, possibly repeated by Stephen, had obviously made a lasting impression on the accusers' minds. Furthermore, although they thought Christ to be dead, they were concerned about His destroying the Temple and changing the customs at some time in the future.

Change the customs. This accusation was probably pressed by the Pharisees, since it deals with "customs" (see Vol. V, pp. 51, 52). The charge, though made against Stephen, is still linked with Jesus of Nazareth and His teachings. They had already accused Stephen concerning the Temple and the law (v. 13). Now they accuse him concerning the "customs" that had gathered around the Temple and the law. They claim that these had been given them by Moses, but such a claim was not true. Irksome restrictions had been loaded on the people, mainly since the return in 536 B.C., nearly a thousand years after Moses' time (see on Mark 7:1-23, particularly on v. 3). It was these traditions that Jesus had scathingly condemned (Matt. 15:1-13).

15. Stedfastly. The word is characteristic of Luke (see on Acts 1:10). Stephen's accusers would naturally gaze intently at him, wondering what he would say in his own defense. The members of the council were surprised at what they saw and heard.

Face of an angel. It is not enough to say that the look on Stephen's face was because of a natural dignity of expression, or even because Stephen was astonishingly tranquil and undisturbed in the presence of grave danger to himself. It must have been that his face was lighted up with a divine brightness. The brightness of angelic messengers is described again and again in Scripture, as with the angelic "young man" of Mark 16:5. Moses' face shone as he came down from Mt. Sinai, where he had been in the very presence of God (Ex. 34:28-35). Even so, Stephen's face was illuminated because of his nearness to Christ and by the light of the vision he was about to have of Jesus standing at the right hand of God (Acts 7:56).

Ellen G. White Comments

1 AA 87, 88

1-4SR 259

1-6WM 275

1-15AA, 87-99; SR 259-264; 7T 252

2 4T 356

2-7AA 89

3 AA 91

4 Ev 91

7 DA 266

7, 8 EW 197; SR 260

8-10AA 97; SR 262

11 SR 263

12, 13 EW 197

13 AA 98

14, 15 AA 99; EW 198

15 AA 116, 495; COL 218; MB 33; PP 329; SL 91; SR 263

Acts Chapter 7

1 Stephen, permitted to answer to the accusation of blasphemy, 2 sheweth that Abraham worshipped God rightly, and how God chose the fathers 20 before Moses was born, and before the tabernacle and temple were built: 37 that Moses himself witnessed of Christ: 44 and that all outward ceremonies were ordained according to the heavenly pattern, to last but for a time: 51 reprehending their rebellion, and murdering of Christ, the Just One, whom the prophets foretold should come into the world. 54 Whereupon they stone him to death, who commendeth his soul to Jesus, and humbly prayeth for them.

1. Are these things so? The high priest's question served to interrupt the astonishment of the onlookers as they beheld Stephen's countenance, but it was normal to the opening of a formal trial, and analogous to the question put to the Lord (Matt. 26:62). The accused was called upon to plead guilty or not guilty, and Stephen's defense follows.

2. He said. Stephen's reply was a declaration of faith. It was also an indictment of his accusers. See Additional Notes at end of chapter, Note 1.

Men, brethren, and fathers. Stephen's address is dignified, yet on a more familiar basis than Peter's (cf. ch. 4:8). The accused man addresses the Jewish leaders as brethren, and pays respect to the elders. Paul used the same words when he addressed the throng from the castle stairs (ch. 22:1).

God of glory. Literally, "God of the glory," that is, the God manifested to Israel in the glory of the pillars of cloud and fire and of the Shekinah (Ex. 13:21, 22; Ex. 40:34, 35). The glory of God is His character (see on Ex. 34:6). This was impressively revealed in the life and work of Jesus Christ (see on Isa. 40:5; John 1:14; cf. James 2:1). The phrase "God of glory" forms a wise opening to Stephen's speech. It rebuts the charge of blasphemy and prepares the way for a fresh concept of the God whom the Jews claimed to worship.

Appeared. Showing that God manifested Himself before the Temple existed. Genesis lists five manifestations to Abraham, aside from those connected with the calls to leave his family and homeland (chs. 12:1-3; 15:7): the promise (ch. 12:7), the covenant (ch. 13:14-17), the covenant sealed (ch. 15), the covenant of circumcision (ch. 17:10), the covenant renewed at Mamre (ch. 18:1).

Mesopotamia. Literally, "between the rivers," the name used for the country lying between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers (cf. on Gen. 24:10). Stephen seems to limit the name to the southern area, above the Persian Gulf. The ancestral home of Abraham is called "Ur of the Chaldees" (Gen. 11:31; see Acts 7:4), and is spoken of as "on the other side of the flood" (Joshua 24:2, 3), that is, beyond the Euphrates. The site of Ur has not yet been identified with certainty.

Charran. The Greek form of the OT Haran (see on Gen. 11:31). Stephen appears to separate Haran from Mesopotamia, although the city was actually in the northwestern part of what is loosely called Mesopotamia.

3. Get thee out. Stephen quotes from Gen. 12:1, but omits "from thy father's house," probably because he applies the passage to Abraham's departure with his father's household from Ur, whereas Genesis refers it to Abraham's leaving his relatives at Haran.

4. Land of the Chaldæans. Approximately the land of Babylonia (see on Gen. 10:22).

When his father was dead. For a discussion of the relationship between this statement and Gen. 11:26, 32; 12:1 see on Gen. 11:26. Terah died at the age of 205 years; Abraham was then 75 years old.

He removed him. That is, God removed Abraham, or caused him to migrate. The Greek is less vague than the English. The change of subject (cf. ch. 6:6) may be noted as more natural in a speaker than a writer. This supports the view that ch. 7 is an actual report of Stephen's speech.

5. None inheritance. This fact is confirmed rather than challenged by Abraham's purchase of a burial site in Machpelah (Gen. 23), for the possession of a grave site can hardly be called an inheritance. Indeed, if he had acquired a possession, he would not have needed to buy a grave site. He made use of the largely unoccupied grazing lands of central and southern Canaan for his large herds of cattle, but such land was not exclusively his, and was certainly not an inheritance.

His foot. The phrase literally reads, "not even a foot's breadth."

Yet he promised. Rather, "but he promised." See Gen. 12:7; 13:15, 16.

For a possession. Rather, "in possession."

No child. Abraham was 75 years old when he left Haran (Gen. 12:4), and was 100 years old when Isaac was born (Gen. 21:5).

6. God spake. The words are substantially as in the LXX of Gen. 15:13, 14.

In a strange land. Referring to both Canaan and Egypt (see on Gen. 15:13).

Four hundred years. See on Gen. 15:13; Ex. 12:40.

7. Shall they come forth. With the natural freedom of narrative Stephen combines the promise to Abraham with a free rendering of the promise given to Moses (Ex. 3:12).

8. The covenant of circumcision. That is, a covenant of which circumcision was the sign (see on Gen. 17:10-14).

Begat Isaac. The birth of Isaac constituted objective evidence that God indeed would fulfill His covenant with Abraham. By circumcising Isaac, Abraham continued to fulfill his responsibilities under the same covenant.

Patriarchs. For the term, see on ch. 2:29. Here the expression is applied to the twelve sons of Jacob, each of whom was the founder of a family.

9. Moved with envy. The record is that his brethren "hated him" (Gen. 37:4, 5) and "envied him" (v. 11). This is the first step in Stephen's argument that the messengers of God have always been opposed by those who were for a given time representatives of the Hebrew nation.

Sold Joseph into Egypt. Actually Joseph was sold to the Midianites and Ishmaelites (Gen. 37:25, 28), but since the result was Joseph's enslavement in Egypt, objection to Stephen's phrasing is trivial. Joseph himself said to his brethren, "Ye sold me hither" (Gen. 45:5).

But God. Rather, "and God." This reflects the account in Gen. 39:2, 21, 23. God's presence is not limited, for the Lord was with Joseph even in heathen Egypt. Remembrance of this fact must have brought comfort to Stephen during his trial.

10. Delivered. Gr. exaireoµ, "to pluck out," "to choose out," "to rescue." The deliverance of Joseph was not out of Egypt, but out of his afflictions in Egypt. Thus it is with God's deliverance of His people. God gives them strength to triumph over their troubles and afflictions.

Governor. See Gen. 41:38-45.

11. Found no sustenance. Rather, "could not find sustenance." The word translated "sustenance" is generally used for "fodder" for cattle (see LXX of Gen. 24:25, 32). But more than food for cattle was affected by the famine, and therefore the term must be taken as applying to food for both man and beast.

12. Corn. Gr. sitia, "food," "provisions." "Corn," or a small hard grain such as wheat, is sitos. This is not the "corn" of North America, which is properly called "maize."

Our fathers. That is, the ten sons whom Jacob first sent into Egypt (Gen. 42:1-3). If Stephen is doing more here than developing a historical sequence, he is seeking to show that the very ones who afflicted Joseph came to be dependent upon the bounty resulting from his wisdom. And so the Jews of Stephen's day must needs turn for their spiritual sustenance to Jesus Christ, whom they have afflicted.

13. Second time. See Gen. 45:1-4.

Was made known. This phrase appears twice in this verse in the KJV. In the second instance, the Greek original is different and should be translated "became manifest."

Kindred. Gr. genos, "race." Joseph had not sought to conceal his Hebrew origin (Gen. 41:12), but until this crisis it was not generally known. Now Pharaoh himself was aware of it (Gen. 45:16).

14. Kindred. Gr. suggeneia, "kindred," or "family," used also in v. 3 and Luke 1:61.

Threescore and fifteen souls. See on Gen. 47:26, 27. There are many Jewish traditions as to the number who went down into Egypt (see Talmud Baba Bathra 123a, 123b, Soncino ed., pp. 511, 512).

15. Jacob went down. Now begins the 215-year sojourn (see on Gen. 15:13; Ex. 12:40) of the Hebrews in Egypt, away from the Land of Promise.

Died. Rather, "and he died, himself." Some commentators take this as referring to Joseph rather than to Jacob.

16. Were carried. Apart from the burial of the bones of Joseph in Shechem (Gen. 50:25; Ex. 13:19; Joshua 24:32) there is no record in Scripture of the carrying of the bodies of the patriarchs to Canaan. Josephus says, "Their bodies were carried some time afterwards by their descendants [and their sons] to Hebron and buried there" (Antiquities ii. 8. 2 [199]; Loeb ed., vol. 4, p. 251). An ancient Jewish tradition has the bodies of the patriarchs carried out from the land of Egypt with the departing Israelites.

Into Sychem. This Sychem is the Shechem of the OT (see on Gen. 12:6).

Abraham bought. Abraham's purchase of the cave of Machpelah, to the east of Mamre, near Hebron, is the only recorded transaction of this kind (see on Gen. 23:3-20). Here Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Rebecca, and Leah were buried. However, the region of Shechem was the place of Abraham's first settlement upon his entrance into Canaan, and there he built an altar (Gen. 12:6, 7). It may be that he bought land for that purpose, although there is no record of the purchase.

Jacob's purchase of the field at Shechem is the only recorded transaction in which the sons of Hamor appear as sellers (Gen. 33:19). Here an altar was erected (Gen. 33:20), and Joseph's bones were buried, but there is no record of its being a burial place for his brothers ("our fathers," Acts 7:15). Jerome, a Christian writer of the 4th century, states (86th Epistle, Benedictine ed.) that the tombs of the 12 patriarchs were shown at Shechem in his day, and this corresponds to a Samaritan tradition preserved for many centuries. This may coincide with information available to Stephen but unknown to us today.

Emmor. The Greek form of the OT Hamor.

Father of Sychem. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading "in Sychem [Shechem]."

17. But when. Rather, "but as," suggesting that the time was approaching rather than that it had arrived.

Time of the promise. That is, the time of its fulfillment, in the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt (see on Gen. 15:13, 14; Ex. 12:40; see Vol. I, pp. 188-195). The fathers "all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off" (Heb. 11:13).

Drew nigh. Rather, "was drawing nigh," harmonizing with "but as."

God had sworn. Rather, "had vouch-safed."

Grew and multiplied. See on Ex. 1:7; 12:37.

18. Another king arose. Textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for adding the words "over Egypt." Not simply an additional king, but a different kind of king (see on Ex. 1:8), and certainly having a different attitude toward the Hebrews.

Knew not. Rather, "had not known." This may mean that the new ruler was ignorant of Joseph's great services to Egypt, or that he deliberately ignored them (cf. the use of "to know" in Matt. 7:23; 25:12).

19. Subtilly. Or, "craftily" (see on Ex. 1:10).

Evil entreated. An archaic expression for "treated badly." Josephus (Antiquities ii. 9. 1 [203]) says that the Egyptians made the Israelites cut channels and dikes for the Nile.

They cast out. Rather, "in causing their young children to be cast out." The phrase refers to what Pharaoh did to the hated Hebrews (see on Ex. 1:22).

20. In which time. While infants were being exposed.

Exceeding fair. Literally, "fair to God" (see on Ex. 2:2). Josephus (ibid. 9. 6 [231]) describes the beauty of the infant Moses as such that those who met him turned to look upon him in admiration.

21. Cast out. Jochebed, the mother of Moses, fulfilled the king's command and, at the same time, executed her own plan (see on Ex. 2:3).

Took him up. Literally, "lifted him up," referring either to Moses' being taken out of the Nile, or more likely, to his being adopted by Pharaoh's daughter. The root form of the verb means "to choose," and is so used in Phil. 1:22. Its force is made clear in the next phrase.

Her own son. See on Ex. 2:5, 10. Josephus (ibid. ii. 9. 7 [232-237]) declares that according to Jewish tradition the then-ruling Pharaoh had no son, and Moses was selected to be the heir.

22. Learned. Rather, "trained," or "instructed." The OT does not plainly state this, but it is implied in Moses' relationship to the household of Pharaoh.

Wisdom of the Egyptians. See on Ex. 2:11; 1 Kings 4:30. There are many legends about the first 40 years of Moses' life. Philo (Life of Moses i. 5) claims to give details concerning the curriculum Moses followed, but the Bible is silent on the subject.

Mighty in words. This primarily applies to Moses' speech while the great leader was in the Egyptian court, and involves no conflict with his later statement, "I am not eloquent, ... I am slow of speech" (see on Ex. 4:10), which was uttered after his 40-year sojourn in Midian.

In deeds. There is no Biblical record of his deeds, but it would be strange if one who proved so able in later life had not also shown great gifts during early manhood (see on Ex. 2:11).

23. Full forty years old. Literally, "when a time of forty years was being fulfilled for him," that is, when he was about forty years old. The OT gives no information about his age at this juncture. It indicates that Moses was 80 years old when he was sent to Pharaoh (Ex. 7:7), and that he was 120 when he died (Deut. 34:7). Ancient Jewish tradition divides Moses' life into three 40-year periods (Midrash Rabbah, on Gen. 50:22, Soncino ed., p. 1001), and Stephen follows a similar division: (1) the 40 years in Egypt, (2) the 40 years as a shepherd in the wilderness, (3) the 40 years in which he led his people from Egypt to the borders of Canaan.

To visit. Gr. episkeptomai, "to look upon," in order to see how a person fares, "to inspect" (cf. Ex. 4:31; Luke 7:16; James 1:27). Moses was bent on helping his compatriots (see on Ex. 2:11).

24. Suffer wrong. By smiting or blows (cf. Ex. 2:11).

Avenged him. Literally, "wrought an avenging," and thereby undertook what should have been left to the Lord.

Smote the Egyptian. That is, killed him (see on Ex. 2:12).

25. For he supposed. Rather, "but he was supposing," even as he slew the Egyptian. He took for granted that the Hebrews would understand his deed and its motives. He was quickly disillusioned. This insight into the mind of Moses is not drawn from the OT, but could have been given to Stephen by the Holy Spirit. The speaker may also be suggesting a comparison between Moses and Jesus, who were both rejected by the people whom they sought to help.

By his hand. Apparently it had been revealed to Moses that he was to deliver Israel, but he was under the misapprehension that the work was to be accomplished by the same sort of means the Egyptians commonly used to enforce their power.

They understood not. A terse but effective phrase, highlighting the obtuseness of the chosen people. God's people too often do not understand, and are unready for, God's acts of deliverance (cf. the Jewish attitude toward Christ, John 1:11).

26. As they strove. That is, two men of the Hebrews (Ex. 2:13).

Set them at one. Literally, "was bringing them into peace," that is, was reconciling them.

Sirs. Rather, "men." His newly awakened fraternal feeling is so strong that Moses seems unable to tolerate anything less than a brotherly unity among the Hebrews as they suffer together.

27. Who made thee a ruler? As shown in v. 35, Stephen stresses this early challenge of Moses' authority to show that the whole history of Israel had been marked by the rejection of God's messengers, who had been sent for the good of the nation. The rejection of Jesus was the climatic rejection.

28. Wilt thou? Compare on Ex. 2:14.

29. Then fled Moses. Stephen's quick survey passed over the fact that Pharaoh became aware of what had happened, and was searching for Moses. Josephus (Antiquities ii. 11. 1 [254-256]) assigns the flight of Moses to the jealousy of the Egyptians, who feared that he would lead a revolt.

Was a stranger. Literally, "became a sojourner," that is, an alien.

Madian. Gr. Madiam, for Heb. Midyan, "Midian" (see on Ex. 2:15, 16).

He begat two sons. Gershom and Eliezer. The mother was Zipporah, the daughter of Jethro (see on Ex. 4:20; 18:2-4).

30. Forty years. With the 40 years mentioned in v. 23, this makes Moses 80 years of age when he was called to deliver Israel (see on Ex. 7:7).

Mount Sina. The OT form is "Sinai," which is often called "Horeb" (see on Ex. 3:1).

An angel of the Lord. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of the words "of the Lord." Stephen's reference to Moses' experience at the burning bush was indirectly an answer to the charge that he spoke against Moses, for he is here giving him full honor as one who had personal experience with his God. For the identification of the angel as the Lord see on Ex. 3:2.

A flame of fire. See on Ex. 3:2.

Bush. Gr. batos, "a thornbush," or "bramblebush." It is not possible to identify this bush accurately.

31. To behold. Compare Ex. 3:3.

Voice of the Lord. See on Ex. 3:2.

32. God of Abraham. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of "the God of" before the names Isaac and Jacob. If, as tradition declares, Stephen had been one of the Seventy (see on ch. 6:5), he doubtless had heard these words cited by the Lord as witnessing against the unbelief of the Sadducees concerning the resurrection (Matt. 22:32). If any of those Sadducees were in the council, they would have been reminded of the citation as Stephen addressed them. The majestic words would bring to their minds the promise of the resurrection, and its demonstration in the raising of Jesus from the dead.

33. Put off thy shoes. In Ex. 3 this command quite logically comes before God identifies Himself to Moses, who would hardly have needed instruction when once he recognized God's presence. Stephen's use of this experience would emphasize his true respect for holy places, and show that God's presence was not limited to the precincts of the Jerusalem Temple (see on Ex. 3:5).

34. I have seen. The repetition of this phrase is a reflection, in Greek, of an emphatic Hebrew construction, and is well rendered "I have surely seen" in Ex. 3:7. This verse is an abbreviated and composite quotation taken from Ex. 3:7, 8, 10.

I will send thee. Stephen may have used the present verse to suggest to his hearers the way in which Christ, like Moses, had been sent in answer to prayer to relieve affliction and to deliver His people (see on v. 35).

35. This Moses. This passage is phrased to emphasize that it was Moses who was the honored one to whom the Lord had appeared.

Whom they refused. Here again is emphasis upon the rejection of Moses by the Hebrew people, although he was so well attested as a messenger of God. Perhaps Stephen implied that his hearers were acting similarly in rejecting Jesus Christ.

Deliverer. Gr. lutroµteµs, "liberator," "redeemer." This word is not found elsewhere in the NT, but it appears in the LXX as a translation of the Hebrew term go'el (see on Ps. 19:14; cf. on Ruth 2:20). Thus, while it has the basic sense of "liberator," in Biblical usage it carries the overtones of meaning associated with the Hebrew idea of the kinsman-redeemer. Moses liberated, and so redeemed, his people from Egypt, but Christ liberates, redeems, His people from sin and death.

By the hand of the angel. Literally, "with the hand of an angel." The word "with" stresses that Moses' work was done in cooperation with the heavenly powers. For the identity of the angel see on Ex. 3:2; cf. on Acts 7:30.

36. Brought them out. Moses was able to do this, having God's power with him (see on Ex. 3:12).

Wonders and signs. See on chs. 2:19, 22; 6:8; cf. Vol. V, p. 208.

Red sea. This is the name given by the Greeks to the water the Hebrews called the Sea of Reeds (see on Ex. 10:19). The reason for either name cannot be definitely ascertainead.

Forty years. See Num. 14:33; Deut. 29:5.

37. A prophet. Stephen, like Peter (see on ch. 3:22), refers to the prophecy given in Deut. 18:15-18. Like Peter, he sees it fulfilled in Jesus. He is now intent on confronting the Sanhedrin with this Prophet in the person of the Jesus whom they had crucified.

Him shall ye hear. Important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the omission of these words. However, they are well attested in the quotation of the same passage in ch. 3:22.

38. This is he. The reference is still to Moses.

The church. Gr. ekkleµsia, "assembly," or "congregation" (see on Matt. 18:17).

In the wilderness. Stephen has in mind the assembling of the Hebrew nation at Mt. Sinai prior to the giving of the law (Ex. 19).

With the angel. As in v. 35, the angel is the Lord Himself, even as in v. 31 the voice that spoke is called "the voice of the Lord."

Who received. That is, Moses.

Lively oracles. Gr. logia zoµnta, "living oracles." Logia is the diminutive of logos, "word." In the LXX it is used for the words of God (Num. 24:4, 16), and in Philo (see Vol. V, p. 93) for the Decalogue. In the KJV, logia is translated "oracle" (Rom. 3:2; Heb. 5:12; 1 Peter 4:11). Here, the reference is to the law received by Moses and passed on to succeeding generations. These oracles are described as "lively," that is, living, in the sense that they abide and endure from generation to generation (cf. Heb. 4:12; 1 Peter 1:23).

39. Would not obey. Literally, "were not willing to become obedient." This rebellion by the children of Israel broke out one month after their deliverance at the Red Sea, and before they reached Sinai (Ex. 16:2, 3). While Moses was in the mount their discontent led to apostasy (Ex. 32:1), as outlined by Stephen in succeeding verses. By inference, he is presenting a parallel between the Israelites' attitude toward Moses, and the Jews' attitude toward Christ. The people of both eras were disobedient to their would-be redeemer. For obedience see on Acts 5:32.

In their hearts. They did not actually return, but longed for the so-called good things they had enjoyed in the country of their captivity (see on Ex. 16:3; cf. on Num. 11:4-6). So Lot's wife looked back to Sodom and died (Gen. 19:26). The Lord condemns the man, who, having put his hand to the plow, looks back (Luke 9:62).

Turned back again. Or, simply, "turned." The immediate reference of Stephen's words is to the experiences recorded in Ex. 16:2, 3; 32:1-6, but there were many others (Ex. 17:1-3; Num. 11:1-5; 14:1-4; etc.).

40. Make us gods. See on Ex. 32:1. Stephen shows how their lack of faith in Moses' leadership led the Israelites to one of the worst forms of sin--idolatry.

41. They made a calf. See on Ex. 32:4, 5. The Hebrews had probably seen the Egyptians worshipping the bull Mnevis at Heliopolis or the bull Apis at Memphis, and desired a similar beast-image to represent the great God of the universe.

Idol. The Hebrews claimed that the golden calf was a god (see Ex. 32:4), but Stephen rightly calls it an "idol."

Rejoiced. Rather, "were rejoicing," that is, they continued in their idol worship and its accompanying orgies. The verb especially expresses the joy of a feast, as in Luke 15:23, 24, 29 (cf. on Ex. 32:5, 6). Moses heard, not the cries of conflict, but "the noise of them that sing" (Ex. 32:18).

Works of their own hands. Not only is the worship of an image a denial of God, but, what is worse, it sets up a man-made object in His place. The idolater turns his back upon his Maker, and bows down, instead, to that which he himself has made. See Hosea 6:6.

42. Then God turned. Rather, "But God turned." Israel had turned from Moses, God's representative, and now God turns from them (cf. Joshua 24:20). Men have come to a fearful state when God must give them up (see on Hosea 4:17; 5:6). It is this appalling condition that Paul describes in Rom. 1:24, 26, 28.

To worship. Gr. latreuoµ, "to serve for hire," and, by extension, "to render religious service," "to worship."

The host of heaven. See on Deut. 4:19; Zeph. 1:5. Israel had been warned against such worship as being a form of idolatry (Deut. 4:19; 17:3). But both historians (2 Kings 17:16; 23:5; 2 Chron. 33:3, 5) and prophets (Jer. 8:2; 19:3; Zeph. 1:5) record that the warning was in vain. This worship of the heavenly bodies is known as Sabaism. It is alluded to in such NT references to astrology as this.

The book of the prophets. That is, the prophets of the OT (see on Luke 24:44). The Jews generally considered the writings of the twelve so-called minor prophets one book. Stephen, following the general custom, does not identify the author of his quotation.

Have ye offered? Rather, with the emphasis of the Greek word order, "Did ye offer unto me slain beasts and sacrifices forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel?" The quotation is, with minor changes, from the LXX of Amos 5:25, 26. In terms of historical fact, the question is to be answered in the affirmative, for sacrifices were offered to God during the wilderness wanderings. But spiritually, the answer is in the negative, for many of the people, though making the sacrifices, were also worshipping false gods, and the Lord rejected their divided worship.

43. Ye took up. Rather, "and ye took up." This verse is a quotation, with a few variations, from Amos 5:26 as it appears in the LXX, which at this point is quite different from the Masoretic Hebrew text. The passage connects Israel's unacceptable worship and their devotion to idols. In their wanderings Israel should have "taken up" only the tabernacle of the Lord, but too often they also "took up" the tabernacle, or tent, housing a heathen image.

Moloch. The Greek form of the name of the god variously known in the OT as Molech, Milcom, Malcham (see on Lev. 18:21; 20:2; Jer. 7:31). In these texts the worship of Molech is sternly prohibited. But the prohibition was in vain (see 2 Kings 16:2, 3; 23:10; Jer. 7:31; 32:35; Eze. 23:37; etc.).

Remphan. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) among the readings Rhemphan, Rhempham, Rhempha, Rhompha, Rhaiphan, and Rhephan. The LXX of Amos 5:26, from which this verse is taken, has Rhaiphan, which appears to have been taken as equivalent to the Hebrew Kywn, or KéÆyyuÆn (KJV, "Chiun"), supposed by many scholars to be a Hebrew term for the planet Saturn of which Rhaiphan was the Coptic, or Egyptian, name. But no Egyptian word similar to the Greek term is known. However, Amos, whom Stephen quotes, clearly condemns star worship. Hence Stephen stands fully justified in condemning the ancient Jews as idolaters.

Beyond Babylon. In Amos 5:26, from which the present verse is quoted, both the Hebrew and the LXX give "Damascus." Up to the time of Amos, Syria, represented by Damascus, had been a serious enemy of both Israel and Judah. The Babylonian captivity had not then taken place, but as Stephen looks back, it is Babylon that stands out as the archenemy of the Jews, and doubtless for that reason he, by inspiration, substituted "Babylon" for "Damascus." In vs. 37-43 Stephen has pointed out the apostasies of the Hebrews, who turned against God by turning against Moses, and in Stephen's own day turned against God by turning against Jesus.

44. Tabernacle of witness. See on Ex. 25:8; Num. 9:15.

Appointed. The clause reads literally, "even as he appointed who spake unto Moses." See on Ex. 25:8, 9.

According to the fashion. Rather, "according to the pattern," as in Heb. 8:5 (see on Ex. 25:9). Stephen's argument implies that the heavenly sanctuary is the important and central institution, and thus emphasizes the temporary nature of the tabernacle as the focal point in the worship of God.

45. That came after. Gr. diadechomai, "to receive in turn," that is, they inherited the tabernacle from their fathers. It was the generation following that of the Exodus that took the tabernacle into Canaan, for all who came out of Egypt, except Caleb and Joshua, died in the wilderness.

Jesus. Gr. Ieµsous, equivalent to the Heb. YehoshuaÔ, "Joshua" (see on Matt 1:1). Here the reference is obviously to Joshua, who brought the Israelites and the tabernacle into Canaan.

Into the possession. Literally, "in the taking possession."

Gentiles. That is, "nations," or "heathen," with particular reference to the Canaanites.

Whom God drave out. See on Deut. 9:3; Ps. 44:2.

Days of David. This phrase may have two applications: (1) the original Canaanite population of Palestine was not wholly conquered until David's day; (2) the tabernacle was the focal point of Israelitish worship up to and including the reign of David. After his time the Temple took the place of the tabernacle.

46. Found favour. David, favored of God, wished to build the Temple, but God would not permit him to do so (see on 2 Sam. 7:1-17; 1 Chron. 22:6-10).

Desired. Rather, "requested."

Find a tabernacle. These words, which appear unusual in the present context, are drawn from the LXX of Ps. 132:5. Here the Greek word translated "tabernacle" (skeµnoµma) is perhaps better rendered "habitation," as the tabernacle (skeµneµ) had existed since the days of Moses, and David wished to build a permanent temple.

God of Jacob. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between the readings "God of Jacob" and "house of Jacob," but the context favors the text as it stands in the KJV. The LXX of Ps. 132:5, from which these words are drawn, reads "God of Jacob."

47. Solomon built. See on 1 Kings 6:1.

48. Howbeit. That is, but, on the other hand. This points the contrast between the immediately preceding verses, which speak of the tabernacle and Temple as God's meeting places with men, and verses 48, 49, which emphasize that God does not dwell in man-made buildings.

The most High. Since, apart from the article, the title is but one word in Greek, the word "most" should be capitalized. For comment on the title see on Gen. 14:18.

Dwelleth not. The clause may be translated, "does not dwell in handmade things" (cf. on Heb. 9:11, 24), for there is no word for "temple" in the original. The Jews should not have needed this reminder about the omnipresence of God, for they had been well instructed concerning this aspect of His nature (see on 1 Kings 8:27; Ps. 139:7-13). But they had concentrated on the truth that He had promised to grace the Temple with His presence until their thought confined Him to its precincts. Even worse, they came to have a greater reverence for the building than for the One for whom the building was erected. In so doing they unfitted themselves to recognize and receive God "manifest in the flesh" (1 Tim. 3:16) when He became incarnate and lived among them.

Paul, who had heard Stephen's defense, used a similar argument in talking to the philosophers of Athens (Acts 17:24, 25).

Saith the prophet. The quotation is from the gospel prophet, Isaiah (ch. 66:1, 2), who saw God in His heavenly temple (ch. 6:1-7).

49. Heaven is my throne. Stephen quotes the LXX almost verbatim. For comment on vs. 49, 50 see on Isa. 66:1, 2. Isaiah points out that the Most High cannot be confined within human limitations, but will dwell with those who are "poor and of a contrite spirit." These words were a rebuke to the Jews who heard them. With their worship centered upon the earthly Temple, they were far from being "poor and of a contrite spirit." Stephen's unspoken appeal is to accept the Divine One, who had walked among them so humbly, and had shown them their heavenly Father's lovely character. Many of the priests had already accepted the gospel (see Acts 6:7); more would do so. These converts from the old typical system were building a spiritual temple in the hearts of men.

51. Ye stiffnecked. The sudden change in the tenor of Stephen's address doubtless is to be accounted for by the growing excitement of the Sanhedrin, and the resentment aroused by his words (cf. AA 100; Matt. 26:65). Apparently realizing that his end was near, and that no further discussion would affect the issue, Stephen broke forth in a stern rebuke. The adjectives he used had been applied to the sins of ancient Israel: "stiffnecked" in Ex. 33:3, 5; 34:9, and "uncircumcised" in Lev. 26:41. "Stiffnecked" is applied to stubborn oxen (see on Ex. 32:8). The actual phrase "uncircumcised in heart" had been used by Ezekiel (ch. 44:7) of "strangers." Now at the very moment when Stephen had been telling them that their veneration of the Temple was excessive and futile, he put them in the class of the Gentiles. No worse insult could have been directed against these furious people.

Always resist the Holy Ghost. An accurate historical summary, for from the days of Moses, whom their fathers had disobeyed, down to the days of Jesus Christ, whom they had crucified, the people of Israel had resisted the Holy Spirit. The Greek word for "resist" (antipiptoµ) implies active, strenuous opposition.

52. Which of the prophets? Here is an echo of Christ's own words (Matt. 5:12; Luke 11:47; 13:34). For comment on the history of such persecution of prophets see on Matt. 5:12; 23:37 (cf. 1 Thess. 2:15; cf. on 2 Chron. 36:16).

Shewed. Rather "announced."

The Just One. Or, "Righteous One." This high title is also used of the Lord in chs. 3:14; 22:14 The name had already been applied in Jewish literature to the expected Messiah (Enoch 38:2), and may have been suggested by Isa. 11:4, 5. Pilate's wife used the description in referring to Jesus (Matt. 27:19). The early church seems to have accepted it, and an example of its application may be seen in 1 John 2:1, where the Greek word for "righteous" is the same as that used here for "Just One." The Christ who had been condemned as a malefactor was distinguished from all men as the "Righteous One," the "Just One." By an impartation of this same righteousness, Stephen stood out in contrast with the men who were about to execute him in wicked fury.

Have been. Rather, "have become."

Betrayers and murderers. Reading in the faces of his tormentors the fate that is soon to be his own, Stephen reminds them of their former actions with respect to Christ.

53. Who have received. An emphatic form, "Ye who received."

By the disposition of angels. More literally, "as ordinances of angels." It was Christ, the Son of God, who gave the law on Mt. Sinai (see on Ex. 20:2). He was also the Angel of the covenant (see on Ex. 23:20). But a host of angels were with the Lord on Mt. Sinai (cf. on Deut. 33:2; Ps. 68:17; Gal. 3:19; Heb. 2:2). The LXX of Deut. 33:2 reads, "on his right hand angels were with him," and Josephus (Antiquities xv. 5. 3) presents the same idea.

Have not kept it. Rather, "Ye did not keep it." This is said in dramatic contrast with the earlier phrase "received the law," and must have dealt a telling blow to those who heard it. They had kept neither the letter of the law nor its intent. The law, given by angels, could have been their glory; its perversion was precipitating their shame and destruction.

54. When they heard. Rather, "Now while they were hearing."

Cut to the heart. See on ch. 5:33. The word used describes a keener pang than the "pricked" of ch. 2:37, and it produced now, not repentance, but furious wrath.

Gnashed on him. Literally, "gnashed their teeth at him." The figurative expression is not infrequent (Matt. 8:12; 13:42; etc.). Here, however, it is a literal manifestation of wrath. The Jews had allowed their rage to pass beyond control. Speechless with anger, they wanted to rend him as brute beasts would tear their prey with their teeth.

55. But he. Pointing the simple, stark contrast to his raving opponents.

Being full. Implying not a sudden inspiration, but a continuing experience. As at the beginning (ch. 6:5), so at the end, Stephen is "full of the Holy Ghost."

Looked up stedfastly. See on ch. 1:10.

Into heaven. Stephen saw "the heavens opened" (Acts 7:56; cf. on Isa. 6:1). None of the onlookers saw the glory of the heavens thus opened, and the statement that Stephen saw this glory seemed to them to aggravate his guilt. But only the prophets can tell us whether what they see is with the inward spiritual eye or through an extension of the physical sense (cf. Matt. 3:16; 2 Cor. 12:1-6).

Saw the glory of God. Compare on Gen. 3:24; Ex. 13:21; John 1:14; Acts 7:2. Stephen's speech begins with a reference to "the God of glory," and ends by reporting a vision of divine glory that shines upon his mind. With what a rapt expression he must have gazed into that glory. He forgot the deadly peril of the moment, and gave himself entirely to the heavenly vision.

Jesus standing. Christ is usually spoken of as sitting at the right hand of God.

Right hand of God. See on Matt. 26:64. This sight of the Father and the Son fortified their faithful suffering servant.

56. Son of man. In the NT outside the Gospels only here and in Rev. 1:13; 14:14. Stephen may have heard it from the Lord's own lips, or he may have learned it from the early church, since his speech was made before any of the Gospels were written. The members of the Sanhedrin probably remembered that Christ Himself had used this phrase at the time of His trial before them (Matt. 26:64). They had then condemned the Lord's claims as blasphemous. For comment on the title see on Mark 2:10; cf. Vol. V, p. 917.

57. Then they cried out. Rather, "But they cried out," that is, in an attempt to silence Stephen, instead of listening and becoming convicted in the presence of the glory of God.

Stopped. Gr. sunechoµ, "to compress," "to hold together." They regarded Stephen's words as blasphemous, and did not wish to hear more. They thus proved that they deserved the description given in v. 51. They, and not Stephen, were the blasphemers.

Ran upon him. Rather, "rushed upon him with one accord." Satan had brought into the Sanhedrin the kind of unity required by the Law (Deut. 13:9, 10) when a man was to be executed. There was no waiting for an official verdict; they were unanimous in their desire and decision. For the judicial aspects of such summary proceedings compare on Matt. 26:59.

58. Cast him out. According to Lev. 24:14 the one to be stoned must be taken outside the camp, which, in the time of Stephen, meant outside the walls of Jerusalem.

Stoned him. Literally, "were stoning him," as though the act of execution went on while the martyr was praying (vs. 59, 60). Stoning was the penalty for blasphemy under the Mosaic law (Lev. 24:14-16; see on John 8:7). But however closely the Sanhedrin may have been following this law, under the Romans they had no right to take life, particularly if Stephen was a Roman citizen (see on Acts 6:5). But Roman officials could be bribed into convenient silence (AA 98, 101). Pilate, who was still procurator (see Vol. V, pp. 67, 68), may have been out of the city at the time, but would be unlikely to interfere with the attack on Stephen after his humiliating experience at the trial of Jesus.

Laid down their clothes. The Law required that the accuser should be the first to use the deadly stones (Deut. 17:7; cf. on John 8:7). The loose flowing cloaks worn as outer garments would have impeded the free action of the arms of the executors, and hence were laid aside (cf. Acts 22:20).

Young man's. Gr. neanias, "youth," is used with great latitude for men between 20 and 40 years of age. The term, therefore, gives no help in determining the chronology of Paul's life (cf. on Philemon 9:1). For a possible dating of Stephen's martyrdom see p. 99.

Saul. For the meaning of the name see on 1 Sam. 9:2. For comment on Saul's previous history, his presence at the martyrdom of Stephen, and subsequent change of name to Paul see Additional Note 2 at end of chapter.

59. They stoned. Rather, "as they were stoning." Stephen prayed while he was being stoned.

Calling upon God. As indicated by italics in the KJV, the word "God" is not in the original. The prayer itself shows that Stephen called upon the Lord Jesus, whom he had just seen standing at the right hand of God (v. 56).

Receive my spirit. See on Matt. 27:50; Luke 8:55; Acts 7:60. Note how Luke also records a similar prayer on the part of Jesus as He died (Luke 23:46).

60. Kneeled down. In prayer to and adoration of the One whom he had seen on the right hand of God, though he was doubtless forced to his knees by the stoning.

Lay not this sin. Literally, "do not reckon to them this sin." Stephen could do little with respect to his persecutors' past sins, but he had a personal right to request forgiveness for their present transgression. In pleading for them he revealed how fully he had acquired the forgiving spirit that had characterized his Master (cf. Luke 23:34).

Fell asleep. See on Mark 5:39; John 11:11. Throughout his defense Stephen's conduct is in marked contrast with that of his accusers. They are filled with vindictive fury, but he maintains a calm such as possessed Christ in the judgment hall. Now Luke, in closing his account of the martyr's ministry, preserves that hallowed atmosphere in his final phrase, "he fell asleep." The battle is over, the victory is won; God's faithful warrior leaves the tumult and quietly sleeps until the resurrection day. Succeeding chapters show that his death was not in vain.

additional notes on chapter 7

Note 1

The speech of Stephen presents some difficulties as to its purpose, the matters it presents, and its questions of fact. In approaching these problems certain considerations should be borne in mind: (1) The speech is reported, not as Luke might have understood its matter and import 30 years later, when he wrote Acts, but probably as it was reported to him by one or more of the hearers, such as Saul (Paul) or one of the converted priests (ch. 6:7). Of course, it must be remembered that God could have given a knowledge of the sermon directly to Luke. (2) The speech was never finished, because his hearers rushed upon him in fury, dragged him outside the city, and stoned him to death. (3) Stephen's speech was historical, as had been Peter's speeches before him (chs. 2; 3), and Paul's afterward (chs. 13; 22; 26), and to that extent records little of his theological thinking. Stephen's theology, as it had developed up to this time, must be seen in the implications of the history he traced, and in the accusations of his enemies. (4) His discourse was doubtless a continuation of the evangelistic message given by the seven following their ordination (ch. 6:7-10), and of the presentation of the gospel Stephen had been making in the synagogues of the Hellenists (see on v. 9). Therefore his defense took for granted much that would be of help to the present-day student in analyzing and evaluating it. (5) Some of the historical and exegetical difficulties that his discourse appears to present--such as the matter of Abraham's not leaving Haran until after Terah's death (ch. 7:4); the 75 persons as the total of the Hebrew clan with Joseph in Egypt (v. 14); the parcel of ground said to have been purchased in Shechem by Abraham (v. 16); the burial of Jacob in that plot of ground (vs. 15, 16); the citation from Amos 5:26, 27, in which Stephen substitutes "Babylon" for "Damascus"; and the names of the pagan deities mentioned (Acts 7:43)--can be viewed as arising, in part or in whole, from our lack of information that may have been known to Stephen.

Three fairly obvious objectives can be inferred for Stephen's speech:

1. To win approval, or rather to temper disapproval, by showing the Sanhedrin that he had familiarity with Hebrew history, and to provide ground for proving his orthodoxy.

2. To show historically how God had sought to lead the Hebrews, and how persistently they had rejected that leadership as given through Moses, the prophets, and the long-foretold Messiah.

3. To show the nature and meaning of the worship that God had prescribed for the patriarchs and for His chosen people, in relation, as must be recognized, to Christ's newly inaugurated work at the right hand of God. This may be considered the most important, but least clearly stated, objective. Four facts are to be observed in connection with it:

a. When the deacons, of whom Stephen emerges as the leading evangelist, began their public ministry, "a great company of the priests," it is noted for the first time, "were obedient to the faith" (ch. 6:7). This result may have arisen from a particular emphasis in the presentation of the gospel by Stephen and the other deacons.

b. The serious accusation was brought against Stephen that he taught what was contrary to "this holy place," that is, the Temple; to "the law"; and to the "customs" (ch. 6:13, 14).

c. Stephen stressed the call of Abraham and God's providential care of Jacob and his descendants (ch. 7:2-17); the liberation of the Hebrews from Egypt under the leadership of Moses (vs. 18-36); Moses' witness to a future prophet for the church in the wilderness (vs. 37, 38); the false worship and unconsecrated sacrifices of the Hebrews (vs. 39-43); the wilderness tabernacle built according to the pattern shown to Moses (vs. 44, 45); Solomon's Temple (vs. 46, 47); and the fact that God is in no need of man-made temples (vs. 48-50). This emphasis upon worship would suggest that Stephen was leading to the subject of Christ's ministry in heaven.

d. Stephen's experience bears a recognizable relationship to the prophecy of the 70 weeks (Dan. 9:24-27), which began in 457 B.C., in the last week of which Messiah was to be cut off, "not for himself," and the typical, earthly sacrificial system was to end as an effective means of intercession, which result would mean also the end of the earthly priesthood. This commentary accepts the view that the crucifixion took place in a.d. 31 (see Vol. V, pp. 251-265), "in the midst of the week." Therefore the last of the 70 prophetic weeks must end in a.d. 34. Thus Stephen's ministry can be viewed as dramatically symbolizing God's appeal to His chosen people during the last prophetic week, before the gospel is offered to the Gentiles. Accordingly, it seems reasonable to date Stephen's martyrdom in a.d. 34, for the killing of Stephen may be viewed as a final act of rejection of the gospel by the Jews as a nation.

When Stephen's speech is viewed against this background, it is seen to be a dramatic, vital episode in a critical period of early church history.

Note 2

The young man, Saul, introduced in ch. 7:58, plays so important a part in the NT scene as to warrant close attention from the first mention of his name. Direct biographical details are scanty, but indirect references permit a reasonably certain reconstruction of his early life.

Apart from an oblique mention of his mother (Gal. 1:15), and general references to his Hebrew ancestors (Acts 24:14; Gal. 1:14; 2 Tim. 1:3), the Scriptures give no clue to Saul's parentage. That he was not an only child is clear from Acts 23:16, where "Paul's sister's son" is introduced. It is possible that his family, regarding him as an apostate when he became a Christian, was alienated, and severed all connections with him (see Phil. 3:8), and that this made mention of them painful to him, although Rom. 16:7 may be understood to mean that some of his relatives were Christians.

A tradition of the 2d century, first recorded by Jerome, states that Saul's parents originally lived in Gischala, of Galilee. About 4 B.C. they are supposed to have been captured and taken as slaves to Tarsus, the chief city of Cilicia, in Asia Minor, where they eventually gained their freedom, prospered, and became Roman citizens. Later, a son, Saul, was born to them there.

Saul's life began at Tarsus (Acts 22:3), where, on the eighth day, he was circumcised (Phil. 3:5) and, in accordance with custom, named (see on Luke 1:59). Since he was of the tribe of Benjamin (Rom. 11:1; Phil. 3:5), he may have been named after the first king of Israel, who came from the same house.

From birth he possessed certain enviable privileges. He was born a Roman citizen (Acts 22:28). In the 1st century a.d., Roman citizenship was still jealously guarded, and it is probable that Saul's family was one of some distinction and of more than average wealth. The holder of such citizenship had every reason to be proud, and would naturally be favorably inclined toward imperial Rome. But, in addition, Saul had a local loyalty to his own distinguished city. He was a citizen of Tarsus (ch. 21:39). This means that he was not merely resident there, but possessed citizen rights. This privilege he probably enjoyed because of services rendered to the city by his family.

Over and above these social privileges, however, Saul valued his racial and religious heritage. He gloried in the description, "an Hebrew of the Hebrews" (Phil. 3:5; cf. 2 Cor. 11:22), and was jealous of his ancestral traditions. This was quite compatible with his pride in Roman and Tarsian citizenship, for until a.d. 70, when Vespasian abolished their legal rights, the Jews were allowed to preserve their distinctive nationality, even in the pagan Roman setting. To this satisfaction with his religious background he added a special pride in his Pharisaism. He "lived a Pharisee" "after the most straitest [Jewish] sect" of his religion (Acts 26:5; cf. ch. 23:6; Phil. 3:5). Some commentators suggest that this Pharisaism was inherited from his father, but it is just as possible that he became a Pharisee because of his training under Gamaliel (cf. on Acts 5:34).

At an early age, probably when he was 12, Saul was sent to Jerusalem (ch. 26:4), where he was educated by the famous Gamaliel I (ch. 22:3; see on ch. 5:34). He was trained in "the perfect manner of the law," "believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets," growing to be "zealous toward God" and "more exceedingly zealous of the traditions" of his fathers (Acts 22:3; 24:14; Gal. 1:14). It seems that he became a more fanatical supporter of his sect than did his master (cf. on Acts 5:34). He thus laid the foundation for his future energetic crusade against the Christian church (chs. 8:1, 3; 22:4, 5; 26:9-12). With this background, and in this setting, Saul enters the narrative of the book of Acts (ch. 7:58). As a zealous member of the strictest section of Judaism, he lends the weight and assent of his presence to the death of Stephen who seems to be a critic of Judaism. His presence suggests that he had continued to live in Jerusalem. He would therefore be well aware of Christ's ministry and death, and the increasingly powerful apostolic witness that followed. But since he mentions only his supernatural encounter with Jesus on the Damascus road (Acts 22:7, 8; 26:14, 15; 1 Cor. 15:8), it is unlikely that he ever met Him in the flesh. Nevertheless, Saul was well equipped as an anti-Christian persecutor, and there is nothing anomalous in his participation in the first martyr's death.

Considerable discussion has centered on the change of name that occurs about halfway through the book of Acts. Chapter 13:9 speaks of "Saul (who also is called Paul)," or, to give a variant translation, "Saul, otherwise Paul." Why should a second name be here introduced when "Saul" has already been used 18 times between chs. 7:58 and 13:9? From the days of Jerome the newly introduced name has been connected with that of Sergius Paulus, the deputy (proconsul) of Cyprus. It has been suggested that Saul took the name Paul at this juncture to honor the deputy's conversion to the Christian faith. Such an explanation seems improbable, for there are weighty reasons for concluding that Saul must have had more than one name from his earliest years.

Saul was born into a multilingual world. A heterogeneous population spoke an amazing babel of differing tongues, but each group had its own native speech. Superimposed on this base were Greek, the lingua franca of the civilized world (see Vol. V, p. 103), and Latin, the official language of the Roman Empire. As a result, many men of the day spoke not only their native tongue but also Greek and Latin. Because of this, many of them came to have more than one name, or differing forms of the same name according to the language or society in which it was being used. In other cases they bore names that had no linguistic connections with each other--that is, were not translations from one language to another. In Saul's case the process may have worked as follows: At circumcision he was given a Jewish name, Saul, but since he lived in a Gentile community, he also bore a not uncommon Latin name, Paulus. Many examples of double names may be quoted: Belteshazzar-Daniel, Esther-Hadassah, John Mark (cf. Acts 1:23; 13:1; Col. 4:11). Luke shows his awareness of the apostle's two names, Saul and Paul. Prior to Acts 13:9, he has portrayed him in a predominantly Hebrew environment, and has therefore used his Hebrew name, Saul. Now, in ch. 13:9, Luke sees him face to face with a Roman official, who would naturally ask him such questions as, "What is your name?" "Where is your home?" To such queries the Roman citizen would not reply, "Saul, a Pharisee of Jerusalem," but "Paul, a Roman citizen of Tarsus." Thus it appears that Luke's revelation of his hero's other name is particularly felicitous--it is true to circumstance, and scarcely needs any other explanation. From this point on, Luke uses the Gentile name, apart from three reminiscent references to "Saul" (chs. 22:7, 13; 26:14), which show how accurately Luke reported Paul's speeches. This is entirely appropriate, for Paul's ministry during the second half of Acts is almost entirely for non-Jews. The name Paul is thus interwoven with his service to the Gentiles. This receives the strongest possible support from the apostle's own invariable use of "Paul" in his epistles (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:12; 2 Cor. 10:1; Gal. 5:2; Col. 4:18; etc.).

One other interpretation merits consideration. The Latin word paulus (its Greek equivalent is pauros) means "little," or "small," and has been taken as a description of Saul's stature. The idea receives some support from the apocryphal Acts of Paul and Thecla, which dates from a.d. 160-180, and though not wholly reliable, may possibly reflect a genuine tradition concerning the personal appearance of the great apostle. The relevant passage says: "A man small in size, bald-headed, bandy-legged, well-built, with eyebrows meeting, rather long-nosed, full of grace. For sometimes he seemed like a man, and sometimes he had the countenance of an angel" (ANF, vol. 8, p. 487). It must be recognized, however, that such an explanation involves acceptance of a later date for the name Paul, since it could not have been given until physical characteristics were pronounced.

Whatever the origin of Saul's alternative name, the name itself was Roman and was eminently appropriate to the apostle's ultimate aim of taking the gospel to the imperial capital (cf. on Acts 19:21; Rom. 1:15). Furthermore, as Luke enters upon the main topic of his book, the Gentile ministry of Paul, he consistently uses only the apostle's Roman name.

For a tentative chronology of the life of Saul, otherwise and more commonly known as Paul, see pp. 97-102.

Ellen G. White Comments

1-60AA 99-102; SR 264-267

4 PP 127

5 PP 169

6 8T 207

22 CT 406, 417; Ed 62; FE 342, 360, 393; MH 474; PP 245; SR 108; 4T 343

23-25CT 407

25 PP 246

29, 30 FE 360, 423; MH 508

37 AA 99

44 PP 357

48 EW 198

48-50AA 99; SR 264

51, 52 EW 198

51-55AA 100

51-56SR 265

55 AA 115

55, 56 EW 198, 208; SL 91

56 AA 116; ML 67; MYP 113; SR 270

56-60AA 101

57, 58 EW 199

58-60PK 699

59 AA 575, 597; 4T 525

59, 60 ML 67; SR 206

60 EW 199; MB 33

Acts Chapter 8

1 By occasion of the persecution in Jerusalem, the church being planted in Samaria, 5 by Philip the deacon, who preached, did miracles, and baptized many, among the rest Simon the sorcerer, a great seducer of the people: 14 Peter and John come to confirm and enlarge the church: where, by prayer and imposition of hands giving the Holy Ghost, 18 when Simon would have bought the like power of them, 20 Peter sharply reproving his hypocrisy, and covetousness, and exhorting him to repentance, together with John preaching the word of the Lord, return to Jerusalem. 26 But the angel sendeth Philip to teach, and baptize the Ethiopian eunuch.

1. Saul was consenting. Many authorities place this first sentence at the end of ch. 7, to bind off the account of Stephen's martyrdom with a record of Saul's attitude toward it. Saul was in agreement with what was done, although he did not himself take part in the stoning. Doubtless, Stephen's fearless witness stirred Saul's mind more deeply than he realized. This resulted in an inner conflict between his own Pharisaic fanaticism, and conviction of the rightness of Stephen's cause. The consequence of this conflict was increased bitterness against the Christians, and intensified persecution (AA 101, 102, 112, 113). At the time, he was rewarded for his part in the martyrdom by being made a member of the Sanhedrin (AA 102; see on 1 Cor. 7:7). In later days he contritely confessed the part he had played in the death of Stephen (cf. Acts 22:20).

At that time. Literally, "on that day." The stoning of Stephen marked the beginning of an organized persecution against the church. Having gone to such lengths as to kill Stephen, the Jewish leadership turned its rage upon all the Christians.

Great persecution. Once again the church is persecuted by the Jewish authorities, as it already had been on a lesser scale after the healing of the lame man, (ch. 4:1-7), and after the death of Ananias and Sapphira (ch. 5:17, 18). This persecution is distinguished from its predecessors by being termed "great"--great in extent and severity. See Ministry of Philip.

It is clear from this, from v. 3, and from Paul's later descriptions (cf. chs. 22:4; 26:10, 11), that the persecution involved much suffering, with imprisonment.

The church. That is, the congregation that had grown up in the capital city since Pentecost (see on Matt. 18:17). This suggests that there were other branches of the church outside Jerusalem, which indicates encouraging growth.

Scattered abroad Gr. diaspeiroµ, "to scatter like grain," "to disperse." Thus the rage of enemies succeeded only in causing the church to fulfill what Christ had foretold (ch. 1:8). The "all" need not include the totality of membership (see on ch. 1:1), but only the more fearful, or the more active, or those known personally to the persecutors. But believers, both men and women, were still left in the city (see ch. 8:3).

Judæa and Samaria. Cities and towns such as Hebron, Gaza, Lydda, and Joppa may have become cities of refuge to the Christians. To this influx of Christians and to the preaching of Philip (see v. 40) may be attributed the early existence of Christian communities in some of these places (cf. ch. 9:32, 36). Some fled to Samaria, doubtless because of the hatred of that people toward the Jews--a person fleeing from the priests and rulers of Jerusalem would probably be welcome there. The second region mentioned in ch. 1:8 was being reached. This may have served as the first step in breaking down antipathy toward the Samaritans and, eventually, the Gentiles.

Except the apostles. Three possible reasons have been adduced for the apostles' remaining: (1) The Twelve had learned from their Master that "the hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling" (John 10:13), and refused to desert their responsibilities. (2) The Twelve wished to remain in Jerusalem in spite of all persecution, because the city was looked upon as the headquarters of the Christians, and fugitives would look there for guidance and help. (3) This persecution was apparently directed, in particular, against those who, like Stephen, taught the transitory nature of the customs (see on Acts 6:14) which the Pharisees stressed. The apostles apparently continued as worshipers in the Temple, keeping themselves in ritual cleanness (ch. 10:14), and held aloof from fellowship with Gentiles (v. 28). The large body of the common people probably looked upon them with considerable favor and respect. Therefore the persecution may have been directed more at the Hellenistic disciples. It was certainly this class who were most active in taking the next great step in the expansion of the church. No dogmatic decision can be made in favor of any one of these three reasons offered by commentators and church historians.

2. Devout. Gr. eulabeµs, "taking hold well," and, by extension, "cautions," "pious" (see on ch. 2:5). Ananias, who led Paul to baptism, is characterized by this adjective (ch. 22:21). Because persons inclined toward Judaism are described as "devout" (chs. 13:50; 17:4, 17), some have concluded that these men were proselytes. However, the Greek word translated "devout" in these references is not eulabeµs, but sebomenos. The suggestion has also been made that these "devout" were a group who honored the dead Stephen, without defending fully the truth he had presented when alive, even as Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathaea had done in the case of Christ after the crucifixion. This verse really forms a conclusion to ch. 7.

Carried. Rather, "buried," since the word covers the whole interment ceremony.

Great lamentation. Compare on Gen. 23:2; Job 1:20; 2:12; Mark 5:38, 39. Considerable courage must have been required to perform the funeral rites for Stephen, who had fallen before the rage of the Sanhedrin. Indeed, anyone who had been stoned to death on a charge of blasphemy would ordinarily have no funeral honors (Mishnah Sanhedrin 6. 5, 6, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 305). Public lamentation on the part of the "devout" may have been in the nature of a protest against those who had brought about Stephen's death.

3. As for. Rather, "but." This verse continues the narrative begun in v. 1.

Made havock. Gr. lumainoµ, "to ravage," "to devastate," "to ruin." The word is used in the LXX of Ps. 80:13 of the ravages of a wild boar. The tense used here may imply continued persecution. Paul states that he "persecuted this way unto the death" (Acts 22:4; cf. ch. 26:10). There seemed, as he afterward confessed (ch. 26:11), a kind of insane ferocity in his violence.

Church. In Jerusalem. See on v. 1; cf. ch. 26:10.

Every house. It appears from ch. 26:11 that Saul first entered the synagogues in search of victims, and then pursued the Christians from house to house. These houses may also have been their meeting places.

Haling. That is, hauling, or dragging, them into court.

Men and women. The fact that women were also among the sufferers suggests that they were prominent in the church (cf. on Luke 8:2, 3; Acts 1:14). Throughout the history of the church they have proved steadfast under persecution.

Prison. That is, to await judicial action. The numbers were too great for all to be brought to an immediate trial.

4. Went every where. Gr. dierchomai, "to go through," a favorite word with Luke for missionary labor (cf. Luke 9:6; Acts 8:40; 9:32; 11:19; 13:6). In this case the attempt to stamp out the new faith gave it wider scope of action, as the Lord had desired (Acts 1:8), and forced it beyond limits to which it might otherwise have been confined for a much longer waiting period. Then, as later, the blood of martyrs was the seed of the church.

Preaching. Gr. euaggelizomai, for which a very literal and picturesque translation is "to gospelize." This graphically represents the work done by these persecuted Christians--they carried the gospel, or good news (see on Mark 1:1), to the many places to which they were scattered.

Word. This should be understood in its broadest sense as referring to all teaching concerning Christ. Much of this would come from the OT, but a great part of "the word" was not yet committed to writing and was dependent on the spoken messages of the voluntary evangelists.

5. Philip. This cannot refer to Philip the apostle, since v. 1 specifically states that the apostles remained in Jerusalem. The reference must therefore be to the deacon by that name (see on ch. 6:5). Because he was conspicuous in this early evangelism, he was afterward known as Philip the evangelist (ch. 21:8).

City of Samaria. Opinion is divided as to whether this refers to Sebaste (previously known as Samaria), the capital of Samaria, or to an unidentified city (cf. on v. 9). Whatever the precise location may have been, the seed had already been sown in Samaria (see on John 4:4-42). As a result the fields were "white already to harvest" (John 4:35).

Ministry of Philip

Preached. Gr. keµrussoµ, a different word from that used in v. 4, and meaning, "to proclaim [as a herald]," implying a more formal, deliberate preaching than that of the unordained believers. The word is used of the preaching of both John the Baptist and Christ (Matt. 3:1; 4:17). The tense of the verb implies that Philip continued to preach.

Christ. Rather, "the Christ," the Anointed One, or Messiah. John 4:25 implies that the expectation of the Messiah was strong among the Samaritans, as among the Jews, and Philip's work therefore was to proclaim that the long-expected One had come, that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ, the Son of God.

6. People. Rather, "multitudes," giving a picture of large congregations.

One accord. See on ch. 1:14.

Gave heed. Gr. prosechoµ, "to hold to," "to apply [the mind] to," hence, "to give credence to" (Acts 8:10, 11; 16:14; 1 Tim. 1:4; 3:8; 4:1, 13; 2 Peter 1:19). The text implies that crowds of people accepted the new teaching. The readiness with which they did so shows that, in spite of the adverse influence of Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-11), which had come in since our Lord had taught there, His work had not been in vain.

Hearing. Literally, "hearing them," that is, Philip's words. The Samaritans had first believed simply as a result of hearing Christ preach (John 4:39-42), without the "signs" (cf. Matt. 12:38-42). The miracles now performed were not a foundation for, but a strengthening of, their faith. The signs removed all doubt concerning the power working through Philip. Undoubtedly also they were a corrective against the influence of Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-11).

7. Unclean spirits. Opinion is divided as to the best translation of the first half of this verse. It may be rendered: "For unclean spirits, crying with a loud voice, came out of those possessed." Note how Luke, the physician, differentiates the demon-possessed from those with other diseases. Concerning "unclean spirits" see on ch. 5:16; see Additional Note on Mark 1.

8. Great joy. The joy in this Samaritan city illustrates how very favorably the work of the Christian emissaries was received by the people of Samaria.

9. Simon. See on John 1:42. This man is usually spoken of as Simon Magus, from the Gr. magos, "sorcerer," or "magician." According to Justin Martyr (First Apology 26) he was born at Gitto, a village of Samaria. Later accounts in the Fathers describe him as persistently at enmity with Peter, whom he followed to Rome to oppose his teaching there. Most of the legends are of extremely doubtful authority. Simon was typical of a class of Jews who traded on the prestige of their race and the credulity of the heathen. Such were Elymas at Cyprus (Acts 13:8); the vagabond Jewish exorcists at Ephesus (ch. 19:13); and Simon of Cyprus, unless he was the same man as the Samaritan (Josephus Antiquities xx. 7. 2). See Vol. V, p. 912; Vol. VI, p. 34.

Same city. Referred to in v. 5. The separate mention of "Samaria" in v. 9 suggests that the term refers to the province and not the capital city.

Used sorcery. Rather, "who formerly was practicing magic in the city." "Magic" refers to the arts practiced by the Magi of the East, who claimed to be enchanters, astrologers, diviners, and interpreters of dreams. Simon may have had no more than an elementary knowledge of chemistry, by use of which he first attracted attention, and then traded on the credulity of those who came to consult with him. The Jews had known of such things from the time of their sojourn in Egypt, and in their traditional literature some of the "wisdom" of Moses is falsely described as of this character (cf. Acts 7:22; cf. on Dan. 1:20).

Bewitched the people. Rather, "amazed the nation," that is, the population of Samaria were superstitiously impressed by the so-called miracles of this vaunted "great one," Simon Magus.

Some great one. Verse 10 more clearly defines the nature of the claim. The cry of the people that Simon was "the great power of God" was doubtless the echo of his own pretensions. In some undefined way he claimed to be an incarnation of divine power. He possibly linked himself with the Messiah. Jewish Messianic hopes set a pattern for impostors, and helped them to secure a following. Contrast Philip (v. 5), who preached Christ, not himself.

10. All gave heed. See on v. 6. His deceptions met with great success, for every class of people believed in him. The sorcerer appears as one of the earliest of those who come with lying signs and wonders so as to deceive, if it were possible, the very elect (cf. Matt. 24:24; 2 Thess. 2:9).

Great power of God. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading "the power of God that is called Great." Irenaeus (Against Heresies i. 23; ANF, Vol. 1 p. 348) says of Simon Magus that "he was glorified by many as if he were a god. ... He represented himself, in a word, as being the loftiest of all powers."

11. Had regard. Gr. prosechoµ (see on v. 6).

Bewitched. See on v. 9. The "long time" during which this evil fascination had been exercised would bring the beginning of Simon's sorceries close to the time of our Lord's ministry in Samaria some six or seven years before.

12. Preaching. See on v. 5. Then, as now, men were saved by preaching (see on 1 Cor. 1:21). The power of Philip's message proved stronger than the fascination of Simon's magic.

Kingdom of God. See on Matt. 4:17; Luke 17:20, 21; Acts 1:6. As the field of gospel labor widened, the message of the disciples became clearer. It was comprehensive and specific; it led to the baptism of its hearers.

Name of Jesus Christ. See on chs. 2:21; 3:16.

Were baptized. See on Matt. 3:6. The tense of the Greek verb here implies not one great baptism but a succession of converts, both men and women, who were thus admitted to the church.

13. Then Simon himself. Rather, conveying the emphasis of the Greek, "even Simon himself."

Believed. Doubtless he was impressed by the miracles that Philip wrought (v. 6); he felt himself to be in the presence of a Power infinitely higher than his own. But he accepted Philip's statements as to the death and resurrection of Christ, without developing a personal faith. His was the sort of faith of which James speaks (James 2:14, 19). A similar imperfect belief is described in John 8:31 where certain Jews are described as believing on Jesus while the remainder of the chapter shows that their belief was not a saving one. Yet Simon understood enough to be baptized, although, as his later attitude showed, his baptism could have represented no new birth to a higher life. He remained still in "iniquity" (Acts 8:23). Luke draws a distinction between the belief of the Samaritans and that of Simon: the people were won by Philip's preaching, but Simon was attracted by the wonders that he saw. Nevertheless, God did not reject this imperfect faith. He accepted it as the base on which to build a more acceptable belief. When Simon fell away, Peter called upon him (v. 22) to repent and to pray for forgiveness.

Wondered, beholding. Rather, the clause should read, "beholding signs and great miracles coming to pass, he was amazed" (see on v. 9). The tables were now turned. The magician, who had been wondered at, yielded to a spell mightier than his own, and was in turn astonished as he beheld the power that attended the proclamation of the gospel.

14. The apostles. They had remained in Jerusalem (v. 1), directing the activities of the church. The Lord had once placed a geographic limit upon the preaching of the message of the kingdom (Matt. 10:5). He had canceled those limits by the gospel commission (Matt. 28:19, 20) and by the instruction in Acts 1:8. Word of Philip's success in Samaria came to the Twelve as proof that the removal of limitations was a fact. The time had now come to witness for Christ in Samaria.

Heard. In spite of persecution, communication between the scattered workers and headquarters appears to have been faithfully maintained.

Samaria. Philip's message was carried throughout the district by his enthusiastic converts.

Word of God. The expression is here used by Luke, as in his Gospel, for the whole sum and substance of the gospel of Christ (cf. Luke 5:1; 8:11, 21).

Peter and John. Evidently there was no particular pre-eminence assigned to any one of the Twelve in those early days. By the decision of the whole apostolate, Peter and John were sent on their Samaritan mission. It was logical to choose these two, for they had been most active in the beginning work of the church (cf. chs. 1:15; 2:14; 3:1; 4:8; etc.). There is no evidence here of the supremacy of Peter; he was under the direction of the body of the apostles, who "sent" him and John on this mission. John, who had once sought to call down fire upon the Samaritans (Luke 9:54), was now, in love, to bring them the baptism of the Holy Ghost and of fire (Matt. 3:11). The suggestion that the John here mentioned might have been John Mark (see on Acts 13:5, 13) is hardly tenable. Had John Mark already gone through the experiences described in the following verses, he would scarcely have turned back from Paul and Barnabas (ch. 13:13).

15. Prayed. This was the first act of the two apostles. They did not confer the Holy Spirit upon the newly baptized Samaritan believers, but besought the Lord to bestow the Spirit upon them as a sequel to their baptism (cf. ch. 2:38), and as evidence of their being accepted by God.

16. He was fallen. This verse makes a clear distinction between the water baptism administered by Philip, and the reception of the Holy Spirit through the ministry of Peter and John. The verb translated "fallen" is used of the gift of the Spirit in chs. 10:44; 11:15, and of Peter's trance in ch. 10:10.

Only they were baptized. Rather, "they had only been baptized." The water baptism had been administered by Philip, but the gifts of the Spirit did not fall until Peter and John arrived.

In the name. Or, "into the name." This indicates the close tie with which the new converts to the faith were bound to Christ by baptism.

17. Hands on them. See on ch. 6:6.

Received. Note the three steps that enabled the Samaritans to receive the Holy Spirit: (1) Their own confession of faith by baptism (v. 12), (2) the apostles' prayer (v. 15), and (3) the apostles' laying on of hands (v. 17).

18. Simon saw. He had been baptized by Philip even as the other Samaritans had been, but the apostles' hands had not been laid upon him, and he had not received the Spirit, who had been graciously given to the other believers. There must have been a reason for this; perhaps his true nature had already been clearly perceived. The distinction made between him and his fellow countrymen, however, aroused his desire. He saw evidence of their reception of the Spirit. The men were changed; they may have begun speaking with tongues and prophesying; at least it was obvious that the Holy Spirit had entered their lives.

Offered them money. He saw that his fellows were being endowed with abilities far greater than his own, and although he did not possess the Holy Spirit, he desired the power that such possession would bring. He therefore offered money to Peter and John, hoping that he would be able to purchase what he had not freely received. Such conduct reveals the faulty character of his faith and uncovers the motives that controlled him. His offer of money has given its name to a large class of ecclesiastical offenses. Any attempt to purchase spiritual powers or offices is labeled "simony."

19. Give me. The character of the man was now fully revealed. He did not desire the Holy Spirit for himself as a spiritual gift to seal his baptism, but that he might use the power to dominate others. He wanted the external power without having undergone the inward change that would justify such a gift. It is possible that he intended to make money out of this hoped-for ability to impart the Holy Spirit to others, as he might wish.

20. Thy money perish with thee. Literally, "Thy silver be together with thee, for perdition." So Peter expressed his disgust at Simon's offer. He realized that if the man did not change he would be destroyed. But he did not regard Simon's state as hopeless, for in v. 22 he urged him to repent and be forgiven.

Gift of God. The clause may be translated, "because thou thoughtest to acquire the gift of God by money." Simon's attitude betrayed a fundamental misapprehension of God's character and the gifts of the Spirit. He had yet to learn that the most precious things in life cannot be bought with money.

21. Neither part nor lot. This is no arbitrary pronouncement, but a judgment based on the known state of Simon's heart. He did not truly belong to God's family, so was not eligible to share in its privileges and responsibilities. For comment on "lot" see on ch. 1:26.

This matter. Or, "this word." This phrase most obviously refers to the topic under discussion, that is, the power to impart the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands (v. 19). But if the literal rendering "this word" be adopted,the reference is to v. 14, where it is said, "Samaria had received the word of God."

Right. Gr. euthus, "straight," and by extension, in a moral sense, "straightforward," "upright," "true," "sincere." The word is rare in the NT, but like so many of the spoken words of Peter, is found again in an epistle of his (2 Peter 2:15).

22. Repent. See on Matt. 3:2. This is the first condition for obtaining forgiveness and averting merited punishment. Note that although Simon's attitude is described as "wickedness," Peter's appeal shows that salvation was still available for him.

Pray God. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading "Lord" instead of "God." This would be a special reference to the Lord Jesus, against whom Simon's offense was committed.

If perhaps. This implies a doubt, not of God's willingness to forgive, but of Simon's readiness to repent. Peter may also have thought that Simon's sin approximated the unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost (see on Matt. 12:31). In this case the use of such words by Peter, after Christ had given to the apostles great disciplinary power (John 20:23), would be most serious indeed.

Thought. Gr. epinoia, "purpose," "intent," giving the idea of a ripened scheme. This makes the offense all the more serious. The apostle sees how the mind of Simon has been fully occupied with his plan, and while he will not declare that there is no hope for him, his covetousness, bordering upon idolatry, makes repentance almost impossible. God is ever ready to forgive, but man is often not ready for forgiveness (see on Ps. 32:1; 130:4).

23. I perceive. With true insight, Peter gauged the contents of Simon's heart.

Gall of bitterness. That is, "the gall which is bitterness," and in the next phrase, "the bond which is iniquity." Peter sees the man as immersed in bitterness and chained in iniquity. Simon had allowed envy and covetousness to embitter his soul, and wickedness to become a fixed habit, until he was a prisoner to these evils.

24. Pray ... for me. Simon shows by the nature of his plea that he is not moved by genuine repentance. He shows no sorrow. He sees no need of character. He asks only that he be relieved of the threat of punishment. His entreaty may be compared to the oft-repeated plea of Pharaoh to Moses, "Intreat the Lord" (Ex. 8:8, 28; 9:28; 10:17), which reflected simply his fear, and resulted in no change of conduct. There is no record of a subsequent repentance on Simon's part, and it may therefore be assumed that he remained unconverted.

This is the end of the record of Simon in the book of Acts, but early church history preserves many legends about him. These legends represent him as a self-appointed leader of a debased form of Christianity that constantly warred against orthodox belief. The unedifying story may be followed in Pseudo-Clementine Homilies ii. 18-39, Recognitions ii. 5-16; Justin Martyr First Apology 26, 56; Irenaeus Against Heresies i. 23; Eusebius Ecclesiastical History ii. 13. 13-18; 14. 1-6; 15. 1. These writings portray Simon as a forerunner of the Gnostic heretics, a teacher whose system was largely based on astrology, angelology, and an overwhelming belief in his own divine powers. See Vol. V, p. 912; Vol. VI, p. 34.

25. And they. This certainly indicates the apostles Peter and John. Some commentators think it includes Philip. However, see AA 107.

Testified. Gr. diamarturomai, "to testify earnestly."

Preached. Gr. laleoµ, "to speak," "to say."

Returned. The form of the verb in Greek here may be translated, "began to return." They continued to preach the gospel as they made their way back to Jerusalem.

This closes the inspired record of Christianity in Samaria, except for a passing reference in ch. 15:3.

26. The angel. Rather, "an angel." Luke is observant of angel ministry (cf. Luke 1:38 and Acts 10:7; Luke 2:9 and Acts 12:7; Luke 24:4 and Acts 1:10; 10:30). The Greek construction suggests that an angel spoke to Philip while Peter and John were doing their work of evangelism. The supernatural call may well have come in a vision (cf. Cornelius, Acts 10:3).

South. Gr. meseµmbria, generally rendered "midday" or "noon." However, in the Northern Hemisphere, the sun is in the south when it reaches its meridian; hence the word also came to signify locality, that is, "the south." Some authorities prefer the translation "noon."

Unto the way. Rather, "on the way," or "along the road."

Gaza. This name is the Greek transliteration of the Heb. ÔAzzah, which means "strong." Gaza (also called Azzah in Deut. 2:23; 1 Kings 4:24; Jer. 25:20) was a southern border city of the early Canaanites (Gen. 10:19). It was occupied first by the Avim, and then by the Caphtorim (Deut. 2:23). Joshua failed to subdue it (Joshua 10:41; 11:22). Judah held it for a brief period (Judges 1:18), but soon lost it to the Philistines (Joshua 13:3; Judges 3:3), who made it the southernmost of their five great cities. The city was the scene of Samson's humiliation and death (Judges 16), and continued to be held by the Philistines during the time of Samuel and onward (1 Sam. 6:17). Solomon (1 Kings 4:21, 24), and later Hezekiah (2 Kings 18:8), attacked it. It resisted Alexander the Great for five months, but was eventually captured and became an important military post during the struggles between the Ptolemies and the Seleucids, and in the wars of the Maccabees (1 Maccabees 11:61).

About 96 B.C. Gaza was destroyed and its people massacred by Alexander Jannaeus (Josephus Antiquities xiii. 13. 3 [358-364]), but it was rebuilt by the proconsul Gabinius (ibid. xiv. 5. 3 [88]), though it is said that the restored city was nearer the sea than the ancient one. There was more than one road from Jerusalem to Gaza, some 50 mi. to the southwest. A northern route passed near Lydda, then ran parallel with the coast southward through Azotus to Gaza. Another went southward to Hebron, then due west through desert country to the city of Gaza. The latter is the more likely route of the narrative, especially if meseµmbria is translated "south."

Desert. The clause literally reads, as if a separate sentence, "This is desert." There is nothing to show whether these were the angel's words or an explanatory note added by Luke. Neither is it clear whether "this" refers to the "way" or to the "city," although it is unlikely that Luke would name a city and then describe it as "desert." The RSV translates it, "This is a desert road." In simple faith Philip was to go to the less frequented, less promising route from Jerusalem to Gaza, and without knowing that on the road he would meet a traveler whose conversion was to become so memorable.

27. He arose and went. His instant obedience reveals absence of any doubt of the authenticity of the message he had received.

Ethiopia. Ethiopia, like Cush in the OT, is a general name given to the country south of the first cataract of the Nile, and extending into modern Ethiopia. Its northern portion was the great kingdom of Meroe in the upper valley of the Nile, which was ruled over by queens for a long period, and it is most probably from this kingdom that the eunuch had come. Its connection with the Jewish people presents many points of interest. According to the Letter of Aristeas 13, during the reign of one of the Pharaohs named Psamtik (perhaps Psamtik II, 594-588 B.C.) a body of Jews were sent to Egypt to aid in a campaign against Ethiopia. Jewish influences had certainly been at work in that region for centuries. This may be reflected in the courageous work of an early Ethiopian eunuch Ebed-melech, in the time of Jeremiah (chs. 38:7-13; 39:15-18). Even earlier the Hebrews had expected and seen the admission of Ethiopians into their commonwealth (Ps. 68:31); 87:4).

Eunuch. See on Esther 1:10; 2:3; Matt. 19:12.

Great authority. Gr. dunasteµs, "a prince," "a potentate," "a high officer." The letter of the Deuteronomic law (see on Deut. 23:1) was explicit concerning the exclusion of eunuchs from the sanctuary of God, but this was doubtless modified in practice. The admission of Sabbathkeeping eunuchs into the ranks of God's people is promised by Isaiah (ch. 56:4). Rank, race, and physical condition are not factors in admission to the family of our heavenly Father (Gal. 3:28, 29; Col 3:10, 11).

Candace. This appears to have been a dynastic name or title, like Pharaoh or Ptolemy in Egypt, and Caesar among the Romans, rather than the personal name of an individual queen. The name occurs in Strabo Geography xvii. 1. 54; and Dio Cassius History liv. 5. 4-6. According to Eusebius (c. a.d. 325) Ethiopia was still under the rule of a queen in his time (Ecclesiastical History ii. 1. 13). See Vol. VIII, "Candace."

Treasure. Gr. gaza, "royal treasury," "treasure," a word of Persian origin that was coming into use about this time among Greek and Latin writers (Cicero De Officiis ii. 22 [76]). The LXX translators employed it in Ezra 5:17; 6:1; 7:21; Isa. 39:2. It is not found elsewhere in the NT, but a compound form is used for the treasury of the Temple (Luke 21:1). Philip meets a man who has charge of gaza, the treasure. The evangelist helps him to find a treasure, even as the man in the parable of Matt. 13:44 found a treasure by diligently seeking for it.

To worship. It appears that this eunuch was a circumcised proselyte of righteousness (see Vol. V, p. 63) who was visiting Jerusalem to worship at the Temple. Proselytes, as well as Jews, came to Jerusalem for this purpose, as may be observed from the enumeration of those present at Pentecost (Acts 2:10). According to John 12:20, Greeks also came up to the feasts at Jerusalem. The eunuch had come to Jerusalem in search of a blessing, but before he reaches home he is to receive one that surpasses all his expectations. See Vol. IV, pp. 27-30.

28. Was returning. That is, from Jerusalem to Ethiopia, at the termination of his recent visit to worship at the Temple.

Read. Rather, "was reading." Apparently he was reading aloud (see v. 30), as this was a common practice among Orientals. It may be that the man had just bought the scroll of Isaiah while he was in Jerusalem, and if so, the wonderful utterances of the gospel prophet must have seemed fresh and rich to him. It is clear, from vs. 32, 33, that he was reading from the 53d chapter of Isaiah in the LXX version.

29. The Spirit said. Compare on v. 26. Here the Spirit speaks, and gives explicit instructions to the evangelist, by an inward prompting or an audible voice.

Join thyself. This royal official doubtless had a large retinue, to which it would be natural for a single traveler on a desert road to attach himself. Philip would be able to approach and hear what was read without being considered intrusive.

30. Philip ran. That is, ran up to the chariot, in immediate obedience to the Spirit's command. Christians should emulate this ready response. Those who do so will find more people ready to listen to sincere, Christ-centered conversation than they would ordinarily expect.

Understandest thou? Note the skillful opening of the conversation: Philip began just where he found the man, and suited his approach to his prospect's interests. In this he provides an example for every Christian worker to follow. Philip's question referred to the meaning rather than the words. Its form in Greek implies that he expected a negative answer. The eunuch might have heard some of the Jewish expositions of the passage, but he probably had no inkling of the fact that the words referred to Jesus Christ. But Philip knew their meaning, and was led by the Spirit to explain their import.

31. How can I? The question implies lack of ability, for he was not trained to interpret the Scriptures.

Guide. Gr. hodeµgeoµ, "to lead on one's way," "to guide." The same word is used by Jesus of the guidance of the Holy Spirit (John 16:13). The eunuch, returning to Ethiopia, where he will be separated from those who have hitherto guided him in Jerusalem, feels that he needs skilled instruction for this difficult scripture. His question suggests that he is noticing the passage for the first time, or is having it pressed upon him by the Spirit with renewed emphasis.

Desired. Rather, "besought." The word implies an earnest request, and indicates the eunuch's eagerness to have more instruction. Note how smoothly the Spirit's injunction (v. 29) is fulfilled. Philip draws near, and the eunuch himself invites the evangelist to enter his chariot and ride with him.

32. The place. Gr. periocheµ, "content." This word was used as an equivalent for the Hebrew terms parashah, or hapht\arah, the passages of Scripture appointed for public reading in the synagogue (see Vol. V, p. 57). The word was in common use among the Greeks, and was adopted by Cicero (Letters to Atticus xiii. 25). It signified the whole context of the passage. "The scripture" (singular, here and in the Greek) refers to a passage of Scripture, and not to the whole body of Scriptures. The clause may therefore be translated, "The content of the passage of Scripture." The verses quoted are from Isaiah 53:7, 8, and are given word for word from the LXX.

He was led. For general comment on the passage quoted see on Isa. 53:7, 8, remembering that the NT quotation is a translation of the LXX, not the Hebrew, text.

33. His humiliation. The clause may be literally translated, "In the humiliation His judgment was removed," but the reading is capable of several interpretations. It might mean that "His condemnation was taken away," or "canceled"; that is, because He humbled Himself, He was afterward exalted; or, alternatively, "Justice was denied Him in His humiliation," as it undoubtedly was during His trial. The Hebrew of Isa. 53:8 suggests, "He was taken away by oppression and judgment"; that is, He was the victim of a judicial murder.

His generation. This expression has had various interpretations: (1) "Who shall declare the number of those who shared His life, and are, as it were, sprung from Him"; that is, who can count His faithful disciples? (2) "Who, as far as His generation went, were wise enough to consider?" (3) "Who shall declare the wickedness of the crooked and perverse generation in which He lived?" See also on Isa. 53:8.

His life is taken. The Hebrew of Isa. 53:8 suggests that the Saviour was hurried to a violent death. The LXX version expresses the same thought, and makes no reference to Christ's departure from earth at the ascension.

34. I pray thee. The eunuch's brief encounter with this man of God must have made a very favorable impression upon him, for he shows immediate confidence in Philip's ability to answer his question. This presents Philip with the opportunity he is seeking. The Christian will often be surprised at the way in which opportunities arise when he is ready and willing to utilize them.

Of whom? The eunuch was keen enough to ask the most important question concerning the passage he was reading, namely, to whom did Isaiah's words refer? The question was not settled in his day, and is still much discussed in ours (see on Isa. 41:8; 42:1; 52:13; 53:1). Philip, however, has no doubts upon the subject--nor should we. The question provides him with his text for preaching Jesus to the Ethiopian.

35. Opened his mouth. The phrase, wherever it occurs in the NT, implies something like a set discourse rather than the mere act of speaking (cf. Matt. 5:2; 13:35; Acts 10:34).

The same scripture. Philip met the eunuch on his own ground, at the passage he was studying. There was no better place for Philip to begin. Nor is there for the preacher today.

Preached unto him Jesus. During his sojourn in Jerusalem the eunuch had probably heard of Jesus' teaching. The work of the disciples had attracted the attention of the entire city (chs. 2:41; 4:33; 5:12-14; 6:7, 8). But many of the discussions he had heard undoubtedly classified Jesus as an impostor, and it is very unlikely that he would have seen Isa. 53 in the light of the apostle's preaching. But this prophecy is one of the clearest OT portrayals of the sacrificial and substitutionary death of Jesus Christ as the only avenue of salvation from the experience, the condemnation, and the destructive power of sin. The sequel indicates that Philip's teaching included not only an application of the prophecy to Jesus Christ, but instruction as to what it meant to join the fellowship of His disciples. It is clear from the NT that such instruction was given before baptismal candidates were immersed.

To preach Jesus is the work, not only of every preacher of the gospel, but of every Christian, whether the preaching is done by word or by the witness of the daily life. Whatever the announced subject of a sermon, its burden should be Jesus Christ.

36. As they went. Philip and the eunuch must have traveled for some time together, for he not only presented to him the facts of salvation through Jesus Christ in terms of Isa. 53, but carried the instruction to the point where the eunuch understood the meaning of baptism, and desired it for himself.

A certain water. In the 4th century this was identified with Bethsura, the Bethzur of 2 Chron. 11:7, 20 mi. (32 km. from Jerusalem, and 4 mi. (6.4 km. from Hebron. A spring here still retains the old name in the Arabic form, Beit-S\uµr. Others think the spring was in the WaÆdéµ-el-H\eséµ, between Eleutheropolis and Gaza, not far from the old cities of Lachish and Eglon. This better agrees with the proximity of the event to Gaza and with the information that the way of travel led through the desert.

What doth hinder? The eagerness of the eunuch to complete his preparation for membership in the church of his new-found Lord is exemplary. The initiative was his; he needed no urging from Philip. He had learned of a Saviour, and had forsaken his sins. He had been instructed in the Name and the Way (cf. Acts 4:12; John 14:6). What reason could be advanced to deny him the rite of baptism?

37. If thou believers. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of this verse. It is possible that a marginal explanation, drawn from an early baptismal confession, has crept into the text at this point. It should be noted, however, that the truth expressed in v. 37 is set forth in variant forms elsewhere in the Bible (cf. John 3:16; Acts 2:38; 16:30, 31).

38. He commanded. This brought the whole retinue to a standstill. Its members must have been interested witnesses of the baptism, and some of them possibly formed the nucleus of the first Christian congregation in Ethiopia. Tradition asserts that the eunuch proclaimed the gospel to his countrymen.

Went down both into. Gr. katabainoµ eis, "to go down unto," or "to go down into." If this phrase appeared by itself, there would be no way to decide whether Philip and the eunuch went down unto the brink of the water or whether they actually went into it. But the complementary phrase in v. 39 settles the matter satisfactorily.

39.Come up out. Gr. anabainoµ ek, "to come up out of." This shows that both men went down into the water, otherwise they could not have come up out of the water. This was certainly for the purpose of baptism by immersion. See on Matt. 3:6; Mark 16:16; Rom. 6:3-6. Here, then, we have a clear illustration of the method of baptism employed in the early church,even on such an unexpected, rather informal occasion as this.

The Spirit. The Spirit had initiated Philip's meeting with the eunuch, and now that it had reached a successful result, the Spirit again opened new possibilities for service to him.

Caught away. Gr. harpazoµ, "to seize," "to carry off by force," "to snatch away." The the same verb is used in a comparable way in 1 Thess 4:17; Rev. 12:5. Human feeling would naturally have led the evangelist to remain, to complete his work with the eunuch and to instruct him more fully. But by means of a supernatural power, Philip was literally snatched away from his companion. Compare 1 Kings 18:12; 2 Kings 2:16; Eze. 3:12, 14.

And he went. Literally, "for he went." This explains more clearly why the eunuch "saw him no more." It also suggests that the eunuch accepted Philip's disappearance as a supernatural act, that he spent no time in fruitless search for his teacher and baptizer, but rather went on his own way, that is, continued his interrupted journey.

Rejoicing. The position of this word at the end of a phrase is typically Lukan (cf. Luke. 15:5; 19:6). Believing that Philip was in the hands of God, the eunuch felt no anxiety about him, but could afford to go on his way rejoicing in the new light he had received. Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History ii. 1. 13; Loeb ed., vol. 1, pp. 110, 111) speaks of the eunuch as returning to his native country, and there preaching "the knowledge of the God of the universe and the sojourn of our Saviour which gives life to men," and so fulfilling the words "Ethiopia shall soon stretch out her hands unto God" (Ps. 68:31). It is significant that the Ethiopian church has had elements similar to Judaism throughout its history. It was early separated from the remainder of Christendom, and retained the simplicity of the life and teachings of the early church for some time. Ethiopian Christians long kept the seventh-day Sabbath, together with the observance of the first day of the week.

40. Was found at. The Greek preposition eis may be literally translated "into," suggesting that Philip was found inside the city. Not that a search party was sent out for him, but that there his presence was made known.

Azotus. The Ashdod of the OT (1 Sam. 5:1-7), one of the five chief cities of the Philistines, about 3 mi. (c. 5 km.) from the sea and halfway between Gaza and Joppa. Like Gaza, its history was marked by successive sieges: by the Assyrians (Isa. 20:1), by the Egyptians (Herodotus ii. 159; see on Jer. 47:1), by the Maccabees (1 Maccabees 5:68; 10:84). It was restored by the Roman general Gabinius in 55 B.C. The old name lingers in the modern EsduÆd. The Israelis have built a large port city adjacent to the ancient site. Philip did not stay there, but "passed through," or "passed on" see on Acts 8:4) Luke's narrative suggests that Philip continued his work as an evangelist. The psalmist names Philistia as joining with Ethiopia in providing a company of converts for the city of God (Ps. 87:4).

He preached. Rather, "he was preaching," or "he continued to preach." Philip's remarkable experience with the eunuch hardly interrupted his other activities as a preacher of the gospel.

In all the cities. His route probably led through Lydda and Joppa, and we may doubtless see the effects of his labors in the flourishing Christian communities later found in both these towns (ch. 9:32, 36).

Cæsarea. Caesarea lay on the road from Tyre to Egypt, and was of great historical importance. It dates from the Roman period. In the writings of Strabo the geographer (Geography xvi. 2. 27; c. a.d. 20) it was known only as Strato's Tower, and was merely a landing place for ships. Herod the Great transformed it into a flourishing port with a harbor as large as that of Piraeus, at Athens. He named the city for his imperial patron Augustus, calling it Caesarea Sebaste, the latter word being equivalent to the Latin title Augusta (see Josephus Antiquities xvi. 5. 1; War i. 21. 5-7). After the expulsion of Archelaus from Judea, it became the official residence of the Roman procurator (cf. ch. 23:23, 24). Tacitus (Histories ii. 78) speaks of Caesarea as the chief city, the caput, of Judea. Its population was largely heathen, with an admixture of Jews, making it a fruitful center for missionary labor. As the following chapters of Acts show (the city is mentioned 15 times), it was prominent in the early history of the church. It may be inferred from ch. 21:8 that Philip made it the headquarters of his evangelistic work. Caesarea later became the scene of the labors of the Church Father Origen. Possibly it was the birthplace of the historian-bishop Eusebius. There are now only a few scattered ruins on the site of the ancient city.

Ellen G. White Comments

1 AA 101, 103, 129; COL 308; EW 199; 6T 330

1-40AA 103-111

3 AA 103, 113; EW 199

4 AA 105, 113, 166; CM 58; DA 233; GC 219; PK 699; 3T 413; 6T 330, 403, 478; 8T 57

4, 5 GC 328

5-8AA 106; MH 139

9 GC 516

9, 10 GC 625

14 8T 57

17 EW 101

18, 19 9T 217

20 GC 128

23 2T 563

26-28AA 107

26-408T 57

29 MH 473

29-40AA 108

Acts Chapter 9

1 Saul, going towards Damascus, 4 is stricken down to the earth, 10 is called to the apostleship, 18 and is baptized by Ananaias. 20 He preacheth Christ boldly. 23 The Jews lay wait to kill him: 29 so do the Grecians, but he escapeth both. 31 The church having rest, Peter healeth AEneas of the palsy, 36 and restoreth Tabitha to life.

1. Saul. See Additional Note 2 on ch. 7.

Yet. Gr. eti, "still," connecting the narrative of ch. 9 with ch. 8:3. While the church has been expanding outside Jerusalem (ch. 8:4-40) Saul has continued to persecute it inside and around the capital.

Breathing out. Gr. empneoµ, "to breathe in," or "on." The arrest and slaughter of Christians were, figuratively speaking, the very air Saul breathed. Semitic peoples often associated the emotion of anger with breath.

Threatenings and slaughter. Rather, "threatening and murder." The persecutor's zeal has intensified; he is willing to go to extreme limits to stamp out the hated teaching. He himself acknowledges this in chs. 22:4; 26:9-11. He does not try to minimize the terrible part he played in ravaging the church. The early Church Fathers saw a half-prophetic parallelism between the language of Jacob, "Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf: in the morning he shall devour the prey, and at night he shall divide the spoil" (Gen. 49:27), and the conduct of one who gloried in being of the tribe of Benjamin (Phil. 3:5), and who bore the name of the tribe's great hero-king.

Against the disciples. The names of the victims of this continued persecution are not given, but Paul's later confession, "When they were put to death, I gave my voice [vote] against them" (ch. 26:10), indicates that Stephen was not the only one killed at this time. The zeal Saul showed at the time of Stephen's death led to his election to the Sanhedrin (AA 102), and he was soon armed with authority from the chief priests to hunt down Christians in Jerusalem. If it was known in Jerusalem that Samaritans had been admitted to the church (see on ch. 8:1), the hatred of the Jews doubtless was intensified.

High priest. Annas or Caiaphas (see on ch. 4:6), both of whom were Sadducees, whereas Saul gloried in being a strict Pharisee (ch. 26:5). But the strangeness of this alliance (see Vol. V, pp. 51, 52) did not deter the stern persecutor. The coalition of Sadducees and Pharisees that had earlier been formed against Jesus Christ (Matt. 26:3) was renewed against His followers.

2. Desired. Preferably, "requested," or "asked," on his own behalf, possibly to justify his elevation to the Sanhedrin.

Early Life of Paul

From Birth at Tarsus to Call to Antioch

Letters. These were the papers that constituted Saul's "authority and commission" (ch. 26:12). It appears that Rome cooperated with the Jewish authorities by giving the high priest powers of extradition over fugitive Jews. This authority probably dates from about 56 B.C. (Josephus Antiquities xiv. 8. 5 [146-148]; cf. 1 Maccabees 15:15-24).

Damascus. The city is accounted one of the oldest in the world. Its site was traditionally the scene of the murder of Abel. Josephus (Antiquities i. 6. 4 [145]) attributes the founding of the town to Uz, the grandson of Shem (Vol. I, p. 270). It figures in the history of Abraham as the birthplace of his steward (Gen. 15:2). David placed garrisons there (2 Sam. 8:6), but under Rezon the city became a center of opposition to Solomon (1 Kings 11:23-25). Its rivers, Abana and Pharpar, were, in the eyes of the leprous Syrian general, Naaman, better than any rivers of Israel (2 Kings 5:12). It was the center of the Syrian kingdom in its alliances and wars with Israel and Judea (2 Kings 14:28; 16:9, 10; Amos 1:3, 5). It carried on trade in wares with Tyre, and in wine and white wool, as noted by Ezekiel (ch. 27:16, 18). In 333 B.C. the Macedonian general Parmenion took the city for Alexander the Great. It was taken again by the Roman Pompey in 64 B.C. At the time of Saul's conversion it was under the jurisdiction of Vitellius, then Roman governor of Syria. When Tiberius died in 37 a.d., Vitellius hastened to Rome, and Aretas IV, king of the Nabataeans, seized control of Damascus and governed it by a deputy. Thus matters stood at the time when Saul escaped from the city (2 Cor. 11:32).

Damascus formed an oasis in the Syrian desert. The river Abana, fed by the snows of the Anti-Lebanon Mts., watered the terrain and made it very productive. The city was well described as "a predestined capital." Its population was predominantly Aramaic, but the city possessed a large Jewish colony. The narrative (Acts 9:2, 14) implies that there were many "disciples of the Lord" (v. 1) among them. Of these, many may have been refugees from the persecution in and around Jerusalem, and the local synagogues were doubtless called upon to enforce the decree of the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem. Luke does not explain why Saul selected this place for his further vindictive work against the church. Reasons, however, can be offered: (1) As noted, Christians had taken refuge there, at some considerable distance from Judea. (2) There were Christian converts who were citizens of the place. (3) Damascus may have become an outlying center of the expanding church. (4) Saul may have been well acquainted with the Jewish authorities, and could count on their cooperation against the Christians.

Synagogues. The city was cosmopolitan, and Jews from many nations probably lived there. As in Jerusalem (cf. on ch. 6:9), national groups would establish their own synagogues. It is estimated that there may have been 30 or 40 synagogues in the city of Damascus at this time. Doubtless, Christians were still devoutly attending the synagogues, and it was against them that Saul planned to proceed.

Of this way. That is, "any who were belonging to the way." The word "way" appears as an early synonym for Christianity (cf. chs. 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22). Compare Luke's use of "the name" (ch. 5:41, RSV), "the word" (chs. 4:4; 8:4; 14:25), "the way of salvation" (ch. 16:17), and "the way of the Lord" (ch. 18:25). The term may have originated in Christ's declaration that He is the "way" (John 14:6), or in His reference to the narrow "way" (Matt. 7:14).

Men or women. The inclusion of women among his prospective victims emphasizes the fury with which Saul moved against the Christians (cf. ch. 22:4).

Bound unto Jerusalem. Saul's mission implies that the offense of the Christians was beyond the jurisdiction of local tribunals (see on Matt. 10:17), and had to be referred to the Sanhedrin (Vol. V, p. 67) in Jerusalem. So great was the priestly power (see above under "letters") that Jewish authorities were allowed to arrest those whom they desired, even on foreign soil.

3. Journeyed. There is now no way to know by which road Saul and his companions went, but they had the choice of at least two roads. One of these was the main caravan route from Egypt to Damascus, which ran parallel with the Palestinian coast line until it struck east to cross the Jordan River above the Lake of Galilee. The other way led through Samaria and crossed the Jordan south of the Lake of Galilee, and after passing through Gadara, went northeastward to Damascus. The 150 mi. might be covered in one week.

Near Damascus. The site of Saul's vision is unknown. Conflicting and unfounded traditions point out four different places. It must have been relatively close to the city, however, for his companions "led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus" (v. 8; cf. AA 117).

The book of Acts records three accounts of what now took place near Damascus. Concerning minor variations in parallel Bible accounts, see Additional Note on Matt. 3. The table below compares the chief points in the three accounts.

Shined. Better, "flashed." Chapters 22:6; 26:13 identify the time of day as noon. Bright as is the midday glare of the Eastern sun, Paul later says the light he saw from heaven was "above the brightness of the sun" (ch. 26:13). In the midst of this effulgence he so clearly saw the glorified Christ that he includes himself among those who were privileged to behold the Lord after His resurrection (Acts 9:17; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:8; AA 115). As to the manner of the

The Three Accounts of Paul's Conversion

Luke's Historical Account

Paul's Speech Before the People

Paul's Speech Before Agrippa

Acts 9:1-9

Acts 22:4-11

Acts 26:9-18

v. 1. Saul persecuted the dis-

v. 4. Persecuted this way.

vs. 9-11. Persecuted the saints.

ciples.

v. 2. Desired letters from the

v. 5. Received letters from

v. 12. Received commission

high priest to the syna-

the high priest and

from the chief priests.

gogues in Damascus.

elders.

To bring Christians,

To bring Christians to

both men and women,

Jerusalem to be pun-

to Jerusalem.

ished

v. 3. Near Damascus a light

v. 6. Near Damascus, about

v. 13. At midday he saw a

from heaven suddenly

noon, a great light

light from heaven above

shone about him.

from heaven suddenly

the brightness of the

shone about him.

sun, which shone about

the group.

v. 4. He fell to the earth.

v. 7. He fell to the ground.

v. 14. All fell to the ground.

He heard a voice: "Saul,

He heard a voice: "Saul,

He heard a voice, in

Saul, why persecutest

Saul, why persecutest

the Hebrew tongue:

thou me?"

thou me?"

"Saul, Saul, why perse-

cutest thou me?"

v. 5. He said, "Who art thou,

v. 8. He answered, "Who art

v. 15. He said, "Who art thou,

Lord?"

thou, Lord?"

Lord?"

The Lord said, "I am

The Lord said, "I am

The Lord said, "I am

Jesus whom thou perse-

Jesus of Nazareth, whom

Jesus whom thou perse-

cutest."

thou persecutest."

cutest."

v. 6. He said, "Lord, what

v. 10. Saul said, "What shall

----------------

wilt thou have me to

I do Lord?"

do?"

The Lord said, "Arise,

The Lord said, "Arise,

----------------

and go into the city"--

and go into Damascus"

for instructions.

--for instructions.

v. 7. His companions stood

v. 9. His companions saw

----------------

speechless, hearing a

the light, but heard not

voice, but seeing no

the voice.

man.

v. 8. He arose, but saw no

v. 11. He could not see for

vs. 16-18. The Lord bade him

man.

the glory of that light.

rise.

Companions led him by

Was led by the hand of

----------------

the hand into Damascus.

companions into Da-

mascus.

appearance, it is natural to think of it as being such as had met the gaze of Stephen (see on Acts 7:55, 56). The martyr's words, "I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God," had then seemed like blasphemy to the fiery zeal of Saul, the Pharisee. Now Saul himself sees the Son of man in the glory of the Father. Saul's companions heard a voice but did not distinguish the words (see ch. 22:9; cf. on ch. 9:7). They saw the light (ch. 22:9), but did not perceive the form of Him that spoke (cf. on John 12:29). These deta

4. Fell. The light from heaven so overwhelmed the travelers that all fell to the ground (ch. 26:14), although Luke here mentions only Saul. There is no evidence that any of them were on horseback.

Heard a voice. Comparison with chs. 9:7 and 22:9 suggests that Saul heard and understood the voice that spoke to him, whereas his companions heard the sound without understanding what was said (see on ch. 9:7).

Saul. Up to this point the narrative has given Saul's name in its Greek form, Saulos. Here, and in chs. 9:17; 22:7, 13; 26:14, however, the Hebrew form of the name, Saoul, is used. This probably reflects the actual words spoken: (1) by Jesus, who, according to ch. 26:14, spoke in the Hebrew (Aramaic) tongue (see Vol. I, p. 30); (2) by Ananias, who was probably a Jew and therefore spoke Hebrew (Aramaic). For the reiteration of a person's name in divine communications, cf. Gen. 22:11; 1 Sam. 3:10; Matt. 23:37; Luke 10:41; 22:31.

Why persecutest thou me? It is a searching question that Christ asked of the persecutor; it challenged the basis of his conduct, and showed that he had not known the One whom he was so relentlessly persecuting. Note that Christ so identifies Himself with His disciples that their sufferings become His (AA 117). "In all their affliction he was afflicted" (Isa. 63:9), and "he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye" (Zech. 2:8). What was done to the disciples the Lord counted as done to Himself (Matt. 10:40).

5. Who art thou, Lord? Saul would scarcely yet be using the word "Lord" in all the fullness NT meaning. It was the natural utterance of awe and respect (see on John 1:38). But Saul was dimly sensible of the divine presence, and showed this by his use of "Lord."

Jesus. There is some textual evidence (cf. p. 10) for the reading "Jesus of Nazareth," or "Jesus the Nazarene." It is probable, however, that this was inserted from ch. 22:8, where it occurs in Paul's own narrative. Jesus of Nazareth is the name that was scornfully used by Stephen's accusers (ch. 6:14), the very name that Saul had been compelling men and women to blaspheme (ch. 26:11; cf. v. 9). By using this name for Himself, the heavenly Being who appears to Saul identifies Himself unequivocally as Christ. The persecutor capitulates. The realization that Jesus is the Christ marks the point of Saul's conversion, and the end of his persecuting rage. He is made to see what his master, Gamaliel, had before suggested (ch. 5:39), that to persecute Jesus was to "fight against God." See on chs. 22:8; 26:15.

Whom thou persecutest. The pronoun "thou" is expressed emphatically in the Greek, as is also the preceding pronoun, "I." This sets Christ, in love and might and glory, in marked contrast with Saul, persecuting, yet now prostrate and fearful.

It is hard. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of the words, "it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks." There is, however, sound textual basis for these words in ch. 26:14. Though the words are found in many Latin texts of ch. 9:5, they appear in no Greek manuscripts. Their presence in the printed Greek Bible from which the KJV was translated was translated in due to the fact that Erasmus (see Vol. V, pp. 141, 142), in preparing his printed edition of the Greek NT, translated them into Greek from the Latin and inserted them in his text. For comment on these words see on ch. 26:14.

6. And he trembling. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of the words, "and he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him." However, Saul's question, "What shall I do, Lord?" appears with unqualified textual support in ch. 22:10. Like the latter part of v. 5 (see above under "It is hard"), the present passage is found in no Greek manuscript, and apparently came into the KJV through an insertion made by Erasmus from the Latin Vulgate.

Arise. Saul had continued prostrate where he had fallen.

Go into the city. This suggests that Saul and those accompanying him were near Damascus (cf. v. 3).

It shall be told thee. In ch. 26:16-18 Paul gives a fuller report of Christ's instructions to him. Luke's account is here more brief. Further instruction is given, through Ananias, in vs. 15-17.

7. The men. Saul had been furnished not only with authority for his persecuting work but also with a number of assistants. Apparently it was the plan to root out Christianity completely from the city of Damascus.

Stood. They were stricken down (ch. 26:14). Probably they had risen before Saul.

Speechless. Although the experience was less intense for them than for their leader, it had left them mute.

Hearing a voice. Gr. akouontes ... teµs phoµneµs. On first sight this statement seems to contradict what is said in ch. 22:9, where Paul declares that his companions "heard not the voice" (teµn ... phoµneµn ouk eµkousan). However, a careful study of the two accounts helps to explain this seeming discrepancy. The verb akouoµ, "to hear," may refer either to the ability of the ears to hear sound (see Matt. 11:15; 13:15) or to the ability of the mind to understand what is heard (see Mark 4:33; 1 Cor. 14:2). In the present passage, the word translated "voice" (phoµneµs) is in the genitive case. In the Greek, this indicates that Saul's companions heard only the sound of the voice but could not understand what was said. In ch. 22:9 the word translated "voice" (phoµneµn) is in the accusative, and this, with the negative "not," signifies that they did not hear the voice distinctly enough to understand what was said (cf. ch. 9:4, where in speaking of Saul, who understood, Luke uses the accusative in saying that he "heard a voice" [eµkousen phoµneµn]). This explanation may be further supported by the fact that ch. 22:9 also declares that the men "saw indeed the light," while the present verse says that they "stood speechless ... seeing no man." They saw the dazzling light, but their sight was not distinct enough to discern the One revealed to Saul in the light. Similarly, it is reasonable to understand that they heard the sound of the voice, but not distinctly enough to comprehend the words that were spoken.

Seeing no man. They saw the heavenly light (ch. 22:9) but did not perceive the divine form that Saul saw enshrouded in that light.

8. Eyes were opened. But they were sightless.

Saw no man. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading "saw nothing." He had been blinded by the dazzling glory of the heavenly light (cf. ch. 22:11). His blindness proved that what he had seen was no mere hallucination. For Saul himself, the blindness may well have had a spiritual significance. He had looked on himself as a "guide of the blind," boasting that he saw clearly (cf. Rom. 2:19). Now for a time, till inward and outward light should shine upon him, he had to accept his blindness. The new-born soul had to be as--

"An infant crying for the light,

And with no language but a cry."

Some commentators find evidence of the permanent effect of this experience on his power of sight in the fact that he generally dictated his letters (see 2 Thess. 3:17), that he used large characters as he wrote (see on Gal. 6:11), and that he did not recognize the high priest who commanded him to be struck (see Acts 23:2-5). The most reasonable of the many theories concerning his "thorn in the flesh" is that it was an affliction of the eyes, perhaps involving attacks of agonizing pain (see on 2 Cor. 12:7). On this assumption, the eager wish of the Galatians to pluck out their eyes, if possible, and give them to him, takes on special significance (see on Gal. 4:15).

They led him. His companions' eyesight was relatively unaffected. Perhaps they had not gazed so directly at the blazing glory, or the full radiance had not shone upon them. In any case they were able to guide Saul, leading by the hand him who had started forth as their leader. Saul's pride was now changed to humiliation. His mission was already known at Damascus, and his arrival had been eagerly anticipated by the priestly faction and dreaded by the Christians. Now he had come, but the mission had collapsed. The letters to the synagogues were never delivered.

9. Three days. The conflict in Saul's conscientious soul must have been terrible, and all of the three days were needed before peace was attained. The Spirit of God, moreover, used these three sightless days for illuminating the mind of the stricken man. In the quiet darkness Saul was able to recall the Messianic prophecies, to apply them to Jesus of Nazareth, and to judge his own past in the light of his new convictions. How great must have been his anguish, how fervent his prayers for pardon, how sweet the gift of Christ's own forgiveness! See AA 118-120.

Eat nor drink. The abstinence was not entirely a penitential act. His mental anguish temporarily overpowered the normal craving for food. The three days of blindness were a period of soul searching and repentance.

10. Ananias. For the meaning of the name see on ch. 5:1. Ananias was a common name among the Jews. There is no other mention of this particular disciple in Scripture, except in ch. 22:12, where Paul describes him as "a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt" in Damascus. It is possible that these qualities made him the leader of the Christian community and prepared him to be the Lord's messenger to Saul. How he became a Christian is not known. He may have followed the Saviour during the earthly life of Christ, or have been among the Jewish converts on the day of Pentecost or at some subsequent time. He then may have been forced to flee from Jerusalem by the persecution that followed the death of Stephen. These, however, are only conjectures. But it is clear from the words that Ananias employed in expressing his reluctance to visit Saul (ch. 9:13, 14) that he still had trustworthy communication with Jerusalem, for he knew of the havoc the persecutor had caused, and of the purpose of his mission to Damascus.

In a vision. As Ananias was prepared by a vision to visit Saul, so Saul was prepared for a visit from Ananias (v. 12). On this preparation through vision, and its similarity to the preparation of Peter and Cornelius (ch. 10:1-8), Conybeare and Howson remark: "The simultaneous preparation of the hearts of Ananias and Saul, and the simultaneous preparation of those of Peter and Cornelius--the questioning and hesitation of Peter, and the questioning and hesitation of Ananias,--the one doubting whether he might make friendship with the Gentiles, the other doubting whether he might approach the enemy of the Church,--the unhesitating obedience of each, when the divine will was made clearly known,--the state of mind in which both the Pharisee and the centurion were found, each waiting to see what the Lord would say unto them--this close analogy will not be forgotten by those who reverently read the two consecutive chapters [9 and 10], in which the baptism of Saul and the baptism of Cornelius are narrated in the Acts of the Apostles" (The Life and Epistles of the Apostle Paul, p. 94).

Behold, I am here, Lord. These words express Ananias' readiness to execute the Lord's instructions. Compare the examples of Samuel (1 Sam. 3:1-10) and Isaiah (Isa. 6:8).

11. Street. Gr. rhumeµ, a narrow passage between rows of houses. The name was eventually applied to broader thoroughfares. Even so, the "street" would be narrow by Western standards.

Straight. A long straight street, now known by the name Sultaniyeh, still runs through the old city of Damascus from east to west, and is possibly the same along which Ananias walked to meet Saul in the house of Judas. The present street level is some 30 steps above that of Saul's time, so it is not possible to identify the house where Saul stayed.

Judas. The record gives no information concerning this Judas, or why Saul had been led to his house. This whole account shows how detailed are both the Lord's knowledge and His planning.

Saul, of Tarsus. This passage is noteworthy as the first mention in Scripture of the apostle's birthplace (cf. Additional Note 2 on ch. 7). Its physical position guaranteed the importance of Tarsus. Although it stood 10 mi. inland, a safe harbor lay between the city and the sea, and small craft could reach the town. Beyond the city's limits there towered the Taurus Mts., through which the narrow gorge known as the Cilician Gates gave access to the interior of Asia Minor. But the ancient city was noted for more than its strategic site. It was famous as a university town, and was sometimes known as the Athens of Asia Minor. Its scholars were respected for their skill in the sciences, and its philosophers included many noted Stoics, who may have had some influence on Saul's own outlook. In the realm of trades, it is significant that tent-making, Saul's trade (ch. 18:3), held a prominent position.

Prayeth. Rather, "is praying," denoting continuity in prayer (cf. 1 Thess. 5:17). Here is indeed a contrast between the threatening and slaughter the persecutor breathed out as he drew near to Damascus, and the prayerfulness of humble repentance in which he now was living. Saul's prayers would include a petition for pardon for the past, light and wisdom for the future, strength for the work to which he was now called, and intercession for those whom he had before been persecuting.

12. In a vision. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between retaining and omitting these words, yet Saul was probably informed thus. It is not strange that the Lord who revealed Himself on the Damascus road should now ensure the success of His plans by giving almost simultaneous visions to those whom He is planning to bring together.

A man. Although Jesus is speaking to Ananias, He is reporting Saul's viewpoint. It seems clear from this description of Ananias that he was unknown to Saul at this time.

Coming in. Note the indirect way in which the Lord here gives Ananias his instructions: He recounts the vision and expects Ananias to make it an actuality by finding Saul and restoring his sight.

13. Heard by many. Rather, "heard from many." Ananias recoils from the implied command. His obedient but human spirit balks at the thought of ministering to one with Saul's dreadful reputation. He respectfully remonstrates with the Lord. The words show that Ananias had been living in Damascus, and had not just arrived from Jerusalem (cf. on v. 10). They also indicate how widespread among the Christians was the knowledge of the fury of Saul's attacks upon the church. The reports were sadly confirmed by the refugees who had come to the city from Jerusalem.

How much evil. See on chs. 8:1, 3; 9:1.

Saints. For the Hebrew background of the term see on Ps. 16:3. For its significance among Christians see on Rom. 1:7. It is interesting that this early use of the word in the NT (cf. Matt. 27:52) should be by Ananias, sent to be Saul's instructor, and that it should afterward have been employed so frequently by the apostle himself (Rom. 1:7; 15:25; 16:2; 2 Cor. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; etc.).

14. Authority. This was formal authority expressed in writing, which Saul had sought personally (see vs. 1, 2).

All that call. To call on Christ is to believe in Him. See on ch. 2:21; cf. Acts 9:21; 1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Tim. 2:22.

15. Go. The words "thy way" appear in no Greek text. The perplexity of Ananias arose from his ignorance of the true state of affairs. But the Lord knew every circumstance in this situation, and directed His servant accordingly.

Vessel. Gr. skeuos, "vessel," "implement," is used with a wide range of meaning in the NT (cf. Matt. 13:48; Luke 8:16; John 19:29; Acts 10:11; Rom. 9:21; 2 Cor. 4:7; 1 Thess. 4:4). It was employed by classical writers concerning useful and trustworthy slaves. It is in this sense that the Lord applies skeuos to Saul as the instrument with which He would work out His gracious will for the Gentiles. The word for "chosen" (eklogeµ), which occurs here for the first time in the NT, is translated "election" in all other cases.

Bear my name. This explains the Lord's purpose in the election of Saul; he was to carry Christ's name, or exhibit His character (see on ch. 3:16).

Gentiles. The Gentiles are placed first on the list, because Saul's field of labor was to be especially among them (see on Rom. 1:13, 14; 11:13). This must have been a startling revelation to Ananias, who, as a devout Jew, had not yet realized that the whole world was to hear of Christ. But he now sees, in the man of whom he had only heard as the great persecutor, one who has been chosen and trained, and made more fit than all others for the work of spreading the gospel throughout the world.

Kings. The words find sufficient, but perhaps not exclusive, fulfillment in Paul's speech before Agrippa (ch. 26:1, 2), and possibly before Nero (see on 2 Tim. 4:16).

Children of Israel. Although an apostle to the Gentiles, Paul preached to the Jews at every opportunity (see chs. 13:5; 14:1; 17:1, 10; 18:4, 19; 19:8).

16. I will shew. This suggests special instruction given by Christ to Saul, possibly through a vision (cf. ch. 20:23). The prospect of suffering tends to deter some persons from embarking on an enterprise. To Saul of Tarsus, however, such a prospect would be a challenge. It would enable him, if not to atone for the past, at least to bring forth fruits worthy of his repentance. The fulfillment of the forecast of suffering is recorded in 2 Cor. 11:23-28, and, in less detail, in 2 Cor. 6:4, 5. See also on Matt. 5:10-12; Acts 14:22; Rom. 8:17; 2 Tim. 2:12.

17. Ananias went. He accepts the Lord's assurances, and renders instant obedience.

Putting his hands. This act had a twofold purpose: (1) to heal (see Mark 16:18), and (2) to bestow the Holy Spirit (cf. on Acts 6:6). The act served to confirm Saul's vision (ch. 9:12) and to identify his Heaven-sent visitor.

Brother Saul. The erstwhile persecutor had cut himself off from the Jewish authorities and had seemingly small prospects of being accepted by the Christians. Ananias' use of the title "Brother" would therefore reassure him and set his fears at rest. Ananias uses the same Hebrew (Aramaic) form of the name (Saoul) as Jesus had already employed in the vision on the way to Damascus (see on v. 4).

The Lord, even Jesus. This composite title combines the title Saul already had used for his heavenly interlocutor (v. 5) and Christ's own identification of Himself as "Jesus" (v. 5). This also would reassure the stricken man.

That appeared. The fact that Ananias, hitherto unknown to Saul, already knew of the revelation on the Damascus road, must have confirmed to Saul the reality of what he had seen and heard.

Hath sent me. This links Paul's vision along the way and the visit of Ananias. Saul could now expect the promised instruction (v. 6), of which a fuller report is given in ch. 22:14-16.

Receive thy sight. Literally, "look up," meaning, regain thy sight. There is here a close relationship between the laying on of hands, the recovery of sight, and being filled with the Holy Spirit.

Be filled. Compare on Acts 2:4; 4:31; Eph. 5:18.

18. Scales. Gr. lepides, used by Hippocrates as a technical term for a disease of the eye. Inasmuch as Saul's blindness was the result of a supernatural manifestation, it is fruitless to attempt to identify his affliction precisely in modern medical terminology. However, it is understandable that Luke would use a medical term to describe Saul's condition.

He received sight. Literally, "he looked up," meaning, he recovered his sight.

Forthwith. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of this word. That the cure was instantaneous, however, is clear from the word "immediately."

Baptized. The fuller account in ch. 22:16 shows that Ananias exhorted Saul to engage in the rite. It is clear that baptism was regarded as a condition for admission into the church (see on Matt. 3:6; Acts 22:16). No visions and revelations of the Lord, no intensity of personal conviction, exempted Saul from it. The baptism would probably be conducted in either the Abana or the Pharpar river, mentioned in the narrative of Naaman (2 Kings 5:8-14). The rite was administered by Ananias, as Christ's representative (AA 122).

19. Received meat. The first sentence of this verse seems to fit better at the close of v. 18. For the use of "meat," meaning "food," see on Matt. 3:4. Saul's three-day fast must have left him weak.

Strengthened. As Calvin says, "He refreshed not his body with meat until his soul had received strength." Then, both body and soul were made strong for the work that lay before them.

Was Saul. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the reading "he was," referring, of course, to Saul.

Certain days. Gr. heµmerai tines is also used by Luke in Acts 10:48; 15:36; 16:12; 24:24; 25:13, and in every case indicates a brief period of time. It describes the time Peter stayed with Cornelius, the short time spent by Paul and Barnabas at Antioch, Paul's short stay at Philippi, the brief time Paul was detained at Caesarea before he was heard by Felix, and a like period between the arrival of Festus and the visit Agrippa made to greet him as the new governor. Here it stands in contrast with the expression "many days" in ch. 9:23, which seems to indicate in the writer's mind a somewhat longer period. It is probable, from the way in which "disciples" are here mentioned, that there were many Christians in Damascus, even at this early period. Saul was now received by them, not as an enemy, but as a brother. The work of faithful Ananias is now done, and he appears in no other scenes in the book of Acts.

20. Straightway. Christ healed Saul "immediately" (v. 18); Saul began his witness "straightway." The two adverbs are from the same Greek word.

Preached Christ. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the reading "Jesus" in preference to "Christ," which was not yet generally used. The preaching that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ, their long-expected Messiah, was ever the main content of the apostle's message to the Jews. Saul's preaching, like that of Peter (see on ch. 2:16), would certainly have a strong prophetic background (AA 123, 125).

In the synagogues. Saul went, even as Christ had (see on Luke. 4:16), into the synagogues as the places most likely to furnish audiences for his gospel proclamation. As a Sabbathkeeper, he would be in the synagogues on the Sabbath. As an apostle, he would proclaim there the gospel. Instead of delivering to the presidents of the synagogues the letters he had received from the leaders in Jerusalem (Acts 9:2), he heralded to them the gospel from a far higher Authority than the chief priests. For Paul's practice of preaching to the "children of Israel" in the synagogues see on v. 15.

The Son of God. For the significance of the title see on Luke 1:35. This is the only instance where the title is used of Jesus in Acts. What Paul proclaimed was (1) that Christ was verily the Son of God no less than the son of David, (2) that Jesus of Nazareth had been shown to be the Christ. Not only was this a perplexity to the Jews (cf. on Matt. 22:41-46), but it seemed to them a blasphemous claim. It required much grace for the Jews to accept the message of the unique Sonship of Jesus.

21. Amazed. See on ch. 2:7. This amazement is understandable in the light of Saul's reputation as a persecutor of Christians. The synagogue authorities may have been instructed to give Saul their cooperation in the work he was to do. It is clear from what follows that his fame was well known to the Jews of Damascus.

Destroyed them. Or, "made havoc of them." Paul makes use of the same verb to describe his own conduct (Gal.1:13, 23). From the strong expression used here it is evident that the slaughter of Christians in Jerusalem was not limited to the stoning of Stephen.

Called on this name. See on chs. 2:21; 3:16; 4:12.

Came hither. Rather, "had come hither," implying that Saul's purpose in coming to Damascus had been abandoned.

22. Saul increased. He increased in experience and effectiveness. The Holy Ghost was giving him more and more power as time went by.

Strength. In later years this word played a prominent part in Paul's thinking. "I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me" (Phil. 4:13). He realized that it was Christ whose "strength" was "made perfect in weakness" (2 Cor. 12:9); it was Christ who "enabled" him, or made him strong for the ministry (1 Tim. 1:12); and it was Christ who "strengthened" him in the closing trials of his life (2 Tim. 4:17).

Confounded. Gr. sugchunoµ, "to pour together," "to bewilder," "to confound." Saul's training under Gamaliel stood him in good stead. He could now use his thorough knowledge of Jewish learning for the support of his new-found convictions. His methods commended his faith to those Jews who were sincerely looking for the Hope of Israel; but these, unfortunately, would not be a large proportion of his listeners. The rest of the Jews were "confounded." They heard their Scriptures applied to the life of Jesus by a trained mind. They continued their rejection of the Saviour, but had not yet moved far enough to attack Saul.

Proving. Gr. sumbibazoµ, "to join together," "to cause a person to unite with one in a conclusion"; hence, "to demonstrate," "to prove." With consummate skill Saul set forth the prophecies of the Messiah as fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth.

This is very Christ. Or, "this is the Anointed One [the Messiah]."

23. Many days. Gr. heµmerai hikanai, an expression that refers in v. 43 to the time Peter spent in Joppa; in ch. 18:18 (translated, "a good while") to the time Paul tarried in Corinth after his hearing before Gallio; and in ch. 27:7 (translated, "many days") to the extended period of Paul's slow sailing on his voyage to Rome. It appears, therefore, that the expression covers a fairly long but indefinite period of time. In contrast, "certain days" denotes a shorter period (see on ch. 9:19).

This distinction is of great value in any attempt to reconstruct this period in the apostle's career. The "certain days" of v. 19, and the "many days" of this present verse, appear to distinguish two periods of residence in Damascus. The first was brief, and ended with Saul's confounding the Jews (v. 22). The second was longer, and came to an end with his flight from Damascus (vs. 23-25). The visit to Arabia (Gal. 1:15-18) can best be placed between these two periods (AA 125-128). Luke makes no mention of such a visit, but Paul states that he went to Arabia soon after his conversion, prior to his return to Damascus, and before he went back to Jerusalem (Gal. 1:15-18). After the crisis on the Damascus road, rest and seclusion were desirable, and quiet communion with God was needed to prepare him for the years of strenuous labor that lay ahead. If the "three years" of Gal. 1:18 is reckoned from Saul's conversion, then both visits to Damascus would be included in that period, and the stay in Arabia and the residence of "many days" in the city need not be unduly extended.

The precise location of the "Arabia" to which Saul went is unknown. However, the fact that Damascus at that time was occupied by the troops of Aretas IV, king of Arabia Petraea, or Nabataea (see Palestine During the Ministry of Jesus), makes it probable that Saul went into that region. This was so large an area, stretching from the borders of Egypt to the environs of Damascus, that it gives no specific idea of where Saul went. Neither are there any certain data for fixing the time of his visit. For relevant chronological facts see p. 100.

The period of Saul's absence probably witnessed a large growth in the Christian society at Damascus, with a type of discipline and worship similar to that at Jerusalem. So far as is known, no Gentile converts had yet been admitted to the church, and the preaching of the gospel was still restricted to the Jews. With intense affection for his brethren according to the flesh (Rom. 10:1), Saul entered vigorously upon the work of evangelization among them, until their bitter antagonism drove him from Damascus. Saul himself was now tasting the hatred that had been poured out against Stephen.

Took counsel. The authorities were provoked to plot against Christ because of the success of His ministry (see on Matt. 15:21; 19:3; John 5:16). Even so did Saul's work lead the Jews to murderous opposition. Their evaluation of the new apostle's witness may be estimated by the drastic steps they took in their attempt to destroy Saul.

24. Laying await. Gr. epibouleµ, "a plan against one," hence, "a plot." The same word is used in chs. 20:3, 19; 23:30, but is peculiar to Acts. It implies a carefully planned opposition, with the death of Saul as its goal. Saul came to hear of the plot, perhaps through one of his own disciples (see on ch. 9:25). The fact that he was warned shows that he had made friends in the city, and that these were willing to aid him in the emergency that now developed.

Watched. Rather, "were watching," secretly, by day and by night. For details of this incident in the apostle's life see 2 Cor. 11:32, 33. An active part in the plot against Saul was taken by the ethnarch (governor) of the city. This ethnarch represented the Nabataean Aretas, king of Arabia Petraea, who had Petra in ancient Edom as his capital, and who was the father of the woman whom Herod Antipas divorced in order to marry Herodias (see Vol. V, pp. 40, 64). For a suggestion as to how Aretas had come into possession of Damascus see on Acts 9:2. Damascene coins have been found bearing the names of Augustus and Tiberius, but none has been found for the reigns of Tiberius' successors, Caligula and Claudius. Tiberius had been a friend and supporter of Herod Antipas against Aretas, but it is possible that Caligula reversed this policy and created a new ethnarchy, in favor of Aretas, to whose predecessors Damascus had belonged (Josephus Antiquities xiii. 15. 2 [392]). The ethnarch apparently wished to court favor with the large Jewish population, and looking upon Saul as a disturber of the public peace, took measures for his arrest and condemnation. From Luke's account it appears that the Jews assumed a large part of the responsibility for Saul's capture. Paul's own story (2 Cor. 11:32) does not conflict with this, but shows that they had the ethnarch's support. Sentinels were evidently stationed at each gate of the city, through which a fugitive might attempt to pass, in order to prevent Saul's escape.

25. The disciples. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the reading "his disciples." This well-supported reading is in agreement with the implications of the phrase "many days" in v. 23. On his second visit to Damascus Saul remained long enough to gather around him a group of followers who accepted him as their teacher, and were now willing to risk their lives for his safety.

Basket. Gr. spuris, "basket," probably a hand basket, as in Matt. 15:37. But in 2 Cor. 11:33 Paul describes it by another word, sarganeµ, "a wicker or ropework hamper," which would be large enough to hold a man. This experience is mentioned by Paul in connection with his "infirmities" (in which he may have included his traditional smallness of stature) of which he was content to boast (2 Cor. 11:30). The escape was made through an opening or "window" in the town wall (2 Cor. 11:33; cf. the escape of the spies from Rahab's house, Joshua 2:15, and of David from his own house, 1 Sam. 19:12). Saul seems to have been conscious of the incongruity of the situation: he was being saved, in a rather ignominious manner, by the very people whom he had come to extirpate!

26. Jerusalem. This flight from Damascus to Jerusalem comes after the three-year period of residence in Arabia (see Gal. 1:17, 18). Thus it would be Saul's first visit to the capital since the day he set out for Damascus, and he was probably still known to the Christians in Jerusalem only as their determined enemy.

Assayed to join. That is, "attempted [or "tried"] to join." The verb translated "join" (kollaoµ) is used of close and intimate fellowship, such as that of husband and wife; of brothers; and of friends (cf. on Matt. 19:5; Luke 15:15). Saul was seeking full brotherhood with the disciples. Had Saul gone as a Jew to Alexandria or some other city where Jews were numerous, his first thought would have been to search out his co-religionists. He did so in Jerusalem: he sought to join the Christian community. But the church was suspicious of him. Its members knew Saul only from his terrible persecutions. Might he not still be bent on their destruction? They would be cautious until they were sure of his sincerity. Their ignorance concerning the genuine nature of his conversion can be explained on at least two grounds: (1) The "three year" absence (see on Acts 9:23) gave little basis for reliable news about his attitude toward Christianity; (2) political changes in the city of Damascus may have (see on v. 24) interrupted communications between the Christians there and those in Jerusalem.

Afraid of him. This clause should be introduced by "and" instead of "but." This makes less sharp the contrast between Saul's desire to join the brethren and their consequent behavior. The phrase may then read, "and all [the disciples] were fearing him." They had justifiably feared him in the past, and knowing no reason to change, continued to fear him. They may have wondered whether he was merely disguising his true nature in order to spy on them and provoke further trouble.

Believed not. This shows that someone informed the disciples about Saul's conversion, but that they were not ready to accept news of such a miracle. They wanted trustworthy evidence of his change before accepting him into their community. Under the circumstances, their caution was natural and even commendable.

27. Barnabas. Why did Barnabas receive Saul, when the other disciples feared him? The answer may be found in his character, which appears to have been of a kindly, generous nature (see on ch. 4:36, 37). Many commentators suggest that Barnabas championed Saul because of previous acquaintance. If this is true, we can see Barnabas, on the strength of his trust in Saul's sterling character, believing the miracle of his conversion, and gladly recommending him to the apostles. The kindly act also testifies to the influential position held by Barnabas in the church.

To the apostles. That is, he brought him to such of the apostles as happened to be then in Jerusalem. In the more specific account in Gal. 1:18, 19, Saul himself states that he went to Jerusalem "to see Peter," and that the only other leading teacher whom he saw was "James the Lord's brother." Although he had received his commission directly from Jesus, he wished to hear about his Lord from those who were eyewitnesses of His earthly life and ministry. Since only Peter and James are mentioned, it is possible that the other apostles were absent from Jerusalem at the time. It is also possible that, after feeling the pulse of the church, he made no effort to force his presence upon them. He records that he "was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea" (Gal. 1:22). This expression, however, may simply mean that he was unknown to the provincial churches in Judea, although he was personally known to the members in Jerusalem. In view of his vigorous evangelistic activity in Jerusalem (Acts 9:28, 29), it is hardly possible that he remained unknown to the church in the capital city. On the other hand, his visit lasted only 15 days (Gal. 1:18), and was cut short by attempts on his life (Acts 9:29, 30).

Declared. Gr. dieµgeomai, "to declare fully," "to declare in detail." This, as the Greek text more clearly states, was done by Barnabas on Saul's behalf. This presupposes a full recital of his conversion experience by Saul to Barnabas, who then recounted the wonderful story.

Seen the Lord. In none of the other records of Saul's encounter on the Damascus road (chs. 9:3-9; 22:6-11; 26:12-18) is it specifically stated that he saw the Lord Jesus. However, in chs. 9:17; 26:16 the Lord is said to have appeared unto Saul, and in ch. 22:14 Ananias speaks of his having seen "that Just One." Now Barnabas says clearly that Saul "had seen the Lord in the way." This agrees with Paul's later claims--"Have I not seen Jesus Christ?" and "he [the Lord] was seen of me also" (1 Cor. 9:1; 15:8).

Spoken to him. It was important for the apostles to know that Christ had actually spoken to the one whom Barnabas was sponsoring. They had received their commissions directly from the Lord (see on Mark 3:14; Matt. 28:19, 20; etc.). They would be impressed on learning that Saul had also been personally commissioned by the same Master.

Preached boldly. Gr. parreµsiazomai, "to speak plainly," or "freely"; hence, "to grow confident," "to have boldness" (cf. 9:29; 14:3; 18:26; etc.). Here was proof of the genuine nature of the conversion of Saul. He boldly championed the cause he had originally set out to destroy. Barnabas well knew that news of Saul's bold ministry would make a deep impression on the minds of the apostles and lead them to receive him as one of their own.

Name of Jesus. See on ch. 3:6, 16.

28. Was with them. This implies intimacy of fellowship.

Coming in and going out. This does not mean that Saul was constantly leaving and re-entering the city, but that he was freely moving about within Jerusalem (see on ch. 1:21).

29. Spake boldly. See on v. 27. The first clause of v. 29 should be taken with v. 28. It reads literally, "speaking boldly in the name of the Lord." The second clause reads literally, "he was both speaking and disputing against the Grecians."

Name. See on chs. 2:21; 3:6, 16.

Disputed. The Greek word thus translated is used by Luke to describe Stephen's encounter with the Greeks (see on ch. 6:9). There is a notable difference, however. The "Grecians" had disputed with Stephen; now Saul disputes with them. He, as a Tarsian Jew, was well equipped for such discussion (see on ch. 9:11). They were aroused to a passionate frenzy. Twice within a few weeks the apostle's life was endangered, first in Damascus (v. 24), now in Jerusalem.

Grecians. That is, Hellenistic Jews (see on ch. 6:1).

Went about. Gr. epicheireoµ, "to put the hand to," "to try" (see Acts 19:13; cf. on Luke 1:1; Acts 9:23, 24).

To slay. Saul was willing to face the death that had been dealt to Stephen, but the Lord had other plans for His courageous servant. It is at this juncture that the vision of warning and instruction can best be placed (see on ch. 22:17-21; cf. AA 130).

30. Brethren knew. They now know Saul, and the plot that is being laid against him. Their knowledge spurs them to immediate action. They take him down to the seacoast, whence he can flee the country.

Cæsarea. Not Caesarea Philippi (at the foot of Mt. Hermon), but the seaport that lay about 64 mi. northwest of Jerusalem. This was a place from which Tarsus could easily be reached either by sea or by the road that ran northward along the coast of Syria. At Caesarea he would probably find Philip. The two men, one the friend and the other the erstwhile opponent of Stephen, would thus come face to face as brethren. See on ch. 8:40.

Sent him forth. Gr. exapostelloµ, literally, "to send away out of." This seems to imply that the disciples sent Saul away by ship to Tarsus. There is no irreconcilable conflict between this and Paul's own statement: "Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia" (Gal. 1:21). Syria and Cilicia together formed one Roman province at that time, and by going to Tarsus, Saul entered that district. Alternative interpretations are that (1) his boat called at Syrian ports on its way to Tarsus in Cilicia, (2) Saul went first to Tarsus and then made missionary trips into nearby territories in Cilicia and Syria. This last suggestion may account for the presence of Christian churches in that area, which must have been established independently of Paul's First Missionary Journey (see on Acts 15:36, 41).

Tarsus. This, Saul's home town (see on v. 11), may not have been the most comfortable refuge for the apostle. Christ's saying that "a prophet hath no honour in his own country" (John 4:44) was likely to be painfully true in Saul's case. Not only was he returning to his birthplace; he was returning to his birthplace; he was going back as a renegade Jew, an apostate from the faith of his fathers, a leader of the despised and persecuted sect of the Christians. His reception may be imagined, and may help to account for his silence on the subject of his family. At this point the narrative leaves Saul until Barnabas seeks him out for a more extensive ministry (Acts 11:25).

31. Then. Rather, "therefore." The pattern of events in vs. 29-32 is similar to that of ch. 8:3-5. At the earlier time Saul persecuted the church, therefore the believers were scattered and preached the word, and the way opened for Philip to take the gospel to Samaria. In the present instance, Saul himself was persecuted, withdrew to Tarsus, the church gained a respite and used it profitably, and Peter evangelized the coastal districts.

Churches. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading, "now the church throughout the whole of Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace." The reference is to the whole Christian body, not to specific congregations. This emphasizes the union of the local churches into the corporate body of the entire church. The word "church" thus seems to be used here in a universal rather than a local sense.

Rest. Literally, "peace." The respite may have arisen from Paul's departure: when he left, the irritant to the Jews was removed. Another reason may possibly be found in the diversion caused by the emperor Caligula's attempt to set up his statue in the Temple at Jerusalem (see p. 78)--an attempt from which he was dissuaded, according to Josephus (Antiquities xviii. 8. 2-8), only by the determined opposition of the Jews, by the earnest entreaties of King Herod Agrippa, who resided in the city of Rome at the time, and by the appeals of Petronius, the governor of Syria. According to Josephus, the Syrian governor was influenced by showers of rain that, after a long drought, fell from a clear sky in answer to the prayers of Israel.

All Judæa. This brief notice covers a great deal of early church history, and is especially significant. It is the first intimation of the existence of organized religious communities in the towns and villages of Palestine. No local churches are named, but many may have sprung up as a delayed result of Christ's personal ministry. In addition, the work of Philip, Peter, and John needs to be taken into account (see on ch. 8:5, 6, 14, 25). But, whatever may have been the origin of the Palestinian churches, this verse attests their existence and demonstrates that Christ's command (ch. 1:8) was being faithfully obeyed.

Edified. Gr. oikodemeoµ, "to build a house," "to erect a building," and, by extension, "to edify," "to build up" in general. The "peace" mentioned earlier in the verse gave opportunity for the church to be "built up" in both the organizational and the spiritual sense. Oikodomeoµ plays a frequent part in Paul's vocabulary (see Acts 20:32; Rom. 15:20; 1 Cor. 8:1; Gal. 2:18; etc.).

Fear of the Lord. The phrase is common in the writings of the OT, where it describes reverential awe (see on Job 28:28; Ps. 19:9; Prov. 1:7). It is rare in the NT, the English form of the phrase being used only here. In 2 Cor. 5:11 "the terror of the Lord" is better translated, "the fear of the Lord."

Comfort. Gr. parakleµsis, "consolation," "exhortation," "encouragement" (see on Matt. 5:4; Luke 6:24; John 14:16). The phrase may be translated, "walking ... in [or "by"] the counsel of the Holy Spirit." The church members feared the Lord and were guided by the Spirit; their whole lives were under divine control.

Were multiplied. As a result of the satisfactory spiritual state of the church, its members and its groups increased in numbers. It will always be so. Deep spiritual life on the part of Christians will be fruitful in the salvation of the unsaved. Such fruitage may come from the lives of laymen as well as from the ministry of the officers of the church.

32. Came to pass. See on Luke 1:8. The phrase is typical of Luke's style. He uses it at least 39 times in his Gospel, and 14 times in Acts. It usually marks a juncture in the narrative.

Peter. From this point until ch. 11:25, the record leaves Saul and turns to the work of Peter. Because of this, the present section is sometimes described as "The Acts of Peter." It is evident, however, that Luke gives this account of Peter's ministry not as a partial biography of this pillar of the church, but as a part of his over-all literary plan of depicting the conversion of the Gentiles. When, through the work of Peter, this new phase of Christian service is well on its way, the writer returns to Saul's career and concentrates on his missionary labors among the Gentiles.

Luke's narrative (Acts 8:25) had left Peter, with John, preaching the gospel to Samaritan villages on his way back to Jerusalem. After his return he received a 15-day visit from Saul (Gal. 1:18). But it is clear that the apostles did not cloister themselves in Jerusalem; they went farther afield and ministered to newly established groups of believers. Such visits helped to unify the infant church and promote its balanced growth.

Passed. Gr. dierchomai, "to go through." For its missionary significance see on ch. 8:4 (cf. Luke 9:6).

Throughout all quarters. This may also be translated "among them all," referring either to the church groups of v. 31 or to the "saints" mentioned later in this verse.

Saints. See on v. 13.

Lydda. Lod of the OT (1 Chron. 8:12; Ezra 2:33; Neh. 7:37; 11:35), known in modern times as Ludd. The town was founded by settlers from the tribe of Benjamin (1 Chron. 8:1, 12), in the rich plain of Sharon. It lay 11 mi. (17.7 km.) southeast of Joppa, and a day's journey northwest of Jerusalem. Josephus (Antiquities xx. 6. 2) called it a village "not less than a city in largeness." At the request of Judas Maccabaeus, Demetrius Soter transferred it to the holdings of the Temple at Jerusalem (1 Maccabees 11:32-34). Under the rule of the Roman Cassius, noted for his brutal seizure of property and funds, the inhabitants were sold as slaves (Josephus Antiquities xiv. 11. 2 [275]). However, it had recovered its former prosperity, and appears at this time to have been the seat of a flourishing Christian community. In the wars preceding the destruction of Jerusalem, it was burned by Cestius Gallus a.d. 66 (Josephus War ii. 19. 1 [515, 516]), when most of its inhabitants had gone to the Feast of Tabernacles in Jerusalem, and was occupied by Vespasian in a.d. 68 (ibid. iv. 8. 1 [444]). When the city was rebuilt, probably under Hadrian (c. a.d. 130), it was renamed Diospolis (City of Zeus). It was later the seat of one of the chief bishoprics of the Syrian church. Its outstanding characteristic seems to have been its poverty. According to an ancient Jewish commentary, Rabbi Nathan (a.d. 160) said, "There are ten portions of poverty in the world, nine in Lydia [Lydda] and one in the rest of the world" (Midrash Rabbah, on Esther 1:3, Soncino ed., p. 30). It is quite likely that the faith of Christ was planted in the city by Philip the evangelist. The town would be on the road that Philip would travel as he passed through "all the cities" on his way from Azotus to Caesarea (see on Acts 8:40).

Ministry of Peter to Jews and Gentiles

33. æneas. Gr. Aineias, an old Greek name, not to be confused with that of the famous hero of Troy, Aineias. In Josephus (Antiquities xiv. 10. 22 [248]) the name is used of a Jew, so this man could well have been a Hellenistic Jew (see on ch. 6:1). We are not told that he was a disciple, but it may be inferred that he was among "the saints." The care with which Luke records that Aeneas had been eight years a bedridden paralytic, may reflect professional exactness (cf. Luke 13:11; Acts 3:2; 4:22; 14:8). For exhibits of Luke's interest in medical matters see on Acts 3:7; 9:18; 28:8. For the significance of the word "palsy" see on Matt. 4:24; Mark 2:3. No doubt could be cast upon the miraculous nature of this man's cure.

34. Jesus Christ. Note the care with which Peter avoids claiming any personal power to heal. He acknowledges only Christ's ability to help the sufferer (cf. chs. 3:6, 12; 4:9, 10).

Maketh thee whole. Rather, "heals thee." Use of the present tense suggests that the healing was immediate (cf. "he arose immediately").

Arise. A command used by our Lord in similar cases (Matt. 9:6; John 5:8).

Make thy bed. He was to do at once for himself what others had done for him for so many years.

35. All that dwelt. That is, not necessarily every individual, but a large number of the inhabitants. As the news of this miracle was spread abroad, there was a general revival of godliness in the area.

Saron. Gr. ho Saroµn, "the Saron," from the Heb. Sharon. No village or town of this name is known. The use of the article makes it probable that the reference is to the Plain of Sharon, which lay between the central mountains of Palestine and the Mediterranean Sea, and extended along the coast from Joppa to Carmel. It was proverbial for its beauty and fertility (see on Isa. 35:2; 65:10).

Saw him. The man's eight-year-long paralysis must have been well known in the district, and to see such a one going about healed must have attracted as much attention as did the healing of the lame man at the Temple (cf. ch. 3). Many doubtless inquired as to how the man had been healed.

Turned to the Lord. The miracle that restored Aeneas physically, aroused faith in the power of Jesus Christ to heal spiritually. Thus the circle of believers was still further widened. The way was being prepared for the giving of the gospel to the Gentiles who lived in that coastal region.

36. Joppa. Gr. Ioppeµ, from the Heb. Yapho, meaning, "beauty," the modern Jaffa. See on Joshua 19:46; 2 Chron. 2:16; Jonah 1:3. The city is mentioned by the Egyptians of the 15th century b.c. The place was famous in Greek legends as the spot where Andromeda was bound when delivered by Perseus (Strabo Geography xvi. 2. 28; Josephus War iii. 9. 3 [420, 421]). The town stood on a hill so high that it was claimed that Jerusalem could be seen from its summit. It was the port nearest to Jerusalem, and though the harbor was difficult and dangerous to enter, it was used to land the timber which, first under Solomon, and afterward under Zerubbabel, was brought from Lebanon for the construction of the Temple (1 Kings 5:9; 2 Chron. 2:16; Ezra 3:7). It was the port from which ships sailed to Tarshish (Jonah 1:3). Under the Maccabees the harbor and fortifications were restored (1 Maccabees 14:5). Augustus gave the city to Herod the Great and afterward to Archelaus (Josephus Antiquities xv. 7. 3; xvii. 11. 4). When Archelaus was deposed, the city became part of the Roman province of Syria. It remained fanatically Jewish, however, and stayed loyal to Judaism throughout the upheavals of a.d. 66-70. In Peter's day and later it was notorious as a headquarters for pirates. Here, as in the case of Lydda (see on Acts 9:32), the raising up of a Christian company was probably accomplished by Philip (see on ch. 8:40).

Disciple. Gr. matheµtria "a female disciple."

Tabitha. An Aramaic name, T\abyetha', corresponding to the Hebrew name Zibiah in the OT (2 Kings 12:1; 2 Chron. 24:1), or Zibia (1 Chron. 8:9), "gazelle." The Greek form, Dorkas, means "wild she-goat," or "gazelle." The fact that this disciple's name is given in two languages may imply some points of connection between the Hebrew and the Hellenistic sections of the church.

Full of good works. By some, Dorcas is regarded as a deaconess in the church at Joppa. If this is true, it may reflect the influence of Philip. He was one of the seven (see ch. 6:3, 5), and it is possible that he carried the organization of the church in Jerusalem into the churches he himself established. Thus, Dorcas may have had special care of the widows of the church (cf. chs. 6:1; 9:39).

Almsdeeds. Gr. eleeµmosuneµ, "mercy," especially as shown in giving alms, hence, "charity," "benefaction," "alms." Dorcas' benevolence expressed itself in two principal ways: she gave her services in "good works"; she gave her means in "almsdeeds." She was not content to be charitable by proxy, but gave herself as well as her possessions.

37. Came to pass. See on v. 32.

Was sick, and died. The details given of the treatment of Dorcas' body are evidence that she had, indeed, died. Critics often attempt to throw doubt on the actuality of miracles of raising the dead by alleging that the person was simply in a coma.

Washed. The custom of washing the corpse was practiced by many people in classical times. Among the Jews it was known as the "purification of the dead." In the Mishnah (Shabbath 23. 5, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 771) it is stated: "All the requirements of the dead may be done; he may be anointed with oil and washed." The women of the church now performed this office for their beloved Dorcas.

Laid. In Jerusalem, burial took place on the day of death (cf. ch. 5:6, 10). Outside the capital there might be an interval of three days between death and burial. The corpse was allowed to lie until all hope of resuscitation was past and there was no danger of anyone's being buried alive. During this waiting time the body was usually laid in the upper room, immediately under the roof. In the case of Dorcas, the church may have delayed burial in the hope of divine intervention. Peter had just healed Aeneas, and devout souls may well have hoped that he would restore Dorcas to life.

38. Nigh to Joppa. Lydda lay only 11 mi. (17.7 km.) southeast of Joppa, so the report of the healing of Aeneas could quickly have traveled from one town to the other.

Not delay. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the direct form of entreaty, reading, "entreating, Delay not to come unto us." The messengers may have left Joppa before the death of Dorcas, hoping the apostle would arrive in time to avert death. If, as is more probable, death had already taken place, the church had faith that resurrection was possible through the power of God. In either case, haste was imperative, either to save a life or to forestall a burial.

39. Peter arose. He was ready for any genuine appeal that came to him, especially such an urgent call as came from the Christians in Joppa.

Upper chamber. See on v. 37.

All the widows. Luke shows a special sympathy for womankind (see on Luke 8:2, 3). He mentions "widow" nine times in his Gospel and three times in Acts. The "widows" of the church were the object of a special provision (see on Acts 6:1). The phrase used here suggests that the church at Joppa was also organized for charity.

Coats and garments. Gr. chitoµnes and himatia, respectively (see on Matt. 5:40).

Dorcas made. Rather, "used to make." It was her custom to make garments for charitable purposes (see on v. 36).

40. Put them all forth. In doing so, Peter was following his Lord's example in the healing of Jairus' daughter (see on Mark 5:39, 40), which he had witnessed. There was the noise of great mourning (Acts 9:39) in the chamber where the body of Dorcas lay. Peter felt the need for silence, in which he could commune with God. Compare Elijah's method with the widow's child (1 Kings 17:17-23), and Elisha's procedure at the raising of the Shunammite's son 2 Kings 4:33. Note also how God's servants avoid ostentatious display of power.

Prayed. Peter kneels down and engages in earnest prayer, realizing that only divine power can accomplish the desired miracle. Prayer again proves to be the channel through which the early church obtains power (cf. on chs. 1:14, 24; 6:4, 6; 8:15; 9:11; 10:2; etc.). The humble, devout, earnest nature of Peter is clearly revealed in this incident (cf. on ch. 3:1).

Turning. After he had prayed and received the inner assurance that his prayer was heard. He realizes his utter dependence on supernatural power, but when assured of its operation he does not hesitate to act.

Body. This leaves no room for doubt concerning the nature of the subsequent miracle. Dorcas was dead (see on v. 37). Peter turned to her lifeless body.

Arise. The very brevity of his command shows his unfaltering belief that his prayer would be positively answered.

Sat up. Gr. anakathizoµ, "to sit up," is employed by medical writers to describe a patient's sitting up in bed, and by Luke in his Gospel (ch. 7:15). The brief description of Dorcas' restoration is extraordinarily vivid. There is the opening of the eyes, as after sleep; the unexpected sight of Peter, who was probably unknown to her; and the dramatic sitting up of one who had been dead. Such details accord well with Luke's medical interests.

41. Gave her his hand. She accepted his proffered hand, for she was already conscious, unlike Jairus' daughter when Jesus "took her by the hand" (Matt. 9:25). This detail is evidence that the two narratives are independent. The latter is no mere echo of the earlier story, as some have contended.

The saints. See on v. 13. This does not necessarily imply that the widows were not "saints," or Christians, although it may well have been that some of those whom Dorcas helped were not church members.

Presented her alive. Peter made sure that this miracle of God would receive due recognition by first gathering together those who knew Dorcas personally and could testify to the fact of her death, and then making a public presentation of her to them. Thus he ensured that there would be ample witness to the fact that a miracle had taken place.

42. Many believed. News of such a miracle spread quickly. The whole area of Joppa was aroused, and the gospel message received a great impetus.

43. It came to pass. See on v. 32.

Tarried. There is no way of knowing how long Peter tarried. For comment on "many days" see on v. 23.

Simon a tanner. Luke shows an interest in the names of minor characters in his story (cf. chs. 9:11, 33, 36; 12:13; 21:16; etc.) and in occupations (cf. chs. 8:27; 10:1; 16:14; 18:3; 19:24). The occupation of tanner was one that repelled strict Jews. This was either because it would require coming in contact with carcasses and hides of dead beasts, with the risk of ceremonial defilement (see Lev. 11:24, 25), or because it was in general a repulsive and unpleasant business. The Jewish rabbis held that if a tanner who was about to marry concealed his occupation from his intended wife, the concealment was considered in the nature of a fraud, which would invalidate the contract (Mishnah Kethuboth 7. 10, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, pp. 482, 483). This tanner's house was "by the sea side" (Acts 10:6). It would be easy for Peter, during his long stay with the humble but hospitable Simon, to return to his old occupation of fishing, and thus earn his living. The fact that he was willing to take up his abode with a tanner indicates that the apostle was already tending to abandon Jewish prejudices. Even so did God prepare His servant for the greater step of preaching to Cornelius, the Gentile (see on ch. 10).

Ellen G. White Comments

1, 2 SR 268

1-5AA 114

1-13EW 200

1-22SR 268-275

1-43AA 112-132

3-5Ed 65; GW 58; SR 269; 3T 429

4-6AA 117

6 AA 120; CE 60; CM 41; CS 343; FE 127, 216; GC 601; LS 267; MM 325, 333; SL 15; SR 270, 271; 1T 45, 511; 2T 166; 3T 430, 433; 4T 54; 5T 220, 584, 609; 6T 116, 480; 7T 252; 8T 94; 9T 169

7 AA 115

8 AA 117

8, 9 SR 271; 3T 430

9 AA 118

10-15AA 121; SR 272

11 3T 430, 431

15 AA 120, 121, 159, 163; EW 199, 222; GW 58; MB 34; 3T 429, 431, 433; 6T 415

15-18EW 201

16 1T 78

17 AA 121; 3T 433

17, 18 SR 272; 3T 431

18 AA 122

18-20SR 273

19, 20 AA 123

21 AA 124; EW 201

21, 22 SR 274

22 AA 125; EW 201

22-26SR 276

23-29EW 202

25, 26 AA 128

26, 27 SR 277

27, 29 AA 129

29, 30 SR 279

30 AA 130

32-39AA 131

34-40SR 281

36, 37 5T 304; WM 67

40 AA 132; GW 178; PK 48

40, 41 SR 282; 5T 304

Acts Chapter 10

1 Cornelius, a devout man, 5 being commanded by an angel, sendeth for Peter: 11 who by a vision 15, 20 is taught not to despise the Gentiles. 34 As he preacheth Christ to Cornelius and his company, 44 the Holy Ghost falleth on them, 48 and they are baptized.

1. Cæsarea. That is, Caesarea Palestinae, situated on the Mediterranean coast, not Caesarea Philippi. It was the capital of the Roman province (see on ch. 8:40) and the usual residence of the Roman procurator of Judea. It was doubtless a cosmopolitan city and a center of commerce. See Ministry of Peter to the Jews and Gentiles.

Cornelius. Luke may have learned the details of this story during one of his stays at Caesarea (chs. 21:8; 23:33; 24:27). The conversion of Cornelius marks a new stage of expansion in the growth of the church. Cornelius was a Roman officer, but he was not completely a heathen. He was "devout" and "feared God," and gave alms to the people (see on ch. 10:2). Even so, in Jewish eyes he was a Gentile, for he was uncircumcised. Consequently his admission into the church marks a new stage in the expansion of Christianity. It is understandable, then, that the apostles in Jerusalem gave special consideration to his case (ch. 11:1-18). The striking, supernatural features of Cornelius' conversion must have been an important factor in leading the apostles to accept the fact that an uncircumcised Gentile might become a Christian. It took the church several years more, however, to realize fully that Gentiles should enjoy exactly the same status and privileges as circumcised Jews (see Acts 15:1-31; Gal. 2:12).

Centurion. See on Luke 7:2. A centurion commanded about 100 men. He ranked as a minor officer who had immediate command of the soldiery and was chiefly responsible to see that they executed their duties and to maintain discipline. Centurions did not often rise to higher positions in the Roman army. Cornelius was a Roman citizen.

Of the band. Gr. ek speireµs, "from the cohort," indicating that Cornelius was not commander of the cohort, but an officer in it. The cohort, the administrative unit of the Roman auxiliary forces, consisted of either 500 or 1,000 men.

Italian band. This was probably the Cohors II. Italica, which is known to have been stationed in Syria during the Jewish-Roman War, and apparently was there earlier, at the time of the present narrative. This cohort is thought to have been made up of freedmen, or at least of men who were non-Roman in origin. It was an auxiliary cohort of archers.

2. One that feared God. This expression, and the similar words, "one that worshipped God," as well as the expression "devout persons," are used repeatedly by Luke (chs. 10:22, 35; 13:16, 26, 50; 16:14; 17:4, 17; 18:7) in reference to Gentiles who, like Cornelius, had accepted Judaism to the extent of worshiping Jehovah. Many times, at least, this also involved keeping the Sabbath and abstaining from foods forbidden in the law. But such Gentiles did not fully identify themselves with Judaism by submitting to circumcision or by obeying punctiliously all the regulations required of a pious Jew. See Vol. V, pp. 62, 63.

These expressions have occasioned considerable scholarly discussion. The LXX refers to "those who feared" (2 Chron. 5:6) in such a way as to lead some scholars to think that a particular class apart from full-fledged Jews is indicated. Similarly, Josephus (Antiquities xiv. 7. 2 [110]; Loeb ed., vol. 7, p. 505) speaks of "those who worshipped God," as sending gifts to the Temple from all over the world.

The additional suggestion has been made that those "that feared God" and those "that worshipped God," mentioned in Acts, are the same as the "proselytes of the gate," who are supposed to have constituted a recognized group of half-proselytes who though worshiping Jehovah and observing some of the Jewish law, were not circumcised, and therefore were not considered completely Jews. However, some question this explanation.

Thus it appears that the terms "one that feared God" (or "God fearer") and "one that worshipped God" may have been technical expressions in the NT period for a particular class of half-proselytes to Judaism who enjoyed a certain recognition in the synagogue, as has often been suggested. In later Judaism a similar term, "fearers of Heaven," may have represented some such group. The God fearers scarcely could have held any formally recognized status within the Jewish communities, and their relationship to Judaism must have been largely an informal one. Nevertheless the presence of such devout men throughout the Roman world provided Christian preachers with an audience of Gentiles, who, though not bound slavishly to the legalism of Judaism, were sincere seekers after God and were somewhat acquainted with the Jewish Scriptures (particularly the LXX) and Jewish beliefs.

With all his house. Cornelius was not satisfied with having found a higher truth for himself, but sought to impart it to his family, his servants, and others who came under his influence. The soldier sent to find Peter is called "devout" (v. 7).

Much alms. Cornelius was generous like the other centurion of whom the Jews said, "He loveth our nation, and he hath built us a synagogue" (Luke 7:5).

The people. That is, the Jews, as contrasted with "the nations," the Gentiles.

Prayed. The combination of almsgiving and prayer was common both in Judaism and in early Christianity (see Matt. 6:2, 5; Acts 10:4; 1 Peter 4:7, 8; Tobit 12:8).

Since the vision that follows doubtless may be regarded as an answer to Cornelius' prayers, it is natural to think that he was seeking guidance to greater knowledge of God's way (see Acts 11:14).

3. A vision. Gr. horama, "that which is seen," and particularly, as here, of a view that is divinely granted. The phrase "in a vision" may also be translated, "in vision." See on 1 Sam. 3:1.

Evidently. Gr. phaneroµs, "clearly," "distinctly," "manifestly," "apparently."

Ninth hour. This was the afternoon hour of prayer at the Temple (see on Matt. 27:45; Acts 3:1). Apparently Cornelius had adopted the Jewish hours of prayer, as he was praying when the vision was given him (ch. 10:30).

4. Looked. Or, "gazed intently," "stared."

He was afraid. The angel is called a "man ... in bright clothing" (v. 30; cf. ch. 1:10). For the moment his sudden appearance terrorized Cornelius. The Roman soldiers guarding the tomb of Christ, who were not attuned spiritually as was Cornelius, shook and became like dead men in the presence of the blazing glory of the resurrection angel (see Matt. 28:2, 4; cf. Dan. 10:7-11).

What is it? By this question Cornelius indicated that the vision involved more than he could understand, and his words may be taken to imply his readiness to follow divine direction. Compare the response Saul gave when Christ appeared to him on the road near Damascus (ch. 9:6).

Lord. Gr. kurios, a title of respect, which, when applied to human beings, is to be translated, "sir" (ch. 16:30), but when referred to God, means "Lord" (ch. 7:33). Which translation is preferable here depends on the degree to which Cornelius at first recognized the angel as a heavenly messenger. "Lord" is probably the better translation.

Thy prayers and thine alms. See on v. 2. Cornelius' alms were a tangible expression of the sincerity of his inner spiritual life, nourished, as it was, by habitual prayer.

Are come up. Rather, "have arisen." Prayer may be thought of as similar to incense ascending to the throne of God (see Rev. 5:8; 8:3, 4) or to the smoke of the burnt offering, which in Hebrew was called an Ôolah, "that which ascends." This was a particularly fitting expression to use for prayer offered at the time of the evening sacrifice (see on Acts 10:3).

Memorial. Gr. mneµmosunon, a word used repeatedly in the LXX to refer to the portion of the meal offering the priest burned upon the altar (Lev. 2:2, 9, 16; 5:12; 6:15). The smoke of the offering, as it ascended, was representative of Israel's prayers. This same word appears in Tobit 12:12, where an angel says, "I did bring the memorial of your prayer before the glory of the Lord" (in R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, vol. 1, p. 234). The prayers of Cornelius were acceptable to God. He followed "the true Light, which lighteth every man" (John 1:9), and he partook of the faith that from the beginning of the world has opened the way to justification--the belief that the true God "is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him" (Heb. 11:6).

5. Send men. God willed that Cornelius should make an active effort to obtain knowledge of the gospel. Truths gained as the result of personal inquiry often are more preciously treasured than those that are urged upon us.

Call for one Simon. Doubtless the centurion could have discovered that Simon the apostle was staying with Simon the tanner. But God, the Omniscient One, knew where Peter was and directed Cornelius accordingly. In His omniscience God knows every intimate detail about each one. Man's realization of this can be a deterrent from sin; better, it is a vast encouragement to godly living. The psalmist's wanderings and accompanying sorrows were known to God (Ps. 56:8). Even the fall of the sparrow is noted by the Lord, and the hairs of men's heads are numbered (Matt. 10:29-31). The parallel between the experience of Cornelius and that of Ananias and Saul (Acts 9:10-12) is notable.

6. Simon a tanner. See on ch. 9:43.

He shall tell thee. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of the words, "he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do." However, the same thought is set forth in Peter's own account of the visit to Cornelius (ch. 11:14), in the clause, "who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved." This is one of several instances found in some late manuscripts of the Acts where apparently an endeavor has been made to form a complete narrative in the earlier chapters by gathering together and adapting statements that appeared originally only in later chapters (cf. ch. 9:6).

For a discussion of the status of full proselytes and "proselytes of the gate," who had accepted the Jewish faith in part, see Vol. V, p. 62.

7. A devout soldier. The word "devout" implies that this man was, like his superior the centurion, a worshiper of the true God, but hardly a circumcised proselyte (see Vol. V, p. 62).

8. Declared all these things. The confidence Cornelius placed in those under his command is shown by his frankly telling them at once about his vision. Doubtless they had known his former hopes and prayers, and so were ready to share in the promised answer. All this throws light on the character of Cornelius, indicating that, as far as he had been able, he had tried to lead those under his influence to the truth that had brought him personally to a higher life.

To Joppa. The distance from Caesarea to Joppa was about 30 mi. Joppa was the city whence Jonah fled when called to preach to the Gentiles a message that proved to be life to them. Now, from this same city Peter was to be called to proclaim the gospel to the Gentiles.

9. Drew nigh. The events that led to Peter's vision were so timed as to bring the climax of that vision just at the hour the messengers arrived (see vs. 17-20).

Housetop. Gr. doµma, "building," "house." To "go up on the house" was to ascend to the housetop, which in the East was usually flat. This was an appropriate place for prayer and meditation. In a city like Joppa, and in the tanner's house, it was perhaps the only place suitable for such a purpose. For examples of other uses of housetops see 1 Sam. 9:25; Jer. 19:13; Matt. 10:27.

The sixth hour. That is, midday. Among the Jews this probably was not one of the regular hours for prayer, and early Jewish literature says nothing about it as such. Particularly pious persons may have observed it (see Ps. 55:17), and Peter's prayer at this hour may possibly be so interpreted (see on Acts 3:1). However, other explanations are also possible. The regular morning prayer, which normally took place about 9:00 a.m., at the time of the morning offering, might be offered as late as noon. Thus it may have been his morning prayer that Peter was offering. Another other interesting possibility is suggested by a Jewish regulation that goes back at least to the 3d century a.d. This rule provided that if a man had not eaten until midday, he should then first offer his afternoon prayer before partaking of food, for the afternoon prayer (normally about 3:00 p.m.) was not to be said soon after eating. Inasmuch as Peter was "very hungry" (ch. 10:10), it may have been that on the day in question he had not yet eaten, and so purposely offered his evening prayer at an earlier hour.

Whatever explanation is adopted for Peter's having prayed at this hour, it is clear that his meditation and devotion opened the way for his reception of a vision at exactly the right moment to prepare him to receive the messengers from the Gentile Cornelius.

10. Very hungry. Apparently Peter was not fasting, for he intended to eat. His noonday hunger prepared him for the command to eat, which was to be given him in connection with his vision (v. 13). Coming under these circumstances, the command was particularly forceful.

Would have eaten. Literally, "was wishing to eat," or "began to want to eat."

A trance. Gr. ekstasis, "a standing aside," and by extension, a displacement of the mind from its normal environment. The English word "ecstasy" is derived from ekstasis. Luke uses this word again for Paul's vision in the Temple (ch. 22:17). This word is employed in the LXX to describe the deep sleep of Abraham (Gen. 15:12). It represents a state in which the normal action of the senses is suspended, so that the vision is seen only mentally, as in a dream (see 2 Cor. 12:3). Peter's ekstasis provided a channel for a revelation of the divine will.

11. Heaven opened. Indicating that the vision and its message came from God (see ch. 7:56).

Vessel. Gr. skeuos, a word used to describe household and other utensils; in the present case, a general term for a container.

Unto him. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of these words.

A great sheet. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) as to whether this passage should read as in the KJV, or, "a great sheet let down by four corners." The word rendered "corners" is the common word for "beginning," and so refers to an extremity, which in the case of a sheet would be its corners. Apparently what the apostle saw was an extended sheet, the four corners of which were let down from what might be called the four extremities of the opened sky.

12. All manner of ... beasts. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of the words "of the earth, and wild beasts." However, the same words are found in ch. 11:6. The vision represented the whole animal creation. Evidently there were represented both the foods permitted to the Jews and those forbidden but used for food by the Gentiles.

13. Kill, and eat. Peter was hungry, and the natural promptings of appetite were confirmed by a voice from heaven. His resistance was because of conscience. Peter had not yet learned that the distinction between Jew and Gentile was done away in Christ (Gal. 3:28, 29). That Peter failed to learn this fully even after this vision is shown by his later dissembling at Antioch, for which Paul so frankly rebuked him (Gal. 2:9-21).

14. Not so, Lord. Peter's emphatic resistance even to a voice from heaven is quite in harmony with his character (see Matt. 16:22; John 13:8). His exclamation here is reminiscent of that of Ezekiel when he contemplated Israel's eating of defiled food (ch. 4:14). Abstention from unclean flesh was one of the most characteristic marks of the Jew, and a distinction to which he held rigorously. It had been one of the basic issues between the Jews and the Syrians during the Maccabean War (see 2 Maccabees 6:18-31), an issue over which stanch Jews willingly laid down their lives.

However, the distinction between clean and unclean beasts, made definite in Lev. 11, preceded the Jewish nation. This distinction was made by God and respected by Noah when he supervised the entrance of the animals into the ark (Gen. 7:2; cf. ch. 8:20). Man's original food consisted of fruit, grain, and nuts (Gen. 1:29). Before flesh foods were added to this diet (Gen. 9:2, 3), the distinction between clean and unclean animals already had been made clear. Thus there is no good basis for the position that the ban upon unclean foods was removed when the Jewish ceremonial law ended at the cross. In Peter's vision these dietary restrictions had symbolic reference to Jewish distinctions between men--themselves and the Gentiles--and the abrogation of these distinctions was the point at issue (see on Gen. 9:3; Lev 11; Acts 10:15; Additional Note on Lev. 11).

Common. The use of the word "common" in the sense of "impure" according to the Mosaic ritual, reflected the Jewish attitude toward Gentiles. All who were not Jews were viewed as the "common" rabble, shut out from God's covenant. The practices of these spiritual outcasts, different from those of the chosen people, were called "common" things, and as these "common" things were generally those forbidden by the law, all such prohibited things or actions became known as "common." Similarly, when men's hands were defiled ceremonially, they were known as "common hands" (a literal translation of the expression rendered "defiled ... hands" in Mark 7:2).

15. What God hath cleansed. In the vision clean and unclean beasts stood on the same footing, being let down from heaven in the same sheet. They represented thus a general mixing of things, among which none was to be called common, or unclean. In interpreting the vision one should recognize that, although it was given in the setting of physical hunger (v. 10), it did not concern food, it concerned men. It was for the souls of men, of every kind everywhere, that Peter was to experience a hunger. Having learned this lesson, at least in part, Peter declared, "God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean" (v. 28). Gentiles, ordinarily considered unclean, were awaiting the spiritual ministration of Peter. He must not hesitate to serve them. They were no longer to be considered unclean.

16. Done thrice. The vision was repeated three times, doubtless that it might remain in the apostle's mind. Similarly Pharaoh's dream had been given twice (Gen. 41:32), and Jesus had thrice repeated to Peter the injunction, "Feed my lambs" or "Feed my sheep" (John 21:15-17), an injunction that now was to take on a new and fuller meaning to him.

17. Doubted. Rather, "was perplexed," "was at a loss to know." This word is used of Herod's perplexity about Christ, when men said that John the Baptist was risen from the dead (Luke 9:7). Now Peter, aroused from his trance, did not know how to apply what he had seen and heard. The representatives of Cornelius, calling for him at this moment, brought the answer. See Acts 10:28.

Stood before the gate. The general location of Simon's house had been described to Cornelius (v. 6). and when his messengers found that the details corresponded, it must have given them confidence that their errand was to be successful. The timing of the vision of Cornelius with that of Peter to permit the arrival of the messengers, after a mi. journey (see on v. 8), at Peter's lodging at exactly the right moment, was no coincidence.

18. And called. That is, for someone inside the house to come forth. The messengers doubtless were Gentiles, like Cornelius himself, and so would hesitate to enter a Jewish house without giving notice of their presence.

19. Peter thought. Peter was pondering his difficulty and asking what God could have meant to teach by the vision. While he was thus pondering, the explanation came.

The Spirit said. Peter was no longer in a trance. The divine Spirit now spoke to the inner recesses of his soul. The Spirit's instruction implied that Peter should connect the arrival of the delegation with the vision he had seen.

Three men. The two servants and the soldier whom Cornelius had sent (v. 7).

20. Get thee down. Peter was still on the housetop.

Doubting. Or, "hesitating." As once before, Peter did not know yet what his Lord was doing, but he would know hereafter (John 13:7). He and the messengers of Cornelius were alike acting on the promptings of the Holy Spirit. The vision had given Peter no hint that he was to take a journey. Now Peter was informed of this, and he understood that the "doubting nothing" was to mean, at the end of his journey, that he was to put no distinction between Jews and other men. Thus the vision became intelligible little by little, and his perplexity was removed.

21. Which were sent. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of the words, "which were sent unto him from Cornelius."

What is the cause? The Spirit had told Peter that the men were waiting for him and that he should go with them, but he had not been informed of the reason for their coming. Naturally, then, his first question was regarding the purpose of their call.

22. Cornelius the centurion. The description given by his messengers seems to imply that Cornelius was not altogether unknown at Joppa. Peter may have been reminded of the other centurion, whose name is not recorded, who was stationed at Capernaum and had built a synagogue for the Jews (Luke 7:5). With that recollection there would come back to his memory the words that his Master had spoken, in praising the centurion's faith, that "many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 8:11).

One that feareth God. See on v. 2.

Of good report. That is, on account of the alms he had given and his evident reverence for the true God. Not only among the general populace of Caesarea was the piety of Cornelius known, but among all the Jews.

Was warned from God. Gr. chreµmatizoµ, "to advise." This word was employed repeatedly by pagan writers for answering by an oracle. Josephus uses it a number of times for God's speaking to men, and in the present passage this is clearly its meaning. It is used of admonitions to the wise men (Matt. 2:12), and to Joseph (Matt. 2:22), of the revelation given to Simeon (Luke 2:26), and of the divine messages sent to Moses (Heb. 8:5), and to Noah (Heb. 11:7). Consequently the KJV has rendered the one word as "was warned from God."

To hear words. That is, to learn from Peter what God would have Cornelius do (see ch. 11:14). Similarly, the Jews frequently called the Ten Commandments the Ten Words (cf. Ex. 20:1).

23. Called he. For Peter to call these Gentiles into the house was to take a first step toward laying aside scruples that the Jews felt toward non-Jews.

On the morrow. Since it was about noon that Peter went up to the housetop to pray, the arrival of the messengers following his vision must have been in the early afternoon. Because it was already too late to reach Caesarea, some 30 mi. away, yet that day, Peter did not set out until the following day. Also the messengers doubtless needed to rest from their journey to Joppa.

Certain brethren. These men were, of course,Jewish Christian (v. 45), and according to ch. 11:12, they were six in number. Doubtless Peter remembered Christ's words: "In the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established" (Matt. 18:16). He wished them to report to the church whatever he did. The usefulness of their testimony later in Jerusalem is implied in Acts 11:12. No doubt Peter informed them of his vision and of the message that Cornelius' servants had brought. The good reputation of Cornelius would have weight with them and make them ready to go with Peter.

24. The morrow after. Apparently Peter and his companions stayed overnight on their journey to Caesarea, as the messengers from Cornelius probably also had done on their way to Joppa (see vs. 7-9, 17). Their road lay along the Mediterranean coast.

Cornelius waited. Rather, "was waiting for them." His attitude of preparation shows how convinced he was that his own vision was real, and that God was about to give him an answer to his prayers.

Kinsmen and near friends. These doubtless included soldiers under Cornelius' command who were more or less in sympathy with his religious feelings, and friends from the community. He sought to bring as many as possible within reach of the new light he was to receive.

25. Worshipped him. This obeisance was the most extreme form of Eastern homage. So Jairus bowed down before Jesus (Matt. 9:18), and John before the angel (Rev. 22:8). This act on the part of Cornelius, a Roman officer, revealed that he recognized Peter as God's messenger. Such acts were certainly not usual among Roman soldiers, particularly in relation to Jews.

26. Took him up. That is, "raised him up." Peter's answer shows that worship should be given to God alone. For man to require or receive such homage from man could never be right. Peter's words are parallel with those of Paul at Lystra (ch. 14:15). To worship saints, or even angels, is to efface the distinction that should ever exist between God and man (see Rev. 22:9).

27. Talked with him. Peter's subsequent remarks indicate that Cornelius told the apostle many things not specifically mentioned in the text.

He went in. Apparently the preceding part of the interview was conducted near the entry of the house. Cornelius' action in coming forth to meet Peter was in the spirit of the centurion in the Gospel, who said, "I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter under my roof" (Luke 7:6).

Many. The personality and conduct of Cornelius had won him many friends, and in his enthusiasm and faith he had brought them together to see and hear a man of whom he knew nothing (see on v. 24).

28. An unlawful thing. The apostle states it as a known fact that a Jew might not associate with a Gentile. The action of the messengers of Cornelius in standing outside the house of Simon and calling upon someone to come to them in the open air showed that they were aware of Jewish prejudice. Such Jewish exclusiveness was known to the classical writers. Juvenal says: "Having been wont to flout the laws of Rome,they [the Jews] learn and practice and revere the Jewish law, and all that Moses handed down in his secret tome, forbidding to point out the way to any not worshipping the same rites, and conducting none but the circumcised to the desired fountain" (Satires xiv. 100-104; Loeb ed., p. 273). Similarly Tacitus declared: "The Jews are extremely loyal toward one another, and always ready to show compassion, but toward every other people they feel only hate and enmity. They sit apart at meals, and they sleep apart" (Histories v. 5; Loeb ed., Vol. 2, pp. 181, 183).

Peter, of course, was speaking from the standpoint of traditional Pharisaism rather than from that of the law itself; but such feelings were exhibited widely, and showed themselves in rigorous forms wherever Jews and heathen came in contact. The strict Jew would hesitate to enter a Gentile's house, as is reflected by a prohibition in the Mishnah: "The dwelling-places of heathens are unclean" (Oholoth 18. 7, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 226). In an ancient Jewish commentary on Leviticus appears a remarkable example of ceremonial defilement by contact with a Gentile: "It is related that Simeon the son of K\imh\ith went out to talk with an Arabian King, and a jet of saliva from the latter's mouth was spurted on to his garments and defiled him. His brother Judah entered and ministered in the office of the High Priesthood in his stead" (Midrash Rabbah, on Lev. 16:1, Soncino ed., p. 263). The Hindu feeling of caste, of shrinking from contact with those of a lower grade, although now slowly dying out under pressure of law and liberal feeling, presents a close modern parallel.

To keep company. Or, "to join himself" (see on ch. 9:26). The word signifies direct contact. Although the ordinary dealings of life forced Jews constantly to be in the company of Gentiles, they were to avoid such contact if possible, lest they be ceremonially defiled.

Not call any man common. The apostle now showed that he had learned the lesson of the vision. Humanity had been redeemed by the incarnation, the sacrifice, and the ascension of Christ, and even the lowest heathen was no longer common or unclean. God was willing to receive all men, and through Jesus He does so. Sin alone is that which separates men from Him (Isa. 59:2). Impurity is to be thought of as a moral, not a physical or racial, taint. The follower of God must learn to see in every sinner the potentialities of a redeemed, justified, and sanctified man. Inasmuch as every man is potentially the subject of such a godly transformation, he must be respected as one in whom the image of God is not entirely effaced and may yet be restored (see 1 Peter 2:17). Pride of class resting on mere differences of culture or opportunity, and showing itself in acts and words of contempt, is from one point of view even less excusable than distinctions resting upon a religious basis. The latter is the more amenable to cure.

It is evident from this verse that the lesson God taught Peter concerned, not beasts, but men. All men were to be reached with the gospel; ultimately they would be unclean only when they should reject God's endeavors to save them.

29. Without gainsaying. Peter had come to Caesarea without argument or question, following in faith the guidance of the Spirit, although he saw only dimly what God would have him do.

30. Four days ago. This is a clear example of the method of counting time periods by inclusive reckoning (see Vol. I, p. 182; Vol. II, pp. 136, 137; Vol. V. pp. 249, 250). Cornelius received his vision and dispatched his servants on the first day of (vs. 3, 7, 8); they arrived at Joppa on the second day (vs. 9, 17); they, with Peter and his friends, left Joppa on the third day (v. 23); and all arrived at Caesarea on the fourth day (v. 24). Since they met Cornelius at about the same hour as he had had his vision (see below on "until this hour"), the total period could have been scarcely more than 72 hours, yet because parts of four days were involved Cornelius spoke of it as "four days."

I was fasting. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of these words.

Until this hour. The Greek of this passage is ambiguous, but is probably best translated, "Four days ago about this hour." This indicates that Peter's arrival at Caesarea must have been in the middle of the afternoon, about the ninth hour, the same time of day at which Cornelius had received his vision.

At the ninth hour I prayed. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading, "I was praying the ninth," that is, the ninth-hour prayer, offered at the time of the afternoon sacrifice (see on chs. 3:1; 10:3, 9). Thus this whole passage probably is best read, "Four days ago about this hour I was praying the ninth [-hour prayer] in my house."

In bright clothing. See ch. 1:10. This phrase, in the Greek, is the same as that translated in James as "goodly apparel" and "gay clothing" (James 2:2, 3). The adjective, translated "bright" is employed by John to describe the raiment of the angels (Rev. 15:6), and of the bride of the Lamb (ch. 19:8).

31. Thy prayer. As contrasted with the parallel passage in v. 4, where the reference is to "prayers," in the plural, the present passage speaks of "thy prayer," implying a specific supplication. This gives a greater definiteness to Cornelius' prayer, and to its object. Doubtless it was for greater light and fuller knowledge of truth (see on v. 2).

Thine alms. See on v. 4.

Had in remembrance. A verbal form of the word translated "memorial" in the parallel passage (see on v. 4).

32. Joppa. See on ch. 9:36; 10:8.

Simon a tanner. See on ch. 9:43.

33. Thou hast well done. The expression is not of mere approval, but of heartfelt gratitude (see Phil. 4:14).

We all here. The words imply that the friends gathered around Cornelius shared in his eagerness to know further truth, and were ready to comply with whatever might be revealed to them as the will of God.

To hear. This word implies also the intention to believe and obey (see on John 5:24). The centurion expected to hear from Peter words whereby he and all his house might be saved.

34. Opened his mouth. An expression used for utterances of importance (see on ch. 8:35).

Respecter of persons. Gr. prosoµpoleµmpteµs, "one who receives the face," and so, one who distinguishes between persons on the basis of outward appearances. This expression finds an interesting parallel in the Hebrew phrase, nas÷o' phanim, literally, "to lift up the face," which in common usage also meant to make unjust distinctions between men. Compare the English expression, "to lose face." See Vol. V, p. 107. Peter had seen in his Master an absence of "respect of persons," whether the distinctions were of social rank, or knowledge, or wealth. This even His enemies acknowledged (Matt. 22:16). James lays stress on this same element of character as essential to all who wish to be true disciples of Christ (ch. 2:1-9). Peter needed to learn that the full application of this great principle called for the Jewish Christians to accept those of other races into equal fellowship with themselves. Paul, the champion of Gentile Christianity, stresses this principle in Rom. 2:9-11 From Cornelius' vision, parallel to his own, Peter was learning that God makes Himself known to all aspirants to righteousness, whether they are Jews or Gentiles. See Deut. 10:17; 1 Sam. 16:7.

35. In every nation. Peter dimly realized that Christianity was not to be national. In his dealings with Cornelius he began to see how this might be, though he did not yet understand it thoroughly. Paul would shortly declare that neither race, nor sex, nor social status have any bearing in God's sight (Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:10, 11).

The Jews had come to look upon themselves as exclusively the objects of God's interest, care, and mercy. Whereas prior to the Babylonian captivity they had conformed their lives and their religious beliefs and practices to those of the heathen nations about them (see Vol. IV, p. 31), after the Captivity they put forth extreme efforts to insulate themselves from their Gentile neighbors. They developed a spirit of exclusiveness that made them despise non-Jews and deny their eligibility to acceptance with God.

At first this spirit of exclusiveness constituted the chief barrier to the advance of the gospel among non-Jews. Had Christianity remained but a sect of Judaism--as Jewish Christians at first conceived of it--it could never have claimed the allegiance of all men everywhere. The first major task of the church was therefore to break the tight bonds of Judaism. In the conversion of Cornelius the Holy Spirit led the infant church to take its first important step in that direction.

Feareth him. This and the following phrase may be thought of as covering, respectively, the two tables of the law--the first referring to man's duty to God, the second, to his duty to his fellow men. See on Micah 6:8; Matt. 22:34-40.

Accepted. Or, "acceptable." God has no longer a chosen race of people. He calls all men to repent, and accepts those who do so in sincerity.

36. The word. That is, the message, the tidings of the Messiah, which brought peace on earth through a Saviour who is Christ the Lord (see Luke 2:14). This was first preached to Israel as God's chosen people, but now Peter recognized that God is the remitter of sins to everyone who believes on Him (see Acts 10:43). The message of peace now was to be not only between God and the chosen race but also between God and the Gentiles.

Preaching. A form of the Greek verb euaggelizoµ, "to declare glad tidings," and, in a technical Christian sense, "to preach the gospel" (see Isa. 52:7).

Peace. God is said to create peace for him that is afar off, as well as for him that is near, for the Gentile and for the Jew (see on Isa. 57:19; cf. ch. 49:6). Christ preached this peace between God and all nations without distinction (see Matt. 8:11; John 12:32 cf. Matt. 28:19). The apostles carried this good news to the world. Speaking to the Gentiles, Paul says, "Ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ" (Eph. 2:13). The apostles preached always that there was no name under heaven by which men could be saved but the name of Christ (Acts 4:12), and that whether men be Jews or Greeks, Christ is all and in all (Col. 3:11). Hence, in this doctrine of peace through Christ there is harmony between OT and NT, between prophets and apostles. Christ is Lord of all (Rom. 3:29).

The peace that is promised is a peace, not primarily between men, but between God and each man, and is obtained when atonement is received through Jesus Christ by faith (Rom. 3:24-26; 5:1). The messenger of peace is Jesus Christ; the basis of peace is His atoning work; the terms of peace are faith; the blessing of peace is the remission of sins; the fruit of peace is holiness.

Lord of all. Inasmuch as Jesus Christ is Lord of all, every man must stand on an equal footing before Him. By saying this, Peter also safeguarded Cornelius against thinking that the Jews whom he understood was the Messiah, was only a prophet and a teacher.

37. Word. Gr. rheµma, which stresses the utterance, or preaching, of the word rather than the "word" (logos) itself, as in v. 36. There, it is the whole message of salvation through Christ. Here, more specifically, it is the tidings about Jesus that had been spread abroad after the preaching of John the Baptist. Apparently Cornelius and his friends knew of these tidings, perhaps through the teaching that already had extended as far as Caesarea (ch. 8:40). The content of this teaching was that though Jesus had lived as a man in Nazareth, He was God's anointed, the Messiah, and was shown to be so by the mighty works that He did (see ch. 10:38). This indicates that the story of Christ was widely known--that the tidings concerning Him had been vigorously and effectively given by the apostles and lay members.

Began from Galilee. After Jesus was baptized in the Jordan, He began His preaching in Galilee (see Mark 1:14).

38. Anointed. Gr. chrioµ, "to anoint," the same word that appears in a different form as "Christ" (see on ch. 4:26). Coming shortly after Peter's reference to Christ in ch. 10:36, this word seems to imply that it was at His baptism, when He received the Spirit, that Jesus of Nazareth became publicly and officially the Messiah (see Matt. 3:16, 17), the "Anointed," though He was "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Rev. 13:8).

Holy Ghost. Jesus was anointed at His baptism, not with oil, but with the Holy Spirit (Matt. 3:13-17).

With power. When the Son of God humbled Himself at the incarnation, He laid aside the independent exercise of His attributes as the second person of the Godhead (cf. Vol. V, pp. 918, 919). For all that He accomplished on earth He relied, as must other men, on power from above (see DA 143; cf. John 5:19, 30; 8:28).

Doing good. The life of Jesus exhibits a consistent example of dedication to the service of mankind (see ch. 2:22; DA 70).

Oppressed of the devil. In a sense all illness and suffering are from Satan. Even Paul's "thorn in the flesh" was a "messenger of Satan to buffet" him (2 Cor. 12:7). But there is also a specific demonic possession, not always recognized as such by modern medical diagnosis. This possession was manifested in all its terribleness and repulsiveness during the early years of the proclamation of the gospel. Jesus conquered this force whenever He met it. Again and again He cast out demons. See Additional Note on Mark 1.

God was with him. Nicodemus confessed, "No man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him" (John 3:2).

39. We are witnesses. Peter had been with Jesus from the beginning of His ministry (John 1:40-42). The apostle recognized that the main purpose of his mission was to witness for Christ to men, as the Lord had commanded (see Acts 1:8, 21, 22; cf. Matt. 28:19, 20; Luke 24:48).

Land. Gr. choµra, "region," "countryside," here contrasted with the city, Jerusalem (see Luke 2:8; Acts 26:20).

They slew and hanged. See on ch. 5:30. As in ch. 2:23, Peter represents the crucifixion as mainly the act of the rulers and people of Jerusalem, and not of the Roman governor.

Tree. Gr. xulon, "wood," but used in the LXX and the papyri also for "tree." Clearly the cross is meant. There does not appear to be any allusion here to the tree of knowledge of good and evil in Eden, as some commentators have suggested.

40. The third day. This is an example of inclusive reckoning of a time period. For further discussion of this method see Vol. I, p. 182; Vol. II, pp. 136, 137; Vol. V, pp. 249, 250; cf. on v. 30. For the length of time Christ was in the tomb see Matt. 16:21; Luke 23:53 to 24:6.

Shewed him openly. Literally, "gave Him to be manifest," that is, "made Him manifest." Christ was not openly shown (see v. 41), but by many proofs it was made clear to those who saw Him that He was the same Jesus, now alive and glorified, who had hung on the cross.

41. Not to all. The Jews in general, having failed to recognize Jesus as the Messiah foretold in OT prophecy, were not likely to be willing witnesses to His resurrection (see Luke 16:31). The fact that even some of the disciples were at first unprepared to accept the risen Christ (Matt. 28:17; Mark 16:14) illustrates how unavailing a public appearance to the Jews in general would have been.

Witnesses chosen before. The disciples had been chosen from the beginning not only to aid Jesus in His ministry but, even more, to be witnesses after His departure to what they had seen and heard (see Matt. 28:19, 20; John 17:6-8; Acts 1:8; 2 Peter 1:16-18).

To us. See Acts 1:3; 1 Cor. 15:5-8.

Did eat and drink. See Luke 24:42, 43; John 21:13-15. His eating and drinking was the crucial test that proved Christ was no phantom of the disciples' imagination.

42. Commanded us to preach. This command is implied in Matt. 28:18-20, and is covered by the instruction in Acts 1:8 to witness concerning the kingdom of God (cf. ch. 1:2).

Ordained of God. Under the terms of the everlasting covenant Christ was to accomplish man's salvation. This makes it fitting that He also should be the judge of men, in complete fulfillment of the covenant.

Quick. That is, "living." Paul (ch. 17:31) agrees with Peter in connecting the resurrection with the assurance that He who had risen was to be the future judge of all men. The fact that Jesus was a man, and yet a man who was victorious over sin and death, and the further fact that at the same time He was God, the author of the law by which men are judged, make Him the logical and rightful one to be the judge of all men (see on John 5:22, 27).

43. All the prophets. As in his earlier speeches (see chs. 2:16, 30; 3:18), so here, Peter reveals an understanding of the meaning of OT prophecy in regard to Christ and His work. Doubtless much of this was the result of the teaching that he and the other apostles received from Christ in the interval between His resurrection and His ascension (see Luke 24:27, 44). In the present instance Peter probably had reference to such passages as Isa. 49:6; Joel 2:32. The fact that Peter uses OT scriptures to reinforce his argument is an evidence that he knew Cornelius and his household were familiar with those writings.

Through his name. These words must have made a deep impression upon Peter's eager listeners. Here was the answer to their doubts and perplexities. They were to find salvation, not by submitting themselves to circumcision, nor to the traditions of the Jews, nor to all that these things implied, but by the simple act of faith in Christ and in the power of His name (see on ch. 3:16). Their salvation was in the power of Christ's divine attributes, of which His name was an inclusive symbol. Through Jesus Christ of Nazareth, they, Gentiles though they were, would receive the remission of sins that their aroused consciences taught them was the necessary condition of peace with God. The satisfaction of their previous yearnings put them in a spiritual condition to join in the wonderful event the next verse narrates.

Whosoever believeth. This is the promise of John 3:16. Here Peter reiterates it, as Paul did later (Acts 16:31). Salvation is by acceptance of the grace of God through Jesus Christ (Eph. 2:5, 8), and not by the works of the law (Gal. 2:16, 20, 21). The works follow the receiving of the gift of salvation (Eph. 2:10; Phil. 2:12, 13).

Remission of sins. See chs. 2:38; 3:19.

44. The Holy Ghost fell. The descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Gentile Cornelius and his family before their baptism directly fulfilled, for Peter's companions, Chrit's promise that the Holy Spirit "will guide you into all truth" (John 16:13). In spite of Peter's vision they still were unprepared to accept Gentiles fully into the church (Acts 10:45), until the coming of the Holy Spirit demonstrated that Gentiles were acceptable to God.

Many Christians have held that the reception of the Holy Spirit is dependent upon the act of water baptism. They have taught that baptism has a sacramental power, and so is an instrumental cause that produces divine grace for the recipient. The present instance, in which Cornelius and his family received the gift of the Holy Spirit before they had been baptized by water, indicates that the reception of the Spirit is not dependent upon the act of baptism (see on v. 47). Baptism is rather an outward symbol of an inner spiritual regeneration, and derives its meaning from that experience (see pp. 43, 44; see on Matt. 3:6; Rom. 6:3-6).

45. They of the circumcision. That is, the six Jewish Christians mentioned in ch. 11:12 (see on ch. 10:23) as companions of Peter. Their astonishment is a testimony to the reality of the gift that Cornelius and his family received. Up to this point Christians had taken for granted that if Gentiles were to be Christians, they must first become full-fledged Jewish proselytes. The case of the Ethiopian eunuch baptized by Philip was probably not an exception to this. But Cornelius and his family were Gentiles, and Peter's Jewish Christian companions were unable to understand how such could receive the gift of the Holy Spirit without first having become proselytes. Possibly an added reason for their astonishment may be found in the fact that some ancient Jews declared that in the days of the Messiah no proselytes would be received into Israel (Talmud ÔAbodah Zarah 3b, Soncino ed., p. 8). Believing that the Messianic time had arrived, Peter's companions may have been influenced in their thinking by such an exclusive attitude toward proselytes.

On the Gentiles. Peter's Jewish Christian companions now saw a definite fulfillment of the apostle's vision. Cornelius and his family, filled with the Holy Spirit, were proof that no man might henceforth call the Gentiles "common or unclean." For Peter's fellow Christians this evidence doubtless sufficed.

46. Speak with tongues. The same kind of manifestation of God's gifts was made here as in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost (see on ch. 2:4). The words imply a sudden thrill of spiritual joy and elevation that showed itself in a burst of unpremeditated praise. In the history of the apostolic church there are a number of recorded instances of the manifestation of the Holy Spirit through the gift of tongues (cf. Acts 19:6; cf. ch. 2:4; see on 1 Cor 14). This gift was given for a useful purpose. At Pentecost it enabled the apostles to proclaim the gospel to the non-Aramaic-speaking multitudes gathered for the feast. In the case of Apollos' converts who were rebaptized by Paul at Ephesus, it is reasonable to conclude that it prepared them for a wider area of Christian effectiveness (see on Acts 19:6). So also in the present instance, the gift of tongues was a sign and testimony to Peter's companions, who were not prepared to accept the Gentiles into the church.

Then answered Peter. No previous question is stated, but obviously Peter's words in v. 47 are in answer to the astonished inquiries of his Jewish Christian friends as to what action he would take in view of the fact that the Gentile Cornelius and his family had received the Holy Spirit. He had followed divine guidance in coming to preach to them; would he now go all the way and baptize them also?

47. Forbid water. Could the outward sign be refused these Gentiles, when the inward and spiritual grace that it symbolized had been so manifestly bestowed directly by God? Ordinarily, as in the case of the Samaritans (ch. 8:15-17), baptism was followed by the subsequent act of the laying on of hands, accompanied by the gift of spiritual power. But now the gift of the Spirit had been given first, and all that remained was the outward act of bringing these believers into the society of the church. The event showed that God gives His gifts directly, as men are ready to receive them (see on ch. 10:44). But it showed just as clearly that no spiritual gifts, however marvelous, thereby make obedience to certain outward forms, such as baptism, unnecessary. In fact, the exceptional gift was bestowed for the very purpose of removing any scruples that those of the circumcision might have felt concerning baptizing them. The gift of the Spirit cleared the way, and baptism followed.

As well as we. Peter recognized that God had chosen Gentiles as well as Jews, and had given the same grace to each.

48. Commanded them to be baptized. The construction seems to imply that Peter himself did not baptize these converts. Jesus (John 4:1, 2) and Paul (1 Cor. 1:14-16) refrained from baptizing converts, and apparently Peter followed a similar course in this instance. Paul declares that he refrained generally from baptizing, lest factions arise and Christian unity be broken by men dividing into parties under the names of those who had baptized them. This may also have been the reason here (see 1 Cor. 1:12).

Who administered the baptism we are not told. Perhaps it was done by Peter's companions. Possibly there already may have been an organized congregation at Caesarea, as the result of Philip's work, and its elders or deacons, or Philip himself, may have acted under Peter's instructions.

The Lord. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the reading "Jesus Christ."

To tarry. It is probable that Peter consented to stay (see ch. 11:3), and thus showed that he was prepared to act thereafter according to the teaching of his vision. Peter must have mingled freely with the new converts, eating and drinking with them (vs. 2, 3) without fear of being defiled thereby. Luke gives so much space to Peter's experience in Caesarea that it must be considered as marking a turning point in the life of the apostle, attesting his essential agreement with Paul. Although afterward Peter wavered in his attitude toward Gentile Christians (Gal. 2:11-13), and was rebuked by Paul for so doing, the account of that severe rebuke shows that Peter had laid aside his Jewish prejudices to a great degree, and had acted as he did only under the influence of certain very strict Jews who had come from Jerusalem to Antioch.

Certain days. See on ch. 9:19.

Ellen G. White Comments

1, 2 SR 282

1-48AA 132-141; Ev 558; EW 78; SR 282-290

2 CG 263; MH 209

2-5AA 133

4 3T 405; 7T 216

4-6SR 283

5, 7, 8 AA 134

9-16AA 135

11-13SR 306

11-16SR 284

15 AA 193; SR 307

17-20AA 136

17-24SR 286

19, 20 MH 473

21-23AA 137

24 AA 138

25, 26 AA 137

25-29SR 287

27-29AA 138

33 COL 59; FE 108; 4T 394

33, 34 AA 138

33-35SR 288

34 CS 133, 162; PK 31, 304, 369; PP 420; IT 475, 536; 4T 423; 7T 21; WM 109

34, 35 3T 172

38 CH 498; COL 417; DA 241; Ed 80; GC 20, 327; LS 87; ML 118, 130, 166, 227; PK 718; SC 11; 1T 482; 2T 136, 337; 3T 217; 4T 139, 227, 268; 6T 225, 415; 7T 221; 8T 208; 9T 31; WM 53, 56

43 DA 211

44-48AA 139; SR 289

46, 47 SR 306

Acts Chapter 11

1 Peter, being accused for going in to the Gentiles, 5 maketh his defence, 18 which is accepted. 19 The gospel being spread into Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, Barnabas is sent to confirm them. 26 The disciples there are first called Christians. 27 They send relief to the brethren in Judaea in time of famine.

1. In Judaea. Or, "throughout Judea." The context implies that while Peter remained at Caesarea the news of his contact with Cornelius traveled widely, first probably to Joppa and Lydda, and then to Jerusalem.

The Gentiles. This must have been shocking to the Jerusalem church. As far as is known, this was the first time that uncircumcised Gentiles had been baptized and received into the church.

2. To Jerusalem. Which was still the headquarters (see on ch. 8:14).

Of the circumcision. There is no indication that this expression describes a particular class of Jewish Christians, for all Christians were either Jews or proselytes at the time these events occurred. Therefore the protest must have come from the whole church. However, Luke's narrative was written at a later time, when those who were "of the circumcision" had become a distinct party, and when their influence was working a definite division in the Christian congregations. Therefore Luke's employment of the expression must be taken as significant. See on v. 3.

Those who had been born Jews, and who had neither heard of Peter's vision nor seen the gift of the Holy Ghost poured out upon Cornelius and his household, are to be pardoned if their scruples caused them to challenge Peter's conduct. When these had heard his story they were satisfied (see v. 18), but many Jewish Christians elsewhere continued to make this a matter of contention (see Acts 15:1; Gal. 2:11-14).

Contended. Gr. diakrinoµ, "to separate," "to doubt," "to hesitate"; "to make a difference," "to discriminate"; "to oppose," "to contend with" (see chs. 10:20; 11:12; 15:9). Here it means that they separated themselves from Peter in a hostile sense, opposed him, disputed with him. The contenders insisted that the difference between Jew and Gentile should still be maintained. That is, that Christians should hold fellowship only with those who had become proselytes to Judaism and gave due obedience to the ritual law. Cornelius had not been received into the fellowship of the Jews in Caesarea (see ch. 10:2), and the active Judaizing sentiment in the church would tend to prevent his being accepted into the Christian community. The prejudice that had grown up among the Jews through generations of ceremonial observance makes this comprehensible. An entire nation is not brought to a radical change of feeling in a short period of time.

Incidentally, the fact that Peter could be militantly challenged demonstrates that he was not considered the head of the church, nor the "chief of the apostles," and certainly not infallible.

3. Wentest in. See on ch. 10:28.

Men uncircumcised. This expression, as used by a Jew, was the essence of scorn. Indeed, it shows the strength of feeling that had arisen against Peter. The men with whom he had mixed are not called Gentiles, but "the uncircumcised," words of profound reproach in the mouth of a pious Jew.

Didst eat. Peter had eaten with men among whom there would ordinarily be no regard as to kinds of food and ways in which it was prepared--things very important to the Jew. This charge was the real issue. Compare the Pharisees' accusations against Christ (Luke 5:30; 15:1, 2; etc.). The Jewish attitude in regard to eating with Gentiles is strikingly revealed by a passage in the book of Jubilees, probably from the late 3d century b.c.:

"And do thou, my son Jacob, remember my words,

And observe the commandments of Abraham, thy father:

Separate thyself from the nations,

And eat not with them"(22:16; in R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, vol. 2, p. 46).

4. Peter rehearsed the matter. Rather, "began and set forth the matter." The almost word-for-word repetition of the narrative of ch. 10 in ch. 11 appears at first inconsistent with Luke's skill in literary composition. Some commentators offer the explanation that Luke obtained the first account from the disciples he met at Caesarea, and the second from those at Jerusalem, and realized that their similarity confirmed the incident. Luke does the same with the narratives of Paul's experience at Damascus (chs. 9; 22; 26), leaving the slight variations as proof of independent accounts, and as the testimony of different witnesses.

For fuller comment on the story that follows in vs. 5-17 see on ch. 10:9-48. In the comment on ch. 11:5-17 attention will be given only to those points not discussed under ch. 10. The variations in the narrative, as given in chs. 10; 11, are few and of little importance.

5. It came even to me. There is a vivid touch of personal recollection in the description of the sheet coming "even to me," that is, toward me; it not only came down, but moved forward to Peter.

6. I considered. Or, "I was pondering." Another vivid detail. The apostle recalls the intense, eager gaze with which he had looked on the strange vision.

9. Call not thou common. The admonition is directed at Peter's judgment of men, not of beasts (see on ch. 10:28).

10. Drawn up again. A somewhat more vivid description than that in the parallel account in ch. 10:16.

11. Where I was. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between this and the reading "where we were," including his six companions in the statement.

12. The Spirit bade me. Guided by the Spirit, Peter had raised no contention, as those "of the circumcision" were now doing. These were challenging what the Spirit had led Peter to do.

Nothing doubting. Textual evidence maybe cited (cf. p. 10) for the omission of these words.

These six brethren. They had been his companions on the journey to Caesarea, and Peter had brought them to Jerusalem, that their statement might support his account, and that they might declare to the church what they had witnessed.

14. Shall be saved. The words are not found in the report of the angel's speech in ch. 10:4-6, but are implied in it. Cornelius longed for salvation, and when he was told, in answer to his prayer, to send for a certain one who could speak to him, he knew he would hear of the way of salvation.

15. I began. The Holy Spirit was ready to act upon Cornelius and his family as soon as everyone involved was prepared psychologically and spiritually to appreciate what was to happen. The opening words of Peter's sermon (ch. 10:34-43) doubtless brought his hearers to this point. So the Spirit is ever ready to bless, when men are ready to receive Him.

At the beginning. That is, at the Feast of Pentecost. These words of defense were spoken to fellow apostles and disciples who had shared in the Pentecostal gift. Peter testified that what he witnessed at Caesarea was no less certainly the Spirit's work than what the disciples had experienced at the first.

16. Remembered I. What a wonderful experience it must have been to have the Spirit call to their minds the things Jesus Christ had taught them! This is what Christ had promised would happen (see John 14:26).

The word of the Lord. The special promise referred to was that recorded in ch. 1:5 concerning the baptism by the Holy Spirit. When it was given, the promise had seemed to the disciples to refer only to them. Now Peter saw the gift of the Spirit in a broader perspective, as one to be bestowed also on those who were not of Israel. Since the baptism of the Holy Spirit was given to them also, therefore, as the greater includes the lesser, they also were admissible to the baptism of water.

17. Like. Literally, "equal." They were, equally with the Christian Jews, recipients of the Holy Spirit.

Who believed. Literally, "having believed," definitely and finally. The words refer alike to "them" and to "us." Thus the two cases are made parallel, as in v. 15. For just as the faith of Peter and the apostles existed before the gift of the Spirit, so with Cornelius and his companions there existed, before the gift, a measure of faith (see on ch. 10:35). The measure of faith was sufficient in their case to qualify them for greater gifts, and their acceptability for baptism and for fellowship with the church became evident.

What was I? The clause reads literally, "I, who was I? Able to withstand God?" That is, how was I, being such a one as I am, able to withstand God?

18. Held their peace, and glorified. Or, "held their peace, and began glorifying." The difference in tense of the two Greek verbs indicates that they first "held their peace," and then began a continuous utterance of praise. However, important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the reading "glorified," with the same tense as "held their peace." The fact that Cornelius and his household received the Spirit of God was obviously of immense importance as bearing on the question soon to arise between Paul and the Judaizers (see Acts 15; Gal. 2). The Spirit led in the first step in the free admission of Gentiles into the church at the hands of Peter, and the formal approval of the apostles and the other Jewish Christians of Jerusalem was added.

To the Gentiles. The Jews thought very highly of themselves, as if God's blessings had been designed for them only, and ill of other nations. "Thou madest the world for our sakes," says the book of Esdras. "As for the other people ... thou hast said that they are nothing, but be like unto spittle. ... These heathen ... have ever been reputed as nothing" (2 Esdras 6:55-57). The expected Messiah was to save the Jews and make them a glorious people, but was to destroy all other nations or to enslave them to the Jews. To free the growing Christian church from this arrogant the Lord made the singular display of His Spirit on Cornelius and those with him.

The lesson that the church learned in the experience of Cornelius was that God designed that the "middle wall of partition" (Eph. 2:14) between Jews and Gentiles was to be broken down. Paul knew that the gospel of Christ must accomplish this breaking down. The typical ceremonies were brought to an end in Christ's death. His saving grace and divine strength, imparted to the believer and enabling him to keep the law, remove the law's condemnation from the sinner (Rom. 8:1-4). Since both Jew and Gentile benefit from this, there is no difference: all are condemned; all are saved who believe (Gal. 3:27-29); Col. 3:10, 11). Both groups are reconciled to God and brought into harmony with the heavenly Father (Eph. 2:11-22).

This is the "mystery" now revealed (Eph. 3:1-12). The grace of God had rested upon Israel in the flesh. They had not recognized that He intended it to extend also to the nations. Now in Christ all is made plain. The Gentiles may enter into the "fellowship of the mystery" (Eph. 3:9 of righteousness, which includes all in the same great plan of salvation.

Granted repentance. God gives repentance. Faith is the gift of God (Rom. 12:3), and so is the repentance that follows it (Rom. 2:4; 2 Tim. 2:25). Through His Spirit God had given these Gentiles not only the opportunity for, but the experience of, repentance. Changed in heart (cf. Jer. 24:7; Eze. 11:19; 36:26), repentant and forgiven, they were accepted of God. How, indeed, could Peter withstand God?

19. Scattered abroad. What now follows is a continuation of ch. 8:1-4. There has been a digression to tell the story of Philip's work with the Samaritans and the Ethiopian, of Saul's with the Cilicians, and of Peter's with Cornelius and his household. This digression prepares the reader for the narrative that now follows, which tells of the conversion of Greeks to the gospel.

Persecution. Or, "tribulation." Reference is to the persecution in which Saul had taken an active part (see chs. 8:1; 9:1, 2).

About Stephen. The death of the martyr was followed, as ch. 8:1-4 shows, by a fanatical outburst against the Christians in Jerusalem. This resulted in a dispersion of many believers. Philip labored in Samaria and Caesarea. Others went to Phoenicia, to the cities of Tyre, Sidon, and Ptolemais, and were probably instrumental in founding the churches mentioned in chs. 21:3-7; 27:3. In Cyprus the way was prepared for the later work of Barnabas and Saul (see ch. 13:4-13), See Persecution and Expansion of the Early Church.

As far as Phenice. That is, Phoenicia, the district in which were the important cities of Tyre and Sidon (see Vol. II, pp. 67-69).

Cyprus. See on ch. 13:4.

Antioch. Here is the first-mentioned contact between the infant Christian church and the capital of Syria. Following Rome, Alexandria, and Ephesus, Antioch was the greatest city of the Roman Empire, and long a chief Christian center. Perhaps Nicolas, the proselyte of Antioch (ch. 6:5), had returned to proclaim his new faith. The entrance of Christianity there was of great importance. Located on the Orontes River, some 15 mi. (24 km.) inland from the port of Seleucia, Antioch, founded by Seleucus I Nicator about 300 B.C. and named after his father Antiochus, had grown in wealth and importance to be the leading city of Asia. The world acclaimed its men of letters and literature. To one of them, Archias, Cicero made a famous oration. Juvenal recognized the influence of Antioch upon Roman life and taste by declaring: "What fraction of our dregs come from Greece? The Syrian Orontes has long since poured into the Tiber, bringing with it its lingo and its manners, its flutes and its slanting harpstrings" (Satires iii. 62-64; Loeb ed., p. 37).

Antioch had a large colony of Jews, in honor of whom Herod the Great built a marble colonnade that ran the length of the city. Antioch was headquarters for the Roman prefect, or propraetor, of Syria. Christianity found itself at Antioch in closer contact with Greek culture than at Jerusalem or Caesarea. Here also it encountered heathenism in its most tempting and debasing forms. Its groves to Daphne were famous for their voluptuous, idolatrous worship. It was an amazing victory that the church was able to make Antioch one of its principal headquarters.

To none but unto the Jews only. Or, "to no one but Jews." This, of course, was to be expected from those who had left Jerusalem before the conversion of Cornelius had occurred, or had become generally known. They had not been informed, as had Peter, that the time had come to carry out Christ's prophetic command to its fullest extent (ch. 1:8). The singling out of the Jews is apparently noted in contrast both with the preceding narrative concerning Peter and Cornelius and with the following statement of missionary labors.

20. Men of Cyprus and Cyrene. In the case of these men, with their more cosmopolitan background, there was probably less hesitation about mixing with Gentiles than there was among the Jews of Palestine, the home of the Jewish nation and the stronghold of their prejudices. Who these men were we can only conjecture: possibly Lucius of Cyrene, who appears in the list of prophets in ch. 13:1; possibly Simon of Cyrene, who, there is reason to think, was a disciple of Christ (see on Matt. 27:32; see Mark 15:21). The founders of the church in Antioch must remain unknown.

To Antioch. See on v. 19.

Spake. The tense of the Greek verb used here implies that they began to speak and continued speaking.

Grecians. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) mainly between two readings: Helleµnistai, Greek-speaking Jews, or, more broadly, "Greek speakers," and Helleµnai, Greeks by descent--or, more loosely in the NT, Gentiles--the weight of evidence inclining slightly in favor of the former. If we accept Helleµnistai, as the KJV does, then we must suppose that the stress is upon the fact that the evangelists, instead of speaking to the Jews at large (many of whom, being Syrians, would speak Aramaic), preached especially to the Greek-speaking Jews and proselytes. If so, they followed in Stephen's footsteps, and indirectly prepared the way for Paul; for the Helleµnestai were, as a body, the link between the Jews, as a race, and the Helleµnai, who were Gentiles.

On the whole, however, other evidence tips the scale in favor of the reading, Helleµnai, Greeks (Gentiles). Several reasons support this reading: (1) Since the Helleµnistai were Jews, Luke would naturally include them among the Jews of v. 19, and so there would be no contrast indicated by their mention in v. 20. Luke would scarcely have had occasion to call attention to the fact that the preaching at Antioch was to Helleµnistai, Greek Jews, for there was a large number of them already in the church at Jerusalem (see ch. 6:1), and probably these Grecian and Cyprian teachers were themselves Greek Jews. But special mention by Luke is appropriate if they began preaching to the Helleµnai, that is, Greeks (Gentiles), in Antioch. (2) The contrast thus drawn between Jews and Helleµnai is an entirely natural one (see chs. 14:1; 18:4), and if the word Helleµnai is the true reading, here is a needed note of progress. Later references clearly imply the presence of Gentile Christians in Antioch of Syria (ch. 15:1, 28-31; AA 155-161, 188). (3) Also, if these were Helleµnai, they may not have been entirely heathen idolaters when they were converted. Perhaps, like Cornelius, some of them already feared God (see on ch. 10:2), and were attending the services of the synagogue (cf. the Corinthians, Acts 18:4).

Whether the conversion of the Helleµnai in this chapter preceded or followed the conversion of Cornelius cannot be known--the data are insufficient to provide an answer. It seems probable that the work went on at Antioch for many months among the Hellenistic and other Jews, and that the men of Cyprus and Cyrene arrived after the experience with Cornelius had set in motion forces that brought about the removal of restraints against reaching non-Jews.

Preaching. See on ch. 10:36.

21. Hand of the Lord. The expression is a common one in the OT for the direct interposition of God in the affairs of the world. See Ex. 14:31: "And Israel saw that great work [Heb. yad, "hand"] which the Lord did upon the Egyptians." Compare the statement of the Egyptians magicians: "This is the finger of God" (Ex. 8:19). The expression makes vivid the truth of a very personal God.

A great number believed. Here is a further record of phenomenal increase in the church. See chs. 2:47; 4:4; 5:14; 6:7; 8:6, 12; see on chs. 9:31; 11:24.

22. Tidings of these things. Or, "the report concerning them," that is, concerning these converts at Antioch. If, as is probable, the new converts were Gentiles, the apparently favorable reception that the news of their conversion received at Jerusalem was doubtless due to the acceptance that probably already had been accorded to Cornelius.

Church ... in Jerusalem. See on ch. 8:14.

Persecution and Expansion, c. A.D. 34-c. A.D. 45

Sent forth Barnabas. To strengthen the work at Antioch and to give it the approval and direction of the church in Jerusalem, even as Peter and John had been sent into Samaria (ch. 8:14). Perhaps the choice fell upon Barnabas because he was known to sympathize with the work going on in Antioch. He was a friend of Saul, whom he had introduced to certain of the disciples at Jerusalem (ch. 9:27), and he must have known of Saul's convictions and hopes regarding the Gentiles. Therefore he would welcome the opportunity to work in the same way. The fact that he was of the same country as some of the missionaries working in Antioch would further qualify him.

That he should go. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of this expression.

As far as Antioch. Barnabas may have visited other congregations on the way to Antioch.

23. Grace of God. For comment see on Rom. 3:24.

Was glad. Barnabas saw in the new work only that which would call for his approval, and the fact that more members were being added to the church was a source of deep joy to him. In fact, the whole Christian experience and program should at all times be one of continuous and undiminished rejoicing.

Exhorted. Or, "began exhorting." The tense may be understood to imply the beginning of continuous action.

Purpose. Barnabas wished them to be able to say, with the psalmist, "My heart is fixed" (Ps. 57:7; Ps. 108:1).

Cleave unto the Lord. Allegiance must be to Jesus Christ Himself, and must remain in Him "with purpose of heart," as is indicated in the preceding phrase. Barnabas had seen the result of the operation of God's grace upon those of Antioch, but he knew, as every true pastor knows, that man's will, or lack of it, can frustrate that grace. "Once saved, always saved" is not true; men backslide and apostatize, and the cooperation of man's will is necessary to bring the work of sanctification to completion.

24. Good. Or, "upright" (see Luke 18:18, 19). Applied to Barnabas, this was high praise, and no doubt expressed Luke's personal opinion of the man. He was perhaps careful to put this recommendation into the record because he would shortly have to narrate the contention that was to separate Barnabas from Luke's own friend and fellow worker, Saul of Tarsus (Acts 15:39).

Full of the Holy Ghost. A man of character like Barnabas, eminent among the Greek Jews of Antioch, would have a great influence among both Jews and Greeks in the city. The same qualification is given for Stephen (ch. 6:5). It was in consequence of the persecution following Stephen's death that the preachers had come to Antioch. Some of them may have been Grecians who had been active in the work for which Stephen was martyred.

Much people. Literally, "a great multitude," implying a large increase over the work related in v. 21. The approval of the church in Jerusalem on what was being done, as expressed in the joy and encouragement of Barnabas, "the son of exhortation," would increase the zeal of these earnest workers for Christ.

25. Barnabas to Tarsus. This is significant. It presupposes that Saul would approve the work that was going forward in Antioch, and shows the confidence of Barnabas that Saul was the right person to aid in the work there. It implies, too, that some intercourse had been maintained with Saul by letter or messenger since his departure from Jerusalem. Saul, it is to be inferred, had remained in and around Tarsus, preaching the gospel there and in the neighboring towns of Cilicia (see pp. 101, 102; see on ch. 15:41).

To seek Saul. Literally, "to hunt up Saul." He to whom the Lord had appeared, and who had been marked as a "chosen vessel" (ch. 9:15) to carry the name of Christ to the Gentiles, was now asked to join Barnabas in this new work of preaching to the Gentiles at Antioch. Doubtless having already heard of the operation of the power of God there, Saul accepted the invitation.

26. A whole year. Unlike preceding instances, here the length of time is given with exactness. Saul had preached at Damascus and at Jerusalem with his life in his hands, so to speak. With the church at Antioch he found a degree of quiet and a wide scope of opportunity suited to his earnestness.

With the church. Or, "in the church." Not in the church building--buildings were not in the possession of the church until the 3d century--but in the congregations. Those interested met with the believers and were incorporated into the body of the church as rapidly as they fully accepted the gospel message.

Taught much people. See on vs. 21, 24.

Were called Christians. Rather, "received the name of Christians." The Roman emperor Julian, called the Apostate (a.d. 361-363), noted that the tendency to invent nicknames as a form of satire characterized the population of Antioch in his time. The same tendency doubtless prevailed at the time of the first appearance of Christianity. The first syllable of the word Christian is from the Greek Christos, "Christ," while the ending is essentially Latin, and comparable to such words as Pompeiani, the followers of Pompey, and other party names. Similarly in the Gospels appears an analogous term, Herodians (Herodianai; Matt. 22:16), which apparently reflects Roman association. Possibly also, the name was given in ridicule to Christians by the heathen, somewhat as the term Lutherani was used derisively 15 centuries later by the enemies of Luther's followers.

Apparently the disciples of Christ did not give the name to themselves; and since the use of it would imply that those who bore it were followers of the Messiah, the Christ, it is certain that it would not be given to them by the Jews. The reason for the new term is apparent. When these new Gentile converts joined the church at Antioch, none of the former names would embrace the entire cosmopolitan body. They were no longer all Nazarenes or Galileans or Greek Jews, and in the eyes of the people of Antioch they must have seemed a strange mixture. Therefore, the hybrid term "Christians," a Greek word with a Latin termination, would seem to fit them. At a later time, what had been at first a taunt became a name in which to glory: "If any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed" (1 Peter 4:16).

Tradition, however, ascribes the origin of the name to Euodius, the first bishop of Antioch. Ignatius, the successor of Euodius as leader of the church there, used it frequently.

27. In these days. See Additional Notes on Chapter 12, Note 2.

Came prophets. A fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel, referred to by Peter in his Pentecostal sermon (ch. 2:17), that there should be prophets in the infant church (see Acts 13:1, 2; Eph. 2:20). We cannot, however, gather from NT records a clear description of what this office of the "prophets" was. They were men who possessed a gift of the Spirit, who were sometimes occupied in preaching and explaining the Word of God, and sometimes had the power of foretelling future events, as Agabus did here (see Acts 13:1; 15:32; 19:6; 21:9, 10; Rom. 12:6; 1 Cor. 12:10, 28, 29; 13:2; 14:6, 29-37). The mission of the prophets must obviously be taken as a further approval given by the church at Jerusalem to the work that Saul and Barnabas were carrying on at Antioch.

28. Agabus. The same prophet appears later in the narrative at Caesarea (ch. 21:10, 11).

Signified by the Spirit. Compare the statement of ch. 21:11.

Great dearth. This famine is probably that mentioned by Josephus (Antiquities xx. 2. 5), who tells how Helena, queen of Adiabene, east of the Tigris, while visiting at Jerusalem helped the people by obtaining for them corn from Alexandria and dried figs from Cyprus. This famine may be seen as a partial fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy in Matt. 24:7. For its bearing on NT chronology see pp. 98, 100; Additional Notes on ch. 12, Note 1.

World. Gr. oikoumeneµ, a word referring to the inhabited earth. In Luke 2:1; 4:5, and elsewhere in the NT, it is used for the Roman Empire.

Claudius Caesar. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the omission of "Caesar." The reign of Claudius lasted from a.d. 41 to 54, which period was memorable for frequent famines (Suetonius Claudius xviii. 2; Tacitus Annals xii. 43).

29. Then the disciples. That is, the church of Antioch.

According to his ability. Literally, "as each prospered." Apparently the collection was made, in consequence of the prophecy, before the famine itself came. Undoubtedly Saul and Barnabas were active in stirring up the Gentiles to support this charity. It was the first of those collections for the "poor saints ... at Jerusalem" (Rom. 15:25, 26) that were afterward so prominent in Paul's labors (cf. Acts 24:17; 1 Cor. 16:1; 2 Cor. 9; Gal. 2:10), and that the apostle regarded as a bond of union between the Jewish and the Gentile sections of the church. The liberality of the converts in Jerusalem in the glory of their first love (Acts 2:45), together with their subsequent persecution (ch. 8:1), probably had left them more exposed than most others to the pressure of poverty. Thus when the famine came it may have found them to a great extent dependent on the help of churches located in areas not affected by the famine. The church at Antioch set a worthy example for other churches.

30. Elders. Gr. presbuteroi, "older [men]," and so "elders," "presbyters." This is the first notice of such officers in the Christian church. They were probably not the apostles, for elders are mentioned separately from apostles in ch. 15:2, 4, 6. Henceforth they appear as a prominent element of church organization. The term "elder," and to a considerable extent the office in the church to which it referred, had backgrounds in both Gentile and Jewish life. Papyri from Egypt show that the "elders" played an important role in the economic life of local villagers. Thus appeals were made to them in questions regarding the renting of land and the payment of taxes (see J. H. Moulton and G. Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, p. 535). In Asia Minor the term was used for the members of a corporation, and in Egypt, for the priests of a temple (see A. Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 156, 233). In Jewish life "elder" (presbuteros) was used to designate the leader of a local synagogue, as is shown by the Theodotus Inscription (see on ch. 6:9). It was also used for lay members (Heb. zeqenim) of the Sanhedrin (see on ch. 4:5). The term thus lay ready at hand for the Christian church to adopt for their officers who held the primary responsibilities in their local congregations. In addition to these local responsibilities, the elders in the church at Jerusalem may also have occupied a position somewhat analogous to that of the zeqenim in the Jewish Sanhedrin, inasmuch as they, with the apostles, are seen in ch. 15 to have had some authority beyond the limits of their own congregation. In the present instance it was to them that the funds collected at Antioch were sent for distribution to those in need, by the hands of Barnabas and Saul.

In the early church the elder was also known as an episkopos, meaning "overseer," a word that has come into English as "bishop." Although historically, at least since the 3d century a.d., the terms "presbyter" (elder) and "bishop" have represented two different officers of the church, the evidence of the NT indicates clearly that in apostolic times the two terms referred to the same official (cf. 1 Tim. 3:2-7 with Titus 1:5-9; see on Acts 20:28; cf. Phil. 1:1). Clement of Rome (c. a.d. 96) appears to equate the two (Epistle to the Corinthians 44), and Chrysostom (d. a.d. 407) declared, "In olden times the elders were called overseers [or bishops] and ministers [or deacons] of Christ, and the overseers, elders" (First Homily on Epistle to the Corinthians 1, in Migne, Patrologia Graeca, vol. 62, col. 183).

According to Jame's epistle one of the duties of an elder is visiting the sick, praying to the Lord for their restoration to health, and anointing them with oil for healing (ch. 5:14). For a discussion of later developments in the offices of elder and bishop see pp. 26, 38-43.

Ellen G. White Comments

1-4AA 141; SR 290

12 AA 137; SR 290

15-17AA 141; SR 290

17 AA 193

18 AA 142; SR 291

19 AA 155

20 AA 166

20-25AA 156

21,24 SR 301

26 AA 157; SR 302

27-306T 271

Acts Chapter 12

1 King Herod persecuteth the Christians, killeth James, and imprisoneth Peter; whom an angel delivereth upon the prayers of the church. 20 In his pride taking to himself the honour due to God, he is stricken by an angel, and dieth miserably. 24 After his death, the word of God prospereth.

1. About that time. The event here narrated must have occurred not long before the death of Herod Agrippa I (see vs. 20-23). Since he died in a.d. 44, the events of the early part of this chapter can be dated perhaps the year previously or in the early months of a.d. 44.

Herod the king. Herod Agrippa I was the son of Aristobulus and Berenice, grandson of Herod the Great and the Hasmonaean princess Mariamne, and brother of the Herodias who appears in the story of John the Baptist (see Vol. V, p. 40). He was named after the statesman who was the chief minister of Augustus. After his father had fallen a victim in 7 B.C. to the suspicious of his grandfather, Herod the Great (see Vol. V, p. 42), he was sent to Rome, partly as a hostage and partly to keep him out of involvement in intrigues. There he became an intimate of Caligula and Claudius, both of whom later became emperors. When Herod Antipas married Herod Agrippa's sister Herodias, Agrippa was made the market overseer of Tiberias, but he soon quarreled with Antipas and went to Rome. Here he fell under the displeasure of Tiberius, because he expressed a rash wish that his friend Caligula might become emperor. He was imprisoned by Tiberius and remained in confinement until the death of that emperor. When Caligula succeeded Tiberius on the throne, he loaded his friend Agrippa with honors, gave him the tetrarchies, first of Philip and then of Lysanias (Luke 3:1), and bestowed upon him the title of king. When Antipas was deposed (see Vol. V, p. 65), Agrippa fell heir to his territories also. For a sketch of his reign see Vol. V, pp. 69, 234.

Stretched forth his hands. Rather, "laid hands on."

To vex. That is, "to injure," or "to afflict." Since Agrippa was anxious to be looked upon as a devoted Jew, he could easily be aroused by the Jews to attack the Christians. Therefore he began a persecution of the church, "spoiling the houses and goods of the believers" (AA 143).

2. Killed James. Had the apostle been guilty of blasphemy or heresy the Sanhedrin would have sentenced him to death by stoning. As in the case of John the Baptist (Matt. 14:10), the decapitation of the apostle James shows that his death was decreed by a civil ruler, who employed Roman methods of punishment (cf. Matt. 20:23). Why Herod should have selected James as his first victim can only be conjectured; but as James preached the gospel, he may have continued to occupy the prominent position that he had shared with Peter and John in the gospel story. He may have been marked by a natural vehemence, for he was called a son of thunder (Mark 3:17). A tradition, preserved by Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History ii. 9) from Clement of Alexandria, records that James's accuser became converted when he beheld the faith and patience of his victim.

James filled a short ministry of only 13 years after Christ's ascension. Of the apostles, he died first, whereas John, his brother, was probably the last of the Twelve to die.

With the sword. Death by the sword was a Roman mode of punishment, which, according to the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 7. 3, Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 354), was also employed at times by the Jews.

3. Pleased the Jews. This was Agrippa's object. Josephus notices this. Comparing Agrippa with Antipas, he says that the latter "was more friendly to the Greeks than to the Jews," but that Agrippa "was not at all like" Antipas (Antiquities xix. 7. 3).

An incident is related in the Mishnah (Sot\ah 7. 8; Soncino ed. of the Talmud, p. 202) that illustrates the sensitiveness of the king to popular praise or blame. At a Feast of Tabernacles in a sabbatical year, King Agrippa was reading the law. When he came to the words of Deut. 17:15: "Thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother," his eyes overflowed with tears at the thought of his own Idumaean descent. The people saw him weeping, and thinking rather of his Hasmonaean ancestry, cried out, "Our brother art thou our brother art thou!" and the king's heart was comforted.

Unless it was chiefly the Jewish leaders whom Agrippa wished to please, this story implies that a great change must have occurred from the earlier popular feeling in favor of the apostles, indicated so plainly in chs. 2:47; 5:26. Doubtless this change was caused by the rapid increase in the membership of the church.

Proceeded further to take. Literally, "added to take," seizing Peter as well as James. The expression is a close translation of a common Hebrew idiom.

Peter also. Peter, being an outstanding figure among the Twelve, was a logical object of Herod's attack.

Days of unleavened bread. This expression refers to the whole feast of the Passover, as may be seen from Luke 22:1: "The feast of unleavened bread ..., which is called the Passover."

4. Put him in prison. To keep him a prisoner until the termination of the feast.

Four quaternions. A quaternion was a squad of four men, used to maintain a watch. Probably two soldiers were chained to the prisoner and two stood guard outside (see on v. 10). Four such squads were appointed to have charge of Peter, apparently in rotation.

Easter. Gr. pascha, "Passover." The translation "Easter" is an unfortunate one. As noted above, the whole paschal feast is meant, and not merely a single day of it. Peter was arrested about the beginning of the Passover feast (the Passover meal was eaten during the night that began the 15th of Nisan), and the king's intention was to sentence and punish him after the feast had come to an end on the 21st.

The word "Easter" is of Anglo-Saxon origin, derived from the Norse EoÆstre, the goddess of spring, in whose honor a festival was celebrated each year at the time of the vernal equinox. The term "Easter" now properly describes only the Christian festival that took the place of the Passover day. It first appears in Christian history in the 2d century, and was celebrated as the festival of the resurrection. The Roman bishops urged that its celebration fall always on a Sunday. (Eusebius Ecclesiastical History v. 23-25), a custom that doubtless contributed to the practice of weekly Sunday observance. See p. 50.

To bring him forth. Literally, "to lead him up" for condemnation, as Pilate led Jesus forth to the judgment seat (John 19:13).

5. Peter ... was kept. Implying at least several days' imprisonment.

Without ceasing. Gr. ektenoµs, "earnestly," the same word that is used in the description of Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane (Luke 22:44). The word is translated "fervent" in 1 Peter 4:8, and implies intensity. From the general situation of the church it may be supposed that these prayers were offered by groups of Christians meeting in private homes (Acts 12:12), for the persecution by Agrippa would render open Christian services dangerous, as was often the case in the early days of Christianity.

6. Would have brought. Literally, "was about to bring," an additional evidence of the passage of time between Peter's arrest and the moment of his intended execution.

The same night. Or, "on that very night."

Peter was sleeping. It is an inspiration and a challenge to faith to see the calm repose of the apostle, as of one to whom God had given the sleep of His beloved (see Ps. 127:2), undisturbed by the fear of coming suffering and death.

Keepers. Or, "guards," that is, probably the two soldiers of the quaternion who were not chained to the prisoner.

7. The angel. Rather, "an angel."

Came upon. Gr. ephisteµmi, literally, "to stand over," the same verb that is used of the angels' appearing to the shepherds (Luke 2:9).

A light shined. Just as the "glory of the Lord shone round about" the shepherds, so now the presence of the angel brought heavenly glory into the dark prison.

Prison. Gr. oikeµma, "dwelling," "chamber," "cell." The Athenians used this term as a euphemism for "prison."

Raised him up. Or, "roused him up." The verb indicates that the angel woke Peter from his sleep, but not necessarily that he helped him to arise.

His chains fell off. Peter was bound by chains to two members of the squad of soldiers. Though the chains dropped from his ankles and wrists, the guards did not awake.

8. Gird thyself. When he lay down to sleep, Peter would naturally have put aside his cloak, loosened the girdle that bound his tunic, and removed his sandals. To gird oneself was a necessary preparation for journeying (see Ex. 12:11; 2 Kings 4:29).

Garment. Gr. himation, the outer robe, or mantle, as distinguished from the undertunic (see Vol. V, p. 47).

Follow me. The angel made no explanation, but simply freed Peter from his shackles, which act was sufficient evidence to justify the apostle's following him in faith.

9. Wist not. To Peter the situation evidently seemed very similar to his vivid trance and vision recorded in ch. 10. He must have thought he would wake to find himself chained to the two soldiers, as before he had wakened to realize that he had had a vision on the housetop while praying.

10. Ward. Gr. phulakeµ, "guard." "The first and the second ward" may refer to guards stationed near the inner door of the prison and at a door some distance away, or possibly to guards chained to him and others at the door (see on v. 4). Perhaps Peter had been placed in an inner dungeon, and thus needed to be led through two courtyards.

Unto the city. Apparently the prison was inside the city. It may have been in the Tower of Antonia (see Vol. V, p. 225; cf. below on "went out").

His own accord. Rather, "its own accord," the idea being that no human agency was employed (cf. Lev. 25:5). Doubtless the gate was opened by an unseen angel.

The simple and almost casual way in which Luke records this miracle is a testimony to the accuracy of his record.

Went out. There is some textual evidence (cf. p. 10) for the reading, "going out they descended the seven steps and passed on through one street." Although this reading cannot be shown to be original, it implies a more detailed acquaintance with Jerusalem than we now have. It may be based upon a tradition that Peter was imprisoned in the Tower of Antonia, which seems to have been entered by a flight of stairs (see ch. 21:34, 35, 40).

Street. Gr. rhumeµ, a word meaning either a street or an alley.

The angel departed. When supernatural aid was no longer necessary, he allowed Peter to take the further steps necessary for his escape.

11. Come to himself. Peter finds himself free in the cool night air in the open street.

The Lord. Peter had no doubt as to the source of this timely aid.

Delivered me. As before (ch. 5:19), Peter's Master had sent His angel to deliver him. There could be no question now as to the reality of his freedom.

12. Considered. Or, "understood," "comprehended." At first Peter had been "like them that dream" (Ps. 126:1) in regard to his deliverance from prison, but at last his mind could grasp the wonderful truth and he could act upon it. The verb indicates that he also perceived the circumstances surrounding the deliverance; he took in at a glance the whole situation and realized what he should do.

Mary. This Mary was related to Barnabas (see Col. 4:10, where Mark is designated "sister's son to Barnabas," though the expression in Greek means rather "cousin to Barnabas"). As Mark's father is not mentioned, Mary may have been a widow. Like Barnabas (see Acts 4:36, 37), she apparently possessed means, for she was able to have a house which was large enough to serve the church as a meeting place for prayer.

John. Since Peter speaks of Mark as his "son" (1 Peter 5:13), it may be that the young man was converted by him. The Latin name Marcus suggests some point of contact with Romans or Roman Jews.

Gathered together praying. Literally, "gathered together and praying." Probably such gatherings were usual in Mary's house. At the time Peter was being delivered from prison the group were earnestly praying (see v. 5) for his deliverance, for they realized that the church was in an hour of crisis.

13. Peter knocked. When the angel opened the prison doors, the supernatural intervened to meet an extraordinary need. But only a few minutes after the miracle of his deliverance, Peter had to knock at the door of a house to have his need of admission met in the usual way.

Gate. Gr. puloµn, see on Matt. 26:71.

A damsel. Gr. paidiskeµ, "a young girl," "a servant girl."

To hearken. A sense of danger is here implied--danger because of the persecution that Agrippa's zeal for Judaism was bringing to the disciples. Saul had formerly entered into every house and carried off men and women to prison (ch. 8:3), and there was prospect of a like danger now. Therefore Rhoda would not open the door until she knew who might be seeking admission.

Rhoda. A common Greek name meaning "rose." Rhoda is not mentioned apart from this experience, but few servants are so well known. Like the thief on the cross, the Mary who washed Jesus' feet, and the unnamed widow who put the two mites into the offering box of the Temple, Rhoda has been known to every Bible reader for 19 centuries.

14. Peter's voice. Doubtless the young woman's Christian love for a devoted and courageous soldier of the cross had led her to listen carefully to Peter when she had had opportunity, and she knew his voice. Then too, Peter had a touch of Galilean dialect in his speech, which had caused him to be recognized by a servant girl on a previous occasion (Matt. 26:73).

For gladness. It was not because of lack of faith, but from sheer joy, that Rhoda did not open the door for Peter. She had shared in the anxiety of the brethren for Peter and in the prayers offered in his behalf. Her eager desire to tell the good news of Peter's escape caused her to lose her presence of mind. Similarly Luke recorded of the disciples on the evening of the resurrection that when they recognized Jesus they "believed not for joy" (Luke 24:41).

15. Thou art mad. When Rhoda brought the news that Peter was at the door, the brethren could not believe her. They did not have enough faith to believe that God had answered their prayers. Therefore, they concluded, the young woman must be out of her mind.

Constantly affirmed. That is, stoutly asserted, confidently averred.

His angel. In Hebrews (ch. 1:14) the sound belief of the Jews concerning angels is expressed in the question, "Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?" The Jews believed that a guardian angel was assigned to each man, and that when the angel appeared in human form he assumed the man's likeness. During the intertestamental period the Jews developed a complicated angelology.

16. Continued knocking. Peter was as persistent in knocking for admission as the believers were in praying for his deliverance.

Were astonished. It would be hard to find a better illustration of the unwillingness of even good people to believe that prayers are definitely and specifically answered. When Peter stood before them, they could scarcely concede that it was he. Yet Jesus had given the fullest guarantee to His followers that their prayers of faith would be answered (John 14:13, 14).

17. Brought him out. When he had been released from prison and had come to himself, he had exclaimed, "The Lord hath sent his angel" (v. 11). Now he testified that it was the Lord who had delivered him.

Go shew. Gr. apaggelloµ, "to carry tidings," "to bring word," "to declare."

James. This is undoubtedly the James who presided over the council at Jerusalem concerning circumcision, and who gave his decision on that question (ch. 15:13). Thus he was in some sense the presiding elder of the church at Jerusalem, and it was natural for Peter to wish him to have news immediately of his deliverance.

This James may have been the son of Alphaeus or the James who was a brother of the Lord. Jesus' brothers did not believe in Him until the close of His life on earth, long after the Twelve had been chosen. To the James who was one of the pillars of the church in Jerusalem, after the death of James the son of Zebedee, Paul gives the express title "the Lord's brother" (Gal. 1:19; cf. ch. 2:9). This is probably the James to whom Peter here refers. Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History ii. 23; Loeb ed., vol. 1, p. 171) calls him bishop of Jerusalem, and quotes Hegesippus' Memoirs (a.d. 180) concerning James, which, though not necessarily exact, probably preserve some elements of truth: "`He was called the "Just" by all men from the Lord's time to ours, since many are called James, but he was holy from his mother's womb. He drank no wine or strong drink, nor did he eat flesh; no razor went upon his head; he did not anoint himself with oil, and he did not go to the baths. He alone was allowed to enter into the sanctuary, for he did not wear wool but linen, and he used to enter alone into the temple and be found kneeling and praying for forgiveness for the people, so that his knees grew hard like a camel's because of his constant worship of God, kneeling and asking forgiveness for the people.'" According to tradition, he was carried up to a pinnacle of the Temple, and when he refused to disown Christ, and insisted on holding to his belief in Him, he was thrown down, and stoned, and beaten to death by the club of a fuller (see vol. V, p. 71). According to Josephus (Antiquities xx. 9. 1) he was stoned to death. See Introduction to the book of James.

Palestine Under Herod Agrippa I

Into another place. Peter's removal to another place was in accordance with the command the Lord gave to the Twelve (Matt. 10:23). There is no way of knowing to what place Peter made his escape. Some Roman Catholic writers have insisted that he went to Rome, and after founding the church there returned to Jerusalem in time for the council recorded in Acts 15. Others have suggested that he went to Antioch, which is perhaps less improbable, but there are no traces of his presence there until after the Jerusalem Council (unless Gal. 2:1-10 is equated with Acts 11:30; see Additional Notes on ch. 15, Note 1; cf. Gal. 2:12). Some nearer city, such as Lydda or Joppa, may well have sufficed for a place of refuge. The fact that the name of the place is not given suggests that it was comparatively unimportant for Luke's record.

18. No small stir. The guards who had been chained to Peter must have discovered as soon as they awoke that he had gone, and they knew that their lives were to be forfeited because of his escape.

This is the end of the Scripture record of Peter's activities. Reference has already been made to Paul's mention of him in Galatians (chs. 1:18; 2:7, 8, 11, 14). Peter gives a few hints of his doings in his two epistles (1 Peter 1:1; 5:12, 13; 1 Peter 1:14). Otherwise nothing further is known of him from any inspired record. Tradition has a great deal to say, but its claims must be accepted or rejected on their own merits. The statement in Jerome's paraphrase of Eusebius' Chronicon, that Peter preached for 25 years in Rome, is made highly questionable by the fact that Peter was in Jerusalem for the council (Acts 15); that he was present in Antioch apparently following the council 2 (Gal. 2:11-14; see Additional Note on Acts 15); and that he himself hints of labors in the northwest region of Asia Minor (1 Peter 1:1; see Eusebius Ecclesiastical History iii. 1). In the light of Acts 8-12, all of this must have come subsequent to Peter's release in a.d. 44.

19. Be put to death. Literally, "that they should be led away," that is, to execution. The same verb is rendered "led ... away" in the accounts given in the Gospels of the trial and crucifixion of Jesus (Matt. 26:57; 27:2, 31; Mark 14:53; Luke 23:26). A Roman law promulgated about a.d. 529, declares: "The custody and care of imprisoned persons devolves upon the jailor, who must not think that some abject and vile dependent will be responsible, if a prisoner should, in any way escape, for We desire that he himself shall suffer the same penalty to which the prisoner who escaped is shown to have been liable" (The Code of Justinian ix. 4. 4; in S. P. Scott, tr., The Civil Law, vol. 14, p. 364). Doubtless this had long been the law, or at least the usage, in respect to a guard from whom a prisoner escaped. At Philippi, the jailer, when he thought his prisoners had all escaped, was ready to commit suicide rather than meet the death penalty at the hands of the law (Acts 16:27). Compare ch. 27:42.

To Caesarea. Agrippa, not a Roman governor, was in power at Caesarea at this time, for Josephus says that he had received Judea and Samaria from Claudius, in addition to the districts over which he had ruled under Caligula (Antiquities xix. 8. 2).

20. Was highly displeased. Or, "was exasperated," "was in a hostile state of mind," implying a deep-seated feeling of anger.

Tyre and Sidon. These two Phoenician cities, seats of maritime industry, were not subject to Agrippa. They were in a sense autonomous, though under the control of Rome. Perhaps Agrippa's regard for the people at Berytus (Beirût) another Phoenician seaport a little north of Sidon, may have been connected with his anger at the people of the two older cities. Josephus gives an account of the splendid buildings that Agrippa built in Beirut (ibid. 7. 5; see Vol. V, p. 69). It is clear that in some way the royal anger made itself felt, interfering with the commercial prosperity of Tyre and Sidon.

They came. That is, they joined in a common embassy and sent persons from both towns to make representations and to use their influence to appease Herod's anger.

Blastus. Nothing else is known of this man. The title of "chamberlain," found in inscriptions, was common in the Byzantine period. From imperial usage it was taken over into European courts. It meant, literally, the officer who had charge of the king's bedchamber, and designated a sort of highly placed secretary. It is possible that the representatives from the two cities secured his friendship by means of bribes.

Desired peace. That is, "were asking for peace." It is not to be understood from these words that Agrippa was actually making war on Tyre and Sidon, but only that he was on unfriendly terms with them. See 1 Kings 5:11; Eze. 27:17, which show the identity of the commercial needs of the two countries at widely separated intervals in their history.

Was nourished. The extent of Herod's rule was wide (see Vol. V, pp. 69, 234), and if he favored another port and diverted traffic from Tyre and Sidon, he could seriously cripple their trade.

21. A set day. Josephus says (Antiquities xix. 8. 2) that this was a day appointed for holding a festival on which to make vows for the safety of Caesar.

Sat. For a graphic description of the incident see Josephus Antiquities xviii. 6-8; xix. 8. 2. See Additional Notes at end of chapter, Note 1.

An oration. Or, a popular harangue.

22. The people. Gr. deµmos, "the mass of the people"; the pagan populace, assembled in a public place. Luke alone uses this word, and he uses it only in non-Jewish settings.

The voice of a god. Probably in the sense of pagan worship of the emperor, not of a celestial being (see on v. 21).

23. Smote him. In v. 7 an angel smote Peter to awake and save him. Here, by striking contrast, and angel smites Herod to destroy him. Smiting by a divine agency usually implies a severe judgment (see 1 Sam. 25:38; 2 Kings 19:35; Acts 23:3).

Gave not God the glory. The words do not necessarily mean merely that Agrippa had failed to ascribe to God the praise that was due Him, and Him only. To give God the glory always involved taking such action, appropriate to the circumstances, that would glorify God. Sometimes this meant the confession of sin and weakness, as in Joshua 7:19 (cf. on John 9:24).

Eaten of worms. Josephus, in his parallel account, does not name the specific form of the disease. Luke's more detailed description may reflect his profession, though it is to be doubted that "eaten of worms" is intended as a technical description of a specific disease. This was a divine judgment. Being eaten of worms was always regarded by the ancients as a divine chastisement, because of its loathsome character. There are several instances of it recorded in history: Pheretime, queen of Cyrene (Herodotus History iv. 205); Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Macc. 9:5-10). Herod the Great (Josephus Antiquities xvii. 6.5); and Galerius, an enemy of the church in the time of Diocletian's persecution, a.d. 303-313 (Lactantius On the Manner in Which the Persecutors Died 33). A similar account is given of a death of Philip II of Spain. Agrippa died in a.d. 44, in the seventh year of his reign, at the age of 53.

Gave up the ghost. See on ch. 5:5.

24. Word of God grew and multiplied. See chs. 6:7; 19:20; see on ch. 11:24. "The seed is the word" (Luke 8:11), said Christ, and so the Christian historian, Luke, tells us that the word was as a seed: when it was cast forth diligently, it grew and bore fruit. The words describe a continuous expansion. The death of Agrippa, as the chief persecutor, left the preachers of the gospel free to proclaim their message, and they were not slow to avail themselves of the opportunity.

25. Barnabas and Saul returned. That is, from their visit to Jerusalem (ch. 11:27-30) to their labors among the Gentile converts in Antioch (see below on "from Jerusalem"; see also Additional Notes at end of chapter, Note 2).

From Jerusalem. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading "unto Jerusalem," as though Barnabas and Saul were returning to Jerusalem from "their ministry" in the field at Antioch. However, most of the editors of the Greek text, obviously judging from the context and considering that ch. 12:25 is the conclusion of ch. 11:27-30, prefer to regard as original the less well-attested reading "from Jerusalem," as in the KJV. A suggestion has been made whereby the better-attested reading can be understood in this same sense, by reversing the order of "unto Jerusalem" and "when they had fulfilled their ministry." The unpunctuated Greek text allows this translation, which would read literally, "Barnabas and Saul returned, having fulfilled their ministry unto Jerusalem."

Fulfilled their ministry. Or, "charge," "deaconate," "ministration." The Greek word is the same as that translated "relief" in ch. 11:29. Barnabas and Saul completed the mission on which they had been dispatched by the church at Antioch.

Took with them John. See on v. 12. The choice is partly explained by John's relationship to Barnabas (Col. 4:10), but it shows also that John was entering heartily into the work of converting the Gentiles. See Acts 13:5, 13; 15:37-39; 2 Tim. 4:11. Apparently, he had been living at home in Jerusalem until this time.

additional notes on chapter 12

Note 1

Comparing Luke's narrative with that of Josephus, it seems probable that the delegates from Tyre and Sidon were among those who raised the cry, "The voice of a god, and not of a man," and added, as Josephus reports, "Be thou merciful to us." Note the marked contrast between Peter's refusal of homage on the part of Cornelius and Agrippa's acceptance of the blasphemous flattery by the multitude at Caesarea. Josephus' account agrees with that of Luke in the following details: (1) Among the multitude who flattered Agrippa there were some who were seeking to regain his favor. (2) The day was a "set day." (3) Herod was clad in royal robes. (4) The flattery consisted in calling him a god. (5) He did not rebuke them. (6) He was stricken immediately so that he had to be carried to his palace. Josephus adds that Agrippa acknowledged that the stroke came from God as a rebuke for accepting such blasphemous flattery, and that everyone expected him to die at once.

With reference to the latter portion of the Josephus account, which says that violent pain increased in force very rapidly, and to the NT account, which says that Agrippa was eaten of worms, it is noticeable that in the account of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes these two features are mentioned as characterizing the same disease, and are described separately: "The all-seeing Lord, the God of Israel, smote him with a fatal and unseen stroke; the words were no sooner out of his mouth than he was seized with an incurable pain in the bowels, and his internal organs gave him cruel torture. ... Worms actually swarmed from the impious creature's body" (2 Maccabees 9:5, 9; in R. H. Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, vol. 1, p. 144). Josephus, who looked upon Agrippa with marked approval, has merely described the form in which the king's malady made itself apparent at first, and has omitted the loathsome details from the death story of one who in his eyes was a great king. The Scripture has given the fuller account, because the object of the writer of Acts was to emphasize in all its seriousness the sin for which, as Josephus tells us, Agrippa knew he was stricken. The points of agreement in the two accounts are so many, and the differences so slight and so easily explained, that the account by Josephus must be regarded as a tribute to the historical accuracy and carefulness of Luke.

Note 2

At the end of chapter 12 the question arises whether the famine visit of Barnabas and Saul (ch. 11:27-30) occurred before or after the imprisonment of Peter and the death of Herod Agrippa I, since the last verse of ch. 12 is evidently the conclusion of the narrative begun in ch. 11:27-30. This problem is made apparent by the fact that chronological evidence suggests that the death of Herod occurred before the famine visit, an order that seems to be in reverse of that in which Luke treats these events.

In considering this problem it is to be recognized that Luke does not always attempt to be strictly chronological in his accounts in either his Gospel or the Acts. Luke, in his Gospel (ch. 1:1-3), mentions "many" who took "in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us." From their records he chose, as "it seemed good to" him, "having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first," those events that provided a coherent narration of certain phases of early Christian history. After he had followed the activities of one character (such as Peter, mainly, in Acts 1-12), or had given a coherent picture of one area of development (such as the gospel in Palestine, to ch. 11:18), Luke then went back and picked up another phase or another character, and followed that through to another logical point of climax or conclusion (cf. the transition, ch. 11:18, 19). Chronological order sometimes is less important to Luke than other kinds of orderly arrangement, such as by subject or by geographical area. This attitude is characteristic of the literature of his time, as it is of the OT (see on Gen. 25:19; 27:1; 35:29; Ex. 16:33, 35; 18:25).

The expressions "in these days" (ch. 11:27) and "about that time" (ch. 12:1) are used, as often in the Gospels, merely as stereotyped transitional phrases, not necessarily intended to point out a specific time chronologically. It is entirely possible that the events of ch. 12:1-24 occurred between vs. 26 and 27 of ch. 11; ch. 12:25 logically follows ch. 11:30. The "ministry" (ch. 12:25) apparently refers to the carrying of the "relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judæa" (ch. 11:29). Thus the famine visit would come after Peter's imprisonment, miraculous release, and departure from the city of Jerusalem, and after the death of Herod Agrippa I, which occurred in a.d. 44.

Following his historical method as described above, Luke has related the story of the opening of work for the Gentiles in Antioch. At the end of that narrative, its heroes, Barnabas and Saul, are sent to Jerusalem to carry the famine relief offering to the elders. In view of this change of scene, Luke next goes back (ch. 12:1) to bring his readers up to date on what had been happening in Jerusalem during the period represented by his narrative on Antioch. He tells the story of Herod's persecution of the church, including the killing of James and the imprisonment of Peter, and of the fearful end to which the persecutor came. He is then ready to pick up again his narrative at Antioch, with the sending forth of Barnabas and Saul as ordained missionaries (ch. 13:1-3). But first he brings his main characters back to that place by mentioning (ch. 12:25) that they "returned from Jerusalem, when they had fulfilled their ministry." He also uses this opportunity to introduce a new character, John Mark (already mentioned incidentally at Jerusalem, v. 12), for Mark is to accompany the two older men as they set out on the journey that Luke now proceeds to describe (chs. 13:4 to 14:27), Paul's first tour.

Such a minor displacement of the account of the famine visit is entirely reasonable in view of Luke's habitual method of organizing his material, and it does not involve any major rearrangement or the coalescing of two events, or records of events, as do some views (see Additional Notes on Chapter 15, Note 1).

Ellen G. White Comments

1-3AA 143; SR 292

1-25AA 143-154; Ev 581; SR 292-300

2 AA 597

2, 3 EW 186

4, 5 AA 145

5, 6 SR 293

6, 7 AA 146

6-10CG 42

6-115T 748

7 AA 152; EW 186

7, 8, 10 SR 295

8-10AA 147

11 SR 296

11-15AA 148

13-17SR 296

16-19AA 149

19 SR 297

21 AA 150

21-23EW 186

22 SR 298

22, 23 AA 151

23 AA 152; SR 299

Acts Chapter 13

1 Paul and Barnabas are chosen to go to the Gentiles. 7 Of Sergius Paulus, and Elymas the sorcerer. 14 Paul preacheth at Antioch, that Jesus is Christ. 42 The Gentiles believe: 45 but the Jews gainsay and blaspheme: 46 whereupon they turn to the Gentiles. 48 As many as were ordained to life believed.

1. Church ... at Antioch. See ch. 11:26. With chapter thirteen the center of the narrative shifts from Jerusalem to Antioch, as has already been anticipated in ch. 11:19-30. From Antioch Paul, as the apostle to the Gentiles, set out on his three great missionary tours. The record of these three journeys takes up most of the remaining chapters of the book of Acts. It is quite proper, therefore, that the focal point of the narrative should now shift to Antioch. There, for the first time, Gentiles had come in large numbers into the church. See pp. 28, 29; see on ch. 11:19, 20, 26.

Prophets and teachers. Here is the first time that those persons who exercised particular gifts of the Spirit are seen functioning administratively in the church. No specific indication is given regarding formal church organization at Antioch, although it doubtless existed. At all events it is clear that the men of the Spirit were functioning actively. See pp. 26, 38, 39.

The NT treats such men as a recognizable group, although they were not organized as an official class. A man was recognized to be of this number not merely when he was seen to be "spiritual" in the sense of "pious" (see Gal. 6:1), but when he proved himself possessed of a functioning gift of the Holy Spirit. Later, in the Christian literature of the 2d century, these men emerge as a class known as pneumatikoi, "spiritual [men]." Eventually they disappeared, unjustly discredited by the appearance of "false prophets" (see 1 John 4:1), and by pressure from the elected officers, the elders or bishops (see pp. 26, 38). For a further discussion of the gifts of the Spirit see on 1 Cor. 1:12.

The different connections and activities of the men mentioned here indicate that the church at Antioch enjoyed a cosmopolitan leadership. Barnabas was a Cypriote; Lucius, a Cyrenian; Manaen, apparently a Palestinian aristocrat; and Saul, a rabbi from Tarsus in Cilicia.

Barnabas. See on ch. 4:36; cf. chs. 9:27; 11:22.

Simeon. This man's first name, Simeon, or Simon, indicates that he was of Jewish origin. His second name is a Latin adjective meaning "black," which he may have assumed, or may have been given, because of a dark complexion. Jews frequently had Gentile names in addition to their Jewish ones, as John Mark, Simon Peter, Joses Barnabas, and Saul "who also is called Paul" (see on v. 9). This second name may have been given to Simeon to distinguish him from other persons who bore the same name.

Lucius of Cyrene. The fact that this man came from Cyrene suggests that he may have been one of the Jews who abounded in that province, and one of the "men of Cyprus and Cyrene" (ch. 11:20) who had been among the first to evangelize the Gentiles in Antioch. He may be the Lucius who is mentioned in Rom. 16:21. On the ground that Cyrene was famous for its school of medicine, and that inscriptional evidence shows that the names Lucius and Luke might be used interchangeably, some writers have identified this man with the author of Acts, Luke the physician. However, such identifications must be accepted with extreme reserve in view of the fact that the name Lucius was very common among the Romans, and could easily have been held by more than one prominent Christian.

Manaen. A Greek form of the Hebrew name Menahem.

Brought up. Gr. suntrophos, a word that may mean either that Manaen was a foster brother of Herod, perhaps in the sense that Manaen's mother was nursing mother to Herod, or that he was reared with him, or even simply that he was in some way connected with the court of Herod. "Herod the tetrarch" must be Herod Antipas (see Matt. 14:1; Luke 3:19; 23:7-12; Vol. V, pp. 64, 65), the ruler whom Jesus once called "that fox" (Luke 13:32). Josephus (Antiquities xv. 10. 5) mentions an Essene named Menahem, or Manaen, who foretold that Herod the Great would become king. The Talmud also knows a Menahem who is supposed to have been in the service of Herod the Great (see Talmud H\agigah 16b, Soncino ed., p. 108). The identity of name would seem to indicate that the name Manaen became a favorite among those who were in the good graces of the Herodian house. Both Herod Antipas and his brother Archelaus were educated at Rome, and Manaen of Antioch may have accompanied them thither. How or when he was brought to believe in Jesus as the Christ is not known. His activity as a Christian teacher at Antioch presents a striking contrast to the career of Herod Antipas, the ruler who slew John the Baptist, mocked Jesus, and who some years before the time of the present story, was exiled in disgrace to Gaul.

Herod the tetrarch. See above on "brought up."

Saul. Saul of Tarsus is here "among the prophets" with far better results than was true of Saul the king a millennium before (1 Sam. 10:11, 12). Saul's name comes at the end of the list. The construction of this passage in Greek suggests, but does not necessitate, the conclusion that the first three men named here were prophets, and the last two, teachers. Saul may not yet have exercised the prophetic gift.

Paul's First Missionary Tour, c. A.D. 45 to 47

2. Ministered. Gr. leitourgeoµ, "to minister," a word used in secular Greek to describe service rendered by a state official, and in both the LXX and the NT for the ministry of the priests and Levits in the sanctuary (Num. 18:2; Heb. 10:11). Paul used it figuratively of his ministry to the Gentiles, likening himself to a priest, and presenting the Gentiles as offerings to God (Rom. 15:16).

To the Lord. The ministry of the prophets and teachers of Antioch, their work of prayer, exhortation, and teaching, was dedicated to God (see Rom. 14:18; Col. 3:24).

Fasted. This was a solemn act of devotion as the men of Antioch faced the work before them. It has been well said that "a full stomach neither studies diligently, nor offers devout prayers." See on Matt. 4:2, 3.

The Holy Ghost said. Doubtless the Spirit spoke His will through the lips of the prophets, as in ch. 20:23.

Separate. In the Greek the particle deµ follows this verb, indicating the definiteness of the command and that it was to be executed immediately. Barnabas and Saul were to be set apart for a new work.

Barnabas and Saul. For the previous companionship between the Saul and Barnabas see chs. 9:27; 11:25, 26. From the first Saul was called a "vessel of election" (see on ch. 9:15), and had been intended by God for extensive missionary service. In view of the previous association of the two men, it was logical that Barnabas was selected as Saul's colaborer. Up to this time the two men had been among the prophets and teachers of the church. Now they were being sent out on a distinct mission, on the authority of an inspired command, and were consecrated to the work of apostleship among the Gentiles.

For the work. Since the basic command came from the Holy Spirit, it can be supposed that the general course of the First Missionary Journey was outlined also by the Spirit. Certainly there is no record that the church gave any study to plans for such a missionary journey.

3. Fasted and prayed. The repetition of these words would indicate that the fast of v. 2 continued. The new command called for an intensity of spiritual life, to which fasting was a normal prelude and accompaniment. The implication is that a solemn dedication service marked the closing hours of the fast.

Laid their hands. See on ch. 6:6. As the apostles laid their hands on the Seven, so did the prophets and teachers of the church of Antioch witness to the divine commission of Saul and Barnabas and implore for them the divine blessing.

4. Sent forth. Here begins Saul's (Paul's) First Missionary Journey; see Paul's First Missionary Tour. Barnabas and he now went forth under the direct command of the Holy Spirit, evidently with specific instructions from that divine Source. See p. 29.

How were these missionaries to be supported? There is no indication of a salary, nor of any fund furnished to them. Probably, as he did later (ch. 18:3, 4), Paul worked at his trade during the week and preached in the synagogues on Sabbaths. Years afterward, writing to the Philippians, Paul indicated that he had received but little support (Phil. 4:15-18). Apparently it had not yet occurred to the infant church that tithe, which was always paid to the Levites, might properly be given for the use of a consecrated Christian ministry. In fact, there was as yet no clergy as a professional class.

Unto Seleucia. This town lay about 15 mi. (24 km.) from Antioch near the mouth of the Orontes River, and was the seaport for Antioch. Seleucia was named for its founder, Seleucus I Nicator (d. 280 B.C.), the general of Alexander who established the Seleucid Empire. The Journeys of Paul.

Sailed to Cyprus. If the missionaries were not specifically directed, doubtless they chose this first point of call because Cyprus was the birthplace of Barnabas. Its population was largely Greek. It claimed Aphrodite, or Venus, as its patron goddess. Her chief center of worship was at Paphos, which was conspicuous for the licentiousness of the harlot-priestesses of her temple. The metal cuprum, "copper" took its name from the island, and the copper mines, lying only a short voyage from Syria, had attracted many Jews. Probably it was among these that the gospel had been preached already by itinerant Christian evangelists (ch. 11:19). It is probable, too, that some of those from Cyprus who were converted in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost took the Christian message back to their homeland.

5. Salamis. At the eastern end of the island, this was the nearest port of Cyprus for those coming from Seleucia.

Preached. They proclaimed forthrightly from the Scriptures the word of God, giving the message of a crucified and risen Saviour (see v. 12).

Synagogues. The mention of "synagogues," plural, implies a considerable Jewish population. Following their general rule of preaching first to the Jews (v. 46), the apostles naturally made their initial contacts in the synagogues. The synagogue services provided particularly valuable opportunities for visitors such as Saul and Barnabas to preach (see Vol. V, pp. 57, 58).

John. That is, John Mark, the cousin of Barnabas (see on Col. 4:10).

Minister. Gr. hupeµreteµs, an "under rower" on a ship, and so, by extension, an "assistant" of any kind. In the NT this word is used for an officer who executes sentences imposed by a judge (Matt. 5:25), for the chazzan in the synagogue (see Vol. V, p. 56), and for officers under the command of the Jewish leaders (John 7:32). In addition to the present passage Luke uses this term twice of ministers of the gospel (Luke 1:2; Acts 26:16). The specific duties of Mark are not stated, but evidently he assisted the two apostles generally in their ministry.

6. Through the isle. Textual evidence attests (see p. 10) the reading "through the whole island." Probably Paul and Barnabas taught at various places on their way across the island.

Paphos. Paphos lay at the western extremity of the island. There was an old city of Paphos that was noted for its sanctuary dedicated to Aphrodite, but in Paul's day a new city had been built some 7 mi. (c. 11 km.) farther to the northwest, and this served as the headquarters of the Roman governor of Cyprus. It was to this new city that Paul and Barnabas came.

Sorcerer. Gr. magos, "magus" (pl. "magi"), originally a Persian word denoting the priestly class among the Iranian fire worshipers. As such, the Magi held a position of dignity and respect. To this class belonged the "wise men" who visited the infant Jesus (see on Matt. 2:1). However, as early as the 5th century b.c. the term magos also had come to have the bad sense of a "sorcerer," or a "quack." Thus the Greek poet Sophocles makes Oedipus revile Teiresias under this name, as one who practiced magic (Oedipus the King 387). Luke uses a similar term for Simon, the sorcerer at Samaria (Acts 8:9). He apparently employs it in a general sense in connection with "false prophet," to indicate that Bar-jesus, though he held a position of influence with the governor, was a quack.

A false prophet. A decadence in the use of true revelation produces false prophets, who in turn accelerate the decay.

A Jew. Pretenders to magic powers were common among the Jews (see Talmud Berakoth 59a, Soncino ed., p. 367). They traded on the religious prestige of their race, and boasted, in addition to their sacred books, of spells and charms that had allegedly come down to them from Solomon.

Bar-jesus. This is clearly a Jewish name, but textual evidence is so divided as to its correct spelling in Greek that a final decision on its exact meaning in Hebrew or Aramaic is hardly possible. It may mean "son of Joshua" (see on Matt. 1:1).

7. Deputy. Gr. anthupatos, the Greek equivalent of the Roman title "proconsul." The provinces of the Roman Empire, under the organization of Augustus (27 B.C.), were divided into two classes. Those needing military control were placed under the emperor as commander of the legions, and were governed by propraetors, and procurators. The more peaceful provinces were left to the rule of the Senate and were under the government of proconsuls. Cyprus had been an imperial province (see Strabo Geography xiv. 6. 6), but later it was reassigned to the Senate (Dio Cassius Roman History liii. 12. 7), and consequently in Paul's day it was ruled by a proconsul. The existence of proconsular government there is proved also by the fact that extant from the time of Claudius are coins of Cyprus that give the title of proconsul to the local ruler, Cominius Proclus. Luke here, as elsewhere, is careful to use correct titles for the various officials who appear in his narrative (see on Acts 23:24; cf. on Matt. 27:2).

Sergius Paulus. A Latin inscription from a.d. 35, listing a group of the Arval Brethren, priests who served as curators of the Tiber, contains the name "L[ucius] Sergius Paullus." Although no positive identification of this man with the proconsul in the present narrative can be made, it is not impossible that they are the same person, and that Sergius Paulus had been a priest at Rome before being sent to Cyprus. Another inscription, from Soli in Cyprus, declares itself to be from the time of "Paulus, proconsul." Scholars have sought repeatedly to identify this proconsul with the Sergius Paulus of Acts, but the best opinion is that the date of this inscription cannot be reconciled with the time of the First Missionary Journey. It probably refers to a proconsul who ruled Cyprus several decades earlier. Pliny the Elder, writing c. a.d. 90, has been thought to name a Sergius Paulus as his chief authority for the facts in certain portions of his Natural History, but a critical study of the manuscript evidence indicates that the man mentioned there was rather one Sergius Plautus. Consequently nothing certain is known concerning the Sergius Paulus of Acts beyond that recorded by Luke.

A prudent man. The adjective describes intelligence and discernment, as in Matt. 11:25; Luke 10:21; 1 Cor. 1:19. The presence of Elymas with Sergius Paulus shows that the proconsul was a man of inquiring mind. He certainly displayed this characteristic when he asked to hear Barnabas and Saul. He showed his prudence when he came to recognize the higher type of character presented by the missionaries. He can scarcely have been dominated by the sorcerer.

8. Elymas. Many conjectures have been made by scholars as to the meaning of this name, but no final conclusion has been possible. Perhaps it may represent a Semitic word that has some such meaning as "sorcerer," or "wizard." In this case the phrase "by interpretation" would not mean that "Elymas" is a translation of "Bar-jesus," but would merely be a way of adding that he was a sorcerer.

Sorcerer. Gr. magos (see on v. 6).

Withstood them. The charlatan feared the loss of the influence he thought himself exercising over the proconsul. He saw his victim emancipating himself, passing from credulity toward the sorcerer to faith in the gospel, and that change Elymas was determined to check. Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses (2 Tim. 3:8) in somewhat parallel circumstances, and with the same sort of satanic endeavor.

Seeking to turn away. At this point Sergius Paulus had not yet accepted the doctrine of Christ, though it is probable that both Elymas and he had heard much concerning the apostles' message since they had landed at Salamis. The sorcerer saw that the proconsul's interest was aroused, and he wished to divert his attention, lest he send for Barnabas and Saul. But the proconsul was determined in his purpose, and had the apostles brought before him.

9. Called Paul. At this point for the first time the name is introduced by which the apostle to the Gentiles is best known. For a discussion of the names Saul and Paul see Additional Notes on ch. 7, Note 2.

Filled with the Holy Ghost. The tense of the Greek participle here implies a sudden access of spiritual power, showing itself at once in insight into character, righteous indignation, and prevision of divine chastisement to be applied. Evidently the sentence of punishment to be inflicted on Elymas was revealed to the apostle by the Spirit. Paul knew from the same Source that what he was about to say would come to pass.

Set his eyes. Gr. atenizoµ, "to gaze intently." It has been suggested that such a gaze was necessary because Paul's vision was defective as a result of the fierce brightness seen on the Damascus road. But Luke uses this Greek word repeatedly of the fixed gaze of men of normal powers of sight, as they look in wonder or scrutiny (see Acts 3:4; Luke 4:20; 22:56). Elymas needed to be observed, for he was standing by, ready to employ any means he could to discredit the apostles. But Paul fixed him with his eyes and delivered a bitter condemnation.

10. All subtilty and all mischief. The word translated "mischief" is found only here in the NT. Its primary meaning of "ease [or, "facility"] in working" came to have the bad sense of "shiftiness" and "trickery." Paul was explicit and unreserved in his condemnation of Elymas. Filled with the Holy Spirit, he indicted the sorcerer witheringly but truly. There are those who think that a Spirit-filled Christian will show only the relatively passive "fruit of the Spirit" catalogued by Paul in Gal. 5:22, 23. But the Spirit also leads His messengers to identify and define sin frankly, and to condemn it in clear terms. The Spirit-filled Paul did this very thing in the case of Elymas.

Child of the devil. See on John 8:44. As the devil is the father of lies, so Elymas, who traded in deceit, could well be called by this bitter epithet. If the name Bar-jesus means "Son of Joshua" (a name that means "Jehovah is salvation"; see on v. 6), Paul's characterization of him here would have been a particularly striking contrast.

Enemy of all righteousness. Paul recognized in the proconsul an earnest desire to know truth. His wrath blazed against Elymas for interfering with that desire.

Pervert the right ways. The influence of Elymas was a twisting and misrepresentation of the true way of God. He turned the straight paths of God's making into the crooked ones of man's subtlety. It was an exact reversal of what Isaiah described as the true preparation of the way of the Lord, making the crooked straight (Isa. 40:4).

11. Hand of the Lord. See on Acts 11:21; cf. Ex. 9:3; Judges 2:15. The inquiries Sergius Paulus had made of Elymas probably concerned the Jewish faith. Instead of teaching the proconsul to know God, he had led him astray by his own pretensions. The hand of the Lord, whose ways Elymas had perverted, was about to fall upon him.

Thou shalt be blind. A most fitting judgment, for Elymas had fought against the light of truth. The form of Elymas' punishment stands in striking contrast with the apostle's own previous experience. Paul had become blind to outward light, but had been illuminated inwardly by a light from heaven (see on ch. 9:9). Elymas, blinded for a time, might be able yet to receive the Light that lights every man (John 1:9).

For a season. That the blindness was temporary implies that it was not only a punishment but an intended remedy. The punishment inflicted on Elymas was lighter than that on Ananias and Sapphira, because their conduct, if continued, would have brought ruin upon the church. Their sin was against greater light than had been bestowed on the magician of Cyprus.

A mist and a darkness. The order of words indicates a gradual diminution of sight. At first Elymas' eyes clouded over, and then he became blind. Such precision in the record seems to reflect Luke's training as a physician (see Col. 4:14; cf. on Acts 9:18).

To lead him. Elymas had falsely and selfishly used what knowledge he had to guide others wrongly, to his own advantage. Now he must seek others to guide his own steps. He did it gropingly, for such a man would wish to show as little as possible how exactly the apostle's words had come to pass for him.

12. The deputy. The proconsul saw the miracle, and heard the words that accompanied it. He believed that the apostles showed the greater power, and accepted their message, so evidently superior to what Elymas had been teaching him.

Astonished. Or, "amazed." Here, as in Matt. 7:28, the word is used of glad amazement at the hearing of the gospel.

Doctrine of the Lord. That is, the teaching about Jesus Christ.

13. Paul and his company. Literally, "those about Paul." From this point on, Paul is recognized as the leader of the mission. Henceforth, Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, is the central figure in nearly every scene of the book of Acts.

Loosed. Gr. anagoµ, commonly used for sailors "putting to sea." Paul and his company sailed to the northwest.

Perga in Pamphylia. Pamphylia was a small region about midway on the south coast of Asia Minor. In a.d. 43, just before Paul's visit, it was combined with Lycia, its western neighbor, to form an imperial province. Perga was its chief city, situated on the river Cestrus, about 8 mi. from the sea. Luke records no evangelistic work in the city at this time, perhaps because there were no synagogues. Trouble of mind at John Mark's departure may have caused Paul and Barnabas to move on. They did preach in Perga on the return journey (ch. 14:25). See Paul's First Missionary Tour.

John departing. That is, John Mark (see on v. 5). There is no clue as to why John left. Perhaps he feared the perils and hardships of the journey into the interior.

John Mark was probably the same person as the writer of the second Gospel. He became afterward an earnest laborer for Christ. Paul spoke of him later with affection (Col. 4:10), and wished to see him during his last imprisonment (2 Tim. 4:11). If Luke knew why John Mark withdrew, respect for his more successful experience later evidently kept Luke from revealing the reason here.

14. Departed from Perga. Or, "passed through from Perga." The route of Paul and Barnabas led north, probably along one of the branches of the Cestrus River into the province of Galatia. To reach Antioch they "passed through" the whole breadth of Pamphylia and the southwestern corner of Galatia. See Paul's First Missionary Tour.

Antioch. Pisidia was only a region in Paul's day, and did not become a province until the end of the 3d century a.d. The Antioch in question was not in Pisidia, but nearby in the region of Phrygia. However, in 39 B.C. it had come under the rule of the king of Pisidia, and consequently it was known as Pisidian Antioch, to distinguish it from other cities of the same name. In NT times it was included in the province of Galatia.

Antioch was one of the many cities built by Seleucus I Nicator (d. 280 B.C.), who named it after his father, Antiochus. It lay on the lower slopes of the Taurus Mts. at an elevation of 3,600 feet above sea level. Its people had been granted a form of Roman citizenship under Augustus. Antioch probably had attracted a considerable Jewish population, which apparently had led the Gentiles to acquire an interest in Judaism (v. 42).

Perhaps on this journey Paul and his companion were exposed to "perils of robbers," of which he speaks in 2 Cor. 11:26. Pisidia, through which they passed to reach Antioch, was a mountainous country, rising gradually toward the north. Strabo (died c. a.d. 24; Geography xii. 7. 2) speaks of much brigandage in those regions.

The synagogue. Although Paul was the declared apostle to the Gentiles, he always went first to the synagogues (see on ch. 13:5, 14), which frequently afforded visitors an opportunity to speak (see Vol. V, pp. 57, 58). The organization of the synagogue excluded any sort of priestly ceremony, and lay preaching was an established practice for those trained for it. Neither the elders nor the scribes of the synagogue needed to be of the tribe of Levi, as did the priests in the Temple.

On the sabbath. Like his Lord (see Luke 4:16), Paul was habitually present at the synagogue services on the Sabbath day (see Acts 13:42-44; 17:2; 18:4; cf. ch. 16:13). The apostle Paul obviously had a double purpose in this--he wished to make effective spiritual contact with the Jews (see above on "the synagogue"), and to keep holy the Sabbath day "according to the commandment" (Luke 23:56).

15. Reading of the law. On the place of the readings from the Law and the Prophets in the synagogue service see Vol. V, pp. 57, 58. These readings frequently formed the basis for the sermon that followed. Although it is impossible to say with certainty what the readings were on this particular Sabbath, it is an interesting fact that vs. 17 and 18 contain key words that are found also in Isa. 1:2 and Deut. 1:31, passages that are still read together on the same Sabbath in the synagogue service (see comment on Acts 13:17, 18). This would seem to suggest that these two passages, which have a certain similarity of theme, may also have been read together in Paul's day. However, inasmuch as there is no evidence that there was a set cycle for the Sabbath reading of the Scriptures at the time of the present narrative (see Additional Note on Luke 4), any attempt to ascertain the time of year of Paul's visit to Antioch from the date on which these Scriptures would be read in cycle must remain highly dubious.

Rulers of the synagogue. Gr. archisunagoµgoi, a term that had both pagan and Jewish usage. A pagan inscription has been discovered in Thrace in which the title is applied to the leader of an association of barbers. In Jewish circles this term was a counterpart to the Hebrew phrase ro'sh hakkeneseth, "head of the assembly," an official who was one of the leading men of a Jewish community. His chief duty, as reflected here, was to arrange for the worship services in the synagogue; he chose those who offered prayers, read the Scriptures, and delivered the sermon (see Vol. V, p. 56). Although the usual practice appears to have been to have only one such official in each congregation, the present passage seems to indicate that in some instances a board of such officers directed the affairs of a synagogue.

The rulers doubtless noticed Paul and Barnabas in the congregation, and perhaps learning of Paul's rabbinical training, invited the apostle to speak, since it was part of their official privilege to extend such invitations.

Ye men and brethren. Literally, "Men, brethren." As in chs. 1:16; 2:37, this was a courteous mode of address.

Exhortation. Or, "consolation." Barnabas was called "son of exhortation" (see on ch. 4:36), and the same word is used here.

16. Beckoning. Rather, "signaling." Paul waved his hand to command silence and request attention rather than to invite someone to come, as we now understand beckoning (see ch. 12:17).

Men of Israel. When audience, subject matter, and purpose are considered, it is not surprising that this address of Paul at Antioch, the speech of Peter at Pentecost, and the defense of Stephen are similar. Paul had heard Stephen's defense; the visions at Damascus (ch. 9:3-7) and Jerusalem (ch. 22:17-21) had confirmed to him the truths that Stephen had uttered; he now spoke with boldness concerning the truth of the resurrection.

Ye that fear God. Paul's audience seems to have included Gentiles, or at least proselytes (see on ch. 10:2; cf. ch. 13:42).

Give audience. Literally, "hear ye!"

17. God of this people. Paul introduced his speech much as Stephen had his. The Jewish approach to religion was historical rather than theological. Thus Paul begins with the recapitulation of the main facts of the history of Israel, a theme that Jews never tired of hearing. Such an approach also showed that the apostles recognized that the Hebrews were God's chosen people.

Exalted. Gr. hupsooµ, a word found also in the LXX of Isa. 1:2 (KJV, "brought up"). This may be an echo of the hapht\arah, the Scripture reading from the Prophets, that may have just been read (see on Acts 13:15; cf. on v. 18).

An high arm. That is, with a demonstration of power.

18. Forty years. The time spent by the Hebrews between leaving Egypt and reaching Canaan (see Ex. 16:35; Num. 14:33, 34; Deut. 8:2-4).

Suffered he. Textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for reading "he suffered," or "he endured," and "he bore," "he nourished." This same textual variant is found in the LXX manuscripts of Deut. 1:31, where the Hebrew should be translated "he bore thee." All this suggests the possibility that Paul referred here to God's gracious care of Israel in the wilderness rather than to His forbearance. The apparent connection between the present verse and Deut. 1:31 may not be coincidental, as the latter passage may have been part of the Scripture reading from the Law (the parashah), that had been read before Paul began to speak (see Vol. V, p. 57; see on Acts 13:15; cf. on v. 17).

19. Seven nations. These are enumerated in Deut. 7:1, before the story of the Israelites' crossing over Jordan, as the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites.

Chanaan. That is, Canaan.

He divided. Textual evidence attests (cf. p. 10) the reading, "he gave as an inheritance."

20. Judges. Rule by itinerant judges was God's first plan for the government of His people in Canaan. Only when they showed themselves unwilling to cooperate with that plan did God give them a king "like all the nations" (see 1 Sam. 8:5-9).

Four hundred and fifty years. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading "He gave their land as an inheritance for about four hundred and fifty years. And afterwards He gave judges until Samuel the prophet." For the significance of this passage for Hebrew chronology see Vol. I, p. 193.

21. Desired a king. In doing so, the ancestors of Paul's Jewish hearers had rejected God (1 Sam. 8:7). The apostle was soon to tell them (Acts 13:23-28) that their fellow countrymen had also rejected Jesus as the Messiah. The expectation of a kingly Messiah, for whom the Jews of Paul's day looked in vain, had caused them to commit a sin similar to that of their forefathers.

Saul. Paul, the present speaker, was also a Saul of the tribe of Benjamin (see Phil. 3:5).

Forty years. The length of Saul's reign is not given in the OT, but Ishbosheth, Saul's youngest son (see on 1 Chron. 8:33), was 40 years old at that time of Saul's death (2 Sam. 2:10), and Saul himself was a "young man" when chosen king (1 Sam. 9:2). Josephus (Antiquities vi. 14. 9 [378]) says that Saul reigned 18 years before Samuel's death and 22 years after it, which statement agrees with Paul's account here. See on 1 Sam. 13:1.

22. Found David. Here Paul makes a composite quotation, after the manner of the rabbis, from Ps. 89:20 and 1 Sam. 13:14.

After mine own heart. See 1 Sam. 13:14. David was anointed king because he was a man after God's own heart. The intent of his heart was to serve God (Ps. 57:7; 108:1), and when he sinned, he repented in sincerity and humility (Ps. 32:5-7; 51:1-17). "The character is revealed, not by occasional good deeds and occasional misdeeds, but by the tendency of the habitual words and acts" (SC 57, 58).

Fulfil all my will. This is highly reminiscent of God's words to Cyrus in Isa. 44:28. It states the basic requirement for acceptance with God, and for doing His service (see Luke 22:42; John 14:15; Heb. 10:9). Not the doer of great works as such, but only he who does the will of the Father in heaven, will come into the kingdom (Matt. 7:21-23).

23. According to his promise. A general reference to the promises of the Messiah and perhaps more particularly to such passages as 2 Sam. 22:51; Ps. 132:11; cf. Acts 2:30.

Raised. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading "brought."

A Saviour, Jesus. The name Jesus means "Jehovah is salvation" (see on Matt. 1:1). Thus Paul could present Him with particular fitness as "a Saviour." The name of Jesus was probably not entirely unknown, even in the distant regions of Pisidia. Any Jew who had gone up to a feast at Jerusalem during recent years must have heard of Him. By the way he spoke, Paul seemed to assume that his hearers had at least a vague knowledge of Jesus, and he offered to bring to them greater knowledge.

24. Baptism of repentance. See Matt. 3:1-12. John's message was essentially a call to repentance in preparation for the coming Messiah. Thus his baptism signified repentance and the remission of sin (Luke 3:3). For the distinction between John's baptism and the spiritual knowledge of those who entered into it, compared with baptism in the name of Jesus, see Acts 19:1-7.

25. Fulfilled. Or, "was fulfilling."

Whom think ye? Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between this reading and "What think ye?" This precise question is not found in the Gospels. For John's words see Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:7; Luke 3:16; John 1:20, 21, 27.

26. Men and brethren. See on v. 15.

Stock of Abraham. Gr. genos Abraam, "the race of Abraham," "Abrahamic descent."

Whosoever ... feareth God. See on v. 16.

To you. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between this reading and "to us." If the latter reading is original, it agrees with v. 17, "God ... chose our fathers." It is evident throughout this whole address that Paul sought to avoid wounding Jewish feelings. Whenever he could do so truthfully he classed himself with his hearers.

This salvation. In connection with v. 23 the demonstrative pronoun makes clear that the salvation Paul preached rested upon the work of Jesus Christ, and was gained by union with Him.

27. They knew him not. See ch. 3:17. Paul implies that he now was preaching to the Gentiles and the dispersed Jews because the proffer of salvation had been rejected by those who normally should have accepted it, and who, had they done so, would have become witnesses to those who were "afar off" (Eph. 2:17), both geographically and spiritually.

Voices of the prophets. That is, their writings, which preserved in written form the messages that many times their voices originally had proclaimed.

Read every sabbath. See on v. 15. Paul appeals, to the Sabbath readings of the synagogue service, that they might witness to the suffering Messiah, who was realized in Jesus. The thought of such a Messiah stood in sharp contrast with the concept of the kingly Messiah, a concept that stood in the way of Jewish acceptance of the gospel.

Fulfilled them. Paul uses their own Scriptures to convict the Jews of their sin in crucifying Christ. He turns the Messianic prophecies back upon the Jews and declares that they themselves had brought about their fulfillment. Compare on Luke 24:26, 27, 32.

28. No cause of death. The Sanhedrin had condemned Jesus on the technical charge of blasphemy (Matt. 26:65, 66), but they could not bring sufficient evidence to prove the charge (vs. 59, 60). When they came before Pilate they hesitated to urge the accusation, and contended themselves with stating in general terms that they had condemned Him as a malefactor (John 18:30). Afterward, however, in the presence of the wavering Pilate, they added that according to their law He ought to die, because He had made Himself the Son of God (John 19:7), and that by making Himself a king, He had spoken against the emperor (John 19:12). But Pilate said that he "found no cause of death" in Him (Luke 23:22). Christ "did no sin" (1 Peter 2:22).

29. Fulfilled all. That is, the prophecies that pointed to the cruel treatment Jesus received, and the other circumstances that surrounded His death.

They took him down. In the present context Paul would appear to say that the same men who had condemned Jesus also took Him from the cross. In reality, it was Joseph of Arimathaea and Nicodemus, two prominent Jews, who took Him down and buried Him, men who apparently had not been involved in Jesus' condemnation (see Luke 23:50, 51; cf. John 19:39). At the same time, it is clear that their removal of Jesus' body from the cross was in harmony with the Jewish leaders' expressed desire (John 19:31). In view of all this, Paul in his present brief summary may be understood as generalizing.

Tree. See on ch. 5:30.

30. God raised him. See on Acts 2:32; cf. on John 5:26; 10:17, 18. Paul put forward the resurrection as proof that God was fulfilling the promise made to Abraham and to David, of the "seed" in whom all nations of the earth should be blessed (Gen. 12:1-3). Paul says elsewhere that Jesus was "declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead" (Rom. 1:4). As with every argument the apostles put forward in these early days of the beginning church, the resurrection is necessary in the development of the gospel argument. The resurrection is proof that Jesus is the Messiah.

31. Seen many days. Paul speaks as one who has talked with witnesses, and has been convinced of the truth of their testimony. What he says here he gives in expanded form in 1 Cor. 15:3-8. See Additional Note on Matt. 28.

From Galilee to Jerusalem. The apostles and most of Christ's followers were drawn from Galilee. Thus even before the crucifixion His followers were popularly characterized as Galileans (Mark 14:70). Paul asserts this Galilean background, in the face of official and even popular contempt for those who came from Galilee (see John 7:52; cf. ch. 1:46).

Who are his witnesses. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between this reading and "who now are His witnesses." Without having mentioned the ascension of Jesus, Paul implies that He was no longer on earth to be seen of men. The emphasis is upon the witness borne by those who were with Christ during His incarnation. Apparently on this occasion Paul did not tell that he himself had seen his risen Lord (see 1 Cor. 15:8).

The Church Before Paul's Missionary Journeys.

The people. That is, the Jews, to whom the Twelve still largely restricted their proclamation of the gospel (see ch. 26:17, 23).

32. Declare ... glad tidings. Gr. euaggelizoµ, "to proclaim good news," and in the technical Christian sense, "to preach the gospel" (see on ch. 5:42). Paul declares that while the Twelve are Jesus' witnesses, Barnabas and he are His evangelists, the bringers of "good news."

The promise. The promise of the prophecy becomes the "glad tidings" of the gospel. The promise and glad tidings are one.

33. Fulfilled. Gr. ekpleµrooµ, "to fulfill completely," "to make good" a promise.

Raised up Jesus again. Or, "raised up Jesus." These words may most naturally be understood to refer to the resurrection of Christ. But if so, a problem arises in regard to the application of the quotation that follows from Ps. 2 (see below on "this day"). Therefore many commentators understand the words, "raised up Jesus," here in the same sense that they appear in chs. 3:22; 7:37, where they clearly refer, not to the resurrection, but to God's introduction of Christ into this world. See on Deut. 18:15.

Second psalm. The quotation is from Ps. 2:7. In ancient times, however, the first and second psalms were sometimes counted as one, and thus some manuscripts could refer to this passage as being in the first psalm.

My Son. See on Luke 1:35.

This day. This quotation from Ps. 2:7 has been understood in the present context in various ways. Some interpreters take it to refer directly to the resurrection of Jesus. According to others, Ps. 2 was, in its original historical context, a song of triumph written to celebrate a victory of a king of Israel. The victory of that day had proved the king to be a chosen "son" of God, and the day itself marked a new begetting, or manifestation, of this sonship. By inspiration Paul applies the words of this psalm to Christ as the King of Israel and as God's Son in a unique sense, and to His resurrection (cf. on Deut. 18:15). Christian believers made the resurrection the foundation of their belief in Christ's Sonship. Christ was "the first begotten of the dead" (Rev. 1:5), and the resurrection is understood as confirming to Him the title "Son of God." See on Luke 1:35.

Another interpretation of the present passage is to understand the "promise" (Acts 13:32) in the broad sense of all the OT promises of Christ as Saviour, of which the resurrection was the culminating fulfillment (see above on ekpleµrooµ under "fulfilled"). On this view the quotation from Ps. 2:7 would not refer directly to the resurrection, but to the career of Jesus as a whole, crowned by the resurrection. Such a view places the present quotation in much the same setting as it is found in Heb. 1:5.

Still another interpretation grows out of understanding the words "raised up Jesus" (see comment above) as not referring to the resurrection, but to the incarnation. The quotation from Ps. 2:7 then refers clearly to the incarnation also, and is in the same setting as in Heb. 1:5. Acts 13:34 then goes on to speak specifically of the resurrection.

34. Concerning that he raised. Paul turns directly to the question of the resurrection here, and this may indicate that in the previous verse he had not yet had it so specifically under discussion (see on v. 33).

To corruption. Not as Lazarus, who, having been raised again to this life, had to die again. Although Christ is forever "the man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim. 2:5; see Heb. 2:9-18), He is also eternally exalted and glorified (see 1 Cor. 15:20-25; Phil. 2:9-11).

Sure mercies of David. Rather, "holy, faithful [mercies, or blessings] of David." This is a quotation from the LXX of Isa. 55:3, where the Hebrew may be translated "the true, steadfast love for David." The Greek word hosios, here rendered "holy," is one that the LXX frequently used to represent the Hebrew chesed, "mercy," "steadfast love." Paul doubtless used the LXX in speaking at Antioch, for it was the Bible of the Greek-speaking Jews. The "sure mercies" that God had promised to David included the promise of an eternal kingdom (2 Sam. 7:16), which was realized through Christ, the Son of David. This broad understanding of "the sure mercies of David" is indicated by the promise, "I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David" (Isa. 55:3). The victory of Christ, made certain by the resurrection, was a fulfillment of this covenant and a crucial point in the establishment of the kingdom promised to David.

35. Thine Holy One. A quotation from Ps. 16:10. In the original, this quotation is connected with the previous one by the repetition of the word "holy" (see on Acts 13:34). The argument Paul presents here is strikingly parallel to Peter's on the day of Pentecost (see ch. 2:25-31). It expresses the basic thesis of the apostolic preaching.

To see corruption. The fact that Christ rose bodily the third day implies that His body, in contrast with the bodies of other men who die, did not suffer decomposition.

36. Served his own generation. Or, "served in his own generation." This suggests a contrast between the limited service that a man can render to men, however great or powerful he may be, and the boundless, endless service to the whole human family that Jesus Christ, the Son of man, gives.

By the will of God. These words may be translated simply, "the will of God," and taken as the direct object of "served" (in which case the previous phrase should be translated, "in his own generation" [see comment above]), or they may be connected with the verb that follows. The word translated "will" is bouleµ, "counsel," "purpose." Thus the passage may be understood as saying that David served God's purpose, that he served in accordance with His purpose, or that he fell asleep in accordance with it when his life's work was done.