Acts · Chapter 6

V. 1. There arose a murmuring-Here was the first breach made on those who were before of one heart and of one soul. Partiality crept in unawares on some; and murmuring on others. Ah Lord! how short a time did pure, genuine, undefiled Christianity remain in the world! O the depth! How unsearchable are thy counsels! Marvellous are thy ways, O King of saints! The Hellenists were Jews born out of Palestine. They were so called, because they used the Greek as their in other tongue.

In this partiality of the Hebrews, and murmuring of the Hellenists, were the needs of a general persecution sown. Did God ever, in any age or country, withdraw his restraining providence, and let loose the world upon the Christians, till there was a cause among themselves? Is not an open, general persecution, always both penal and medicinal? A punishment of those that will not accept of milder reproofs, as well as a medicine to heal their sickness? And at the same time a means both of purifying and strengthening those whose heart is still right with God.

Verse 1. A murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews] Those who are here termed Grecians, ellhnistai, or Hellenists, were Jews who sojourned now at Jerusalem, but lived in countries where the Greek language was spoken, and probably in general knew no other. They are distinguished here from those called Hebrews, by which we are to understand native Jews, who spoke what was then termed the Hebrew language, a sort of Chaldaio-Syriac.

It has been remarked that Greek words ending in isthv imply inferiority. eJllhnev, Hellenes, was distinguished from eJllhnistai: the former implies pure Greeks, native Greeks, who spoke the Greek tongue in its purity; and the latter, Jews or others sojourning among the Greeks, but who spoke the Greek language according to the Hebrew idiom. Pythagoras divided his disciples into two classes; those who were capable of entering into the spirit and mystery of his doctrine he called puqagoreioi, Pythagoreans; those who were of a different cast he termed puqagoristai, Pythagorists: the former were eminent and worthy of their master; the latter only so so. The same distinction is made between those called attikoi and attikistai, Attics and Atticists, the pure and less pure Greeks, as between those called eJllhnev and eJllhnistai, Hellenes and Hellenists, pure Greeks and Græcising Jews. See Jamblicus, Deuteronomy Vit. Pyth. cap. 18, and Schoettgen on this place. The cause of the murmuring mentioned here seems to have been this: When all the disciples had put their property into a common stock, it was intended that out of it each should have his quantum of supply. The foreign or Hellenistic Jews began to be jealous, that their widows were neglected in the daily ministration, that they either had not the proportion, or were not duly served; the Palestine Jews being partial to those of their own country. This shows that the community of goods could never have been designed to become general. Indeed, it was no ordinance of God; and, in any state of society, must be in general impracticable. The apostles, hearing of this murmuring, came to the resolution mentioned below.

Verse 1. In those days — Some time after the fact last recorded had taken place; when the number of the disciples was multiplied — For it appears their number increased continually and rapidly, notwithstanding the opposition made by the priests and rulers to the preaching of the gospel: indeed that opposition, instead of checking the progress of Christianity, contributed to it: there arose a murmuring — The historian’s manner of speaking, plhqunontwn twn maqhtwn egeneto goggusmov, the

disciples multiplying, there arose a murmuring, seems to imply, that the murmuring was partly, at least, the consequence of the great increase of the disciples. And certainly, 1st, In proportion as the number of Christians increased, the scandal of the cross would be diminished, and many would be inclined to unite themselves to them, who were influenced by motives not perfectly pure, and were not truly converted to God, and made new creatures in Christ. 2d, The accession of a great number of converts to the church, perhaps chiefly from the poor, would render it more difficult than it was before, to afford all the necessitous a proper supply. But, whatever was the cause of the murmuring here spoken of, it was the first breach made on those who were before of one heart and of one soul. Partiality crept in unawares on some, and murmuring on others. Ah, Lord! how short a time did pure, genuine, undefiled Christianity remain in the world! How soon was its glory, at least in some measure, eclipsed! Of the Grecians — Greek, of the Hellenists, that is, the Jews born out of Judea, so called, because they used the Greek as their native language. These were descendants of such Jews as, in several national calamities, had been forced to flee to Alexandria, and other Gentile countries, or, on account of trade and commerce, had chosen to settle there, and yet kept themselves unmixed with the Gentiles; and, retaining the knowledge of the true God, were wont to come occasionally, especially on the solemn feasts, to worship at Jerusalem. Against the Hebrews — Who were natives of Judea, and therefore used a dialect of the Hebrew, or Syro-Chaldaic tongue; because their widows were neglected — In some degree, as they supposed; in the daily ministration — Of the charities that were distributed to the poor members of the church. It is justly observed here by Mr. Scott, that “as the greatest part of the public stock must have been contributed by the Hebrews, perhaps they, who acted under the apostles in this business, thought it right to show more favour to the poor widows of that description than the others.” It is very probable, however, that the Hellenists suspected more partiality than there really was. Be this as it may, by this real or supposed partiality of the Hebrews, and the murmuring of the Hellenists, there is reason to think the Spirit of God was grieved, and the seeds of a general persecution were sown. For, did God ever, in any age or country, withdraw his restraining providence, and let loose the world upon the Christians, till there was a cause for it among themselves? Is not an open, general persecution, always both penal and medicinal? a punishment of those that will not accept of milder reproofs as well as a medicine to heal their sickness? and at the same time a means of purifying and strengthening those whose hearts are still right with God?

Verse 1. A murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews. The original word here rendered Grecians is Hellenists; from Hellen, son of Deucalion, king of Thessalia, who was drowned during the inundation which laid all Thessalia under water, two hundred and forty eight years after the deluge of Ogyges. Erasmus says that the ancient jews called all uncircumcised nations by this name; and so indeed it would seem, for Mark calls the woman of Tyre and Sidon a Hellenist: chap. 7:26. But after the jews were dispersed among the gentiles, the term became gradually applied to all the jews born among the gentiles, and who for the most part spake the greek tongue. Annota. Antwerp edit. 1538. These Hellenists were assuredly circumcised, and they are obviously distinguished from proselytes in chap. 2:11. Abraham is called a Hebrew, says rabbin Nehemiah, in Lightfoot, because he descended from Heber. Other rabbins say, he derived this name because he used the language of those beyond the Euphrates. Hence we may infer, that they are called Hellenists on account of their extraneous birth and language. The widows therefore of persons born in Jerusalem, being better known, received a better attention than the widows of strangers. It was a fault, but undesigned.

Because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. Hunger cries in the ears of heaven. The price of corn in England during the war was almost double its price abroad. Now the depression crushes the farmer, and the farmer crushes the poor. Parochial associations are therefore forming to build large boarding-houses for the poor, and cut them off from the tenderest ties of nature, where their groans cannot be heard, nor their tears seen. In France, the poor are really poor; but they get a loaf on Monday, and another on Thursday. Men of property have a list of widows, and of the poor who are blind and lame, to whom they extend weekly alms. — I am horrified at the new name of those boarding prisons.

1. In those days—A Hebrew phrase used in Acts 1:15, to mark a period of a few days, and in Matthew 3:1, to imply an indefinite number of years. As thus far Luke has given but few dates, the reader may suppose that we are advanced but a few months from the Ascension. But according to the best chronology the events of this chapter take place in the year thirty-six. (See note on Acts 9:24.) Assuming the crucifixion to have occurred in the year 30, we must either overleap a few years, or, more properly, distribute the events thus far as we best can over a period of six years. During this period the management of the affairs of the Church, as limited to Jerusalem alone, rests upon the apostles. Yet the real power lies in the body of the Church. The apostles, though divinely appointed, are the personal representatives and executives of that power. Their authority is undefined by any exact limits. With them as its heads, the whole body moves with spontaneous harmony and freedom. The hierarchy in form is a democracy in spirit.

Meanwhile they are now beginning to find that, like Moses, (Exodus 18:13-26,) their task is too large for their hands. The instrumentalities they are obliged to use, especially in the charitable distributions, are too irresponsible, and negligences and partialities give rise to murmurs. Baumgarten entitles this section “The first dissension,” but he might as well define it the first official deficiency; for that the administration was defective is proved by the prompt thoroughness with which the radical correction was made.

A murmuring—The Greek word goggusmov is an imitative word expressing a low buzz of discontent gradually reaching the apostolic ears. Grecians… Hebrews—Three classes of persons are to be carefully distinguished in this earliest Christian history—the Hebrews, the Proselytes, and the Grecians or Hellenists. The FIRST were claimants of the real Hebrew blood, more or less pure, speaking mainly the vernacular Hebrew of the day, (the Aramaic or Syro-Chaldaic,) inclined to reside in or connect themselves with Palestine, and especially Jerusalem, and standard zealots for Moses and the law. The SECOND were Gentiles who, tired of idolatry and polytheism, were glad to learn from Judaism the doctrine of one true and holy God. One class went only so far as to accept the Monotheism and the so-called moral precepts of Noah, without undergoing circumcision and the ritual of Moses; and, because thus stopping at the threshold, (or rather, perhaps, because they were strangers “within thy gates,” Exodus 20:10,) they were significantly named Proselytes of the Gate, while the receivers of the whole law were proudly styled Proselyres of Righteousness. The Grecians, Grecising Jews, or Hellenists, (see note on Acts 9:29,) were Jews by birth and circumcision, who, born in a foreign land, spake a foreign language, especially the Greek, and were held by the pure Jews to be tinctured with Gentilism, and so defective in the perfectness of their Judaism. They were inclined to liberalism, except when prompted by emulation to become more Jewish than the Jews themselves. It was among the two latter classes that Christianity found most ready acceptance. The Gentile inclined to Monotheism was glad of a religion teaching holiness, salvation, and God, without circumcision and the burdens of ritual Mosaicism. The liberal Greek-speaking Jew or Hellenist glided easily into a resignation of the ceremonial law for a more spiritual piety. But the rigid, proud, intense Jew, most inflexible of all, was disposed to reject Christianity with a flout, or to accept it by the half, and to carry into his Christianity fragments of old Judaism with a conscious superiority over his Christian brethren often intolerant and fanatical. It was from this class of Jews and Jewish Christians that Paul, though by blood a pure “Hebrew of the Hebrews,” suffered through his whole apostolic career. The extremest of these became the Ebionites of later, but very early, Church history. It must therefore be acknowledged that this murmur, if not the first buzz of a long quarrel, did indicate a division of classes from which subsequent permanent quarrel would arise.

Widows—A turbulent and bloody age throws large numbers of widows upon the benevolence of the Church. Daily ministration—The daily distribution of food to the home of each widow. Ministration—Greek, diakonia diaconia, from which deacon and diaconate or deaconship are derived. Its composition from dia, through, and koniv, dust, if correct, implies a service through drudgery of a very humble sort. But Scripture nowhere applies the official title deacon to these men, and Luke seems even to avoid so doing (Acts 21:8) in calling Philip one of the seven. This is not parallel to calling the apostles the twelve, for that was their divinely limited and permanently fixed number. Luke’s phrase indeed apparently implies that “the seven” was a unique and memorable, though discontinued, class of men. The application to their office of the generic term diaconia, ministry, or the verb form of the word, is no proof of specific deaconship. The generic term is rendered ministry in verse 4, serve, verse 2, Luke 10:40, Luke 12:37, Luke 22:26, 27.

V. 2. It is not right that we should leave the word of God and serve tables-In the first Church, the primary business of apostles, evangelists, and bishops, was to preach the word of God; the secondary, to take a kind of paternal care (the Church being then like a family,) for the food, especially of the poor, the strangers, and the widows. Afterward, the deacons of both sexes were constituted for this latter business. And whatever time they had to spare from this, they employed in works of spiritual mercy. But their proper office was, to take care of the poor. And when some of them afterward preached the Gospel, they did this not by virtue of their deaconship, but of another commission, that of evangelists, which they probably received, not before, but after they were appointed deacons. And it is not unlikely that others were chosen deacons, or stewards, in their room, when any of these commenced evangelists.

Verse 2. It is not reason] ouk areston esti, it is not pleasing, proper, or fitting, that we should leave the word of God, that we should give up ourselves, or confide to others, the doctrine of salvation which God has commanded us to preach unto the people.

And serve tables.] Become providers of daily bread for your widows and poor: others can do this, to whom our important office is not intrusted.

Verses 2-4. Then the twelve — For such was now again their number, Matthias having supplied the place of Judas; called the multitude of the disciples unto them — Not the rest of the one hundred and twenty merely, but the whole body of Christian converts, they being the persons to whom satisfaction was then due. See Whitby. It was of great importance that the apostles should immediately take measures to suppress these rising murmurs and discontents; for had they been suffered to remain and take root, they might have produced dangerous disputes and divisions, and have involved the apostles themselves in suspicion and censure. It is not reason — Ouk areston estin, it is not right, proper, or, pleasing; namely, to God; that we — Who have an office to discharge of so much greater weight and consequence; should leave the word of God — Should be less frequently employed in dispensing it; and serve tables — Attend to the distribution of money to relieve the wants of the poor; and yet this we must do, in order to prevent these complaints, unless some further measures be taken by common consent. Wherefore, brethren — As you see how inconvenient it would be to suffer this care to lie upon us, and how inevitably it would render us incapable of attending to the proper duties of our office; look ye out among you seven men — A number sufficient for the present; of honest report — That there may be no room to suspect them of partiality and injustice; full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom — For it is not a light matter to dispense even the temporal goods of the church. To do even this well, a large measure both of the gifts and grace of God is requisite. Whom we may appoint over this business — It would have been happy for the church, had its ordinary ministers, in every age, taken the same care to act in concert with the people committed to their charge, which the apostles themselves, extraordinary as their office was, did on this and other occasions. It may be proper to observe here, that in the first church, the primary business of apostles, evangelists, and elders, was to preach the word of God; the secondary, to take a kind of paternal care (the church being then like a family) for the support especially of the poor, the strangers, and the widows. Afterward, as here, the deacons were constituted for this latter business. And whatever time they had to spare from this, they employed in works of spiritual mercy. But their proper office was to take care of the poor. And when some of them afterward preached the gospel, they did this, not by virtue of their deaconship, but of another commission, that of evangelists, which they probably received, not before, but after they were appointed deacons. And it is not unlikely that others were chosen deacons, or stewards, in their room, when any of these commenced evangelists. But we — Being thus freed from this great encumbrance; will give ourselves continually — Will dedicate our whole time; to prayer, and to the ministry of the word — Which is our grand business, and which we would be glad to prosecute without interruption. It is, doubtless, still the proper business of a Christian minister, whether termed a pastor, elder, or bishop, to speak to God in prayer; and to men in preaching his word, as an ambassador for Christ.

2. Then the twelve—This is the first recorded movement for forming a Church economy; we can hardly say government. Beyond the appointment of his twelve, Christ had left no draft of a constitution for his Church. There is clearly no connection between this seven and the seventy deacons sent forth by our Lord, nor any certain connection between them and the deacons of the Epistles or of subsequent ecclesiastical history. The whole movement of their election is a measure of immediate expediency, suggested by an incidental want, adopted without any claim or consciousness of special inspiration, and without the least apparent thought that they are adopting a permanent order for the universal Church, without which a complete and valid Church cannot exist. The whole act suggests the doctrine that any Church is endowed by the great Head of the Church with the right of shaping itself into any organic form most conducive to its great mission of salvation. (See note on Acts 13:3.) Called the multitude—The apostolic mind originates the new idea, but the body of the Church alone can give it reality. The thought moves in the brain, but the energetic and active soul lives in the whole body. Serve tables—The Greek word trapeza may signify either a money table or a meal table indifferently, (Matthew 16:27, Acts 16:34, and also Matthew 21:12, and Luke 19:23,) and perhaps includes both here. This deaconship was certainly not a merely pecuniary office, a mere agency to apply the moneys laid at the apostles’ feet. In all probability the seven, with the funds, supplied the ministrations of the daily table-provisions where the oversights took place.

V. 3. Of good report-That there may be no room to suspect them of partiality or injustice.

Full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom-For it is not a light matter to dispense even the temporal goods of the Church. To do even this well, a large measure both of the gifts and grace of God is requisite. Whom we will set over this business-It would have been happy for the Church, had its ordinary ministers in every age taken the same care to act in concert with the people committed to their charge, which the apostles themselves, extraordinary as their office was, did on this and other occasions.

Verse 3. Wherefore-look ye out among you seven men] Choose persons in whom ye can all confide, who will distribute the provisions impartially, and in due time; and let these persons be the objects of the choice both of the Hebrews and Hellenists, that all cause of murmuring and discontent may be done away. Though seven was a sacred number among the Jews, yet there does not appear to be any mystery intended here. Probably the seven men were to take each his day of service; and then there would be a superintendent for these widows, &c., for each day of the week. Of honest report] marturoumenouv Persons to whose character there is authentic testimony, well known and accredited.

Full of the Holy Ghost] Saved into the spirit of the Gospel dispensation; and made partakers of that Holy Ghost by which the soul is sanctified, and endued with those graces which constitute the mind that was in Christ. And wisdom] Prudence, discretion, and economy; for mere piety and uprightness could not be sufficient, where so many must be pleased, and where frugality, impartiality, and liberality, must ever walk hand in hand. Whom we may appoint] Instead of katasthswmen, we may appoint, katasthsomen, we shall appoint, is the reading of ABCDE, and several others. It makes, however, very little difference in the sense.

Verses 2-4. Then the twelve — For such was now again their number, Matthias having supplied the place of Judas; called the multitude of the disciples unto them — Not the rest of the one hundred and twenty merely, but the whole body of Christian converts, they being the persons to whom satisfaction was then due. See Whitby. It was of great importance that the apostles should immediately take measures to suppress these rising murmurs and discontents; for had they been suffered to remain and take root, they might have produced dangerous disputes and divisions, and have involved the apostles themselves in suspicion and censure. It is not reason — Ouk areston estin, it is not right, proper, or, pleasing; namely, to God; that we — Who have an office to discharge of so much greater weight and consequence; should leave the word of God — Should be less frequently employed in dispensing it; and serve tables — Attend to the distribution of money to relieve the wants of the poor; and yet this we must do, in order to prevent these complaints, unless some further measures be taken by common consent. Wherefore, brethren — As you see how inconvenient it would be to suffer this care to lie upon us, and how inevitably it would render us incapable of attending to the proper duties of our office; look ye out among you seven men — A number sufficient for the present; of honest report — That there may be no room to suspect them of partiality and injustice; full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom — For it is not a light matter to dispense even the temporal goods of the church. To do even this well, a large measure both of the gifts and grace of God is requisite. Whom we may appoint over this business — It would have been happy for the church, had its ordinary ministers, in every age, taken the same care to act in concert with the people committed to their charge, which the apostles themselves, extraordinary as their office was, did on this and other occasions. It may be proper to observe here, that in the first church, the primary business of apostles, evangelists, and elders, was to preach the word of God; the secondary, to take a kind of paternal care (the church being then like a family) for the support especially of the poor, the strangers, and the widows. Afterward, as here, the deacons were constituted for this latter business. And whatever time they had to spare from this, they employed in works of spiritual mercy. But their proper office was to take care of the poor. And when some of them afterward preached the gospel, they did this, not by virtue of their deaconship, but of another commission, that of evangelists, which they probably received, not before, but after they were appointed deacons. And it is not unlikely that others were chosen deacons, or stewards, in their room, when any of these commenced evangelists. But we — Being thus freed from this great encumbrance; will give ourselves continually — Will dedicate our whole time; to prayer, and to the ministry of the word — Which is our grand business, and which we would be glad to prosecute without interruption. It is, doubtless, still the proper business of a Christian minister, whether termed a pastor, elder, or bishop, to speak to God in prayer; and to men in preaching his word, as an ambassador for Christ.

Ver. 3. Look ye out among you seven men of honest report. The office of deacon is the same in the christian church as in the jewish synagogues, from whence it was derived. See the note on Matthew 4:23. It was an office filled both by ministers and members of the church, and not unfrequently by women. Phebe was a deaconess of the church of Cenchrea. Romans 16:1. And I know not why the Vulgate and other versions should render the original “minister, or servant.” The Greek church was obliged to ordain pious matrons to that office for the sake of gaining access to their own sex. As to the injunction, to look out suitable persons for the office, I see no impropriety in this, for the distribution of their alms; nor do I see any connection between this, and the call of ministers to the sacred office, which must ever originate with the Spirit of God. The exterior effects will then guide the ministers and the people in calling them to the work. But the adjection, whom we may appoint over this business, à qui commettions ce ministere, imports the apostolic sanction and charge of impartiality. The like officers were in the synagogues. It is probable that the city was divided into seven districts, for the temporal and spiritual superintendence of the poor, and for the worship of God.

3. Look ye out—The laity were to look the seven men out, and the laity concurred (the saying pleased them) and chose the men. It is thus the business of the Church in all ages to provide for itself a ministry. Though the ministry does at first call, and so in a sense create the Church, yet normally in turn the Church creates its ministry. It must search, find, bring out, and perform its part in choosing them. We may appoint— Katathsomen, may make-stand, may station or establish. The electing by the laity did not make the officer without the appointing by the apostles. Both must, and, animated by one spirit, would spontaneously concur. Seven—Doubtless this number, like that of the twelve, had a symbolic character, as we have illustrated in our notes on the Sacred Numbers in our second volume. So the Jews, according to Maimonides as quoted by Dr. Gill, had seven good men of the city as a kind of trustees of the synagogues. Some suppose, without much reason, that the Jerusalem Church was divided into sections worshipping in seven different houses, with a deacon to each. Dr. Clarke supposes, with more reasonable probability, that one deacon served in turn on each of the seven days of the week. A symbolical and a real reason could easily coincide in a given case. It is a curious instance of the service of the letter that the Church in Rome scrupulously limited its deacons to seven even while its elders amounted to forty. Honest report—Honourable reputation. Holy Ghost… wisdom— The high qualifications of the deacons implied that even they were not to be limited to a mere manual service. To feed the poor and tend the sick in a Christian way require service to the soul as well as body. In point of fact we find that of two of the seven preaching was largely the providential duty. For this their official character was an authorization.

V. 4. We will constantly attend to prayer, and to the ministry of the word-This is doubtless the proper business of a Christian bishop: to speak to God in prayer; to men in preaching his word, as an ambassador for Christ.

Verse 4. We will give ourselves continually to prayer]

proskarterhsomen,, We will steadfastly and invariably attend, we will carefully keep our hearts to this work. The word is very emphatic. To prayer.-See this defined, Matthew 6:5. Even apostles could not live without prayer; they had no independent graces; what they had could not be retained without an increase; and for this increase they must make prayer and supplication, depending continually on their God. Ministry of the word.] diakonia tou logou, The deaconship of the word. The continual proclamation of the Gospel of their Lord; and, to make this effectual to the souls of the hearers, they must continue in prayer: a minister who does not pray much, studies in vain. The office of deacon, diakonov, came to the Christian from the Jewish Church. Every synagogue had at least three deacons, which were called µysnrp parnasim, from snrp parnes, to feed, nourish, support, govern. The snrp parnas, or deacon, was a sort of judge in the synagogue; and, in each, doctrine and wisdom were required, that they might be able to discern and give right judgment in things both sacred and civil. The חזנ chazan, and vmv shamash, were also a sort of deacons. The first was the priest’s deputy; and the last was, in some cases, the deputy of this deputy, or the sub-deacon. In the New Testament the apostles are called deacons, 2 Corinthians 6:4; Ephesians 3:7; Colossians 1:23: see also 2 Corinthians 11:15. Christ himself, the Shepherd and Bishop of souls, is called the deacon of the circumcision, legw de criston ihsoun diakonon gegenhsqai peritomhv, Romans 15:8. As the word implies to minister or serve, it was variously applied, and pointed out all those who were employed in helping the bodies or souls of men; whether apostles, bishops, or those whom we call deacons. Some remark that there were two orders of deacons: 1. Diakonoi thv trapizhv, deacons of the TABLE, whose business it was to take care of the alms collected in the Church, and distribute them among the poor, widows, &c. 2. Diakonoi tou logou, deacons of the WORD, whose business it was to preach, and variously instruct the people. It seems that after the persecution raised against the apostolic Church, in consequence of which they became dispersed, the deaconship of tables ceased, as did also the community of goods; and Philip, who was one of these deacons, who at first served tables, betook himself entirely to preaching of the word: see Acts 8:4, &c. In the primitive Church, it is sufficiently evident that the deacons gave the bread and wine in the Eucharist to the believers in the Church, and carried it to those who were absent, Just. Mar. Apol. ii. p. 162; they also preached, and in some cases administered baptism. See Suicer on the words diakonov, khrussw, and baptisma. But it appears they did the two last by the special authority of the bishop. In the ancient Roman Church, and in the Romish Church, the number of seven deacons, in imitation of those appointed by the apostles, was kept up; and in the council of Neocæsarea it was decreed that this number should never be exceeded, even in the largest cities: vide Concil. Neocæsar. Canon. xiv. other Churches varied this number; and the Church of Constantinople had not less than one hundred. Deacons were ordained by the bishops, by imposition of hands. None was ordained deacon till he was twenty-five years of age, and we find that it was lawful for them to have wives. See Suicer under the word diakonov, and see Clarke’s note on “Matthew 20:26”.

In the Church of England, (the purest and nearest to the apostolical model in doctrine and discipline of all national Churches,) a deacon receives ordination by the imposition of the hands of a bishop, in consequence of which he can preach, assist in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, and in general perform any sacred office, except consecrating the elements, and pronouncing the absolution. No person in this Church can be ordained deacon till he be twenty-three years of age, unless by dispensation from the Abp. of Canterbury. There were deaconesses, both in the apostolic and primitive Church, who had principally the care of the women, and visited and ministered to them in those circumstances in which it would have been improper for a deacon to attend. They also assisted in preparing the female candidates for baptism.

At present, the office for which the seven deacons were appointed is, in the Church of England, filled by the churchwardens and overseers of the poor; in other Churches and religious societies, by elders, stewards, &c., chosen by the people, and appointed by the minister.

Verses 2-4. Then the twelve — For such was now again their number, Matthias having supplied the place of Judas; called the multitude of the disciples unto them — Not the rest of the one hundred and twenty merely, but the whole body of Christian converts, they being the persons to whom satisfaction was then due. See Whitby. It was of great importance that the apostles should immediately take measures to suppress these rising murmurs and discontents; for had they been suffered to remain and take root, they might have produced dangerous disputes and divisions, and have involved the apostles themselves in suspicion and censure. It is not reason — Ouk areston estin, it is not right, proper, or, pleasing; namely, to God; that we — Who have an office to discharge of so much greater weight and consequence; should leave the word of God — Should be less frequently employed in dispensing it; and serve tables — Attend to the distribution of money to relieve the wants of the poor; and yet this we must do, in order to prevent these complaints, unless some further measures be taken by common consent. Wherefore, brethren — As you see how inconvenient it would be to suffer this care to lie upon us, and how inevitably it would render us incapable of attending to the proper duties of our office; look ye out among you seven men — A number sufficient for the present; of honest report — That there may be no room to suspect them of partiality and injustice; full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom — For it is not a light matter to dispense even the temporal goods of the church. To do even this well, a large measure both of the gifts and grace of God is requisite. Whom we may appoint over this business — It would have been happy for the church, had its ordinary ministers, in every age, taken the same care to act in concert with the people committed to their charge, which the apostles themselves, extraordinary as their office was, did on this and other occasions. It may be proper to observe here, that in the first church, the primary business of apostles, evangelists, and elders, was to preach the word of God; the secondary, to take a kind of paternal care (the church being then like a family) for the support especially of the poor, the strangers, and the widows. Afterward, as here, the deacons were constituted for this latter business. And whatever time they had to spare from this, they employed in works of spiritual mercy. But their proper office was to take care of the poor. And when some of them afterward preached the gospel, they did this, not by virtue of their deaconship, but of another commission, that of evangelists, which they probably received, not before, but after they were appointed deacons. And it is not unlikely that others were chosen deacons, or stewards, in their room, when any of these commenced evangelists. But we — Being thus freed from this great encumbrance; will give ourselves continually — Will dedicate our whole time; to prayer, and to the ministry of the word — Which is our grand business, and which we would be glad to prosecute without interruption. It is, doubtless, still the proper business of a Christian minister, whether termed a pastor, elder, or bishop, to speak to God in prayer; and to men in preaching his word, as an ambassador for Christ.

4. Give ourselves… continually—Proskarterhsomen. We will

persevere in, or continue in; constantly, yet not exclusively. Their spiritual office exempted them from official attention to temporal charities, but was no cessation from spontaneous alms. As Christ was, at first, divine Apostle, (Hebrews 3:1,) and contained within himself all authority, so his apostles were the source whence all church-official grades are derived. As Dr. Schaff well says, (“Apostolic History,” 499:) The higher (the apostolate) “includes the lower, not the reverse.” “The apostles were at the same time prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers, and at first had charge even of the business of the deacons, Acts 4:35, 37, 6:2.” What was peculiar to the apostles alone left the earth with them; but all other ministries are carved out of what was transmissible in them, and all true ministers are successors of the apostles. Prayer… ministry of the word— These every minister inherits as his blessed perquisite and privilege from the apostles. In the divine establishment of the Church the “ministry of the word” is a permanent institution. “Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature” is the command, followed by the promise of Christ’s presence “until the end of the world.” So that preaching and preacher stand while the world stands. It is by the foolishness of preaching the world is to be saved. And such a preacher is divinely “called” to his work. That call by the moving of the Holy Ghost is manifested to his own soul by an impressive sense of duty, an assuring testimony to the soul from God upon prayerful inquiry, and a deep love and attraction for the blessed work of gaining souls for Christ and heaven. Without such a “call” no man should ever enter the ministry of reconciliation.

We do not say that a man may not, by the same Spirit and in a similar way be “called” to some other “calling,” as to be a physician or a mechanic. Did men consult the divine will in a profounder spirit of devotion the divine “call” would be oftener recognized. But if the call and the Spirit may be much the same, the destination to which the call directs is profoundly different. Medicine is not a spiritual institution; it has not the direct notice of revelation; it forms no part of a divinely established Church; and the divine call directs a man to it as to a secularity. But the minister is divinely called to a divinely constituted work, office, responsibility, danger, and dignity. And we may add that such a call may be outlived and forfeited. Many a minister gives evidence, by the loss of the true spirit of a minister, that he has lost his call as a minister.

V. 5. And they chose-It seems seven Hellenists, as their names show. And Nicholas a proselyte-To whom the proselytes would the more readily apply.

Verse 5. Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost] A person every way properly fitted for his work; and thus qualified to be the first martyr of the Christian Church.

Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch] A heathen Greek, who had not only believed in the God of Israel, but had also received circumcision, and consequently was a proselyte of the covenant; for, had he been only a proselyte of the gate, the Jews could not have associated with him. On the word proselyte, see the note on Exodus 12:43. As this is the only proselyte mentioned here, we may presume that all the rest were native Jews. From this Nicolas, it is supposed that the sect called Nicolaitans, mentioned Revelation 2:6, 15, derived their origin. Dr. Lightfoot doubts this, and rather inclines to derive the name “from alwkyn nicola, let us eat together; those brutes encouraging each other to eat meats offered to idols, like those in Isaiah 22:13, who said, Let us eat flesh and drink wine, &c.” Both Irenæus and Epiphanius derive this sect from Nicolas the deacon. Clemens Alexandrinus gives this Nicolas a good character, even while he allows that the sect who taught the community of wives pretended to derive their origin from him. See Clarke on “Revelation 2:6”.

Verses 5, 6. And the saying pleased the multitude — Who had been called together upon this occasion; and — After some little deliberation upon the choice that was to be made; they chose seven — It seems all Hellenists, as their names show; a measure which accorded very well with the occasion of their election; Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost — That is, not only endowed with the ordinary graces of the Holy Spirit, in a high degree, but even with his extraordinary gifts, as appears from the subsequent verses; and Philip — Who long continued an ornament and blessing to the church, being afterward raised to a yet higher character, that of an evangelist; and Nicolas — Who was not a Jew born, but a proselyte of Antioch — That is, one who by circumcision had been incorporated with the Jewish people; for if he had only been what was called a proselyte of the gate, he could not at this time have been a member of the Christian Church, no uncircumcised person being yet admitted into it. As he was a proselyte, others that were proselytes would the more readily apply to him for redress in any matter of grievance; and perhaps his peculiar relation to the Grecians might be a special reason why he was chosen to this office, the disciples being willing to cut off from them all cause of complaint. Whom they set before the apostles — That is, presented to them, as persons in whom they could put confidence, and whom they wished the apostles to accept, as proper for the intended work. And when they had prayed — Supplicated the divine blessing to attend all their ministrations: they laid their hands on them — Both that they might express their solemn appointment of them to the office, and confer upon them such extraordinary gifts as would qualify them yet more abundantly for the full discharge of it.

Ver. 5. They chose Stephen, full of faith and of the Holy Ghost. Stephen was also a minister of the word. All the seven deacons are called by their greek names, though six of them were jews by birth; but their parents might have lived among the greeks. Their names are also names of dignity or respect. Stephen, a crown. Philip, a lover of horses. Nicholas, a ruler of the people. This last, a gentile by birth and education, stands charged by John, in Revelation 2:6, and by some of the fathers, with defending the gentile practice of polygamy, though he himself lived in chastity. Prochorus and Nicanor are said to have been martyred in Cyprus.

5. Pleased… whole multitude—The organic consent of the entire body of both sexes, apparently, without which the measure would not have been adopted.

Full… faith… Holy Ghost—Luke pauses after Stephen’s name to add a precious eulogy, premonitory of his future history. It is remarkable that of the names the entire seven are Greek, a uniformity which could not exist without a cause. Hebrews had often indeed Greek names. Of the twelve apostles, as their names appear in the Acts, four are Greek. From the uniformity here it is perhaps too much to infer with some that the whole seven were foreign Greekish Jews added to Hebrew deacons already existing, for, as we have already intimated, the present office was entirely new. We may infer that possibly the Church, magnanimously to the weaker party, chose Greekish Jews alone. Or perhaps three were Hebrews with Greek names, three were foreign Jews, and one proselyte through Judaism from the Gentiles. Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch—First a Gentile, then a Jew, then a Christian. He was led by Moses from Paganism to Christ. Of the seven, two alone, Stephen and Philip, have any history in the New Testament; while a third, this Nicolas, possesses a singular note in ecclesiastical literature. He was said by Irenaeus to have been the founder of the vile sect of Nicolaitans condemned in Revelation 2:14. And this statement is confirmed by the recently discovered work of Hippolytus, an authority considered by Pressense decisive upon this point. It is indeed certain that that infamous sect claimed him as their founder. Yet the statement of Clement of Alexandria, an early and discriminating authority, seems well to account for the assumption of his name by the sect and yet exculpate him from guilt. It was a favourite maxim of Nicolas that “it is right to abuse (paracrhsqai) the flesh.” This maxim was doubtless identical with the maxim that “all evil lies in matter,” or flesh. (See note on Acts 8:8.) Both these maxims could alike be interpreted to mean either that the flesh should be mortified ascetically, or indulged licentiously. It is very possible that Nicolas meant it in an ascetic sense, while a licentious sect used it as a license for infamy and claimed the credit of his name. Just so Epicurus taught in a good sense the maxim that virtue and pleasure coincide, meaning that true pleasure could be attained only by virtue. But the Epicureans made it to mean that the pursuit of pleasure is all the virtue there is.

Verse 6. And when they had prayed] Instead of kai, and, the Codex Bezæ reads oitinev, who, referring the act of praying to the apostles, which removes a sort of ambiguity. The apostles prayed for these persons, that they might in every respect be qualified for their office, and be made successful in it. And, when they had done this, they laid their hands upon them, and by this rite appointed them to their office. So then, it plainly appears that the choice of the Church was not sufficient: nor did the Church think it sufficient; but, as they knew their own members best, the apostles directed them, Acts 6:3, to choose those persons whom they deemed best qualified, according to the criterion laid down by the apostles themselves, that they should be of honest report, and full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom. Let us examine the process of this business: 1. There was an evident necessity that there should be more helpers in this blessed work 2. The apostles called the disciples together, that they might consider of this necessity and provide for it, Acts 6:3. 3. They directed the disciples to choose out from among themselves such persons as they judged the most proper for the work. 4. They gave them the criterion by which their choice should be directed; not any man, not every man, not their nearest relative, or best beloved friend; but such as were of honest report, whose public character was known to be unblemished; and men who were full of the Holy Ghost, the influence of which would keep all right within, and direct their hearts into all truth; and men who were known to be men of prudence and economy, for not every good and pious man may be proper for such a work. 5. Seven persons being chosen by the disciples, according to this criterion, are presented to the apostles for their approbation and confirmation. 6. The apostles, receiving them from the hands of the Church, consecrated them to God by prayer, imploring his blessing on them and their labour. 7. When this was done, they laid their hands upon them in the presence of the disciples, and thus appointed them to this sacred and important work; for it is evident they did not get their commission merely to serve tables, but to proclaim, in connection with and under the direction of the apostles, the word of life. Let no man say that any of the things here enumerated was unnecessary, and let no Church pretend or affect to do without them. 1. No preacher or minister should be provided till there is a place for him to labour in, and necessity for his labour. 2. Let none be imposed upon the Church of Christ who is not of that Church, well known and fully approved by that branch of it with which he was connected. 3. Let none be sent to publish salvation from sin, and the necessity of a holy life, whose moral character cannot bear the strictest scrutiny among his neighbours and acquaintance. 4. Let none, however moral, or well reported of, be sent to convert souls, who has not the most solid reason to believe that he is moved thereto by the Holy Ghost. 5. Let those who have the power to appoint see that the person be a man of wisdom, i.e. sound understanding-for a witling or a blockhead, however upright, will never make a Christian minister; and that he be a man of prudence, knowing how to direct his own concerns, and those of the Church of God, with discretion. 6. Let no private person, nor number of private members in a Church, presume to authorize such a person, though in every way qualified to preach the Gospel; for even the one hundred and twenty primitive disciples did not arrogate this to themselves. 7. Let the person be brought to those to whom God has given authority in the Church, and let them, after most solemnly invoking God, lay their hands upon him, according to the primitive and apostolic plan, and thus devote him to the work of the ministry. 8. Let such a one from that moment consider himself the property of God and his Church, and devote all his time, talents, and powers, to convert sinners, and build up believers in their most holy faith. 9. And let the Church of God consider such a person as legitimately and divinely sent, and receive him as the ambassador of Christ.

Verses 5, 6. And the saying pleased the multitude — Who had been called together upon this occasion; and — After some little deliberation upon the choice that was to be made; they chose seven — It seems all Hellenists, as their names show; a measure which accorded very well with the occasion of their election; Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost — That is, not only endowed with the ordinary graces of the Holy Spirit, in a high degree, but even with his extraordinary gifts, as appears from the subsequent verses; and Philip — Who long continued an ornament and blessing to the church, being afterward raised to a yet higher character, that of an evangelist; and Nicolas — Who was not a Jew born, but a proselyte of Antioch — That is, one who by circumcision had been incorporated with the Jewish people; for if he had only been what was called a proselyte of the gate, he could not at this time have been a member of the Christian Church, no uncircumcised person being yet admitted into it. As he was a proselyte, others that were proselytes would the more readily apply to him for redress in any matter of grievance; and perhaps his peculiar relation to the Grecians might be a special reason why he was chosen to this office, the disciples being willing to cut off from them all cause of complaint. Whom they set before the apostles — That is, presented to them, as persons in whom they could put confidence, and whom they wished the apostles to accept, as proper for the intended work. And when they had prayed — Supplicated the divine blessing to attend all their ministrations: they laid their hands on them — Both that they might express their solemn appointment of them to the office, and confer upon them such extraordinary gifts as would qualify them yet more abundantly for the full discharge of it.

Ver. 6. Whom they set before the apostles; and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them. This was no doubt accompanied with proper charges of fidelity towards God and the church.

The name given to these officers is greek: diakonov, deacon: diakonh, deaconess: diakonein, to minister, to serve at the table, as is explained in ver. 2. It is not reasonable that we should leave the word of God and “serve tables.” In this view, when our Saviour blessed and brake the bread, he humbly served as the archdeacon of the church, and gave us an example of humility. In Greek authors, the term is applied to waiters at a feast. The deaconesses of the primitive church, besides performing other services, carried the sacred elements from the Lord’s table (the bread, as our Saxon fathers used to say, having first been “hallowed to husel”) to their sick and absent sisters in the city.

6. Whom they set before the apostles—The people selected and elected the men; the apostles were to ratify the election by laying hands upon them, implying a veto power in an extreme case where the good of the Church was at stake. Laid their hands—This imposition of hands, the form of patriarchal benediction, was derived from Moses, (Numbers 27:18,) and was permanent in the Jewish Church. It implied the identification of that touched individual from all the world for that office, and poured, as it were, through the hands of the imposer, the official individualization. This imposition of hands, adopted from the Jewish Church, is the true type by which every Christian Church would properly authenticate its established ministry. Were a pious layman to be cast upon a pagan island and by his holy labours to convert the people and gather a Church of thousands or millions, of which the ministers were chosen and authenticated by other credentials than imposition of hands, both the Church and ministry should be accepted by others as valid in spite of the absence of the New Testament form. Doubtless such a Church ought, in Christian propriety, upon learning the biblical example, to conform thereto. The neglect to do so would be worthy of disapproval, but would not invalidate the Church or ministry. (See note on Acts 13:3.)

V. 7. And the word of God grew-The hinderances being removed.

Verse 7. The word of God increased] By such preachers as the apostles and these deacons, no wonder the doctrine of God increased-became widely diffused and generally known; in consequence of which, the number of the disciples must be greatly multiplied: for God will ever bless his own word, when ministered by those whom he has qualified to proclaim it. A great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.] This was one of the greatest miracles wrought by the grace of Christ: that persons so intent on the destruction of Christ, his apostles, and his doctrine, should at last espouse that doctrine, is astonishing; and that they who had withstood the evidence of the miracles of Christ should have yielded to the doctrine of his death and resurrection, is worthy of note. And from this we may learn that it is not by miracles that sinners are to be converted unto God, but by the preaching of Christ dying for their offenses, and rising again for their justification.

Instead of lerewn, priests, a few MSS., and the Syriac, read ioudaiwn, Jews; for the copyists seem to be struck here with two difficulties: 1. That such persons as these priests could be converted. 2. That the word oxlov, company, or multitude, could with propriety be applied to this class, which must have been inconsiderable in their numbers, when compared with the rest of the Jews. To preserve the ancient reading, which is undoubtedly genuine, some have altered the text by conjecture; and, by putting a comma after oclov, and a kai before twn ierewn, make the text read thus: And a great multitude, and some of the priests, were obedient to the faith. This conjecture is unnecessary, as there is no such difficulty here as to require so desperate an expedient, which is not recommended by the evidence of a single MS. or version. 1. The grace of Christ Jesus can save even a murderous Jewish priest: his death is a grand atonement for all crimes and for the worst of sinners. 2. In the twenty-four courses of priests, there was not a multitude merely, but multitudes: indeed the number of ecclesiastics at Jerusalem was enormous. A great company out of these might be converted, and yet multitudes be left behind.

Verse 7. And the word of God increased — The matter of the complaint, and other hinderances being thus removed, and the apostles more entirely at leisure to attend to the great and peculiar duties of their office, the success of the word increased, and the number of the disciples in Jerusalem was, sfodra, very much augmented; and a great company — Greek, poluv oclov, a great crowd, or multitude, of the priests were obedient to the faith — That is, they embraced the doctrine of the gospel, and evinced the sincerity of their faith in it, by a cheerful compliance with all its rules and precepts.

7. Increased… multiplied—In consequence of this wise action of the apostles, peace and increased prosperity returned to the Church. And this is a clear indication that the complaints of the Grecians (Hellenists) (verse 1) were originally just. Priests—The number of priests in Jerusalem even at the return of Ezra from Babylon was more than four thousand, and must have been much larger in the time of Stephen. It was a great evangelic triumph to reach this class, the hierarchy; and then the ingathering seems to have been suddenly great. A sanguine spirit might now begin to anticipate that all the priesthood, and thence all Jerusalem, and finally all Judaism, were about to accept the faith, and so Christianity about to triumph in the capital and the nation. This was the zenith of the Pentecostal Church—its moment of highest popularity just previous to its downfall. That downfall is the next event of this history.

What was the theology of the Pentecostal Church? Special interest in this question arises from the fact that Rationalists have maintained that it was Ebionitic; that is, that this first Church maintained the cessation of property, and denied the divinity and vicarious atonement of Christ. With regard to the first of these points, enough has been already said in our foregoing notes. In regard to the latter, 1. If we confine our investigation simply to Luke’s history, we shall find that Jesus was held to be enthroned at the right hand of God, (Acts 2:33-36;) the hearer of prayer, (Acts 1:24;) the sender of the Spirit, (Acts 2:33;) the receiver of the spirits of the dying, (Acts 7:59;) and the final Judge of the human race, (Acts 2:25.) Salvation is possible only through his name, (Acts 4:12.) All these things are affirmed incidentally, without any formal purpose of laying down a complete system of doctrine, and they imply, if they do not fully express, the full theology of the evangelical Church of the present day. But, 2. We are not rightfully limited to Luke’s brief history, written with no purpose of framing a doctrinal programme. We have a right to say that there is no reason to doubt that this most primitive Church held the entire doctrine taught in the entire New Testament. We must not forget that the formers of this holy canon were members of that holy Church. Matthew and Mark, and John, and probably Luke, the four Evangelists, were all there. Peter, the author of two epistles, and James, of one, were also there. And Paul, if not there in person, was well represented by Luke, whose theology the epistles of Paul, and especially that to the Romans, may be safely held to have embodied. The Hebrew edition of the Gospel of Matthew was published, we believe, not much later than this; and that Gospel, in its baptismal formula, (xxviii, 19,) contains the fundamental trinitarian dogma. The exact relations of Christianity to the Church of the Circumcision, and the real era of the coming of Christ, inspiration itself professedly withheld from the infant Church. (See sup. note to Matthew 25.) There is no just ground to doubt, with these two exceptions, that the doctrines found by our present Evangelical Church in the New Testament were the doctrines of Pentecostal Christianity. Early in the second century, Hegesippus, having ascertained by extensive travel, declared that one Gospel doctrine was unitedly held by all the apostolic Churches.

VII. PENTECOSTAL CHURCH IN ITS LAST STRUGGLE AND DISPERSION, Acts 6:8-8:4.

2. Zeal and Arraignment of Stephen, 9-15.

As the name of Peter stands at the head of the catalogue of apostles to indicate that he was preeminent in character, though possessed of no official authority over the rest, so the name of Stephen (whose name signifies crown) crowns the list of deacons. It was thereby his mission to disturb the delusive repose into which the Pentecostal Church was forgetfully declining by bringing out into uncompromising prominence the doctrine of our Lord’s discourse (Matthew 25,) that the ritual was to disappear and merge into the Universal Church.

Verse 8. Stephen, full of faith and power] Instead of pistewv, faith, caritov, grace, is the reading of ABD, several others, the Syriac of Erpen, the Coptic, Armenian, Vulgate, and some of the fathers. This reading Griesbach has admitted into the text. Some MSS. join both readings. Stephen was full of faith-gave unlimited credence to the promises of his Lord; he was full of grace-receiving the fulfilment of those promises, he enjoyed much of the unction of the Divine Spirit, and much of the favour of his God; and, in consequence, he was full of power, dunamewv, of the Divine energy by which he was enabled to work great wonders and miracles among the people.

Verses 8-10. And Stephen, full of faith and power — That is, of a strong faith, by which he was enabled to do extraordinary things. They that are full of faith are full of power, because, by faith the power of God is engaged for us. Some valuable copies, however, read caritov, grace, instead of pistewv, faith. Did great wonders and miracles among the people — Did them openly, and in the sight of all: for Christ’s miracles feared not the strictest scrutiny. We need not wonder that Stephen, though not a preacher by office, should do these great wonders; for the gifts of the Spirit were divided among the disciples as God pleased: and the power of working miracles was a gift distinct from that of prophesying or preaching, and bestowed on some to whom the latter was not given, 1 Corinthians 12:10, 11. And our Lord promised that the signs of miracles should not only follow them that preached, but them that believed, Mark 16:17. Then there arose certain of the synagogue of the Libertines — So they were styled, whose fathers were once slaves, and afterward made free. This was the case of many Jews, who had been taken captive by the Romans, under Pompey, and carried into Italy, and Cyrenians, &c. — It was one and the same synagogue, which consisted of these several nations. Saul of Cilicia was, doubtless, a member of it. Disputing with Stephen — Arguing with him concerning his doctrine, with a view to prevent the success of his preaching. But such was the force of his reasoning, that they were not able to resist the wisdom, &c. — They could neither support their own arguments nor answer his. He proved Jesus to be the Christ by such irresistible arguments, and delivered himself with so much clearness and evidence, that they had nothing of any weight to object against what he advanced: though they were not convinced, yet they were confounded. It is not said, they were not able to resist him, but to resist the wisdom and the Spirit — That is, the Spirit of wisdom which spake by him. They thought they only disputed with Stephen, and could make their cause good against him; but they were disputing with the Spirit of God in him, for whom they were an unequal match. Now was fulfilled that promise, I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay or resist, Luke 21:15.

V. 9. There arose certain of the synagogue which is called-It was one and the same synagogue which consisted of these several nations. Saul of Cilicia was doubtless a member of it; whence it is not at all improbable, that Gamaliel presided over it.

Libertines-So they were styled, whose fathers were once slaves, and afterward made free. This was the ease of many Jews who had been taken captive by the Romans.

Verse 9. The synagogue-of the Libertines, &c.] That Jews and proselytes from various countries had now come up to Jerusalem to bring offerings, and to attend the feast of pentecost, we have already seen, Acts 2:9-11. The persons mentioned here were foreign Jews, who appear to have had a synagogue peculiar to themselves at Jerusalem, in which they were accustomed to worship when they came to the public festivals.

Various opinions have been entertained concerning the Libertines mentioned here: Bp. Pearce’s view of the subject appears to me to be the most correct.

“It is commonly thought that by this name is meant the sons of such Jews as had been slaves, and obtained their freedom by the favour of their masters; but it is to be observed that with these Libertines the Cyrenians and Alexandrians are here joined, as having one and the same synagogue for their public worship. And it being known that the Cyrenians (Acts 2:10) lived in Libya, and the Alexandrians in the neighbourhood of it, it is most natural to look for the Libertines too in that part of the world. Accordingly we find Suidas, in his Lexicon, saying, upon the word libertinoi, that it is onoma tou eqnouv, the name of a people. And in Gest. Collationis Carthagine habitæ inter Catholicos et Donatistas, published with Optatus’s works, Paris, 1679, (No. 201, and p. 57,) we have these words: Victor episcopus Ecclesiæ Catholicæ LIBERTINENSIS dixit, Unitas est illic, publicam non latet conscientiam. Unity is there: all the world knows it. From these two passages it appears that there was in Libya a town or district called Libertina, whose inhabitants bore the name of libertinoi, Libertines, when Christianity prevailed there. They had an episcopal see among them, and the above-mentioned Victor was their bishop at the council of Carthage, in the reign of the Emperor Honorius. And from hence it seems probable that the town or district, and the people, existed in the time of which Luke is here speaking. They were Jews, (no doubt,) and came up, as the Cyrenian and Alexandrian Jews did, to bring their offerings to Jerusalem, and to worship God in the temple there. Cunæus, in his Rep. Hebr. ii. 23, says that the Jews who lived in Alexandria and Libya, and all other Jews who lived out of the Holy Land, except those of Babylon and its neighbourhood, were held in great contempt by the Jews who inhabited Jerusalem and Judea; partly on account of their quitting their proper country, and partly on account of their using the Greek language, and being quite ignorant of the other. For these reasons it seems probable that the Libertines, Cyrenians, and Alexendrians, had a separate synagogue; (as perhaps the Cilicians and those of Asia had;) the Jews of Jerusalem not suffering them to be present in their synagogues, or they not choosing to perform their public service in synagogues where a language was used which they did not understand.” It is supposed, also, that these synagogues had theological, if not philosophical, schools attached to them; and that it was the disciples or scholars of these schools who came forward to dispute with Stephen, and were enraged because they were confounded. For it is not an uncommon custom with those who have a bad cause, which can neither stand the test of Scripture nor reason, to endeavour to support it by physical when logical force has failed; and thus:-

“Prove their doctrine orthodox,

By apostolic blows and knocks.”

In the reign of Queen Mary, when popery prevailed in this country, and the simplest women who had read the Bible were an overmatch for the greatest of the popish doctors; as they had neither Scripture nor reason to allege, they burned them alive, and thus terminated a controversy which they were unable to maintain. The same cause will ever produce the same effect: the Libertines, Cilicians, Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, pursued this course: Stephen confounded them by Scripture and reason, and they beat his brains out with stones! This was the most effectual way to silence a disputant whose wisdom they could not resist. In the same way were the Protestants treated, when by Scripture and reason they had shown the absurdity and wickedness of that anti-christian system which the fire and the sword were brought forth to establish. These persecutors professed great concern at first for the souls of those whom they variously tortured, and at last burned; but their tender mercies were cruel, and when they gave up the body to the flames, they most heartily consigned the soul to Satan. Scires è sanguine natos: their conduct proclaimed their genealogy.

Verses 8-10. And Stephen, full of faith and power — That is, of a strong faith, by which he was enabled to do extraordinary things. They that are full of faith are full of power, because, by faith the power of God is engaged for us. Some valuable copies, however, read caritov, grace, instead of pistewv, faith. Did great wonders and miracles among the people — Did them openly, and in the sight of all: for Christ’s miracles feared not the strictest scrutiny. We need not wonder that Stephen, though not a preacher by office, should do these great wonders; for the gifts of the Spirit were divided among the disciples as God pleased: and the power of working miracles was a gift distinct from that of prophesying or preaching, and bestowed on some to whom the latter was not given, 1 Corinthians 12:10, 11. And our Lord promised that the signs of miracles should not only follow them that preached, but them that believed, Mark 16:17. Then there arose certain of the synagogue of the Libertines — So they were styled, whose fathers were once slaves, and afterward made free. This was the case of many Jews, who had been taken captive by the Romans, under Pompey, and carried into Italy, and Cyrenians, &c. — It was one and the same synagogue, which consisted of these several nations. Saul of Cilicia was, doubtless, a member of it. Disputing with Stephen — Arguing with him concerning his doctrine, with a view to prevent the success of his preaching. But such was the force of his reasoning, that they were not able to resist the wisdom, &c. — They could neither support their own arguments nor answer his. He proved Jesus to be the Christ by such irresistible arguments, and delivered himself with so much clearness and evidence, that they had nothing of any weight to object against what he advanced: though they were not convinced, yet they were confounded. It is not said, they were not able to resist him, but to resist the wisdom and the Spirit — That is, the Spirit of wisdom which spake by him. They thought they only disputed with Stephen, and could make their cause good against him; but they were disputing with the Spirit of God in him, for whom they were an unequal match. Now was fulfilled that promise, I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay or resist, Luke 21:15.

Ver. 9. Then arose certain of the synagogue — the synagogue of the libertines, whose fathers had been liberated from servitude: a low degenerate race.

9. Certain of the synagogue—The five synagogues here mentioned, out of the four hundred and eighty synagogues in Jerusalem, were all held by Hellenists or foreign Jews, and so glad, perhaps, to signalize their zeal for Judaism against their brother Hellenist, Stephen. Libertines—That is, freedmen, emancipates from slavery. They probably belonged to the Roman Jews, who were mostly of this class. (See section on the Roman Church in our Introduction to Romans.) About seventeen years before this period Tiberius had ordered the Jews to depart from Rome, and we may thence infer that some of them immigrated to Jerusalem and built their synagogues. Libertines here would therefore be equivalent to Roman Jews. The structure of the verse implies a twofold classification into Roman and African Jews, and Asiatic Jews.

Cyrenians—See Mark 15:21. About one fourth of the African city of Cyrene were Jews. This city had representatives at the Pentecost, (Acts 2:10,) and probably from among them it was that certain came and preached at Antioch, (Acts 11:20,) and Lucius of Cyrene was one of the eminent men who commissioned Barnabas and Paul from Antioch, (Acts 13:1.)

The more fully we investigate the subject the more strongly we incline to the belief that Luke is identical with “Lucius of Cyrene” in Acts 13:1, (where see our note,) and so was himself a Cyrenian and an attendant at this synagogue. Supposing, according to our note on Luke 24:13, that he was one of the two from Emmaus, he arrived in Jerusalem (from Cyrene by way of Alexandria perhaps) at the Passover of the crucifixion, and was some way connected with the Christian disciples. He was a physician, and both Cyrene and Alexandria were medically celebrated. He was, thence, at the Pentecost, as his full narrative of the preparations and of the Pentecost, as well as his full report of the speeches of Peter, show. He was part of the Pentecostal Church through the whole six or seven years of its history. Then upon the Stephanic dispersion he was one of the “men of Cyrene,” who went first to Cyprus (Acts 11:19, 20) and thence to Antioch, where he is the “Lucius of Cyrene,” of Acts 13:1, where see note. Alexandrians—Alexandria, the chief maritime city, and for a long time the metropolis, of lower Egypt, received its name from its founder, Alexander the Great. Its advantageous commercial position raised it among the most eminent cities of its period, and well attested the wisdom of its founder in its selection. Alexander was a favourer of the Jewish race, and gave them such advantages in this new metropolis that they became numerous, wealthy, educated, and influential. The Jews never had a man of greater erudition than Philo, who adorned this city with his genius, and left works extant and valued at the present day. Here the Hebrew Old Testament was translated into the Greek, forming the celebrated Septuagint. (Vol. II, p. 10.)

Cilicia—Paul’s native province. It was the long, narrow strip of territory lining the northern shore of the eastern part of the Mediterranean. It was bounded, or rather walled in from the rest of Asia Minor, by the almost impassable line of Taurus mountains. Yet, though thus isolated, it formed the marching route of armies between Europe and Asia. At the eastern extremity, where the Taurus range nearly touches the great northeast corner of the sea, was the narrow pass into Syria and Asia, generally called the Cilician Gates, (Issus,) where more than one memorable battle was fought for the right of way. The inhabitants were Asiatic Greeks mixed with Syrians. The aboriginal population, as well as the name, is probably Phenician. Antiochus the Great introduced two thousand Jews into Asia Minor, and the Jewish population appears from this verse to have been numerous enough to need a synagogue in Jerusalem.

Asia—The Asia of the New Testament never includes, as in modern times, the eastern great quarter of the globe, (called by a late Roman writer, Justin, Asia Major.) Nor was the term Asia Minor used until the fourth century. Asia under Roman dominion, “proconsular Asia,” usually included the provinces of Phrygia, Mysia, Caria, and Lydia, of which the capital was Ephesus, and this was the Asia of Acts and the Epistles.

Disputing with Stephen—It is probable that some of the synagogues of large cities consisted of two apartments, one for public worship, the other for theological education and discussion.

Verse 10. They there not able to resist the wisdom, &c.] He was wise, well exercised and experienced, in Divine things; and, as appears by his defence, in the following chapter, well versed in the Jewish history. The spirit by which he spake was the Holy Spirit, and its power was irresistible. They were obliged either to yield to its teachings, or were confounded by its truth. Several MSS. add to this verse, because he reproved them with boldness, they could not resist the truth. This reading is not genuine, though it exists (but in different forms) in some good MSS.

Verses 8-10. And Stephen, full of faith and power — That is, of a strong faith, by which he was enabled to do extraordinary things. They that are full of faith are full of power, because, by faith the power of God is engaged for us. Some valuable copies, however, read caritov, grace, instead of pistewv, faith. Did great wonders and miracles among the people — Did them openly, and in the sight of all: for Christ’s miracles feared not the strictest scrutiny. We need not wonder that Stephen, though not a preacher by office, should do these great wonders; for the gifts of the Spirit were divided among the disciples as God pleased: and the power of working miracles was a gift distinct from that of prophesying or preaching, and bestowed on some to whom the latter was not given, 1 Corinthians 12:10, 11. And our Lord promised that the signs of miracles should not only follow them that preached, but them that believed, Mark 16:17. Then there arose certain of the synagogue of the Libertines — So they were styled, whose fathers were once slaves, and afterward made free. This was the case of many Jews, who had been taken captive by the Romans, under Pompey, and carried into Italy, and Cyrenians, &c. — It was one and the same synagogue, which consisted of these several nations. Saul of Cilicia was, doubtless, a member of it. Disputing with Stephen — Arguing with him concerning his doctrine, with a view to prevent the success of his preaching. But such was the force of his reasoning, that they were not able to resist the wisdom, &c. — They could neither support their own arguments nor answer his. He proved Jesus to be the Christ by such irresistible arguments, and delivered himself with so much clearness and evidence, that they had nothing of any weight to object against what he advanced: though they were not convinced, yet they were confounded. It is not said, they were not able to resist him, but to resist the wisdom and the Spirit — That is, the Spirit of wisdom which spake by him. They thought they only disputed with Stephen, and could make their cause good against him; but they were disputing with the Spirit of God in him, for whom they were an unequal match. Now was fulfilled that promise, I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay or resist, Luke 21:15.

Ver. 10. They were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake. So the proverb was realized: he that is worsted in logic grows angry: but the anger here was madness.

10. Not able to resist—Five synagogues against one man were unable to resist his prowess. Wisdom—That insight into the independence of Christianity which foresaw the vanishing destiny of Judaism. Spirit—That blending (compare verses 5 and 8) of perfect faith in distinctive Christianity, of divine grace through its experience, and of power to illustrate its truth with miracle.

Verse 11. Then they suborned men] upebalon. They made underhand work; got associated to themselves profligate persons, who for money would swear any thing.

Blasphemous words against Moses, and against God.] This was the most deadly charge they could bring against him. We have already seen, Matthew 9:4, that blasphemy, when against GOD, signifies speaking impiously of his nature, attributes, or works; and, when against men, it signifies speaking injuriously of their character, blasting their reputation, &c. These false witnesses came to prove that he had blasphemed Moses by representing him as an impostor, or the like; and GOD, by either denying his being, his providence, the justice of his government, &c.

Verses 11-14. Then they suborned men — As they found they were incapable of defending themselves by fair argument, they had recourse to a most mean and dishonest fraud; they suborned men to bear false witness against him, and depose that they had heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses — Their great and divinely-commissioned lawgiver; and against God — The great author of that law which Moses delivered by command from him. They were right in supposing that they who blasphemed Moses, if they meant the writings of Moses, which were given by inspiration of God, blasphemed God himself. They that speak reproachfully of the Scriptures, and ridicule them, reflect upon God himself, and do despite to him. But did Stephen blaspheme Moses? By no means; he was far from it. Christ and the preachers of his gospel never said any thing that looked like blaspheming Moses; they always quoted his writings with respect; appealed to them, and said no other things but what Moses foretold should come. Very unjustly, therefore, is Stephen indicted for blaspheming Moses. “On such terms,” says Baxter, “we dispute with malignant men: when they cannot resist the truth, they suborn men to swear to false accusations. And it is next to a miracle of Providence, that no greater number of religious persons have been murdered in the world, by the way of perjury and pretence of law, when so many thousands hate them, who make no conscience of false oaths.” And they stirred up the people and the elders — They incensed both the government and the mob against him, that if they could not prevail by the one, they might by the other; that if the sanhedrim should still think fit, according to Gamaliel’s advice, to let him alone, yet they might prevail against him by popular rage and tumult; or, if the people should countenance and protect him, they might effect his destruction by the authority of the elders and scribes. And came upon him, and caught him — Greek, epistantev sunhrpasan, rushing on him, they seized him, and brought him to the council; which, it seems, was then sitting; and there, in the presence of their highest court of judicature, they set up false witnesses — Witnesses that they themselves knew to be false; who said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words — These suborned witnesses, being brought together, imboldened one another in bearing a false testimony. Against this holy place — Meaning the temple, where they then were; and the law — The divinely-inspired law, as one that has no reverence at all for its authority. For we have heard him say, that Jesus shall destroy this place — Perhaps they had, but that did not prove that he had been guilty of blasphemy. Thus Christ was condemned as a blasphemer, for words which were thought to reflect upon the temple, for the honour of which they seemed to be greatly concerned, at the very time when by their wickedness they were profaning it; making it not only a house of merchandise, but a den of thieves. And shall change the customs which Moses delivered us — It is not probable that Stephen knew the mystery of the abolition of the Mosaic law, which even the apostles do not seem to have had now any idea of. And it is much less probable that he openly taught what Paul himself, many years after, only insinuated, and that with very great caution. Compare Galatians 2:2. This therefore seems to have been merely an inference drawn by them from what he taught concerning the destruction coming on the Jews, if they continued in their unbelief: but it was a very precarious inference, as the city and temple had been destroyed before, without any repeal of the law, and therefore they were false witnesses. And they were still more so in affirming that in saying these things he had spoken blasphemous words against that holy place, and against the law — What blasphemy was it against that holy place, which they at once profaned and idolized, to say that it should not be perpetual, any more than Shiloh was? And that the just and holy God would not continue the privileges of his sanctuary to those that abused them? Had not the prophets given the same warning to their fathers, of the destruction of that holy place by the Chaldeans? Nay, when the temple was first built, did not God himself give the same warning? This house, which is high, shall be an astonishment, 2 Chronicles 7:21. And with respect to the law, which they charged him with blaspheming, that law of which they made their boast, and in which they put their trust, even then, when, through breaking it, they dishonoured God, (Romans 2:23,) how was Stephen’s saying, (if he really did say,) that Jesus would change the customs which Moses had delivered to them, blaspheming it or its glorious Author? Was it not foretold by the prophets, and therefore to be expected, that in the days of the Messiah, the old customs should be changed, and that the shadows should give place when the substance was come? This, however, was no essential change of the law, but the perfecting of it: for Christ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it; and if he changed some customs that Moses delivered, it was to introduce and establish those that were much better.

Ver. 11. They suborned men which said, we have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses. Jezebel, when mortified at the firmness of Naboth, did the same; not considering that her life would soon pay for that of the subject. So it proved to those rulers in the tragic fall of Jerusalem. The blood of saints “shall not be purged with sacrifice.”

Verse 12. And they] The Libertines, &c., mentioned before, stirred up the people-raised a mob against him, and, to assist and countenance the mob, got the elders and scribes to conduct it, who thus made themselves one with the basest of the people, whom they collected; and then, altogether, without law or form of justice, rushed on the good man, seized him, and brought him to a council who, though they sat in the seat of judgment, were ready for every evil work.

Verses 11-14. Then they suborned men — As they found they were incapable of defending themselves by fair argument, they had recourse to a most mean and dishonest fraud; they suborned men to bear false witness against him, and depose that they had heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses — Their great and divinely-commissioned lawgiver; and against God — The great author of that law which Moses delivered by command from him. They were right in supposing that they who blasphemed Moses, if they meant the writings of Moses, which were given by inspiration of God, blasphemed God himself. They that speak reproachfully of the Scriptures, and ridicule them, reflect upon God himself, and do despite to him. But did Stephen blaspheme Moses? By no means; he was far from it. Christ and the preachers of his gospel never said any thing that looked like blaspheming Moses; they always quoted his writings with respect; appealed to them, and said no other things but what Moses foretold should come. Very unjustly, therefore, is Stephen indicted for blaspheming Moses. “On such terms,” says Baxter, “we dispute with malignant men: when they cannot resist the truth, they suborn men to swear to false accusations. And it is next to a miracle of Providence, that no greater number of religious persons have been murdered in the world, by the way of perjury and pretence of law, when so many thousands hate them, who make no conscience of false oaths.” And they stirred up the people and the elders — They incensed both the government and the mob against him, that if they could not prevail by the one, they might by the other; that if the sanhedrim should still think fit, according to Gamaliel’s advice, to let him alone, yet they might prevail against him by popular rage and tumult; or, if the people should countenance and protect him, they might effect his destruction by the authority of the elders and scribes. And came upon him, and caught him — Greek, epistantev sunhrpasan, rushing on him, they seized him, and brought him to the council; which, it seems, was then sitting; and there, in the presence of their highest court of judicature, they set up false witnesses — Witnesses that they themselves knew to be false; who said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words — These suborned witnesses, being brought together, imboldened one another in bearing a false testimony. Against this holy place — Meaning the temple, where they then were; and the law — The divinely-inspired law, as one that has no reverence at all for its authority. For we have heard him say, that Jesus shall destroy this place — Perhaps they had, but that did not prove that he had been guilty of blasphemy. Thus Christ was condemned as a blasphemer, for words which were thought to reflect upon the temple, for the honour of which they seemed to be greatly concerned, at the very time when by their wickedness they were profaning it; making it not only a house of merchandise, but a den of thieves. And shall change the customs which Moses delivered us — It is not probable that Stephen knew the mystery of the abolition of the Mosaic law, which even the apostles do not seem to have had now any idea of. And it is much less probable that he openly taught what Paul himself, many years after, only insinuated, and that with very great caution. Compare Galatians 2:2. This therefore seems to have been merely an inference drawn by them from what he taught concerning the destruction coming on the Jews, if they continued in their unbelief: but it was a very precarious inference, as the city and temple had been destroyed before, without any repeal of the law, and therefore they were false witnesses. And they were still more so in affirming that in saying these things he had spoken blasphemous words against that holy place, and against the law — What blasphemy was it against that holy place, which they at once profaned and idolized, to say that it should not be perpetual, any more than Shiloh was? And that the just and holy God would not continue the privileges of his sanctuary to those that abused them? Had not the prophets given the same warning to their fathers, of the destruction of that holy place by the Chaldeans? Nay, when the temple was first built, did not God himself give the same warning? This house, which is high, shall be an astonishment, 2 Chronicles 7:21. And with respect to the law, which they charged him with blaspheming, that law of which they made their boast, and in which they put their trust, even then, when, through breaking it, they dishonoured God, (Romans 2:23,) how was Stephen’s saying, (if he really did say,) that Jesus would change the customs which Moses had delivered to them, blaspheming it or its glorious Author? Was it not foretold by the prophets, and therefore to be expected, that in the days of the Messiah, the old customs should be changed, and that the shadows should give place when the substance was come? This, however, was no essential change of the law, but the perfecting of it: for Christ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it; and if he changed some customs that Moses delivered, it was to introduce and establish those that were much better.

12. Came upon… caught… brought—The words imply a taking him by surprise and hurrying him by force into the presence of the Sanhedrin.

Verse 13. Against this holy place] The temple, that it shall be destroyed. And the law] That it cannot give life, nor save from death. It is very likely that they had heard him speak words to this amount, which were all as true as the spirit from which they proceeded; but they gave them a very false colouring, as we see in the succeeding verse.

Verses 11-14. Then they suborned men — As they found they were incapable of defending themselves by fair argument, they had recourse to a most mean and dishonest fraud; they suborned men to bear false witness against him, and depose that they had heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses — Their great and divinely-commissioned lawgiver; and against God — The great author of that law which Moses delivered by command from him. They were right in supposing that they who blasphemed Moses, if they meant the writings of Moses, which were given by inspiration of God, blasphemed God himself. They that speak reproachfully of the Scriptures, and ridicule them, reflect upon God himself, and do despite to him. But did Stephen blaspheme Moses? By no means; he was far from it. Christ and the preachers of his gospel never said any thing that looked like blaspheming Moses; they always quoted his writings with respect; appealed to them, and said no other things but what Moses foretold should come. Very unjustly, therefore, is Stephen indicted for blaspheming Moses. “On such terms,” says Baxter, “we dispute with malignant men: when they cannot resist the truth, they suborn men to swear to false accusations. And it is next to a miracle of Providence, that no greater number of religious persons have been murdered in the world, by the way of perjury and pretence of law, when so many thousands hate them, who make no conscience of false oaths.” And they stirred up the people and the elders — They incensed both the government and the mob against him, that if they could not prevail by the one, they might by the other; that if the sanhedrim should still think fit, according to Gamaliel’s advice, to let him alone, yet they might prevail against him by popular rage and tumult; or, if the people should countenance and protect him, they might effect his destruction by the authority of the elders and scribes. And came upon him, and caught him — Greek, epistantev sunhrpasan, rushing on him, they seized him, and brought him to the council; which, it seems, was then sitting; and there, in the presence of their highest court of judicature, they set up false witnesses — Witnesses that they themselves knew to be false; who said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words — These suborned witnesses, being brought together, imboldened one another in bearing a false testimony. Against this holy place — Meaning the temple, where they then were; and the law — The divinely-inspired law, as one that has no reverence at all for its authority. For we have heard him say, that Jesus shall destroy this place — Perhaps they had, but that did not prove that he had been guilty of blasphemy. Thus Christ was condemned as a blasphemer, for words which were thought to reflect upon the temple, for the honour of which they seemed to be greatly concerned, at the very time when by their wickedness they were profaning it; making it not only a house of merchandise, but a den of thieves. And shall change the customs which Moses delivered us — It is not probable that Stephen knew the mystery of the abolition of the Mosaic law, which even the apostles do not seem to have had now any idea of. And it is much less probable that he openly taught what Paul himself, many years after, only insinuated, and that with very great caution. Compare Galatians 2:2. This therefore seems to have been merely an inference drawn by them from what he taught concerning the destruction coming on the Jews, if they continued in their unbelief: but it was a very precarious inference, as the city and temple had been destroyed before, without any repeal of the law, and therefore they were false witnesses. And they were still more so in affirming that in saying these things he had spoken blasphemous words against that holy place, and against the law — What blasphemy was it against that holy place, which they at once profaned and idolized, to say that it should not be perpetual, any more than Shiloh was? And that the just and holy God would not continue the privileges of his sanctuary to those that abused them? Had not the prophets given the same warning to their fathers, of the destruction of that holy place by the Chaldeans? Nay, when the temple was first built, did not God himself give the same warning? This house, which is high, shall be an astonishment, 2 Chronicles 7:21. And with respect to the law, which they charged him with blaspheming, that law of which they made their boast, and in which they put their trust, even then, when, through breaking it, they dishonoured God, (Romans 2:23,) how was Stephen’s saying, (if he really did say,) that Jesus would change the customs which Moses had delivered to them, blaspheming it or its glorious Author? Was it not foretold by the prophets, and therefore to be expected, that in the days of the Messiah, the old customs should be changed, and that the shadows should give place when the substance was come? This, however, was no essential change of the law, but the perfecting of it: for Christ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it; and if he changed some customs that Moses delivered, it was to introduce and establish those that were much better.

13. Set up—Made stand. False witnesses—Before the council or Sanhedrin. The facts adduced by these witnesses were mainly true; but the witnesses infused a false spirit and intent into them as to make facts be lies. There were five things of which Stephen is charged with blasphemously predicting a change, namely: Moses, Jehovah, (Moses taking precedence in their talk,) this holy place, (the temple and perhaps city,) the law, (place takes precedence of law with them,) and the customs, or entire body of ritual observances. Touching all these, the predictions of Stephen have become history. The perjury of the witnesses which unjustly produced his death consisted in inventing a blasphemous or hostile animus. Stephen announced the disappearance of all that was transient in these, yet not as necessarily, destroyed, but living essentially in their permanent elements with a renewed vitality in the new Christianity. Hence in his defence Stephen seeks to give such a rehearsal of Israel’s whole history as to show that his Christianity joins on to it as the latest and most natural development of the New from the Old. So far from hostility or blasphemy against these venerable five, he reverently claims them as among the antecedents to the divine consequents embraced in Jesus Messiah, and would urge his countrymen to identify themselves while they may with the coming New.

And here commences the great fracture anticipated in our note on 4:1, between Judaism and Christianity, which scattered the Pentecostal Church, and has lasted for ages. (See note on Acts 10:1.) Its termination is indicated in Romans 11:32-36.

V. 14. We have heard him say-So they might. But yet the consequence they drew would not follow.

Verses 11-14. Then they suborned men — As they found they were incapable of defending themselves by fair argument, they had recourse to a most mean and dishonest fraud; they suborned men to bear false witness against him, and depose that they had heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses — Their great and divinely-commissioned lawgiver; and against God — The great author of that law which Moses delivered by command from him. They were right in supposing that they who blasphemed Moses, if they meant the writings of Moses, which were given by inspiration of God, blasphemed God himself. They that speak reproachfully of the Scriptures, and ridicule them, reflect upon God himself, and do despite to him. But did Stephen blaspheme Moses? By no means; he was far from it. Christ and the preachers of his gospel never said any thing that looked like blaspheming Moses; they always quoted his writings with respect; appealed to them, and said no other things but what Moses foretold should come. Very unjustly, therefore, is Stephen indicted for blaspheming Moses. “On such terms,” says Baxter, “we dispute with malignant men: when they cannot resist the truth, they suborn men to swear to false accusations. And it is next to a miracle of Providence, that no greater number of religious persons have been murdered in the world, by the way of perjury and pretence of law, when so many thousands hate them, who make no conscience of false oaths.” And they stirred up the people and the elders — They incensed both the government and the mob against him, that if they could not prevail by the one, they might by the other; that if the sanhedrim should still think fit, according to Gamaliel’s advice, to let him alone, yet they might prevail against him by popular rage and tumult; or, if the people should countenance and protect him, they might effect his destruction by the authority of the elders and scribes. And came upon him, and caught him — Greek, epistantev sunhrpasan, rushing on him, they seized him, and brought him to the council; which, it seems, was then sitting; and there, in the presence of their highest court of judicature, they set up false witnesses — Witnesses that they themselves knew to be false; who said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words — These suborned witnesses, being brought together, imboldened one another in bearing a false testimony. Against this holy place — Meaning the temple, where they then were; and the law — The divinely-inspired law, as one that has no reverence at all for its authority. For we have heard him say, that Jesus shall destroy this place — Perhaps they had, but that did not prove that he had been guilty of blasphemy. Thus Christ was condemned as a blasphemer, for words which were thought to reflect upon the temple, for the honour of which they seemed to be greatly concerned, at the very time when by their wickedness they were profaning it; making it not only a house of merchandise, but a den of thieves. And shall change the customs which Moses delivered us — It is not probable that Stephen knew the mystery of the abolition of the Mosaic law, which even the apostles do not seem to have had now any idea of. And it is much less probable that he openly taught what Paul himself, many years after, only insinuated, and that with very great caution. Compare Galatians 2:2. This therefore seems to have been merely an inference drawn by them from what he taught concerning the destruction coming on the Jews, if they continued in their unbelief: but it was a very precarious inference, as the city and temple had been destroyed before, without any repeal of the law, and therefore they were false witnesses. And they were still more so in affirming that in saying these things he had spoken blasphemous words against that holy place, and against the law — What blasphemy was it against that holy place, which they at once profaned and idolized, to say that it should not be perpetual, any more than Shiloh was? And that the just and holy God would not continue the privileges of his sanctuary to those that abused them? Had not the prophets given the same warning to their fathers, of the destruction of that holy place by the Chaldeans? Nay, when the temple was first built, did not God himself give the same warning? This house, which is high, shall be an astonishment, 2 Chronicles 7:21. And with respect to the law, which they charged him with blaspheming, that law of which they made their boast, and in which they put their trust, even then, when, through breaking it, they dishonoured God, (Romans 2:23,) how was Stephen’s saying, (if he really did say,) that Jesus would change the customs which Moses had delivered to them, blaspheming it or its glorious Author? Was it not foretold by the prophets, and therefore to be expected, that in the days of the Messiah, the old customs should be changed, and that the shadows should give place when the substance was come? This, however, was no essential change of the law, but the perfecting of it: for Christ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it; and if he changed some customs that Moses delivered, it was to introduce and establish those that were much better.

V. 15. As the face of an angel-Covered with supernatural lustre. They reckoned his preaching of Jesus to be the Christ was destroying Moses and the law; and God bears witness to him, with the same glory as he did to Moses, when he gave the law by him.

Verse 15. Saw his face, as it had been the face of an angel.] Sayings like this are frequent among the Jewish writers, who represent God as distinguishing eminent men by causing a glory to shine from their faces. Rabbi Gedalia said that, “when Moses and Aaron came before Pharaoh, they appeared like those angels which minister before the face of the Lord; for their stature appeared greater, and the splendour of their faces was like the sun, and their eyes like the wheels of the sun; their beard like clusters of grapes, and their words like thunder and lightning; and that, through fear of them, those who were present fell to the earth.”

The like is said of Moses, in Debarim Rabba, fol. 75. that “when Sammael (Satan) came to Moses, the splendour of his face was like the sun, and himself resembled an angel of God.” The reader may find several similar sayings in Schoettgen.

It appears that the light and power of God which dwelt in his soul shone through his face, and God gave them this proof of the falsity of the testimony which was now before them; for, as the face of Stephen now shone as the face of Moses did when he came down from the mount, it was the fullest proof that he had not spoken blasphemous words either against Moses or God, else this splendour of heaven had not rested upon him. The history of the apostolic Church is a series of wonders. Every thing that could prevent such a Church from being established, or could overthrow it when established, is brought to bear against it. The instruments employed in its erection and defence had neither might nor power, but what came immediately from God. They work, and God works with them; the Church is founded and built up; and its adversaries, with every advantage in their favour, cannot overthrow it. Is it possible to look at this, without seeing the mighty hand of God in the whole? He permits devils and wicked men to work-to avail themselves of all their advantages, yet counterworks all their plots and designs, turns their weapons against themselves, and promotes his cause by the very means that were used to destroy it. How true is the saying, There is neither might nor counsel against the Lord! ACTS

Verse 15. And all that sat in the council — The priests, rulers, scribes, and elders; looking steadfastly on him — As being a stranger, and one whom they had not till now had before them, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel — Covered with a supernatural lustre, like that which appeared on the face of our Lord when he was transfigured, or at least that of Moses’s face, when he came down from the mount. Hereby God designed to put honour on his faithful witness, and confusion on his persecutors and judges, whose sin would be highly aggravated, and would indeed be rebellion against the visible glory of God, if, notwithstanding this, they proceeded against him. They reckoned his preaching of Jesus as the Christ, was destroying both Moses and the law; and God bears witness to him with the same glory as he did to Moses, when he gave the law by him. And it was an astonishing instance of the incorrigible hardness and wickedness of their hearts, that they could murder a man on whom God put such a visible glory, similar to that of their great legislator. But we know what little impression other miracles made upon them, the truth of which they were compelled to acknowledge.

Ver. 15. The council — saw his face as it had been the face of an angel. God inspired him with inward glory and holiness, which emanated in his aspect to convince all of his purity; for he had no one to confront the perjured race, and prove the innocence and sanctity of his life.

15. All… sat… council—Stephen now stands the focus upon which the eyes of the Sanhedric semicircle are concentrated. The victim stands, while the judges sit.

THE SANHEDRIN

Directly facing him sits upon an elevated seat, at the middle point of the semicircular line, the high priest. It is probably no longer Caiaphas, who after twenty years of office had been deposed, but Theophilus, a son of Annas, and so a member of the same great Sadducean family who so long monopolized the supremacy at Jerusalem. Face… angel—He who was accused of blaspheming Moses bears the radiance that authenticated Moses in his own face. (Exodus 35:29-35.) It was a faint beam from that glory of which he spoke in Acts 7:2, and which his own eyes beheld in Acts 7:55. Awed by his beaming face the Sanhedrin gaze steadfastly on him, and for a while listen with rapt and silent attention.