Text -- Acts 7:1-25 (NET)

Stephen’s Defense Before the Council

7:1 Then the high priest said, “Are these things true?” 7:2 So he replied, “Brothers and fathers, listen to me. The God of glory appeared to our forefather Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he settled in Haran, 7:3 and said to him, ‘Go out from your country and from your relatives, and come to the land I will show you.’ 7:4 Then he went out from the country of the Chaldeans and settled in Haran. After his father died, God made him move to this country where you now live. 7:5 He did not give any of it to him for an inheritance, not even a foot of ground, yet God promised to give it to him as his possession, and to his descendants after him, even though Abraham as yet had no child. 7:6 But God spoke as follows: ‘Your descendants will be foreigners in a foreign country, whose citizens will enslave them and mistreat them for four hundred years. 7:7 But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves,’ said God, ‘and after these things they will come out of there and worship me in this place.’ 7:8 Then God gave Abraham the covenant of circumcision, and so he became the father of Isaac and circumcised him when he was eight days old, and Isaac became the father of Jacob, and Jacob of the twelve patriarchs. 7:9 The patriarchs, because they were jealous of Joseph, sold him into Egypt. But God was with him, 7:10 and rescued him from all his troubles, and granted him favor and wisdom in the presence of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, who made him ruler over Egypt and over all his household. 7:11 Then a famine occurred throughout Egypt and Canaan, causing great suffering, and our ancestors could not find food. 7:12 So when Jacob heard that there was grain in Egypt, he sent our ancestors there the first time. 7:13 On their second visit Joseph made himself known to his brothers again, and Joseph’s family became known to Pharaoh. 7:14 So Joseph sent a message and invited his father Jacob and all his relatives to come, seventy-five people in all. 7:15 So Jacob went down to Egypt and died there, along with our ancestors, 7:16 and their bones were later moved to Shechem and placed in the tomb that Abraham had bought for a certain sum of money from the sons of Hamor in Shechem. 7:17 “But as the time drew near for God to fulfill the promise he had declared to Abraham, the people increased greatly in number in Egypt, 7:18 until another king who did not know about Joseph ruled over Egypt. 7:19 This was the one who exploited our people and was cruel to our ancestors, forcing them to abandon their infants so they would die. die. 7:20 At that time Moses was born, and he was beautiful to God. For three months he was brought up in his father’s house, 7:21 and when he had been abandoned, Pharaoh’s daughter adopted him and brought him up as her own son. 7:22 So Moses was trained in all the wisdom of the Egyptians and was powerful in his words and deeds. 7:23 But when he was about forty years old, it entered his mind to visit his fellow countrymen the Israelites. 7:24 When he saw one of them being hurt unfairly, Moses came to his defense and avenged the person who was mistreated by striking down the Egyptian. 7:25 He thought his own people would understand that God was delivering them through him, but they did not understand.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: Act 7:1

Are these things so? ( ei tauta houtōs echei ).

On this use of ei in a direct question, see note on Act 1:6. Literally "Do these things hold thus?"A formal question by the high priest like our "Do you plead guilty, or not guilty?"(Furneaux). The abrupt question of the high priest would serve to break the evident spell of the angelic look on Stephen’ s face. Two charges had been made against Stephen (1) speaking against the holy temple, (2) changing the customs which Moses had delivered. Stephen could not give a yes or no answer to these two charges. There was an element of truth in each of them and a large amount of error all mixed together. So he undertakes to explain his real position by the historical method, that is to say, by a rapid survey of God’ s dealing with the people of Israel and the Gentiles. It is the same method adopted by Paul in Pisidian Antioch (Act 13:16.) after he had become the successor of Stephen in his interpretation of the universal mission of Christianity. If one is disposed to say that Luke made up this speech to suit Stephen’ s predicament, he has to explain how the style is less Lukan than the narrative portions of Acts with knowledge of Jewish traditions that a Greek would not be likely to know. Precisely how Luke obtained the data for the speech we do not know, but Saul heard it and Philip, one of the seven, almost certainly. Both could have given Luke help about it. It is even possible that some one took notes of this important address. We are to remember also that the speech was interrupted at the end and may not include all that Stephen meant to say. But enough is given to give us a good idea of how Stephen met the first charge "by showing that the worship of God is not confined to Jerusalem or the Jewish temple"(Page). Then he answers the second charge by proving that God had many dealings with their fathers before Moses came and that Moses foretold the coming of the Messiah who is now known to be Jesus. It is at this point (Act 7:51) that Stephen becomes passionate and so powerful that the wolves in the Sanhedrin lose all self-control. It is a great and masterful exposition of the worldwide mission of the gospel of Christ in full harmony with the Great Commission of Christ. The apostles had been so busy answering the Sadducees concerning the Resurrection of Christ and maintaining their freedom to teach and preach that they had not pushed the world-wide propaganda of the gospel as Jesus had commanded after they had received the Promise of the Father. But Stephen had proclaimed the same message of Christ and was now facing the same fate. Peter’ s mind had been enlightened by the Holy Spirit so that he could rightly interpret Joel and David in the light of Pentecost. "So Stephen read the history of the Old Testament with new eyes in the light of the life and death of Jesus"(Furneaux).

Robertson: Act 7:2

Brethren and fathers ( andres adelphoi kai pateres ).

The spectators (brethren) and members of the Sanhedrin (fathers) as Paul in Act 22:1.

Robertson: Act 7:2

Hearken ( akousate ).

First aorist (ingressive) active imperative, Give me your attention now.

Robertson: Act 7:2

The God of glory ( Ho theos tēs doxēs ).

The God characterized by glory (genitive case, genus or kind) as seen in the Shekinah, the visible radiance of God. Jesus is also called "the Glory"=the Shekinah in Jam 2:1. Cf. Exo 25:22; Exo 40:34; Lev 9:6; Heb 9:5. By these words Stephen refutes the charge of blasphemy against God in Act 6:11.

Robertson: Act 7:2

Appeared ( ōphthē ).

First aorist passive indicative of horaō . See Luk 23:43. Before there was temple or tabernacle and away over in Mesopotamia (Ur of the Chaldees, Gen 11:31), even before (prin ē with the infinitive) he dwelt in Haran (Charran , or Carrae not far from Edessa, where Crassus met death after his defeat by the Parthians b.c. 53).

Robertson: Act 7:3

Which I shall shew thee ( hēn an soi deixō ).

Indefinite relative clause with an and the aorist active subjunctive (same form in first person singular as the future active indicative). Abraham followed on as God led him.

Robertson: Act 7:4

When his father was dead ( meta to apothanein auton ).

Meta with the accusative of the articular infinitive and the accusative of general reference (auton ), regular Greek idiom. In Gen 11:32 it is stated that Terah died at Haran at the age of 205. There are various explanations of the discrepancy, but no one that seems certain. It is possible (Hackett, Felten) that Abraham is mentioned first in Gen 11:26 because he became the most prominent and was really younger than Haran his brother who died before the first migration who was really sixty years older than Abraham. According to this view Terah was 130 years old at the birth of Abraham, leaving Abraham 75 at the death of Terah (205).

Robertson: Act 7:4

Wherein ye now dwell ( eis hēn humeis nun katoikeite ).

Note eis in the sense of en as often. Note also emphatic use of humeis (ye) and now (nun ).

Robertson: Act 7:5

Not so much as to set his foot on ( oude bēma podos ).

From Deu 2:5. Old word from bainō , to go, to step. "Stepping of a foot,"only instance of this original meaning in the N.T. From this it comes to mean a platform reached by steps, official seat of a judge (Mat 27:19). The field purchased by Abraham (Gen 23:9-17) was not a gift from God.

Robertson: Act 7:5

Promised ( epēggeilato ).

First aorist middle indicative of epaggellō , common verb. See Gen 12:7; Gen 17:8; Gen 48:4 for this promise. So God appeared again to Abraham in a strange land.

Robertson: Act 7:5

In possession ( eis kataschesin ).

Late word, in lxx, and in N.T. only here and Act 7:45. From katechō , to hold back, then to hold fast (or down), to possess. It was fulfilled in the descendants of Abraham.

Robertson: Act 7:5

When as yet he had no child ( ouk ontos autōi teknou ).

Genitive absolute with negative ouk rather than mē to emphasize actual absence of a child. He had only the promise of God about the land and the child.

Robertson: Act 7:6

On this wise ( houtōs ).

A free quotation from Gen 15:13.

Robertson: Act 7:6

Should sojourn ( estai paroikon ).

Shall be a sojourner, Paroikos (para , beside, oikos , home), one dwelling near one’ s home, but not of it, so a stranger, foreigner, old word, often in lxx, temporary residence without full rights of citizenship (Act 7:29; Act 13:17), and descriptive of Christians (Eph 2:19; 1Pe 1:17; 1Pe 2:11).

Robertson: Act 7:6

In a strange land ( en gēi allotriāi ).

In a land not one’ s own, that belongs to another, alien as in Mat 17:25., which see.

Robertson: Act 7:6

Four hundred years ( etē tetrakosia ).

Accusative of duration of time. As in Gen 15:13, but a round number as in Exo 12:40 the time is 430 years. But in Gal 3:17 Paul, following the lxx in Exo 12:40, takes the 430 years to cover the period in Canaan and the stay in Egypt, cutting the sojourn in Egypt to about half. Josephus gives it both ways. Hackett suggests two solutions, one that there were two ways of reckoning the period among the Jews with no way of settling it, the other that by the 430 years in Egypt the writers meant to include Canaan also as merely the preliminary to the period in Egypt.

Robertson: Act 7:7

Will I judge ( krinō egō ).

Future (accent on ō ) active indicative of krinō and egō (I) expressed is emphatic.

Robertson: Act 7:7

In this place ( en tōi topōi toutōi ).

Quoted from Exo 3:12 and referring to Sinai or Horeb, but Stephen applies it to the Promised Land.

Robertson: Act 7:8

The covenant of circumcision ( diathēkēn peritomēs ).

A covenant marked by (genitive) circumcision (no article) of which circumcision is the sign (Rom 4:11) as set forth in Gen 17:9-14. In the ancient Greek diathēkē was usually will (Latin, testamentum ) and sunthēkē was used for covenant (sun , together, rather than dia , between). But the lxx and the N.T. use diathēkē for covenant (will in Heb 9:15.) as Lightfoot on Gal 3:16 says: "The lxx translation and New Testament writers probably preferred diathēkē as better expressing the free grace of God than sunthēkē ."

Robertson: Act 7:8

And so ( kai houtōs ).

After the covenant was made and as a sign and seal of it.

Robertson: Act 7:9

Moved with jealousy ( zēlōsantes ).

First aorist active participle of zēloō , old verb from zēlos (Act 5:17), to burn or boil with zeal, and then with envy as here (Act 17:5, etc.) and Gen 37:11.

Robertson: Act 7:10

Delivered him out ( exeilato auton ek ).

First aorist middle indicative of exaireō , old verb to take out, snatch out. Note repetition of ek .

Robertson: Act 7:10

Pharaoh King of Egypt ( Pharaō basileōs Aiguptou ).

Pharaoh is not a name, but a title, the Egyptian perāā meaning great house.

Robertson: Act 7:11

Found no sustenance ( ouch hēuriskon chortasmata ).

Imperfect active, kept on not finding.

Robertson: Act 7:11

Chortasmata

is from chortazō , originally to feed with grass (chortos ) or herbs. Old word, but only here in the N.T. and includes food for both men and animals. In Gen 24:25, Gen 24:32 it is fodder for the cattle, a first necessity for owners of herds of cattle.

Robertson: Act 7:12

That there was corn ( onta sitia ).

Participle (present active of eimi ) in indirect discourse, after akousas , "heard of corn being in Egypt."Sitia is diminutive of sitos and means grain (wheat, barley, not our maize or Indian corn), old word also for provisions, victuals, here only in the N.T.

Robertson: Act 7:12

The first time ( prōton ).

While Jacob himself remained in Canaan before he went down to Egypt and died there (Act 7:15.).

Robertson: Act 7:13

At the second time ( en tōi deuterōi ).

This expression only here in the N.T. This second visit is recorded in Gen 45:1.

Robertson: Act 7:13

Became manifest ( phaneron egeneto ).

In Gen 41:12 the fact that Joseph was a Hebrew had been incidentally mentioned to Pharaoh, but now it was made clear to him.

Robertson: Act 7:14

Three-score and fifteen souls ( en psuchais hebdomēkonta pente ).

Stephen follows the lxx which counts some grandchildren of Joseph and so makes it 75 whereas Gen 46:26 has 66 and then the next verse makes it 70 including Jacob and Joseph with his two sons. The use of en means "consisting in."

Robertson: Act 7:16

They were carried over unto Shechem ( metetethēsan eis Suchem ).

First aorist passive of metatithēmi , only here in the N.T. in this sense of changing places. Jacob was buried in the cave of Machpelah (Gen 50:13). The O.T. does not say where the sons of Jacob were buried save that Joseph was buried in Shechem (Jos 24:32). Possibly only "our fathers"without Jacob is the subject of "were carried."

Robertson: Act 7:16

Which Abraham bought ( hōi ōnēsato Abraam ).

Hackett is sure that our present text is wrong. Hort notes some sixty "primitive errors"in the critical text of the N.T. It is possible that this is also one. If "Jacob"is substituted for "Abraham,"the matter is cleared up. "It is quite as likely, judging a priori , that the word producing the error escaped from some early copyist as that so glaring an error was committed by Stephen"(Hackett). At any rate Abraham bought a burying-place, the cave of Machpelah, from Ephron the Hittite at Hebron (Gen 23:16), while Jacob bought a field from the sons of Hamor at Shechem (Gen 33:19; Jos 24:32). Abraham had built an altar at Shechem when he entered Canaan (Gen 12:6.). It is possible, of course, that Abraham also bought the ground on which the altar stood.

Robertson: Act 7:16

In Shechem ( en Suchem ).

This is the reading of Aleph B C instead of the Textus Receptus tou Suchem which makes it "Hamar the father of Sichem.""In Shechem"is the true reading.

Robertson: Act 7:17

Drew nigh ( ēggizen ).

Imperfect active, was drawing nigh.

Robertson: Act 7:18

Another king ( basileus heteros ).

A different kind of king also, probably a king of the new dynasty after the shepherd kings had been expelled from Egypt.

Robertson: Act 7:18

Who knew not Joseph ( hos ouk ēidei ton Iōsēph ).

Second past perfect of oida used like an imperfect. Joseph’ s history and services meant nothing to the new king. "The previous dynasty had been that of the Hyksos: the new king was Ahmes who drove out the Hyksos"(Knobel).

Robertson: Act 7:19

Dealt subtilly ( katasophisamenos ).

First aorist middle participle of katasophizomai , late compound (kata and sophizō , old verb, to make wise, to become wise, then to play the sophist), perfective use of kata . In the lxx, but here only in the N.T. To use fraud, craft, deceit.

Robertson: Act 7:19

That they should cast out their babes ( tou poiein ta brephē ektheta ).

Tou poiein (genitive of the articular present infinitive) can be either design or result. The Revised Version here takes it as purpose while the Authorized as result. In either case Pharaoh required the Israelites to expose their children to death, a possible practice done voluntarily in heathen China and by heathen in so-called Christian lands. But the Israelites fought against such an iniquity. The word ektheta (exposed, cast out) is a verbal adjective from ektithēmi . It is an old word, but here only in the N.T. and not in the lxx.

Robertson: Act 7:19

To the end they might not live ( eis to mē zōogoneisthai ).

Purpose with eis and the articular infinitive (present middle). This compound verb is from zōogonos (from zōos , alive, and genō , to bear) and is used by late writers and the lxx. It is three times in the N.T. (here, Luk 17:33; 1Ti 6:13) in the sense to preserve alive.

Robertson: Act 7:20

Exceeding fair ( asteios tōi theōi ).

Ethical dative, fair to God (as God looked at him). Asteios is from astu , city, and so means "of the city,"with city manners and polish. Old word, only twice in the N.T. (here and Heb 11:23) and both times about Moses and taken from Exo 2:2.

Robertson: Act 7:20

He was nourished ( anetraphē ).

Second aorist passive indicative of anatrephō . He was brought up at home for three months in defiance of the new Pharaoh.

Robertson: Act 7:21

When he was cast out ( ektethentos autou ).

Genitive absolute with first aorist passive participle of ektithēmi .

Robertson: Act 7:21

Took up ( aneilato ).

Second aorist middle indicative (with first aorist vowel a instead of e as often in the Koiné[28928]š ) of anaireō , common in the N.T. in the sense of take up and make away with, to kill as in Act 7:28, but here only in the N.T. in the original sense of taking up from the ground and with the middle voice (for oneself). Quoted here from Exo 2:5. The word was used of old for picking up exposed children as here. Vincent quotes Aristophanes ( Clouds , 531): "I exposed (the child), and some other women, having taken it, adopted (aneileto ) it."Vulgate has sustulit . "Adopted"is the idea here. "After the birth of a child the father took it up to his bosom, if he meant to rear it; otherwise it was doomed to perish"(Hackett).

Robertson: Act 7:21

Nourished him for her own son ( anethrepsato auton heautēi eis huion ).

Literally, "she nursed him up for herself (heautēi besides middle voice) as a son."This use of eis =as occurs in the old Greek, but is very common in the lxx as a translation of the Hebrew le . The tradition is that she designed Moses for the throne as the Pharaoh had no son (Josephus, Ant. ii. 9, 7).

Robertson: Act 7:22

Was instructed ( epaideuthē ).

First aorist passive indicative of paideuō , to train a child (pais ), the usual idea in ancient Greek as here. The notion of chastisement (Heb 12:6) is also in the old Greek and especially in the lxx and the N.T. Here with instrumental case (pasēi sophiāi ) or the locative. The accusative would usually be retained after this verb. The priestly caste in Egypt was noted for their knowledge of science, astronomy, medicine, and mathematics. This reputation was proverbial (1Ki 4:30). Modern discoveries have thrown much light on the ancient civilization of Egypt. Moses, like Paul, was a man of the schools.

Robertson: Act 7:22

Mighty in his words and works ( dunatos en logois kai ergois autou ).

The same phrase used of Jesus in Luk 24:19. The adjective dunatos is employed of Apollos as an interpreter of the Scriptures (Act 18:24). Moses did not have the rhetorical skill or eloquence of Aaron (Exo 4:10), but his words like his deeds carried weight and power.

Robertson: Act 7:23

When he was well-nigh forty years old ( Hōs eplērouto autōi tessarakontaetēs chronos ).

A rather awkward Greek idiom for the English: "When a forty year old time (same idiom in Act 13:18 and only twice in the N.T.) was being fulfilled (eplērouto , imperfect passive) for him (dative case)."The life of Moses is divided into three periods of forty years each (in Egypt 40 years, in Midian 40, governed Israel 40, 120 when he died, Deu 34:7).

Robertson: Act 7:23

It came into his heart ( anebē epi tēn kardian autou ).

Second aorist active indicative of anabainō , common verb. Came up as if from the lower deeps of his nature. This Hebrew image occurs in Jer 3:16; Isa 65:17; 1Co 2:9.

Robertson: Act 7:23

To visit ( episkepsasthai ).

First aorist middle infinitive of episkeptomai , old verb to go to see for oneself, with his own eyes, to help if possible. Used of God visiting his people (Luk 7:16). Our "visit"is from Latin video , to see, visito , to go to see. During the Welsh mining troubles the Prince of Wales made a sympathetic visit to see for himself the actual condition of the coal miners. Moses desired to know first hand how his kinsmen were faring.

Robertson: Act 7:24

Suffer wrong ( adikoumenon ).

Present passive participle of adikēo . By blows (Exo 2:11).

Robertson: Act 7:24

Avenged ( epoiēsen ekdikēsin ).

First aorist active indicative of poieō . This idiom occurs in Luk 18:7 with ekdikēsin (this from ekdikeō and that from ekdikos without right or law dikē and then exacting law of right out of ek one, exacting vengeance).

Robertson: Act 7:24

Him that was oppressed ( tōi kataponoumenōi ).

Present passive articular participle in the dative case of kataponeo , to tire down with toil, to treat roughly, common in late Greek, in the N.T. only here and 2Pe 2:7 (sore distressed). The man was on the point of being overcome.

Robertson: Act 7:24

Smiting ( pataxas ).

First aorist active participle of patassō , in the old Greek the beat of the heart, only in the lxx and N.T. to smite a deadly blow as here like plēssō .

Robertson: Act 7:25

He supposed ( enomizen ).

Imperfect active of nomizō . He was supposing, Stephen explains, when he smote the Egyptian.

Robertson: Act 7:25

That his brethren understood ( sunienai tous adelphous ).

Present active infinitive of suniēmi , to send (put) together, to grasp, to comprehend, in indirect discourse with the accusative of general reference.

Robertson: Act 7:25

By his hand was giving them deliverance ( dia cheiros autou didōsin sotērian autois ).

Picturesque use of "hand"as in Act 2:23, present active indicative of didōmi retained in indirect discourse after imperfect enomizen . But they understood not (hoi de ou sunēkan ). Page notes "the rhetorical power of these words"from Stephen. Sunēkan (first aorist indicative, k aorist) refers to sunienai just before.

Vincent: Act 7:1

Then said the high-priest

" The glorified countenance of Stephen has caused a pause of surprise and admiration, which the high-priest interrupts by calling upon the accused for his defence" (Gloag).

Vincent: Act 7:2

Brethren

Addressing the audience generally.

Vincent: Act 7:2

Fathers

Addressing the members of the Sanhedrim.

Vincent: Act 7:2

Of glory

Outward, visible glory, as in the shekinah and the pillar of fire.

Vincent: Act 7:2

Appeared ( ὤφθη )

See on Luk 22:43.

Vincent: Act 7:5

Inheritance ( κληρονομίαν )

See on 1Pe 1:4.

Vincent: Act 7:5

Not so much as to set his foot on ( οὐδὲ βῆμα ποδός )

Lit., not even the stepping of a foot. From the original meaning, a pace or step, which occurs only here in the New Testament, comes the sense of a step considered as a raised place or seat, and hence a tribune or judgment - seat , which is its meaning in every other passage of the New Testament.

Vincent: Act 7:5

Possession ( κατάσχεσιν )

Only here and Act 7:45. See on keep , Luk 8:15. It denotes a permanent possession.

Vincent: Act 7:8

The covenant of circumcision

There is no article, and it is better omitted in rendering. He gave him a covenant, the peculiar character of which is defined by the next word - of circumcision; i.e., of which circumcision was the completion and seal.

Vincent: Act 7:9

Moved with envy ( ζηλώσαντες )

Compare Jam 4:1; and see on envying, Jam 3:14.

Vincent: Act 7:10

Afflictions ( θλίψεων )

See on Mat 13:21.

Vincent: Act 7:11

Sustenance ( χορτάσματα )

For their cattle: fodder . See on shall be filled, Mat 5:6.

Vincent: Act 7:12

In Egypt ( ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ )

But the best texts read εἰς Αἴγυπτον , into Egypt, and construe with sent forth: " he sent forth our fathers into Egypt. "

Vincent: Act 7:13

Joseph's race

Note the repetition of the name. " A certain sense of patriotic pride is implied in it."

Vincent: Act 7:14

Threescore and fifteen

Lit., " in (ἐν ) threescore and fifteen;" the idiom expressing the sum in which all the individuals were included.

Vincent: Act 7:17

When ( καθὼς )

Rev., more correctly, as; the word being not a particle of time, but meaning in proportion as.

Vincent: Act 7:18

Another ( ἕτερος )

Not merely a successor, but a monarch of a different character.

Vincent: Act 7:18

Knew not

As sixty years had elapsed since Joseph's death, and a new dynasty was coming to the throne, this may be taken literally: did not know his history and services. Some explain, did not recognize his merits.

Vincent: Act 7:19

Dealt subtilely ( κατασοφισάμενος )

Only here in New Testament. Lit., to employ cunning against. See on σοφὸς , wise, Jam 3:13.

Vincent: Act 7:19

So that they cast out ( τοῦ ποιεῖν ἔκθετα )

Lit., make exposed. The verb ἐκτίθημι , to set out, or place outside, is not uncommon in classical Greek for the exposure of a new-born child. Thus Herodotus, of Cyrus, exposed in infancy: " The herdsman's wife entreated him not to expose (ἐκθεῖναι ) the babe" (i., 112). The rendering of the A. V., " so that they cast out," is correct, expressing the result, and not Pharaoh's design.

Vincent: Act 7:19

Young children ( βρέφη )

Incorrect. See on 1Pe 2:2. Rev., rightly, babes.

Vincent: Act 7:19

Live ( ζωογονεῖσθαι )

Or, be preserved alive. See on Luk 17:33.

Vincent: Act 7:20

Time ( καιρῷ )

Better, season or juncture. " Sad, seasonable" (Bengel). See on Act 1:7.

Vincent: Act 7:20

Exceeding fair ( ἀστεῖος τῷ θεῷ )

Lit., fair unto God : a Hebrew superlative. Compare Jon 3:3 : great unto God ; A. V., exceeding great. Gen 10:9, of Nimrod: a mighty hunter before the Lord. 2Co 10:4 : mighty unto God; i.e., in God's sight. Ἀστεῖος , fair (only here and Heb 11:23), is from ἄστυ , a town, and means originally town-bred; hence refined, elegant, comely. The word is used in the Septuagint of Moses (Exodus 2:2), and rendered goodly. The Jewish traditions extol Moses' beauty. Josephus says that those who met him, as he was carried along the streets, forgot their business and stood still to gaze at him.

Vincent: Act 7:21

Took up ( ἀνείλετο )

Used among Greek writers of taking up exposed children; also of owning new-born children. So Aristophanes: " I exposed (the child) and some other woman, having taken it, adopted (ανείλετο ) it" (" Clouds," 531). There is no reason why the meaning should be limited to took him up from the water (as Gloag).

Vincent: Act 7:23

It came into his heart ( ἀνέβη ἐπὶ τὴν καρδίαν )

Lit., " it arose into his heart." " There may be something in the depth of the soul which afterward emerges and ascends from that sea into the heart as into an island" (Bengel). The expression is imitated from the Hebrew, and occurs in the Septuagint: " The ark shall not come to mind; " lit., go up into the heart (Jeremiah 3:16). See, also, Jeremiah 32:35; Isaiah 65:17.

Vincent: Act 7:24

Defended ( ἠμύνατο )

Only here in New Testament. The word means originally to ward off from one's self, with a collateral notion of requital or revenge.

Vincent: Act 7:25

Understood ( συνιέναι )

See on understanding, Mar 12:33.

Wesley: Act 7:2

St. Stephen had been accused of blasphemy against Moses, and even against God; and of speaking against the temple and the law, threatening that Jesus would destroy the one, and change the other. In answer to this accusation, rehearsing as it were the articles of his historical creed, he speaks of God with high reverence, and a grateful sense of a long series of Acts of goodness to the Israelites, and of Moses with great respect, on account of his important and honourable employments under God: of the temple with regard, as being built to the honour of God; yet not with such superstition as the Jews; putting them in mind, that no temple could comprehend God. And he was going on, no doubt, when he was interrupted by their clamour, to speak to the last point, the destruction of the temple, and the change of the law by Christ. Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken - The sum of his discourse is this: I acknowledge the glory of God revealed to the fathers, Act 7:2, the calling of Moses, Act 7:34 &c; the dignity of the law, Act 7:8, Act 7:38, Act 7:44; the holiness of this place, Act 7:7, Act 7:45, Act 7:47. And indeed the law is more ancient than the temple; the promise more ancient than the law. For God showed himself the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and their children freely, Act 7:2, &c; Act 7:9, &c; Act 7:17, &c; Act 7:32, Act 7:34-35 and they showed faith and obedience to God, Act 7:4, Act 7:20, &c; Act 7:23 particularly by their regard for the law, Act 7:8 and the promised land, Act 7:16. Meantime, God never confined his presence to this one place or to the observers of the law. For he hath been acceptably worshipped before the law was given, or the temple built, and out of this land, Act 7:2, Act 7:9, Act 7:33, Act 7:44. And that our fathers and their posterity were not tied down to this land, their various sojournings, Act 7:4, &c; Act 7:14, Act 7:29, Act 7:44 and exile, Act 7:43, show. But you and your fathers have always been evil, Act 7:9 have withstood Moses, Act 7:25, &c; Act 7:39, &c; have despised the land, Act 7:39, forsaken God, Act 7:40, &c, superstitiously honoured the temple, Act 7:48, resisted God and his Spirit, Act 7:50, killed the prophets and the Messiah himself, Act 7:51, and kept not the law for which ye contend, Act 7:53. Therefore God is not bound to you; much less to you alone. And truly this solemn testimony of Stephen is most worthy of his character, as a man full of the Holy Ghost, and of faith and power: in which, though he does not advance so many regular propositions, contradictory to those of his adversaries, yet he closely and nervously answers them all. Nor can we doubt but he would, from these premises, have drawn inferences touching the destruction of the temple, the abrogation of the Mosaic law, the punishment of that rebellious people; and above all, touching Jesus of Nazareth, the true Messiah, had not his discourse been interrupted by the clamours of the multitude, stopping their ears, and rushing upon him. Men, brethren, and fathers - All who are here present, whether ye are my equals in years, or of more advanced age. The word which in this and in many other places is rendered men is a mere expletive.

Wesley: Act 7:2

The glorious God, appeared to Abraham before he dwelt in Haran - Therefore Abraham knew God, long before he was in this land. Gen 12:1.

Wesley: Act 7:3

Abraham knew not where he went.

Wesley: Act 7:4

While Terah lived, Abraham lived partly with him, partly in Canaan: but after he died, altogether in Canaan.

Wesley: Act 7:5

For the field mentioned, Act 7:16, he did not receive by a Divine donation, but bought it; even thereby showing that he was a stranger in the land.

Wesley: Act 7:6

Gen 15:13.

Wesley: Act 7:7

Not the Egyptians.

Wesley: Act 7:8

After the covenant was given, of which circumcision was the seal. Gen 17:10.

Wesley: Act 7:9

Though he was not in this land. Gen 37:28.

Wesley: Act 7:12

Without Benjamin.

Wesley: Act 7:14

five souls - So the seventy interpreters, (whom St. Stephen follows,) one son and a grandson of Manasseh, and three children of Ephraim, being added to the seventy persons mentioned Gen 46:27.

Wesley: Act 7:16

It seems that St. Stephen, rapidly running over so many circumstances of history, has not leisure (nor was it needful where they were so well known) to recite them all distinctly. Therefore he here contracts into one, two different sepulchres, places, and purchases, so as in the former history, to name the buyer, omitting the seller, in the latter, to name the seller, omitting the buyer. Abraham bought a burying place of the children of Heth, Gen. 23:1-20. There Jacob was buried. Jacob bought a field of the children of Hamor. There Joseph was buried. You see here, how St. Stephen contracts these two purchases into one. This concise manner of speaking, strange as it seems to us, was common among the Hebrews; particularly, when in a case notoriously known, the speaker mentioned but part of the story, and left the rest, which would have interrupted the current of his discourse, to be supplied in the mind of the hearer.

Wesley: Act 7:16

The first land which these strangers bought was for a sepulchre. They sought for a country in heaven. Perhaps the whole sentence might be rendered thus: So Jacob went down into Egypt and died, he and our fathers, and were carried over to Shechem, and laid by the sons (that is, decendants) of Hamor, the father of Shechem, in the sepulchre that Abraham bought for a sum of money.

Wesley: Act 7:17

Exo 1:7.

Wesley: Act 7:18

Probably of another family.

Wesley: Act 7:19

Cast out to perish by hunger or wild beasts.

Wesley: Act 7:20

A sad but a seasonable time. Exo 2:2.

Wesley: Act 7:21

By which means, being designed for a kingdom, he had all those advantages of education, which he could not have had, if he had not been exposed.

Wesley: Act 7:22

Which was then celebrated in all the world, and for many ages after.

Wesley: Act 7:22

Deep, solid, weighty, though not of a ready utterance.

Wesley: Act 7:23

Probably by an impulse from God.

Wesley: Act 7:24

Probably by one of the task masters.

Wesley: Act 7:25

Such was their stupidity and sloth; which made him afterward unwilling to go to them.

JFB: Act 7:2-5

A magnificent appellation, fitted at the very outset to rivet the devout attention of his audience; denoting not that visible glory which attended many of the divine manifestations, but the glory of those manifestations themselves, of which this was regarded by every Jew as the fundamental one. It is the glory of absolutely free grace.

JFB: Act 7:2-5

Though this first call is not expressly recorded in Genesis, it is clearly implied in Gen 15:7 and Neh 9:7; and the Jewish writers speak the same language.

JFB: Act 7:4

Though Abraham was in Canaan before Terah's death, his settlement in it as the land of promise is here said to be after it, as being in no way dependent on the family movement, but a transaction purely between Jehovah and Abraham himself.

JFB: Act 7:6-8

Using round numbers, as in Gen 15:13, Gen 15:16 (see on Gal 3:17).

JFB: Act 7:7

Here the promise to Abraham (Gen 15:16), and that to Moses (Exo 3:12), are combined; Stephen's object being merely to give a rapid summary of the leading facts.

JFB: Act 7:8

That is, the covenant of which circumcision was the token.

JFB: Act 7:8

That is, according to the terms of this covenant, on which Paul reasons (Gal. 3:1-26).

JFB: Act 7:8

So called as the founders of the twelve tribes of Israel.

JFB: Act 7:9-16

Here Stephen gives his first example of Israel's opposition to God's purposes, in spite of which and by means of which those purposes were accomplished.

JFB: Act 7:14

According to the Septuagint version of Gen 46:27, which Stephen follows, including the five children and grandchildren of Joseph's two sons.

JFB: Act 7:17

Rather, "as."

JFB: Act 7:17

That is, for its fulfilment.

JFB: Act 7:17

For more than two hundred years they amounted to no more than seventy-five souls; how prodigious, then, must have been their multiplication during the latter two centuries, when six hundred thousand men, fit for war, besides women and children, left Egypt!

JFB: Act 7:20-22

Of deepest depression.

JFB: Act 7:20-22

The destined deliverer.

JFB: Act 7:20-22

Literally, "fair to God" (Margin), or, perhaps, divinely "fair" (see on Heb 11:23).

JFB: Act 7:22

Though defective in utterance (Exo 4:10); his recorded speeches fully bear out what is here said.

JFB: Act 7:22

Referring probably to unrecorded circumstances in his early life. If we are to believe JOSEPHUS, his ability was acknowledged ere he left Egypt.

JFB: Act 7:23-27

In Act 7:23, Act 7:30, Act 7:36, the life of Moses is represented as embracing three periods, of forty years each; the Jewish writers say the same; and though this is not expressly stated in the Old Testament, his age at death, one hundred twenty years (Deu 34:7), agrees with it.

JFB: Act 7:23-27

His heart yearning with love to them as God's chosen people, and heaving with the consciousness of a divine vocation to set them free.

JFB: Act 7:24

Going farther in the heat of his indignation than he probably intended.

JFB: Act 7:25

And perhaps imagined this a suitable occasion for rousing and rallying them under him as their leader; thus anticipating his work, and so running unsent.

JFB: Act 7:25

Reckoning on a spirit in them congenial with his own, he had the mortification to find it far otherwise. This furnishes to Stephen another example of Israel's slowness to apprehend and fall in with the divine purposes of love.

Clarke: Act 7:1

Are these things so? - Hast thou predicted the destruction of the temple? And hast thou said that Jesus of Nazareth shall change our customs, abolish our religious rites and temple service? Hast thou spoken these blasphemous things against Moses, and against God? Here was some color of justice; for Stephen was permitted to defend himself. And, in order to do this he thought it best to enter into a detail of their history from the commencement of their nation; and thus show how kindly God had dealt with them, and how ungraciously they and their fathers had requited Him. And all this naturally led him to the conclusion, that God could no longer bear with a people the cup of whose iniquity had been long overflowing; and therefore they might expect to find wrath, without mixture of mercy

But how could St. Luke get all this circumstantial account? He might have been present, and heard the whole; or, more probably, he had the account from St. Paul, whose companion he was, and who was certainly present when St. Stephen was judged and stoned, for he was consenting to his death, and kept the clothes of them who stoned him. See Act 7:58; Act 8:1; Act 22:20.

Clarke: Act 7:2

Men, brethren, and fathers - Rather, brethren and fathers, for ανδρες should not be translated separately from αδελφοι . Literally it is men-brethren, a very usual form in Greek; for every person knows that ανδρες Αθηναιοι and ανδρες Περσαι should not be translated men-Athenians and men-Persians, but simply Athenians and Persians. See Act 17:22. So, in Luk 2:15, ανθρωποι ποιμενες should be translated shepherds, not men-shepherds. And ανθρωπος βασιλευς Mat 18:23, should not be translated man-king, but king, simply. By translating as we do, men, brethren, and fathers, and putting a comma after men, we make Stephen address three classes, when in fact there were but two: the elders and scribes, whom he addressed as fathers; and the common people, whom he calls brethren. See Bp. Pearce, and see Act 8:27

Clarke: Act 7:2

The God of glory appeared, etc. - As Stephen was now vindicating himself from the false charges brought against him, he shows that he had uttered no blasphemy, either against God, Moses, or the temple; but states that his accusers, and the Jews in general, were guilty of the faults with which they charged him: that they had from the beginning rejected and despised Moses, and had always violated his laws. He proceeds to state that there is no blasphemy in saying that the temple shall be destroyed: they had been without a temple till the days of David; nor does God ever confine himself to temples built by hands, seeing he fills both heaven and earth; that Jesus is the prophet of whom Moses spoke, and whom they had persecuted, condemned, and at last put to death; that they were wicked and uncircumcised in heart and in ears, and always resisted the Holy Ghost as their fathers did. This is the substance of St. Stephen’ s defense as far as he was permitted to make it: a defense which they could not confute; containing charges which they most glaringly illustrated and confirmed, by adding the murder of this faithful disciple to that of his all-glorious Master

Clarke: Act 7:2

Was in Mesopotamia - In that part of it where Ur of the Chaldees was situated, near to Babel, and among the rivers, (Tigris and Euphrates), which gave the name of Mesopotamia to the country. See the note on Gen 11:31

Clarke: Act 7:2

Before he dwelt in Charran - This is called Haran in our translation of Gen 11:31; this place also belonged to Mesopotamia, as well as Ur, but is placed west of it on the maps. It seems most probable that Abraham had two calls, one in Ur, and the other in Haran. He left Ur at the first call, and came to Haran; he left Haran at the second call, and came into the promised land. See these things more particularly stated in the notes on Gen 12:1 (note).

Clarke: Act 7:4

When his father was dead - See the note on Gen 11:26.

Clarke: Act 7:5

Gave him none inheritance - Both Abraham and Jacob had small parcels of land in Canaan; but they had them by purchase, not by God’ s gift; for, as Abraham was obliged to buy a burying-place in Canaan, Genesis 23:3-18, it is obvious he had no inheritance there

Clarke: Act 7:5

And to his seed after him - See Gen 12:7 (note); Gen 13:15, and the notes there.

Clarke: Act 7:6

That his seed should sojourn in a strange land - See Gen 15:13, Gen 15:14

Clarke: Act 7:6

Four hundred years - Moses says, Exo 12:40, that the sojourning of the children of Israel in Egypt - was 430 years. See the note there. St. Paul has the same number, Gal 3:17; and so has Josephus, Ant. lib. ii. cap. 1, sect. 9; in Bell. lib. v. cap. 9, sect. 4. St. Stephen uses the round number of 400, leaving out the odd tens, a thing very common, not only in the sacred writers, but in all others, those alone excepted who write professedly on chronological matters.

Clarke: Act 7:7

Will I judge - Κρινω εγω, I will punish, for in this sense the Greek word is frequently taken. "When,"says Bp. Pearce, "a malefactor is brought before a judge, the judge does three things

1.    he tries or judges him

2.    he then gives his judgment or sentence; and

3.    he puts the law in execution, and punishes him

Hence κρινω, at different times, signifies each of these things; and the sense of the word is to be determined by the context. Here it signifies to punish, as κριμα is used for punishment, in Rom 13:2; 1Co 11:29, compared with 1Co 11:30, 1Co 11:31."The Egyptians, to whom the Israelites were in bondage, were punished by the ten plagues, described Exodus 7:19-12:30.

Clarke: Act 7:8

He gave him the covenant of circumcision - That is, he instituted the rite of circumcision, as a sign of that covenant which he had made with him and his posterity. See Gen 17:10, etc

Clarke: Act 7:8

And so Abraham begat Isaac - Και οὑτως, And thus, in this covenant, he begat Isaac; and as a proof that he was born under this covenant, was a true son of Abraham and inheritor of the promises, he circumcised him the eighth day; and this rite being observed in the family of Isaac, Jacob and his twelve sons were born under the covenant; and thus their descendants, the twelve tribes, being born under the same covenant, and practising the same rite, were, by the ordinance of Gods legal inheritors of the promised land, and all the secular and spiritual advantages connected with it.

Clarke: Act 7:9

And the patriarchs - The twelve sons of Jacob, thus called because each was chief or head of his respective family or tribe

Clarke: Act 7:9

Moved with envy - Ζηλωσαντες . We translate ζηλος variously: zeal or fervent affection, whether its object be good or bad, is its general meaning; and ζηλοω signifies to be indignant, envious, etc. See the note on Act 5:17. The brethren of Joseph, hearing of his dreams, and understanding them to portend his future advancement, filled with envy, (with which no ordinary portion of malice was associated), sold Joseph into the land of Egypt, hoping by this means to prevent his future grandeur; but God, from whom the portents came, was with him, and made their envy the direct means of accomplishing the great design.

Clarke: Act 7:10

Gave him favor and wisdom in the sight of Pharaoh - God gave him much wisdom, in consequence of which he had favor with the king of Egypt. See the whole of this remarkable history explained at large, Genesis 41:1-45:28 (note).

Clarke: Act 7:14

Threescore and fifteen souls - There are several difficulties here, which it is hoped the reader will find satisfactorily removed in the note on Gen 46:20 (note). It is well known that in Gen 46:27, and in Deu 10:22, their number is said to be threescore and ten; but Stephen quotes from the Septuagint, which adds five persons to the account which are not in the Hebrew text, Machir, Gilead, Sutelaam, Taham, and Edem; but see the note referred to above.

Clarke: Act 7:16

And were carried over to Sychem - " It is said, Gen 50:13, that Jacob was buried in the cave of the field of Machpelah before Mamre. And in Jos 24:32, and Exo 13:19, it is said that the bones of Joseph were carried out of Egypt by the Israelites, and buried in Shechem, which Jacob bought from the sons of Hamor the father of Shechem. As for the eleven brethren of Joseph, we are told by Josephus, Ant. lib. ii. cap. 8. sect. 2, that they were buried in Hebron, where their father had been buried. But, since the books of the Old Testament say nothing about this, the authority of Stephen (or of Luke here) for their being buried in Sychem is at least as good as that of Josephus for their being buried in Hebron."- Bp. Pearce

We have the uniform consent of the Jewish writers that all the patriarchs were brought out of Egypt, and buried in Canaan, but none, except Stephen, mentions their being buried in Sychem. As Sychem belonged to the Samaritans, probably the Jews thought it too great an honor for that people to possess the bones of the patriarchs; and therefore have carefully avoided making any mention of it. This is Dr. Lightfoot’ s conjecture; and it is as probable as any other

Clarke: Act 7:16

That Abraham bought for a sum of money - Two accounts seem here to be confounded

1.    The purchase made by Abraham of the cave and field of Ephron, which was in the field of Machpelah: this purchase was made from the children of Heth, Gen 23:3, Gen 23:10, Gen 23:17

2.    The purchase made by Jacob, from the sons of Hamor or Emmor, of a sepulchre in which the bones of Joseph were laid: this was in Sychem or Shechem, Gen 33:19; Jos 24:32

The word Abraham, therefore, in this place, is certainly a mistake; and the word Jacob, which some have supplied, is doubtless more proper. Bp. Pearce supposes that Luke originally wrote, ὁ ωνησατο τιμης αργυριου, which he bought for a sum of money: i.e. which Jacob bought, who is the last person, of the singular number, spoken of in the preceding verse. Those who saw that the word ωνησατο, bought, had no nominative case joined to it, and did not know where to find the proper one, seem to have inserted Αβρααμ, Abraham, in the text, for that purpose, without sufficiently attending to the different circumstances of his purchase from that of Jacob’ s.

Clarke: Act 7:18

Which knew not Joseph - That is, did not approve of him, of his mode of governing the kingdom, nor of his people, nor of his God. See the note on Exo 1:8.

Clarke: Act 7:19

The same dealt subtilty - Οὑτος κατασοφισαμενος, A word borrowed from the Septuagint, who thus translate the Hebrew נהחכמה לו nithchokmah lo , let us deal wisely with it, i.e. with cunning and deceit, as the Greek word implies; and which is evidently intended by the Hebrew. See Gen 27:35, Thy brother came with subtilty, which the Targumist explains by בחוכמא be -chokma , with wisdom, that is, cunning and deceit. For this the Egyptians were so remarkable that αιγυπτιαζειν, to Egyptize, signified to act cunningly, and to use wicked devices. Hence the Jews compared them to foxes; and it is of them that Canticles, Son 2:15, is understood by the rabbins: Take us the little foxes which spoil our vines; destroy the Egyptians, who, having slain our male children, sought to destroy the name of Israel from the face of the earth

Clarke: Act 7:19

To the end they might not live - Might not grow up and propagate, and thus build up the Hebrew nation.

Clarke: Act 7:20

Moses - was exceeding fair - ΑϚειος τῳ Θεῳ, Was fair to God, i.e. was divinely beautiful. See the note on Exo 2:2.

Clarke: Act 7:22

In all the wisdom of the Egyptians - Who were, at that time, the most intelligent and best instructed people in the universe. Philo says, Moses was taught arithmetic, geometry, poetry, music, medicine, and the knowledge of hieroglyphics. In Sohar Cadash, fol. 46, it is said, "that, of the ten portions of wisdom which came into the world, the Egyptians had nine, and that all the inhabitants of the earth had only the remaining portion."Much of the same nature may be seen in the rabbins, though they apply the term wisdom here to magic

Clarke: Act 7:22

Was mighty in words and in deeds - This may refer to the glorious doctrines he taught, and the miracles he wrought in Egypt. Josephus Ant. lib. ii. cap. 10, sect. 1, gives an account of his being general of an Egyptian army, defeating the Ethiopians, who had invaded Egypt, driving them back into their own country, and taking Saba their capital, which was afterwards called Meroe. But this, like many other tales of the same writer, is worthy of little credit

Phoenix says the same of Achilles: -

Μυθων τε ῥητηρ ’ εμεναι, πρηκτηρα τε εργων

Il. ix. v. 443

Not only an orator of words, but a performer of deeds.

Clarke: Act 7:23

When he was full forty years old - This was a general tradition among the Jews: "Moses was forty years in Pharaoh’ s court, forty years in Midian, and forty years he served Israel.

Clarke: Act 7:23

To visit his brethren - Probably on the ground of trying to deliver them from their oppressive bondage. This desire seems to have been early infused into his mind by the Spirit of God; and the effect of this desire to deliver his oppressed countrymen was his refusing to be called the son of Pharaoh’ s daughter - see Heb 11:24, and thus renouncing all right to the Egyptian crown, choosing rather to endure addiction with the people of God than enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season.

Clarke: Act 7:24

Smote the Egyptian - See this explained, Exo 2:11, Exo 2:12 (note).

Clarke: Act 7:25

He supposed his brethren would have understood, etc. - He probably imagined that, as he felt from the Divine influence he was appointed to be their deliverer, they would have his Divine appointment signified to them in a similar way; and the act of justice which he now did in behalf of his oppressed countryman would be sufficient to show them that he was now ready to enter upon his office, if they were willing to concur.

Calvin: Act 7:1

1. There appeareth as yet some color of equity in the high priest and in the council; and yet, notwithstanding, there is a most unjust prejudice in his words; for he asketh him not what cause he had to teach thus, neither doth he admit him unto the defense of right, (which was, notwithstanding, the chief;) but he demanded precisely whether Stephen uttered these words, whatsoever they were; as the Papists at this day will not demand what doctrine it is, and whether it can be proved out of the Scriptures; but they inquire ³⁶⁴ whether any man durst mutter against their superstitions, that so soon as he is convict, they may forthwith burn ³⁶⁵ him. Furthermore, Stephen’s answer may seem at the first blush absurd and foolish. He beginneth first at the very first beginning; afterwards he maketh a long narration, wherein there is no mention made, in a manner, of the matter in hand; and there can be no greater fault than to utter many words which are nothing appertinent unto the matter; ³⁶⁶ but whosoever shall thoroughly consider this long speech, he shall find nothing therein which is superfluous; and shall full well perceive that Stephen speaketh very ap-pertinently, ³⁶⁷ as the matter requireth. He was accused as an apostate (or revolt,) which did attempt the overthrow of religion and the worship of God; therefore, he beateth in ³⁶⁸ this diligently, that he retaineth that God which the fathers have always worshipped, so that he turneth away the crime of wicked backsliding; ³⁶⁹ and declareth that his enemies were pricked forward with nothing less than with the zeal of the law, for they bear a show that they were wholly determined ³⁷⁰ to increase the glory of God; therefore, he wringeth from them this false boasting, and because they had the fathers always in their mouths, because they were puffed up with the glory of their nation, Stephen declareth also that they have no cause to be proud of this, but rather that the corruptions of the fathers were so great and so many, that they ought to be ashamed and humbled.

As concerning the principal state of the cause, because the question was concerning the temple and the ceremonies, he affirmeth plainly that their fathers were elected of God to be a peculiar people before there was any temple, and before Moses was born; and to this end tendeth that exordium or beginning which is so far fet, (fetched.) Secondly, he telleth them that all external rites which God gave by the hand of Moses were fashioned according to the heavenly pattern.

Whereupon it followeth, that the ceremonial law is referred unto another end, and that those deal foolishly and disorderly who omit the truth, and stay only in the signs. If the readers shall refer the whole oration of Stephen unto these points, they shall find nothing therein which agreeth not very well with the cause, as I shall declare again briefly in the end; nevertheless, that scope of the whole oration shall not hinder but that we may discuss all things briefly which are worth the noting.

Calvin: Act 7:2

2.Men, brethren, and fathers Although Stephen saw that those which sat in the council were, for the most part, the sworn enemies of Christ, yet because the ordinary government of the people did belong to them, and they had the oversight of the Church, which God had not as yet cast off, therefore, he is not afraid, for modesty’s sake, to call them fathers. Neither doth he flatteringly purchase favor hereby; but he giveth this honor to the order and government appointed by God, until such time as the authority should be taken from them, the order being altered. Nevertheless, the reverence of the place which they had doth not hinder him nor stop his mouth; but that he doth freely dissent from them, whereby it appeareth how ridiculous the Papists are who will have us so tied unto bare and vain invented titles, that they may enforce us to subscribe unto their decrees, though they be never so wicked.

The God of glory By this beginning, he declareth that he doth not disagree or dissent from the fathers in true religion which they followed; for all religion, the worship of God, the doctrine of the law, all prophecies, did depend upon that covenant which God made with Abraham; therefore, when Stephen confessed that God appeared to Abraham, he embraceth the law and the prophets, which flow from that first revelation as from a fountain; moreover, he calleth him the God of glory, that he may distinguish him from the false and reigned gods, who alone is worthy of glory.

When he was in Mesopotamia It is well known that that is called by this name which lieth between the river Tigris and Euphrates; and he saith before, he dwelt in Charran, because Abraham, being warned by an oracle, fled ³⁷¹ from Chaldea to Charran, which is a city of Mesopotamia, famous by reason of the slaughter of Crassus and the Roman army; although Pliny saith that it was a city of Arabia; and it is no marvel that Chaldea is in this place comprehended under the name of Mesopotamia, because, although that region, which is enclosed with Tigris and Euphrates, [Mesopotamia,] be properly the country between two rivers, yet those which set down any description of countries ³⁷² do call both Assyria and Chaldea by this name.

The sum is this, that Abraham being commanded by God, did forsake his country, and so he was prevented with the mere goodness of God when as he sought that which was offered him at home of the [its] own accord. Read the last chapter of Joshua; but it seemeth that Moses’ narration doth somewhat disagree with this, for after that, about the end of the 11th chapter of Genesis, he had declared, that Abraham doth [did] go into another country to dwell, having left his house, he addeth, in the beginning of the 12th, that God spake unto Abraham. This is easily answered, for Moses reciteth not in this latter place what happened after the departure of Abraham; but lest any man should think that Abraham wandered into other countries, having unadvisedly forsaken his own house, (as light and indiscreet men ³⁷³ used to do sometimes,) he showeth the cause of his departure, to wit, because he was commanded by God to flit into another place. And thus much do the words of the oracle import. For, if he had been a stranger in another country, God could not have commanded him to depart out of his native soil, forsaking his kinsmen and father’s house. Therefore, we see that this place agreeth wondrous well with the words of Moses. For after that Moses hath said that Abraham went to Charran, to the end he may show that this journey was taken in hand, not through any lightness of man, but at the commandment of God, he addeth that afterwards which he had before omitted, which manner of speaking is much used of the Hebrews.

Calvin: Act 7:3

3.Come out of thy country God useth many words, to the end he may the more wound the mind of Abraham, as if it were not a thing sharp enough of itself to be banished out of his own country. And that served to try his faith; even as that other thing also, that God assigneth him no land wherein he may dwell, but maketh him stand in doubt, and wait for a time. Wherefore the obedience of Abraham was so much the more to be commended, because the sweetness of his native soil keepeth him not back from going willingly, as it were, into exile; and in that he doubteth not to follow God, although there appear no certain resting-place, but is commanded to wander to and fro for a time. Whereas, the showing of the land is deferred, it differeth not much from deceiving of him. ³⁷⁴

Furthermore, we learn continually by our own experience how profitable it was for Abraham thus to be exercised, and, as it were, trained by little and little. Many men are carried with a godly affection to attempt great things, but by and by, so soon as their heat is waxen cold, it repenteth them of their purpose, and they would gladly slip their necks out of the collar. ³⁷⁵ Therefore, lest Abraham should faint when he was in the midst of his course, through the remembrance of those things which he had left behind him, God sifteth and trieth his mind thoroughly, immediately after he had begun, lest he take anything in hand lightly and unadvisedly. To this purpose serveth the parable which Christ setteth before us concerning the building of the tower, (Luk 14:28.) For he teacheth that we must first cast the charges, lest with shame we be enforced to leave off building after we have begun. And though this were a particular thing in Abraham in that he was commanded to go out of his own country, and to go into a far country, in that God carried him from place to place, yet, notwithstanding, there is in these words some figure of the calling of us all. We are not all simply commanded to forsake our country, but we are commanded to deny ourselves; we are not commanded to come out of our father’s house, but to bid adieu to our own will, and to the desires of our own flesh. Again, if father and mother, wife and children, hinder us from following God, we must forsake them all. The commandment is given simply to Abraham to flit; but we are commanded to do the stone upon condition. For if in any place we cannot serve God, we must rather make choice of exile than to stay in our nest, being slothful and sluggish. Therefore, let us have the example of Abraham always before our eyes. He is the father of the faithful, he was tried all manner of ways. Doth he forget his country, his friends, and himself, that he may give over himself unto God? (Rom 4:16.) If we will be counted the children of God, we must not degenerate from him.

Which I shall show thee We must note that which I touched a little before, that Abraham is kept in doubt, to the end his patience may be tried. And this must we also apply to our own use, that we may learn to depend wholly upon God. And surely this is a principal exercise of our faith to put our trust in God, even when we see nothing. God, indeed, will oftentimes show us a land wherein he granteth us an abiding-place; yet, notwithstanding, because we are strangers in the world, we have no certain and continual place of abode anywhere. Again, our life, as Paul saith, is hid, (Col 3:3;) and being like unto dead men, we hope for salvation, which is hid in heaven. Therefore, as touching our perpetual habitation, God doth cause us to depend upon his providence alone, when he commandeth us, as it were, to wander in a strange country. Lest such deferring discourage us, we must hold this general rule of faith, that we must go whither God calleth us, howsoever he do not show that which he promiseth.

Calvin: Act 7:4

4.Then going out The readiness and willingness of faith is commended in these words. For when he is called he maketh no delay, but maketh haste ³⁷⁶ and subdueth all his affections, that they may obey the holy commandment of God. It is uncertain for what cause he stayed at Charran; yet it may be that the weakness of his father caused him to tarry there, who, as we read, died there shortly after; or else, because he durst go no further, until such time as the Lord had told him whither he should go. It is more like to be true in mine opinion, that he was stayed there a while with the wearisomeness and sickness of his father, because Stephen saith plainly that he was brought thence after the death of his father.

Calvin: Act 7:5

5. We must note three firings in this place; that God exercised the patience of his servant, because, after that he had brought him out of his own country, he dwelt in the land of Canaan as a stranger.

[First,] For Abraham possessed not one foot’s-breadth, save only that which he bought to bury in. And that is counted no possession which serveth not for the uses of this life. Secondly, forasmuch as that field was bought, Stephen doth for good causes say, that God gave Abraham nothing. For that could not be gotten either with money, or by any other means which man could invent, which Abraham did hope for of the promise.

Secondly, we must note, that though God did not show Abraham the thing itself as yet, yet did he uphold him by his word. And this is our stay, when God promiseth that that is laid up for us which as yet we possess not. Therefore, when as the thing, that is, the possession of the land, was wanting, Abraham had for his help and stay the promise of God; and being content with the same alone, he desired nothing in the land of Canaan save only an uncertain resting-place wherein he might sojourn.

For as much as [επαγγελλεσθαι ] signifieth simply to promise, I thought there was no cause why, with Erasmus, I should translate it in this place, to promise again. For I resolve it adversatively, although he had promised, that by the way we may note as it were, a show of deceiving, ³⁷⁷ unless peradventure some man be disposed to apply it unto the promises which are oftentimes repeated. ³⁷⁸

Thirdly, we must note that the promise was such that it did not much differ from a mere mock. God promised the land to the seed of Abraham when he was fourscore years old, and had to wife one that was barren, neither had he any hope to have any issue. This seemeth to be more than frivolous. For why doth he not rather promise that he will give him seed? But this was a notable trial of faith, in that Abraham, without asking any question, or any curious disputation, did obediently and meekly embrace that which he had heard proceed out of the mouth of the Lord. Therefore, let us remember that God doth so lift up and comfort his servant with his word, that he doth not only defer the giving of the thing, ³⁷⁹ but also he may seem after a sort to mock him; as he dealeth with us also in some respect. For, although he call us the heirs of the world, (Jas 2:5,) he suffereth us oftentimes to want even a competent living and necessary helps. And this doth he of set purpose, that he may bring the wisdom of the flesh to nought, seeing that we do not otherwise give due honor to his word.

Calvin: Act 7:6

6.Thy seed shall be a stranger Stephen putteth the Jews in mind in how miserable and reproachful an estate their fathers were in Egypt; and showeth that this their servitude, wherewith they were oppressed, came not by chance; because it was foretold long before by the oracle of God. This history ought to have been of great force, partly to tame their lofty courages, ³⁸⁰ and to teach them modesty; partly to set forth the grace of God, because God had always had a care of that nation. For this is a singular benefit, in that the people are restored wonderfully, as it were, from death to life. In the mean season, the Jews are taught that the Church of God was elsewhere than in the land wherein they dwelt; that the fathers were chosen to be a peculiar people, and that they were kept safe under the tuition of God, before ever the temple was built, or the external ceremonies of the law were instituted.

These things appertain unto the general scope or drift of the sermon. But hence may we gather a profitable admonition. Bondage is of itself hard and bitter; but when cruelty of masters is added thereunto, it seemeth to be intolerable. Wherefore, it must needs be that the mind of the godly man was sore wounded, when he heard that his seed should serve, and be villanously and cruelly entreated, Moreover, this was no small trial; forasmuch as these things were, to look to contrary—the inheritance of the land of Canaan which was now promised, and bondage in a strange country. For who would not have thought that God had, as it were, forgotten his former promise, when as he telleth Abraham that his seed shall endure miserable bondage? He saith, at the first, that he will give his seed the land. But he had as yet no seed; yea, all hope of seed was now cut off. But when doth he promise that he will give it? After his death. By and by he saith, that that seed should be carried away to another place, that it may serve strangers. And how long? Four hundred years. Doth he not seem, by this means, to pull back his hand, that he may not perform that which he had promised?

Let us know that this was done, (not once only,) for God dealeth oftentimes with us thus, so that he may seem contrary to himself; and he speaketh also in such sort as that he may seem to call back ³⁸¹ that which he had promised. Therefore, it cannot be but that flesh will judge that he is contrary to himself; but faith doth know that his words do agree well together amongst themselves, and with his works. And this is the purpose of God, to the end he may extend the sight of our faith the farther, to show his promises afar off, as it were, a long place [space] being put between. Therefore it is our duty to go forward, and to strive to attain unto that salvation which is set before us through many straits, ³⁸² through divers lets, through long distance, through the midst of deeps, and, finally, through death itself. Furthermore, seeing that we see that the people which God had chosen did serve the Egyptians, and was uncourteously ³⁸³ afflicted, we must not be discouraged if the like condition be prepared for us at this day. For it is no new thing, neither any unwonted thing, for the Church of God to lie oppressed under tyranny, and to be, as it were, trodden under foot of the wicked.

Calvin: Act 7:7

7.The nation whom they shall serve This judgment is joined with the deliverance of the people. For, whereas God doth punish the cruelty and tyranny of the wicked Egyptians, he doth that for his people’s sake, whom he took into his tuition, that it may be seen that he is the deliverer of his Church. Therefore, so often as we are unjustly afflicted by the wicked, let us remember that God is the Judge of the world, who will let no injuries be unpunished. Let every man thus think with himself, Seeing that I am under the tuition of God, who is the Judge of the world, and to whom it belongeth to punish all injuries, those shall not escape his hand who trouble me now. There is the like place in Deu 32:43, where God saith that vengeance is his. Whence Paul gathereth that we must give place to wrath, (Rom 12:19;) as if he should say, that this ought to serve to reform impatience, and to bridle our evil affections, in that God promiseth that he will revenge; for he which revengeth himself doth take God’s office from him. And let us still remember that which I have already said, that God is touched with an especial care to revenge injuries done to his children, as it is in the Psalm, “Hurt not mine anointed, and be not troublesome to my prophets.”

They shall come thence and serve me Therefore their deliverance went before the temple and the worship of the law; whereupon it followeth, that the grace of God was not tied to ceremonies. Nevertheless, Stephen noteth the end of their deliverance, that God chose both a peculiar people and a peculiar place for the true worship of his name. Whence we gather again, that we must regard what he commandeth and alloweth. Other nations also were determined to worship God; but because their rites were corrupt and bastardly, ³⁸⁴ God doth separate the Jews from the rest, and assigneth them a place where he will have them to worship him sincerely and duly as they ought. This place teacheth us, that God’s benefits must be referred to this end, that men might be brought to addict and give over themselves wholly to him. Now, since that God hath dispersed the treasures of his grace throughout the whole world, we must endeavor to sanctify him, by worshipping him purely and holily, in what country soever we dwell.

Calvin: Act 7:8

8.He gave him the covenant When as he confesseth that circumcision is the covenant of God, he cleareth himself sufficiently of that crime which was laid to his charge; but, in the mean season, he showeth that the Jews deal amiss, if they place the beginning of their salvation in the external sign. For if Abraham was called, and the land and redemption promised to his seed before such time as he was circumcised, it appeareth that the glory of the whole stock cloth not depend upon circumcision. Paul useth the same argument in the 4^th chapter to the Romans, (Rom 4:11.) For, seeing that Abraham obtained righteousness, and pleased God before he was circumcised, he gathereth thence that circumcision is not the cause of righteousness. Therefore we see that Stephen frameth no vain and idle narration; because this was very much appertinent unto the cause, that the Jews might remember how God had adopted them with their fathers, and it is to be thought that Stephen did plainly express both things; that although circumcision was given by God, that it might be a sign of grace, yet was the adoption before it both in order and in time. But we have no need to dispute any longer in this place concerning the nature and force of circumcision. Only let us note this, that God doth first promise those things to Abraham which he confirmeth afterward by circumcision, that we may know that the signs are vain and nothing worth, unless the word go before. Let us also note, that there is a profitable doctrine contained in the word covenant, to wit, that God maketh his covenant with us in the sacraments, that he may declare his love toward us; which thing, if it be true, first, they are not only works of external profession amongst men, but they gave great force inwardly before God, to confirm the faith. Secondly, they are no vain figures; because God, who is true figureth nothing there which he doth not perform.

Calvin: Act 7:9

9. Now followeth the greatest wickedness of the nation of Israel, that they conspired ³⁸⁵ together to oppress their innocent brother, which cruelty is contrary ³⁸⁶ to nature. Neither could the Jews object that it was a private fault of a few; for the infamy reacheth unto all the people. Forasmuch as all the patriarchs, Benjamin excepted, had polluted themselves with that treachery; therefore in that Stephen vouchsafeth to give them an honorable name that redoundeth to the greater reproach of the nation. They boasted proudly of their fathers; he showeth what manner [of] persons the chief of them were; to wit, murderers of their brother, ³⁸⁷ so much as in them laid. For, besides that slavery was a kind of death, we know what they went about at the first and, secondly, what cruel punishments Joseph suffered, of all which his brethren were guilty. Hereby it appeareth that God was bountiful and merciful to those which were, as it were unwilling, and which did resist him. For him (who was about to be the author of health and help ³⁸⁸) would they have destroyed. Wherefore they did what they could to renounce all the benefits of God. So he will declare afterward that Moses was rejected when he was offered of God to be a redeemer. Therefore, the Jews have small cause to brag of the excellency of their kindred; but this alone remaineth for them, that, being ashamed, ³⁸⁹ they confess that whosoever they are, they have the same through the mere mercy of God, and that they consider that the law was given to set forth the same.

God was with him God was not so with him that he did always show forth his power in helping him. For that is no small thing which is said in the Psalm, (105:18,) “That the iron went through his soul.” Surely, it must needs be that he was in great heaviness, ³⁹⁰ when, being destitute of all help, he suffered reproach also together with bonds and the punishment of an ungodly and wicked man; but God useth oftentimes to be present with his in such sort, that he lieth hid for a time. And the end was an evident ³⁹¹ token of his presence, which Joseph saw not at the first. Furthermore, we ought to remember this every now and then, that Joseph was not delivered because he had called upon God in the [a] temple but afar off in Egypt.

Calvin: Act 7:10

10. Stephen addeth the means, because God gave him favor in the sight of Pharaoh. God could have delivered him by some other means, but his counsel had respect unto a farther thing, that Joseph, being ruler of the kingdom, might entertain his father and all his family. In these two words, favor and wisdom, there is the figure hypalloge. For the wisdom wherewith Joseph was endued was the cause that he found favor; although I confess that they were two distinct benefits. For, though Joseph were a faithful interpreter of dreams, and did excel in divine wisdom, yet the proud tyrant would never have brought him to so great honor, unless God had bent the mind of Pharaoh unto a certain unwonted love; yet, notwithstanding, we must consider that order whereby God useth to bring him into favor. ³⁹² Wisdom doth not only signify the gift of prophecy in interpreting dreams, but prudence in giving counsel; for Moses putteth in both. That which Stephen reporteth of one man in this place is extended unto all. For what aptness and readiness ³⁹³ soever is in men, it ought to be reckoned amongst the gifts of God, and that his special gifts. ³⁹⁴ And it is he that giveth good success as it pleaseth him, that his gifts may be profitable to that end for which it seemed good to him to give them. Therefore, although Joseph be made chief ruler of Egypt by Pharaoh, yet is he lifted up to so great honor properly by the hand of God. ³⁹⁵

Calvin: Act 7:11

11.There came a famine Hereby it appeareth that the deliverance of Joseph was such a benefit as was common to all the family of Jacob. For, seeing the famine drew on, ³⁹⁶ Joseph was sent before in due time to provide sustenance to feed the hungry; as he himself doth acknowledge the wonderful counsel of God in that point. Nevertheless, the free goodness of God appeareth plainly in the person of Joseph, whilst that he is appointed to nourish and feed his brethren, who had sold him, and by that means sent him far away, and thought that he was gone away quite ³⁹⁷ out of the world. He putteth meat in their mouths who had thrown him into a pit, and had deprived him of the air and the common breath. Finally, he nourisheth and preserveth their life who were not afraid ³⁹⁸ to take from him his life. In the mean season, Stephen putteth the Jews in mind of this, that the patriarchs were enforced to depart out of that land which was given them for an heritage, and that they died in another place. Therefore, forasmuch as they were sojourners in it, they are at length banished out of the same. ³⁹⁹

Calvin: Act 7:14

14. Whereas he saith that Jacob came into Egypt with seventy-five souls, it agreeth not with the words of Moses; for Moses maketh mention of seventy only. Jerome thinketh that Luke setteth not down, word for word, those things which Stephen had spoken, or that he took this number out of the Greek translation of Moses, (Gen 46:27,) either because he himself, being a proselyte, had not the knowledge of the Hebrew tongue, or because he would grant the Gentiles this, who used to read it thus. ⁴⁰⁰ Furthermore, it is uncertain whether the Greek interpreters set down this number of set purpose, or whether it crop [crept] in afterward through negligence, [mistake;] which (I mean the latter) might well be, forasmuch as the Grecians used to set down their numbers in letters. Augustine, in his 26^th book of City of God, [De Civitate Dei,] thinketh that Joseph’s nephews and kinsmen ⁴⁰¹ are comprehended in this number; and so he thinketh that the words went down doth signify all that time which Jacob lived. But that conjecture can by no means be received. For, in the mean space, the other patriarchs also had many children born to them. This seemeth to me a thing like to be true, that the Seventy Interpreters did translate that truly which was in Moses. And we cannot say that they were deceived; forasmuch as [in] Deu 10:0, where this number is repeated, they agree with Moses, at least as that place was read without all doubt in the time of Jerome; for those copies which are printed at this day have it otherwise. Therefore, I think that this difference came through the error of the writers which wrote out the books. ⁴⁰² And it was a matter of no such weight, for which Luke ought to have troubled the Gentiles which were accustomed with the Greek reading. And it may be that he himself did put down the true number; and that some man did correct the same amiss out of that place of Moses. For we know that those which had the New Testament in hand were ignorant of the Hebrew tongue, yet skillful in ⁴⁰³ the Greek,

Therefore, to the end [that] the words of Stephen might agree with the place of Moses, it is to be thought that that false number which was found in the Greek translation of Genesis was by them put in also in this place; concerning which, if any man contend more stubbornly, let us suffer him to be wise without measure. Let us remember that it is not without cause that Paul doth forbid us to be too curious about genealogies. This, so small a number, is purposely expressed, to the end the power of God may the more plainly appear, in so great an enlarging of that kindred, which was of no long continuance. For such a small handful of men could not, by any human manner of engendering, grow to such an infinite multitude as is recorded in Exo 12:37, within two hundred and fifty years. We ought rather to weigh the miracle which the Spirit commendeth unto us in this place, than to stand long about one letter, whereby the number is altered. There arise other questions (and those which are more hard to be answered) out of the rest of the text, [context.]

Calvin: Act 7:16

16. Stephen saith, that the patriarchs were carried into the land of Canaan after they were dead. But Moses maketh mention only of the bones of Joseph, (Gen 1:13.) And Jos 24:32, it is reported, that the bones of Joseph were buried without making any mention of the rest. Some answer, that Moses speaketh of Joseph for honor’s sake, because he had given express commandment concerning his bones, which we cannot read to have been done of the rest. And, surely, when Jerome, in the pilgrimage of Paula, saith, that she came by Shechem, he saith that she saw there the sepulchres of the twelve patriarchs; but in another place he maketh mention of Joseph’s grave only. And it may be that there were empty tombs ⁴⁰⁴ erected to the rest. I can affirm nothing concerning this matter for a certainty, save only that this is either a speech wherein is synecdoche, or else that Luke rehearseth this not so much out of Moses, as according to the old fame; as the Jews had many things in times past from the fathers, which were delivered, as it were, from hand to hand. And whereas he saith afterward, they were laid in the sepulcher which Abraham had bought of the sons of Hemor, it is manifest that there is a fault [mistake] in the word Abraham. For Abraham had bought a double cave of Ephron the Hittite, (Gen 23:9,) to bury his wife Sarah in; but Joseph was buried in another place, to wit, in the field which his father Jacob had bought of the sons of Hemor for an hundred lambs. Wherefore this place must be amended.

Calvin: Act 7:17

17. Stephen passeth over unto the deliverance of the people, before which ⁴⁰⁵ went that innumerable issue which had increased beyond the ordinary manner in no long space of time. Therefore, he setteth down this as a singular gift of God, that the people was increased, to the end we may know that that came not to pass according to the common or wonted custom of nature. But, on the other side, God seemeth to take from the Jews all hope, because Pharaoh doth tyrannously afflict them, and their bondage groweth greater daily. And when as they are commanded to cast out their male infants, it seemeth that the destruction of the whole nation was present. There is another token of deliverance given, when Moses cometh abroad; but because he is by and by refused and enforced to fly into exile, there remaineth nothing but mere despair. The sum is this; that God, being mindful of his promise, did increase the people in time, that he might perform that which he had sworn to Abraham; but the Jews (as they were unthankful and froward) did refuse the grace of God, so that they did what they could to shut up the way before themselves. Furthermore, we must note the providence of God in this place, whilst that he doth so order the course of times, that his works have always their opportunity. But men who make haste disorderly in their desires cannot hope patiently, and be at rest, until such time as God showeth forth his hand; for this cause, because they take no heed to that moderation whereof I have spoken. And to the end God may exercise the faith of his children so often as he appeareth with joyful tokens of grace, he setteth other things against those on the other side, which cut off suddenly the hope of salvation. For who would not have said of the Hebrews, that they were utterly undone, when as the king’s commandment appointed all the men children to be put to death? For which cause the meditating upon that doctrine is the most [more] necessary for us, that God doth kill and restore to life; he leadeth unto hell, and bringeth back again.

Calvin: Act 7:19

19.Dealt subtilely The old interpreter did not translate this amiss, to deceive. ⁴⁰⁶ For Stephen meaneth that the king of Egypt did craftily invent new shifts and wicked pretenses, that he might every now and then lay heavier burdens upon the people, like as almost all tyrants do; for how unjustly soever they vex their subjects, they are [but] too witty to invent excuses. And it is not to be doubted but that Pharaoh abused this honest color, that it was not meet that the Jews, who were sojourners, should have a place of abode in his realm for nought, and that they should be free from all burthens, seeing they did enjoy great commodities. Therefore, he deceitfully made them vile bondslaves of free-men. When Stephen saith that this tyrant knew not Joseph, hereby it appeareth how soon the remembrance of benefits passeth away among men, For although we do all with one consent detest unthankfulness, yet is there no vice more common amongst us.

Lest they should be increased Erasmus translateth this improperly, in my judgment. For [Ζωογονεισθαι ] expresseth more than lest their children should live. For the word is fet [fetched] thence, because the people doth all always remain alive in the offspring. And, furthermore Stephen doth not reckon up all the parts of their evil-entreating, but putteth down one example of extreme cruelty. Whence we may easily gather how near the whole seed of Abraham was to destruction. For Pharaoh seemed to have murdered them all with that commandment as with one stroke of a sword. But such violent barbarism did the more set forth the unlooked-for and incredible power of God; because when Pharaoh hath, by all means possible, striven against God, yet all is in vain.

Calvin: Act 7:20

20. It is not without cause that Stephen noteth the circumstance of time. Moses was born at the very same time when the king had commanded that all the men children should be cast out. Therefore, it seemeth that the minister of deliverance is dead before he is born. But that time is most fit for God to work in, when there is no hope or counsel to be looked for at man’s hands. And it appeareth also most plainly how God doth make perfect his power in man’s weakness, (2Co 41:9.) Moses is kept three months, but at length his parents (that they may save their own lives) are enforced to cast him out into the river. Only they put him into a little coffer, ⁴⁰⁷ that he may not by and by [immediately] perish. When as Pharaoh’s daughter taketh him up, he escaped death indeed, yet so that he goeth into another nation, being cut off from the kindred of Israel. Yea, he was like to be a most troublesome adversary to his nation, unless God had restrained his mind. It is forty years before he showeth any token of brotherly good-will.

Calvin: Act 7:22

22. Whereas Luke reporteth that he was taught in all wisdom of the Egyptians, he putteth that in his commendation as a point of excellency. Notwithstanding, it might have so fallen out, as it doth oftentimes, that being puffed up with profane sciences, he might have despised the base common people; yet because God had determined to redeem his people, he doth, in the mean season, frame both the mind of Moses and all other things to finish his work. The reason of man’s flesh ⁴⁰⁸ should murmur in this place, Why doth God wink at so long miseries of the people? Why doth he suffer Pharaoh to rage more cruelly daily? Why doth he not suffer Moses to grow up amongst his own people? Why doth he after a sort cut him off from the kindred of Israel, being adopted by the king’s daughter? Why will he suffer him to remain amidst courtly pleasures, ⁴⁰⁹ and doth not rather pull him thence? But the end itself is so wonderful, that we are enforced to confess that all these things were governed by singular counsel and order to set forth the glory of God.

Whereas I said that Luke speaketh in this place of the learning of the Egyptians for honor’s sake, I would not have it so taken as if there were in the same no corruption. Forasmuch as astrology ⁴¹⁰ doth consider the wonderful workmanship of God, not only in the placing of the stars, and in such excellent variety, but also in their moving, force, and secret offices, it is a science both profitable and worthy of praise. The Egyptians bestowed great study in this, but being not content with the simple order of nature, they wandered also into many foolish speculations, as did the Chaldeans. It is uncertain whether Moses was infected with these superstitions or no. Yet, howsoever it be, we see how sincerely and plainly he setteth that before us to be considered in the frame of the world, which is appertinent unto godliness. Surely this was excellent modesty, in that he which could reason with learned and witty men of the secrets of nature, doth not only omit higher subtleties, but doth also descend unto the common capacity of every most simple man, and doth, in a common style, set forth unto men unlearned those things which they perceive by experience. When Justinian [Justin] babbleth concerning Moses, he maketh him a magician, which, with juggling and enchantments, made passage for the people through the Red Sea; so that Satan did not only go about to bury the power of God, but also to blaspheme the same. But we know that Moses did not strive with the enchanters by magic, but did that only which God had enjoined him.

Furthermore, the Egyptians had mystical divinity, wherewith they colored their doting inventions and monstrous abominations, as if they would prove that they went mad not without reason: as the Papists, whereas they delude and mock men like stage-players, in their mass and other foolish rites, yet they invent mysteries, that they may persuade men that there is nothing there but that which is divine. The common sort of priests cannot climb so high, but those which amongst them will be accounted more cunning ⁴¹¹ do omit no rite, how foolish and childish soever it be, affirming that there is some spiritual mystery in every [one] of them. There is extant concerning this matter a most foolish mingle-mangle, which they call the Rationall [Rationale] of Divine Offices. But forasmuch as sacrificing priests alone did use such dotings amongst themselves, it is not to be thought that Moses spent any time in these, whose bringing up was princely, but that he was taught in liberal arts.

He was mighty This phrase doth express among the Hebrews a double excellency, when as he which doth excel in wit and learning, is also apt to attempt and bring to pass great and weighty matters. ⁴¹² Stephen’s meaning is, therefore, that Moses was furnished with rare gifts, so that they did all confess that he was a singular man. But seeing he was in such estimation, the Israelites had the less hope that he should be the minister which should work their deliverance.

Calvin: Act 7:23

23.When the time was fulfilled Many gather by this that Moses was never estranged in mind from his nation; but the words of Stephen incline rather toward the contrary, to wit, that the Spirit of God did at length awake his mind, as it were out of sleep, that he might at length go visit his brethren, whom he had long time neglected. It is to be thought that he was not ignorant of what stock he came, seeing he had some token thereof in his flesh, and seeing the rumor thereof was spread abroad in the court, because the king’s daughter could not adopt him to be her son without some suspicion of wickedness, unless his kindred had been known; yet was it long before he was of such courage that he durst make known the love which he bare toward his kindred. And this serveth not a little to set forth the glory of God, that Moses, being ignorant of his calling, doth remain a long time idle in the king’s court, and is afterward called of the Lord contrary to the hope of all men, and his own also. Therefore, this new care for his brethren which came into his mind, proceeded from a new and unwonted motion of God’s Spirit.

Calvin: Act 7:24

24.When he saw a certain man Moses came not to this spectacle by chance, but forasmuch as God had appointed him to be the deliverer of his people, he would have him show forth this token, and, as it were, make this beginning. For Stephen doth plainly express that he did attempt nothing unadvisedly, but did that which became him that was appointed to be a deliverer of the people, knowing that he was thereunto called. For unless God had armed him, (and made him puissant,) it had been a thing altogether unlawful for him to kill any man, how wicked soever he had been. It is a godly deed, and praiseworthy, for a man to set himself against the wicked, to defend the good against the injuries of the wicked, to bridle their violence; but it is not for a private person to punish, (or take vengeance.) Therefore, it was unlawful for Moses to slay the Egyptian, save only inasmuch as the Lord had put the sword in his hand according to the right of his calling. But this heroical courage and nobleness of heart ⁴¹³ was a work of the Holy Ghost; because God doth mightily show forth his power in those whom he appointeth unto great matters, that they may be able to fulfill their function. In sum, Stephen meaneth that Moses was even then offered to be the minister of deliverance when the day was at hand, according to the covenant made with Abraham, yet did the people hope for nothing less.

Defender: Act 7:2

Stephen had been accused of blasphemy against the temple and the law, but even though the false witnesses had distorted his message, Stephen did not attempt to defend himself. Instead he probably presented the same type of message to the council as he had been preaching in the synagogue, stressing that the principles of God's plan for Israel had been established long before the temple system, and that the Abrahamic Covenant centered in the promised Messiah, as did the preaching of the prophets. But Israel had rejected God's Word at every stage, had killed the prophets, corrupted the law and finally murdered the Messiah when he came. Stephen's message was powerful and true, but could only anger the council further.

Defender: Act 7:2

This title - "the God of glory" - occurs only one other time in the Bible, in Psa 29:3 : "The voice of the Lord is upon the waters: the God of glory thundereth: the Lord is upon many waters." In context, this psalm records David's retrospective vision of the great Flood (see notes on Psa 29:1-11). Stephen's use of this name at the beginning of his apologetics exhortation to these rulers of Israel was probably to remind them that the same Creator God who judged the whole world in the days of Noah had called Abram, not just to found an elect nation but to use that nation to bring the promised seed who would bless all nations."

Defender: Act 7:3

Here Stephen quotes Gen 12:1, God's call to Abram; Stephen's hearers would certainly recall that this call was immediately followed by the promise of a seed who would bless all nations of the earth (Gen 12:3)."

Defender: Act 7:4

Apparently Abram's father Terah had also been called to go to Canaan, but instead, he only went as far as Haran (Gen 11:32). Abram could not continue to Canaan until his father died. Terah had, at least to some degree, served other gods (Jos 24:2), along with his belief in the true God (see notes on Genesis 11:26-12:4)."

Defender: Act 7:6

Gen 15:13 also says 400 years, where Exo 12:40 and Gal 3:17 say this period was 430 years. Probably the Israelites were treated well for the first 30 years, then evil, as Stephen says, for 400 years."

Defender: Act 7:9

In documenting the long-continued rebellion of the Israelite leaders against God's plan, Stephen thus notes that this began with the very first generation of the children of Israel."

Defender: Act 7:14

In Gen 46:27, we are told that "all the souls of the house of Jacob, which came into Egypt, were threescore and ten." A number of ways have been suggested for correlating these two numbers. Probably the most natural solution is to assume that the seventy-five included several wives of Jacob's sons who were not actually "of the house of Jacob" (Gen 46:27) but who did come into Egypt and were recognized as his kindred."

Defender: Act 7:22

Critics used to allege that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch, because he could not have known how to write. This is absurd; most people in Egypt and Babylonia knew how to write long before Moses. Moses himself was raised as a prince, in line possibly even for Egypt's throne, and was thoroughly trained in all the culture of the advanced Egyptian civilization."

TSK: Act 7:1

Are : Act 6:13, Act 6:14; Mat 26:61, Mat 26:62; Mar 14:58-60; Joh 18:19-21, Joh 18:33-35

TSK: Act 7:2

Men : Act 22:1, Act 23:7

The God : Psa 24:7, Psa 24:10, Psa 29:3; Isa 6:3; Mat 6:13; Luk 2:14; Joh 1:14, Joh 12:41; 2Co 4:4-6; Tit 2:13 *Gr: Heb 1:3; Rev 4:11, Rev 5:12, Rev 5:13

appeared : Gen 12:1; Neh 9:7; Isa 51:2

when : Jos 24:2

Charran : Gen 11:31, Gen 12:5, Gen 29:4, Haran

TSK: Act 7:3

Get : Gen 12:1; Mat 10:37; Luk 14:33; 2Co 6:17; Heb 11:8

the land : Gen 13:14-17, Gen 15:7; Jos 24:3; Neh 9:8

TSK: Act 7:4

came : Gen 11:31, Gen 11:32, Gen 12:4, Gen 12:5; Isa 41:2, Isa 41:9

TSK: Act 7:5

he gave : Gen 23:4; Psa 105:11, Psa 105:12; Heb 11:9, Heb 11:10,Heb 11:13-16

not : Deu 2:5

yet : Gen 12:7, Gen 13:15, Gen 15:3, Gen 15:18, Gen 17:8, Gen 26:3, Gen 28:13-15; Exo 6:7, Exo 6:8; Deu 6:10,Deu 6:11; Act 9:5, Act 10:11, Act 11:9, 34:4; Neh 9:8; Psa 105:8-11

when : Gen 15:2-5, Gen 16:2, Gen 17:16-19

TSK: Act 7:6

That : Gen 15:13, Gen 15:16

four : Exo 12:40,Exo 12:41; Gal 3:17

TSK: Act 7:7

the nation : Gen 15:14-16; Exod. 7:1-14:31; Neh 9:9-11; Psa 74:12-14, Psa 78:43-51; Psa 105:27-36, Psa 135:8, Psa 135:9, Psa 136:10-15; Isa 51:9, Isa 51:10

and serve : Exo 3:12

TSK: Act 7:8

the covenant : Gen 17:9-14; Joh 7:22; Rom 4:10; Gal 3:15, Gal 3:17

and so : Or, ""and thus,"" και [Strong’ s G2532], ουτως [Strong’ s G3779], in this covenant. Gen 17:12, Gen 21:1-4

and Isaac : Gen 25:21-26; 1Ch 1:34; Mat 1:2; Rom 9:9-13

and Jacob : Gen 29:31-35, 30:1-24, Gen 35:16, Gen 35:23-26; Exo 1:1-4; 1Ch 2:1, 1Ch 2:2

patriarchs : Act 2:29; Heb 7:4

TSK: Act 7:9

moved : Gen 37:4-11, Gen 49:23; Mat 27:18

sold : Gen 37:18-29, Gen 45:4, Gen 50:15-20; Psa 105:17

but : Gen 39:2, Gen 39:5, Gen 39:21-23, Gen 49:24; Isa 41:10, Isa 43:2

TSK: Act 7:10

delivered : Gen 48:16; Psa 22:24, Psa 34:17-19, Psa 37:40, Psa 40:1-3; 2Ti 4:18; Jam 5:11; Rev 7:14

gave : Gen. 41:12-46, Gen 42:6, Gen 44:18, Gen 45:8, Gen 45:9; Psa 105:19-22; Pro 2:6, Pro 3:4, Pro 16:7

TSK: Act 7:11

Gen 41:54-57, Gen 43:1, Gen 45:5, Gen 45:6, Gen 45:11, Gen 47:13-15; Psa 105:16

TSK: Act 7:12

Gen. 42:1-24, Gen 43:2

TSK: Act 7:13

Joseph : Gen. 45:1-18, Gen 46:31-34, Gen 47:1-10

TSK: Act 7:14

sent : Gen 45:9-11; Psa 105:23

threescore : Gen 46:12, Gen 46:26, Gen 46:27; Deu 10:22; 1Ch 2:5, 1Ch 2:6

TSK: Act 7:15

Jacob : Gen 46:3-7; Num 20:15; Deu 10:22, Deu 26:5; Jos 24:4

died : Gen 49:33; Exo 1:6; Heb 11:21, Heb 11:22

TSK: Act 7:16

were : Of the two burying-places of the patriarchs, one was at Hebron, the cave and field which Abraham purchased of Ephron the Hittite (Gen 23:16, etc.); the other in Sychem, which Jacob (not Abraham) bought of the sons of Emmor (Gen 33:19). To remove this glaring discrepancy, Markland interprets παρα [Strong’ s G3844], from, as it frequently signifies with a genitive, and renders, ""And were carried over to Sychem; and afterwards from among the descendants of Emmor, the father, or son, of Sychem, they were laid in the sepulchre which Abraham bought for a sum of money.""This agrees with the account which Josephus gives of the patriarchs; that they were carried out of Egypt, first to Sychem, and then to Hebron, where they were buried. Exo 13:19; Jos 24:32

the sepulchre : Gen 33:9-20, Gen 35:19, Gen 49:29-32

Emmor : Gen. 34:2-31, Hamor, Shechem

TSK: Act 7:17

when : Act 7:6; Gen 15:13-16; 2Pe 3:8, 2Pe 3:9

the people : Act 13:17; Exo 1:7-12, Exo 1:20; Psa 105:24, Psa 105:25

TSK: Act 7:18

Exo 1:8

TSK: Act 7:19

Exo 1:9-22; Psa 83:4, Psa 83:5, Psa 105:25, Psa 129:1-3; Rev 12:4, Rev 12:5

TSK: Act 7:20

Moses : Exo 2:2-10

and was : 1Sa 16:12; Heb 11:23

exceeding fair : or, fair to God

TSK: Act 7:21

when : Exo 2:2-10; Deu 32:26

for : Heb 11:24

TSK: Act 7:22

was learned : 1Ki 4:29; 2Ch 9:22; Isa 19:11; Dan 1:4, Dan 1:17-20

and was : Luk 24:19

TSK: Act 7:23

when : Exo 2:11, Exo 2:12; Heb 11:24-26

it came : Exo 35:21, Exo 35:29; 1Ch 29:17-19; 2Ch 30:12; Ezr 1:1, Ezr 1:5, Ezr 7:27; Pro 21:1; 2Co 8:16; Phi 2:12, Phi 2:13; Jam 1:17; Rev 17:17

to : Act 15:36; Exo 4:18

TSK: Act 7:24

Act 7:28; Joh 18:10,Joh 18:11, Joh 18:25-27

TSK: Act 7:25

For : or, Now

God : Act 14:27, Act 15:4, Act 15:7, Act 21:19; 1Sa 14:45, 1Sa 19:5; 2Ki 5:1; Rom 15:18; 1Co 3:9; 1Co 15:10; 2Co 6:1; Col 1:29

but : Psa 106:7; Mar 9:32; Luk 9:45, Luk 18:34

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Act 7:1

Then said the high priest - See the notes on Mat 2:4. In this case the high priest seems to have presided in the council.

Are these things so? - To wit, the charge alleged against him of blasphemy against Moses and the temple, Act 6:13-14.

Barnes: Act 7:2

Men, brethren, and fathers - These were the usual titles by which the Sanhedrin was addressed. In all this Stephen was perfectly respectful, and showed that he was disposed to render due honor to the institutions of the nation.

The God of glory - This is a Hebrew form of expression denoting "the glorious God."It properly denotes His "majesty, or splendor, or magnificence"; and the word "glory"is often applied to the splendid appearances in which God has manifested Himself to people, Deu 5:24; Exo 33:18; Exo 16:7, Exo 16:10; Lev 9:23; Num 14:10. Perhaps Stephen meant to affirm that God appeared to Abraham in some such glorious or splendid manifestation, by which he would know that he was addressed by God. Stephen, moreover, evidently uses the word "glory"to repel the charge of "blasphemy"against God, and to show that he regarded him as worthy of honor and praise.

Appeared ... - In what manner he appeared is not said. In Gen 12:1, it is simply recorded that God "had said"unto Abraham, etc.

Unto our father - The Jews valued themselves much on being the children of Abraham. See the notes on Mat 3:9. The expression was therefore well calculated to conciliate their minds.

When he was in Mesopotamia - In Gen 11:31, it is said that Abraham dwelt "in Ur of the Chaldees."The word "Mesopotamia"properly denotes the region between the two rivers, the Euphrates and the Tigris. See notes on Act 2:9. The name is Greek, and the region had also other names before the Greek name was given to it. In Gen 11:31; Gen 15:7, it is called Ur of the Chaldees. Mesopotamia and Chaldea might not exactly coincide; but it is evident that Stephen meant to say that "Ur"was in the country afterward called Mesopotamia. Its precise situation is unknown. A Persian fortress of this name is mentioned by Ammianus Gen 25:8 between Nisibis and the Tigris.

Before he dwelt in Charran - From Gen 11:31, it would seem that Terah took his son Abraham of his own accord, and removed to Haran. But from Gen 12:1; Gen 15:7, it appears that God had commanded "Abraham"to remove, and so he ordered it in his providence that "Terah"was disposed to remove his family with an intention of going into the land of Canaan. The word "Charran"is the Greek form of the Hebrew "Haran,"Gen 11:31. This place was also in Mesopotamia, in 36 degrees 52 minutes north latitude and 39 degrees 5 minutes east longitude. Here Terah died Gen 11:32; and to this place Jacob retired when he fled from his brother Esau, Gen 27:43. It is situated "in a flat and sandy plain, and is inhabited by a few wandering Arabs, who select it for the delicious water which it contains"(Robinson’ s Calmet).

Barnes: Act 7:3

And said unto him - How long this was said before he went is not recorded. Moses simply says that God had commanded him to go, Gen 12:1.

Thy kindred - Thy relatives, or family connections. It seems that "Terah"went with him as far as to Haran; but Abraham was apprised that he was to leave his family and to go almost alone.

Into the land ... - The country was yet unknown. The place was to be shown him. This is presented in the New Testament as a strong instance of faith, Heb 11:8-9. It was an act of "simple confidence"in God. And to leave his country and home; to go into a land of strangers, not knowing whither he went, required strong confidence in God. It is a simple illustration of what man is always required to do at the command of God. Thus, the gospel requires him to commit all to God; to yield body and soul to his disposal; to be ready at his command to forsake father, and mother, and friends, and houses, and lands, for the sake of the Lord Jesus, Luk 14:33; Mat 19:27, Mat 19:29. The trials which Abraham might have anticipated may be readily conceived. He was going, in a rude and barbarous age of the world, into a land of strangers. He was without arms or armies, and almost alone. He did not even know the nature or situation of the land, or the character of its inhabitants.

He had no title to it; no claim to urge; and he went depending on the simple promise of God that he would give it to him. He went, therefore, trusting simply to the promise of God. Thus, his conduct illustrated precisely what we are to do in reference to all our coming life, and to the eternity before us: We are to trust simply to the promise of God, and do what he requires. This is faith. In Abraham it was as simple and intelligible an operation of mind as ever occurs in any instance. Nor is faith in the Scriptures regarded as more mysterious than any other mental operation. If Abraham had seen all that was to result from his going into that land, it would have been a sufficient reason to induce him to do as he did. But God saw it; and Abraham was required to act just as if he had seen it all, and all the reasons why he was called. Upon the strength of God’ s promises, Abraham was called to act. This was faith. It did not require him to act where there was "no reason"for his so acting, but where he did not see the reason. So in all cases of faith. If man could see all that God sees, he would perceive reasons for acting as God requires. But the reasons of things are often concealed, and man is required to act on the belief that God sees reasons why he should so act. To act under the proper impression of that truth which God presents is faith; as simple and intelligible as any other act or operation of the mind. See the notes on Mar 16:16.

Barnes: Act 7:4

Land of the Chaldeans - From Ur of the Chaldees, Gen 11:31.

When his father was dead - This passage has given rise to no small difficulty in the interpretation. The difficulty is this: From Gen 11:26, it would seem that Abraham was born when Terah was 70 years of age. "And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran."From Gen 12:4, it seems that Abraham was 75 years of age when he departed from Haran to Canaan. The age of Terah was therefore but 145 years. Yet in Gen 11:32, it is said that Terah was 205 old when he died, thus leaving 60 years of Terah’ s life beyond the time when Abraham left Haran. Various modes have been proposed of explaining this difficulty:

(1) Errors in "numbers"are more likely to occur than any other. In the "Samaritan"copy of the Pentateuch, it is said that Terah died in Haran at the age of 105 years, which would suppose that his death occurred 40 years before Abraham left Haran. But the Hebrew, Latin, Vulgate, Septuagint, Syriac, and Arabic read it as 205 years.

\caps1 (2) i\caps0 t is not affirmed that Abraham was born just at the time when Terah was 70 years of age. All that the passage in Gen 11:26 proves, according to the usual meaning of similar expressions, is, that Terah was 70 years old before he had any sons, and that the three were born subsequently to that. But which was born first or what intervals intervened between their birth does not appear. Assuredly, it does not mean that all were born precisely at the time when Terah was 70 years of age. Neither does it appear that Abraham was the oldest of the three. The sons of Noah are said to have been Shem, Ham, and Japheth Gen 5:32; yet Japheth, though mentioned last, was the oldest, Gen 10:21. As Abraham afterward became much the most distinguished, and as he was the father of the Jewish people, of whom Moses was writing, it was natural that he should be mentioned first if it cannot be proveD that Abraham was the oldest, as assuredly it cannot be, then there is no improbability in supposing that his birth might have occurred many years after Terah was 70 years of age.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 he Jews unanimously affirm that Terah relapsed into idolatry before Abraham left Haran; and this they denominate "death,"or a moral death (Kuinoel). It is certain, therefore, that, from some cause, they were accustomed to speak of Terah as "dead"before Abraham left him. Stephen only used language which was customary among the Jews, and would employ it, doubtless, correctly, though we may not be able to see precisely how it can be reconciled with the account in Genesis.

Barnes: Act 7:5

And he gave him none inheritance - Abraham led a wandering life; and this passage means that he did not himself receive a permanent possession or residence in that land. The only land which he owned was the field which he "purchased"of the children of Heth for a burial place, Gen. 23: As this was obtained by "purchase,"and not by the direct gift of God, and as it was not designed for a "residence,"it is said that God gave him no "inheritance."It is mentioned as a strong instance of his faith that he should remain there without a permanent residence himself, with only the prospect that his children, at some distant period, would inherit it.

Not so much as to set his foot on - This is a proverbial expression, denoting in an emphatic manner that he had no land, Deu 2:5.

Would give it to him - Gen 13:15. Abraham did not himself possess all that land; and the promise is evidently equivalent to saying that it would be conferred on the family of Abraham, or the family of which he was the father, without affirming that "he"would himself personally possess it. It is true, however, that Abraham himself afterward dwelt many years in that land as his home, Gen. 13, etc.

For a possession - To be held as his own property.

When as yet he had no child - When there was no human probability that he would have any posterity. Compare Gen 15:2-3; Gen 18:11-12. This is mentioned as a strong instance of his faith; "who against hope believed in hope,"Rom 4:18.

Barnes: Act 7:6

And God spake on this wise - In this manner, Gen 15:13-14.

His seed - His posterity; his descendants.

Should sojourn - This means that they would have a "temporary residence there."The word is used in opposition to a fixed, permanent home, and is applied to travelers, or foreigners.

In a strange land - In the Hebrew Gen 15:13, "Shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs."The land of Canaan and the land of Egypt were strange lands to them, though the obvious reference here is to the latter.

Should bring them into bondage - Or, would make them slaves, Exo 1:11.

And entreat them evil - Would oppress or afflict them.

Four hundred years - This is the precise time which is mentioned by Moses, Gen 15:13. Great perplexity has been experienced in explaining this passage, or reconciling it with other statements. In Exo 12:40, it is said that their sojourning in Egypt was 430 years. Josephus ( Antiq. , book 2, chapter 9, section 1) also says that the time in which they were in Egypt was 400 years; though in another place ( Antiq. , book 2, chapter 15, section 2) he says that they left Egypt f 430 years after their forefather, Abraham, came to Canaan, but 215 years after Jacob removed to Egypt. Paul also Gal 3:17 says that it was 430 years from the time when the promise was given to Abraham to the time when the Law was given on Mount Sinai. The Samaritan Pentateuch also says Exo 12:40 that the "dwelling of the sons of Israel, and of their fathers, which they dwelt "in the land of Canaan,"and in the land of Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years."

The same is the version of the Septuagint. "A part"of this perplexity is removed by the fact that Stephen and Moses use, in accordance with a very common custom, "round numbers"in speaking of it, and thus speak of 400 years when the literal time was 430. The other perplexities are not so easily removed. From the account which Moses has given of the lives of certain persons, it would seem clear that the time which they spent in "Egypt"was not 400 years. From Gen 46:8, Gen 46:11, it appears that "Kohath"was born when Jacob went into Egypt. He lived 133 years, Exo 6:18. Amram, his son, and the father of Moses lived 137 years, Exo 6:20. Moses was 80 years old when he was sent to Pharaoh, Exo 7:7. The whole time thus mentioned, including the time in which the father lived after his son was born, was only 350 years. Exclusive of that, it is reasonable to suppose that the actual time of their being in Egypt could not have been but about 200 years, according to one account of Josephus. The question then is, how can these accounts be reconciled? The only satisfactory way is by supposing that the 430 years includes the whole time from the calling of Abraham to the departure from Egypt. And that this was the fact is probable from the following circumstances:

(1)    The purpose of all the narratives on this subject is to trace the period before they became finally settled in the land of Canaan. During all this period from the calling of Abraham, they were in a wandering, unfixed situation. This constituted substantially one period, including all their oppressions, hardships, and dangers; and it was natural to have reference to this "entire"period in any account which was given.

(2)\caps1     a\caps0 ll this period was properly the period of "promise,"not of "possession."In this respect the wanderings of Abraham and the oppressions of Egypt came under the same general description.

(3)    Abraham was himself occasionally in Egypt. He was unsettled; and since Egypt was so pre-eminent in all their troubles, it was natural to speak of all their oppressions as having occurred in that country. The phrase "residence in Egypt,"or "in a strange land,"would come to be synonymous, and would denote all their oppressions and trials. They would speak of their sufferings as having been endured in Egypt, because their afflictions there were so much more prominent than before.

(4)\caps1     a\caps0 ll this receives countenance from the version of the Septuagint, and from the Samaritan text, showing the manner in which the ancient Jews were accustomed to understand it.

(5)\caps1     i\caps0 t should be added, that difficulties of chronology are more likely to occur than any others; and it should not be deemed strange if there are perplexities of this kind found in ancient writings which we cannot explain. It is so in all ancient records; and all that is usually expected in relation to such difficulties is that we should be able to present a "probable"explanation.

Barnes: Act 7:7

And the nation ... - Referring particularly to the Egyptians.

Will I judge - The word "judge,"in the Bible, often means to "execute judgment"as well as to pronounce it; that is, "to punish."See Joh 18:31; Joh 3:17; Joh 8:50; Joh 12:47; Act 24:6; 1Co 5:13, etc. It has this meaning here. God regarded their oppressive acts as deserving His indignation, and He evinced it in the plagues with which He visited upon them, and in their overthrow at the Red Sea.

Shall serve me - Shall worship me, or be regarded as my people.

In this place - That is, in the place where God made this promise to Abraham. These words are not found in Genesis, but similar words are found in Exo 3:12, and it was a practice, in making quotations, to quote the sense only, or to connect two or more promises having relation to the same thing.

Barnes: Act 7:8

And he gave him - That is, God appointed or commanded this, Gen 17:9-13.

The covenant - The word "covenant"denotes properly "a compact or agreement between two or more persons,"usually attended with seals, pledges, or sanctions. In Gen 17:7, and elsewhere, it is said that God would establish his "covenant"with Abraham; that is, he made him certain definite promises, attended with pledges and seals, etc. The idea of a strict "compact"or "agreement"between God and man, as between "equal parties"; is not found in the Bible. The word is commonly used, as here, to denote "a promise on the part of God,"attended with pledges, and demanding, on the part of man, in order to avail himself of its benefits, a specified course of conduct. The "covenant"is therefore another name for denoting two things on the part of God:

(1)    A "command,"which man is not at liberty to reject, as he would be if it were a literal covenant; and,

(2)    A "promise,"which is to be fulfilled only on the condition of obedience. The covenant with Abraham was simply a "promise"to give him the land, and to make him a great nation, etc. It was never proposed to Abraham with the supposition that he was at liberty to reject it, or to refuse to comply with its conditions. Circumcision was appointed as the mark or indication that Abraham and those thus designated were the persons included in the gracious purpose and promise. It served to separate them as a special people; a people whose unique characteristic it was that they obeyed and served the God who had made the promise to Abraham. The phrase "covenant of circumcision"means, therefore, the covenant or promise which God made to Abraham, of which circumcision was the distinguishing "mark"or "sign."

The twelve patriarchs - The word "patriarch"properly denotes "the father and ruler of a family."But it is commonly applied, by way of eminence, to "the progenitors"of the Jewish race, particularly to "the twelve sons of Jacob."See the notes on Act 2:29.

Barnes: Act 7:9

Moved with envy - That is, dissatisfied with the favor which their father Jacob showed Joseph, and envious at the dreams which indicated that he was to be raised to remarkable honor above his parents and brethren, Gen 37:3-11.

Sold Joseph into Egypt - Sold him, that he might be taken to Egypt. This was done at the suggestion of "Judah,"who advised it that Joseph might not be put to death by his brethren, Gen 37:28. It is possible that Stephen, by this fact, might have designed to prepare the way for a severe rebuke of the Jews for having dealt in a similar manner with their Messiah.

But God was with him - God protected him, and overruled all these wicked doings, so that he was raised to extraordinary honors.

Barnes: Act 7:10

And delivered him ... - That is, restored him to liberty from his servitude and humiliation, and raised him up to high honors and offices in Egypt.

Favour and wisdom - The favor was the result of his wisdom. His wisdom was particularly evinced in interpreting the dreams of Pharaoh, Gen. 41.

And he made him governor ... - Gen 41:40.

All his house - All the family, or all the court and government of the nation.

Barnes: Act 7:11

Now there came a dearth - A famine, Gen 41:54.

And Chanaan - Jacob was living at that time in Canaan.

Found no sustenance - No food; no means of living.

Barnes: Act 7:12

Was corn in Egypt - The word "corn"here rather denotes "wheat."See the notes on Mat 12:1.

Our fathers - His ten sons; all his sons except Joseph and Benjamin, Gen. 42: Stephen here "refers"only to the history, without entering into details. By this general reference he sufficiently showed that he believed what Moses had spoken, and did not intend to show him disrespect.

Barnes: Act 7:13

Joseph was made known - Gen 45:4.

Joseph’ s kindred ... - His relatives; his family, Gen 45:16.

Barnes: Act 7:14

All his kindred - His father and family, Gen 45:17-28; 46:1-26.

Threescore and fifteen souls - Seventy-five persons. There has been much perplexity felt in the explanation of this passage. In Gen 46:26, Exo 1:5, and Deu 10:22, it is expressly said that the number which went down to Egypt consisted of 70 persons. The question is, in what way these accounts can be reconciled? It is evident that Stephen has followed the account which is given by the Septuagint. In Gen 46:27, that version reads, "But the sons of Joseph who were with him in Egypt were nine souls; all the souls of the house of Jacob which came with Jacob into Egypt were seventy-five souls."This number is made out by adding these nine souls to the 66 mentioned in Gen 46:26. The difference between the Septuagint and Moses is, that the former mentions five descendants of Joseph who are not recorded by the latter. The "names"of the sons of Ephraim and Manasseh are recorded in 1Ch 7:14-21. Their names were Ashriel, Machir, Zelophehad, Peresh, sons of Manasseh; and Shuthelah, son of Ephraim. Why the Septuagint inserted these, it may not be easy to see. But such was evidently the fact; and the fact accords accurately with the historic record, though Moses did not insert their names. The solution of difficulties in regard to chronology is always difficult; and what might be entirely apparent to a Jew in the time of Stephen, may be wholly inexplicable to us.

Barnes: Act 7:15-16

And died - Gen 49:33.

He and our fathers - The time which the Israelites remained in Egypt was 215 years, so that all the sons of Jacob were deceased before the Jews went out to go to the land of Canaan.

And were carried over - Jacob himself was buried in the field of Macpelah by Joseph and his brethren, Gen. 1, 13. It is expressly said that the bones of Joseph were carried by the Israelites when they went into the land of Canaan, and buried in Shechem, Jos 24:32; compare Gen 50:25. No mention is made in the Old Testament of their carrying the bones of any of the other patriarchs, but the thing is highly probable in itself. If the descendants of Joseph carried his bones, it would naturally occur to them to take also the bones of each of the patriarchs, and give them an honorable sepulchre together in the land of promise. Josephus ( Antiq. , book 2, chapter 8, section 2) says that "the posterity and sons of these men (of the brethren of Joseph), after some time, carried their bodies and buried them in Hebron; but as to the bones of Joseph, they carried them into the land of Canaan afterward, when the Hebrews went out of Egypt."This is in accordance with the common opinion of the Jewish writers, that they were buried in Hebron. Yet the tradition is not uniform. Some of the Jews affirm that they were buried in Sychem (Kuinoel). As the Scriptures do not anywhere deny that the patriarchs were buried in Sychem, it cannot be proved that Stephen was in error. There is one circumstance of strong probability to show that he was correct. At the time when this defense was delivered, "Sychem"was in the hands of the Samaritans, between whom and the Jews there was a violent hostility. Of course, the Jews would not be willing to concede that the Samaritans had the bones of their ancestors, and hence, perhaps the opinion had been maintained that they were buried in Hebron.

Into Sychem - This was a town or village near to Samaria. It was called Sichar (see the notes on Joh 4:5), "Shechem,"and "Sychem."It is now called "Naplous"or "Napolose,"and is ten miles from Shiloh, and about forty from Jerusalem, toward the north.

That Abraham bought - The word "Abraham"here has given rise to considerable perplexity, and it is now pretty generally conceded that it is a mistake. It is certain, from Gen 33:19 and Jos 24:32, that this piece of land was bought, not by Abraham, but by "Jacob,"of the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem. The land which "Abraham"purchased was the cave of Macpelah, of the sons of Heth, in Hebron, Gen. 23. Various solutions have been proposed of this difficulty, which it is not necessary to detail. It may be remarked, however:

(1)    That as the text now stands, it is an evident error. This is clear from the passages cited from the Old Testament above.

(2)\caps1     i\caps0 t is not at all probable that either Stephen or Luke would have committed such an error. Every consideration must lead us to the conclusion that they were too well acquainted with such prominent points of the Jewish history to commit an error like this.

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 he "probability,"therefore, is, that the error has arisen since; but how, is not known, nor is there any way of ascertaining. All the ancient versions agree in reading "Abraham."Only one manuscript reads "Abraham our father."Some have supposed, therefore, that it was written "which our father bought,"and that some early transcriber inserted the name of Abraham. Others, that the name was omitted entirely by Stephen; and then the antecedent to the verb "bought"will be "Jacob,"in verse 15, according with the fact. Other modes have been proposed also, but none are entirely satisfactory. If there was positive proof of Stephen’ s inspiration, or if it were necessary to make that out, the difficulty would be much greater. But it has already been remarked that there is no decisive evidence of that, and it is not necessary to make out that point to defend the Scriptures. All that can be demanded of the historian is, that he should give a fair account of the defense as it was delivered; and though the probability is that Stephen would not commit Such an error, yet, admitting that he did, it by no means proves that "Luke"was not inspired, or that Luke has committed any error in recording "what was actually said."

Of the sons of Emmor - In the Hebrew Gen 33:19, "the children of Hamor"- but different ways of rendering the same word.

Barnes: Act 7:17

The time of the promise - The time of the "fulfillment"of the promise.

The people grew ... - Exo 1:7-9.

Barnes: Act 7:18

Till another king arose - This is quoted from Exo 1:8. What was the "name"of this king is not certainly known. The "common"name of all the kings of Egypt was "Pharaoh,"as "Caesar"became the common name of the emperors of Rome after the time of Julius Caesar: thus we say, Augustus Caesar, Tiberius Caesar, etc. It has commonly been supposed to have been the celebrated Rameses, the sixth king of the eighteenth dynasty, and the event is supposed to have occurred about 1559 years before the Christian era. M. Champollion supposes that his name was Mandonei, whose reign commenced in 1585 b.c., and ended 1565 years before Christ (Essay on the Hieroglyphic System, p. 94, 95). Sir Jas. G. Wilkinson supposes that it was Amosis, or Ames, the "first"king of the eighteenth dynasty (Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, vol. 1, pp. 42, 2nd ed.). "The present knowledge of Egyptian history is too imperfect to enable us to determine this point"(Prof. Hackett).

Which knew not Joseph - It can hardly be supposed that he would be ignorant of the name and deeds of Joseph; and this expression, therefore, probably means that he did not favour the designs of Joseph; he did not remember the benefits which he had conferred on the nation; or furnish the patronage for the kindred of Joseph which had been secured for them by Joseph under a former reign. National ingratitude has not been uncommon in the world, and a change of dynasty has often obliterated all memory of former obligations and compacts.

Barnes: Act 7:19

Dealt subtilly - He acted deceitfully; he used fraud. The cunning or deceitful attempt which is referred to, is his endeavour to weaken and destroy the Jewish people by causing their male children to be put to death, Exo 1:22.

Our kindred - Our nation, or our ancestors.

And evil-entreated - Was unjust and cruel toward them.

So that ... - For that purpose, or to "cause"them to cast them out. He dealt with them in this cruel manner, hoping that the Israelites themselves would destroy their own sons, that they might not grow up to experience the same sufferings as their fathers had. The cunning or subtilty of Pharaoh extended to everything that he did to oppress, to keep under, and to destroy the children of Israel.

Barnes: Act 7:20

In which time ... - During this period of oppression. See Exo 2:2, etc.

Was exceeding fair - Greek: "was fair to God"; properly rendered, "was very handsome."The word "God"in the Greek here in accordance with the Hebrew usage, by which anything that is "very handsome, lofty, or grand"is thus designated. Thus, Psa 36:7, "mountains of God,"mean lofty mountains; Psa 80:11, "cedars of God,"mean lofty, beautiful cedars. Thus, Nineveh is called "a great city to God"(Jon 3:3, Greek), meaning a very great city. The expression here simply means that Moses was "very fair,"or handsome. Compare Heb 11:23, where he is called "a proper child"; that is, a "handsome child."It would seem from this that Moses was preserved by his mother on account of his "beauty"; and this is hinted at in Exo 2:2. And it would also seem from this that Pharaoh had succeeded by his oppressions in what he had attempted; and that it was not unusual for parents among the Jews to expose their children, or to put them to death.

Barnes: Act 7:21

Was cast out - When he was exposed on the banks of the Nile, Exo 2:3.

And nourished him - Adopted him, and treated him as her own son, Exo 2:10. It is implied in this that he was educated by her. An adopted son in the family of Pharaoh would be favored with all the advantages which the land could furnish for an education.

Barnes: Act 7:22

Moses was learned - Or, was "instructed."It does not mean that he had that learning, but that he was carefully "trained"or educated in that wisdom. The passage does not express the fact that Moses was distinguished for "learning,"but that he was carefully "educated,"or that pains were taken to make him learned.

In all the wisdom ... - The learning of the Egyptians was confined chiefly to astrology, to the interpretation of dreams, to medicine, to mathematics, and to their sacred science or traditionary doctrines about religion, which were concealed chiefly under their hieroglyphics. Their learning is not infrequently spoken of in the Scriptures, 1Ki 4:30; compare Isa 19:11-12. Their knowledge is equally celebrated in the pagan world. It is known that science was carried from Egypt to Phoenicia, and thence to Greece; and not a few of the Grecian philosophers traveled to Egypt in pursuit of knowledge. Herodotus himself frankly concedes that the Greeks derived very much of their knowledge from Egypt. (See Rawlinson’ s Herodotus, vol. 2, pp. 80, 81; Herodotus, bk. 2, pp. 50, 51.)

And was mighty - Was powerful, or was distinguished. This means that he was eminent in Egypt before he conducted the children of Israel forth. It refers to his addresses to Pharaoh, and to the miracles which he performed "before"their departure.

In words - From Exo 4:10, it seems that Moses was "slow of speech, and of a slow tongue."When it is said that he was mighty in words, it means that he was mighty in his communications to Pharaoh, though they were spoken by his brother Aaron. Aaron was in his place, and "Moses"addressed Pharaoh through him, who was appointed to deliver the message, Exo 4:11-16.

Deeds - Miracles, Exo. 7, etc.

Barnes: Act 7:23

Full forty years old - This is not recorded in the Old Testament; but it is a constant tradition of the Jews that Moses was 40 years of age when he undertook to deliver them. Thus, it is said, "Moses lived in the palace of Pharaoh forty years; he was forty years in Midian; and he ministered to Israel forty years"(Kuinoel).

To visit ... - Probably with a view of delivering them from their oppressive bondage. Compare Act 7:25.

Barnes: Act 7:24

Suffer wrong - The wrong or injury was, that the Egyptian was smiting the Hebrew, Exo 2:11-12.

Smote the Egyptian - He slew him, and buried him in the sand,

Barnes: Act 7:25

For he supposed - This is not mentioned by Moses; but it is not at all improbable. When they saw him "alone"contending with the Egyptian; when it was understood that he had come and taken vengeance on one of their oppressors, it might have been presumed that he regarded himself as directed by God to interpose, and save the people.

Poole: Act 7:1

Act 7:1-8 Stephen, called upon to answer the charge against him,

relateth how God called Abraham, and gave him and his

seed the land of Canaan by promise,

Act 7:9-16 how Joseph was sold by his brethren, and Jacob with

his family went down into Egypt,

Act 7:17-36 how, when they were oppressed by the Egyptians, Moses

was born, and sent to deliver Israel out of Egypt,

Act 7:37-43 that this same Moses witnessed of Christ, received the

law, and experienced the disobedience and idolatry of

their forefathers,

Act 7:44-50 who had the tabernacle of witness, till Solomon built

the temple,

Act 7:51-53 He reproacheth his hearers with imitating their

fathers’ rebellion against God, and persecution of his

prophets, by having themselves murdered Christ, and

transgressed the law they had received,

Act 7:54-60 Stung with reproach, they stone him, looking up with

faith unto God, and calling upon Jesus to receive his

soul, and forgive his persecutors,

Then said the high priest who was resolved to condemn any, right or wrong, that should profess Christ, as appears Joh 9:22 .

Are these things so? That he might seem just, he gives him a kind of liberty to answer for himself; not to defend his doctrine, but; to know out of his own mouth whether he preached it, or not.

Poole: Act 7:2

Brethren to take away any prejudice they might have conceived against him, and to recommend, not his person as much as his doctrine to them, he calls them brethren;

1. As hoping in the same promises with them;

2. Observing the same law;

3. Worshipping the same God.

Fathers a word of respect; especially the elder amongst them, or his judges: thus the Roman senators were called fathers; and magistrates ought to be reverenced as the fathers of their country.

The God of glory who is also called, Psa 24:7 , the King of glory; from whom all glory descends to angels or men. By this, and what follows, St. Stephen would show that he honoured the true God, and thought respectfully of the law, the temple, and the patriarchs, whom he was accused to contemn and disgrace. He names Abraham, because he was accounted the first father and patriarch of the Jews, and had the first clear promise that the Messiah should come of his seed.

Mesopotamia is sometimes taken strictly for that country which lies between the two rivers, Tigris and Euphrates, from whence it had its name; sometimes more largely, including Chaldea; and so it is taken here.

Charran a city of the Parthians, in the borders of Mesopotamia, towards the land of Canaan.

Poole: Act 7:3

This command given unto Abraham we read of, Gen 12:1,5,6 ; and it is here the rather spoken of by St. Stephen, to prove that Abraham was in the favour of God, and did truly serve him, before he ever saw the land of Canaan, and before the ceremonial law was given by Moses, and, much more, before the temple was built; and therefore it could not be blasphemy in him to hold that God might be served without those ceremonies, and worshipped elsewhere than in Jerusalem.

The land which I shall show thee this was the glory of Abraham’ s faith, that it submitted absolutely to God, and enabled Abraham to go he knew not whither, Heb 11:8 , for God did not so much as name the place he would have him go unto.

Poole: Act 7:4

Abraham had as great a love to his kindred and native country as others have; but he had a greater faith, which made him yield to God’ s call and command, and follow from place to place the will of God, who is said here to have removed Abraham, and does choose the inheritance and habitation for his people, Psa 47:4 .

Poole: Act 7:5

He gave him none inheritance in it it is true that Abraham had a field, and the cave of Mach-pelah, Gen 23:9 ; but that was of no use to Abraham whilst alive, but to bury him in when dead; besides, it was not as an inheritance by God’ s gift, but it was purchased with his money.

Not so much as to set his foot on whereby the least parcel of ground is meant: hence St. Stephen would prove, that Abraham’ s happiness, and theirs too, if they rightly understood it, did not depend upon the enjoyment of that place and country.

And to his seed after him faith met with a double difficulty, not only Abraham must believe he should have all that country given him for an inheritance, in which he had not a foot of land, but he must also believe that it should be his seed’ s after him, whenas he had no children; but thus faith is

the evidence of things not seen Heb 11:1 .

Poole: Act 7:6

Should sojourn in a strange land as men which dwell in houses that are not their own; which seem to contradict the promise mentioned in the foregoing verse; but it is only to make Abraham the more believe against hope in hope, as it is said, Rom 4:18 : though there were never so many difficulties more, for what God hath promised faith would overcome them all. This very space of

four hundred years is also mentioned, Gen 15:13 ; which is thus computed: from the birth of Isaac (the promised seed) to the birth of Jacob, sixty years; from Jacob’ s birth to his going into Egypt, one hundred and thirty years; from thence to their deliverance out of Egypt, two hundred and ten years; this period is accounted, Exo 12:40,41 , to be four hundred and thirty years; which also St. Paul reckons by, Gal 3:17 ; but then thirty years is added unto the account, being the space of time between the first promise made unto Abraham of this seed, and the birth of Isaac, in whom the promise was to be fulfilled; St. Stephen here reckoning only from the birth of Isaac.

Poole: Act 7:7

Will I judge or punish; and so the Egyptians were punished, not by human means, but by Divine power, and with God’ s own immediate hand, and that in the fulness of time, the very night in which God’ s promise was to take effect: and therefore it is a night to be much observed, Exo 12:42 , as showing, that the sabbath of his people, and the destruction of his enemies, slumber not, 2Pe 2:3 .

Serve me in this place in Mount Horeb. The reason why God delivers his people is, that they may serve him, as Luk 1:74,75 ; and so long as God hath any work for them to do in this world, he will preserve and deliver them.

Poole: Act 7:8

He gave him Abraham, of whom he was speaking, the convenant of circumcision; of which covenant, circumcision was the sign and seal by which, on the part of Abraham and his seed it was stipulated, that they should put off all carnal affections.

Begat Isaac after the promise: so that the promises were not given for Isaac’ s sake, but Isaac was given for the promise’ sake; which made these things more fit to represent gospel grace, of which St. Stephen was preaching.

The twelve patriarchs the heads of the tribes, from whom they were denominated. Of this genealogy, see Mat 1:1,2 , &c., and the history of it in Genesis.

Poole: Act 7:9

Moved with envy enraged: the holy martyr accommodates his apology so, as that they may yet have occasion to reflect on themselves; for as they had sold our Saviour unto strangers, so had their fathers

sold Joseph. But God was with him to favour and bless him; for God’ s presence brings all good along with it: with this he comforts himself and others, that it was not without example or precedent that God should be with such whom their persecutors could not endure.

Poole: Act 7:10

And delivered him out of all his afflictions the effect of God’ s presence with him, which to his people is always in an especial manner, not only as he is with all other creatures, but as the soul is with the body, most effectually, so is God with them.

And gave him favour and wisdom in the sight of Pharaoh: thus God brought Daniel into favour, Dan 1:9 , and hath all hearts in his hands.

Poole: Act 7:11

A dearth this is mentioned, Gen 41:54 , &c.

And great affliction as seldom any mischief comes alone, rapine and many diseases follow famine.

Found no sustenance any coarse diet, grass or herbs.

Poole: Act 7:12

The history is known, Gen 42:1-38 . Our fathers our progenitors, Jacob’ s sons, from whom we are descended.

Poole: Act 7:13

Upon their second coming into Egypt, Gen 45:3,4,16 , Joseph made himself known unto them.

Joseph’ s kindred was made known unto Pharaoh for the continuance of their sustenance, and fulfilling of what was foretold.

Poole: Act 7:14

All his kindred his affinity, and not consanguinity only, which may be the reason why, though in Gen 46:26 it is said, that all

the souls that came with Jacob into Egypt were threescore and six ( it being then added, they were all such as came out of his loins), yet it is said they were seventy persons, Gen 46:27 , Jacob, Joseph, and Joseph’ s two sons (who were also of the promised seed) being added unto the number. In this account of St. Stephen, his sons’ wives might be added, which make up seventy-five. There are other accounts of this difference; but it is not of any consequence as to faith and holy living, which are only necessary unto salvation: the wonderful increase to so many hundred thousands of men, besides children, spoken of, Exo 12:37 , notwithstanding the barbarous cruelty of the Egyptians, is to be admired.

Souls the nobler and better part, by which they are numbered, and according unto which they are esteemed by God.

Poole: Act 7:15

Which St. Stephen puts them in mind of the rather, that he might insinuate, no country, nor place, nor temple, were so necessary, but that (notwithstanding they had none of them) their forefathers did live and die in the fear and favour of God, although in Egypt, out of the Promised Land, &c.

Poole: Act 7:16

That they carried Joseph to bury him in Canaan, according to the oath he made them take, Gen 1:25 , is certain; and that this was desired to be done for him out of faith, Heb 11:22 ; but is not so certain (unless this place be so understood) that the rest of the patriarchs were so translated after their death: yet it is very likely; for, first: They had as much reason to desire it as Joseph had; they believed the same promises, and had an interest in that land as well as he. Secondly: Their posterity bore the same respect unto them that Joseph’ s family did to him. Thirdly: It seems alike reasonable, that none of those twelve heirs to the land of Canaan should be left in the land of bondage. This place is acknowledged to be most difficult, and the difficulties are better not to be mentioned than ill solved, which the nature of these notes (not to mention other reasons) might occasion: whosoever will consider the intended shortness of the story, with the usual idioms of the Hebrew language, from which it was deduced, may take this as a paraphrase upon the whole verse: And Jacob and our fathers died, and were removed to Sychem, and were laid in sepulchres, in that which Abraham bought for money, and in that which was bought of the sons of Emmor, the father of Sychem. Dr. Lightfoot, in locum.

Poole: Act 7:17

Of the promise of the fulfilling of the promise, either of the increase of his seed, or of their deliverance out of bondage, for both were promised, Gen 22:17 ; though at that very time there were the greatest endeavours to hinder either when God accomplished both.

Poole: Act 7:18

These words are taken from the Septuagint, Exo 1:8 .

Poole: Act 7:19

Pharaoh resolves to deal (as he thought) wisely, Exo 1:10 , and it is acknowledged that the Egyptians dealt subtilly with them, Psa 105:25 . For they do not at once destroy them, which might have been hazardous, the Israelites being so numerous; neither could Egypt well spare at once so many inhabitants; (too great and sudden evacuations cause swoonings); but they endeavour their ruin by degrees:

1. Wasting them by hard labours.

2. Commanding the midwives privately to kill their males.

3. Casting out, or exposing, any whom they found spared.

Yet this people, attempted upon by so many secret and open means to bring them to destruction, God did preserve; and so he will his church, (which they did typify), maugre all the endeavours the most potent malice can use against it.

Poole: Act 7:20

Exceeding fair or, fair to God; which though some understand of the inward beauty of the mind, (which is indeed the most admirable), yet in this place there is no more to be understood by it, than the wonderful beauty of his body, which God bestowed in an extraordinary measure upon him, that it might be a means to attract the care and pity of Pharaoh’ s danghter, as it afterwards came to pass: besides, that which is eminent in any kind, is, by a Hebraism, said to be of God: upon this account Nineveh is called a city of God, Jon 3:3 ; and we read of Rachel’ s great wrestlings, or wrestlings of God, Gen 30:8 . Josephus says, that Moses was so beautiful, that all who passed by left the business they were about to gaze at him, Antiq. ii. 5.

Poole: Act 7:21

Was cast out exposed and left, Exo 2:2 , &c.; now was the time for God to take him up, as in Psa 27:10 .

Pharaoh’ s daughter an enemy to God’ s Israel; yet God did make use of her to bring tip and educate Moses, who was their deliverer, adopting him for her son, Exo 2:10 , and giving him education accordingly.

Poole: Act 7:22

Learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians the Egyptians were anciently famous for learning, especially in astronomy, and some other parts of philosophy.

Mighty in words he was eloquent.

And in deeds his deeds were equal to his words; he could do, as well as say, what became him.

Poole: Act 7:23

Forty years old this age of Moses is not set down in his history, but they might have it by tradition, which is here confirmed unto us by the holy penman: these forty years Moses spent in Pharaoh’ s court.

It came into his heart it speaks these thoughts and resolutions to have been from God, that such a great courtier should so far debase himself; therefore this is deservedly attributed unto his faith, Heb 11:24 , which is the gift of God, Eph 2:8 .

Poole: Act 7:24

This fact of Moses some defend by the law of nature, which allows us to protect the innocent; but many things we know were done by an extraordinary warrant, which we are not to imitate; nor by our own authority to avenge ourselves or others.

Poole: Act 7:25

This they might have inferred,

1. From his extraordinary deliverance out of the Egyptians’ hands, and out of the river, when young.

2. From his readiness to defend them: it was wonderful, that such a one as he was, and might have been, should mind them.

3. From the drawing near of the time of their deliverance, which they could not, without negligence, be wholly ignorant of.

By his hand by his means and ministry.

But they understood not: stupidity is frequently charged upon this people: they then did not receive Moses, as these now would not receive Christ.

Haydock: Act 7:1

Are these things so? The high priest speaks after this mild manner, being either terrified, or charmed with his angelical countenance. St. Stephen's design in this discourse, was to shew them, first, that he was falsely accused of speaking either against Moses, or the law, for which he shews so great a veneration. 2. He puts them in mind, that the true worship of God may subsist without a temple, as it did in the time of Abraham, and the patriarchs, before the law was given, or the temple built. 3. That as their forefathers had been rebellious to Moses, and disobedient to the prophets, whom they many times persecuted even to death, so they had lately resisted, persecuted, and crucified their Messias. (Witham)

Haydock: Act 7:5

Not the pace of a foot; not so much as a foot of land, that is, to dwell in, though he bought there a place to bury in. (Genesis xxiii. 9.) (Witham)

Haydock: Act 7:6

For four hundred years, counting from the birth of Isaac, which was twenty-five years after the call and promises made to Abraham. It is certainly the Israelites were not four hundred years in Egypt. (Witham) ---

Four hundred. These words are taken from the fifteenth chapter of Genesis, in which Moses mentions the same number of years. This calculation in made from the entry of Abraham into Chanaan, to the departure of the Israelites out of Egypt. Strictly, the Israelites did not remain in Egypt more than two hundred and fifteen years.

Haydock: Act 7:7

The nation which they shall serve, I will judge. The meaning is, that God would afflict the Egyptians with divers plagues, or visible punishments, before they dismissed the Israelites. (Witham)

Haydock: Act 7:8

The covenant, or the testament, [1] and alliance of circumcision, by which the Israelites should be known to be the elect people of God. (Witham) ---

Literally, he gave them the alliance of circumcision; he made with him an alliance, of which circumcision was the seal. (Bible de Vence)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Testamentum, Greek: ten diatheken. See Hebrews ix. 16.

Haydock: Act 7:10

Gave him favour and wisdom in the sight of Pharao. Some understand divine graces, and gifts of prophecy, and the like: others, that he made him find favour in the sight of king Pharao, who appointed him to be governor of Egypt. (Witham)

Haydock: Act 7:16

Which Abraham bought ... of the sons of Hemor, the son of Sichem. This purchase made by Abraham must be different from the purchase of a field made afterwards by Jacob. (Genesis xxxiii. 19.) See a Lapide, the author of the Analysis, dissert. 23. P. Alleman, &c. (Witham) ---

Abraham bought. There must be an error of the copyist in this verse. Either the word Abraham ought to be omitted, or changed into Jacob. For it is plain, from Genesis xxxiii. 19. that the latter bought the land from the sons of Hemor. The Hebrew says, he bought it for one hundred kesitha, which some translate pieces of silver; others, lambs. As for Abraham, and Jacob, they were buried in the cavern of Mambre, which Abraham had purchased from the children of Heth. (Genesis xxiii.) (Calmet) ---

It is supposed that originally the name of Jacob was given, abridged JAB, and that the first letter having disappeared, the two remaining letters were taken by misprision, for the abridgment of the name of Abraham. Hemor was the father of Sichem, and here the Greek text simply calls him Hemor of Sichem. (Bible de Vence)

Haydock: Act 7:19

Dealing craftily, circumventing craftily, afflicting, and endeavouring to extirpate the race of the Israelites. (Witham)

Haydock: Act 7:20

Moses ... was acceptable to God. [2] Greatly favoured both with gifts of nature and grace. Some expound it, was extremely fair or beautiful. (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Gratus Deo, Greek: asteios to theo. Acceptable to God. It may also signify, beautiful in the sight of God, that is, in the style of the Scriptures, very beautiful.

Haydock: Act 7:21

Philo believes that the princess feigned him to be her own child; Moses denied that he was, and would not take advantage of this adoption. (Hebrews xi. 24.)

Haydock: Act 7:22

In words and in deeds. Moses was persuasive and powerful in reasoning; but had an impediment in his speech, as we know from Exodus iv. 10. and iv. 12. He possessed, moreover, strength, energy, and grandeur, in his discourse. Of this we have abundant proofs in his books. He is inimitable in narrating, as often as he writes laws, composes canticles, or makes harangues. He is simple, clear, sublime, vehement, concise, prolix, and rapid, in turns, as the nature of his subject requires. He was likewise powerful in work. All his conduct was wise, virtuous, enlightened, as well in affairs of policy, as in war. He was an able captain, before he put himself at the head of the Israelites. (Calmet) ---

Josephus assures us that he became a great conqueror.

Gill: Act 7:1

Then said the high priest,.... The Ethiopic version adds, "to him"; that is, to Stephen; for to him he addressed himself: or he "asked him", as the Syriac version renders it; he put the following question to him:

are these things so? is it true what they say, that thou hast spoken blasphemous words against the temple, and the law, and hast said that Jesus of Nazareth will destroy the one, and change the other? what hast thou to say for thyself, and in thine own defence? this high priest was either Annas, or rather Caiaphas; See Gill on Act 4:6.

Gill: Act 7:2

And he said,.... Stephen replied, in answer to the high priest's question, and addressed himself to the whole sanhedrim, saying:

men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; to the following oration and defence; he calls them men, brethren, by an usual Hebraism, that is, "brethren"; and that, because they were of the same nation; for it was common with the Jews to call those of their own country and religion, brethren; and he calls them "fathers", because of their age and dignity, being the great council of the nation, and chosen out of the senior and wiser part of the people:

the God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham; he calls God "the God of glory", because he is glorious in himself, in all his persons, perfections, and works, and is to be glorified by his people; and his glory is to be sought by all his creatures, and to be the end of all their actions; and the rather he makes use of this epithet of him, to remove the calumny against him, that he had spoke blasphemous things against God; and because God appeared in a glorious manner to Abraham, either in a vision, or by an angel, or in some glorious form, or another; and it is observable, that when the Jews speak of Abraham's deliverance out of the fiery furnace, for so they interpret Ur of the Chaldees, they give to God much such a title; they say ^r.

""the King of glory" stretched out his right hand, and delivered him out of the fiery furnace, according to Gen 15:7.''

Stephen uses a like epithet; and he calls Abraham "our father", he being a Jew, and according to the common usage of the nation: and this appearance of God to Abraham was "when he was in Mesopotamia"; a country that lay between the two rivers Tigris and Euphrates, from whence it had its name; and is the same with Aram Naharaim, the Scriptures speak of; See Gill on Act 2:9. Of this appearance of God to Abraham, mentioned by Stephen, the Scriptures are silent; but the Jewish writers seem to hint at it, when they say ^s,

"thus said the holy blessed God to Abraham, as thou hast enlightened for me Mesopotamia and its companions, come and give light before me in the land of Israel.''

And again, mentioning those words in Isa 41:8 "the seed of Abraham my friend, whom I have taken from the ends of the earth"; add by way of explanation, from Mesopotamia and its companions ^t: and this was

before he dwelt in Charan; or Haran; see Gen 11:31 where the Septuagint call it "Charan", as here; and by Herodish ^u it is called καρραι, where Antoninus was killed; and by Pliny ^w, "Carra"; and by Ptolomy ^x, "Carroe"; it was famous for the slaughter of M. Crassus, by the Parthians ^y. R. Benjamin gives this account of it in his time ^z;

"in two days I came to ancient Haran, and in it were about twenty Jews, and there was as it were a synagogue of Ezra; but in the place where was the house of Abraham our father, there was no building upon it; but the Ishmaelites (or Mahometans) honour that place, and come thither to pray.''

Stephanus ^a says it was a city of Mesopotamia, so called from "Carra", a river in Syria.

Gill: Act 7:3

And said unto him,.... Not the words in Gen 12:1 for they were said in Haran, these in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt there, and besides, these are different from them; no mention is here made of getting out from his father's house, as there; because his father's house sent along with him, or rather he with them from Mesopotamia to Haran:

get thee out of thy country; from Ur of the Chaldees, where he was born:

and from thy kindred; his relations that lived in the same place, who did not go along with him:

and come into the land which I shall show thee; not telling him the place whither he was to go; wherefore when he had his first call, and first set out, he knew not whither he went; see Heb 11:8. This was an emblem of the calling of the saints out of the world, from their former course of life, and from among their old companions and friends, to follow Christ whithersoever he is pleased to lead them; and who at last will bring them safe to the land afar off, the better and heavenly country.

Gill: Act 7:4

Then came he out of the land of the Chaldeans,.... The same with Mesopotamia; so Pliny says ^b, that

"because of Babylon the head of the Chaldean nation---the other part of Mesopotamia and Assyria is called Babylonia.''

And he places Babylon in Mesopotamia; it was out of Ur, in the land of the Chaldeans particularly, that Abraham came, upon his first call:

and dwelt in Charan: according to the Jewish writers ^c, he dwelt here five years:

and from thence, when his father was dead; who died in Haran, as is said in Gen 11:32 and that it was after the death of Terah his father, that Abraham went from thence, is manifest from Gen 11:31 and yet a Jew ^d has the impudence to charge Stephen with a mistake, and to affirm, that Abraham went from Haran, whilst his father was yet living; proceeding upon a false hypothesis, that Terah begat Abraham when he was seventy years of age: but Philo the Jew is expressly with Stephen in this circumstance; he says ^e,

"I think no man versed in the laws can be ignorant, that Abraham, when he first went out of the land of Chaldea, dwelt in Charan; τελευτησαντος τε αυτω του πατρος εκενθι "but his father dying there", he removed from thence:''

and so says Stephen:

he removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell; the land of Canaan; see Gen 12:5 or "he removed himself", as the Ethiopic version renders it; or rather "God removed him", as the Syriac version reads, and so one copy in the Bodleian library; for it was by the order and assistance, and under the direction and protection of God, that he came into that land: after the words

wherein ye now dwell, Beza's ancient copy adds, "and our fathers that were before us".

Gill: Act 7:5

And he gave him none inheritance in it,.... To be personally enjoyed by him; and which was a great trial to Abraham's faith, to be brought out of his country, and into another land, and which was promised to him and his; and yet, as not the whole, so not a single part of it was given him to possess:

no, not so much as to set his foot on: so that when Sarah his wife died, he was obliged to buy a piece of ground for a burying place to bury her in: and which could not be said to be given him by the Lord, for he bought it with his money:

yet he promised that he would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child; which was another exercise of Abraham's faith, that he should have a whole country promised him and his seed, and yet had no seed given him; see Gen 12:7.

Gill: Act 7:6

And God spake on this wise,.... The Vulgate Latin and Syriac versions read, "and God spake to him", and so does one of Beza's copies; and the Ethiopic version reads it both ways, God "said thus to Abraham", as in Gen 15:13.

That his seed should sojourn in a strange land; or "be a stranger in a land not theirs"; first in the land of Canaan, and then in Egypt, which were possessed by other persons, the natives of them:

and that they should bring them into bondage; that is, the inhabitants of the lands, and particularly Egypt, should bring the seed of Abraham into bondage, as they did; and very hard bondage it was, at least some part of it:

and entreat them evil four hundred years; which must be reckoned not from the time of their going down into Egypt, which to their coming up out of it were but two hundred and ten years, but from the birth of Isaac: which was as soon as Abraham had the promised seed, and may be reckoned after this manner; from the birth of Isaac to the birth of Jacob, sixty years, Gen 25:26 and from thence to the coming of Jacob into Egypt, one hundred and thirty years, Gen 47:9 and from thence to the coming of the children of Israel out of Egypt, two hundrd and ten years; which in all make up four hundred years; for the sojourning and evil entreating of Abraham's seed are not to be confined to the land of Egypt, but belong to other lands, where they were within this time, though that land is more especially intended; and so the Septuagint version renders the text in Exo 12:40. "Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, which they (and some copies add, and their fathers) sojourned in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, were four hundred and thirty years": and this text is differently read in the Talmuds, in one of them thus ^f; "and the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt", ובכל הארצות, "and in all the lands, were four hundred and thirty years"; and in the other of them thus ^g, "and the sojourning of the children of Israel who dwelt in Egypt", ובשאר ארצות, "and in the rest of the lands, were four hundred years"; upon which latter the gloss has these words;

"from the time that the decree of the captivity was made between them to the birth of Isaac, were thirty years; and from the birth of Isaac, until the Israelites went out of Egypt, were four hundred years; take out of them the sixty of Isaac, and the one hundred and thirty that Jacob had lived when he went down into Egypt, and there remain two hundred and ten; and so is the decree, that "thy seed shall be a stranger in a land not theirs", Gen 15:13 and it is not said in Egypt, but in a land not theirs; and when Isaac was born, Abraham was a sojourner in the land of the Philistines; and from thence, till they went out of Egypt, it will be found that Isaac and his seed who were the seed of Abraham, were strangers: and the thirty years before that are not numbered in the decree;''

See Gill on Gal 3:17.

Gill: Act 7:7

And the nation to whom they shall be in bondage,.... At the end of the four hundred years, and which was the Egyptian nation:

I will judge, said God; that is, condemn and punish them, as he did, by inflicting the ten plagues upon them:

and after that they shall come forth; out of the land of Egypt, and their hard bondage there; and which was brought about by the judgments executed upon the Egyptians:

and serve me in this place; in the land of Canaan; though these words are not to be found in Gen 15:13 what comes nearest them is in Exo 3:12. "Ye shall serve God upon this mountain"; meaning Mount Horeb, where Moses then was, and from whence the law was afterwards given.

Gill: Act 7:8

And he gave him the covenant of circumcision,.... Or the covenant, of which circumcision was a sign or token, Gen 17:11. Stephen speaks here in the language of the Jews, who are wont to speak of circumcision after this manner; hence in the Jewish liturgy, there is a collect, לברית מילה, "for the covenant of circumcision" ^h; and so it is said ⁱ,

"when Joseph died, they made void the "covenant of circumcision":''

and so Abraham begat Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day; according to the express command in Gen 17:12

and Jacob begat the twelve patriarchs; the heads of the twelve tribes of Israel.

Gill: Act 7:9

And the patriarchs, moved with envy,.... See Gen 37:11 the sons of Jacob and brethren of Joseph were filled with envy, and enraged at him, because of the evil report of them he brought to his father; and because he had a greater share in his father's love than they had; and because of his dreams, which signified that he should have the dominion over them, and they should be obliged to yield obedience to him: wherefore they

sold Joseph into Egypt; they sold him to the Ishmaelites for twenty pieces of silver, who were going down to Egypt, and who carried him thither with them: these twenty pieces of silver, the Jews say, the ten brethren of Joseph divided among themselves; everyone took two shekels, and bought shoes for his feet; to which they apply the passage in Amo 2:6 "they sold the righteous for silver, and the poor for a pair of shoes" ^k: and they suggest, that the redemption of the firstborn among the Israelites on account of the selling of Joseph; they say ^l,

"because they sold the firstborn of Rachel for twenty pieces of silver, let everyone redeem his son, his firstborn, with twenty pieces of silver; says R. Phinehas, in the name of R. Levi, because they sold the firstborn of Rachel for twenty pieces of silver, and there fell to each of them a piece of coined money (the value of half a shekel), therefore let everyone pay his shekel coined.''

They also affirm ^m, that the selling of Joseph was not expiated by the tribes, until they were dead, according to Isa 22:14 and that on the account of it, there was a famine in the land of Israel seven years. There seems to be some likeness between the treatment of Joseph and Jesus Christ, which Stephen may have some respect unto; as Joseph was sold by his brethren for twenty of silver, so Christ was sold by one of his disciples, that ate bread with him, for thirty pieces of silver; and as it was through envy the brethren of Joseph used him in this manner, so it was through envy that the Jews delivered Jesus Christ to Pontius Pilate, to be condemned to death: of this selling of Joseph into Egypt, Justin the historian speaks ⁿ; his words are,

"Joseph was the youngest of his brethren, whose excellent wit his brethren fearing, secretly took him and sold him to strange merchants, by whom he was carried into Egypt.''

And then follow other things concerning him, some true and some false; Stephen here adds,

but God was with him; see Gen 39:2 he was with him, and prospered him in Potiphar's house; he was with him, and kept him from the temptations of his mistress; he was with him in prison, and supported and comforted him, and at length delivered him from it, and promoted him as follows; and caused all the evil that befell him to work for good to him and his father's family.

Gill: Act 7:10

And delivered him out of all his afflictions,.... From the evil designs of his mistress, and from all the miseries of a prison:

and gave him favour and wisdom in the sight of Pharaoh king of Egypt; so Justin in the place above cited says, that Joseph was very dear to the king; but not through his knowledge of magic arts, as he suggests, but on account of the wisdom which God gave him; for when he is said to have favour and wisdom in the sight of Pharaoh, the meaning is, that he was highly esteemed of by him, because of the wisdom he saw in him; and both the favour he had with him, and the wisdom he had in himself, were from the Lord; and in a very humble and modest manner does he speak of himself, in Gen 41:16 which Onkelos the Targumist paraphrases thus:

""not from my wisdom", but from the Lord, shall the peace of Pharaoh be answered;''

the name of this Pharaoh was Misphragmuthosis; by the Jews he is called Rian ben Walid ^o:

and he made him governor over Egypt: a deputy governor under him; for Pharaoh kept the throne, and in it was greater than Joseph, and had the other ensigns of royalty, and Joseph rode in the second chariot to him:

and all his house; see Gen 41:40 as he had the affairs of the kingdom committed to him, so likewise the domestic affairs of Pharaoh, he was steward of his household.

Gill: Act 7:11

Now there came a dearth over all the land of Egypt, and Canaan,.... This dearth, or famine, is said to be in all lands, Gen 41:54 though only Egypt and Canaan are mentioned here, because the history is concerned with no other. The Jewish writers ^p speak of three lands particularly, which were affected with it, Phenicia, Arabia, and Palestine; and this famine in the land of Israel, they say ^q, which lasted seven years, was on account of the selling of Joseph into Egypt, as before observed. The Heathen writers make mention of this famine, particularly Justin ^r, who speaking of Joseph says, that he foresaw many years before the barrenness of the fields; and all Egypt would have perished with famine, had not the king, through his advice, ordered by an edict, that corn should be laid up for many years: this was the fifth of the ten famines, the Jews say have been, or shall be in the world ^s:

and great affliction; meaning the famine, which was very severe, and lasted a long time, even seven years: want of eating is called עינוי, "affliction", by the Jews ^t; by which they mean fasting, which is a voluntary want of eating, or abstinence from it; and if that is an affliction, then much more want of food, or abstinence through necessity; compare 1Ti 5:10.

And our fathers found not sustenance; Jacob and his family could not get sufficient provision for them in the land of Canaan, where they then were, but were obliged to go to Egypt for it.

Gill: Act 7:12

But when Jacob heard that there was corn in Egypt,.... Not then growing, or gathering in there, or that was of that year's produce; for the famine was strong in the land of Egypt, as well as in Canaan; but was what had been laid up, and preserved in the seven years of plenty, by the order and care of Joseph; which by some means or another, Jacob had heard of; see Gen 42:1 the Jews suggest ^u, that it was by divine revelation:

he sent out our fathers first; the first time, or the first year of the famine; or he sent them first, he laid his commands on them, or they had not gone; these were the ten sons of Jacob, and brethren of Joseph, who were sent the first time, for Benjamin stayed with his father: see Gen 42:3.

Gill: Act 7:13

And at the second time Joseph was made known to his brethren,.... That is, when the brethren of Joseph went a second time down to Egypt for corn, Joseph made himself known unto them, Gen 45:1.

And Joseph's kindred was made known unto Pharaoh; for though it was known before that he was an Hebrew, see Gen 39:17 yet it was not known of what family he was, who was his father, or his brethren, but now it was known, Gen 45:16.

Gill: Act 7:14

Then sent Joseph,.... Gifts and presents to his father, and wagons, to fetch down him and his family into Egypt, Gen 45:21.

and called his father Jacob to him, and all his kindred, threescore and fifteen souls; which seems to disagree with the account of Moses, who says, that "all the souls of the house of Jacob, which came into Egypt, were threescore and ten", Gen 46:27. But there is no contradiction; Moses and Stephen are speaking of different things; Moses speaks of the seed of Jacob, which came out of his loins, who came into Egypt, and so excludes his sons' wives; Stephen speaks of Jacob and all his kindred, among whom his sons' wives must be reckoned, whom Joseph called to him: according to Moses's account, the persons that came with Jacob into Egypt, who came out of his loins, and so exclusive of his sons' wives, were threescore and six; to which if we add Jacob himself, and Joseph who was before in Egypt, and who might be truly said to come into it, and his two sons that were born there, who came thither in his loins, as others in the account may be said to do, who were not yet born, when Jacob went down, the total number is threescore and ten, Gen 46:26 out of which take the six following persons, Jacob, who was called by Joseph into Egypt, besides the threescore and fifteen souls, and Joseph and his two sons then in Egypt, who could not be said to be called by him, and Hezron and Hamul, the sons of Pharez not yet born, and this will reduce Moses's number to sixty four; to which sixty four, if you add the eleven wives of Jacob's sons, who were certainly part of the kindred called and invited into Egypt, Gen 45:10 it will make up completely threescore and fifteen persons: or the persons called by Joseph maybe reckoned thus; his eleven brethren and sister Dinah, fifty two brother's children, to which add his brethren's eleven wives, and the amount is threescore and fifteen: so that the Jew ^w has no reason to charge Stephen with an error, as he does; nor was there any need to alter and corrupt the Septuagint version of Gen 45:27 to make it agree with Stephen's account; or to add five names in it, in Act 7:20 as Machir, Galaad, Sutalaam, Taam, and Edom, to make up the number seventy five: and it may be observed, that the number is not altered in the version of Deu 10:22 which agrees with the Hebrew for seventy persons.

Gill: Act 7:15

So Jacob went down into Egypt,.... At the invitation of his son Joseph:

and died, he, and our fathers; both Jacob and his twelve sons died in Egypt, though we have no account of the death of any of them, but Jacob and Joseph, particularly; only in general, that Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation, Gen 49:33 Exo 1:6 the Syriac version adds "there", that is, in Egypt.

Gill: Act 7:16

And were carried over into Sichem,.... The Syriac version reads in the singular number, "and he was translated into Sichem, and laid", &c. as if this was said of Jacob only, whereas he is not spoken of at all, only the fathers, the twelve patriarchs; for Jacob, though he was carried out of Egypt, he was not buried in Sichem, but in the cave of Machpelah, Gen 50:13. But Joseph and the rest of the patriarchs, who died in Egypt, when the children of Israel came out from thence, they brought their bones along with them, and buried them in Sichem: of the burial of Joseph there, there is no doubt, since it is expressly affirmed in Jos 24:32 and that the rest of the patriarchs were buried there, and not in Hebron, as Josephus asserts ^x, may be concluded from hence; because in the cave of Machpelah at Hebron, there are never mentioned more in Jewish writers ^y, than these four couple; Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Leah; from whence, they say, Hebron was called Kirjath Arba, the city of four; as also, because it is the general consent of the Jews; and if they had not agreed in it, or said nothing about it, the thing is natural to suppose, that the children of Israel brought the bones of all the patriarchs out of Egypt, along with Joseph's ^z; and since they buried the bones of Joseph in Sichem, it is most reasonable to believe, that the rest were buried there likewise; though it must be owned, that there is an entire silence about them, even when the sepulchre of Joseph is taken notice of: so R. Benjamin speaking of the Samaritans says ^a,

"among them is the sepulchre of Joseph the righteous, the son of Jacob our father, on whom be peace, as it is said, Jos 24:32.''

And says another of their writers ^b,

"from Sichem about a sabbath day's journey, in a village, called Belata, there Joseph the just was buried;''

but of the rest, no mention is made:

and laid in the sepulchre that Abraham bought for a sum of money of the sons of Emmor, the father of Sichem; the last clause, the father "of Sichem", is left out in the Syriac version; and the Alexandrian copy reads it, "in Sichem"; as if it was the name of a place, and not of a man: the Vulgate Latin, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions read, "the son of Sichem"; whereas it is certain, that Sichem was the son of Emmor, or Hamor, Gen 33:19 unless it can be thought there were two Sichems, one that was the father of Emmor, and another that was his son: but the great difficulty is, how the sepulchre in which the fathers were laid at Sichem, can be said to be bought by Abraham of the sons of Emmor, when what Abraham bought was the field and cave of Machpelah; and that not of the sons of Emmor, but of the sons of Heth, and of Ephron, the son of Zohar the Hitrite, Gen 23:16. Whereas the parcel of ground in Sichem, bought of the sons of Emmor, the father of Sichem, was bought by Jacob, Gen 33:19. Various things are suggested, to reconcile this; some think the word Abraham is an interpolation, and that it should be read, which he (Jacob) bought; but to support this, no copy can be produced: others observe, that it may be read, which he bought for Abraham; that is, which Jacob bought for Abraham and his seed, as a pledge of the inheritance of the whole land, promised unto him; others think that by Abraham is meant a son of Abraham, that is, Jacob; as children are sometimes called by their father's name; as the Messiah is called David, and the like; but what best seems to remove the difficulty is, that the words refer to both places and purchases; to the field of Machpelah bought by Abraham, and to the parcel of field is Sichem bought by Jacob, of the sons of Emmor; for the words with the repetition of the phrase, "in the sepulchre", may be read thus; "and were laid in the sepulchre, that Abraham bought for a sum of money", and in the sepulchre (bought by Jacob) "of the sons of Emmor", the father of Sichem; or the words may be rendered thus, "they were carried over into Sichem, and laid in the sepulchre which Abraham bought for a sum of money, besides" that "of the sons of Emmor", the father "of Sichem"; namely, which Jacob bought, and in which Joseph was laid, Gen 33:19. And this agrees with Stephen's account and design, in the preceding verse; he observes, that Jacob died in Egypt, and all the twelve patriarchs; and here he tells us how they were disposed of, and where they were buried, both Jacob and his sons; they were removed from Egypt, and brought into the land of Canaan; Jacob, he was laid in the cave of Machpelah, in the sepulchre Abraham bought of the children of Heth; and Joseph and his brethren, they were laid in the sepulchre at Sichem, which Jacob bought of the sons of Emmor: upon the whole, the charge of several errors brought by the ^c Jew against Stephen appears to be groundless; the sum this sepulchre was bought for was an hundred pieces of money, Gen 33:19.

Gill: Act 7:17

But when the time of the promise drew nigh,.... That is, the time of the four hundred years; when God promised to deliver the seed of Abraham out of their affliction and servitude, and bring them into the land of Canaan to inherit it:

which God had sworn to Abraham; in Gen 15:13 for though there is no express mention made of an oath, yet there is a most solemn affirmation, which is equivalent to one; the Alexandrian copy and some others, and the Vulgate Latin version read,

which God promised unto Abraham; the people grew and multiplied in Egypt; see Exo 1:7 insomuch, that though their number were but threescore and ten when they went down to Egypt, and though various methods were taken to destroy them, and lessen their numbers, yet in little more than two hundred years, their number was increased to six hundred thousand, and three thousand and five hundred and fifty men, besides old men, women, and children, and besides two and twenty thousand Levites, Num 1:46. And it seems, that they multiplied the more towards the time when the promise of deliverance drew nigh to be accomplished, and even when they were the most afflicted, Exo 1:12.

Gill: Act 7:18

Till another king arose,.... In, or over Egypt, as the Alexandrian copy, and others, and the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions read; in Exo 1:8 it is a new king; the Jewish writers are divided about him, whether he was a different king from the former; or only so called, because he made new edicts ^d:

"Rab and Samuel, one says a new one absolutely: and the other says, because his decrees were renewed; he that says a new one absolutely, (thinks so) because it is written a new one; and he who says, because his decrees are renewed (or he makes new decrees, he thinks so) from hence, because it is not written, and he died, and there reigned; and (it makes) for him that says, because his decrees are renewed, what is written, "who knew not Joseph"; what is the meaning of that, "who knew not Joseph?" that he was like one who knew not Joseph at all.''

The Septuagint version of Exo 1:8 renders it "another" king, as does Stephen here; another king from the Pharaoh of Joseph: the name of this was Ramesses Miamun; and one of the treasure cities built for him seems to be called after his name, Raamses, Exo 1:11. The Jews call him Talma ^e and by Theophilus of Antioch ^f he is called Tethmosis; and by Artapanus ^g, Palmanotha: "which knew not Joseph"; nor what great things he had done, to the advantage of the Egyptian nation; he was acquainted with the history of him, and of his worthy deeds, and therefore had no regard to his people, as the other Pharaoh had Josephus ^h says, the kingdom was translated to another family; which might be the reason why he was not known, nor his friends taken notice of: Aben Ezra says, he was not of the seed royal; wherefore it is written, "and there arose"; he the kingdom, and had not a just right and title so that being a stranger, it is no wonder that he should not know Joseph; Jarchi's note is,

"he made himself as if he did not know him''

he dissembled, he pretended ignorance of him, because he would show no respect unto his people. Beza's ancient copy, and another in the Bodleian library, read, "which remembered not Joseph".

Gill: Act 7:19

The same dealt subtilly with our kindred,.... See Exo 1:10 he took crafty, and yet cruel methods, to diminish the children of Israel, and to humble them; weakening their strength by labour, that they might not be able to beget children; ordering the Hebrew midwives to kill all the males that were born; and charging all his people to drown such male children that should escape the hands of the midwives;

and evil entreated our fathers; keeping them to hard labour, in mortar and brick, and all rural service; in which he made them to serve with rigour, and thereby made their lives bitter to them; employing them in building cities, pyramids, walls, and towers; making ditches, throwing up trenches, cutting watercourses, and turning rivers, with other things; which he added, setting taskmasters over them, to afflict them with burdens:

so that they cast out their young children, or "by making their children cast outs": or as the Arabic version renders it, "by making that their children should be cast out": that is, by ordering his people to expose them to ruin, and to cast them in the rivers; and so the Syriac version, "and he commanded that their children be cast out"; for this refers to Pharaoh, and his orders to his officers and people, to cast out the male children of the Israelites; and not to the parents of the children, which our version and the Vulgate Latin incline to: for though Moses's mother, after she had hid him three months, put him into an ark of bulrushes, and laid him among the flags by the river's side, yet that was in order to save his life: whereas the end of the casting out of these young children was as follows,

to the end they might not live: for this has not respect unto the parents of the children, that they might not increase or multiply their offspring, but to the young children, that they being cast into the waters, might perish, and not live and become men; the Ethiopic version is rather a paraphrase, "and he commanded that they should kill every male that was born".

Gill: Act 7:20

In which time Moses was born,.... The word Moses, is differently written in the New Testament; sometimes Moses, as here, sometimes Mo-yses, as in Act 7:35 sometimes Mo-yseus, as in Act 15:1 and sometimes Moseus, as in Rom 5:14. He had his name from the Hebrew word, משה, which signifies "to draw", Psa 18:16 according to the reason of it given by Pharaoh's daughter,

she called his name Moses; and she said, because I drew him out of the water, Exo 2:10 Though Josephus ⁱ, Philo ^k, and others ^l, make it to be an Egyptian name; the former of which serves, that the Egyptians call water "Mo", and "yses", such who are saved from water; wherefore compounding the name of both, they gave it to him: though according to Aben Ezra ^m, his name in the Egyptian language was Monios; his words are these,

"the name of Moses is interpreted out of the Egyptian language into the Hebrew language, for his name in the Egyptian language was Monios; and so it is written in a book of agriculture, translated out of the Egyptian language into the Arabic, and also in the books of some Greek writers.''

Moses had many names, as a Jewish chronologer observes ⁿ;

"Pharaoh's daughter called his name Moses; his father called him Chabar, or Heber; his mother called him Jekuthiel; and his sister called him Jether (perhaps Jared, since this was one of his names); and his brethren called him Abizanoah; and Kohath called him Abi Socos; and the Israelites called him Shemaiah ben Nathaneel, and sometimes Tobiah, sometimes Shemaiah, and sometimes Sopher; but the Egyptians called him Monios.''

For "Mo", in the Egyptian language, signifies "water", and "Ni" is "out"; and so both together signify, "out of the water", which agrees with the Hebrew etymology of his name. Now he was born at the time that orders were given by Pharaoh to cast all the male children of the Israelites into the rivers, to drown them; Moses was born, whose parents were Amram and Jochebed, of the tribe of Levi; he was born, according to the Jews ^o, on the seventh day of Adar, or February:

and was exceeding fair; or "fair to God"; divinely fair and beautiful; and so Pharaoh's daughter, acccording to Josephus, said to her father, that she had brought up a child that was μορφη θειον ^p "in form divine": and so the Jews say ^q, that his form was as an angel of God; or he was fair in the sight of God, as the Ethiopic version; the Syriac version renders it, "he was dear to God"; and the Vulgate Latin version, grateful to God; was well-pleasing to him, in whom he delighted, having designed to do great things by him: or "fair by God": he had a peculiar beauty put upon him by God; partly to engage his parents the more to seek the preservation of him; and partly to engage the affection of Pharaoh's daughter to him, when she should see him. Justin the historian ^r makes mention of his extraordinary beauty, for which he was praised; but very wrongly makes him to be the son of Joseph; and the account Josephus gives of it, is very remarkable ^s;

"as to beauty, says he, no man could be so out of love with it, as to see the goodly form of Moses, and not be amazed; it happened to many who met him, as he was carried along the way, that they would turn back at the sight of the child, and neglect their business, to indulge themselves with the sight of him; for such was the loveliness of the child, that it detained those that saw him.''

The Arabic version renders it, he "was consecrated by a vow to God"; but of this we have no account: the Jews say ^t, that

"the Spirit of God came upon Miriam, and she prophesied; saying, behold a son shall be born to my father and to my mother at this time, who shall save Israel out of the hand of the Egyptians--and it is further said, that at the time of his birth, the whole house was filled with a great light, as the light of the sun and moon;''

upon which they had raised expectations of him: though this phrase, "fair to God", may be only an Hebraism, just as Niniveh is said to be a city "great to God", i.e. exceeding great, Jon 3:3 it being usual with the Jews to join the word God to an adjective, to express the superlative degree; and so it is rightly rendered here, "exceeding fair: and nourished up in his father's house three months"; so long he was hid by his mother there, which was a great instance of her faith; see Exo 2:2. The reason why he was kept no longer there was, because as the Jews say ^u, the three months after Jochebed was delivered of a son, the thing was known in the house of Pharaoh, wherefore she could hide him no longer.

Gill: Act 7:21

And when he was cast out,.... Into the river, or by the river, as some copies read; the Syriac version adds, by his own people; by his father and mother and sister; who might be all concerned in it, and were privy to it; and which was done after this manner; his mother perceiving she could keep him no longer, made an ark of bulrushes, daubed with slime and pitch, into which she put him; and then laid it in the flags, by the river's side, and set his sister Miriam at a proper distance, to observe what would be done to him, Exo 2:3.

Pharaoh's daughter took him up; her name, according to Josephus ^w, was "Thermuthis"; she is commonly, by the Jews ^x, called "Bithiah"; and by Artapanus in Eusebius ^y, she is called "Merrhis". This princess coming down to the river to wash, as she and her maidens were walking by the river side, spied the ark in which the child was laid, among the flags, and ordered one of her maids to go and fetch it; and which being done by her orders, is attributed to her; and opening the ark, she was struck at once with the loveliness of the babe, and being filled with compassion to it, which wept, she took him,

and nourished him for her own son: not that she took him to the king's palace, and brought him up there, but the case was this; Miriam the sister of Moses, observing what was done, and perceiving the inclination of Pharaoh's daughter to take care of the child, offered to call an Hebrew nurse, to nurse the child for her; to which she agreed, and accordingly went and fetched her own and the child's mother, who took it upon wages, and nursed it for her; and when it was grown, brought it to her, who adopted it for her son, Exo 2:5. According to Josephus ^z, and some other Jewish writers ^a, so it was, that when the child was taken out of the ark, the breast was offered it by several Egyptian women, one after another, and it refused to suck of either of them; and Miriam being present, as if she was only a bystander and common spectator, moved that an Hebrew woman might be sent for; which the princess approving of, she went and called her mother, whose breast the child very readily sucked; and at the request of the princess she took and nourished it for her: according to Philo the Jew ^b, this princess was the king's only daughter, who had been a long time married, but had had no children, of which she was very desirous; and especially of a son, that might succeed in the kingdom, that so the crown might not pass into another family; and then relating how she came with her maidens to the river, and found the child; and how that the sister of it, by her orders, fetched an Hebrew nurse to her, which was the mother of the child, who agreed to nurse it for her; he suggests that from that time she gave out she was with child and feigned a big belly, that so the child might be thought to be γνησιος αλλ' μη υποβολιμαιος "genuine, and not counterfeit": but according to Josephus ^c, she adopted him for her son, having no legitimate offspring, and brought him to her father, and told him how she had taken him out of the river, and had nourished him; (Josephus uses the same word as here;) and that she counted of him to make him her son, and the successor of his kingdom; upon which Pharaoh took the child into his arms, and embraced him, and put his crown upon him; which Moses rolling off, cast to the ground, and trampled upon it with his feet: other Jewish writers say ^d, that he took the crown from off the king's head, and put it on his own; upon which, the magicians that were present, and particularly Balaam, addressed the king, and put him in mind of a dream and prophecy concerning the kingdom being taken from him, and moved that the child might be put to death; upon which his daughter snatched it up, and saved it, the king not being forward to have it destroyed: and they also tell this story as a means of saving it, that Jethro who was sitting by, or Gabriel in the form of one of the king's princes, suggested that the action of the child was not to be regarded, since it had no knowledge of what it did; and as a proof of it, proposed that there might be brought in a dish, a coal of fire, and a piece of gold, or a precious stone; and that if he put out his hand and laid hold on the piece of gold, or precious stone, then it would appear that he had knowledge, and deserved death; but if he took the coal, it would be a plain case that he was ignorant, and should be free: the thing took with the king and his nobles, and trial was made, and as the child put out his hand to lay hold on the piece of gold or precious stone, the angel Gabriel pushed it away, and he took the coal, and put it to his lips, and to the end of his tongue; which was the cause of his being slow of speech, and of a slow tongue: by comparing Philo's account with this text, one would be tempted to think that Pharaoh's daughter did really give out, that Moses was her own son; and the author of the epistle to the Hebrews seems to confirm this, Heb 11:24 who says, "that Moses denied to be called, or that he was the son of Pharaoh's daughter"; as the words may be rendered.

Gill: Act 7:22

And Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, Which was reckoned very considerable: 1Ki 4:30 Philo the Jew says ^e that he learned arithmetic, geometry, and every branch of music, the hieroglyphics, the Assyrian language, and the Chaldean knowledge of the heavens, and the mathematics; yet was not a magician, or skilled in unlawful arts, as Justin suggests ^f:

and was mighty in words; he had a command of language, and a large flow of words, and could speak properly and pertinently upon any subject; for though he was slow of speech, and of tongue, and might have somewhat of a stammering in speaking, yet he might have a just diction, a masculine style, and a powerful eloquence, and the matter he delivered might be very great and striking:

and in deeds; or in "his deeds", as the Alexandrian copy, the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions read: he was a man of great abilities, and fit for business both in the cabinet and in the field. Josephus ^g relates an expedition of his against the Ethiopians, whilst he was in Pharaoh's court, in which he obtained victory over them, when the Egyptians had been greatly oppressed by them; in which his prudence and fortitude were highly commended.

Gill: Act 7:23

And when he was full forty years old,.... This Stephen had from tradition, and not from Scripture, which is silent about the age of Moses at this time, and only says, "it came to pass in those days when Moses was grown", Exo 2:11 but that he was at this time at such an age, is the general sense of the Jews. Upon the above mentioned passage they have this note ^h.

"twenty years old was Moses at that time; and there are that say, that he was forty years old. And ⁱ elsewhere still more particularly; Moses was "forty" years in the palace of Pharaoh, forty years in Midian, (the Amsterdam edition reads, במדבר, "in the wilderness", wrongly,) and he served Israel forty years.''

Indeed, the fabulous history of his life makes him to be but fifteen years of age at this time ^k; but Stephen's account is undoubtedly right, and which is confirmed by the above testimonies.

It came into his heart; by the Spirit of God, under a more than ordinary impulse of which he now was:

to visit his brethren, the children of Israel; whom he knew to be his brethren, partly from the common report in Pharaoh's court concerning him, and partly from the mark of circumcision in his flesh, and chiefly from divine revelation: for some years he had lived a courtly and military life, and had took no notice of the Israelites in their oppressions; but now the Lord laid it upon his heart to visit them, and observe how things were with them; and though he could not use any public and open authority, yet Philo the Jew says ^l, that he exhorted the officers to use mildness and moderation with them, and comforted and encouraged the Israelites to bear their burdens with patience and constancy, and not sink under them; suggesting, that things would take another turn, and would change for the better in time.

Gill: Act 7:24

And seeing one of them suffer wrong,.... Beza's Cambridge copy, and one of Stephens's, and one in the Bodleian library add, "of his own kindred": and so Exo 2:11 he is said to be "one of his brethren"; which Aben Ezra explains, ממשפחתו, "of his family", one of the tribe of Levi; and so another Jewish writer ^m is very particular, and says,

"Moses went out to the camp of the Israelites, and saw an Egyptian smite one of the sons of Kohath, who was of his brethren of the tribe of Levi, as it is said, Exo 2:11.''

This man, according to some of the Jewish writers ⁿ, was the husband of Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, Lev 24:11 but, according to others, it was Dathan ^o: the cause and manner of his suffering wrong was this, as they report ^p; one of the taskmasters having set his eyes upon his wife, who was a beautiful woman, came early one morning, and got him out of his house to work, and then went into his wife, and lay with her; which when the man understood, he made some disturbance about it, for which he caused him to serve in very hard bondage, and beat him severely; who flying to Moses for protection,

he defended him, and avenged him that was oppressed; he took his part, and screened him from the insults and blows of the officer, and avenged his cause:

and smote the Egyptian; and killed him: it is commonly said by the Jews ^q, that he killed him by the sword of his mouth, by making use of the word Jehovah; though others ^r say, he smote him with his fist, which is more likely; or rather with his sword; the Ethiopic version adds, "and buried him in the sand". Beza's ancient copy, and one of Stephens's, add, "and he hid him in the sand", as it is in Exo 2:12 and which the Jews understand not literally of any sand pit, into which he might cast him, and cover him; or of the sand of the sea, near which he was, and which does not appear; but mystically of the people of Israel, comparable to the sand of the sea, among whom he hid him. So in one of their Midrashes ^s it is observed on these words,

"and "he hid him in the sand"; though there were none there but the Israelites---who are like to sand: he said unto them, ye are like the sand; take this man here and put him there, and his voice is not heard; so this thing will be hid among you, and not heard. And so you find that the thing was not heard but by the means of the Hebrews, as it is said, "and he went out on the second day, and two men of the Hebrews", &c.''

And another of their ^t writers, says, that when Moses saw the Egyptian smiting the Hebrew,

"he began to curse him, and took the sword of his lips, and killed him, and hid him in the camp of the Israelites, as it is said, Exo 2:12 not in the sand, but among the Israelites: hence it is said, "the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea", Hos 1:10.''

To which may be added what one of their chronologers ^u affirms, that

"Moses slew the Egyptian with the ineffable name of God, and hid him among the children of Israel, who are like to sand.''

This Egyptian is said, by Jarchi, to be one of the taskmasters who was appointed over the officers of Israel, who, from the cockcrowing, kept them to their work, which is very probable.

Gill: Act 7:25

For he supposed his brethren would have understood him,.... From his being an Hebrew in such high life; from his wonderful birth, and miraculous preservation in his infancy, and education in Pharaoh's court; and from the promise of God that he would visit them and save them:

how that God by his hand would deliver them: wherefore he was the more emboldened to kill the Egyptian, believing that his brethren would make no advantage of it against him; but look upon it as a beginning and pledge of their deliverance by him:

but they understood not; or "him not", as the Ethiopic version reads; they did not understand that he was to be their deliverer, or that this action of his was a token of it.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Act 7:1

¹ tn Grk “If it is so concerning these things” (see BDAG 422 s.v. ἔχω 10.a for this use).

NET Notes: Act 7:2

¹ tn Grk “said.”

² tn Or “ancestor”; Grk “father.”

NET Notes: Act 7:3

¹ sn A quotation from Gen 12:1.

NET Notes: Act 7:4

¹ tn Grk “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

² tn The translation “made him move” for the verb μετοικίζω (metoikizw) is given by L&N 85.83. The verb has the idea of “resettling” someone (BDAG 643 s.v.); see v. 43, where it reappears.

NET Notes: Act 7:5

¹ tn Grk “And he.” Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

² tn Grk “He did not give him an inheritance in it.” This could be understood to mean that God did not give something else to Abraham as an inheritance while he was living there. The point of the text is that God did not give any of the land to him as an inheritance, and the translation makes this clear.

³ tn Grk “a step of a foot” (cf. Deut 2:5).

⁴ tn Grk “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

⁵ sn An allusion to Gen 12:7; 13:15; 15:2, 18; 17:8; 24:7; 48:4. On the theological importance of the promise and to his descendants after him, see Rom 4 and Gal 3.

⁶ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Abraham) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

NET Notes: Act 7:6

¹ tn Grk “that his”; the discourse switches from indirect to direct with the following verbs. For consistency the entire quotation is treated as second person direct discourse in the translation.

² tn Or “will be strangers,” that is, one who lives as a noncitizen of a foreign country.

³ sn A quotation from Gen 15:13. Exod 12:40 specifies the sojourn as 430 years.

NET Notes: Act 7:7

¹ tn BDAG 568 s.v. κρίνω 5.b.α states, “Oft. the emphasis is unmistakably laid upon that which follows the Divine Judge’s verdict, upon the condemnation or punishment: condemn, punish …Ac 7:7 (Gen 15:14).”

² tn The words “of there” are not in the Greek text, but are implied.

sn A quotation from Gen 15:14.

³ tn Or “and serve,” but with religious/cultic overtones (BDAG 587 s.v. λατρεύω).

⁴ sn An allusion to Exod 3:12.

NET Notes: Act 7:8

¹ tn Grk “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

² tn Grk “him”; the referent (Abraham) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

³ sn God gave…the covenant. Note how the covenant of promise came before Abraham’s entry into the land and before the building of the temple.

⁴ tn Grk “circumcised him on the eighth day,” but many modern readers will not understand that this procedure was done on the eighth day after birth. The temporal clause “when he was eight days old” conveys this idea more clearly. See Gen 17:11-12.

⁵ tn The words “became the father of” are not in the Greek text due to an ellipsis, but must be supplied for the English translation. The ellipsis picks up the verb from the previous clause describing how Abraham fathered Isaac.

⁶ sn The twelve patriarchs refers to the twelve sons of Jacob, the famous ancestors of the Jewish race (see Gen 35:23-26).

NET Notes: Act 7:9

¹ tn Grk “And the.” Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

² tn The meaning “sell” for the middle voice of ἀποδίδωμι (apodidwmi) is given by BDAG 110 s.v. 5.a. See Gen 37:12-36, esp. v. 28.

³ tn Though the Greek term here is καί (kai), in context this remark is clearly contrastive: Despite the malicious act, God was present and protected Joseph.

NET Notes: Act 7:10

¹ tn Or “appointed.” See Gen 41:41-43.

NET Notes: Act 7:11

¹ tn Grk “came upon all Egypt.”

² tn Grk “and,” but logically causal.

³ sn Our. Stephen spoke of “our” ancestors (Grk “fathers”) in an inclusive sense throughout the speech until his rebuke in v. 51, where the nation does what “your” ancestors did, at which point an exclusive pronoun is used. This serves to emphasize the rebuke.

⁴ tn Or “forefathers”; Grk “fathers.”

NET Notes: Act 7:12

¹ tn Or possibly “food,” since in a number of extrabiblical contexts the phrase σιτία καὶ ποτά (sitia kai pota) means “food and drink,” where solid food is contrasted with liquid nourishment (L&N 3.42).

² tn Or “forefathers”; Grk “fathers.”

³ tn The word “there” is not in the Greek text. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context, but must be supplied for the modern English reader.

NET Notes: Act 7:13

¹ tn BDAG 194 s.v. γένος 2. gives “family, relatives” here; another alternative is “race” (see v. 19).

NET Notes: Act 7:14

¹ tn The words “a message” are not in the Greek text, but are implied.

² tn Or “Joseph had his father summoned” (BDAG 121 s.v. ἀποστέλλω 2.b).

³ tn Grk “souls” (here an idiom for the whole person).

NET Notes: Act 7:15

¹ tn The word “there” is not in the Greek text. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context, but must be supplied for the modern English reader.

² tn Or “forefathers”; Grk “fathers.”

NET Notes: Act 7:16

¹ tn “and they.”

² sn See Gen 49:29-32.

NET Notes: Act 7:17

¹ tn Grk “But as the time for the fulfillment of the promise drew near that God had declared to Abraham.” The order of the clauses has been rearranged to improve English style. See vv. 6-7 above.

² tn Grk “the people increased and multiplied.”

NET Notes: Act 7:18

¹ tn Or simply “did not know.” However, in this context the point is that the new king knew nothing about Joseph, not whether he had known him personally (which is the way “did not know Joseph” could be understood).

² tn Grk “arose,” but in this context it clearly refers to a king assuming power.

³ sn A quotation from Exod 1:8.

NET Notes: Act 7:19

¹ tn According to L&N 88.147 it is also possible to translate κατασοφισάμενος (katasofisameno") as “took advantage by clever words” or “persuaded by sweet talk.”

² tn Or “race.”

³ tn Or “forefathers”; Grk “fathers.”

⁴ tn Or “expose” (BDAG 303 s.v. ἔκθετος).

⁵ tn Grk “so that they could not be kept alive,” but in this context the phrase may be translated either “so that they would not continue to live,” or “so that they would die” (L&N 23.89).

NET Notes: Act 7:20

¹ tn Or “was well-formed before God,” or “was well-pleasing to God” (BDAG 145 s.v. ἀστεῖος suggests the meaning is more like “well-bred” as far as God was concerned; see Exod 2:2).

² tn Grk “who was brought up for three months.” The continuation of the sentence as a relative clause is awkward in English, so a new sentence was started in the translation by changing the relative pronoun to a regular pronoun (“he”).

NET Notes: Act 7:21

¹ tn Or “exposed” (see v. 19).

² tn Grk “Pharaoh’s daughter took him up for herself.” According to BDAG 64 s.v. ἀναιρέω, “The pap. exx. involve exposed children taken up and reared as slaves…The rendering ‘adopt’ lacks philological precision and can be used only in a loose sense (as NRSV), esp. when Gr-Rom. terminology relating to adoption procedures is taken into account.” In this instance both the immediate context and the OT account (Exod 2:3-10) do support the normal sense of the English word “adopt,” although it should not be understood to refer to a technical, legal event.

³ tn Or “and reared him” (BDAG 74 s.v. ἀνατρέφω b).

NET Notes: Act 7:22

¹ tn Or “instructed.”

² tn Or “was able” (BDAG 264 s.v. δυνατός 1.b.α).

NET Notes: Act 7:23

¹ tn Grk “heart.”

² tn Grk “brothers.” The translation “compatriot” is given by BDAG 18-19 s.v. ἀδελφός 2.b.

³ tn Grk “the sons of Israel.”

NET Notes: Act 7:24

¹ tn Grk “And when.” Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

² tn “Hurt unfairly” conveys a better sense of the seriousness of the offense against the Israelite than “treated unfairly,” which can sometimes refer to slight offenses, or “wronged,” which can refer to offenses that do not involve personal violence, as this one probably did.

³ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

⁴ tn Or “he defended,” “he retaliated” (BDAG 55 s.v. ἀμύνομαι).

NET Notes: Act 7:25

¹ tn Grk “his brothers.”

² tn Grk “was granting them deliverance.” The narrator explains that this act pictured what Moses could do for his people.

³ tn Grk “by his hand,” where the hand is a metaphor for the entire person.

⁴ sn They did not understand. Here is the theme of the speech. The people did not understand what God was doing through those he chose. They made the same mistake with Joseph at first. See Acts 3:17; 13:27. There is good precedent for this kind of challenging review of history in the ancient scriptures: Ps 106:6-46; Ezek 20; and Neh 9:6-38.

Geneva Bible: Act 7:1

Then ^{( 1 )} said the high priest, Are these things so?

^{( 1 )} Steven is allowed to plead his cause, but for this reason and purpose, that under a disguise and pretence of the Law he might be condemned.

Geneva Bible: Act 7:2

^{( 2 )} And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of ^{( a )} glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in ^{( b )} Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran,

^{( 2 )} Steven witnesses to the Jews that he acknowledges the true fathers, and the only true God, and more than this shows this that these are more ancient than the temple and all the temple service appointed by the Law, and therefore they ought to lay another foundation of true religion, that is to say, the free covenant that God made with the fathers.

^{( a )} The mighty God full of glory and majesty.

^{( b )} When he says afterwards in (Act 7:4) that Abraham came out of Chaldea, it is evident that Mesopotamia contained Chaldea which was near to it, and bordered upon it; and so writes Plinius, book 6, chap. 27.

Geneva Bible: Act 7:5

And he gave him none inheritance in it, no, not [so much as] to ^{( c )} set his foot on: yet he ^{( d )} promised that he would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed after him, when [as yet] he had no child.

^{( c )} Not enough ground to even set his foot upon.

^{( d )} The promise of the possession was certain, and belonged to Abraham, though it was his posterity that enjoyed it a great while after his death: and this is the figure of speech synecdoche.

Geneva Bible: Act 7:6

And God spake on this wise, That his seed should sojourn in a strange land; and that they should bring them into bondage, and entreat [them] evil ^{( e )} four hundred years.

^{( e )} Four hundred years are counted from the beginning of Abraham's progeny, which was at the birth of Isaac: and four hundred and thirty years which are spoken of by Paul in (Gal 3:17), from the time that Abraham and his father departed together out of Ur of the Chaldeans.

Geneva Bible: Act 7:9

^{( 3 )} And the patriarchs, moved with envy, sold Joseph into Egypt: but God was ^{( f )} with him,

^{( 3 )} Steven diligently recounts the horrible misdeeds of some of the fathers, to teach the Jews that they ought not rashly to rest in the authority or examples of the fathers.

^{( f )} By these words are meant the peculiar favour that God shows men: for he seems to be away from those whom he does not help: and on the other hand, he is with those whom he delivers out of troubles, no matter how great the troubles may be.

Geneva Bible: Act 7:10

And delivered him out of all his afflictions, and gave him ^{( g )} favour and wisdom in the sight of Pharaoh king of Egypt; and he made him governor over Egypt and all his house.

^{( g )} Gave him favour in Pharaoh's sight because of his wisdom.

Geneva Bible: Act 7:16

And were ^{( h )} carried over into Sychem, and laid in the sepulchre that Abraham bought for a sum of money of the sons of Emmor [the father] of Sychem.

^{( h )} The patriarchs who were the sons of Jacob, though only Joseph is mentioned; (Jos 24:32).

Geneva Bible: Act 7:19

The same ^{( i )} dealt subtilly with our kindred, and evil entreated our fathers, so that they cast out their young children, to the end they might not live.

^{( i )} He devised a subtle plan against our stock, in that he commanded all the males to be cast out.

Geneva Bible: Act 7:20

In which time Moses was born, and was ^{( k )} exceeding fair, and nourished up in his father's house three months:

^{( k )} This child was born through God's merciful goodness and favour, to be of a lovely and fair countenance.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Act 7:1-60

1 Stephen, permitted to answer to the accusation of blasphemy,

2 shows that Abraham worshipped God rightly, and how God chose the fathers,

20 before Moses was born, and before the tabernacle and temple were built;

37 that Moses himself witnessed of Christ;

44 and that all outward ceremonies were ordained, according to the heavenly pattern, to last but for a time;

51 reprehending their rebellion, and murdering of Christ, the Just One, whom the prophets foretold should come into the world.

54 Whereupon they stone him to death, who commends his soul to Jesus, and humbly prays for them.

Combined Bible: Act 7:1

1. " Then said the high priest, Are these things so?"Stephen responds in a long and powerful discourse.  

There is great diversity of opinion among commentators, as to the logical bearing and connection of this discourse. We would naturally expect to find in it— if we regard it as properly a defense— a formal response to the charge which had been preferred. But it contains no direct answer to any of the specifications. He neither admits nor denies what was charged in reference to the destruction of the temple by Jesus and the changing of the customs delivered by Moses; though his silence may be regarded as an admission that the witnesses had spoken the truth on these points. Neither does he formally answer to the charge of blasphemy against Moses and against God, or against the holy temple and the law. The only thing in the discourse that has even an indirect bearing in this way, is his frequent reference to facts contained in the writings of Moses, which has been understood, by some commentators, as intended to indicate a degree of respect for Moses inconsistent with a disposition to speak blasphemy against him. But if such was his purpose, it is unaccountable that he should have pursued so indirect a course, instead of distinctly avowing the sentiments he intended to indicate. Again, this supposition can not account for the introduction of so many facts connected with the persecution of various individuals.  

The best statement of the drift of the discourse, I think, is this: The charge against him was hypocritically preferred, and his judges had no intention to investigate it, but were using it merely as an excuse for his predetermined condemnation to death. They were now giving him somewhat the form for a trial, to keep up appearances before the people. Under such circumstances, Stephen knew that it would be useless to offer a formal defense; and, therefore, he does not undertake it. He sees, however, that his persecutors were identifying themselves, by their proceedings, with the unbelieving and persecuting portion of their forefathers, and he determines to make them stand forth to the people in this their true position. In prosecuting this purpose he selects his material from the writings of Moses, and shows that his accusers are with the persecuting party, while his Master and himself are side by side with Moses and others whom they had persecuted: Thus he hurls back upon them, and fastens on them, effectually, the charge which they had falsely preferred against him.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:2

4. We will now take up the different sections of the discourse, treating each separately, and showing their connected bearing upon his main purpose. Before exhibiting the manner in which Moses was treated by the ancestors of his audience, he first shows that the mission on which Moses came was a subject of prophesy: thus indicating, at the outset, an analogy between it and that of Christ. To do this, he must begin with Abraham, to whom this prophesy was first given; but his reference to Abraham is only for the historical introduction of his main theme. (2) " And he said: Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Haran, (3) and said to him, Get thee out from thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into a land which I will show thee. (4) Then he came out of the land of the Chaldeans, and dwelt in Haran: and thence, after his father died, he removed into this land in which you now dwell."

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:3

notes on verse 2  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:4

notes on verse 2  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:5

Having now introduced Abraham, and brought him into the land of Canaan, Stephen quotes the prophesy, connected with the fulfillment of which he is to find the chief points of his argument. (5) " And he gave him no inheritance in it, not a footprint: and he promised to give it for a possession to him and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child. (6) But God spoke thus: That his seed should sojourn in a strange land, and they should bring them into bondage, and afflict them four hundred years. (7) And the nation to whom they shall be in bondage, I will judge, said God, and after these things they shall come forth, and serve me in this place. (8) And he gave him the covenant of circumcision; and so he begot Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day; and Isaac, Jacob; and Jacob, the twelve patriarchs. "  

The period of four hundred years is taken by Stephen from Genesis 15:13 Ge 15:13> , where God expresses himself, in round terms, of a period which was, more accurately, four hundred and thirty years, as we find in Exodus 12:40-41 Ex 12:40> . This was not the period of their actual sojourn in Egypt; but, as we learn from Paul, ( Galatians 3:17 Ga 3:17> ,) and from the genealogical tables in Genesis and Exodus, it extended from the call of Abraham to the departure from Egypt.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:6

notes on verse 5  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:7

notes on verse 5  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:8

notes on verse 5  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:9

The speaker next proceeds to recount the circumstances which brought the people down into Egypt, in order that the rejection of Joseph, and the final salvation of the whole family through him, might stand out before his hearers, and be made to bear upon his final conclusion. (9) " And the patriarchs, moved with envy, sold Joseph into Egypt. And God was with him, (10) and delivered him out of all his afflictions, and gave him favor and wisdom in the sight of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and he made him governor over Egypt and all his house. (11) Now, there came a famine on all the land of Egypt and Canaan, and great affliction; and our fathers found no sustenance. (12) But Jacob, having heard that there was grain in Egypt, sent out our fathers the first time. (13) And at the second time Joseph was made known to his brothers, and Joseph's kindred was made known to Pharaoh. (14) Then Joseph sent and called to him his father Jacob and all his kindred, seventy-five souls. (15) And Jacob went down into Egypt, and died, he and our fathers, (16) and were carried over into Sychem, and laid in the sepulcher which Jacob bought for a sum of money from the sons of Emmor, the father of Sychem. "  

There is a numerical discrepancy between moses and Stephen, in reference to the number of Jacob's family when they went into Egypt. Stephen makes then seventy-five, while Moses states them at seventy, including Joseph's family and himself. The Septuagint translation of Genesis agrees with Stephen. Various methods of reconciling these statements are proposed, of which the only satisfactory one is this. The number given by Moses includes all "who came out of his loins, besides Jacob's sons' wives." The number given by Stephen must, then, include five of their wives, who were, probably, all that were then living. The translators of the Septuagint, having some historical evidence, now lost to us, that five of their wives went with them, saw fit to fill up the number in their translation, and Stephen followed their enumeration.  

It was Jacob, and not Abraham, who purchased the sepulcher from the sons of Emmor, as is certain from the history given in Genesis 33:19-20 Ge 33:19> ; yet it is attributed to Abraham here in the common version, and most of the Greek manuscripts. It is far more likely, however, that the manuscripts should err, in a case of this kind, than that the error should have been committed by Stephen or by Luke. I have, therefore, not hesitated to insert the name of Jacob, instead of Abraham, in the text. Dr. Bloomfield says, "The best critics are of the opinion that Abraham is spurious."   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:10

notes on verse 9  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:11

notes on verse 9  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:12

notes on verse 9  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:13

notes on verse 9  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:14

notes on verse 9  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:15

notes on verse 9  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:16

notes on verse 9  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:17

From this glance at the leading points in the history of Joseph, Stephen advances to the case of Moses, showing that his brethren rejected him in like manner, and were also finally delivered by him. (17) " But when the time of the promise of which God had sworn to Abraham was drawing near, the people increased and were multiplied in Egypt, (18) until another king arose who knew not Joseph. (19) The same dealt craftily with our kindred, and afflicted our fathers, so that they cast out their young children, in order that they might not live. (20) In which time Moses was born, and was exceedingly beautiful. He was nourished in his his father's house three months. (21) And when he was cast out, Pharaoh's daughter took him up, and nourished him for her own son. (22) And Moses was educated in all the learning of the Egyptians, and was powerful in words and in deeds. (23) And when he was full forty years old, it came into his heart to look after his brethren, the children of Israel. (24) And seeing one of them suffer wrong, he defended and avenged him who was oppressed, smiting the Egyptian. (25) Now he thought that his brethren would understand that God would, by his hand, give them salvation; but they did not understand. (26) The next day he appeared to them as they were fighting, and would have brought them to peace, saying, Men, you are brethren; why do you wrong one another? (27) But he who was wronging his neighbor thrust him away, saying, Who made you a ruler and a judge over us? (28) Do you wish to kill me as you killed that Egyptian yesterday? (29) Then Moses fled at this word, and became a sojourner in the land of Midian where he begot two sons. "  

In the rejection of Moses by his countrymen, when he was seeking to deliver them from bondage, according to the promise of God, Stephen has before the minds of the Sanhedrim another case bearing upon his final conclusion. It is true, that as yet they could not anticipate the use he intended to make of it, but the obscurity of his design awakened their curiosity, and rendered their mortification the more intense when at last it was suddenly developed. If they could have anticipated it, they would have stopped his mouth at the beginning.   

  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:18

notes on verse 17  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:19

notes on verse 17  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:20

notes on verse 17  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:21

notes on verse 17  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:22

notes on verse 17  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:23

notes on verse 17  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:24

notes on verse 17  

  

Combined Bible: Act 7:25

notes on verse 17  

  

MHCC: Act 7:1-16

Stephen was charged as a blasphemer of God, and an apostate from the church; therefore he shows that he is a son of Abraham, and values himself on it. The slow steps by which the promise made to Abraham advanced toward performance, plainly show that it had a spiritual meaning, and that the land intended was the heavenly. God owned Joseph in his troubles, and was with him by the power of his Spirit, both on his own mind by giving him comfort, and on those he was concerned with, by giving him favour in their eyes. Stephen reminds the Jews of their mean beginning as a check to priding themselves in the glories of that nation. Likewise of the wickedness of the patriarchs of their tribes, in envying their brother Joseph; and the same spirit was still working in them toward Christ and his ministers. The faith of the patriarchs, in desiring to be buried in the land of Canaan, plainly showed they had regard to the heavenly country. It is well to recur to the first rise of usages, or sentiments, which have been perverted. Would we know the nature and effects of justifying faith, we should study the character of the father of the faithful. His calling shows the power and freeness of Divine grace, and the nature of conversion. Here also we see that outward forms and distinctions are as nothing, compared with separation from the world, and devotedness to God.

MHCC: Act 7:17-29

Let us not be discouraged at the slowness of the fulfilling of God's promises. Suffering times often are growing times with the church. God is preparing for his people's deliverance, when their day is darkest, and their distress deepest. Moses was exceeding fair, " fair toward God;" it is the beauty of holiness which is in God's sight of great price. He was wonderfully preserved in his infancy; for God will take special care of those of whom he designs to make special use. And did he thus protect the child Moses? Much more will he secure the interests of his holy child Jesus, from the enemies who are gathered together against him. They persecuted Stephen for disputing in defence of Christ and his gospel: in opposition to these they set up Moses and his law. They may understand, if they do not wilfully shut their eyes against the light, that God will, by this Jesus, deliver them out of a worse slavery than that of Egypt. Although men prolong their own miseries, yet the Lord will take care of his servants, and effect his own designs of mercy.

Matthew Henry: Act 7:1-16

Stephen is now at the bar before the great council of the nation, indicted for blasphemy: what the witnesses swore against him we had an account of in the foregoing chapter, that he spoke blasphemous words against Moses and God; for he spoke against this holy place and the law. Now here,

I. The high priest calls upon him to answer for himself, Act 7:1. He was president, and, as such, the mouth of the court, and therefore he saith, "You, the prisoner at the bar, you hear what is sworn against you; what do you say to it? Are these things so? Have you ever spoken any words to this purport? If you have, will you recant them, or will you stand to them? Guilty or not guilty? "This carried a show of fairness, and yet seems to have been spoken with an air of haughtiness; and thus far he seems to have prejudged the cause, that, if it were so, that he had spoken such and such words, he shall certainly be adjudged a blasphemer, whatever he may offer in justification or explanation of them.

II. He begins his defence, and it is long; but it should seem by his breaking off abruptly, just when he came to the main point (Act 7:50), that it would have been much longer if his enemies would have given him leave to say all he had to say. In general we may observe,

1. That in this discourse he appears to be a man ready and mighty in the scriptures, and thereby thoroughly furnished for every good word and work. He can relate scripture stories, and such as were very pertinent to his purpose, off-hand without looking in his Bible. He was filled with the Holy Ghost, not so much to reveal to him new things, or open to him the secret counsels and decrees of God concerning the Jewish nation, with them to convict these gainsayers; no, but to bring to his remembrance the scriptures of the Old Testament, and to teach him how to make use of them for their conviction. Those that are full of the Holy Ghost will be full of the scripture, as Stephen was.

2. That he quotes the scriptures according to the Septuagint translation, by which it appears he was one of the Hellenist Jews, who used that version in their synagogues. His following this, occasions divers variations from the Hebrew original in this discourse, which the judges of the court did not correct, because they knew how he was led into them; nor is it any derogation to the authority of that Spirit by which he spoke, for the variations are not material. We have a maxim, Apices juris non sunt jura - Mere points of law are not law itself. These verses carry on this his compendium of church history to the end of the book of Genesis. Observe,

(1.) His preface: Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken. He gives them, though not flattering titles, yet civil and respectful ones, signifying his expectation of fair treatment with them; from men he hopes to be treated with humanity, and he hopes that brethren and fathers will use him in a fatherly brotherly way. They are ready to look upon him as an apostate from the Jewish church, and an enemy to them. But, to make way for their conviction to the contrary, he addresses himself to them as men, brethren, and fathers, resolving to look on himself as one of them, though they would not so look on him. He craves their attention: Hearken; though he was about to tell them what they already knew, yet he begs them to hearken to it, because, though they knew it all, yet they would not without a very close application of mind know how to apply it to the case before them.

(2.) His entrance upon the discourse, which (whatever it may seem to those that read it carelessly) is far from being a long ramble only to amuse the hearers, and give them a diversion by telling them an old story. No; it is all pertinent and ad rem - to the purpose, to show them that God had no this heart so much upon that holy place and the law as they had; but, as he had a church in the world many ages before that holy place was founded and the ceremonial law given, so he would have when they should both have had their period.

[1.] He begins with the call of Abraham out of Ur of the Chaldees, by which he was set apart for God to be the trustee of the promise, and the father of the Old Testament church. This we had an account of (Gen 12:1, etc.), and it is referred to, Neh 9:7, Neh 9:8. His native country was an idolatrous country, it was Mesopotamia, (Act 7:2), the land of the Chaldeans (Act 7:4); thence God brought him at two removes, not too far at once, dealing tenderly with him; he first brought him out of the land of the Chaldeans to Charran, or Haran, a place midway between that and Canaan (Gen 11:31), and thence five years after, when his father was dead, he removed him into the land of Canaan, wherein you now dwell. It should seem, the first time that God spoke to Abraham, he appeared in some visible display of the divine presence, as the God of glory (Act 7:2), to settle a correspondence with him: and then afterwards he kept up that correspondence, and spoke to him from time to time as there was occasion, without repeating his visible appearances as the God of glory.

First, From this call of Abraham we may observe, 1. That in all our ways we must acknowledge God, and attend the directions of his providence, as of the pillar of cloud and fire. It is not said, Abraham removed, but, God removed him into this land wherein you now dwell, and he did but follow his Leader. 2. Those whom God takes into covenant with himself he distinguishes from the children of this world; they are effectually called out of the state, out of the land, of their nativity; they must sit loose to the world, and live above it and every thing in it, even that in it which is most dear to them, and must trust God to make it up to them in another and better country, that is, the heavenly, which he will show them. God's chosen must follow him with an implicit faith and obedience.

Secondly, But let us see what this is to Stephen's case. 1. They had charged him as a blasphemer of God, and an apostate from the church; therefore he shows that he is a son of Abraham, and values himself upon his being able to say, Our father Abraham, and that he is a faithful worshipper of the God of Abraham, whom therefore he here calls the God of glory. He also shows that he owns divine revelation, and that particularly by which the Jewish church was founded and incorporated. 2. They were proud of their being circumcised; and therefore he shows that Abraham was taken under God's guidance, and into communion with him, before he was circumcised, for that was not till Act 7:8. With this argument Paul proves that Abraham was justified by faith, because he was justified when he was in uncircumcision: and so here. 3. They had a mighty jealousy for this holy place, which may be meant of the whole land of Canaan; for it was called the holy land, Immanuel's land; and the destruction of the holy house inferred that of the holy land. "Now,"says Stephen, "you need not be so proud of it; for,"(1.) "You came originally out of Ur of the Chaldees, where your fathers served other gods (Jos 24:2), and you were not the first planters of this country. Look therefore unto the rock whence you were hewn, and the holy of the pit out of which you were digged; "that is, as it follows there, " look unto Abraham your father, for I called him alone (Isa 51:1, Isa 51:2) - think of the meanness of your beginnings, and how you are entirely indebted to divine grace, and then you will see boasting to be for ever excluded. It was God that raised up the righteous man from the east, and called him to his foot. Isa 41:2. But, if his seed degenerate, let them know that God can destroy this holy place, and raise up to himself another people, for he is not a debtor to them."(2.) "God appeared in his glory to Abraham a great way off in Mesopotamia, before he came near Canaan, nay, before he dwelt in Charran; so that you must not think God's visits are confined to this land; no; he that brought the seed of the church from a country so far east can, if he pleases, carry the fruit of it to another country as far west."(3.) "God made no haste to bring him into this land, but let him linger some years by the way, which shows that God has not his heart so much upon this land as you have yours, neither is his honour, nor the happiness of his people, bound up in it. It is therefore neither blasphemy nor treason to say, It shall be destroyed,"

[2.] The unsettled state of Abraham and his seed for many ages after he was called out of Ur of the Chaldees. God did indeed promise that he would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed after him, Act 7:5. But, First, As yet he had no child, nor any by Sarah for many years after. Secondly, He himself was but a stranger and a sojourner in that land, and God gave him no inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on; but there he was as in a strange country, where he was always upon the remove, and could call nothing his own. Thirdly, His posterity did not come to the possession of it for a long time: After four hundred years they shall come and serve me in this place, and not till then, Act 7:7. Nay, Fourthly, They must undergo a great deal of hardship and difficulty before they shall be put into the possession of that land: they shall be brought into bondage, and ill treated in a strange land: and this, not as the punishment of any particular sin, as their wandering in the wilderness was, for we never find any such account given of their bondage in Egypt; but so God had appointed, and it must be. And at the end of four hundred years, reckoning from the birth of Isaac, that nation to whom they shall be in bondage will I judge, saith God. Now this teaches us, 1. That known unto God are all his works beforehand. When Abraham had neither inheritance nor heir, yet he was told he should have both, the one a land of promise, and the other a child of promise; and therefore both had, and received, by faith. 2. That God's promises, though they are slow, are sure in the operation of them; they will be fulfilled in the season of them, though perhaps not so soon as we expect. 3. That though the people of God may be in distress and trouble for a time, yet God will at length both rescue them and reckon with those that do oppress them; for, verily there is a God that judgeth in the earth.

But let us see how this serves Stephen's purpose. 1. The Jewish nation, for the honour of which they were so jealous, was very inconsiderable in its beginnings; as their common father Abraham was fetched out of obscurity in Ur of the Chaldees, so their tribes, and the heads of them, were fetched out of servitude in Egypt, when they were the fewest of all people, Deu 7:7. And what need is there of so much ado, as if their ruin, when they bring it upon themselves by sin, must be the ruin of the world, and of all God's interests in it? No; he that brought them out of Egypt can bring them into it again, as he threatened (Deu 28:68), and yet be no loser, while he can out of stones raise up children unto Abraham. 2. The slow steps by which the promise made to Abraham advanced towards the performance, and the many seeming contradictions here taken notice of, plainly show that it had a spiritual meaning, and that the land principally intended to be conveyed and secured by it was the better country, that is, the heavenly; as the apostle shows from this very argument that the patriarchs sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, thence inferring that they looked for a city that had foundations, Heb 11:9, Heb 11:10. It was therefore no blasphemy to say, Jesus shall destroy this place, when at the same time we say, "He shall lead us to the heavenly Canaan, and put us in possession of that, of which the earthly Canaan was but a type and figure."

[3.] The building up of the family of Abraham, with the entail of divine grace upon it, and the disposals of divine Providence concerning it, which take up the rest of the book of Genesis.

First, God engaged to be a God to Abraham and his seed; and, in token of this, appointed that he and his male seed should be circumcised, Gen 17:9, Gen 17:10. He gave him the covenant of circumcision, that is, the covenant of which circumcision was the seal; and accordingly, when Abraham had a son born, he circumcised him the eighth day (Act 7:8), by which he was both bound by the divine law and interested in the divine promise; for circumcision had reference to both, being a seal of the covenant both on God's part - I will be to thee a God all-sufficient, and on man's part - Walk before me, and be thou perfect. And then when effectual care was thus taken for the securing of Abraham's seed, to be a seed to serve the Lord, they began to multiply: Isaac begat Jacob, and Jacob the twelve patriarchs, or roots of the respective tribes.

Secondly, Joseph, the darling and blessing of his father's house, was abused by his brethren; they envied him because of his dreams, and sold him into Egypt. Thus early did the children of Israel begin to grudge those among them that were eminent and outshone others, of which their enmity to Christ, who, like Joseph, was a Nazarite among his brethren, was a great instance.

Thirdly, God owned Joseph in his troubles, and was with him (Gen 39:2, Gen 39:21), by the influence of his Spirit, both on his mind, giving him comfort, and on the minds of those he was concerned with, giving him favour in their eyes. And thus at length he delivered him out of his afflictions, and Pharaoh made him the second man in the kingdom, Psa 105:20-22. And thus he not only arrived at great preferment among the Egyptians, but became the shepherd and stone of Israel, Gen 49:24.

Fourthly, Jacob was compelled to go down into Egypt, by a famine which forced him out of Canaan, a dearth (which was a great affliction ), to that degree that our fathers found no sustenance in Canaan, Act 7:11. That fruitful land was turned into barrenness. But, hearing that there was corn in Egypt (treasured up by the wisdom of his own son), he sent out our fathers first to fetch corn, Act 7:12. And the second time that they went, Joseph, who at first made himself strange to them, made himself known to them, and it was notified to Pharaoh that they were Joseph's kindred and had a dependence upon him (Act 7:13), whereupon, with Pharaoh's leave, Joseph sent for his father Jacob to him into Egypt, with all his kindred and family, to the number of seventy-five souls, to be subsisted there, Act 7:13. In Genesis they are said to be seventy souls, Gen 46:27. But the Septuagint there makes them seventy-five, and Stephen or Luke follows that version, as Luk 3:36, where Cainan is inserted, which is not in the Hebrew text, but in the Septuagint. Some, by excluding Joseph and his sons, who were in Egypt before (which reduces the number to sixty-four), and adding the sons of the eleven patriarch, make the number seventy-five.

Fifthly, Jacob and his sons died in Egypt (Act 7:15), but were carried over to be buried in Canaan, Act 7:16. A very considerable difficulty occurs here: it is said, They were carried over into Sychem, whereas Jacob was buried not in Sychem, but near Hebron, in the cave of Machpelah, where Abraham and Isaac were buried, Gen 50:13. Joseph's bones indeed were buried in Sychem (Jos 24:32), and it seems by this (though it is not mentioned in the story) that the bones of all the other patriarchs were carried with his, each of them giving the same commandment concerning them that he had done; and of them this must be understood, not of Jacob himself. But then the sepulchre in Sychem was bought by Jacob (Gen 33:19), and by this it is described, Jos 24:32. How then is it here said to be bought by Abraham? Dr. Whitby's solution of this is very sufficient. He supplies it thus: Jacob went down into Egypt and died, he and our fathers; and ( our fathers ) were carried over into Sychem; and he, that is, Jacob, was laid in the sepulchre that Abraham brought for a sum of money, Gen 23:16. (Or, they were laid there, that is, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.) And they, namely, the other patriarchs, were buried in the sepulchre bought of the sons of Emmor, the father of Sychem.

Let us now see what this is to Stephen's purpose. 1. He still reminds them of the mean beginning of the Jewish nation, as a check to their priding themselves in the glories of that nation; and that it was by a miracle of mercy that they were raised up out of nothing to what they were, from so small a number to be so great a nation; but, if they answer not the intention of their being so raised, they can expect no other than to be destroyed. The prophets frequently put them in mind of the bringing of them out of Egypt, as a aggravation of their contempt of the law of God, and here it is urged upon them as an aggravation of their contempt of the gospel of Christ. 2. He reminds them likewise of the wickedness of those that were the patriarchs of their tribes, in envying their brother Joseph, and selling him into Egypt; and the same spirit was still working in them towards Christ and his ministers. 3. Their holy land, which they doted so much upon, their fathers were long kept out of the possession of, and met with dearth and great affliction in it; and therefore let them not think it strange if, after it has been so long polluted with sin, it be at length destroyed. 4. The faith of the patriarchs in desiring to be buried in the land of Canaan plainly showed that they had an eye to the heavenly country, to which it was the design of this Jesus to lead them.

Matthew Henry: Act 7:17-29

Stephen here goes on to relate,

I. The wonderful increase of the people of Israel in Egypt; it was by a wonder of providence that in a little time they advanced from a family into a nation. 1. It was when the time of the promise drew nigh - the time when they were to be formed into a people. During the first two hundred and fifteen years after the promise made to Abraham, the children of the covenant were increased but to seventy; but in the latter two hundred and fifteen years they increased to six hundred thousand fighting men. The motion of providence is sometimes quickest when it comes nearest the centre. Let us not be discouraged at the slowness of the proceedings towards the accomplishment of God's promises; God knows how to redeem the time that seems to have been lost, and, when the year of the redeemed is at hand, can do a double work in a single day. 2. It was in Egypt, where they were oppressed, and ruled with rigour; when their lives were made so bitter to them that, one would think, they should have wished to be written childless, yet they married, in faith that God in due time would visit them; and God blessed them, who thus honoured him, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply. Suffering times have often been growing times with the church.

II. The extreme hardships which they underwent there, Act 7:18, Act 7:19. When the Egyptians observed them to increase in number they increased their burdens, in which Stephen observes three things: - 1. Their base ingratitude: They were oppressed by another king that knew not Joseph, that is, did not consider the good service that Joseph had done to that nation; for, if he had, he would not have made so ill a requital to his relations and family. Those that injure good people are very ungrateful, for they are the blessings of the age and place they live in. 2. Their hellish craft and policy: They dealt subtly with our kindred. Come on, said they, let us deal wisely, thinking thereby to secure themselves, but it proved dealing foolishly, for they did but treasure up wrath by it. Those are in a great mistake who think they deal wisely for themselves when they deal deceitfully or unmercifully with their brethren. 3. Their barbarous and inhuman cruelty. That they might effectually extirpate them, they cast out their young children, to the end they might not live. The killing of their infant seed seemed a very likely way to crush an infant nation. Now Stephen seems to observe this to them, not only that they might further see how mean their beginnings were, fitly represented (perhaps with an eye to the exposing of the young children in Egypt) by the forlorn state of a helpless, out-cast infant (Eze 16:4), and how much they were indebted to God for his care of them, which they had forfeited, and made themselves unworthy of: but also that they might consider that what they were now doing against the Christian church in its infancy was as impious and unjust, and would be in the issue as fruitless and ineffectual, as that was which the Egyptians did against the Jewish church in its infancy. "You think you deal subtly in your ill treatment of us, and, in persecuting young converts, you do as they did in casting out the young children; but you will find it is to no purpose, in spite of your malice Christ's disciples will increase and multiply. "

III. The raising up of Moses to be their deliverer. Stephen was charged with having spoken blasphemous words against Moses, in answer to which charge he here speaks very honourably of him. 1. Moses was born when the persecution of Israel was at the hottest, especially in that most cruel instance of it, the murdering of the new-born children: At that time, Moses was born (Act 7:20), and was himself in danger, as soon as he came into the world (as our Saviour also was at Bethlehem) of falling a sacrifice to that bloody edict. God is preparing for his people's deliverance, when their way is darkest, and their distress deepest. 2. He was exceedingly fair; his face began to shine as soon as he was born, as a happy presage of the honour God designed to put upon him; he was asteios tō Theō - fair towards God; he was sanctified from the womb, and this made him beautiful in God's eyes; for it is the beauty of holiness that is in God's sight of great price. 3. He was wonderfully preserved in his infancy, first, by the care of his tender parents, who nourished him three months in their own house, as long as they durst; and then by a favourable providence that threw him into the arms of Pharaoh's daughter, who took him up, and nourished him as her own son (Act 7:21); for those whom God designs to make special use of he will take special care of. And did he thus protect the child Moses? Much more will he secure the interests of his holy child Jesus (as he is called Act 4:27) from the enemies that are gathered together against him. 4. He became a great scholar (Act 7:22): He was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, who were then famed for all manner of polite literature, particularly philosophy, astronomy, and (which perhaps helped to lead them to idolatry) hieroglyphics. Moses, having his education at court, had opportunity of improving himself by the best books, tutors, and conversation, in all the arts and sciences, and had a genius for them. Only we have reason to think that he had not so far forgotten the God of his fathers as to acquaint himself with the unlawful studies and practices of the magicians of Egypt, any further than was necessary to the confuting of them. 5. He became a prime minister of state in Egypt. This seems to be meant by his being mighty in words and deeds. Though he had not a ready way of expressing himself, but stammered, yet he spoke admirably good sense, and every thing he said commanded assent, and carried its own evidence and force of reason along with it; and, in business, none went on with such courage, and conduct, and success. Thus was he prepared, by human helps, for those services, which, after all, he could not be thoroughly furnished for without divine illumination. Now, by all this, Stephen will make it appear that, notwithstanding the malicious insinuations of his persecutors, he had as high and honourable thoughts of Moses as they had.

IV. The attempts which Moses made to deliver Israel, which they spurned, and would not close in with. This Stephen insists much upon, and it serves for a key to this story (Exo 2:11-15), as does also that other construction which is put upon it by the apostle, Heb 11:24-26. There it is represented as an act of holy self-denial, here as a designed prelude to, or entrance upon, the public service he was to be called out to (Act 7:23): When he was full forty years old, in the prime of his time for preferment in the court of Egypt, it came into his heart (for God put it there) to visit his brethren the children of Israel, and to see which way he might do them any service; and he showed himself as a public person, with a public character. 1. As Israel's saviour. This he gave a specimen of in avenging an oppressed Israelite, and killing the Egyptian that abused him (Act 7:24). Seeing one of his brethren suffer wrong, he was moved with compassion towards the sufferer, and a just indignation at the wrong-doer, as men in public stations should be, and he avenged him that was oppressed, and smote the Egyptian, which, if he had been only a private person, he could not lawfully have done; but he knew that his commission from heaven would bear him out, and he supposed that his brethren (who could not but have some knowledge of the promise made to Abraham, that the nation that should oppress them God would judge ) would have understood that God by his hand would deliver them; for he could not have had either presence of mind or strength of body to do what he did, if he had not been clothed with such a divine power as evinced a divine authority. If they had but understood the signs of the times, they might have taken this for the dawning of the day of their deliverance; but they understood not, they did not take this, as it was designed, for the setting up of a standard, and sounding of a trumpet, to proclaim Moses their deliverer. 2. As Israel's judge. This he gave a specimen of, the very next day, in offering to accommodate matters between two contending Hebrews, wherein he plainly assumed a public character (Act 7:26): He showed himself to them as they strove, and, putting on an air of majesty and authority, he would have set them at one again, and as their prince have determined the controversy between them, saying, Sirs, you are brethren, by birth and profession of religion; why do you wrong one to another? For he observed that (as in most strifes) there was a fault on both sides; and therefore, in order to peace and friendship, there must be a mutual remission and condescension. When Moses was to be Israel's deliverer out of Egypt, he slew the Egyptians, and so delivered Israel out of their hands; but, when he was to be Israel's judge and lawgiver, he ruled them with the golden sceptre, not the iron rod; he did not kill and slay them when they strove, but gave them excellent laws and statutes, and decided upon their complaints and appeals made to him, Exo 18:16. But the contending Israelite that was most in the wrong thrust him away (Act 7:27), would not bear the reproof, though a just and gentle one, but was ready to fly in his face, with, Who made thee a ruler and a judge over us? Proud and litigious spirits are impatient of check and control. Rather would these Israelites have their bodies ruled with rigour by their task-masters than be delivered, and have their minds ruled with reason, by their deliverer. The wrong-doer was so enraged at the reproof given him that he upbraided Moses with the service he had done to their nation in killing the Egyptian, which, if they had pleased, would have been the earnest of further and greater service: Wilt thou kill me, as thou didst the Egyptian yesterday? Act 7:28, charging that upon him as his crime, and threatening to accuse him for it, which was the hanging out of the flag of defiance to the Egyptians, and the banner of love and deliverance to Israel. Hereupon Moses fled into the land of Midian, and made no further attempt to deliver Israel till forty years after; he settled as a stranger in Midian, married, and had two sons, by Jethro's daughter, Act 7:29.

Now let us see how this serves Stephen's purpose. 1. They charged him with blaspheming Moses, in answer to which he retorts upon them the indignities which their fathers did to Moses, which they ought to be ashamed of, and humbled for, instead of picking quarrels thus, under pretence of zeal for the honour of Moses, with one that had as great a veneration for him as any of them had. 2. They persecuted him for disputing in defence of Christ and his gospel, in opposition to which they set up Moses and his law: "But,"saith he, "you had best take heed,"(1.) "Lest you hereby do as your fathers did, refuse and reject one whom God has raised up to be to you a prince and a Saviour; you may understand, if you will not wilfully shut your eyes against the light, that God will, by this Jesus, deliver you out of a worse slavery than that in Egypt; take heed then of thrusting him away, but receive him as a ruler and a judge over you."(2.) "Lest you hereby fare as your fathers fared, who for this were very justly left to die in their slavery, for the deliverance came not till forty years after. This will be the issue of it, you put away the gospel from you, and it will be sent to the Gentiles; you will not have Christ, and you shall not have him, so shall your doom be."Mat 23:38, Mat 23:39.

Barclay: Act 7:1-7

When Oliver Cromwell was outlining the education he thought necessary for his son Richard, he said, "I would have him know a little history." It was to the lesson of history that Stephen appealed. Clearly believing that the best form of defence was attack, he took a bird's eye view of the history of the Jewish people and cited certain truths as condemnation of his own nation.

(i) He saw that the men who played a really great part in the history of Israel were the men who heard God's command, "Get thee out," and were not afraid to obey it. With that adventurous spirit Stephen implicitly contrasted the spirit of the Jews of his own day, whose one desire was to keep things as they were and who regarded Jesus and his followers as dangerous innovators.

(ii) He insisted that men had worshipped God long before there ever was a Temple. To the Jews the Temple was the most sacred of all places. Stephen's insistence on the fact that God does not dwell exclusively in any temple made with hands was not to their liking.

(iii) Stephen insisted that when the Jews crucified Jesus they were only setting the coping stone on a policy they had always followed; for all through the ages they had persecuted the prophets and abandoned the leaders whom God had raised up.

These were hard truths for men who believed themselves to be the chosen people, and it is little wonder that they were infuriated when they heard them. We must watch for these ever-recurring notes as we study Stephen's defence.

Barclay: Act 7:1-7

As we have already seen, it was Stephen's method of defence to take a panoramic view of Jewish history. It was not the mere sequence of events which was in Stephen's mind. To him every person and event symbolized something. He began with Abraham, for in the most literal way it was with him that, for the Jew, history began. In him Stephen sees three things.

(i) Abraham was a man who answered God's summons. As the writer to the Hebrews put it, Abraham left home without knowing where he was to go (Heb 11:8). He was a man of adventurous spirit. Lesslie Newbigin of the Church of South India tells us that negotiations towards that union were often held up by people demanding to know just where such and such a step might lead. In the end someone had to say to these careful souls, "A Christian has no right to demand to know where he is going." For Stephen the man of God was he who obeyed God's command even when he had no idea what the consequences might be.

(ii) Abraham was a man of faith. He did not know where he was going but he believed that, under God's guidance, the best was yet to be. Even when he had no children and when, humanly speaking, it seemed impossible that he ever should have any, he believed that some day his descendants would inherit the land God had promised to them.

(iii) Abraham was a man of hope. To the end of the day he never saw the promise fully fulfilled but he never doubted that it would be.

So Stephen presents the Jews with the picture of an adventurous life, ever ready to answer God's summons in contrast to their desire to cling to the past.

Barclay: Act 7:8-16

The picture of Abraham is succeeded by the picture of Joseph. The key to Joseph's life is summed up in his own saying in Gen 50:20. At that time his brothers were afraid that, after the death of Jacob, Joseph would take vengeance on them for what they had done to him. Joseph's answer was, "As for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good." Joseph was the man for whom seeming disaster turned to triumph. Sold into Egypt as a slave, wrongfully imprisoned, forgotten by the men he had helped, the day yet came when he became prime minister of Egypt. Stephen sums up the characteristics of Joseph in two words--grace and wisdom.

(i) Grace is a lovely word. At its simplest it means beauty in the physical sense; then it comes to mean that beauty of character which all men love. Its nearest English equivalent is charm. There was about Joseph that charm which is always on the really good man. It would have been extremely easy for him to become embittered. But he dealt faithfully with each duty as it emerged, serving with equal devotion as slave or as prime minister.

(ii) There is no word more difficult to define than wisdom. It means so much more than mere cleverness. But the life of Joseph gives us the clue to its meaning. In essence, wisdom is the ability to see things as God sees them.

Once again the contrast is there. The Jews were lost in the contemplation of their own past and imprisoned in the mazes of their own Law. But Joseph welcomed each new task, even if it was a rebuff, and adopted God's view of life.

Barclay: Act 7:17-36

Next upon the scene comes the figure of Moses. For the Jew, Moses was above all the man who answered God's command to go out. He was quite literally the man who gave up a kingdom to answer God's summons to be the leader of his people. Our Bible story has little to tell us of the early days of Moses; but the Jewish historians had much more to say. According to Josephus, Moses was so beautiful a child that, when he was being carried down the street in his nurse's arms, people stopped to look at him. He was so brilliant a lad that he surpassed all others in the speed and the eagerness with which he learned. One day Pharaoh's daughter took him to her father and asked him to make him his successor on the throne of Egypt. Pharaoh agreed. Then, the tale goes on, Pharaoh took his crown and jestingly placed it on the infant Moses' head; but the child snatched it off and threw it on the ground. One of the Egyptian wise men standing by said that this was a sign that if he was not killed at once this child was destined to bring disaster on the crown of Egypt. But Pharaoh's daughter snatched Moses into her arms and persuaded her father not to heed the warning. When Moses grew up he became the greatest of Egyptian generals and led a victorious campaign in far-off Ethiopia where he married the princess of the land.

In face of that we can see what Moses gave up. He actually gave up a kingdom in order to lead his people out into the desert on a great adventure for God. So once again Stephen is making the same point. The great man is not the man who, like the Jews, is thirled to the past and jealous of his privileges; he is the man who is ready to answer God's summons and leave the comfort and the ease he might have had.

Constable: Act 6:8--9:32

II. THE WITNESS IN JUDEA AND SAMARIA 6:8--9:31

In this next major section of Acts, Luke narrated three significant events in the life and ministry of the early church. These events were the martyrdom of Stephen, the ministry of Philip, and the conversion of Saul of Tarsus. Luke's presentation of these events was primarily biographical. In fact, he began his account of each event with the name of its major character (6:8; 8:5; 9:1).

The time when these events took place was probably shortly after those reported in the earlier chapters of the book.

Constable: Act 6:8--8:2

A. The martyrdom of Stephen 6:8-8:1a

Luke presented the events surrounding Stephen's martyrdom in Jerusalem next. He did so to explain the means God used to scatter the Christians and the gospel from Jerusalem into Judea, Samaria, and the uttermost parts of the earth. This record also throws more light on the spiritual strength and vitality of the church at this time. Stephen's experiences as recorded here resemble those of our Lord, as Peter's did in the earlier chapters.

Constable: Act 6:8--7:2

1. Stephen's arrest 6:8-7:1

6:8 Stephen was full of grace (cf. cf. 4:33; Luke 4:22) and power (cf. 2:22; 4:33) as well as the Holy Spirit (vv. 3, 5), wisdom (v. 3), and faith (v. 5). His ability to perform miracles seems unrelated to his having been appointed as one of the Seven (v. 5; cf. 21:8). Jesus and the Twelve were not the only ones who had the ability to perform miracles (cf. 2:22, 43; 5:12).

6:9-10 Many different synagogues existed in Jerusalem at this time (cf. 24:12). The Talmud said there were 390 of them before the Romans destroyed the city.³⁰¹ Like local churches today, they tended to attract people with similar backgrounds and preferences. Many families that had experienced liberation from some kind of slavery or servitude evidently populated the Synagogue of the Freedmen.³⁰²

"The Freedmen were Roman prisoners (or the descendants of such prisoners) who had later been granted their freedom. We know that a considerable number of Jews were taken prisoner by the Roman general Pompey and later released in Rome, and it is possible that these are meant here."³⁰³

These people had their roots in North Africa (Cyrene and Alexandria) and Asia Minor (Cilicia and Asia). Thus these were Hellenistic Jews, the group from which Stephen himself probably came. Since Saul of Tarsus was from Cilicia, perhaps he attended this synagogue, though he was not a freed man. The leading men in this congregation took issue with Stephen whom they had heard defend the gospel. Perhaps he, too, attended this synagogue. However they were unable to defeat him in debate. Stephen seems to have been an unusually gifted defender of the faith, though he was not one of the Twelve. He was a forerunner of later apologists. God guided wise Stephen by His Spirit as he spoke (cf. Luke 21:15).

This is the first occurrence in Acts of someone presenting the gospel in a Jewish synagogue. Until now we have read that the disciples taught and preached in the temple and from house to house (5:42). We now learn that they were also announcing the good news in their Jewish religious meetings. Paul normally preached first in the synagogue in towns he evangelized on his missionary journeys.

"While not minimizing the importance of the apostles to the whole church, we may say that in some way Stephen, Philip, and perhaps others of the appointed seven may well have been to the Hellenistic believers what the apostles were to the native-born Christians."³⁰⁴

6:11 Failing to prove Stephen wrong by intellectual argumentation, his adversaries falsely accused him of defying Moses and God (cf. Matt. 26:61, 65). At this time the Jews defined blasphemy as any defiant sin.³⁰⁵

6:12 Stephen's accusers stirred up the Jewish people, the Jewish elders (family and tribal leaders), and the scribes (Pharisees) against Stephen. Soldiers then arrested him and brought him before the Sanhedrin as they had done to Jesus, Peter, John, and the other apostles (4:15; 5:27; cf. 22:30).

6:13-14 The false testimony against Stephen was that he was saying things about the temple and the Mosaic Law that the Jews regarded as untrue and unpatriotic (cf. Matt. 26:59-61). Stephen appeared to be challenging the authority of the Pharisees, the Mosaic Law, and a major teaching of the Sadducees, namely the importance of the temple. He was evidently saying the same things Jesus had said (cf. Matt. 5:21-48; 12:6; 24:1-2; Mark 4:58; John 2:19-21).

"Like the similar charge against Jesus (Matt. 26:61; Mark 14:58; cf. John 2:19-22), its falseness lay not so much in its wholesale fabrication but in its subtile and deadly misrepresentation of what was intended. Undoubtedly Stephen spoke regarding a recasting of Jewish life in terms of the supremacy of Jesus the Messiah. Undoubtedly he expressed in his manner and message something of the subsidiary significance of the Jerusalem temple and the Mosaic law, as did Jesus before him (e.g., Mark 2:23-28; 3:1-6; 7:14-15; 10:5-9). But that is not the same as advocating the destruction of the temple or the changing of the law--though on these matters we must allow Stephen to speak for himself in Acts 7."³⁰⁶

"For Luke, the Temple stands as a time-honored, traditional place for teaching and prayer in Israel, which serves God's purpose but is not indispensable; the attitude with which worshippers use the temple makes all the difference."³⁰⁷

6:15 Luke may have intended to stress Stephen's fullness with the Holy Spirit that resulted in his confidence, composure, and courage by drawing attention to his face. Moses' face similarly shone when he descended from Mt. Sinai after seeing God (cf. 7:55-56; Exod. 34:29, 35). Stephen proceeded to function as an angel (a messenger from God), as well as looking like one, by bringing new revelation to his hearers, as Moses had. The Old Covenant had come through angelic mediation at Mt. Sinai (Heb. 2:2). Now revelation about the New Covenant was coming through one who acted like and even looked like an angel.

7:1 The "high priest" probably refers to Caiaphas, the official high priest then, but possibly Luke meant Annas (cf. 4:6).³⁰⁸ Jesus had stood before both these men separately to face similar charges (John 18:13-14, 24; Matt. 26:57). This was the third time that Christian leaders had defended their preaching before the Sanhedrin that Luke recorded in Acts (cf. 4:15; 5:27).

Constable: Act 7:2-53

2. Stephen's address 7:2-53

As a Hellenistic Jew, Stephen possessed a clearer vision of the universal implications of the gospel than did most of the Hebrew Jews. It was this breadth of vision that drew attack from the more temple-bound Jews in Jerusalem and led to his arrest. His address was not a personal defense designed to secure his acquittal by the Sanhedrin. It was instead an apologetic for the new way of worship that Jesus taught and His followers embraced.

"On the surface it appears to be a rather tedious recital of Jewish history which has little relevance to the charges on which Stephen has been brought to trial; on closer study, however, it reveals itself as a subtile and skilful proclamation of the Gospel which, in its criticism of Jewish institutions, marks the beginning of the break between Judaism and Christianity, and points forward to the more trenchant exposition of the difference between the old faith and the new as expressed by Paul and the author of the Letter to the Hebrews."³⁰⁹

Luke evidently recorded this speech, the longest one in Acts, to explain and defend this new way of worship quite fully. He showed that the disciples of Jesus were carrying on God's plan whereas the unbelieving Jews had committed themselves to beliefs and behavior that God had left behind and disapproved.

The form of Stephen's defense was common in his culture, but it is uncommon in western culture. He reviewed the history of Israel and highlighted elements of that history that supported his contentions. He built it mainly around outstanding personalities: Abraham, Joseph, Moses, and, to a lesser degree, David and Solomon. The first section (vv. 2-16) deals with Israel's patriarchal period and refutes the charge of blaspheming God (6:11). The second major section (vv. 17-43) deals with Moses and the Law and responds to the charge of blaspheming Moses (6:11) and speaking against the Law (6:13). The third section (vv. 44-50) deals with the temple and responds to the charge of speaking against the temple (6:13) and saying that Jesus would destroy the temple and alter Jewish customs (6:14). Stephen then climaxed his address with an indictment of his hard-hearted hearers (vv. 51-53).³¹⁰

"Stephen . . . was endeavoring to show how the Christian message was fully consistent with and the culmination of OT revelation."³¹¹

Stephen's purpose was also to show that Jesus experienced the same things Abraham, Joseph, and Moses had experienced as God's anointed servants. As the Sanhedrin recognized them as men whom God had anointed for the blessing of Israel and the world, so should they recognize Jesus. The people to whom these three patriarchs went as God's representatives all initially rejected them but later accepted them, which was also Jesus' experience.

Stephen quoted from the Septuagint (Greek) Old Testament. This was the translation most commonly used by Hellenistic Jews such as himself. His selective history of Israel stressed the points that he wanted to make.

"In this discourse three ideas run like cords through its fabric:

"1. There is progress and change in God's program. . . .

2. The blessings of God are not limited to the land of Israel and the temple area. . . .

"3. Israel in its past always evidenced a pattern of opposition to God's plans and His men."³¹²

Constable: Act 7:2-16

Stephen's view of God 7:2-16

The false witnesses had accused Stephen of blaspheming God (6:11). He proceeded to show the Sanhedrin that his view of God was absolutely orthodox. However in relating Israel's history during the patriarchal period, he mentioned things about God and the patriarchs that his hearers needed to reconsider.

Constable: Act 7:2-8

The Abrahamic Covenant 7:2-8

Stephen began his defense by going back to Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, and to the Abrahamic Covenant, God's foundational promises to the Jews.

7:2-3 Stephen called for the Sanhedrin's attention addressing his hearers respectfully as "brethren and fathers" (cf. 22:1). These men were his brethren, in that they were fellow Jews, and fathers, in that they were older leaders of the nation.

He took the title "God of glory" from Psalm 29:2 where it occurs in a context of God revealing His glory by speaking powerfully and majestically. God had revealed His glory by speaking this way to their father (ancestor) Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia. Genesis 12:1-3 records God's instruction for Abraham to leave his homeland to go to a foreign country that God would show him. Stephen was quoting from the Septuagint translation of Genesis 12:1.³¹³

God directed Abraham to a promised land. The Promised Land had become a Holy Land to the Jews, and in Stephen's day the Jews venerated it too greatly. We see this in the fact that they looked down on Hellenistic Jews, such as Stephen, who had not lived there all their lives. What was a good gift from God, the land, had become a source of inordinate pride that made the Jews conclude that orthodoxy was bound up with being in the land.

7:4 Obeying God's call Abraham left Mesopotamia, specifically Ur of the Chaldeans (cf. Gen. 15:7; Josh. 24:3; Neh. 9:7), and settled temporarily in Haran, near the top of the Fertile Crescent. After Abraham's father Terah died, God directed Abraham south into Canaan, the land the Jews occupied in Stephen's day (Gen. 12:5).

"A comparison of the data in Genesis (11:26, 32; 12:4) seems to indicate that Terah lived another 60 years after Abraham left [Haran]. . . . The best solution seems to be that Abraham was not the oldest son of Terah, but was named first because he was the most prominent (11:26)."³¹⁴

The father of Judaism was willing to depart from where he was to follow God into unknown territory on the word of God alone. The Jews in Stephen's day were not willing to depart from where they were in their thinking even though God's word was leading them to do so, as Stephen would point out. Stephen wanted them to follow Abraham's good example of faith and courage.

7:5 Stephen also contrasted Abraham's lack of inheritance in the land with God's promise to give the land to Abraham's descendants as an inheritance (Gen. 12:7; cf. Heb. 11:8). God promised this when the patriarch had no children. Thus the emphasis is on God's promise of future possession of the land through descendants to come. Of course, Abraham did possess the cave of Machpelah in Canaan (Gen. 23:3-20), but perhaps Stephen meant that God gave no continuing or full possession to Abraham.

The Jews of Stephen's day needed to realize that God had not exhausted His promises to Abraham in giving them what they presently had and valued so highly. There was greater inheritance to come, but it would come to future generations of their descendants, not to them. Specifically it would come to those who continued to follow Abraham's good example of faith by believing in Jesus. God sought to teach these Jews that there were spiritual descendants of Abraham who were not his physical descendants (Gal. 3:6-9, 29).

7:6 God also told Abraham that his offspring would be slaves and suffer mistreatment outside their land for 400 years (Gen. 15:13).³¹⁵

The Israelites were currently under Roman oppression but were about to lose their freedom and experience antagonism outside the land for many years. Jesus had predicted this (Matt. 23:1-25:46).

7:7 God promised to punish the nations that oppressed Israel (Gen. 12:3) and to bring her back into the land eventually (Gen. 15:13). God had told Moses that he would bring the Israelites out of Egypt and that they would worship Him at Mt. Sinai (Exod. 3:12). Stephen's point was that God had promised to punish those who oppressed His people. The Jews had been oppressing the Christians by prohibiting their preaching and even flogging them (4:18; 5:40). Gamaliel had warned that if the Christians were correct the Jewish leaders would be fighting against God by opposing them (5:39). God's promise to judge His people's oppressors went back into the Abrahamic Covenant, which the Jews treasured and Stephen reminded them of here.

7:8 Stephen probably referred to God giving Abraham the covenant of circumcision (Gen. 17) because this was the sign that God would deliver what He had promised. It was the seal of the Abrahamic Covenant. God's promise was firm. Moreover God enabled Abraham to father Isaac, whom Abraham obediently circumcised, and later Isaac gave birth to Jacob who fathered the 12 patriarchs. Thus this chapter in Israel's history ends with emphasis on God's faithfulness to His promises to Abraham. The Sanhedrin needed to reevaluate these promises in the light of how God was working in their day.

Stephen affirmed belief that the God of glory had given the Abrahamic Covenant, which contained promises of land (vv. 2-4), seed (v. 5), and blessing (vv. 6-7). He had sealed this covenant with a sign, namely circumcision (v. 8). Circumcision was one of the Jewish customs that would pass away in view of the new revelation that had come through Jesus Christ (cf. 6:14).

Throughout his speech Stephen made many statements that had revolutionary implications for traditional Jewish thinking of his day. He did not expound these implications, but they are clear in view of what the disciples of Jesus were preaching. As such his speech is a masterpiece of understatement, or rather non-statement. That the Sanhedrin saw these implications and rejected them becomes clear at the end of the speech when they reacted as negatively as possible.

Constable: Act 7:9-16

God's faithfulness to His people 7:9-16

Stephen next proceeded to show what God had done with Joseph and his family. He selected this segment of the patriarchal narrative primarily for two reasons. First, it shows how God miraculously preserved His people in faithfulness to His promises. Second, it shows the remarkable similarity between the career of Joseph, a savior God raised up, and that of Jesus. Jesus repeated many of Joseph's experiences illustrating God's choice of Him. Also the Israelites in the present were similar to Joseph's brothers in the past. Stephen's emphasis continued to be on God's faithfulness to His promises even though Joseph's brothers were wicked and the chosen family was out of the Promised Land. Stephen mentioned Jesus explicitly only once in his entire speech, in his very last sentence (v. 52). Nevertheless he referred to Him indirectly many times by drawing parallels between the experiences of Joseph and Moses and those of Jesus.

7:9-10 The patriarchs, Joseph's brothers, became jealous of him (Gen. 37:11) and sold him as a slave into Egypt (Gen. 37:28). Nevertheless God was with him (Gen. 39:2, 21) and rescued him from prison, gave him favor and wisdom before Pharaoh, and made him ruler over Egypt (Gen. 41:41) and his father's family. God was with Joseph because he was one of God's chosen people and because he followed God faithfully. This is what the Christians were claiming to be and do.

"The treatment of Joseph by his Hebrew brothers should have been a pointed reminder of the way Jesus had been dealt with by the Jewish nation."³¹⁶

Like Joseph, Jesus' brethren rejected and literally sold Him for the price of a slave. Nevertheless God was with Joseph and Jesus (v. 9). God exalted Joseph under Pharaoh and placed Him in authority over his domain. God had done the same with Jesus.

7:11-12 The Jews' forefathers suffered from a famine in the Promised Land and sent to Egypt for food (Gen. 41:54-55; 42:2, 5). When hard times came upon God's people, He sustained them and brought them into blessing and under the rule of Joseph. So will it be in the future with Jesus. The Jews would suffer hardship (in the destruction of Jerusalem and in the Tribulation) and then God will bring them into blessing under Jesus' rule (in the Millennium).

7:13-14 On their second visit, Joseph revealed himself to his brothers, who could not believe he was their ruler, and he revealed his family's identity to Pharaoh (Gen. 45:1-4). In the future Israel will finally recognize Jesus as her Messiah (Zech. 12:10-14). Joseph then invited Jacob and his family, who numbered 75, to move to Egypt (Gen. 45:9-10). I take it that this was the number of people invited to Egypt. Some interpreters believe 75 people entered Egypt.

"Stephen apparently cited the LXX figure which really was not an error, but computed the total differently by including five people which the Masoretic text did not."³¹⁷

"One of the most widely accepted solutions is to recognize that the Hebrew text includes Jacob, Joseph, and Joseph's two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh (a total of 70), but that the Septuagint omits Jacob and Joseph but includes Joseph's seven grandchildren (mentioned in 1 Chron. 7:14-15, 20-25). This is supported by the Hebrew in Genesis 46:8-26 which enumerates 66 names, omitting Jacob, Joseph, and Joseph's two sons."³¹⁸

7:15 The number of people who made the trip and entered Egypt was probably 70 (Gen. 46:26-27; Exod. 1:5; Deut. 10:22). Jacob died safe and blessed under Joseph's rule. So will Israel end its days under Jesus' rule in the Millennium. Jacob died in Egypt as did his sons and their immediate descendants. Thus verses 11-15 record a threat to the chosen people and God's preservation of them, a second testimony to God's faithfulness in this pericope (cf. vv. 9-10).

7:16 From Egypt the chosen people eventually returned to the Promised Land. God had been with them out of the land, and He now returned them to the land. Believers in Jesus will end up in the final resting place of Jesus, heaven.

Shechem was of special interest to Stephen. The Israelites buried Joseph's bones there after their initial conquest of the land (Josh. 24:32). Stephen's allusion to this event was his way of concluding this period of Israel's history. Really Jacob, not Abraham, had purchased the tomb from Hamor in Shechem (Gen. 33:19; cf. 23:16; 50:13). This is probably a case of attributing to an ancestor what one of his descendants did (cf. Heb. 7:9-10). In the ancient oriental view of things, people regarded an ancestor as in one sense participating in the actions of his descendants (Gen. 9:25; 25:23; cf. Mal. 1:2-3; Rom. 9:11-13). Abraham had purchased Joseph's burial site in the sense that his grandson Jacob had purchased it (cf. Heb. 7:9-10). Stephen probably intended that his reference to Abraham rather than to Jacob would remind his hearers of God's faithfulness in fulfilling the promises God gave to Abraham. He did this in one sense when Israel possessed Canaan under Joshua's leadership. Israel will experience the ultimate fulfillment of God's land promises to Abraham when she enters rest under Jesus' messianic rule in the Millennium.

Two other explanations of this apparent error are these. Stephen telescoped two events into one: Abraham's purchase from Ephron in Hebron (Gen. 23:1-20), and Jacob's purchase from Hamor in Shechem.³¹⁹ Abraham really did purchase the plot in Shechem, though Moses did not record that (cf. Gen. 12:6-7), and Jacob repurchased it later.³²⁰

In Stephen's day Shechem was in Samaritan territory. He reminded the Sanhedrin that their ancestral deliverer was buried in the land that orthodox Jews despised and avoided. This was another instance of helping them see that they should not think that the only place God worked was in the Promised Land. Stephen had already referred to Mesopotamia as where God had revealed Himself to Abraham (v. 2).

Constable: Act 7:17-43

Stephen's view of Moses and the Law 7:17-43

Stephen continued his review of Israel's history by proceeding into the period of the Exodus. He sought to refute the charge that he was blaspheming against Moses (6:11) and was speaking against the Mosaic Law (6:13).

Constable: Act 7:17-36

The career of Moses 7:17-36

Stephen's understanding of Moses was as orthodox as his view of God, but his presentation of Moses' career made comparison with Jesus' career unmistakable. As in the previous pericope, there is a double emphasis in this one, first, on God's faithfulness to His promises in the Abrahamic Covenant and, second, on Moses as a precursor of Jesus.

"More specifically than in the life of Joseph, Stephen sees in the story of Moses a type of the new and greater Moses--Christ himself."³²¹

7:17-18 Stephen had gotten ahead of himself briefly in verse 16. Now he returned to his history of Israel just before the Exodus. "The promise" God had made to Abraham was that He would judge his descendants' enslaving nation and free the Israelites (Gen. 15:14). This was a particular way that He would fulfill the earlier promises to give Israel the land, to multiply the Israelites, and to curse those nations that cursed Israel (Gen. 12:1-3, 7). The Israelites increased in Egypt until another Pharaoh arose who disregarded Joseph (Exod. 1:7-8).

Similarly Christ had come in the fullness of time (Gal. 4:4). Before Moses appeared on the scene, Israel increased in numbers and fell under the control of an enemy that was hostile to her. Likewise before Jesus appeared, Israel had increased numerically and had fallen under Roman domination.

7:19 This Pharaoh took advantage of the Israelites and mistreated them by decreeing the death of their infants (Exod. 1:10, 16, 22). Like Pharaoh, Herod had tried to destroy all the Jewish babies at the time of Jesus' birth.

7:20-22 Moses, the great deliverer of his people, was born, preserved, protected (by Pharaoh's daughter no less), and educated in Egypt.

". . . the pillar of the Law was reared in a foreign land and in a Gentile court."³²²

Moses became a powerful man in word (his writings?) and deed. All this took place outside the Promised Land, which further depreciated the importance of that land.

Like Moses, Jesus was lovely in God's sight when He was born, and Mary nurtured Him at home before He came under the control of the Egyptians temporarily (cf. Matt. 1:13-21). Moses had great knowledge as did Jesus; both became powerful men in words and deeds (v. 22).

". . . after forty years of learning in Egypt, God put him [Moses] out into the desert. There God gave him his B. D. degree, his Backside of the Desert degree, and prepared him to become the deliverer."³²³

7:23-29 Moses' presumptive attempt to deliver his people resulted in his having to flee Egypt for Midian where he became an alien (cf. v. 6). These verses relate another story of an anointed leader of God's people, like Joseph, being rejected by those people. Yet God did not abandon Moses or his people. God blessed Moses in a foreign land, Midian, by giving him two sons.

Moses offered himself as the deliverer of his brethren, but they did not understand him. The same thing happened to Jesus. Moses' Jewish brethren who did not recognize that God had appointed him as their ruler and judge rejected him even though Moses sought to help them. Likewise Jesus' Jewish brethren rejected Him. Moses' brethren feared that he might use his power to destroy them rather than help them. Similarly the Jewish leaders feared that Jesus with His supernatural abilities might bring them harm rather than deliverance and blessing (cf. John 11:47-48). This rejection led Moses to leave his brethren and to live in a distant land where he fathered sons (v. 29). Jesus too had left His people and had gone to live in a distant land where He was producing descendants (i.e., Christians).

7:30-34 It was in Midian, after 40 years, that God appeared to Moses in the burning bush. The angel that appeared to Moses was the Angel of the Lord, very possibly the preincarnate Christ (vv. 31-33; cf. Exod. 3:2, 6; 4:2; John 12:41; 1 Cor. 10:1-4; Heb. 11:26). God commanded Moses to return to Egypt as His instrument of deliverance for the Israelites. God revealed Himself and His Law outside the Holy Land.

Moses received a commission from God in Midian to return to his brethren to lead them out of their oppressed condition. Jesus, on God's order, will return to the earth to deliver Israel from her oppressed condition during the Tribulation when He returns at His second coming.

7:35-36 The very man whom the Israelite leaders had rejected as their ruler and judge (v. 27) God sent to fulfill that role with His help. Moses proceeded to perform signs and wonders in Egypt, at the Red Sea, and in the wilderness.

The third reference to 40 years (cf. vv. 23, 30, 36) divides Moses' career into three distinct parts. These stages were (1) preparation ending with rejection by his brethren, (2) preparation ending with his return to Egypt, and (3) ruling and judging Israel. The parallels with the career of Jesus become increasingly obvious as Stephen's speech unfolds.

"Jesus too had been brought out of Egypt by Joseph and Mary, had passed through the waters of Jordan at his baptism (the Red Sea), and had been tempted in the wilderness for forty days."³²⁴

As Moses became Israel's ruler and judge with angelic assistance, so will Jesus. As Moses had done miracles, so had Jesus. The ultimate prophet that Moses had predicted would follow him was Jesus (cf. 3:22).

"Stephen naturally lingers over Moses, in whom they trusted' (Jn. v. 45-47), showing that the lawgiver, rejected by his people (35), foreshadowed the experience of Christ (Jn. i. 11)."³²⁵

College: Act 7:1-60

ACTS 7

2. Stephen's Defense (7:1-53)

The Old Testament Patriarchs (7:1-8)

¹ Then the high priest asked him, " Are these charges true?" ² To this he replied: " Brothers and fathers, listen to me! The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham while he was still in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran. ³ 'Leave your country and your people,' God said, 'and go to the land I will show you.' ^{a 4}" So he left the land of the Chaldeans and settled in Haran. After the death of his father, God sent him to this land where you are now living. ⁵ He gave him no inheritance here, not even a foot of ground. But God promised him that he and his descendants after him would possess the land, even though at that time Abraham had no child. ⁶ God spoke to him in this way: 'Your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own, and they will be enslaved and mistreated four hundred years. ⁷ But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves,' God said, 'and afterward they will come out of that country and worship me in this place.' ^{b 8} Then he gave Abraham the covenant of circumcision. And Abraham became the father of Isaac and circumcised him eight days after his birth. Later Isaac became the father of Jacob, and Jacob became the father of the twelve patriarchs.

^a 3 Gen. 12:1 ^b 7 Gen. 15:13,14

Caiaphas, who was high priest until A.D. 36, was handling still another case associated with the followers of Christ. He had been determined to rid Jerusalem of Jesus (Matt 26:57-66) and had strictly warned Peter and John not to preach in the name of Jesus (4:18). He had supervised the hearing in which all of the apostles were punished for preaching in this name (5:40). Now he directed his questions to Stephen.

Stephen's address is a defense of himself only indirectly. The two points he emphasized were that God's presence could not be confined to a place, whether to a particular land or material building. Secondly, Stephen established the record of Jewish hostility to the leaders appointed by God over the nation. To the extent that his preaching had stirred up controversy on these issues, Stephen's address was a defense of his message.

He began by tracing the Old Testament account of God's dealings with the patriarchs. God's calling of Abraham in Meso-potamia to travel to Palestine established the presence of God with the patriarchs even though " He gave them no inheritance" in Palestine, " not even one foot of ground." As a matter of fact, Stephen focused attention on the promise which was given to Abraham in word only, at a time when the patriarch " had no child" or anyone to call an heir. His implication was that the presence of God had been evident even though no temple or sacred location was established. God's people will always " live loose to any particular earthly spot."

Stephen also mentioned the covenant of circumcision given to Abraham (Gen 17:10-11). The essential elements of God's relationship with Israel were thus established before any location had been chosen for the temple.

Two historical problems present themselves at this point in Stephen's address. The first has to do with the time of Abraham's calling. Stephen places God's call of Abraham " in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran." The call recorded in Genesis 12:1, however, comes after Abraham's arrival in Haran. But this problem seems to disappear when Genesis 15:7 is taken into account, a passage which has the Lord saying to Abraham " I am the Lord, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans."

The second problem is also connected with chronology. Stephen's address has Abraham leaving for Canaan " after the death of his father." Genesis 11 and 12 imply that Abraham's father, Terah, was 145 years old at the time Abraham left Haran, some sixty years before his death. Some have solved this problem by suggesting that the list of Terah's sons in Genesis 11:27 does not mean that Abraham was the oldest and that his birth came later in Terah's life. Another possibility which is just as likely, however, is that Stephen's speech follows the Samaritan Pentateuch where the Genesis account has Abraham leaving for Canaan after his father's death.

The number 400 (7:6) in connection with the bondage years in Egypt can be understood as an approximation of the time reported in Genesis 15:13. Paul uses the number 430 in Galatians 3:17.

Stephen made his major points by citing Abraham's call by God and the divine promises which God made to him. For this reason he only briefly summarized the lives of Isaac and Jacob.

Israel in Egypt (7:9-19)

⁹" Because the patriarchs were jealous of Joseph, they sold him as a slave into Egypt. But God was with him ¹⁰ and rescued him from all his troubles. He gave Joseph wisdom and enabled him to gain the goodwill of Pharaoh king of Egypt; so he made him ruler over Egypt and all his palace. ¹¹ Then a famine struck all Egypt and Canaan, bringing great suffering, and our fathers could not find food. ¹² When Jacob heard that there was grain in Egypt, he sent our fathers on their first visit. ¹³ On their second visit, Joseph told his brothers who he was, and Pharaoh learned about Joseph's family. ¹⁴ After this, Joseph sent for his father Jacob and his whole family, seventy-five in all. ¹⁵ Then Jacob went down to Egypt, where he and our fathers died. ¹⁶ Their bodies were brought back to Shechem and placed in the tomb that Abraham had bought from the sons of Hamor at Shechem for a certain sum of money. ¹⁷ As the time drew near for God to fulfill his promise to Abraham, the number of our people in Egypt greatly increased. ¹⁸ Then another king, who knew nothing about Joseph, became ruler of Egypt. ¹⁹ He dealt treacherously with our people and oppressed our forefathers by forcing them to throw out their newborn babies so that they would die.

Stephen now began to introduce the second major theme of his address-the pattern of Jewish resistance to those leaders God raised up. His summary of the patriarchs called attention to the friction between those God used to accomplish his will and those who opposed them.

Jealousy provoked " the patriarchs" (he does not say " his brothers" ) to sell Joseph into slavery. These leaders whom the Jews revered set themselves against Joseph, even though " God was with him." The evidence of God's presence was Joseph's rise to power in Egypt.

Regarding the famine, Stephen mentioned the two visits of the brothers to Egypt. Though this item may seem unimportant, Stephen's point may have been a subtle reference to the two comings of Christ. In the first one he was not recognized, but in the second he will be seen for who he is.

In citing the number of Joseph's family who traveled to Egypt, Stephen's number was not the same number used in the Hebrew Old Testament. The number seventy-five probably comes from the Septuagint where the number given is seventy-five, rather than the number seventy given in the Hebrew Bible (Gen 46:27; Exod 1:5; Deut 10:22). The difference of five resulted from the Septuagint's addition of two sons of Manasseh, two of Ephraim, and one grandson of Ephraim.

Stephen's comments on the location of the tomb of the patriarchs presents an example of compressing of the narrative. Genesis describes two purchases of burial plots-one by Abraham at Hebron (Gen 23:17-18) and the other by Jacob at Shechem (Gen 33:19). Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were buried at Hebron, while Joseph was buried later at Shechem (Josh 24:32). Stephen compressed these accounts into one story in his statement that the patriarchs were buried " in the tomb that Abraham had bought" at Shechem. The Sanhedrin would have understood his summary completely. The burial of the patriarchs was also outside of the " holy" land in the " hated Samaritan territory."

Drawing this stage of Israel's history to a close, Stephen summarized the period of bondage by noting the increasing numbers of Hebrews in Egypt. The turning point for their fortunes came with the rise of a new pharaoh (see Exod 1:8). At this point Stephen had set the stage for his reflections on the leadership of Moses.

Early Days of Moses (7:20-29)

²⁰ " At that time Moses was born, and he was no ordinary child. ^a For three months he was cared for in his father's house. ²¹ When he was placed outside, Pharaoh's daughter took him and brought him up as her own son. ²² Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians and was powerful in speech and action. ²³ When Moses was forty years old, he decided to visit his fellow Israelites. ²⁴ He saw one of them being mistreated by an Egyptian, so he went to his defense and avenged him by killing the Egyptian. ²⁵ Moses thought that his own people would realize that God was using him to rescue them, but they did not. ²⁶ The next day Moses came upon two Israelites who were fighting. He tried to reconcile them by saying, 'Men, you are brothers; why do you want to hurt each other?' ²⁷ But the man who was mistreating the other pushed Moses aside and said, 'Who made you ruler and judge over us? ²⁸ Do you want to kill me as you killed the Egyptian yesterday?' ^{b 29} When Moses heard this, he fled to Midian, where he settled as a foreigner and had two sons.

^a 20 Or was fair in the sight of God ^b 28 Exodus 2:14

The Sanhedrin continued listening as Stephen emphasized his two dominant themes. Moses was an example of a leader chosen by God but resisted by his own people. He was also an example of one who served in the power of God, yet without a homeland.

Following the Old Testament account from Exodus 2:11-15 closely, Stephen interpreted the record by drawing out particular points along the way, beginning with the first forty years of Moses' life. As an infant his parents realized he was " no ordinary child," a phrase which reads literally " fair to God." The phrase fits with Stephen's emphasis on Moses as one chosen by God.

After reviewing the details of Moses' escape from Pharaoh's decree, Stephen mentioned the accomplishments of Moses in Egypt. At forty years of age, he " decided to visit (ejpiskevyasqai, episkepsasthai ) his fellow Israelites." Polhill notes that this term is used " throughout Luke-Acts for God or his emissaries overseeing and caring for his people." The implication is that Moses was being used by God to " look out for" the people while in bondage. God had chosen Moses to deliver the people from slavery.

Stephen, however, focused on the lack of acceptance of Moses. After Moses had defended and even delivered his Hebrew brother from the Egyptian, the Israelites refused to accept him. When Moses found two Hebrew brothers quarreling and tried to reconcile them, they rejected his help with the question, " Who made you ruler and judge over us?" Not so subtle in Stephen's address was the conclusion that God had made Moses ruler and deliverer over them and they did not know it nor were they prepared to accept it. Moses was, like Christ, sent from God to deliver and reconcile his people, but the people to whom he came rejected him.

Because of the danger he now faced, Moses fled to Midian (Exod 2:15). Located in southeastern Sinai along either side of the eastern arm of the Red Sea (known as the Gulf of Aqabah), Moses was now settling in a foreign land. Stephen's point was reinforced. Those whom God has invested with his presence have often been pilgrims without a home. The Lord has a history of dealing with his chosen leaders apart from any sacred plot of ground. The implication is that the temple is not necessary for God's purposes.

The Call of Moses (7:30-34)

³⁰" After forty years had passed, an angel appeared to Moses in the flames of a burning bush in the desert near Mount Sinai. ³¹ When he saw this, he was amazed at the sight. As he went over to look more closely, he heard the Lord's voice: ³² 'I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.' ^a Moses trembled with fear and did not dare to look. ³³ Then the Lord said to him, 'Take off your sandals; the place where you are standing is holy ground. ³⁴ I have indeed seen the oppression of my people in Egypt. I have heard their groaning and have come down to set them free. Now come, I will send you back to Egypt.' ^b

^a 32 Exodus 3:6 ^b 34 Exodus 3:5,7,8,10

Moses' exile in Midian closed with another major turning point in his life. The forty years in Egypt were followed by forty years in Midian. Then he witnessed the burning bush which was not burned up, an experience in which the voice of God spoke to him, calling him to fulfill a mission by going back to Egypt.

Again Stephen's theme was emphasized as he recounted how Moses experienced the presence of God in a foreign land. The same God who had revealed himself to the patriarchs when they were foreigners was the God who spoke to Moses. Ironically, this spot became " holy ground" -a place far from the sacred precincts of the temple and the Sanhedrin. Removal of his sandals was a way of demonstrating respect for the presence of God and of avoiding any possibility of defiling the ground through contact with something defiled on the foot.

The Wilderness Wanderings (7:35-43)

³⁵" This is the same Moses whom they had rejected with the words, 'Who made you ruler and judge?' He was sent to be their ruler and deliverer by God himself, through the angel who appeared to him in the bush. ³⁶ He led them out of Egypt and did wonders and miraculous signs in Egypt, at the Red Sea ^a and for forty years in the desert. ³⁷ This is that Moses who told the Israelites, 'God will send you a prophet like me from your own people.' ^{b 38} He was in the assembly in the desert, with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers; and he received living words to pass on to us. ³⁹ But our fathers refused to obey him. Instead, they rejected him and in their hearts turned back to Egypt. ⁴⁰ They told Aaron, 'Make us gods who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who led us out of Egypt-we don't know what has happened to him!' ^{c 41} That was the time they made an idol in the form of a calf. They brought sacrifices to it and held a celebration in honor of what their hands had made. ⁴² But God turned away and gave them over to the worship of the heavenly bodies. This agrees with what is written in the book of the prophets: 'Did you bring me sacrifices and offerings forty years in the desert, O house of Israel? ⁴³ You have lifted up the shrine of Molech and the star of your god Rephan, the idols you made to worship. Therefore I will send you into exile' ^d beyond Babylon.

^a 36 That is, Sea of Reeds ^b 37 Deut. 18:15 ^c 40 Exodus 32:1 ^d 43 Amos 5:25-27

The final forty years of Moses' life now became the focus of Stephen's speech. His theme was clearly in view at this juncture. Examples of resistance to the leader chosen by God were prominent. The Israelites had asked, " Who made you ruler and judge?" They had no inclination to follow Moses' leadership, even though it was God who made Moses " ruler and deliverer" when He appeared to Moses at the burning bush.

In spite of this resistance, it was Moses who led the Israelites out of Egyptian bondage and across the Red Sea. God's presence was evident in these events, especially in the " wonders and miraculous signs in Egypt," a reference to the plagues inflicted on pharaoh and his people.

Even still, Stephen pointed out, their " fathers" did not honor him with their cooperation. They " refused to obey him." The best example of their resistance was their insisting that Aaron help them construct an idol at the foot of Sinai. Rather than honoring what God had instituted among them, they preferred to worship " what their hands had made." Even here, Stephen appeared to be making subtle references to the temple made with human hands, to which the Sadducees had become so attached. God's condemnation of Israel was severe. He " gave them over" to their idolatry, a judgment upon idolaters which Paul describes in Romans 1:24-28. The idea is that he consigned them to the wickedness their hearts determined to achieve.

The idolatry of Israel was also the subject of warnings from later prophets. When Amos confronted the Israelites about their wickedness, he foretold of the Assyrian captivity which was coming upon them. Stephen found in these words the appropriate reference to the rebellious spirit of idolatry which continued to live in Israel. Following the Septuagint, Stephen quoted Amos 5:25-27, replacing the destination of " Damascus" with " Babylon" since that city had been the ultimate captivity. The quotation highlighted Israel's idolatry in the wilderness where the " sacrifices and offerings" they brought were not to the Lord, but to other gods. Bruce notes that both Molech and Rephan appear to be references to planetary deities in the time of Amos.

Moses predicted that God would raise up another prophet like himself (Deut 18:15). If Israel was determined to resist the leadership of Moses, God would send another leader. The subtle references to Christ are evident in Stephen's words at this point. Jesus was the new Moses. Stephen's contention remained consistent. The temple authorities were standing in the way of the chosen leader of God whose story was being proclaimed by his disciples.

The Tabernacle and the Temple (7:44-50)

⁴⁴" Our forefathers had the tabernacle of the Testimony with them in the desert. It had been made as God directed Moses, according to the pattern he had seen. ⁴⁵ Having received the tabernacle, our fathers under Joshua brought it with them when they took the land from the nations God drove out before them. It remained in the land until the time of David, ⁴⁶ who enjoyed God's favor and asked that he might provide a dwelling place for the God of Jacob. ^{a 47} But it was Solomon who built the house for him. ⁴⁸" However, the Most High does not live in houses made by men. As the prophet says: ⁴⁹ 'Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me? says the Lord. Or where will my resting place be? ⁵⁰ Has not my hand made all these things?' ^b

^a 46 Some early manuscripts the house of Jacob ^b 50 Isaiah 66:1,2

In the wilderness the " forefathers" had the " tabernacle of Testimony." It was not considered a house in the sense of the temple, but Stephen pointed to its construction as an effort conforming to the will of God. To this point in Israel's history, he implied, the nation had not fixed a sacred site as the place for God. Even during the time of Joshua the tabernacle was in use and continued to be used through the period of the judges until the time of David.

At this juncture, Stephen suggested, a change occurred. David " enjoyed God's favor" and wanted to build a permanent dwelling place for God. His wish was fulfilled by Solomon. But now Stephen turned to the words of Isaiah 66:1-2 to impress upon the Jewish audience that God cannot be confined to temples made by human hands. God is far too big for such houses. If heaven is his throne and earth his footstool, who can construct an edifice to hold Him? If everything was created by his hand, how can people build him a house as if he had need of such assistance?

Stephen's quotation of these words was enough to hint at the problem in Jerusalem. The Sanhedrin was engaged in false worship built on the false premise that God needed the Jerusalem temple. No such help was needed by God. He had a history of making his presence known to his chosen people when they were far removed from the sacred precincts of this plot of ground in Jerusalem.

As to the charges leveled against Stephen (6:11-14), his message had no hint of blasphemy. But in regard to the temple, Stephen had perhaps echoed the prediction of Jesus that " not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down" (Matt 24:2). Even this quotation could have brought the wrath of the leaders of the temple.

The Personal Application (7:51-53)

⁵¹" You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit! ⁵² Was there ever a prophet your fathers did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him- ⁵³ you who have received the law that was put into effect through angels but have not obeyed it."

As Stephen came to the conclusion of his address, he drove the message home. The Jewish leaders were the guilty ones. They were " stiff-necked" and had " uncircumcised hearts and ears," charges that had already been made in Old Testament times. They were always resisting the Holy Spirit, that is, they were standing in the way of the Spirit's work.

As if these accusations from Stephen were not serious enough, he also charged them with persecuting and killing the prophets. The Old Testament speaks of the sufferings of some of the prophets, but Jewish tradition has more to say about such incidents as the sawing in two of Isaiah in the reign of Manasseh and the stoning of Jeremiah before he was forced to go to Egypt with the people.

Stephen climaxed his address by accusing the religious authorities of crucifying the Messiah. Following in the footsteps of their fathers who " killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One," they " betrayed and murdered him." This nation so favored by God that they received the law " put into effect through angels" was guilty of rejecting the chosen servant of God.

The Final Witness of Stephen (7:54-56)

⁵⁵ But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. ⁵⁶" Look," he said, " I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God."

Stephen's accusations hit home with the members of the Sanhedrin. They were outraged. They were " cut to the heart" (dieprivonto, dieprionto ) with anger. Even their teeth showed anger as they were ground together at Stephen.

Stephen's reaction to their outburst was to look into heaven and witness the Lord Jesus standing at the right hand of God. His words described the scene and his accusers were even angrier. Stephen's vision of Jesus contradicted their position. If the vision was true, God was giving a sign of his approval of Stephen. They could not believe this was possible. Stephen must be further blaspheming the Lord. They placed their hands over their ears to shut out the sound and they rushed toward him to silence him. He deserved to be stoned as far as they were concerned.

His testimony that Jesus was standing at the right hand of God is curious. Usually references to the ascended Christ picture him seated at the right hand of God (see Mark 16:19; Matt 26:64; Luke 22:69). Was he standing in order to welcome the first Christian martyr? Was his stance before the throne seen to conform to the vision recorded in Daniel 7:14-15 where the Son of Man was pictured? It is impossible to say for certain, but his presence at the Lord's right hand communicates his divinity and authority.

The Death of Stephen (7:57-60)

⁵⁷ At this they covered their ears and, yelling at the top of their voices, they all rushed at him, dragged him out of the city and began to stone him. Meanwhile, the witnesses laid their clothes at the feet of a young man named Saul. ⁵⁹ While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, " Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." ⁶⁰ Then he fell on his knees and cried out, " Lord, do not hold this sin against them." When he had said this, he fell asleep.

Stoning as a form of execution involved throwing the victim over a small cliff. The first witness then rolled a heavy stone down the precipice, intending that the weight of the stone should crush the victim to death. If the first stone did not accomplish this task, the second witness rolled down a second stone until the objective was accomplished.

In Stephen's case it seems as if the Sanhedrin's members resorted to more of a mob action than the organized procedure called for by Jewish law. Stephen had time before his death to pray and ask forgiveness for his persecutors. This note implies that the mob was throwing stones at him in those last few moments of his life. Also the note that they " laid their clothes" at the feet of the young man Saul implies that they wanted freedom of movement for throwing stones. Saul of Tarsus will become one of the prominent characters in the rest of Acts. Whether this mention of Paul indicates that he was in charge of the execution is unclear. No one can doubt, however, that he gave his consent to the action. Luke thus introduces one new personality which he wants to describe more fully in the chapters to come.

The Consent of Saul (8:1a)

¹ And Saul was there, giving approval to his death.

Luke's final comment with regard to the martyrdom of Stephen has to do with the disposition of Saul. He was " giving approval" (suneudokw'n, syneudokôn) to the action against Stephen. The participle in the present tense indicates more than just a momentary enthusiasm on the part of Saul. His very condition gave evidence of an ongoing determination to oppose any example of this new teaching.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

McGarvey: Act 7:1

VII: 1. " Then said the high priest, Are these things so?" Stephen responds in a long and powerful discourse.

There is great diversity of opinion among commentators, as to the logical bearing and connection of this discourse. We would naturally expect to find in it-if we regard it as properly a defense-a formal response to the charge which had been preferred. But it contains no direct answer to any of the specifications. He neither admits nor denies what was charged in reference to the destruction of the temple by Jesus and the changing of the customs delivered by Moses; though his silence may be regarded as an admission that the witnesses had spoken the truth on these points. Neither does he formally answer to the charge of blasphemy against Moses and against God, or against the holy temple and the law. The only thing in the discourse that has even an indirect bearing in this way, is his frequent reference to facts contained in the writings of Moses, which has been understood, by some commentators, as intended to indicate a degree of respect for Moses inconsistent with a disposition to speak blasphemy against him. But if such was his purpose, it is unaccountable that he should have pursued so indirect a course, instead of distinctly avowing the sentiments he intended to indicate. Again, this supposition can not account for the introduction of so many facts connected with the persecution of various individuals.

The best statement of the drift of the discourse, I think, is this: The charge against him was hypocritically preferred, and his judges had no intention to investigate it, but were using it merely as an excuse for his predetermined condemnation to death. They were now giving him somewhat the form for a trial, to keep up appearances before the people. Under such circumstances, Stephen knew that it would be useless to offer a formal defense; and, therefore, he does not undertake it. He sees, however, that his persecutors were identifying themselves, by their proceedings, with the unbelieving and persecuting portion of their forefathers, and he determines to make them stand forth to the people in this their true position. In prosecuting this purpose he selects his material from the writings of Moses, and shows that his accusers are with the persecuting party, while his Master and himself are side by side with Moses and others whom they had persecuted: Thus he hurls back upon them, and fastens on them, effectually, the charge which they had falsely preferred against him.

McGarvey: Act 7:2-4

2-4. We will now take up the different sections of the discourse, treating each separately, and showing their connected bearing upon his main purpose. Before exhibiting the manner in which Moses was treated by the ancestors of his audience, he first shows that the mission on which Moses came was a subject of prophesy: thus indicating, at the outset, an analogy between it and that of Christ. To do this, he must begin with Abraham, to whom this prophesy was first given; but his reference to Abraham is only for the historical introduction of his main theme. (2) " And he said: Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Haran, (3) and said to him, Get thee out from thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into a land which I will show thee. (4) Then he came out of the land of the Chaldeans, and dwelt in Haran: and thence, after his father died, he removed into this land in which you now dwell."

McGarvey: Act 7:5-8

5-8. Having now introduced Abraham, and brought him into the land of Canaan, Stephen quotes the prophesy, connected with the fulfillment of which he is to find the chief points of his argument. (5) " And he gave him no inheritance in it, not a footprint: and he promised to give it for a possession to him and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child. (6) But God spoke thus: That his seed should sojourn in a strange land, and they should bring them into bondage, and afflict them four hundred years. (7) And the nation to whom they shall be in bondage, I will judge, said God, and after these things they shall come forth, and serve me in this place. (8) And he gave him the covenant of circumcision; and so he begot Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day; and Isaac, Jacob; and Jacob, the twelve patriarchs. "

The period of four hundred years is taken by Stephen from Genesis 15:13 Ge 15:13>, where God expresses himself, in round terms, of a period which was, more accurately, four hundred and thirty years, as we find in Exodus 12:40-41 Ex 12:40>. This was not the period of their actual sojourn in Egypt; but, as we learn from Paul, (Galatians 3:17 Ga 3:17>,) and from the genealogical tables in Genesis and Exodus, it extended from the call of Abraham to the departure from Egypt.

McGarvey: Act 7:9-16

9-16. The speaker next proceeds to recount the circumstances which brought the people down into Egypt, in order that the rejection of Joseph, and the final salvation of the whole family through him, might stand out before his hearers, and be made to bear upon his final conclusion. (9) " And the patriarchs, moved with envy, sold Joseph into Egypt. And God was with him, (10) and delivered him out of all his afflictions, and gave him favor and wisdom in the sight of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and he made him governor over Egypt and all his house. (11) Now, there came a famine on all the land of Egypt and Canaan, and great affliction; and our fathers found no sustenance. (12) But Jacob, having heard that there was grain in Egypt, sent out our fathers the first time. (13) And at the second time Joseph was made known to his brothers, and Joseph's kindred was made known to Pharaoh. (14) Then Joseph sent and called to him his father Jacob and all his kindred, seventy-five souls. (15) And Jacob went down into Egypt, and died, he and our fathers, (16) and were carried over into Sychem, and laid in the sepulcher which Jacob bought for a sum of money from the sons of Emmor, the father of Sychem. "

There is a numerical discrepancy between moses and Stephen, in reference to the number of Jacob's family when they went into Egypt. Stephen makes then seventy-five, while Moses states them at seventy, including Joseph's family and himself. The Septuagint translation of Genesis agrees with Stephen. Various methods of reconciling these statements are proposed, of which the only satisfactory one is this. The number given by Moses includes all "who came out of his loins, besides Jacob's sons' wives." The number given by Stephen must, then, include five of their wives, who were, probably, all that were then living. The translators of the Septuagint, having some historical evidence, now lost to us, that five of their wives went with them, saw fit to fill up the number in their translation, and Stephen followed their enumeration.

It was Jacob, and not Abraham, who purchased the sepulcher from the sons of Emmor, as is certain from the history given in Genesis 33:19-20 Ge 33:19>; yet it is attributed to Abraham here in the common version, and most of the Greek manuscripts. It is far more likely, however, that the manuscripts should err, in a case of this kind, than that the error should have been committed by Stephen or by Luke. I have, therefore, not hesitated to insert the name of Jacob, instead of Abraham, in the text. Dr. Bloomfield says, "The best critics are of the opinion that Abraham is spurious."

McGarvey: Act 7:17-29

17-29. From this glance at the leading points in the history of Joseph, Stephen advances to the case of Moses, showing that his brethren rejected him in like manner, and were also finally delivered by him. (17) " But when the time of the promise of which God had sworn to Abraham was drawing near, the people increased and were multiplied in Egypt, (18) until another king arose who knew not Joseph. (19) The same dealt craftily with our kindred, and afflicted our fathers, so that they cast out their young children, in order that they might not live. (20) In which time Moses was born, and was exceedingly beautiful. He was nourished in his his father's house three months. (21) And when he was cast out, Pharaoh's daughter took him up, and nourished him for her own son. (22) And Moses was educated in all the learning of the Egyptians, and was powerful in words and in deeds. (23) And when he was full forty years old, it came into his heart to look after his brethren, the children of Israel. (24) And seeing one of them suffer wrong, he defended and avenged him who was oppressed, smiting the Egyptian. (25) Now he thought that his brethren would understand that God would, by his hand, give them salvation; but they did not understand. (26) The next day he appeared to them as they were fighting, and would have brought them to peace, saying, Men, you are brethren; why do you wrong one another? (27) But he who was wronging his neighbor thrust him away, saying, Who made you a ruler and a judge over us? (28) Do you wish to kill me as you killed that Egyptian yesterday? (29) Then Moses fled at this word, and became a sojourner in the land of Midian where he begot two sons. "

In the rejection of Moses by his countrymen, when he was seeking to deliver them from bondage, according to the promise of God, Stephen has before the minds of the Sanhedrim another case bearing upon his final conclusion. It is true, that as yet they could not anticipate the use he intended to make of it, but the obscurity of his design awakened their curiosity, and rendered their mortification the more intense when at last it was suddenly developed. If they could have anticipated it, they would have stopped his mouth at the beginning.

Commentary -- Other

Contradiction: Act 7:14

59. Did 70 members of the house of Jacob come to Egypt (Genesis 46:27), or was it 75 members (Acts 7:14)?

(Category: misunderstood the historical context)

This apparent contradiction asks how many members of the house of Jacob went to Egypt. The two passages contrasted are Genesis 46:27 and Acts 7:14. However both passages are correct. In the Genesis 46:1-27 the total number of direct descendants that traveled to Egypt with Jacob were 66 in number according to verse 26. This is because Judah was sent on ahead in verse 28 of Chapter 46 and because Joseph and his two sons were already in Egypt. However in verse 27 all the members of the family are included, including Joseph and his sons and Judah making a total number of 70, referring to the total number of Jacob's family that ended up in Egypt not just those that traveled with him to Egypt.

In the older Septuagint and Dead Sea Scroll manuscripts the number given in verse 27 is 75. This is because they also include Joseph's three grandsons and two great grandsons listed in Numbers 26:28-37, and in at least the Septuagint version their names are listed in Genesis 46:20. Therefore the Acts 7:14 quotation of Stephen's speech before his martyrdom is correct because he was quoting from the Septuagint.

Critics Ask: Act 7:14

ACTS 7:14 —Why does this text say “seventy-five people” when Exodus 1:5 says there were “seventy persons”?

PROBLEM: According to Exodus 1:5 there were only 70 descendants who went down into Egypt with Jacob. But, when Stephen relates this same incident in Acts 7:14 , he gives the number as 75. This appears to be a flat contradiction. SOLUTIONS: There are several possible ways to explain the difference between these accounts. First, some scholars suggest that Acts 7:14 is incorrect in stating 75. They note that both the Greek translation of the OT (Septuagint) and a Hebrew manuscript found in the Dead Sea area use the number 75 just as Stephen said.

Others suggest that while Luke accurately records Stephen’s sermon, that Stephen nevertheless made a mistake. Thus Acts is an inerrant record of the speech in which Stephen made this error. The parallel account in Genesis 46:27 also gives the number as 70. The main objection to this view is the fact that Luke’s inclusion of this speech carries with it the implication that what he said is correct. Further, the text states that Stephen was “full of the Holy Spirit” when he gave the addresses ( 7:55 ).

Another explanation points out that the discrepancies can be explained by the fact that Stephen was probably quoting from the Septuagint (the Greek version of the OT) which states, “And all the souls from Jacob were seventy-five” ( Ex. 1:5 ), rather than the Hebrew, which states “And all the persons who came from the loins of Jacob were seventy in number, but Joseph was already in Egypt” ( Ex. 1:5 , NASB ). The difference arises from the difference in the way the totals are calculated.

Jacob has twelve sons. Adding Jacob’s grandsons and great-grandsons, the total was 66. Adding Ephraim and Manasseh who were born to Joseph in Egypt, the total is 68. When you add Jacob and his wife the total is 70, as the Hebrew records. The Septuagint, however, starting with Jacob’s 12 sons, added Jacob’s grandsons and great-grandsons for a total of 66. Then, it added the seven additional descendants of Joseph who were probably sons of Ephraim and Manasseh who were born to Joseph’s sons some time after the migration of Jacob to Egypt, but before Jacob died. The Septuagint also omitted Jacob and his wife. This makes a total of 75 as Stephen mentions in the Acts passage.

HEBREW TEXT GREEK TEXT   

Jacob and his 2 not counted   

wife   

Jacob’s sons 12 12   

Jacob’s 54 54   

grandsons and   

great grandsons   

Joseph’s sons 2 2   

Ephraim and   

Manasseh   

Joseph’s not counted 7   

additional   

descendants in   

  

Egypt   

TOTAL 70 75   

Evidence: Act 7:5

The Bible’s fascinating facts . In the Book of Beginnings, in Genesis 16:12, God said that Ishmael (the progenitor of the Arab race, see Time, April 4, 1988) would be a " wild man...and every man’s hand [will be] against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren." Almost four thousand years later, who could deny that this prophecy is being fulfilled in the Arab race? The Arabs and the Jews are " brethren" having Abraham as their ancestor. The whole Middle East conflict is caused by their dwelling together.

Evidence: Act 7:22

Don’t be concerned that you aren’t " gifted" as a speaker when it comes to reaching the lost. Moses " was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was mighty in words and in deeds," yet God didn’t use him to deliver Israel until 40 years later. It took all that time of tending sheep to produce in him a meekness of character. We are told, " The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way" ( Psa 25:9 ). The " wisdom" that Moses gained in Egypt was not wisdom from above. When he saw injustice, he took the law into his own hands and committed murder. God doesn’t need the wisdom of this world. He merely desires a pure, humble, peace-loving, compassionate soul to use as a mouthpiece for the gospel. He wants us to be a lighthouse of His love. The moment we receive the Spirit of Christ, we receive the gift of those virtues. We don’t need to tend sheep for 40 years when we have the character of the Good Shepherd manifesting through us.

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: Acts (Book Introduction)

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

By Way of Introduction

But for the Acts we should know nothing of the early apostolic period save what is told in the Epistles. There are various apocryphal " Acts," but they are without historical worth. Hence the importance of this book.

Luke the Author

It ought to be possible to assume this as a fact since the work of Ramsay and Harnack on various phases of the problems concerning the Acts. Harnack, in particular, has covered the ground with his accustomed thoroughness and care in his two volumes ( The Acts of the Apostles , English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1909; The Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels , English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1911). Ramsay’s view may be found in Chapter I of St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen , Chapter XII of Pauline and Other Studies . A good summary of the matter appears in Part V of The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts by Dr. D. A. Hayes, in Robertson’s Luke the Historian in the Light of Research , and in the introduction to the various commentaries by Knowling, Rackham, Furneaux, Rendall, Hackett, Meyer-Wendt, Zahn, Blass, Campbell-Morgan, Stokes. In Part I of The Acts of the Apostles , Vol. II of The Beginnings of Christianity , edited by Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake both sides are ably presented: The Case for the Tradition by C. W. Emmet, The Case against the Tradition by H. Windisch. The Internal Evidence of Acts is discussed by the Editors, Foakes-Jackson and Lake, with an adverse conclusion against Luke. Henry J. Cadbury surveys The Tradition (the external evidence) and draws a negative conclusion likewise on the ground that the early writers who ascribe Acts to Luke were not critical scholars. A similar position is taken by Cadbury in his more recent volume, The Making of Luke--Acts (1927). But all the same the traditional view that Luke is the author of the Acts holds the field with those who are not prejudiced against it. The view of Baur that Acts is a Tendenz writing for the purpose of healing the breach between Peter and Paul and showing that the two factions came together had great influence for a while. In fact both Ramsay and Harnack at first held it. Ramsay broke away first and he was followed by Harnack. Both were influenced to change their views by the accumulation of evidence to the effect that the author of both the Gospel and Acts is Luke the Physician and Friend of Paul. Part of this evidence has already been given in the Introduction to the Gospel according to Luke.

The Author of the Gospel Also

The author of the Acts expressly states that he wrote " the first treatise ( ton prōton logon ) concerning all things, O Theophilus, that Jesus began both to do and to teach until which day he gave command through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen and was received up" (Act_1:1.). There is no room for dispute that the reference is directly to the Gospel according to Luke as we have it now. Like the Gospel the book is dedicated to Theophilus. And, what is even more important, the same style appears in both Gospel and Acts. This fact Harnack has shown with great pains and conclusiveness. There is the same interest in medical matters and even Cadbury, who denies by implication the Lukan authorship, admits identity of authorship for both books.

The Unity of the Acts

There are some scholars who are willing to admit the Lukan authorship of the " we" sections when the author uses " we" and " us" as in chapter 16:10-40; 20:6-28:31. It has been argued that Luke wrote a travel-document or diary for these sections, but that this material was used by the editor or redactor of the whole book. But, unfortunately for that view, the very same style appears in the Acts as a whole and in the Gospel also as Harnack has proven. The man who said " we" and " us" in the " we" sections wrote " I" in Act_1:1 and refers to the Gospel as his work. The effort to disprove the unity of the Acts has failed. It stands as the work of the same author as a whole and the same author who wrote the Gospel.

Sources of the Acts

Beyond a doubt Luke employed a variety of sources for this great history as he did for the Gospel (Luk_1:1-4). In fact, Cadbury argues that this Prologue was meant to apply to the Acts also as Volume II whether he intended to write a third volume or not. Certainly we are entitled to say that Luke used the same historical method for Acts. Some of these sources are easy to see. Luke had his own personal experience for the " we" sections. Then he had the benefit of Paul’s own notes or suggestions for all that portion where Paul figures from chapter 8 to chapter 28, since Luke was apparently with Paul in Rome when he finished the Book. This would include Paul’s sermons and addresses which Luke gives unless one wishes to say, as some do, that Luke followed the style of Thucydides and composed the kind of addresses that he thought Paul would make. I see no evidence of that for each address differs from the others and suits precisely the occasion when it was delivered. The ancients frequently employed shorthand and Paul may have preserved notes of his addresses. Prof. C. C. Torrey, of Yale University, argues in his Composition and Date of Acts (1916) that Luke used an Aramaic document for the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. There is an Aramaic element in certain portions of these chapters, but nothing like so pronounced as in Luke 1 and 2 after Luk_1:1-4. It cannot be said that Torrey has made out his case for such a single document. Luke may have had several such documents besides access to others familiar with the early days of the work in Jerusalem. There was Simon Peter whom Paul visited for two weeks in Jerusalem (Gal_1:18) besides other points of contact with him in Jerusalem and Antioch (Acts 15 and Galatians 2). There was also Barnabas who was early Paul’s friend (Act_9:27) and who knew the beginnings as few did (Act_4:36.). Besides many others it is to be observed that Paul with Luke made a special visit to Caesarea where he spent a week with the gifted Philip and his daughters with the gift of prophecy (Act_21:8.). But with all the inevitable variety of sources for the information needed to cover the wide field of the Book of Acts the same mind has manifestly worked through it and it is the same style all through that appears in the " we" sections where the writer is confessedly a companion of Paul. No other companion of Paul carries this claim for the authorship and no other was a physician and no author has the external evidence from early writers.

The Date

There are three views about the date of the Acts. Baur and his Tubingen School held the second century to be the date of this late pamphlet as they termed it after the fashion of the Clementine Homilies. But that view is now practically abandoned save by the few who still strangely oppose the Lukan authorship. Probably the majority of those who accept the Lukan authorship place it in the latter part of the first century for two reasons. One is that the Gospel according to Luke is dated by them after the destruction of Jerusalem because of the prophecy by Jesus of the encompassing of the city by armies. Predictive prophecy that would be and so it is considered a prophecy post eventum . The other reason is the alleged use of the Antiquities of Josephus by Luke. Josephus finished this work a.d. 93 so that, if Luke did use it, he must have written the Acts after that date. Usually this argument is made to show that Luke could not have written it at all, but some hold that he may have lived to an age that would allow it. But it cannot be assumed that Luke used Josephus because of his mention of Theudas and Judas the Galilean. They differ so widely (Act_5:36. and Josephus, Ant . XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz ( Dictionary of the Apostolic Church , art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. So Luke (Luk_13:1.) alludes to a Galilean revolt not mentioned by Josephus and Josephus records three revolts under Pilate not referred to by Luke. A comparison of the accounts of the death of Agrippa I in Act_12:20-23 and Ant . XIX. viii, 2 redounds to the credit of Luke. The Josephus phase of the argument may be brushed to one side. The third view, held by Harnack and adopted here, is that Luke wrote the Acts while with Paul in Rome and finished the book before Paul’s release, that is by a.d. 63. This is the obvious and natural way to take the language of Luke at the close of Acts. Events had gone no farther and so he ends the narrative right there. It is argued against this that Luke contemplated a third volume and for this reason closed with the arrival of Paul in Rome. But the use of prōton (first) in Act_1:1 is a common Koiné[28928]š idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark’s Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.

The Historical Value

It was once a fad with a certain school of critics to decry Luke in the Acts as wholly untrustworthy, not above the legendary stage. But the spade has done well by Luke for inscriptions and papyri have brought remarkable confirmation for scores of points where Luke once stood all alone and was discounted because he stood alone. These will be duly noted in the proper places as they occur. Ramsay has done most in this restoration of the rank of Luke as a credible historian, as shown in particular in his St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen and in The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament . In every instance where discoveries have been made they have confirmed the testimony of Luke as concerning politarchs in Thessalonica, proconsul in Cyprus, etc. The result is that the balance of evidence is now in favour of Luke even when he still stands alone or seems to be opposed by Josephus. Luke, as it stands today, is a more credible historian than Josephus. Ramsay dares to call Luke, all things considered, the greatest of all historians, even above Thucydides. An interesting book on this phase of the subject is Chase’s The Credibility of the Acts of the Apostles (1902).

The Purpose of the Acts

It is not easy to say in a word precisely the object of Luke in writing this book. It is not the Acts of all the apostles. Outside of Peter and John little is told of any of them after chapter 3. And all the acts of Peter and John are not given for Peter disappears from the narrative after chapter 15, though he has been the central figure through chapter 11. Paul is not one of the twelve apostles, but Luke follows Paul’s career mainly after chapter 8. Stephen and Barnabas come in also. Still ( St. Paul on Trial , 1923) argues that Luke meant the book as an apology to be used in Paul’s trial at Rome or at any rate to put Paul in the right light with the Jews in Rome. Hence the full account of Paul’s series of defences in Jerusalem, Caesarea, Rome. There may be an element of truth in this idea, but it clearly does not cover the whole purpose of Luke. Others hold that Luke had a dramatic plan to get Paul to Rome as the climax of his campaign to win the Roman Empire to Christ. The book is not a history of all early Christianity. Peter and Paul dominate the atmosphere of the book with Paul as the great hero of Luke. But one can easily see that the work is done with consummate skill. The author is a man of culture, of Christian grace, of literary power. The book pulses with life today.

The Text of the Acts

A special problem arises concerning the text of Acts inasmuch as the Codex Bezae (D) with some other Western support presents a great many additions to the Neutral-Alexandrian text of Aleph A B C. Blass has even proposed the idea that Luke himself issued two editions of the book, an attractive hypothesis that is not generally accepted. J. M. Wilson has published The Acts of the Apostles from Codex Bezae . The whole subject is elaborately treated by J. H. Ropes in Vol. III, The Text of Acts in Part I of The Beginnings of Christianity . Besides thorough discussion of all the problems of text involved Ropes gives the text of the Vatican Codex (B) on the left page and that of Codex Bezae (D) on the right, making comparison easy. Blass’s ideas appear in his Acta Apostolorum .

JFB: Acts (Book Introduction)

THIS book is to the Gospels what the fruit is to the tree that bears it. In the Gospels we see the corn of wheat falling into the ground and dying: in the Acts we see it bringing forth much fruit (Joh 12:24). There we see Christ purchasing the Church with His own blood: here we see the Church, so purchased, rising into actual existence; first among the Jews of Palestine, and next among the surrounding Gentiles, until it gains a footing in the great capital of the ancient world--sweeping majestically from Jerusalem to Rome. Nor is this book of less value as an Introduction to the Epistles which follow it, than as a Sequel to the Gospels which precede it. For without this history the Epistles of the New Testament--presupposing, as they do, the historical circumstances of the parties addressed, and deriving from these so much of their freshness, point, and force--would in no respect be what they now are, and would in a number of places be scarcely intelligible.

The genuineness, authenticity, and canonical authority of this book were never called in question within the ancient Church. It stands immediately after the Gospels, in the catalogues of the Homologoumena, or universally acknowledged books of the New Testament (see Introduction to our larger Commentary, Vol. V, pp. iv, v). It was rejected, indeed, by certain heretical sects in the second and third centuries--by the Ebionites, the Severians (see EUSEBIUS, Ecclesiastical History, 4.29), the Marcionites, and the Manicheans: but the totally uncritical character of their objections (see Introduction above referred to, pp. xiii, xiv) not only deprives them of all weight, but indirectly shows on what solid grounds the Christian Church had all along proceeded in recognizing this book.

In our day, however, its authenticity has, like that of all the leading books of the New Testament, been made the subject of keen and protracted controversy. DE WETTE, while admitting Luke to be the author of the entire work, pronounces the earlier portion of it to have been drawn up from unreliable sources (New-Testament Introduction, 2a, 2C). But the Tubingen school, with BAUR at their head, have gone much farther. As their fantastic theory of the post-Joannean date of the Gospels could not pretend even to a hearing so long as the authenticity of the Acts of the Apostles remained unshaken, they contend that the earlier portion of this work can be shown to be unworthy of credit, while the latter portion is in flat contradiction to the Epistle to the Galatians--which this school regard as unassailable--and bears internal evidence of being a designed distortion of facts for the purpose of setting up the catholic form which Paul gave to Christianity in opposition to the narrow Judaic but original form of it which Peter preached, and which after the death of the apostles was held exclusively by the sect of the Ebionites. It is painful to think that anyone should have spent so many years, and, aided by learned and acute disciples in different parts of the argument, should have expended so much learning, research, and ingenuity in attempting to build up a hypothesis regarding the origination of the leading books of the New Testament which outrages all the principles of sober criticism and legitimate evidence. As a school, this party at length broke up: its head, after living to find himself the sole defender of the theory as a whole, left this earthly scene complaining of desertion. While some of his associates have abandoned such heartless studies altogether for the more congenial pursuits of philosophy, others have modified their attacks on the historical truth of the New Testament records, retreating into positions into which it is not worth while to follow them, while others still have been gradually approximating to sound principles. The one compensation for all this mischief is the rich additions to the apologetical and critical literature of the books of the New Testament, and the earliest history of the Christian Church, which it has drawn from the pens of THIERSCH, EBRARD, and many others. Any allusions which it may be necessary for us to make to the assertions of this school will be made in connection with the passages to which they relate--in Acts, First Corinthians, and Galatians.

The manifest connection between this book and the third Gospel--of which it professes to be simply the continuation by the same author--and the striking similarity which marks the style of both productions, leave no room to doubt that the early Church was right in ascribing it with one consent to Luke. The difficulty which some fastidious critics have made about the sources of the earlier portion of the history has no solid ground. That the historian himself was an eye-witness of the earliest scenes--as HUG concludes from the circumstantiality of the narrative--is altogether improbable: but there were hundreds of eye-witnesses of some of the scenes, and enough of all the rest, to give to the historian, partly by oral, partly by written testimony, all the details which he has embodied so graphically in his history; and it will appear, we trust, from the commentary, that De Wette's complaints of confusion, contradiction, and error in this portion are without foundation. The same critic, and one or two others, would ascribe to Timothy those later portions of the book in which the historian speaks in the first person plural--"we"; supposing him to have taken notes of all that passed under his own eye, which Luke embodied in his history just as they stood. It is impossible here to refute this gratuitous hypothesis in detail; but the reader will find it done by EBRARD (The Gospel History, sect. 110, Clark's translation; sect. 127 of the original work, Wissenschaftliche Kritik der Evangelische Geschichte, 1850), and by DAVIDSON (Introduction to New Testament, Vol. II, pp. 9-21).

The undesigned coincidences between this History and the Apostolic Epistles have been brought out and handled, as an argument for the truth of the facts thus attested, with unrivalled felicity by PALEY in his Horæ Paulinæ, to which Mr. BIRKS has made a number of ingenious additions in his Horæ Apostolicæ. Exception has been taken to some of these by JOWETT (St. Paul's Epistles, Vol. I, pp. 108 ff.), not without a measure of reason in certain cases--for our day, at least--though even he admits that in this line of evidence the work of PALEY, taken as a whole, is unassailable.

Much has been written about the object of this history. Certainly "the Acts of the Apostles" are but very partially recorded. But for this title the historian is not responsible. Between the two extremes--of supposing that the work has no plan at all, and that it is constructed on an elaborate and complex plan, we shall probably be as near the truth as is necessary if we take the design to be to record the diffusion of Christianity and the rise of the Christian Church, first among the Jews of Palestine, the seat of the ancient Faith, and next among the surrounding Gentiles, with Antioch for its headquarters, until, finally, it is seen waving over imperial Rome, foretokening its universal triumph. In this view of it, there is no difficulty in accounting for the almost exclusive place which it gives to the labors of Peter in the first instance, and the all but entire disappearance from the history both of him and of the rest of the Twelve after the great apostle of the Gentiles came upon the stage--like the lesser lights on the rise of the great luminary.

JFB: Acts (Outline)

• INTRODUCTION--LAST DAYS OF OUR LORD UPON EARTH--HIS ASCENSION. (Act 1:1-11)
• RETURN OF THE ELEVEN TO JERUSALEM--PROCEEDINGS IN THE UPPER ROOM TILL PENTECOST. (Act 1:12-26)
• DESCENT OF THE SPIRIT--THE DISCIPLES SPEAK WITH TONGUES--AMAZEMENT OF THE MULTITUDE. (Act 2:1-13)
• PETER FOR THE FIRST TIME, PUBLICLY PREACHES CHRIST. (Acts 2:14-36)
• BEAUTIFUL BEGINNINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. (Act 2:41-47)
• PETER AND JOHN DISMISSED FROM THE SAMHEDRIM, REPORT THE PROCEEDINGS TO THE ASSEMBLED DISCIPLES--THEY ENGAGE IN PRAYER--THE ASTONISHING ANSWER AND RESULTS. (Act 4:23-37)
• ANANIAS AND SAPPHIRA. (Act 5:1-11)
• THE PROGRESS OF THE NEW CAUSE LEADS TO THE ARREST OF THE APOSTLES--THEY ARE MIRACULOUSLY DELIVERED FROM PRISON, RESUME THEIR TEACHING, BUT ALLOW THEMSELVES TO BE CONDUCTED BEFORE THE SAMHEDRIM. (Act 5:12-26)
• SECOND APPEARANCE AND TESTIMONY BEFORE THE SAMHEDRIM--ITS RAGE CALMED BY GAMALIEL--BEING DISMISSED, THEY DEPART REJOICING, AND CONTINUE THEIR PREACHING. (Acts 5:27-42)
• FIRST ELECTION OF DEACONS. (Act 6:1-7)
• STEPHEN ARRAIGNED BEFORE THE SAMHEDRIM. (Act 6:8-15)
• DEFENSE AND MARTYRDOM OF STEPHEN. (Acts 7:1-60)
• PERSECUTION CONTINUED, IN WHICH SAUL TAKES A PROMINENT PART--HOW OVERRULED FOR GOOD. (Act 8:1-4)
• SUCCESS OF PHILIP'S PREACHING IN SAMARIA--CASE OF SIMON MAGUS. (Acts 8:5-25)
• THE ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH. (Act 8:26-40)
• CONVERSION OF SAUL, AND BEGINNINGS OF HIS MINISTRY. (Acts 9:1-25)
• SAUL'S FIRST VISIT TO JERUSALEM AFTER HIS CONVERSION. (Act 9:26-31)
• FLOURISHING STATE OF THE CHURCH IN PALESTINE AT THIS TIME. (Act 9:31)
• PETER HEALS ENEAS AT LYDDA AND RAISES TABITHA TO LIFE AT JOPPA. (Act 9:32-43)
• ACCESSION AND BAPTISM OF CORNELIUS AND HIS PARTY; OR, THE FIRST-FRUITS OF THE GENTILES. (Acts 10:1-48)
• THE GOSPEL BEING PREACHED TO GENTILES AT ANTIOCH ALSO BARNABAS IS SENT THITHER FROM JERUSALEM, WHO HAILS THEIR ACCESSION AND LABORS AMONG THEM. (Act 11:19-24)
• BARNABAS, FINDING THE WORK IN ANTIOCH TOO MUCH FOR HIM, GOES TO TARSUS FOR SAUL--THEY LABOR THERE TOGETHER FOR A WHOLE YEAR WITH MUCH SUCCESS, AND ANTIOCH BECOMES THE HONORED BIRTHPLACE OF THE TERM CHRISTIAN. (Act 11:25-26)
• BY OCCASION OF A FAMINE BARNABAS AND SAUL RETURN TO JERUSALEM WITH A CONTRIBUTION FOR THE RELIEF OF THEIR SUFFERING BRETHREN. (Act 11:27-30)
• PERSECUTION OF THE CHURCH BY HEROD AGRIPPA I--MARTYRDOM OF JAMES AND MIRACULOUS DELIVERANCE OF PETER. (Acts 12:1-19)
• HEROD'S MISERABLE END--GROWING SUCCESS OF THE GOSPEL--BARNABAS AND SAUL RETURN TO ANTIOCH. (Act 12:20-25)
• BARNABAS AND SAUL, DIVINELY CALLED TO LABOR AMONG THE GENTILES, ARE SET APART AND SENT FORTH BY THE CHURCH AT ANTIOCH. (Act 13:1-3)
• ARRIVING IN CYPRUS THEY PREACH IN THE SYNAGOGUES OF SALAMIS--AT PAPHOS, ELYMAS IS STRUCK BLIND, AND THE GOVERNOR OF THE ISLAND IS CONVERTED. (Act 13:4-12)
• AT PERGA JOHN MARK FORSAKES THEM--AT ANTIOCH IN PISIDIA, PAUL PREACHES WITH GLORIOUS EFFECT--THE JEWS, ENRAGED, EXPEL THEM OUT OF THEM COASTS. (Acts 13:13-52)
• MEETING WITH SIMILAR SUCCESS AND SIMILAR OPPOSITION AT ICONIUM, PAUL AND BARNABAS FLEE FOR THEIR LIVES TO LYSTRA AND DERBE, AND PREACH THERE. (Act 14:1-7)
• AT LYSTRA PAUL HEALING A CRIPPLE, THE PEOPLE ARE SCARCE RESTRAINED FROM SACRIFICING TO THEM AS GODS, BUT AFTERWARDS, THEIR MINDS BEING POISONED, THEY STONE PAUL, LEAVING HIM FOR DEAD--WITHDRAWING TO DERBE, THEY PREACH AND TEACH THERE. (Act 14:8-21)
• COUNCIL AT JERUSALEM TO DECIDE ON THE NECESSITY OF CIRCUMCISION FOR THE GENTILE CONVERTS. (Acts 15:1-35)
• DISSENSION BETWEEN PAUL AND BARNABAS--THEY PART COMPANY TO PROSECUTE SEPARATE MISSIONARY TOURS. (Act 15:36-46)
• THEY BREAK NEW GROUND IN PHRYGIA AND GALATIA--THEIR COURSE IN THAT DIRECTION BEING MYSTERIOUSLY HEDGED UP, THEY TRAVEL WESTWARD TO TROAS, WHERE THEY ARE DIVINELY DIRECTED TO MACEDONIA--THE HISTORIAN HIMSELF HERE JOINING THE MISSIONARY PARTY, THEY EMBARK FOR NEAPOLIS, AND REACH PHILIPPI. (Act 16:6-12)
• AT THESSALONICA THE SUCCESS OF PAUL'S PREACHING ENDANGERING HIS LIFE, HE IS DESPATCHED BY NIGHT TO BEREA, WHERE HIS MESSAGE MEETS WITH ENLIGHTENED ACCEPTANCE--A HOSTILE MOVEMENT FROM THESSALONICA OCCASIONS HIS SUDDEN DEPARTURE FROM BEREA--HE ARRIVES AT ATHENS. (Act 17:1-15)
• PAUL AT ATHENS. (Acts 17:16-34)
• PAUL'S ARRIVAL AND LABORS AT CORINTH, WHERE HE IS REJOINED BY SILAS AND TIMOTHY, AND, UNDER DIVINE ENCOURAGEMENT, MAKES A LONG STAY--AT LENGTH, RETRACING HIS STEPS, BY EPHESUS, CÆSAREA, AND JERUSALEM, HE RETURNS FOR THE LAST TIME TO ANTIOCH, THUS COMPLETING HIS SECOND MISSIONARY JOURNEY. (Acts 18:1-22)
• PAUL'S THIRD AND LAST MISSIONARY JOURNEY--HE VISITS THE CHURCHES OF GALATIA AND PHRYGIA. (Acts 18:23-21:16)
• EPISODE CONCERNING APOLLOS AT EPHESUS AND IN ACHAIA. (Act 18:24-28)
• SIGNAL SUCCESS OF PAUL AT EPHESUS. (Acts 19:1-41)
• PAUL FULFILS HIS PURPOSE OF PROCEEDING AGAIN TO MACEDONIA AND GREECE--RETURNING THENCE, ON HIS ROUTE FOR JERUSALEM, HE REVISITS PHILIPPI AND TROAS--HIS MINISTRATIONS AT TROAS. (Act 20:1-12)
• CONTINUING HIS ROUTE TO JERUSALEM HE REACHES MILETUS, WHENCE HE SENDS FOR THE ELDERS OF EPHESUS--HIS FAREWELL ADDRESS TO THEM. (Acts 20:13-38)
• SAILING FROM EPHESUS, THEY LAND AT TYRE, AND THENCE SAILING TO PTOLEMAIS, THEY PROCEED BY LAND TO CÆSAREA AND JERUSALEM. (Acts 21:1-16)
• PAUL REPORTS THE EVENTS OF HIS THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY--IN THE TEMPLE, PURIFYING HIMSELF FROM A JEWISH VOW, HE IS SEIZED BY A MOB AND BEATEN TO THE DANGER OF HIS LIFE--THE UPROAR BECOMING UNIVERSAL, THE ROMAN COMMANDANT HAS HIM BROUGHT IN CHAINS TO THE FORTRESS, FROM THE STAIRS OF WHICH HE IS PERMITTED TO ADDRESS THE PEOPLE. (Acts 21:17-40)
• PAUL'S DEFENSE FROM THE STAIRS OF THE FORTRESS--THE RAGE OF THE AUDIENCE BURSTING FORTH, THE COMMANDANT HAS HIM BROUGHT INTO THE FORT TO BE EXAMINED BY SCOURGING, BUT LEARNING THAT HE IS A ROMAN, HE ORDERS HIS RELEASE AND COMMANDS THE SAMHEDRIM TO TRY HIM. (Acts 22:1-30)
• PAUL'S DEFENSE BEFORE THE SAMHEDRIM DIVIDES THE RIVAL FACTIONS, FROM WHOSE VIOLENCE THE COMMANDANT HAS THE APOSTLE REMOVED INTO THE FORTRESS. (Act 23:1-10)
• IN THE FORTRESS PAUL IS CHEERED BY A NIGHT VISION--AN INFAMOUS CONSPIRACY TO ASSASSINATE HIM IS PROVIDENTIALLY DEFEATED, AND HE IS DESPATCHED BY NIGHT WITH A LETTER FROM THE COMMANDANT TO FELIX AT CÆSAREA, BY WHOM ARRANGEMENTS ARE MADE FOR A HEARING OF HIS CAUSE. (Acts 23:11-35)
• PAUL, ACCUSED BY A PROFESSIONAL PLEADER BEFORE FELIX, MAKES HIS DEFENSE, AND IS REMANDED FOR A FURTHER HEARING. AT A PRIVATE INTERVIEW FELIX TREMBLES UNDER PAUL'S PREACHING, BUT KEEPS HIM PRISONER FOR TWO YEARS, WHEN HE WAS SUCCEEDED BY FESTUS. (Acts 24:1-27)
• FESTUS, COMING TO JERUSALEM, DECLINES TO HAVE PAUL BROUGHT THITHER FOR JUDGMENT, BUT GIVES THE PARTIES A HEARING ON HIS RETURN TO CÆSAREA--ON FESTUS ASKING THE APOSTLE IF HE WOULD GO TO JERUSALEM FOR ANOTHER HEARING BEFORE HIM, HE IS CONSTRAINED IN JUSTICE TO HIS CAUSE TO APPEAL TO THE EMPEROR. (Act 25:1-12)
• HEROD AGRIPPA II ON A VISIT TO FESTUS, BEING CONSULTED BY HIM ON PAUL'S CASE, DESIRES TO HEAR THE APOSTLE, WHO IS ACCORDINGLY BROUGHT FORTH. (Act 25:13-27)
• PAUL'S DEFENSE OF HIMSELF BEFORE KING AGRIPPA, WHO PRONOUNCES HIM INNOCENT, BUT CONCLUDES THAT THE APPEAL TO CÆSAR MUST BE CARRIED OUT. (Acts 26:1-32)
• THE VOYAGE TO ITALY--THE SHIPWRECK AND SAFE LANDING AT MALTA. (Acts 27:1-44)
• THE WINTERING AT MALTA, AND NOTABLE OCCURRENCES THERE--PROSECUTION OF THE VOYAGE TO ITALY AS FAR AS PUTEOLI, AND LAND JOURNEY THENCE TO ROME--SUMMARY OF THE APOSTLE'S LABORS THERE FOR THE TWO FOLLOWING YEARS. (Acts 28:1-31)
• PAUL AND BARNABAS RETRACE THEIR STEPS, RETURN TO ANTIOCH IN SYRIA, AND THUS COMPLETE THEIR FIRST MISSIONARY JOURNEY. (Act 14:21-28)
• VISITATION OF THE CHURCHES FORMERLY ESTABLISHED, TIMOTHEUS HERE JOINING THE MISSIONARY PARTY. (Acts 15:41-16:5)
• AT PHILIPPI, LYDIA IS GAINED AND WITH HER HOUSEHOLD BAPTIZED--AN EVIL SPIRIT IS EXPELLED, PAUL AND SILAS ARE SCOURGED, IMPRISONED, AND MANACLED, BUT MIRACULOUSLY SET FREE, AND THE JAILER WITH ALL HIS HOUSEHOLD CONVERTED AND BAPTIZED. (Act 16:12-34)

TSK: Acts (Book Introduction)

The Acts of the Apostles is a most valuable portion of Divine revelation; and, independently of its universal reception in the Christian church, as an authentic and inspired production, it bears the most satisfactory internal evidence of its authenticity and truth. St. Luke’s long attendance upon St. Paul, and his having been an eyewitness of many of the facts which he has recorded, independently of his Divine inspiration, render him a most suitable and credible historian; and his medical knowledge, for he is allowed to have been a physician, enabled him both to form a proper judgment of the miraculous cures which were performed by St. Paul, and to give an authentic and circumstantial detail of them. The plainness and simplicity of the narrative are also strong circumstances in its favour. The history of the Acts is one of the most important parts of the Sacred History, for without it neither the Gospels nor Epistles could have been so clearly understood; but by the aid of it the whole scheme of the Christian revelation is set before us in a clear and easy view.

TSK: Acts 7 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Act 7:1, Stephen, permitted to answer to the accusation of blasphemy, Act 7:2, shows that Abraham worshipped God rightly, and how God chose the fathers, Act 7:20. before Moses was born, and before the tabernacle and temple were built; Act 7:37, that Moses himself witnessed of Christ; Act 7:44, and that all outward ceremonies were ordained, according to the heavenly pattern, to last but for a time; Act 7:51, reprehending their rebellion, and murdering of Christ, the Just One, whom the prophets foretold should come into the world; Act 7:54, Whereupon they stone him to death, who commends his soul to Jesus, and humbly prays for them.

Poole: Acts 7 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 7

MHCC: Acts (Book Introduction)

This book unites the Gospels to the Epistles. It contains many particulars concerning the apostles Peter and Paul, and of the Christian church from the ascension of our Saviour to the arrival of St. Paul at Rome, a space of about thirty years. St. Luke was the writer of this book; he was present at many of the events he relates, and attended Paul to Rome. But the narrative does not afford a complete history of the church during the time to which it refers, nor even of St. Paul's life. The object of the book has been considered to be, 1. To relate in what manner the gifts of the Holy Spirit were communicated on the day of Pentecost, and the miracles performed by the apostles, to confirm the truth of Christianity, as showing that Christ's declarations were really fulfilled. 2. To prove the claim of the Gentiles to be admitted into the church of Christ. This is shown by much of the contents of the book. A large portion of the Acts is occupied by the discourses or sermons of various persons, the language and manner of which differ, and all of which will be found according to the persons by whom they were delivered, and the occasions on which they were spoken. It seems that most of these discourses are only the substance of what was actually delivered. They relate nevertheless fully to Jesus as the Christ, the anointed Messiah.

MHCC: Acts 7 (Chapter Introduction)

(v. 1-50) Stephen's defence.

(Act 7:51-53) Stephen reproves the Jews for the death of Christ.

(Act 7:54-60) The martyrdom of Stephen.

Matthew Henry: Acts (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Acts of the Apostles

We have with an abundant satisfaction seen the foundation of our holy religion laid in the history of our blessed Saviour, its great author, which was related and left upon record by four several inspired writers, who all agree in this sacred truth, and the incontestable proofs of it, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. Upon this rock the Christian church is built. How it began to be built upon this rock comes next to be related in this book which we have now before us, and of this we have the testimony only of one witness; for the matters of fact concerning Christ were much more necessary to be fully related and attested than those concerning the apostles. Had Infinite Wisdom seen fit, we might have had as many books of the Acts of the Apostles as we have gospels, nay, as we might have had gospels: but, for fear of over-burdening the world (Joh 21:25), we have sufficient to answer the end, if we will but make use of it. The history of this book (which was always received as a part of the sacred canon) may be considered.

I. As looking back to the preceding gospels, giving light to them, and greatly assisting our faith in them. The promises there made we here find made good, particularly the great promises of the descent of the Holy Ghost, and his wonderful operations, both on the apostles (whom here in a few days we find quite other men than what the gospels left them; no longer weak-headed and weak-hearted, but able to say that which then they were not able to bear (Joh 16:12) as bold as lions to face those hardships at the thought of which they then trembled as lambs), and also with the apostles, making the word mighty to the pulling down of Satan's strong holds, which had been before comparatively preached in vain. The commission there granted to the apostles we here find executed, and the powers there lodged in them we here find exerted in miracles wrought on the bodies of people - miracles of mercy, restoring sick bodies to health and dead bodies to life - miracles of judgment, striking rebels blind or dead; and much greater miracles wrought on the minds of people, in conferring spiritual gifts upon them, both of understanding and utterance; and this in pursuance of Christ's purposes, and in performance of his promises, which we had in the gospels. The proofs of Christ's resurrection with which the gospels closed are here abundantly corroborated, not only by the constant and undaunted testimony of those that conversed with him after he arose (who had all deserted him, and one of them denied him, and would not otherwise have been rallied again but by his resurrection, but must have been irretrievably dispersed, and yet by that were enabled to own him more resolutely than ever, in defiance of bonds and deaths), but by the working of the Spirit with that testimony for the conversion of multitudes to the faith of Christ, according to the word of Christ, that his resurrection, the sign of the prophet Jonas, which was reserved to the last, should be the most convincing proof of his divine mission. Christ had told his disciples that they should be his witnesses, and this book brings them in witnessing for him, - that they should be fishers of men, and here we have them enclosing multitudes in the gospel-net, - that they should be the lights of the world, and here we have the world enlightened by them; but that day - spring from on high the first appearing of which we there discerned we here find shining more and more. The corn of wheat, which there fell to the ground, here springs up and bears much fruit; the grain of mustard-seed there is here a great tree; and the kingdom of heaven, which was then at hand, is here set up. Christ's predictions of the virulent persecutions which the preachers of the gospel should be afflicted with (though one could not have imagined that a doctrine so well worthy of all acceptation should meet with so much opposition) we here find abundantly fulfilled, and also the assurances he gave them of extraordinary supports and comforts under their sufferings. Thus, as the latter part of the history of the Old Testament verifies the promises made to the fathers of the former part (as appears by that famous and solemn acknowledgment of Solomon's, which runs like a receipt in full, 1Ki 8:56, There has not failed one word of all his good promises which he promised by the hand of Moses his servant ), so this latter part of the history of the New Testament exactly answers to the world of Christ in the former part of it: and thus they mutually confirm and illustrate each other.

II. As looking forward to the following epistles, which are an explication of the gospels, which open the mysteries of Christ's death and resurrection, the history of which we had in the gospels. This book introduces them and is a key to them, as the history of David is to David's psalms. We are members of the Christian church, that tabernacle of God among men, and it is our honour and privilege that we are so. Now this book gives us an account of the framing and rearing of that tabernacle. The four gospels showed us how the foundation of that house was laid; this shows us how the superstructure began to be raised, 1. Among the Jews and Samaritans, which we have an account of in the former part of this book. 2. Among the Gentiles, which we have an account of in the latter part: from thence, and downward to our own day, we find the Christian church subsisting in a visible profession of faith in Christ, as the Son of God and Saviour of the world, made by his baptized disciples, incorporated into religious societies, statedly meeting in religious assemblies, attending on the apostles' doctrine, and joining in prayers and the breaking of bread, under the guidance and presidency of men that gave themselves to prayer and the ministry of the word, and in a spiritual communion with all in every place that do likewise. Such a body as this thee is now in the world, which we belong to: and, to our great satisfaction and honour, in this book we find the rise and origin of it, vastly different from the Jewish church, and erected upon its ruins; but undeniably appearing to be of God, and not of man. With what confidence and comfort may we proceed in, and adhere to, our Christian profession, as far as we find it agrees with this pattern in the mount, to which we ought religiously to conform and confine ourselves!

Two things more are to be observed concerning this book: - (1.) The penman of it. It was written by Luke, who wrote the third of the four gospels, which bears his name; and who (as the learned Dr. Whitby shows) was, very probably, one of the seventy disciples, whose commission (Luk 10:1, etc.) was little inferior to that of the twelve apostles. This Luke was very much a companion of Paul in his services and sufferings. Only Luke is with me, 2Ti 4:11. We may know by his style in the latter part of this book when and where he was with him, for then he writes, We did so and so, as Act 16:10; Act 20:6; and thenceforward to the end of the book. He was with Paul in his dangerous voyage to Rome, when he was carried thither a prisoner, was with him when from his prison there he wrote his epistles to the Colossians and Philemon, in both which he is named. And it should seem that St. Luke wrote this history when he was with St. Paul at Rome, during his imprisonment there, and was assistant to him; for the history concludes with St. Paul's preaching there in his own hired house. (2.) The title of it: The Acts of the Apostles; of the holy Apostles, so the Greek copies generally read it, and so they are called, Rev 18:20, Rejoice over her you holy apostles. One copy inscribes it, The Acts of the Apostles by Luke the Evangelist. [1.] It is the history of the apostles; yet there is in it the history of Stephen, Barnabas, and some other apostolical men, who, though not of the twelve, were endued with the same Spirit, and employed in the same work; and, of those that were apostles, it is the history of Peter and Paul only that is here recorded (and Paul was now of the twelve), Peter the apostle of the circumcision, and Paul the apostles of the Gentiles, Gal 2:7. But this suffices as a specimen of what the rest did in other places, pursuant to their commission, for there were none of them idle; and as we are to think what is related in the gospels concerning Christ sufficient, because Infinite Wisdom thought so, the same we are to think here concerning what is related of the apostles and their labours; for what more is told us from tradition of the labours and sufferings of the apostles, and the churches they planted, is altogether doubtful and uncertain, and what I think we cannot build upon with any satisfaction at all. This is gold, silver, and precious stones, built upon the foundation: that is wood, hay, and stubble. [2.] It is called their acts, or doings; Gesta apostolorum; so some. Praxeis - their practices of the lessons their Master had taught them. The apostles where active men; and though the wonders they did were by the word, yet they are fitly called their acts; they spoke, or rather the Spirit by them spoke, and it was done. The history is filled with their sermons and their sufferings; yet so much did they labour in their preaching, and so voluntarily did they expose themselves to sufferings, and such were their achievements by both, that they may very well be called their acts.

Matthew Henry: Acts 7 (Chapter Introduction)

When our Lord Jesus called his apostles out to be employed in services and sufferings for him, he told them that yet the last should be first, and the first last, which was remarkably fulfilled in St. Stephen and St. Paul, who were both of them late converts, in comparison of the apostles, and yet got the start of them both in services and sufferings; for God, in conferring honours and favours, often crosses hands. In this chapter we have the martyrdom of Stephen, the first martyr of the Christian church, who led the van in the noble army. And therefore his sufferings and death are more largely related than those of any other, for direction and encouragement to all those who are called out to resist unto blood, as he did. Here is, I. His defence of himself before the council, in answer to the matters and things he stood charged with, the scope of which is to show that it was no blasphemy against God, nor any injury at all to the glory of his name, to say that the temple should be destroyed and the customs of the ceremonial law changed. And, 1. He shows this by going over the history of the Old Testament, and observing that God never intended to confine his favours to that place, or that ceremonial law; and that they had no reason to expect he should, for the people of the Jews had always been a provoking people, and had forfeited the privileges of their peculiarity: nay, that that holy place and that law were but figures of good things to come, and it was no disparagement at all to them to say that they must give place to better things (v. 1-50). And then, 2. He applies this to those that prosecuted him, and sat in judgment upon him, sharply reproving them for their wickedness, by which they had brought upon themselves the ruin of their place and nation, and then could not bear to hear of it (Act 7:51-53). II. The putting of him to death by stoning him, and his patient, cheerful, pious submission to it (Act 7:54-60).

Barclay: Acts (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

A Precious Book

In one sense Acts is the most important book in the New Testament. It is the simple truth that if we did not possess Acts, we would have, apart from what we could deduce from the letters of Paul, no information whatever about the early Church.

There are two ways of writing history. There is the way which attempts to trace the course of events from week to week and from day to day; and there is the way which, as it were, opens a series of windows and gives us vivid glimpses of the great moments and personalities of any period. The second way is the way of Acts.

We usually speak of The Acts of the Apostles. But the book neither gives nor claims to give an exhaustive account of the acts of the apostles. Apart from Paul only three apostles are mentioned in it. In Act_12:2 we are told in one brief sentence that James, the brother of John, was executed by Herod. John appears in the narrative, but never speaks. It is only about Peter that the book gives any real information, and very soon, as a leading character, he passes from the scene. In the Greek there is no The before Acts; the correct title is Acts of Apostolic Men; and what Acts aims to do is to give us a series of typical exploits of the heroic figures of the early Church.

The Writer Of The Book

Although the book never says so, from the earliest times Luke has been held to be its writer. About Luke we really know very little; there are only three references to him in the New Testament--Col_4:14 , Phm_1:24 , 2Ti_4:11 . From these we can say two things for sure. First, Luke was a doctor; second, he was one of Paulmost valued helpers and most loyal friends, for he was a companion of his in his last imprisonment. We can deduce the fact that he was a Gentile. Col_4:11 concludes a list of mentions and greetings from those who are of the circumcision, that is, from Jews; Col_4:12 begins a new list and we naturally conclude that the new list is of Gentiles. So then we have the very interesting fact that Luke is the only Gentile author in the New Testament.

We could have guessed that Luke was a doctor because of his instinctive use of medical words. In Luk_4:35 , in telling of the man who had the spirit of an unclean devil, he says "when the devil had thrown him down" and uses the correct medical word for convulsions. In Luk_9:38 when he draws the picture of the man who asked Jesus, "I beg you to look upon my son" he employs the conventional word for a doctor paying a visit to a patient. The most interesting example is in the saying about the camel and the needleeye. All three synoptic writers give us that saying (Mat_19:24 ; Mar_10:25 ; Luk_18:25 ). For needle both Mark and Matthew use the Greek raphis (G4476), the ordinary word for a tailoror a household needle. Luke alone uses belone, the technical word for a surgeonneedle. Luke was a doctor and a doctorwords came most naturally to his pen.

The Recipient Of The Book

Luke wrote both his gospel and Acts to a man called Theophilus (Luk_1:3 ; Act_1:1 ). We can only guess who Theophilus was. Luk_1:3 calls him "most excellent Theophilus." The phrase really means "your excellency," and indicates a man high up in the service of the Roman government. There are three possibilities.

(i) Just possibly Theophilus is not a real name at all. In those days it might well be dangerous to be a Christian. Theophilus comes from two Greek words, theos (G2316) which means God and philein (G5368) which means to love. It may be that Luke wrote to a lover of God whose real name he did not mention for safetysake.

(ii) If Theophilus was a real person, he must have been a high government official. Perhaps Luke wrote to show him that Christianity was a lovely thing and that Christians were good people. Maybe his writing was an attempt to persuade a government official not to persecute the Christians.

(iii) There is a more romantic theory than either of these based on the facts that Luke was a doctor and that doctors in the ancient days were often slaves. It has been conjectured that Luke was the doctor of Theophilus, that Theophilus had been gravely ill, that by Lukeskill and devotion he was brought back to health, and that in gratitude he gave Luke his freedom. Then, it may be, Luke wished to show how grateful he was for this gift; and since the most precious thing he had was the story of Jesus, he wrote it down and sent it to his benefactor.

LukeAim In Writing Acts

When a man writes a book he does so for a reason, and maybe for more than one. Let us consider now why Luke wrote Acts.

(i) One of his reasons was to commend Christianity to the Roman government.

Again and again he goes out of his way to show how courteous Roman magistrates were to Paul. In Act_13:12 Sergius Paulus, the governor of Cyprus, becomes a Christian. In Act_18:12 Gallio is absolutely impartial in Corinth. In Act_16:35 . the magistrates at Philippi discover their mistake and apologize publicly to Paul. In Act_19:31 the Asiarchs in Ephesus are shown to be concerned that no harm should come to Paul. Luke was pointing out that in the years before he wrote Roman officials had often been well-disposed and always just to Christianity.

Further, Luke takes pains to show that the Christians were good and loyal citizens. and had always been regarded as such. In Act_18:14 Gallio declares that there is no question of wickedness or villainy. In Act_19:37 the secretary of Ephesus gives the Christians a good testimonial. In Act_23:29 Claudius Lysias is careful to say that he has nothing against Paul. In Act_25:25 Festus declares that Paul has done nothing worthy of death, and in the same chapter Festus and Agrippa agree that Paul might well have been released had he not appealed to Caesar.

Luke was writing in the days when Christians were disliked and persecuted; and he told his story in such a way as to show that the Roman magistrates had always been perfectly fair to Christianity and that they had never regarded the Christians as evil men. In fact, the very interesting suggestion has been made that Acts is nothing other than the brief prepared for Pauldefense when he stood his trial before the Roman Emperor.

(ii) One of Lukeaims was to show that Christianity was for all men of every country.

This was one of the things the Jews found it hard to grasp. They had the idea that they were Godchosen people and that God had no use for any other nation. Luke sets out to prove otherwise. He shows Philip preaching to the Samaritans; he shows Stephen making Christianity universal and being killed for it; he shows Peter accepting Cornelius into the Church; he shows the Christians preaching to the Gentiles at Antioch; he shows Paul travelling far and wide winning men of all kinds for Christ; and in Ac 15 he shows the Church making the great decision to accept the Gentiles on equal terms with the Jews.

(iii) But these were merely secondary aims. Lukechief purpose is set out in the words of the Risen Christ in Luk_1:8 , "You shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judaea and Samaria and to the end of the earth." It was to show the expansion of Christianity, to show how that religion which began in a little corner of Palestine had in not much more than thirty years reached Rome.

C. H. Turner has pointed out that Acts falls into six panels, each ending with what might be called a progress report. The six panels are:

(a) Ac 1-5; Act_6:1-7 ; this tells of the church at Jerusalem and the preaching of Peter; and it finishes with the summary, "The word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem; and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith."

(b) Act_6:8-15 ; Ac 7-8; Act_9:1-31 ; this describes the spread of Christianity through Palestine and the martyrdom of Stephen, followed by the preaching in Samaria. It ends with the summary, "So the Church throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria had peace and was built up; and, walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it was multiplied."

(c) Act_9:32-43 ; Ac 10-11; Act_12:1-24 ; this includes the conversion of Paul, the extension of the Church to Antioch, and the reception of Cornelius, the Gentile, into the Church by Peter. Its summary is, "The word of God grew and multiplied."

(d) Act_12:25 ; Ac 13-15; Act_16:1-5 ; this tells of the extension of the Church through Asia Minor and the preaching tour of Galatia. It ends, "So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and they increased in numbers daily."

(e) Act_16:6-40 ; Ac 17-18; Act_19:1-20 ; this relates the extension of the Church to Europe and the work of Paul in great Gentile cities like Corinth and Ephesus. Its summary runs, "So the word of the Lord grew and prevailed mightily."

(j) Act_19:21-41 ; Ac 20-28; this tells of the arrival of Paul in Rome and his imprisonment there. It ends with the picture of Paul "preaching the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ quite openly and unhindered."

This plan of Acts answers its most puzzling question, why does it finish where it does? It finishes with Paul in prison awaiting judgment. We would so much have liked to know what happened to him and the end is wrapped in mystery. But Luke stopped there because his purpose was accomplished; he had shown how Christianity began in Jerusalem and swept across the world until it reached Rome. A great New Testament scholar has said that the title of Acts might be, "How they brought the Good News from Jerusalem to Rome."

LukeSources

Luke was an historian, and the sources from which an historian draws his information is all important. Where then did Luke get his facts? In this connection Acts falls into two parts.

(i) There are the first fifteen chapters, of whose events Luke had no personal knowledge. He very likely had access to two sources.

(a) There were the records of the local churches. They may never have been set down in writing but the churches had their stories. In this section we can distinguish three records. There is the record of the Jerusalem church which we find in Ac 1-5 and in Ac 15-16. There is the record of the church at Caesarea which covers Act_8:26-40 , Act_9:31-43 and Act_10:1-48 . There is the record of the church at Antioch which includes Act_11:19-30 , Act_12:25 , Ac 13 and Act_14:1-28 .

(b) Very likely there were cycles of stories which were the Acts of Peter, the Acts of John, the Acts of Philip and the Acts of Stephen. Beyond a doubt Lukefriendship with Paul would bring him into touch with all the great men of all the churches and all their stories would be at his disposal.

(ii) There is Ac 16-28. Of much of this section Luke had personal knowledge. When we read Acts carefully we notice a strange thing. Most of the time Lukenarrative is in the third person plural; but in certain passages it changes over to the first person plural and "they" becomes "we". The "we" passages are as follows--Acts 16:10-17; Act_20:5-16 ; Act_21:1-18 ; Ac 27 ; Act_28:1-16 . On all these occasions Luke must have been present. He must have kept a travel diary and in these passages we have eye-witness accounts. As for the times when he was not present, many were the hours he must have spent in prison with Paul and many were the stories Paul must have told him. There can have been no great figure Luke did not know and in every case he must have got his story from someone who was there.

When we read Acts we may be quite sure that no historian ever had better sources or used his sources more accurately.

FURTHER READING

Acts

F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (NLC; E)

E. Haenchen, Die Apostelgeschichte (G)

F. J. Foakes Jackson and K. Lake, The Beginnings Of Christianity (A five-volume work; especially useful are Vol.

IV, The Commentary and Vol. V, Additional Notes)

W. Neil, The Acts of the Apostles (NCB; E)

Abbreviations

NCB: New Century Bible

NLC: New London Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: Acts 7 (Chapter Introduction)

Stephen's Defence (Act_7:1-7)

The Man Who Came Out (Act_7:1-7 Continued)

Down Into Egypt (Act_7:8-16)

The Man Who Never Forgot His Fellow-Countrymen (Act_7:17-36)

A Disobedient People (Act_7:37-53)

The First Of The Martyrs (Act_7:54-60; Act_8:1)

Constable: Acts (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

The title "Acts of the Apostles" is very ancient. The Anti-Marcionite Prologue to the Gospel of Luke (150-180 A.D.) contains the oldest reference to the book by this name. The title is a bit misleading, however, because the book contains only a few of the acts of some of the apostles, primarily Peter and Paul.

Writer

Two lines of argument lead to the conclusion that Luke, the friend, fellow missionary, and physician of Paul wrote this book under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. First, there is the internal evidence, the passages written in the first person plural that can refer to Luke (16:10-40; 20:5-21:18; 27:1-28:16). Second, we have external evidence indicating that Luke wrote Acts. This evidence includes references by early church fathers,¹ comments in collections of New Testament books,² and editorial statements in early notes on certain New Testament books.³

Date and place of composition

The date of composition was probably in the early sixties, 60-62 A.D. In view of his emphases Luke probably would have mentioned several important events had they occurred by the time he wrote. These include the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., Paul's death in 68 A.D., and the Neronian persecution of Christians that began in 64 A.D.

We do not know for sure where Luke was when he wrote Acts. Perhaps he composed it over a period of years drawing on various sources and then put it into its final form in Rome where Paul was in confinement for two years (28:30-31; 60-62 A.D.).

"Fortunately the intelligibility and value of the book are largely independent of a knowledge of the precise situation in which it was written. While the finer points of the interpretation of Acts can still cause intense discussion among scholars, the essential themes of the book are basically clear and simple."⁴

Scope

The events recorded in Acts cover a period of about 30 years beginning with the Lord's ascension in 33 A.D. to Paul's two-year Roman house arrest that ended about 62 A.D.⁵

Purpose

There seems to have been a three-fold purpose for the writing of Acts. As with the other books of the Bible that record history in narrative form, certainly the Holy Spirit had a historical purpose.⁶ He intended to provide an inspired record of selected events that show the spread of the gospel and the church. They branched out from Jerusalem, the center of Judaism where the church began, to Rome, the uttermost part of the Gentile earth.

"Streeter suggested that an alternative title for the book of Acts might be The Road to Rome', for this is indeed the significance of Luke's work. Whatever minor motifs Luke had in mind, such as the establishment of Christianity in men's minds as a constructive and not destructive element in the social order, his main concern was to show that, in God's plan for the renewal of the life of mankind, Jerusalem, the heart of old Israel, was the goal of Stage I [i.e., the Book of Luke], while Rome, the centre of the world, was the goal of Stage II [i.e., the Book of Acts]."⁷

However the fact that Luke included what he did and omitted much other historical data indicates a second theological purpose. He showed how the plans and purposes of God were working out through history. In particular he showed how Jesus Christ was faithfully and irresistibly building His church (Matt. 16:18).⁸ This involved clarifying how God's dealings with humankind had taken a different course because of the Jews' rejection of their Messiah.

Third, Luke evidently had an apologetic purpose in writing. He frequently pointed out the relationship of the church to the Roman state by referring to many Roman officials not one of whom opposed Christianity because of its doctrines or practices. This would have made Acts a powerful defensive tool for the early Christians in their struggle to survive in a hostile pagan environment.⁹

". . . the Acts is to be seen in close literary association with the Gospel [of Luke]. They form two parts of one work, conceived in its final form as a unity, whether or not the original composition of the Gospel took place independently of the plan to produce the two-part work. Although there are other examples of literary compositions in two parts (Josephus, Contra Apionem, is one of the nearest parallels to Luke-Acts in time and cultural context), Luke's work appears to be unique among Christian writings and to have no close secular precedents in its combination of the stories of a religious leader and of his followers."¹⁰

". . . Luke in Acts is not merely concerned to draw a link between the time of Jesus and the time of the early church, as is commonly noticed, but also between the time of Israel and the time of Jesus and His church. Acts insists that the God who was at work in the history of his ancient people, Israel, bringing them salvation, is the same God who is at work in the church."¹¹

Unique features

Acts is the only New Testament book that continues the history begun in the Gospels. It is also an indispensable historical record for understanding the Apostle Paul's epistles; without it we could not understand some of the things he wrote. It is the only Bible book that records the historical transition from Judaism to Christianity. It provides basic information about and insight into the early church. And it challenges every modern Christian.¹²

Structure

Longenecker identified five phenomena about the structure of Acts that the reader needs to recognize to appreciate what Luke sought to communicate.

"1. It begins, like the [Third] Gospel, with an introductory section of distinctly Lukan cast dealing with the constitutive events of the Christian mission (1:1-2:41) before it sets forth the advances of the gospel in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth' (1:7).

"2. This introductory section is followed by what appears to be a thematic statement (2:42-47). This material, while often viewed as a summary of what precedes, most probably serves as the thesis paragraph for what follows.

"3. In his presentation of the advance of the Christian mission, Luke follows an essentially geographical outline that moves from Jerusalem (2:42-6:7), through Judea and Samaria (6:8-9:31), on into Palestine-Syria (9:32-12:24), then to the Gentiles in the eastern part of the Roman Empire (12:25-19:20), and finally culminates in Paul's defenses and the entrance of the gospel into Rome (19:21-28:31).

"4. In his presentation, Luke deliberately sets up a number of parallels between the ministry of Peter in the first half of Acts and that of Paul in the last half.¹³

"5. Luke includes six summary statements or progress reports' (6:7; 9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; and 28:31), each of which seems to conclude its own panel' of material.¹⁴

"Taking all these literary and structural features into account, we may conclude that Luke developed his material in Acts along the following lines:

"Introduction: The Constitutive Events of the Christian Mission (1:1-2:41)

Part I: The Christian Mission to the Jewish World (2:42-12:24)

Panel 1--The Earliest Days of the Church at Jerusalem (2:42-6:7)

Summary Statement: So the word of God spread. The number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith' (6:7).

Panel 2--Critical Events in the Lives of Three Pivotal Figures (6:8-9:31)

Summary Statement: Then the church throughout Judea, Galilee and Samaria enjoyed a time of peace. It was strengthened; and encouraged by the Holy Spirit, it grew in numbers, living in the fear of the Lord' (9:31).

Panel 3--Advances of the Gospel in Palestine-Syria (9:32-12:24)

Summary Statement: But the word of God continued to increase and spread' (12:24).

Part II: The Christian Mission to the Gentile World (12:25-28:31)

Panel 4--The First Missionary Journey and the Jerusalem Council (12:25-16:5)

Summary Statement: So the churches were strengthened in the faith and grew daily in numbers' (16:5).

Panel 5--Wide Outreach Through Two Missionary Journeys (16:6-19:20)

Summary Statement: In this way the word of the Lord spread widely and grew in power' (19:20).

Panel 6--To Jerusalem and Thence to Rome (19:21-28:31)

Summary Statement: Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ' (28:31)."¹⁵

Message¹⁶

If I were to boil down to one sentence what the Book of Acts is in the Bible to teach us, I would say this.

The message of Acts is that the church of Jesus Christ is God's instrument to glorify Himself in the present age. The subject of the Book of Acts, what is its primary focus of attention, is the church of Jesus Christ.

Acts contains three major revelations regarding the church that I would like to point out.

The first of these concerns is the origin of the church. Jesus Christ created the church.

During His earthly ministry Jesus Christ prepared for the creation of the church. He instructed His disciples with truth they did not fully understand at the time, and He demonstrated for them life that they did not fully appreciate at the time (John 14:6). We have this record in the Gospels.

After His ascension Christ poured out His Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. This was the birthday of the church. The baptism of the Spirit did something God had never done before in history. It united believers with Christ in a new relationship as fellow members of the spiritual body of Christ (John 14:17). Believers then shared the life of Christ in a way never before experienced. God united them with Him. The same Spirit of God that indwelt Him now indwells us. The unity of the church is not external: what we believe (creeds), how we organize ourselves (polity), where we meet (culture), etc. It is internal: who indwells us. The basis of our unity in the church goes back to the origin of the church. It began when the Holy Spirit first baptized believers on the day of Pentecost (1 Cor. 12:13; Rom. 8:9).

The second major revelation of the church that we receive in Acts concerns the nature of the church. The church is one with Jesus Christ. That is its nature. It shares one life with its risen Lord.

In Luke's Gospel our writer presented Jesus Christ as the Head of a new race. As Adam was the head of one race, Christ is the last Adam, the Head of a new race. As Adam was the first man, Christ is the second man, the Head of a new race. As the First-born from the dead, Christ is the Head of a new race.

In Acts we see the new race springing from the First-born from the dead. We see the brotherhood of which Christ is the elder Brother. We see the body growing of which Christ is the Head. The spiritual bonds that unite the members of Christ's race are stronger than the physical bonds that unite the members of Adam's race (Matt. 12:47-50). The members of the new race are feeble, faulty, and foolish, but they possess the life of Christ. Christ is manifesting His life through those who have become partakers of His life by Holy Spirit baptism. The nature of the church is that it is one organic whole empowered by the life of Christ. The Holy Spirit has joined us organically to Christ.

The third major revelation of the church that Acts gives us concerns the function of the church. The function of the church is to be the instrument of Jesus Christ, His hands and feet and mouth, to carry out His will in the world. What is the will of Christ? Let me point out three things that Acts emphasizes.

The will of God is the imparting of life where there is death. Jesus Christ ministers divine life through His human instruments. We see Peter, Paul, and all God's other servants in Acts, doing the same kinds of things Jesus did when He walked this earth. They even did the same types of miracles. Christ by His Spirit was working through them (1:1-2). References to their being filled with the Spirit reflect Christ's control of these people as His instruments. He wants to impart life through us too.

The will of God is also the manifestation of light where there is darkness. The light of the gospel shines through Spirit filled believers to bring the lost into the light of God's presence. In Acts we see Christ through the Holy Spirit choosing the persons to whom the gospel would go. We see Him indicating the places where the gospel would reach. We see Him initiating the processes by which the gospel would penetrate the darkness caused by Satan. This is what Christ wants to do today too. He wants to manifest light through us.

Third, the will of God is the production of love where there is apathy, bitterness, and hatred. Christ's love reaches through believers, His instruments, by the Holy Spirit. It produces in the believer love for the Lord, love for the brethren, and love for the world. We see this illustrated in Acts. This is what Christ wants to do through us: produce love.

In summary, these are three great revelations of the church in Acts. As to its origin, Jesus Christ created it (Matt. 16:18). As to its nature, the church is one with Christ (1 Cor. 12:13). As to its function, the church is the instrument of Christ. Rom. 6:13 says, "Present yourselves to God . . . and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God."

Acts also warns us of three major antagonists facing the church.

The first of these is prejudice. Prejudice means prejudging, judging on the basis of limited information.

The outstanding example of this type of opposition in Acts is the unbelieving Jews. They refused to accept the witness of the Christians. They would not tolerate the evidence the Christians presented. They became the major enemies of the church as well as missing the blessings that could have been theirs if they had acknowledged their Messiah. The church faces the same opposition today (e.g., traditional concepts as opposed to Scriptural revelation).

The root cause of this problem is lack of confidence in the Holy Spirit. Prejudice says, "I do not trust what the Holy Spirit has said in Scripture." We must always interpret experience in the light of revelation, not the other way around.

The second antagonist the church faces that Acts identifies is personal interests. By this I mean the desire for something other than the will of God.

There are several examples of this peril in Acts. Ananias and Sapphira wanted a reputation for spirituality as well as spirituality. Simon Magus wanted a supernatural gift for personal glory as well as for the glory of God. Our flesh also tempts us to serve ourselves as well as God. This is compromise.

The root cause of this problem seems to me to be lack of passive yielding to the Holy Spirit. The Spirit does not fill or control us. We are doubleminded.

A third antagonist the church faces that we also see in Acts is pride.

Two men provide perhaps the outstanding examples of this peril: Felix and Agrippa. Their desire for personal prestige determined their response to God's will. Many a person's career goals and ego needs have limited God's use of him.

The cause of this problem is lack of active obedience to the Holy Spirit. When the Spirit through His Word says "Do this," and we refuse, it is because we set our wills against His. That is pride. We need to humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God. In chapter 10 Peter said, "Not me, Lord."

These are three major perils to the church corporately as well as to Christians individually. Luke has warned us of them in Acts. They are major obstacles to Christ's building His church in the world.

Acts also presents three major lessons for the church that it should always keep in view.

First, the church's passion must be the glory of God. This was the driving motive in the lives of Peter, Paul, and the other faithful missionaries and witnesses that Luke recorded in this book. Their passion was not their own personal safety or their physical comfort, or the opportunity to relieve the sufferings of others, or the desire to create better living conditions in the world. They subordinated all these to God's glory in their hearts. We too must commit ourselves to glorifying God above everything else personally and corporately. My goal for this course is that it will glorify God.

Second, the church's governing principle must be loyalty to Christ. Again, the leaders of the early church modelled this for us. They put Christ's interests before their own. They were singleminded in their living. This is the evidence of their being filled with the Spirit. Their primary commitment was to letting His life work in and through them, and to carrying out His work, not their own. How loyal are we to Christ individually and corporately? John the Baptist said, "He must increase, but I must decrease."

Third, the church's power must be the Holy Spirit. The constant references to prayer in Acts show us how conscious the early Christians were of their dependence on God's power. They did not go out in self-confidence but in God-confidence. They called on Him to reveal Christ's life in and through them (4:24-30). They called on Him to direct Christ's works in and through them (12:12; 20:36). We must not only be obedient and yielded to the Holy Spirit but also dependent on Him because He is our power individually and corporately (John 15:5). I'll be praying for you this semester. Please pray for me.

Finally I would like to leave you with three challenges that grow out of the emphases of Acts.

First, what is your motivation? Why do you do what you do? What motivated the Spirit filled believers in Acts was the desire that God get the glory above everything else. Who do you want to get the credit for what you do?

Second, what is your method? How do you do what you do? Our models in Acts cooperated with God so Christ could work through them by His Holy Spirit. This involved having confidence in His revelation, yielding to His will, obeying His Word, and depending on His Holy Spirit.

Third, what is your emphasis? What do you do? In Acts the leaders of the church gave priority to what is most important to God, not to what was most important to them personally. Furthermore they emphasized the essentials, not the incidentals. Let's not get so fascinated with the incidentals, such as how God manifested His power (healings, speaking in tongues, etc.), that we fail to give priority to the essentials. One essential is that He is powerful enough to do anything to accomplish His purposes. Let's give ourselves to the task before us wholeheartedly and enthusiastically (Matt. 28:19-20; Acts 1:8).

Constable: Acts (Outline)

Outline

I. The witness in Jerusalem 1:1-6:7

A. The founding of the church 1:1-2:46

1. The resumptive preface to the book 1:1-5

2. The command to witness 1:6-8

3. The ascension of Jesus 1:9-11

4. Jesus' appointment of a twelfth apostle 1:12-26

5. The birth of the church 2:1-41

6. The early state of the church 2:42-46

B. The expansion of the church in Jerusalem 3:1-6:7

1. External opposition 3:1-4:31

2. Internal compromise 4:32-5:11

3. Intensified external opposition 5:12-42

4. Internal conflict 6:1-7

II. The witness in Judea and Samaria 6:8-9:31

A. The martyrdom of Stephen 6:8-8:1a

1. Stephen's arrest 6:8-7:1

2. Stephen's address 7:2-53

3. Stephen's death 7:54-8:1a

B. The ministry of Philip 8:1b-40

1. The evangelization of Samaria 8:1b-25

2. Philip's ministry to the Ethiopian eunuch 8:26-40

C. The mission of Saul 9:1-31

1. Saul's conversion and calling 9:1-19a

2. Saul's initial conflicts 9:19b-30

3. The church at peace 9:31

III. The witness to the uttermost part of the earth 9:32-28:31

A. The extension of the church to Syrian Antioch 9:32-12:24

1. Peter's ministry in Lydda and Joppa 9:32-43

2. The conversion of Cornelius 10:1-11:18

3. The initiatives of the Antioch church 11:19-30

4. The persecution of the Jerusalem church 12:1-24

B. The extension of the church to Cyprus and Asia Minor 12:25-16:5

1. The divine appointment of Barnabas and Saul 12:25-13:3

2. The mission to Cyprus 13:4-12

3. The mission to Asia Minor 13:13-14:25

4. Paul and Barnabas' return to Antioch of Syria 14:26-28

5. The Jerusalem Council 15:1-35

6. The strengthening of the Gentile churches 15:36-16:5

C. The extension of the church to the Aegean shores 16:6-19:20

1. The call to Macedonia 16:6-10

2. The ministry in Macedonia 16:11-17:15

3. The ministry in Achaia 17:16-18:17

4. The beginning of ministry in Asia 18:18-22

5. The results of ministry in Asia 18:23-19:20

D. The extension of the church to Rome 19:21-28:31

1. Ministry on the way to Jerusalem 19:21-21:16

2. Ministry in Jerusalem 21:17-23:32

3. Ministry in Caesarea 23:33-26:32

4. Ministry on the way to Rome 27:1-28:15

5. Ministry in Rome 28:16-31

Constable: Acts

Acts

Bibliography

Albright, William Foxwell. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed. Pelican Archaeology series. Harmondswroth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1956.

Alexander, Joseph Addison. Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, n.d.

Alexander, L. C. A. "Luke's Preface in the Context of Greek Preface-Writing." Novum Testamentum 18 (1986):48-74.

Allen, Roland. Missionary Methods: St. Paul's or Ours? 2nd American ed., Chicago, Moody Press, 1959.

Allis, Oswald T. Prophecy and the Church. Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1945.

The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1974.

Archer, Gleason L. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Regency Reference Library, 1982.

Ballance, M. The Site of Derbe: A New Inscription. Anatolian Studies series. London: British Institute of Archaeology at Ankora, 1957.

Bammel, Ernst. "Jewish Activity against Christians in Palestine according to Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 357-64. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Barclay, William. The Acts of the Apostles. Daily Study Bible series. 2nd ed. and reprint ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1962.

Barker, Kenneth L. "The Scope and Center of Old and New Testament Theology and Hope." In Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition, pp. 293-328. Edited by Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Barnhouse, Donald G. God's River. Vol. IV in Exposition of Bible Doctrines. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1958.

Barrett, C. K. "The Apostolic Decree of Acts 15.29." Australian Biblical Review 35 (1987):50-59.

_____. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. Vol. 1. The International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1994.

_____. The New Testament Background: Selected Documents. New York: Harper & Row, 1961.

Bauckham, Richard. "James and the Jerusalem Church." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 415-80. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Bellshaw, William G. "The Confusion of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:478 (April-June 1963):145-53.

Berghuis, Kent D. "A Biblical Perspective on Fasting." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:629 (January-March 2001):86-103.

Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. 4th revised ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1959.

Blaiklock, E. M. The Acts of the Apostles. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. London: Tyndale Press, 1959; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1979.

Blaising, Craig. A. "The Extent and Varieties of Dispensationalism." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 9-56. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

_____. "The Fulfillment of the Biblical Covenants Through Jesus Christ." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 174-211. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

_____. "The Kingdom of God in the New Testament." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 232-83. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

Bock, Darrell L. "Evidence from Acts." In A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 181-98. Edited by Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992.

_____. "Jesus as Lord in Acts and in the Gospel Message." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:570 (April-June 1986):146-54.

_____. "The Reign of the Lord Christ." In Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition, pp. 37-67. Edited by Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

_____. "A Theology of Luke-Acts." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 87-166. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Boice, James Montgomery. Foundations of the Christian Faith. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1986.

Bruce, F. F. "Chronological Questions in the Acts of the Apostles." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 68:2 (Spring 1986):273-95.

_____. Commentary on The Book of Acts. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

_____. "The Church of Jerusalem in the Acts of the Apostles." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67:2 (Spring 1985):641-61.

_____. The Epistle to the Galatians. New International Greek Testament Commentary series. Exeter, England: Paternoster Press, 1982; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

_____. "Paul's Apologetic and the Purpose of Acts." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library 39:2 (Spring 1987):379-93.

Brunner, Emil. The Misunderstanding of the Church. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1953.

Burns, J. Lanier. "A Reemphasis on the Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 132:527 (July-September 1975):242-49.

Burton, Ernest DeWitt. "The Politarchs." American Journal of Theology 2 (1898):598-632.

Butcher, J. Kevin. "A Critique of The Gospel According to Jesus." Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 2:1 (Spring 1989):27-43.

Cadbury, Henry J. The Book of Acts in History. London: Black, 1955.

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Vols. XXI and XXII in The Library of Christian Classics. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960.

Campbell, Donald K. "Paul's Ministry at Ephesus--A Devotional Study." Bibliotheca Sacra 118:472 (October-December 1961):304-10.

Capper, Brian. "The Palestinian Cultural Context of Earliest Christian Community of Goods." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 323-56. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Carroll, J. Response to the End of History: Eschatology and Situation in Luke-Acts. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989.

Carson, Donald A. Exegetical Fallacies. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984.

Casson, Lionel. Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World. Princeton: University Press, 1971.

Catalog of Oral Roberts University. Tulsa, Ok: Oral Roberts University, 1973.

Chafer, Lewis S. Grace. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1922.

_____. He That Is Spiritual. Findlay, Oh.: Dunham Publishing Co., 1819.

_____. Salvation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1917.

_____. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1947-48.

Chase, F. H. The Credibility of the Acts of the Apostles. London: Macmillan Co., 1902.

Cocoris, G. Michael. Evangelism: A Biblical Approach. Chicago: Moody Press, 1984.

_____. "John MacArthur, Jr's, System of Salvation: An Evaluation of the Book, The Gospel According to Jesus." Glendora, CA: By the Author, 1989.

_____. Lordship Salvation--Is It Biblical? Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1983.

Cohen, Shaye J. D. "Was Timothy Jewish (Acts 16:1-3)? Patristic Exegesis, Rabbinic Law, and Matrilineal Descent." Journal of Biblical Literature 105:2 (June 1986):251-68.

Cole, Dan P. "Corinth & Ephesus." Bible Review 4:6 (December 1988):20-30.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

_____. "The Gospel Message." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 201-17. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

_____. "What Prayer Will and Will Not Change." In Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost, pp. 99-113. Edited by Stanley D. Toussaint and Charles H. Dyer. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Conybeare, W. J. and Howson, J. S. The Life and Epistles of St. Paul. New ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964.

Criswell, W. A. Acts. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

Crocker, Piers T. "The City of Meroe and the Ethiopian Eunuch." Buried History 22:3 (September 1986):53-72.

Croy, N. Clayton. "Hellenistic Philosophies and the Preaching of the Resurrection (Acts 17:18, 32)." Novum Testamentum 39:1 (1997):21-39.

Culver, Robert Duncan. "Apostles and the Apostolate in the New Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 134:534 (April-June 1977):131-43.

Dalman, Gustaf H.. The Words of Jesus. Translated by D. M. Kay. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1909.

Dana, H. E., and Mantey, Julius R. A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament. New York: Macmillan, 1955.

Darby, John Nelson. Meditations on the Acts of the Apostles. London: G. Moorish, n.d.

_____. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Dean, David A. "A Study of the Enthronement of Christ in Acts 2 and 3." Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1992.

Deere, Jack. Surprised by the Power of the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Deissmann, Adolf. Light From the Ancient East. Revised ed. Translated by Lionel R. M. Strachan. Grand Rapids: Baker Book Houst, 1965.

_____. Paul: A Study in Social and Religious History. Translated by William E. Wilson. Harper Torchbook ed. New York: Harper and Row, Harper Torchbooks, 1957.

deSilva, David A. "Paul and the Stoa: A Comparison." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 38:4 (December 1995):549-64.

_____. "Paul's Sermon in Antioch of Pisidia." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):32-49.

Detwiler, David F. "Paul's Approach to the Great Commission in Acts 14:21-23." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:605 (January-March 1995):33-41.

de Waard, J. A. A Comparative Study of the Old Testament Text in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the New Testament. Leiden: Brill, 1965.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S.v. "Acts of the Apostles," by Kirsopp Lake.

Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S.v. "Acts of the Apostles," by A. C. Headham.

_____. S.v. "The Chronology of the New Testament," by C. H. Turner.

_____. S.v. "Temple," by W. T. Davies.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

_____. Speaking in Tongues: Seven Crucial Questions. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1980.

"Doctrinal Statement of Dallas Theological Seminary." Dallas Theological Seminary 1988-89 Catalog.

Documents of the Christian Church. Edited by Henry Bettenson. Second ed. London, Oxford, and New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

Dodd, C. H. According to the Scriptures. London: Nisbet, 1952.

Dunn, James D. G. Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1970.

Edgar, Thomas R. "The Cessation of the Sign Gifts." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:580 (October-December 1988):371-86.

_____. Miraculous Gifts. Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1983.

English, E. Schuyler. "Was St. Peter Ever in Rome?" Bibliotheca Sacra 124:496 (October-December 1967):314-20.

Eusebius. The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus. Twin Brooks series. Popular ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Falk, Daniel K. "Jewish Prayer Literature and the Jerusalem Church." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 267-301. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Feldman, Louis H. "The Omnipresence of the God-Fearers." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:5 (September-October 1986):58-63.

Fiensy, David A. "The Composition of the Jerusalem Church." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 213-36. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Finegan, Jack. The Archaeology of the New Testament. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.

Foakes-Jackson, F. J. The Acts of the Apostles. Moffat New Testament Commentary series. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1931; reprint ed. 1960.

Foakes-Jackson, F. J. and Lake, Kirsopp. The Acts of the Apostles. Part I of The Beginnings of Christianity, vols. 4 and 5. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965

Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. "Israel and the Church." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 113-30. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology. Tustin, Cal.: Ariel Ministries Press, 1989.

Fung, Ronald Y. K. The Epistle to the Galatians. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1988.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Acts of the Apostles: An Exposition. New York: Our Hope, 1912.

_____. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1970.

Gangel, Kenneth O. "Paul's Areopagus Speech." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:508 (October-December 1970):308-12.

Gentry, K. L. "The Great Option: A Study of the Lordship Controversy." Baptist Reformation Review 5 (1976):49-79.

Gerlach, Joel C. "Glossolalia." Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 70:4 (October 1973):233-61.

Gill, David W. J. "Acts and Roman Policy in Judaea." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 15-26. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Goodspeed, Edgar J. "Gaius Titius Justus." Journal of Biblical Literature 69:4 (December 1950):382-83.

Grant, F. W. The Numerical Bible. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Gromacki, Robert G. The Modern Tongues Movement. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1967; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, n.d.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Haenchen, Ernst. The Acts of the Apostles. Translated by R. McL. Wilson. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971.

Harm, Frederick R. "Structural Elements Related to the Gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts." Concordia Journal 14:1 (January 1988):28-41.

Harnack, Adolph. The Date of the Acts and of the Synoptic Gospels. Translated by J. R. Wilkinson. London: Williams & Norgate, 1911.

_____. The Mission and Expansion of Christianity. 2 vols. Translated by J. Moffatt. London: Williams & Norgate, 1908.

Hays, J. Daniel. "The Cushites: A Black Nation in the Bible." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-December 1996):396-409.

Heater, Homer, Jr. "Evidence from Joel and Amos." In A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 147-64. Edited by Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992.

Helyer, Larry R. "Luke and the Restoration of Israel." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 36:3 (September 1993):317-29.

Hengel, Martin. "The Geography of Palestine in Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 27-78. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Herodotus. 4 vols. With an English translation by A. D. Godley. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, and London: William Heinemann, 1960.

Hesner, Colin. "The Name of Felix Again." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 31 (October 1987):45-49.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. Working With God: Scriptural Studies in Intercession. New York: Carlton Press, 1987.

Hodges, Zane C. Absolutely Free! A Biblical Reply to Lordship Salvation. Dallas: Redencion Viva, and Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1989.

_____. "A Dispensational Understanding of Acts 2." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 167-80. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. The Gospel Under Seige. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

_____. "The Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:479 (July-September 1963):226-33.

_____. Review of "A Review of The Gospel According to Jesus, by Darrell L. Bock in Bibliotheca Sacra, January-March 1989, pp. 21-40." Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 2:1(Spring 1989):79-83.

Hoehner, Harold W. Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ. Grand Rapid: Zondervan Publishing House, 1977.

_____. "Chronology of the Apostolic Age." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1965.

_____. "The Duration of the Egyptian Bondage." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):306-16.

Homer. The Odyssey. 2 vols. With an English translation by A. T. Murray. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, and London: William Heinemann, 1946.

Hook, H. Phillip. "A Biblical Definition of Faith." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:482 (April-June 1964):133-40.

Horsley, Richard A. "High Priests and the Politics of Roman Palestine." Journal for the Study of Judaism 17:1 (June 1986):23-55.

Ice, Thomas D. "Dispensational Hermeneutics." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 29-49. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. S.v. "Acts of the Apostles," by A. T. Robertson.

Ironside, Harry A. Except Ye Repent. New York: American Tract Society, 1937.

_____. Lectures on the Book of Acts. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1943.

Jeremias, Joachim. Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus. Translated by F. H. and C. H. Cave. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969.

_____. "Untersuchungen zum Quellenproblem der Apostelgeschichte." Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschrift 36 (1937):208-13.

Jewett, Robert A. A Chronology of Paul's Life. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979.

Jewish Encyclopedia. S. v. "Alexandrians in Jerusalem," by Emil Schürer.

Johnson, Elliott E. "Hermeneutical Principles and the Interpretation of Psalm 110." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:596 (October-December 1992):428-37.

Johnson, John E. "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.

Johnson, S. Lewis, Jr. "The Gift of Tongues and the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:480 (October-December 1963):309-11.

_____. "How Faith Works." Christianity Today 33:13 (September 22, 1989):21-25.

Jones, A. H. M. Studies in Roman Government and Law. New York: Praeger, 1960.

Jones, Bruce. "Real Repentance." Moody Monthly 88:2 (October 1987):21-23.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews and The Wars of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. Back Toward the Future: Hints for Interpreting Biblical Prophecy. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1989.

Kent, Homer A., Jr. Jerusalem to Rome. New Testament Studies series. Brethren Missionary Herald, 1972; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House and BMH Books, 1985.

Ladd, George E. "Acts." In Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1123-78. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

_____. A Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1974.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol 9: John--Acts, by J. P. Lange and Gotthard Victor Lechler. Translated by Philip Schaff and Charles F. Schaeffer.

Larkin, William J., Jr. "The Recovery of Luke-Acts as Grand Narrative' for the Church's Evangelistic and Edification Tasks in a Postmodern Age." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:3 (September 2000):405-15.

Law, Robert. The Tests of Life. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1909.

Lawrence, William D. "The New Testament Doctrine of the Lordship of Christ." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1968.

Lawson, Steven J. "The Priority of Biblical Preaching: An Expository Study of Acts 2:42-47." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:630 (April-June 2001):198-217.

Légasse, Simon. "Paul's Pre-Christian Career according to Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 365-90. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Lenski, R. C. H. The Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1964.

Levinskaya, Irena. The Book of Acts in Its Diaspora Setting. Vol. 5 of The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting, edited by Bruce W. Winter. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1996.

Lewellen, Thomas G. "Has Lordship Salvation Been Taught throughout Church History?" Bibliotheca Sacra 147:585 (January-March 1990):54-68.

Lightner, Robert P. Speaking in Tongues and Divine Healing. 2nd ed. Schaumburg, Il: Regular Baptist Press, 1978.

Longenecker, Richard N.. "The Acts of the Apostles." In John-Acts. Vol. 9 of Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

_____. Paul, Apostle of Liberty. New York: Harper & Row, 1964.

Lumby, J. Rawson. The Acts of the Apostles. Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1885.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979.

_____. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

_____. The Gospel According to Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1988.

_____. Justification by Faith. Chicago: Moody Press, 1984.

Macartney, Clarence E. N. Paul the Man. Westwood, NJ: Fleming H. Revell, 1961.

MacLennan, Robert S. and A. Thomas Kraabel. "The God-Fearers--A Literary and Theological Invention." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:5 (September-October 1986):46-53.

Maile, John F. "The Ascension in Luke-Acts." Tyndale Bulletin 37 (1986):29-59.

Malina, Bruce J. "Religion' in the World of Paul." Biblical Theology Bulletin 16:3 (July 1986):92-101.

Malphurs, Aubrey M. "A Theological Critique of the Churches of Christ Doctrine of Soteriology." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1981.

Man, Ronald E. "The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation." Bibliotheca Sacra 141:562 (April-June 1984):146-57.

Manek, Jindrich. "The New Exodus in the Books of Luke." Novum Testamentum 2 (1957):8-23.

Manson, T. W. Studies in the Gospels and Epistles. Edited by Matthew Black. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962.

Marshall, I. Howard. "Acts and the Former Treatis.'" In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting, pp. 163-182. Edited by Bruce W. Winter and Andrew D. Clarke. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

_____. The Acts of the Apostles. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Reprint ed. Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, and Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

Mason, Steve. "Chief Priests, Sadducees, Pharisees and Sanhedrin in Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 115-77. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

McClain, Alva J. The Greatness of the Kingdom. Reprint ed. Winona Lake, In.: BMH Books, 1974.

McGee, J. Vernon. Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee. 5 vols. Pasadena: Thru the Bible Radio, 1983.

McGrath, Alister E. "Apologetics to the Romans." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:620 (October-December 1998):387-93.

McIntyre, Luther B., Jr. "Baptism and Forgiveness in Acts 2:38." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:609 (January-March 1996):53-62.

McLean, John A. "Did Jesus Correct the Disciples' View of the Kingdom?" Bibliotheca Sacra 151:602 (April-June 1994):215-27.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. Revised by C. S. C. Willilams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Meisner, Donald R. "Chiasm and the Composition and Message of Paul's Missionary Sermons." S.T.D. thesis, Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago, 1974.

_____. "The Missionary Journeys Narrative: Patterns and Implications." In Perspectives on Luke-Acts, pp. 199-214. Edited by Charles H. Talbert. Danville, Va: Association of Baptist Professors of Religion, 1978.

Merrill, Eugene H. "Paul's Use of About 450 Years' in Acts 13:20." Bibliotheca Sacra 138:551 (July-September 1981):246-57.

Metzger, Bruce M. "St. Paul and the Magicians." Princeton Seminary Bulletin 38 (1944):27-30.

Meyer, F. B. Paul: A Servant of Jesus Christ. London: Morgan and Scott, n.d.

The Mishnah. Translated by Herbert Danby. London: Oxford University Press, 1933.

Moore, Thomas S. "To the End of the Earth': The Geographical and Ethnic Univarsalism of Acts 1:8 in Light of Isaianic Influence on Luke." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:3 (September 1997):389-99.

Morgan, G. Campbell. The Acts of the Apostles. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1924; reprint ed., London: Pickering and Inglis, 1965.

_____. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Moule, C. F. D. "Once More, Who Were the Hellenists?" Expository Times 70 (October 1958-September 1959):100-2.

Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome. "The Cenacle--Topographical Setting for Acts 2:44-45." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 303-22. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

_____. "On the Road and on the Sea with St. Paul." Bible Review 1:2 (Summer 1985):38-47.

Murray, George W. "Paul's Corporate Evangelism in the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:618 (April-June 1998):189-200.

Murray, John. Redemption--Accomplished and Applied. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1955.

"Must Christ be Lord to be Savior?" Eternity, September 1959, pp. 14-18, 36-37, 48.

Neil, William, The Acts of the Apostles. New Century Bible Commentary series. London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, 1973; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, 1981.

The New Bible Dictionary. Edited by J. D. Douglas. 1962 ed. S.v. "Cilicia," by E. M. B. Green.

_____. Edited by J. D. Douglas. 1962 ed. S.v. "Judas Iscariot," by R. P. Martin.

The New Scofield Reference Bible. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelien, William Culbertson, et al. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

The New Testament in Modern English. Translated by J. B. Phillips. New York: Macmillan Co., 1958.

The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. First series. Edited by Philip Schaff. 14 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978.

O'Connor, E. D. The Pentecostal Movement in the Catholic Church. Notre Dame: Ave Maria Press, 1971.

Orr, J. Edwin. The Fervent Prayer: The Worldwide Impact of the Great Awakening of 1858. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

O'Toole, Robert F. "Acts 2:30 and the Davidic Covenant of Pentecost." Journal of Biblical Literature 102:2 (1983):245-58.

Packer, James I. Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God. Downers Grove, Il: InterVarsity Press, 1961.

Palmer, D. W. "The Literary Background of Acts 1.1-14." New Testament Studies 33:3 (July 1987):427-38.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. "The Apostles' Use of Jesus' Predictions of Judgment on Jerusalem in A.D. 70." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 134-43. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1990.

Peterson, David. "The Motif of Fulfilment and Purpose of Luke-Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting, pp. 83-104. Edited by Bruce W. Winter and Andrew D. Clarke. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

Philostratus. The Life of Appollonius. 2 vols. With an English translation by F. C. Conybeare. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: London: William Heinemann, and New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1921.

Pink, Arthur W. Studies on Saving Faith. Swengel, Pa: Reiner Publications, n.d.

Pocock, Michael. "The Role of Encouragement in Leadership." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 301-7. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Pollock, A. J. The Apostle Paul and His Missionary Labors. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

Praeder, Susan Marie. "The Problem of First Person Narration in Acts." Novum Testamentum 29:3 (July 1987):193-218.

Price, J. Randall. "Prophetic Postponement in Daniel 9 and Other Texts." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 133-65. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Rackham, Richard Belward. The Acts of the Apostles. Westminster Commentaries series. 9th ed. London: Methuen and Co., 1922.

Ramm, Bernard. Rapping about the Spirit. Waco: Word Books, 1974.

Ramsay, William M. The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953.

_____. The Church in the Roman Empire. 3rd ed. London: Hoddar and Stoughton, 1894.

_____. Pictures of the Apostolic Church. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1910.

_____. St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. London: Hoddar and Stoughton, 1897; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1960.

Reinhardt, Wolfgang. "The Population Size of Jerusalem and the Numerical Growth of the Jerusalem Church" In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 237-65. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Richard, Ramesh. "Soteriological Inclusivism and Dispensationalism." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):85-108.

Riesner, Rainer. "Synagogues in Jerusalem." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 179-211. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Roberts, C.; Skeat, T. C.; and Nock, A. D. "The Guild of Zeus Hypsistos." Harvard Theological Review 29 (1936):39-88.

Robertson, Archibald, and Plummer, Alfred. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians. International Critical Commentary series. Second ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Rogers, Cleon L., Jr. "The Davidic Covenant in Acts-Revelation." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March):71-84.

_____. "The Davidic Covenant in the Gospels." Bibliotheca Sacra 150:600 (October-December 1993):458-78.

Rosner, Brian S. "Acts and Biblical History." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting, pp. 65-82. Edited by Bruce W. Winter and Andrew D. Clarke. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

Ross, Bob L. Acts 2:38 and Baptismal Regeneration. Pasadena, TX.: Pilgrim Publications, 1976.

Ruble, Richard L. "The Doctrine of Dreams." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:500 (October-December 1968):360-64.

Russell, Walt. "The Anointing with the Holy Spirit in Luke-Acts." Trinity Journal 7NS (Spring 1986):47-63.

Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. The Acts of the Apostles. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1961.

_____. Balancing the Christian Life. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969.

_____. The Basis of the Premillennial Faith. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1953.

_____. "The Christian and Civil Disobedience." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:506 (April-June 1970):153:62.

_____. Dispensationalism. Chicago: Moody Press, 1995.

_____. Dispensationalism Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

_____. "The End of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September 1967):243.

_____. So Great Salvation. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1989.

_____. You Mean the Bible Teaches That . . . Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Sanders, John. "Inclusivism." In What about Those Who Have Never Heard? Three Views on the Destiny of the Unevangelized, pp. 21-55. Edited by John Sanders. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1995.

Sarles, Ken L. "All Power & Signs." Kindred Spirit 13:2 (Summer 1989):8-11.

_____. "An Appraisal of the Signs and Wonders Movement." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1988):57-82.

_____. "A Theological Evaluation of the Prosperity Gospel." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):329-52.

Saucy, Robert L. The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

_____. "The Presence of the Kingdom and the Life of the Church." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1987):30-46.

Schwartz, Joshua. "Peter and Ben Stada in Lydda." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 391-414. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Scofield, C. I. Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth. 1896; reprint ed. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

Schürer, Emil. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1979.

Sherrill, John. They Shall Speak with Other Tongues. Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1964.

Showers, Renald E. Maranatha Our Lord, Come: A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church. Bellmawr, Pa.: Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, 1995.

Smith, James. The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul. London: Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1848.

Stagg, Frank. The Book of Acts. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1955.

Stewart, James S. A Man in Christ. Reprint ed. London: Hoddar and Stoughton, 1964.

Stonehouse, Ned. "The Gift of the Holy Spirit." Westminster Theological Journal 13 (1949-51):1-15.

Stott, John R. W. Basic Christianity. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. The Message of Acts. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1990.

Strabo. Geography. 8 vols. With an English translation by Horace Leonard Jones. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, and London: William Heinemann, 1960.

Strom, Mark R. "An Old Testament Background to Acts 12. 20-23." New Testament Studies 32:2 (April 1986):289-92.

Suetonius. "The Deified Claudius." In The Lives of the Caesars. Translated by J. C. Rolfe. The Loeb Classical Lubrary. Cambridge, Mass.: and London: Harvard University Press, 1939.

Swindoll, Charles. "Dallas's New Dispensation." Christianity Today, October 25, 1993, pp. 14-15.

Sylva, Dennis D. "The Meaning and Function of Acts 7:46-50." Journal of Biblical Literature 106:2 (1987):261-75.

Tacitus. The Histories. The Loeb Classical Library series. Translated by Clifford H. Moore. London: William Heinemann Ltd., New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1931.

Talbert, Charles H. Literary Patterns, Theological Themes, and the Genre of Luke-Acts. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1974.

_____. Luke and the Gnostics. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1966.

Tannehill, Robert C. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary Interpretation. Vol. 2: The Acts of the Apostles. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990.

Tannenbaum, Robert F. "Jews and God-Fearers in the Holy City of Aphradite." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:5 (September-October 1986):54-57.

Tanton, Lanny T. "The Gospel and Water Baptism: A Study of Acts 2:38." Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 3:1 (Spring 1990):27-52.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. S.v. "kyrios," by Werner Foerster.

_____. S.v. "pneuma . . .," by Eduard Schweizer.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, W. H. Griffith. The Acts of the Apostles: Outline Studies in Primitive Christianity. Chicago: Bible Institute Colportage Association, n.d.

Toussaint, Stanley D. "Acts." In Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, pp. 349-432. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

_____. "The Contingency of the Coming of the Kingdom." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 222-37. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Treier, Daniel J. "The Fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32: A Multiple-Lens Approach." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:1 (March 1997):13-26.

Trites, Allison A. "Church Growth in the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:578 (April-June 1988):162-73.

Unger, Merrill F. "Archaeology and Paul's Visit to Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe." Bibliotheca Sacra 118:470 (April-June 1961):107-12.

_____. The Baptizing Work of the Holy Spirit. Chicago: Scripture Press, 1953.

_____. "Historical Research and the Church at Thessalonica." Bibliotheca Sacra 119:473 (January-March 1962):38-44.

_____. "Pisidian Antioch and Gospel Penetration of the Greek World." Bibliotheca Sacra 118:469 (January-March 1961):46-53.

_____. "The Significance of Pentecost." Bibliotheca Sacra 122:486 (April-June 1965):169-77.

_____. Zechariah. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1963.

Unger's Bible Dictionary. Edited by Merrill F. Unger. 1957 ed. S.v. "Herod," by S. L. Bowman.

van Ommeren, Nicholas M. "Was Luke an Accurate Historian? Bibliotheca Sacra 148:589 (January-March 1991):57-71.

van Unnik, W. C. Tarsus or Jerusalem: The City of Paul's Youth. Translated by G. Ogg. London: Epworth, 1962.

Walvoord, John F. "The Ascension of Christ." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:481 (January-March 1964):3-12.

_____. "Biblical Kingdoms Compared and Contrasted." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 75-91. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. The Holy Spirit at Work Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1973.

_____. Jesus Christ Our Lord. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969.

Warfield, Benjamin B. Counterfeit Miracles. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1918; reprint ed., London: Banner of Truth Trust, 1972.

Weinert, Francis D. "Luke, Stephen, and the Temple in Luke-Acts." Biblical Theology Bulletin 17:3 (July 1987):88-90.

Wenham, John. "The Identification of Luke." Evangelical Quarterly 63:1 (1991):3-44.

Wilkin, Robert N. "An Exegetical Evaluation of the Perseverance of the Saints." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1982.

_____. "Did H. A. Ironside Teach Commitment Salvation?" Grace Evangelical Society News 4:6 (June 1989):1, 3.

_____. "Repentance and Salvation." Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 1:1 (Autumn 1988):11-20; 2:1 (Spring 1989):13-26.

_____. "Repentance and Salvation: A Key Gospel Issue." Grace Evangelical Society News 3:6 (June-July 1988):3.

Williams, Ernest Swing. Systematic Theology. 3 vols. Springfield, Mo: Gospel Publishing House, 1953.

Williams, Margaret H. "Palestinian Jewish Personal Names in Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 79-113. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Wimber, John. Power Evangelism. San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers, 1986.

Winter, B. W. "Providentia for the Widows of 1 Timothy 5:3-16." Tyndale Bulletin 39 (1988):93-99.

Woodbridge, Charles J. A Study of the Book of Acts. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1955.

Zimmerman, Charles. "To This Agree the Words of the Prophets." Grace Journal 4:3 (Fall 1963):28-40.

Zuck, Roy B. "Cheap Grace?" Kindred Spirit 13:2 (Summer 1989):4-7.

_____. "The Doctrine of Conscience." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):329-40.

Zweck, Dean W. "The Areopagus Speech of Acts 17." Lutheran Theological Journal 21:3 (December 1987):111-22.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Acts (Book Introduction)

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.

INTRODUCTION.

St. Luke, who had published his gospel, wrote also a second volume, which, from the first ages, hath been called the Acts of the Apostles. Not that we can look upon this work, as a history of what was done by all the apostles, who were dispersed in different nations; but we have here a short view of the first establishment of the Christian Church, a small part of St. Peter's preaching and actions, set down in the first twelve chapters, and a more particular account of St. Paul's apostolical labours, in the following chapters, for about thirty years, till the year 63, and the 4th year of Nero, where these acts end. (Witham) --- St. Luke, after giving us the history of the life, actions, miracles, sufferings, and instructions of Jesus Christ, in his gospel, here give us the life and actions of the apostles, the primitive Christians, and particularly all that relates to St. Paul, by way of an appendix. And what could he give more useful or more important to the Church, whether we consider the noble examples he offers for our imitation, or the excellent lessons for our improvement in spiritual wisdom? He describes in this book the accomplishment of many things that had been predicted by Jesus Christ, the descent of the Holy Ghost, the prodigious change effected in the minds and hearts of the apostles: we behold here the model of Christian perfection, in the lives of the first Christians, and the practice of the most eminent virtues, in the conduct of the blessed apostles; the miraculous operations of the holy Spirit, in the conversion of the Gentiles, and this wonder of wonders, the foundation of the holy Catholic Church, the establishment of the spiritual kingdom of God promised through all the inspired oracles, and the daily addition which the Lord made to his Church, of such as should be saved. (chap. 2. ver. 47. and chap. xv. ver. 5.) --- St. Luke has entitled this work, the Acts of the Apostles, that we may seek therein, says St. John Chrysostom, (tom. 5. hom. xii.) not so much the miracles that the apostles performed, as their good deeds, and eminent virtues. In appearing to give us a simple history, says St. Jerome, this holy physician furnishes us with as many remedies, to cure the maladies of our souls, as he gives us words for our instruction. (Ep. 103.) --- It is thought, that his principal design was to oppose to the false acts of the apostles, that were then in circulation, a true and authentic history of the actions of St. Peter and St. Paul. The Catholic Church has ever held this work in such great esteem, that it has not only superseded every pretended history of the kind, that preceded it, but also every ascititious one that has succeeded it. (St. Augustine, de consen. Evang. lib. iv. chap. 8.) --- It is very probable, that St. Luke wrote his acts at Rome, whilst he was near St. Paul, during the time of his confinement, for he remained with him till his deliverance. There can be no doubt that the work was written in Greek, and in a more pure and polished style, than we find in any other writings of the New Testament. St. Luke generally cites the Septuagint, apparently because he was ignorant of the Hebrew; and because, St. Paul more frequently having to preach to the Gentiles, preferred citing the sacred text in the language known in common, sooner than in Hebrew, which was understood by few. See St. Jerome, in Isai. vi. and again, tradit. Hebr. in Genes. 45. --- The Catholic Church has ever admitted this book into the canon of Scriptures; though many heretics, says St. Augustine, have rejected it. (ep. 253. and lib. de util. cred. 7.) St. John Chrysostom, (hom. i. in Acta) complains, that this book, in his time, was not sufficiently attended to, which he esteems as no less useful than the gospel itself. Erasmus, in his preface to the Acts, says, that he had, in the first instance, some notion of adding this book to St. Luke's gospel, as they are both addressed to the same person, and the Acts are not inconsiderable part of the sacred history; for, as the gospel shews the seed committed to the earth, and sown in the field, the Acts represent it as taking root, shooting up, and producing its fruit. --- The Acts have not uniformly held the same place in the Testament which they hold at present. Sometimes this book was inserted immediately before the book of Revelation, as St. Augustine and others insinuate. At other times, we find it between the epistles of St. Paul and the canonical epistles. Some persons express their surprise, that St. Luke, who was the inseparable companion of St. Paul, has not given the account of St. Paul's martyrdom. St. John Chrysostom (hom. i. in Acta) gives an excellent solution: "the apostles, and other apostolic men, wrote little, but did a great deal." The martyrdom of St. Paul, that took place in the public theatre of Rome itself, and before the eyes of all the Christians of this capital of the world, could not remain unknown, but the voyages and other circumstances of his life, too useful to the Church to be suffered to pass into oblivion, called for the exertions of St. Luke's eloquent pen, which, though admirably accommodated to an historic design, is not wholly free from Hebraisms, and Syriacisms. The Acts of the Apostles include the history of the infant Church, from the day of our Lord's ascension into heaven, till the deliverance of St. Paul, two years after his arrival at Rome, i.e. a space of thirty years, from the year 33, to the year 63 of Jesus Christ, or from the 19th year of Tiberius, till the 9th year of Nero. This golden book paints, as it were, the face of the primeval Christian Church; it places before our eyes the singular providence of God, in founding and protecting his Church, and how the apostles, (in spite of every opposition of the armed power of the whole world, to oppress the gospel,) without any foreign assistance of learning, credit, power, or expectation of any temporal advantages, but relying solely on the power of truth, and the virtue of the holy Spirit, laboured in the propagation of the faith, without intermission, till the power of God, under the ignominy of the cross, became eventually triumphant. See Wm. Whitfield Dakins, LL.D. in his prolegomena. --- It may be divided into four parts. In the first eight chapters, St. Luke gives the origin and progress of the Christian Church among the Jews. From the 9th to the 16th, he shews how widely it was spread among the Gentiles: from the 16th to the 20th, the diverse peregrinations of St. Paul, till his last journey to Jerusalem: and from the 20th to the end, with what patience he underwent innumerable sufferings, trials, and indignities, with what magnanimity he had head against the violent surges of persecution, and his astonishing equanimity under every possible calamity. --- This account, which is not continued beyond his two years' imprisonment in Rome, contains a general sketch of the history of the Church during the epoch it describes of thirty years. The leading facts therein contained are, the choice of Matthias to be an apostles, in the room of Judas; the descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost; the preaching, miracles, and sufferings of the apostles at Jerusalem; the conversion of St. Paul; the call of Cornelius, the first Gentile convert; the persecution of the Christians by Herod Agrippa; the preaching of Paul and Barnabas to the Gentiles, by the express command of the Holy Ghost; the decree made at Jerusalem, declaring that circumcision, and a conformity to other Jewish rites and ceremonies were not necessary in Gentile converts; the miraculous cures performed by the handkerchiefs and aprons which had only touched the body of St. Paul; whilst the latter part of the book is exclusively confined to the history of St. Paul, of whom, as we have already seen, St. Luke was the constant companion for several years. --- The place of its publication is doubtful. A learned prelate advances, that the probability appears to be in favour of Greece, though some contend for Alexandria, in Egypt. This latter opinion rests upon the subscriptions at the end of some Greek manuscripts, and of the copies of the Syriac version; but the best critics think, that these subscriptions, which are also affixed to other books of the New Testament, deserve but little weight; and in this case they are not supported by any ancient authority. But the sentiment of this learned prelate, does not bias the opinion we gave at the beginning, and which we find confirmed by Alban Butler, in his life of St. Luke, vol. x. p. 432. where he says, "that St. Luke attended St. Paul at Rome, whither he was sent prisoner from Jerusalem in 61. The apostle remained there two years in chains; but was permitted to live in a house which he hired, though under the custody of a constant guard; and there he preached to those who daily resorted to hear him. From ancient writings and monuments belonging to the Church of St. Mary in via lata, which is an ancient title of a Cardinal Deacon, Boronius, in his Annals ad. an. 55. and Arringhi, in his Roma Subterranea, lib. iii, chap. 41. tell us, that this Church was built upon the spot where St. Paul then lodged, and where St. Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles."

====================

Gill: Acts (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO ACTS

This book, in some copies, is called, "The Acts of the holy Apostles". It contains an history of the ministry and miracles of the apostles of Christ, and is a sort of a journal of their actions, from whence it takes its name. It begins at the ascension of Christ, and reaches to the imprisonment of the Apostle Paul at Rome; and is a history of upwards of thirty years: it gives an account of the first Gospel church at Jerusalem, and of the progress of the Gospel there, and in Judea, by the means of all the apostles, and particularly Peter, the minister of the circumcision, and who also first opened the door of faith to the Gentiles: it shows how the Gospel went forth from Jerusalem, and was spread in the Gentile world, especially by the Apostle Paul, whose companion Luke was, that was the writer of this book; for that it was written by him is very evident from the beginning of it, it being dedicated to the same person his Gospel is, and of which he makes mention; and in the Complutensian edition the book is called, "The Acts of the Apostles of Saint Luke the Evangelist"; and so the title of it in the Syriac version is, "the Book of the Acts: that is, the history of the blessed apostles, which my Lord Luke the Evangelist collected for the saints". It was by him written in the Greek language; and we are told ^a, that there was a version of it into the Hebrew language, and which was laid up in the library of the Jews at Tiberias; and is cited by R. Azarias ^b under the name of twlweph, "the Acts": of the authority of this book there has been no doubt, among the ancients, only Cerinthus the heretic endeavoured to discredit it; and it was not received by another sort of heretics called Severiani, from Severus, a disciple of Tatian ^c. It is a most excellent and useful work, showing the first planting of Christianity, and of Christian churches, both among the Jews and Gentiles; the spread and progress of the Gospel in several parts of the world; what sufferings the apostles endured for the sake of it; and with what patience and courage they bore them; and what success attended them; and is a standing proof and confirmation of the Christian religion.

College: Acts (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION

As early as the second century the title "The Acts of the Apostles" was given to this document. Before that time the work probably circulated with its companion volume, "The Gospel of Luke." When the other three Gospels were collected and the New Testament was formed, The Gospel of Luke and The Acts of the Apostles were separated. Both were included in the New Testament as books of history.

AUTHORSHIP

Like the Third Gospel, the Book of Acts does not identify its author. Evidence must be gathered, therefore, from both within the document itself and from references to the document in early church history.

The strongest evidence within the Book of Acts is its Prologue (1:1-3). When the Prologue of Acts is compared with the Prologue of the Third Gospel (1:1-4), the similarities are striking. Both books mention the name Theophilus as the recipient. Acts refers to "the former book," implying that the Third Gospel is that book. Acts also intends to begin the story at the point that the Third Gospel ends it-the ascension of Christ. The style of Greek used in both cases is polished and formal. The implication that both works were written by the same author is unavoidable.

In addition, the passages in Acts which use the pronoun "we" imply an eyewitness account. Appearing toward the end of Acts, these passages give the impression that whoever was writing the book was also present when some of the recorded events took place. It seems that the author makes himself a companion of Paul at these points in the narrative (Acts 16:10-17; 20:5-21:18; 27:1-28:16). At other points in the record the author was content to use "they" in describing events.

Inevitably, then, the question of authorship focuses on Paul's traveling companions. Because some of the "we" sections overlap with Paul's years in prison at both Caesarea and Rome, the companions who were with him at that time become prime candidates. When Paul wrote the letters to Philemon and to the Colossians from prison, Luke was one of the companions Paul mentioned (Phlm 23-24; Col 4:10-17).

Another line of reasoning was proposed by W.K. Hobart in 1882. He analyzed the vocabulary of Acts and concluded that the language indicated that the author of Acts was a physician. This proposal did not survive the scrutiny of scholarship for long. By 1920 H.J. Cadbury offered a study which showed that much of the language which Hobart considered "technical" medical terminology was in use by such nonmedical writers as Josephus, Plutarch, and Lucian. The most that can be said for this evidence today is that the terminology of Acts is compatible with authorship by a person with a medical background.

These pieces of evidence are consistent with the external evidence. Though references to The Acts of the Apostles do not appear as early in the church fathers as do references to other books of the New Testament, they do appear nonetheless. Diognetus (A.D. 130) and The Didache (A.D. 140) allude to the work, as does The Epistle of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons (A.D. 177), according to Eusebius. The latter source quotes the words of Stephen's prayer in which he asks that his accusers not have their sin charged against them ( Ecclesiastical History V.2). Similarly, Irenaeus (A.D. 180), Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 190), Tertullian (A.D. 200), and Eusebius (A.D. 325) quote from Acts without naming their source.

In addition to this evidence, many early church writers refer to the Third Gospel as written by Luke. This is important since the internal evidence makes the author of the Third Gospel the same as the author of Acts. Such testimony comes from the Muratorian Canon (A.D. 170). Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Jerome, on the other hand, speak directly of Acts as written by Luke.

Much attention has also been given to the sources used by Luke in writing Acts. Harnack was the primary scholar who promoted the position that underlying Acts are several sources. He argued that one could detect first an "Antioch" source, then a second source describing Paul's conversion, and finally a third source which contained the "Jerusalem Caesarean" tradition. This third source, he said, was actually two sources blended together, one more reliable than the other.

Harnack's proposals ran into trouble on a couple of counts. His approach seemed dominated by a rationalism which excised the miraculous from the text. In addition his theories about the parallels between the two "Jerusalem Caesarean" sources did not hold up under the scrutiny of Joachim Jeremias and others.

Another proposal regarding written sources for Acts came from C.C. Torrey. He argued that an Aramaic source was used in the composition of Acts 1-15, but absent from Acts 16-28. This argument was made on the basis of Semitisms which he found in these earlier chapters. Later scholars argued that these terms and phrases are best explained as coming from the Septuagint or the synagogue.

Also among the possible sources for Acts are oral traditions. C.J. Hemer lists dozens of passages which he thinks are best explained as deriving from reports passed along verbally to Luke.

In recent years scholars have been far more interested in Luke as a writer and theologian than as a compiler of sources. In some cases studies have concentrated on comparing Luke's style with other ancient writers.

With the work of Hans Conzelmann in 1953 the emphasis on Luke's theology as reflected in Acts became pronounced. This perspective continues to dominate scholarly discussions today. One problem with this perspective is that it frequently ignores or denies the value of Acts as a historical record of events in the early church.

DATE OF WRITING

Acts 1:1 indicates that Luke wanted Acts to serve as the second volume of a two-volume work. For this reason Acts must be dated at the same time or later than the Gospel of Luke. The earliest dates that scholars assign to Luke are in the late 50s. Festus had already ascended to power when Acts was written, an event which is dated in A.D. 60. These boundaries fix the earliest date for Acts.

The real question is how late can Acts be dated. Some radical Bible critics have dated Acts as late as A.D. 115-130. This date reduces the chances that Luke was the author. Many scholars fix the date between A.D. 70-80. The reasons often given for this date have to do with the subject matter of Luke's Gospel, especially Luke 21:5-38. In these verses Jesus speaks of the destruction of Jerusalem. His description is so vivid that many scholars believe Luke must have recorded it after the event had occurred in A.D. 70.

One question which must arise in discussing the date of Acts has to do with the last verses of the Book. Acts closes with a description of the Apostle Paul under house-arrest in Rome. He was taken there to stand trial before Caesar. The account ends by noting that he remained there "two whole years," preaching the gospel as he waited for his accusers to arrive. Tradition indicates that he was martyred in Rome during the reign of Nero (A.D. 54-68). The question to be answered is whether Paul was martyred during this Roman imprisonment. If so, why didn't Luke record Paul's death in Acts? Is the absence of any word on Paul's death significant? Was Luke avoiding the issue in order to preserve his focus on the victorious progress of the church? If so, maybe Acts was meant to end at this point in the story. This would allow for Acts to be written later than the year of Paul's death. The date of writing could then be fixed somewhere between A.D. 70-80.

On the other hand, it may be that Luke does not record Paul's death because it had not occurred when he wrote Acts, meaning that the dating of Acts would be earlier. If Luke finished Acts before Paul's death occurred, the work must be dated somewhere in the early or mid 60s. Church tradition (especially Jerome and Eusebius) dates Paul's martyrdom in Rome around A.D. 67-68. Many scholars believe, however, that Paul was released from his house-arrest described in Acts 28. They argue that he resumed his missionary travels until the day he was once again arrested and taken to Rome. They also contend that the Pastoral letters (1, 2 Timothy and Titus) were written before this second imprisonment. If this is true, then Acts may have been written at the end of Paul's first imprisonment, or about A.D. 63.

THEME OF ACTS

Acts opens with a statement from Jesus which seems to set the tone for the entire work. Jesus promises the Apostles that they will receive power in the form of the Holy Spirit (see 1:8). He then tells them that they will be his "witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth" (NIV). This theme of being a witness for the gospel is carried throughout the Book of Acts. Consider the following verses in Acts:

1:22 - the replacement for Judas had to be a witness of Christ's resurrection

2:32 - Peter's sermon on Pentecost emphasized that the apostles were witnesses of the resurrection

3:15 - after healing the beggar Peter proclaimed the resurrected Christ and that the apostles were witnesses

4:20 - the apostles told the Jewish authorities they could not help proclaiming what they had seen and heard

5:32 - when the apostles were again persecuted they said they must obey God because they were witnesses along with the Holy Spirit

8:25 - Peter and John went to Samaria where they "testified and proclaimed the word of the Lord"

10:39 - Peter proclaimed to Cornelius that he was a witness to the ministry of Jesus

13:31 - Paul told the crowd in Pisidian Antioch that Jesus' followers had witnessed Christ's resurrection

22:15 - Ananias went to Paul with the message that Paul would be a witness to all men of what he had seen and heard

23:11 - God appeared to Paul encouraging him that he would testify in Rome concerning the Lord These references do not include the numerous passages in which individuals are found witnessing falsely (e.g., 6:13; 7:58; 24:1; 25:7).

As the witnesses for Christ carried the gospel toward the far reaches of the world, the church advanced everywhere. This theme is also important in Acts. The expansion of the church is presented in a historical context. Luke even dates some of the events in his record by using key Roman names and events as reference points (see 12:1, 19; 18:12; 23:24; 24:24; 25:1, 23).

As Acts 1:8 indicates, Luke shows how the gospel prevailed wherever it was proclaimed. In Jerusalem, huge numbers were baptized on the Day of Pentecost. Later, thousands were added (4:4), even though the believers were being persecuted by the Jewish authorities. Such incidents as the striking down of Ananias and Sapphira and the dissension over the ministry to Hellenistic widows did not slow down the rapid increase of converts to the gospel (5:14; 6:1,7).

Beyond the walls of Jerusalem, the gospel also found fertile ground for growth. After the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, the church in Judea, Galilee, and Samaria experienced peace and saw its numbers increasing (9:31). Peter's work in Lydda bore rich fruit (9:35) and his raising of Tabitha in Joppa brought many to believe in the Lord (9:42).

The ever-widening influence of the gospel was felt beyond Judea and Samaria as well. Antioch saw increasing numbers of believers, especially among the Gentile populations (11:21,24). The cities of southern Galatia felt the gospel's impact as Paul and Barnabas evangelized in places like Lystra, Iconium, and Derbe (see 14:1,21). Later, Paul and Silas revisited these cities and more growth came (see 16:5). On this same missionary journey Paul and Silas even crossed into Macedonia where the results were the same (see 17:12). The gospel continued to conquer hearts and minds for Christ with each passing day.

Through all of Luke's record, the role of the Holy Spirit is highlighted. From the Day of Pentecost when he was poured out (see 2:14ff), the Spirit was essential to God's purposes for the proclamation of the gospel. When the men were chosen to administer the benevolence to widows, Stephen was appointed because he was a man full of "faith and of the Holy Spirit" (see 6:5). In Samaria the new converts received a visit from the apostles who placed their hands on them, granting them the power of the Holy Spirit (see 8:17). This was a power which Simon the Sorcerer wanted to buy (see 8:18). Philip heard from the Spirit that he was to go to the chariot of the Ethiopian (see 8:29). While Peter was preaching to Cornelius, the Holy Spirit came on the listeners, interrupting Peter's address (see 10:44). Barnabas and Saul were first selected as missionaries at Antioch when the Spirit spoke to the church (see 13:2). Their travels were guided by the Holy Spirit (see 16:7) and in Ephesus Paul rebaptized believers who had not received the Spirit (see 19:1-7). When Paul addressed the Ephesian elders, he reminded them that they had become leaders because of the Spirit's ministry (see 21:28).

While Acts emphasizes that the apostles received the power of the Spirit (1:8), it also emphasizes how they used this power. They faithfully bore witness for Christ. Acts underscores the work of the apostles, or at least some of the apostles. Roughly speaking, Acts 1-12 focuses on the work of the Apostle Peter. His role in the choosing of a successor for Judas (see 1:15ff) and the preaching on the Day of Pentecost (see 2:14ff) open the book. Almost every chapter which follows contains some report on the work of Peter. He and John heal the lame man (see 3:1-10), and then stand before the Sanhedrin (see 4:1-22). He confronts Ananias and Sapphira (see 5:1-11) and Simon the Sorcerer (see 8:9-25). He experiences the vision which results in the preaching to Cornelius and the conversion of his family (see 10:9-48). He then defends his actions before the church leaders in Jerusalem (see 11:1-18). Finally, he miraculously escapes imprisonment by Herod (see 12:1-19).

With Acts 13 the spotlight shifts to the Apostle Paul. Paul and Barnabas are sent from Antioch as missionaries (see 13:2). Their report at the Jerusalem conference is crucial (see 15:12), and though they cannot agree about John Mark, a second missionary journey is undertaken by Paul and Silas (see 15:40). The second journey is followed immediately by a third (see 18:23), and then comes the account of Paul's tragic visit to Jerusalem and his arrest in the temple (see 21:30). The rest of the book describes the series of hearings Paul endures and his transport to Caesarea and on to Rome. Paul's ministry as a Roman prisoner is the focus of the final comment in Acts. For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him. Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ (28:30-31).

THE PURPOSE OF ACTS

For years scholars have puzzled over why Luke produced Acts. Comparing the opening of Acts with that of Luke's Gospel shows that a particular disciple named Theophilus was central to Luke's motives. Was he a new convert? Was he a wealthy patron? Was he an influential Christian? These questions have no obvious answer.

Luke implies in the opening of the gospel that he had carefully researched his material (see Luke 1:1-4). He was concerned to provide a proper sequence of events. He shows awareness of other accounts which have been written concerning Jesus.

One purpose often noted is a historical one. Luke wanted to provide a historical record of the events of Jesus' life and the progress of the first-century church. Though some scholars argue that his reasons had to do with his concerns about the return of Christ, it is possible that he saw the end of the age of the apostles coming. Perhaps Luke wanted a written record of the apostles' work in carrying on the ministry of Jesus.

The immediate purpose of Luke may be indicated in his words in the opening of the gospel. He tells Theophilus that he writes so that this believer will "know the certainty of the things" he had been taught (1:4). This comment may indicate that the two-volume work was meant for Christian instruction.

The apologetic value of Acts has often been noted. Some have wondered if Luke's work was intended to serve as a defense-brief for the Apostle Paul as he stood before Caesar. The problem with this suggestion is that Luke includes so much material that has nothing to do with Paul's defense. Why would he include the birth, ministry, death, and resurrection of the Lord? Why would he focus on the Apostle Peter in the early chapters of Acts? Acts would be very tedious reading if the main purpose were a defense of Paul.

Nevertheless, it is true that much of Acts emphasizes that the believers posed no threat to the Roman empire. When the apostles are summoned before the Jerusalem authorities, their only crime is healing the lame man (see 3:1ff). When Stephen is martyred, his only fault is his zeal for the faith (see 6:8ff). Peter's imprisonment at the hands of Herod Agrippa I is due to no fault of the Apostle (see 12:1ff). Paul's hearing before Gallio is a matter of questions about the Jewish Law (see 18:12-16). The series of trials experienced by Paul repeatedly emphasizes his innocence (see 21:29; 23:29; 24:27; 25:19; 26:31). The cumulative effect of these statements establishes that the church was never any real threat to Caesar.

Beyond these purposes, Acts has a theological purpose. Luke intends to show how the apostles began the work Jesus initiated on the earth. Acts 1:1 describes Luke's Gospel as an account of "all that Jesus began to do and to teach." Acts intends to describe how the apostles continued this work of Jesus. The Gospel begins in Jerusalem and fans out over the whole Roman world to the Imperial City itself. The salvation of the Lord is, in Paul's language, "first for the Jew, then for the Gentile" (Rom. 1:16). Acts records how God used human means to send out the divine message of salvation in Christ.

THE HISTORICITY OF ACTS

Concerning the historical accuracy of the Book of Acts modern scholarship appears to be at an impasse. Questions have been raised for years about Luke's account of events. Many of the questions have been aimed at the portrait of Paul which is presented in Acts. Since the days of F.C. Baur and the Tübingen school, the issue of how Paul is presented in Acts as compared with the Pauline letters has been prominent among scholars who study Acts. The result has been a series of scholars who cast doubts upon the historical accuracy of Acts.

Drawing much of this attention has been the relationship between Acts and Galatians. Especially important to scholars are such topics as the number of visits Paul made to Jerusalem, the description of the debate about circumcision, the matter of Paul's relationship to the other apostles, the position of Paul regarding the "apostolic decrees" (see 15:19-20), and other matters relating to Paul's association with the Jerusalem leaders. In addition questions have been raised about Paul's portrait in Acts as an apostle who would carry the decrees from church to church when he says nothing of them in his letters to some of the same churches. Also a problem is the fact that Acts is silent with regard to any of these letters Paul was addressing to the churches, even though he wrote during the very time covered in Acts. Beyond this strange silence is the other important event in Paul's ministry about which Acts is so quiet-the collection for the believers in Judea (see 1 Cor 16:1-4; Rom 15:23-33).

These differences have caused some scholars to speak of the "Lucan Paul" in contrast to the "Paul of the epistles." Another scholar explains the difference (in the tradition of Baur) by referring to the "Paulinism of Acts." Luke is viewed not as a historian recording events in the ministry of Paul, but as a theologian who carefully constructs a historical explanation of Paul even if it is at odds with historical reality. The Pauline speeches of Acts, in particular, are viewed as fabrications of Luke's theological genius, motivated by the need to present Paul in terms which agree with his own theological perspective.

For many scholars, then, Acts is regarded as so preoccupied with theological concerns as to render it suspect as a historical report of events in the life of the first-century church. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries this skepticism was met with a wave of scholars who resisted such a pessimistic assessment of the historicity of Acts. Such scholars as James Smith, Henry Alford, J.B. Lightfoot, F.W. Farrar, R.B. Rackham, William Ramsay, Theodor Zahn, Adolf Harnack, Arthur McGiffert, C.C. Torrey, and H.J. Cadbury found more reasons for confidence in the historical value of Acts. The impact of Martin Dibelius, however, was decisive. His critical studies of Acts produced a significant trend toward the conclusion that Acts should be understood in terms of descriptive theology rather than history. Hans Conzelmann and Ernst Haenchen were instrumental in systematically applying the approach of Dibelius to the text of Acts. Thus a powerful stream of thought continues to influence scholars who study Acts for the purpose of clarifying the theological tendencies of early church teaching, while dismissing the historical contribution of the work.

These trends have been called into question in recent years by such scholars as F.F. Bruce, I.H. Marshall, Martin Hengel, and C.J. Hemer. But no consensus among scholars has been reached. To some extent, then, the study of Acts advances on two entirely different (if not always unrelated) tracks. Work goes on in the effort to understand the theological tendencies which shape Luke's production of the Book of Acts. At the same time other scholars look to historical and archaeological studies as potential sources for additional help in comprehending the contribution Acts makes to the historical picture of the emerging church of the first century.

Whenever scholars from the Restoration Movement have engaged in major studies of Acts, the issue of the historicity of the Book has been dominant. Alexander Campbell's Acts of the Apostles is largely a grammatical analysis of the text of Acts, but the historicity of Luke's work is assumed throughout. J.W. McGarvey's New Commentary on Acts of Apostles not only proceeds on the presupposition that Acts can be trusted as a historical representation of the events it records, but argues the point against such "infidel" scholars as Baur and Zeller. Another commentary was produced in 1896, this time by David Lipscomb. His work makes theology the primary focus, but once again the issue of the historical credibility of Acts is central.

More recent volumes have appeared which offer the same balance. H. Leo Boles produced his commentary in 1941, a study which follows in the same tradition. Don DeWelt's commentary appeared in 1958, and it is stamped with a devotional and didactic quality that makes the message of Acts practical for the believer, yet it never compromises on the assumption that Acts is reliable as a historical account. Finally, the work of Gareth Reese was pivotal. His New Testament History: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Acts is from the very start a work which argues the case for the historicity of Acts. With full awareness of the challenges from the Bible critics, Reese builds his case for the credibility of Luke's account of these events.

In this commentary our approach is to appreciate the theological motivations of Luke's work while not rejecting this record as the most valuable source we have regarding the developing church. Our confidence does not rest entirely on the fact that Luke's abilities as a historian have proven to be convincing. We also believe in the promise of the Lord to direct his servant into all truth.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Commentaries:

Arrington, French. The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary . Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1988.

Boles, H.L. A Commentary on Acts of the Apostles . Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1941.

Campbell, Alexander. Acts of the Apostles . Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1858.

Conzelmann, Hans. Acts of the Apostles , trans. James Limburg, A. Thomas Kraabel, Donald Juel. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987.

Carter, C.W. and Ralph Earle. Acts of the Apostles . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1959.

DeWelt, Don. Acts Made Actual . Joplin, MO: College Press, 1969.

Foster, Lewis. "Acts," in The NIV Study Bible . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985.

Harnack, Adolf. The Acts of the Apostles , trans. J.R. Wilkinson. London: Williams & Norgate, 1909.

Haenchen, Ernst. The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary , trans.Bassil Blackwell. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1971.

Harrison, E.F. Interpreting Acts . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986.

Lake, Kirsopp and H.J. Cadbury. The Beginnings of Christianity , ed. F.J. Foakes-Jackson. Vol. 4. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979.

Lipscomb, David. Commentary on Acts of the Apostles . Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1896.

McGarvey, J.W. New Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles . 2 Vols. in One. Cincinnati: Standard, 1892.

Marshall, I.H. The Acts of the Apostles , Tyndale Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

Munck, Johannes. The Acts of the Apostles . The Anchor Bible. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967.

Pesch, Rudolf. Die Apostelgeschichte . Teilband I: Apg. 1-12. Zurich: Benziger, 1986.

Polhill, John. Acts . The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman, 1992.

Stagg, Frank. The Book of Acts: The Early Struggle for an Unhindered Gospel . Nashville: Broadman, 1955.

Reese, Gareth. New Testament History: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Acts . Joplin, MO: College Press, 1991.

Williams, C.S.C. A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles . Harper's New Testament Commentaries. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1988.

Special Studies:

Arrington, French. New Testament Exegesis: Examples . Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, 1977.

Barrett, C.K. The New Testament Background: Selected Documents . New York: Harper & Row, 1961.

Bassler, Jouette. Divine Impartiality: Paul and a Theological Axiom . Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1982.

Beasley-Murray, George. Baptism in the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

Behm, Johannes. "Glossa," in TDNT , ed. Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich; trans. Geoffrey Bromiley. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.

Beitzel, Barry. The Moody Atlas of Bible Lands . Chicago: Moody, 1985.

Blaiklock, E.M. "The Acts of the Apostles as a Document of First-Century History," in Apostolic History and the Gospel , ed. Ward Gasque, Ralph Martin. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.

Cadbury, H.J. "Roman Law and the Trial of Paul," in The Beginnings of Christianity , ed. F.J. Foakes-Jackson. Vol. 5. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975.

. Style and Literary Method of Luke Part 1. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1920.

. The Making of Luke-Acts . New York: MacMillan, 1927.

Casson, Lionel. Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World . Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973.

. The Ancient Mariners . New York: Macmillan, 1959.

Conzelmann, Hans. The Theology of St. Luke , trans. G. Buswell. New York: Harper & Row, 1960.

Cottrell, Jack. Baptism: A Biblical Study . Joplin, MO: College Press, 1989.

Dahl, Nils. "The Story of Abraham in Luke-Acts," in Studies in Luke-Acts , ed. Leander Keck, J.L. Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

Davies, W.D. Paul and Rabbinic Judaism . London: SPCK, 1958.

. The Gospel and the Land . Berkeley: University of California, 1974.

. Torah in the Messianic Age and/or the Age to Come. Philadelphia: SBL, 1952.

Dibelius, Martin. "The Acts of the Apostles in the Setting of the History of Early Christian Literature," in Studies in the Acts of the Apostles , trans. M. Ling. London: SCM, 1956.

. "Paul on the Areopagus," Ibid.

Dunn, J.D.G. Baptism in the Holy Spirit . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970.

. Jesus and His Spirit . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975.

Dupont, Jacques. The Salvation of the Gentiles: Essays on the Acts of the Apostles . New York: Paulist, 1967.

. The Sources of Acts: The Present Position , trans. Kathleen Pond. London: Darton, Longman, & Todd, 1964.

Easton, Burton. Early Christianity: The Purpose of Acts and Other Papers , ed. F.C. Grant. London: SPCK, 1955.

Ellis, E.E. Paul's Use of the Old Testament . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1985.

Enslin, Morton. Reapproaching Paul . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1987.

Esler, Philip. Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political Motivations of Lucan Theology . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.

Filson, Floyd. "The Journey Motif in Luke-Acts," in Apostolic History and the Gospel , ed. W.W. Gasque and Ralph Martin. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.

Fitzmyer, Joseph. Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament . London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1971.

Flew, R.N. Jesus and His Church: A Study of the Idea of the Ecclesia in the New Testament . London: Epworth, 1943.

Gärtner, Bertil. The Areopagus Speech and Natural Revelation . Uppsala: Gleerup, 1955.

Gasque, Ward. A History of the Criticism of the Acts of the Apostles . Tübingen: Mohr, 1975.

Gaston, Lloyd. No Stone on Another: Studies in the Significance of the Fall of Jerusalem in the Synoptic Gospels . Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1970.

Georgi, Dieter. The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986.

Goulder, M.D. Type and History in Acts . London: SPCK, 1964.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction . Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1970.

Hamey, L.A. and J.A. The Roman Engineers . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.

Harnack, Adolf. Luke the Physician , trans. J.R. Wilkinson. New York: Putnam's, 1907.

Harris, J.R. Testimonies , I, II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1916.

Hemer, C.J. The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History , ed. Conrad Gempf. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990.

Hengel, Martin. Between Jesus and Paul , trans. John Bowden. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.

. Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in Their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period , trans. John Bowden. 2 Vols. in One. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981.

Hobart, W.K. The Medical Language of St. Luke . London: Longmans Green, 1882.

Horsley, Richard. Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs: Popular Movements in the Time of Jesus . New York: Harper and Row, 1985.

Horton, Jr., Fred. "Reflections on the Semitisms of Luke-Acts," in Perspectives on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Hubbard, Benjamin. "The Role of Commissioning Accounts in Acts," in Perspectives on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Hurd, John. The Origin of 1 Corinthians . London: SPCK, 1965.

Jensen, Irving. Acts: An Independent Study . Chicago: Moody, 1974.

Jeremias, Joachim. Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus , trans. F.H. and C.H. Cave. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989.

Jervell, Jacob. Luke and the People of God: A New Look at Luke-Acts . Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1979.

Jewett, Paul. Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

Jewett, Robert. A Chronology of Paul's Life . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979.

Johnson, Luke. S haring Possessions: Mandate and Symbol of Faith . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981.

Kim, Seyoon. The Origin of Paul's Gospel . Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1981.

Kurz, William. "Luke-Acts and Historiography in the Greek Bible," in SBL Seminar Papers 1980, ed. P.J. Achtemeier. Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980.

Ladd, George. A Theology of the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

Lohse, Eduard. "Pentekoste," in TDNT , ed. Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich; trans. Geoffrey Bromiley. Vol. 6. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.

Longenecker, Richard. Paul, Apostle of Liberty . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1977.

McRay, John. Archaeology and the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991.

Maddox, Robert. The Purpose of Luke-Acts . Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1982.

Manson, T.W. The Servant-Messiah . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953.

Marshall, I.H. Luke: Historian and Theologian . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1970.

Martin, Ralph. New Testament Foundations . 2 Vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

Miesner, Donald. "The Missionary Journeys Narrative: Patterns and Implications," in Perspective on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Minear, Paul. Images of the Church in the New Testament . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1977.

Moore, G.F. Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era . New York: Schocken, 1971.

Moule, C.F.D. "Obligation in the Ethic of Paul," in Essays in New Testament Interpretation . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

. "The Christology of Acts," in Studies in Luke-Acts , ed. Leander Keck, J.L. Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

Moulton, J.H., W.F. Howard, and Nigel Turner. A Grammar of New Testament Greek . 4 Vols. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1963.

Munck, Johannes. Paul and the Salvation of Mankind , trans. Frank Clarke. Richmond, VA: John Knox, 1959.

Nickle, K.F. The Collection . London: SCM, 1966.

Norden, Eduard. Agnostos Theos . Stuttgart: Teubner, 1923.

O'Neill, J.C. The Theology of Acts in Its Historical Setting . London: SPCK, 1961.

Plevnik, Joseph. What Are They Saying about Paul? New York: Paulist Press, 1986.

Ramsay, William. Luke the Physician . London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1908.

. St. Paul the Traveller and Roman Citizen . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978.

Richard, Earl. Acts 6:1-8:4: The Author's Method of Composition. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1978.

Rienecker, Fritz. A Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament , trans. Cleon Rogers, Jr. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1980.

Rivkin, Ellis. A Hidden Revolution . Nashville: Abingdon, 1978.

Robertson, A.T. Luke the Historian in Light of Research . Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1920.

Robinson, J.A.T. Twelve New Testament Studies . London: SCM, 1962.

Robbins, Vernon. "By Land and by Sea: The We-Passages and Ancient Sea Voyages," in Perspectives on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Russell, Bob. Making Things Happen: The Power of Christian Leadership . Cincinnati: Standard, 1987.

Sanders, E.P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977.

Scharlemann, Martin. Stephen: A Singular Saint . Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1968.

Schürer, Emil. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ , ed. and rev. Geza Vermes, Fergus Millar, and Matthew Black. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1979.

Shepard, J.W. The Life and Letters of the Apostle Paul: An Exegetical Study . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956.

Sherwin-White, A.N. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament . Oxford: Clarendon, 1963.

Smith, James. The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul , 3rd ed. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1866.

Spiro, Abram. "Stephen's Samaritan Backgound," in Johannes Munck, The Acts of the Apostles , Anchor Bible. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967.

Stagg, Frank. The Book of Acts: The Early Struggle for an Unhindered Gospel . Nashville: Broadman, 1955.

Stagg, Frank and Evelyn . Woman in the World of Jesus . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978.

Stendahl, Krister. "The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West," in Paul among Jews and Gentiles . Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.

Swidler, Leonard. Biblical Affirmations of Woman . Philadelphia: Westminster, 1979.

Talbert, Charles. Literary Patterns, Theological Themes and the Genre of Luke-Acts . Missoula: Scholars Press, 1974.

Tarn, W.W. and G.T. Griffith. Hellenistic Civilization . Cleveland: World Publishing, 1969.

Torrey, C.C. The Composition and Date of Acts . Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1916.

Trites, Allison. The New Testament Concept of Witness . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977.

van Unnik, W.C. "Luke-Acts, A Storm Center in Contemporary Scholarship," in Studies in Luke-Acts , ed. Leander Keck and J.L. Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

. "Tarsus or Jerusalem: The City of Paul's Youth," trans. G. Ogg, in Sparsa Collecta . Part 1. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1973.

Veltman, Fred. "The Defense Speeches of Paul in Acts," in Perspectives on Luke-Acts , ed. Charles Talbert. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Via, E.J. "An Interpretation of Acts 7:35-37 from the Perspective of Major Themes in Luke-Acts," in Society of Biblical Literature 1978 Seminar Papters , ed. Paul Achtemeier. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1978.

Vielhauer, Philipp. "On the 'Paulinism' of Acts," in Studies in Luke-Acts , ed. Leander Keck, J.L. Martyn. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

Wilson, Stephen. "Law and Judaism in Acts," in SBL Seminar Papers 1980, ed. Paul Achtemeier. Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980.

. The Gentiles and the Gentile Mission in Luke-Acts . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973.

Periodicals:

Acworth, Angus. "Where Was St. Paul Shipwrecked? A Re-examination of the Evidence." JTS 24 (1973): 190-193.

Bamberger, Bernard. "The Sadducees and the Belief in Angels." JBL 82 (1963): 433-435.

Best, Ernest. "Acts XIII.1-3." JTS 11 (1960): 344-348.

Blevins, William. "The Early Church: Acts 1-5." RevEx 71 (1974): 463-474.

Bowker, J.W. "Speeches in Acts." NTS 14 (1968): 96-111.

Bruce, F.F. "Chronological Questions in the Acts of the Apostles." BJRL 68 (1986): 273-295.

Bull, Robert. "Caesarea Maritima: The Search for Herod's City." BAR 8 (1982): 24-41.

Cadbury, H.J. "Erastus of Corinth." JBL 50 (1930): 42-58.

. "Lexical Notes on Luke-Acts: V. Luke and the Horse-Doctors." JBL 52 (1933): 55-65.

Catchpole, David. "Paul, James and the Apostolic Decree." NTS 23 (1977): 428-444.

Cosgrove, Charles. "The Divine dei in Luke-Acts." NovT 26 (1984): 168-190.

Clark, David. "What Went Overboard First?" BTr 26 (1975): 144-146.

Culpepper, R.A. "Paul's Mission to the Gentile World." RevEx 71 (1974): 487-497.

Daube, David. "On Acts 23: Sadducees and Angels." JBL 109 (1990): 493-497.

Davis, J.C. "Another Look at the Relationship between Baptism and Forgiveness of Sins in Acts 2:38." RestQ 24 (1981): 80-88.

Downing, F.G. "Common Ground with Paganism in Luke and Josephus." NTS 28 (1982): 546-559.

Duncan, G.S. "Paul's Ministry in Asia - The Last Phase." NTS 3 (1957): 211-218.

Filson, Floyd. "The Christian Teacher in the First Century." JBL 60 (1941): 317-328.

Fitzgerald, Michael. "The Ship of Saint Paul: Comparative Archaeology." BA 53 (1990): 31-39.

Fitzmyer, Joseph. "The Ascension of Christ and Pentecost." TS 45 (1984): 409-440.

Gilchrist, J.M. "On What Charge Was St. Paul Brought to Rome?" ExpT 78 (1967): 264-266.

Goldsmith, Dale. "Acts 13:33-37: A Pesher on II Samuel 7." JBL 87 (1968): 321-324.

Goodspeed, E.J. "Gaius Titius Justus." JBL 69 (1950): 382-383.

Gordon, Alasdair. "The Fate of Judas according to Acts 1:18." EQ 43 (1971): 97-100.

Greenhut, Zvi. "Burial Cave of the Caiaphas Family." BAR 18 (1992): 29-36.

Haldane, Douglas. "Anchors of Antiquity." BA 53 (1990): 19-24.

Hemer, C.J. "First Person Narrative in Acts 27-28." TB 36 (1985): 97-98.

Hirschfield, Nicolle. "The Ship of St. Paul - Part I: Historical Background." BA 53 (1990): 19-24.

Hohlfelder, Robert. "Caesarea beneath the Sea." BAR 8 (1982): 42-47.

Horsley, G.H.R. "The Inscriptions of Ephesos and the New Testament." NovT 34 (1992): 105-168.

Kepple, Robert. "The Hope of Israel, The Resurrection of the Dead, and Jesus: A Study of Their Relationship in Acts with Particular Regard to the Understanding of Paul's Trial Defense." JETS 20 (1977): 231-241.

Kilgallen, John. "The Function of Stephen's Speech (Acts 7:2-53)." Biblica 70 (1989). 173-193.

Kilpatrick, G.D. "Acts XXIII.23 DEXIOLABOI ." NTS 14 (1963): 393-394.

Kodell, Jerome. "'The Word of God grew': The Ecclesial Tendency of logos in Acts 1,7; 12,24; 19,20." Biblica 55 (1974): 505-519.

Ladouceur, David. "Hellenistic Preconceptions of Shipwreck and Pollution as a Context for Acts 27-28." HTR 73 (1980): 435-449.

Lofthouse, W.F. "The Holy Spirit in the Acts and the Fourth Gospel." ExpT 52 (1940-41): 334-337.

Malherbe, Abraham. "Gentle as Nurse." NovT 12 (1970): 203-217.

Mare, Harold. "Acts 7: Jewish or Samaritan?" WThJ 34 (1971): 1-21.

Mastin, B.A. "Scaeva the Chief Priest." JTS 27 (1976): 405-412.

Meinardus, Otto. "St. Paul Shipwrecked in Dalmatia." BA 39 (1976): 145-147.

Merrill, Eugene. "Paul's Use of 'About 450 Years' in Acts 13:20." BiblThecSac 138 (1981): 246-257.

Metzger, Bruce. "The Meaning of Christ's Ascension." ChrT 10 (1966): 863-864.

Miles, Gary and Garry Trompf. "Luke and Antiphon: The Theology of Acts 27-28 in the Light of Pagan Beliefs about Divine Retribution, Pollution, and Shipwreck." HTR 69 (1976): 259-267.

Nash, Donald. "For the Remission of Sin." ChrSt (3-30-75): 270-272.

Palmer, Darryl. "Acts and the Historical Monograph." TB 43 (1992): 373-388.

Parrat, J.K. "The Rebaptism of the Ephesian Disciples." ExpT (1968): 182-183.

Parker, Pierson. "Once More, Acts and Galatians." JBL 36 (1967): 175-182.

Rapuano, Yehudah. "Did Philip Baptize the Eunuch at Ein Yael?" BAR (1990): 44-49.

Scott, J.J. "Stephen's Speech: A Possible Model for Luke's Historical Method?" JETS 17 (1974): 91-97.

. "The Cornelius Incident in the Light of Its Jewish Setting." JETS 34 (1991): 475-484.

Slater, Thomas. "The Possible Influence of LXX Exodus 20:11 on Acts 14:15." AUSS 30 (1992): 151-152.

Stagg, Frank. "The Unhindered Gospel." RevEx 71 (1974): 451-462.

Stein, Robert. "The Relationship of Galatians 2:1-10 and Acts 15:1-35: Two Neglected Arguments." JETS 17 (1974): 239-242.

Stoops, Jr., R.F. "Riot and Assembly: The Social Context of Acts 19:23-41." JBL 108 (1989): 73-91.

Talbert, Charles. "The Place of the Resurrection in the Theology of Luke." Int 46 (1992): 19-30.

Thornton, T.C.G. "Stephen's Use of Isaiah LXVI.1." JTS 25 (1974): 432-435.

Tiede, David. "The Exaltation of Jesus and the Restoration of Israel in Acts 1." HTR 79 (1986): 278-286.

Trites, Allison. "The Importance of Legal Scenes and Language in the Book of Acts." NovT 16 (1974): 278-284.

Viviano, Benedict and Justin Taylor. "Sadducees, Angels, and Resurrection (Acts 23:8-9)." JBL 111 (1992): 496-498.

Walker, William. "Acts and the Pauline Corpus Reconsidered." JSNT 24 (1985): 3-23.

Wall, Robert. "Successors to 'the Twelve' according to Acts 12:1-17." CBQ 53 (1991): 628-643.

Wilcox, Max. "The 'God-Fearers' in Acts - A Reconsideration." JSNT 13 (1981): 102-122.

Workman, W.P. "A New Date Indication in Acts." ExpT 11 (1900): 316-317.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

ABBREVIATIONS

AUSS . . . Andrews University Seminary Studies

BA . . . Biblical Archaeology

BAR . . . Biblical Archaeology Review

BiblThecSac . . . Bibliotheca Sacra

BJRL . . . Bulletin of the John Rylands Library

BTr . . . Bible Translator

ChrSt . . . Christian Standard

ed. . . . edited by

EQ . . . Evangelical Quarterly

ExpT . . . Expository Times

HTR . . . Harvard Theological Review

JBL . . . Journal of Biblical Literature

JSNT . . . Journal of Studies in the New Testament

JETS . . . Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

JTS . . . Journal of Theological Studies

n. . . . note

NovT . . . Novum Testamentum

RevEx . . . Review and Expositor

TB . . . Tyndale Bulletin

TDNT . . . Theological Dictionary of the New Testament

TS . . . Theological Studies

trans . . . translated by

WThJ . . . Westminster Theological Journal

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: Acts (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. THE CHURCH IN JERUSALEM - 1:1-8:1a

A. INTRODUCTION OF THE BOOK - 1:1-3

B. THE COMMISSIONING OF THE APOSTLES - 1:4-8

C. THE ASCENSION OF CHRIST - 1:9-11

D. WAITING FOR THE HOLY SPIRIT - 1:12-14

E. THE REPLACEMENT OF JUDAS ISCARIOT - 1:15-26

F. THE DAY OF PENTECOST - 2:1-47

1. The Apostles Baptized with the Holy Spirit - 2:1-4

2. The Amazement of the Crowd - 2:5-13

3. The Sermon of Peter - 2:14-36

a. The Promise of Joel - 2:14-21

b. The Proclamation of Jesus' Resurrection - 2:22-28

c. Jesus the Lord and Messiah - 2:29-36

4. The Call to Repentance - 2:37-40

5. The First Church - 2:41-47

G. THE HEALING OF THE LAME MAN AND ITS CONSEQUENCES - 3:1-4:31

1. A Cripple Cured - 3:1-10

2. Peter's Address in Solomon's Colonnade - 3:11-26

a. The Power of Jesus' Name - 3:11-16

b. The Call to Repentance - 3:17-21

c. The Witness of the Prophets - 3:22-26

3. The Arrest of Peter and John - 4:1-4

4. Peter and John before the Sanhedrin - 4:5-12

5. The Debate in the Sanhedrin - 4:13-17

6. The Prohibition against Preaching Christ - 4:18-22

7. The Release of Peter and John - 4:23-31

a. Their Reunion with the Twelve - 4:23

b. Their Prayer for Boldness - 4:24-30

c. Their Power from the Holy Spirit - 4:31

H. THE UNITY AND GENEROSITY OF THE EARLY CHURCH - 4:32-5:16

1. The Sharing of Material Possessions by Believers - 4:32-35

2. The Example of Barnabas - 4:36-37

3. The Deceit of Ananias and Sapphira - 5:1-11

4. The Signs and Wonders from the Apostles - 5:12-16

I. THE ARREST OF THE APOSTLES - 5:17-42

1. The Imprisonment of the Apostles - 5:17-26

2. The Apostles before the Sanhedrin - 5:27-40

3. The Continued Witness of the Apostles - 5:41-42

J. THE CHOOSING OF THE SEVEN DEACONS - 6:1-7

K. THE ARREST, TRIAL, AND STONING OF STEPHEN - 6:8-8:1a

1. False Accusations Against Him - 6:8-15

2. Stephen's Defense - 7:1-53

a. The Old Testament Patriarchs - 7:1-8

b. Israel in Egypt - 7:9-19

c. Early Days of Moses - 7:20-29

d. The Call of Moses - 7:30-34

e. The Wilderness Wanderings - 7:35-43

f. The Tabernacle and the Temple - 7:44-50

g. The Personal Application - 7:51-53

h. The Final Witness of Stephen - 7:54-56

i. The Death of Stephen - 7:57-60

j. The Consent of Saul - 8:1a

II. THE CHURCH IN JUDEA AND SAMARIA - 8:1b-12:25

A. PERSECUTION AND DISPERSION OF THE CHURCH - 8:1b-3

B. MINISTRY OF PHILIP - 8:4-40

1. Philip in Samaria - 8:4-8

2. The Conversion of Simon Magus - 8:9-13

3. The Visit of Peter and John to Samaria - 8:14-17

4. Peter's Condemnation of Simon's Offer to Pay for the Holy Spirit - 8:18-24

5. The Return of the Apostles to Jerusalem - 8:25

6. Philip and the Conversion of the Ethiopian - 8:26-40

C. THE CONVERSION OF SAUL OF TARSUS - 9:1-31

1. The Expedition of Saul to Damascus - 9:1-2

2. The Light and the Voice from Heaven - 9:3-7

3. The Entrance of Saul to Damascus - 9:8-9

4. The Commissioning of Ananias to Visit Saul - 9:10-16

5. The Visit from Ananias - 9:17-19a

6. The Preaching of Saul in Damascus - 9:19b-22

7. The Escape of Saul from Damascus - 9:23-25

8. The Ministry of Saul in Jerusalem and His Departure for Tarsus - 9:26-30

D. PEACE AND PROSPERITY FOR THE CHURCH - 9:31

E. PETER'S MINISTRY IN WESTERN JUDEA - 9:32-43

1. The Ministry at Lydda: Healing of Aeneas - 9:32-35

2. The Ministry at Joppa: The Raising of Dorcas - 9:36-43

F. THE CONVERSION OF THE FIRST GENTILES - 10:1-11:18

1. The Ministry of Peter at Caesarea - 10:1-48

a. The Vision Seen by Cornelius - 10:1-8

b. The Vision Seen by Peter - 10:9-16

c. The Arrival at Joppa of Servants Sent by Cornelius - 10:17-23a

d. The Visit of Peter to the House of Cornelius - 10:23b-33

e. The Sermon by Peter - 10:34-43

f. The Reception of the Holy Spirit by Gentiles - 10:44-48

2. The Endorsement of Peter's Ministry by the Jerusalem Leadership - 11:1-18

a. The Questioning of the Jerusalem Leaders - 11:1-3

b. The Defense by Peter - 11:4-17

c. The Defense Accepted - 11:18

G. THE CHRISTIANS AT ANTIOCH - 11:19-30

1. Evangelism among the Gentiles of Antioch - 11:19-21

2. The Ministry of Barnabas and Saul at Antioch - 11:22-26

3. The Famine Relief Work from Antioch - 11:27-30

H. THE PERSECUTION OF THE CHURCH BY HEROD AGRIPPA I - 12:1-25

1. The Martyrdom of James and Imprisonment of Peter - 12:1-4

2. The Escape of Peter from Prison - 12:5-11

3. The Report of Peter about the Escape - 12:12-17

4. The Discovery of Peter's Escape - 12:18-19a

5. The Death of Herod Agrippa I - 12:19b-23

6. The Continued Progress of the Gospel - 12:24

7. The Return of Barnabas and Saul to Antioch - 12:25

III. THE CHURCH IN THE ENDS OF THE EARTH - 13:1-28:31

A. THE FIRST MISSIONARY JOURNEY - 13:1-14:28

1. The Commissioning of Barnabas and Saul at Antioch - 13:1-3

2. The Arrival of Barnabas and Saul on Cyprus - 13:4-5

3. The Confrontation at Paphos - 13:6-12

4. The Arrival at Pisidian Antioch - 13:13-15

5. Paul's Address in the Synagogue - 13:16-41

a. Old Testament Prelude to Christ - 13:16-22

b. Fulfillment in Christ - 13:23-37

c. Conclusion and Warning - 13:38-41

6. The Response to Paul's Address - 13:42-43

7. Gentile Interest and Jewish Opposition - 13:44-52

8. The Visit to Iconium - 14:1-7

9. The Healing at Lystra - 14:8-13

10. Paul's Address about the Living God - 14:14-18

11. The Stoning of Paul - 14:19-20a

12. The Visit to Derbe and Return to Lystra, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch - 14:20b-23

13. Return to Antioch of Syria - 14:24-28

B. THE COUNCIL AT JERUSALEM - 15:1-35

1. The Visit of Judaizers to Antioch - 15:1-2

2. The Journey of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem - 15:3-5

3. The Convening of the Council - 15:6

4. The Address of Peter - 15:7-11

5. The Address of Paul and Barnabas - 15:12

6. The Summation by James - 15:13-21

7. The Apostolic Letter to Gentile Christians - 15:22-29

8. The Reception of the Apostolic Letter by the Church in Antioch - 15:30-35

C. THE SECOND MISSIONARY JOURNEY - 15:36-18:22

1. The Proposal and the Debate about John Mark - 15:36-39

2. The Journey through Syria and Cilicia - 15:40-41

3. The Visit to Derbe and Lystra - 16:1-4

4. The Growth of the Churches - 16:5

5. The Journey through Phrygia and Galatia - 16:6-7

6. The Macedonian Vision in Troas - 16:8-10

7. The Visits to Samothrace and Neapolis - 16:11

8. The Visit to Philippi - 16:12-40

a. The Faith of Lydia - 16:12-15

b. The Slave Girl with the Spirit of Divination - 16:16-22

c. The Imprisonment - 16:23-26

d. The Conversion of the Jailer - 16:27-34

e. The Departure - 16:35-40

9. The Visits at Amphipolis and Apollonia - 17:1a

10. The Visit at Thessalonica - 17:1b-9

a. Paul's Preaching in the Synagogue - 17:1b-4

b. The Backlash from the Jews - 17:5-9

11. The Visit of Paul and Silas in Berea - 17:10-14

12. The Visit at Athens - 17:15-34

a. Paul's Preaching in Athens - 17:15-17

b. Paul's Encounter with the Philosophers - 17:18

c. Paul's Address in the Areopagus - 17:19-31

1) Paul's Acknowledgement of Their Idols - 17:19-23

2) God the Creator of Everything - 17:24-26

3) God Who is Near Enough to Touch - 17:27-29

4) God Who Judges and Demands Repentance - 17:30-31

d. The Reaction to Paul's Preaching - 17:32-34

13. The Visit at Corinth - 18:1-17

a. Paul's Arrival and Ministry with Aquila and Priscilla - 18:1-4

b. Resistance from the Jews and Paul's Decision to Preach to the Gentiles - 18:5-6

c. Encouragement in a Night Vision - 18:7-10

d. Paul's Trial before Gallio - 18:11-17

14. The Visit at Cenchrea - 18:18

15. The Visit at Ephesus - 18:19-21

16. The Journey to Caesarea, Jerusalem,and Antioch of Syria - 18:22

D. THE THIRD MISSIONARY JOURNEY - 18:23-21:16

1. The Journey through Galatia and Phrygia - 18:23

2. The Ministry of Apollos in Ephesus and Corinth - 18:24-28

3. The Twelve Disciples at Ephesus - 19:1-7

4. Paul's Preaching in the Synagogue and the School of Tyrannus - 19:8-10

5. The Conflict with the Exorcists - 19:11-19

6. The Growth of Paul's Ministry - 19:20

7. Paul's Plans to Visit Rome - 19:21-22

8. The Riot of Demetrius and the Silversmiths - 19:23-41

a. The Anger of the Silversmiths - 19:23-28

b. The Demonstration in the Theater - 19:29-34

c. The Calming Words of the Town Clerk - 19:35-41

9. The Journey through Macedonia and Greece - 20:1-6

10. The Visit at Troas - 20:7-12

11. The Visits at Assos, Mitylene, Kios (Chios), Samos, and Miletus - 20:13-15

12. The Meeting with the Ephesian Elders - 20:16-38

a. Paul's Summons of the Ephesian Elders - 20:16-17

b. Paul's Reflections on His Ephesian Ministry - 20:18-21

c. Paul's Expectations for the Future - 20:22-24

d. Paul's Charge to the Ephesian Elders - 20:25-31

e. Paul's Final Admonition - 20:32-35

f. The Emotional Parting - 20:36-38

13. The Stops at Cos, Rhodes, and Patara - 21:1-2

14. The Arrival at Tyre - 21:3-6

15. The Arrival at Ptolemais and Caesarea - 21:7-14

a. The Entrance into the Home of Philip - 21:7-9

b. The Warning of Agabus and Paul's Response - 21:10-14

16. The Arrival at Jerusalem - 21:15-16

E. PAUL'S VISIT TO THE TEMPLE AND HIS ARREST - 21:17-23:30

1. Paul's Reception by the Church - 21:17-26

a. Paul's Report of the Gentile Response to the Gospel - 21:17-19

b. The Proposal of James and the Elders - 21:20-26

2. The Riot in the Temple - 21:27-30

3. Paul's Rescue by the Romans - 21:31-36

4. Paul's Request for Permission to Address the Mob - 21:37-40

5. Paul's Defense to the Jews - 22:1-21

a. Paul's Early Days - 22:1-5

b. The Episode on the Damascus Road - 22:6-11

c. The Visit from Ananias of Damascus - 22:12-16

d. The Vision in the Temple - 22:17-21

6. The Reaction of the Mob and Paul's Imprisonment - 22:22-29

7. The Trial before the Sanhedrin - 22:30-23:10

a. The Confrontation with the High Priest - 22:30-23:5

b. The Division of the Pharisees and Sadducees over the Resurrection Hope - 23:6-10

8. The Word of Encouragement from God - 23:11

9. The Conspiracy Against Paul's Life - 23:12-15

10. The Discovery of the Conspiracy - 23:16-22

11. The Decision to Transfer Paul to Caesarea - 23:23-24

12. The Letter from the Tribune to Felix - 23:25-30

F. THE IMPRISONMENT AT CAESAREA - 23:31-26:32

1. Paul's Transfer to Caesarea - 23:31-35

2. Paul's Trial before Felix - 24:1-21

a. The Accusations Against Paul - 24:1-9

b. The Defense by Paul - 24:10-21

3. The Postponement of a Verdict by Felix - 24:22-23

4. Paul's Interviews with Felix - 24:24-26

5. The Ascension of Festus: Paul's Continued Custody - 24:27

6. The Visit of Festus to Jerusalem - 25:1-5

7. Paul's Appeal to Caesar - 25:6-12

8. The Visit of Agrippa II and Bernice to Festus - 25:13-22

9. Paul's Appearance before Agrippa - 25:23-26:32

a. The Presentation of Paul to Agrippa by Festus - 25:23-27

b. Paul's Address to Agrippa - 26:1-23

1) The Introduction - 26:1-3

2) Paul's Pharisaic Heritage - 26:4-8

3) Paul's Former Zeal Against Christians - 26:9-11

4) Paul's Experience on the Road to Damascus - 26:12-18

5) Paul's Obedience to God - 26:19-20

6) Paul's Arrest - 26:21

7) Paul's Continuing Preaching of Christ - 26:22-23

c. The Interchange Between Festus, Paul, and Agrippa - 26:24-29

d. The Agreement Regarding Paul's Innocence - 26:30-32

G. PAUL'S VOYAGE TO ROME - 27:1-28:31

1. The Journey from Caesarea to Sidon - 27:1-3

2. The Journey from Sidon to Myra - 27:4-6

3. The Journey from Myra around Crete - 27:7

4. The Arrival at Fair Havens - 27:8-15

a. Paul's Warning About the Coming Danger - 27:8-12

b. The Storm at Sea - 27:13-15

5. The Difficult Journey around Cauda - 27:16-17

6. The Shipwreck - 27:18-44

a. The Attempts to Lighten the Ship - 27:18-19

b. Paul's Words of Encouragement - 27:20-26

c. The Sighting of Land - 27:27-29

d. The Attempt of the Sailors to Escape - 27:30-32

e. Paul's Encouragement of the Crew to Eat - 27:33-38

f. The Running Aground of the Ship - 27:39-41

g. The Escape to Dry Land - 27:42-44

7. The Winter at Malta - 28:1-10

a. The Welcome by the Barbarians - 28:1-6

b. Paul's Ministry of Healing - 28:7-10

8. The Journey to Syracuse - 28:11-12

9. The Journey to Rhegium and Puteoli - 28:13-14

10. The Welcome at Three Taverns - 28:15

11. The Imprisonment at Rome - 28:16-29

a. The Arrival at Rome - 28:16

b. Paul's Preaching to the Jews - 28:17-29

1) Paul's Defense - 28:17-20

2) The Request for Further Information by the Jews - 28:21-22

3) The Interview with the Jews - 28:23

4) The Mixed Response - 28:24-29

12. Paul's Two Years in Rome - 28:30-31

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV