The first part of Philip's important witness took place in Samaria. Luke recorded the cause of Philip's ministry there (vv. 1b-3), its nature (vv. 4-8), and its effects (vv. 9-24).
This short section sets the stage for Philip's ministry by giving us its cause.
8:1b Stephen's execution ignited the first popular persecution of Christian Jews.348Since Stephen was a Hellenistic Jew, the Hellenistic Jewish Christians were probably the main targets of this antagonism. The unbelieving Jews living in Jerusalem turned against the believing Jews. This hostility resulted in many of the believers leaving Jerusalem for more secure places of residence. They took the gospel seed with them and planted churches in all Judea (cf. 1 Thess. 2:14) as well as in Samaria.349This persecution was hard on the Christians, but it was good for the church since it resulted in widening evangelization. The apostles probably stayed in Jerusalem because they believed their presence there was essential regardless of the danger. Moreover the persecution seems to have been against Hellenistic Jews particularly, and the Twelve were Hebrews.
8:2 The "devout men"who buried Stephen were probably God-fearing Jews like Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus who buried Jesus (Luke 23:50-53). There were undoubtedly many Jews in Jerusalem who were still sympathetic with the Christians (cf. 6:7). Some of them evidently gave Stephen a burial suitable to his importance. The Mishnah considered open lamentation for someone who had suffered death by stoning as inappropriate.350Luke's notation that people made loud lamentation for Stephen may, therefore, be evidence that there were many Jews who regarded Stephen's stoning as extremely unfortunate.
8:3 The Greek word translated "ravaging"(lumainomai) occurs only here in the New Testament. The Septuagint translators used it in Psalm 80:13 to describe wild boars destroying a vineyard. This is how Saul began behaving.351He was a leader of the persecution in Jerusalem (9:1-2, 29; 22:4-5; 26:11). Evidently Stephen's execution fueled Paul's hatred for the Christians and resulted in his increasing antagonism toward them. He not only went from house to house arresting Christians (cf. 2:46; 5:42) but also carried his purges into the synagogues (cf. 6:9) and tried to force believers to blaspheme there (22:19; 26:11).
8:4 Whereas persecution resulted in the death of some believers it also dispersed the disciples over a wider area. Luke described what they did as scattered believers as "preaching the word"(Gr. euaggelizomenoi ton logon, lit. "proclaiming good news the word"). The gospel message is in view. Sometimes what appears to be very bad turns out to be very good (Matt. 16:18).
". . . the thrust of the church into its mission after the persecution of the Christian community in Jerusalem is parallel with Luke's portrayal in his Gospel of the spread of Jesus' fame after the devil's assault in the wilderness."352
"As the mission begins to move beyond Jerusalem and Judea, it is useful to distinguish two roles within it: the role of the initiatorand the role of the verifier. The apostles shift at this point from the former to the latter role. That is, their function is reduced to recognizing and confirming the work of the evangelists who bring the gospel to new areas and groups, or to working as evangelists in areas already opened for mission (cf. 8:25; 9:32-42)."353
8:5 Philip was apparently a Hellenistic Jew like Stephen. This was Philip the evangelist who was one of the Seven (cf. 6:5), not the Philip who was one of the Twelve. He travelled north from Jerusalem to Samaria. He followed Jesus' example of taking the gospel to the Samaritans (cf. John 4). The other Jews did not like the people who lived in this area and had no dealings with them (John 4:9). They regarded them as racial and religious half-breeds. They did so since their ancestors were Jews who had intermarried with the Gentiles whom the Assyrians had sent to live there following Assyria's conquest of Israel in 722 B.C. Furthermore the Samaritans had opposed the rebuilding of the temple in Ezra's day and had erected their own temple on Mt. Gerizim in competition with the temple on Mt. Zion in Jerusalem. In view of Stephen's depreciation of the Jerusalem temple (7:44-50), it is not incredible to read that Philip took the gospel to Samaritans. The Samaritans accepted only the Pentateuch as authoritative and looked for a personal Messiah who would be like Moses.
We do not know exactly where Philip went because Luke did not identify the place specifically.354It was "down"from Jerusalem topographically, not geographically. Some ancient versions of Acts refer to "a city of Samaria"whereas others have "the city of Samaria."Probably "the city"is correct. This capital town stood a few miles west and a little north of Old Testament Shechem and very near New Testament Sychar (cf. John 4:5). The Old Testament city of Samaria--Sebaste was its Greek name--had been the capital of the northern kingdom of Israel. Philip's willingness to preach "the Christ"(cf. v. 12) to the Samaritans demonstrates an openness that had not characterized Jesus' disciples formerly (cf. John 4:9). Sometimes God moves us out of our comfort zone because He has a job for us to do elsewhere. A whole new people-group came to faith in Christ.
8:6-8 Philip also could perform miracles like Jesus and the apostles. He cast out demons and healed paralyzed and lame people. These signs attracted the attention of multitudes of Samaritans and supported Philip's profession that God was with him. Perhaps the fact that Philip had been rejected by the Jerusalem Jews made him appealing to the Samaritans since they too had experienced rejection by those Jews. Again, deliverance brought rejoicing (cf. 2:46-47).
"It is not too difficult to imagine what would have happened had the apostles at Jerusalem first been the missioners [sic] to Samaria. Probably they would have been rebuffed, just as they were rebuffed earlier in their travels with Jesus when the Samaritans associated them with the city of Jerusalem (cf. Luke 9:51-56). But God in his providence used as their evangelist the Hellenist Philip, who shared their fate (though for different reasons) of being rejected at Jerusalem; and the Samaritans received him and accepted his message."355
8:9-11 Another person who was doing miracles in Samaria, but by satanic power, was Simon whom people have sometimes called Simon Magus. Magus is the transliteration of the Greek word magosmeaning magician or sorcerer. The magic that he did was not sleight of hand deception but sorcery, the ability to control people and or nature by demonic power. This ability had made Simon very popular, and he had encouraged people to think that he was a great power whom God had sent.356
"As the counterfeit of the true, these false prophets were among the most dangerous enemies of Christianity; and the distinction between the true and the false, between religion and spiritualism, had to be sharply drawn once for all."357
8:12 Simon promoted himself, but Philip preached Christ.
"I believe that Simon is the first religious racketeer in the church--but, unfortunately, not the last."358
Luke described Philip's message as the good news about God's kingdom and the name of Jesus Christ. Those who trust in Christ become partakers in His spiritual rule over them now and eventually will enter into His future earthly millennial rule. The phrase "name of Jesus Christ"points to the fact that Jesus is the Christ, the anointed Messiah (cf. 1 John 5:1). Note that water baptism followed conversion almost immediately (cf. 2:38). Both men and women were believing and were undergoing baptism. This was clearly water baptism since they did not experience Spirit baptism until later (v. 17).
8:13 Even Simon believed. I see no reason to conclude that Simon's faith was spurious.359The text says that he believed just as the others Luke mentioned (v. 12), and there is no reason to doubt the reality of their faith. Having practiced Satan's magic Simon could not believe the difference between Philip's God-given miracles and his own magic.
8:14-17 The 12 apostles were, of course, the divinely appointed leaders of the Christians (ch. 1). It was natural and proper, therefore, that they should send representative apostles to investigate the Samaritans' response to the gospel. This was especially important in view of the hostility that existed between the Hebrews and the Samaritans. It was important that both the Samaritan Christians and the Hebrew Christians believe that God had united them in Christ. When Peter and John came down, they observed that these Samaritans also had accepted Jesus as the Messiah. They asked God in prayer to send His Holy Spirit to baptize them as He had baptized the Jews who believed in Jesus (cf. Luke 11:13).
"This was a period of transition from the OT dispensation to the NT era, and these believers at Samaria were in a position similar to the believers at Jerusalem prior to Pentecost."360
However the baptism of the Spirit occurred somewhat differently here than it had in Jerusalem (ch. 2). There it happened spontaneously, but here it came in answer to the apostles' prayer and with the laying on of their hands. There the sound of a mighty wind, visible flames of fire, and speaking in tongues accompanied it. Here there is no mention that these phenomena were present. Perhaps tongues were not spoken here because the Jews and the Samaritans spoke the same language. In both places, Jerusalem and Samaria, the Spirit's reception for permanent indwelling through Spirit baptism is in view, and the Holy Spirit baptized people who were already believers in Jesus Christ.
"But what if the Spirit had come upon them [the Samaritans] at their baptism when administrated by Philip? Undoubtedly what feelings there were against Philip and the Hellenists would have carried over to them, and they would have been doubly under suspicion. But God in his providence withheld the gift of the Holy Spirit till Peter and John laid their hands on the Samaritans--Peter and John, two leading apostles who were highly thought of in the mother church at Jerusalem and who would have been accepted at that time as brothers in Christ by the new converts in Samaria."361
Does what happened in Jerusalem and Samaria set a precedent for a "second blessing"experience (i.e., the baptism of the Spirit as a separate work of God subsequent to regeneration)? Paul described normative Spirit baptism in 1 Corinthians 10:13 and Romans 8:9. The person who has not experienced Spirit baptism is not a Christian (Rom. 8:9). Therefore the instances of Spirit baptism in Acts when it followed salvation later must have been exceptional occasions. This unusual separation of salvation and Spirit baptism is understandable. People needed to perceive Spirit baptism as such at the beginning of the church's history. God baptized believers with the Spirit in this way to validate Jesus' promise that He would send the Spirit to indwell believers permanently, something not true previously (John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7).362
In chapter 2 God identified Spirit baptism--which normally takes place without the believer being aware that it is happening--with wind, fire, and speaking in tongues. These things served as signs to the Jews present of God's working. Here in chapter 8 signs apparently did not announce the baptism of the Spirit but accompanied Philip's preaching. What would have impressed the Samaritans that the baptism of the Spirit was taking place? What would have impressed the Jews in Jerusalem that it had taken place in Samaria? The Spirit's baptizing work taking place in response to the laying on of the apostles' hands would have done so. This is, of course, exactly what God did.
"Peter used the keys committed to him (Matt. 16:18, 19) to open the door officially to the Samaritans, just as he did to 3,000 Jews at Pentecost, and would again a little later to the gentiles at the house of Cornelius (chap. 10). It would be a great mistake, however, to treat this incident at Samaria as normative for all subsequent believers. A look at the Spirit's coming upon Saul (9:17) and Cornelius (10:44) will reveal considerable differences, so that the Samaritan experience was not the regular pattern in the Book of Acts."363
8:18-19 Clearly some external sign accompanied the coming of the Spirit to baptize because the people present perceived it as happening. Perhaps the sign was speaking in tongues as in chapter 2. Simon desired to buy the ability to precipitate Spirit baptism and its accompanying sign from Peter and John. This practice, the attempt to buy spiritual powers and offices, has become identified with Simon's name (i.e., simony). Simon failed to appreciate the uniqueness of Spirit baptism. He appears to have wanted to produce this in anyone, not just believers. Perhaps Simon's error was an innocent mistake due to theological ignorance.
Note that it was clear to Simon that the laying on of hands communicated Spirit baptism (v. 19).
8:20-23 Peter's stern response, however, revealed the seriousness of Simon's error. J. B. Phillips paraphrased Peter's opening words, "To hell with you and your money!"364By his request Simon had revealed that he hoped he could buy God's gifts, namely the Holy Spirit and the ability to impart the Holy Spirit to others. Peter corrected him harshly. God's gifts are gifts; people cannot purchase them because God gives them freely. Simon had much to learn about the grace of God. Peter told him God would not grant the ability he sought because his heart was not right with God. Simon wanted to be able to bring glory to himself rather than to God.365Proper motives are essential as we seek to serve Jesus Christ. Simon's flesh rather than the Holy Spirit still controlled him. Bitterness, bondage, and iniquity still characterized him (v. 23). He was to the Samaritan church what Ananias and Sapphira were to the Jerusalem church: an early instance of self-seeking (cf. 5:1-11). Peter may have wondered if God would judge Simon as He had Ananias and Sapphira, if Simon was about to fall dead at his feet.
8:24 Peter's rebuke terrified Simon. A man with the spiritual power Simon had seen Peter demonstrate was no one to antagonize. Probably Simon's request for prayer that God would be merciful to him was sincere though superficial.
Many interpreters believe that Simon was not a genuine believer, but he may have been. True Christians can do and have done everything that Simon said and did. His background, fresh out of demonism, makes his conduct easier to understand. I see him as another Ananias except that Ananias knew exactly what he was doing whereas Simon's error seems to have involved ignorance to some extent. Probably that is why he did not suffer the same fate as Ananias. Both men became examples to the Christians in their respective areas of how important it is to behave under the control of the Holy Spirit (cf. Eph. 5:15-21).
The subjects of this verse are evidently Peter and John. The fact that while they were returning to Jerusalem the apostles preached the gospel in other Samaritan towns shows that they fully accepted the Samaritans as fellow believers. Furthermore they welcomed them into the church. Quite a change had taken place in John's heart in particular, and in Peter's, since these disciples had visited Samaria with Jesus (cf. Luke 9:52-54). John had wanted to call down fire from heaven on a Samaritan village.
This mission into Samaria constituted a further gospel advance to the Gentiles. The Jews regarded the Samaritans as half Jew and half Gentile. In view of Peter's later reluctance to go to the Gentiles (ch. 10) this incident was clearly part of God's plan to broaden his vision. It prepared him to accept Gentiles into the church equally with Jews.
