Verse by Verse

30 “And when forty years had passed, an Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire in a bush, in the wilderness of Mount Sinai.

31 When Moses saw it, he marveled at the sight; and as he drew near to observe, the voice of the Lord came to him,

32 saying, ‘I am the God of your fathers — the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ And Moses trembled and dared not look.

33 ‘Then the Lord said to him, “Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.

34 I have surely seen the oppression of My people who are in Egypt; I have heard their groaning and have come down to deliver them. And now come, I will send you to Egypt.”‘

35 “This Moses whom they rejected, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and a judge?’ is the one God sent to be a ruler and a deliverer by the hand of the Angel who appeared to him in the bush.

36 He brought them out, after he had shown wonders and signs in the land of Egypt, and in the Red Sea, and in the wilderness forty years.

37 “This is that Moses who said to the children of Israel, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear.’

38 “This is he who was in the congregation in the wilderness with the Angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers, the one who received the living oracles to give to us,

39 whom our fathers would not obey, but rejected. And in their hearts they turned back to Egypt,

40 saying to Aaron, ‘Make us gods to go before us; as for this Moses who brought us out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.’

41 And they made a calf in those days, offered sacrifices to the idol, and rejoiced in the works of their own hands.

42 Then God turned and gave them up to worship the host of heaven, as it is written in the book of the Prophets: ‘Did you offer Me slaughtered animals and sacrifices during forty years in the wilderness,O house of Israel?

43 You also took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, images which you made to worship; and I will carry you away beyond Babylon.’

forty years (v.30) — in Midian — The amount of time Moses spent in Midian is not given in the Old Testament. — 40 years in Egypt and 40 years in Midian = 80-years old at the Exodus (Exodus 7:7).

Angel of the Lord (vs. 30, 35, 38) — God

trembled (v.32) — used (in the N.T.) for trembling at the observance of supernatural phenomena

holy ground (v.33) — because God was there

deliverer (v.35) — redeemer — pointing to Moses as a type of Christ

The Sanhedrin accused Stephen of blaspheming Moses. He showed that it was the Israelites who rejected Moses and His promised Prophet (v.37). Stephen was, in fact, honoring Moses by accepting the Prophet Moses had spoken of (Deuteronomy 18:15 — see Acts 3:22).

congregation (v.38) — the assembly of Israelites at the base of Mount Sinai.

living oracles (v.38) — That is, in effect, “living words and utterances of revelation.” The word translated “oracles” was used by the pagan Greeks of the (supposed) oracular utterances of their gods, in answer to the inquiries of their worshipers. It was then employed by the Greek translators of the Old Testament to represent divine utterances and communications. It is found again in Romans 3:2; Hebrews 5:12; 1 Peter 4:11. They are called “living oracles” because of the divine power and life which lay behind them (cf. John 6:63; Hebrews 4:12; 1 Peter 1:23). Perhaps Stephen would hint to his hearers that the Law which they revered so highly was intended to be a spiritual and effective system, and not merely a dead and mechanical code, observed only with a scrupulous attention to the letter. — Walker, pages 166-167.

would not obey (v.39) = did not wish to be obedient

rejected (v.39) — repeated from verse 27 to emphasize the Israelites’ rejection of Moses

in their hearts they turned back (v.39) — Exodus 16:3; Number 11:4-5

calf (v.41) — The word rendered “calf,” borrowed from the LXX, really means “a young bull,” and there can scarcely be any doubt that the golden image fashioned by Aaron assumed that special shape. The Egyptians worshiped the sacred bulls Apis and Mnevis, considered as incarnations of Osiris and the sun-god respectively, and the Israelites most probably learned this form of idolatry from them. — Walker, page 167

God turned (v.42) — same verb as that used in verse 39 — The Israelites turned from God, so He turned from them.

to serve the host of heaven (v.42) — That is “to worship the sun, moon, and stars.” We find references to such a worship in Deuteronomy 17:3; 2 Kings 17:16; 21:3; 2 Chronicles 33:3; Job 31:26-28; Jeremiah 8:2; 19:13. In Egypt, the sun was worshiped under the names Ra, Tum, etc; the moon under the title Aah; while the planets also received special veneration. — Walker, page 168

book of the Prophets (v.42) — by Hebrew thinking, the 12 Minor Prophets are one book

The quote in verses 42 and 43 is from Amos 5:25-26.

did you offer (v.42) — Yes, the Israelites made offerings to God, but their hearts weren’t in it.

you also took up (v.43) — the word used in the original Hebrew in Amos is the word used when describing the priests and Levites “taking up” the ark and the tabernacle. It isn’t known if they actually carried idols with them — it may mean that they carried idol worship in their hearts.

the tabernacle of Moloch (v.43) — The word for “tabernacle” is the same as is used in verse 44 of the “tabernacle of the testimony,” and is probably employed of set purpose to denote both the true and the counterfeit. The real becomes counterfeit when the heart is wrong. This translation follows the LXX of Amos 5:26, and has something to be said in its favor. But the word used by the prophet in the original Hebrew (siccuth) is not the usual one for “tabernacle” (ohhal), though it closely resembles the usual word for “booths” (succoth), which is regularly employed of the Feast of Tabernacles (booths). It is regarded, therefore, in the Revised Version as a proper name; and, instead of “moloch,” we have the words “your king,” which are a literal translation of the original Hebrew (the Hebrew for king being melech). Thus the whole sentence in Amos now runs “Ye have borne Siccuth your king.” Now, in the Accad language anciently spoken in North Babylonia, we meet with the word Sakkut or Sakkus as a name of the planet Saturn, with a Babylonian equivalent Kaawanu. The general opinion of scholars now is that the Hebrew word Siccuth or Sikkuth, which occurs nowhere else, represents the Accadian Sakkut and stands for Saturn. The Hebrews, in transliterating idol names, were accustomed to alter them slightly, chiefly from a spirit of contempt for them. If this conjecture is correct, then Amos really said “Ye have borne (not the tabernacle of the Lord but) Saturn your king.

Stephen, of course, used his vernacular Bible, the LXX version of the Old Testament, and the lesson which he pointed from that version was forcible enough. Moloch was the sun-god, who was widely worshiped by various branches of the Semitic race. Frequent references to his worship occur in the Bible (Leviticus 18:21; 20:2; 1 Kings 11:7; 2 Kings 23:10; Jeremiah 32:35). — Walker, pages 170-171.

__________

the god Rephan (v.43) — So runs the LXX rendering of Amos. In the English version, we now find “Chiun your images.” It has already been pointed out that the Babylonian equivalent of Sakkut, the non-Semitic word for Saturn, is Kaawanu, which curiously resembles Chiun, the term employed in the original by Amos. The latter word, therefore, is probably a Hebrew transliteration of Kaawanu or Kawan, and, like Siccuth, represents the planet Saturn. The name for Saturn in Persian is still Kaiwan.

“Rephan” may, perhaps, be a linguistic alteration deliberate or otherwise, by the Greek translators of the word Kawan or Chiun. Some, however, think that it stands for the Egyptian Repa, a title, it is said of the god Set (Saturn); and that it was adopted by the LXX translators, writing in Egpyt, as the nearest local equivalent for the god Chiun. The matter is not clear enough to be dogmatic about.

The parallelism which predominates in Hebrew poetry favors this interpretation:

Ye have borne Sikkuth (Saturn) your king;

Yea, Chiun (Saturn) your images;

The star of your god

Which ye made to yourselves. — Walker, pages 171-172

beyond Babylon (v.43) — in Amos, it says “beyond Damascus,” but Stephen was including what was now historical fact — that the Israelites had been captive in Babylon.

Such was the tendency of even God’s covenant people to despise His prophets and to depart from His Word. In the minds of the rulers Stephen left the question: Were they doing this again by rejecting Christ? And were they too, perhaps, in danger of being “given up” to even greater evils?

It was not Stephen, it was they who were despising Moses and the law. Had not Moses himself said: “A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; Him shall ye hear” (verse 37).

What Stephen, tactfully, did not quote, but what the rulers well knew, was the rest of the prophetic declaration, where God goes on to say: “And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which He shall speak in My name, I will require it of him” (Deuteronomy 18:19).

Did not this prophecy about Messiah clearly indicate that the Old Covenant was a temporary institution? Did it not prove that Christ was to supersede Moses? And the remarkable part is that Christ had not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17) and to bring in the New Covenant by the shedding of His blood and the coming of His Spirit, so that Israel might carry out the law from the heart (Read carefully Jeremiah 31:31-34, Acts 21:20). — Stam, page 226.

17 “But when the time of the promise drew near which God had sworn to Abraham, the people grew and multiplied in Egypt

18 till another king arose who did not know Joseph.

19 This man dealt treacherously with our people, and oppressed our forefathers, making them expose their babies, so that they might not live.

20 At this time Moses was born, and was well pleasing to God; and he was brought up in his father’s house for three months.

21 But when he was set out, Pharaoh’s daughter took him away and brought him up as her own son.

22 And Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was mighty in words and deeds.

23 “Now when he was forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his brethren, the children of Israel.

24 And seeing one of them suffer wrong, he defended and avenged him who was oppressed, and struck down the Egyptian.

25 For he supposed that his brethren would have understood that God would deliver them by his hand, but they did not understand.

26 And the next day he appeared to two of them as they were fighting, and tried to reconcile them, saying, ‘Men, you are brethren; why do you wrong one another?’

27 But he who did his neighbor wrong pushed him away, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and a judge over us?

28 Do you want to kill me as you did the Egyptian yesterday?’

29 Then, at this saying, Moses fled and became a dweller in the land of Midian, where he had two sons.

Stephen was showing how, throughout their history, the Jews had rejected their deliverers the first time, and suffered as a result, and then accepted them the second time — as they will with Jesus.

Moses spent 40 years learning the wisdom of the Egyptians (not mentioned in the O.T.), 40 years in the land of the Midians and 40 years leading the Israelites through the wilderness.

The king in question [v.18] is thought to be Rameses II, of the 19th dynasty, who was preeminent as a builder. His son and successor, Merenptah, was, most likely, the Pharaoh of the Exodus. There is some ground, however, for regarding Thothmes III, of the 18th dynasty, as the Pharaoh of the captivity, and his son Amenotep III as the Pharaoh of the Exodus. — Walker, page 160

Treacherously (v.19) = with guile and cunning

Pharaoh’s daughter (v.21) — not named. Josephus the historian calls her Thermutis

wisdom of the Egyptians (v.22) — This isn’t noted in the Old Testament, but it is to be expected for one who was raised as the son of Pharaoh’s daughter. The Egyptians had much knowledge of astronomy, geometry and medicine.

Literally “it came up on to his heart” [v.23], a non-classical expression adopted from the LXX in which it occurs several times (2 Kings 12:4; Isaiah 65:17). We meet with it again in 1 Corinthians 2:9. It represents a Hebrew idiom. It is as though an idea which had lain dormant in the depths of Moses’ mind suddenly rose up as a distinct plan and purpose, awakened into activity by a divine impulse. — Walker, page 162

visit (v.23) = look kindly on with intent to help and relieve. The same verb is used in James 1:27.

Moses thought the Israelites would understand (v.25) that God sent him to deliver them. (This fact is not mentioned in the O.T.)

at this saying, Moses fled (v.29) — Exodus 2:15 — Moses realized his killing of the Egyptian was known.

Midian (v.29) — on the Gulf of Akabah (an arm of the Red Sea) including the northern part of Arabia

8 Then He gave him the covenant of circumcision; and so Abraham begot Isaac and circumcised him on the eighth day; and Isaac begot Jacob, and Jacob begot the twelve patriarchs.

9 “And the patriarchs, becoming envious, sold Joseph into Egypt. But God was with him

10 and delivered him out of all his troubles, and gave him favor and wisdom in the presence of Pharaoh, king of Egypt; and he made him governor over Egypt and all his house.

11 Now a famine and great trouble came over all the land of Egypt and Canaan, and our fathers found no sustenance.

12 But when Jacob heard that there was grain in Egypt, he sent out our fathers first.

13 And the second time Joseph was made known to his brothers, and Joseph’s family became known to the Pharaoh.

14 Then Joseph sent and called his father Jacob and all his relatives to him, seventy-five people.

15 So Jacob went down to Egypt; and he died, he and our fathers.

16 And they were carried back to Shechem and laid in the tomb that Abraham bought for a sum of money from the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem.

circumcision (v.8) — marked Israel’s special relationship to God but later (v.51), Stephen calls the leaders uncircumcised in heart and ears

envious (v.9) — the same verb is used in Acts 17:5 to explain the Jews’ antagonism toward Paul in Thessolonica

favor (v.10) = grace

seventy five people (v.14) — See note * below.

carried back to Shechem (v.16) — See note ** below.

Abraham bought (v. 16) — See note *** below.

Note the growing power of Stephen’s skillful argument. He had not even mentioned Christ yet, for that would only have enraged them so that he would not have been heard, but every Jew in the Sanhedrin knew what he meant. By the mere repetition of this familiar history he was saying: “Do not be too sure that you have disposed of Christ by nailing Him to a tree. Joseph’s brothers thought they had disposed of him when they threw him into the pit. but they were wrong, and after a time they were made to face him whom they had rejected.” — Stam, page 222 (Stam also notes: “There is no discrepancy between Acts 7:14 and Genesis 46:27, for in the Genesis passage those of “the house of Jacob” are referred to, that is, those who “came out of his loins,” while in Acts 7:14 it is his “kindred.”)

__________

* The number is given as 70 in Genesis 46:27; Exodus 1:5; Deuteronomy 10:22, inclusive of Jacob and Joseph. In the LXX version of Genesis 46:27 and Exodus 1:5, however, the total is stated at 75, though it remains 70 in the LXX of Deuteronomy 10:22. The total is made up to 75 in the LXX by the addition of the names, in the list of Genesis 46:8-27, of Manasseh’s son Machir and grandson Gilead (Machir’s son), with Ephraim’s sons Soutalaam and Taam, and his grandson Edom (Soutalaam’s son). Stephen, as  Hellanistic Jew, of course quoted the LXX, as his vernacular version of the Scriptures … — The Acts of the Apostles, by Thomas Walker, page 158

__________

** Jacob was buried not in Shechem but in the cave of Macpelah at Hebron (Genesis 50:13).

Joseph, however, was interred at Shechem, according to the statement of this verse (Joshua 24:32); and we must remember that it is more especially Joseph that Stephen is speaking at the time.

We have no account in the Bible of the burying place of the other sons of Jacob, and too much reliance cannot be places on the statement of Josephus that it was at Hebron, as it may only represent an unfounded tradition. If their bones were carried, like Joseph’s, from Egypt, it would be natural for them to be laid with his at Shechem. Jerome tells us that, in his time, the reputed “Tombs of the Twelve Patriarchs” were shown in Shechem. Be this as it may, Joseph at least was interred in Shechem, and it is his figure which, for the moment, fills Stephen’s field of vision. Shechem, being in Samaria, and so distasteful to the Jews, would remind them once more that the sacred places of their race were by no means confined to Jerusalem. — Walker, page 159

__________

*** Here two different transactions appear to be run together, so to speak.

Abraham, we read, bought a piece of ground in Hebron, containing the cave of Macpelah, from Ephron the Hittite (Genesis 23:14-20).

Jacob, at a later period, purchased a parcel of ground at Shechem, from the children of Hamor, Shechem’s father (Genesis 33:18-20). This latter purchase may have had reference to the fact that Abraham had built his first altar there on first entering Canaan (Genesis 12:6-7), a fact which would make the place seem sacred in the eyes of his descendants.

It would seem that our verse, as it stands, gives a sort of “composite photograph” of these two distinct events. The most natural explanation is that, in speaking of two purchase transactions and two places of burial, the speaker, perhaps in the very rapidity of his historical review, blended them into one. His mind was set on great issues rather than on little details. Most of his hearers, we must remember, were fully conversant with all the facts of their natural history. From Stephen’s point of view at the moment, the real stress is to be laid on Jospeh and Shechem. — Walker, pages 159-1

1 Then the high priest said, “Are these things so?”

2 And he said, “Brethren and fathers, listen: 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 out of your country and from your relatives, and come to a land that I will show you.’

4 Then he came out of the land of the Chaldeans and dwelt in Haran. And from there, when his father was dead, He moved him to this land in which you now dwell.

5 And God gave him no inheritance in it, not even enough to set his foot on. But even when Abraham had no child, He promised to give it to him for a possession, and to his descendants after him.

6 But God spoke in this way: that his descendants would dwell in a foreign land, and that they would bring them into bondage and oppress them four hundred years.

7 ‘And the nation to whom they will be in bondage I will judge,’ said God, ‘and after that they shall come out and serve Me in this place.’

fathers (v.2) — officials and senior members of the Sanhedrin

brethren (v.2) — the rest of the audience

The God of glory (v.2) — should be “the God of the glory” Psalm 29:3

appeared to Abraham (v.2) — see footnote * below

Mesopotamia (v.2) — east of the Euphrates

get out (v.3) — Genesis 12:1

when his father was dead (v.4) — see note  below

moved (v.4) = caused to migrate

Stephen was quoting from the Greek version of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, which accounts for many of the seeming differences between his account and that in the Old Testament.

gave him no inheritance (v.5) — Stephen was pointing out that the land of promise was God’s free gift and not theirs by right.

God spoke (v.6) — quote from Genesis 15:13-14

foreign land (v.6) — Egypt

four hundred years (v.6) — see note below

said God (v.7) — quote from Exodus 3:12 — Mount Sinai

Stephen’s address as it is given here is a remarkably comprehensive synopsis of Israel’s history. Doubtless it was designed to show 1) that Christ’s rejection was no proof that He was not the Messiah, for Israel’s outstanding heroes had frequently been accepted only after having first been violently rejected, and 2) that the Mosaic Covenant was not a permanent institution, for Abraham had enjoyed a close relationship with God long before the Mosaic law had been given, and Moses himself had promised another Leader, saying of Him: “Him shall ye hear” (v.37). — Stam, page 218.

__________

Stephen had been specifically, though falsely, charged with speaking against the sacred law and the holy temple of the Jews (Acts 6:13-14), which, to their minds, were indissolubly bound up with the chosen race and the promised land. In his defense, the preacher takes up these points and speaks, in a truly patriotic spirit, as well of the election and history of the Hebrew race as of their possession of the land of promise (vs. 2-16; 45). He also deals with the giving of the law and the building of the temple (vs. 17-41; 44-45). In so doing, he lays stress upon certain important facts which bore directly upon the points at issue between himself and his accusers.

1) Their own history proves abundantly that God’s presence and glory cannot be confined to any place, however sacred (vs. 2, 9, 16, 29, 38, 44).

2) It proves, also, that, as a race, they had constantly resisted God’s chosen messengers, just as they were now resisting and rejecting the last and greatest of those messengers, the Christ Himself (vs. 9; 22-29; 35-40; 51-53).

3) It demonstrates the fact, again, that law and temple and every sacred institution are capable of abuse, and may become, by such abuse, worse than useless; spirit and truth being infinitely more important than external rites and ordinances (vs. 42-43; 48-50).

4) It makes it quite clear, once more, that Christ, the Messiah, is the goal of the law and the prophets, and that, in accepting Him, the true Jew fulfills the purpose of the God of his fathers and the sacred destiny of his race (vs. 5, 37, 52). — Walker page 152

__________

We read here that the appearance of God to Abraham was prior to his removal to Haran, and this accords well with the notices contained in Genesis 15:7; Joshua 24:3; Nehemiah 9:7 … In Genesis 12:1-5, however, it seems to be implied, following as it does on 11:31-32, that God appeared to him in Haran.

There can scarcely be any doubt that Abraham’s departure from his original home was the result, as here stated, of a divine communication (Genesis 11:31: “to go into the land of Canaan”). It would seem, therefore, from Genesis 12:1-4, that the original communication was renewed in Haran. God’s later promises and blessings to Abraham were similarly reduplicated and renewed (see Genesis 12:7; 13:14-17; 17:15-16; 18:10). We note that this divine revelation was given in Mesopotamia, a heathen land, not in the land of promise. — Walker, page 153

__________

When Terah died at the age of 205 (Genesis 11:32), his son Abraham was 75 years old (Genesis 12:4). This would make him 130 years of age when Abraham was born.

But we read, “Terah lived 70 years and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran (Genesis 11:26). If these words denote the order of birth, then Abraham was the eldest son, born when his father was 70 years old. Since 70 and 75 make 145 only, there are then 60 years of Terah’s life left unaccounted for; and from this many have concluded that he lived still 60 years after the departure of his son from Haran to Canaan, a conclusion which is clearly at variance with our text.

It is possible, however, that Abraham was really the youngest son of Terah, though his name is placed first in the list because of the precedence of fame and honor, and that he was not born till Terah was 130 years of age or thereabouts. In this case, the apparent difficulty would disappear. There are other instances of such an order of precedence in names in the Old Testament. — Walker, pages 154-155

__________

A period [400 years] given, probably, in round numbers. In Exodus 12:40, we find the duration of Israel’s sojourning stated to be 430 years (Galatians 3:17). Josephus mentions both these numbers. Possibly both may be correct, as reckoned from different initial dates; but, in any case, we shall not be far wrong if we regard 430 as the exact figure and 400 as a round number.

Philo, like Stephen gives the latter total, 400.

The period of 430 years may be computed as follows:

25 years — Abraham’s arrival in Canaan to birth of Isaac

60 years — Isaac’s age at the birth of Jacob

130 years — Jacob’s age on going to Egypt

71 years — Jacob’s arrival in Egypt to the death of Joseph

64 years — Joseph’s death to the birth of Moses

80 years — Birth of Moses to the Exodus

430 years total —Walker, page 156

8 And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and signs among the people.

9 Then there arose some from what is called the Synagogue of the Freedmen (Cyrenians, Alexandrians, and those from Cilicia and Asia), disputing with Stephen.

10 And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spoke.

11 Then they secretly induced men to say, “We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and God.”

12 And they stirred up the people, the elders, and the scribes; and they came upon him, seized him, and brought him to the council.

13 They also set up false witnesses who said, “This man does not cease to speak blasphemous words against this holy place and the law;

14 for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and change the customs which Moses delivered to us.”

15 And all who sat in the council, looking steadfastly at him, saw his face as the face of an angel.

synagogue (v.9) — This one was made up of Hellenists, Jews who were brought up and trained in foreign countries.

A synagogue (gathering-together) was the place where Jewish communities assembled for the reading of their sacred Scriptures and public worship. We do not know when they first came into vogue, but have reason to suppose that they existed from the period of the Persian domination of Palestine. During apostolic times, every Jewish community had its own synagogue, and we shall frequently have occasion to notice them in the history of the Acts. In Jerusalem they were very numerous, each section of foreign Hebrews having a synagogue of their own, quite apart from those used by the natives of the city. The people who attended such a place of worship were called “sons of the synagogue.” Each synagogue had its rosh, i.e. head or ruler, who maintained order and arranged for the conduct of public worship. It had also a chazan or attendant, who had charge of the building and was responsible for its furnishings. It fell to him, too, to hand the roll of the Scriptures to the reader and to assist in the service in subordinate ways. Sometimes, moreover, he officiated as schoolmaster for the instruction of the children of the congregation. The service consisted chiefly in readings from the Pentateuch and Prophets, with a translating of the original Hebrew into the vernacular (in the case of the Aramaic synagogues), together with stated prayers, etc. An exposition of the lesson or sermon was added when competent speakers were present. The synagogue sometimes consisted of two apartments, the one being used for worship, while the other served for purposes of education and discussion. Our verse [vs.9] speaks of several synagogues belonging to various sections of foreign Jews. — Walker, pages 145-146

Most synagogues had schools and colleges attached to them, and most of their members appear to have been students.

Freedmen (v.9) — Libertines — Jews from Rome. In 63 B.C., under Pompey, Jews had been taken to Rome as slaves. Their descendants were freed. (“Libertines” does not mean “free-thinkers” here.) This may have been Stephen’s synagogue, as he was a Hellenist.

Cyrenians (v.9) — from Cyrene, a city in what is now Lybia.

Alexandrians (v.9) — from the capital of Egypt, founded by Alexander the Great in 332 B.C. and under Rome since 30 B.C.. It had a large, influential Jewish population.

Cilicia (v.9) — Paul was from Tarsus, the chief city of this region in Asia Minor near Syria. He very likely was one who disputed with Stephen.

disputing (v.9) = questioning — not initiated by Stephen — This same word is used in Acts 9:29 of Paul’s ministry with Hellenistic Jews, perhaps in the same synagogues

It is not improbable that Saul of Tarsus was among them, for we learn from Acts 21:39 that Tarsus was “a city in Cilicia” and we know that Saul was now at Jerusalem, where he had been studying under Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). Since Saul was present at the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58) and “consenting unto his death” (Acts 8:1); indeed, since Saul became the chief persecutor of the Pentecostal church very shortly after this, it seems quite probable that he was one of the company that sought to overcome Stephen in debate. — Stam, pages 212-213

secretly induced (v.11) = procured for the purpose of false witness

people (v.12) — up until this point, the people had been mostly favorable toward the believers

seized (v.12) — expressive of exceeding force — violence

council (v.12) — the Sanhedrin

this holy place (v.13) — the temple (John 4:21-23)

The charge that “this Jesus of Nazareth” (note the contempt in their reference to Christ) was to destroy the temple, was practically the same as that which had previously been brought against Christ Himself (Matthew 26:61). But neither the Lord nor Stephen had made any such statement.

Our Lord had indeed predicted, with heavy heart, that the temple would be destroyed (Luke 19:41-44, etc.) but He had never intimated that He would destroy it. It was also true that He had spoken of His body as “this temple,” but so far from saying that He would break it down, He had said that if they broke it down He would raise it up again in three days! (John 2:19). — Stam, pages 214-215

customs (v.14) — ecclesiastical traditions and institutions

If Stephen had indeed spoken of any changes from the Mosaic dispensation it could only have been in the same sense that our Lord spoke of such changes. For example, we find our Lord quoting from the law of Moses in His Sermon on the Mount and repeatedly adding the words: “But I say unto you,” etc. But this implied no contempt for Moses’ law, nor any suggestion of altering its precepts or lowering its standards. The fact is simply that under the Messianic reign a still higher standard was to be maintained. There was to be a change indeed, but only in the sense that God’s people, by the Spirit, would obey the law spontaneously from their hearts! Even their own prophet Jeremiah had prophesied such a change.

“Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah —  not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people (Jeremiah 31:31-33). — Stam, pages 215-216

__________

Reference to angels is characteristic of Luke. This is the only mention in the New Testament of “the face of an angel,” and we may understand it as an indication that Stephen’s face was seen to be radiant and glorious with a celestial holiness and brightness (Matthew 28:3). We may compare the glory visible in the face of Moses (Exodus 34:35; 2 Corinthians 3:7), and that which shone in our Savior’s countenance on the Transfiguration mount (Matthew 17:2; Luke 9:29). See also Acts 7:55-56. Peter tells us that “the Spirit of glory” rests upon the man who is persecuted for the name of Christ (1 Peter 4:14). — Walker, page 151

1 Now in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplying, there arose a complaint against the Hebrews by the Hellenists, because their widows were neglected in the daily distribution.

2 Then the twelve summoned the multitude of the disciples and said, “It is not desirable that we should leave the word of God and serve tables.

3 Therefore, brethren, seek out from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business;

4 but we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word.”

5 And the saying pleased the whole multitude. And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch,

6 whom they set before the apostles; and when they had prayed, they laid hands on them.

7 Then the word of God spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith.

Hellenists (v.1) — Greek-speaking Jews who lived (or had lived) in Gentile lands

Hebrews (v.1) — Aramaic-speaking Jews who lived in Palestine

distribution (v.1) — Acts 4:35

We don’t know if the Hellenist widows really were being neglected or if this was just their perception.

serve tables (v.2) — distribute food

good reputation (v.3) — well spoken of by all

business (v.3) = necessity

All seven names (v.5) are Greek — probably six Hellenistic Jews and one proselyte, removing all grounds for discontent

Stephen (v.5) = “crowns”

laid hands on them (v.6) — the apostles were identifying themselves with the work these men were to do

word of God (v.7) — the Old Testament — None of the New Testament had yet been written.

priests (v.7) — probably Pharisees

Who can read this passage with an unbiased mind and contend that it records the breakdown of the Pentecostal program? That program broke down later and was superseded by another, but as to the Hebrew assembly dying out during the Acts period, let us look at the record:

Acts 2:41 — 3,000 added to the original group

Acts 2:47 — Believers added daily

Acts 4:4 — The number has grown to about 5,000 men

Acts 5:14 — More added; multitudes both of men and women

Acts 6:1 — The number is multiplied

Acts 6:7 — The number is multiplied greatly and a great company of the priests become obedient to the faith.

Thus, while the apostles are threatened and imprisoned and beaten by the rulers, the cause for which they stand continues to grow steadily.

Even the fierce persecution led by Saul after the stoning of Stephen, while it drove this multitude temporarily from Jerusalem (Acts 8:1) did not by any means diminish its numbers, for “they that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the word” (Acts 8:4). Moreover, God saved Saul, the flaming leader of the persecution who, misunderstood and distrusted on every hand, had to be sent back home to Tarsus (Acts 9:30).

And now see the result: Then had the churches rest throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria, and were edified; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, were multiplied (Acts 9:31).

All the enmity and persecution of the rulers had proved fruitless. The enemies of Christ had been defeated. God had crippled the opposition by saving Saul! From this point on the high priest and the rulers went into bitter seclusion, staying practically out of sight until, toward the close of Acts, we find them leaping like a viper out of the fire to attack Paul, but, like the symbol in Acts 28:3-4, this “generation of vipers” was shaken back into the fire, while Paul and what he stood for remained unharmed.

Meanwhile, in Acts 15 we find the multitude back in Jerusalem again for the great council there, which is apparently held without opposition from the rulers. And before we have closed the book of Acts we find the believing elders there saying to Paul: … thou seest, brother, how many thousands [what myriads] of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the Law (Acts 21:20).

This does not mean, of course, that either the majority in Israel, or the rulers in Israel had turned to Christ. As a nation Israel still remained unrepentant.

We bring this all in here because it is so important to understand that the present dispensation of the mystery was not ushered in, nor the kingdom postponed, because of the failure of the Jewish believers (whatever their failures may have been) but because of the grace of God to His enemies.

The company of Jewish believers described in the passage above formed the nucleus of the kingdom to come. God did not give up the twelve apostles or the Hebrew church. He gave up unbelieving Israel, and that only “that He might have mercy upon ALL” (Romans 11:23). Thus, humanly speaking, Israel was set aside because of her persistent rejection of Christ. From the divine side, however, Israel was set aside to demonstrate the failure of man and the infinite grace of God. God had made a difference between Jew and Gentile to show that essentially “there is no difference,” and those who suppose that God was a “respecter of persons” in giving Israel such great advantages over the Gentiles for 1,500 years, should observe that God has set her aside and allowed her to remain out of His favor for some 1,900 years.

And thus in early Acts we witness the fulfillment of Luke 2:34 concerning “the failing and rising up of many in Israel.”

In these early chapters of Acts the kingdom is being taken from the rulers (Matthew 21:43) and given to the “little flock” (Luke 12:32). The rulers fall while the despised followers of Messiah rise to take their place. — Stam, pages 207-210

Stam includes a footnote with the above passage in which he says:

“With the raising up of Paul, however, all who were still alive came into an additional hope as fellow members of the joint body (2 Corinthians 5:16-17; 1 Corinthians 12:13), a dual position theirs.”

I think I basically agree with him, but I still have some questions. I don’t know if all the kingdom believers believed Paul’s message and became members of the Body of Christ, although I think most of them probably did. If there were some who didn’t hear or were resistant, I don’t think they lost the salvation offered under the kingdom. I don’t think the 2 Corinthians passage Stam refers to really speaks to the issue. The 1 Corinthians passage does, but doesn’t answer it totally, in my mind. More study needed!

33 When they heard this, they were furious and plotted to kill them.

34 Then one in the council stood up, a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law held in respect by all the people, and commanded them to put the apostles outside for a little while. 

35 And he said to them: “Men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you intend to do regarding these men.

36 For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody. A number of men, about four hundred, joined him. He was slain, and all who obeyed him were scattered and came to nothing.

37 After this man, Judas of Galilee rose up in the days of the census, and drew away many people after him. He also perished, and all who obeyed him were dispersed.

38 And now I say to you, keep away from these men and let them alone; for if this plan or this work is of men, it will come to nothing;

39 but if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it — lest you even be found to fight against God.”

40 And they agreed with him, and when they had called for the apostles and beaten them, they commanded that they should not speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go.

41 So they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for His name.

42 And daily in the temple, and in every house, they did not cease teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.

furious (v.33) = sawn through (“cut to the heart” in the KJV) — violent mental anguish and indignation

plotted (v.33) — tense indicates continuous action. The leaders were willing and wanting to kill the apostles.

Gamaliel (v.34) —  He was not a believer and, later, wrote a prayer to be read in synagogues against the believers.

Gamaliel means “the reward of God.” We may safely regard him as identical with the famous Rabbi Gamaliel, grandson of that Hillel who founded the more liberal of the two schools into which the Pharisees were divided. He was a man of great learning and noble character, the first of those seven eminent Jewish doctors of divinity who alone were styled Rabbi (Master). He had studied Greek literature, and was in advance of most of the Rabbis in culture and liberality. He was held in the highest possible repute by the Jews, and was honorably named “the beauty of the Law.” He is said to have died 18 years before the destruction of the temple. As we know, Saul of Tarsus was one of his pupils (Acts 22:3). — Walker, page 130

put the apostles outside (v.34) — remove them from the chamber

Theudas (v.36) — nothing is known about him for sure — perhaps one of the insurgents in Palestine around 4 B.C., the time of Herod the Great

Judas (v.37) — 6 A.D., incited a nationalist revolt against paying tribute to Caesar — the census was that of Publius Sulpicius Quirinius, imperial legate of Syria for the second time

plan (v.38) — determination, design

beaten (v.40) —  the first suffering of the apostles (1 Peter 4:13-14)

The verb [beaten] occurs again in the Acts in 16:37; 22:19. The Sadducean party were loathe to let them off unpunished, and possibly a compromise was thus arrived at between them and the Gamaliel section of the Sanhedrin. The apostles probably received the “forty stripes save one” spoken of in the Law of Moses (Deuteronomy 25:1-3), and the word used suggests a severe cudgeling or flogging. These were the first stripes, so far as we know, received by Christ’s followers on His behalf. — Walker, page 133.

teaching (v.42) = instruction of believers

preaching (v.42) = declare as good tidings — evangelism

29 But Peter and the other apostles answered and said: “We ought to obey God rather than men.

30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus whom you murdered by hanging on a tree.

31 Him God has exalted to His right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.

32 And we are His witnesses to these things, and so also is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey Him.”

obey (v.29) = specifically “obey one in authority” — the apostles weren’t disputing the Sanhedrin’s right to rule, they were just obeying a higher authority

God of our fathers (v.30) — the apostles and the rulers were Jews

raised up Jesus (v.30) — Peter again mentions the resurrection, the prime issue for the Sadducees who didn’t believe in resurrection and who wouldn’t mention Jesus’ name

murdered (v.30) = murdered with one’s own hands

The high priest had just said (v.28) that the apostles were trying to pin Christ’s murder on the Sanhedrin and here (v.30), Peter does exactly that.

hanging on a tree (v.30) — a reference to Deuteronomy 21:22-23: If a man has committed a sin deserving of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain overnight on the tree, but you shall surely bury him that day, so that you do not defile the land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance; for he who is hanged is accursed of God.

Paul refers to this same passage in Galatians 3:13: Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”).

The rulers had not only murdered Jesus, but done so in a way which was associated with guilt and shame.

Him (v.31) — emphatic — the one you murdered and shamed, God has exalted (see 2:33)

Prince (v.31) — includes the sense of ruling and of originating (salvation)

repentance to Israel (v.31) — the apostles message was still directed only to Jews

forgiveness of sins (v.31) = letting go, discharge from obligation — specifically, the release of a sinner from guilt and consequences of sin

these things (v.32) = these sayings — the facts Peter had just stated

Holy Spirit (v.32) — He is also witness to the truth of what Peter had been saying

obey (v.32) — as in v.29. Obedience (apart from the obedience of faith) is not a prerequisite for receiving the Spirit under grace as it was under the Kingdom.

Peter accuses the rulers of murdering the Messiah, but then offers forgiveness.

25 So one came and told them, saying, “Look, the men whom you put in prison are standing in the temple and teaching the people!”

26 Then the captain went with the officers and brought them without violence, for they feared the people, lest they should be stoned.

27 And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest asked them,

28 saying, “Did we not strictly command you not to teach in this name? And look, you have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this Man’s blood on us!”

in this name (v.28) — the high priest refused to speak Jesus’ name

you have filled (v.28) — the tense indicates “and it continues to be filled”

bring this Man’s blood on us (v.28) — the verb is used in the New Testament (2 Peter 2:1, 5) only to indicate retributive judgment

These judges have to take the place, so to speak, of culprits, and defend themselves against a charge of murder, brought against them by the prisoners arraigned before them. They refer doubtless to Peter’s words in 2:23, 36; 3:15 and especially those in 4:10-12. We must remember, in this connection, that they and their followers had accepted all responsibility for the crucifixion of Christ before Pilate (Matthew 27:25). We notice how carefully they avoided all reference to the miraculous deliverance of the prisoners from the prison-house. — Walker, pages 125-126

__________

This opening question betrays the weakness of the high priest’s position in the contest. He had indeed strictly ordered the apostles not to teach in this name, but they had boldly declared that they would do so nevertheless — and he had been forced to dismiss their case.

As to filling Jerusalem with this doctrine, his own guilt gave him an exaggerated idea of what the apostles were accomplishing, for Messiah’s followers were still so much in the minority that after the stoning of Stephen they could be driven from Jerusalem by persecution.

Furthermore, the apostles were not seeking to bring the guilt of Christ’s blood upon the rulers. The very opposite was true.

The bitter antipathy of the high priest against Christ and the apostles is seen in his terms: “your doctrine” and “this man.” He does not even say what the doctrine is nor name the name of Christ. This is the first example of that avoidance of the name of Christ by the Jews which later became so general among them. In the Talmud, for example, He is most frequently referred to as peloni: “so and so.” — Stam, pages 194-195.

17 Then the high priest rose up, and all those who were with him (which is the sect of the Sadducees), and they were filled with indignation,

18 and laid their hands on the apostles and put them in the common prison.

19 But at night an angel of the Lord opened the prison doors and brought them out, and said,

20 “Go, stand in the temple and speak to the people all the words of this life.”

21 And when they heard that, they entered the temple early in the morning and taught. But the high priest and those with him came and called the council together, with all the elders of the children of Israel, and sent to the prison to have them brought.

22 But when the officers came and did not find them in the prison, they returned and reported,

23 saying, “Indeed we found the prison shut securely, and the guards standing outside before the doors; but when we opened them, we found no one inside!”

24 Now when the high priest, the captain of the temple, and the chief priests heard these things, they wondered what the outcome would be.

The apostles were arrested and treated as criminals as a result of their healing of the crowd. The Sadducees denied the resurrection and would lose their authority and influence if the people believed in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

high priest (v.17) — Annas or Caiaphas

all those who were with him (v.17) — his party, the Sadducees

sect (v.17) = religious party

indignation (v.17) = jealousy (at their loss of authority)— meaning includes envy and zeal

apostles (v.18) — probably all 12 of them this time

common prison (v.18) — public ward— an ignominious treatment

angel (v.19) — the Sadducees denied the existence of angels. The angel opened the prison doors — and shut them (v.23)

early in the morning (v.21) — daybreak, first light, when the temple was first opened

taught (v.21) = continued to teach

council (v.21) — the Sanhedrin

elders (v.21) — probably a group of influential men, in addition to the Sanhedrin, who were called in for important matters — probably the same as the “council of the elders” in Acts 22:5

officers (v.22) — the temple guard

shut securely (v.23) — There was no evidence or awareness of the apostle’s release from prison.

captain of the temple (v.24) — see Acts 4:1

wondered (v.24) — perplexed, at their wits’ end with no idea how to deal with the situation