YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

THE
COLLEGE OF MISSIONS LIBRARY
at the
YALE DIVINITY SCHOOL

NEW COMMENTARY

ON

ACTS OF APOSTLES

BY
J. W. McGARVEY, A. M.
"Professor of Sacred History in the College of the Bible. ' Author of
" Comnfentary on Matthew and Mark," "Lands ofthe
"Bible," and "Evidences of Christianity,"
LEXINGTON, KY.

VOLUME 1.

CINCINNATI :
The Standard Publishing Company,
Publishers of Christian Literature.

K\ non

copyrighted, 1892, by
J. W. McGarvey.

PEEFACE.
The composition of my first commentary on Acts
was begun when I was about thirty years of age, and the
work was published about four years later. The greater
part of the writing was done amid the distractions of
the first two years of our civil war, and the volume was
issued in the autumn of 1863, when men's thoughts were
turned away from religion to the events of the mighty
struggle. The publication of a commentary under such
circumstances was considered so hazardous, that it was
not undertaken until the demand for it was tested by a
call for subscribers in advance. The response to this
call was unexpectedly encouraging, and the volume was
issued in the inexpensive form which it has since re
tained. The sale of the old work, though never very large,
has been continuous from the time of its publication till
the present hour ; and the author has received from time
to time most gratifying assurances of the good it has
done, both in furnishing needed instruction to many
young preachers, and in teaching many other earnest souls
" the way of the Lord more perfectly." Encouraged by
these assurances, yet becoming more and more conscious
every year of the defects of the work, I have felt a very
keen desire to bring it to a higher state of excellence iii

iv PREFACE. \
before my life-work is done. I would be ungrateful in
deed were I not very thankful now for the kind prov
idence which has prolonged my life, and given me the
strength to accomplish in some degree this desire of my
heart. During the twenty-nine years that have intervened,
I flatter myself that I have become far better fitted to
write a commentary on this precious book ; for I have not
only experienced the mental growth which is common to
men of studious habits, but during twenty-seven of those
years I have annually given instruction on every verse of
lhe book to the senior class in the College of the Bible.
Within the same time questions of vital importance,
pertaining both to the trustworthiness of this narrative,.
and through it to the foundations of the faith itself,
have been imported from the rationalistic schools of Ger
many, and have sprung up in our own country and Great
Britain, which were unknown to me thirty years ago.
These questions must of necessity be discussed in a
commentary on Acts that shall be suited to the wants
of present day students. In seeking to meet these
new issues, the friends of the Bible have been not less
industrious than its foes have been in presenting them,
and the result is an extensive literature not in existence
when my first commentary was printed. Not only so,
but the life-long labors of Tischendorf and Tregelles on
the Greek text have been completed, as well as those of
Westcott and Hort which were then but fairly begun,

PREFACE.
aud we now have for the first time since the early centu
ries of our era a corrected text in which to read these
invaluable writings. The Bevised Version has also come
to my relief, saving me the necessity of correcting my
own revision of the Authorized Version which was the
basis of my former work.
In making use of all these new and better facilities,
I have produced a work which is much more than a new
and improved edition of my first commentary, and which
I am constrained to style my New Commentary on Acts.
It is new in almost everything except the form. As re
gards this, I have fo'und the old form, which enables one
to read 1he book, not as you read a dictionary, but con
tinuously as you do other books, so advantageous in
many respects, that I have retained it with slight mod
ifications. My advanced age, and the many calls of duty
which seem to claim the remnant of my active life,
remind me that this is most probably the last effort that
I shall make to improve a work which many of my
friends have represented as the most useful of all my
writings ; and I now commit this labor of my hands and
brain to the fate that awaits it in the form in which it
will outlive me in this world. The Lord, in whose service
I have written it, will deal with it according to its merits.
THE AUTHOR.
Lexington, Ky., 1892.

INTRODUCTION.

I. Acts of Apostles is a much neglected book. It
was so in the days of Chrysostom, who lived in the fifth
century, and who says : " There are many who do not
even know that this book is in existence, or who can
state the name of the author." l It is so to the present
time; and thousands go to other books of the Bible to
find that which is the distinctive teaching of this. The
reason is to be found in the fact that before the time of
Chrysostom the church had departed from its distinctive
teaching, and that to this day they have not returned to
it. It was a painful consciousness of this fact which led
the present writer, more than thirty years ago, to under
take a popular commentary on the book ; and, although
it is not now so much neglected as formerly, it still needs
to be brought more prominently before the attention of
this age. The fresh attention which has been given to it
within our own generation, is mainly a result of attacks
made upon its credibility by rationalists; and this may
prove the providential means of calling men back to that
clear understanding of its teachings, and that faithful
observance of them, which characterized the primitive
church. II. The Title, "The Acts ofthe Apostles," is mis
leading : it leads the uninitiated reader to suppose that it
treats of all or nearly all the acts of all the apostles ;
whereas it actually treats of only a few acts of any of
them, and of almost none of the acts of the majority.
1 Homily on Acts I.

Vin. INTRODUCTION.
By omitting the two definite articles we obtain the title,
Acts of Apostles, which answers well to the contents,
representing some of the acts of some of the apostles,
without pointing to the number of either. This is the
very title which the book hears in one of the two oldest
existing MSS. (B), while in the other (the Sinaitic) it is
styled simply, Acts. The title was doubtless given after
the book left the hands of its author ; for the writers of
that age were not accustomed to giving titles to their
books ; but it would be difficult to invent a better title
than the one which we have adopted.
III. Its Author. This book comes to us without
an external expression of its authorship ; but in its open
ing sentence it is addressed to one Theophilus, and it
claims to be from the pen of one who had written a
previous treatise concerning the career of Jesus, addressed
to the same person. This previous treatise is our third
Gospel, and it is credited to Luke. This claim of a com
mon authorship is confirmed by the uniformity of style
which pervades the two books.1 All the evidence, there
fore, which tends to prove that Luke wrote our third
Gospel has equal force in proof that he wrote the book
of Acts. While unbelieving writers in general deny that
he wrote either, all admit that the same author wrote
both. In the course of the writing we learn, from the use
of the pronoun " we " in connection with large sections
of the narrative,2 that the author claims to have been a

1 " Not fewer than fifty words are common to the two books
that are not found elsewhere in the New Testament " (Plumptre
Int. I.).
2 Beginning with chap. xvi. 11, when Paul was first at Troas, it
oceurs at short intervals in the narrative to the end.

INTRODUCTION. ix
traveling companion of the apostle Paul during a large
part of his ministry, and to have been with him during-
his first imprisonment in Rome.1 These indications
point exclusively to him whom Paul styles " Luke the
beloved physician ;" for he was with Paul in the Roman
imprisonment, as appears from salutations sent by him
in the epistles to the Colossians, and to Philemon, both
written in that imprisonment; and the author is dis
tinguished in Acts from all the other habitual compan
ions of Paul. He is thus distinguished in the account
of the company which started with Paul on his last
journey to Jerusalem (xx. 4-6) ; for there Sopater,
Aristarchus, Secundus, Gaius, Timothy, Tychicus, and
Trophimus, are mentioned as going before Paul to Troas,
and there waiting for "us," meaning the writer and
Paul. As then the writer was none of these, and yet
he journeyed with Paul on this visit to Jerusalem, and
thence to Rome, we can identify him with no other than
Luke. True, some others besides Luke were with Paul
when the two epistles just mentioned were written, but
none of these journeyed with Paul as did the author.2
The internal evidence of the authorship of any
written document has a presumption in its favor, like
that in favor of a deed or a will when found in proper
form ; and it stands good before the bar of law and of
reason until it is set aside by stronger evidence from ex
ternal sources. In order to set aside this evidence that
Luke is the author of Acts, we should find some writer
competent to testify, who contradicts it. Not only so,
but, as the book was certainly written by somebody, the
1 Acts xxviii. 16.
2 The persons named are Aristarchus, Jesus called Justus,
Mark, Epaphras, Luke, Demas (Col. iv. 10-14 ; Philemon, 23, 24).

X INTRODUCTION.
question of authorship lies between Luke and some
other writer ; and the adverse testimony, to be conclu ¦
sive, should name that other writer. But it is not pre
tended that such evidence is in existence. Not only is
the book not credited by name to any other known
author, but it is not pretended that there is any ex
ternal evidence that Luke is not its author. On the
contrary, the two earliest writers of antiquity whose
works have been preserved, and who mention this book
by name, declare that Luke is its author. One of these
is Irenseus, who was born in the vicinity of Smyrna in
the first half of the second century, became an elder in
the church of Lyons, France, in the year 170, and died
about the close of that century. In his boyhood he
knew Polycarp, who was acquainted with several of the
apostles, and therefore he could not well be mistaken in
regard to this matter.1 The other is the author of the
Muratorian Canon, written about the same time, who
makes the same statement.2 Such •evidence in regard to
the authorship of any book of a secular kind would not
be doubted by any scholar ; for in reality there is less
evidence than this for the authorship of almost every
secular book of antiquity.
Such being the internal evidence, and the earliest
external evidence of the origin of the book, we find, as
we should expect to find, traces of its existence all
through the period intervening between the time of its
composition and the days of the authors just mentioned.
1 Against Heresies, iii. 14, 1.
2 Tlie words are, "The acts of all the apostles are written in
one book, Luke relates the events of which he was an eye wit.
ness to Theophilus." The statement is inaccurate, but it is ex
plicit as to the authorship.

INTRODUCTION.

xi

Going backward from the latter date, Acts is found in
the two translations of the New Testament made about
the year 150, one of them into the Latin language, and
the other into the Syriac. The former, the old Latin
version, circulated in the Roman province of Africa, and
the latter, the Peshito Syriac, in Syria, north of Pales
tine. That the book was thus translated shows that it
had previously existed in Greek long enough to be
credited to an inspired source, and this at a time when
old men in the churches remembered far back into the
days of the apostles. We find, also, that Polycarp, above
mentioned as a contemporary of the apostles, makes
quotations from Acts.1 This chain of evidence is too
strong to be broken. It has withstood the strain of un
believing attacks in all the past, and it will doubtless
continue to do so in all the future.
IV. The Author's Sources of Information.
While the use of the first person in the passages in which
it occurs proves that the author was present in the
scenes therein described, it does not imply that he was
present in these alone. He may have spoken of Paul's
company in the third person when he was bimself pres
ent. When he was present his source of information
was of course his own personal observation, and this
covers not only the so-called " we" passages, but, in all
probability, some others. For nearly all the rest, in
cluding the account of Stephen's speech and martyrdom,
he had Paul as an informant ; and concerning those
events with which Paul had no connection, he had op
portunity to Converse with those who had — with Philip.
1 In the first chapter of his epistle to the Philippians, he quotes
from Peter's sermon on Pentecost the words, " whom God raised
Jrom the dead, having loosed the bands of hades."

xn INTRODUCTION.
for instance, concerning the latter's labors in Samaria
and Philistia ; and with Peter and James the Lord's
brother, for all in which they participated. The fact
that some Hebraisms characterize his earlier chapters
has led some scholars to suppose that he employed written
documents to some extent, and this is not at all improba
ble. We must not forget, also, that he almost certainly
enjoyed the miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit through
the imposition of apostolic hands; and this, while it may
not have superseded the necessity for careful inquiry,
must have guided him in his selections, and guarded him
against accepting misinformation.
V. Its Credibility. The question of the credi
bility of the book is resolved by the nature of the sub
ject matter into two — its credibility, first, as to the facts
recorded; and second, as to the speeches reported. The
former rests upon three substantial grounds. In the
first place, the book comes to us from a writer possessed
of the first degree of credibility according to the canons
of historical criticism ; that is, he was a contemporary
of the events which he records, and, to the extent that
he was not an eye-witness of them, he obtained them
from those who were. Such a writer, unimpreached,
possesses the highest degree of credibility known to
secular history. In the second place, the events which
he records correspond in many important particulars
with the statements of other competent writers of the
age in which he lived, and whose creeds and nationali
ties were hostile to his own. This adds greatly to the
force of the evidence based on the groiind first men
tioned. In the third place, the book contains many
points of incidental agreement with the acknowledged
epistles of the apostle Paul, which can not be accounted

INTR OD UCTION. xm
for except on the supposition that he and Paul both give
a truthful account of these events. For a somewhat
elaborate exhibition of the specifications under the last
two heads, the reader is referred to Paley's Horse Pauli
na?, the great masterpiece on the subject, and to the
author's Evidences of Christianity, Part Third, which
presents some points of the evidence omitted by Paley.
The principle ground on which the credibility of Acts
has been called in question is undoubtedly the fact that
it contains so many accounts of miracles ; but this ob
jection is urged only by rationalists, who reject all such
accounts, wherever found, without deeming them worthy
of investigation. All special objections, based on par
ticular passages in the book, will be noticed in the course
of the commentary.
As to the speeches in Acts, it has been urged that, in
the absence of any method of short-hand writing, it was
impossible to preserve them as they were delivered ; and
it has been charged that certain characteristics of Luke's
style of writing which they contain prove that he com
posed them and put them into the mouths of the sup
posed speakers. But these two objections are met by
the consideration in regard to the first, that all of these
speeches are obviously only epitomes of the originals,
very greatly abbreviated, such as could be remembered
and reported by the speakers, or even by their hearers ;
and that, as respects the marks of Luke's peculiar style,
they can be accounted for partly by the part which he
took in the abbreviation of them, and partly by the fact
that some of them, having been delivered in Aramaic,
were translated by Luke, and thus received the impress
of his style. Furthermore, it has been clearly demon
strated by scholars who have taken the pains to search

xi V INTR OD UCTION.
into the phraseology of these speeches, and to compare
them with the epistles of the speakers, that in the
speeches of every speaker who has left epistles there are
found some of the characteristics of his own style.1 In
reality, then, the speeches have precisely the characteristics
which we should expect them to have if they originated
and came to us as the narrative requires us to suppose.
VI. Its Divisions. Like all other early historians,
Luke goes through his narrative from beginning to end
without a mark or note to indicate the divisions of his
subject; but while there is nothing addressed to the eye
for the purpose of marking the divisions, they are made,
and they are unmistakable. No one can read the book
through without observing two great divisions, the first
of which might be styled a general history of the church
up to the death of Herod (xii. 23-25) ; and the second, ex
tending thence to the end of the book, might be styled
an account of the labors of the apostle Paul. Conse
quently, many writers treat the book as being divided
only into these two parts. But each of these contains
divisions which are sufficiently distinguished from one
another, and of sufficient length to be also styled parts.
The career of Paul, for instance, is divided into the ac
count of his preaching tours among the Gentiles, from
his being set apart to this work (xiii. 1-3), till his last
visit to Jerusalem at the close of his third tour (xxi. 16) ;
and the account of his five years of imprisonment, which
occupies the remainder of the book. The general his
tory, too, is divided into two very distinct parts, the first
of which, ending with viii. 4, treats exclusively of the
1 Numerous specifications are given in Alford's Introduction to
Acts, Sec. II., and Canon Cook's Introduction to Acts in the
Speaker's Commentary, Sec. 8.

INTRODUCTION. xv
Jerusalem church, and the remainder, from viii. 5 to xii.
25, of the spread of the gospel in Judea, Samaria, and
surrounding countries. I prefer, therefore, a distribution
into four parts, according to these four large divisions
made by the author.
Each of these parts is subdivided into sections,
treating each of a special topic under the general head.
These should be distinguished by the chapters in our
printed New Testaments, and they would be if the
division into chapters had been made on scientific prin
ciples ; but as the chapters are arbitrary, frequently
severing natural sections, and thus leading to confusion,
I have distributed the text into its natural sections, and
have employed the chapter divisions only for conven
ience of reference. I have also, for the purpose of ex
hibiting more clearly still to the eye of the reader the
author's divisions of his subject matter, separated the
text into paragraphs, and appended to each its proper
heading. These divisions, with their headings and sub
headings, are really parts of tlie commentary, as they
help to exhibit to the reader the author's plan; and a
careful study of them in connection with the remarks
made on the details of the narrativej will enable the
student to form a much higher opinion than he is other
wise apt to do of the author's literary skill.
VII. Its Design. Between believing scholars and
rationalists there is a radical difference in regard to the
chief purpose for which the book of Acts was written.
F. C. Baur, in common with all his followers of the
Tubingen school, assumes that Peter was the leader of
those Judaizers who were in continuous antagonism with
Paul, the other apostles being also in full sympathy with
Peter ; that this antagonism was unremitting throughout

xvi INTR OD UCTION.
the lives of the apostles ; and that Acts was written
about the close of the first century, or a little later, tor
the deliberate purpose of making it appear that no such
antagonism had ever existed. Baur says : " We are thus
obliged to think that the immediate object for which
Acts was written was to draw a parallel between the two
apostles, in which Peter should appear in Pauline, and
Paul in a Petrine character. Even in respect to the
deeds and the fortunes of the two men, we find a re
markable agreement. There is no kind of miracle
ascribed to Peter in the first part of the work which
does not find its counterpart in the second. It is even
more striking to observe how in the doctrine of their
discourses, and in their mode of action as apostles, they
not only agree with each other, but appear to have
actually changed parts."1 This view of the author's
design makes the book entirely untruthful, and a suffi
cient refutation of it is found in what we have said above
as to its authorship and its credibility. We may add
here, that the parallel between Paul and Peter, which
really exists, fails to support the theory, because it is
fully accounted for on the supposition that the whole
story is truthful. If Peter and Paul had the power to
heal diseases, they must have healed such diseases as
they found among the people, and therefore they must
have healed some of the same kinds of diseases. If
they preached the same gospel, they must have given
utterance to many of the same ideas, especially if they
preached, as they must have done, to many persons in the
same state of mind and needing the same instruction.
If they were persecuted, they must have suffered alike
the afflictions which men commonly visit on those whom
1 Church History, i. 133.

INTRODUCTION. xvii
they persecute ; and if they were guided by the same
Spirit, they must have agreed with each other. Both
the theory, then, and the reasoning by which it is sup
ported, are fanciful and false.
While believers must of necessity reject the radical
theory just stated, they differ very much among them
selves as to the chief design of the writer. Opinions on
this point are almost as numerous as commentators. We
shall not attempt to name them : it is sufficient to say
that they nearly all involve the mistake of failing to
distinguish between what the author has done, and the
design for which he did it. What he has done is to write
a very brief account of the origin and progress of the
church in Jerusalem, until its dispersion under the per
secution which arose about Stephen; ofthe men and
methods by which churches were then established in
surrounding districts, including the baptism of Gentiles;
of Paul's preaching tours among the districts of Asia
Minor, Macedonia and Greece, including the origin and
partial settlement of a controversy in regard to the rela
tion of Gentile converts to the law of Moses ; and
finally, of Paul's imprisonment, which began in Jeru
salem, and was terminated in Rome. This is what he
has done; and his purpose in doing it is to be ascer
tained by an inspection of the subject matter which he
has introduced into the different parts of his narrative.
Doubtless, like other historians, he had more than one
purpose in view, one of which may be regarded as chief,
and the others as subordinate ; and we are to distinguish
these by the relative amount of attention which he has
given to each. That must be the chief purpose to which
the most space is devoted, and to which the statements
on other matters sustain a subordinate relation. Now

xvm INTRODUCTION.
much the greater part of the book consists in detailed
accounts of conversions to Christ, and of unsuccesslul
attempts at the same. If we extract from the book all
accounts of this kind, together with the facts and inci
dents preparatory to and consequent upon each, we shall
have exhausted almost entirely the contents of the book.
The first chapter shows us how the apostles were pre
pared for the work of converting men ; the second gives
the account of converting the three thousand ; the third
recounts the conversion of many others, followed by the
arrest and trial of Peter and John in consequence of
these conversions; the persecutions in the next four
chapters all grew out of opposition to these conversions ;
the eighth, ninth and tenth chapters are devoted to the
conversions of the Samaritans, the eunuch, Saul of Tar
sus, and Cornelius ; the eleventh, mainly to the estab
lishment of the church in Antioch by the baptism of
Jews and Gentiles there ; the twelfth is an episode,
showing the benevolence of the new converts, and an
other persecution in Jerusalem; the thirteenth and
fourteenth give the sermons and conversions on Paul's
tour with Barnabas; the fifteenth describes the con
troversy on circumcision which grew out of the conver
sions on Paul's first tour ; the sixteenth gives mainly the
incidents leading to and immediately connected with the
conversions of Lydia and the Philippian jailer ; the
seventeenth, the conversions in Thessalonica and Bcerea,
followed by a nearly fruitless effort to the same end in
Athens; the eighteenth, the conversions in Corinth, oc
cupying a year and a half; the nineteenth, the many
conversions followed by persecution in Ephesus; the
twentieth, Paul's last journey to Jerusalem, followed by
his arrest and his futile attempts to convert the mob in

INTRODUCTION. xix
Jerusalem, Felix, Festus, and Agrippa; and his journey
to Rome, where he attempts in vain to convert the
leaders of the unbelieving Jews in that city. Undoubt
edly, then, the writer's chief design was to set forth to
his readers a multitude of cases of conversion under the
labors of apostles and apostolic men, so that we may
know how this work, the main work for which Jesus
died and the apostles were commissioned, was accom
plished. The cases recorded represent all the different
grades of human society, from idolatrous peasants up to
priests, proconsuls and kings. They represent all the
degrees of intellectual and religious culture ; all the
common occupations of life ; and all the countries and
languages of the then known world ; thus showing the
adaptation of the one system of life and salvation to all
the inhabitants of the earth.
The history of a case of conversion embraces two
distinct classes of facts ; first, the agencies and instru
mentalities employed in effecting it; and second, the
changes wrought in the subject of it. In the pursuit of
his main design, therefore, the author was led to desig
nate specifically all these agencies, instrumentalities, and
changes. He does so that his ret-ders may know what
agents are employed, and how they work ; what instru
mentalities are used, and how they are applied; and
what changes take place in a Scriptural conversion.
Men are taught more successfully and moved more easily
by example than by precept; and in accordance with
this well known characteristic of our nature, many re
ligious teachers depend much more, in their efforts at the
conversion of sinners, on well told " experiences," than
on the direct preaching of the word. This method was
anticipated by the Lord in giving us the book of Acts.

xx INTRODUCTION.
The cases herein recorded have this superiority over all
that now occur, in that they were directed by infallible
teaching, and that they were selected by infallible wis
dom from among the thousands which had occurred, be
cause of their peculiar fitness for a place in the inspired
record. If, then, modern conversions accord with these,
they must be right ; if they do not, they must be to that
extent wrong. The man who proposes to guide others
in the way of salvation is in duty bound to guide them
by these models ; and the man who supposes himself to
be a genuine convert to Christ may test his experience
by comparing it with these.
If it be asked, why may we not as well take as our
model the conversions which occurred under the old
dispensations, or under the personal ministry of Jesus,
the answer is, that we do not live under the law of
Moses, or under the personal ministry of Jesus, but un
der the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Forasmuch as
Jesus, just previous to his ascension, committed all the
affairs of his kingdom on earth into the hands of twelve
men, to be guided by the Holy Spirit, who descended
shortly after he ascended, all that we can know of the
present terms of pardon must be learned through the
teaching and the example of these men. If the con
ditions of pardon, therefore, under any preceding dis
pensation, differ in any particular from those laid down
and exemplified in Acts, in all the points of difference
we are bound by the latter and released from the former.
To study the book of Acts aright is to study it with
supreme reference to this subject; and for this reason
this topic is never lost sight of in the following pages.
If this book has been neglected in the past, it has
been neglected most of all, as we have intimated above,

INTRODUCTION. XXI
in reference to this its most distinctive teaching. Through
ignorance of this, thousands of evangelists are accus
tomed to referring sinners for instruction on the subject
of conversion more frequently to the book of Psalms,
than to Acts of Apostles. It is therefore a demand of
this age, an intensely missionary age, that we under
stand better this one book of all in the Bible which is
devoted to this transcendently important subject.
The principal agent in bringing about these conver--
sions, and in directing all the labors of the apostles, was
the Holy Spirit ; and it is undoubtedly a secondary, if not
a coordinate purpose of the author, to show how this
divine power was exerted in compliance with the oft re
peated promise of our Lord. The book has its starting
point in the apostolic commission (i. 2) ; but the apostles
were instructed not to begin their appointed work until
the Holy Spirit should come upon them (i. 4); and so
the main body of the book opens with an account of the
descent of the Spirit, and from beginning to end it sets
forth the labors of the apostles and evangelists as being
constantly directed by the Spirit. who dwelt within them.
Our Lord had said to his disciples, before his departure,
" It is expedient for you that I go away : for if I go not
away the Advocate will not come to you ; but if I go, I
will send him to you " (Jno. xvi. 7). " I have yet many
things to say unto you, but ye can not bear them now.
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he
shall guide you into all the truth" (ib. 22, 23). The
account of the departure of the first of these heavenly
guides is found in the introduction to Acts (i. 9-11),
and the body of the book sets forth the promised work
of the second. If, then, we may properly style the com
bined accounts of the four evangelists the Gospel of

xxii INTRODUCTION.
Christ, we may with equal propriety, as Plumptre sug
gests,1 style Acts the Gospel of the Holy Spirit.
In carrying out his main purpose in regard to con
versions and the guidance ofthe Holy Spirit, it was nec
essary for Luke to make selections from the multitudinous
events which occurred in the thirty years covered by his
narrative, and the plan on which these selections were
made brings to view another of his subordinate designs.'
He evidently designed to set forth the labors of Paul
more fully than those of all otlier men ; probably because,
while they would serve his main purpose as well, he at
the same time had a better personal acquaintance with
them. But to set these forth alone would have been to
present them without their historical connection in the
past, and consequently he was constrained to begin with
those events which preceded Paul's ministry and pre
pared the way for if. As Peter was the leader in all
these preceding events, it was but natural that he should
figure, most prominently in that part of the narrative ;
and inasmuch as there were many Judaizers at the time
of the composition of the. book, who were busily propa
gating the report that Paul's teaching was in some respects
antagonistic to that of Peter, it was a wise expedient to
refute this false and injurious report by selecting such ac
tions and words of the two as would prove their perfect
agreement. This further accounts for that phase of the
narrative mentioned above which has been seized upon
by rationalists as a ground for denying the credibility of
the book.
When we inquire into the special character of the
selections made in connection with Peter's work, we dis
cover another subordinate design, that of giving in brief
1 Handy Commentary, Introduction, IV.

INTRODUCTION. xxni
the fortunes of the mother church in Jerusalem, and then
the secondary agencies by which the gospel was carried
to the peoples living adjacent to Palestine. At the same
time, both in this part and in that with Paul as the cen
tral figure, the writer accomplishes another very impor
tant purpose, that of setting forth the apostolic method
of organizing the individual congregations of the believ
ers. Other subordinate purposes might be pointed out
if we were disposed to exhaust this topic ; but these are
sufficient to show that the author's plan v/as systematic,
well studied, and far-reaching. No book in the Bible
gives finer proofs of a thorough forecasting of its method
and matter with reference to the purposes in the mind
of the writer.
VIII. Its Date. F. C. Baur, and all the ra
tionalists of the Tubingen school, fix the composition
of the Book of Acts at a date too late for Luke to have
been its author. For this they have no reason except
the demands of their theory respecting the design of the
author, which we have briefly stated above (VII). ; but
as the theory is unquestionably false, the conclusion based
on it is unworthy of serious consideration. Some writers
who are more conservative, but who are to some extent
under rationalistic influence, date it not earlier than
A D. 70.1 The controlling reason for assigning it this
late date is the assumed fact that Luke's gospel was
written after the fall of Jerusalem ; and the ground of
this assumption is the further assumption that the pre
diction of the destruction of Jerusalem, quoted from
J^sus in xxi. 20-25, was written after the event. But
as such assumptions can have no weight at all with men
1 Meyer, Introduction, Sec. III. ; Lechler, Introduction, Sec. II. ;
Weiss, Life of Christ, i. 88.

xxiv INTRODUCTION.
who believe in the reality of miraculous prediction, we
are justified in laying aside without further notice the
conclusion which is based upon it.
Conservative writers in general, guided by the indi
cations found in the book itself, unite in assigning it the
date of the last circumstance mentioned in it.1 This
circumstance is the continuance of Paul's imprisonment
in Rome for "two whole years." That the narrative
here closes without telling the reader whether Paul was
liberated or put to death, is held to be conclusive proof
that neither had taken place when the last word of the
book was written. This proof is greatly strengthened
when we consider it in connection with the course ofthe
narrative in the last four chapters. In chapter xxv., the
writer gives the account of Paul's appeal to Csesar, which
broke off his trial before Festus, and which led to all
the subsequent proceedings. It was in consequence of
this appeal that Festus, being puzzled as to what report
he should send to the Emperor with the prisoner, brought
his case to the attention of Agrippa, and also brought
Paul himself before this young king (xxv. 12, 26, 27).
He was sent upon the voyage described in the twenty-
seventh chapter in compliance with the law governing
the right of appeal ; he was cheered when life was
despaired of in the storm by the divine message, " Fear
not, Paul; thou must stand before Csesar" (xxvii. 24) ;
his appeal to Csesar was the topic of the first conversa
tion which he held with the Jews in the city of Rome
(xxviii. 17-19) ; and he was kept in prison two whole
years awaiting his trial. Now, if his trial before Csesar
had taken place when this book was completed, whether
1 Gloag, Int., Sec. V. ; Canon Cook, Speaker's Commentary,
Int. to Acts, Sec. X. ; Aiford, Int., Sec. IV. : Hackett, Int., Sec. V.

INTR OD UCTION. xxv
it resulted in acquittal or conviction, it is unaccountable
that the book was closed without a word on the subject.
This would have been, not a mere omission like many
others which we know to have occurred in the course of
the narrative — the omission of matters the mention of
which was not required by the historical context — but
the omission of the culminating fact to which a long
series of events previously mentioned led forward, and
concerning which the writer had deliberately awakened
the curiosity of his reader. It would be like a drama
in which the deepest interest in the sequel of the plot is
excited, but which closes just at the point Avhen the
sequel would have been the next and the last thing to be
witnessed. Or, more pointedly still, it would be like
the story of a noted trial, which would give the arrest
of the prisoner, his transportation from a distant country
to the place of trial, the incidents of a long imprison
ment leading up to the very day of the trial, and then
closing without a word about the trial itself. Such a
narrative was never written, unless it were some fictitious
story thus closing for the very purpose of tantalizing its
readers. Such a close to a serious and truthful history
is unheard of. Our only rational inference, then, is that
Luke wrote the last sentence of this book just at the
close of the two whole years which he mentions, and
before Paul's case had yet been adjudged by the em
peror. An attempt has been made to break the force of this
reasoning by supposing that Luke may have intended to
write another book, and that, as he left the account of
the 'ascension of Jesus incomplete at the close of his
Gospel, and then completed it by giving other particu
lars in the beginning of Acts, so he intended to do with

xxvi INTRODUCTION.
the account of Paul's trial.1 But there is not the least
foundation for the supposition that Luke had any such
intention. It is invented to explain a fact which admits
of explanation without it. Moreover, the supposed case
is not a parallel ; for in Luke's Gospel he did mention
the ascension, of which he gave a fuller account in his
next book ; but here he says not a word about the result
of Paul's trial, although he could have done so in a sin
gle line. He disposes of the death of the apostle James
in seven words in the Greek (xii. 2), and he could cer
tainly have added that many to tell us that Paul was
acquitted, or that he was convicted ; and then, if he had
another book in contemplation, he could have reserved
for it a fuller account.
It is proper to say, before we leave this subject, that
Irenseus, who wrote in the latter half of the second cen
tury, says that Luke wrote his Gospel after the death of
the apostles Peter and Paul ; 2 but the internal evidence
adduced above outweigh ts this traditional evidence, and
it acquires a still greater weight when we consider that
on this supposition the author not only omitted to tell
the result of Paul's appeal to Csesar, but also failed to
mention two events immediately connected with his
story, which were the most alarming and distressing of
all the calamities that befell the apostolic church, the
execution in Rome of these two prominent apostles.
IX. Its Chronology. With the exception of
some sections in Part Second, in which the author starts
from the dispersion of the Jerusalem church to follow
the preacher or preachers who carried the gospel to a
1 Meyer, Int., Sec. III., following several rationalistic German
critics. 2 Against Heresies, iii. 1.

INTRODUCTION.
certain district, and then returns to the same point to
follow another, all the matter in Acts is arranged in
chronological order, and yet the author gives no con
nected notes of time from which we can make out either
the whole time occupied by the events, or the time
covered by any one part of the book except the last. In
this last part he is explicit as to time, stating that Paul
was arrested in Jerusalem at a feast of Pentecost ; that
lie was held in prison from that time two years till the
accession of Festus; that in the following autumn he
was sent by Fegtus to Rome, reaching that city in the
spring following ; and that he remained a prisoner in
Rome two whole years.1 Thus we have nearly five
years occupied with this portion of the history, and as it
is a well established fact that Festus was sent to Judea
in the year 60,2 we see that Paul's arrest two years
previous was at Pentecost 58 ; that his departure to
Rome was in the fall of 60 ; that he reached Rome in
the spring of 61 ; and that the narrative closes in the
spring of 63. As the epistles entitled Ephesians, Colos
sians, Philemon and Philippians, were written during
this imprisonment,3 they bear date 6 1-62.
If we start from Paul's arrest in Jerusalem, Pente
cost 58, and count backward, we can go a certain distance
by the light of Luke's statements alone, and still farther
by the aid of Paul's. On the journey by which he
reached Rome he spent at Philippi the preceding days of
1 Acts xx. 16, cf. xxiv. 27; xxvii. 1 ; 9; xxviii. 11-16 ; 30.
2 This I think is clearly established by the evidence in Cony
beare and Howson, Appendix IL, note (C), against the views of
Meyer, Int. to Acts, Sec. IV.
3 Eph. iii. 1 ; iv. 1 ; Phil. i. 12, 13 ; iv. 22 ; Col. iv. 10, 18 ; Phil
emon 1, 9, 10, 23.

xxvm INTR OD UCTION.
unleavened bread (xx. 6), and he came thither directly
from Greece, where he had remained three months (xx.
1-6). These must have been the three winter months,
as they were followed by the trip to Philippi in the early
spring. Here, then, we have reached the winter of 57-58 ;
and as Romans was written on the eve of leaving Greece
on the same journey (Rom. xv. 25, 26, cf. Acts xxiv. 17),
its date is the beginning of 58. Galatians shows in
ternal evidence of having been written about the same
time.1 As Paul went directly from Macedonia into Greece,
he must have spent the autumn in the former country ;
and as he tells the Corinthians that he intended to abide
in Ephesus till Pentecost, and spend at Corinth the next
winter, he must also have spent the summer in Mace
donia (I. Cor. xvi. 5-8). This was the summer of 57,
and as he wrote Second Corinthians in Macedonia
(II. Cor. i. 12; vii. 5), this must be the date of that
epistle. But he wrote First Corinthians in Ephesus not
long before Pentecost the same year (I. Cor. xvi. 8), and
consequently this is the date of that epistle, and it is also
the year in which his labors in Ephesus ended. He had
been there two years and three months (xix. 8-10), and
therefore he commenced his work there in the beginning
of 54. From this point backward we have no connect
ing figures, but we can feel our way by conjecture a
short distance with a good degree of probability. As
Paul, on his last homeward journey to Antioch left an
appointment at Ephesus, and left there Priscilla and
1 This is seen in the sameness of subject matter making up the
principal argument of the two epistles, that is, justification by
faith, together with Paul's allusion (Gal. i. 6) to the shortness of
time since he had been in Galatia, a little over three years.

INTRODUCTION. xxix
Aquila with the purpose of thus securing their aid on
his return (xviii. 19-21), it is almost certain that on his
return he passed very rapidly over the districts lying
between Antioch and Ephesus, giving to the journey
much less than a year. If so, he commenced his third
tour in 53, having closed his second tour about the mid
dle, or in the first half of that year. But in closing the
second tour he came direct from Corinth, a journey of a
week or two ; and in Corinth he had stayed eighteen
months (xviii. 11). This takes us back to about the be
ginning of the year 52, or late in 51, for the beginning
of his labors in Corinth. About this time he wrote
the two epistles to the Thessalonians.1 If, now, we allow
a little less than two years for the events of the second
tour as far as to Corinth, we fix the beginning of that
tour early in 50; and as that tour was begun almost im
mediately after the conference in Jerusalem on circum
cision, we fix the beginning of the year 50 as the prob
able date of that event.
At this point some of Paul's figures come to our
assistance. He states in Galatians (i. 18) that three
years after his conversion he went from Damascus to
Jerusalem, and that after fourteen years (ii. 1) he went
there again with Barnabas to the conference. Now if
these two periods are to be understood as consecutive,
'This is ascertained by comparing what is said of the arrival
of Timothy and Silas in Corinth, Acts xviii. 5, with I. Thess. iii.
3-6, which shows that Timothy had been sent back to Thessa
lonica from Athens, and had returned to Paul at Corinth when
the first epistle was written ; and the sameness of the condition
of the Thessalonian church, together with the continued pres
ence of Silas with Paul, who was not with him after he left Cor
inth, shows that Second Thessalonians was written soon afterward.
See II. Thess. 1-4.

xxx INTRODUCTION.
making it seventeen years from his conversion to the
conference, the conference could not have been in 50
without throwing Paul's conversion into 33, the year
previous to the founding of the church.1 But if we
1 The majority of ehronologists date the death of our Lord and
the founding of the church in the year 33-; but I am constrained,
after much reflection, to believe that it occurred in 34. Jesus was
baptized, according to Luke (iii. 24), when he was about thirty
years of age, and consequently he entered almost immediately
upon his thirty-first year. If he died in his thirty-third year, his
ministry can have lasted only a little over two years. Our only
means of ascertaining how longit lasted is by observing the num
ber of passo vers that occurred during his ministry according to
the statements of John, the only writer who pays attention to this
matter. The one mentioned in the second chapter of John is the
first of these, and it probably occurred nearly or quite six months
after the baptism of Jesus. If the feast mentioned, but not
named, in v. 1 was a passover, the whole time of the ministry
from the first passover was tliree years; for he certainly passed
the time of one other mentioned in vi. 4, which would make two
years, and he lived till the next, mentioned in xii. 1, which
makes three years. The only debatable question, if we rely upon
John's testimony, is as to whether the feast of v. 1 was a pass-
over, or some other feast. If we argue that it-can not be a pass-
over because John calls it a mere feast without naming it, we
may as well argue from the same fact that it can not have been
the feast of pentecost, or that of tabernacles, or that of dedica
tion; for he names all three of these feasts in other places. But
it must have been one of the four, for the Jews had no others.
If it was either the pentecost, the tabernacles, or the dedication
following the supposed passover, this would make no difference as
to the whole length of the ministry ; for we would have the pass-
over in question passed by in silence, and the space between the
passover of chap. ii. and that of chap. vi. would still be two
whole years. The supposition adopted by those who make the
whole ministry last but two years after the first passover is, that
the feast of v. 1 was the feast of dedication following next after the
passover of chap. ii. But this requires a forced interpretation of
the remark of Jesus to his disciples in John iv. 35: " Say ye not,
There aro yet four months, and then cometh the harvest?"

INTRODUCTION. xxxi
count the three years and the fourteen as both beginning
from his conversion, which best agrees with the argument
of the first chapter of Galatians, then fourteen years
back from 50 fixes his conversion in the year 36, the
second year after the founding of the church, and this is
quite harmonious with the course of events in the first
eight chapters of Acts.
With Paul's conversion in 36 as a new starting point,
his first visit to Jerusalem thereafter, three years later,
and his departure to Tarsus, are fixed in 39, and the
labors of Philip in Samaria, together with his baptism
of the eunuch, in the interval between 36 and 39. 1
Next in advance of these figures we have a date
fixed by Josephus. From him we learn that Agrippa
died in 44,2 and this was while Barnabas and Paul were
The natural implication in this question is that at the time it
was propounded the next harvest was four months in the fu
ture; and as the harvest in Palestine begins late in April, the
remark was made in the last, of December, or the first of Janu
ary. If so, the feast of dedication for that year was most prob
ably already past, for it occurred on the fifteenth of the tenth
month, which was never later than the fifth of our January, nor
earlier than the fifth of Oecember. Even if that was one of the
years in which this feast fell late in our calendar, it is scarcely
possible that it was the feast of John v. 1 ; for if it was, Jesus
made this journey into Galilee only to return immediately to
Jerusalem, and this in the dead of winter. For these reasons I
think that the feast of v. 1 was a passover, and that, therefore the
ministry of Jesus lasted more than three years, and terminated
in the year 34.
1 By describing these labors between his account of the dis
persion of the church and the return of Paul to Jerusalem, Luke
evidently means that they occurred in this interval.
2 He informs us (Ant. xix. ; iv. 4, cf. v. 1 ; viii. 2) that soon
after Claudius came to the throne he gave to Agrippa all the
dominions of his grandfather Herod, and that Agrippa reigned
over this enlarged kingdom three years. But Claudius came to

xxxii INTRODUCTION.
engaged in their visit of charity to the churches in Judea
(xi. 29; xii. 25). But previous to starting on this visit,
these two brethren had spent a whole year in Antioch
(xi. 26), and this fixes both the arrival ot Paul in that
city in the year 43, and the duration of his stay in Syria
and Cilicia from 39 to 43, a period of about four years.
During this period occurred the labors of Peter recorded
in the ninth and tenth chapters of Acts, and the found
ing of the Antioch church. We can trace the chronology
of these with a good degree of probability. We are
told that after Paul was sent away from Jerusalem the
church throughout Judea, Samaria and Galilee had peace,
and that Peter went " throughout all parts," meaning all
parts of these three districts, until he finally came down
to Lydda, whence he was called to Joppa ; and that
there he tarried "many days" (ix. 32-43). Now it
would appear quite unreasonable to suppose that all these
labors and journeys of Peter occupied less than one year,
and it is more probable that they occupied two. If we
adopt the former estimate, his call from Joppa to Csesarea
to baptize the Gentiles was in the year 40 ; and if the
latter, it was in 41. The latter has been adopted as the
correct date by the majority of commentators. It can
not be far from correct; and it shows that the apostles
continued to confine their preaching to the circumcised
for seven years, from 34 to 41.
The date of founding the church of Antioch can he
approximated by a similar calculation. As soon as the
brethren in Jerusalem heard of the baptism of Greeks
there, they sent Barnabas thither (xi. 22). This can not
have been many weeks after the event, and Barnabas re-
the throne a. d. 41, and therefore Agrippa's death, three years
later, must have been in 44.

INTRODUCTION. xxxiii
mained there apparently but a short time before he went
to Tarsus, and brought Paul to Antioch. But this last
event, as we have seen above, was in 43 ; and coase-
quently the founding of the church could not have been
earlier than some time in 42. Thus we see that the
baptism of Greeks in Antioch was begun some months
after the baptism of the house of Cornelius, just as the
course of the narrative in Acts would naturally lead us
to suppose. The results obtained by this zigzag line of research,
the only kind of line which our detached figures permit
us to follow, may be arranged for convenience in the
following form, an interrogation point being placed
after those dates which depend largely on conjecture :
1. The first Pentecost, May 34.
2. The dispersion of the Jerusalem church, and the
conversion of Saul, 36.
3. The return of Paul to Jerusalem after his con
version, 39.
4. Philip's labors in Samaria, and the baptism of
the eunuch, between 36 and 39.
5. The baptism of the house of Cornelius, 41 ?
6. Founding the Antioch church, 42?
7. First labors of Barnabas and Saul together in
Antioch, 43.
8. Barnabas and Saul sent to Judea with alms, death
of James, imprisonment of Peter, and death of Herod,
44. 9. The conference on circumcision, 50?
10. Paul's first tour among the Gentiles, between 44
and 50, five years lacking a stay in Antioch before he
started, and a stay in Antioch just before the conference.
The tour probably occupied nearly four years.

xxxiv INTR OD UCTION.
11. Paul's second tour, 50 to 53, including eighteen
months, near about half the time, in Corinth. There he
wrote I. and II. Thessalonians.
12. Paul's third tour, 53-58, including two years
and three months in Ephesus, his longest stay in any
one place. On this tour he wrote I. and II. Corinthians
in 57, and Galatians and Romans in the beginning of 58.
13. From 58 to 63, his imprisonment, beginning in
Jerusalem in 58, continuing in Cassarea from 58 to 60,
on the voyage to Rome from the fall of 60 to the spring
of 61, and in Rome from 61 to 63. In the last two
years, the writing of Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon,
Philippians, and also Hebrews, if he wrote the last at
all (Heb. xiii. 18, 19).
Meyer, in his Commentary on Acts (Introduction),
gives a table presenting the chronologies of thirty-three
authors, ancient and modern, including only one of the
many English authors who have written on the subject.
No two of these fully agree with each other, yet so nearly
do they all approximate agreement that very few of
them differ more than two years at any one point from
the figures given above. This is therefore a sufficiently
near approach to the exact truth in the case to answer all
practical purposes, especially as Luke shows by his almost
total disregard of chronology that he did not base upon
it the value of his facts.
X. Literature. It would be easy to copy a list
of all the books, ancient and modern, which have been
written for the elucidation of Acts ; but I think it
sufficient here to name those which I have found most
useful in my own studies.
When I wrote my old commentary, I had constantly
in hand only Bloomfield's, Olshausen's and Hackett's

INTRODUCTION. xxxv
commentaries on the original text, and the popular com
mentaries of J. A. Alexander, Albert Barnes, and a few
ofthe older English works which are now obsolete. I
also made constant use of Conybeare and Howson's Life
and Epistles of Paul, which was then a new work, and,
being the first of its kind, was like a fresh revelation to
all who had never studied Acts in the light of Paul's
Epistles. In preparing the present commentary, I have had
the additional assistance of the following works:
1. Commentaries : Alford's, Meyer's, Gloag's, Lech-
ler's (in Lange's Bible Work), Jacobson's (in Speaker's
Commentary), Plumptre's (a volume of the Handy Com
mentary), Stokes' (a volume of Expositor's Bible), and
Lumby's (a volume of the Cambridge Bible for Schools
and Colleges). Of these, I have found Meyer's the most
elaborate and instructive in grammatical exegesis ; while
Alford's and Plumptre's have proved the most helpful
in other particulars.
2. Lives op Paul. Farrar's Life and Works of
Paul has vivified the picture drawn with so much pre
cision by Conybeare and Howson, while the infidel
works of C. F. Baur and Ernest Renan, have been of
service in pointing out the approaches of the enemy, so
that we may guard the student more securely against
him. 3. Other Works. I have found a. similar utility
to that last mentioned, in the infidel work of Baur on
the History of the Christian Church in the first three
Centuries, in Zeller's work on Acts, and in the anony
mous English work entitled Supernatural Religion.
In addition to the information derived from such
books as I have mentioned, I also made the tour of

xxxvi INTRODUCTION.
Palestine in the year 1879, and visited points of Biblical
interest in Asia Minor and Greece. I traveled more
extensively in Palestine, and saw more of its out-of-the-
way places, than any other American with whose writ
ings I am acquainted; and I did so for the distinct pur
pose of better qualifying myself to speak and to write on
such topics as are illuminated by an exact knowledge of
the country.

COMMENTARY ON ACTS.

PART FIRST.
THE ORIGIN, PROGRESS, AND DISPERSION
OF THE CHURCH IN JERUSALEM.
(I. l — VIII. 4.)

SEC. I. — INTRODUCTORY STATEMENTS.
(i. 1-28.)
1. The Starting Point of the Narrative.
Vv. 1, 2. Luke fixes the starting point of this
narrative on the day in which his account of Jesus ter
minated : (1) The former treatise I made, 0 Theophilus,
concerning all that Jesus began1 both to do and to teach,
(2) until the day in which, having given commandment
through the Holy Spirit unto the apostles whom he had
chosen, he was taken up.2 This is the proper starting
point chronologically, because the present treatise is a
continuation of the history begun in the former; and
1 "Began both to do and teach" is an idiomatic expression in
which "began" is superfluous in English. We would say, both
did and taught. For other examples of this idiom, see Mark vi. 2;
xiii. 5; Luke iii 8; xi. 29; xiii. 25; xiv. 9, 29; John xiii. 5. Itis
a mistake to suppose that there is an allusion in this expression
to the personal acts and teaching of Christ as a mere beginning
of that which he continued to do and teach after his ascension.
* In this rendering of verse 2 the exact order of the clauses in
the Greek is followed, and the connection between the day of the
1

2 COMMENTARY. [i. 1, 2.
the commandment given " on the day in which he was
taken up," which can be no other than the Apostolic
Commission, is the proper starting point logically, be
cause from it the apostles derived their authority for the
acts about to be recorded. During the personal minis
try of Jesus, he authorized no one to preach him as the
Christ ; on the contrary, he forbade his apostles to do so.1
He was doubtless moved to this by consideration of
their inadequate conceptions of the Messiahship, their
misunderstanding of the nature of his kingdom, and
their imperfect apprehension of much that he had taught
them. They were as yet incapable of setting forth
his claims correctly. On the night of the betrayal he
informed them that in a short time the Holy Spirit
would be given to them to guide them into all the
truth, and that then this restriction would be removed.
Finally, "on the day in which he was taken up," he
said, as Luke had written before, " Thus it is written,
that the Christ should suffer, and rise again from the
dead the third day; and that repentance and remission
of sins should be preached in his name unto all the
nations, beginning from Jerusalem ; " 2 and as Mark had
written, " Go ye into all the world, and preach the
gospel to the whole creation. He that believeth and is
baptized shall be saved; but he that disbelieveth shall be
condemned."3 We shall find that this commission is
the key to the whole narrative before us ; that the acts
ascension and the commandment given on that day is expressed
as in the original. At the same time the words "after that"
used in A. V. and E. V., but not represented by corresponding
words in the original, are avoided, and the participle, evre&i/ievos,
has its proper rendering.
IMatt. xvi. 20; xvii. 9. 2Luke xxiv. 46, 47. 'Mark xvi.
15, 16.

i. 3-5.] ACTS. 3
of the apostles here recorded are the counterpart of its
terms, and the best exposition of its meaning.
Ver. 3. As the apostles are soon to appear in the
narrative' testifying to the resurrection of Jesus, our
author next gives a compendious statement of their
qualifications for this testimony : (3) to whom he also
showed himself alive after his passion by many proofs,
appearing unto them by the space of forty days, and
speaking the things concerning the kingdom of God:
In the concluding chapter of the former narrative a
number of these proofs had been given, and they are
not here repeated. We learn here, however, a fact not
there related, that the time from the resurrection to the
ascension was forty days. This statement has been
treated by unfriendly critics as an after-thought on
Luke's part, it being held that in his former narrative
he represents Jesus as ascending to heaven on the same
day on which he arose from the dead.1 The truth is, that
in the former account he describes an interview which
occurred on the day of the resurrection, and one on the
day of the ascension, without noting the fact that there
was an interval between them;2 while here he distinctly
states that there was an interval of forty days. The
latter statement serves the purpose of an explanation ;
but it is not a contradiction.
Vv. 4, 5. To account for the delay of the apostles
in Jerusalem after receiving their commission, and
also to fix more definitely the time at which they
were to begin their work, the historian next quotes a
part of the conversation which took place on the day of
the ascension : (4) and being assembled together with
them, he charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but
1 Eenan, Apostles, 20 ; Meyer in loco. 2 Luke xxiv. 43, 44-51.

4 COMMENTARY. [i. 4, 5, 6-
to wait for the promise of the Father, which, said he, ye
heard from me : (5) for John indeed baptized with water ;
but ye shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many
days hence. This commandment has been mistaken by
commentators for the command referred to above (2) ;
but, as we have seen, that commandment is the com
mission, while this is but a limitation of the commission
as to its time and place of beginning. The " promise of
the Father," which they had heard from him, is the
promise of the Holy Spirit which he had made them on
the night of the betrayal.1 On the meaning of the ex
pression, " baptized in the Holy Spirit," see forward
under ii. 4. The allusion to John's baptism was prob
ably suggested by the well remembered remark of John :
" I indeed baptize you with water ; but there cometh he
that is mightier than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am
not worthy to unloose : he shall baptize you in the
Holy Spirit and in fire" (Luke iii. 16).
2. The Final, Promise of the Holy Spirit, 6-8.
Ver. 6. When Jesus died, all hope that he would
set up the expected kingdom expired for a time ; but
since his resurrection he had spoken much to the dis
ciples concerning the kingdom (verse 3), and he had
said, as reported by Matthew, " All authority hath been
given unto me in heaven, and on earth" (xxviii. 18);
and from such remarks the apostles had begun te believe
that the kingdom which he had failed to establish before
his death he would yet establish after his resurrection.
Luke reveals this revival of hope by his next state
ment : (6) They therefore, when they were come to
gether, asked him, saying, Lord, dost thou at this time
1 John xiv. 26 ; xv. 26, 27 ; xvi. 12, 13.

i. 6-8.] ACTS. 5
restore the kingdom to Israel ? The form of the ques
tion, " restore the kingdom to Israel," shows that they
still retained their former misconception, that Christ's
kingdom was to be a restoration of the old kingdom of
David, and not a new and different institution. The
question also shows unmistakably that his kingdom had
not yet been inaugurated ; for if it had been, it is in
conceivable that these men, who were its chief executive
officers on earth, knew nothing of the fact; and it is
equally inconceivable that, if it had been, Jesus would
not have promptly corrected so egregious a blunder on
the part of the disciples. Nothing, indeed, but a miscon
ception almost as gross as that of the twelve concerning
the nature of the kingdom could have originated the
thought entertained by some in modern times, that
Christ's kingdom had been set up previous to this time.
All the arguments in support of this idea, and all the
interpretations of special passages in its favor, plausible
as they may be, are set aside by the one decisive con
sideration, that this kingdom could not be inaugurated
until the King was crowned in heaven. This occurred
after the ascension,1 and his first administrative act on
earth was that of sending the Holy Spirit upon the
apostles on the next Pentecost.2
Vv. 7, 8. We now take up the answer to the ques
tion which we have just considered : (7) And he said to
them, It is not for you to know times and seasons,
which the Father hath set within his own authority.
(8) But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is
come upon you : and ye shall be my witnesses both in
Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and unto the
uttermost part of the earth. The answer suggests that
1 Phil. ii. 8-11 ; Heb. ii. 9. * Acts ii. 32, 33.

6 COMMENTARY. [i. 7, 8.
the times and seasons of God's purposes are kept more
in reserve than the purposes themselves ; and this is in
harmony with the known characteristic of prophecy,
that it deals more in facts and the succession of events
than in dates or definite periods. It was not important
for them to know the time at which the kingdom would
be established ; but it was all-important that they should
receive the power necessary to the part which they were
to take in its inception and progress; so the answer is
concerned chiefly with the latter. The power promised,
and their work as witnesses, are so connected together
as to indicate that ihe power to be effective witnesses is
meant. This, as we learn from the testimony which
they afterward gave, was not merely to tell what they
had seen and heard, which they could have done by
their unaided powers ; but it included ability to recall
all that he had said to them in his years of ministry ;
and to testify as to his exaltation in heaven, his will
concerning all spiritual affairs on earth, and his future
dealings with both men and angels. This power was to
be conferred as he had previously promised,1 and as he
now once more assures them, by the Holy Spirit which
they were to receive "not many days hence." The
order of localities in which he tells them to bear witness
was not the result of partiality for the Jews and Samari
tans over the Gentiles ; nor yet was it merely to fulfill
the prediction that thus it must be ; for it had been pre
dicted because there were good reasons that it should
be so. One reason, suggested by the commentators in
general, for beginning in Jerusalem, was that he might
be vindicated in the same city in which he was con
demned; but the controlling reason was doubtless this:
1 Luke xxiv. 48.

i. 7-9.] ACTS. 7
the most devout portion of the Jewish people, that
portion which had been most favorably impressed by
the preparatory preaching • of John and Jesus, were
always collected in Jerusalem at the great annual festi
vals, and hence a beginning could be made there with
greater success than elsewhere. Next to these, the in
habitants of the rural districts of Judea were best pre
pared by the previous preaching ; then the Samaritans,
who had seen some of the miracles of Jesus ; and last
of all, the Gentiles. Thus the rule of success was made
their guide from place to place, and it became the
custom, even in heathen lands, to preach " first to the
Jew, and then to the Gentile." The result justified the
rule, for the most signal triumph which the gospel ever
achieved was in Jerusalem, and the most successful ap
proach to the Gentiles in every country was through
the Jewish synagogue.
3. The Ascension of Jesus, 9-11.
Ver. 9. Having now completed his brief account
of the last interview between Jesus and his disciples,
Luke says : (9) And when he had said these things, as
they were looking, he was taken up ; and a cloud re
ceived him out of their sight. We learn from Luke's
former account of the ascension, to which this is a sup
plement, that Jesus was in the act of blessing them with
uplifted hands, when he was parted from them and
borne aloft into heaven.1 The cloud formed a back
ground which rendered the outline of his person very
distinct while in view, and suddenly shut him off from
view as he entered its bosom. Thus all the circum
stances of this most fitting departure are calculated to
1 Luke xxiv. 50, 51.

8 COMMENTARY. [i- 9-
preclude the suspicion of deception, or of optical illu
sion. It has been urged by some skeptical writers that
the silence of Matthew and John in reference to the
ascension, who were eye - witnesses of it if it really
occurred, while it is mentioned only by Luke and Mark,
who were not present, is ground for suspicion that the
latter derived their information from impure sources.
That the testimony of Mark and Luke, however, is
credible, is made apparent to all who believe in the re
surrection of Jesus by simply inquiring, What became
of the body after it was raised ? Even if none of the
historians had described the ascension, we should still
conclude that at some time and in some manner it
did take place. It should be observed, too, that while
John does not mention it, he quotes a conversation be
tween Jesus and Mary Magdalene which implies it. He
said to her, " Touch me not ; for I am not yet ascended to
my Father."1 Perhaps it was omitted by Matthew and
John because they both close their narratives with
scenes in Galilee, far removed from Jerusalem ; and
mentioned by Mark and Luke because they conclude
tbe previous part of their narratives in Jerusalem and
on the day the ascension took place. Thus the associa
tion of thought, which so often governs insertions and
omissions, may have had its natural influence on them.
Finally, as to Luke, there was a special reason why he
should mention it, found in the fact that the speeches
and discussions which he is about to record had con
stant reference to Christ ascended and glorified, and it
was most fitting that his introduction should mention
the fact of the ascension. 1 John xx. 17.

i. 10-12.] ACTS. 9
Vv. 10, 11. Not only the ascension of Jesus to
heaven, but also his future coming to judgment, was to
be a prominent topic in the coming narrative, hence the
introduction here of another fact which Luke had omit
ted in bis former account: (io) And while they were
looking steadfastly into heaven as he went, behold, two
men stood by them in white apparel ; (i i) who also
said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking into
heaven ? This Jesus, who was received up from you
into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye beheld
him going into heaven. The sudden coming, the ap
pearance, and the words of these " two men in white,"
combined to show that they were angels, as the author
would have us to believe. They state not merely that
Jesus shall come again, but that he shall come in like
manner as the apostles had seen him go ; that is, visibly
and bodily. 4. The Waiting in Jerusalem, 12-14.
Ver. 12. At the rebuke of the angels the disciples
withdrew their gaze from the cloud, and left the spot :
(12) Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount
called Olivet, which is nigh unto Jerusalem, a sabbath
day's journey off. The ascension took place near Beth
any,1 which was nearly two miles from Jerusalem,2 and
on the eastern slope of the mount. It is the nearer side
of the mount, or rather the summit of it, which is a
Sabbath day's journey, or seven-eighths of a mile from
the city. We learn from Luke's former narrative that
they returned' to Jerusalem "with great joy;"3 their
sorrow at parting from the Lord being turned into joy
at the thought of meeting him again.
1 Luke xxiv. 50. 2 John xi. 18. 3 Luke xxiv. 52.

10 COMMENTARY. [i. 13, 14.
Ver. 13. (13) And when they were come in, they
went up into the upper chamber, where they were abid
ing ; both Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip
and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son
of Alphaeus, and Simon the Zealot, and Judas the son of
James. This fresh enumeration of the eleven very ap
propriately finds place here, because it shows that all of
those to whom the commission was given were at their
post, ready to begin their appointed work, and waiting
only for the promised power from on high.
Ver. 14. The manner in which these men spent the
time of their waiting, an interval of ten days,1 was such
as we should expect : (14) These all with one accord con
tinued steadfastly in prayer, with the women, and Mary
the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren. The place
of this prayer and supplication was not chiefly the
"upper chamber were they were abiding," but the
temple ; for we learn from Luke's former narrative that
they "were continually in the temple blessing God."2
This is the last time that the mother of Jesus appears in
New Testament history. The fact that she had returned
with the disciples to Jerusalem, and remained with them
instead of resuming her residence in Nazareth, indicates
that John was faithful to the dying request of Jesus,
and was caring for her as his own mother, though his
natural mother was still living.3 Though the prominence
here given to her name shows that she was regarded
with great respect by the apostles, yet the manner in
which Luke speaks of her shows that he had no thought
1 From the " morrow arter the Sabbath " of the passover week
until Pentecost was fifty days (Lev. xxiii. 15, 16), and forty of these
had passed when the ascension took place.
2 Luke xxiv. 53. 3 Matt, xxvii. 56.

i. 14-19.] ACTS. 11
of the homage that was to be paid her in later ages by
an idolatrous church. Those styled " the women," who
were also in this company of worshipers, were those who
had come with Jesus from Galilee;1 and they are men
tioned in this informal way because they would be re
membered by one who, like Theophilus, had read the
former treatise. They, too, had returned from their
Galilee homes to await with the twelve the coming
" promise of the Father." The fact that the brethren
of Jesus were of the company is proof that a great
change had come over them since their divine brother
had closed his labors in Galilee : for then they did not
believe in him,2 but now they do, and they are closely
identified with the apostles. What special evidence had
brought about this change, or just when it had taken
place, we have no means of ascertaining.
5. The Place of Judas Filled, 15-26.
Vv. 15-19. The next incident is introduced in these
terms : (15) And in these days Peter stood up in the
midst of the brethren, and said, (and there was a mul
titude of persons gathered together, about a hundred and
twenty, (16) Brethren, it was needful that the Script
ures should be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke
before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who
was guide to them who took Jesus. (17) For he was
numbered among us, and received his portion in this
ministry. (18) (Now this man obtained a field with the
reward of his iniquity ; and falling headlong, he burst
asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
(19) And it became known to all the dwellers at Jeru
salem ; insomuch that in their language that field was
1 Luke xxiii. 49. 2 John vii. 1-5.

12 COMMENTARY. [i. 15-19.
called Akeldama, that is, The field of blood.) The paren
thetical statement that the number together was about
one hundred and twenty, is not to be understood as
meaning that these were all the disciples Jesus then had,
but only those then and there assembled ; for Paul says
that Jesus was seen after his resurrection by more than
five hundred brethren at once.1 The hundred and
twenty were probably all who at that time resided in
Jerusalem. The latter part of the parenthesis which describes
the' fate of Judas is unquestionably the language of
Luke, and it is so closeJy connected with the former
part as to indicate the same authorship for both. The
certainty that it is Luke's arises from the use of the ex
pression, "their language ; " whereas Peter would have
said, " our language ; " and from the translating of the
Hebrew word Akeldama into Greek, which Peter would
not have done in addressing, as he did, an audience of
Hebrews. The parenthesis was inserted to make intel
ligible to Luke's readers Peter's allusions to Judas,
which, though perfectly intelligible without the paren
thesis to Peter's hearers, would not be to Luke's readers.
But while this parenthesis serves very well its ob
vious purpose, it presents three points of apparent con
flict with Matthew's account of the fate of Judas. First,
it says that he fell headlong and burst asunder, wheress
Matthew says that he hung himself; second, it repre
sents him as obtaining a field with the reward of ini
quity, whereas Matthew represents the chief priests as
buying the field with the same money; third, it derives
the name Akeldama from the circumstance of Judas
having fallen there and burst asunder, whereas Matthew
1 1. Cor. xv. 6.

i. 15-19.] ACTS. 13
derives it from the circumstance that the field was
bought with the blood money.1 As to the first, the two
accounts are in perfect harmony : for if he "hung himself,
he was either taken down, or he fell ; and Luke says he
fell. If he fell and burst asunder, he must have fallen
a considerable distance ; or when he fell his abdomen/
must have been in a somewhat decayed condition ; or *
both may have been true. His hanging himself, and re
maining suspended till he fell, supplies both conditions,
and fully accounts for his bursting asunder. Further
more, if we attempt to account for his bursting asunder
on any other hypothesis, we find it very difficult to
imagine one that is adequate. The two accounts, then,
are not only harmonious, but Luke's is supported by
Matthew's. As to the second point, if Judas returned
the money as described by Matthew, and if the priests
bought with it the potter's field, then that field was
really the property of Judas, and could have been
claimed by his heirs ; for it was bought with money that
belonged to him ; and it could be truthfully said by
Luke that Judas obtained the field. Thirdly, if the
field was bought with the blood money, or if Judas fell
there and burst asunder, the field could have derived its
name from either circumstance, and much more might it
have derived it from both. The probability is that the
piece of land had been rendered comparatively worthless
by the excavations which the potter had made in search
of potter's clay ; and when, in addition to this, it was
found spattered with the contents of the putrefied bowels
of a traitor who had hung himself there, it was so hor
rible a place that the owner was glad to sell it for a
trifle, and this enabled the priests to buy it for the thirty
1 Matt, xxvii. 3-8.

14 COMMENTARY. [i. 15-20.
pieces of silver, amounting probably to about sixteen
dollars. No other piece of land large enough for a small
burying ground could have been puichased' near the
wall of Jerusalem for so small a sum. It was intended
for the burial of foreigners too poor to afford a rock-
hewn sepulcher. The poor, whether Jews or Gentiles,
were buried in the ground.
Ver. 20. The historian now resumes the report of
Peter's speech, which he had interrupted with a paren
thesis. In the remarks already quoted, Peter had based
the action which he was about to propose on a prediction
uttered by David, and he had stated, as the ground of
the application about to be made, the fact that Judas had
been numbered with them, and had " received his por
tion in this ministry." He now quotes the prediction
alluded to : (20) For it is written in the book of Psalms,
Let his habitation be made desolate, and let no man
dwell therein : and, His office1 let another take. These
two passages, the former from Psalm lxix. 25, and the
latter from Psalm cix. 8, have no specific reference to
Judas in their original context. They occur in the midst
of curses pronounced, not by David, but, as Peter
1The word kvunamijv, here rendered "office" in the E. V.,
and "bishoprick" in the A. V., is quoted from the Septuagint,
and its exact etymological equivalent in Eng ish is overseership
What particular kind of overseership is meant in the Psalm from
which it is quoted, the context there does not indicate ; but that
it had not in the days of the Psalmist the meaning now at
tached to the word bishoprick in English, is absolutely certain,
for no such office then existed. Tn the absence of definite knowl
edge as to the overseership originally referred to, it is probable
that the generic term office is here the best representative of the
word, especially as it is so rendered in the Psalm from which the
quotation is made. See more on the N. T. use of the word, under
xx. 28.

i. 20-22.] ACTS. 15
explicitly states, by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of
David (16), concerning wicked men in general who per
secute the servants of God. But if it be proper that
the habitations of such men in general should be made
desolate, and that any office they held should be given
to others, it was preeminently so in the case of Judas;
and it was proper to say that these words were written ¦
of him as one among many. This was unquestionably
Peter's meaning, for he could see as plainly as we can
the general aim of the denunciation.
Vv. 21, 22. It is of some moment to observe here
that the question on which Peter is discoursing is not
the original appointment of an apostle, but the se
lection of a man to succeed an apostle. The qualifica
tions, therefore, which are declared necessary to an
election are those which must be possessed by any one
who aspires to be a successor to an apostle. He states
them in the next sentence : (21) Of the men therefore
who have companied with us all the time that the Lord
Jesus went in and went out among us, (22) beginning from
the baptism of John, unto the day that he was received
up from us, of these must one become a witness with us
of his resurrection. There being no other instance in
the New Testament of the selection of a successor to an
apostle, this is our only scriptural guide on the subject;
and we must conclude that all those who have since
claimed to be successors to the apostles, but were not
with the Lord in his personal ministry, lack an essential
qualification for the office. The obvious reason for con
fining the choice to such as had been with the apostles
from the beginning is that only such would be
thoroughly competent witnesses of the identity of Jesus
when they saw him after his resurrection. Thus Peter,

16 COMMENTARY. i. 21-26.
like Paul in his first epistle to the Corinthians (ix. 1),
makes it an essential characteristic of an apostle that he
be a witness of the resurrection of Jesus.
Vv. 23-26. (23) And they put forward two, Joseph
called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Mat
thias. (24) And they prayed, and said, Thou Lord,
who knowest the hearts of all men, show of these two
the one whom thou hast chosen, (25) to take the place
in this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas fell
away, that he might go to his own place. (26) And
they gave lots for them ; and the lot fell upon Matthias ;
and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
It should be observed that the disciples did not
themselves select Matthias, but, having first put forward
the two persons between whom the choice was to be
made, they prayed the Lord to show which one he had
chosen, and then they cast lots, understanding that the one
on whom the lot fell was the Lord's choice. This shows
that they believed in a providence of God so especial
that it includes, in the things that it determines, even the
casting of lots — of all things apparently the most acci
dental. If it be inquired why they confined the Lord's
choice. to two persons, the obviotis answer is, that these
were the only two who possessed all of the qualifications
laid down by Peter.
The prayer offered on this occasion is a model of its
kind. The petitioners had a single object for which they
bowed before the Lord, and to the proper presentation
of thisthey confine their words. They do not repeat a
thought, nor do they elaborate one beyond the point or
perspicuity. Their . petition having reference to the
spiritual as well as the intellectual qualifications of two
persons, they most appropriately address the Lord as

i. 23-26.] ACTS. 17
xapdeoyuwara, tfie heart knower. They do not pray, Show
us which thou wilt choose, or dost choose; as though
there was need of reflection with the Lord ; but, "show
of these two the one whom thou hast chosen. " They
describe the office which they desire the Lord to fill, as
"the place in this ministry and apostleship from which
Judas fell away, that he might go to his own place."
He had been in a place of which he had proved un
worthy, and now they have no hesitation in saying that
he has gone, to his own place, the place to which hypo
crites go after death. So brief a prayer on so important
an occasion would in this voluble age be scarcely re
garded as a prayer at all ; and one expressing so plainly
the fate of a dead man would be regarded as uncharitable ;
for who dares to hint, at this day, that any dead sinner
has gone to his own place ?
Forasmuch as this transaction occurred before the
inspiration of the apostles, and forasmuch as Peter
bases his authority for it, not on any command of Jesus,
but on what some critics regard as irrelevant citations
from the Psalms, it has been held by some that it was
totally unauthorized, and that Matthias was not therefore
a real apostle. But the statement of Luke, " he was
numbered with the eleven apostles," was written long
after the inspiration of the twelve, and it expresses their
final judgment in the case. Moreover, from this time on
the company of the apostles is stvled no longer " the
eleven," but " the twelve," x indicating that from the time
of the appointment Matthias was held to be one of the
number. Let it be observed, too, that Peter's omission
to cite the authority of Jesus for the appointment is by
no means proof that they did not have his authority.
>Chap. ii. 14; vi. 2.

18 COMMENTARY. [i. 23-26.
Among the things concerning the kingdom of which he
had spoken during the forty days (3), this may have
been one, for aught we know ; and Peter may have omit
ted to mention it because it was already well known to
all the disciples, while they had failed to observe the
predictions which also made it proper. Finally, the
promise that the twelve apostles should sit on twelve
thrones, jrfdging the twelve tribes,1 required that the va
cant place be filled ; and even this may have been spoken
of on some previous occasion, and was therefore omitted
now. Paul's apostolate was a special one to the Gen
tiles. The author has now completed his introductory state
ments. He has shown that his narrative starts from
the commission given on the day of the ascension ; that
the apostles were assured on that day of a speedy bap
tism in the Holy Spirit, which would give them full
power to testify for Jesus; that they witnessed his ascen
sion to heaven whence he was to send the promised
Spirit ; that the original eleven were all at their post
after the ascension, awaiting the promise ; and that they
had filled the vacant place of the traitor with a suitable
successor. All was now in readiness, and the next sec
tion of the story opens with the advent of the expected
Spirit. I 1Matt. xix. 28.

ii. 1-4.] ACTS. 19
SEC. IL — THE CHURCH IN JERUSALEM ES
TABLISHED.
(II. 1-47).
1. The Apostles are Filled with the Holy
Spirit, 1-4.
Vv. 1-4. The author now enters upon the main body
of his work by describing the promised advent of the
Holy Spirit : (i) And when the day of Pentecost was
now come, they were all together in one place. (2) And
suddenly there came from heaven a sound as of the rush
ing of a mighty wind, and it filled all the house where
they were sitting. (3) And there appeared unto them
tongues parting asunder, like as of fire ; and it sat upon
each one of them. (4) And they were all filled with the
Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as
the Spirit gave them utterance.
The day of Pentecost wasthe fiftieth day after the
sabbath of the passover week ; and as the count com
menced on the day after the sabbaih, it also ended on the
same day of the week, or our Sunday.1 On account of
'The commentators in general, misled by Josephus, represent
the fifty days as being counted from " the second day of unleav
ened bread, which is the sixteenth day of the month " (Ant. iii.
10. 5). If this were correct, the first of the fifty, and consequently
the last, might fall on any day of lhe week. But the enacting
clause in the law reads as follows : "And ye shall count unto you
from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought
the sheaf of the wave offering ; seven sabbaths shall there be
complete : even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall
ye number fifty days ; and ye shall offer a new meal oflfering unto
the Lord" (Lev. xxiii. 15, 16.) This language is not easily mis
understood ; for if even in the first clause, the words " from the
morrow after the sabbath " could be construed as meaning from

20 COMMENTARY. [ii. 1-4.
the seven weeks which intervened between it and the
passover sabbath, it was called in the Old Testament
" the feast of weeks ; " 1 on account of the wheat harvest
having occurred in that interval, it was called " the feast
of harvest ;" 2 and on account of the offering peculiar to it,
it was called " the day of first fruits."3 But after the
Greek language become known in Palestine, in conse
quence of Alexander's conquest of Asia, it acquired the
name Pentecost (fiftieth), because it was the fiftieth day.
It was celebrated, according to the Mosaic ritual, by the
special service of (offering the first fruits of the wheat
harvest in the form of two loaves of bread.4 ) This was
one of the( three annual festivals at which all of the male
Jews were required to be present. The condemnation
and death of Jesus had occurred during one of these,
the morrow after the first day of unleavened bread, the latter part
of the sentence precludes such a construction ; for the count was
to be " unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath," and the word
sabbath here unquestionably means a weekly sabbath ; and if the
fiftieth day was the morrow after a weekly sabbath, then the
first must also have been the morrow after a weekly sabbath.
That it was is further proved by the terms of the law, fixing the
day of offering the sheaf of the wave offering: "And he shall
wave the sheaf before the Lord, to be accepted for you : on the
morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it " (Lev. xxiii.
11.) The first day of unleavened bread, although in it " no ser
vile work " was to be done, is never called a sabbath. As to the
testimony of Josephus on the subject, we must remember that,
although he claims to have been of priestly ancestry, he was
never consecrated as a priest, he wrote his antiquities many years
after the fall of the temple and the cessation of its solemnities,
and he depended for his knowledge of such topics .on his readings
of the Old Testament, in which he had no advantage over modern
scholars. He has here, as in many other places, misinterpreted
the text. y
/ 'Deut. xvi. 10. ^Ex. xxiii. 16. 'Num. xxviii. 26. *Lev.
xxiii. 15-21 ;"Num. xxviii. 26-31.

ii. 1-4.] ACTS. 21
and the next was most appropriately chosen as the oc
casion for his vindication, and for the inauguration of
his kingdom on earth. The day was also appropriate
from its being the day of the week on which he arose
from the dead.
The persons thus assembled together and filled with
the Holy Spirit were not, as many have supposed, the
one hundred and twenty disciples mentioned in a paren
thesis in the previous chapter^but the twelve apostles.)
This is made certain by the grammatical connection be
tween the first verse of this chapter and the last of the
preceding. Taken together they read as follows: "And
they gave lots for them, and the lot fell upon Matthias ;
and he was numbered with the eleven apostles. And
when the day of Pentecost was now come, they were all
together in one place."1
The house in which the apostles were sitting when
the Spirit came upon them was not the upper_chamber
in which they were abiding, but some apartment of the
temple ; for, as we learn from Luke's former treatise,
the apostles during these days of waiting were "contin-
f1 The supposition first advanced by Chrysostom, and adopted
very generally by more recent commentators, that all the one
hundred and twenty were included, acd the view advanced in
modern times (see Alford in' loco), that all the disciples of Jesus
who had come to the feast were included, are entirely without
support in the context J and the only plausible reason given for
either is the universal'language employed in the quotation made
below from Joel : " I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh ; and
your sons and daughters shall prophesy, and your young men
shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams,'' etc.
But it is obvious at a glance that these words were not all fulfilled
on that occasion. Nobody then present was seeing visions, or
dreaming dreams, llhere was here only the beginning of a ful
fillment which afterward was extended until all was done which
Joel predicted. \

22 COMMENTARY. [ii. 1-4.
ually in the temple praising God ; " that is, continually
there through the hours in which the temple was open.
The upper chamber was their place of lodging.1
The firelike and forked tongues which were visible
above the heads of the apostles were symbols of the
audible tongues in which they immediately began to
speak; and they added much to the splendor of the
scene, which soon riveted the attention of the gathering
throng. The statement that the tongues "appeared to
them " is not intended to exclude as witnesses of it
those who were drawn together, but it points to the fact
that the apostles were alone when the phenomenon first
made its appearance. A
When the apostles were filled with the Holy Bpirit,
and began to speak as the Spirit gave them utterance,
the promise of a baptism in the Holy Spirit and of power
from on high was fulfilled. The power took effect on
their minds, and its presence was manifested outwardly
by their speaking in languages which they had never
learned.2 The inner and mental miracle was demon-
1 In opposition to this conclusion, Alford says: "Certainly
Luke would not have used this word ('all the house') of a
chamber in the temple, or of the temple itself, without further
explanation." (See also Meyer in loco). But explanation suf
ficient had already been given by the statement that the apostles
were "continually in the temple;" and, although Alford says
that this statement can not apply here, he gives no good reason
for the assertion, and we insist that it can and does. An upper
room in a private house could not possibly have afforded space
for the assembly which witnessed this phenomenon; while one
of the many apartments in the temple court, with one side open
to the whole area of the court, would have been perfectly suited
to the occasion.
2 In regard to the author's meaning here, the following em
phatic statement of Alford is to be heartily adopted : " There can
be no Question in any unprejudiced mind, that the fact which

ii. 1-4.] ACTS. 23
strated by the outward and physical. The promise, " It
shall not be ye that speak, but the Spirit of my Father
that speaketh in you," was fulfilled in its most literal
sense ; for the very words which they uttered were sup
plied to them immediately by the Spirit. They were
not anxious how or what they should say, neither did
they premeditate. It was literally given them in that
hour what they should speak. Such power had never
before been bestowed on men. It was the baptism in
the Holy Spirit ; not of their bodies, like John's bap
tism in water, but of their spirits. It was not a literal
baptism, for this act is not to be affirmed of the connec
tion between spirit and spirit ; but the word baptism is
used metaphorically. As the body, when baptized in
water, is sunk beneath its surface and completely over
whelmed, so their spirits were completely under the con
trol of the Holy Spirit, their very words being his and
not theirs. The metaphor is justified by the absolute
power which the divine Spirit exerted upon their spirits.
Such is not the case with the ordinary influences of the
this narrative sets before us is that the disciples began to speak
in various languages, viz : the languages of the nations below enumer
ated, and perhaps others. All attempts to evade this are connected
witli some forcing of the text, or some far-fetched and indefens
ible explanation." To admit with Meyer (Com. in loco), that this
is the author's meaning, and then to say, " The sudden com
munication of a facility of speaking foreign languages is neither
logically possible nor psychologically and morally conceivable,"
is not only to deny the reliability of the author, and thus to throw
discredit on all of his accounts of miracles, but it is to deny that
the Spirit can act miraculously upon the minds of men. The
reader who is curious to know the many preposterous attempts
which have been made to explain away this miracle, will find a
sufficient account of them in Meyer's Commentary on this pass
age.

24 COMMENTARY. [ii- 5-13.
Spirit, consequently these are not styled baptisms in the
Spirit.1
2. The Effect on the Multitude, 5-13.
Vv. 5-13. If we attempt to conceive some method
by which the miraculous inspiration of a company of
men could be immediately demonstrated to an audience,
we shall doubtless be at a loss to think of any other than
the one employed on this occasion — that of speaking in
telligibly the wonderful works of God in a variety of
tongues unknown to the speakers. This shows the
appropriateness of the particular miracle here wrought,
and even the necessity for it in order to the immediate
conviction of the hearers. Such an exhibition could be
available for its purpose only in the presence of persons
acquainted with the languages spoken ; but the present
occasion supplied this condition, and to this the author
next addresses himself : (5) Now there were dwelling at
Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under
heaven. (6) And when this sound was heard, the mul
titude came together, and were confounded, because that
every man heard them speaking in his own language.
(7) And they were all amazed, and marveled, saying,
Are not all these who speak Galileans ? (8) And how
hear we every man in our own language, wherein we
were born ? (9) Parthians and Medes and Elamites,
and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, in Judea and Cappa
docia, (10) in Pontus and Asia, in Phrygia and Pam
phylia, in Egypt and the parts of Libya about Cyrene,
and sojourners from Rome, (11) both Jews and prose
lytes, Cretans and Arabians, we do hear them speaking
in our own tongues the mighty works of God. (12) And
'See further remarks on this subject under chap. x. 44-46.

ii. 5-13.] ACTS. 25
they were all amazed, and were perplexed, saying to
one another, What meaneth this ? (13) But others
mocking said, They are filled with new wine.
The native tongues of these Jews were those of the
countries enumerated in which they were born ; yet all,
or nearly all of them, had been taught by their parents
the home dialect of Judea; for such was the custom of
the Jews of that age. This enabled them to understand
the tongues spoken by the apostles, and to know the
reality of the miracle. Such a miracle had never before
been witnessed, and the author exhausts his vocabulary
in the attempt to describe its effect on the hearers. He
says, " They were confounded," " they were amazed,"
" they marveled," " they were perplexed," and they
said to one another, " What meaueth this ? " On this
question their thoughts centered when they had time to
think ; and it shows that they recognized the miraculous
nature ofthe phenomenon, but could not determine what
it meant; that is, for what purpose the miracle was
wrought. As yet they knew nothing of the men who
were speaking, except that they were Galileans. Their
question, however, was the very one which the miracle
was designed to call forth, and the speech which fol
lowed furnished the answer.
The mockers who said, " They are filled with new
wine," were irreverent men, who either did not under
stand more than one of the tongues spoken, and so mis
took the rest for nonsense ; or were so excessively
irreverent as to mock at that which filled all others with
amazement. Their mockery received due notice in the
speech which followed.

26 COMMENTARY. [ii. 14-21.
3. Peter's Sermon, 14-40.
i.
INTRODUCTION: THE MIRACLE EXPLAINED, 14-21.
Vv. 14-21. (14) But Peter standing up with the
eleven, lifted up his voice, and spake forth unto them,
saying, Ye men of Judea, and all ye that dwell in Jeru
salem, be this known unto you, and give ear unto my
words. (15) For these are not drunken as ye suppose ;
seeing it is but the third hour of the day ; (16) but this
is that which hath been spoken by the prophet Joel ;
(17) And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God,
I will pour forth of 1 my Spirit upon all flesh :
And your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
And your young men shall see visions,
And your old men shall dream dreams :
(18) Yea, and on my servants and on my handmaidens in
those days
Will I pour out my Spirit ; and they shall prophesy.
(19) And I will show my wonders in the heaven above,
And signs on the earth beneath ;
'The use that has been made of the expression " pour forth" in
connection with the controversy on baptism (Alexander on Acts
in loco) is a specimen of partisan zeal which is worthy of notice
only because it is made to figure in discussions on the subject
by men of little discrimination. It is used figuratively for
the sending of the Holy Spirit, for it can not be used literally of a
person. The mission of the Spirit thus designated, and the bap
tism in the Spirit, are two distinct conceptions, and the term
in which the former is expressed can have no possible bearing on
the meaning of the term by which the latter is expressed. Mare-
over, the term baptism is also used figuratively in this connec
tion. It expresses the power which the Spirit exerted over
the minds of the apostles after he entered into ihem ; while the
term pour forth (e/c*™) expresses the act of Christ in sending the
Spirit from heaven.

ii. 14-21. J ACTS. 27
Blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke :
(20) The sun shall be turned into darkness,
And the moon into blood,
Before the day of the Lord come,
The great and notable day :
(21) And it shall be, that whosoever shall call upon the
name of the Lord shall be saved.
Peter had heard what the mockers said, and although
it came from only a few, he spoke of it as though it
expressed the sentiment of the multitude. This had the
advantage of avoiding a personal issue with those who
had made the remark, while it was calculated to excite
for it the disgust of those who had taken the matter
seriously. His answer was not a complete refutation of
the charge, for men might be intoxicated at any hour of
the day ; but the early hour made it highly improbable
that they were under the influence of wine, while the
rest of his discourse was relied upon to demonstrate the
falsity of the charge.
The first part of the citation from Joel, verses 17, 18,
are used by Peter to answer the question of the multi
tude, " What meaneth this ?" and the answer was con
clusive. If he had ascribed the speaking in tongues to
the ingenuity of himself and his fellows, or to any
other than divine power, his hearers could not have ac
cepted his explanation ; for they knewthat only divine
power could enable men thus to speak. When, there
fore, he ascribed it to the Spirit of God, they could but
see that he was right; and when he cited the passage
from the prophet which was obviously fulfilled before
their eyes, they could but see that the miracle was pre
determined in the mind of God. They could see, too,
that the prediction involved much more than they were

28 COMMENTARY. [ii. 14-21.
then witnessing; for it contemplated an outpouring of
the Holy Spirit, not only on the men then before
them, but on " all flesh," such as would cause men and
women to prophesy, to see visions, and to dream dreams.
All but the first was yet to be fulfilled, but all was ful
filled in the course of the events which the author is
about to record. By " all flesh " is obviously meant,
not every human being, but persons of all nationalities.
The remainder of the quotation from Joel, verses 19,
20, has no bearing on Peter's argument, but was prob
ably made in order to complete the connection of that
which his argument demanded. The great and notable
day to which it refers has been variously understood ;
some referring it to the destruction of Jerusalem, some
to the day of judgment, and some even to the day of
Pentecost itself. The fact that in connection with it the
promise is made, " Whosoever shall call on the name
of the Lord shall be saved," seems to identify it with
the day of judgment ; for the terrors of that day alone
will be escaped by calling on the name of the Lord.
We are not to understand that the mere act of call
ing on the name of the Lord will save, but such prayer
to the Lord as accompanies the faith and the obedience
without which all prayer is vain.
Thus far in his discourse Peter has confined himself
to the proof of the inspiration of himself and his com
panions. This was a necessary preparation for what is to
follow, for his hearers could in this way alone be pre
pared to receive with implicit confidence what he had to
say of Jesus. Had he closed his discourse at this point,
they would have been convinced (that is, the thoughtful
portion of them) that they were listening to an inspired
man ; but they would have learned no more about Jesus,

ii. 22-24.] ACTS. 29
or about salvation through him, that they knew before.
But now the introduction of the discourse is completed;
the way is paved for the presentation of the principal
theme, and he proceeds at once to announce the proposi
tion for which all that he had said was but introductory.
II.
JESUS PROCLAIMED AS CHRIST AND LORD, 22-32.
(a). HIS RESURRECTION DECLARED, 22-U-
Vv. 22-24. It is impossible for us, at this distance of
space and time, to realize, except in a faint degree, the
effect on minds so wrought up of the next announcement
made by Peter : (22) Ye men of Israel, hear these words :
Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God to you by
mighty works and wonders and signs,1 which God did by
him in the midst of you, even as ye yourselves know ;
(23) him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and
foreknowledge of God, ye by the hands of lawless 2 men
did crucify and slay : (24) whom God raised up, having
loosed the pangs 3 of death : because it was not possible
'By the three terms, mighty works (6vva.jj.uc.), wonders (repara),
and signs (arifieia), Peter does not mean three classes of actions, but
he uses the three terms to describe the same phenomena. He
means the miracles of Jesus, which were mighty works, or
powers, because wrought by the immediate power of God; won
ders, because they excited wonder in those who witnessed them;
signs, because they signified God's approval of what Jesus taught
in connection with them.
2 The original, av6fim, means in this place, as is indicated in the
margin of the R. V., not men who are violators of the law, but
men who are not under the law, i. e., GenthVs, cf. I. Cor. ix. 21.
3 In the expression, "loosed the pangs of death," rag uSlvac tov
davarov, the pangs of dying are figuratively regarded as bonds
which hold the victim of death in confinement until they are
loosed. Both terms are used figuratively, and it is not Peter's

30 COMMENTARY. [ii. 22-28.
that he should be held by it. Filled with amazement
as the hparers already were, by a visible and audible
manifestation of the Spirit of God, they now see that
the whole of this amazing phenomenon is subservient to
the name of that Nazarene whom they had despised and
crucified. This conviction is forced upon them in a
sentence packed with a series of facts calculated to
make them reel and stagger as under a rapid succes
sion of heavy blows. In one breath they are re
minded of the wonderful miracles and signs which Jesus
had wrought among them ; they are charged with knowing
this to be true ; they are informed that it was in accord
ance with God's preordained purpose that he was
delivered into their power, and not through his own
impotence ; and they are boldly told that God had
raised him from the dead, it being impossible that such
a being as he should be permanently held down among
the dead. Never did mortal lips announce in so brief
a space so many facts of import so terrific to the hearers.
We might challenge the world to find a parallel to it in
the speeches of her orators, or the songs of her poets.
There is not such a thunderbolt in all the burdens ofthe
prophets of Israel, or among the voices which echo
through the Apocalypse. It is the first public announce
ment to the world of a risen and glorified Redeemer.
(6). THE RESURRECTION OF THE CHRIST PREDICTED BY
DAVID, $5-31.
Vv. 25-28. Two ofthe facts stated in this announce
ment required proof; the others required none. That
Jesus had been approved of God to them by miracles,
purpose to intimate that Jesus suffered any pangs after dying.
But for another view of the meaning, see Alford and Meyer.

ii. 25-28.] ACTS. 31
and that they had by the hands of the lawless Romans
put him- to death, were facts well known to the auditors;
but that Jesus had been delivered up to them in accord
ance with a predetermined purpose of God, was news to
them ; and that God had raised him from the dead they
did not believe ; both these latter statements, therefore,
needed proof, and Peter proceeds to give the proof in a
way both formal and conclusive. He cites first a pass
age in which David had very clearly predicted a resur
rection of some one from the dead, speaking in the first
person, as if he meant himself: (25) For David1 says
concerning him,
I beheld the Lord always before my face ;
For he is on my right hand, that I should not be
moved :
(26) Therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue re
joiced :
Moreover my flesh also shall dwell in hope :
(27) Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hades,
Neither wilt thou give thy Holy One to see corrup
tion.
(28) Thou madest known to me the ways of life ;
Thou shalt make me full of gladness with thy
countenance.
Only so much of this quotation as refers to the re
surrection suits the special purpose of the apostle, the
preceding portion (verses 25, 26) serving to connectedly
introduce it. The words, " Thou wilt not leave my soul
1 To deny that David wrote Psalm xvi., which is here quoted by
Peter (Meyer in loco, and rationalists in general), is to deny that
he was speaking by inspiration, and therefore it is to deny the
historic truthfulness of tbe preceding account of the Holy Spirit's
work in him and the other apostles.

32 COMMENTARY. [ii. 29-31.
in hades," assert a return of the soul from the disem
bodied state ; 1 while the words, " Neither wilt thou give
thy Holy One to see corruption," assert that the body
would be reanimated by the return of the soul, before cor
ruption would set in. The added words, " Thou madest
known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full
of gladness with thy countenance," refer first to the
knowledge of this subject imparted previous to death,
and secondly to the gladness of the one raised from the
dead when beholding the countenance of God. That
this pas-age predicts the resurrection of some person
from the dead previous to the corruption of his body, is
undeniable; and the only question between Peter and
his hearers was, of whom does David speak ? As he
uses the first person, and therefore appears to speak of
himself, it was necessary for Peter, in order to make out
his argument, to show that he refers to some other per
son, and that person the Christ. This he proceeds to do.
Vv. 29-31. (29) Brethren, I may say to you freely
of the patriarch David, that he both died and was buried,
and his tomb is with us unto this day. (30) Being
therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn
with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins he
would set one upon his throne ; (31) he foreseeing this,
'Hades is a Greek word transferred into English because our
language has no native word to exactly represent it. It is com
pounded of a privative and ideiv, to see, and means literally the un
seen ; but in usage it is applied exclusively to the unseen abode of
disembodied human spirits. If we had no other proof of this
meaning, our text, combined with Peter's comment, verse 31 be
low, would make it clear. While the body of Jesus was in the
tomb, his soul was in hades, and yet it was in Paradise, as we
learn from his declaration to the dying robber (Luke xxiii. 43).
This shows that to the righteous hades is a place of enjoyment.

ii. 29-32.] ACTS. 33
spake of the resurrection of Christ, that neither was he
left in hades, nor did his flesh see corruption. It was
well known to the Jews, as it now is to all interpreters
ofthe prophetic Psalms, that David habitually speaks in
the first person when prophesying of the Christ ; and in
any given case, if it is made clear that he does not speak
of himself, the conclusion is that he speaks ofthe Christ.
This is the force of Peter's argument, and it proved to
his Jewish hearers that which he set out to prove, that
the Christ, according to a predetermined and expressed
purpose of God, was to suffer death, and to arise again
speedily from the dead. It also corrected their concep
tion of an earthly reign of the Christ, and showed them
that he was to sit on David's throne after his resurrec
tion, and not before his death.
(c). THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS ATTESTED BY THE
TWELVE, SS.
Ver. 32. Thus far in his argument the speaker has
proved that the Christ was to be delivered up to death,
and that he was to arise from the dead to sit on his
throne ; but he has yet to prove that this was true of
Jesus. This he now proves by the testimony of himself
and the eleven standing with him : (32) This Jesus did
God raise up, whereof we all are witnesses. It is prob
able that this is only the substance of what he said on
this point, and that he went into the details of the testi
mony. As the witnesses were personally unknown to
tlie multitude, their testimony as mere men could have
had but little weight with their hearers; but they spoke
as men filled with the Spirit of God, and this to men of
Jewish education was a sufficient guarantee that what
they said was certainly true. Consequently, the fact

34 COMMENTARY. [ii. 32, 33.
now established by this testimony, taken in connection
with that just learned from the Psalm, that the Christ
was to suffer and rise from the dead as Jesus had suffered
and risen, proved beyond a doubt that Jesus was the Christ.
So it must have appeared to every thoughtful hearer.
(d). JESUS EXALTED TO THE- THRONE OF GOD, S3-3S.
Ver. 33. In order to sustain the proposition that
the Christ was to be thus raised that he might sit on
David's throne (verses 30, 31), it was necessary for Peter
to trace his progress beyond the resurrection, and show
that he had actually been exalted to a throne. This he
does in these words : (33) Being therefore by the right
hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father
the promise of the Holy Spirit, he hath poured forth this
which ye see and hear. His proof is not the fact recited
in the introductory chapter of Acts, that he and his com
panions had seen Jesus ascend into heaven ; for this
would have been unavailing, seeing that their eyes fol
lowed him no farther than the cloud which received him
out of their sight; but it is that which his hearers were
witnessing with their own eyes and ears, the fact that he
and his companions were speaking as the Holy Spirit
gave them utterance, while the tongues of flame sat upon
their heads. In saying that Jesus had been exalted by
the right hand of God, Peter spoke that which neither
he nor any other mortal could know except by direct
revelation ; but as the direct revelation was manifested
before the people, it was clear that the testimony given
was that of the Holy Spirit himself, who had just
descended from heaven where the exaltation had taken
place. Here was testimony which no sane man among
the Jews could think of calling in question.

ii. 34, 35.] ACTS. 35
Vv. 34, 35. One more point established, not in
further proof that Jesus had been exalted, but to show
that this which was now proved concerning him was pre
dicted ofthe Christ, and this inimitable argument will
be completed: (34) For David1 ascended not into the
heavens : but he saith himself,
The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right
hand,
Till I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet.
The Pharisees themselves admitted that in this passage
David referred to the Christ ; and they had been much
perplexed in consequence of this admission in a memora
ble conversation with Jesus;2 but Peter, taking nothing
for granted, guards tbe application, as he had done that
ofthe previous quotation from David, by remarking that
David himself had not ascended to heaven, and there
fore he could not in these words be speaking of himself.
This admitted, the only alternative was, as in the other
instance, that he referred to the Christ; for certainly
David would call no other his Lord.
1 In here quoting Psalm ex. as having been written by
David, Peter by the Holy Spirit follows the example of Jesus,
who did the same, and who also declares that David said this "in
the Spirit" (Matt. xxd. 43, 44). This explicit testimony to the
Davidic authorship of that Psalm can not be set aside by claim
ing that it was, in the lips either of Jesus or Peter, a mere ac
orn modation to an incorrect opinion then current among the
Jews; for the argument in both instances turns upon the fact
that David was the writer, and it is fallacious if this is not a fact.
Neither can it be regarded as a mistake on the part of either Jesus
or Peter ; for this would be to accuse them of fallacious reasoning
based on premises assumed in ignorance. It would be a denial
of supernatural knowledge on the part of Jesus, and of inspira
tion on the part of Peter.
* Matt. xxii. 43. 44.

36 COMMENTARY. [i. 36, 37.
(e). THE LOGICAL CONCLUSION, 86.
Ver. 36. Having now established by incontestable
evidence the two statements made in his opening an
nouncement which needed proof; first, that Jesus had
been delivered to his enemies by the determinate counsel
and foreknowledge of God ; and second, that God had
raised him from the dead ; and having gone beyond his
first announcement by proving that God had also exalted
him, and caused him to sit at his own right hand in
heaven, Peter now announces his final conclusion in
these confident and startling terms : (36) Let all the
house of Israel therefore know assuredly, that God hath
made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye
crucified. He had made him Lord by causing him to
sit on God's own throne, to rule over angels and men ;
and he had made him Christ by causing him to sit on
the throne of David according to the promise. It was
God's throne, because it was the throne of universal
dominion ; and it was David's throne, because it was the
lineal descent from David which made Jesus the rightful
king. From this conclusion the Jewish hearers of Peter
learned that, contrary to their previous conception, the
promised Christ was to sit, not on an earthly throne,
however glorious, but on the throne ofthe universe.
III.
THE PEOPLE EXHORTED TO SAVE THEMSELVES, 37-40.
Ver. 37. As we have already observed, up to the
moment at which Peter arose to address the audience,
although the baptism of the. Holy Spirit had occurred,
and its effects on the subjects of it had been witnessed,
no change had taken place in the minds of the people in
reference to Jesus, nor did they experience any emotion

ii. 37, 38.] ACTS. 37
except amazement and confusion. The desired change
in reference to Christ was not effected till Peter spoke;
and all the power to effect it which resided in the
baptism in the Spirit was brought to bear through the
words which the Spirit caused Peter to speak. The
first visible effect is described in these words : (37) Now
when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart,
and said unto Peter and the rest of the apostles, Brethren,
what shall we do ? In this exclamation they tacitly
confessed their belief of what Peter had preached; and
the statement that they were pierced to the heart shows
that they felt keenly the remorse which the facts they
now believed were intended to inspire. Since Peter be
gan to speak a change has taken place in both their con
victions and their feelings. They now believe that
Jesus is the Christ, and they are pierced to the heart with
the thought that they have murdered him. All this
effect Luke traces, as we see it must be traced, to what
they had heard : " Now when they heard this they were
pricked in the heart." This exempifies Paul's teaching,
that " faith comes by hearing; and hearing by the word
of Christ."1 Vbb. 38. The question, " What shall we do ?" had
reference to the escape of these guilty men from the con
sequences of their crime ; and although the idea of salva
tion from their sins in general could scarcely yet have
had a place in their minds, the real force of their ques
tion would be well expressed by the full inquiry, What
shall we do to be saved ? This is the first time under
the reign of Christ that this momentous question was
propounded, and the first time of course that it received
an answer. Whatever may haye been the proper answer
» Bom. x. 14-17.

38 COMMENTARY. [ii. 38.
under any previous dispensation, or on any previous day
in the world's history, the answer given by Peter on this
day of Pentecost, the day in which the reign of Christ on
earth began, is the true and infallible answer for all such
inquirers in all subsequent time. (38) And Peter said
to them, Repent1 ye, and be baptized every one of you
in the name of Jesus Christ for2 the remission of sins;
and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
It should be observed that in this answer to the
question, what shall we do ? they are told to do two
things; first, to repent; and second, to be baptized in
the name of Jesus Christ. If Peter had stopped here,
the people would have learned their immediate duty,
and we also would have learned that the immediate duty
of men pricked in the heart by a sense of guilt is to re
pent and be baptized ; we would also know that this is
what we are to do to be delivered from our guilt. But
Peter did not stop with the two commands; he saw fit
to state specifically the blessings which would follow
compliance with them. The people were told to repent
and be baptized " for the remission of sins." This is
only stating more specifically what would have been
understood from connecting the question with its answer,
as we have just stated. It makes it doubly certain that
1 That these persons were commanded to repent after they
had been "pricked in the heart" by the power of the Spirit
through the truth preached, and were so penetrated with a sense
of guilt as to cry out, "Brethren, what shall we do?" shows
plainly that repentance is not mere sorrow for sin, but a change
which follows after it. For a further definition of it, see the note
under chap. iii. 19.
2 For a justification of this departure from the Ii. V., and for
a full statement of the connection between baptism and the
remission of sins, see Excursus A.

ii. 38.] ACTS. 39
remission of sins follows baptism, and is therefore to be
expected by the baptized. This is equally true if the
correct rendering be, as in R. V., " unto remission of
sins," for if we are baptized " unto " remission, remission
follows baptism, and baptism brings us to it. Remission
of sins, forgiveness of sins, and pardon, are synonymous
terms, and they express the chief want of the human
soul in its most favorable earthly circumstances. The
rebel against God's government, though he lay down his
arms and become a loyal subject, can have no hope with
out pardon for the past ; and after being pardoned,
while he is humbly struggling in the service of God, he
knows himself still guilty of shortcomings by which he
must fail ofthe final reward unless he is pardoned again
and again. The question as to the conditions of pardon,
therefore, divides itself into two ; one having reference
to the hitherto unpardoned sinner, and the other to the
saint who may have fallen into sin. It was the former
class who propounded the question to Peter, and it is to
them alone that his answer applies.
The second blessing promised on condition of re
pentance and baptism, is the " gift of the Holy Spirit."
By this is not meant that miraculous gift which had just
been bestowed upon the apostles; for we know from the
subsequent history that this gift was not bestowed on all
who repented and were baptized, but on only a few
brethren of prominence in the several congregations.
The expression means the Holy Spirit as a gift ; and the
reference is to that indwelling of the Holy Spirit by
which we bring forth the fruits of the Spirit, and with
out which we are not of Christ. Of this promise
Peter speaks more fully in the next sentence of his
sermon.

40 COMMENTARY. [ii. 39, 40.
Ver. 39. (39) For to you is the promise, and to your
children, and to all that are afar off, even unto as many
as the Lord our God shall call unto him. As this is a
conditional promise, conditioned on repentance and
baptism, the children mentioned can be no others than
those who repent and are baptized. This promise can
not therefore be understood of infant children. More
over, the promise is to those whom the Lord shall " call
unto him," and he calls only those who can hear and be
lieve. We may remark that the universality of this
promise, while very plain to us who read it in the light
of subsequent revelations, was understood by Peter and
the other apostles to include the Gentiles only as they
might be circumcised. This is an instance among many
in which inspired men, while speaking the words which
the Spirit gave them, did not themselves adequately ap
prehend their import.
Ver. 40. In concluding his report of Peter's sermon,
the author indirectly informs us that he has "given only
an epitome of it : (40) And with many other words he
testified, and exhorted them, saying, Save yourselves
from this crooked generation. The term "testified" re
fers to the argumentative part of the discourse ; and the
term " exhorted " to the hortatory part. The latter
naturally followed his statement of the conditions of
pardon, and it is summed up in the words, " Save your
selves from this crooked generation." They were to
save themselves by complying with the conditions of
salvation just laid down ; for salvation from sin is ac
complished in the remission of sins ; x and the reference
l"Recome saved from this (the now living) perverse generation
away, in separating from them by the /isravoia and baptism." —
Meyer. In opposition to this, Alford says : " The apostles' com-

ii. 40.] ¦ ACTS. 41
to these conditions was too obvious to be misunder
stood. This exhortation should have prevented any
one from ever conceiving the idea so often expressed by
modern revivalists, that a sinner can do nothing toward
saving himself. While it is true that the sinner can do
nothing in the1- way of procuring or meriting his own
salvation, or of forgiving his own sins, he must do that
which is prescribed as the method of accepting the salva
tion procured for him and offered to him. To this ex
tent he saves himself. To be saved from that genera
tion was to be saved from the fate awaiting that gen
eration in the eternal world, as we may be saved from a
sinking ship by escaping its fate.
If the reader will carefully review this discourse,
with reference to its plan as a sermon, and the conduct
of its line of argument, he will find that it complies with
the rules of homiletics as strictly as though Peter had
been trained in this modern science ; and that its logic is
faultless from beginning to end. This could not have
been a result of Peter's education or training ; for he
had no previous instruction which could have qualified
him for extemporaneous work of this character ; but it
must be ascribed to the guiding power of the Holy
Spirit, giving him, according to the promise,1 " a mouth
mand is improperly rendered in A. V., ' save yourselves.' It is strictly
passive — be saved — ' let us save you,' ' let God by us save you.' "
But the staggering effort which this ingenious interpreter makes
to extract from the precept the meaning which he assigns to it,
betrays the weakness of the attempt. The original word is in
the imperative mood, aadrrre, and as it expresses the command,
Be saved, it requires the act of saving to be done' by the persons
addressed, and it is, therefore, properly expressed by the terms,
" save yourselves."
1 Luke xxi. 15.

42 COMMENTARY. [ii. 41.
and wisdom which all his adversaries were not able to
withstand or to gainsay."
4. Effect of the Sermon, and Progress of the
Church, 41-47.
Ver. 41. The auditors who had been so pierced to
the heart as to cry out, " Brethren, what shall we do ?"
were happily surprised to find the terms of pardon so easy ;
and they acted with becoming promptness : (41) They
then that received his word were baptized ; and there
were added to them in that day about three thousand
souls. They received his word in the sense that they
believed it to be true, and adopted it as their rule of
action. Times without number it has been urged, and as
often refuted, that three thousand men could not have
been baptized (immersed) during the remainder of that
day, and with the supply of water accessible in Jerusalem.
It is true that there is no running stream in the vicinity
ofthe city, and there never has been, suitable for the
purpose ; but from a time long prior to the birth of
Jesus the city has been supplied with artificial pools in
which the ordinance could be administered even to such
a multitude. At the present day, the only one of these
which remains entirely suitable for the purpose, and
which has been so used in modern times by missionaries,
is the pool of Siloam, situated in the valley immediately
south of the temple enclosure. It is fifty feet long, has
an average width of about sixteen feet, and is walled up
with masonry to a height of about eighteen feet. At its
southwestern corner, where the wall does not rise so
high, a flight of stone steps, four feet wide, leads down to
the bottom of it. The water comes in at the northern

ii. 41.] ACTS. 43
end, being conducted by an underground conduit from
the Virgin's Pool, a perennial spring, and it escapes at
the opposite end through two orifices, one at the bottom,
and the other some three or four feet above the bottom.
When the former is closed, as it usually is, the water
stands at the depth most suitable for baptism.
The pool now called Upper Gihon, situated about
half a mile due west from the Joppa gate, is at present
the next most suitable place. It is three hundred and
sixteen feet long, two hundred and eighteen wide, and
has an average depth of about twenty feet. It is sup
plied by surface drainage, and is now seldom full. It
was supplied with broad steps at every corner, descend
ing to the bottom, now in a state of dilapidation ; and
when the water was at a suitable depth it afforded
facilities for baptizing such a multitude as were baptized
on Pentecost. But the most suitable of all the ancient
pools is the one now called Lower Gihon by Europeans,
but called the Pool of the Sultan, on account of its size, by
the natives. It was formed by constructing an immense
dam across the valley which lies under the western wall of
Mount Zion, to retain the water flowing through the val
ley, and another wall, five hundred and ninety-two feet
higher up the valley, to hold back the earth at that end.
The sides and bottom of this pool consist of the shelv
ing rock of the valley, and this, on the side next to the
city, lies in ledges from two to three feet thick, with an
exposed surface in many places from eight to ten feet
wide. On these ledges, at any depth of the water, a
large number of administrators could stand, many more
than the twelve apostles, and baptize at one time with
out interfering, with one another. The plastering on the
lower dam of the pool was three and a half inches thick •.

44 COMMENTARY. ti. 41.
but it is now broken off to such an extent that lhe water
freely pours through, and the pool is empty in the dry
season ; but when this dam was in a good state of pres
ervation no one accustomed to baptizing would think of
resorting to any other place about the city. Indeed, it is
seldom that a better baptistery can be found anywhere.
S.nce a knowledge of these facilities for baptizing in an
cient Jerusalem has been spread abroad by the writings
of explorers within our own generation, it has become
inexcusable in "any person of intelligence to raise the ob
jection which we have been considering.
As to the question of time for the baptism of so
many, any one who will make the mathematical calcula
tion, without which it is idle to offer the objection, can
see that there was the greatest abundance of time.
Peter's sermon began at nine o'clock, and we may safely
suppose that the proceedings at the temple closed as early
as noon. This allows six hours for the baptizing to be
completed that day, as the text asserts. It is very delib
erate work for au administrator to baptize one person in
a minute; and if he stands at one spot, as is often the
case when a large number are to be baptized, and has
the candidates to come and go in a continuous line, the
work ean be done in half this time. But, at the rate of
sixty to the hour, twelve men could baptize seven hun
dred and twenty in one hour, and three thousand in four
hours and a quarter. This simple calculation shows how
idle the objection is, and it proves that those who urge it
have never given the subject proper consideration.
Not satisfied with the two objections to the immersion
of the three thousand which we have now disposed of,
many affnsionists insist that " access to the reservoirs,
most precious to the population of a large city, would

ii- 41, 42.] ACTS. 45
not have been allowed to such a multitude." 1 This ob
jection betrays ignorance of the design of these pools,
and of the use which is made of them. Even at this
day, when water is far more scarce than in ancient times,
they are freely used as swim pools, and their water is
never employed for drinking or culinary purposes.
Baptizing in them did not reduce the quantity or impair-
the quality of the water for any of the purposes for
which it was used. The multitude who heard Peter
could resort to them for baptism with precisely the same
freedom with which believers now resort to streams and
pools in the vicinity of any of our American cities or
villages. It is to be hoped that the day has come when
this objection will be heard no more from men of .average
intelligence.2 Before leaving this verse, we should observe that two
distinct steps were taken by the three thousand : they
were baptized, and then, as a distinct process, they were
added to the previous number of the believers. The
adding doubtless consisted in some firm of public recog
nition, by which they were acknowledged as members of
the church. As the form is not specified, it is not author
itative ; and believers are now free to adopt any form
which appears appropriate and in harmony with the sim
plicity of the gospel.
Ver. 42. These young disciples having now been
baptized on the same day in which they first became be
etle Bishop of Chester, (Speaker's Com. in loco).
2 And yet, in the volume of The Expositors' Bible on Acts, the
author, G. T. Stokes, D. D., makes this statement: " On the day
of Pentecost it was clearly impossible to immerse three thousand
persons in the city of Jerusalem" (p. 143). We may charitably
suppose that the author has never made himself acquainted with
the water supply of Jerusalem.

46 COMMENTARY. [ii. 42.
lievers, had many subordinate objects of faith to become
acquainted with, and many duties yet unknown in which
to be instructed. In giving an account of these matters
Luke is far more brief, adhering strictly to the ciiief
purpose of his narrative, that of giving the process and
means of conversion, rather than those of edification and
instruction. He closes this section of the history with a
brief notice of the order established in the new church,
first mentioning their acts of public worship : (42) And
they continued steadfastly in the apostles' teaching and
fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and the prayers.
The apostles were as yet the only teachers, and in teach
ing the disciples they were executing the part of their
commission which required them to teach those whom
they baptized all things which Jesus had commanded.1
The command which made it their duty to teach made
it also the duty of the disciples to learn from them, and
to abide by their teaching ; and that they did both is
affirmed in saying, "They continued steadfastly iu the
apostles' teaching."
The fellowship in which they continued was their
joint participation in religious privileges. The original
term, xoivwvia, is sometimes used for contributions made
for the poor;2 but while this is one of the ways in which
fellowship is manifested, the word is not usually restrict
ed to this sense. It usually occurs in such connections
as the following : " Ye were called into the fellowship
of his Son Jesus Christ ;" " the favor of our Lord Jesus
Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy
Spirit be with you ;" " and truly our fellowship is with
the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ ;" 3 " we have
1 Matt, xxviii. 19, 20. a Eom. xv. 26; II. Cor. ix. 13. "I. Cor.
i. 9 ; II. Cor. xiii. 14 ; I. Jno. i. 3, 7.

ii. 42, 43.] ACTS. 47
fellowship with one another." We have fellowship
with God, because we are made partakers of the divine
nature as we escape tlie corruption which is in the world
through lust. We have fellowship with his Son, because
of the sympathies which his life and sufferings have
established between him and us; and with the Holy
Spirit, because we partake of the strength and enlight
enment which he imparts, and because he dwells in us.
We have fellowship with one another, because of mutual
participation in one another's affection and good offices.
The term is also used with reference to the Lord's sup
per : "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the
fellowship of the blood of Christ? the loaf which we
break, is it not the fellowship of the body of Christ? "x
This fellowship is our joint participation in the benefits
of Christ's broken body and shed blood. In all these
particulars the first disciples continued steadfastly in the
fellowship. The breaking of bread and the prayers, in which they
also steadfastly continued, are the breaking of the em
blematic loaf, or the observance of the Lord's supper,
and the public prayers in the congregation. The fre
quency with which the loaf was broken is not here inti
mated ; but it was doubtless the same weekly observance
of this ordinance which we afterward find in existence
in distant congregations.2 This, as well as the number
and character of the prayers offered at the meetings, was
so well known to Theophilus that it was needless to give
the details.
Ver. 43. Next to this brief notice of the public
service of the church, we have a glance at the effect of
the scenes just described on the surrounding community :
•I. Cor. x. 16. 2 Acts xx. 17 ; I. Cor. xi. 20-

48 COMMENTARY. [ii. 43-47.
(43) And fear came upon every soul : and many wonders-
and signs were done by the apostles. This fear was not
that which partakes of aversion ; for we learn below (47)
that many were daily added to the church. It was that
solemn awe which miracles naturally inspire, mingled
with profound reverence for a community universally
characterized by holy living.
Vv. 44, 45. We are next introduced to a remark
able exhibition of the fellowship previously mentioned :
(44) And all that believed were together, and had all
things common ; and they sold their possessions and
goods, (45) and parted them to all, according as any man
had need. This conduct was in marked contrast with
the neglect of the poor which was then com mon among
the Jews, in violation of their own- law, and which was
universal among the Gentiles. Nothing like it had ever
been seen on earth before. For a fuller account of it,
see the remarks under chap. iv. 32, below.
Vv. 46, 47. The further history of the church for a
short time is condensed into this brief statement : (46)
And day by day, continuing steadfastly with one accord
in the temple, and breaking bread at home, they did take
their food with gladness and singleness of heart, (47)
praising God, and having favor with all the people.
And the Lord added to them day by day those that were
being saved. This shows plainly that tne tt mple was
the daily meeting place of the church. Its courts were
open at all times ; all Jews had as free access to them as
to the streets of the city ; and even Gentiles had free
access to the outer court, which was called on this ac
count the Court of the Gentiles.1 No other place inside
1 See more as to their use of the temple, under chap. iii. 11 ;
v. 12, 20, 25, 42.

ii. 47.] ACTS. 49
the city walls could have afforded room for the as
semblage of such multitudes.
The breaking of bread mentioned here is not the
same as that mentioned above at verse 42 ; for here the
reference is to bread for food, as is seen in the qualifying
clause, "they did take their food with gladness and sin
gleness of heart." That they had "favor with all the
people," was a natural consequence of the admirable
lives whieh they led. The priests and scribes had re
ceived such a shock by the sudden rise of the church
that they were not yet prepared for open opposition
to it. The statement that " the Lord added to them day by
day those that were being saved," means that there were
daily additions to the church, and that those daily added
were daily being saved. The last expression does not
mean that they were merely in the way of salvation ;
but that they were saved. They were saved in the sense
in which Peter had exhorted those on Pentecost to
"save themselves." The word save means to make
safe ; and a man is made safe from all his past sins when
they are forgiven. He can be saved from them in no
other way. In this sense those daily addtd were saved.
Paul uses the word in the same sense when he says:
" According to his mercy he saved us through the wash
ing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy
Spirit" (Titus iii. 5). The fact that it was the saved
who were added to the church, justifies the conclusion
that only those who are saved, or whose sins are for
given, are entitled to church membership. It condemns
the practice of receiving persons into the church " as a
means of grace," that is, as a means of seeking pardon ;
and it also condemns the reception of infants who are

50 COMMENTARY. [iii. 1-10.
incapable as yet of complying with the conditions on
which pardon is offered.

SEC. III. — PROGRESS OF THE CHURCH,
AND ITS FIRST PERSECUTION.
III. 1 — IV. 31.
1. A Lame Man Healed by Peter, hi. 1-11.
Vv. 1-10. Thus far the labors of the apostles had
met with uninterrupted and most astonishing success.
Now we are introduced to a series of conflicts, in which
success and apparent defeat alternate in the history of
the Jerusalem church. The temple is still the place of
meeting, and it becomes the place of conflict, (i) Now
Peter and John were going up into the temple at the hour
of prayer, being the ninth hour. (2) And a certain man
that was lame from his mother's womb was carried,.
whom they laid daily at the door of the temple which is
called Beautiful, to ask alms of them that entered into
the temple ; (3) who seeing Peter and John about to go
into the temple, asked to receive an alms. (4) And
Peter, fastening his eyes upon him, with John, said,
Look on us. (5) And he gave heed to them, expecting
to receive something from them. (6) But Peter said,
Silver and gold have I none ; but what I have, that I
give unto thee. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth,
walk. (7) And he took him by the right hand, and
raised him up ; and immediately his feet and his ankle
bones received strength. (8) And leaping up, he stood,
and began to walk ; and he entered with them into the
temple, walking, leaping, and praising God. (9) And

iii. 1-11.] ACTS. 51
all the people saw him leaping and praising God : (io)
and they took knowledge of him, that it was he who sat
for alms at the Beautiful Gate of the temple : and they
were filled with wonder and amazement at that which
had happened to him. This miracle is one of the many
s;gns and wonders mentioned before in chap. ii. 43, as
being wrought from day to day by the apostles; and it
is selected for particular mention because of the conse
quences which followed it. The circumstances attending
it were calculated to make it attract unusual attention.
The Beautiful Gate was doubtless the favorite passway
into the temple court ; and as the subject of this cure was
laid there every day, he became well known to all who
frequented the temple. The natural curiosity of the
benevolent concerning the afflictions of those to whom
they minister had also led to the general knowledge that
he had been a cripple from his birth. Furthermore, the
time of the cure was when a multitude of pious people
were just entering the temple for evening prayer, at the.
hour of evening incense,1 arid they could but notice the
leaping and shouting of the man who was healed. As
they witnessed his ecstasy, and saw him clinging to Peter
and John, no one needed to ask the meaning of his con-
duet, for all saw at once that he had been healed by the
apostles, and all stood gazing in amazement, forgetting
the prayers for which they had come together.
Veu. 11. It was probably the intention of Peter and
John to go with the people into the Jewish court, and
'The hours of burning incense in the temple were the third
and the ninth ; and we learn from the example of the people at
the time of Zacharias' vision (Luke i. 10) that it was the custom
of devout persons in the city to assemble about the temple and
pray while the incense was burning.

52 COMMENTARY. [iii. 11.
engage with them in prayer while the incense was burn
ing in the temple, but the conduct of the cripple and that
of the people combined brought about a different course.
(ii) And as he held Peter and John, all the people ran
together unto them into the porch that is called Solemon's,
greatly wondering. The structure that is here called a
" porch " was a colonnade constructed along the inner
face ofthe enclosing wall of the, outer court. It con
sisted, according to Josephus, of rows of stone columns
twenty-seven feet high, with a roof of cedar resting on
them and on the wall, so as to constitute a covered por
tico, with its inner side open toward the temple. On the
eastern side of the court there were two rows of these
columns, making that portico sixty feet deep and as long
as the wall, which Josephus ^ estimates at a furlong,
though its exact measurement to-day is fifteen hundred
and thirty feet. Across the southern end, which now
measures nine hundred and twenty-two feet, there were
four rows of columns, making three walks or passages
between them, each thirty feet deep, and consequently the
depth of this portico was ninety feet.1 These immense
covered' porticos, or cloisters, as Josephus calls them,
served as a protection from the sun in the summer, and
from the rain in the winter. They contained space suf
ficient for the great multitude of the disciples when
assembled in one mass; and also for many separate meet
ings of large numbers to listen to different preachers
speaking at the same time. All the twelve apostles
might be preaching in them at the same hour, each to a
large audience, and yet be far enough apart to avoid
confusion of sound. In which of these porticos the
present meeting was held we can not tell, because we are
1 Josephus (Ant. xv. 3. 5).

iii. 12-15.] ACTS. 53
not informed as to which was distinguished by the name
" Solomon's," this being of course an honorary title.
2. Peter's Second Sermon.

INTRODUCTION: THE MIRACLE EXPLAINED, 12-16.
Vv. 12-15. The admiration of the multitude was
directed toward Peter and John, and the former saw that
they ascribed the cure rather to something extraordinary
in them than to the power of their Master. He takes ad
vantage of this circumstance, and devotes the introduction
of his sermon to turning their thoughts into the right chan
nel. (12) And when Peter saw it, he answered unto the
people, Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this man?
or why fasten ye your eyes on us, as though by our own
power or godliness we had made him to walk ? (13)
The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God
of our fathers, hath glorified his servant Jesus ; whom
ye delivered up, and denied before the face of Pilate,
when he had determined to release him. (14) But ye
denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a
murderer to be granted unto you, and killed the author '
1 The word apxvyoc, here rendered Prince both in A. V. and B.
V., can have this meaning only in the primary sense of leader.
It also means author, or originator, and itis so rendered in E. V.,
in Heb. v. 9 ; xii. 2, '' author of eternal salvation," " author and
perfecter of our faith." In those places it could not be rendered
prince. Its only two other occurrences in the N. T. are in this
place and in a later speech of Peter, v. 31. In the last instance
"prince and Saviour " is not so good a rendering as ''leader and
Saviour," because the mind is apt to associate with prince the
conception of royalty, which is not suggested by the original word.
There is the same objection to " prince " in the passage before
us, and the further objection, that the expression, " prince of

54 COMMENTARY. [iii. 12-15.
of life ; (15) whom God raised from the dead; whereof we
are witnesses.
In this passage the apostle makes in substance the
same announcement concerning Jesus with which he in
troduced the principal theme of his first discourse. The
antithetical style adopted on this occasion gave his
announcement a force even greater than before, if we
consider it with reference to the effect on the consciences
of his hearers. The fact that the God of their fathers
had glorified Jesus is contrasted with the fact that
they had delivered him up to die ; their refusal to let
him be released, with Pilate's desire to let him go ; their
rejection of one who was holy and just, with the demand
that a murderer should be released to them ; and the
fact that they killed him, with the fact that he was the
author of life. These four points of contrast form the
steps of a climax. He whom the God of your fathers
glorified, ye have delivered up to die. Your criminality
in this is heightened by the consideration that when
the heathen ruler of your nation pronounced him inno
cent, and proposed to release him, ye cried out against it.
Even this does not express the enormity of your guilt,
for ye yourselves knew him to be a man holy and just, .
and ye preferred the release of one whom ye knew to be
a murderer. Finally, in murdering him ye put to death
the very author of life itself, your own life, and the life
of all men; and although ye put him to death, he has
arisen from the dead. A grander climax, or a "happier
life," conveys no distinct idea, and certainly not the correct idea.
Peter is contrasting the act of killing Jesus with the fact that he
is the author of life. For these reasons I have not hesitated to de
part from the R. V. in this instance. See _ Thayer's Grimm;
Meyer in loco, and Speaker's Com. in loco.

iii. 16.] ACTS. 55
combination of climax and antithesis, is not found often,
if at all, in literature. We have reason to believe (see
below under verse 17) that the effect on the multitude
was overwhelming. The facts set forth in it were unde
niable, except the resurrection, and of this Peter declares
himself and John to be witnesses.
Ver. 16. By the preceding announcement Peter
only in part introduced the theme of his discourse. He
advanced as far as the resurrection, but he stopped short
of the whole truth concerning the glorification of Jesus.
He now completes his introduction, and at the same
time demonstrates the reality of the resurrection and
glorification of Jesus, by adding: (16) And by faith in
his name hath his name made this man strong, whom
ye behold and know : yea, the faith which is through
him hath given him this perfect soundness in the pres
ence of you all. Here is one of those repetitions com
mon with extemporaneous speakers, intended to give
greater emphasis to the principal thought, and at the
same time to guard against a probable misunderstanding.
Lest the peculiar use made of the name of Jesus should
lead some of the excited multitude to think that there
was some charm in the mere name, a mistake into which
certain Jews in Ephesus afterward fell,1 Peter is particu
lar to say that it was by faith in his name that the
miracle had been wrought. We must notice, too, that
the faith which had effected the cure was not that of the
cripple ; for it is evident from the account of the cure
(verses 4-8) that previous to it he had no faith at all.
When Peter said to him, " Look on us," the man looked
up, expecting to receive alms. And even when Peter
told him in the name of Jesus Christ to walk, he made
1 Acts xix. 13-17.

56 COMMENTAR Y. [iii. 16-18.
no attempt to move until Peter took him by tbe hand
and lifted him up. He showed no faith either in Jesus,
or in the healing power of the apostles, until he found
himself able to stand aud walk. The faith, then, was that
of Peter; and this accords with what we learn in the
Gospels, that the working of a miracle by those possessed
of spiritual gifts was always dependent on tbeir faith.
Peter was empowered to walk on the water; but when
his faith wavered he began to sink, and Jesus said, " O
thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?"1
When nine of the apostles on a memorable occasion,
tried to cast out a demon, and failed, Jesus explained
the failure by saying it was because of their little faith.2
It was only the " prayer of faith " which could heal the
sick.3 It may be well to observe here, that while faith was
necessary on the part of one to whom miraculous powers
had been imparted, in order to work any particular
miracle, no faith ever enabled one to work a miracle to
whom such powers had not been imparted. The notion,
therefore, which has existed in some minds from time to
time ever since the apostolic period, that if our faith
were strong enough we also could work miracles, has as
little foundation in Scripture as it has in experience.
II.
FORGIVENESS OE SINS OFFERED THROUGH CHRIST, 17-21.
Vv. 17, 18. At this point in the discourse there is a
marked change in Peter's tone and manner. He has
made a fearful arraignment of his hearers, exposing their
criminality in unsparing terms; but now he softens his
tone and extenuates their fault, influenced no doubt by a
1 Matt. xiv. 31. 2 Matt. xvii. 20. 3 James v. 15.

iii. 17, 18.] 'ACTS. 57
perceptible expression of pain in their countenances.
(17) And now, brethren, I know that in ignorance ye did
it, as did also your rulers. (18) But the things which
God foreshowed by the mouth of all the prophets, that
his Christ should suffer, he thus fulfilled. That they
acted in ignorance was an extenuation of their crime,
but it did not render them innocent. The fact stated in
connection with this, that in their mistreatment of Jesus
God was fulfilling what he had declared through the
prophets should be done, is not easily reconciled by hu
man philosophy with the assertion of their guilt. Once
before Peter had brought these two apparently conflict
ing facts, the sovereignty of God and the free agency of
man, into juxtaposition, when he said, "Him, being
delivered up by the determinate counsel and fore
knowledge of God, ye by the hands of lawless men did
crucify and slay." That God had predetermined the
death of Jesus, can not be denied without contradicting
both the prophets and the apostles ; and that those who
slew him acted wickedly in doing what God had de
termined should be done, Peter affirms, and three thou
sand of the participants on Pentecost, together with
many on this occasion, admitted it: If any man can
frame a theory by which these two facts can be philo
sophically reconciled, we shall accept it if we can under
stand it ; but unless both facts unaltered have a place in
the theory, it must be rejected. In the mean time it is
well to follow Peter's example, who lays the two facts
side by side, appealing to the prophets for proof of the
one, and to the consciences of his hearers for the proof
ofthe other, and not seeming to realize that he has in
volved himself in the slightest difficulty. Itis folly to
climb where we are certain to fall.

58 COMMENTARY. [iii. 19-21.
Vv. 19-21. Having now demonstrated the resurrec
tion and glorification of Jesus, together with the crimi
nality of those who had condemned him, the apostle
next offers forgiveness to his hearers on the terms pre
scribed in the commission. (19) Repent ye therefore,
and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that
so there may come seasons of refreshing from the pres
ence of the Lord ; (20) and that he may send the Christ
who hath been appointed for you, even Jesus : (21)
whom the heaven must receive until the times of the
restoration of all things whereof God spake by the mouth
of his holy prophets which have been since the world
began. Here, as in his former statement of the con
ditions of pardon, the apostle makes no mention of
faith ; but, having labored from the beginning of his
discourse to convince his hearers, his command to repent
carries the assumption that they believed. A command
based upon an argument, or upon testimony, always im
plies the sufficiency of the proof, and assumes that the
hearer is convinced. Moreover, Peter knew that none
would repent at his command who did not believe what
he had said. In every view of the case, then, he pro
ceeded naturally and safely in omitting the mention of
faith. In the command, " Repent and turn again," the word
turn expresses something to be done subsequent to re
pentance, and something different from repentance ; for
there would be no propriety in adding the command,
" Turn," if its meaning had already been expressed in the
command, " Repent." In order to a proper understand
ing of the conditions of forgiveness here prescribed,
we must determine the exact import of both these
terms.

iii. 19-21.] ACTS. , 59
The most prevalent conception of repentance is godly
sorrow for sin; but according to Paul, godly sorrow for
sin stands related to repentance as cause to effect.
" Godly sorrow," he says, " worketh repentance unto
salvation, a repentance which bringeth no regret." He
says further to the Corinthians : " Now I rejoice, not that
ye were made sorry, but that ye were made sorry unto
repentance." 1 These remarks show that it is godly sor
row that brings men to repentance; and the last implies
that there may be sorrow for sin without repentance.
The same distinction is implied in commanding those on
Pentecost who were already " pricked in the heart" to
repent. It is illustrated in the case of Judas, who ex
perienced the most intense sorrow for sin ; but instead of
working repentance, it drove him to suicide.
The fact thus made clear, that repentance is a result
of godly sorrow for sin, has led some critics to suppose
and to teach, that repentance means reformation of life,
seeing that this is a result of the sorrow in question.2
But while reformation does result from sorrow for sin,
the Scriptures furnish clear evidence that it is dis
tinguished from repentance. Confounding the two terms
would make the passage before us a piece of tautology ;
for when Peter says, " Repent and turn," the idea of
reformation is involved in the word turn ; and if repent
meant to reform, then the command would be nothing
more than reform, and reform. John the Baptist, in
requiring the people to " bring forth fruits worthy of
repentance," distinguished between repentance and the
deeds of a reformed life, by referring to the latter as the
fruits ofthe former. With him reformation is the fruit
1 II. Oor. vii. 8-10. 2 First\propounded by Dr. George Camp
bell in his Notes on the Four Gospels.

60 COMMENTARY. [iii. 19-21.
of repentance, and not its equivalent. When Jesus
speaks of repenting seven times a day, he certainly means
something different from reformation; for this would
require more time. Again, when Peter required those
on Pentecost to repent and be baptized, if by repent he
had meant reform, he would have given them time to
reform before baptizing them, instead of baptizing them
immediately. Finally, the original term is sometimes
used in connection with such prepositions as are not
suited to the idea of reformation. For instance, in
II. Cor. xii. 21, it is said, " Many have not repented of
the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which
they have committed." Men do not reform of their evil
deeds ; and the original preposition 1 in this case will not
admit of a rendering that will suit the term reform.
Seeing now that repentance results from sorrow for
sin, and leads to reformation of life, we can have no
further difficulty in ascertaining what it is ; for the only
result of sorrow for sin which leads to reformation is a
change of the will in reference to sin. The primary
meaning of the Greek word (fieravoia) is a change of the
mind ; and in this sense it is used when it said that Esau
" found no place for ftsravoia, though he sought it care
fully with tears." 2 What he sought was a change in
his father's mind with reference to the blessing already
' bestowed on Jacob. Here the desired change was not a
change from sin ; for Isaac had committed no sin in con
ferring the blessing on Jacob ; consequently, the word
in this instance ought to be translated, not repentance,
but change of mind. If the change of will designated
by the word is not a result of sorrow for sin, but of some
considerations of mere expediency, it is not the repent-
1 It is km with the dative. 2 Heb. xii. 17.

iii. 19-21.] ACTS. 61
ance required ; and if it stop short of reformation of life
on the part ofthe penitent, it falls short ofthe blessings
here promised by Peter. Repentance, then, fully de
fined, is a change of will caused by sorrow for sin', and
leading to a reformation of life.
We can now perceive more clearly than before that
in the command, " Repent and turn again," two distinct
changes are required, which occur in the order of the
words. In commenting on the latter as rendered in the
King James version, Mr. Barnes says : " This expression
(be converted) conveys an idea not at all to be found in
the original. It conveys the idea of passivity — be con
verted, as if they were to yield to some foreign influence
which they were now resisting. But the idea of being
passive in this is not conveyed by the original word.
The word properly means to turn — .to return to a path
from which one has gone astray ; and then to turn away
from sins, or to forsake them."1 This interpretation
was not disputed by competent scholars while the old
version was current, and now that the Revised Version
has stamped it with its authority, it will scarcely be dis
puted by any.2 The term denotes a change of conduct.
But a change of conduct has a beginning; and a person
is properly said to turn when he does the first act of the
better life. Now it so happens that one act was uni
formly enjoined upon the penitent believer as the first
act of obedience to Christ ; that is, to be baptized. This
Peter's present hearers understood ; for it had been pro-

1 Notes in loco.
2 In this vision the terms convert and converted are not found,
the original word being everywhere translated turn. This better
rendering should promote a better understanding of an important
subject.

62 COMMENTARY. [iii. 19-21.
claimed from Pentecost onward, and they had seen it
observed every day. When therefore they heard the
command, " Repent and turn again," they could but un
derstand that they were to turn by being baptized, thus
entering upon a new and better life. Baptism was the
turning act.
We may reach the same conclusion by another course
of reasoning. The command, " Turn again," occupies
the same position between repentance and remission of
sins that the command, " Be baptized," does in Peter's
former discourse. He then said, "Repent and be bap
tized for the remission of sins;" he now says, "Repent
and turn, that your sins may be blotted out." We need
scarcely remark that blotting out of sins is a mataphori-
cal expression for their forgiveness, the forgiveness being
compared to blotting out from a waxen tablet that which
was written thereon. Now when Peter's hearers heard
him command them to repent and turn for the same bless
ing for which he had formerly commanded them to re
pent and be baptized, they could but understand that the
generic word turn was used with specific reference to
baptism ; and this, not because the two words mean the
same, but because men turned by being baptized. This
is the doctrine ofthe passage.
While the command to repent and turn again was for
the primary purpose that their sins might be blotted
out, two other consequences are mentioned as further
inducements to compliance ; first, " that so there may
come seasons of refreshing from the presence of the
Lord ;" and second, " that he may send the Christ who
hath been appointed for you, even Jesus." The " spa-
sons of refreshing " are placed here where " the gift of
the Holy Spirit " was placed in the first discourse, and

iii. 19-23.] ACTS. 63
the reference is to the refreshing of the soul effected by
the joys of the Holy Spirit. The sending of Christ to
them refers no doubt to his final coming ; and it was
dependent on their obedience, as we can know from later
utterances, though Peter's hearers could not know it at
the time, in the general way that a certain amount
of work in the saving of men was to be accomplished be
fore his coming. This is indicated by the qualifying re
mark, " whom the heaven must receive until the time of
the restoration of all things whereof God spake by the
mouth of his holy prophets since the world began." It
is difficult to determine the exact meaning of the word
restoration in this place ; but it is limited by the ex
pression, " all things whereof God spake by the Holy
prophets," and consequently it consists in the fulfillment
ofthe Old Testament predictions ; and the remark gives
assurance that Jesus will not return again till all these
predictions shall have been fulfilled. It is quite common
for those theorists who believe in the final salvation of
all men to quote this passage improperly by omitting
the last clause, quoting it, " the restoration of all things,"
and making it mean the restoration to primitive purity
and hippiness of all things and all men. This is to
handle the word of God deceitfully. III.
THESE THINGS. MATTERS OF PREDICTION AND OF
PROMISE, 22-26.
Vv. 22, 23. Whatever might be proved concerning
the resurrection or glorification of Jesus, a Jew would
not be prepared to accept him as the promised Messiah
unless the proof contained evidence that the facts were
subjects of prophecy. To this end, and also for the pur-

64 COMMENTARY. [iii. 22-24.
pose of warning his hearers against rejecting what they
had heard, Peter next introduces a well known predic
tion made by Moses : (22) Moses indeed said, A prophet
shall the Lord God raise up unto you from among your
brethren, like unto me ; to him shall ye hearken in all
things whatsoever he shall speak to you. (23) And it
shall be, that every soul which shall not hearken to
that prophet, shall be utterly destroyed from among the
people. That Peter was right in applying this prediction
to Jesus, was perfectly obvious to all who believed what
he had previously said ; for if what he had said of Jesus
was true, the likeness on which the application depended
was found in Jesus, and in no one else. Moses was
distinguished from all the other prophets in that he was
a deliverer and a lawgiver. The others were employed
in enforcing the law which Moses gave, but not in adding
to it, or setting any of it aside. Jesus, however, was like
Moses, in that he also came as a deliverer, proposing a
far more glorious deliverance than that effected by
Moses, and he also issued laws for a new government of
men. This proved that he alone was the prophet spoken
of by Moses, and it showed the audience that in obeying
Jesus they would be obeying Moses, while in rejecting
him they would incur the curse which Moses pro
nounced. Ver. 24. Not content with bringing to bear the
testimony of Moses, Peter adds to it the combined au
thority of all the prophets. (24) Yea, and all the proph
ets from Samuel and them that follow after, as many as
have spoken, they also told of these days. This declar
ation is to be understood only of those prophets whose
predictions are recorded in the Old Testament ; for to
these alone could Peter appeal before his hearers. The

iii. 24-26.] ACTS. 65
universal terms pf the remark are used, as was common
with Jewish speakers and writers, in only a general
sense; for it can not be affirmed absolutely that all of
the prophets had spoken explicitly " of these days ;" but
this was true of the prophets in general, and Peter dates
the beginning of the series from Samuel, not because
Samuel himself spoke of these days, but because the
constant succession began with him. It is highly probable
that in the actual delivery of the discourse, of which
Luke has almost certainly given us only an epitome, as
he did of the first discourse, Peter quoted many of these
predictions, and made their application clear to his
hearers. The argument of the discourse is now com
pleted, and Jesus is once more proved to be the promised
Messiah and the glorified Son of God.
Vv. 25, 26. Having completed his argument, Peter
next makes an appeal to his hearers based on their vener
ation for the fathers of their nation, and for the covenant
which they had inherited. (25) Ye are the sons of the
prophets, and of the covenant which God made with your
fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all
the families of the earth be blessed. (26) Unto you first
God, having raised up his Servant, sent him to bless
you, in turning away every one of you from his in
iquities. This was a tender appeal to their national feel
ings, made more effective by the information that the
blessing offered them in Christ was the very blessing
contemplated in the well known promise to Abraham,
and that to them first, because of their relation to the
prophets and to Abraham, God had sent his risen Son to
bless them before visiting the rest of mankind.
We here have an authoritative interpretation of the
promise to Abraham. It is fulfilled, according to Peter,

66 COMMENTARY. [iii. 26— iv. 3.
in turning living men away from their iniquities. Those
only who turn away from their iniquities are the recipi
ents of the promised blessing ; and the fact that all the
kindreds of the earth were to be blessed, does not affect
this conclusion, except, by extending its application to
those among all kindreds who shall turn from their
iniquities. To Peter's hearers this concluding remark
not only conveyed this information, but it recalled the
exhortation, " Turn again," by telling them that God had
sent Jesus for the very purpose of turning them from
iniquity. For a cause which appears in the next paragraph of
the narrative, this discourse of Peter was not brought
to its conclusion. Doubtless, if he had been allowed to
continue it, he would have closed with an exhortation
to immediate obedience such as that which closed his
first sermon.
3. Peter and John Arrested, iv. 1-4.
Vv. 1-3. Thus far the work of the apostles had
gone on without interruption, and they probably began
to imagine that the old enemies of their Lord were so
completely paralyzed by the triumphs of the truth that
they had lost all of their former zeal and courage. But
just at this moment of hope and joy the calm was fol
lowed by a storm, (i) And as they spake unto the
people, the priests and the captain of the temple and the
Sadducees came upon them, (2) being sore troubled be
cause they taught the people, and proclaimed in Jesus
the resurrection from the dead. (3) And they laid hands
on them, and put them in ward unto the morrow : for
it was now eventide. This sudden disturbance of the
interested audience by a body of armed men rushing

iv. 1-3.] ACTS. 67
through their midst and seizing Peter and John, was a
very bold and startling movement on the part of the
unbelievers. At first thought we would have expected the Phari
sees, the old persecutors of Jesus, to be the leaders in
any persecution of his apostles ; but here we see the
Sadducees, who were comparatively indifferent to his
pretensions, taking the lead ; and it is explained by
the fact that the apostles taught through Jesus the resur
rection from the dead. While Jesus had taught the
same doctrine, and on one occasion had maintained it
against the Sadducees in special debate,1 he had but sel
dom assailed either the doctrine or the practices of this
party. But now the whole brunt of the preaching was
in opposition to the denial by the Sadducees of the resur
rection from the dead; and as for Caiaphas, the chief
priest, who was a Sadducee, the preaching affected him still
more seriously by accounting him a murderer. It was
well calculated to arouse that party to violence. At the
same time, although the Pharisees could by no mfans
have looked upon the triumph of the apostles with in
difference, even though their enemies were being dis
comfited by it, the doctrine of the resurrection was their
own, and the only objection they had to the preaching
was that the resurrection was proclaimed in the name of
Jesus. They were as yet watching the course of things
in amazement, unprepared for any decisive action.
They had hated Jesus because he had assailed their tra
ditions and exposed their hypocrisy ; they had not yet
learned to hate the apostles, because as yet the latter had
not openly assailed them. The priests who assisted in
this arrest may have been Sadducees, or they may have
1 Matt. xxii. 23-33.

68 COMMENTARY. [iv. 4-6.
been instigated by the fact that this preaching of Peter,
beginning that day at the hour of evening prayer, had
diverted the minds of the people from the sacrifices and
the customary prayers before the temple. The " captain
of the temple," who led the party making the arrests,
was the commander of the guard of Levites who always
stood on duty at the gates aud elsewhere, to keep order
within the holy precincts.1
Ver. 4. The people who had been listening to Peter
must have been thrown into great excitement by the ar
rest, and the disciples present may have expected to see
reenacted the murderous scenes which terminated the
life of their Master ; nevertheless, the words of Peter
were not without a decided effect, for Luke says : (4)
But many of them that heard the word believed ; and the
number of the men came to be about five thousand.
True to the custom of Oriental nations even to the pres
ent day, the number of men alone is here given, tho
women not being counted. The whole number of be
lievers of both sexes must have been largely in excess of
these figures. The increase since the day of Pentecost
must have been very rapid, for doubtless many of those
baptized then must have departed to their distant homes,
and still the increase had been more than two thousand,
without counting women.
4. Peter's Defense before the Council, 5-12.
Vv. 5, 6. The arrest having been made late in the
afternoon (eventide, 3), further proceedings were post
poned till the next day, and Peter and John had the
'They were first appointed under the name of porters by
David (II. Chron. xxvi. 1-19). A plurality of them is alluded to
in Luke xiii. 4,

iv. 5-7.] ACTS. 69
quiet of a night under guard for reflection and mutual
encouragment ere they were brought to trial. (5) And
it came to pass on the morrow, that their rulers and
elders and scribes were gathered together in Jerusalem ;
(6) and Annas the high priest was there, and Caiaphas,
and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the
kindred of the high priest. The men here called " rulers
and elders and scribes " constituted the main body of
the high court of the Jews, called the Sanhedrin. An
nas, whom Luke both here and in his former narrative
calls high priest, was the lawful high priest, but he had
been deposed by Valerius Gratus, the predecessor of
Pilate, and Caiaphas, his son-in-law, had been by the
same unlawful procedure put in his place, so that while
the latter was holding the office, the other was lawfully
entitled to it, and was recognized as high priest by the
people.1 The John and Alexander mentioned were well
known men of high authority, as the manner in which
they are mentioned clearly indicates, but nothing more
is now known of them. The assembly was called for the
purpose of determining what should be done with Peter
and John.
Ver. 7. When the court was assembled the prisoners
were brought in, and the cripple who had been healed,
not willing that his benefactors should suffer without his
presence and sympathy, boldly walked in and took
position close to them. (7) And when they had set them
in the midst, they inquired, By what power, or in what
name, have ye done this ? This was not the first time
that Peter and John had been in the presence of this
august assembly. As they looked up into the faces of
1 To represent this as a mistake on Luke's part, as do Meyer
and others, is aDsuru.

70 COMMENTARY. [iv. 7.
their judges, and recognized many of them, they could
but remember the morning when their Master stood there
in bonds, while they stood in the court and looked on,
full of fearful misgivings. The fall and the bitter tears
of Peter on that occasion were now a warning and a
strength to them both, while their position brought to
mind some solemn words of Jesus which had never ac
quired a present value till now. ' "Beware of men : for
they shall deliver you up to councils, and they will
scourge you in their synagogues, and ye shall be brought
before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony
to them and the Gentiles. But when they deliver you
up, be not anxious how or what ye shall speak ; for it
shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall say.
For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father
that speaketh in you."1 Cheered by these promises,
they now stood before their accusers and judges with a
boldness which to the latter was altogether unaccount
able. The prisoners had been arrested and brought into
court without a formal charge being brought against
them, and the court was now dependent on what might
be extorted from them for a ground of accusation. The
question propounded is remarkable for its vagueness :
" By what power, or by what name have ye done this ?"
Done what ? might have been the answer. Done this
preaching? or this miracle? or what? The question
specified nothing, and the obvious reason is that there
was no particular thing done by Peter and John on
which they dared to fix attention, or on which they
could base a charge of wrong doing. The chief priest
cunningly framed an indefinite question, in the hope that
1 Matt. x. 17-19.

iv. 8-12.] ACTS. 71
the defendants, in their confusion, would furnish a
ground of accusation by speaking unguarded words.
Vv. 8-10. Cunningly devised as the question of the
council was, none could have served Peter a better pur
pose. It left him free to select as the subject of his
answer anything that he had done, and he chose, out of
all that he had done, that which was the most unwelcome
to his judges. He framed his answer, too, with a more
direct reference to the other terms of their question, than
they either desired or anticipated. (8) Then Peter, filled
with the Holy Spirit, said unto them, (9) Ye rulers of
the people, and elders, if we this day are examined con
cerning a good deed done to an impotent man, by what
means this man is made whole ; (10) be it known to you
all, and to all the people of Israel, that in the name of
Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God
raised from the dead, even in him does this man stand
hefore you whole. This statement needed no proof, for
the judges could not deny, with the man standing before
them, that the miracle had been wrought ; nor could
they with any plausibility ascribe the deed to any other
power or name than that claimed by him who performed
it. To deny that the power was divine, would have
been absurd in the estimation of all the people; and to
have rejected the explanation given by those through
whom the power was exerted, would have been not less
so. The answer, then, vindicated itself, and confounded
those who propounded the question.
Vv. 11, 12. Realizing the advantage which he had
now gained, Peter pushes it still farther by adding :
(11) He is the stone which was set at naught by you
builders, which was made the head of the corner. (12)
And in none other is there salvation : for neither is there

72 COMMENTARY. [iv. 11-14.
any other name under heaven, that is given among men,
wherein we must be saved. Here, using the words of
David,1 he. puts his judges and accusers in the ridiculous
altitude of builders laying the foundation of a house,
but rejecting the stone which was cut out for the corner,
\without which the foundation course could not be closed
up, and no part ofthe wall could be built. Then, drop
ping the figure, he plainly declares that there is no sal
vation for man except in the name of the very Jesus
whom thej' had crucified. This declaration is universal ;
and it shows that every human being who is saved at all
will be saved in the name of Christ. If any who do not
know him or believe in him are saved, still in some
way their salvation will be in his name.
5. A Private Consultation, 13-17.
Vv. 13, 14. Instead of answering evasively, or
timidly, as was expected of men in their social position
when arraigned in such a presence, the apostles had un
hesitatingly avowed the sentiments which they had been
preaching, and on account of which they had been ar
rested, and it had the effect of silencing their accusers :
(13) Now when they beheld the boldness of Peter and
John, and had perceived that they were unlearned and
ignorant men, they marveled, and they took knowledge
of them that they had been with Jesus. (14) And see
ing the man who was healed standing with them, they
could say nothing against it. It was not till this mo
ment, apparently, that the two apostles were recognized
by the judges as former attendants of Jesus, though all
perhaps had seen them with him repeatedly before his
death, and John was a personal acquaintance of
1 Psalm cxviii. 22, 23.

iv. 15-17.] ACTS. 73
Caiaphas.1 At the close of Peter's remarks there seems
to have been total silence for a time ; for " they could
say nothing against it." Not one of them was ready to
contradict anything he had said, or to rebuke him for
saying it. Their embarrassment was painful.
Vv. 15, 16. The silence was broken by a proposal
that the prisoners be withdrawn. (15) But when they
had commanded them to go aside out of the council, they
conferred among themselves, saying, (16) What shall
we do to these men ? for that indeed a notable miracle
hath been wrought through them, is manifest to all who
dwell in Jerusalem ; and we can not deny it. This ad
mission shows that in their public proceedings they had
been utterly hypocritical and heartless. How they could
now look one another in the face, is a moral puzzle.
Perhaps they did not; and certainly they could not have
allowed themselves to look up toward God.
Ver. 17. The motive which controlled them crops
out in the conclusion to which their deliberations brought
them : (17) But that it spread no further among the
people, let us threaten them, that they speak henceforth
to no man in this name. The man who made this pro
posal thought that he had solved a difficult problem, and
the others were too well pleased at finding a loophole of
escape from their present embarrassment, to forecast very
shrewdly the probable success of the measure. It was a
safe course, if not a very bold one, and as there was no
obstacle in the way except conscience, they did not hesi
tate to adopt it.
How Luke learned the particulars of this secret con
sultation, we are not informed ; but it is not difficult to
imagine. Gamaliel, Saul's teacher, was probably present,
1 John xviii. 15, 18.

74 COMMENTARY. [iv. 17-22.
and it is not unlikely that Saul himself was also there.
Moreover, "a great company of the priests" afterward
became obedient to the faith, and after they ' repented
they would not hesitate to confess all of the villainy of
their party.
6. More Preaching Forbidden, 18-22.
Ver. 18. The resolution was no sooner adopted than
acted upon. (18) And they called them, and charged
'them not to speak at all or teach in the name of Jesus.
This is the first time in the history of the church that
preaching was forbidden ; and now it was forbidden ab
solutely. If the apostles obey, not another word is to
be spoken for Jesus in public or in private. We shud
der to think ofthe consequences if that injunction had
been obeyed.
Vv. 19, 20. The apostles, if at all solicitous for their
personal safety, might have retired from the assembly in
silence. (19) But Peter and John answered and said to
them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken
unto you rather than unto God, judge ye : (20) for we
can not but speak the things which we saw and heard.
The first part of this answer was an appeal to the con
sciences of the judges, and the last part was a plain but
modestly expressed avowal of the purpose to disregard
their order. Silence might have been construed as
giving assent; and the apostles were too candid to allow
it to be thought for a moment that assent would be
given. Vv. 21, 22. It must have been a sore trial to the
proud spirits of the Sanhedrin to brook such defiance
from humble men like these ; but a desire to conciliate
the people, mingled with a secret fear, perhaps, of doing

iv. 21-30.] ACTS. 75
violence to men possessed of such power, restrained their
wrath. (21) And they, when they had further threat
ened them, let them go, finding nothing how they might
punish them, because of the people ; for all men glorified
God for that which was done. (22) For the man was
more than forty years old, on whom this miracle of
healing was wrought. Whatever the people thought of
the teaching of Peter, they could but admire and applaud
the " good deed done to the impotent man ;" and the
fact that the latter was more than forty years of age,
made him well known and an object of universal sym
pathy.
7. Report of the Two Apostles, and Prayer
of the Twelve, 23-31.
Vv. 23-30. The apostles now retired in triumph
from the assembly ; but they were uninflated by their
triumph as they had been undaunted in their danger.
They sepm to have attained to that lofty equipoise of
faith and hope which enables men to maintain complete
self-possession amid all the vicissitudes of life. The
course which they immediately pursued is worthy of
profound consideration. (23) And being let go, they
came to their own company, and reported all that the
chief priests and elders had said to them. (24) And
they, when they heard it, lifted up their voice to God
with one accord, and said, 0 Lord, thou that didst make
the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that in
them is : (25) who by the Holy Spirit, by the mouth of
our father David thy servant,1 didst say,
1 In this passage, contrary to the opinions of modern rational
ists, the apostles represent David as the author of the second
Psalm, from which they quote, and they declare that God himself,

76 COMMENTARY. - [iv. 23-60.
Why did the Gentiles rage,
And the peoples imagine vain things ?
(26) The kings of the earth set themselves in array,
And the rulers were gathered together,
Against the Lord, and against his Anointed :
(27) for of a truth in this city against thy holy servant
Jesus, whom thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius
Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel (28)
were gathered together to do whatsoever thy hand and
thy counsel foreordained to come to pass. (29) And
now, Lord, look upon their threatenings ; and grant unto
thy servants to speak thy word with all boldness, (30)
while thou stretchest forth thy hand to heal ; and that
signs and wonders may be done through the name of thy
holy servant Jesus.
In this prayer, as in all those recorded in the Bible,
we find a propriety in each part, and a fitness in the
whole, which are worthy of study and of imitation. On
a former occasion the apostles had set before the Lord
two persons between whom choice was to be made for
the apostolic office, so they addressed God as the heart-
knower;1 but now they desire his protecting power,
and their invocation is, " O Lord, thou that didst make
the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all thfft in
Their petition is equally appropriate. They

by his Holy Spirit, spake these words by the mouth of David
Words could not be framed into a more explicit statement of both
facts, and the truthfulness of the statement is attested not only by
the authority of the inspired apostles, but by the manifest fulfill
ment of the predictions of the passage in the proceeding which
they recite in the next division of the prayer. It is vain to say
that these men did not understand higher criticism, for here they
speak not as mere men, but as inspired men.
1 Acts i. 24.

iv. 23-30.] ACTS. 77
lay the foundation for it in the word of prophecy which
the Lord himself had spoken, and which had now been
fulfilled by Herod, Pilate, the people of Israel, and the
Gentiles ; and the petition is, first, " Behold their threat
enings ;" and second, " Grant unto thy servants to speak
thy word with all boldness."
In these days of passion and war, when it is common
for prayers to be filled with entreaties for victory over
our enemies, and sometimes with maledictions upon those
who are waging war against our supposed rights, it is
quite refreshing to observe the tone of this apostolic
prayer. These men were not in danger of losing some
merely political power or privilege ; but the dearest and
most ind isputable right they had on earth was denied
them, and they were threatened with death if they did
not relinquish it : yet in their prayer they manifest no
vindictive or resentful spirit ; but they pray in reference
to their enemies only this, " Lord, behold their threat
enings," while they leave the Lord without suggestion
or request, to do as might appear good in his sight. By
such prayers as are often uttered at the present time
men seek to make God a partisan in all their angry con
tentions, as though he were nothing more than them
selves.20 In reference to their own work, the apostles
pray only for boldness to continue it without regard to
the threatenings of their enemies; and they intimate
20 These thoughts were first written amid the din and confu
sion of our great civil war, when even devout men on both sidas
were beside themselves with the passions of the time. Tne com
position of the first edition of this Commentary was once inter
rupted by the booming of cannon in the siege of Lexington, Mo.,
not many miles from the author's home in 1862, and once by the
march and countermarch of contending armies through Lexing
ton, Ky., where he lived in 1863.

78 COMMENTARY. [iv. 31-35.
how they expect this boldness to be given them by ask
ing that the signs and wonders which had attested the
presence of God with them thus far, might continue to
attest it still. They had no thought of fear so long as
they had evidence of the divine presence and approval.
Ver. 31. The prayer for boldness was answered at
once, but in a way not expected. (31) And when they
had prayed, the place was shaken wherein they were
gathered together ; and they were all filled with the
Holy Spirit, and they spake the word of God with bold
ness. The shaking of the house, attended by a conscious
renewal of the miraculous power of the Holy Spirit,
gave them the boldness for which they prayed, by
assuring them that God was still with them.

SEC. IV.— FURTHER PROGRESS OF THE
CHURCH, AND A SECOND PERSECUTION.
(IV. 32— V. 42.)
1. Unity and Liberality of the Church, 32-37.
Vv. 32-35. After the preceding account of the first
persecution, Luke turns our attention once more to the
internal condition of the church. The religious life of
the disciples was now more developed than at the time
referred to in the close of the second chapter, and the
description enters more into details. (32) And the mul
titude of them that believed were of one heart and soul :
and not one of them said that aught of the things that
he had was his own ; but they had all things common.
(33) And with great power gave the apostles their wit
ness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus : and great

iv. 33-35.] ACTS. 79
grace was upon them all. (34) For neither was there
any among them that lacked: for as many as were
possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the
prices of the things that were sold, (35) and laid them
at the apostles' feet; and distribution was made unto
each, according as any one had need.
Considering the large number of persons in this con
gregation, and the variety of social relations from which
they had been suddenly drawn together, it is truly re
markable, and well worthy of a place in the record, that
they were " of one heart and soul." The unity for which
the Saviour had prayed1 was now enjoyed by the church,
and witnessed by the world. The most surprising mani
festation of it was seen in that complete subsidence of
selfishness which led one and all to say that the things
which he possessed were not his own, but the property
of all. This was not the result of socialistic theorizing,
or of rules laid down to govern all who sought admission
into the new society; but it was the spontaneous ex
pression ofthe love of God and man which had taken
possession of every heart. Among the heathen nations
of antiquity, systematic provision for the wants of the
poor was unknown ; and even among the Jews, whose
laws made ample provisions for this unfortunate class,
voluntary benevolence was greatly neglected. It was
therefore a new thing under the sun to see many per
sons in a large community voluntarily selling houses and
lands in order to supply the wants of the poor who were
among them. It could not fail to have the effect which
Luke traces to it in the words, " And with great power
gave the apostles their witness ofthe resurrection of the
Lord Jesus ; and great grace was upon them all." The
1 John xvii. 11, 20,21.

80 COMMENTARY. [iv. 32-3.3.
fresh power was not in the testimony itself, which was a
fixed quantity, the same at all times ; but in its effect
upon the people. Its effect was more powerful than be
fore, because it was now backed up by such a life among
those who accepted the testimony as could not have been
seen or anticipated at the beginning. The "great
grace " that was upon them all was not the grace of
God, which had been upon them uniformly from the
beginning : but the grace, more properly rendered, the
favor ofthe people. It has been often observed since
then that when unity and liberality prevail in a congre
gation the preaching has greater power because of its
greater favor with the people ; whereas, in the absence
of unity and liberality, the most forcible preaching often
fails of visible results.
This church was not at this time a commune, or a
socialistic club, as many interpreters have fancied ; for
there was no uniform distribution ofthe property of all
among the members; neither was the property of all
held and administered by the apostles as a business com
mittee. On the contrary, " distribution was made unto
each as any one had need ;" which shows that only the
needy received anything, and that those who were not
needy were the givers. This is further illustrated by
the conduct of Ananias and Sapphira below (v. 1-4),
and by the circumstances connected with the appoint
ment ofthe seven to serve tables (vi. 1-3). It must not
be supposed, either, that these disciples made a mistake'
•V* the matter of their benevolence, wbich they found it
necee^iy afterward to correct by acting more rationally.
This supposition can be adopted only by those who deny '
that the apostles were guided by the Holy Spirit in
directing the affairs of the church, and who at the same

iv. 32-36.] ACTS. 81
time fail to take into their minds an adequate conception
of Christian benevolence. In reality this church was
setting an example for all other churches in all time to
come, by showing that true Christian benevolence re7
quires that we shall not let our brethren in the church
suffer for food, even if those of us who have houses and
lands can prevent it only by the sale of our possessions.
In other words, it teaches us to share the last crust with
our brother. We shall see hereafter that the church in
Antioch imitated quite closely this noble example (xi.
27-30). Ver. 36. Luke now brings forward an individual
instance ofthe liberality previously mentioned, which he
introduces no doubt on account of the subsequent promi
nence of the person. (36) And Joseph, who by the
apostles was surnamed Barnabas (which is, being trans
lated, Son of exhortation), a Levite, a man of Cyprus by
race, (37) having a field, sold it, and brought the money,
and laid it at the apostles' feet. " Son of exhortation " is
a Hebraism for one noted as an exhorter. The name was
given to him on account of his superiority in hortatory
addresses. This is a power much rarer among public
speakers than logical or didactic force, and it has been
very highly prized throughout all the history of the
church. We shall see hereafter that it had much to do
with shaping the subsequent career of this excellent
man. Inasmuch as the law of Moses made no appropriation
of lands for the tribe of Levi, but provided that it
should be supported by the tithes from the other tribes,
some surprise has been expressed that this Levite was
the owner of real estate. But it should be remembered
that the original allotment of certain lands to certain

82 COMMENTARY. [iv. 36.— v. 1, 2.
tribes, and certain cities to the Levites, had been com
pletely broken up by the Assyrian and Babylonian cap
tivities, and had never been fully restored, for it was
pnly remnants of some of the tribes which returned from
captivity, and even they did not again settle within the
old tribal limits. This state of things left the Levites to
shift for themselves to a great extent, and there was no
law, nor had there ever been, to prevent them from
acquiring individual landed possessions. It is highly
probable, too, though it is not asserted in the text, that
Joseph's land was in Cyprus, which was his native counr
try. In the expression, " a man of Cyprus by race,"
the term race is used, as it is in some other passages,1 for
the place of his ancestry, and not for his ancestral blood.
2. A. Case of Discipline, v. 1-11.
Vv. 1, 2. Unfortunately for our race, every excel
lence in human character has its counterfeits, and the
praise lavished on men of real benevolence prompts
others at times to play the hypocrite by pretending to be
more benevolent than they are. So it proved in the
present instance : for the benevolence of the church,
which was its noblest characteristic in the eyes of the
world, became the occasion of the first piece of corrup
tion among its members, (i) But a certain man named
Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, (2) sold a possession,
and kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy
to it, and brought a certain part and laid it at the
apostles' feet. The language implies what is distinctly
avowed by the wife below, that this part was represented
as the whole price of the possession. If we attempt to
analyze the motive of the guilty pair, we shall find that
1 Mark vii. 26; Acts xviii. 2, 24.

v. 1-1,] ACTS. 83
their act was a compromise between two unholy desires.
The desire to have the praise of men, such as had been
bestowed upon Barnabas and on some others, prompted
the sale and the gift, while the love of money, which
still held too strong a hold on them, prompted the reten
tion of a part while they were pretending to give all.
True benevolence seems to have had no part in moving
them. But while they were undoubtedly governed by
avarice in withholding a part, it was not, after all, an ex
cess of avarice ; for if this passion had been as strong
in them as in many professors of the faith at the present
day, they would not have sold the land at all. That
they gave a large part, is proof that they were not sin
ners above all men in respect of love of money, and yet
their fate is held up as a warning to all generations.
Vv. 3, 4. Never was a man, or an assembly of men,
more astonished than were Ananias and the congregation
in whose presence he had ostentatiously presented his
gift, at that which followed : (4) But Peter said, Ana
nias, why hath Satan filled thy heart to lie to the Holy
Spirit, and to keep back part of the price of the land ?
(4) While it remained, did it not remain thine own?
and after it was sold, was it not in thy power ? How is
it that thou hast conceived this thing in thy heart?
Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. In this
heart-searching demand Peter brings together the power
of Satan and the free agency of the tempted, just as he
had in a former discourse the free agency of man and
the sovereignty of God. He demands of Ananins,
" Why hath Satan filled thy heart to lie to the Holy
Spirit," and in the same breath, " Why hast thou con
ceived this thing in thy heart?" The existence and
agency of the tempter are distinctly recognized, yet it is

84 COMMENTARY. [v. 3-5.
not Satan, but Ananias, who is rebuked, and he is re
buked for doing the very sin that Satan had done,
showing that he is as guilty as though Satan had done
nothing. The justice of this is manifest from the fact
that Satan had no power over his heart without his
cooperation. That he had rendered this cooperation,
threw the responsibility on him.
Peter's knowledge of the attempt at deception was
the result, not of human information, but of the insight
miraculously imparted by the Holy Spirit. This con
clusion is necessitated by the whole course of the narra
tive, as well as by the words of Peter concerning the
Holy .Spirit.
Ver. 5. While the exposure of the hypocrisy of
Ananias was a great surprise to the people present, they
were not prepared, as probably Peter himself was not, for
that which immediately ensued. (5) And Ananias hear
ing these words fell down and gave up the spirit : and
great fear, came upon all that heard it. There is no evi
dence that Peter had any will of his own in this sudden
death. It seems to have been a sudden stroke of the
divine will, the responsibility for which attached not to
Peter as an officer of the church, but to God as the
moral governor of men. The propriety of it may be
appreciated if we suppose Ananias to have succeeded in
his undertaking. His success would have been but
temporary, for the fraud, like all other frauds, would
have been detected sooner or later, and when detection
came it would have brought with it a serious discount in
the minds of the people on the powers of the Holy
Spirit dwelling in the apostles. To learn that the Spirit
could be deceived, would have • undermined the whole
fabric of apostolic authority, and might have overthrown

v. 5-7.] ACTS. 85
the faith of many, if not of all. The attempt brought on
a crisis of vital importance, and demanded such a vindi
cation of the power of the Spirit as could be neither
mistaken nor forgotten. The immediate effect was pre
cisely the effect desired : " great fear came upon the
whole church, and upon all who heard these things."
Ver. 6. The scene was too awe-inspiring for lamen
tation, or for needless funeral ceremonies. As when
Nadab and Abihu fell dead at the door ofthe tabernacle,
with strange fire in their censers, there was no weeping
or delay.1 (6) And the young men arose and wrapped
him round, and they carried him out and buried him.
This was an imitation of the burial of the two sons of
Aaron just mentioned; and as the latter was ordered by
Moses, the former was doubtless ordered by Peter. It
is scarcely conceivable that young men in the audience
would have felt at liberty to do anything, unless it would
be to go and tell the dead man's wife what had hap
pened, if they had received no orders from the apostle.
So natural is this supposition, that the historian says
nothing as to the reason why the young men acted as
they did.
Ver. 7. Sapphira was not present. (7) And it was
about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not
knowing what was done, came in. How she was kept
so long ignorant ofthe fate of her husband, we are not
informed, though it is a most extraordinary circumstance.
He had dropped dead in a public assembly, had been
carried forth for burial, and three hours had passed, yet
his wife came into the same assembly without a word
reaching her ear on the subject. Naturally, the first im
pulse of every one would have been to run at once and
1 Lev. x. 1-7.

86 COMMENTARY. [v. 7-10.
tell her the story, so that she could at least be present at
her husband's burial. It is necessary to suppose here, as
in case of the surprising act of the young men, some
overruling authority; aud it is not difficult to see that
Peter himself, in order that the complicity of Sapphira
in the crime might be fairly tested and exposed, com
manded the disciples present to withhold the information
from her.
Vv. 8-10. She came in prepared to act out in full
the part agreed on between her and her husband. (8)
And Peter said unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the
land for so much. And she said, Yea, for so much.
(9) But Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have
agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord ? Be
hold, the feet of them who have buried thy husband are
at the door, and they shall carry thee out. (10) And
she fell down immediately at his feet, and gave up the
spirit : and the young men came in and found her dead,
and they carried her out and buried her by her husband.
In her case Peter knew what was about to take place,
and declared it ; but there is no evidence that his own
will was exerted in causing her death. We regard her
death, like that of her husband, as a miracle wrought
independently of the power lodged in the apostle ; and
it seems to have been so regarded by the authorities in
Jerusalem ; for when the apostles were afterward brought
before them, no charge of murder was preferred, as
might have been the case if the act had been understood
differently. In the question, " Why have ye agreed together to
tempt the Spirit of the Lord?" Peter states the result of
their agreement, and not the aim of it. The act was
tempting the Spirit, in the sense of trying its power to

v. 8-11.] ACTS. 87
detect the thoughts of men. If the guilty pair had been
asked, beforehand, whether they thought they could de
ceive the Holy Spirit, no doubt they would have
answered, no : for they must have known that such an
attempt would be in vain. They dared to make the
attempt because they had their minds on the apostles as
men, and not as inspired men. The test thus uninten
tionally applied resulted in a triumphant vindication of
the Spirit's power as an indwelling guide, and the cir
cumstances were such that no man could dare to repeat
the experiment.
Ver. 11. The failure of the plot proved as pro
pitious to tbe cause of Christ as its success would have
been disastrous, (n) And great fear came upon the
whole church, and upon all that heard these things.
This fear was excited not merely by the sudden and
awful fate of the guilty pair ; but also by the evidence
which the incident furnished of the heart-searching
power which dwelt in the apostles. The disciples now
had a better conception of the nature of apostolic in
spiration, and the unbelieving masses were awed into
respect and reverence.
We must not drop this incident without observing
its bearing in another direction. This piece of cor
ruption was connected with the Lord's treasury; and
apart from the feature which was emphasized by Peter,
it has a bearing on our modern church life. The lie
told by Ananias consisted in representing his gift as
being more liberal in proportion to his ability than it
really was. Every time a member of the church at the
present day makes exaggerated statements of the amount
he is giving, or understates the amount of his wealth, in
order to make out a degree of liberality beyond what is

88 COMMENTARY. [v. 11-16.
real, he is guilty of the sin of Ananias and Sapphira ;
and if all such were to drop dead in their tracks, there
would be a thinning of the ranks in some places. All
who are tempted to act thus should be faithfully notified
that the same God who punished Ananias and Sapphira
on the spot will not fail to punish, in his own time and
place, all who imitate them.
3. Prosperity of the Church Increased, 12-16.
In this paragraph the author states more fully the
effects of the exposure and punishment of Ananias and
Sapphira. They were seen in the greater number of
cures wrought by the apostles, the greater reverence felt
for them by the people, and the greater number of addi
tions to the church. (12) And by the hands of the
apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among
the people ; and they were all with one accord in Solo
mon's porch. (13) But of the rest durst no man join
himself to them : howbeit the people magnified them,
(14) and believers were the more added to the Lord,
multitudes both of men and women ; (15) insomuch that
they even carried out the sick into the streets, and laid
them on beds and couches, that, as Peter came by, at
least his shadow might overshadow some of them. (16)
And there also came together the multitude from the
cities round about Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and
them that were vexed with unclean spirits : and they
were healed every one. The latter part of this passage
shows that the greater number of miracles now wrought
was in consequence, not of any increased power of the
apostles, but of increased zeal for healing among the peo
ple ; and they brought a greater number of sick to be
healed because their faith in the healing power was

v. 12-16.] ACTS. 89
greater than before. Many of these who were healed
and of those who brought them were doubtless baptized,
and thus churches began to be formed in these " cities
round about." Solomon's portico continued to be the
meeting place of the disciples; but now both saints and
sinners kept at a more respectful distance from the per
sons of the apostles than before; for each felt his own
unworthiness, and dreaded the possibility of being smit
ten for some sin, as Ananias and his wife had been. All
these considerations had their natural effect on sinners,
in bringing them in greatly increased numbers to re
pentance and baptism. The special mention of women
here for the first time is a probable indication that
among the converts there was now a greater relative
number of these than before.
Usually, in our modern experience, a great sin ex
posed in the church, such as that of Ananias and Sap
phira, brings the church into disrepute for a time,
diminishes the respect for it entertained in the commun
ity, and renders all efforts to add to its numbers futile.
Why was the effect in Jerusalem the reverse of this ?
This is a serious question for those who bear rule in the
church. It is quite evident that the difference depends
on the very different way in which such scandalous con
duct is now treated. If the Jerusalem church had
tolerated Ananias and Sapphira, by retaining them in
their fellowship after their exposure, doubtless the
"ways of Zion would have mourned," and sinners
would not have been turned to the Lord. But the sud
den punishment visited upon them by the Lord, and the
abhorrence of their deed manifested by burying them
without ceremony in the clothing in which they died,
and while their bodies were scarcely cold, made the

90 COMMENTARY. [v. 12-18.
whole community feel that here was a people among
whom sin could not be tolerated. It was a safe place
for a man who needed holy companionship to help him
in the effort to live a holy life — a place in which he
might expect every false step to be promptly corrected,
and through which he might confidently hope to
make his pilgrimage to a better world. People who
wish to make a compromise with sin, and who join a
church merely because they are afraid to live without
some appearance of religion, will always avoid such
a church ; but those who are in earnest about the
desire to save their souls and to do good, seek just such
a church as their spiritual home. When shall the rigid
discipline which God established in the beginning be
seen on earth once more ? Let the shepherds of the
flock give an answer, as they remember that they must
give account to God concerning the souls committed to
their care.
4. The Apostles are Imprisoned and Released,
17-21.
Vv. 17, 18. The excitement which now prevailed
throughout Jerusalem and the adjacent cities, finding
expression in enthusiastic praise of the apostles, and in
the turning of many to the Lord, was too much for the
equanimity of the dignitaries who had forbidden any
more preaching or teaching in the name of Jesus, and it
moved them to action again. (17) But the high priest
rose up, and all they that were with him (which is the
sect of the Sadducees), and they were filled with jeal
ousy, (18) and laid hands on the apostles, and put them
in public ward. Here we have the same Sadducees who
had arrested and threatened Peter and John. Made

v. 17-21.] ACTS. 91
furious with jealousy toward men whose influence they
had vainly tried to destroy, and who were now almost
worshiped by the people, they seized not only the two
whom they had formerly arrested, but all of their com
panions, being determined to execute on a large scale the
threats which they had uttered. The night in prison
was a gloomy one to the apostles, and still gloomier to
the thousands of their less courageous brethren and sis
ters outside.
Vv. 19-21. To the apostles the arrest and imprison
ment could not have been a surprise, for they knew
that the Sanhedrin was governed by determined men who
would be likely to put their threats into execution ; but
that which followed the night of imprisonment must
have been a great surprise both to them and to all Jeru
salem. (19) But an angel of the Lord by night opened
the prison doors, and brought them out, and said, (20)
Go ye, and stand and speak in the temple to the people
all the words of this life. (21) And when they had
heard this, they entered into the temple about daybreak,
and taught. The hearers whom they found in the temple
" about daybreak " were doubtless few, and they were
probably some of the brethren who could not sleep for
anxiety, and who went there to pray. As these early
worshipers entered the temple and found the apostles
there, their first impulse was to run and spread the
news; so the apostles had not long to wait ere they
were surrounded by a listening throng. I imagine
that the sermons which were interrupted the previous
day were renewed as if the interruption had been but
momentary.

92 COMMENTARY. [v. 21-24.
5. The Apostles are Brought into Court,
21-27.
Vv. 21-24. To the high priest and his coadjutors,
the night had doubtless been one of troubled thought;
for they knew that in the morning they would have to
confront once more the men who had defied them, and
who, in their course of defiance, had won to their side a
vast multitude of the best people in the city and sur
rounding country. What to do with them was a puz
zling question. (21) But the high priest came, and they
that were with him, and called the council together, and
all the senate of the children of Israel, and sent to the
prison to have them brought. (22) But the officers that
came found them not in the prison ; and they returned,
and told, saying, (23) The prison house we found shut in
all safety, and the keepers standing at the doors : but
when we had opened, we found no man within. (24)
Now when the captain of the temple and the chief priests
heard these words, they were much perplexed concerning
them whereunto this would grow. The disappearance
of the prisoners was to them a mystery, yet they could
not fail to refer it to the working of the miraculous
power with which they knew the apostles to be endowed.
To us the mystery is that, with such facts confronting
them, they thought only of "whereunto this would
grow," instead of thinking, What will God do with us
if we continue to fight against these manifestations of his
power ? The wonder is that they did not immediately
disperse, and try to conceal the fact that they had come
together at all. They were, in reality, staggered by the
announcement, and they knew not for a time what to do
or say.

v. 25-28.] ACTS. 93
Vv. 25-27. It was soon known abroad in the city
that the Sanhedrin had assembled, and the purpose of
the meeting was well understood. By this time also
some of the people who stood with the priests had
learned what was going on in the temple. (25) And
there came one and told them, Behold, the men whom ye
put in the prison ate in the temple standing and teach
ing the people. (26) Then went the captain with the
officers, and brought them, but 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. When the news came that the apostles were
in the temple, the captain and his band, having once be
fore been sent for them, needed no further orders ; he
went at once for his escaped prisoners. He doubtless
saw in the faces of the people that his task was a danger
ous one, and he may have seen a few stones in the hands
of the more excitable part of the crowd ; for to the
people, who now understood how the apostles had been
released, their re-arrest appeared to be a daring outrage.
The captain does not handle the men as he would es
caped prisoners under ordinary circumstances; but he
escorts them most deferentially into the presence of the
court. It was doubtless the outside multitude from
whom he feared the stoning, and not the disciples; but
it is not improbable that some of the new converts, who
had imbibed only in part the spirit of the gospel, would
have taken* part in the fray had it once begun.
6. The Accusation and the Defense, 27-32.
Vv. 27, 28. We now have a lively and graphic
description ofthe trial of the apostles. Caiaphas is not
so indefinite about the grounds of accusation as in the

94 COMMENTARY. [v. 27-32.
case of Peter and John : the injunction with which they
had been dismissed gives him a starting point for the
present proceedings. (27) And the high priest asked
them, saying, (28) We straitly charged you not to teach
in this name : and behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with
your teaching, and intend to bring this man's blood upon
us. These words contain two specific charges against
the apostles — disobedience to the Sanhedrin, and an
attempt to bring upon them the blood of Jesus. The
last was the tender point with the accusers, and the men
tion of it here brings to light a secret feeling which had
been animating them from the beginning. If the resur
rection of Jesus could have been established without
implicating those who had condemned him in the crime
of shedding innocent blood, it is highly probable that
this series of attempts to suppress the preaching would
not have been made. But this could not be ; and these
unfortunate men now found themselves involved by
their previous crime in the necessity of accepting the
brand of murderers at the hands of an indignant people,
or suppressing and crushing out the belief in the resur
rection. Instead of receding from the course of
hypocrisy and crime upon which they had entered in
condemning Jesus, they chose the bad alternative of
plunging into it still deeper.
Vv. 29-32. The candor and fearlessness of Peter's
reply to the demand of the chief priest are worthy of
the man and the occasion. (29) But Peter and the
apostles answered and said, (30) We must obey God
rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up
Jesus, whom ye slew, hanging him on a tree.1 (31)
1 On the word " tree," used here for the word cross, see remarks
under chap. xiii. 29.

v. 29-32.] ACTS. 95
Him did God exalt with his right hand to be a Prince
and a Saviour, to give repentance to Israel and remission
of sins. (32) And we are witnesses of these things ;
and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God hath given to them
that obey him. To the first charge, that of disobeying
the Sanhedrin, they, plead guilty. Peter and John had
departed from their first trial with the words, " Whether
it be right in the sight of God to obey you rather than
God, judge ye;" and now they say in reference to their
disobedience, "We ought to obey God rather than
men." The second charge is met by reiterating that for
which they were accused — by boldly hurling into the
teeth of their judges the awful fact that it was innocent
blood which they had shed, and that this was proved by
the resurrection of Jesus and his exaltation in heaven.
And lest they should still doubt the fact ofthe resurrec
tion and exaltation, Peter repeats what he had so often
said before, that he and his fellow apostles were wit
nesses of the former, while he refers to the Holy Spirit
as the witness of the latter. This testimony, coming
from men who had just been delivered miraculously from
a guarded prison, the guards not knowing they had
passed out, and who had previously filled Jerusalem
with wonderful works wrought by the power of the Holy
Spirit, could not be gainsaid, or honestly doubted.
In the statement that Jesus had been exalted a Prince
and Saviour to " give " repentance and remission of sins,
it is implied that repentance as well as remission of sins
is a gift. But to give repentance can not mean to bestow
it without an exercise of our own will ; for it is itself,
as we have seen before, an act of our will.1 It is an act
ofthe will to which we are led by sorrow for sin. God
1 See the remarks on repentance under chap. iii. 19.

96 COMMENTARY. Lv. 29-34.
gives it then, not directly, but indirectly, by giving the
motives which lead to it. There were adequate motives
to sorrow for sin before Jesus was presented as a Saviour ;
but it must be admitted that his death, resurrection, and
exaltation in our behalf, is the one great motive now,
compared with which all others are insignificant. By
furnishing this greatest of all motives for repentance,
God had given repentance to Israel.
7. They are Saved from Death by Gamaliel,
33-42.
Vv. 33, 34. The manner in which Peter, as the
mouthpiece of the apostles, repeated in the presence of
the Sanhedrin the offense for which they had been
arrested, exasperated the leading Sadducees beyond
measure, and came near turning the court into a mob :
(33) But they, when they heard this, were cut to the
heart, and were minded to slay them. (34) But there
stood up one in the council, a Pharisee named Gamaliel,
a doctor of the law, had in honor of all the people, and
commanded to put the men forth a little while. The
Pharisees, as we have seeu before, were less excited over
the progress of the gospel than the Sadducees ; and now
that the latter were about to precipitate a crisis which
would have involved the whole Sanhedrin in a horrible
crime, at least one Pharisee was cool enough and prudent
enough to interpose wiser counsel. The removal of the
prisoners, like that of Peter and John before, was to pre
vent them from hearing any admissions which might be
made in the course of the intended discussion. The
statement that Gamaliel "commanded" the men to be
put forth, implies that this was the privilege of any
member of the court.

V. 35-39.] ACTS. 97
Vv. 35-39. Gamaliel seems to have retained his
position on the floor until the officers had withdrawn the
prisoners and closed the doors, while the Sadducees, with
no little impatience, were awaiting his remarks. (35)
And he said to them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to
yourselves as touching these men, what ye are about to
do. (36) For before these days rose up Theudas, giving
himself out to be somebody ; to whom a number of men,
about four hundred, joined themselves : who was slain ;
and all, as many as obeyed him, were dispersed, and
came to nought. (37) After this man rose up" Judas of
Galilee in the days of the enrollment, and drew away
some of the people after him : he also perished ; and all,
as many as obeyed him, were scattered abroad. (38) And
now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let
them alone : for if this counsel or this work be of men, it
will be overthrown : (39) but if it is of God, ye will not
be able to overthrow them ; lest haply ye be found even
to be fighting against God.
It has been charged by unfriendly critics that the
author of Acts has here put into the mouth of Gamaliel
a speech which, in the nature of the case, he could not
have uttered. It is held that while Theudas is here
placed before Judas, he really lived at a later period, a
mistake of which Gamaliel could not have been guilty ;
and furthermore, that Theudas flourished twelve years
after the time at which Gamaliel is said to have made
this speech. The charge is based on the fact that
Josephus mentions a Theudas who did flourish at a
later period, in the reign of Claudius Csesar, and whose
career was similar to that of the Theudas here men
tioned.1 The truth of the charge depends on the
1 Ant. xx. v. 1.

98 COMMENTARY. [v. 35-39.
identity of the Theudas of Josephus and the Theudas
of Luke. Neither writer goes into such details as to
furnish safe ground for the assumption of identity, while
Josephus himself makes room for the supposition that
there may have been more than one Theudas, by men
tioning a large number of insurrections occurring at the
right period to suit the remark of Gamaliel, without
naming their leaders. He says of the period just pre
ceding the deposition of Archelaus : " Now at that time
there were ten thousand other disorders in Judea, which
were like tumults, because a great number put them
selves in a warlike posture, either out a. hopes of gain
to themselves, or out of enmity to the Jews." He also
says in another place : " And now Judea was full of
robberies ; and as the several companies of the seditious
lighted upon any one to lead them, he was created a king
immediately, in order to do mischief to the public."1
Now, that one of these leaders may have been named
Theudas, is not at all improbable, and when we have the
word of a veracious writer that he was, it is most unjust,
in the absence of all conflicting evidence, to charge him
with falsehood.2
1 Ibid. xvii. x. 4, 8.
2 The question discussed above has been in dispute ever since
the second century, when the objection was first urged by Celsus
(Origen vs. Celsus, B. I. c. 6). All unbelievers and all semi-ra
tionalistic writers who think that our Gospels and Acts were not
written by their reputed authors, taking ground against Luke ;
while those who give full credit to the Scriptures have held
substantially the view stated and defended above. The reader
will find in Alford's Commentary, and Meyer's, the two sides of
the controversy well stated, and also the names of the most noted
writers on both sides. In confirmation of what I have said
above, I may add, that while the Theudas of Gamaliel was fol
lowed by about " four hundred " men, who were, after he was

v. 35-39.] ACTS. 99
Upon the fate of these two impostors Gamaliel bases
his advice in reference to the apostles. The merits of
his advice must be differently estimated according to the
point of view from which we contemplate it. If it
were proposed as a general rule of procedure in reference
to religious movements, we should condemn it as time
serving. Instead of waiting to see if such a movement
is to prove successful, every lover of truth will promptly
investigate its claims, if it has any worthy of attention,
and decide without reference to public opinion or prob
able success. But Gamaliel was arguing a different
question from this, the question whether this movement
should be suppressed by violence ; and from this point
of view his advice was certainly good. Assuming, as he
did, that the movement was an improper one, the ques
tion was, Shall we attempt to crush it out with violence ?
or shall we suspend proceedings against it until it begins
to grow weak of itself, as it certainly will if it be not of
slain, "dispersed;" the Theudas of Josephus "persuaded a great
part of the people to take their effects with them and follow him
to the Jordan ;'' and when the troops of Cuspius Fadus attacked
them, they "slew many of them, and took many of them alive"
(Ant. xx. v. 1). The differences are not easily explained, except
by supposing that the Theudas of Gamaliel and the Theudas of
Josephus are different persons. The probability that two such
leaders, living at considerable intervals apart, may have borne
the same name, is happily illustrated by similar occurrences in
our own century. We quote from Prof. Stokes: "There was an
Irish movement in 1848 which numbered among its prominent
leaders a William Smith O'Brien, and there is now (1891) an Irish
movement of the same character, and it also numbers a William
O'Brien among its most prominent leaders. A Parnell leads a
movement for the repeal of union in 1890. Ninety years earlier
a Parnell resigned high office sooner than consent to the con
summation of the same legislative union of Great Britain and
Ireland " (Expositor's Bible, Acts, p. 237.)

100 COMMENTARY. [v. 35-42.
God ? Such was the drift of the first part of his re
marks ; but at the close he betrays a doubt whether the
movement should be opposed at all ; for he very clearly in
timates that it may be of God, and that in fighting against
it they might be found fighting against God. It is
strange that a man who was capable, under such circum
stances, of the calm thought and sound reasoning which
characterize this speech, had not already committed him
self to a cause so well supported by incontrovertible
evidence.1 Vv. 40-42. The advice of Gamaliel had the effect of
restraining the council from shedding blood; but the
priests and elders were too much exasperated to follow
fully his advice. (40) And to him they agreed ; and when
they had called the apostles to them, they beat them, and
charged them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let
them go. (41) They therefore departed from the pres
ence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted
1 Christian Baur makes use of this consideration to throw
doubt on the reality of the preceding miracles. He says: "If
all these miracles were really performed as i3 here narrated, and
in so authentic a manner that the Sanhedrin itself could not
ignore them, nor bring anything against them ; if the man lame
from his birth was healed by the word of the apostle, and if the
apostles themselves, without any human intervention, were freed
from prison by an angel from heaven — how could Gamaliel, if he
was a man such as is here described, unbiased and thouglitfui,
resting his judgment on experience, express himself so problem
atically as he does here, and leave it to the future to decide
whether this cause were or were not divine?" (Paul, vol. i. 35).
If this question had been propounded to Gamaliel himself, it
would doubtless have thrown him into confusion ; for he was in
that particular state of mind in which men are often guilty of the
greatest inconsistency. They are unwilling to admit conclusions
which evidence is forcing upon them, and yet they are too honest
to altogether deny the force of the evidence.

v. 40-42.] ACTS. 101
worthy to suffer dishoner for the name. (42) And every
day, in the temple and at home, they ceased not to teach
and preach Jesus as the Christ. The law of Moses
limited the scourge to forty stripes, and left it discretion
ary with the judges for what offenses it should be in
flicted.1 It seems from Paul's experience to have been
customary to stop at thirty-nine,2 perhaps to prevent
going beyond the limit of the law by a miscount. It is
probable that the apostles received thirty-nine apiece on
the naked back. The statement that when they were re
leased they went away " rejoicing that they were counted
worthy to suffer dishonor for the name," would be in
credible, were it not written in such a book as this, and
written of such men as these. Even as the case stands
it is a more surprising fact than any of the miracles
which they are said to have wrought ; especially when
we consider that this was their first experience of scourg
ing. After Paul had endured a long continued fight of
afflictions like this, it is not so wonderful to hear him
say, " I take pleasure in weaknesses, in injuries, in
necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake :
for when I am weak then I am strong."3 But that the
older apostles had a similar experience the first time they
were scourged, is one of the grandest exhibitions of faith
to be found in apostolic history. - Perhaps the secret of
their ability to rejoice is to be found in the consideration
that Christ showed confidence in their steadfastness by
allowing them to be tested in this way, and they were
glad of the opportunity to prove that his confidence was
not misplaced.
The preaching was now, as before, in the temple ;
for there was no thought of excluding the apostles and
1 Deut. xxv. 1 -3. 2 II. Cor. xi. 24. 3 II. Cor. xii. 10.

102 COMMENTARY. [v. 40-42.
their brethren from the open court to which all Jews
had right of access ; and it was also daily. They held,
in modern Protestant phraseology, a continuous pro
tracted meeting. But they did not limit their labors, as
so many modern preachers are content to do, to public
preaching : they also taught and preached " at home "
(42) — an expression which points to the homes of their
hearers, rather than to their own home ; for in their own
home, if they still lodged in the same house, they could
receive but few persons, whereas in the homes of the
people they could reach everybody who was in need of
instruction or conviction. Thus we have the inspired
apostles as an example for that most directly effective of
all preaching, the face to face work, without much of
which no preacher of the gospel can be thoroughly suc
cessful in evangelizing a community.
We have now reached the close of the first persecu
tion, and it is plainly to be seen that it resulted in a
complete triumph for the apostles. When the people
saw them go away from the whipping-post, rejoicing that
they were counted worthy to suffer thus for the name of
their Master, they were amazed ; for the like of this had
never before been seen on earth. And when they saw
that the preaching continued without intermission in de
fiance of all threats and all punishment, the hearts of all
the nobler men and women, of all who could admire
moral heroism, were irresistibly drawn toward the Christ
whose love thus ennobled his followers.

vi 1.] ACTS. 103
SEC. V.— FURTHER PROGRESS OF THE
CHURCH, AND THIRD PERSECUTION.
(VI. 1— VIII. 4.)
1. Seven Men Appointed to Serve Tables, 1-7.
Ver. 1. Having completed his account of the second
persecution, our author continues the plan of this part of
his work by turning our attention once more to the prog
ress ofthe church, and then to a third persecution which
followed. The perfect unity which had hitherto bound
together the multitude of the disciples was now in
jeopardy, though it would be too much to say, with some
writers, that it was broken ; and we are introduced to
both the cause of peril and the steps by which it was
averted, (i) Now in these days, when the number of
the disciples was multiplying, there arose a murmuring
of the Grecian Jews against the Hebrews, because their
widows were neglected in the daily ministration. By
daily ministration is meant the daily distribution from
the fund contributed by benevolent members, which was
made " to every one as he had need." That it was made
daily, and that the widows were the principal recipients,
confirms our former conclusion that there was no general
equalization of property, but only a provision for the
needy. The Grecian Jews, more properly Hellenists,
were Jews of foreign birth and Greek education, so
called because they adopted the manners ofthe Hellenes,
or Greeks. The great multiplication of the disciples
having rendered it impracticable for the twelve, with so
much other work on hand, to look after the wants of all
with equal care, very naturally the widows of these com-

104 COMMENTARY. [vi. 1-4.
parative strangers in the city were the first to be unin
tentionally overlooked.
Vv. 2-4. The unity of heart and soul which still
prevailed in the church manifested itself by the prompt
ness with which a satisfactory arrangement was made to
quiet the murmur as soon as it was heard. Doubtless
the need for such au arrangement was foreseen by the
head ofthe church and by the Holy Spirit dwelling in
the apostles; but this foresight was not given to the
apostles, nor were they moved to make the arrangement
until the need for it was manifest to them and to the
whole church. Thus the Spirit guided them into ad
ditional truth as additional truth was needed. Hitherto
the twelve were the only officers in the church ; but now
they are led to the appointment of others. (2) And the
twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them,
and said, It is not fit that we should forsake the word
of God, and serve tables. (3) Look ye out therefore,
brethren, from among you seven men of good report,
full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may ap
point over this business. (4) But we will continue
steadfastly in prayer, and in the ministry of the word.
The alternative with the twelve was to forsake (not
wholly, but in some measure) the preaching and teach
ing of the word, in order to serve the tables satisfactor
ily, or to turn the latter business over to others, and give
themselves wholly to the former. The right course was
too obvious to admit of hesitation or delay.
It seemed good to the apostles and to the Holy
Spirit that the whole "multitude of the disciples"
should take part in the selection of these officers, tho
apostles doing no more in the matter than to prescribe
their qualifications. No ingenuity of argument can

vi. 2-6.] ACTS. 105
evade the conclusion that this gives the authority of
apostolic precedent for the popular election of church
officers. In what way the choice was made by the mul
titude, whether by balloting, or by a viva voce vote, and
whether with or without nominations, we are not in
formed ; and consequently, in reference to these points,
every congregation is left to its own judgment.
The three qualifications prescribed should not escape
our notice. They indicate what kind of men are alone
fitted to be office-bearers in the church of God. They
were to be men, first, of " good report ;" and this has
reference, no doubt, to their reputation both within the
church, and within the circle of fair-minded persons out
side the church. Second, they were to be " full of the
Spirit." As we have had no account thus far of any
but the apostles having received miraculous powers from
the Spirit, the historian can not be fairly understood as
referring, by this expression, to such powers. He means
men who were full of the Spirit as respects the fruits of
a holy life. That some of these wrought miracles after
ward, is no proof that they could do so now. Third, they
were to be men " full of wisdom ;" by which is meant
that they should possess that practical good sense which
enables men to manage complicated business affairs with
satisfaction. Vv. 5, 6. The wisdom of the proposal was obvious
to all, and none hesitated about prompt compliance
with it. (5) And the saying pleased the whole multi
tude : and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and
of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and
Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicholas a
proselyte of Antioch : whom they set before the apostles :
(6) and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on

106 COMMENTARY. [vi. 5, 6.
them. It is a remarkable manifestation of generosity in
the church at large that all these are Greek names, in
dicating that the men were selected from the very party
whence the murmuring had proceeded. It was as if the
Hebrews had said, We have no selfish ends to accom
plish, and no jealousy toward you whose widows have
been neglected; we therefore give the whole business
into your hands, and fearlessly trust our widows to your
care. So generous a trust could not be betrayed except
by the basest of men : it was a continuation of the per
fect unity which had existed before, and which the mur
muring had not been allowed to interrupt.
The title ofthe office here created is not given, and
from this circumstance some scholars have failed to iden
tify it with that of deacon, mentioned in the first chapter
of Philippians and the third chapter of First Timothy.
But while the name of the office is absent, terms are
used which show plainly that the office is the same. If
the question had been one about ruling, and the seven
had been chosen and appointed to rule, there could cer
tainly be no hesitation about styling them rulers. The
case before us is a perfect parallel. The question was
about the " daily diaxoviav," 1 an 1 the seven were chosen
1The word 6iaitovoc is rendered in our English version by the
three words, minister, servant, and deacon. No reader unac
quainted with the original could imagine that three English
words now currently used in senses so different, could represent
the same word in the original; and consequently this rendering
leads to confusion. One of the three should be employed uni
formly so as to give the.English reader the same opportunity to
see its usage that the Greek reader enjoys. The term deacon
would not answer this purpose, because it is limited in its mean
ing as an English word to the office so designated, and it would
be misleading in every passage in which the original occurs ex
cept two ; for out of the many occurrences of di&novog it is rendered

vi. 5, 6.] ACTS. 107
to dcaxovetv ; why, then, hesitate to call them dcdxovoi ?
Indeed, the verb btoxov&v, here used to express the chief
duty of the office, is the very one which in the third
chapter of First Timothy is twice rendered in our ver
sion " serve as deacons."1 Undoubtedly, then, it is the
deacon's office which was here first created, and supplied
with incumbents. The chief duty for which they were
appointed was " to serve tables ;" and as reference is had
to the " daily ministration," and the complaints of neg
lected widows, the tables of the poor are specially those
to be served. But while serving these tables, it was a
natural consequence of having such business in charge'
deacon only in Phil. i. 1 and I. Tim. iii. 8, 10. Deacon, indeed,
is the Greek word anglicized, and we have to resort to a Greek
lexicon for its meaning. The word minister would also be ob
jectionable as a uniform rendering, for it is appropriated in
modern usage to the public speakers of the church, whereas the
original word has no such limitation. Should we adopt it, we
would have such renderings as these : " His mother said to the
ministers, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it " (Jno. ii. 5 ; see
also 9) ; " If any man serve me (tfiol 6ianovrj), let him follow me;
and where I am, there shall my minister (diaicovoc) be" (Jno. xii.
26J ; " Phcebe our sister, who is a minister of the church at Cen
chrea" (Rom. xvi. 1). But the word servant would properly ex
press the idea everywhere. This is the precise meaning of the
word, and the Latin word minister, by which it is most commonly
rendered in our version, means the same. With servant as the
uniform rendering, the English reader could determine by the
context, as the Greek scholar now does, whether in a given pas
sage the servant was one in the official or in the unofficial sense
of the term. The two classes of officers, now called elders and
deacons, would in this way be known as rulers and servants,
their true relationship.
1 It is gratifying to know that this argument, made in the first
edition of my Commentary, is made also by Bishop Lightfoot in
his Commentary on Philippians, published several years later
(Lightfoot's Phil. p. 186).

108 COMMENTARY. [vi. 5, 6.
that they also served the Lord's table ; and it was an
equally natural transition, that forasmuch as the poor
fund was in their hands, all the other financial interests
of the church were also committed to them. Because
these officers were charged with the business affairs of
the church, it by no means follows that they were shut
off from usefulness in any other way for which they had
capacity and opportunity. God exacts the employment
of every talent which he has committed to us, and he
has appointed no work to be done which is too holy for
the humblest disciple. We therefore find one of the
seven soon after standing in the front rank of the de
fenders of the faith in the very city where the apostles
themselves were laboring ; while another was the first
to plant a church among the Samaritans. Those who
deny to deacons in the present day the same privilege,
impose restrictions in conflict with this manifestation of
God's will. Only two ofthe seven are mentioned after
ward in Acts, but this does not prove that the others
were either inactive or unfaithful. The service of all as
deacons proved temporary ; not, as some suppose, because
it was so intended ; but because the church which they
served was soon scattered to the winds, and their
ministration was no longer needed. When the church
was afterward restored, it may be that some of them
returned to the city and resumed the duties of their
office. The first name in the list, that of Stephen, is fol
lowed by the words, " a man full of faith and of the Holy
Spirit," and these words are not repeated after the other
names; but we are not to understand from this that they
were not true of the other persons ; for as the apostles
had prescribed this characteristic as a qualification for

vi. 5-7.] ACTS. 109
the office, we are to understand the words, though not
repeated, as applying to all alike.
That Nicholas was a " proselyte of Antioch," which
means that he was a convert from heathenism to Juda
ism, and had previously lived in Antioch, shows very
plainly that the disciples entertained no doubt about the
reception into the church, and even about the election to
office, of Gentiles, provided they had been circumcised.
This should be borne in mind when we come to consider
the discussions which afterward arose about the relation
ofthe Gentiles to the church, and to salvation in Christ.
Ver. 7. The appointment ofthe seven to administer
the business affairs of the church, left the apostles, as
was intended, with nothing to do but to preach and
teach and pray ; and thus the work of the whole church
was more effective than before. (7) And the word of
God increased ; and the number of the disciples multi
plied in Jerusalem exceedingly ; and a great company of
the priests were obedient to the faith. This great mul
tiplication of the disciples in Jerusalem, after such an
increase as we have noticed before, puts it beyond our
power to estimate, with any approach to accuracy, the
number at this time. The tide of success had now
reached its flood, and this was signalized not so much by
the great number of converts, as by the fact that among
these was a " great company of the priests." The peculiar
relation which the priesthood sustains to any religion
must always render the priests the chief conservators of
old forms, and the most persistent opponents of revolu
tionary changes. When they begin to give way, the
system which they have upheld is ready to fall. No fact
previously recorded by Luke shows so strikingly the
effect of the gospel on the popular mind in Jerusalem.

110 COMMENTARY. [vi. 7.
The remark made concerning these priests, that they
" were obedient to the faith," shows that there is some
thing in the faith to be obeyed. This obedience is ren
dered not by believing ; for that is to exercise the faith,
not to obey it : but faith in Jesus as the Christ, the Sou
of God, demands of us a course of life in accordance
with that which we believe ; and to follow this course
is to obey the faith by yielding to its demands. This
obedience begins with baptism ; and consequently, to say
that the priests " were obedient to the faith" is equiva
lent to saying that they were baptized. Paul, with the
same thought in mind, declares that the grace and apos
tleship conferred on him were for the " obedience of faith
among all the nations." 1
There is another expression in this verse worthy of
notice, because of its singular contrast with phraseology
often heard in modern times in connection with such
events. It is the saying, in connection with the great
multiplication of the disciples, and the obedience of so
many priests, that "the word of God increased." At
the present day such incidents are often introduced by
remarks of this kind : " There was a precious season of
grace ;" " The Lord was present in his saving power ;"
" There was a gracious outpouring of the Holy
Spirit," etc. So great a departure from Scripture
phraseology, indicates a departure from Scriptural ideas.
With the conception that the conversion of sinners is
an abstract work of the Holy Spirit, men may express
themselves thus ; but Luke, who had no such con
ception, saw in the increase an increase of the word
of God ; by which he means an increase not in the
amount of the word, but in its effects. The more favor-
1 Rom. i. 5.

vi. 7-10.] ACTS. Ill
able condition of the church when the recent murmur
ing ceased, and the introduction of a more perfect or
ganization, made the preaching more effective, and
greater success was the consequence.
2. Stephen Arrested and Falsely Accused, 8-15.
Ver. 8. The great prosperity ofthe church resulted,
as it had done twice before, in arousing the unbelievers
to action in the way of persecution. In this instance
Stephen was selected as the victim. (8) And Stephen,
full of grace and power, wrought great wonders and
signs among the people. This is the first exhibition of
miraculous power by any but an apostle. Whether
Stephen received the power to work wonders and signs
before or after his appointment as deacon, we have no
means of determining ; neither does the writer tell us in
what way' it was imparted to him. He reserves infor
mation on the subject of imparting spiritual gifts to a
point in the history further on (viii. 14-17).
Vv. 9, 10. The circumstances which led to this
prominence on the part of Philip are stated next. (9)
But there arose certain of them that were of the syna
gogue called the synagogue of the Freedmen,1 and of the
Cyrenians, and of the Alexandrians, and of them of
Cilicia and Asia, disputing with Stephen. (10) And
they were not able to withstand the wisdom and the
Spirit by which he spoke. All the parties here men
tioned were Hellenistic Jews, who, from a natural incli
nation to flock together in the Holy City, had a syna-
1 The word libertines in our version is here misleading to the
uneducated reader ; and as it is the Latin word for freedmen,
there can be no good reason for not translating it, and therefore
I depart from the R. V. here in rendering it freedmen.

112 COMMENTARY. [vi. 9, 10.
gogue of their own.1 Stephen, being also a Hellenist,
had doubtless been a member of this synagogue before he
became a Christian, and by his new connection he had
not forfeited his membership. Most naturally, when he
began the public advocacy ofthe new faith, he did so in
the synagogue of which he was already a member, and
undertook the conviction and conversion of his iormer
associates. This brought on the conflict.
The Freedmen, who constituted a large element of
the membership in this synagogue, were Jews who had
been slaves, and had by one means or another obtained
their freedom. The others were from the several cities
and countries named, at least the Cilicians being the
countrymen of him who was afterward the apostle Paul.
The Jewish learning ofthe day belonged to the Pharisees,
rather than the Sadducees ; the faithful among the for
eign Jews were chiefly Pharisees, and they were gener-
elly men of some wealth and much intelligence. Conse
quently we now find a new leader on the part of the
church and a different party of the unbelievers brought
into conflict. It was not now, as in the two former conflicts,
a mere struggle between force and endurance ; but it was
an intellectual struggle — a war of arguments <>n the great
question of the Messiahship. Never, perhaps, even in
the life of Jesus, had there been so protracted, and so
warmly contested a debate between competent disputants
on the great question of the day. It was the first time
the disciples had measured arms with their opponents in
open discussion. The young converts had hitherto en-
1 1 can see no ground in the wording of the text for the con
clusion adopted by some writers, that three synagogues are here
designated (Alford in loco), by others two, by others five (Meyer in
loco). Itis a matter, however, of no special importance.

vi. 9-14.] ACTS. 113
joyed no opportunity of comparing the evidences by
which they had been convinced with those which learn
ing and ingenuity might frame against them; but now
they heard both sides, with the odds in numbers, learn
ing and social position all on the side of their oppo
nents. It was a critical moment in their experience, and
it needs no vivid imagination to realize the solicitude
with which they listened to Stephen and his foes. Any
fears they may have entertained at first were soon dissi
pated, as it became evident that Stephen's antagonists
" were not able to resist the wisdom and the Spirit by
which he spoke."
Vv. 11—14. When men 'whose chief concern it is to
vindicate themselves rather than the truth are defeated
in debate, they very commonly resort to vituperation or
violence. Both were tried against Stephen. The Phari
sees, who had the management of the case, entered upon
the same line of policy which they had pursued success
fully in the prosecution of Jesus, (ii) Then they sub
orned men, who said, We have heard him speak blas
phemous words against Moses and against God. (12)
And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the
scribes, and came upon him, and seized him, and brought
him into the council, and set up false witnesses, who said,
(13) This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words
against this holy place and the law : (14) for we have
heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy
this place, and shall change the customs which Moses de
livered unto us.
This is the first time that the people are represented
as being stirred up against the disciples. Hitherto the
fear of the people had restrained the violence of the
persecutors. This change is accounted for by the fact

114 COMMENTARY. [vi. 11-14.
that the Sadducees, who had conducted the previous per
secutions, had comparatively little influence with the
masses, and the further fact, that they had contented
themselves with arraying against the apostles the mere
authority of the Sanhedrin ; but now the Pharisees, who
had much more popular influence, are in the lead, and
they poison the minds of the people by seizing upon cer
tain utterances of Stephen which needed to be only
slightly distorted in order to form the ground of very
serious charges. They are cunning enough, too, to make
these charges, not against the whole body of the dis
ciples, or against the apostles, who now enjoyed the
confidence of the masses ; Jbut against a single person
who had just risen up from obscurity.
The general charge was that he had committed blas
phemy — a crime punishable with death under the law ;
blasphemy against Moses, in saying that Jesus would
change the customs which Moses had delivered ; and
blasphemy against God, in saying that he would destroy
God's holy temple. It is quite probable that Stephen
had, in the course of the debate, quoted the prediction of
Jesus that the temple would be destroyed, but had not
said that Jesus would destroy it ; and as his enemies
could see that the destruction of the temple would
necessarily bring to an end the temple services, they put
their own inference into his lips, in charging him with
saying that Jesus would change the customs delivered by
Moses. The specifications were so nearly true as to form
a plausible ground for the accusation,1 while the falsity
5 The position taken by Baur in his chapter headed " Stephen
the Predecessor of Paul," that Stephen looked upon the temple
worship " as a thing already antiquated and in ruins," while
" the apostles always remained immovably true to their old ad-

vi. 11-15.] ACTS. 115
of the witnesses lay in the additions they made to
Stephen's words, and in construing what he said as blas
phemy. Let us observe here, that the Pharisees avoided the
blunder committed by the Sadducees, of bringing men
into court for trial with no definite charges framed
against them. Charges were formally presented, wit
nesses were deliberately heard in support of them, and
Stephen was called upon for his defense.
Ver. 1 5. When the case had been fully stated, and
the testimony of all the witnesses was in, there was a
momentary pause, and all eyes were fixed upon Stephen,
who stood before his accusers. (15) And all that sat in
the council fastening their eyes on him, saw his face as
it had been the face of an angel. There is no need to
suppose anything supernatural in his appearance. He
was standing just where his Master had stood when con
demned to die ; he was arraigned on a similar charge ;
he had the same judges; and he knew perfectly well
that the court had come together not to try him, but to
condemn him. He knew that the supreme hour of his
life had come ; and the emotions which stirred his soul
as he thought of the past, of death, of heaven, of the
cause which he had pleaded, and of the foul murder
about to be perpetrated, necessarily lit up his countenance
with a glow almost supernatural. If his features, as is
highly probable, were naturally fine and expressive, the

herance to the temple," is without justification in the text, even
if we regard the accusations brought against Stephen as strictly
true; for there is no evidence that he differed from the apostles
in believing the prediction of Jesus concerning the destruction of
the temple, or that he held the temple worship as " already anti
quated and in ruins." (Life and Works of Paul, vol. i. c. 2).

116 COMMENTARY. [iv. 15— vii. 8.
crowning ornament of a noble form, it is not surprising
that in such a moment his face should be compared to
that of an angel.
3. Stephen's Discourse, vii. 1-53.
i.
THE INTRODUCTION, 1-8.
Vv. 1-8. With his face glowing like that of an
angel, at a word from the high priest Stephen proceeds
to deliver one of the most remarkable discourses on
record, (i) And the high priest said, Are these things
so ? (2) And he said, Brethren and fathers, hearken.*
The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham,
when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Haran,1
1 It is charged by rationalists generally, that Stephen makes
several historical mistakes in this speech, of which the first is his
representation here that God gave this command to Abraham
" before he dwelt in Haran," whereas it is said in Genesis xii. l-4i
that he gave it to him in Haran. But his language implies that
he knew what occurred in Haran, but wished to state an addi
tional and antecedent fact. Knowing that God did appear to
Abraham in Haran, and also knowing what some of his hearers
overlooked, that he had also appeared before that time, he here
speaks of the previous appearance, this being the one that started
Abraham in the direction of Canaan. Those who say that he
was mistaken should account for the fact stated in Gen. xi. 81,
that Terah took his family, " and they went forth with them
from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan." What
could have started this whole family of Shemites on a journey of
more than a thousand miles into a country occupied by Hamites,
unless it were some such command as that which finally took
Abraham from Haran into that same country ? Stephen says it
was such a command ; and even if he based the statement on a
logical inference, with no other source of knowledge, no one can
deny that the inference is a just one. If it be objected that the
command, if given before, would not have been repeated in words
so nearly identical, we may answer, that the command given to

vii. 11-8.] ACTS. 117
(3) and said unto him, Get thee out of thy land, and
from thy kindred, and come into the land which I will
show thee. (4) Then he came out of the land of the
Chaldeans, and dwelt in Haran : and from thence, when
his father was dead,1 God removed him into this land,

Jonah to go into Nineveh was expressed in almost the same
terms when first given as when repeated after his experience in
the bowels of the fish (Jonah i. 2 ; iii. 2). Furthermore, there is
au important omission in Stephen's quotation of the words as
compared with those in Gen. xii. He omits the words, "and
from thy father's house," which agrees with the fact that on
leaving Ur of Chaldea he did not leave his father's house, as he
did when he left Haran.
1 Here is the second mistake charged upon Stephen. It is
claimed that Abraham was born when his father was seventy
years old (Gen. xi. 26) ; that he left Haran when he was himself
seventy-five years old, which would make his father 70-|-75=145 ;
and as Terah lived to two hundred and five (Gen. xi. 32), he must
have lived 205 — 145=60 years after Abraham left Haran, instead
of dying, as Stephen says, before Abraham's departure. But this
whole calculation depends on the correctness of the figures from
which it starts. The statement of the text, Gen. xi. 26, is that
" Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abraham, Nahor and
Haran." Unless we assume that these three were triplets, we
can not assert that Terah was just seventy when Abraham was
born. But that they were not triplets, and that Nahor and Abra
ham were much younger than Haran, is evident from the fact
that Nahor's wife was Haran 's daughter, and that Haran's son
Lot was not many years younger than Abraham, as appears from
the later history of the two. It is obvious, then, that this state
ment about the births of the three is not intended to show the
time of the birth of Abraham or Nahor, but only that of Haran.
It is similar to the statement in Gen. v. 32, that " Noah lived five
hundred years: and Noah begat Shem, Ham and Japheth ;"
whereas, by comparison of the ages of Noah and Shem at the
time of the flood, we find that Noah was five hundred and two
years old when Shem was born. (Gen. iii. 13, cf. xi. 10). In other
words, the author of Genesis, in his aim at extreme brevity, in
both these instances gives the age of a father at the birth of one

118 COMMENTARY. [vii. 1-8.
wherein ye now dwell : (5) and he gave him no inher
itance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on : and
he promised that he would give it to him in possession,
and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child.
(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, four hundred
years. (7) And the nation to which they shall be in
bondage will I judge, said God : and after that they
shall come forth and dwell in this place. (8) And he
gave him the convenant of circumcision : and so Abraham
begat Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day ; and
(and apparently, in both cases the oldest) of his sons, and while
doing so mentions the births of the other two, without wishing to
make the impression that they were all brought forth at one
birth. Indeed, he avoids that impressien by other statements in
the context which preclude it. Stephen then may be relied on
when he says that God removed Abraham from Haran into
Canaan after the death of Terah ; and if so, then the age of Terah
when Abraham was born was 205 — 75=130 years. Alford objects
to this conclusion in the following terms: "Terah, in the course
of nature, begets his son Abram at one hundred and thirty ;
yet this very Abram regards it as incredible that he himself
should beget a son at ninety-nine (Gen. xvii. 1, 17); and on the
birth of Isaac out of the course of nature, most important Scrip
ture arguments and consequences are founded, cf. Eom. iv. 17-21 ;
Heb. xi. 11, 12 " (Commentary in loco.) The learned author forgets
that " in the course of nature " this same Abram, long after he was
ninety-nine, and apparently after the death of Sarah, when he
was one hundred and thirty-seven, took a younger wife and begat
six other sons, the sons of Keturah (Gen. xxiii. 1 ; xxiv. 1-4).
The incredulity of Abram, then, so far as it respected himself (for
it is evident that it had reference chiefly to Sarah), depended on
something else than his mere age. It may have depended largely
on the fact that he had now been living thirteen years with a
young concubine, Hagar, since the birth of Ishmael, and she had
not borne him another son (xvii. 24, 25).

vii. 1-16.] ACTS. 119
Isaac, Jacob ; and Jacob, the twelve patriarchs. Here
is a calm, dignified, and very graphic sketch ofthe story
in Genesis, from the first call of Abraham until the birth
and circumcision of the twelve sons of Jacob. It was a
recital which always interested a Jewish audience, just
as an effective recital of the migration of our Pilgrim
Fathers always interests an American audience. But
what had it to do with the charges brought against
Stephen ? and why should it be found on the lips of a
man about to be condemned to die ? These questions it
was impossible at the moment for his hearers to answer,
though they must have occurred to every mind. It is
equally impossible for us to answer them, unless we an
ticipate the sequel, which we should not do.
II.
THE CASE OE JOSEPH, 9-16.
Vv. 9—16. The speaker next recounts the circum
stances growing out of the sale of Joseph, which led to
the migration of Jacob into Egypt, and to his death,
with that of his sons, in that foreign land. The account
is equally graphic with the preceding, and as skillfully
abridged. (9) And the patriarchs, moved with envy
against Joseph, sold him into Egypt : (10) and God was
with him, and delivered him out of all his afflictions,
and gave him favor and wisdom before Pharaoh king of
Egypt ; and he made him governor over Egypt and all
his house. (11) Now there came a famine over all
Egypt and Canaan, and great affliction ; and our fathers
had no sustenance. (12) But when Jacob heard that
there was corn in Egypt, he sent forth our fathers for
the first time. (13) And at the second time Joseph was
made known to his brethren ; and Joseph's race became

120 COMMENTARY. [vii. 9-16.
manifest unto Pharaoh. (14) And Joseph sent and called
to him his father, and all his kindred, three score and
fifteen souls.1 (15) And Jacob went down into Egypt ;
and he died, himself, and our fathers; (16) and they
were carried over into Shechem, and laid in the tomb
that Abraham bought for a price in silver of the sons of
Hamor in Shechem.2 In this division of the discourse,
1 Here Stephen is said to make his third mistake, in putting the
number of Jacob's family at seventy-five, whereas the text of
Gen. xlvi. 27 makes the number seventy, including two who had
died in Canaan. Many conjectures have been advanced to ac
count for this difference, while the only one that should have
been thought of has been often overlooked. Stephen, being a
Hellenist, read the Scriptures in the Greek translation, as
did all of his adversaries in the foreign synagogue, and as did
the great majority of the Jewish people, to whom the original
Hebrew was already a dead language. His Greek Bible, the Sep
tuagint version, gives precisely the number of names which he
here quotes. It reads : " All the souls of the house of Jacob who
went with Jacob into Egypt, were seventy-five souls ;" and it
makes the additional five, by giving, at verse 20, the names of two
sons of Manasseh, two of Ephraim, and one grandson of the latter.
Stephen then gave the figures as he and his hearers read them in
their Bible, and perhaps neither he nor they had ever observed
the discrepancy between the version and the original.
2 In this sentence are two more of the mistakes charged on
Stephen, and they are much more like real mistakes than any of
the preceding. He appears to say that Jacob was carried over to
Shechem and buried, whereas he was buried at Hebron in the
cave of Macpelah ; and he does plainly say that Abraham bought
a tomb of the sons of Hamor in Shechem, whereas it was the
tomb at Hebron which he bought, while it was Jacob who bought
a piece of land at Shechem. It is difficult to imagine how Stephen
could have made these two mistakes ; for the burial of Jacob is
made so prominent in Genesis, and was attended by so remark
able a funeral procession, including not only all the men of his
own posterity, but the elders of Egypt, and a great company of
Egyptian horsemen, that the account of it must have been very
familiar to every Israelite, and very dear to his heart. So, too,

vii. 9-16.] ACTS. 121
the ill treatment of Joseph by his brethren is brought
into vivid contrast with his final rescue of the whole
family from starvation ; and the way the story is told
the purchase of the cave at Macpelah by Abraham, attended is it
was by great sorrow for the loss of his beloved wife at an ad
vanced age, and by the beautiful courtesies which adorned both
his own conduct and that of his Hittite neighbors in making the
transfer, was too prominent and interesting an event for a Jew
of *any intelligence in the Scripture, such as Stephen certainly
was, to commit so great a blunder in regard to it. It is far more
likely that some early copyist, knowing of Abraham's purchase,
and not remembering that Jacob also made one at Shechem, here
inadvertently substituted the name Abraham where the name
Jacob was originally written. We are constrained therefore, by
the natural probabilities of the case, to conclude with many emi
nent critics that the name Abraham is a clerical error, and not a
mistake made by Stephen. The statement made concerning the
burial of Jacob admits another explanation. As the two clauses
stand in our version, "he died, himself, and our fathers ; and
they were carried over into Shecham," there can be no doubt
that " himself " and " fathers " are common subjects of the one
verb " died," and that the pronoun " they " before " were car
ried " refers to both alike. But it is not so in the original. The
construction is different. The verb rendered died is in the sin
gular number, ers^vrr/aev, and it agrees only with avrdc, himself.
The plural substantive " fathers " is not the subject of that verb,
but of the plural eTeXevnjaav understood: The construction having
been changed with the introduction of the plural subject, it fol
lows that the plural verb fieTsrsBijoav, " were carried, " belongs to
fathers, and not to Jacob. The two clauses, properly punctu
ated, and with the ellipsis supplied, read thus : " and he died ;
and our fathers died, and were carried over into Shechem." With
this rendering and punctuation, which are certainly admissible,
the contradiction totally disappears ; and if the passage had been
thus rendered at first into English, a contradiction would not have
been thought of. The question whether the " fathers," other than
Joseph, were carried over to Shechem for burial, can not be de
termined by anything said in the Old Testament; for of their
burial place nothing what ever is said. Steph en must have obtained
his information on this point, as he did his knowledge of the edu-

122 COMMENTARY. [vii. 17-29.
was well calculated to interest Stephen's hearers ; but
the use which he intended to make of the facts recited was
a mystery to them, and no one present could have been
more conscious of this than Stephen himself, who pur
posely kept his ultimate aim out of sight.
III.
THE CASE OP MOSES IN EGYPT, 17-37.
Vv. 17-29. From this glance at the history of Joseph
the speaker advances to that of Moses ; and with a mas
ter hand, he sketches so much of it as to show that God
raised him up in a remarkable way to a position of great
learning and power, and that Moses undertook the de
liverance of his people, but failed because they turned
against him. (17) But as the time of the promise drew
nigh, which God vouchsafed to Abraham, the people
grew and multiplied in Egypt, (18) till there arose
another king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph.* (19)
The same dealt subtilly with our race, and evil entreated
our fathers, that they should cast out their babes, to the
end that they should not live. (20) At which season
Moses was born, and was exceeding fair ; and he was

cation of Moses, from some extra biblical source. As the mummy
of Joseph was buried in the piece of land bought from the sons of
Hamor (Josh. xxiv. 32), it is not improbable that the same was
true of his brothers. Jerome, who lived in Palestine in the
fourth century, says : " The twelve patriarchs were buried not [in
Arbes (Hebron), but in Shechem ;" which shows that in his day
the fact stated by Stephen was the current belief of the Jews.
(See the citation in Speaker's Commentary). That a tomb was
purchased together with the piece of land bought at Shechem,
Stephen must also have learned from some source other than the
Old Testament; but it is not at all improbable. Indeed, the
possession of a sepulcher may have been one of the motives for
the purchase of the land.

vii. 17-37.] ACTS. 123
nourished three months in his father's house : (21) and
when he was cast out, Pharaoh's daughter took him up,
and nourished him for her own son. (22) And Moses
was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians ; and
he was mighty in words and works. (23) But when
he was well nigh 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 him, and
avenged him that was oppressed, smiting the Egyptian :
(25) and he supposed that his brethren understood how
that God by his hand was giving them deliverance ; but
they understood not. (26) And the day following he
appeared unto them as they strove, and would have set
them at one again, saying, Sirs, ye are brethren ; why
do ye wrong one to another ? (27) But he that did his
neighbor wrong thrust him away, saying, Who made
thee a ruler and a judge over us ? (28) Wouldst thou
kill me, as thou killedst the Egyptian yesterday ? (29)
And Moses fled at this saying, and became a sojourner
in the land of Midian, where he begat two sons. Al
though it was afterward discovered that this effort of
Moses was premature, the Israelites of later generations
must have regretted that their fathers rejected in so un
generous a manner the offer to . deliver them made by
Moses at such a sacrifice to himself; for no doubt Stephen
here rightly interprets his slaying of the Egyptian as a
signal for his countrymen to rise and strike for liberty
under his leadership. It was sad to think of their want
of appreciation of such heroism.
Vv. 30-37. But Stephen has use for the next section
in the career of Moses, in which, after being rejected by
his countrymen, God made him their deliverer : and this
he proceeds to sketch in the same graphic style. (30)

124 COMMENTARY. [vii. 30-41.
And when forty years were fulfilled, an angel appeared
to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in a flame of
fire in a bush. (31) And when Moses saw it, he won
dered at the sight : and as he drew near to behold, there
came a voice of the Lord, (32) I am the God of thy
fathers, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob.
And Moses trembled, and durst not behold. (33) And
the Lord said, Loose the shoes from thy feet: for the
place whereon thou standest is holy ground. (34) I have
surely seen the affliction of my people which is in Egypt,
and have heard their groaning, and I have come down to
deliver them : and now come, I will send thee to Egypt.
(35) This Moses whom they refused, saying, Who made
thee a ruler and a judge ? him hath God sent to be both
a ruler and a deliverer with the hand of the angel who
appeared to him in the bush. (36) This man led them
forth, having wrought wonders and signs in Egypt, and
in the Red Sea, and in the wilderness forty years. (37)
This is that Moses, who said unto the children of Israel,
A prophet shall God raise up unto you from among your
brethren, like unto me.1 In this passage the speaker not
only presents the contrast between the rejection of Moses
by his brethren, and God's appointment of him to the
very office which they refused him, but he also intro
duces the prediction uttered by Moses concerning the
Messiah — a prediction in which Moses evidently antici
pated the coming of a prophet greater than himself.
IV.
THE CASE OP MOSES IN THE WILDERNESS, 38-41.
Vv. 38-41. Ungrateful as had been the conduct of
the Hebrews toward Moses when he first attempted to
1 Deut. xviii. 15-19.

vii. 38-41.] ACTS. 125
deliver them, it bore no comparison to their mistreat
ment of him after he had led them out into the wilder
ness ; and to this Stephen next invites the attention of
his hearers : (38) This is he that was in the church1 in
the wilderness with the angel2 who spoke to him in
Mount Sinai, and with our fathers : who received living
oracles 3 to give unto us : (39) to whom our fathers
would not be obedient, but thrust him from them, and
turned back in their hearts into Egypt, (40) saying unto
Aaron, Make us gods which shall go before us : for as
for this Moses, who led us forth out of the land of Egypt,
we know not what is become of him. (41) And they
made a calf in those days, and brought a sacrifice unto
1The word here rendered church, iKKkqaia, is the one usually
so rendered in N. T., but never in O. T. As the body of the
Israelites represented by it is always in O. T. styled the congre
gation, or the assembly, so it should have been here in the
text as our revisers have given it in the margin. This is
required by uniformity, and it would have prevented some
persons from confounding the assembly in the wilderness with
the New Testament church.
2 By " the angel who spoke to him in Mount Sinai," Stephen
means the same angel mentioned in verse 30, where he says, " An
angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in a
flame of fire in a bush." In the next verse (31) this angel is
called The Lord, as in Exodus he is called both Jehovah and
God (Ex. iii. 2, 4). This shows that visible and audible manifes
tations of God were made through the persons of angels.
3 The term oracles was used by the Greeks for communica
tions supposed to have been received from their gods. In con
trast with these, which came from no living being, and which
were nothing but empty words, the communications received by
Moses are called by Stephen living oracles, because they came
from the living God, and because they had within themselves
power to direct aright the lives of men. Both Paul and Peter
unite with Stephen in applying the title "living" to the word of
God (Heb. iv. 12: I. Pet. i. 23). See further under 53.

126 COMMENTARY. [vii. 38-43.
the idol, and rejoiced in the works of their hands. The
greater flagrance of this sin appears from the fact that it
was committed immediately after those splendid manifes
tations of God's presence with Moses which the people had
witnessed in Egypt, at the Eed Sea, in the march tc Mount
Sinai, and in the giving of the law from the summit of
that mountain. They rejected Moses after he had ac
complished the main part of their deliverance, and yet
God made him the instrument for completing the deliver
ance which he had begun.

GOD'S PINAL REJECTION OP ISRAEL, 42, 43.
Vv. 42, 43. The next division of the speech is ap
parently more abbreviated in Luke's report than the
preceding divisions, and perhaps Stephen himself went
less into details here than before. In a single sentence
he passes over all the apostasies of Israel, from the time
of the calf worship at the foot of Mount Sinai, till the
final announcement of the Babylonian captivity by the
mouth of the prophet Amos, whom he quotes : (42) But
God turned, and gave them up to serve the host of
heaven ; as it is written in the book of the prophets,
Did ye offer unto me slain beasts and sacrifices
Forty years in the wilderness, 0 house of Israel ?
(43) And ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch,
And the star of the God Rephan,
The figures which ye made to worship them :
And I will carry you away beyond Babylon.1
1 Stephen here quotes the Septuagint version of Amos v. 25-27,
which varies slightly from the Hebrew. A discussion of the
variations belongs rather to a commentary on Amos than to one
on Acts. Stephen's purpose in the quotation is to show his

vii. 42, 43.] ACTS. 127
With this brief glance at the course of Israel in re
jecting their divinely appointed leaders and deliverers
during a period of many centuries, the first general
division of the speech, as we shall see, is concluded.
Before making the application of it, he passes to a topic
which was included in his accusation ; for we should be
careful to observe that nothing which he has said thus
far has any connection at all with the charges under
which he was arraigned. His hearers could but wonder
what use he intended to make of the facts which he had
recited, and he was not yet ready to satisfy their
curiosity.hearers that one of their own prophets had long since convicted
the generation in the wilderness of abandoning the service of
Jehovah for that of various idols besides the calf which Aaron
made ; in consequence of which God then gave them up to wor
ship " the host of heaven," and, as a remoter consequence, was
in the days of the prophet about to send them into captivity in a
foreign land. The question, " Did ye offer me slain beasts and
sacrifices in the wilderness forty years ?" is answered by the
statement, " Ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star
of the god Rephan ;" thus showing, that although, as plainly ap
pears in the Pentateuch, some sacrifices were offered in the
wilderness, they were vitiated so as to amount to no worship at
all because of the idolatry which was intermingled with them. In
the expression " beyond Babylon," Stephen departs from the text
of both the Hebrew and the Septuagint, which read " beyond
Damascus." He doubtless did this on purpose, because the
change more fully expressed the real mind of God in the pre
diction. God saw fit, in speaking through the prophet, to speak
only of sending the people beyond Damascus, which was a short
distance, when he really intended, as subsequent events dis
closed, to send them much farther. Stephen puts in the word
which expresses the full purpose of God. His hearers were ac
quainted with the fapts, and could easily perceive his purpose.

128 COMMENTARY. [vii. 44-50.
VI.
THE TABERNACLE AND THE TEMPLE, 44-50.
Vv. 44-50. Instead of either admitting or formally
denying the charge of blasphemy against the temple, the
speaker proceeds to show very briefly the true religious
value of that building. This he does by first alluding to
the movable and perishable nature of the tabernacle,
which was superseded by the temple, and then showing
from the prophets that a temple made with hands can
not be the real dwelling place of God. (44) Our fathers
had the tabernacle of testimony in the wilderness, even
as he appointed who spoke unto Moses, that he should
make it according to the figure that he had seen. (45)
Which also our fathers, in their turn, brought in with
Joshua when they entered on the possession of the na
tions, which God thrust out before the face of our fathers,
unto the days of David ; x (46) who found favor in the
sight of God, and asked to find a habitation for the God
of Jacob. (47) But Solomon built him a house. (48)
Howbeit the Most High dwelleth not in houses made with
hands ; as saith the prophet,
(49) The heaven is my throne,
And the earth the footstool of my feet :
What manner of house will ye build me ? saith the
Lord:
1 The commentators are nearly equally divided on the ques
tion whether the clause, " unto the days of David," is to be con
nected with the thrusting out of the Canaanites, or the bringing
in of the tabernacle ; Alford, Meyer and Hackett holding the
latter view, and Lechler, Gloag and Jacobson, the former. It is
not important to decide the question, for both views are in har
mony with the facts of the history, and also with Stephen's train
of thought. Our translators appear to have held the latter view,

vii. 44-53.] ACTS. 129
Or what is the place of my rest ?
(So) Did not my hands make all these things ? 1
Involved in these remarks is the argument, that in
asmuch as the tabernacle was once God's house, but was
supplanted by the temple ; and inasmuch as the tem
ple, grand and ancient as it was, was infinitely too small
to contain the living God, and was declared by one of
their own prophets not to be God's real dwelling place,
it could be no blasphemy to say that it was yet to be set
aside and destroyed. VII.
* THE APPLICATION, 51-53.
Vv. 51—53. Stephen is now prepared to spring upon
his accusers the concealed application of the facts which
he had arrayed in the first division of his discourse.
The historical introduction had paved the way for the
following analogies. As Joseph, the divinely selected
saviour of his brethren, had been sold into slavery by
these brethren ; as Moses, divinely selected to delivei-
Israel from bondage, was at first rejected by them' to
become a fugitive in Midian, but was sent back by the
God of their fathers to actually deliver them ; as Moses,
after leading them out of Egypt, was again and again
rejected by them ; and as all the prophets had met with
similar mistreatment ; so now, the final prophet of whom
Moses and all the later prophets had spoken, sent to de
liver them from a far worse bondage, had been rejected
and slain by the sons of those persecuting fathers. The
force of all these analogies is concentrated in the few
for the comma wbich they have placed after " fathers " is out ol
place if the former is the connection of thought.
1 Isa. xlvi. 1, 2.

130 COMMENTARY. [vii. 51-53-
words which follow : (51) Ye stiffnecked and uncircum
cised 1 in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy
Spirit : 2 as your fathers did, so do ye. (52) Which of
the prophets did not your fathers persecute ? and they
killed them who showed before the coming of the
Righteous One ; of whom ye have now become betrayers
and murderers ; (53) ye who received the law as it was
ordained by angels, and kept it not.3 The pent-up fires
which had burned in the breast of Stephen from the be
ginning of these cruel proceedings, and which had given
an angelic glow to his features before he began to speak,
but had been carefully smothered during the progress
of his argument, found vent, to the amazement of his
hearers, in these scorching and blazing words.
1 On account of the feeling with which Jews came to look upon
all uncircumdsed persons, the term uncircumcised was used by
them as a term of reproach and contempt ; Moses emphasizes his
want of eloquence by speaking of his " uncircumcised lips " (Ex.
vi. 12, 30) ; and speaks of Israel in apostasy as having " uncir-
cised hearts " (Lev. xxvi. 41). David denounces Goliath as " this
uncircumcised Philistine " (I. Sam. xvii. 26) ; while Jeremiah
eays of the people, "Their ear is uncircumcised, they can not
hearken " (Jer. vi. 10) ; and Ezekiel speaks of Elam as " uncir
cumcised in heart, and uncircumcised in flesh " (chap. xliv. 7, 9).
Adopting this Scriptural usage, Stephen denounces his judges
in the terms hurled at heathen nations and apostate Israel by
Moses and the prophets. No words could have been severer in
their estimation, and none could have been more just.
'Their fathers had resisted the Holy Spirit, as Stephen shows
in the next verse, by persecuting the prophets ; and they had
done the same, as he shows in verse 53, by persecuting Jesus.
Thus we see that men resist the Holy Spirit when they reject the
words spoken by the Holy Spirit through inspired men.
* The Greek words here rendered " as it was ordained by angels,"
«T Siarayac ayykhw, are very obscure in meaning, and therefore
difficult of translation. Many and conflicting attempts have been
made by the commentators, but Alford is surely correct when he

vii. 54-60.] ACTS. 131
4. Stephen is Stoned, and the Church is Dis
persed, vii. 54 — viii. 4.
Vv. 54-60. The exasperation of the Sanhedrin was
as sudden as was the explosion of feeling with which the
discourse came to an end ; and it was the more intense
because the denunciation hurled in their teeth was not a
mere burst of passion, but the deliberate announcement
of a righteous judgment, sustained by his array of
analogies from Scripture, the bearing of which now
flashed suddenly upon their minds. They had not been
able to resist in debate the wisdom and spirit with which
Stephen spoke, and now their efforts to convict him of
crime had recoiled with terrific force upon their own
heads. Their only recourse was the one usual with
unprincipled partisans when totally discomfited, and to
this they rushed with fearful rapidity. (54) Now when
they heard these things they were cut to the heart,1 and
they gnashed on him with their teeth. (55) But he,
says: " The key to the right understanding of them seems to be
the similar expression in Gal. iii. 19." He might have added,
Heb. ii. 2. In the former place it is said that " the law was or
dained through angels by the hand of a mediator ;" and in the
latter it is referred to as "the word spoken through angels."
These passages show that according to apostolic interpretation
God gave the law to Moses, not by speaking in his own proper
person, but by speaking through angels whom he sent to Moses,
and who doubtless appeared to him visibly. This, then, is the
conception which Stephen embodies in the words before us; and
although the rendering of the Revised Version which we follow
does not bring out this thought very clearly, it is perhaps the
best rendering which the original admits.
1 Literally, sawn asunder in their hearts. They felt as if then-
hearts had been cut through with the rough teeth of a saw, so
sharp and rasping were the words of Stephen. The literal gnash
ing of their teeth toward him was a natural consequence.

132 COMMENTARY. [vii. 54-60.
being full of the Holy Spirit, looked up steadfastly into
heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing
on the right hand of God, (56) and said, Behold, I see
the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the
right hand of God. (57) But they cried out with a loud
voice, and stopped their ears, and rushed upon him with
one accord ; (58) and they cast him out of the city, and
stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their gar
ments T at the feet of a young man named Saul. (59)
And they stoned Stephen, calling upon the name of the
Lord, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. (60)
And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord,
lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said
this, he fell asleep, (viii. 1) And Saul was consenting to his
death. This was a strange way for a court to break up;
the whole body of seventy grave rabbis, whose official
duty it was to watch for the faithful execution of the
law, leaving their seats and rushing in a wild mob, amid
hideous outcries, to the sudden execution of a prisoner
uncondemned and untried.2 But the maddest pranks ever
played on earth are witnessed when wicked men set them
selves in uncompromising opposition to God and his people.
'The witnesses had to begin the stoning (Deut. xvii. 7), and
they threw off their outer garments to give their arms free move
ment. 2 The objection urged by unfriendly critics, that the Sanhe
drin had no right to execute a criminal without the consent of
the Roman governor, and that therefore this account of Stephen's
death is incredible (Baur, Life of Paul, i. 53, 54), is precluded by
the narrative itself, which shows that this was an essentially un
lawful procedure. It were as sensible to deny the credibility of
any other account of mob violence, on the ground that it was not
lawful. Mobs, because they are mobs, violate law, yet they often
observe some of the forms of law, as did this mob in requiring
the witnesses to begin the stoning.

vii. 54— viii. 4.] ACTS. 133
The vision witnessed by Stephen need not be under
stood as a real opening ofthe sky, so that things beyond
could be seen by the human eye, but only as a symbol
ical representation, such as those granted to John in the
isle of Patmos. It was vouchsafed both for his own
encouragement in the hour of death, aud for the good
of friends and foes alike in subsequent days. The words
of Stephen, " Son of man standing on the right hand of
God," were an echo in the ears of the chief priests
of those uttered by Jesus when he stood before them on
trial. There was at least one in the audience upon whom,
we have reason to believe, the impression made by this
whole procedure was deep and. lasting. The young man
Saul never forgot it, but long afterward, when bending
under the weight of years, he made sad mention of the
scene.1 From him, as an eye-witness, Luke undoubtedly
obtained the information concerning it on which he re
lied, and also his report of Stephen's discourse. This is
a sufficient answer to all who have raised doubts about
the practicability of his obtaining a correct report of
the speech.2
Vv. 1-4. The enemies of the church had now tried
in vain all ordinary methods of opposing the truth.
Under the leadership of the Sadducees they tried first
threatening, then imprisonment, and then stripes. They
were about to follow these with the death of the twelve,
when the milder counsels of the yet unexasperated
Pharisees prevailed, and resort was had to discussion.
But the cause, which had prospered under the imprison
ment and scourging of its chief advocates, bounded for
ward with a fresh impetus when brought before the
1 Acts xxii. 19, 20; I. Tim. i. 12-17.
' See Baur, Paul, i. 52, 55 ; Zeller, Acts of Apostles, i. 241.

134 COMMENTARY. [viii. 1-4.
people in open debate, and the Pharisees were moved to
follow the Sadducees in using violence. It was their
purpose to proceed in their bloody work with the forms
of law ; but in a moment of frenzy they lost all restraint,
and dispatched their chosen victim with the violence of
a mob. Once embarked in this mad career, nothing less
than the extermination of the church could satisfy them.
(i) And there arose on that day1 a great persecu
tion against the church which was in Jerusalem; and
they were all2 scattered abroad throughout the regions
of Judea and Samaria,3 except the apostles. (2) And
devout men buried Stephen, and made great lamentation
over him. (3) But Saul laid waste the church, entering
into every house, and dragging forth 4 both men and wo
men, committed them to prison. (4) They therefore that
were scattered abroad went about preaching the word.5
The grief of the good in a community at the loss of
a good man is always great; but it is most intense when
1 The statement of the text is not that the whole of the perse-
secution described below occurred on "that day," but it then
"arose." Doubtless many days transpired before the whole
church was dispersed.
2 To assume with some (Baur, Zeller, et. al.), that only the
Hellenistic portion of the church was scattered abroad, is to con
tradict without reason the universal terms of the text.
3 That Samaria was one of the regions to which these Jews
fled, shows that already there was a feeling among the Samaritans
toward the disciples quite different from that toward the Jews in
general. *The term haling, here employed by our translators, is ao
thoroughly obsolete, that it should no longer disfigure the text,
and I have accordingly discarded it, as was desired by the Amer
ican section of the Revision Committee.
6 The preaching here referred to was doubtless both public
and private preaching, the latter being participated in by women
as well as men.

v»i. 1-4.] ACTS. 135
the death is brought about by injustice and violence. It
is not surprising, therefore, that the burial of Stephen
was attended by " great lamentation " on the part of the
"devout men" who discharged this mournful service.
Possibly some of them were not members of the church.
But while his death filled the hearts of the disciples with
unutterable grief, it possessed a very great value to them
from another point of view. They had embarked with
all, their interests, temporal and eternal, in the cause of
one who, though he had proved himself mighty to de
liver while present with them, had^ gone beyond the
reach of vision, and no longer held personal converse
, with his former companions. Thus far, amid many
tears, some stripes, and much affliction, they had foiind
satisfaction in his service; but before Stephen's death
it was not known by experience how their new faith
would sustain them in a dying hour. Now one of their
number had tried the dread reality. He had died pray
ing for his murderers, and committing his spirit to the
Son of man, whom he saw in a heavenly vision. No
man at the present day can tell how great was the
strength and consolation which came to all when the
death of the first who died was so triumphant. It was
a fitting and most providential preparation for the fiery
ordeal through which the whole body of the believers was
immediately compelled to pass. They could now go for
ward in their tear-dimmed course without fear or care
for that within the grave or beyond it. With much
bitterness of heart they left their native city and their
individual homes to seek refuge among strangers ; but
to many of them the bitterness of temporal loss was no
doubt slight compared with that of seeing the cause
which they loved better than life apparently brought to

136 COMMENTAR Y. [viii. 1-4.
ruin. Still, though they had lost all for preaching
the word, they went everywhere preaching it. And
what must have been the feelings of the twelve when
they found themselves alone in a great city, the congre
gation of many thousands which they had collected all
scattered aud gone, and they themselves silenced for
want of hearers ? Their own lives must have been in
imminent peril ; but, supposing that the time to which
Jesus had limited their stay in Jerusalem had not yet ex
pired, and being undoubtedly solicitous for the future of
their many brethren and sisters who were languishing
there in prison, they courageously stood their ground, re
gardless of consequences. That they were allowed to
stay, and were unmolested, may be accounted for in part
by the supposition that they would be powerless after
the destruction of the church, and in part by the re
membrance of their miracles, especially their miraculous
escape from prison. Moreover, they could no longer
preach in public for want of an audience, and thus they
appeared to be frightened into silence, and were conse
quently considered harmless.

COMMENTARY ON ACTS.

PART SECOND.
SPREAD OF THE GOSPEL IN JUDEA AND
ADJACENT COUNTRIES.
(VIII. 5— XII. #5.)

SEC. I.— THE LABORS OF PHILIP.
(VIII. 5-40.)
1. He Founds a Chuech in the City of Samaria,
5-13.
Ver. 5. Among the many who now went about
preaching the word, the writer first follows Philip, and
describes some of his labors. (5) And Philip went down
to the city of Samaria, and proclaimed unto them the
Christ. This Philip was not the apostle by that name,
seeing that the apostles are said in verse 1 to have re
mained in Jerusalem; but he was one ofthe seven men
tioned in vi. 5. His office of deacon had terminated,. by
the dispersion ofthe church which he had served, and
now he becomes an evangelist, the title by which he is
called in xxi. 8. He evidently became an evangelist,
not by being formally set apart to this work, but by be
ginning to evangelize under the force of circumstances.
Among the older commentators there was much dispute
as to whether the city into which he went was a city of
137

138 COMMENTARY. [viii. 5-12.
Samaria, or the city of Samaria ; but the definite article
is now admitted to be a part of the Greek" text, and this
settles the question.1 It was the old capital of the
twelve tribes, and it had recently been enlarged and
embellished by Herod the Great.2 Luke describes Philip's
work in Samaria first, because this was the first success
ful work outside of Judea, and because, in the directions
given by Jesus (i. 8), Samaria stands next to Judea.
Vv. 6-12. When Philip entered the city of Samaria
the public mind was in a condition apparently unfavor
able to the reception of the gospel. The practice of
magical arts was quite common among the Jews and the
Samaritans of that age, and the masses of the people of
all nations were very superstitious in reference to them.
At this particular time the people of Samaria were com
pletely under the influence of a famous magician, and
this obstacle had to be overcome before Philip could
hope for success. The story of the conflict and the
triumph is briefly told. (6) And the multitude gave
heed with one accord to the things that were spoken by
Philip, when they heard, and saw the signs which he
did. (7) For from many of those who had unclean
spirits, they came out, crying with a loud voice : and
many that were palsied, and that were lame, were
healed. (8) And there was much joy in that city. (9)
But there was a certain man, Simon by name, who be-
1 It was settled by the reading (rijv ¦koIiv t^c Sa/mpeiag) in the Sin-
aitic MS., which, reinforcing the previously known evidence of
the Alexandrian and the Vatican MSS., overbalanced all evi
dence for the omission of rfpi before irSXiv
a Herod changed its name to Sebaste, the Greek for Augusta,
in honor of Augustus Csesar ; and it still retains this name in the
Arabic form, Sebustiyeh. For a description of its present ruins, see
the author's Lands of the Bible, 294.

viii. 5-12.] ACTS. 139
foretime in the .city used sorcery, and amazed the people
of Samaria,1 giving out that himself was some great
one : (io) to whom they all gave heed, from the least to
the greatest, saying, This man is that power of God
which is called Great, (n) And they gave heed to him,
because that of long time he had amazed them with his
sorceries. (12) But when they believed Philip preach
ing good tidings concerning the kingdom of God and the
name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and
women. This is another case of conversion, with a very brief
account of the means and influences by which it was
brought about. Philip's preaching, like that of the
apostles on the day of Pentecost, and that of Jesus before
them, was accompanied by miracles. The first effect on
the people was great joy, accompanied by the most
interested attention to the things which were spoken by
Philip (6-8). Next, they shook off the spell which Si
mon had wrought upon them, and believed Philip's
preaching (9-12). When they believed they were bap
tized, both men and women (12), and here the briel
story ends. It is as simple and direct as the commission
under which Philip preached : " He that believeth and is
baptized shall be saved."
This case of conversion was well chosen by Luke,
because the subjects of it, up to the moment in which
Philip began to speak to them, were under the spell ot
a magician, and the miracles wrought by Philip were
1 Here the name Samaria designates not the city, but the coun
try of the Samaritans. The expression in Greek is rd Wvoc, -rijc
2a/japeiac. Josephus describes its limits (Wars, iii. 3, 4); and
they corresponded very closely to those of the tribes of Ephraim
and western Manasseh.

140 COMMENTARY. [viii. 6-13.
brought into direct comparison with the wonders wrought
by Simon. The fact that the people without hesitation
gave up their faith in Simon as the great power of God,
and implicitly believed in what Philip did and taught,
can be accounted for only on the ground that there was
such a difference between the tricks of sorcery and the
miracles, that the people, even though completely deluded
by the former, could plainly see, when once the two were
placed side by side, that the latter were divine, and the
former human. The tricks of sorcery were, and they
are still, as inexplicable to the beholder as miracles;
but the former are mere tricks, serving no purpose ex
cept to excite idle curiosity, and therefore they are un
worthy of God as their author ; while the miracles con
sisted in acts of healing which were altogether beneficent
and worthy of the exercise of divine power. Further
more, the latter served the purpose of accrediting a mes
sage of mercy to a lost race, and thus they subserved -a
purpose far superior in beneficence to their immediate good
effects on the afflicted. On account of this distinction,
the miracles, instead of being superior exhibitions of
magic art, as skeptics have alleged, are found in mortal
conflict with magic wherever the two came together.
See further evidence of this iu xiii. 6-12, and xix. 11-2Q.
Ver. 13. The most signal triumph achieved on this
occasion, was that over Simon himself. Luke gives it
the prominence of a separate statement in these words:
(13) And Simon also himself believed ; and being bap
tized, he continued with Philip ; and beholding signs and
great miracles wrought, he was amazed. His amaze
ment is proof that he saw, as the people did, the dis
tinction between miracles and his own tricks of jugglery.
He could understand the nature of the latter, even such

viii. 13-17] ACTS. 141
as he knew not how to work, because of his own experi
ence with such things; but the former were to him, as to
all men, incomprehensible. It was undoubtedly this
which caused him to believe ; and to avoid the con
fusion into which many have fallen in regard to his
faith, it should be observed that the words, " Simon also
himself believed," are written not from Philip's point of
view, but from Luke's. Philip might have been de
ceived by a pretended faith; but Luke, writing long
after the transaction, and with all the knowledge of
Simon's later career that we have, says that he believed,
and this should preclude all doubt as to the reality of
his faith. The statements made below (18-24) are to
be interpreted in the light of this fact. His baptism
committed him not only to this faith, but to the aban
donment of sorcery, as of all other sins.
2. Mission of Peter and John to Samaria, 14-17.
Vv. 14—17. Luke next introduces an incident which,
on account of its singularity in New Testament history,
and the speculations to which it has given rise, demands
very careful consideration : (14) Now when the apostles
who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received
the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John :
(15) who, when they were come down, prayed for them,
that they might receive the Holy Spirit : (16) for as yet
he was fallen upon none of them ; only they had been
baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. (17) Then
they laid their hands on them, and they received the
Holy Spirit.
In order to a correct understanding of this procedure,
we must notice four facts which are conspicuous : first,
t'hat the Samaritans, having believed the gospel and been

142 COMMENTARY. [viii. 14-17.
baptized, were, according to the commission (Mark xvi.
16), and according to Peter's answer on Pentecost (Acts
ii. 38), pardoned and in possession of the " gift of the
Holy Spirit." After they had been in possession of this
gift long enough for the news to reach Jerusalem, the
body ofthe apostles united in sending to them Peter and
John.1 Third, previous to the arrival of Peter and John
the Holy Spirit had fallen with its miraculous powers on
none ofthe Samaritans. Fourth, upon the imposition of
hands by the two apostles, preceded by prayer, the Holy
Spirit with its miraculous powers fell upon them.
From these facts we may draw several conclusions.
(1) Whatever other purposes may have prompted the
mission ofthe two apostles, such as confirming the faith
of the disciples, or assisting Philip in his labors, it is
quite certain that the chief purpose was the impartation
ofthe Holy Spirit. What they did on their arrival was
certainly that for which they went : but the chief thing
which they did was to confer the Holy Spirit ; therefore
this was the chief purpose of their visit. If, however,
Philip could have conferred this gift, the mission would
have been useless so far as its chief purpose is concerned.
This affords strong evidence that the miraculous gift of the
Holy Spirit was bestowed through no human hands but
those of the apostles ; and this conclusion is confirmed
by the consideration that in the only other instance of
the kind recorded in Acts, that of the twelve in Ephesus
(xix. 1-7), the gift was bestowed by the hands of an
apostle. The case of Saul is not an exception (see the
remarks on ix. 17) ; neither is that of Timothy ; for
; That Peter and John were " sent " by the other apostles, con
flicts with the Roman Catholic doctrine of the primacy of Peter,
by showing that he was subject to his brethren.

viii. 14-17.] ACTS. 143
although the latter is said to have received a gift through
the laying on of the hands ofthe eldership (I. Tim. iv.
14), yet he received the same or some other gift by the
putting on of Paul's hands (II. Tim. i. 6). From Paul
he doubtless received the miraculous gift, and from the
elders the gift of position as an evangelist.
(2) Tlie* fact that these disciples enjoyed pardon and
membership in the church before receiving the miraculous
gift, proves that this gift has no connection with the en
joyment of either of these blessings; yet the mystic
power of an ultra spiritualism has involved some great
minds in confusion as to this important matter. Wit
ness the following from Neander in reference to the con
dition of the Samaritans previous to the visit of Peter
and John : " They had not yet attained the consciousness
of a vital communion with the Christ whom Philip
preached, nor yet to the consciousness of a personal
divine life. The indwelling of the Spirit was as yet
something foreign to them, known only by the wonder
ful operations which they saw taking place around
them."1 This assertion is in direct conflict with the
commission, and with the apostolic promise that they
who would repent and be baptized should receive the
gift of the Holy Spirit. It also conflicts with Paul's
teaching, that the indwelling of the Spirit is characteristic
of all who are Christ's (Rom. viii. 9-11); for certainly
those who had been properly " baptized into the name
of Christ," as the Samaritans had been (16), were his.
(3) The statement, lf as yet he had fallen upon none
of them : only they had been baptized into the name or
the Lord Jesus," shows that there was no such con
nection between baptism and the miraculous gift of the
1 Planting and Training of the Church, in loco.

144 COMMENTARY. [viii. 14-17.
Spirit, as that the latter might be inferred from the
former. This gift, then, was not common to the dis
ciples, but it was enjoyed only by those to whom it was
specially imparted.
Seeing that this extraordinary gift of the Spirit was
not necessary to the conversion and pardon of these per
sons, nor to the indwelling ofthe Spirit, it is proper to
inquire for what purpose it was bestowed. We have
already remarked under chapter i. 8, that the design of
bestowing it on the apostles was to endow them with
power to establish the kingdom, and to furnish miraculous
attestation of their mission. In general, miracles were
designed to indicate divine sanction of the precedure
with which they were connected; but when the miracle
assumed a mental form, it was intended also to impart to
the person a supernatural mental power. The young
church in Samaria had hitherto been guided by the
teaching of Philip, and more recently by that of Peter
and John ; but these men must, in executing their high
commission, soon depart to other fields of labor; and if,
in doing so, they had left the church in the condition in
which Peter and John found it, it would have been
without means of increasing its knowledge of the new
institution, and with none but the uncertain memories of
the members of retaining with accuracy what it had
already learned. To supply this defect, primarily, and
secondarily to leave with the church the means of con
vincing unbelievers, the gift of inspiration was be
stowed.1 It was bestowed we may presume, not on all,
1 The suggestion made by Alford, that another purpose of im
parting the Spirit to the Samaritans was to remove the aliena
tion between them and the Jewish brethren, by showing the latter
that God gave to the Samaritans the same gifts as to themselves,

viii. 14-19.] ACTS. 145
both men and women, but on a sufficient number of
chosen individuals. The design of such gifts, and the
way in which they were exercised in the congregation,
are fully set forth by Paul in I. Cor. xii.-xiv. These
gifts served a temporary purpose, until the facts, doctrine,
commandments and promises of the new covenant were
Committed to writing by inspired men, when the prophe
cies, tongues, and miraculous knowledge of individual
teachers gave place to the written word.
3. A Wicked Proposal by Simon, 18-24.
Vv. 18, 19. In the preceding remarks on the inci
dent before us, it has been assumed tbat the gift of the
Spirit imparted was miraculous. This assumption is
justified by the fact that it was a matter of observation
to the bystanders, as is evident from the next statement
of the text : (18) Now when Simon saw that through the
laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Spirit was
given, he offered them money, (19) saying, Give me also
this power, that on whomsoever Llay my hands he may
receive the Holy Spirit. This proposal shows, as does
the previous statement of verse 17, that the Spirit did
not come upon these persons directly from heaven, as
upon the apostles on the day of Pentecost ; but that it
was imparted through the imposition of hands, and came
from the person of the apostles in whom the Spirit
dwelt. This is one mark of distinction between the
points to a probable effect of the gift ; but after the Lord had
personally directed the apostles to preach in Samaria (chap. i. 8),
it is by no means certain that any prejudice on the subject re.
mained in the minds of the disciples, especially as the Samaritans
were a circumcised people.

146 COMMENTARY. [viii. 18-23.
baptism in the Spirit and the gift of the Spirit. See
further under chap. xi. 16.
In order to account for the infamous proposal of
Simon, we must remember his former mode of life, and
consider the mental habits which it generated. As a
sorcerer, it had been his business to increase his stock in
trade by purchasing from other sorcerers the secret of
tricks which he could not himself perform, and watch
ing for opportunities to make such purchases. When
he saw the apostles impart to men the power to work
real miracles, he at once perceived that here was a
chance for profit far beyond that which he had aban
doned. His overruling avarice, mingled with a passion
for popular applause, a passion which his former habits
had also cultivated, prompted him to make the offer; and
the blinding effect of these passions prevented him from
seeing the wickedness of either offering money for this
power, or of intending to sell it to others.
Vv. 20-23. Nothing could be more abhorrent to an
apostle than such a proposal. It aroused the impulsive
spirit of Peter, and his response is marked by his char
acteristic vehemence. (20) But Peter said to him, Thy
silver perish with thee, because thou hast thought to ob
tain the gift of God with money. (21) Thou hast neither
part nor lot in this matter : for thy heart is not right be
fore God. (22) Repent therefore of this thy wickedness,
and pray the Lord, if perhaps the thought of thy heart
shall be forgiven thee. (23) For I see that thou art in
the gall cf bitterness and in the bond of iniquity. This
description of Simon's spiritual condition is explicit and
emphatic. The "gall of bitterness" is a forcible ex
pression for the wretchedness of his condition ; and "the
bond of iniquity," for the dominion under which in-

viii. 20-23.] ACTS. 147
iquity held him. His heart was not right before God,
and he was on the way to perdition. The declaration,
" Thou hast no part nor lot in this matter," is not to be
limited to the matter of imparting the Spirit, as appears
from the reason given : " for thy heart is not right before
God." If his heart had been right before God, he would
still have had no part or lot in imparting the Holy
Spirit. The reference is to the whole subject in hand,1
in which a baptized person would have a part if his
heart was right.
Simon's destitute and miserable condition has beeiL
construed by many as proof that he had been a hypo
crite from the beginning. Whether this inference is
justifiable, depends upon the question whether conver
sion involves so complete a renovation that old mental
habits are entirely eradicated, never to exert their power
again. If this is true, then Simon was certainly not a
genuine convert. But if, as both Scripture and exper
ience teach, the turning of a sinner to God leaves his
passions still within him in a latent state, ready to spring
into activity under temptation, it must be admitted that
Simon may have been a truly penitent believer when he
was baptized ; and inasmuch as Luke says, with all the
facts before him, that he did believe (13), we must
not deny this inspired testimony. The unfortunate man
had become a child of God, but he was yet a babe ; and
all the weaker from the degradation to which his moral
nature had been reduced before his conversion. He was
therefore an easy prey to temptation, coming to him in
1Tbe Greek words are ev r£ Myy rovr/p, literally rendered, in
this word, as in the margin of R. V. ; but such is the latitude
which usage attached to the word Uyoc, that the rendering, in AU
matter, correctly expresses the meaning in this instance.

148 COMMENTARY. [viii. 20-24
its old form, and in an unexpected way. He fell, as
many a man still falls, when an old slumbering passion
is suddenly aroused. Peter therefore does not say to
him as to an alarmed man of the world, Repent and be
baptized; but, as to a sinning disciple, " Repent and
pray God, if perhaps the thought of thy heart shall be
forgiven thee." The " perhaps " very clearly indicates
a doubt whether forgiveness would be attainable. The
doubt was based on the uncertainty in Peter's mind,
whether the repentance of such a man under such
circumstances could be sufficiently thorough to secure
forgiveness.1 Ver. 24. The doubt indicated by the "perhaps" of
Peter was confirmed in a measure by Simon's response :
(24) And Simon answered, and said, Pray ye for me to
the Lord, that none of the things which ye have spoken
come upon me. This response shows plainly that Peter's
scathing speech terrified Simon, but there it stops. He
was told to pray for himself, and for the forgiveness of
his sin ; but instead of doing this, he calls on the two
apostles to pray for him, and he limits his request to the
thought of merely escaping the things which they had
spoken. Here the record leaves him, and although he
disappears in a more hopeful condition, he leaves no
assurance of final repentance and salvation. Many tra
ditions are related of his -subsequent career by Justin
Martyr, Cyril of Jerusalem, Irenseus, Tertullian, and
the author of the Clementine Recognitions, all writers
of the second century ; but most of them are certainly
1 Peter could have had no allusion to the unpardonable sin, as
several commentators have supposed (Plumptre, Alford, et. al.) ;
for he knew very well what that sin is (Mark iii. 28-30) ; and he
knew that Simon had not committed it.

viii. 24-26.] ACT'S. 149
legendary, and none of them are at all reliable. It is
not wise to fill the memory with idle tales in regard to
Biblical characters.
4. Other Labors op Peter and John, and their
Return, 25.
Ver. 25. The next statement of our author illus
trates another phase of the labors on which the apostles
had now entered. (25) They therefore, when they had
testified and spoken the word of the Lord, returned to
Jerusalem, and preached the gospel to many villages of
the Samaritans. The first clause of this sentence refers
to their further testifying and speaking in the city of
Samaria; and the last to their work on the way to
Jerusalem. The route of travel from Samaria to Jeru
salem led them through Shechem, so often mentioned in
the Old Testament, and through Sychar, near Jacob's
well, where Jesus had conversed with the woman of
Samaria (Jno. iv. 39-43). If that woman was still
alive, and if she had not already gone over to Samaria
to hear Philip preach, she had now an opportunity to
learn what Jesus meant by his puzzling remarks about
" living water" (Jno. iv. 10-15). The apostles prob
ably adopted a circuitous route to Jerusalem, so that they
might touch other villages than those on the main
thoroughfare; and in each they doubtless remained long
enough to reap some of the fruits of their labor.
5. Philip is Sent to an Ethiopian Eunuch, 26-31.
Ver. 26. When the congregation in Samaria had
been supplied with spiritual gifts, and sufficiently in-
etrueted to iustify leaving it to its own resources for
edification, Fh.iip was called to another field of labor.

150 COMMENTARY. [viii. 26.
and we are introduced to a case of conversion in which
a single individual is the subject, and the details are
given with unusual fullness. It is a case in which God
is seen to lay plans, as it were, to bring about the result,
and we are able to trace distinctly the method of his
procedure. The first step taken in the case was the mission of an
angel from heaven ; but when the angel made his ap
pearance on earth, it was not, as in case of many imagi
nary angelic visits for such a purpose, in the presence of
the man to be converted, but in the presence of the
preacher. (26) But an angel of the Lord spake unto
Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the
way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza: the
same is desert. This is all that the angel has to say.
His part of the work, which was simply to 'start the
evangelist in the direction ofthe person to be converted,
is accomplished ; so he retires from tbe soene.
The words, " the same is desert " (whether spoken by
the angel, or appended by Luke, is immaterial), were in
tended to note the singularity of a preacher being sent
away from a populous district to an uninhabited region.
The term desert is not here to be understood as meaning
a barren waste ; for no such waste has ever existed
between Jerusalem and Gaza ; but as meaning that part
of the way which leads through a comparatively unpopu
lated district.1 Much error and confusion concerning
this way, or road, is found in the older commentaries,
which were written before the recent thorough explora
tions of the country ; but these, and especially the actual
1 That the Greek word, Ipiuoc, has this meaning, may be seen
by reference to the following passages : Matt. xiv. 15, 19 ; Mark
vi. 35, 39; Jno. vi. 10.

viii. 26-28.] ACTS. 151
surveys made by the Palestine Exploration Fund of
Great Britain, have cleared up the subject by showing
chat there was a Roman paved road leading from Jeru
salem direct to Gaza, some traces of which are still visi
ble, though the route, in the roughest part, is now im
passable for vehicles. This road is laid down on the
great map of Palestine made from the surveys, and can
be easily traced by any one in possession of the map.
The whole distance from city to city is about fifty miles,
and the direction from Jerusalem is nearly due south
west. Some five or six miles from the latter city the
road begins to descend from the central ridge, which it
follows that far, through a rough and narrow ravine
called Wady el Mesarr, into Wady es Sunt, known in
the Old Testament as the valley of Elah. After travers
ing this valley a few miles nearly due south, the road
turns to the west, and rises through another wady to the
level ofthe great Philistine plain, which it follows the
rest of the way to Gaza. The passage along the moun
tain ravine must be the part called desert, for all the
rest of the way the road passes through the midst of
villages, pastures, and cultivated fields; that is, it did so
when the country was well populated. If Philip's path
intersected the road in this desert, he traveled due south
from the city of Samaria, and passed to the west of
Jerusalem, all in compliance with the direction of the
angel. Vv. 27, 28. Philip promptly obeyed the voice of the
angel, and by a journey of nearly fifty miles he came
into the designated road in the rear of a chariot. The
occupant was the man in whose behalf he had come, but
as yet he knew nothing of him. (27) And he arose and
went : and behold, a man of Ethiopia, a eunuch of great

152 COMMENTARY. [viii. 27-28.
authority under Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who
was over all of her treasure, who had come to Jerusalem
to worship ; (28) and he was returning and sitting in
his chariot, and was reading the prophet Isaiah. All
that is said here about the man was learned by Philip
afterward, and was doubtless communicated by him to
Luke. His being a eunuch debarred him from the
privilege of mingling in the Jewish congregation, or en
tering the Jewish court of the temple;1 but it did not
debar him from the court of the Gentiles, in which men
of all nations, clean or unclean, were at liberty to wor
ship. That he had been in Jerusalem to worship, and
that he was now engaged in the study of the Jewish
Scriptures, make it almost certain that he was either a
Jew or a proselyte, more probably the former; and
when we add to these considerations the circumstance
that Luke introduces farther on the baptism of uncir
cumcised persons as if it were a startling innovation, we
are constrained to think that it was Luke's intention
that we shall regard this eunuch as a circumcised man.
It was not uncommon for Jews born and reared in
foreign lands to attain to eminent positions, such as this
man enjoyed, and especially in the department of finance,
for which they have always possessed natural fitness.
A remarkable prescience is observable in the timing
of the angel's mission and the movements of Philip to
the beginning and progress of the eunuch's journey.
Philip must have started from Samaria at least as early
•Wnile emasculated persons were shut out from the assem
bly of Israel as Gentiles were — the former for the purpose of
preventing Jews from allowing themselves or their sons to be
thus mutilated (Deut. xxiii. 1) — yet both, if obedient to the law of
God, were encouraged to worship God, and to send in sacrifices
with the assurance that they would be accepted (Isa. lvi. 1-8).

viii. 27-30.] ACTS. 153
as the day previous to that in which the eunuch left
Jerusalem; yet the Lord who sent the angel knew so
well when the eunuch would start, how long it would
take him to reach the point at which Philip came in be
hind him, and how long it would take Philip to reach
the same point, that the angel's mission was so timed as
to make all the movements fit one another : thus the
providence of God united with the miraculous mission
of the angel to bring about the intended conversion of
the eunuch, and to send the gospel in him to a distant
nation. Ver. 29. When Philip entered the road to which he
was directed, his mission was accomplished so far as he
could know from the message ofthe angel ; for this was
all that the angel had told him to do. Here he would
doubtless have paused for further orders had not another
divine admonition moved him on. Just at this moment
the Holy Spirit began to take part in the proceedings ;
and, like the angel, he began, not with the sinner, but
with the preacher. (29) And the Spirit said unto Philip,
Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. The purpose
of this communication was evidently the same as that of
the angel, to bring the preacher and the subject for con
version face to face. But for it Philip might have
allowed the chariot, which was already some distance
ahead of him, to pass out of sight. |
Ver. 30. In order to do as the Spirit directed, Philip
had to move energetically. (30) And Philip ran to him,
and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and said,
Understandest thou what thou readest ? The man was
reading aloud — a good way to keep the mind fixed on
what we read. Considering the relative positions ofthe
parties, Philip's question, Dost thou understand what

154 COMMENTARY. [viii. 30-33.
thou readest ? strikes us as a rather abrupt if not an im
pertinent method of introducing himself to the grandee.
It was, however, an appropriate question, and wisely
propounded. Philip as yet knew not his man ; he knew
not whether to approach him as a fellow disciple, or as
an unbeliever. He knew that if he was an unbeliever
he could not tell the meaning of the well known
prediction which he was reading, one of the plainest pre
dictions in all the prophets concerning the sufferings of
Christ. The Jews, not being willing to apply it to the
Christ, because they expected him to be a great earthly
king, knew not what to do with it. On the other hand,
he knew that if the man was a believer the passage would
be unmistakably clear to him. The purpose of the ques
tion, then, was to draw out the religious position of his
man, so as to determine how to'proceed with him further.
6. Philip Preaches to the Eunuch, Baptizes
Him, and then Preaches in Philistia, 31-40.
Vv. 31-35. The eunuch's answer to Philip's ques
tion was prompt and satisfactory : (31) And he said,
How can I except some one shall guide me ? And he
besought Philip to come up and sit with him. (32) Now
the place of the Scripture which he was reading was this,
He was led as a sheep to the slaughter ;
And as a lamb before his shearer is dumb,
So he openeth not his mouth :
(33) In his humiliation his judgment was taken away :
His generation who shall declare ?
For his life is taken from the earth. *

1 This quotation is taken from Isaiah liii. 7, 8; but it follows
the Septuagint, which was the Bible of all foreign born Jews,
and which the eunuch must have been reading. The clause " In

viii. 34* 35.] ACTS. 155
(34) And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray
thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this ? of himself, or
of some other ? (35) And Philip opened his mouth, and
beginning from this Scripture, preached unto him Jesus.
Philip now understands his man, and he better un
derstands what had just taken place with himself. The
man is a devout worshiper of God, who, though the
treasurer of a distant kingdom, does not fail to come to
Jerusalem, as the law requires, to worship. He has
been there now ; and, on his way home he is scarcely out
of sight of the holy city when he takes in hand, as he
rides along, the book of Isaiah. He is a thoughtful
reader, carefully inquiring, as he reads, the meaning of
every passage. He is an unbeliever in Christ, or he
would not doubt to whom the passage he is reading
refers. It so happens that he is reading and studying
his humiliation his judgment was taken away," is best explained
by the fact that in the trial of Jesus he was deprived of right
judgment by an unfair trial and condemnation. So Plumptre,
Gloag, Hackett and Alford understand it. Meyer and others
bold that the judgment that was taken away was his right to
judge ; but this right Jesus treated as one yet to be exercised in
the future world (Jno. v. 22-38; xii. 47, 48), and therefore he was
not robbed of it in his humiliation The clause, " His genera
tion who shall declare ?" must be interpreted in the light of the
clause, "for his life is taken from the earth." The fact that
his life was taken, raised the question, Who shall declare his
generation. The meaning depends on that of the expression,
"his generation." This expression usually means a man's
posterity, and the question implies a negative answer. The
meaning seems to be, no one shall set forth his posterity, because
he had no posterity when his life was cut off. The meaning sug
gested by Meyer, " Who shall declare the multitude of his
spiritual offspring?" is read into the passage from subsequent
developments, and could not well have been in the prophet's
views ; and it is not suggested by his words.

156 COMMENTARY. [viii. 36-40.
the very passage of all others in Isaiah which, when
understood, will be most likely to bring him to Christ :
and could Philip have failed to say to himself, " God sent
the angel to me, to bring me here at the exact moment
in which he foresaw that this man would be reading this
very passage, and raising in his own mind a question
concerning it which I can answer by the name Jesus ?"
There was no time to pause and wonder over this out
cropping of God's knowledge and wisdom ; but doubtless
Philip's soul was fired by it as he proceeded from that
Scripture to preach Jesus as its fulfillment. And if his
puzzled hearer had offered David's prayer, " Open thou
mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy
law," he realized an answer when he saw, beaming from
the page which was so dark before, the glory of a suffer
ing Saviour. The Scriptures were opened to him by the
ministration of angels and of the Holy Spirit, but all
became effective to him through' the words of the
preacher. Vv. 36-40. The account of this conversion termi
nates, like those on Pentecost and those in Samaria, with
the baptism of the person. (36) And as they went on
the way, they came unto a certain water ; and the
eunuch saith, Behold, here is water ; what doth hinder
me to be baptized ? (38) And he commanded the chariot
to stand still : and they both went down into the water,
both Philip and the eunuch ; and he baptized him. (39)
And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of
the Lord caught away Philip ; and the eunuch saw him
no more, for he went on his way rejoicing. (40) But
Philip was found at Azotus: and passing through he
preached the gospel to all the cities, till he came to Cse
sarea.

viii. 36-40.] ACTS. 157
The first natural water to which they came, unless it
were a spring on the wayside, was the brook which flows
through the valley of Elah, the brook which David
crossed in going forth to meet Goliath.1 It is a moun
tain stream, which goes dry in the summer, but flows
with a strong current through the winter and the
spring.2 Such streams always wear out pools here and
there very suitable for baptizing. If the chariot had
already crossed this stream when the eunuch requested
baptism, there was another in the Philistine plain, now
called Wady el Hasy, which Robinson, the first to insti
tute any intelligent inquiries on this subject, fixed upon
as the place of baptism.3 It is a perennial stream, and
suitable for baptizing at any season of the year. It is
not at all improbable, however, that the real place of
this baptism was one of the many artificial pools with
which the country abounded at that time, and the ruins
of which are found in every section.4 The rainless sea
son of seven months, which is experienced there every
year, made it necessary, when the country was filled with
people and flocks and herds, to make extraordinary pro
vision of water for stock, and for irrigating the summer
crops ; and no country was ever so well supplied in this
way as Judea.
The question, " What doth hinder me to be bap
tized ?" was suggested immediately by the appearance of
the water; but it could not have occurred to the eunuch
had he not been previously instructed concerning the
ordinance. He had learned not only that there was such
1 1. Sam. xvii. 40.
1 See an account of it in the author's Lands of the Bible, 259.
3 Biblical Researches, ii. 514, note xxxii.
4 See Lands of the Bible, 48.

158 COMMENTARY. [viii. 36-40.
an ordinance, but that it was the duty and the privilege
of men to observe it when properly prepared for it. He
also desired to be baptized, and his only question was
whether he was a suitable candidate. As he had known
nothing of Jesus as the Christ up to the moment of
Philip's preaching to him, he had certainly learned noth
ing definite concerning the baptism which Jesus had
ordained; and we are consequently forced to the con
clusion that what he now knew he had learned from
Philip's preaching.1 From this we learn that in preach
ing to him Jesus, Philip had instructed him concerning
baptism ; that when men preach Jesus as they should,
baptism is a part of the sermon. It was a part of
Peter's sermon on Pentecost, and of Philip's preaching
to the Samaritans ; and we shall see, as we proceed with
this commentary, that it had a place in every completed
apostolic sermon addressed to sinners. The evangelists
of the present day who omit it preach a mutilated
gospel, and they do so to please men by catering to a
sectarian prejudice which they should rather seek to up
root and destroy.
As soon as he had propounded the question, he com
manded the chariot to stand still, showing that Philip's
answer, which is not recorded, presented no hindrance.
To some persons in a later age it appeared that Philip
is here represented as making no answer, and that he
acted too hastily; hence the interpolation into some
' The conceit that he had learned it from the words, " So shall he
sprinkle many nations," near tlie close of the previous chapter of
Isaiah, has been advanced by some controversialists ; but it has
not bet-n approved by any of the critical Commentators, and it is
proved to be groundless by the fact that the Septuagint, which
ihe eunuch was reading, has in that passage, instead of the Greek
for sprinkle, the word, 8avpaT&£u, which means to astonish.

viii. 36-40.] ACTS. 159
copies of Acts of the words : " And Philip said, If thou
believest with all thy heart, thou mayest. And he
answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son
of God." 1 The interpolator obtained the idea which he
inserted from such passages as Romans- x. 8, 9 ; I. Tim.
vi. 13; and Matt. xvi. 16, which show that such a con
fession was taken by the apostles ; and it is not improb
able that this apostolic custom was still prevalent when
the interpolation was made.2
It is impossible to frame a sentence in English or in
Greek which could more unmistakably declare the fact
that previous to the baptism of the eunuch both he and
Philip went down into the water, and that after the
baptism they came up out of it. It is painful to observe
the disingenuousness with which some commentators, like
many unlearned controversialists, have taxed their in
genuity to obscure this fact,3 in tlie interest of a perverted
1 In regard to scarcely any reading are the textual critics more
unanimously agreed, or on better manuscript evidence, than the
rejection of this verse as an interpolation. See the evidence in
Tregelles, or Westcott and Hort, or in "Tischendorf's Eighth
Edition. 'It was found in at least one MS. in the latter half of the
second century; for it is quoted by Irenseus, who was in active
life from the year 170 to 210. His words are: ac airbc 6 eimoixoc
TreioBeic Kai icapavrlica afyov SaicTujBijvai, iXeye, Hiareva tov viov uvai
'lijoovv Xpiarov ; when the eunuch himself was persuaded, and
thought proper to be baptized immediately, and said, I believe
that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Cyprian quotes the passage
as follows : " Behold water ; what is it that hinders me to be bap
tized?" Then Philip said, "If thou believest from the whole
heart, thon mayest." Ecce aqua, quid est quod me impedit bap-
tizari? Tunc dixit Philippus, si credis ex toto cardo tuo licit
(Cyprian's Works, 318).
* As a recent and striking example, we quote the following re
marks from the Expositor's Bible, by Prof. G. T. Stokes, on this

160 COMMENTARY. [viii. 36-40.
form of the ordinance of baptism. It is clearly seen
that neither Philip nor the eunuch would have gone into
the water if the purpose had been to merely sprinkle or
pour a small quantity of water upon the latter. The
same reasons precisely which now keep preachers who
practice sprinkling out of the water would have kept
Philip and the eunuch out of it. On the other hand,
the same necessity which now compels those who practice
immersion to go into the water for the purpose com
pelled Philip and the eunuch to do so ; and from this
conclusion the candid mind can find no escape. If we
knew nothing at all ofthe meaning ofthe word baptize,
whether in English or Greek, except the single fact that
some say it means to sprinkle, and others that it means
to immerse, this passage alone would settle the question
forever with all whose minds are free to follow implicitly
the obvious meaning of the Scriptures. The account of
the eunuch's conversion administers rebuke at several
points to many teachers of our age, and it should call
them back with trembling to the teaching and practice
of the inspired evangelists.
The removal of Philip after the baptism may have
been miraculous, so far as the meaning ofthe expression
" caught away " is concerned ; and this meaning agrees
best with the expression, " found at Azotus ;" or it may
have been by a sudden command, such as that which
passage : " The Ethiopian eunuch baptized by St. Philip in the
wilderness could not have been immersed. He came to a stream
trickling along, scarcely sufficient to lave his feet, or perhaps
rather to a well in the desert ; the water was deep down, and
reached only, as in the case of Jacob's well, by a rope or chain.
Even if the water could have been reached, common sense, not to
speak of any higher motive, would have forbidden the pollution
of an element so needful for human life " (page 143).

viii. 36-40.] ACTS. 161
caused him to run and overtake the eunuch's chariot
(29, 30) ; and this agrees better with the reason given
why the eunuch saw him no more, " for he went on his
way rejoicing," This reason implies that if he had not
gone on his way, he might have followed Philip on his
way. The evident purpose of the writer is to show that
it was the Spirit who caused his departure from the
presence of the eunuch, and to leave the exact method
of his removal in obscurity, as a matter of no importance
to his readers. The circumstance worthy of note is that
Philip was not allowed to remain longer in company
with his new convert, as he would naturally desire to do
in order to his further instruction. It was God's will
that the man should go on his way to his native land,
and work out his own salvation (together, perhaps, with
that of many other persons) by building upon the ele
mentary instruction which he had now received. With
many men this would doubtless be unsafe ; but God
knew his man; and it was because he knew him that he
had taken the deliberate steps which we have traced to
bring him to himself in Christ.
Notwithstanding this sudden separation from his
teacher, and the necessity of going on his way with so
little knowledge of his newly found Saviour, the eunuch
" went on his way rejqicing." His rejoicing sprang from
the experience of that which Paul afterward set forth to
an audience of Jews : " Through this man is proclaimed
unto you remission of sins: and in him every one that
believeth is justified from all things, from which ye could
not be justified in the law of Moses" (xiii. 38, 39). It
is impossible that Philip failed to tell him, as did Peter
his converts, the connection of remission of sins with
repentance and baptism ; and now that he had complied

162 COMMENTARY. [viii. 36-40.
with the conditions of pardon, he rejoices in the experi
ence of it.
Our conception of this case of conversion will lack
completeness if we fail to look at it from another point
of view which the account enables us to take. Should a
friend have met the eunuch after he parted from Philip,
and inquired as to the cause of the joy so manifest in his
countenance, the recital would have presented the facts
of the conversion from his point of view, rather than
from that of the historian. He would not have begun
the story, as our author does, with the visit of the angel
to Philip; for of this he knew nothing; he would not
have mentioned the command of the Holy Spirit, " Go
join thyself to this chariot;" for of this he was equally
ignorant; but his story would have been about this : I
had been to Jerusalem to worship. I had started for
home ; and as I rode in my chariot I opened the book of
Isaiah and commenced reading. I came upon the
passage so much puzzling to our scribes, in which the
prophet speaks ofthe humiliation and dpath of someone
for the good of the world ; and I was laboring hard to
determine in my own mind of whom the prophet wrote
those words, when suddenly there appeared running by
the side of my chariot a footman, who inquired, " Un
derstandest thou what thou readest?" His manner in
dicated that he understood it, and it seemed providential
that he came to me at the very moment when I needed
his help. I invited him to take a seat with me; I
pointed to the passage, and stated to him my difficulty.
In a short time he made it perfectly plain to me that the
passage referred to the long looked for Messiah ; and
tbat this great personage, instead of reigning here on
earth, as our scribes have taught us, was to die a sacrifice

viii. 36-10.] ACTS. 163
for our sins ; to rise from the dead, ascend to heaven
whence he came, and to establish his kingdom over both
men and angels. He convinced me of the truth of all
this, and showed me that through that man's blood, by
faith in him and repentance and baptism in his name,
we are to receive the remission of sins which the law
could not give lis. While he was still speaking to me
these good tidings of great joy, we came to a certain
water, and I requested the baptism in which he had in
structed me. He baptized me ; he then turned away as
abruptly as he had come to me ; but I have come on my
way rejoicing in the forgiveness of sins, and in the
assured hope of everlasting life. Such was the experi
ence of this man up to the moment that the curtain of
history drops and hides him from our view. Happily,
as we lose sight of him the sounds that come back to us
are notes of joy, and we may hope to meet him at the
point where all our journeys end, and to rejoice with
him forever. His ready faith and prompt obedience give
evidence of such a character that we may believe he
will bring many sheaves with him in the great harvest.1
The Azotus at which Philip was found is the Ashdod
of the Old Testament, one of the five cities of the Phi
listines. It stood a few miles from the seashore, nearly
at a right angle to the line of the eunuch's travel, and
probably filteen miles distant. From that place to
Csesarea, the terminal point of the labors of Philip here
mentioned, is about sixty miles ; and the region in which
'Very naturally, the Christians of Ethiopia (now Abyssinia)
afterward ascribed to the eunuch tlie introduction of Christianity
into their country ; and they have some traditions in regard to
his subsequent career, but none of them is sufficiently authenti
cated to deserve our attention.

164 COMMENTARY. [viii. 36-40— ix. 1, 2.
he labored was the old land of Philistia as far north as
Joppa, and the plain of Sharon thence thirty miles north
to Csesarea. At Azotus this plain is about sixteen miles
wide, and about ten at Csesarea ; and all the way it is
exceedingly productive. At that time it was thickly set
with villages and small cities, many of which, in a state
of decay, remain to the present time. It was a field for
evangelization sufficient to occupy many years of Phil
ip's life. We shall see traces of the probable effects of
his work as we proceed.

SEC. IL — THE CONVERSION AND EARLY
LABORS OF SAUL.
(IX. 1-31.)
1. His Journey to Damascus, 1-9.
Vv. 1, 2. From the conversion of a nobleman,
whose home was in a distant land, our author now turns
to that of the most noted enemy of the church at the
time. He has already introduced Saul to his readers, in
the account of Stephen's martyrdom ; for this most
laborious and self-sacrificing of all the apostles first ap
pears on the page of history standing by when Stephen
was stoned, with the clothing of the witnesses against
him lying at his feet. His own statements concerning
himself enable us to trace his history to a still earlier
period. The early education and ancestral remembrances
of a man have much to do with forming his character
and shaping his career. Those of Saul were well calcu
lated to thrust him into the very course of action in

ix. 1, 2.] ACTS. 165
which he first figures in Luke's narrative. He was born
in the famous Greek city of Tarsus, on the banks of the
river Cydnus in Cilicia.1 This city was then a seat of
Greek learning, almost rivaling Athens and Alexandria;2
and on account of its situation on a navigable river, and
near to the mountain passes leading into the interior of
Asia Minor to the north, and of Syria to the east,3 it
was the center of an extensive commerce. Here he ac
quired in childhood a knowledge of the Greek language,
and of the manners and customs of the Greeks, which
served, him a good purpose in after life. At the same
time, he was carefully guarded by other influences against
the evil effects of the heathen society around him. He
was of pure Jewish extraction, " a Hebrew of the He
brews, of the tribe of Benjamin, and descended from
pious ancestors." 4 This insured his careful instruction
in Jewish history, and in the law of Moses. His parents
1 Acts xxii. 3.
2 " So great is the zeal of the inhabitants for philosophy and
all other encyclic training, that they have surpassed even Athens
and Alexandria, and every other place one could mention in
which philosophical and philological schools have arisen "
(Strabo, xiv. 4).
3 The plain in which Tarsus is situated is bounded on the
north and northwest by a lofty range of mountains, covered
with snow the greater part of the year. The region beyond is
reached by a pass through this range called the Gates of Cilicia,
because it was the only means of access to Cilicia from the west.
Another range bounds Cilicia on the east, and through it there
are two other well known passes, called the Amanid and the
Syrian Gates, which give access to Syria. Tarsus is now an
insignificant town of about ten thousand inhabitants; but a rail
way has been recently constructed from the sea coast through
and beyond Adanah, and this may lead to a partial renewal of
its ancient importance.
* Phil. iii. 4, 5 ; II. Tim. i. 3.

166 COMMENTARY. [ix. 1, 2.
were Pharisees,1 and his understanding of the Scriptures
was therefore modified by the peculiar interpretations
and traditions of that sect.
Resides this religious instruction, he was taught the
trade of a tent-maker.2 The goat's hair which was used
for the manufacture of rude garments and tent cloth,
was produced in great quantities in the mountains of
Cilicia, and the manufactured article acquired the name
xdixcov (Latin, Cilicium), from the name of the province.
The fact that he afterward received an expensive intel
lectual education proves that his father put him to this
humble trade, not through necessity, but in compliance
with the Jewish conception, that some form of manual
labor was an important part of the education of every
boy.3 The trade was of great service to him in some of
the darker days of his subsequent life.4
It was only his childhood that was thus devoted to
parental instruction and to the acquirement of the Greek
language and a trade ; for he was " brought up " at the
feet of Gamaliel in Jerusalem.5 Under the instruction
of this learned Pharisee, whose prudence and calmness
we have had occasion to notice in connection with the
trial of the twelve apostles (v., 33—39), his knowledge of
the law was enlarged, his zeal for it inflamed, and his
Pharisaic prejudices intensified. His progress in this
Bible school is thus described by himself: "I advanced
1 Acts xxiii. 6. 2 Acts xviii. 3.
3 In the Talmud Gamaliel is quoted as sayiner, " Learning of any
kind, unaccompanied by a trade, ends in nothing, and leads to
sin;" Eabbi Meir, as saying, "Let a man always teach his sons
pure and easy trades;" and Rabbi Judah, as saying. "Not to
teach one's son a trade is like teaching him robbery " (Farrar'»
Life of Paul, p. 14, n. 1).
4 Acts xviii. 3/ xx. 34; I. Thess. ii. 9. 5 Acts xxii. 3.

ix. 1, 2.] ACTS. 167
in the Jews' religion beyond many of mine own age
among my countrymen, being more exceedingly zealous
for the traditions of my fathers."1 This preeminence in
scholarship and zeal was accompanied by the strictest
religious deportment, so that after the lapse of many
years he could appeal to those who knew him in his
youth, though now his enemies, to testify that according
to the strictest sect of their religion he had lived a
Pharisee ; and he could even declare that as touching the
law he was blameless.2 Such was his character and repu
tation previous to his appearance on the pages of Acts.
It is not probable that Saul was in Jerusalem at the
time of the crucifixion of Jesus, or for several years
previous. If he had been, it is unaccountable that in all
his speeches and epistles he makes no allusion to a per
sonal knowledge of events in the life of Jesus. At the
time of Stephen's death he must have been at least thirty
years of agp,3 and he had probably been out of school
for ten or more years. The supposition that he had re
turned to Tarsus previous to the beginning of John's
ministry, and had reappeared in Jerusalem after the
ascension of Jesus, is most agreeable to all the known
facts in the case. When the conflict arose between
Stephen and the Jews ofthe foreign synagogue, Saul was
almost certainly one of the Cilicians who encountered
him (vi. 9) ; and his superior learning in the law nat
urally placed him in the front rank of the disputants.
He was apparently a member of the Sanhedrin,4 and he
1 Gal. i. 14 2Acts xxvi. 4, 5 ; Phil. iii. 6.
3 He is called " a young man " at the time, but his leadership
implies an age as well advanced as would be consistent with
styling him a young man, and points to about thirty.
* If we are to understand his remark (chap. xxvi. 10), " When
they were condemned to death, I gave my vote against them,"

168 COMMENTARY. [ix. 1, 2.
certainly took the part of a leader of that body when
they turned into a mob and stoned Stephen ; for " the
witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a
young man named Saul ;" and the formal statement is
made that "Saul was consenting unto his death."1
After the death of Stephen he still maintained the posi
tion of a leader in the persecution, until the church was
dispersed. In the course of this persecution others be
sides Stephen were put to death, while many were
scourged in the synagogues to make them blaspheme the
name of Jesus.2
When the church in Jerusalem had been scattered
abroad, Saul doubtless thought that he had effectually
destroyed the hated sect : but the news soon began to
come back from various quarters, that the scattered dis
ciples were establishing congregations in every direction.
One less persistent than Saul might now have despaired
of success in suppressing a faith which had thus far been
promoted by every attack made upon it, and which had
seemed to gather renewed life from apparent destruction ;
but he had a will that rose to higher resolve as obstacles
multiplied before it, and thus he is represented in the
text which must now come before us. (i) But Saul, yet
literally, he was certainly 'a member of some tribunal which de
cided the fate of the disciples in this persecution ; and no other is
known except the Sanhedrin. Against the supposition that he
was a member'of this body, nothing is alleged except a tradition
among later Jewish writers, that no one could be a member who
was not of mature age, or who was not a married man (Gloag,
Lechler, Hackett on xxvi. 10). As for the latter qualification,
Farrar gives very plausible if not conclusive reasons for believ
ing that Saul was married in early life, and had become a
widower (Life of Paul, chap. iv). Both objections, however, are
without the support of well established facts.
1 Chap. vii. 58 ; viii. 1. s Chap. xxvi. 11.

ix. 1-4.] ACTS. 169
breathing threatening and slaughter against the disciples
of the Lord, went unto the high priest, (2) and asked of
him letters to Damascus unto the synagogues, that if he
found any that were of the Way, whether men or women,
he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. The plurality
of synagogues in Damascus here indicated shows that
the city contained a very considerable Jewish popula
tion ; and with this agrees the statement of Josephus,
that not less than ten thousand Jews were slain in a
tumult there in the reign of Nero.1 When the news
reached Jerusalem that the faith of Jesus was being
propagated in this large Jewish community, the exaspera
tion of Saul and his fellow persecutors knew no bounds ;
and as Damascus was the nearest foreign city of great
importance, it was at once selected as the first point for
the pursuit of the scattered disciples. Under ordinary
circumstances such letters as Saul carried would not have
empowered him to arrest men in a foreign city, and to
bring them away in bonds ; but he had reason to believe,
from considerations which must now be only a matter of
conjecture, that the authorities in Damascus would per
mit him thus to act ; and that he was correct is apparent
from the readiness with which the governor of the city
afterward lent the aid of his guards for the purpose of
arresting Saul himself.2
Vv. 3, 4. It is impossible for a man to be in a frame
of mind less favorable to conversion to Christ, than was
Saul when he started on this mad expedition. How
striking the contrast between him, breathing out threat
ening and slaughter against the disciples of Christ, as he
started for a foreign city to arrest and imprison them,
and the eunuch, reading thoughtfully the prophet
'Wars, ii. 25. 2 II. Cor. xi. 32.

170 COMMENTARY. [ix. 3, 4.
Isaiah as he started on a peaceful journey to his distant
home. Yet the gospel of Christ shows its wonderful
power of adaptation by turning both into the way of sal
vation. The distance from Jerusalem to Damascus is
about one hundred and forty miles. The most usual
route of travel was northward along the dividing ridge
of the- mountain range through Bethel and Shechem to
Jezreel ; thence westward to Bethshan on the bluff lead
ing down into the Jordan valley ; thence up that valley
to a stone bridge across the Jordan which is standing in
good condition to this day ; 1 and thence along the ele
vated plateau east of the Jordan valley to Damascus.
During the last day's journey the road passes along the
eastern base of Mount Hermon, whose snow-capped
summit bounds the horizon on the left. The stQrm of
passion with which Saul started on this journey would
naturally have subsided in some degree during the four or
five days of travel, leaving him in a mood better suited to
the interview which Christ had made ready for him. (3)
And as he journeyed, it came to pass that he came nigh
unto Damascus : and suddenly there shone round about
him a light out of heaven : (4) and he fell upon the earth,
and heard a voice saying to him, Saul, Saul, why perse
cutest thou me ? Luke omits several important details
of the scene which he now describes, because thev are
supplied to his readers in two speeches which he quotes
from Paul farther on.2 It is proper that we also leave
them out of sight while we attempt to realize the scene
as Luke aims to set it before us. We are not here told
how Saul knew that the light which suddenly shone
1 See a description of this bridge in the author's Lands of the
Bible, 354.
2 Chap. xxii. 6- 10 ; xxvi. 12-18.

ix. 3-6.] ACTS. 171
around him was a " light out of heaven:" it is sufficient
to know that it was of such a character as to leave no
doubt on this point. It was of such a nature that when
it shone upon him "he fell upon the earth ;" and he was
too brave a man to be thus unnerved without an adequate
cause. That it was a miracle, he must have instantly
perceived ; and when the voice came, saying, " Saul,
Saul, why persecutest thou me ?" the word persecute con
veyed too plain a reference to his course toward the dis
ciples to be misunderstood. It was also unmistakably
manifest that the voice, as the light, came out of heaven ;
but who the speaker was, whether Stephen, or some
other disciple whom he had slain, or some other mys
terious personage, he could not know from these words,
so he immediately inquires who it is.
Vv. 5, 6. (5) And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And
he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest : (6) but
rise, and enter into the city, and it shall be told thee
what thou shalt do. It is impossible for us, who have
been familiar with the glory of the risen Christ from
infancy, to fully realize the thoughts and feelings which
flashed like lightning into the soul of Saul, on hearing
these words. Up to this moment he had held Jesus to
be an impostor cursed of God and man, and his fol
lowers blasphemers worthy of death ; but now this hated
being is suddenly revealed to him in a blaze of divine
glory. The evidence of eyes and ears can not be doubted.
There he stands,1 with the light of heaven and the glory
of God around him, and he says, " I am Jesus." Stephen
then was right, and I have shed innocent blood. " O
'That Saul saw Jesus, though not stated here, is expressly
stated by Ananias (17), by Barnabas (27), and by Saul himself
(I. Cor. xv. 8).

172 COMMENTARY. [ix. 5-9.
wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the
body of this death?" The die is cast. The proud
spirit yields, and the current of that mighty soul is
turned back in its channel, to flow forever deeply and
strongly in the opposite direction.
Vek. 7. At this point Luke reveals the fact that
Saul was not alone, and he mentions briefly the deport
ment ofthe men who were with him. (7) And the men
who journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing the
voice, but beholding no man. This is not the statement
of a writer who is conscious of inventing a story, and
taking care to bolster it up with fictitious evidence:
otherwise he would not have admitted that the only per
sons who could have been joint witnesses with Saul of
the presence of Jesus did not see him. The fact that
they did not, if he really appeared, can be accounted for
on one of only two suppositions ; either that Jesus pur
posely kept himself concealed from them while appear
ing to Saul; or that they failed, for some cause unmen-
tioned in the text, to turn their eyes in that direction.
The real cause will appear farther on.1 In the mean
time these companions, though not able to say who spoke
to Saul, were competent witnesses to the facts that the
light appeared, that a voice was heard from the midst of
it, and to the blindness of Saul which followed as an
immediate result.
Vv. 8, 9. But for the last words spoken by Jesus,
" Rise, and enter into the city, and it shall be told thee
what thou shalt do," Saul would not have known what
step next to take ; but having received this command,
he obeyed it as best he could. (8) And Saul arose from
the earth ; and when his eyes were opened, he saw noth-
1 See under chap. xxii. 9 ; xxvi. 14.

ix. 5-12.] ACTS. 173
ing : and they led him by the hand, and brought him
into Damascus. (9) And he was three days without
sight, and did neither eat nor drink. The words, " when
his eyes were opened," do not imply that they had been
closed from the instant that the light first appeared ; for
then he could not have seen Jesus. Moreover, had he
closed them then, the light would not have blinded him.
The narrative plainly implies that he gazed into the
light as long as he could endure the glare; and that he
closed his eyes when he could bear the pain no longer.
When he arose, which may have been after some mo
ments spent in an -effort to steady his nerves, he instinct
ively opened his eyes, and found himself blind. The
words, " they led him by the hand and brought him into
Damascus," imply that he and they were on foot, a very
common mode of journeying in those days, and not on
horses or camels, as imagination has so often painted
them. His abstinence from both food and drink can be
accounted for only by his extreme misery while brooding
over his awful crimes and waiting to be told what to do.
The three days are doubtless to be understood, according
io the Jewish count, as including the remnant ofthe day
in which he arrived, the following day, and so much of
the third day as had passed when he obtained relief.
2. Saul is Baptized, 10-19.
Vv. 10-12. The Lord purposely left Saul three days
in the throes of agony which his new convictions had
brought upon him, before telling him, according to
promise, what he should do. This delay fixed the atten
tion of all the unbelieving Jews who surrounded him,
and tried in vain to comfort him, upon the cause of his
distress and of his blindness ; and thus, as we shall see

174 COMMENTARY. [ix. 10-16.
below, a good purpose was subserved.1 The manner in
which relief was at last sent to him is now described.
(io) Now there was a certain disciple at Damascus,
named Ananias ; and the Lord said unto him in a vision,
Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord, (n)
And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go to the street
which is called Straight, and inquire in the house of
Judas for one named Saul, a man of Tarsus, for behold,
he prayeth ; (12) and he hath seen a man named Ananias
coming in, and laying his hands on him, that he might
receive his sight. In this communication the Lord
speaks to Ananias as if Saul were totally unknown to
him, and he reveals the fact, which we might have con
jectured, that in the midst of his remorse Saul was en
gaged in earnest prayer. The vision here mentioned
had been granted to Saul for the obvious purpose of
giving him hope that his eyesight would be restored;
and it was made to conform to that which actually oc
curred, in order that when it occurred Saul might see iu
the correspondence the hand of God. The street called
Straight is still unmistakably identified in Damascus by
its contrast with all the other streets of the city; for
while all the others are very crooked, making curves or
abrupt angles at intervals of from fifty to one hundred
yards, this runs nearly a mile with only five slight angles.
The mention of this street by name, together with the
name of Judas, in whose house Saul was staying, affords
no mean evidence of the authenticity of this narrative.
Vv. 13-16. This communication from the Lord im
posed on Ananias a very unwelcome task. (13) But
Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard from many of this
man, how much evil he did to thy saints at Jerusalem :
1 See under 19-22.

ix. 13-16.] ACTS. 175
(14) and here he hath authority from the chief priests
to bind all that call upon thy name. (15) But the Lord
said to him, Go thy way : for he is a chosen vessel unto
me, to bear my name before the Gentiles and kings, and
the children of Israel : (16) for I will show him how
many things he must suffer for my name's sake. Here
the term saints is applied to the disciples by Ananias
in a way to indicate that it had already acquired this
use, although this is the first occurrence of it in the New
Testament. It designates them as men of holy living.
The equivalent expression, them that" call on thy name,"
is also used for the same persons. The name referred to
is that of the Lord Jesus ; for it is he who holds the con
versation with Ananias. The latter speaks of Saul's
persecuting career in Jerusalem as a matter of hearsay
with himself, from which we infer that he was not one
of those who had fled from Jeru.salem after the death of
Stephen, but rather one who had been baptized there
during the peaceful period previous to that persecution.
How he had heard that Saul came to Damascus to bind
all who there called on the name of Jesus, when none
seemed to know this but the companions of Saul, is not
easily determined, unless we suppose that the apostles
who had remained in Jerusalem had sent runners ahead
of Saul's company, to warn the Damascus disciples of
the impending danger. This is highly probable.
Ananias found, as all others have who have ventured
to argue against a command of the Lord, that he listens
to no such argument. The answer, "Go thy way,"
settled this ; but the Lord vouchsafed to inform him that
he had placed an estimate on Saul far different from that
which any one would have supposed. In the figure of a
;( chosen vessel " to bear the name of Jesus before Gen-

176 COMMENTARY. [ix. 13-19.
tiles and kings and Israelites, he compares Saul to a
carefully selected casket, in which a jewel rich enough
for a present to a king is to be deposited, that jewel being
his own. precious name. Jewelers always keep costly
gems in caskets of corresponding value ; and so, when
Jesus is about to send his name to kings and the great
ones of earth, he chooses this persecuting Saul as the
fittest vessel in which to enclose it. The selection was
a most surprising one to Ananias ; but subsequent events
proved its wisdom. Long afterward Saul himself em
ployed the same figure of speech, having doubtless
caught it from the lips of Ananias ; but he changes it
materially, saying, " We have this treasure in earthen
vessels, that the exceeding greatness of the power may
be of God, and not of us." J While to Christ he was a
choice vessel, in his own eyes he was but a vessel of
pottery. Ananias was perhaps not much less surprised
when the Lord added, as showing a consequence of Saul's
being so choice a vessel, "I will show him how many
things he must suffer for my name's sake." This remark
fixes attention on the fact, observable in all of God's
dealings with the choice spirits of this earth, that when
he calls men to positions of high honor and distinguished
usefulness, he calls them to a life of suffering. This
proved afterward to be preeminently the case with Saul.
Vv. 17-19. By these words of the Lord the natural
fear of the persecutor, which made Ananias "object to go
ing to him, was removed. (17) And Ananias departed,
and entered into the house; and laying his hands on
him, he said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, who
appeared unto thee in the way which thou earnest, hath
sent me, that thou mayest receive thy sight, and be
1 II. Cor. iv. 6, 7.

ix. 17-19.] . ACTS. 177
filled with the Holy Spirit. (18) And straightway there
fell from his eyes as it were scales, and he received his
sight ; and he arose and was baptized ; (19) and he re
ceived food and was strengthened. It does not appear,
from the narrative how Ananias had learned that Jesus
had appeared to Saul on the way. It is most likely that
he had learned it from what was told by those who con
versed with Saul in the house of Judas, the report of it
having spread rapidly among the Jews of the city. He
addressed him with the endearing title, " brother," not be
cause he was a brother Israelite, but because he was now
a fellow believer, and in the way of obedience. That
which fell from his eyes, compared to scales, was un
doubtedly a deposit caused by the acute inflammation con-
' sequent upon the glare of the light from heaven. Ob
serve, too, that it was not something that merely appeared
to Saul as if it fell from his eyes, as some interpreters
would have it,1 but something which did so fall, as Luke
expressly declares. In the statement, "and he arose
and was baptized," there is an omission ofthe command
to that effect, which must have been uttered ; and this
is further proof that Luke has purposely abbreviated the
narrative. The omission is supplied in Paul's account
quoted at xxii. 14-16. The place ofthe baptism is like
wise omitted ; but the river Abana runs through the '
midst of the city, and affords abundant facilities for
baptism in itself, besides supplying many artificial pools
in the courts of the larger buildings.2
The statement of Ananias, that he had been sent that
Saul might " be filled with the Holy Spirit," is commonly
interpreted as implying that the Holy Spirit was to be
1 Lechler, Hackett, and others.
3 See Plumptre in loco, and Lands of the Bible, 551, 552, 558.

178 COMMENTARY. , [ix. 17-19.
imparted by imposition of hands.1 But we have seen
already that when the Samaritan converts of Philip
were to receive the miraculous gift of the Spirit, two
apostles were sent to them for the purpose of imparting
it, from which we inferred that Philip had not this
power. This makes us slow to believe that the power
was given to Ananias ; yet we would be shut up to this
conclusion if there were no alternative. There is> how
ever, an alternative which makes this conclusion not only
unnecessary, but highly improbable. We have learned,
from Peter's first discourse, that all who repented and
were baptized received the Holy Spirit ; and it follows
that Saul received the Spirit when Ananias baptized him.
This made his reception ofthe Holy Spirit dependent on
the coming of Ananias, and it sufficiently accounts for
the words of the latter, without resorting to the im
probable supposition that he was empowered to do that
which none but apostles could ordinarily do. Let it
also be observed at this point that Ananias was almost
certainly an unofficial disciple (verse 10), and that we
here have an example of a baptism by unofficial hands.
It shows that, whatever may be true as a matter of ordi
nary propriety, the validity of the ordinance by no
means depends upon its administration by an officer of
"the church, or a preacher.
The fact that immediately after his baptism Saul
"took food and was strengthened," implies that the re
morse which had led to his extreme fast had then passed
away ; and this agrees with the promise of remission of
sins in baptism. See more on this point under xxii. 16.
If now, before we leave this case of conversion, we
pause to distinguish the human and the divine in the
1 Plumptre, Gloag, Lechler.

ix. 17-19.] ACTS. 179
agencies by which it was effected, and their connections
one with the other, we shall better understand how Saul
was brought to Christ. The foremost characteristic of
this case is the fact that the Lord Jesus was himself the
preacher. It was his word proclaimed out of the light
from heaven, and proved to be divine by that miraculous
light in which he appeared, that made Saul a believer,
and brought him to repentance. Faith came, as in all
other cases, from hearing the word. But while the Lord
was the preacher, and while his word caused the sinner
to believe and repent, there was still something for the
sinner to do before finding peace, and for information
concerning this the Lord sends him to Damascus instead
of giving it himself. While waiting for this information,
although he suffers the keenest pangs of penitence, and
pours out his soul in prayer, his sins are still unforgiven,
showing that justification is not immediately consequent
upon faith and repentance. In this unhappy condition
he remains for three days, because no one has come to
tell him what to do. This is another peculiarity of his
case, no other convert of whom we read having ex
perienced a similar delay. The delay was the Lord's
doing ; for no one who could tell him what to do dared
to go near him, and the Lord had not yet sent Ananias.
As Saul knew not for whom to send, and as neither
Ananias nor any other disciple would come if left to
himself, a divine interposition was necessary, as in the
case of Philip's mission to the eunuch ; and so, instead
of sending an angel, as in that case, the Lord himself
spoke to Ananias. Thus a human messenger is made to
tell the sinner what to do, even after the Lord himself
has appeared to him, and the human messenger helps
him to do what he is told to do by baptizing him. When

180 COMMENTARY. [ix. 19-22-
he is baptized his grief and fasting are at an end, his sins
are forgiven, and here the story of his conversion comes
to an end.
3. Saul Preaches in Damascus, 19-25.
Vv. 19-22. No sooner had Saul obeyed the gospel
and received pardon than he began to devote all his
energies to building up what he had sought to tear down.
(19) And he was certain days with the disciples which
were at Damascus. (20) And straightway in the syna
gogues he" proclaimed Jesus, that he is the Son of God.
(21) And all that heard him were amazed, and said, Is
not this he that in Jerusalem made havoc of them who
called on this name ? and he hath come hither for this
intent, that he might bring them bound before the chief
priests. (22) But Saul increased the more in strength,
and confounded the Jews who dwelt in Damascus, proving
that this is the Christ. The " certain days " (fjfiepac,
nude:) of verse 19 are most naturally understood as
including the time of the preaching next mentioned;
and the " straightway " (eudicoc:) of verse 20, as starting
not from the close of the certain days, but from Saul's
baptism. Undoubtedly the very day he was baptized all
the disciples in the city gathered about him and took
him at once into their fellowship ; and on the very next
Sabbath, whether it was one day or six days later, he
began his preaching in the synagogue, this being his first
opportunity. It may be that some of the synagogues
were opened on other days of the week after he had begun
to preach, thus giving him more frequent opportunities
than the regular meetings allowed. The first effect of
this preaching was amazement to hear the man who had
" made havoc" of the church in Jerusalem, and had

ix. 19-22.] ACTS. 181
come to Damascus for a similar purpose, preaching the
faith which he had sought to destroy. The next effect
is that they were " confounded " by Saul's proofs that
Jesus is the Christ. In the words, " Saul increased the
more in strength," the comparison is with the strength
mentioned in 19 v., " he took food and was strengthened ;"
and the reference is to the restoration of his physical
strength after the exhausting fast and agony ofthe three
days previous. Such an experience would greatly en
feeble a very stout man, and he might be many days re
covering from its effects.
This preaching by Saul was a protracted effort to
convert to the faith the Jews who dwelt in Damascus ;
and although we have no evidence that any were con
vinced, they were at least " confounded." This was the
result of Saul's fresh and independent testimony to the
resurrection and glorification of Jesus. He had not,
like the original apostles, seen the Lord after his resur
rection and previous to his ascension, but he had seen
him descend from heaven in his glorified body, and his
testimony was fully equal to that which had been borne
by Peter. If any man in Damascus doubted his truth
fulness, his traveling companions could testify with him
to the reality of the light from heaven, and the voice
which proceeded out ofthe midst ofthe light, while his
own blindness, better known to the unbelievers than to
the believers, could not have resulted from conceiving
or telling a lie. If in any mind the thought arose that
he had been deceived by some optical or mental illusion,
it was dissipated by the consideration that the blindness
could not have resulted from such a cause. Thus the
blindness served to cut off all escape from the conclusion
that his report ofthe vision was true; and if the vision

-182 COMMENTARY. [ix. 19-22.
was a reality, there was no room to doubt that Jesus had
risen from the dead and ascended to heaven. The
blindness had been protracted, involving the delay of
his baptism mentioned above (p. 179), for the very pur
pose of fixing it in the minds of the people, and espe
cially in the minds ofthe unbelieving Jews, that it might
finally serve this important purpose. Such is the force
of his testimony as it appeared to those who heard him
in Damascus. To ourselves it stands thus : If the vision
which he claimed to have witnessed was a reality, then
Jesus is the Christ, and his religion is divine. His
blindness, which there can be no reason to doubt, pre
cludes the supposition that he was deceived. Was he
then a deceiver ? His whole subsequent career, as re
lated both by Luke and himself, declares that he was
not: for all the motives derived from both time and
eternity which can move men to deception were arrayed
against the course which he afterward pursued. His
reputation among men, his hopes of wealth and power,
his love of friendship, and his personal safety, all de
manded tbat he should maintain his former religious
position. In making the change he knowingly sacrificed
all of these, and, if he was practicing deception, he ex
posed himself to the punishment which he believed the
wicked would receive in eternity. It is possible to be
lieve that a man might, through miscalculation as to im
mediate results, begin to practice a deception involving
such consequences, but it is incredible that he should
continue to do so after his mistake was discovered, and
that he should persist in it through a long life. It is
incredible, therefore, that Saul was a deceiver;1 and as
1 It is evidence such as this which constrains the author of
' Supernatural Religion," one of the most radical infidel works

ix. 19-25.] ACTS. 183
he was neither deceived himself, nor a deceiver of others,
his vision must have been a reality, and Jesus who ap
peared to him is what he proved him to be, the Son of
God.1 Vv. 23-25. Saul now sees enacted in Damascus a
scene like some in which he had played a part in Jeru
salem, but with his own part reversed. He experiences
some of the ill treatment which he had heaped upon
others. (23) And when many days were fulfilled, the
Jews took counsel together to kill him : (24) but their
plot became known to Saul. And they watched the
gates also day and night that they might kill him : (25)
but his disciples took him by night, and let him down
through the wall, lowering him in a basket. From this
account it appears that when he heard of their plot he
hid himself; but his enemies, thinking that he would
try to escape through one of the gates of the city,
and that thus they would be sure of finding him
kept constant watch for him. This watching also
became known to his friends, which shows that they
too were on the watch, and they provided for him
another mode of escape. Along the eastern wall of
Damascus some of the houses are built against the wall,
with upper stories of wood resting on the top of the
published in England within the present generation, to say : " As
to the apostle Paul himself, let it be said in the strongest and
most emphatic manner possible, that we do not suggest the most
distant suspicion of the sincerity of any historical statement he
makes " (vol. iii. 496).
'Lord Lyttleton's small work on the conversion of Paul, in
which he proved the divine origin of the Christian faith from
this incident alone, has never been answered. The theories by
which Renan, Baur and Strauss have attempted to account for
Paul's belief that he saw Jesus, without admitting the fact, are
considered in my Evidences of Christianity, Part III., chap. xi.

184 COMMENTARY. [ix. 23-25.
wall ; and there are also a few such on the southern
wall.1 Out of a window in any of these a man might
now be let down in the way described in the text ;2 and
the same was doubtless true in ancient times. In case
of a siege, when the wall must be surmounted by
soldiers, these wooden superstructures could be torn
away in a few hours.
This attempt to kill Saul is the third effect of his
preaching on the unbelieving Jews. The first was
amazement that he should preach Jesus at all (21) ; the
second, confusion when they heard his testimony for
Jesus (22) ; and third, their plot to kill him. This last
effect was seen "when many days were fulfilled," an in
definite expression which might mean a few weeks, a few
months, or a few years. We learn from Saul's own
statement in Galatians (i. 17, 18), that his escape occurred
three years after his conversion, and that within this
period he had made an excursion into Arabia.3 How
1 Lands of the Bible, 559. 2 Cf. II. Cor. xi. 32.
3 Two contradictions are here alleged between Luke's account
and that of Paul's : first, that Luke's " many days " can not in
clude Paul '' three years ;" and second, that whereas Luke says
that Saul preached in Damascus " immediately," Paul says he
went "immediately into Arabia." As to the first, we may as
well say, that when Joshua remarks to the Israelites, " Ye dwelt
in the wilderness a long season " (Josh. xxiv. 7), while Moses
says they were there forty years, there is here a contradiction,
because a long season is not equal to forty years. Or, taking the
opposite expression, as well say of Job's remark, " Man is of
few days and full of trouble," that according to this men in Job's
days lived only a few days, contradicting the statement that Job
himself lived one hundred and forty years after his affliction (Job
xiv. 1 ; xiii. 16). The case of Shimei is still more in point. When
spared by Solomon on condition that he should not depart from
Jerusalem, he " dwelt in Jerusalem many days ;" yet he went out
of the city " at the end of three years " (I. Kings ii. 36-40). As

ix. 23-25.] ACTS. 185
far he had gone into Arabia, or how long he had re
mained there, he does not intimate; but he says that
after that excursion he returned to Damascus, and it is
easy to see that the attempt to kill him occurred
after this return. He also says that " the governor under
Aretas the king guarded the city of the Damascenes, in
order to take me " (IL Cor. ii. 32) ; which shows that
Damascus was then under the dominion of Aretas, who
for the second allegation, it is not true that Paul's language con
tradicts that of Luke. If we read it with the question in mind,
Does he say that he went immediately into Arabia ? I think we
shall answer that he does not. He says : " But when it was the
good pleasure of God, who separated me, even from my mother's
womb, and called me through his grace, to reveal his Son in me,
that I might preach him among the Gentiles; immediately I con
ferred not with flesh and blood : neither went I up to Jerusalem
to them who were apostles before me: but I went into Arabia;
and again I returned into Damascus " (Gal. i. 15-17). Here are
four statements : first, that he did not confer with flesh and blood ;
second, that he did not go up to Jerusalem to the older apostles;
third, that he went into Arabia ; and fourth, that he returned into
Damascus. "Which of these does " immediately " qualify ? Cer
tainly not the last ; for he did not immediately return to Damas
cus. And if not the last, why the third? These two are the
things which he did; and they are set over by the conjunction
"but" against the two things which he did not do. But does
"immediately" really qualify either of these directly? Did he
mean to say, I immediately did not confer? I immediately did
not go ? Or is there not something understood which immedi
ately qualifies more directly ? He is speaking of being called to
preach ; and what can he mean, but that he immediately com
menced preaching without conferring with flesh and blood, with
out going up to Jerusalem to confer with the apostles. That,
still further, in prosecution of this preaching, which he immedi
ately began, he went into Arabia, and returned again to Damas
cus, all of this, before he went up to Jerusalem to see Peter ? If
this is the train of thought in the passage, and it seems to yield
no other, then instead of contradicting Luke's assertion that he
preached immediately in Damascus, it confirms it.

186 COMMENTARY. [ix. 23-2S.
was king of Arabia, and that the Jews had his coopera
tion in the attempt to arrest Saul in the gates. Further
more, as Damascus was at that time under the king of
Arabia,1 the country south of and adjacent to it must
also have been overrun by his forces, and for the time
in which he held it it would be styled a part of Arabia.
Saul's excursion, then, may have been into this region
for the purpose of preaching in its cities and villages;2
1 Because there is no other historical account of this temporary
possession of Damascus by Aretas, Paul's statement of it has
been called in question ; but he was thoroughly well informed
concerning tbe political relation of the city at the time he was
preaching in it ; and as his statement is that of an eye witness,
and a thoroughly reliable man, no better authority for the fact
can be desired.
2 1 here quote from my Evidences of Christianity, Part III.,
chap. viii. : "The conjecture that Paul's excursion into Arabia
was not for the purpose of preaching, but for the purpose of
meditating on his new relations to Christ, and preparing himself
mentally for the work now before him, although it is adopted by
such men as Alford, Lightfoot and Farrar, appears to me to be
so utterly at variance with the restless activity and burning zeal
of the apostle, as to be altogether incredible. The addition to
this conjecture, that he went as far as Mount Sinai, more than
four hundred miles from Damascus, whither Elijah had retired
before him, instead of confirming the original hypothesis, seems
rather to weaken it ; for Paul knew very well that when Elijah
went thither he was rebuked by the Lord, who said, ' What doest
thou here, Elijah?' and that he was ordered back to his work.
In the absence of all evidence for this conjecture, we should be
governed in judging of the purpose of the excursion by what we
know of Paul's habits during the remainder of his life ; and by
this standard we should judge that he was one of the last men on
eanh to waste any precious moments, not to speak of a year or
two, in meditation in the desert, while the cause which he had
espoused was now struggling for its very existence. See the
views of Alford and Lightfoot in their commentaries on Gala
tians, and those of Farrar in his Life of Paul, chap. xi.

ix' 26-27.] ACTS. 187
and it may have been his activity in this work which
aroused the Jewish opposition to its highest pitch, and at
the same time enabled them to enlist the Arabian gov
ernor in their plot.
4. Saul Returns to Jerusalem, and is Sent to
Tarsus, 26-30.
Vv. 26, 27. The mortification of Saul at being com
pelled to thus escape from the scene of his first labors in
the gospel was long remembered to be mentioned many
years after when he would speak of the things which
concerned his weakness.1 He had not yet seen any of
those who were apostles before him, since he left them in
Jerusalem to go on his murderous mission to Damascus.
He now turns his steps in that direction, determined to
go up and see Peter.2 Early in the night's journey he
passed the spot were Jesus had met him. We shall not
attempt to depict his emotions when the walls of Jeru
salem and the battlements of the temple came once more
into view. As he approached the city, he saw the place
of the crucifixion, and he may bave passed near the spot
where Stephen was stoned, and where he himself had
stood " consenting to his death." He was about to meet
again, on the streets and in the synagogues, his old allies
whom he had deserted, and some of the disciples whom
he had persecuted. The tumult of his emotions we leave
to the imagination of the reader, and their portrayal to
the pages of more voluminous writers,3 while we follow
Luke's account of his reception among the disciples.
(20) And when he was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to
1 IT. Cor. xi. 30-33. 2 Gal. i. 18.
8 See especially Life and Epistles, by Conybeare and Howson;
and Farrar's Life of Paul.

188 COMMENTARY. [ix. 26, 27.
join himself to the disciples : and they were all afraid of
him, not believing that he was a disciple. (27) But
Barnabas took him and brought him to the apostles, and
declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way,
and that he had spoken to him, and how at Damascus he
had preached boldly in the name of Jesus. From this it
appears that at first " all the disciples were afraid of him,
not believing that he was a disciple ;" and that his
attempt to "join himself" to them was repulsed. How
ever painful this may have been to him, it was probably
not a surprise ; for how could he expect them to believe
him a genuine disciple, after experiencing what they had
at his hands ? It is scarcely possible that they had not
heard some report of his conversion ; but as they must
have supposed him capable of any device by which to
gain an advantage over them, it was impossible for them
except on the strongest evidence, to believe that his con
version was genuine. Barnabas was the first to become
fully convinced. Moved by the generous impulses
characteristic of him, he may have sought an interview
with Saul, or the latter, having some knowledge of
Barnabas, may have approached him as the one most
likely to grant him a candid hearing. In either case, it
would not be difficult for Barnabas to credit the unvar
nished story, told, as it must have been, with an earnest
ness and pathos which no impostor could assume. When
Barnabas was once convinced, it was easy for him to
convince the apostles, and for them to convince the
brethren. All this was probably the work of a single
day. Peter received him into the house where he was
then residing, and entertained him fifteen days.1 He
now had ample time and a good opportunity to learn
•GaLi. 18.

ix. 26-30.] ACTS. 189
from Peter's lips the whole story of the life of Jesus,
concerning which his previous knowledge must have
been very limited. " Of the other apostles," he says in
the same connection, " I saw none, save James the Lord's
brother." From this we learn that this James, though
not one of the twelve, was iu some sense regarded as an
apostle ; and Luke undoubtedly includes him, and per
haps others of similar rank among the brethren, in the
" apostles " to whom Barnabas brought Saul.1
Vv. 28-30. The brethren may have received Saul
with some misgiving, but the course which he pursued
must have won their confidence very soon. (28) And he
was with them going in and out at Jerusalem, (29)
preaching boldly in the name of the Lord : and he spoke
and disputed against the Grecian Jews ; but -they went
about to kill him. (30) And when the brethren knew
it, they brought him down to Caesarea, and sent him
forth to Tarsus. During his absence from Jerusalem
the persecution which he had led had so far subsided
that these foreign Jews were once more willing to debate
the questions at issue ; and in the intervals of his con
versations with Peter, Saul met them in discussion ; but
ere two weeks had passed they found their new opponent
equally invincible with Stephen ; and in the madness of
'The assertion made by Zeller (i. 299), following Baur and
other German infidels, that Luke contradicts Paul in saying
that Barnabas brought the latter to "the apostles," is based
on the double assumption that by the term apostles he means
all of the apostles, or the majority of them; and that the
term applies to none but the twelve. But Lightfoot, in his com
mentary on Galatians, has shown clearly that the term was ap
plied to various others, as Paul and Luke both apply it to James
the Lord's brother ; and this fact refutes the charge. See for this
use of the term, chap. xiv. 4, 14; Kom. xvi. 7; II. Cor. viii. 23;
chap. xi. 13 ; Phil. ii. 25 ; Rev. ii. 2.

190 COMMENTARY. ix. 28-30.
defeat they resolved that Stephen's fate should be his.
In this emergency the brethren found opportunity to
make amends for the suspicion with which they had at
first regarded him, by taking him away to a place of
safety. We learn from his own lips, farther on, that the
concern of the brethren for his personal safety was not
the controlling reason for his departure ; and that he had
a very strong desire to stand his ground in Jerusalem,
notwithstanding the purpose of the Jews to kill him.1
After reaching Caesarea, a short voyage on the Medi
terranean and up the Cydnus brought him to Tarsus, the
home of his childhood, and perhaps of his earlier man
hood. He returns to the friends of his early days, a
fugitive from two great cities, and a deserter from that
strictest of sects in which he had been educated ; but he
comes to bring them glad tidings of great joy. He dis
appears at this point from the pages of Luke, but he
does not go into inactivity. His own pen at a later date
fills this blank in the history, by informing us that he
went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, where he
preached the faith which he once destroyed.2 We shall
yet meet with brethren in both these countries, who
were doubtless brought to Christ by this preaching.3
We shall find reason to believe, also, that during this in
terval he encountered a portion of the sufferings which
he enumerates in the eleventh chapter of Second Corin
thians, and that before the close of it he experienced his
well known vision of paradise.4 While he is passing
1 Acts xxii. 18-21. 2 Gal. i. 21-24. s Acts xv. 40, 41.
4 The epistle in which he mentions this vision was written in
the year 57 ; and as the vision had been witnessed fourteen years
previous, its date was the year 43, which, as appears from the
chronology (Int. ix.) was the year in which Paul closed his labors
in Syria and Cilicia, and went with Barnabas to Antioch.

x. 28-31.] ACTS. 191
through these experiences, our historian introduces to us
some important and instructive scenes in the labors of
the apostle Peter.

SEC. III.— PETER PREACHES IN JUDEA, AND
IS SENT TO THE UNCIRCUMCISED.
(IX. 31 — XI. IS.)
1. The Church Enjoys Peace and Prosperity, 31.
Ver. 31. Our author makes the transition from the
labors of Saul to those of Peter, by stating the condition
of affairs which invited Peter to leave Jerusalem and go
abroad. (31) So the church throughout all Judea and
Galilee and Samaria had peace, being edified ; and, walk
ing in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy
Spirit, was multiplied. This time of peace had probably
begun before Saul's return to Jerusalem, and had been
interrupted by the persecution waged against him. Now
that he was gone, it was restored. It might have been
imagined by some that, as the church had sprung into
existence amid strife and persecution, it would languish
when opposition was withdrawn ; but its present pros
perity proved that it was not the obstinacy of human
passion, but the legitimate working of unchangeable
truth, which had brought it into existence. According
to Gamaliel's philosophy (v. 34-39), its claim to a divine
origin was now vindicated. The church was edified, in
the sense of being built up in Christian character ; and
multiplied, in the sense of very rapid increase of num
bers. It should be noticed that the term church, or con-

192 COMMENTARY. [ix. 31-35.
gregation, is here applied so as to include all the disci
ples in these three districts, the region of our Saviour's
personal labors. It is a secondary use of the word, the
whole body being contemplated as if congregated
together.1 2. Peter, Evangelizing, Comes to Lydda, 32-35.
Vv. 32-35. When the Lord ordered Saul away from
Jerusalem he said he would send him " far hence to the
Gentiles ;" but thus far no uncircumcised Gentiles had
been admitted into the church. Luke is now about to
show how Peter opened the gates of the kingdom for
their admission ; and he approaches the subject by re
counting the labors which led Peter to the spot where
the messengers who called him to this task found him.
(32) And it came to pass, as Peter went through all
parts, he came down also to the saints who dwelt at
Lydda. (33) And there he found a certain man named
.ffineas, who had kept his bed eight years ; for he was
palsied. (34) And Peter said unto him, Mnea.s, Jesus
Christ heals thee : arise and make thy bed. And straight
way he arose. (35) And all that dwelt at Lydda and in
Sharon saw him, and they turned to the Lord. From
this it appears that there were saints at Lydda before
Peter's arrival. They may have been baptized in Jeru-
aThe original (imAtjaia) is the common Greek word for an as
sembly of the people. It is used in this sense in chap. xix. 32,
39, 41, where it applies to an assembly of the people of Ephesus,
whether orderly or disorderly. It is unfortunate that it is not
everywhere translated congregation, as in the Geneva version, so
that the uninformed English reader would see its exact meaning.
Its figu,raiive use when applied to more than a single congregation,
as in the present instance, would then be apparent to every
reader as well as to the learned.

ix. 32-38.] ACTS. 193
salem during the early days of the church there ; or they
may have been brought in by Philip while he was
evangelizing from Azotus to Csesarea (viii. 40). It was
doubtless their presence in the town which led Petes, as
he was going "throughout all parts," to come thither.
The " all parts " referred to were the parts of Judea,
Galilee and Samaria, mentioned in the preceding verse ;
and the remark shows that before reaching Lydda Peter
had visited congregations in all of these districts. The
almost unprecedented effect of this one miracle, causing
the mass of the population of Lydda and of the sur
rounding plain of Sharon to turn to the Lord, is
attributable to two causes : first, the fact that the man
cured was, like the cripple cured at the Beautiful gate in
Jerusalem (iii. 10 ; iv. 22), a widely known victim of an
incurable disease j and second, the fact that the people,
like ripe fruit on a tree, which needs only a little shaking
to bring it down, were already most favorably inclined
to the truth.
3. Peter is Called to Joppa, 36-43.
Vv. 36-38. From the midst of these happy and ex
hilarating triumphs of the gospel, Peter was called to a
house of mourning in the city of Joppa. (36) Now
there was at Joppa a certain disciple named Tabitha,
which by interpretation 1 is called Dorcas : this woman
was full of good works and almsdeeds which she did.
(37) And it came to pass in those days, that she fell sick
'For the words, " by interpretation," which so frequently oc
cur in the English New Testament, we should have by transla
tion; for itis in every instance a matter of translation, and not
of interpretation. Here the name Tabitha, translated into Greek,
means Dorcas, and translated into English it means Gazelle.

194 - COMMENTARY. [ix. 36-38.
and died : and when they had washed her, they laid her
in an upper chamber. (38) And as Lydda was nigh unto
Joppa, the disciples, hearing that Peter was there, sent
two men to him, intreating him, Delay not to come on
unto us. Joppa has always been the principal seaport
of Judea,1 except during the comparatively short period
in which the artificial harbor constructed by Herod at
Csesarea was in use.2 It lies in a northwesterly direction
from Jerusalem, from which it is distant thirty-eight
miles by the macadamized road which now connects the
two cities. Lydda is some two or three miles north of
this road, and about twelve miles out from Joppa. The
old road to Jerusalem, which was used before the turn
pike was constructed, passed through Lydda, and entered
Jerusalem from the north, while the present road enters
it from the west. A walk of three hours brought the
two men with their sad message to Peter. We are left
by the historian entirely to conjecture as to the purpose
for which Peter's presence in Joppa was desired, whether
to minister comfort to the distressed little band of be
lievers, in the way which is the only one left to modern
preachers under such circumstances, or with the hope
that he would raise the sleeping saint from the dead. It
is more probable that the former was their thought ; for
it was not the custom of the apostles to bring back to
life their deceased brethren and sisters merely because
1 It is the port at which the rafts of cedar from Lebanon for Solo
mon's temple were landed (II. Chron. ii. 16) ; and also those for the
second temple (Ezra iii. 7) ; and it is the one from which Jonah
set sail, that he migh flee to Tarshish (Jonah i. 3). It now has a
population of between fifteen and twenty thousand, and is con
nected by regular lines of steamers, visiting it weekly, with all
the ports of the Mediterranean Sea.
2 See an account of it under chap. x. 1.

ix. 36-43.] ACTS. 195
they had been useful in their lives ; otherwise Stephen
and others who had been cruelly slain in the midst of
their usefulness would have been resuscitated. The
message to Peter, as we read it, was simply this : " Delay
not to come on unto us." Doubtless the whole story of
Dorcas was told to him ; for the hearts ofthe messengers
were full of it," and Peter had his own thoughts about it
as the three went on their way to Joppa.
Vv. 39-43. Death in that warm climate, where no
facilities exist for preserving dead bodies, is followed by
a speedy burial, usually before the close ofthe same day ;
and if Peter was to be there in time to witness the burial
of Tabitha, there was no time for delay. (39) And Peter
arose and went with them. And when he was come,
they brought him into the upper chamber : and all the
widows stood by him weeping, and showing the coats
and garments1 which Dorcas made while she was with
them. (40) But Peter put them all forth, and kneeled
down, and prayed ; and turning to the body, he said,
Tabitha, arise. And she opened her eyes ; and when
she saw Peter, she sat up. (41) And he gave her his
hand, and raised her up ; and calling the saints and
widows, he presented her alive. (42) And it became
known throughout all Joppa : and many believed on the
Lord. (43) And it came to pass, that he abode many
days in Joppa, with one Simon a tanner. Nothing could
be more graphic than this brief narration, or more touch
ing then the incident itself. Amid the march of impos
ing events which are moving before us, it drops in like
1 The two words rendered coats and garments (xiravag and
ifidria) mean tunics and mantles — the former the inner garment
then worn, which fitted jlose to the body, and the latter the
outer garment, which was loose and flowing.

196 COMMENTARY. [ix. 39-43.
a wild flower in a stately forest. It opens a vista
through the larger events of the history, lets light in
upon the social sorrows of the early saints, and discloses
a scene with the like of which our own experiences
have made us familiar. Here is the same tender care
for the lifeless body, the same distress felt by all, the
same desire for the presence of him who has been our
religious counselor; the same company of weeping
women, and of men standing by in mournful silence;
the same recounting with sobbing voices of the good
deeds done by the departed ; and, beyond all this to
which we are accustomed, a group of poor widows
holding up before Peter as he comes in the tunics and
mantles which Dorcas had made for them and their chil
dren while she was yet with them. What a memorial !
How much richer and more to be desired than monu
ments of marble and bronze covered with flattering
inscriptions ! Blessed are the dead who die in the
Lord ; and blessed are the living in whose softened
hearts is treasured at such an hour the remembrance
of such a life as Dcrcas had lived. As Peter stood there
for a moment in tearful silence, did he not seem to him
self to be standing once more at the tomb of Lazarus
by the side of his Master, and surrounded by the Jews
who wept with Mary and Martha ? But he remembers
that his compassionate Lord is now in heaven. With
deep solemnity he motions the mourners all aside. He
is left alone with the dead. He kneels down, and prays.
The prayer of faith he knows is heard. With a voice ol
authority, and yet of tenderness, a voice which can be
heard by the dead, he says to the cold body, " Tabitha,
arise." Her eyes open, and she sees Peter. Does she
recognize him, or is he a stranger to her ? We know

ix. 39— x. 2.] ACTS. 197
not. She sits up, and looks him in the face. Not an
other word passes between them ; but he gently gives
her his hand, and helps her to her feet. He calls in the
saints and widows, and there in her white shroud she
stands before them alive. Here the narration closes, as
well it might ; for not even Luke's graphic pen could
describe the scene which followed. And if the restor
ation of one saint to the little band which she has left
is indescribable, what shall we say or think of that hour
when all the sainted dead shall rise in glory and greet
one another on the shores of life? Is not this event in
Joppa intended to give us a slight foretaste of the joys
of the resurrection morning ? No wonder that this " be
came known throughout all Joppa,'- and that "many
believed on the Lord." Joppa was now a field white
for the harvest, and Peter found inviting work for many
days. He came to weep with those wvho wept ; he re
mained to rejoice with those who rejoiced.
4. Cornelius, a Gentile, Directed to Send for
Peter, x. 1-8.
Vv. 1, 2. The scene of the narrative changes from
Joppa to Csesarea,1 about thirty miles north ou the Medi-
1 This city was founded by Herod the Great for the purpose of
providing on the coast of Judea, which has no natural harbor, an
artificial one in which ships could anchor at any time of the
year. Its completion as a walled city, together with the com
pletion of the artificial harbor, was celebrated in the year 13 b c ;
and all the procurators of Judea after Pilate made it their seat of
government. After passing through many vicissitudes during
the centuries of war and desolation to which all Judea was sub
jected, it was finally destroyed in the year 1226. Since then its
harbor has silted up, the breakwater having long since crumbled
beneath the ceaseless wash of the waves, and it is now too shallow

198 COMMENTARY. [x. 1, 2.
terranean shore, and we are introduced to another case
of conversion, that of a Gentile and a soldier, (i) Now
there was a certain man in Caesarea, Cornelius by name,
a centurion of the band called the Italian band, a devout
man, and one that feared God with all his house, who
gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God always.
At first glance it might appear strange that a man whose
character is thus described should need conversion.
There are many men in the present day, in whose favor
not so much can be said, who flatter themselves that
their prospects for final salvation are good. They are
honest in their dealings, honorable in their intercourse
with men, good husbands and fathers, generous to their
neighbors, and benevolent to the poor ; what have they
to fear at the hands of a just and merciful God ? But
Cornelius was all this, and beyond this he was a devout
and prayerful man ; yet it was necessary for even him to
hear words whereby he might be saved (xi. 14). Our
self-righteous men of the world must then be deceiving
themselves. They forget that while they are discharg
ing in a creditable manner their obligations to their
fellow men, they are neglecting the much higher obliga
tion to render direct service to God by observing the
ordinances of his appointment. The most inexcusable
of all sins is a refusal to render to God, our Maker and
Redeemer, the homage which is his due. Moreover, in
acting thus we do great harm by our example to our
fellow-men, and most of all to those who love us most.
That Cornelius was an Italian, born and reared'in a
heathen land, is made almost certain by his Latin name,
for any sea-going vessels. Its ruins are among the most exten
sive and interesting in Palestine. For a decription of them the
reader is referred to the author's Lands of the Bible, p. 275 JT.

*• 1-6-] ACTS. 199
combined with the fact that he was an officer in an
Italian cohort. How then could he have acquired the
character which is here ascribed to him? No possible
heathen education could have imparted it to him. It
could be acquired only by contact with the Jewish peo
ple. From the very people, then, whom he was helping
to keep in subjection to the Roman yoke he had learned
the only true religion. With the exception of being un
circumcised, he stood before God as did any pious Jew
of that age, or of this, who had not accepted Christ.
Christ had now come in between all men and God, so
that there was no access to the forgiveness of sins except
through him, and we are to see how Cornelius was
brought to Christ, and through him to God.
Vv. 3-6. The first step taken in bringing this good
man to Christ is described in these words : (3) He saw
in a vision openly, as it were about the ninth hour of the
day, an angel of God coming in unto him, and saying to
him, Cornelius. (4) And he, fastening his eyes upon
him, and being affrighted, said, What is it, Lord ? And
he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are gone
up for a memorial before God. (5) And now send men
to Joppa, and fetch one Simon whose surname is Peter :
(6) he lodgeth with one Simon a tanner, whose house is
by the seaside.
The vision here described did not appear in a dream
or a trance ; but to a man wide awake, and, as we learn
farther on (30), engaged in prayer. That he observed
one of the Jewish hours of prayer (iii. 1), the hour of
evening incense, is additional proof that he owed his re
ligious character to Jewish instruction. The fear which
the visible presence ofthe angel excited was instinctive;
for there is no reason why men should fear angels or

200 COMMENTARY. [x. 1-6.
spirits ; yet all* men, even the most godly, have been
frightened when they have seen, or thought they have
seen, supernatural beings.
From a modern point of view the words of the angel
render it still more surprising (of. remarks under 1, 2)
that such a man should be made a special subject for
conversion. If, in addition to all that is said of his ex
alted religious character, his prayers were heard, and his
alms had gone up for a memorial before God, what did
he yet lack of salvation from sin ? Let a man with such
an experience as his appear before any church at the
present day, and say : " I have been for many years a
devout man, worshiping God as well as I knew how,
giving much alms to the poor, praying continually, and
teaching my household the fear of God. Yesterday
afternoon at three o'clock I was praying according to
my custom, when suddenly an angel stood before me,
and said, ' Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for
a memorial before God.' " Who would hesitate to pro
nounce him a thoroughly converted man ? He cer
tainly wa3 a convert from heathenism to Judaism, yet
the angel, as we learn from Peter's subsequent recital of
the facts (xi. 14), after telling him to send for Peter, ,
said, " He shall speak unto thee words whereby thou
shalt be saved, thou and all thy house." Though the
angel had spoken to him, and though God had heard his
prayers, he must yet hear words from a man's lips before
he will be saved. We must watch the narrative as it
continues, to see what words were spoken, and what they
contained that was so necessary.
Let us not fail to observe that here is the prayer of
a man not yet wholly converted to Christ, and that the
prayer is answered. But how different is the answer

x. 1-6.] ACTS. 201
from that which persons in a similar spiritual condition
are taught to expect in our own time. The angel does
not bring him word that his sins are forgiven ; nor does
he leave him rejoicing in the forgiveness of sins because
he is assured that his prayers are heard. Instead of
this, he is told to send for a man who will tell him what
he must do to be saved. If similar prayers were
answered now, who can doubt that the same God would
answer them in the same way, by telling the inquirer to
send for a preacher, or for some other disciple, who
would rightly instruct him?
It is interesting and instructive to observe that we
here have another instance of the intervention of an
angel in securing the conversion of a man. In comparing
the angel's work with that of the one who appeared in
the case ofthe eunuch (viii. 26), we observe that though
the latter appeared to the preachei, and the former to
the person to be converted, both appeared for essentially
the same purpose; that is, to bring the preacher and the
subject for conversion face to face. Thus we learn that
supernatural, interventions never superseded the indis
pensable work of the human agent. Even when the
Lord himself, as in the case of Saul's conversion, ap
peared to the sinner, the human agency was still indis
pensable, and the Lord himself directed Ananias to go
to the still un forgiven Saul. These facts can not be too
urgently pressed upon the attention of an age like ours,
in which they are totally ignored by the majority of re
ligious teachers. In all three of these instances the
supernatural intervention became necessary, because
without it the parties would not have come together at
all. Philip would not otherwise have known that there
was an Ethiopian on the road to Gaza ; Ananias would

202 COMMENTARY. [x. 1-16.
not have dared to approach Saul ; and Cornelius would
not have known that it was his privilege to send for
Peter. Vv. 7, 8. Although it was now late in the afternoon,
Cornelius did not hesitate to start three messengers at
once on the journey. (7) And when the angel that spake
unto him was departed, he called two of his household
servants and a devout soldier of them that waited onTiim
continually ; (8) and having rehearsed all things unto
them, he sent them to Joppa. Here it appears that the
religions zeal by which he had brought his household to
the fear of God (2) had reached out also to some of the
soldiers under his command. The soldier, in his Roman
uniform, was sent along as a protection to the two serv
ants ; for then, as now, the attendance of even a single
soldier, representing the supreme power of the empire,
was a protection to travelers.
5. Peter is Directed to Go to Cornelius, 9-23.
Vv. 9-16. The scene now changes again, and we
pass from Caesarea back to Joppa, where we left Peter
in the house ofthe tanner. Our author anticipates the
arrival of the messengers of Cornelius, by showing how
the Lord prepared Peter for a favorable reception of
their message. (9) Now on the morrow, as they were on
their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went
up upon the housetop to pray, about the sixth hour : (10)
and he became hungry, and desired to eat: but while
they made ready, he fell into a trance ; (n) and he be
held the heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending,
as it were a great sheet, let down by the four corners
upon the earth : (12) wherein were all manner of four-

x. 9-16.] ACTS. 203
footed beasts and creeping things of the earth and fowls
of the heaven. (13) And there came a voice to him,
Rise, Peter, kill and eat. (14) But Peter said, Not so,
Lord ; for I have never eaten anything that was common
and unclean. (15) And a voice came unto him again
the second time, What God hath cleansed, make not thou
common. (16) And this was done thrice : and straight
way the vessel was received up into heaven. Although
Peter was in a trance, he was btill completely at himself
in thought and feeling; hence the outgush of his char
acteristic impetuosity, when he answered the command
from heaven, " Not so, Lord." His thoughts went no
farther in justification of his boldness than the fact that
he had never in his life eaten anything unclean, as were
some of the things he was commanded to eat; but in
thus abstaining he knew that he was obeying a law which
God had himself given to his fathers, and he could not
at the instant take in the thought that God was now
abolishing one of his own laws. When the sheet and
the voice came to him the second and the third time, he
was silent ; for then he saw that God meant what he
said, and no man was ever more prompt to obey when a
command was understood. This vision came when Peter
was engaged in prayer, because then he was in the most
favorable mood for acquiescence in an unwelcome com
mand ; and when he was hungry, because the command
had reference to the legal distinctions concerning animal
food. He was on the housetop, because, in a small
house, with perhaps only two or three rooms, he could
find privacy better on- the roof than below. A battle
ment may have hidden him from the view of persons on
neighboring houses, if any were on their housetops in
the heat of the day.

204 COMMENTARY. [x. 17-20.
Vv. 17-20. The occurrence of this vision, and the
movements of the messengers sent by Cornelius, like
the journey of Philip and the movement of the eunuch's
chariot (chap. viii. 26, 27),. were wel^ timed by the
angels who had them in charge. (17) Now while Peter
was much perplexed in himself what the vision he had
seen might mean, behold, the men who had been sent by
Cornelius, having made inquiry for Simon's house,
stood before the gate, (18) and called, and asked whether
Simon, who was surnamed Peter, were lodging there.
(19) And while Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit
said to him, Behold, three men seek thee. (20) But rise,
get thee down, and go with them, nothing doubting : for
I have sent them. Peter could not fail to see that by
means of this vision God had abolished the legal dis
tinction between clean and unclean animals ; hence we
infer that his perplexity and his protracted thought on
the meaning of the vision had reference to something
else. That which was abolished was a prominent part
of God's law ; and he may have been perplexed as to
why it should be abolished. He may also have raised
the question whether the rest of the law was also to be
abolished; if so, this would perplex him still more.
But he was not left very long in doubt; for in the skill
ful adjustment of the vision to the movements of the
messengers of Cornelius, the latter had now arrived, and
found the right house, and the Holy Spirit in Peter re
veals to him that three men are below seeking for him,
and bids him go with them. It is not necessary to think
tbat Simon's house was outside the city, because, as
many of the commentators have supposed,1 hi-> business
'This supposition is based exclusively on the statement of
rabbis of a later age ; but there is nothing in the law of Moses

x. 17-24.] ACTS. 205
was considered unclean ; for, whatever may be true as
to that, his tannery may have been outside the walls
while his residence was inside.
Vv. 21, 22. As Peter goes down stairs to meet the
men whose arrival was so strangely made known to him
he is still perplexed as to the meaning of the vision ;
but he soon begins to see a meaning in it which he had
not suspected. (21) And Peter went down to the men,
and said, Behold, I am he whom ye seek : what is the
cause wherefore ye are come ? (22) And they said, Cor
nelius a centurion, a righteous man, and one that feareth
God, and well reported of by all the nation of the Jews,
was warned of God by a holy angel to send for thee into
his house, and to hear words from thee. Connecting
this message, sent by the order of a " holy angel," with
the vision, and with the command of the Spirit to go
with the men, nothing doubting, Peter now in an instant
sees that he is called by divine authority, through the
angel, through the vision, through the Spirit, to do what
he had always before thought sinful, to go into the house
of a Gentile, and to speak to him the word of the Lord.
Nothing less than an unmistakable divine call could
have induced him to do this; but now he has no alter
native unless he would withstand God. He now sees
what he afterward expressed so happily, that he was to
call no man common or unclean (25)..
6. The Meeting op Peter and Cornelius, 23-33.
Vv. 23, 24. The messengers themselves were most
probably Gentiles, and the soldier certainly was; and
under ordinary circumstancps Gentiles could scarcely
to justify it, and it is not at all certain that the business was re
garded as unclean by the Pharisees of the apostolic age.

206 COMMENTARY. [x. 23-29.
have found entertainment in the house of Simon the
tanner. But his mind and that of Peter were suf
ficiently moved in the right direction by what had
already occurred, to remove all hesitation about receiv
ing them to the hospitalities of the house. (23) So he
called them in and lodged them. And on the morrow he
arose and went forth with them, and certain of the
brethren from Joppa accompanied him. (24) And on the
morrow they entered into Caesarea. And Cornelius was
waiting for them, having called together his kinsmen
and his near friends. Peter did not start for Csesarea as
promptly as Cornelius had started his messengers to
Joppa. He may have waited to the next day in order
that the brethren who were to go with him, six in num
ber (chap. xi. 12), might get ready ; or because the place
at which they had to spend the night on the way was at
such a distance as to make it best to start in the morn
ing. Cornelius knew the time that the journey would
require, and so, with military promptness, he had a select
audience ready and waiting. Notice, this audience was
not composed of a miscellaneous crowd, but of kins
men and near friends of Cornelius, who were doubtless
invited to be present because of their known interest in
the object for which they came together.
Vv. 25-29. It was not without emotion that Peter
first approached the door of a Gentile's house, and it
must have been with the deepest emotion that Cornelius
first met the man for whom he had sent in obedience to
the command of an angel. An overpowering sense of
humility marked the deportment of the soldier, while
the apostle bore himself with an easy dignity, which
nothing but a noble nature and a high calling could have
imparted to a fisherman. (25) And when it came to pass

x. 25-29.] ACTS. 207
that Peter entered, Cornelius met him, and fell down at
his feet, and worshiped him. (26) But Peter raised him
up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man. (27)
And as he talked with him, he went in, and findeth
many come together : (28) and he said unto them, Ye
yourselves know how that it is an unlawful thing for a
man that is a Jew to join himself or come unto one of
another nation ; and yet unto me hath God showed that
I should not call any man common or unclean : (29)
wherefore I came without gainsaying when I was sent
for. I ask therefore with what intent ye sent for me.
Cornelius worshiped Peter only in the sense of paying
him that homage which, according to oriental custom,
was due to one of greatly superior rank. The term is
frequently used in this sense, and his know lege of the
true God forbids the supposition that he intended to pay
divine honors to a man. He was moved to this homage
in consideration of the high esteem in which Peter
seemed to be held by the " holy angel." But Peter, not
knowing his man as yet, could not know that only this
kind of homage was intended,1 and hence his remark
" I myself also am a man." Peter's explanation of his
departure from Jewish custom in entering the house of a
Gentile shows that he now clearly understood the vision
as including men in its scope ; and his remark, based
upon this understanding, was satisfactory to his hearers
without the recital of the vision itself. The messengers
had told him for what purpose he was sent for, but
he thought it proper to have a statement of this pur
pose from the parties themselves, before proceeding
further.

1 See Matt. ii. 2, 8 ; viii. 2 ; ix. 18 ; xiv. 33 ; xv. 25 ; xviii. 26 ;
xx. 20.

208 COMMENTARY. [x. 30-33-
Vv. 30-33. Peter's inquiry was addressed to the
company at large, but Cornelius was the proper person
to answer it, and he did so in a most direct and satis
factory manner. (30) And Cornelius said, Four days
ago, until this hour, I was keeping the ninth hour of
prayer in my house ; and behold, a man stood before me
in bright apparel, (31) and saith, Cornelius, thy prayer
is heard, and thine alms are had in remembrance in the
sight of God. (32) Send therefore to Joppa, and call
unto thee Simon, who is surnamed Peter ; he lodgeth in
the house of Simon a tanner, by the seaside. (33) Forth
with therefore I sent to thee, and thou hast well done
that thou art come. Now therefore we are all present
here in the sight of God, to hear all things that have
been commanded thee of the Lord. His first remark in
this answer shows that according to the mode of counting
then prevalent, it had been four days since the appear
ance of the angel, although, according to our own
method, as we can see by counting back, it was precisely
three days. He here styles the being who had spoken
to him " a man in bright apparel," but he evidently
recognized him by the communication which he brought,
if not by the peculiar brightness of his apparel, as an
angel, as he is styled by Luke (3), and by the messen
gers (22). The last statement in the answer shows that
the whole company had assembled in the conscious pres
ence of God, for the express purpose of hearing, and of
hearing as they should hear it, the message from God
with which Peter was charged. When such an audience
is assembled to hear such a preacher, the results most to
be desired are sure to follow.

x. 34-39.] ACTS. 209
7. Peter's Sermon to the Uncircumcised, 34-43.
Vv. 34, 35. The occasion furnished Peter a mos/
happy introduction to the remarks which he had to sub
mit, and like a trained rhetorician, which he was not, he
proceeded to make use of it. (34) And Peter opened his
mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no
respecter of persons ; (35) but in every nation he that
feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is acceptable to
him. The expansive thought here expressed was suf
ficient, in Peter's mind, to burst asunder the exclusive
bonds of the Mosaic covenant ; and it should be sufficient
now to dispel from the minds of men the equally exclu
sive theory of an arbitrary predestination of certain men
and angels to their eternal destiny. It is a positive and
inspired declaration that God respects not persons, but
character. To fear him and work righteousness, and not
any other distinction between persons, is the ground of
acceptability with him. ¦»
Vv. 36-39. As we have observed above, the experi
ence which Cornelius had now related to Peter is such
as would secure him instant recognition as a Christian
among modern Protestants ; but Peter was so far from
thus regarding it, that he proceeds to preach to him the
words whereby he might be saved ; and first, as on Pen
tecost, he briefly describes the personal career of Jesus.
(36) The word which he sent unto the children of Israel,
preaching good tidings of peace by Jesus Christ (he is
Lord of all), that saying ye yourselves know, (37)
which was published throughout all Judea, beginning
from Galilee after the baptism which John preached;
(38) even Jesus of Nazareth, how that God anointed him
with the Holy Spirit and with power : who went about

210 COMMENTARY. [x. 36-41.
doing good, and healing all that were oppressed by the
devil; for God was with him. (39) And we are wit
nesses of all that he did both in the country of the Jews,
and in Jerusalem ; whom they slew, hanging him on a
treei From the words, "ye know," with which this
recital is introduced, we learn that the personal career of
Jesus was already known to Cornelius and his friends ;
and that they were acquainted with the " good tidings
of peace " which Jesus had preached to the children of
Israel. Peter rehearses the story for the apparent pur
pose of confirming their belief in it by the assertion that
he and his companions were witnesses of it all. That of
which the auditors were as yet ignorant was their own
interest in the message of peace, which had been looked
upon as intended for Israel alone.
Vv. 40, 41. The crowning fact of the gospel comes
next in the narrative, as it did in the sermon on Pente
cost. (40) Him God raised up the third day, and gave
him to be manifest, n»t to all the people, (41) but unto
witnesses that were chosen before of God, even to us who
did eat and drink with him after he arose from the dead.
Here, by way of commending the evidence of the resur
rection, Peter states to his hearers a fact which has been
so differently construed by unbelievers as to be made a
ground of objection ; that is, that the witnesses were
chosen beforehand. He says that they were chosen by
God ; but he doubtless has reference to their choice by
the Lord Jesus. Whether Peter or the unbelievers are
right in this, depends entirely on the grounds of the
choice. If they were chosen because of their willingness
to testify without regard to facts, or because of the ease
with which they might be deceived, it might be rightly
regarded as a suspicious circumstance. But the reverse

x. 40, 41.] ACTS. 211
is true in both particulars. Such was the situation of
the witnesses that there was imminent danger to both
property and person in giving their testimony, and there
fore every motive to dishonesty prompted them to keep
silence. They were also the least likely of all men to
be deceived, because of their long and intimate familiar
ity with him who was to be identified. On the other
hand, if he had appeared to all the people, a large ma
jority of them would have been unable to testify with
entire certainty to his identity. Peter, then, was right ;
for the fact ihat such witnesses were chosen beforehand
proves that no deception was intended ; but that, on the
contrary, the aim was to provide the most reliable wit
nesses then living.1 To Cornelius the testimony of Peter
to what had been done was ample, from the fact of his
having been warned of God by a holy angel to send for
Peter; and the company had already declared themselves
ready to hear all things that had been commanded him
by the Lord (33).
1,1 If their point had been to have their story believed,
whether true or false, or if they had been disposed to present
their testimony, either as personal witnesses or as historians, in
such a manner as to render it as specious and unobjectionable
as they could— in a word, if they had thought of anything but
the truth of the case as they understood and believed it— they
would, in the account of Christ's several appearances, at least
have omitted this restriction. At this distance of time, the ac
count as we have it is perhaps more credible than it would have
been in the other way, because this manifestation of the his
torian's candor is of more advantage to their testimony than the
difference in the circumstances of the account would have been
to the nature of the evidence. But this is an effect which the
evangelists could not foresee, and is one which by no means
would have followed at the time when they wrote" (Paley, Evi
dences of Christianity).

212 COMMENTARY. [x. 42, 43.
Vv. 42, 43. Having now sketched the career of
Jesus, and stated the evidence of his resurrection, Peter
proceeds in regular order to the next historical fact, the
giving of the apostolic commission. (42) And he charged
us to preach to the people, and to testify that this is he
who is ordained of God to be the judge of quick and dead.
(43) To him bear all the prophets witness, that through
his name every one that believeth on him shall receive
remission of sins.
The command to preach to the people was expressed
in the commission (Mark xvi. 15), and that they were to
" testify that this is he who is ordained of God to be the
judge of quick and dead " was implied in the preface to
the commission, " All authority hath been given unto me
in heaven and on earth " (Matt, xxviii. 18). Before
this, however, in the lifetime of Jesus, he had declared
to the Jews that all judgment was given to him, and
that the Father would judge no man (Jno. v. 21, 22).
In the promise of remission of sins (43) we must not
overlook the force of the words, " through his name."
The promise is to every one who believeth on Jesus, but
it " is through his name " that the promise is to be made
effective. These very persons were a little later com
manded to be baptized " in the name of Jesus Christ "
(48) ; and all are baptized " into the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit " (Matt, xxviii.
19). This perfectly harmonizes with Peter's command
in his first sermon, "Repent and be baptized every one
of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of
sins ;" and the passage by no means supports the doctrine
of justification by faith onlv. Peter's reference to the
prophets as the witnesses for cms promise is a surprise,
especially as it occurs immediately after his reference to

X. 42-46.] ACTS. 213
the apostolic commission in which was the most explicit
statement of it. His probable purpose was not to indi
cate a primary reliance on the prophets, but to show
that instead of being a new promise coming from Jesus
alone, it was an old one taught generally in the Old
Testament.
8. The Uncircumcised Receive the Holy Spirit
and are Baptized, 44-48.
Vv. 44-46. Peter's sermon was interrupted and broken
off by an incident that stands alone in apostolic history,
and was a great surprise to Peter and his Jewish com
panions. (44) While Peter yet spake the words, the
Holy Spirit fell on all them who heard the word. (45)
And they of the circumcision who believed were amazed,
as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gen
tiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit.
(46) For they heard them speak with tongues, and mag
nify God. The ground of amazement to the Jewish
brethren was not the mere fact that these Gentiles re
ceived the Holy Spirit ; for if Peter had finished his dis
course, promising them the Holy Spirit on the terms
which he had laid down on Pentecost, and had then
baptized them, these brethren would have taken it as a
matter of course that they received the Spirit. And
if, after this, he had laid hands on them and imparted
the miraculous gift of the Spirit, as in the case of the
Samaritans, they would not have been so greatly sur
prised. The considerations which caused the amaze
ment were, first, that the Holy Spirit was "poured out"
upon them directly from God, as it had never been before
011 any but the apostles ; and second, that this unusual gift
was bestowed on Gentiles. This second circumstance

214 COMMENTARY. [x. 44-16.
will be explained in discussing the design of this miracle
under verses 47, 48, below. The fact that this gift of
the Spirit was manifested by the miracle of speaking in
tongues J distinguishes it from that gift of the Spirit
promised to all who repent and are baptized (ii. 38) ;
and the fact that it came directly from heaven, without
the imposition of apostolic hands, distinguishes it from
such gifts as that bestowed on the Samaritans, and that
afterward bestowed on prominent members of many
churches.2 We have no event with which to classify it
1 It is a matter of surprise to find so judicious a commentator
as Plumptre expressing himself on this miracle as follows : " As
there is no mention here of the utterance of praise being in any
other language than those with which the speakers were familiar,
there is no ground for assuming that this feature of the Pente
costal gift was reproduced, and the jubilant ecstatic praise which
was the essence of that gift must be thought of as corresponding to
the phenomena described in I. Cor. xiv. 7-9." It is less sur
prising to fiud Meyer expressing in substance the same opinion.
They both overlook the fact to which Alford calls attention, that
Peter, in describing the incident afterward, says : " God gave unto
them the like gift as he did also unto us " (chap. xi. 17), thus
identifying it with the gift of tongues bestowed on Pentecost. As
Luke has once described speaking in other tongues on Pentecost,
and showed thatmen of these other tongues understood the speak
ers, it was but natural that in his second reference to the same
phenomenon he should use a briefer form of expression; and if,
by "speaking in tongues," he does not mean other tongues than
were natural to the speakers, his words are without meaning."
Tlie supposition that either this phenomenon or that mentioned
in the fourteenth chapter of First Corinthians was mere "jubi
lant ecstatic praise," not uttered in any human tongue, is to sup
pose tliat these inspired persons spoke nonsense; and it is far
more likely that the nonsense is with those who adopt this
supposition. See Alford's notes on the latter passage, and on
Acts ii. 4.
2 See xix. 1-7; I. Cor. i. 4-6; xiv; Gal. iii. 1-6; I. Thess. v.
19, 20.

x. 44-46.] ACTS. 215
except the gift bestowed on the apostles on Pentecost ; and
thus it is actually classified by Peter farther on (xi. 15,
16). He says: " As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit
fell on them, even as on us at the beginning. And I
remembered the word of the Lord, how that he said,
John indeed baptized in water, but ye shall be bap
tized in the Holy Spirit." In these words he identifies
it as a baptism in the Holy Spirit ; and these two are the
only events that are thus designated in the New Testa
ment. The one was the divine expression of the
admission of the first Jews into the new Messianic
kingdom, and the other, that of the first Gentiles.
The baptism of Cornelius and his friends in the Holy
Spirit previous to their baptism in water bas been urged
as evidence that remission of sins takes place before bap
tism. It could furnish such evidence if remission of
sins was simultaneous with the miraculous gift of the
Spirit ; but such is not the case. In every other instance
of a miraculous gift, remission of sins preceded it. This is
true ofthe apostles on Pentecost, for they had long before
been accepted disciples of Christ ; it is true of the Sa
maritans, for they had been baptized by Philip before
the apostles sent Peter and John to them to impart the
miraculous gift ; it is true of the twelve disciples in
Ephesus, to whom Paul imparted this gift after he had
baptized them (xix. 1-7) ; and it is true of all in the
Corinthian church who had received similar gifts (I. Cor.
i. 4-7 ; xii. 1-7). In none of these instances w-as it
connected with remission of sins ; therefore such a con
nection can not be assumed in the present instance. If
it be thought incongruous that this miraculous power
should be manifested in persons whose sins are not for
given, let it be remembered that it was a miracle wrought

216 COMMENTARY. [x. 44-48.
upon these persons for a purpose external to themselves
(see below under 47, 48); and that, although they were
unpardoned, they were godly persons according to Jew
ish faith. There is no greater incongruity, if the thought
of incongruity could be tolerated at all, in their receiving
a momentary miraculous gift of the Spirit, than in the
previous mission of an angel to Cornelius to assure him
that his prayers were heard and that his alms were had
in remembrance by God.
This incident in the conversion of Cornelius can not
in any way be held as a precedent for subsequent ages;
for it was certainly a miracle, and no miracles are now
wrought. We may as well expect sinners now to see an
angel, as Cornelius did, before their sins are forgiven, as
to receive the Spirit as he did.
Vv. 47, 48. The true explanation of this unusual
circumstance, though given most fully in Peter's speech
recorded in the next chapter (xi. 15-18), is clearly im
plied in the following words : (47) Then answered Peter,
Can any man forbid the water, that these should not be
baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit as well as
we ? (47) And he commanded them to be baptized in the
name of Jesus Christ. Then prayed they him to tarry
certain days. There are two ways of ascertaining the
purpose of an incident: the purpose may be stated; or
we may learn what it is by the use which is made of it.
Here there is no statement of the purpose of the gift of
the Spirit ; but Peter, who knew the purpose, plainly
indicates what it was by the use which he makes of it.
He uses it to remove from the minds of his Jewish com
panions any doubt which they might still entertain as to
the propriety of baptizing Gentiles. This, then, is the
purpose for which the miracle was wrought. Further-

x. 47, 48.] ACTS. 217
more, we find Peter using it afterward in Jerusalem, to
remove the same doubts from the minds of the Jewish
brethren there (see last citation). Unquestionably, then,
this was its purpose ; and herein we find the reason why
no such event as this ever occurred afterward, or is now
to be expected; for when it was once demonstrated
that uncircumcised Gentiles might be baptized, the ques
tion was settled forever, and needed not to be settled
again.1 Before he was interrupted, Peter had proceeded with
his discourse so far as to reach the subject of faith and
the remission of sins ; and baptism would have been the
next word on his lips if he had continued according to
the model of his sermon on Pentecost. The inter
ruption, however, did not break the thread of his dis
course ; it only enabled him to advance with still greater
confidence to the very conclusion which he had intended ;
for he first demands of the brethren whether any one
could forbid baptism, and then commands the Gentiles
to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Let us now
recall the fact that Cornelius had been directed to send
for Peter to hear words whereby he and all his house
should be saved (xi. 14). Peter has come, and spoken
these words. He has i.o?d the company of Christ, in
whom they now believe. He has told them to be bap
tized, and it has been doae. What the pious, prayerful,
and almsgiving Cornelius hmA bcked of being a Christian
1 On this point Dean Plumptre exwosses himself in the follow
ing satisfactory manner: " The exceptional gift was bestowed iu
this instance to remove the scruples which 'those, of the uncir
cumcision' might otherwise have felt as to admitting Gentiles,
as such, to baptism ; and having served that purpose, as a cru
cial instance, was never afterwards, so far as we know, repeated
under like conditions" (Com. in loco).

218 COMMENTARY. [x. 47— xi. 3.
has now been supplied, and nothing has been required
of him but to believe in Cbrist and be baptized. This
closes the account of another conversion, and it coincides
in essential details with all that have gone before it in
this narrative.
We should be glad^to know more of Cornelius, so as
to judge whether, even in times of peace, the profession
of arms was considered by the apostles compatible with
the service of the Prince of Peace. He is the only
soldier of whose conversion we have an account in the
New Testament, and of his subsequent career we know
nothing. Not many years afterward the army in which
he held a commission visited a most cruel and unjust
war upon the Jews, and whether he continued in the
service through that period we can never know in this
life. Let it be noted, however, that this is an instance
of a soldier becoming a Christian, not of a Christian be-
beeoming a soldier. It furnishes a precedent for the
former, but not for the latter.
9. Peter's Defense for these Proceedings, xi.
1-18.
Vv. 1-3. The novel and startling scene which had
transpired in Csesarea was soon reported abroad, (i)
Now the apostles and the brethren that were in Judea
heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of
God. (2) And when Peter was come to Jerusalem, they
that were of the circumcision contended with him, say
ing, (3) Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst
eat with them. While the persons who made this com
plaint against Peter are called " they of the circum
cision," and are not said to include any of the apostles,
it is clearly implied that the apostles, who in the first

xi. 1-17.] ACTS. 219
verse are said to have heard of Peter's proceedings, had
not expressed any approval of it. They doubtless
thought and felt as the brethren did who made the
complaint. They are now to be enlightened on the sub
ject, as Peter had been, and the method in which it was
accomplished is very instructive.
Vv. 4-17. (5) But Peter began, and expounded the
matter unto them in order, saying, I was in the city of
Joppa praying : and in a trance I saw a vision, a certain
vessel descending, as it were a great sheet let down from
heaven by four corners ; and it came even unto me : (6)
upon which when I had fastened my eyes, I considered,
and saw the four-footed beasts of the earth, and wild
beasts, and creeping things and fowls of the heaven. (7)
And I heard also a voice saying unto me, Rise, Peter ; kill
and eat. (8) But I said, Not so, Lord : for nothing com
mon or unclean hath ever entered into my mouth. (9)
But a voice answered a second time out of heaven, What
God hath cleansed, make not thou common. (10) And
this was done thrice ; and all were drawn up again into
heaven. (11) And behold, forthwith three men stood
before the house in which we were, having been sent
from Caesarea unto me. (12) And the Spirit bade me go
with them, making no distinction. And these six breth
ren also accompanied me ; and we entered into the man's
house : (13) and he told us how he had seen the angel
standing in his house, and saying, Send to Joppa, and
fetch Simon, whose surname is Peter : (14) who shall
speak unto thee words, whereby thou shalt be saved,
thou and all thy house. (15) And as I began to speak,
the Holy Spirit fell on them, even as on us at the begin
ning. (16) And I remembered the word of the Lord,
how that he said, John indeed baptized in water ; but ye

220 COMMENTARY. [xi. 4-18.
shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit. (17) If then God
gave unto them the like gift as he did also unto us, when
we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I, that I
could withstand God ? In this speech Peter confines
himself to a careful recital of those incidents mentioned
in the preceding chapter which came under his own
observation, and to the conclusion which he deduces
from them. His argument is, that after seeing the
vision, hearing the voice, and receiving the order of
the Spirit to go with the men sent for him, he properly
went into the man's house ; and that when he saw that
the Gentiles whom he had begun to address were bap
tized in the Holy Spirit, he could not withstand God.
By this last remark, taken in its historical connection,
he certainly meant that he would have been withstand
ing God had he refused to baptize the persons, or had
he made a difference in other respects between them and
Jews. He does not mention the act of baptizing them,
neither had it been mentioned by the complainants.
The latter had mentioned only the offense of going into
the house of Gentiles, and eating with them, leaving
out the much graver fault of baptizing them, because,
if the former were wrong, much worse was the latter.
This was a case in which the less included the greater.
In his answer, Peter in express terms justified going into
the house, and, by a necessary implication, the act of
baptizing them.
Ver. 18. The facts rehearsed by Peter had the same
effect on the minds of the objectors that they had on
that of Peter. (18) And when they heard these things,
they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then
to the Gentiles also hath God granted repentance unto
life. Instead of being bigots, as they are sometimes

xi. 18.] ACTS. 221
said to have been, these Jewish brethren, who had been
hitherto untaught on the relation of uncircumcised per
sons to the Church of God, accepted the truth as soon as
they heard it ; and they accepted it not murmuringly, as
men who were forced to its acceptance, but joyfully, as
men who were glad to be relieved from a conviction which
had caused them anxiety. They not only " held their
peace," but they " glorified God " for what they had
learned. In this section of the history we have a striking ex
ample of one of the ways in which the apostles were led
into all the truth, according to the Lord's promise (Jno.
xvi. 13). Peter did not know by virtue of his inspira
tion that the uncircumcised were to be admitted to
baptism ; neither did the other apostles, after Peter had
baptized some uncircumcised persons, know by virtue of
their inspiration that he had done right. As a matter
of course, the Holy Spirit could have illuminated all of
their minds internally on this as on any other topic;
but it chose, instead of this, to adopt a different method.
By visions addressed to his eye, a voice addressed to his
ear, messages sent to him through the command of an
angel, reinforced by just one command from the Holy
Spirit, Peter was guided into this new truth ; and by a
verbal account of the same to his brethren, the latter
were brought to the same light. The latter indeed were
convinced by the same facts which convinced Peter ; the
only difference being that the facts reached Peter
through direct observation, while they reached the
others through the words in which Peter recounted them.
In precisely this way the power of all Scripture facts
reaches the minds and hearts of men at the present day,
and thus the Holy Spirit operates on us through the

222 COMMENTARY. [xi. 18-21.
word. This method had an obvious advantage in the
instance before us in that, the other brethren, both in
spired and uninspired, were not dependent on Peter's
statement of an inward revelation to himself on this
important subject, a method which might have left some
in doubt ; but they could see as clearly as Peter did the
force of the evidence which convinced him. The con
sequence was that amid all the controversies which after
ward disturbed some sections of the church in connection
with circumcision, no doubt was ever afterward inti
mated of the propriety of baptizing uncircumcised
Gentiles.

SEC. IV.— A CHURCH FOUNDED IN ANTIOCH,
AND ANOTHER PERSECUTION
IN JERUSALEM.
(XI. 1© — XII. 25.)
1. Beginning of the Wore in Antioch, 19-21.
Vv. 19-21. Our author, in pursuance of the plan of
this part of his work, now turns back once more to the
dispersion of the Jerusalem church, and surveys rapidly
another section of the wide field before him. (19) They
therefore that were scattered abroad upon the tribulation
that arose about Stephen, traveled as far as Phoenicia,
and Cyprus, and Antioch, speaking the word to none
save only to Jews. (20) But there were some of them,
men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who, when they were come
to Antioch, spake unto the Greeks also, preaching the
Lord Jesus. (21) And the hand of the Lord was with
them : and a great number that believed turned unto the

xi. 19-21.] ACTS. 223
Lord. From these verses we learn that while Philip
was preaching in Samaria, Saul in Damascus and Arabia,
and Peter, a little later, in all parts of Judea, Samaria
and Galilee, other brethren were evangelizing among
the Jews as far north as Phoenicia, the island of Cyprus*
and the famous city of Antioch, the last being their
farthest point in that direction. In preaching to " none
save only to Jews" these brethren were but following
the example of the apostles, until Peter opened the door
to the Gentiles, as described in the last section. The
statement that some of these, when they came to Antioch,
preached also to the Greeks, limits this latter preaching,
as respects the places named, to Antioch. It was not
till they reached Antioch that they began to preach to
Greeks. It appears also that these men came to Antioch
at a latter period than did those who spoke only to Jews.
It is clearly implied that something had taken place in
the interval to cause this change ; and as the last pre
ceding series of events mentioned by Luke is connected
with the baptism of Gentiles by Peter, he seems to have
desired his readers to infer that this latter event preceded
the preaching to Greeks in Antioch. This probability
is reduced almost to certainty when we look to the
chronology of these events. It is well ascertained that
the death of Herod, mentioned in the twelfth chapter,
occurred in the year 44 A. D. ; and we learn from our
present chapter that Barnabas and Saul labored together
in Antioch one whole year previous to that event (26).
Barnabas brought Saul to Antioch, then, in the year 43;
and the statements of verses 22-25 below imply that the
lormer had not been many months in Antioch before he
went for Saul ; consequently, Barnabas must have been
sent from Jerusalem not earlier than the latter part of

224 COMMENTARY. [xi. 19-21.
the year 42. But he was sent as soon as the brethren in
Jerusalem learned of the successful preaching in Antioch ;
and consequently we must conclude that the latter part
of this preaching, that to the Greeks, had not taken place
earlier than the early part of 42, or the last of 41 ; and
as the baptism of Cornelius occurred in 40 or 41, this
event preceded the preaching to Greeks in Antioch.1
Thus the conclusion which is naturally suggested by the
order of Luke's narrative is that which the closest
investigation establishes, that uncircumcised Gentiles were
not baptized until after Peter opened the door to them
in Csesarea. But while Peter's work opened the way,
this work in Antioch was the first vigorous invasion of
the Gentile world by the advanced forces of the Lord's
army. The preaching in Phoenicia here mentioned, suggests
the origin of the churches which are afterward found
there ; 2 and the fact that the preachers who first spoke
to Greeks in Antioch were from Cyprus and Cyrene
suggests the probability that they had first done some
preaching in their own homes, before going upon these
foreign missions. This they had an abundance of time
to do, in the five or six years which had passed since the
death of Stephen. It is possible, as many have sug
gested, that Simon of Cyrene, who bore the cross of
Jesus part of the way to Golgotha, was one of these
Cyrenian preachers. In the words, "a great number
that believed turned unto the Lord," we have a recogni
tion of the fact that turning to the Lord is a different
act from believing, and subsequent to it. As in iii. 19,
where turning to the Lord follows repentance, the
1 See the Chronology of Acts, p. xxviii. a Chap. xv. 3 ; xxii. 3,
4 ; xxvii. 3.

xi. 19-24.] ACTS. 225
specific reference is to baptism, which is the turning act.
An equivalent expression, used elsewhere, would be, a
great number " believed and were baptized." l
2. Barnabas is Sent to Antioch, 22-24.
Vv. 22-24. Jerusalem was still the center and base
of operations, being the headquarters of the apostles.
The latter kept watch over all the movements of the
other preachers, and sent help or counsel according to
circumstances. Even when no apostles were present in
the mother church, they doubtless made provision for
such oversight by other competent persons. (22) And
the report concerning them came to the ears of the church
which was in Jerusalem : and they sent forth Barnabas
as far as Antioch : (23) who, when he was come, and
had seen the grace of God, was glad ; and he exhorted
them all, that with purpose of heart they should cleave
unto the Lord : (24) for he was a good man, and full of
the Holy Spirit and of faith : and much people was add
ed unto the Lord. It is not often that Luke pronounces
an encomium on persons of whom he speaks, as he does
here on Barnabas ; but it was proper tbat the selection
of the latter for this important mission should be justi
fied by mention of the noble qualities which led to
the choice. The purpose of his mission can be learned
only by the work which he did in Antioch ; and from
this we learn that it was somewhat different from that of
the mission of Peter and John to Samaria. It was not
to impart miraculous spiritual gifts, which Barnabas had
not the power to impart ; but to do that for wbich
Barnabas was famous, and from his superiority in which
he had derived his present name — to exhort the brethren
1 Chap, xviii. 8.

226 COMMENTARY. [xi. 22-26,
to cleave unto the Lord. The brethren in Jerusalem
well knew the need of such exhortation to young disci
ples, and they sent for the purpose their best exhorter.
Observe, too, that while he was exhorting the brethren,
many who were not brethren became such. After men
are convinced that Jesus is the Christ, they are very fre
quently brought to repentance and obedience by hearing
exhortations addressed to the disciples.
3. Barnabas Brings Saul to Antioch, 25, 26.
Vv. 25, 26. Barnabas seems to have been engaged
but a short time in these labors, when he felt the need
of help more efficient than that of his predecessors, if
they were still present, and for reasons not stated in the
text his thoughts turned toward Saul, the former perse
cutor, whom he had befriended in Jerusalem. All that
he knew of Saul's work since the brethren in Jerusalem
had sent him away to Tarsus was the report which had
come to Jerusalem : " He that once persecuted us now
preacheth the faith of which he once made havoc"
(Gal. i. 23) ; unless he had heard more since coming to
Antioch, which is quite probable. At any rate, of all
the men who were accessible to him, Saul was his choice
for the work which was now opening in this great city,1
1 1 can not introduce the city of Antioch to the reader unac
quainted with its history so well as by quoting the following
graphic description of it by Farrar : " The queen of the East, the
third metropolis of the world, this vast city of perhaps five hun
dred thousand souls must not be judged by the diminished,
shrunken and earthquake-shattered Antakieh of to-day. 'It was no
mere oriental town, with flat roofs and dingy, narrow streets, but a
Greek capital, enriched and enlarged by Eoman magnificence. It
is situated at the point of junction between the chains of Lebanon
and Taurus. Its natural position on the northern slope of Mount

xi. 25, 26.] ACTS. 227
and so we read : (25) And he went forth to Tarsus to
seek for Saul. (26) And when he had found him, he
brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass that
even for a whole year they were gathered together with
the church, and taught much people ; and that the disci
ples were called Christians first in Antioch. The united
labors of two such men for a whole year, in a community
to which the gospel had already been favorably intro
duced, could not fail of great results ; and the ultimate
results were far beyond any hope which they could then
have entertained ; for they were now erecting as it were
the second capital of the Christian world, whence were
Silpius, with a navigable river, the broad, historic Orontes, flowing
at its feet, was at once commanding and beautiful. The windings
of the river enriched the whole wooded plain, and as the city was
but sixteen miles from the shore, the sea breezes gave health and
coolness. These natural advantages had been largely increased
by the lavish genius of ancient art. Built by the Seleucidse as
the royal residence of their dynasty, its wide circuit of many
miles was surrounded by walls of astonishing height and thick
ness, which had been carried across ravines and over mountain
summits with such daring magnificence of conception as to give
the city the aspect of being defended by its own encircling moun
tains, as though these gigantic bulwarks were but its natural
walls. The palace of the kings of Syria was on an island formed
by an artificial channel of the river. Through the entire length
of the city, from the Golden or Daphne gate on the west, ran for
nearly five miles a grand corso, adorned with trees, colonnades
and statues. Originally constructed by Seleucus Nicator, it had
been continued by Herod the Great, who, at once to gratify his
passion for architecture and to reward the people for their good
will towards the Jews, had paved it for two miles and a half with
blocks of white marble. Broad bridges spanned the river and its
various affluents; baths, basilicas, villas, theaters clustered on
the level plain, and, overshadowed by picturesque and rugged
eminences, gave the city a splendor worthy of its fame as only
inferior in grandeur to Alexandria and. Rome."

228 COMMENTARY. [xi. 25, 26.
sent forth not long afterward the most fruitful missions
of the apostolic age.
The new name which here and now originated proved
the most potent name that has ever been applied to a
body of men. The question, who originated it, whether
Barnabas and Saul, or the disciples of Antioch, or the
unbelievers of Antioch, has occasioned more discussion
than its importance justifies. To an untrained reader of
the Greek it might appear that the passage should be
rendered, " they were gathered together with the church,
and taught much people, and called the disciples Chris
tians first at Antioch," thus representing Barnabas and
Saul as the authors of the name ; but this rendering is
condemned, and that of our text is justified by the almost
unanimous judgment of scholars. To call the followers
of Christ Christians is so obviously proper and natural
that it might have occurred to almost any one acquainted
with the Greek language ; and this renders it difficult to
decide whether it was given by unbelievers, or by the
disciples themselves. In favor of the former supposition
is the fact that bodies of men very commonly receive
the names by which they are permanently known from
others ; but the supposition adopted by many, that this
name was given by the enemies of the faith in derision,
is groundless, as is very clear from the consideration
that there is nothing in it belittling or contemptuous.
It is just such a name as a number of grave and dignified
friends of the cause, had they been sitting in council on
the subject, may have adopted. For its divine approval,
we need no other assurance than that found in its accept
ance by the apostles. True, in the only later occurrences
of it in the New Testament, it appears as the name by
which the disciples were called, rather than that by

xi. 25-30.] ACTS. 229
which they called themselves ; l but it is only natural that
in tbe epistles, which are all addressed to Christians, other
and more intimate titles should be usually employed.2
4. Barnabas and Saul are Sent to Judea,
27-30.
Vv. 27-30. As the husbandman annually exchanges
the labor of tillage for that of gathering in his harvest,
so Barnabas and Saul, after a year's toil in preaching
and teaching, laid aside that work for awhile, in order
to bear some of the fruits of the benevolence wbich they
had cultivated to the suffering in another country. (37)
Now in those days there came down prophets from Jeru
salem unto Antioch. (28) And there stood up one of
them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that
there should be a great famine over all the world : which
came to pass in the days of Claudius. (29) And the dis
ciples, every man according to his ability, determined to
send relief unto the brethren who dwelt in Judea : (30)
which also they did, sending it to the elders by the hand
of Barnabas and Saul. This is the first mention of the
gift of prophecy among the disciples, but Agabus and his
companions seem to have been already well known as
prophets, which shows that their gift had been previously
exercised. The conduct of the brethren at Antioch
shows also that the predictions uttered by these prophets
were implicitly believed ; for they did not wait till the
predicted famine had actually set in, but they made pro-
1 See chap. xxvi. 2S, where it is found in the lips of king
Agrippa II. ; and I. Peter iv. 16, were Peter uses it as the name
under which the disciples were persecuted.
2 For a discussion of the significance and value of names for the
followers of Christ, see Excursus, Vol. II.

230 COMMENTARY. [xi. 27-30.
vision for it in advance. This prompt action on their
part, which seems to have been spontaneous, and not to
have sprung- from exhortations by Barnabas and Saul, is
the more to their credit, from the consideration that the
famine was to extend over their own country, and the
world generally, as well as over Judea. Had they been
characterized by the selfishness of our own age, they
would have said, Let us see first how severe the famine is
going to be with ourselves and our immediate neighbors ;
and then, if we have anything to spare, we will send it to
our more distant brethren. They indulged in no such
selfish parleying ; but, knowing that in the crowded
population of Judea, where there was more poverty at
best than in the region around Antioch, which was made
rich by foreign trade, a famine would be more distress
ing than here, they determined at once to take the
risk for themselves, and to make sure at all hazard of
relieving their poorer brethren. It is clear that they
understood the wonderful benevolence of the Jerusalem
church, not as a fanatical outburst of communism, but
as an example to be imitated under like circumstances
by all Christians. Barnabas and Saul could well afford
to suspend for a few weeks their work of preaching and
teaching for the purpose of promoting a benevolent
enterprise such as the world had seldom or never wit
nessed before. There is no preaching so eloquent as
that which sounds out from whole-hearted benevolence.
The manner in which the elders of the churches in
Judea are here mentioned, without a previous notice of
their having been appointed, shows the elliptical char
acter of Luke's narrative, and it results from the cir
cumstance that he wrote after the churches had been
fully organized, and all of the officials and their duties

xi. 27-30— xii. 1, 2.] ACTS. 231
had become well known. The elders, being the rulers of
the congregations, were the proper persons to receive the
gifts, and to see to the proper distribution of them among
the needy.
5. James is Beheaded and Peter is Imprisoned,
xii. 1-11.
Vv. 1, 2. The historian does not follow Barnabas
and Saul in their tour of the churches of Judea, but,
leaving them in this work, he turns into Jerusalem, and in ¦
troduces a thrilling episode concerning affairs then trans
piring in that city, (i) Now about that time Herod the
king put forth his hand to afflict certain of the church.
(2) And he killed James the brother of John with the
sword. The persecutions which we have hitherto noticed
were conducted by religious partisans in Jerusalem,
without assistance from the civil rulers; but here is one
in which the reigning prince is the leader, while the old
enemies of the truth are working behind the curtain, if
at all. This Herod was a namesake of Agrippa, the
noted minister of Augustus Csesar whose life by Tacitus
is one of the noblest of Latin classics, and he was com
monly called Agrippa. He was a grandson of the Herod
by whom the infants of Bethlehem were slaughtered,
and a nephew of Herod the Tetrarch by whom John the
Baptist was beheaded. He grew up in Rome, where he
wasted what fortune he had inherited in princely ex
travagance ; but while doing so he contracted an intimacy
with Caius Csesar, afterward the notorious Emperor
Caligula. When the latter ascended the throne after the
death of Tiberius, he elevated his friend Agrippa to a
small kingdom composed of part of his grandfather's
dominions, which was subsequently enlarged by Claudius

232 COMMENTARY. [xii. 1-2.
until it included all of the territory ruled by the first
Herod. He was now in the zenith of his power, and
was living in the utmost magnificence.1 There is not a
hint as to the exciting cause of this murder ; and there
are so many causes which may have instigated it that
conjecture in regard to it is vain. A more profitable
subject for reflection is the very singular fact that God
could so soon spare from the world and the church one
of the apostles, when he had only twelve ; for this death
occurred only about ten years after the death of Jesus.
Surely James had accomplished but a very small part of
the work which had been assigned to him and his fellow
apostles in the great commission, when God permitted
his life to be suddenly and cruelly cut off. How striking
an illustration of the oft-repeated saying, that God's
ways are not as our ways. And how distinctly must
James have remembered, when his head was placed on
the block, what Jesus had predicted of himself and his
brother John on a memorable occasion when their am
bition got the better of them.2 By this time he under
stood better than then what it is to sit on the right hand
of Jesus in his kingdom.
The death of James, the first apostle who suffered
martyrdom, must have been a source of indescribable
grief to the church in Jerusalem; and to an uninspired
historian it would have furnished matter for many pages
of eloquent writing : what shall we think, then, of Luke
as a writer, who disposes of it in a sentence of seven
words in Greek, represented by eleven in English?
Surely there is an indication here of some supernatural
'For a full and most interesting account of his career, see
Josephus' Antiquities, Books xviii., xix.
2 Matt. xx. 20-28.

iii. 1-5.] ACTS. 233
restraint upon the impulses of the writer, and it is
accounted for only by his inspiration.
Vv. 3-5. A man engaged in a wicked enterprise is
often made timid by conscience when left to himself;
but when applauded by the multitude he is emboldened
to press forward in his mad career. Agrippa may have
hesitated when he had shed the blood of an apostle — a
crime which none of the previous persecutors in Jeru
salem had dared to perpetrate; but when the people
applauded he hesitated no longer. (3) And when he saw
that it pleased the Jews, he proceeded to seize Peter also.
And those were the days of unleavened bread. (4) And
when he had taken him, he put him in prison, and de
livered him to four quarternions of soldiers to guard him ;
intending after the passover to bring him forth to the
people. (5) Peter therefore was kept in the prison, but
prayer was made earnestly of the church unto God for
him. Evidently the king was seeking the destruction of
the Jerusalem church, as the Pharisees, under the leader
ship of Saul, had done before ; but, in contrast with
their method, he sought to accomplish his purpose by
beheading the leaders, rather than by persecuting the
members. He doubtless congratulated himself on the
wisdom of the new method, when he had succeeded in
slaying one apostle, and in locking up, ready for execu
tion, the chief man of them all. He must have heard
of a previous imprisonment of the twelve, and of their
escape from the prison in the night without the knowl
edge of the guards (v. 17-23) ; so he determined to im
prove upon the method of confinement then adopted, as
well as upon the general method of the persecution.
Not content with confining Peter in a prison whose outer
gate was of iron (10), he added a guard of sixteen

234 COMMENTARY. [xii. 3-11.
soldiers, some of whom he placed in front of that gate
(6), and some at two distinct points between the gate
and the cell in which Peter was confined (10). Finally,
to make surety doubly sure, he had him bound with
two chains to two soldiers, between whom he slept (6).
When all these precautions had been taken, he doubtless
said to the chief priests, I will show you how to keep a
prisoner. Let him get out of my hands, if he can.
In the earnest prayer which the church was now
making for Peter, the brethren were but following the
example of the apostles themselves at the time of their
first persecution (iv. 23-30). We have reason to believe
that they were not praying for his release ; for they well
knew that without miraculous interposition this was im
possible ; and as God had not thus rescued James, they
had no reason to believe that he would thus rescue Peter.
Moreover, when he was released, as we see below (13-15),
they were so far from expecting it or hoping for it, that
they could not at first believe it, as they would have
been ready to do had they been praying for it. It was
most natural under the circumstances that their petition
to God should take a different direction ; for, remem
bering how Peter had once faltered in the presence of
imminent danger, and fully expecting that he would now
be required to face the block, they had good cause to
pray that his faith and courage might not fail him in the
final crisis, but that, like Stephen and like James, as
we may suppose, he might glorify the Lord by a tri
umphant death.
Vv. 6-11. Time wore away in painful suspense until
the last night of the Passover week, and this night was
to the brethren the most painful one of all ; but though
Peter was undoubtedly expecting to die the next morn-

xii. 6-11.] ACTS. 235
ing, he seems to have slept as soundly as the soldiers to
whom he was chained. (6) And when Herod was about
to bring him forth, the same night Peter was sleeping
between two soldiers, bound with two chains : and guards
before the door kept the prison. (7) And behold, an
angel of the Lord stood by him, and a light shined in
the prison cell : and he smote Peter on the side, and
awoke him, saying, Arise up quickly. And his chains
fell off from his hands. (8) And the angel said unto
him, Gird thyself, and bind on thy sandals. And he
did so. And he said unto him, Cast thy garment about
thee, and follow me. (9) And he went out, and fol
lowed ; and he knew not that it was true which was done
by the angel, but thought he saw a vision. (10) And
when they were passed the first and second ward, they
came unto the iron gate that leadeth into the city;
which opened to them of its own accord, and they went
out, and passed on through one street ; and straightway
the angel departed from him. (11) And when Peter was
come to himself, he said, Now I know of a truth, that
the Lord hath sent forth his angel, and delivered me out
of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the
people of the Jews. It is no wonder that Peter thought
he was dreaming while this deliverance was being ac
complished, or that it required the sight of the moon 1
and stars above him, and of the houses around him, to
convince him that he was actually out of prison. No
miracle more complicated or more unexpected had ever
been wrought.
1 As the paschal lamb was eaten at the time of full moon, being
the night between the fourteenth and fifteenth day of the lunar
month, and as this deliverance was on the seventh night after
ward, the moon was just a week past tlie full ; and as this was
the dry season, it was almost certainly visible.

236 COMMENTARY. [xii. 12-16-
6. Peter Leaves the City, and the Guards are
Slain, 12-19.
Vv. 12-16. After coming to himself Peter was not
long in deciding what to do. Either because the house
of Mary was the nearest among the homes of tbe disci
ples, or because of the well known character of its in
mates, or both, he went immediately thither. (12) And
when he had considered the thing, he came to the house
of Mary the mother of John whose surname was Mark ;
where many were gathered together and were praying.
(13) And he knocked at the door of the gate,1 and a
maid 2 came to answer named Rhoda. (14) And when
she knew Peter's voice, she opened not the door for joy,
but ran in and told that Peter stood before the gate. (15)
And they said unto her, Thou art mad. But she con
fidently affirmed that it was even so. And they said,
It is his angel. (16) But Peter continued knocking :
and when they had opened, they saw him, and were
amazed. Mary was not only the mother of Mark,
doubtless the Mark of the second Gospel, but also an
aunt of Barnabas (Col. iv. 10). She was apparently a
widow in good circumstances financially, and her
commodious house was a place of resort for the brethren
1 " The door of the gate," though an unmeaning expression
with us, is strictly accurate as here used ; for the entrance to large
houses in Palestine is through large folding gateways, wide
enough for loaded animals to pass in, while, for the admission of
persons when the large gate is closed, there is a small door
through one of the folds of the gate, just large enough to admit
one person at a time.
2 The Greek word, naiSio-Kij, here rendered " maid," commonly
means a young female slave. Whether slave or hired servant,
Ehoda seems to have been in full sympathy with the ininates of
the house in regard to Peter.

xii. 12-17.] ACTS. 237
of the church. The many who were gathered together
there that night were by no means all the church, as
some writers suppose ; for the church was at this time
far too numerous to be collected in a single private resi
dence. This was probably one of many houses in which
brethren were gathered together praying on what all
supposed to be the last night of Peter's life. Few nights
more solemn had ever been experienced by the brethren
of that oft persecuted church. The unwillingness of
those in Mary's house to believe the words of Rhoda,
and their amazement when they saw Peter with their
own eyes, were but natural under the circumstances;
and doubtless the same incredulity was manifested by
other groups of brethren in the city, as the news gradu
ally came to them during the rest of the night, and early
the next morning. The thought, before they saw him,
that it must be his angel, is based on the supposition
that every man has an angel, which is a true Scriptural
idea ; r and that this angel might sometimes assume the
voice and personal appearance of his ward, which is
doubtless a superstition.
Ver. 17. The deliverance of Peter by the angel was
a clear indication that it was God's will that he should
flee from his enemies, and his plans to this end were
promptly formed. His visit to the house of Mary was
for the purpose of relieving the anxiety of his brethren ;
but the greatest secrecy was necessary in order to pre
vent his plans from being frustrated, so his stay at Mary's
house was but momentary. (17) But he, beckoning unto
them with his hand to hold their peace, declared unto
them how the Lord had brought him forth out of the
prison. And he said, Tell these things unto James and
1 Matt, xviii. 10; Heb. i. 14.

238 COMMENTARY. [xii. 17-19.
to the brethren. And he departed, and went to another
place. Silence was necessary in order to prevent arousing
some of the neighbors, who might learn what was going
on and report to the authorities. James, and the brethren
generally, were to be told of the release, in order that
their anxiety for Peter both now and on the morrow
might be allayed. The manner in which James is men
tioned shows that he, since the death ofthe elder James,
and in the absence of Peter, was the chief man of the
church. The probability is that this was not James the
sons of Alphseus, one of the twelve, but James the
Lord's brother.1 The " other place " into which Peter
now went was doubtless some other place than Jeru
salem ; for in the latter it would be very difficult for
him to safely hide himself. He purposely avoided tell
ing the brethren where he was going, so that they could
truthfully say, if questioned, that they did not know;
and it is by no means certain that Luke had learned
where it was when he wrote this narrative. When
Peter appeared in Jerusalem again there was doubtless
great curiosity among friends and foes alike to know
where he had been concealed ; but prudence even then
may have suggested that he should keep the secret to
himself. Vv. 18, 19. Naturally the morning light brought
great confusion to the soldiers ; first to the two between
1 He is the James who was associated with Peter in Jerusalem
at the time of Paul's first visit to the city after his conversion
(Gal. i. 19) : and also with Peter and John, as the context in
Galatians would indicate, in the conference about circumcision
(chap. ii. 91 ; and at this time, intermediate between the two, it
is a fair presumption that we have the same James. Of the
apostle James, Acts furnishes us no information after the first dis
persion of the Jerusalem church.

xii. 18, 19.] ACTS. 239
whom he had been chained, and afterward to them all.
Herod, too, was surprised and chagrined. He learned
that he had no more skill in keeping apostles imprisoned
than had the chief priests before him. (18) Now as soon
as it was day, there was no small stir among the soldiers,
what was become of Peter. (19) And when Herod had
sought for him, and found him not, he examined the
guards, and commanded that they should be put to death.
And he went down from Judea to Caesarea, and tarried
there. According to the strict letter of Roman military
law, the execution of the soldiers was a necessity. When
those standing in front of the gate were examined, we
can see that the only answer they could give was, We
kept our post all night, we remained wide awake, and no
one passed in or out of that gate. When the man who
kept the key of the iron gate was called, he truthfully
said that it had not been out of his hand, nor had it
been placed in the lock. The two guards between the
outer door and Peter's cell were positive that no one had
passed by them during the night; and the two to whom
Peter had been chained could only say, When we went
to sleep he was here with the chains all secure, and when
we awoke he was gone ; and that is all we know. Of
course none of these statements could be true unless a
stupendous miracle had been wrought; and there was
absolutely no alternative, but to admit the miracle, or to
hold that all of the soldiers had conspired together to
voluntarily release the prisoner. The last horn of the
dilemma could not be accepted by any sane man, seeing
that the soldiers knew perfectly well that their lives
would pay the forfeit of such a release. It seems then
impossible to believe that Herod doubted the reality of
the miracle, or the truthfulness of the soldiers ; but he was

240 COMMENTARY. [xii. 18-23.
determined not to admit the miracle, and he deliberately
chose in preference to murder sixteen innocent men.
There was not a man in Jerusalem who could doubt the
true state of the case when the facts became known. No
wonder that the bloody wretch soon left the scene of so
foul a crime, and made Csesarea his place of residence.
7. The Death op Herod, and the Return op
Barnabas and Saul, 20-25.
Vv. 20-23. Our author continues the history of this
murderous prince to its close. (20) Now he was highly
displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon : and they came
with one accord to him, and, having made Biastus the
king's chamberlain their friend, they asked for peace,
because their country was fed from the king's country.
(21) And upon a set day Herod arrayed himself in royal
apparel, and sat on his throne, and made an oration to
them. (22) And the people shouted, saying, the voice of
a God, and not of a man. (23) And immediately an
angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God
the glory : and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the
spirit. The dependence of Tyre and Sidon on Herod's
country for food was not absolute; for their own terri
tory produced some grain, and Egypt was not very far
away ; but the territory of Phoenicia was only a narrow
mountain range along the seashore, altogether insufficient
for the support of these two large cities, and it was much
cheaper to bring the additional supply from the country
adjoining theirs than from Egypt ; so, as a matter of
public policy, peace with the former was much to be de
sired. It seems that those who came to Csesarea to
secure this peace were not a small body of ambassadors,
but quite a multitude of the citizens. It was probably

xii. 20-25.] ACTS. 241
by bribery that they made Biastus the chamberlain
(treasurer) their friend, and it may be that through
him some of the money reached the king. Josephus,
who gives a more detailed account of Herod's death,
says that the occasion of this oration, here called " a set
day," was a festival which Herod was celebrating in
honor of Claudius Csesar ; and that the royal apparel in
which Herod was arrayed was a robe woven entirely
out of silver, which glistened in the morning sun. He
also says that Herod was seized with violent pains in the
bowels, and that he lingered in great torture for five
days. His account, though containing some details be
sides these given by Luke, and omitting some which
Luke gives, contains nothing inconsistent with what is
here said.1 T*hus was the righteous judgment of God,
which is usually reserved for the future state, displayed
in this world, as a warning to wicked men, and an en
couragement to those who do well.
Ver. 24. It was inevitable that this providential
death of Herod, so soon after the murders which he had
committed in Jerusalem, should seriously affect the pub
lic mind. We are not surprised, therefore, when Luke
adds : (24) But the word of God grew and multiplied.
It grew in the reverence with which the people regarded
it, and it multiplied in the increase of its converts to the
truth. Another formidable and boldly executed plot to
destroy the faith in Christ only advanced it among the
people, as all the others had done.
Ver. 25. The account which we have just gone over,
of the death of James, the imprisonment of Peter, and
the miserable death of Herod, is thrown in between the
arrival of Barnabas and Saul on their mission to the
'Antiquities, xix. 8.

242 COMMENTARY. [xii. 25.
poor saints, and their return to Antioch ; and the author
seems to mean by this arrangement that these events
occurred in this interval. Whether Barnabas and Saul
went into Jerusalem' to attend the passover which was
being observed while Peter was in prison, is not stated;
and it is most probable that, on account of the danger
imminent, they kept away. But after Herod left the
city this danger was diminished, so before their return to
Antioch they entered the city, though it is not probable
that they found there either Peter or any of the other
apostles. (25) And Barnabas and Saul returned from
Jerusalem, when they had fulfilled their ministration,
taking with them John whose surname was Mark. Here
we are first introduced to the son of the Mary to whose
house Peter went when released from prison by the angel.
He was doubtless at home on that memorable night; he
was Peter's son in the Gospel;1 and he must have been
very deeply impressed by the events of that passover.
The Gospel which he afterward wrote furnishes none of
his personal history, but we shall meet with him again
more than once in this narrative. On returning to
Antioch, Barnabas and Saul had very startling news to
tell, in addition to their report concerning the mission
on which they had been sent.
Here the second part of Acts comes to a close, and
with it Luke's account of the general spread of the gos
pel. From this point his narrative is confined to certain
prominent events in the career of the apostle Paul, and
it assumes the character of a biography.
I. Peter v. 13.

EXCURSUS A.

CONNECTION OF BAPTISM WITH REMIS
SION OF SINS.
The thought of any connection at all between bap
tism and remission of sins is repulsive to many Protest
ants of the present age. This state of feeling is largely
due, I am constrained to believe, to a misconception of
the nature of remission of sins. The latter is confounded
with a change of heart, and is supposed to be a renew
ing of the soul effected by the direct agency of the Holy
Spirit. It is regarded as an inward experience, a matter
of consciousness ; and men are taught to look within
themselves for the evidence of it, and to find that evi
dence in the state of joy which immediately succeeds it.
To one who has this conception of remission of sins, and
of the agency by which it is brought about, it must nec
essarily appear absurd to suppose that it is in any way
dependent on baptism, unless, with the Romanists, we
attach to baptism some kind o£ magical power to effect a
change in the soul.
But this conception of remission of sins is a mistaken
one. It is not found in the New Testament. On the
contrary, remission of sins is clearly distinguished from
that change within which we commonly style a change
of heart. This latter change takes place in repentance ;
for in the course of repentance the love of sin is re
moved, sorrow for it intervenes, the love of righteous
ness springs up, and there is a deep resolve to sin no
243

244 EXCURSUS A.
more. But repentance is constantly distinguished in the
Scriptures from remission of sins, and the latter is con
stantly assumed to be consequent upon the former, not
included in it. This is seen in the frequent occurrence
of the expression, " repentance and remission of sins."
It is also seen in such expressions as these : " The bap=
tism of repentance unto remission of sins " (Mark i. 4 ;
Luke iii. 3) ; " Repent and be baptized every one of you
in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your
sins " (Acts ii. 38). Here is not only a very marked dis
tinction between the two, but remission of sins is most
clearly set forth as subsequent to repentance.
This mistaken conception is still further corrected,
and the true idea brought out, by observing the meaning
of the word rendered remission (dpeaic). As defined in
the lexicons, it means, primarily, " release, as from
bondage, imprisonment, etc. Secondarily, when con
nected with sins, it means, forgiveness, pardon of sins
(properly, the letting them go, as if they had not been
committed), remission of their penalty."1 It is used in
its primary sense in the quotation from the Septuagint,
Luke iv. 18, 19, where it occurs twice in the sense of
deliverance or liberation of captives. It is used in its
secondary sense everywhere else in the New Testament,
and in one place (Mark iii. 29, "hath never forgiveness")
the term forgiveness is its only admissible rendering in
English. But forgiveness, pardon, is not an act which
takes place within the soul of the person who is guilty ;
it takes place within the mind of the person who forgives,
and it can not be known to the person forgiven except by
some medium of communication. This is obviously true
1 Grimm. Greek Lexicon N. T. ; also Trench, Greek Synonyms,
sub verbo

EXCURSUS A. 245

i

when one man forgives another ; and when it is God who
forgives, it is an act of the divine mind in reference
to the sinner, and not a change within the sinner him
self. Furthermore, it is an act which, from its very
nature, can not take place until there has already oc
curred within the sinner such a change of heart and
purpose as can make it proper in God, even on the
ground of atonement in Christ, to extend pardon. In
other words, the whole inward change which the sinner
is required to undergo, must take place before sin can be
forgiven. This being true, the apparent absurdity of
connecting remission of sins in some way with baptism
is removed, and it is left an open question, whether, in
addition to faith and repentance, God also requires bap
tism before forgiveness. To the minds of the majority
of present-day Protestants, the mere announcement of
this question brings up the objection that justification is
by faith only, and that the possibility of baptism being a
prerequisite is by this fact excluded. But while justifica
tion, which involves remission of sins, is undoubtedly
dependent on faith as a condition, it is nowhere said or
implied that it is dependent on faith alone ; that is, on
faith apart from the outward manifestations of faith. If
justification is withheld until faith manifests itself in
some outward action, the sinner is still justified by faith,
but it is by faith in action as distinguished from faith as
a mere state of mind. Abraham is the typical example
of justification by faith; yet what we have just said is
true of him, as his case is expounded by the apostle
James. He says : " Was not Abraham our father justified
by works, in that he offered up his son Isaac upon the
altar? Thou seest that faith wrought with his works,
and by works was faith made perfect ; and the Scripture

246 EXCURSUS A.
was fulfilled which saith, And Abraham believed God,
and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness " (ii. 21-
23). Here the apostle, instead of seeing an inconsistency
between justification by faith and justification by faith
manifested in an act of faith, holds the latter in the case
of Abraham to be the fulfillment of the former. In other
words, the Scripture statement that Abraham believed
God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness, was
realized when Abraham by faith offered up his son on
the altar. In precisely the same way, and in perfect
harmony with justification by faith, a man may be justi
fied by faith when, as an act of faith, he is baptized. The
question is still open, then, whether this is the tact in
the case.
It is still further objected that some statements re
specting faith, not included in those connecting it with
justification, exclude the possibility of forgiveness being
connected with baptism. For example : " God so loved
the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that who
soever believeth on him should not perish, but have
eternal life" (Jno. iii. 16); and, "He that believeth on
the Son hath eternal life" (ib. 34). Here it is plainly
affirmed that the believer is in possession of eternal life ;
but it is still an open question whether this is affirmed
of the obedient believer, or of the believer who has not
yet manifested his faith by action; whether, to use
James' phraseology, it is faith made perfect by works of
faith, or faith yet silent in the soul. This question is to
be determined, not by such general statements as these,
but by specific statements as to the conditions on which
forgiveness of sins is offered.
The persistent objector has yet another set of texts
which, to him, preclude the connection of which we

EXCURSUS A. 247
speak, texts in which justification is affirmed of faith
without works of law. For example : " We reckon
therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the
works of the law ; " or, leaving out the articles, " apart
from works of law" (Rom. iii. 28). But by works of
law in this place Paul means such acts of obedience to
law as would justify a man on the ground of innocence,
and make him independent of the grace manifested in
pardon. Now,, acts of faith, such as the offering of
Isaac on the altar, do not belong to this category. On
the contrary, this act of Abraham, viewed in the light
of law, would have been a crime. The same is true of
the act of Rahab in receiving the spies and protecting
them, which James specifies as the act by which she was
justified (Jas. ii. 25). This act, viewed in the light of law,
was treason, while that of Abraham was murder. Now
baptism is certainly an act of faith, deriving its propriety
from a positive command ; and not a work of law in
the sense attached to that expression by Paul ; conse
quently, it may be required of a believer to be baptized
before he is forgiven, and yet justification may be apart
from " works of law. "
All connection between baptism and remission of
sins is supposed to be precluded on still another ground,
the fact that salvation is a matter of grace and not of
works : " For by grace have ye been saved through faith ;
and that not of yourselves : it is the gift of God : not of
works, that no man should glory" (Eph. ii. 8, 9). But
here again, as in the epistle to the Romans, the works
excluded from the ground of salvation are works of per
fect obedience, by which, if any man had wrought them,
he would be saved on the ground of merit. This would
exclude grace. But remission of sins is in its very na-

248 EXCURSUS A.
ture a grace bestowed, and not a debt paid ; and whether
it is bestowed on certain conditions or on no condition,
it remains a matter of grace. Only in case the works
done are of such a nature that the person doing them
deserves salvation, can grace be excluded ; and in that
case there would be no remission, because there would
be no sins to be remitted. So, then, if God has seen fit
to require the believer to be baptized before he forgives
him, forgiveness is none the less a matter of grace than
if he made no such requirement. When a state execu
tive pardons a criminal, no one ever thinks of saying it
is not an act of grace because the criminal is required, as
a condition, to sign a pledge never to repeat his crime ;
and if it were a case of theft, and the governor should
require a restoration of the stolen property as a condi
tion of pardon, no one would think of denying that the
pardon was an act of grace.
Seeing now that a connection between baptism and
remission of sins is not precluded by any of the doctri
nal statements of the Scriptures, which have so com
monly been supposed to have this force, we are at liberty
to examine without prejudice those passages of Scripture
which seem to declare such a connection, and to ascer
tain, if possible, what that connection is. First, then, we
examine some passages which plainly teach that remis
sion of sins follows baptism in order of time.
Foremost among these is Peter's well-known answer,
in his Pentecost sermon, to the question, " Brethren,
what shall we do?" It is foremost, because this is the
first time that Peter, making use of the keys which had
been committed to him (Matt. xvi. 19), opened the gates
of the kingdom to believers by declaring what they
should do to find admittance. He said, " Repent ye, and

EXCURSUS A. 249
be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus
Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall re
ceive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Here, as we have
pointed out in the commentary under this passage,
whether the preposition be rendered unto, for, or in order
to, remission of sins is unmistakingly placed after re
pentance and baptism. No words can make this more
certain. The same connection precisely is stated in
almost identical terms by both Mark and Luke with
reference to the baptism of Jonn. They both say that
John preached " the baptism of repentance unto the re
mission of sins" (Mark i. 4; Luke iii. 3). Here John's
baptism is called the " baptism of repentance," because
repentance was the only prerequisite demanded of a be
lieving Jew. If the baptism instituted by Christ were
distinguished from it by a corresponding epithet, the lat
ter would be styled the baptism of faith ; not because
faith is the only prerequisite, but it is the one most
prominent in the preaching of the apostles. That this
baptism of repentance was " unto remission of sins,"
unmistakably points to remission as subsequent to it in
order of time. In all these passages, however, if " unto "
is used strictly, the baptism is contemplated as bringing
the baptized person to remission, and no lapse of time is
supposed between the baptism and that to which it
brings the person. When, therefore, we speak of re
mission following baptism, we mean that it follows im
mediately. The command of Ananias to Saul teaches
the same thing. The words, " Arise, and be baptized,
and wash away thy sins" (Acts xxii. 16), clearly imply
that his sins were washed away (a metaphor for remission
of sins) as the immediate result of baptism. These are
all of the passages in which sins are mentioned in im-

250 EXCURSUS A.
mediate connection with baptism, and they unite in
showing that remission of the former is an immediate
consequent of the latter.
In another class of passages the same truth is set
forth by implication. Paul makes the statement, and re
iterates it, that we are baptized into Christ : " Or are
ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ
Jesus were baptized into his death ? " (Rom. vi. 3) ;
" For as many of you as were baptized into Christ
did put him on " (Gal. iii. 27). Now when a man is in
Christ his sins are certainly forgiven, and before he is in
Christ they are certainly not " forgiven. They are for
given in passing into Christ, and a part of the process
by which one passes into Christ is the act of baptism ;
and it follows that, as he is not in Christ until he is
baptized, until he is baptized he is not forgiven. The
words of our Lord in the apostolic commission justify
the same inference : " Go ye therefore and make disciples
of all nations, baptizing them into the name of the
Father, and of the Sou, and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt.
xxviii. 19). The man who has not yet entered into the
relation expressed by the words " into the name of the
Father and of the. Son, and of the Holy Spirit," is yet
in an unforgiven state, whatever may be his belief and
his emotions ; and this relation is established as soon as
all of his sins are forgiven ; but he enters into this rela
tion in the act of baptism, he is baptized into it, and it
follows that his sins are forgiven in connection with his
baptism. Still another class of passages present fads which
imply the same relation between baptism and remission.
It is of the nature of forgiveness to impart joy to the
person forgiven, and it is a matter of universal experi*

EXCURSUS A. 251
ence that the consciousness of unforgiven sins is a bur
den to the soul. If, then, in tracing the experiences of
men whose conversion to Christ is described in the New
Testament, we should find that they rejoiced before they
were baptized, this would be evidence that remission of
sins precedes baptism. Ou the other hand, if we find
this rejoicing uniformly following baptism, we must ac
cept the opposite conclusion. Now there is not one in
stance of the former on record ; on the contrary, in
every instance of the mention of this rejoicing, it comes
after baptism. For example, it was after he was bap
tized that the eunuch went on his way "rejoicing;"
while before baptism he was in a state of anxiety and
preplexity (Acts viii. 34-40). Before Saul was baptized,
and up to the moment that Ananias told him to arise
and be baptised and wash away h,is sins, he was in great
agony of soul, and had neither eaten nor drunk for
three days ; but as soon as he was baptized, his soul was
at ease, " for he took food and was strengthened "
(ix. 9-18). In like manner the Philippian jailer was in
distress and perplexity before his baptism, but after he
was baptized he brought Paul and Silas into his house
and set food before them, "and rejoiced greatly, with all
his house, having believed in God" (xvi. 30-34).
A fourth class of passages teach the same doctrine by
the manner in which they connect baptism with salva
tion. Salvation in Christ consists essentially in the for
giveness of sins ; for only when the soul is redeemed
from sins by the power of Christ working within, and
the guilt- of sin taken away by pardon, can a man be in
a state of salvation. If, then, when salvation and bap
tism are spoken of together, it is in a way to indicate
that there is no connection between tbem, this might

252 EXCURSUS A.
force us to re-examine the passages already noticed, to
see if we had by any possibility misread them. Or if in
such passages we should find that salvation is spoken of as
if it precedes baptism, this might demand a similar re-ex
amination. But neither of these conditions is found to
exist ; the reverse is uniformly the order which we find.
In the commission we read, " He that believeth and is
baptized shall be saved "(Mark xvi. 16). Here salva
tion is placed after baptism, and it is certainly the salva
tion which consists in forgiveness of sins; for the final
salvation depends on much more than believing and
being baptized. In the epistle to Titus we read, " When
the kindness of God our Saviour, and his love toward
man, appeared, not by works done in righteousness, which
we did ourselves, but according to his mercy he saved
us, through the washing of regeneration, and the renew
ing of the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us
richly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour ; that, being
justified by his grace, we might be made heirs according
to the hope of eternal life " (iii. 4-7). Here, by the
washing (literally, laver) of regeneration, the apostle
means baptism, which is so called because it is a species
of washing connected with the process of regeneration ;
and it is affirmed that by this and the renewing of the
Holy Spirit (the inward work of the Spirit which pre
cedes baptism) we are saved. At the same time, lest
any might think of merit of any kind as the ground of
this salvation, he says that this salvation is not accorded
because of anything which we had previously done in
the way of righteousness, but only because of God's
mercy. Furthermore, he identifies the salvation thus
spoken of with justification, by the added clause, " that,
being justified by his grace, we might be made heirs ac-

EXCURSUS A. 253
cording to the hope of eternal life." Again we read in
the first epistle of Peter that " eight souls were saved
through water; which also after a true likeness doth now
save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the
filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good con
science toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus'
Christ" (I. Pet. iii. 31). Here the negation of putting
away the filth of the flesh is aimed against a Jewish
misconception, and to us its meaning is obvious. The
clause rendered, " but the interrogation of a good con
science," is confessedly obscure ; but whatever its mean
ing, it leaves unaffected the fact previously stated, that
water does now, in a true likeness to that of the flood,
save us in baptism ; and if baptism saves in any sense
whatever, it must precede salvation, and bring the sin
ner to it.
Finally, tbe connection in question is implied in our
Lord's remark to Nicodemus as to the conditions of en
tering into the kingdom of God : " Except a man be
born of water and the Spirit, he can not enter into the
kingdom of God." All ancient Christian scholars, and
all the abler expositors of modern times, agree in de
claring with one voice, that by the term water Jesus
here refers to baptism. Dr. Wall, in his history of In
fant Baptism, says : " There is not one Christian writer
of any antiquity, in any language, but who understands
the new birth of water as referring to baptism ; and if
it be not so understood, it is difficult to give any account
how a person is born of water, more than born of wood "
(vol. i. 110). Alford testifies: "All the better and
deeper expositors have recognized the coexistence ofthe
two, water and the Spirit" (Com. in loco) ; and to the
same effect it is said by Dr. Westcott : " All interprets-

254 EXCURSUS A.
tions which treat the term water here as 'simply 'figura
tive and descriptive of the cleansing power of the Spirit.
are essentially defective, as they are also opposed to all
ancient tradition" (Com. on John in loco). In another
part of his notes on the passage, Alford goes still farther
in the direction of these assertions, and also gives the
meaning of the verse, in these words : " There can be
no doubt, on any honest interpretation of the words,
that to be born of water refers to the token or outward
sign of baptism — to be born of the Spirit, to the thing
signified, or inward grace of the Holy Spirit. All at
tempts to get rid of these two plain facts have sprung
from doctrinal prejudices, by which the views of ex
positors have been warped." We may set aside, there
fore, as exceptional and sectarian, all interpretations
which take out of this passage its obvious allusion to
baptism, and we are justified in saying that according to
the united judgment of unbiased scholars of all churches
Jesus here meant that except a man experience the in
ward work of the Holy Spirit, and be baptized, he can
not enter into the kingdom of God. Now before a man
is in the kingdom of God, his sins are unforgiven ; and
when his sins are forgiven he is no longer an alien, but
a citizen of that kingdom. By whatever process, then,
he enters into that kingdom, by that or in that he ob
tains the remission of sins; but that process is the
birth of water and the Spirit, of neither alone, but of
both ; and therefore he obtains forgiveness not before,
but when he is baptized. It is but an echo of these
words of our Lord, when Paul says He saved us " through
the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the
Holy Spirit" (Titus iii. 5).
These evidences establish, as clearly as any fact can

EXCURSUS A. 255
be established, an immediate connection between bap
tism and remission of sins, and they show with equal
clearness that the divine act of forgiving sins takes
place when the sinner, in whose heart the Holy Spirit
has wrought faith and repentance, is baptized into Christ.
Here we might draw this discussion to a close but
for the fact that by many this is supposed to be a
heretical doctrine, unsupported by the scholarship of
either past or present ages. To disabuse the reader of
this impression, we proceed to show how these evidences
have been regarded by men of learning. In the first
place, the voice of antiquity is united upon it, as on the
meaning of " born of water and the Spirit." Sufficient
proof of this, without quoting individual authors, is
found in the fact that the article on the subject in the
Nicene Creed, adopted in the beginning of the fourth
century without a dissenting voice, declares : " We be
lieve in one baptism for the remission of sins." It is a
well known fact also, that the Greek Church, the
Armenian, and the Roman Catholic, still teach and
have ever taught this doctrine, with the additional and
unscriptural idea that baptism, independently of faith
and repentance, takes away original sin in the case of
infants. Infant baptism indeed owes its origin to this
mistaken conception. The process is traced by Neander
in the following well known passage : " But when, now,
on the one hand, the doctrine of corruption and guilt,
cleaving to human nature in consequence of the first
transgression, was reduced to a more precise and syste
matic form, and on the other, from the want of duly
distinguishing between what is outward and what is in
ward in baptism (the baptism by water and the baptism
by the Spirit), the error became more firmly established

256 EXCURSUS A.
that without external baptism no one could be delivered
from that inherent guilt, could be saved from the ever
lasting punishment that threatened him, or raised to
eternal life ; and when the notion of magical influence,
a charm connected with the sacrament, continually
gained ground, the theory was finally evolved of the
unconditional necessity of infant baptism. About the
middle of the third century, this theory was generally
admitted in the North African Church." Among the
evidences which he gives of the truth of this representa
tion, is an extract from Cyprian (Epistle 59), in which
the writer contends for the baptism of infants immedi
ately after their birth, and closes with these words :
"But if even the chief of sinners, who have been ex
ceedingly guilty before God, receive the forgiveness of
sins on coming to faith, and no one is precluded from
baptism and from grace, how much less should the child
be kept back, which, as it is but just born, can not have
sinned, but has only brought with it, by its descent from
Adam, the infection of the old death ; and which may
the more easily obtain the remission of sins, because the
sins which are forgiven it are not its own, but those of
another" (Church History, i. 313, 314).
The unfortunate circumstance that this doctrine of
baptism for remission of sins, universally taught in the
ancient church, was thus corrupted by the church of the
dark ages, was undoubtedly the cause of a reaction
against it among the leaders of the Protestant Reforma
tion; yet Luther and Calvin, while repudiating the
doctrine as taught by Rome, and failing to adopt it in
its original form, did both stumble upon it in their ex
position of various passages of Scripture in which it
is plainly taught. Thus Luther, commenting on the

EXCURSUS A. 257
words (Gal. iii. 27), "All ye that are baptized into
Christ, have put -on Christ," makes these remarks:
" This old man must be put off with all his works, that
of the children of Adam we may be made the children
of God. This is not done by changing of a garment, or
by any laws or works, but by a new birth, and by the
renewing of the inward man ; which is done in baptism,
as saith Paul : ' All ye that are baptized, have put on
Christ.' Wherefore, to be appareled with Christ accord
ing to the gospel is not to be appareled with the law or
with works, but with an incomparable gift ; that is to
say, with remission of sins, righteousness, peace, consola
tion, joy of spirit, salvation, life, and Christ himself.
This is diligently to be noted, because of the fond
and fantastical spirits, who go about to deface the
majesty of baptism, and speak wickedly of it. Paul,
contrarywise, commendeth and setteth it forth with
honorable titles, calling it ' the washing of the new
birth, the renewing of the Holy Spirit' (Titus iii.).
And here also he saith, that all they which are baptized
have put on Christ. As if he said, Ye are carried out
of the law into a new birth, which is wrought in bap
tism. Therefore ye are not now any longer under the
law, but ye are clothed with a new garment ; to-wit,
with the righteousness of Christ. Wherefore baptism is
a thing of great force and efficacy " (Luther's Com. on
Galatians). In these extracts Luther confirms the views
expressed above, not only on the passage which he has
immediately in hand, but also on our Lord's remark
about the new birth, and Paul's in regard to the wash
ing of regeneration. And all this comes from him who
is the prime author of the modern doctrine of justifica
tion by faith alone.

258 EXCURSUS A.
John Calvin expresses himself to the same effect,
and brings into view a still larger number of the passages
which I have cited above. He says : ' ' From baptism
our faith derives three advantages, which require to be
distinctly considered. The first is, that as proposed to
us by the Lord, as a symbol and token of our purifica
tion ; or, to express my meaning more fully, it resembles
a legal instrument properly attested, by which he assures
us that all our sins are canceled, effaced, and obliterated,
so that they will never appear in his sight, or come
into his remembrance, or be imputed to us. For he
commands all who believe to be baptized for the remis
sion of their sins. Therefore those who have imagined
that baptism is nothing more than a mark or sign by
which we profess our religion before men, as soldiers
wear the insignia of their sovereign as a mark of their
profession, have not considered that which is the princi
pal thing in baptism ; which is, that we ought to re
ceive it with this promise : ' He that believeth and is
baptized, shall be saved' (Mark xvi. 16). In this sense
we are to understand what is said by Paul, that Christ
sanctifieth and cleanseth the church ' with the washing
of water by the word ' (Eph. v. 26) ; and in another
place that 'according to his mercy he saves us, by the
washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy
Spirit ' (Titus iii. 5) ; and by Peter, that ' baptism doth
now save us' (I. Peter iii. 21)." 1 From this extract the
reader can see at a glance that all the passages cited in it
are understood by Calvin to have the very meaning
which I have attached to them ; and the fact that these
1 Calvin's Institutes, B. iv. 15, \\ 1, 2. Similar views are ex
pressed in H s- 4 ¦- though in § 15 he inconsistently represents
the svua jl cJorneiius as oeing forgiven before he was baptized.

EXCURSUS A. 259
interpretations are given by a theologian who did not
consistently apply them in his system, gives them the
greater weight because it shows that they are not the re
sult of doctrinal prepossession, but of the simplicity and
clearness with which they are expressed in the passages
themselves. It is well known, also, that another great reformer of
more recent times, John Wesley, fell upon this doctrine
in the course of his exegetical studies, although it con
stituted no part of his system. He says : " Baptism ad
ministered to real penitents, is both a means and a seal
of pardon. Nor did God ordinarily, in the primitive
church, bestow pardon on any, unless through this
means " (Notes on N T., p. 350).
Not to multiply evidences of this kind to any unnec
essary extent, we pass by the utterances of many other
eminent scholars of orthodox churches, and add a few
from writers of our own age, eminent for their learning
and their exegetical skill.
H. B. Hackett, one of the most eminent scholars and
commentators in the Baptist Church of America, in com
menting on Acts ii. 38, says: " In order to the forgive
ness of sins, we connect naturally with both the preced
ing verbs. The clause states the motive or object which
should induce them to repent and be baptized. It en
forces the entire exhortation, no one part of it to the ex
clusion ofthe other." On Acts xxii. 16, he says: " And
wash away thy sins. This clause states a result of the
baptism in language derived from the nature of that or
dinance. It answers to ' for the remission of sins ' in
ii. 38 — that is, submit to the rite in order to be for
given." Clearer or more explicit testimony to the doc
trine upheld in this excursus could not be uttered.

260 EXCURSUS A.
Dr. Jacobson, Bishop of Chester, and author of the
notes on Acts in The Speaker's Commentary; under Acts
xxii. 16 quotes with approval the words of Waterland:
" Baptism was at length his [Paul's] grand absolution,
his patent of pardon, his instrument of justification
granted him from above; neither was he justified till he
received that divine seal, inasmuch as his sins were upon
him till that very hour."
Dr. J. A. Alexander, of Princeton, writes : " The
whole phrase, to (or toward) remission of sins, describes
this as the end to which the multitude had reference, and
which, therefore, must be contemplated in the answer."
Again : " The beneficial end to which all this led was
the remission of sins" (Com. Acts ii. 38).
Lechler, author of Commentary on Acts in Lange's
Bible Work, says under ii. 38 : " The apostle promises
to those who repent and receive baptism, (1) the remis
sion of sins, and (2) the gift of the Holy Spirit." Under
xxii. 16, he says: "We have here a noble testimony to
the value which was assigned to holy baptism by the
pure apostolic church. It was not a mere external cere
mony, but a means of grace for washing away sins, and
was the first actual entrance into the church of Jesus."
Dr. Gloag (Presbyterian), says in his Commentary,
under xxii. 16 : " Baptism in the adult, except in the
peculiar case of our Lord, was accompanied by a con
fession of sin, and was a sign of its remission ; hence
called baptism in order to forgiveness of sins " (Acts
ii. 38). Plumptre, after quoting the words of Ananias to Paul,
says : " They show that for the apostle baptism was no
formal or ceremonial act, but was joined with repentance,
and, faith being presupposed, brought with it the assur-

EXCURSUS A. 261
ance of a real forgiveness. In St. Paul's language as to
the ' washing ' (or bath) of regeneration (Tit. iii. 5), we
may trace his continued adherence to the idea which he
had thus been taught on his first admission to the Church
of Christ " (Com. on Acts, xxii. 16).
Finally we quote the testimony of two eminent
philologists. Meyer says under Acts ii. 38 : " itc; de
notes the object of the baptism, which is the admission
of the guilt contracted in the state before fxeravdta."
Grimm, in his great lexicon of the Greek N. T., defines
iec; dfso-cv d/uapnoju, Acts ii. 38, " to obtain the forgive
ness of sins" (j3anTi£a> II. b. aa.).
These citations are abundant to show that we have
not misinterpreted the passages in question ; and they
show clearly that we are right in rejecting the rendering
of the R. V. , " unto remission of sins," and retaining
that ofthe A. V., "for remission of sins." Peter's pur
pose in the expression was not to indicate the mere fact
that baptism brings one to remission, but to state the
blessing in order to the attainment of which his hearers
were to be baptized. In other words, he states a motive
for the act. In many other passages the R. V. is liable
to the same criticism in its rendering of the preposition
etc. We might add many more testimonies if it were
necessary. They show that the connection between bap
tism and remission of sins for which we contend is one
of the most universally recognized doctrines of the New
Testament. We have occupied so much space with its
presentation, from a desire to restore this most solemn
ordinance of our Lord to the place which it occupied in
the primitive church, and to bring into practice the
views of its meaning so clearly expressed by the scholars
of all schools and ages. It has been common, in these

262 EXCURSUS A.
latter days, to decry the doctrine, connected as it must
be with the right action of baptism, because of conse
quences ascribed to it with reference to the salvation of
myriads of pious persons in past ages who have not been
really baptized ; but such consequences, whether real or
imaginary, can not alter the truth of Scriptures, while
the consideration of them tends to bias our judgment
and to hide the truth from us. It is the part of wisdom
to unhesitatingly accept the truth as we discover it,
knowing that we are to be judged in the great day ac
cording to the measure of light which we have, or may
have ; and that if our fathers were saved in neglect of
any duty of which they were ignorant, we may not hope
to be saved in neglect of any duty which is plainly
pointed out to us. The right action of baptism is very
rapidly gaining recognition among the serious minds of
our time ; let us endeavor to restore also its right design,
and thus we may put to silence those " fond and fantastic
spirits," as Luther styles them, " who go about to de
face the majesty of baptism, and speak wickedly of it."

NEW COMMENTARY

ON

ACTS OF APOSTLES

BY
J. W. MCGARVEY, A. M.
"Professor of Sacred History in the College of the Bible. Author of
"Commentary on Matthew and Mark," "Lands of tbe
"Bible," and "Evidences of Christianity ."
LEXINGTON, KY.

' VOLUME 2.

CINCINNATI :
The Standard Publishing Company,
Publishers of Christian Literature.

COMMENTAEY ON ACTS.

PART THIRD.
PAUL'S I OURS AMONG THE GENTILES.
(XIII.— XXI.)

SEC. I.— THE FIRST TOUR.
(xiii. — xiv).
1. Barnabas and Saul Set Apart to the Work,
xiii. 1-3.
Ver. 1. The opening sentence of this part of Acts
stands closely connected with the preceding part, taking
its start from the return of Barnabas and Saul to Antioch ;
and yet, because of the new subject here introduced, its
style is the same as if it were the beginning of an inde
pendent narrative } (i) Now there were at Antioch, in
the church that was there, prophets and teachers, Bar
nabas, and Symeon that was called Niger, and Lucius
of Cyrene, and Manaen foster-brother of Herod the te
trarch, and Saul.
The distinction between prophets and teachers is not
clearly drawn in the New Testament, except to the ex-
 .  1  —  . — .
1 The new and quite different subject matter now introduced,
sufficiently accounts for the author's style here, without aid from
any of the suppositions mentioned by Meyer, including one of
his own.

2 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 1.
tent that the former were men who spoke by inspiration,
while the latter sometimes did and sometimes did not.
The previous statement of Luke, that "there came down
prophets from Jerusalem to Antioch" (xi. 27), of whom
Agabus was one, may have included the prophets who
are here mentioned.
The order in which the five names are written
is probably that of the relative reputation of the men.
Barnabas, having been sent from Jerusalem, and having
been an eminent man there, was naturally looked upon
as the most important person, while Saul was at this
time the least noted of the five. Symeon, as his name
proves, was a full-blooded Jew ; and though his surname
Niger (black) can scarcely justify the conclusion that he
was an African Jew,1 it could scarcely have been given
to him without some allusion to his complexion. Syme-
ons were so numerous among the Jews that it was neces
sary to distinguish them in some way, and it is highly
probable that this one, from having an unusually dark
complexion, was called black Symeon.2 As some of the
second group of preachers who had come to Antioch
were men of Cyrene (xi. 20), it is natural to suppose that
Lucius of Cyrene was one of these, and that he was
therefore one of the founders of the church. Manaen is
the Greek form ofthe Hebrew name Menahem. Having
been the foster-brother of Herod the tetrarch, his mother
having nursed the two when they were infants, he had
in all likelihood kept up through life an acquaintance
1 " From his appellation Niger, he may have been an African
proselyte." (Alford, in loco).
2 It is quite common in America, when two or three men with
the same name live in the same vicinity, to distinguish them by
their shades of complexion, or the color of their hair : e. g., Red
Tom, Black Tom, etc.

xiii. 1-3.] ACTS. 3
with that prince; and it is not improbable that Luke
learned through him something of Herod's thoughts and
words concerning John the Baptist and Jesus, which he
had recorded in his previous narrative (Luke ix. 7-9).
Vv. 2, 3. Symeon, Lucius and Manaen had been
the chief teachers of the church during the absence of
Barnabas and Saul on their mission to Jerusalem, and
now this work is to be left to them again. (2) And as
they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Spirit
said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work where
unto I have called them. (3) Then when they had
fasted and prayed and laid their hands upon them, they
sent them away. The ministering to the Lord here
mentioned has no special reference to the public worship,
but rather to their service in supplying the wants of
their brethren ; for such is the meaning of the original
word when used in reference to Christian1 service. It
was their habitual, daily work. For what cause they
were fasting just at this time we have no intimation ;
but from the instruction of the Master on the subject
(Matt. ix. 15), we may safely infer that it was in con
sequence of some affliction which had befallen them.
The command ofthe Holy Spirit, to separate Barna
bas and Saul, must have been addressed to the other
three brethren, and it was doubtless communicated
through one of them to the others. The clause, " the
work whereunto I have called them," implies that they
had both been called to this work before this time. Paul
1Such is the usage of the verb, teirovpyea, to minister; and of
the nouns, feirovpyia, and teirovpyoc, ministry, and minister, as is
seen'in Rom. xv. 16, 27; II. Cor. ix. 12; Phil. ii. 17, 30. The fact
that the word liturgy is derived from it is suggestive of the great
departure from Scriptural ideas and usage indicated by ancient
and modern liturgies.,

4 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 2, 3.
was called to it in the commission given to him by the
Lord at the time of his conversion, as we learn from his
own lips farther on (xxvi. 16-18) ; but when Barnabas
was called we have no means of determining. Saul had
been preaching to Gentiles as well as to Jews, as we may
safely conclude, ever siuce he had heard of the baptism
of Cornelius by Peter ; but he had never yet made the
former his chief work. It should be observed, that the
thought of separating the two to this work did not
'originate with the brethren; but it was expressly com
municated to them by the Holy Spirit.
The purpose of the fasting, prayer and laying on of
hands is clearly indicated in the context : for what they
did was doubtless what they were told to do ; but what
they were told to do was to " separate " the two to the
work indicated ; and, therefore, fasting, praying and laying
on of hands was the method of separating them. This
is the ceremony deemed suitable for such a separation
by those under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and it
follows that on all similar occasions, such as separating
a brother to the ministry of the word, or separating one
who is already an experienced preacher, as were both
Barnabas and Saul, to some new and different field of
labor, it is proper for those concerned in the movement
to lay hands on him with fasting and prayer. The mod
ern conception, that hands may be imposed only by those
.holding an office superior to that which is to be filled, is
the invention of an unscriptural hierarchy, having no
support in the New Testament. In the instance before
us, hands were imposed on Barnabas by three men who
were his inferiors in the estimation of the church ; and
on Paul, the called apostle of Jesus Christ, by men who
were not apostles, and, so far as our information extends,

xiii. 2-5.] ACTS. . I
not even elders of the congregation in which they were
teachers and prophets. This incident clearly demon
strates another fact in regard to this ceremony, that it
possesses none of the magical power to impart spiritual
graces which has been superstitiously ascribed to it ; for
surely Barnabas and Saul were not destitute of any grace
which could be imparted to them by Symeon, Lucius
and Manaen. The truth is, that this ceremony, now no
longer called ordination1 in the English Scriptures, was
nothing more than a method of solemnly commending a
man to God for the ministration to which he was being
set apart. The subject will come before us again in
regard to Timothy under xvi. 1-3.
Only the teachers and prophets are mentioned in
connection with this proceeding, but we are not to sup
pose that they acted in private. Doubtless the ceremony
of laying on hands was in the presence of the congrega
tion ; and after the command of the Spirit was received,
there was doubtless time given for the apostles to prepare
for the journey, and for the congregation to be notified.
These considerations make it probable that the fasting
connected with the imposition of hands was not the one
in which the teachers and prophets were already engaged,
but one specially appointed for the occasion.
2. Their Labors in Cyprus, 4-12.
Vv. 4, 5. The journeys now entered upon by Saul are
among the most momentous ever undertaken, whether
by one man or many. They are worthy therefore ofthe
space allotted to them by our author, and of the most
lThe revisers have wisely disconnected this English word
from the accounts of appointments to office, and confined it to
decrees and appointments of God.

6 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 4, 5.
careful study by every one interested in human progress.
(4) So they, being sent forth by the Holy Spirit, went
down to Seleucia ; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus.
(5) And when they were at Salamis they proclaimed the
word of God in the synagogues of the Jews : and they
had also John as their attendant. Seleucia was the sea
port of Antioch, sixteen miles distant, where all large
vessels lay at anchor ; for although the Orontes, on the
banks of which Antioch was situated, was navigable for
small vessels, it was too shallow for those of the deepest
draught. Embarking here on some trading vessel, they
sailed. to the port of Salamis,1 which is at the eastern end
of the island of Cyprus.
In choosing this island as the first point in the wide
world to which they directed their course, they were
moved in part, no doubt, by the fact that it was the birth
place of Barnabas, where his personal acquaintance would
be of advantage to them ; but also in part by the con
sideration that there were many Jewish synagogues there,
furnishing starting points for the work, and that the
gospel had been proclaimed there already with some
success (xi. 19, 20).
The John mentioned as the attendant of Barnabas
and Saul is the " John surnamed Mark" of xii. 25. He
had not been set apart to the work, as had his older
companions, but he had undertaken voluntarily to go
with them as an attendant. His work was to assist them
in every way in which a young man can serve his elders.
Luke is entirely silent in regard to the success of the
preaching in Salamis, leaving us to suppose that it was
1 Salamis was afterward destroyed by war and earthquakes,
and its site is now marked by ruins about four miles north of the
modern town Famagosta.

xiii. 4-7.] ACTS. 7
not great, and that the stay of the apostles there was
probably void of stirring incidents.
Vv. 6, 7. It was not till the preachers reached the
other extremity of the island, about one hundred miles
distant to the west, that the writer pauses to relate any
of the incidents of their labors in Cyprus. (6) And when
they had gone through the whole island unto Paphos,
they found a certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew
whose name was Bar- Jesus ; (7) who was with the pro
consul,1 Sergius Paulus, a man of understanding. The
same called unto him Barnabas and Saul, and sought to
hear the word of God. Paphos was not the original city
of that name, the birthplace, according to the Greek
mythology, of the goddess Venus, but a small city of
later origin which inherited the name after its predeces
sor had gone to ruin. It is now an insignificant village
called Baffa, or Bafo. At the time of our text, although
situated at the western extremity of the island, it was
the seat of the Roman government.
1 For a long time modern skeptics contended that Luke here
made the mistake of styling Sergius Paulus a proconsul, when he
should have called him propraetor, the latter, and not the former,
being the Roman title borne by the chief ruler of the island. In
vain believers insisted that, though the latter was the usual title,
there may have been exceptions, and that Luke was therefore to
be credited. " To set the matter finally at rest,'' says Farrar,
" coins and inscription of this very epoch have been found at
Curium and Citium, in which the title of proconsul is given to
Cominius Proclus, Julius Corduo, and L. Annus Bassus, who
must have been immediate predecessors or successors of Sergius
Paulus." (Life of Paul, Excursus, xvi.) Still later, M. de Cesnolo
found at Soli, in the same island, a coin with the inscription
" Paulus the Proconsul." (Cuprus, p. 125). Thus the defense
of Luke, based at first on the presumption that he is a reliable
historian, is made complete by the demonstration of that which
had been presumed in his favor.

8 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 6-8.
Lest the reader should think that Luke makes an
overestimate of Sergius Paulus in styling him " a man
of understanding," seeing that he had with him a false
prophet, we may remark that statesmen and generals in
that age were in the habit of consulting oracles and
auguries about all important matters, and of keeping
about them some one who was credited with interpreting
the signs of approaching good and evil. As there cer
tainly had been true prophets among the Jews, Paulus
showed good sense in trusting to a so-called prophet of
that nation, rather than to any other; and when the two
Jews came to Paphos, claiming to bring fresh revelations
from the God of Israel, the same good sense prompted
him to send for them. Such a mind as his could not fail
to hear with profit what Barnabas and Saul had to say.
Ver. 8. Bar-Jesus saw at once that the success of
Barnabas and Saul in convincing the proconsul would
be an end of his influence with him, and of the profits
which his pretences were yielding ; so he put forth his
utmost efforts to defeat them. (8) But Elymas the sor
cerer (for so is his name by interpretation) x withstood
them, seeking to turn aside the proconsul from the faith.
It would be vain to conjecture the mode of argumenta
tion or vilification which he employed. Whatever it
was, it proved to Paul that he was a villain of the deepest
dye, fighting against what he knew to be right, and per
verting that which he knew to be true. Perhaps Bar
nabas, as the chief man of the company, had been the
speaker up to this moment; but Saul saw that something
1 More properly, " by translation." Luke translates the name
Elymas, by some supposed to be an Arabic, and by others an
Aramaic word (Grimm's Lexicon), into Greek, by the word here
rendered sorcerer. His other name, Bar-Jesus, is Hebrew, and
means son of Jesus.

xiii. 8-12.] ACTS. 9
more decisive than words was demanded, and a most
extraordinary scene followed.
Vv. 9-12. (9) But Saul, who is also called Paul,
filled with the Holy Spirit, fastened his eyes upon him,
(10) and said, 0 full of all guile and all villainy, thou
son of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt
thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord ?
(11) And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee,
and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season.
And immediately there fell on him a mist and a dark
ness ; and he went about seeking some to lead him by
the hand. (12) Then the proconsul, when he saw what
was done, believed, being astonished at the teaching of
the Lord. This is the only miracle wrought by an
apostle to the injury of any one's person. It was a case
much like that of Moses in Egypt, who found it neces
sary to bring some irresistible afflictions on the magi
cians, in order to destroy Pharaoh's confidence in them.
Saul saw that the readiest way to convince the proconsul
that Bar Jesus was a base impostor was to denounce him
in his true character, and then prove the sentence pro
nounced upon him true and just by blinding him. As
he groped about, calling on one and another of the
frightened bystanders to lead him by the hand, the
falsity and iniquity of his pretensions stood practically
confessed, and the divine mission of the apostles was
demonstrated. It had the desired effect on the procon
sul, and perhaps Barnabas and Mark were as much sur
prised, though not so much frightened, as the rest of
the company. Whether the proconsul followed his
belief with the proper obedience, Luke fails to inform
us, and the omission rather implies that he did not. The
hindrances in the way of a heathen of high rank becom-

10 COMMENTARY. xiii. 9-12.
ing a Christian in life were almost insurmountable, and
if Paulus had accomplished the mighty task, it is unac
countable that at least a word to that effect is not spoken.
How long the " season " during which Bar- Jesus was to
remain blind proved to be, is left to conjecture. It was
certainly long enough for him to have become a believer
if his corrupt nature was capable of any good.
With the clause, " Saul, who is also called Paul,"
this apostle ceases to be called Saul, and begins to be
called Paul. Hitherto he has occupied a subordinate
position, and his name has come last in the list of him
self and his companions ; but hereafter he is to occupy
the forefront of almost every scene in which he figures.
Heretofore it has been " Barnabas and Saul ;" hereafter
it is to be " Paul and Barnabas.'' It is impossible not
to connect this change with the name of Paulus, who
was convinced by the vigorous and unexpected action of
Paul. Many eminent scholars think that he had previ
ously borne both names, the one Hebrew and the other
an adopted Roman name ; and that the change consisted
in using the latter henceforward exclusively. This
would be satisfactory, if we had any evidence, of which
we have not the slightest, that he had ever borne the
name Paul previous to this time ; for the mere fact that
many Jews had Greek or Roman surnames can not be
held as evidence that Paul had. The obvious explana
tion is, that just as his companion Barnabas has been so
called by his brethren, his original name being Joseph,
because he was a good exhorter (iv. 36); so be, on account
of convincing the first proconsul who ever paid respect
ful attention to the faith in Christ, and especially on
account of the exceptionally bold and startling way in
which he did it, his brethren, not himself, changed his

xiii. 9-13.] ACTS. 11
name to Paulus. The change was the more easily made,
and the more naturally suggested, from the circumstance
that there was already a difference of only one letter
between the two names. As a matter of course, after
everybody else had put upon him this new name, he was
compelled, willing or unwilling, to use it himself, as he
does in all his epistles.
3. The Johtrney prom Paphos to Antioch, 13-15.
Ver. 13. Cutting short the account of events in
Paphos in a way that disappoints our curiosity, the his
torian hurries us with the two apostles on the further
prosecution of their tour. ¦ (13) Now Paul and his com
pany set sail from Paphos, and came to Perga in Pam
phylia : and John departed from them and returned to
Jerusalem. So completely has Paul now become the
central figure in Luke's narrative, that Barnabas and
John Mark are called simply "his company." Why
they chose this portion of Asia Minor as their next field
of labor, is not stated ; but it was probably because Paul
had already evangelized Cilicia, and wished now to
introduce the gospel to the districts adjacent to Cilicia
on the west, with a view to the systematic evangelization
of the whole peninsula. We shall see a further indica
tion of such a plan in xvi. 1-8. His long residence in
Cilicia made him more or less familiar with the state of
society in the region which be now penetrates, and he
enters it with intelligent foresight.
Luke is equally silent in regard to the reason which
governed John Mark in turning back from Perga, and
going home. He does not even hint at this point that
his reason was unsatisfactory to either of John's com
panions; though he shows plainly farther on (xv. 37-39)

12 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 13-15.
that it was extremely so to Paul. It is very plausibly
conjectured by Mr. Howson that he was moved by fear
of robbers in the mountains which they would have to
cross in passing into the interior. He says : " No popu
lation through the midst of which Paul ever traveled
abounded more in those ' perils of robbers ' of which he
himself speaks, than the wild and lawless clans of the
Pisidian highlands." J The preachers were not burdened
with money to attract robbers, but John knew that rob
bers sometimes kill men and then search for their money.
Vv. 14, 15. Luke does not recount the dangers and
hardships of the journey across the mountains, but fol
lows the two travelers in silence from Perga to Antioch.
(14) But they, passing through from Perga, came to
Antioch of Pisidia ; and they went into the synagogue
on the sabbath day, and sat down. (15) And after the
reading of the law and the prophets the ruler of the
synagogue sent unto them, saying, Brethren, if ye have
any word of exhortation for the people, say on. This is
a graphic, though altogether informal account of the
order of service in a Jewish synagogue. First, a section
of the law is read ; then a section of the prophets ; then
came exhortations based on what had been read. Paul
and Barnabas had taken their seats modestly in the
audience among the people ; for so Jesus had taught his
disciples (Matt, xxiii. 6-12); and the reason why the
ruler ' gave them permission to speak was doubtless
because they had previously sought it. They had come
into this community for the purpose of speaking to the
people ; they had fully intended, as was their custom, to
begin in the synagogue ; and they did as any preacher
at the present day would do under similar circumstances
1 Life and Epistles of Paul, i. 162, 163.

xiii. 14-22.] ACTS. 13
— they took pains, before the service began, to introduce
themselves to the rulers, and ask the privilege of address
ing the audience ere it should be dismissed.
This Antioch was one of many cities founded or
enlarged by Seleucus Nicator, and named Antioch in
honor of his father Antiochus, who was made king of
Syria after the death of Alexander the Great. On
account of the good roads which radiated from it in every
direction, and its comparative proximity to the sea, being
about one hundred and twenty miles from Perga, it was
the center of a considerable trade, and this had attracted
a considerable Jewish population.
4. Paul's Sermon in Antioch, 16-41.
i. the introduction, 16-22.
Vv. 16-22. To the invitation of the synagogue
rulers Paul responded by immediately arising and ad
dressing the audience. There had no doubt been a
previous agreement between him and Barnabas that
he should thus take the lead. He introduced his
discourse by a brief sketch of the history of Israel from
the exodus to the time of David : (16) And Paul stood
up, and beckoning with his hand, said, Men of Israel,
and ye that fear God, hearken. (17) The God of this peo
ple Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when
they dwelt in the land of Egypt, and with a high arm
led them forth out of it. (18) And for about the time of
forty years suffered he their manners in the wilderness.
(19) And when he had destroyed seven nations in the
land of Canaan, he gave them their land for an inherit
ance, for about four hundred and fifty years : (20) And
after these things he gave them judges until Samuel

14 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 16-22
the prophet. (21) And afterward they asked for a
king : and God gave unto them Saul the son of Kish, a
man of the tribe of Benjamin, for the space of forty
years. (22) And when he had removed him, he raised
up David to be their king ; to whom he also bore witness,
and said, I, have found David the son of Jesse, a man
after my heart, who shall do all my will.
The gesture made by Paul as he began, described as
" beckoning with his hand," was habitual with him -,1
and though quite an unusual gesture, it was well calcu
lated to arrest the attention of an audience. It indicated
that he knew what he was about to say, and felt confi
dent of its importance.
His brief sketch ofthe history of Israel served the two
chief purposes of an introduction — it led the minds of
the hearers forward to the main theme of the discourse,
and it did so in a manner well calculated to interest and
please them. The Jews had a glorious history, of which
they were justly proud ; and any happily expressed allu
sions to its more glorious incidents always awakened their
most lively emotions. These incidents furnished the in
spiration of their songs, the themes of their orators, and
their comfort in persecution. He had the readiest access
to their sympathy who showed the highest appreciation
of these great events. Paul, knowing this, passed readily
into the hearts of his hearers through this open door.
In the statement of verse 19, that "when he had de
stroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, he gave
them their land for an inheritance for about four hun
dred and fifty years," the period given can not be under
stood as beginning before the destruction of those nations,
neither can it be limited to the period of Joshua's eon-
' See xxi. 40 ; xxvi. 1.

xiii. 16-22.] ACTS. 15
quest, which is usually estimated at twenty-five years.
It must then refer to the whole period in which God was
gradually giving them full possession of the land. It
was well known that after the death of Joshua many
strongholds were still in the possession of the Canaan
ites, and of course they held the territory immediately
adjacent to these fortified cities. The Philistines, too,
the most indomitable of all these tribes, held their own
territory almost without dispute till after the death of
Saul, who perished in a battle in which they defeated the
hosts of Israel. It was not until late in* the reign of
David that this obstinate power was at last completely
broken down, never again to make war upon Israel (II.
Sam. viii. 1; I. Chron. xviii. 1). Now, if the period of four
hundred and eighty years, given in I. Kings vi. 1, as the
time from the exodus to the founding of Solomon's tern-.
pie in the fourth year of his reign, be understood
as counting, not from the start out of Egypt, but from the
arrival in Canaan; and the time of destroying the nations
of Canaan by Joshua be estimated at twenty-five years,
we have just four hundred and fifty-one years from
the latter date to the end of David's reign ; and thus
the period in which God was giving the land to Israel
by the gradual extermination of the remnants of heathen
left by Joshua, was "about four hundred and fifty
years," as Paul says. It lacked as much of it as the
space between the final conquest of the Philistines and
the end of David's reign, concerning which no figures
are given in the Old Testament. Stephen, like Paul,
counted the subjugation of the Canaanites as in progress
until the time of David, for he refers to them as the
" nations which God thrust out before the face of our
fathers unto the days of David " (vii. 45).

16 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 16-22.
The next statement (20), " and after these things he
gave them judges until Samuel the prophet," can not
mean that he gave them judges after the four hundred
and fifty years, seeing that this period includes both the
time of the judges, and the reigns of Saul and David. The
words are not, after this time, but " after these things
(fxsrd raura) ; " and they may therefore be construed as
referring to the events preceding the figures given. The
last of the events is the destruction of the seven nations,
that is, the breaking down of their national power by
Joshua; and it is true that after these things he gave
them judges, for it is at this very point, according to the
book of Judges, that these rulers began to have sway.
The length of Saul's reign is not given in the Old
Testament, so Paul must have learned that it was forty
years from some extra-biblical source which was current
in his day.
The words, " I have found David the son of Jesse, a
man after my heart, who shall do all my will," express a
thought gathered from Psa. lxxxi. 20, " I have found
my servant David ; " and I. Sam. xiii. 14, " The Lord
hath sought him a man after his own heart, and the Lord
hath appointed him to be prince over his people."
These words are not spoken concerning the whole life of
David, in which there were some things not at all after
God's own heart; but they had reference to David's
character when chosen to be the successor of Saul ; he
was to do all God's will in those particulars in which
Saul had failed.
The commentators have nearly all noticed the simi
larity between this introduction, and a portion of that of
Stephen, of whom Paul was a hearer (vii. 36-45). The
similarity consists only in the fact that both speakers

xiii. 16-25.] ACTS. 17
make use of the deliverance from Egyptian bondage;
for the details which they mention are almost totally dif
ferent, and they make the reference for totally different
purposes — Paul's purpose being to favorably introduce
his main theme, while Stephen was gathering up a bun
dle of misdeeds in the history of the fathers, with which
to lash the consciences of sons who were wickedly imi
tating their fathers in resistance to the Holy Spirit.
II. JESUS PREACHED AS A SAVIOUR, 23-29.
(a) THE PROPOSITION, ZS, U.
Vv. 23, 24. Having reached the name of David in
his introductory sketch, Paul passes immediately from
this name to his main theme, the appearance and work
of David's promised Son : (23) Of this man's seed hath
God according to promise brought unto Israel a Saviour
Jesus ; (24) when John had before his coming preached
the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel. In
this brief sentence Paul skillfully introduces Jesus as the
promised Son of David who was to deliver Israel (Ps.
Ixxxix. 19-37), and also states the time of his public
appearance, in accordance with the Gospel narratives,
as immediately after the close of John's ministry. Thus
he fixes attention not upon the time of his birth, but
upon the time that God "brought him to Israel as a
Saviour." (b) JOHNS TESTIMONY, 25.
Ver. 25. Having pointed to the close of John's min
istry as the time at which Jesus had been brought to
Israel as a Saviour, the speaker next introduces the
direct testimoney on this point which was borne by
John. (25) And as John was fulfilling his course, he said,

18 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 25, 26.
What suppose ye that I am ? I am not he. But behold,
there cometh one after me, the shoes of whose feet I am
not worthy to loose. This quotation from John is not
given in the words of either of our Gospels ; yet it may
nevertheless be a literal quotation from his lips: for
doubtless John very frequently, and in varying forms of
speech, corrected the idea which began to prevail among
the people, that he was the Christ. The purport of the
quotation as used by Paul is that John bore formal
testimony that one was coming after him so much more
exalted than himself that he was not worthy to perform
for him the menial service of untying his sandals ; and
who could this be but the Christ, the Son of David? No
other conclusion could appear possible to his hearers;
and thus the- words of John furnished proof of the two
affirmations contained in the proposition which Paul had
announced ; first, that the Saviour had appeared ; and
second, that he appeared after John had preached re
pentance to all the people of Israel. It is highly probable
that this very preaching of John was familiar to Paul's
hearers, as a consequence of the visits which some of
them had made to the festivals in Jerusalem, where
they would hear all about it ; and consequently Paul had
no occasion to dwell upon it.
(c) PROPHECIES FULFILLED IN THE DEATH OF JESUS, 26-29.
Ver. 26. At this point in his discourse, moved, per
haps, by some favorable expression in the countenances
of his hearers, or possibly by some apparent want of
attention, the speaker interrupts the course of his argu
ment momentarily, and vehemently urges upon his
hearers their personal interest in the matters of which he
is speaking. (26) Brethren, children of the stock of

xiii. 25-29.] ACTS. 19
Abraham, and those among you that fear God, to us is
the word of this salvation sent forth. But his impetu
osity was not so great as to make him forget the con
vincing and persuasive proofs which he had yet to
present, so he advances quickly to a fuller statement of
his argument. Vv. 27-29. After asserting that the messiahship of
Jesus was authenticated by the testimony of John, it was
incumbent on the speaker, to explain the singular fact
that the Jews in Jesusalem had put him to death as an
impostor. Had he proceeded to state this fact without
qualification, if would have appeared to his hearers as
proof that Jesus could not be the Christ; consequently,
he states it in such a way as not only to guard against
this objection, but to furnish additional evidence. (27)
For they that dwell in Jerusalem, and their rulers, be
cause they know him not, nor the voices of the prophets
which are read every Sabbath, fulfilled them by con
demning him. (28) And though they found no cause of
death in him, yet asked they of Pilate that he should be
slain. (29) And when they had fulfilled all that was
written of him, they took him down from the tree, and
laid him in a tomb. This statement ofthe case made it
appear that the Jerusalem Jews had condemned and
slain him because they did not know him ; that their
failure to know him was a result of their ignorance
of what the prophets had said concerning the Christ ;
and that both in his condemnation, and in the de
tails of his crucifixion, they fulfilled what had been
written by the prophets concerning him. Doubtless
Paul here quoted some of these prophecies, in order that
his hearers might see the correctness of his statements ;
but Luke, for brevity's sake, omits them. Thus the

20 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 27-33
crucifixion of Jesus, which, as a naked fact, would be re
garded by any Jew in the world as prima facie evidence
that he was not the Messiah, was turned into an un
answerable argument in his favor, and at the same time
the misconception of the messiahship itself which was
held by the Jews was corrected.
In this condensed account ofthe death and burial of
Jesus, the mention of their taking him down from the
tree, without a previous mention of their hanging him
on the tree, implies either that Paul's hearers were
familiar with the fact of the crucifixion, or that Luke, in
abbreviating, has omitted much of what Paul said. The
latter is the more probable explanation ; tor throughout
the speech Paul speaks as if his hearers were ignorant of
the facts about Jesus. He makes no distinction between
those who condemned him and those who took him
down and buried hi in, for the very obvious reason that
he is telling what "they that dwell in Jerusalem, and
their rulers," did, and these expressions include Joseph
and Nicodemus, who buried him. He calls the cross a
tree, as Peter does (v. 30; x. 39; I. Pet. ii. 24), for the
reason, most likely, that the main shaft of it was the
rough undressed trunk of a small tree.1 Sawed timbers
were not then iu use, and the soldiers were not likely to
hew<a piece for the sake of appearances.
(d) THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS, 80-87.
Vv. 30-33. The speaker next presents the crowning
fact in the gospel evidence, and he fails not to connect
'The word employed is not the usual one for tree (fievdpw).
but ZiAov, which strictly means wood, though it is employed by
Paul and Peter, and by John in Eevelation, in the sense of tree.
See, besides the citations made above, Gal. iii. 13 ; Rev. ii. 7 •
xxii. 2; 14.

xiii. 30-33.] ACTS. 21
it with Old Testament predictions, so as to make his
Jewish hearers more willing to receive it. (30) But God
raised him from the dead : (31) and he was seen for
many days of them that came up with him from Galilee
to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses unto the people.
(32) And we bring you good tidings of the promise made
unto the fathers, (33) how that God hath fulfilled the
same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus ; as
also it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son,
this day have I begotten thee. That the ancient prom
ise to the fathers, " In thee and in thy seed shall all the
families of the earth be blessed," had been fulfilled, was
in the nature of the case good tidings to these Jews ; but
that it was fulfilled in raising Jesus from the dead, was a
new thought to them ; and that in this were fulfilled the
words of the second psalm, " Thou art my Son ; this day
have I begotten thee," was equally new and startling.
Both propositions needed proof. It is scarcely possible
that Paul stated the testimony ofthe witnesses ofthe res
urrection as briefly as it is here given ; for it is the capi
tal fact of the whole sermon, and it needed the most
ample verification to his hearers. He doubtless gave the
testimony of the original witnesses in full ; but he seems
to have omitted his own. As he was addressing total
strangers, this was a matter of prudence. They would
be more ready to believe what he said of the testimony
of others, than of his own, because in stating the former
he would appear more disinterested.
The words, " Thou art my Son, this day have I be
gotten thee," would naturally be referred at first glance
to the birth of the person addressed ; but they are here
applied to the resurrection of Jesus. In other instances
of their occurrence in the New Testament they are ap-

22 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 30-37-
plied in the same way. In Hebrews v. 5, it is said : " So
Christ glorified not himself to be made a priest, but he
that spake unto him, Thou art my Son, this day have
I begotten thee." Now as he was not a priest until
after he had died as a victim, and was prepared to enter
heaven with his own blood, it is clear that these words
refer to his being begotten from the dead. In Hebrews
i. 5, the question, " To which of the angels said he at
any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten
thee ?" is adduced as evidence that he was superior to
angels, and it can not therefore refer to the birth by
which he was "made a little lower than the angels"
(Heb. ii. 7). The context in the psalm, too, supports
this application ; for the words are addressed, not to an
unconscious infant, that day born into the world ; but to
an intelligent being :
" I will tell of the decree :
The Lord said unto me, Thou art my Son ;
This day have I begotten thee."
The whole of the second psalm, from which the quota
tion is made, is evidently Messianic ; for none of it is
applicable to any other person than the Christ.
Vv. 34-37. Paul now adds to the testimony of the
witnesses of the resurrection a still more formal proof
that this was the purpose of God concerning the Christ.
(34) And as concerning that he raised him up from the
dead, now no more to return to corruption, he hath
spoken on this wise, I will give you the holy and sure
blessings of David. (35) Because he saith also in another
psalm, Thou shalt not give thy Holy One to see corrup
tion. (36) For David, after he had in his own generation
served the counsel of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto
his fathers, and saw corruption : (37) but he whom God

xiii. 34-39] ACTS. 23
raised up saw no corruption. The quotation, " I will
give you the holy and sure blessings of David," is taken
from Is. Iv. 3, and the context shows that it has refer
ence to him of whom it had been promised that God
would raise him up to sit on David's throne. Paul uses
the past tense in regard to the fulfillment of this promise,
because his hearers believed in the prophecies, and
would readily grant that every one of them must be ful
filled in its season. If he proved, as he had done, that
Jesus had been raised from the dead, they would readily
grant that in this the prediction was fulfilled. ¦
The reader will at once recognize the next prediction
quoted (35) as the one made use of by Peter in the first
division of his sermon on Pentecost, and the argument
based upon it in the next two verses as the same used
by Peter on that occasion. There is perhaps no passage
in the whole of the Old Testament which contains a
more explicit prediction ofthe resurrection ofthe Christ
than this ; and for this reason it became a favorite proof-
text with the early preachers. To accuse Paul of copy
ing in any unbecoming manner from Peter, or Luke of
falsely putting into Paul's mouth an argument which the
latter would not have deigned to borrow, as some have
done, is absurd ; for if two men are to argue the truth of
any proposition, how is it possible for them to do so suc
cessfully except by both employing the evidences which
support it? And these evidences, whatever the nature
of the proposition, or .of the subject matter, must from
the nature of things be always largely the same.
(e) REMISSION OF SINS PROCLAIMED THRO UGH JESUS, 88, 89:
Vv. 38, 39. Having now established by conclusive
evidences the messiahship of Jesus, Paul proceeds to offer

24 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 38, 39.
the audience the benefit of his mediation: (38) Be it
known to you therefore, brethren, that through this man
is proclaimed unto you the remission of sins : (39) and
by him every one that believeth is justified from all
things, from which ye could not be justified by the law
of Moses. Here Paul joins with John the Baptist, Jesus
himself, and Peter in setting forth remission of sins as
the one distinguishing blessing to be enjoyed in Christ.
The revised version, like that of King James, is wrong
here in the rendering, " by him," and " by the law."
The original means "in him " (iv toutoj) and "in the
law " (iv toj vofitfj)} The thought is, that the believer
who is "in Christ," a characteristic expression with
Paul, is justified in the sense of enjoying remission of
sins (38), which blessing those in cr under the law could
not enjoy. He here teaches concerning the law what he
abundantly taught later in his epistles, that in it there
was no remission of sins, and that the promise of forgive
ness which was made to those who offered the sacrifices
of the law was dependent for its fulfillment on the sub
sequent shedding of the blood of Christ.2 The benefits
of the Jewish law were extended only to those who were
born in or properly initiated into the body of people to
whom the law was given; and just so, the remission ot
sins is here proclaimed to the believer who shall be " in
Christ ; " and as we learn by another characteristic ex
pression of Paul, the believer is " baptized into Christ,''
baptized into his body."3 Thus the connection of the
remission of sins with baptism, which was plainly stated
 / 
1 " Literally, in him, as the sphere in which forgiveness was
found, rather than as the instrument through which it came."
(Plumptre). Meyer, Alford and Lechler give the same rendering.
2 Heb. x. 1-4 ; ix. 15. 3 Rom. vi. 3 ; Gal. iii. 27 ; I. Cor. xii. 13.

xiii. 38-41.] ACTS. 25
in Peter's first discourse (ii. 38), is implied in this, the
first reported discourse by Paul. The reason that he did
not, like Peter, urge his hearers to repent and be bap
tized, that they might be in Christ and enjoy the re
mission of their sins, was because, as we shall see
below, he saw that they were not prepared for such an
exhortation. III. A WARNING, 40, 41.
Vv. 40-41. The announcement which closed the pre
ceding division of the speech was most unwelcome to
Paul's hearers ; for it was an express disparagement of
the law of Moses, and such remarks always grated harsh
ly upon Jewish ears. Peter had said by implication the
same thing, when he said to the sanhedrim, " neither is
there any other name under heaven, that is given among
men, wherein we must be saved " (iv. 12). That which
was implied in Peter's speech was boldly expressed in
Paul's. He doubtless discovered after this utterance an
unfavorable expression in the faces. of his Jewish hearers;
for otherwise so watchful a speaker would not have closed
his address with the words which follow : (40) Beware
therefore, lest that come upon you which is spoken in
the prophets ;
(41) Behold, ye despisers, and wonder, and perish ;
For I work in your days,
A work which ye shall in no wise believe, if one de
clare it unto you.
The quotation was intended to warn them against
rejecting the good tidings which he preached to them,
and to show them that if they did, they would identify
themselves with the class to which these fearful words
of the prophet had reference. The words, " though

26 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 40-43.
one should declare it unto you," imply that the declaration
of it would contain such evidence as would make the
rejection of it inexcusable. The words are quoted from
Habakkuk i. 5 (Septuagint version), and the context
there shows that the reference is to an impending destruc
tion at the hands of the Chaldeans. Paul applies them
to the destruction impending over all who reject the
gospel ; for in this the words have another fulfillment.
5. Immediate Effect of the Sermon, 42, 43.
Vv. 42, 43. Though no one in the audience was pre
pared to obey the gospel ; and no one, perhaps, fully
believed what had been spoken, the majority were favor
ably impressed, as appears from the way in which they
spoke and acted. (42) And as they were going out they
besought that these words might be spoken to them the
next Sabbath. (43) Now when the synagogue broke up,
many of the Jews and the devout proselytes followed
Paul and Barnabas ; who, speaking to them, urged them
to continue in the grace of God. The request mentioned
in the former of these two verses was made as the peo
ple pressed around the apostles after leaving their seats;
while the breaking up of the synagogue mentioned in
the latter means the departure of the people from the
place. The dismission by the elders preceded both.
The " proselytes," here first mentioned, were that por
tion of the audience twice addressed in the course ofthe
sermon as "ye that fear God" (16,26). The picture
which Luke draws of these devout Gentiles and many
of the Jews following Paul and Barnabas in a crowd to
their lodging, and keeping up an earnest conversation,
shows at once the simple habits of the people, and the
deep interest which they felt in the new and thrilling

xiii. 42-44.] ACTS. 27
theme of the discourse. They were already "in the
grace of God," an expression which means only that God
regarded them with favor, as he does all earnest seekers
after truth ; and should they continue in it, as the apostles
exhorted them, they would soon attain to the remission
of sins which he had offered in Christ.

6. Results on the Next Sabbath, 44-48.
Ver. 44. The profound impression made by Paul's
sermon in the synagogue, and by the conversation of
both the preachers with those who followed them to their
lodging, very naturally spread like a contagion through
out the city during the succeeding week ; and we are not
to suppose that the preachers were in the meantime idle.
Paul's characteristic zeal, which afterward caused some
sober men to style him a babbler (xvii. 18), would not
permit him to remain silent for a whole week, when the
tide of public opinion was running so strongly in his
favor. The first result was seen in the next assemblage
at the synagogue. (44) And the next Sabbath almost
the whole city was gathered together to hear the word of
God. The previous audience had assembled merely to
hear the usual readings and exhortations of the syna
gogue ; but this one assembled for the purpose of hearing
the word which was to be preached by Paul. The
synagogues were not built with a view to such crowds,
and therefore it is highly probable that the speaker
stood in the door, as has been done so often in our west
ern country, and spoke to a large crowd without, as
well as to those within the building. The building was
not cumbered, like our modern chapels, with benches;
but the people sat on mats laid on the floor, and could

28 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 45-47.
easily turn their faces toward the door, while those out
side sat in the same way on the ground.
Ver. 45. So large an assemblage of the people to
hear a doctrine which had appeared disparaging to the
law of Moses, and which had on this account already
offended some of the Jews, could but arouse the indigna
tion of the disaffected, and was calculated to disaffect
those who had been favorably impressed on the previous
Sabbath. The leaders among them acted as their coun
trymen of like spirit in other countries uniformly acted
under such circumstances. (45) But when the Jews saw
the multitude, they were filled with jealousy, and con
tradicted the things which were spoken by Paul, and
blasphemed. This contradicting and blaspheming did
not of course precede Paul's remarks. We must under
stand that he delivered a discourse, omitted by the his
torian, in which the doctrine of the previous Sabbath
was again set forth, and that during the course of its
delivery he was interrupted by outspoken contradictions
and reproaches. Such interruptions are not unknown
at the present day in oriental congregations.
Vv. 46, 47. Thus far the apostle had addressed the
Jews directly, and the Gentiles present only indirectly;
but it now appeared that it was useless to reason further
with the former, or to attempt to conciliate them.
(46) And Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly, and said, It
was necessary that the word of God should first be spoken
to you. Seeing that ye thrust it from you, and judge your
selves unworthy of eternal life, lo, we turn to the Gen
tiles. (47) For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying,
I have set thee for a light of the Gentiles,
That thou shouldst be for salvation to the uttermost
part of the earth.

xiii. 48.] ACTS. 29
In these utterances both of the apostles took part
(46), and they were bold utterances from the considera
tion that they were certain to provoke the hatred of the
Jews, and would probably result in violence. The state
ment, " it was necessary that the word of God should
first be spoken to you," shows that the apostles under
stood that the preaching was not only to begin at Jeru
salem (Luke xxiv. 47), but that it was in every
community to be presented to the Jews first. " To the
Jew first, and also to the Greek," was the standing rule
with Paul (Rom. i. 16 ; ii. 10). The propriety of this
we have discussed under i. 8.
Ver. 48. The next statement of our historian has
been the subject of no little controversy. (48) And as
the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the
word of God : and as many as were ordained to eternal
life believed. The controversy turns on the meaning of
the word translated " were ordained " (tjaav rerarfievoc).
Calvinistic writers unite in referring it to the eternal
election and foreordination taught in their creeds. If
this were the correct interpretation, it would involve
some difficulties which they seem not to have observed.
If " as many as were foreordained to eternal life " be
lieved on that day, then all the rest were reprobates,
doomed to everlasting punishment, and Paul's further
preaching to them was useless. Now it is unaccountable
that so complete a separation of the two classes took
place throughout a large assembly in a single day ; and
still more unaccountable that this was revealed to Luke
so that he could record it. Our surprise is even yet
greater when we remember that, according to the theory,
not even the elect themselves can ever know with cer
tainty that they are elect. We should surely not adopt

30 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 48.
a conclusion so anomalous, unless we are compelled to
do so by the obvious force of the words employed. Dr.
Hackett, after rendering the passage, " and as many as
were appointed to eternal life believed," says : " This is
the only translation which the philology of the passage
allows." Grimm, in his lexicon, expresses the Calvin
istic idea more fully by giving as the meaning, " as many
as were appointed (by God) to eternal life, or to whom
God had decreed eternal life."
The word thus translated is from the root rdaaw,
the primary meaning of which is to set in order ; or,
as Grimm expresses it, to place in a certain order. In
composition with dia it is so rendered in I. Cor. xi. 34 :
"The rest will I set in order when I come." In only
one other of its eight occurrences in the New Testament
is it rendered ordained; and in this it may as well have
been rendered by its primary meaning: "The powers
that are ordained [set in order] by God" (Rom. xiii. 1).
It is usually rendered appoint ; as, to appoint a place
(Matt, xxviii. 16) ; to appoint something to be done (Acts
xxii. 10) ; to appoint a day (xxviii. 23). But in making
appointments order is brought out of preceding confusion,
or want of order, and the primary meaning of the word is
not lost sight of in this use of it. The same is true when
it is applied to a mental act. When the mind has been
in confusion on a subject, not knowing what to think,
and finally reaches a definite conclusion or purpose, the
thoughts are brought out of confusion into order, and this
term properly expresses the change. A striking example
is found in xvi. 2, where the brethren in Antioch are
said to have heard " no small dissension and question
ing," between Paul and Barnabas on one side, and certain
men from Judea on the other, in reference to a vital

xiii. 48.] ACTS. 31
question. While this dissension was in progress, the
rank and file of the brethren and sisters must have been
in the utmost confusion ; but they finally reached a con
clusion as to what should be done, and this change is ex
pressed by the word in question ; " they determined
(ira$av) that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of
them should go up lo Jerusalem to the apostles and
elders about this question." This is the rendering of
A. V., and it correctly represents the mental change
which occurred. Dr. Hackett affirms that the term
" was not used to denote an act of the mind ; " but the
translation to which this idea forced him is conclusive
evidence to the contrary. He renders the clause in
question, " they appointed that they should go up," etc.;
and in this he is followed by the authors of R. V. This
is not good English. It is an ungramraatical oise of the
word appoint. When a mission is determined on, we
appoint the men who shall- be sent, but we do not ap
point that they shall go. Evidently the state of the case
was this: the brethren were at first undetermined what
to do ; and they finally determined to do what they did.
Our English word disposed has a similar usage. It
means to arrange in a certain order, and it applies pri
marily to external objects ; but when one's mind is
arranged in accordance with a certain line of conduct,
we say he is disposed to pursue it.
We scarcely need to observe, after the preceding re
marks, that the specific meaning of this verb in a given
passage is to be determined by the context. In the
passage before us the context presents no allusion to
something done by God for one part of the audience,
and not done for the other ; or to some purpose enter-
i&ined respecting the one, and not the other ; but it speaks

32 COMMENTAR Y. [xiii. 48-
of two contrasted states of mind among the people, and
two consequent courses of conduct. Of the Jews pres
ent it is said, first, that they were filled with jealousy ;
second, that they contradicted the things which were
spoken by Paul, and blasphemed; third, that they judged
themselves unworthy of eternal life. In contrast with
these, the Gentiles, first, were glad ; second, they glori
fied the word of God ; third, they were Terarptivoc for
eternal life. Now which ofthe specific meanings of the
Greek word shall we here insert ? It stands contrasted
with the mental act of the Jews in judging themselves
unworthy of eternal I ife, and the law of antithesis requires
that we understand it of some mental act of the opposite
nature. The rendering, were determined, or were dis
posed for eternal life, is the only one of which tbe case
admits. Tbe verb is in the passive voice, and a past
tense, and therefore it represents a mental state which
had been brought about before the moment of which the
writer is speaking. In other words, tbe statement that
" as many as were determined for eternal life believed "
implies that they were brought to this determination be
fore they believed. At some previous time in their his
tory these Gentiles, who Jiad been born and reared in hea
thenism, had heard of eternal life as taught by the Jews.
Either under the teaching of the Jews, or under the teach
ing of Paul since his arrival in Antioch, or under both
combined, they had been brought out of a state of mental
confusion on this transcendently important subject, into
a determination to obtain eternal life if possible.1
1 " Better, ' as many as were disposed for.' " (Plumptre). " All
who, by the grace of God, desired to range themselves in the
ranks of those who desired eternal life accepted the faith."
(Farrar, Life of Paul, 211). " Rather, were set in order for, i. e.,
disposed for eternal life." (Jacobsonin Speaker's Com.) "As many

xiii. 48, 49.] ACTS. 33
Let it be noted that the being determined for eternal
life, and the believing, stand here as cause and effect, or
at least as antecedent and consequent. This is not at all
unnatural or uncommon. A man who has learned that
eternal life may be obtained, and has made up his mind to
obtain it if within his power, is the very man to readily
accept the true way of obtaining it when that way is
clearly pointed out to him ; while the man who is so
much absorbed in worldly matters as to be indifferent to
eternal life is the very man to allow the testimony con
cerning the way of obtaining it to pass in at one ear and
out at the other. We find it so in all of our congrega
tions at the present day. Two men sit side by side
under the sound of the same gospel sermon; one is
awake to the importance of the life to come, while the
other is absorbed in the life that now is. The latter will
turn a deaf ear to the preaching, incurring Paul's reproach
of judging himself unworthy of eternal life, while the
former will believe the glad message, and fly to the seat
of mercy. It is precisely this difference as respects
eternal life which Luke here points out; and he points it
out because it accounts for the fact that one class in
Paul's audience believed, and the other did not. It
leaves the responsibility for belief and unbelief, with
their eternal consequences, on men, and not on God.
7. Final Results in Antioch, 49-52.
Ver. 49. The devout proselytes who believed under
Paul's second sermon proved to be the first fruits of a
as were disposed to eternal life. The meaning of the word dis.
posed must be determined by the context. The Jews had judged
themselves unworthy of eternal life : the Gentiles, as many as
were disposed to eternal life, believed." (Alford).

34 COMMENTARY. [xiii. 50.
large harvest. (49) And the word of the Lord was spread
abroad throughout all the region. This means that not
only in Antioch, but in all Pisidia lying adjacent to it,
converts to the truth were made. Paul's labors were
apparently confined to the city, but the report of his work,
as it spread from place to place, brought interested hear
ers from every direction, even as we see in our own age.
Ver. 50. The jealousy ofthe Jews, which had been
aroused by the presence ofthe great audience that heard
Paul's second sermon, was intensified by these triumphs
of the word, and it led, as similar triumphs had done
from the beginning in Jerusalem, to the violence which
Paul and Barnabas had anticipated (46). (50) But the
Jews urged on the devout women of honorable estate, and
the chief men of the city, and stirred up a persecution
against Paul and Barnabas, and cast them out of their
borders. These devout women were among the Gentile
proselytes who heard Paul ; for such is the usage of the
word rendered devout ; but they were not of those who
had been determined for eternal life; and this shows that
not all the Gentile attendants of the synagogue became
believers under the second sermon. That these women
were of honorable estate, that is, of high connections in
the political world, and satisfied with the present life, ac
counts for their being less determined for eternal life than
those who believed. They doubtless belonged to the
families of the "chief men ofthe city," and it was
through their influence that the latter were stirred up to
persecute the apostles by banishing them from the city.
Women have always been among the most steadfast
friends of Jesus, and yet some women have been ready
and effective tools of his enemies. It seems that the Jews
acted with practical unanimity in this wicked procedure,

xiii. 50-52.] ACTS. 35
and that the favorable impression made on some of them
by Paul's first sermon (43) was but transitory.
Vv. 51, 52. Paul and Barnabas were not without
indignation when they were thus ignominiously expelled
from the city. They were pained to think of the ingrati
tude which it manifested, and to anticipate the prejudice
which the fact would excite against them when they
should enter into other cities with this stigma upon them.
Luke tells us briefly how they acted, and how the
disciples felt after their teachers were driven from them.
(51) But they shook off the dust of their feet against
them, and came unto Iconium. (52) And the disciples
were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit. The act
of the departing apostles, witnessed no doubt by those
for whom it was intended, was not an idle or childish
mark of resentment, as it would be in an uninspired
teacher ; but it was designed as a solemn " testimony
against them " — a prophecy ofthe righteous judgment of
God, whom they had rejected in rejecting his chosen
messengers (Mark vi. 11 ; Luke x. 16). The statement
that the disciples, under these painful circumstances, were
" filled with joy and the Holy Spirit," is to us a surprise ;
for we should have expected them to be filled with grief
and fear. It shows that their assurance concerning the
everlasting life for which they had been determined, and
their belief that the Spirit of God now dwelt in their
mortal bodies, gave them a joy which could now be
maintained without the aid of human teachers, and of
which no human power could deprive them. They
were capable now of standing alone, and of edifying one
another.

36 COMMENTARY. [xiv. 1.
8. Events in Iconium, xiv. 1-7.
Ver. 1. On leaving Antioch the apostles took a
road leading to the southeast, as if they were aiming to
reach Cilicia, Paul's native province. They pursued this
course over a vast plain grazed by innumerable flocks of
sheep for about ninety1 miles, when, after crossing a
mountain ridge, they reached Iconium, the largest and
most important city in that part of Asia Minor, both
then and now. Lofty mountains rise to the west, to the
north, and to the south of it, while to the east there
opens another vast plain with a beautiful lake in the
midst of it. Here the principal routes of travel from the
cardinal points of the compass meet and cross one an
other, making Iconium a center of traffic and travel for
an extensive region; The apostles had passed by all
smaller places on the way, and kept this city in view,
both because it was such a center, and because it con
tained a synagogue, within and around which they could
find a people prepared to hear the gospel, (i) And it came
to pass in Iconium, that they entered together into the
synagogue of the Jews, and so spake that a great multi
tude both of the Jews and the Greeks believed. The mul
titude who believed was great, not in proportion to the
whole population of the city, but to the number who
usually believed in such places, and especially to those in
Antioch. The Greeks, who made up part of the number,
1 The geography of the interior of Asia Minor is very imper
fectly known by western scholars. This is strikingly illustrated
by the conflicting statements of the distance from Antioch to
Iconium, found in recent commentaries. It is represented by
Farrar, Jacobson, and Plumptre, as 60 miles ; by Gloag as 50 ; and
by Hacket as 45. Prof. Ramsey, who mu-3t be accepted as author
ity on the subject because of his very recent explorations in that
region, furnishes the figures given above.

xiv. 1-3.] ACTS. 37
were doubtless proselytes in the main. The immediate
cause of their belief is distinctly stated by Luke ; the
apostles " so spake " that they believed. It was the con
clusiveness of the evidence, and the earnestness with
which it was presented, that carried conviction to the
hearers, thus verifying Paul's subsequent doctrine, that
" faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of
Christ" (Rom. x. 17).
Vv. 2, 3. More Jews were won to Christ there than
in Antioch, but those who were not won exhibited the
spirit universal with their class. (2) But the Jews that
were disobedient stirred up the souls of the Gentiles, and
made them evil affected against the brethren. (3) Long
time therefore they tarried there, speaking boldly in the
Lord, who bare witness unto the word of his grace, grant
ing signs and wonders to be done by their hands. The
Gentiles whom the disobedient Jews stirred up included
others besides Greeks ; that is, the native Lycaonians,
and perhaps persons of other nationalities residing in the
city. It must have been by false and malicious repre
sentations that the Jews succeeded in stirring them up.
This opposition seems to have increased the boldness of
the apostles, and it caused them to continue there "a
long time ; " but how many days, weeks, or months, we
can not say. This is the only note of time given by
Luke in the whole account of this tour.
The manner in which the Lord bore witness to the
word of his favor, as here stated by Luke, is worthy of
notice for the contrast which it presents with much of
the phraseology of modern times. The proof with many
in these days, that a man's ministry is " owned and ac
cepted " by the Lord, is found in the " abundant outpour
ings of the Holy Spirit " which attend it ; and this means

38 COMMENTARY.^ [xiv. 3-7.
the number of "powerful conversions" which reward it.
But the Lord's method, according to Luke, was by
" granting signs and wonders to be done " by the hands
of the preachers. Not a word is said by him, or by any
other inspired writer, of such an attestation as is now
constantly brought forward. This difference shows that
our modern revivalists confound the attestations of the
word by signs aud miracles, which was common in the
apostolic age, with the exciting scenes which now occur
in revivals, many of which were not dreamed of by the
early evangelists. This whole subject needs to be re-
studied in the light thrown upon it by the book of Acts.
Vv. 4-7. The bold and persistent efforts of Paul and
Barnabas stirred the city to its depths, but they failed
to overcome the obstinacy ofthe Jews, and the depravity
of the Gentiles. (4) But the multitude of the city was
divided ; and part held with the Jews, and part with the
apostles. (5) And when there was made an onset both
of the Gentiles and of the Jews with their rulers, to en
treat them shamefully, and to stone them, (6) they
became aware of it, and fled unto the cities of Lyeaonia,
Lystra and Derbe, and the region round about : (7) and
there they preached the gospel. Here, as in Antioch,
the Jews dared not use violence toward the preachers,
for fear that they would themselves suffer as disturbers
of the peace ; so they worked through others until they
gained the cooperation of the city rulers. As the onset
which was concocted involved stoning as well as other
mistreatment, we suppose that the Jews had obtained
permission to do that part of the work, for it was their
national form of capital punishment. As in all such
cases, although the multitude of the city was divided,
the party for truth and right were less active than the

xiv. 4-12.] ACTS. 39
party for injustice ; and, because they were for the right,
they were not willing to use violence. The escape of
the missionaries must have been narrow ; and it was due,
no doubt, to the watchful kindness of some friend, it
may be from among the disobedient, who exposed the plot
in time to prevent its execution. The next journey of
the apostles, like the preceding, was toward the south
east, across the extensive plain which we have already
mentioned (1), to Lystra, about forty miles from Iconium.
9. Labors and Results in Lystra, 8-20.
Vv. 8-12. Lyeaonia, the district into which the
apostles fled, was east of Pisidia, and north of the Taurus
mountains. The exact site of Lystra was not known in
modern times until it was recently identified by Prof.
Ramsay. (Historical Geography of Asia Minor).
Finding at Lystra no Jewish synagogue to afford
them an assembly of devout hearers, the missionaries
were constrained to preach in the open air. The narrow
streets universal in the cities of that age were unsuited
to gatherings of the people ; but in every city there was
more or less unoccupied space about the gates, both in
side and outside, and these were always favorite places
of concourse. It seems from the context below (13)
that Paul was addressing a crowd at the principal gate
when the following incident took place: (8) And at
Lystra there sat a certain man, impotent in his feet, a
cripple from his mother's womb, who never had walked.
(9) The same heard Paul speaking ; who, fastening his
eyes upon him, and seeing that he had faith to be made
whole, (10) said with a loud voice, Stand upright on thy
feet. And he leaped up and walked, (n) And when
the multitude saw what Paul had done, they lifted up

40 COMMENTARY. [xiv. 8-12.
their voice, saying in the speech of Lyeaonia, The gods
are come down to us in the likeness of men. (12) And
they called Barnabas, Jupiter ; and Paul, Mercury, be
cause he was the chief speaker. The " faith to be made
whole," which Paul discovered in the countenance of the
cripple, is no more nor less than belief that Paul could
make him whole. The idea that it was a faith which
would enable Paul to make him whole finds no coun
tenance in the Scriptures. (See remarks under iii. 16).
He could not have obtained this faith from anything
miraculous which Paul had yet done ; for evidently this
was the first cure effected in Lystra. The source of his
belief then must have been something which Paul had
said. Paul had probably spoken ofthe miraculous cures
wrought by Jesus, and of the power given by him to his
apostles to work similar cures in proof of their divine
mission. He may even have mentioned the miracles
which he had wrought at Iconium (3), and have com.
menced looking in the crowd around him for a proper
subject. Seeing the cripple, and fastening his eyes upon
him, he saw that the cripple, with that credulity which
always characterizes persons with chronic diseases, be
lieved, from the solemn statements made, that Paul had
the power which he claimed. Instantly, therefore, with
a loud voice, Paul commanded, " Stand upright on thy
feet." With amazement the crowd fell away from him
as he leaped and walked, and as quickly as the shock of
surprise would allow them to think, with one accord
there flashed into their minds the only conclusion which
their heathen education would allow, that two gods in
the form of men had come down to them. We shall see
another heathen crowd jump to the same conclusion from
a similar event farther on (xxviii. 1-6). As instantane-

xiv. 8-13.] ACTS. 41
ous as the conviction that the preachers were gods, was
the opinion as to which gods they were ; for who could
one of them be but Jupiter, whose temple stood before
their gate as the patron god of the city ? And as the
other was the chief speaker, who could he be but the god
of eloquence, and Jupiter's interpreter ? Their excite
ment caused them very naturally to break forth in their
native tongue, instead of the Greek in which Paul had
addressed them, and which they spoke as an acquired
language. Their shouts necessarily silenced Paul for the
time being, and perhaps, while he was waiting for
silence to be restored so that he could continue his
remarks, he failed to notice that a part of the crowd
darted away, some to bring two or more fat bulls which
were in readiness for a sacrifice to Jupiter, and some
to bring garlands of flowers with which to decorate the
horns of the victims.
Ver. 13. While Paul was still waiting to renew
his discourse, the people made a rush toward the temple,
and he learned from their outcries what was about to take
place. (13) And the priest of Jupiter whose temple was
before the city, brought oxen1 and garlands unto the
gates,2 and would have done sacrifice with the multi-
1 The original is ravpovc, bulls.
2 The position is taken by Mr. Howson (Life and Epistles of
Paul), and he is followed in it by several commentators, that the
word here rendered gates, irvlavac, never means the gates of a city,
but always the gates of a private house ; and that we are there
fore to understand that Paul and Barnabas had retired to their
place of lodging, and that the idolators brought the victims to the
gate of the latter to make the sacrifice. But the criticism on the
use of the Greek word is proved to be inaccurate by the fact that
in the A pocalypse it is used repeatedly for the gates of a city.
See xxi. 12, 13, 15, 21, 25 ; xxii. 14. Furthermore, as there was a
temple to Jupiter in front of the city gate (13), the priest could

42 COMMENTARY. [xiv. 13-18.
tudes. The priest was doubtless moving toward the
altar in front of the temple, which may have been but a
few steps from where Paul stood, and the people at once,
by a common impulse, rushed forward to join in the
honors so promptly made ready for their heavenly vis
itors. Vv. 14-18. Paul and Barnabas were shocked beyond
measure to see themselves about to be honored as gods.
(14) But when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of
it, r they rent their garments, and sprang forth among
the multitude, crying out (15) and saying, Sirs, why
do ye these things ? We also are men of like passions
with you, and bring you good tidings, that ye should
turn from these vain things unto the living God, who made
the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that in
them is : (16) who in the generations gone by suffered
all the nations to walk in their own ways. (17) And
yet he left not himself without witness, in that he did
good, and gave you from heaven rains and fruitful sea
sons, filling your hearts with food and gladness. (18)
And with these sayings scarce restrained they the mul
titudes from doing sacrifice unto them.
It should be observed that Luke here applies the
title apostle to both Barnabas and Paul (14), as we have
not bave thought of leaving it, and going into the street to offer
sacrifice. These considerations constrain us to take the view of
the whole transaction which we have given.
1 Not " heard of it," as if they were at a distance, and did not
see it ; or as if they did not understand the Lycaonian dialect,
and therefore knew not that they had been called gods until some
one who could speak Greek told them of it ; but simply " heard
it" (aKovcavrec). They may have seen the priests and others
bringing the bulls and flowers without the thought of what was
intended until some outcry from the priests, or from the crowd
immediately about the apostles, made it known to them. The

xiv. 14-18.] ACTS. 43
done occasionally in preceding remarks. While Barna
bas was not one of the twelve, and therefore not an
apostle in the same sense that they were, he still bore
the title in common with some others.1 This was
probably due to their having been under the personal
instruction of Jesus, or possibly to their having been
present when the great commission was given as recorded
by Matthew.2 The habit of rending one's clothing when suddenly
and violently agitated, though as old as the time of
Jacob (Gen. xxxvii. 29-34), appears here (14) the last
time in the Bible. The self-possession which the Chris
tian faith inculcates and imparts soon made it disappear
from the customs of the Christian Jews.
Though Barnabas, on this occasion, received the chief
honor from the people, Luke on that account placing his
name foremost in the paragraph just quoted, yet Paul
was the master spirit in all these exciting scenes. He
continued to play the part of Mercury, which the people
had assigned him; for the speech to the idolaters is his in
thought and diction. Mr. Howson notes the coincidence
between the exhortation to the Lystrians, that they should
"turn from these vain things to the living God," and
his remark to the Thessalonians, that they had " turned
from idols to serve the living and true God ; " between
the remark, that " in generations past God had suffered
the Gentiles to go in their own ways," and his statement
fo the Athenians, the "time of this ignorance God has
narrative furnishes no ground at all for the supposition that
neither Paul nor Barnabas understood what the Lycaonians had
said. 1 Rom. xvi. 7 ; II. Cor. xi. 13 ; Gal. i. 19 ; Eev. ii. 2.
z For an elaborate discussion of the N. T. use of this title, see
the essay on the subject in Lightfoot's commentary on Galatians.

44 COMMENTARY. [xiv. 14-19.
overlooked;" and finally, between the argument to
prove that God had not left himself without witness
among the heathen, and that in Romans (i. 20), where
he says : " The invisible things of him since the creation
of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through
the things which are made, even his everlasting power
and divinity; that they may be without excuse." To
which I may add, that the coincidence in thought be
tween this speech and that made in Athens to another
company of idolaters (xvii. 22-31) is so striking that
the latter might be regarded as the same speech altered
to suit another audience. The speech was successful in
preventing the sacrifice intended, but it left the idola
trous crowd sorely perplexed as to who their two visitors
might be.
Ver. 19. Paul continued his labors from day to day,
but so dense was the darkness in which these idolaters
were enshrouded, that he labored in vain to make them
understand the revelation which he brought to them.
In the meantime the news of that strange scene, in which
men were about to be worshiped as gods, flew like wild
fire from city to city, until it reached the ears of Paul's
enemies in Iconium and Antioch, when a number of
these, urged by hatred, made a swift journey to Lystra.
(19) But there came Jews thither from Antioch and
Iconium : and having persuaded the multitudes, they
stoned Paul, and dragged him out of the city, supposing
that he was dead. It is difficult to comprehend the
malignity of these Jews. Those who came from Antioch
had journeyed one hundred and thirty miles, and those
from Iconium forty, to maltreat a man who. had not
harmed them, but whom they hated without a cause. It
is not so difficult to imagine the representations by which

xiv. 19.] ACTS. 45
they persuaded the Lystrians. They could say, We un
derstand that you have taken these two countrymen of
ours for gods in human form. We can tell you who they
they are. They are Jews who came to Antioch and acted
so base a part as to disgust all of their fellow Jews in
the city, and to cause the honorable women and chief
men of the city to rise up and drive them away. They
then went to Iconium, and made themselves such pests
that the city rulers, with the aid of Jews and Gentiles
acting together, prepared to stone them, when they fled
like thieves and came to Lystra. We are not willing
for them to disgrace our name and nation any longer,
and with your permission we will put an end to their
sorcery ; for it is by the power of evil spirits that they
work wonders among tbe people. On hearing such
representations from the countrymen of Paul and Bar
nabas, the Lystrians readily consented to let them have
their own way.
Knowing from past experience how certainly Paul
would escape their hands if he should learn what was
on foot, they waited till he came forth as usual to
preach near the gateway, when they made a rush with
stones already prepared, and pelted him to death in a
moment. He fell inside the city gate. Two or three of
the rudest and strongest of the crowd were directed to
remove his body ; so, seizing him by the hands, or per
haps by the feet, they dragged him to a place outside the
city where his body was left, like that of a dead beast, to
any fate which might await it. Satisfied with what they
had done, and fearing, possibly, that some authority
higher than that of the city rulers might call them to
account for their bloody work, the murderers in all prob
ability started the same hour on their journey homeward.

46 COMMENTARY. [xiv. 19, 20.
They supposed that they would never hear of Paul again
as a living disturber of their peace.
Ver. 20. Up to this moment Luke has given us no
intimation that Paul's labors in Lystra had been rewarded
with converts. Now they appear on his page, and in a
most pitiable condition. (20) But as the disciples stood
round about him, he rose up, and entered into the city :
and on the morrow he went forth with Barnabas to
Derbe. How long the disciples waited before they ven
tured out to where the body lay; how long they stood
over him before he showed signs of returning conscious
ness; and how long after that before he and they ven
tured back into the city, Luke leaves to the imagination
of his reader. We can readily imagine the bitter tears
and cries of that little band, while they gazed upon the
wounds and bruises of one whom they had learned to
love so tenderly; while they thought ofthe cruelty with
which he had been murdered ; and when they glanced
at the future awaiting themselves, like lambs, as they
were, in the midst of wolves. We can rejoice with them
when Paul opened his eyes ; and wonder with them that,
after he was stoned to unconsciousness, the last spark of
life which may have lingered in his body was not extin
guished by the horrid manner in which he was dragged
over the rough pavements, and through the dust and
filth of the street and of the highway, to the place
where they found him. And how was he able, so soon,
to rise up and walk ? How is it possible that he was
able to start on a new journey with Barnabas the next
day ? Does not the last fact especially tell us of gentle
hands and loving ministrations all through the night,
bathing and dressing his many wounds and bruises, and
cheering him with words of deepest sympathy?

xiv. 20.] ACTS. 47
Thank God, we are not left altogether to imagination
for the names of those tender and loving friends. Tim
othy was a native of Lystra, baptized during this very
visit of Paul ; and many years after this we hear, from
the depths of the Roman prison whence Paul was led
forth to the executioner's block, these melting words
addressed to this most beloved of all his companions in
tribulation : " I thank God, whom I serve from my fore
fathers in a pure conscience, how unceasing is my re
membrance of thee in supplications, night and day long
ing to see thee, remembering thy tears, that I may be
filled with joy ; having been reminded of the unfeigned
faith that is in thee; which dwelt first in thy grand
mother Lois and in thy mother Eunice; and, I am
persuaded, in thee also" (II. Tim. i. 3-5). Were those
remembered tears the tears which Timothy, then a boy
of fifteen,1 shed over Paul's bruised and mangled body?
And were the faithful Eunice and the venerable Lois in
the group which stood around that body till animation
was restored? If it was into their house that Paul was
led, and by their hands that he was nursed through the
night, the mystery of his speedy recovery is in part at
least explained. What a scene was that to be witnessed'
by a boy of fifteen, who had been trained from infancy
to the holiest sentiments of the Jewish Scriptures, who
was but newly born into the kingdom of the Redeemer,
and whose soul was responsive to everything noble in
human character ! No wonder that his heart was ever
JAs this event occurred not later than the year 48, and as
Timothy was still a youth at the date of Paul's first epistle to
him (I. Tim. iv. 12), which was written not earlier than 64,
Timothy could not at the time of the stoning have been much
older than fifteen.

48 COMMENTARY. [xiv. 20-22.
after bound to Paul's like that of a dutiful son to a lov
ing father. And what a compensation did Paul himself
afterward find for all his sufferings in Lystra, in the life
long devotion of him concerning whom he could say,
" I have no man likeminded ?" The very hour in which
the whole world seemed to forsake him and hate him
brought to his side the dearest friend he ever knew.
10. Success in .Derbe, and Return to Antioch,
21-28.
Vv. 21, 22. Having been compelled to fly from
Antioch, from Iconium, and from Lystra, who can tell
the feelings of the wounded missionary as he approached
the gates of another heathen city, bearing visible marks
of the indignity which he had suffered ? But He who
brings light out of darkness caused a refreshing light to
shine on the dark pathway of his faithful servant by
granting him here a peaceful and abundant harvest of
souls. (21) And when they had preached the gospel to
that city, and had made many disciples, they returned
to Lystra, and to Iconium, and to Antioch, (22) confirm
ing the souls of the disciples, exhorting them to continue
in the faith, and that through many tribulations we
must enter into the kingdom of God.
At Derbe, where the apostles seem to have suffered no
persecution, they were some miles farther eastward than
at Lystra, and were not far from the well known pass
called the Gates of Cilicia, which leads through the
Taurus mountains down into the plain of Cilicia in the
direction of Tarsus. Had Paul allowed the thought of
rest for a time among friends and kindred to control his
movements, he would now have revisited the home of
his childhood ; but he thought of the disciples whom he

xiv. 21-23.] ACTS. 49
had left behind him to an unknown fate, and he turned
back at great hazard to revisit them. How he succeeded
in re-entering Lystra, and Iconium, and Antioch, and
remaining in each long enough to instruct and organize
the disciples, without a renewal ofthe persecutions which
had driven him away from all of these cities, Luke does
not inform us. It is possible that the fury of the mob
had spent itself, and that his presence was tolerated be
cause he made no further effort to gain converts to the
new faith. The meetings were doubtless held in private,
and perhaps in the night. The apostles confirmed the
souls of the disciples by exhorting them to continue in
the faith, and by assuring them that the pathway into
the everlasting kingdom, at least in their day, was
through many such tribulations as they had already en
dured. They were made to realize that the prize at the
end of the journey was worth all the hardships of the
way, and thus they were made strong to endure. There
were many tearful scenes, as the two brethren, who had
come among these people like visitors from a better
world, were bidding them a final farewell, and leaving
them to make their own way through the temptations
and conflicts which beset them.
Ver. 23. They were left as " sheep in the midst of
wolves ; " but they were committed to the care of the
great Shepherd of the sheep, and were supplied with
under-shepherds to keep them in the fold. (23) And
when they had appointed1 for them elders in every
1 The word here translated appointed (xeiporovea) means prima
rily to stretch out the hand ; secondarily, to appoint by a show
of the hand ; and thirdly, to appoint or elect without regard to
the method. See Grimm's N. T. Greek Lexicon. Whether it
designates here an act of Paul and Barnabas, or one which they
caused the people to do, is not made clear. The force of the

50 COMMENTAR Y. [xiv. 23.
church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended
them to the Lord, on whom they had believed. Here we
see fasting and prayer connected with the appointment of
elders, as we saw prayer and the imposition of hands in the
appointment ofthe seven servants ofthe church in Jeru
salem (vi. 6), and as we saw the last two with fasting in
the separation of Barnabas and Saul to their appointed
work (xiii. 3). The laying on of hands, which was part
of the ceremony in those two services, is not mentioned
here; but as we have seen that it was a part of the
service of appointment to office, we may safely infer that
it was not omitted.
It should be observed that a plurality of elders were
appointed in " every church ; " and this, so far as we are
able to trace the facts, was the universal practice of the
apostles. In appointing these, Paul and Barnabas were
but following the example of the older apostles, by
whom this office was instituted in the churches of Judea
(xi. 30). An elaborate discussion of the subject would
belong properly to a separate treatise, or to a Commentary
on I. Timothy. If any one is surprised that men were
found in these newly founded congregations possessed of
the high qualifications for the office laid down by Paul
in his epistles to Titus and Timothy, he should remem
ber that although these disciples had been but a compara
tively short time in the church, many of them were, in
character and knowledge of the Scriptures, the ripest
fruits ofthe Jewish synagogue; and they needed only the
word favors the former view, while the previous act of the twelve
in requiring the multitude to choose the deacons (vi. 1-3), favors
the latter. For a summary of many opinions on the subject, see
Meyer's commentary, note L by the American editor after chap
ter xiv.

xiv. 23-26.] ACTS. 51
additional knowledge which the gospel brought, in order
to be models of wisdom and piety for the churches.
They were not " novices " (I. Tim. iii. 6) in the sense of
being newly turned away from wickedness. Cornelius
the centurion might represent the class, as respects Gen
tile converts, and Nathaniel those brought in from the
Jews. Vv. 24-26. Having done all in their power for the
churches which they had planted, the apostles continued
their homeward journey by descending from Antioch to
Perga, where they had first landed in their voyage from
Cyprus. (24) And they passed through Pisidia, and
came to Pamphylia. ' (25) And when they had spoken
the word in Perga they went down to Attalia; and
thence they sailed to Antioch, from whence they had
been committed to the grace of God for the work which
they had fulfilled. Why they did not "speak the
word " in Perga at their first visit, and what success
they had now, are alike left out of the account of
Luke, whose omissions, like those of all other New
Testament writers, are not less remarkable than what
he records. It is probable that the preaching done
here now was actuated more by the desire to use
fully occupy the time of waiting for a vessel bound
to Antioch, than by a decided hope of accomplishing
visible results ; and this view is confirmed by the fact
that they at last went by land to Attalia,1 about six
teen miles distant on the sea coast, where they would
be more certain to find a vessel than up the river Ces
trus at Perga. Thence they "sailed to Antioch," with
out going ashore at any intermediate point.
1 Attalia is still a seaport of some importance at which the
coasting steamers of the Levant make regular calls.

52 COMMENTARY. [xiv. 27, 28.
Vv. 27, 28. It is doubtful whether the church in
Antioch had heard from Paul and Barnabas since they
first left Perga. John, on his return, may have brought
them news of the journey to that point. When, there
fore, they appeared unheralded on the streets of the city,
after an absence of three or four years, we may well
suppose that they were met with hearty greetings and
much questioning. They had gone on the first mission
ever sent out to the heathen world, and they were as
eager to tell their story as the disciples were to hear it.
He who returns from a hard fought field bearing good
tidings, pants beneath the burden of his untold story.
(27) And when they were come, and had gathered the
church together, they rehearsed all things that God had
done with them, and how that he had opened a door of
faith to the Gentiles. (28) And they tarried no little time
with the disciples. The metaphor of an open door to
represent men's access to the privileges of the gospel, or
the access of the preacher to the hearts of the people, was
first employed by our Lord. (Jno. x. 1, 2, 7, 9) ; it was a
favorite with Paul (I. Cor. xvi. 9 ; II. Cor. ii. 12 ; Col. iv.
3) ; and it is found in the lips of our Lord after his glori
fication (Rev. iii. 8, 20). Its employment here to rep
resent the access to faith which had now been opened to
the heathen world by the mission of the apostles, is
probably, as Plumptre suggests, an echo in Luke's nar
rative of Paul's own language, in the report under con
sideration. The "no little time" which the apostles
now spent in Antioch counts forward to their journey
to Jerusalem mentioned in the next chapter, and if we
estimate it by comparison with their previous stay in
the same city, it was mofe than a year (cf. xi. 26).

xv. 1.] ACTS. 53
SEC. II. A CONTROVERSY ON CIRCUM
CISION. (XV.)
1. The Beginning or the Controversy, 1-5.
Ver. 1. At this point our historian makes a sud
den transition from the, conflicts of the disciples with
Jews and Gentiles, to one of momentous importance
among themselves. One phase of this controversy had
taken its origin from the baptism of uncircumcised Gen
tiles in the house of Cornelius. The question then was
whether such persons should be baptized ; and by the
evidences of the divine will which had been presented to
Peter, and which he presented to the brethren, it was
settled, definitely and finally (xi. 18). This fact, strangely
overlooked by many commentators, it is necessary to
bear distinctly in mind, if we would distinguish the suc
cessive phases which this controversy assumed. The
question now raised in Antioch was a different one.
Without controverting the propriety of baptizing Gen
tiles, as Paul and Barnabas had been doing, both abroad
and here in Antioch, the disputants took the position that
after being baptized, and receiving forgiveness of sins,
they must be circumcised as a condition of their final
salvation. The position, and the men who assumed it
are thus introduced : (i) And certain men came down
from Judea and taught the brethren, saying, Except ye
be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye can not be
saved. The fact that these men came from Judea,
where the gospel was first preached, and where the
original apostles had been the teachers, gave their utter
ances much authority with the Antioch brethren, so it

54 COMMENTARY. [xv. 1, 2.
is not necessary to suppose that they claimed express
authority from the apostles for their teaching, though it
is possible that they did. They insisted on circumcision,
not because of the covenant with Abraham, which was
the original ground of the obligation, but because of
the law of Moses ; and they did so because, as a part of
the law of Moses, circumcision bound those who submit
ted to it to keep all of the law, while circumcision as a
mere Abrahamic rite did not ; for the Ishmaelites, the
Edomites, the Midianites, and other descendants of Abra
ham, were confessedly not brought under the law of
Moses by their circumcision. The phraseology em
ployed shows, what is brought out expressly farther on
(5), that they insisted on circumcision (c after the custom
of Moses," because they held that all the baptized,
whether Jews or Gentiles, must keep the law of Moses
in order to final salvation. They could not conceive,
as yet, that this divinely given law, which had been
in existence so long, and for the preservation of which
their fathers had suffered so much, could be disre
garded by any who would be heirs of eternal life.
When they thought of the apostolic commission, they
must have included circumcision and the keeping of the
law among lhe things referred to in the words, " teach
ing them [the baptized] to observe all things whatso
ever I have commanded you" (Matt, xxviii. 20).
Ver. 2. Paul, who had long ago received by direct
revelation from Christ a correct knowledge of the gospel
which he preached (Gal. i. 11, 12), knew perfectly that
this teaching was erroneous, and Barnabas had learned
the same from him, if not from some other source ; so the
two united with all their might in opposing the Judean
teachers. We have to tbink of a congregation in our

xv. 2.] ACTS. 55
own day, distracted by an earnest controversy between
its teachers over a vital question of doctrine, in order to
realize the distress and confusion which must have
racked the minds of the brethren in Antioch while this
controversy was in progress. Paul and Barnabas did not
succeed in silencing their opponents, but they so con
ducted the discussion as to bring about a fortunate
decision of a provisional character. (2) And when Paul
and Barnabas had no small dissension and questioning
with them, the brethren determined1 that Paul and
Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to
Jerusalem, unto the apostles and elders about this
question. If the brethren at Antioch had properly estimated
the authority of an inspired apostle, they would have
accepted implicitly Paul's decision without this mission
to Jerusalem ; but their familiarity with the person of
the apostle, like that of the ISazarenes with the person
of Jesus, made them slow to realize that he spoke with
divine authority ; and the fact that he was not one of the
original twelve caused them to think his utterances less
authoritative than theirs. They learned, as the result of
the mission, what they should have realized at first; and
it is not probable that they ever doubted Paul's teach
ing again. <
As the proposal to send Paul and the others to Jeru
salem about this matter involved the implication that
the former was inferior in authority to the apostles
and elders there, it is probable that Paul, for the main
tenance of his apostolic prerogative, would have refused
to go, had not the Lord expressly commanded him to do
1 On the correctness of the rendering, '' determined," instead
of "appointed," (R. V.), see the discussion under xiii. 48.

56 COMMENTARY. [xv. 2, 3.
so ; for he himself says in reference to this journey, " I
went up by revelation " (Gal. ii. 2). This revelation
requiring him to go was made because it was the divine
purpose to settle the question at issue, not for the church
in Antioch alone, but for all the world and for all
time. Before we leave this verse, let it be distinctly' noted
that this procedure was not an appeal from the decision
of a church to some higher tribunal ; for in fact no de
cision had been rendered. Neither was it an overture
from a congregation to a representative body, asking for
instruction; for the body applied to was composed of
the elders of another single congregation, together with
such apostles as might be found there. In truth only
three of the older apostles, as the sequel shows, took part
in rendering the decision (Gal. ii. 9). In these two
essential particulars the step taken by the Antioch church
differs from all modern appeals from lower to higher
ecclesiastical courts, and it furnishes no precedent for
the latter.
Ver. 3. The journey to Jerusalem was made by
land, and the messengers passed through two districts
¦ which had been evangelized already to a considerable
extent. (3) They therefore being brought on their way
by the church, passed through both Phoenicia and Sama
ria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles ; and they
caused great joy unto all the brethren. The Samaritans,
although circumcised like the Jews, had far less antip
athy to Gentiles than the latter ; while the disciples in
Phoenicia, though made up largely of Jews, were closely
identified with Gentiles ; and so both were prepared to
rejoice at the triumphs of the gospel in the heathen
world.

cv. 4.]

ACTS. 57

Ver. 4. After a pleasant journey through the midst
of rejoicing churches, they reached Jerusalem, where the
name of Barnabas was held in sacred remembrance on
account of his usefulness in the church's infancy ; where
Paul was now well known as a courageous and self-
sacrificing evangelist ; and where the news of the suc
cessful tour of both into heathen lands had preceded
them. The reception which was accorded them was
most natural. (4) And when they were come to Jeru
salem, they were received by the church and the apostles
and the elders, and they rehearsed all things that God
had done with them.1 It was a thrilling story which
1 There has been much discussion as to whether this visit of
Paul to Jerusalem is the one mentioned in the second chapter of
Galatians, or some other; but recent writers are almost unan
imous in deciding that it is the same. Farrar puts the decisive
evidence in a nutshell as follows : '' In the two narratives the
same people go up at the same time, from the same place, for the
same object, in consequence of the same interference by the
same agitators, and with the same results. Against the absolute
certainty of the conclusion that the visits described were one and
the same, there is nothing whatever to set but trivial differences
of detail, every one of which is accounted for in the text." (Life
and Work of Paul, 228, n. 5). Rationalists admit this, but they
use the fact to show that as Paul represents this as his second
visit to Jerusalem since his conversion, therefore Luke's account
of his visit with Barnabas on the alms-giving trip mentioned in
xi. is false. (Baur, Life of Paul, i. 114, 115 ; Zeller on Acts ii. 8).
But Paul does not say that the visit of Gal. ii. was his second
visit. He merely says, " Then after the space of fourteen years
I went up again " (Gal. ii. 1). This was, however, the second
visit with which his line of argument in Galatians was concerned ;
for his purpose is to show that he had not before this enjoyed an
opportunity to be instructed by the older apostles, except during
the fifteen days of his first visit (Gal. i. 18) ; and during his brief
visit mentioned in the eleventh chapter, Peter, the only apostle
in the city, was shut up in prison during the passover week,

58 COMMENTAR Y. [xv. 5.
they told, and it must have drawn many tears from the
eyes of the sympathizing audience, while it aroused them
to fresh enthusiasm in the cause of human redemption.
Ver. 5. Touching and inspiring as was the occa
sion, some brethren in the church were not willing to
miss the opportunity of suggesting what they regarded
as a serious defect in the instruction which Paul and
Barnabas had given their Gentile converts. (5) But
there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees who
believed, saying, It is needful to circumcise them, and
to charge them to keep the law of Moses.1 After read
ing so much in the earlier chapters of Acts respecting
the hostility ofthe sect ofthe Pharisees to the church, it'
is a surprise to here meet with some of that party inside
the church, and occupying a position of some influence,
though it is not a surprise to find them on the wrong
side of an important question. They found it no longer
possible to resist the evidence in favor of Jesus, and had
therefore been baptized into his name ; but they still
clung tenaciously to some of their former ideas. Long
after this meeting, when Paul had come to fully under
stand their motives, even if he did not at the time, he
styles them " false brethren privily brought in, who came
and then fled from the city. Paul and Barnabas seem not to have
gone into the city at all until their mission among the churches
of Judea was accomplished, and then their stay must have been
very brief on account of the danger imminent. See xi. 29 — xii. 25.
1 Baur (Life of Paul, i. 117-119 ; Church Hist. i. 52), followed by
the whole school which he represents, declares, without reason
worthy of the name, that Luke here falsifies the facts, and that
the older apostles themselves, and not certain Pharisees who
believed, were Paul's opponents. Paul's own statements about
the perfect agreement between himself and the other apostles
(Gal. ii. 6-10), show clearly the falsity of this assertion, and the
truthfulness of Luke.

xv. 5.] ACTS. 59
in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ
Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage " (Gal. ii. 4).
From this judicial sentence upon them we ascertain that
when they despaired of destroying the church by perse
cution from without, they deliberately confessed Christ
and came into the church for the purpose of controlling
it from within. It was their design to keep the church
, under the bondage of the law, and thus prevent it from
very seriously modifying the state of things among the
Jews in which the Pharisees were the predominant
party. Partisan zeal, the bane of their former life, was
still their controlling passion. It is highly probable
that among them Paul recognized some of his old
acquaintances, who had once been his helpers in perse
cution, and had more recently been of the number who
sought to put him to death. He knew them through
and through.
The essential issue between Paul and the Pharisees
had reference to the perpetuation of the law of Moses in
the church of God ; and the same issue has been in
debate under different phases from that day to this.
Paul defeated the attempt to fasten circumcision on the
church, but later Judaizers succeeded in perpetuating it
under the form of infant immersion, and afterward of
infant sprinkling. That which the Pharisees failed to
accomplish openly was thus accomplished under a thin
disguise. The Pharisees failed to consolidate the law
and the gospel ; but their imitators have largely suc
ceeded in teaching men that the church of Christ origin
ated in the family of Abraham, and that the Jewish
tribes and the Christian congregations constitute one
identical church. The Roman apostasy perpetuates the
daily sacrifice and pompous ritual of the temple ; relig-

60 COMMENTARY. [xv. 5, 6.
ious zealots have slaughtered Canaanites in the persons of
modern heretics ; professed Christians go to war under
the old battle-cry of the " sword of the Lord and of
Gideon ; " the " Latter-day Saints " emulate Solomon in
the multiplication of wives; and for all these corruptions
authority is found in the laws and customs of ancient
Israel. The intelligent reader of the New Testament
knows scarcely which of these errors is farthest from the
truth; and he feels bound to struggle with untiring
energy and ceaseless vigilance to uproot them all from
the minds of men.
2. Another Meeting, and a Speech by Peter,
6-11.
Ver. 6. After the Pharisees had stated their posi
tion, distinctly affirming that the Gentiles should be
circumcised and keep the law, the assembly adjourned
without discussing the question. The second meeting is
announced in these words : (6) And the apostles and the
elders were gathered together to consider of this matter.
Neither this nor the first meeting was composed exclu
sively ofthe apostles and the elders ; for we have seen (4)
that at the first the messengers were " received by the
•church," and from verse 22 below we learn that the
church was now present. There was, however, between
these two public meetings a private meeting of Paul and
Barnabas with the three apostles who were then in
the city. This we learn from Paul's epistle to the
Galatians, in which he both states the fact, and gives his
reason for seeking the interview. He says : " Then
after the space of fourteen years I went up again to
Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus also with me.
And I went up by revelation ; and I laid before them

xv. 6.] ACTS. 61
the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but
privately before them who were of repute, lest by any
means I should be running, or had run, in vain." The
force of the reason given is seen in the fact that if he
had found the old apostles on the side of the Pharisees,
their influence would have overborne his with the breth
ren, and all of his work, both past and future, would
have been overthrown by bringing his converts under
the bondage of the law.1 The result of the interview he
states in these words : " But from those who were re
puted to be somewhat — whatsoever they were, it maketh
no matter to me ; God accepteth not man's person — they,
I say, who were of repute imparted nothing to me ; but
contrariwise, when they saw that' I had been intrusted
with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter
with the gospel of circumcision, (for he that wrought for
Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision wroughtfor
me also unto the Gentiles) ; and when they perceived
the grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas
and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to
me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we
should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circum-
1 1 can not withhold my surprise that Farrar has so completely
misunderstood Paul's meaning here as to write the following
sentence : " When he says to the Galatians that he ' consulted
them about the gospel he was preaching, lest he might be or had
been running to no purpose,' he shows that at this period he had
not arrived at the quite unshaken conviction, which made him
subsequently say that, ' whether he or an angel from heaven
preached any other gospel, let him be anathema," (Life of Paul,
228.) This is totally inconsistent with Paul's repeated declaration
in the previous chapter of Galatians, that he had received his
knowledge of the gospel by direct revelation, and that therefore
he could not have any doubts concerning it. Compare Lightfoot
on the passage in his commentary on Galatians.

62 COMMENTARY. [xv. 6-11.
cision " (Gal. ii. 6-10). From this account ofthe inter
view it appears that as soon as the three older apostles
heard Paul's statement of the case, they heartily ap
proved it, and indicated the fact by extending their
right hands to him and Barnabas. The words, " im
parted nothing to me," are well chosen ; for the question
was whether or not Paul had taught the Gentiles their
whole duty; if not, something additional would have
been imparted. With this information as fo the perfect
understanding and agreement between tbe inspired apos
tles before us, we can plainly see that the second public
meeting ofthe whole church was called, not for the pur
pose of bringing about an agreement between the apos
tles, but for the purpose of enabling the apostles to
bring the whole church into agreement with themselves.
In this light we must study the proceedings, or we shall
totally misconstrue them.
Vv. 7-11. Men who are in error can never be con
vinced that they are wrong by denying them freedom of
speech. Not till they have been allowed to express
themselves to the last word are they capable of listening
dispassionately to the other side. The apostles, knowing
this, or at least acting on it, permitted the judaizers in
the church to say all that they wished to say before any
reply was made to their position and arguments. Then,
when they had completely emptied themselves, the apos
tles, one by one, and in a succession apparently pre
arranged, gave utterance to facts and judgments which
compelled assent. (7) And when there had been much
questioning, Peter rose up, and said unto them,
Brethren, ye know how that a ' good while ago God
made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles
should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. (8) And

xv. 7-11.] ACTS. 63
God, who knoweth the heart, bare them witness, giving
them the Holy Spirit, even as he did unto us ; (9) and
he made no distinction between them and us, purifying
their hearts by faith. (10) Now therefore why tempt ye
God, that ye should put a yoke upon the necks of the dis
ciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to
bear ? (n) But we believe that we shall be saved through
the grace of the Loid Jesus, in like manner as they.
The Greek word rendered questioning in verse 7
(tfrriotc;) literally means a question ; but here it has the
sense of debate or disputation (Grimm's Lexicon) ; and it
is used here rather than the more usual word for debate
(au^Ttjacc;), to indicate, I think, that the discussion was
conducted chiefly by asking questions — a very common
way of putting an adversary to a disadvantage. The
debate was probably one-sided, the Pharisees putting all
the questions, and putting them so that each one carried
in it an argument, or implied a conclusion. It is perhaps
because they had adopted this form of argumentation
that Peter put the main point of his answer (10) in the
same form.
Peter's speech contains just three points of argument :
First, that in the well known case of the first Gentile
converts in the house of Cornelius, God, by giving them
the Holy Spirit as he had given it to the apostles, made
no distinction between Jews and Gentiles ; from which
the silent inference is that as God had made no distinc
tion men should make none. Second, to put on the
necks of these Gentile converts the yoke of the law,
which no generation of Jews had been able to bear,
would be, in the light of the preceding fact, tempting
God; that is, trying his forbearance by their own pre
sumption. Third, the settled belief, indicated in the

64 COMMENTARY. [xv. 7-12.
words " we believe," that both Jews and Gentiles were
to be saved through grace, the grace of the Lord Jesus
Christ, implies necessarily that they were not to be saved
by keeping the law. In affirming tbat the law was a
yoke that the Jews had not been able to bear, he meant
that they had not been able so to keep it as to be saved
by tbe perfection of their obedience to it. This speech,
it would seem, should have been enough to end the
whole controversy; but it was wisely planned amoDg
the apostles that the evidence on the subject should be
multiplied in a way to leave no room for more, and no
room for subsequent caviling.
3. Speeches by Barnabas and Paul, 12.
Ver. 12. After Peter sat down, Barnabas spoke
next, and then Paul, each setting forth other evidences
of Gqd's will on the question at issue. (12) And all the
multitude kept silence ; and they hearkened unto Bar
nabas and Paul rehearsing what signs and wonders God
had wrought among the Gentiles by them. Their line
of argument was a continuation of Peter's. As the
miracle of giving the Holy Spirit in the case of Cor
nelius and his friends gave proof of God's approval in
that case, so the "signs and wonders" which he wrought
by the hands of Barnabas and Paul while they were
bringing in the Gentiles and organizing them as congre
gations without circumcision, and without requiring them
to keep the law, gave proof of his approbation in these
cases also. The argument of the three speeches was
exactly the same, though based upon different facts,
and these facts were presented in their chronological
order.

xv. 13-21.] ACTS. 65
4. A Speech by James, 13-21.
Vv. 13-21. As in the case of the death and resur
rection of the Messiah, no amount of contemporary evi
dence could convince the average Jew, unless he could
be made to see that such a death and resurrection were
spoken of in the predictions concerning the Messiah, so,
in reference to the question in hand, they could not be
silenced without evidence from the prophets. To James
was assigned the task of setting forth the evidence on
this point, and also of proposing a decision in harmony
with the result of the private conference. (13) And after
they had held their peace, James answered, saying,
Brethren, hearken unto me : (14) Symeon hath re
hearsed how first God did visit the Gentiles, to take out
of them a people for his name. (15) And to this agree
the words of the prophets ; as it is written, (16) After
these things I will return, and I will build again the
tabernacle of David, which is fallen, and I will build
again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up ; (17) that
the residue of men may seek after the Lord, and all the
Gentiles upon whom my name is called, (18) saith the
Lord, who maketh these things known from the begin
ning of the world. (19) Wherefore my judgment is, that
we trouble not them who from among the Gentiles
turn to God ; (20) but that we write unto them, that they
abstain from the pollutions of idols, and from fornica
tion, and from what is strangled, and from blood. (21)
For Moses from generations of old hath in every city
them that preach him, being read in the synagogues
every Sabbath.
The words, "James answered" (13), indicate that
this speech was in answer to the positions of the Phari-

R6 COMMENTARY. [xv. 13-21.
sees. The argument is, that the statements of Peter, of
which those made by Barnabas and Paul were a mere sup
plement, and needed not special mention, were in fulfill
ment of prophecy concerning the Messiah's reign ; and it
supplied all that was lacking to convince the brethren.
While he quotes only one prophet (Amos ix. 11, 12), he
says, " to this agree the words of the prophets," meaning
that other prophets besides the one quoted had used words
of the same import. The quotation is made from the
Septuagint, as appears from its agreeing more closely
with that version than with the Hebrew. The prophet
had in previous verses predicted the downfall of the
Jewish kingdom, which would be the overthrow of the
tabernacle or house of David, whose descendants were
the reigning kings; and in the verses quoted he predicts
the rebuilding of the same, which could occur only by
some descendant of David again ascending the throne.
But after that downfall, no man of David's race became
a king until Jesus was enthroned in heaven. This, then,
was the rebuilding of the ruins, and it was to be followed
by " the residue of men," that is, the Gentiles, seeking
after the Lord, as Gentiles had been doing ever since
Peter's visit to the house of Cornelius.
The fact that James introduces the decision which
he proposes with the words, " Wherefore my judgment
is," has been construed by many as evidence that he
was president of the conference, and as such rendered a
decision which the others were bound to accept. But
there is no evidence whatever that he acted in this
capacity, or that his judgment in the case was more
authoritative than that of Peter, or of John, who also
was present. The four things from which James proposed
that the Gentiles should be required to abstain had been

xv. 13-21.] ACTS. 67
made unlawful, not by the Mosaic law, but by the re
velations of the patriarchal age. From the beginning
it had been known to the patriarchs that it was sinful
to have any responsible connection with idols, or to
indulge in fornication ; and from the time of the law
given to the race in the family of Noah, eating blood,
and consequently eating things strangled which retained
their blood within them, had been wrong, and it will
continue to be until the end of the world.1 So, in
regard to the question at issue, whether the Gentile
disciples must observe the law of Moses, James' pro
posal that " we trouble them not," was fully carried out
by imposing nothing on them that was peculiar to the
law. The remark with which James closes his speech, that
Moses was preached in every city by being read in the
synagogues, was intended, I think, to meet an objection
which he knew to be in the minds of some of his hearers,
and it may have been expressed by some of the speakers
1 Farrar and Lightfoot, followed by others, hold that these
provisions were intended to be temporary and local. Both refer
for proof of this to Paul's subsequent discussion of eating things
offered to idols, assuming that he permitted it; and the former
appeals to the fact that the Judaizing party in the church after
ward disregarded the decree (Farrar' s Life of Paul, 243, 244;
Lightfoot on Galatians, 127 [1].) But the fact that it was repudiated
afterward by the Judaizers only, shows that they deserved the
stern rebukes which Paul administers to them in the epistle to
the Galatians (i. 6-9; iv. 17; v. 1 ; vi. 12, 13); and in Paul's
discussion of the question, while he admits that to eat meat
offered' to idols is not sinful when the fact of its being so offered
is not known to the eater ; and while he shows that, if for no
other reason, one should abstain on account of the harm which
eating might do to weak brethren ; he finally takes the very posi
tion of the decree, forbidding it altogether as a communion with
demons. See I/Cor. viii. 8-13; x. 14-22.

68 COMMENTARY. [xv. 13-29.
whom he was answering — the objection that, if the Gen
tiles were not required to keep the law of Moses, the law
would fall into disrepute, and be forgotten among men.
Of this James would assure them there would be no
danger, seeing that the synagogue service would prevent
such a result.
It naturally seems strange to our generation that
the apostles thought it worth while to warn the Gentile
disciples against "pollutions of idols, and fornication."
But they had been trained for generations back to regard
the latter vice as an innocent gratification of a natural
desire, and to look upon the former as a solemn religious
duty ; and it was not easy, when they became believers,
to shake off convictions which had been thus imbedded
in their moral nature. The same difficulty is encoun
tered to this day by missionaries among the heathen.
5. The Decision op the Apostles and Elders,
22-29.
Vv. 22-29. The speech of James brought the dis
cussion to a' close. The combined force of the four
speeches made the will of God so clear that the opposi
tion was totally silenced, and the only remaining ques
tion was, how best to carry out the proposal submitted
by James. (22) Then it seemed good to the apostles and
the elders, with the whole church, to choose men out of
their company, and send them to Antioch with Paul and
Barnabas ; namely, Judas, called Barsabbas, and Silas,
chief men among the brethren : (23) and they wrote thus
by them, The apostles and the elder brethren unto the
brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria
and Cilicia, greeting : (24) Forasmuch as we have heard
that certain who went out from us have troubled

xv 22-2a] ACTS. 69
you with words, subverting your souls ; to whom we
gave no commandment ; (25) it seemed good to us, having
come to one accord, to choose out men and send them unto
you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, (26) men who
have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus
Christ. (27) We have sent therefore Judas and Silas,
who themselves also shall tell you the same things by
word of mouth. (28) For it seemed good to the Holy
Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden
than these necessary things ; (29) that ye abstain from
things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things
strangled, and from fornication ; from which if ye keep
yourselves, it shall be well with you. Fare ye well.
Athough this document was written in the name of
u the apostles and the elder brethren " (23), the latter
expression being the equivalent of " the elders " of 22,
yet " the whole church " (22) was present, and the ex
pression of verse 25, " having come to one accord,"
refers to the apostles having brought all the members of
the church to the judgment in which they themselves
had previously united. Observe that it begins by repu
diating all responsibility for the teaching of the men
who had started the trouble in Antioch, declaring that
the apostles and elders had given them no command
ment at all. The wisdom of sending Judas and Silas is
seen in the fact that they had not been connected at all
with the work among the Gentiles, and that their per
sonal influence would tend to silence any objections
which might be raised by refractory Jews. They could
explain, without suspicion of bias, anything in the writ
ten document which might appear to any one obscure.
This is the earliest document, so far as we know, that
issued from the pen of any apostle. It antedated all of

70 COMMENTARY. [xv. 22-29.
the Gospels, and all of Paul's epistles. It circulated as
a separate document among the churches until it was in
corporated into Acts, when previously existing copies of
it were naturally allowed to perish. It is called an
epistle (30), and also the " decrees [ra 86yiiara"\ which
had been ordained by the apostles and elders that were
at Jerusalem " (xvi. 4). It makes a formal claim of
inspiration by the words, " it seemed good to the Holy
Spirit and to us." No uninspired men could dare to use
such language ; and this circumstance differentiates it
from all the decrees and deliverances of all the ecclesi
astical courts from that day to this, not excepting those
ofthe Roman Catholic Church, which makes blasphemous
pretences of infallibility. Be it observed, too, that while
this conference is constantly referred to by Romanists
and other supporters of episcopacy, as the first general
council, it was no general council at all. It was not
composed of representatives from the congregations of a
district, however small, but of the members of a single
church.1 Furthermore, it decided, on the authority ot
the inspired men who directed its decisions, a question
of doctrine affecting the salvation of souls ; and this no
set of men except the apostles have ever had the right to
do. In no sense, then, can its action be pleaded as a
precedent for the existence of any ecclesiastical court
1 It is gratifying to observe that Archdeacon Farrar, himself a
high dignitary of the Church of England, with a tender side
toward Romanism, unites with the non-episcopal writers in Ihe
view expressed above. He says : " The so-called Council of Jeru
salem in no way resembled the general councils of the church,
either in its history, its constitution, or its object. It was not a
convention of ordained delegates, but a meeting of the entire
churcb of Jerusalem to receive a deputation from the church at
Antioch." (Life of Paul, 243),

xv. 22-34.] ACTS. 71
whatever outside of the individual congregation, or for the
purpose of settling by authority any question of doctrine.
6. Peace Restored in Antioch, 30-35.
Vv. 30, 31. The return journey ofthe messengers,
and the effect in Antioch of the decision which they
brought, is briefly stated. (30) So they, when they were
dismissed, came down to Antioch ; and having gathered
the multitude together, they deliverd the epistle. (31)
And when they had read it they rejoiced for the consola
tion. As the Jewish brethren in Antioch had not become
partisans in the controversy, and had desired only a
peaceable settlement ofthe question, their rejoicing at the
result was a natural consequence. If any of those who
had raised the question at first were still in the city,
doubtless they were crestfallen, but their mouths were
stopped, and it is possible that, like their sympathisers in
Jerusalem, they acquiesced in the decision. Thus the
triumph of Paul and Barnabas was most signal and com
plete. It was rendered more so in the eyes of the
Antioch brethren from the fact mentioned by Paul
(Gal. ii. 1-4), but not by Luke, that Titus, a Gentile,
had gone with Paul ; that a strenuous effort was made
to have him circumcised; and that he had come back
uncircumcised, Paul having refused to give place to the
Judaisers for a single hour.1
Vv. 32-34. Judas and Silas had now accomplished
the main purpose for which they were sent to Antioch,
1 The attempt of some writers, including Farrar (Life of Paul,
233-237), to make it appear that Titus was circumcised, and that
Paul's language about the incident means, he was not compelled
to be circumcised, but I circumcised him for the sake of peace,
appears to me like a mere conceit. Even Baur repudiates it,
saying, " Nothing can be more absurd." (Life of Paul ; i. 122, n. 1).

72 COMMENTARY. [xv. 32-35.
but they found opportunity to make themselves still
further useful. As they had been " chief men among
the brethren " in Jerusalem, it was a source of delight to
the brethren in Antioch to hear them. (32) And Judas
and Silas, being themselves also prophets, exhorted the
brethren in many words, and confirmed them. (33) And
after they had spent some time there, they were dis
missed in peace from the brethren to those who had sent
them forth.1 The fact that they were " themselves also
prophets," gave inspired authority to all their utterances,
and made their exhortations the more edifying to the
brethren. ' Ver. 35. The city of Antioch was still a profitable
field for apostolic labor, and the scene of interesting
events. (35) But Paul and Barnabas tarried in Antioch,
teaching and preaching the word of the Lord, with many
others also. To justify the united labors of so many
eminent men, the number of disciples to be taught and
the number of others willing to hear the preaching
must have been very great.
It is during this period that the most judicious com
mentators, and I may say all recent scholars, locate the
visit of Peter to Antioch, and the rebuke administered
to him by Paul, as recorded in the second chapter of
Galatians. It has been erroneously affirmed that in
this affair Peter acted in direct conflict with the epistle
which he and others are represented as having so recently
written to this church. The harshness of this supposi
tion has led some to deny the truthfulness of Luke's
representations about that epistle. It is argued that
'Verse 34 of the A. V., from the Textus Receptus, is rightly
omitted from the corrected Greek text and R. V., for want of MS,
evidence.

xv. 35.] ACTS. 73
Peter would not have been guilty of such inconsistency ;
and if he had, Paul, instead of rebuking him in the
terms which he reproduces in Galatians, would have ap
pealed to the epistle itself as the most direct method of
refuting Peter.1 Both of these considerations involve a
misconception of the relation between that epistle and
Peter's present conduct. The epistle, or the decree, as
we should rather style it, had reference to imposing the
law of Moses on the Gentiles, and it said nothing at all
about the kincT of social intercourse which should be
maintained between them and the Jews. Now it was
with reference to the latter alone that Peter was at fault
in Antioch. " When Cephas came to Antioch," says
Paul, " I resisted him to the face, because he stood con
demned. For before that certain came from James, he
did eat with the Gentiles ; but when they came he drew
back and Separated himself, fearing them that were of
the circumcision " (Gal. ii. 11, 12). To quote the decree
against him for this would have been irrelevant; there
fore Paul says nothing about the decree ; but he brings
up that which was strictly in point, Peter's eating with
Gentiles in the house of Cornelius, which he had defend
ed and justified when censured for it in Jerusalem (xi.
1-3). Paul alludes to this in then remark : " If thou,
being a Jew, livest as do the Gentiles [he had done this
only in Csesarea before this time], and not as do the
Jews, how compellest thou the /Gentiles to live as do the
Jews?" " For if I build up again those things which
I destroyed, I prove myself a transgressor" (Gal. ii.
14-18). Peter had lived like a Gentile in the house
of Cornelius, and had done the same for a time in
Antioch ; but now, by withdrawing, he was virtually
1 Baur, Life of Paul, i. 28 ff., followed by all of his school.

74 COMMENTARY. [xv. 35.
saying to the Gentiles, You must live like the Jews if you
have social intercourse with me. The trouble doubtless lay
in the fact that Gentiles placed on their table dishes which
the Jews had been taught to consider unclean, and they
also neglected the legal purifications of their own per
sons. It would be hazardous to say that James agreed
with the men who came from him ; for we are warned
against this by the fact that the men from Jerusalem
who stirred up the first strife in Antioch had received no
commandment at all (xv. 24).
The truthfulness of Luke's whole account of the
mission of Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem has been
denied by rationalists, because in his account of it there
is an omission of almost every particular which is men
tioned in Paul's own account given in Galatians. We
have seen, as we passed along, that there is no contra
diction between the two ; but it can not be denied that the
difference just mentioned exists. It is accounted for,
in a most natural way,'by the fact that Paul's epistle was
written at least five years before Acts, and a much longer
time before according to the estimates of the rationalists
themselves, and probably the facts mentioned in it were
well known to Luke's readers, and needed not to be re
peated. All that was needed was to set forth those
details which Paul had omitted.

xv. 36-39] ACTS. 75
SEC. III. PAUL'S SECOND TOUR.
(XV. 36-XVIII. 22.)
1. Change of Companions, and Beginning of the
Tour, 36-41.
Ver. 36. We have lingered long on the interval
spent by Paul and Barnabas in Antioch. We are now
to follow the former in his second tour among the Gen
tiles. (36) And after some days Paul said unto Barnabas,
Let us return now and visit the brethren in every city
wherein we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how
they fare. We shall find as we proceed that the visit
extended far beyond the remotest church which they
had previously planted ; but Paul's proposal contemplat
ed, as the primary purpose of the tour, the care of the
brethren whom they had baptized. This shows that his
solicitude for the congregations which he had planted
was no less ardent than his zeal for the conversion of
sinners. Vv. 37-39. The best of friends sometimes differ on
questions of expediency and of personal preference ; and
we now learn that on such questions even inspired men
were liable to differences. (37) And Barnabas was minded
to take with them John also, who was called Mark. (38)
But Paul thought not good to take with them him who
withdrew from them from Pamphylia, and went not with
them to the work. (39) And there arose a sharp conten
tion, so that they parted asunder one from the other, and
Barnabas took Mark with him, and sailed away unto
Cyprus : Paul's judgment was controlled in the matter by
his high.estimate of the courage and self-sacrifice which
ought to characterize a preacher of the gospel, while

76 COMMENTARY. [xv. 37-41.
Barnabas was undoubtedly warped by his personal rela
tionship to Mark, who was his cousin (Col. iv. 10).
Which ofthe two acted the more wisely we are not now
able to determine, for want of acquaintance with the
motives which actuated Mark in turning back, and with
the circumstances under which he did so ; and even if we
could decide, the decision might be of no practical util
ity. Suffice it to say, that Mark was afterward fully
restored to Paul's confidence, and that no permanent
alienation from Barnabas took place, as we learn from
the manner in which Paul afterward expressed himself
in regard to both.1 Notwithstanding their disagreement
and separation, they did not allow the good cause to
suffer, nor did they fail to accomplish separately that
which Paul proposed that they should accomplish to
gether ; for Barnabas, in revisiting Cyprus, saw a portion
of the brethren to whom he. and Paul had preached,
while Paul, by a different route, visited the others. The
separation of Barnabas from Paul is our separation from
Barnabas ; for his name is not again mentioned by Luke.
But as we bid him a final farewell, the sails are spread
which are to bear him over the sea, that he may make
the islands glad with the knowledge of salvation ; and
the later incidents of his noble life will be made known
to us when we sit down with him in the everlasting
kingdom. Vv. 40, 41. We turn with Luke to follow the steps
of him who was in labors more abundant and in prisons
more frequent that all the apostles, and to form a better
acquaintance with his new companion. (40) but Paul
chose Silas, and went forth, being commended by the
brethren to the grace of the Lord. (41) And he went
1 1. Cor. ix. 6 ; Col. iv. 11 ; II. Tim. iv. 11.

xv. 40, 41.] ACTS. 77
through Syria, and Cilicia, confirming the churches.
The fact that Silas, who had been one ofthe "chief men
among the brethren " in Jerusalem (22), and had been
selected by the apostles and elders there to represent
them in settling the controversy at Antioch, consented
now to unite with Paul in his work among the heathen,
is a proof to us of the perfect agreement whieh existed
between Paul and the authorities of the church in
Jerusalem ; and it was a guarantee to the Jewish breth
ren whom the two might visit in their journey that
there was no antagonism between their teaching and that
ofthe older apostles. The fact that, in addition to this,
Silas was a prophet (32), completed his fitness as Paul's
fellow laborer.
The statement that " they were commended by the
brethren to the grace of the Lord " implies a meeting of
the church for this purpose ; and it is not improbable
that the prayer of commendation was accompanied, as in
the case of Barnabas and Paul in the beginning, by
imposition of hands (cf. remarks under xiii. 3).
During the interval between Paul's departure to
Tarsus (ix. 30) and his arrival in Antioch (xi. 25, 26), he
had preached the gospel in Syria and Cilicia (Gal. i.
21) ; and now he revisits with Silas the churches which
he had planted at that time. His proposal to Barnabas
(36) contemplated only a revisitation of the churches
which they together had planted ; but as Barnabas went
with Mark to some of these, Paul was left free to revisit
some which he alone had planted, and thus the work of
revisitation. was made the more complete by the separa
tion which took place.
Some of the advocates of the episcopal rite of con
firmation affect to find in the words, " confirming the

78 COMMENTARY. [xv. 40, 41— xvi. 1,2.
churches " (41), authority for this rite ; but it requires
only a glance at the four passages in which the original
term occurs (iircoTfjpl^aJ) to see that it has reference not
to laying hands on new converts in order to admit them
to full fellowship, but to making firm by proper instruc
tion and exhortation the souls of those already in the
full fellowship ofthe church.1
2. Churches of the First Tour Revisited,
xvi. 1-5.
Vv. 1, 2. Omitting the details of Paul's labors in
Syria and Cilicia, Luke hurries us forward to his arrival
in Derbe and Lystra, the scenes respectively of the most
painful and the most consoling incidents of his former
tour. Had he been disposed to indulge in descriptions
of scenery, which he never does, he might have given us
a vivid picture of the Gates of Cilicia, the magnificent
pass through the Taurus mountains which opens a way
from the lowlands of Cilicia to the uplands of Lyeaonia.
The grandeur of the view must have deeply impressed
Paul and Silas, as it does all modern travelers ; but Luke
found no room on his living pages for even an allusion
to such things. He is hurrying to introduce to us a new
and most interesting character, destined to play an im
portant part in the subsequent portion of the narrative.
(i) And he came also to Derbe and to Lystra : and behold,
1 This is clearly perceived and admitted by Plumptre, and yet
he makes an attempt, though a feeble one, to connect the term
with the episcopal rite of , confirmation : " Confirming is, it need
hardly be said, used in the general sense of strengthening ; but as
the bestowing of spiritual gifts by laying on of hands was a chief
part of the work so done, it at least approximates to the idea of
confirming in the later and more technical sense of the term."
(Com. in loco).

xvi. 1-3.] ACTS. 79
a certain disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a
Jewess who believed ; but his father was a Greek. (2)
The same was well reported of by the brethren that
were at Lystra and Iconium. The grandmother as well
as the mother of this disciple was a believer, and both
had preceded him into the kingdom. By these two
godly women he had been instructed from his infancy in
the Holy Scriptures (II. Tim. iii. 14, 15) ; he had been
baptized during Paul's previous visit to Lystra ; he had
witnessed the stoning of Paul ; had wept over his pros
trate form ; had seen him, as if raised from the dead,
rise up and return into the city ; and had seen him de
part on the next day with unconquerable determination
into another field of conflict for Christ.1 It is not won
derful that now, with several added years of Christian
experience, he was well spoken of by the brethren.
The fact that he was thus attested not only at Derbe and
Lystra, close about his home, but also at the distant city
of Iconium, renders it probable that he was already a
young preacher, and that the imposition of hands by the
elders of the church, which is mentioned later, had
already taken place.2
Ver. 3. The discerning eye of Paul soon discov
ered in this youth qualities which would render him a fit
companion and assistant, and he secured him for this
position. (3) Him would Paul have to go forth with
him ; and he took and circumcised him because of the
Jews who were in those parts : for they all knew that
his father was a Greek. The " Jews who were in those
parts," like all other Jews, could not look favorably on
1 See remarks under xiv. 19, 20.
2 See I. Tim. iv. 14, where the original word, irpea/Svrepiov, is im
properly rendered presbytery, instead of eldership.

80 COMMENTARY. [xvi. 3.
a man of Jewish blood who was uncircumcised. He
appeared to be repudiating his nationality. His father
having been a Greek is mentioned as the cause of the
neglect of the rite in Timothy's infancy.
To a reader not fully informed as to Paul's position
in regard to circumcision, it seems very strange that he
circumcised Timothy so soon after refusing to do the
same with Titus in Jerusalem.1 It seems also to conflict
with statements of Paul in his epistles, especially with
that in Galatians v. 2-4 : " If ye receive circumcision
Christ will profit you nothing. Yea, I testify again to
every man who receiveth circumcision, that he is a debtor
to do the whole law. Ye are severed from Christ, ye who
would be justified by the law ; ye are fallen away from
grace." But the very terms of this passage show that he
is contemplating one who receives circumcision in order
that he may come under the law, and be saved by keep
ing the law. To cases in which this was not the purport
of the act this censure could not apply. If Titus had
been circumcised, this would have been precisely the
import of it; for it was for the purpose of bringing him
under the law as a means of final salvation, that it was
demanded by the Pharisees. But the circumcision of
Jews like Timothy stood on an altogether different foot
ing. Circumcision, as our Lord had taught, was " not of
Moses, but ofthe fathers " (Jno. vii. 22). The obligation
to observe it did not originate in the law, but in the cove
nant with Abraham ; and its connection with the law
grew out of the fact that the law was given to a portion
of Abraham's circumcised offspring. As then the obliga
tion did not originate with the law, the abrogation of
the law could not annul it. For this reason the propriety
1 See the remarks under xv. 30, 31.

xvi. 3-5.] ACTS. 81
of circumcising children of Jewish blood was never
called in question by Paul ; but he and all the disciples
recognized it to the very last (xxi; 20-25). The cove
nant with Abraham in regard to this rite is an everlast
ing covenant, and the only penalty of neglecting it is
the same to-day that it has ever been, that of being cut
off from Abraham's recognized posterity (Gen. xvii.
9-14). As it was a national mark, it had no connection
with salvation, or with a man's relation to Christ ; hence
Paul's declaration, " In Christ Jesus neither circum
cision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision ; but faith
working through love" (Gal. v. 6).
At some time Paul laid hands on Timothy to impart
to him a spiritual gift (II. Tim. i. 6) ; but whether at this
time, or after he had tried him in the field for a while,
we have no means of knowing. The same is true of
the imposition of hands by the eldership mentioned in
I. Timothy iv. 14. It is highly probable, though, that
inasmuch as Paul himself had been separated to this
work by imposition of hands (xiii. 3), the elders fol
lowed this precedent in the case of Timothy. At any
rate, there can be no reasonable doubt that this cere
mony on the part of the eldership was intended to set
him apart to the work of preaching ; for there is no
other purpose that can account for it. The conceit that
Paul ordained him on the recommendation of two or
three churches, is read into the text by those who think
they find it there.
Vv. 4, 5. Resuming now the thread of his narra
tive where be had broken it to speak of Timothy, Luke
tells us of the other work done by the apostles in the
cities which they had reached. (4) And as they went on
their way through the cities, they delivered them the de-

82 COMMENTARY. Lxvi. 4-8.
crees for to keep, which had been ordained of the apostles
and elders that were at Jerusalem. (5) So the churches
were strengthened in the faith, and increased in number
daily. This statement shows that the decrees were not
intended for Syria and Cilicia alone, but for all the Gen
tile churches. They were everywhere needed to unite
in harmonious fellowship the Jewish and Gentile con
verts. As Paul had founded these churches, and as Si
las had been sent out from Jerusalem by the apostles for
the express purpose of cooperating with him in main
taining the teaching of the decrees, the latter came to
the ears of both Jews and Gentiles with all their force,
and produced the happiest effects. The churches " in
creased in number daily," in consequence of being " con
firmed in the faith."
3. Preaching in Phrygia jnd Galatia, and a
Call to Macedonia, 6-10.
Vv. 6-8. A line drawn from Derbe westward to
Antioch of Pisidia might be styled, in military phrase
ology, the base line of Paul's present advance into the in
terior of Asia Minor, with a view to spreading the gos
pel over all its districts. In person he went no farther
in this direction than Phrygia, which lay to the north
west from Antioch; and Galatia, which lay to the north;
but churches planted in these regions, if active and zeal
ous, would soon cause the truth to be sounded out through
more distant provinces. Journeys and labors which
must have occupied many months are recounted by Luke
in the few words which follow: (6) And they went
through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been
forbidden of the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia ;
(7) and when they were come over against Mysia, they

xvi. 6-8.] ACTS. 83
assayed to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus
suffered them not ; (8) and passing by Mysia they came
down to Troas. We are warned by this brief sentence not
to assume from the brevity of Luke's narration at any
given point that he is brief because he has nothing in
teresting or important to tell, for we learn from Paul
himself that it was far otherwise with the journeys here
so hurriedly passed over. Many congregations sprang
into existence under his labors in Galatia (I. Cor. xvi. 1),
and their subsequent unhappy condition called forth one
of his most valuable epistles. The Galatians were
Gauls, whose ancestors, as predatory warriors, had wan
dered from Gaul (modern France) over into Asia Minor
before the Christian era, and had by the time of Paul's
visit become a settled agricultural people.1 It was not
Paul's intention at first to preach among them, because
doubtless he was looking to what he supposed more
fruitful fields ; but he was constrained by sickness to
tarry until he found among them unexpectedly a field
ripe for the sickle. He wrote to them afterward, " Ye
know that because of an infirmity of the flesh I preached
the gospel unto you the first time." The infirmity, as we
ascertain from what he further says about it, was that
" thorn in the flesh " which he had prayed the Lord in
vain to take from him. It was of such a character that
strangers like these would be likely to despise and re
ject him on account of it ; but they received him so dif
ferently that he wrote to them afterward these grateful
words: "That which was a temptation to you in my
flesh ye despised not, nor rejected ; but ye received me
1 An elaborate account of the Galatians is given by Bishop
Lightfoot in an essay on their history and character appended to
his commentary on the epistle written to them.

84 COMMENTARY. [xvi. 6-8.
as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus." And he
adds, " I bear you witness, that if possible, ye would
have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me ".
(Gal. iv. 14, 15). His distress of mind and weakness of
body may have imparted a mellow tone to his preaching
which at once awakened the quick sympathies of the ex
citable people, and encouraged him to continue his labors
far beyond his first intention. Out of the most unpro-
pitious circumstances under which he had ever intro
duced the gospel to a new community, with the single
exception of his going from Lystra to Derbe, there
sprang up the sweetest fruits of all his labors ; for there
are no other churches of whose devotion to him he speaks
in similar terms. Such experiences as this illustrated to
him the Lord's meaning, when he said to him in answer
to his prayer about this thorn in the flesh, " My grace is
sufficient for thee, for my power is made perfect in weak
ness ; " and it was experience like this which enabled
him at length to say, " Most gladly therefore will I
rather glory in my weaknesses, that the strength of
Christ may rest upon me. Wherefore I take pleasure in
weaknesses, in injuries, in necessities, in persecutions, in
distresses for Christ's sake : for when I am weak, then
am I strong" (II. Cor. xii. 9, 10).
Another new and strange experience befell Paul in
this interval. Not only had he been led by sickness to
preach in Galatia contrary to his intention, but when he
formed the purpose of carrying the gospel next into the
province of Asia, the "Holy Spirit would not permit him
to do so. The name Asia at that time was chiefly used
for the Roman province of which Ephesus was the prin
cipal city ; and doubtless Ephesus, in which he afterward
preached two years and three months, was his objective

xvi. 6-10.] ACTS. 85
point. This is the first time of which we read that his
own judgment as to his next field of labor was overruled
by the Holy Spirit. But this was not all ; for when he
was forbidden to go into Asia, which was southwest of
him, he next proposed to go into Bithynia, a rich and
important province to northward, and he was likewise
forbidden to go thither. Having finished up the work
behind him, and being thus forbidden to turn either
to the left or the right, he had no alternative but to go
right forward ; and this took him through Mysia in a
northwesterly direction. He went through this district
without stopping (for such is the meaning of the ex
pression, " passing by Mysia "), because he saw no open
ing for work on the way, and he came down to Troas,
which was on the seashore, and here he ran upon the
barrier of the sea. It is not possible that he and his
companions failed to be very much puzzled by these
mysterious directings of the Holy Spirit. The questions
must have pressed upon them with increasing interest at
every step, Why are we turned back from these inviting
fields ? and whither is the Lord directing us ?
Vv. 9, 10. During the first night of their stay in
Troas the mystery was solved, at least in part. (9) And
a vision appeared to Paul in the night ; there was a man
of Macedonia standing, beseeching him, and saying,
Come over into Macedonia, and help us. (10) And when
he had seen the vision, straightway we sought to go
forth into Macedonia, concluding that God had called us
for to preach the gospel to them. They now understood a
part of God's purpose ; they afterward understood it
more fully. At this point our author first indicates his
own presence by the use of the pronouns " we " and
"us." The words, "concluding that God had called us

86 COMMENTARY. [xvi. &-12.
to preach the gospel to them," imply that the author was
one of those who had been turned aside from the places
in which they had intended to preach (6, 7), and that
therefore he had joined the company in the interior of
Asia Minor. The traveling companions are now Paul,
Silas, Timothy and Luke.
4. Arrival in Macedonia, and Baptism of Cer
tain Women, 11-15.
Vv. 11, 12. It was not every day that a ship could
be found in the harbor of Troas, and still less frequent
ly one bound for the unimportant seaport of Neapolis,
and ready to set sail. When, therefore, the apostolic
company found one to suit their purpose, and just ready
to weigh anchor, they must have realized that God was
at last favoring their journey, (u) Setting sail there
fore from Troas, we made a straight course to Samoth
race, and the day following to Neapolis ; (12) and from
thence to Philippi, which is a city of Macedonia, the
first of the district, a Roman colony : and we were in
this city tarrying certain days. The remark, " we made
a straight course to Samothrace," implies a favorable
wind ; for only with such a wind can a sailing vessel
make a straight course. We have evidence, too, that this
favorable wind was blowing a stiff breeze, which bore
the ship along rapidly ; for on a subsequent journey
(xx. 6) five days were occupied iu the same voyage.
Here was another indication of a favoring providence
which the voyagers, after their strange experience just
past, could not fail to observe.
Samothrace is an island in the Archipelago, and Ne
apolis (Newtown, now called Ka valla) was a seaport for
Philippi. The latter city is about ten miles from Neap-

xvi. 11-15.] ACTS. 87
olis in a northwesterly direction. The road passes over
a high ridge which runs east and west, and thence de
scends into an extensive plain in which Philippi stands
on an elevation. As the travelers approached the city,
they crossed the river Gangites, on opposite banks of
which the armies under Brutus and Cassius on one side.
and Octavianus and Antony on the other, were formed
in order of battle before that final struggle which decid
ed the fate of the Roman Republic. The missionaries
walked through the field of battle as they drew near the
city. They found it a Roman city with a Greek popu
lation all around it ; for such is the force of the remark
that it was a colony. Augustus Caesar, in commemora
tion of the great battle, had made it such by filling it
with Romans transported from Italy. The apostles were
now in Europe, and this was their first contact with a
community of Romans. The remark that Philippi was
" the first city of the district," can not mean that it was
the most important city of one of the four parts into
which Macedonia was divided ; for Amphipolis occupied
this distinction in the part to which Philippi belonged :
but it refers to a smaller district, and the comparison is
to the small cities and villages not far away.
Vv. 13-15. On entering this strange city the apos
tles found no Jewish synagogue in which they might be
invited to speak " a word of exhortation to the people ;"
and they were doubtless no little perplexed as to how
they should introduce the gospel to the heathen popula
tion. The way in which the problem was solved is
stated in the next words of our text : (13) And on the
Sabbath day we went forth without the gate by a river
side, where we supposed there was a place of prayer ;
and we sat down and spoke to the women who were

88 COMMENTARY. [xvi. 13-15.
come together. (14) And a certain woman named Lydia,
a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, one that wor
shiped God, heard us ; whose heart the Lord opened, to
give heed unto the things which were spoken by Paul.
(15) And when she was baptized, and her household, she
besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful
to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And
she constrained us. From this it seems that they re
mained until the Sabbath before they decided how and
where to begin their work. Had they met with Lydia
and her household sooner, it might have been different.
The cause of their thinking that there was a place of
prayer on the bank of the river may have been that
they saw something indicative of it as they crossed the
river in approaching the town, or it may have been that,
in the course of inquiry as to the presence of Jews in
the city, they had heard of some women being accus
tomed to go out to this place for some purpose every
seventh day.
Thyatira, the home of Lydia, was a city of procon
sular Asia (Rev. i. 11), situated on its northern border;
and Paul's company, in " passing by Mysia " on their
way to Troas, had probably passed near it. It was
noted for the excellence of its purple dyes,1 and it is still
a pleasantly situated town of about ten thousand inhab
itants.2 As purple was a very costly dye, it was used on
none but costly goods ; and the fact that Lydia was a
dealer in these implies that, while she was not above the
necessity of labor, she was in comparatively easy cir-
1 Citations to this effect are made from Homer's Odyssey, i. 14 ;
iii. 9 ; and from Strabo, xiii. 4-14.
1 For a description of its present condition and appearance,
see the author's Lands of the Bible, 585.

xvi. 13-15.] ACTS. 89
cumstances. The same is implied in the fact that she
had a house called her own, whjch was large enough to
entertain Paul and his three companions, and that her
household included a plurality of women (13 cf. 15).
Her character is indicated, not only by the statement
that she was ,," one that worshiped God," but by the con
siderations that in this heathen city, where the Sabbath
was unknown to the inhabitants, she was faithful in ob
serving it ; that while the other dealers in purple goods
were busy on that day, she closed her shop regardless of
the demands of competition ; and that, although there
was no synagogue in which to worship, and no male
Jews to conduct the accustomed worship, she and her
employes habitually left the noisy city, and spent the
holy day in prayer on the bank of the river. Such
fidelity to God, under circumstances so unfavorable, is not
often witnessed in our own more favored times. It was
observed from on high, and it met its reward.
We can now begin to see the design of God in turn
ing Paul back from Asia, and back from Bithynia, when
he desired to go to these countries; in leading him
across Mysia to Troas ; in sending him the vision by
night in that city, and in bringing him and his company
by so singular a chain ot providences to this Roman
colony. These women had been wont to repair to this
river bank on the Sabbath day for prayer. God had
heard their prayers, as in the case of Cornelius, and he
chose this mysterious way of bringing to them the
preachers through whose words they might believe in
Christ and learn the way of salvation. He had directed
the journey of Paul by land and sea, and had timed the
motion of the ship with reference to that weekly prayer-
meeting, as he had once directed the flight of an angel

90 COMMENTARY. [xvi. 13-15.
from heaven, and timed the steps of Philip with refer
ence to movements of the eunuch's chariot. Now, as in
those instances, he answers the prayers of the uncon
verted, not by direct operations of his Spirit within
them, but by bringing to them the gospel on the lips of
a living preacher ; and it is quite a singular circumstance,
as noted by Alford, that though Paul had been forbidden
to preach in Asia, his first converts in Philippi were
Asiatics. The statement that the Lord opened Lydia's heart
implies that previously her heart was in some way closed.
It was certainly not closed by the hardness of a sinful
life, or by inherited depravity ; for such a supposition is
forbidden by the steadfastness with which, under great
temptation, she had previously clung to the worship
of God. It was closed in the sense in which the pious
and earnest heart of a Jewish worshiper might be closed.
Every Jew, and every Jewish proselyte, was at that
time so wedded to the belief that the coming Christ
would establish an earthly kingdom, as to have the heart
very tightly closed against the conception of a crucified
Christ, whose reign as a king is purely spiritual. It was
this that had caused the mass of the Jews to reject the
Christ while he was still on earth, and it continued to be
their "stumbling block" (Jno. v. 44; I. Cor. i. 23).
Whether Lydia was a Jewess or a proselyte, this was
' " the hope of Israel " in which she had been instructed, .
and for which she had been taught to devoutly pray ;
and if the natural effect of it had not been removed from
her heart, she must have rejected the gospel, as did the
mass of those who had been her teachers. The state
ment then that the Lord " opened her heart " means that
he removed this mistaken conception which would have

xvi. 13-15.] ACTS. 91
prevented her from receiving the Christ. The effect of
the opening was precisely that which was aimed at ; it
led her " to give heed to the things which were spoken
by Paul. " The Greek verb here rendered " to give
heed " means, in some connections, to fix the mind upon
a matter, and in others, to put something in practice.1
Here it can not mean the former, for Lydia had already
fixed her mind upon the preaching, as is declared in the
words, " a certain woman named Lydia heard us." She
first heard, then the Lord opened her heart, and then she
gave heed to the things which Paul had spoken. The
meaning is, that she put in practice the things spoken by
Paul. What these things were, Luke has told us so
often that he does not reiterate them here, but he indirect
ly shows that baptism is one of them by the way in
which he mentions her observance of that ordinance.
He says, "and when she was baptized," implying that
this was one of the things that she gave heed to. We
know that in preaching to such persons Paul always
directed them to believe the gospel, to repent of their
sins, and to be baptized ; and if Lydia gave heed to the
things which he spoke, she did these three things.
We have yet to notice, from another point of view,
the statement nowhere else found in connection with a
case of conversion, that the Lord opened Lydia's heart.
1 The word is rcpoakxciv. It is used in the sense of fixing the
attention, in such expressions as these : " Take heed that ye do
not your alms before men?" (Matt. vi. 1); "Beware of false
prophets " (vii. 15) ; " Take heed to yourselves " (Luke xvii. 3) ;
" Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies " (I. Tim. i. 4) ;
et al. It has the other sense in these clauses : " Not given to much
wine " (I. Tim. iii. 8) ; " Give heed to reading, to exhortation, to
teaching " (iv. 13) ; " From which no man hath given attendance at
the altar " (Heb. vii. 13).

92 COMMENTARY. [xvi. 13-15.
We have seen what the opening was, and what were its
effects ; we now inquire in what way it was done by the
Lord. It is too common to understand such expressions
as this in the sense of immediate actions of God or of
his Holy Spirit, and to ignore the secondary agencies or
instrumentalities employed. In this instance we are
likely to jump to the conclusion that the Lord opened
Lydia's heart by a direct operation of his Spirit, and
thus to ignore a very different method clearly indicated
by the context. In order to see this, we must put our
selves in the place of our author, and inquire what led
him to make a remark in regard to Lydia, which he has
not made in regard to any other person whose conversion
he has described. It can not be because God did for
Lydia something, which he omitted in other cases ; for in
the case of every Jew and proselyte the same process
was necessary. The difference is only in the phraseology
employed. This is accounted for by the fact that Luke,
together with Paul and all his company, had been very
much puzzled for weeks past, as to what God was doing
and intending to do, by turning them away from fields
of labor which appeared to them the most promising,
and leading them on, they knew not whither, until he
had brought them to this heathen city where there ap
peared to be no opening for a ready introduction of the
gospel. In the very midst of their perplexity they un
expectedly met with these women ; and though they had
never met them before, and though they might have
expected, under the circumstances, a long and ardent
struggle to overcome their natural repugnance to a cruci
fied Messiah, they are surprised to find Lydia's heart im
mediately opened, and they see at once what the Lord
has done and has been doing since they were liirot for-

xvi. 13-15.] ACTS. 93
bidden to go into Asia. Had not the Lord interfered,
Paul would now have been in Asia or Bithynia, and
these simple hearted women would have still prayed on
in ignorance of the salvation which had been provided
for them. It was so strikingly the Lord's doing, that
Luke was moved to this mode of expressing it. The
Lord opened Lydia's heart, as he did that of the eunuch,
by bringing,, from afar, at the proper juncture, the liv
ing preacher through whose word the end was accom
plished. The fact that Lydia's household were baptized with
her has been taken by some Psedobaptist scholars as
presumptive evidence in favor of infant baptism. Al
bert Barnes argues as follows: "The case is one that
affords a strong presumptive proof that this was an in
stance of .household or infant baptism. For (1) her be
lieving is particularly mentioned. (2) It is not inti
mated that they believed. On the contrary, it is strong
ly implied that they did not. (3) It is manifestly im
plied that they were baptized because she believed. " It
would be difficult to find an instance of more fallacious
reasoning. In the expression, " household or infant
baptism," it is tacitly assumed that the two are identi
cal, the very thing to be proved. The statement that
" her belief is particularly mentioned " is misleading ;
for her belief is not mentioned at all ; it is only implied.
Finally, the assumed implication that " they did not be
lieve," and that " they were baptized because she be
lieved," has not the slightest support in a word of th.e
text. It was read into the text from Mr. Barnes' imagi
nation. Dr. Alexander states the case thus : " The real
strength of the argument lies not in any one case, but in
the repeated mention of whole households as baptized

94 COMMENTARY. [xvi. 13-15.
and in thus stating it, he follows the oft quoted demand
of Bengel : " Who can believe that in so many families
there was not an infant ?" The answer is, that there are
only four whole households mentioned in the New Testa
ment as being baptized, and that there is positive proof
that in three of these there was not an infant. In that
of Cornelius there was none, for they all spoke in tongues
and believed (x. 46 ; xv. 9) ; none in that of the jailer,
for they all believed and rejoiced in the Lord (xvi. 34) ;
and none in that of Stephanas, for " they set themselves
to minister to the saints " (I. Cor. i. 16 ; xvi. 15). The
inference, therefore, in reference to the household of
Lydia is reversed ; for, inasmuch as one peculiarity of
all the households baptized, of which the facts are
known, is the absence of infants, we are justified in the
conclusion, no evidence to the contrary appearing, that
this was also a peculiarity of the household of Lydia.
If the number of whole households baptized were much
greater than it is, the argument would remain the same.;
and it should not be forgotten that it is an every day
occurrence now, among the large number of evangelists
who are constantly baptizing multitudes in our western
states, to baptize whole households without an infant in
them. Almost any active evangelist can relate many
such instances within his own experience. The ablest of
Psedobaptist commentators are more candid on this sub
ject ; thus Alford, commenting on the case of Lydia,
says : " It may be that no inference for infant baptism is
hence deducible." Gloag says : " Evidently the passage
in itself can not be adduced as a proof either for or
against infant baptism ; there is in it no indication
whether there were or were not infants in the household
of Lydia." Meyer says that of the baptism of infants

xvi. 13-15.] ACTS. 95
" no trace is found in the New Testament ;" and Dean
Plumptre expresses himself in these words : " The state
ment that her household were baptized has often been
urged as evidence that infant baptism was the practice of
the apostolic age. It must be admitted, however, that
this is to read a great deal between the lines, and the ut
most that can be said is that the language of the writer
does not exclude infants. In this instance, moreover,
there is no evidence that she had children, or even that
she was married. The household may well have con
sisted of female slaves and freed-women whom she em
ployed, and who made up her familia." In this last
remark this acute and candid writer hits upon the ex
planation really given in the text; for when Paul
reached the river bank he "spoke to the women who
were come together" (13) ; and when, in the second
verse after this, the writer speaks of Lydia's household,
he evidently means to identify those women as the house
hold. It is entirely within the range of probability, as
Plumptre also suggests, that among these women were
Euodia and Syntyche, who subsequently labored with
Paul in the gospel, and whose alienation from each other
at a still later period became a subject of deep solicitude
to the apostle (Phil. iv. 2, 3).
The baptism of this whole family opened to the
apostle and his companions a lodging place far more
congenial than that in some heathen household, which
they had hitherto endured ; and yet a proper feeling of
delicacy forbade him to accept Lydia's hospitality, until
her plea showed clearly that she would regard a final
refusal as evidence that she was not fully trusted as
" faithful to the Lord." By this plea, Luke says, " she
constrained us."

96 COMMENTARY. [[xvi. 16-18.
5. Patjl and Silas are Scourged and Impris
oned, 16-24.
Vv. 16-18. We are next introduced to an incident
which led to the first persecution experienced by the
apostles at the instigation of Gentiles. (16) And it
came to pass, as we were going to the place of prayer,
that a certain maid having a spirit of divination met
us, who brought her • masters much gain by sooth
saying. (17) The same following after Paul and us
cried out, saying, These men are servants of the most
high God, who proclaim unto you the way of salvation.
(18) And this^ she did for many days. But Paul, being
sore troubled, turned and said to the spirit, I charge thee
in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And it
came out that very hour. Literally translated, it was a
Python spirit by which the maid was possessed, the word
Python identifying its manifestations with those of the
women who gave out the oracles at Delphi in Greece ;
and who were supposed by the heathen to be inspired
by the serpent called Python, to whose wisdom these
oracles were accredited. Luke's language can not be
regarded as an indorsement of this supposed inspiration ;
but he distinctly recognizes a real spirit in the maid, and
styles it a Python spirit for the reason given. The case
was undoubtedly one of demon possession, such as so fre
quently occur in our gospel narratives, and with which
Luke's readers were presumed to have become acquaint
ed through his former narrative. It is worthy of remark,
too, that the title " most high God," which is used by
this spirit, is the same that was used by " the legion "
in Gadara (Mark v. 7).

xvi. 16-21.] ACTS. 97
As the maid was proclaiming the truth to a people
who had some confidence in her utterances, and the very
truth which Paul was most solicitous that they should
accept, why did he reject her cooperation, and shut the
mouth of an apparent friend ? The answer can only be,
that to have accepted demons as witnesses to the gospel y
would have convinced the people that there was an
alliance between them and the apostles; and thus all
the good repute of the apostles would have been reflected
on the demons, and all the evil repute of the demons
would likewise have been reflected on the apostles.
To guard against this double evil both Jesus and the
apostles invariably cast out all demons who ventured to
speak in their favor. Paul was " sore troubled " in this
instance, and delayed for many days the act which at
last became unavoidable, because he knew that the
money value of the slave would be greatly reduced by
the expulsion of the demon, and he dreaded the conse
quences of appearing in this heathen city to interfere
with the rights of property. That the maid followed
the preachers to the place of prayer many days before
the demon was expelled, indicates that the place of
prayer was chosen as their daily place of preaching. It
is highly improbable that they could find so suitable
a place inside the city. What became of the maid
thus miraculously relieved of demon possession, we are
not informed ; but gratitude for so great a deliverance
should have thrown her. under the influence of Paul and
of the good women who were now actively cooperating
with him, and who would be naturally interested in her
behalf. Vv. 19-21. The consequences which had troubled
Paul in anticipation (18) were soon realized. (19) But

98 COMMENTARY. [xvi. 19-24.
v/hen her masters saw that the hope of their gain was
gone,1 they laid hold on Paul and Silas, and dragged
them into the marketplace before the rulers, (20) and
when they had brought them unto the magistrates, they
said, These men, being Jews, do exceedingly trouble our
city, (21) and set forth customs which it is not lawful
for us to receive, or to observe, being Romans. The
officers here called magistrates were styled in Latin
duumviri? two men in whom was lodged the supreme
power in a Roman colony. It seems that the apostles
were first brought before rulers of a lower rank in the
agora, the open square improperly called " market place"
in our version, and that by these officers they were
referred to the two chief rulers. The real cause of com
plaint was suppressed, and a false one preferred, because,
in the first place, to have stated the fact in the case
would have reflected credit on Paul in the eyes of the
magistrates ; and in the second place, it was easy in a
heathen city like this to get up an outcry against Jews
on almost any pretence. When Paul reached Corinth on
his present tour all Jews had but recently been expelled
from Rome by order of the emperor (xviii. 2), and per
haps this had already taken place. If so, the circum
stance could but intensify in the minds of all loyal
Romans the common hatred of this persecuted race.
Vv. 22-24. The hypocritical outcry of the slave
owners had the effect aimed at on the heathen rabble,
and on the magistrates. (22) And the multitude rose up
1 Luke here makes a somewhat humorous play upon a word,
which is lost to the English reader. He says that when the evil
spirit e^fpSev " went out," the masters saw that the hope of their
gain k^Wev " went out."
2 The Greek word employed is orpaTiryol, the equivalent of lhe
Latin, praetors.

xvi. 22-26.] ACTS. 99
together against them : and the magistrates rent their
garments off them, and commanded to beat them with rods.
(23) And when they had laid many stripes upon them,
they cast them into prison, charging the jailer to keep
them safely : (24) who, having received such a charge,
cast them into the inner prison, and made their feet fast
in the stocks. Here we have an example of that same
truckling to the clamor of a mob which has made in
famous the name of Pontius Pilate; for the magistrates
gave the prisoners no opportunity to defend themselves,
so that even the forms of justice were disregarded. The
rods with which the apostles were beaten were those
habitually borne in a bundle by the lictors, who always
attended Roman praters; and in order that the beating
might be effectually applied, the victims were doubtless
strapped, as usual, to the whipping post. The jailer
entered fully into the spirit of the mob, and carried out
the order to " keep them safely " with the utmost rigor.
Locking them up in the inner prison would have kept
them safely ; but to safe keeping he added torture by
means of the stocks. With their legs locked in these
clamps, and their feet projecting beyond them, they
could neither lie down nor sit up without pain, nor could
they find relief by a change of position. The pain grew
more intense continually, and no one who has never ex
perienced it can imagine how intense it was.
6. The Jailer and his Family are Baptized,
25-34.
Vv. 25, 26. The condition of the two prisoners as
night drew on was piteous in the extreme. Besides the
physical pain of sitting in a dark dungeon with their
backs bleeding from the scourge, and their legs cramped

100 COMMENTARY. [xvi. 25, 26.
in the stocks, they were racked in mind by a sense of
the cruel injustice which they had suffered at the hands
of men whom they came to bless; and their faith was
heroic indeed if some painful questioning did not intrude
as to why God allowed them to receive such a reward
for their faithful service. The historian leaves all this
to our imagination as respects the first half of the night.
(25) But about midnight Paul and Silas were praying and
singing hymns unto God, and the prisoners were listen
ing to them ; (26) and suddenly there was a great earth
quake, so that the foundations of the prison-house were
shaken : and immediately all the doors were opened ; and
every one's bands were loosed. Men do not pray"when
they are enraged, or sing when they are in deep distress.
That these men prayed at midnight is therefore proof
that ere this the tempest of their feelings, which at the
whipping post, and when first thrust within the dungeon
and fastened in the stocks, made them almost wild, had
now subsided. The cheerfulness necessary to singing must
have been a consequence of their prayer ; and thus Paul
was learning by experience the lesson which he after
ward taught the disciples ih this very city, saying : " In
nothing be anxious ; but in everything by prayer and
supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be
made known unto God. And the peace of God, which
passeth all understanding, shall guard your hearts and
your thoughts in Christ Jesus " (Phil. iv. 6, 7). That
singing was a strange sound to the criminals in the
prison; and when, as they listened attentively, they
suddenly felt the rocking of the earthquake, heard the
slamming of the prison doors, and felt their own fetters
slipping off their limbs, they instinctively connected
these frightful phenomena with the singers, and with

xvi. 27-30.] ACTS. 101
the God whose praises they sang. The effect was para
lyzing. Vv. 27, 28. The jailer seems not to have heard the
singing. He was awakened by the motion of the earth
quake, and he doubtless heard the slamming of the
doors, and the clanking of the fetters as they fell on the
stone floor. (27) And the jailer being roused out of
sleep, and seeing the prison doors open, drew his sword,
and was about to kill himself, supposing that the prison
ers had escaped. (28) But Paul cried with a loud voice,
saying, Do thyself no harm : for we are all here. Know
ing that death was the penalty for allowing prisoners to
escape, he was about to act upon the Roman code of
honor, which required a man to die by his own hand if
necessary to escape that of an enemy or an executioner.
It is not likely that he rushed to this desperate resort
without some outcries which indicated his purpose, and
which were caught by the quick ear of Paul, whose loud
voice snatched him back, in the very nick of time, from
the brink of eternity.
Vv. 29, 30. As soon as the jailer could collect his
senses he remembered that the speaker who had called
to him had been preaching salvation in the name of
the God of Israel, and he instantly perceived that the
earthquake, the opening of the doors, and the unlocking
of the fetters were connected with him, and were the
work of his God. Seizing this thought, and glancing
into the black eternity from which he had just been
rescued, his own salvation, rather than the security of
his prisoners, at once absorbed his thoughts. (29) And
he called for lights, and sprang in, and, trembling for
fear, fell down before Paul and Silas, (30) and brought
them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved ?

102 COMMENTARY. [xvi. 29-34.
At sunset, when coldly thrusting the apostles into the
dungeon, he cared nothing for them, or for the salvation
which he knew they had been preaching ; for then he was
in the midst of Fife and health, and all went well with
him ; but at midnight, when he had been within an inch
of death, a change as suddeu as the earthquake passes over
him, and he falls trembling at the feet of his prisoners.
The other prisoners are forgotten; and even Luke is so
absorbed in the excitement of the jailer that he fails to
tell us what became of them. We may infer that they
were so paralyzed with fear that they remained quiet
in their places until Paul and Silas were led out, and
the outer door was locked.
Vv. 31-34. Leading the apostles into his family
apartment, he received at once a full and satisfactory
answer to his questions. (31) And they said, Believe on the
Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house.
(32) And they spake the word of the Lord unto him,
with all that were in his house. (33) And he took them
the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes ;
and was baptized, he and all his, immediately. (34) And
he brought them up into his house, and set meat l before
them, and rejoiced greatly, with all his house, having
believed in God. The jailer had not previously listened
to Paul very attentively, if at all, or he would have
known what to do to be saved ; for the apostles, unlike
many modern preachers, never left their hearers in doubt
on that supreme question. The first part of Paul's
answer would have been vain without the remainder.
Had he stopped with the words, " Believe on the
Lord Jesus," the jailer might have answered, as did the
1 Literally, set a table before them (irapiBr/Ke Tpiirgov), equivalent
to our household phrase, set the table.

xvi. 31-34.] ACTS. 103
man born blind (Jno. ix. 36), " Who is he, sir, that I
may believe on him?" For this reason the preachers
" spake the word of the Lord unto him." As Plumptre
happily expresses it : " The very title of Christ ; the acts
and words that showed that Jesus was the Christ ; his
life and death and resurrection ; the truths of forgiveness
of sins and communion with him, and the outward signs
which he had appointed as witnesses 'of these truths ; all
this must have been included in the word ofthe Lord
which was preached to that congregation so strangely
assembled between the hours of midnight and dawn."
All this was included in the answer to the question,
" What must I do to be saved ; " and the words, " Believe
on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, and thy
house," are but the beginning of it. Those therefore
who catch at these words of Paul, and draw the conclu
sion that salvation is by faith alone, leave the jail too
soon. They should remain till they hear all — till they
hear Paul tell the man to repent and be baptized; till
the design of baptism is explained to him ; till he is bap
tized ; till he is found rejoicing greatly immediately after
his baptism. It would not require a long delay ; for it
was all done " the same hour of the night." If we com
pare Paul's answer with those given by Peter and
Ananias when the same question was propounded, we
find that Ananias said, " Arise and be baptized, and wash
away thy sins ; " for the questioner in that case had
already believed and repented ; that Peter said, " Repent
and be baptized;" for his questioners had already be
lieved ; while Paul says to his questioner, who had done
neither of the three, " Believe on the Lord Jesus,"
and then added the other two commands. Thus the
three inspired oracles perpectly agree. The consa-

104 COMMENTARY. [xvi. 31-34.
quence of faith, " and thou shalt be saved, and thy
house," is stated in connection with the command to
believe, not because salvation would follow faith unat
tended by repentance and baptism ; but because the right
degree of faith always wrought repentance, and, in the
apostolic practice, was always promptly followed by bap
tism. In other wOrds, belief, in such connections, was put
for the whole process which it constantly superinduced.
While some Psedobaptist writers are candid enough
to admit that the baptism of the jailer and his family
furnishes no evidence for infant baptism,1 others have
tried to show that it favors both this practice and affu
sion. In support of the latter it is assumed that the bab-
tism took place in the prison, and it is claimed that facil
ities for immersion could scarcely have been found there.
But it is clearly stated that the jailer " brought them out
ofthe prison " (30) before they preached " unto him, with
all that were in his house." It is made equally clear that
he " took them " somewhere to wash their stripes and to
be baptized (33) ; and then it is said (34) that after the
baptism " he brought them up into his house." It fol
lows that the baptism occurred neither in the prison nor
in the house, but in the place to which " he took them."
Whether this was in the court of the prison, if it had a
court, or in the river in which Lydia was baptized, we
have no certain means of deciding ; but in either case
1 Thus Plumptre, in commenting on the passage, remarks :
" What has been said above (see note on verse 15) as to the bear
ing of the narratives on the question of infant baptism, applies
here also, with the additional fact that those who are said to have
been baptized are obviously identical with those whom St. Paul
addressed (the word " all " is used'in each case), and must, there.
fore, have been of an age to receive instruction together with the
gaoler himself." ( Commentary in loco).

xvi. 31-34.] ACTS. 105
there is nothing unfavorable to the practice of immersion.
The idea advanced by the English translator of Lech-
ler's Acts is worthy of notice here, because it presents
this issue from the point of view held by some extreme
controversialists. He demands : " If Paul had stealthily
gone forth during the night, in order to immerse the
jailer in a neighboring stream, how could he, as an
honest man, have on the next day declared that, after
being ignominiously conducted within the prison walls
he would not leave them until the magistrates personally
led him forth ?" To this it is answered, that it is very
absurd to represent Paul as going forth "stealthily," if
he went to administer a solemn ordinance of the Lord
which he had reason to believe he would not be per
mitted to administer the next day; and this, too, when
God had himself opened the prison doors and prepared
the way for this baptism. It would be equally absurd
to suppose, as others have done, that the jailer would
have scruples about going out for this purpose with his
prisoners ; for he did so in obedience to manifestations of
divine power and authority. As to Paul's honesty in
doing this, and then refusing to leave the prison the
next morning until escorted by the magistrates, the
question of honesty has no place in the matter ; for the
demands of duty to God in the salvation of his converts
required the former, while the protection of his own
reputation, as we shall see below, required the latter.
The supposition that there is here evidence for infant
baptism is not only unfounded, but it is precluded by the
facts; for Paul spake the word of the Lord to all the
household, and in common with the head of the house
they all rejoiced, and all believed in God. There were
certainly no infants in the family.

106 COMMENTARY. [xvi. 35-39.
7. The Prisoners are Released, 35-40.
Vv. 35, 36. When the magistrates ordered Paul
and Silas to prison, we would naturally suppose that they
intended to make some further inquiry into the charges
preferred against them. (35) But when it was day, the
magistrates sent the Serjeants, saying, Let those men
go. (36) And the jailer reported the words to Paul, say
ing, The magistrates have sent to let you go : now there
fore come forth, and go in peace. This order was issued
without knowledge of what had taken place in the night,
so far as we are informed. As for the earthquake, by
which some scholars suppose that the magistrates had
been alarmed, as it was undoubtedly a miraculous and
not a natural one, there is no ground for supposing that
it extended beyond the prison. The order for release
is most naturally accounted for by the fact that, as the
scourging and imprisonment had been inflicted only to
silence the clamor of the mob/J there was now no need of
protracting the imprisonment. It was thought that the
prisoners, released thus early in the morning, would be
glad to escape from the city, and no further agitation of
the multitude would occur. The magistrates little knew
the kind of men they were dealing with.
Vv. 37-39. To be thus released from prison, as
though they had merely suffered punishment which they
deserved, would be injurious to the apostles, if a report
of it should follow them to other cities ; and fortunately
the means of escaping it were at hand. (37) But Paul
said unto them, They have beaten us publicly, uncon-
demned, men that are Romans, and have cast us into
prison ; and do they now cast us out privily ? nay,
verily ; but let them come themselves and bring us out.

xvi. 37-39.] ACTS. 107
(38) And the Serjeants reported these words unto the
magistrates : and they feared, when they heard that they
were Romans ; (39) and they came and besought them ;
and when they had brought them out, they asked them to
go away from the city. The word Serjeants is a modern
English title improperly used here in our version for
lictors, the real title of these officers. They habitually
attended Roman praetors with bundles of rods in their
hands, and by them the " many stripes " had been laid
on Paul and Silas the day before. The purpose of Paul's
demand is obvious ; if now the fact of his having been
scourged and released should follow him to other cities,
there would also follow the fact that the rulers by whose
order it was done had made amends for it, while the vic
tims had spared their persecutors deserved punishment.
As it was a crime under Roman law to scourge a Ro
man citizen,1 the apostles might have avenged them
selves for the outrage perpetrated upon them, but Paul
taught his brethren not to avenge themselves (Rom. xii.
19), and he acted according to his own precepts. The
incident justifies Christians in appealing to the civil law
for protection ; but not for the punishment of their
enemies. Baur attempts to discredit this whole story by argu
ing that if the apostles had really asserted their citizen
ship they would have done so before tbe scourging, as
Paul did on a subsequent occasion (xxii. 25) ; and that,
if they allowed themselves to be scourged when they
1 The " Porcian law,'' enacted B. C. 300, forbade absolutely the
scourging of a Roman citizen (Livy, x. 9). A climax used by
Cicero, in pleading against Verres for a violation of this law, is
often quoted : " It is a misdeed to bind a Roman citizen — a crime
to scourge him — almost parricide to put him to death."

108 COMMENTARY. [xvi. 37-40.
could so easily have prevented it, they had themselves
alone to blame for it (Paul, i. 154). But how does Baur
know that they did not assert it before the scourging ?
Certainly the silence of the historian does not furnish
this information, and it is highly improbable in itself.
Much more probable is it that, as these men were ar
raigned under the guise of Jews who exceedingly
troubled the city by introducing unlawful customs, their
claim of Roman citizenship, though proclaimed by them,
was disbelieved and scoffed at in the excitement of the
moment ; but that, when repeated the next morning in
connection with a refusal to leave the prison without an
apology from the magistrates, it was believed and re
spected. Ver." 40. When the prisoners were discharged they
took their own time to comply with the request of the
magistrates, and they did so with becoming dignity.
(40) And they went out of the prison, and entered into
the house of Lydia : and when they had seen the breth
ren, they comforted them, and departed. The brethren
here mentioned were doubtless those who had been bap
tized during the " many days " (18) which the apostles
had spent in the city before their imprisonment. Luke
and Timothy, as we shall see farther along (xvii. 1),
were also among the number. These, together with the
jailer's family, constituted the church now planted in
Philippi, and Paul has learned more fully the divine pur
pose in bringing him thither instead of permitting him
to go to Asia or to Bithynia.

xvii. 1-3.] ACTS. 109
8. Preaching and Persecution in Thessalonica,
xvii. 1-9.
Vv. 1—3. The pronoun of the third person which
Luke now resumes, after using that of the second person
since the apostolic company left Troas, implies that he
himself remained at Philippi ; and as the pronoun used
refers grammatically to Paul and Silas, it is implied that
Timothy also remained with Luke, to still further in
struct and organize the church. We find this church at
a later period fully equipped with officers (Phil. i. 1) ;
and the appointment of these was doubtless the work of
these two brethren. Leaving the cause thus guarded in
their rear, Paul and Silas advance to another field of
labor, (i) Now when they had passed through Amphip
olis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where
was a synagogue of the Jews : (2) and Paul, as his cus
tom was, went in unto them, and for three Sabbath days
reasoned with them from the Scriptures, (3) opening and
alleging, that it behoved the Christ to suffer, and to rise
again from the dead ; and that this Jesus whom I pro
claim to you, is the Christ. The distance from Philippi
to Thessalonica is about one hundred miles. It was doubt
less the synagogue in this city which drew the apostles on
without stopping to preach in Amphipolis or Apollonia,
for a synagogue in a city indicated the presence of a con
siderable Jewish population, with a nucleus of Gentile
proselytes about it, and furnished an open avenue for the
introduction of the gospel. Thessalonica, on account of
its commercial importance, was then, and continues to be,
under its modern name Salonica, a great resort for Jews.
The course of argument followed by Paul on these
three Sabbath days was substantially the same as his

110 COMMENTARY. [xvii. 1-3.
own in Antioch of Pisidia, and Peter's on Pentecost ;
and doubtless, if we had reports of his sermons preached
to Jews elsewhere, we would find them very much the
same. It was the course dictated by the state of mind
of the hearers. The preaching of the Christ as one
who had been crucified was to the mass of the Jews a
scandal, because it appeared to them totally inconsistent
with the glorious reign of the Christ as they read it in
the prophets. Until they could be made to see that in
this particular they misread the prophets, it was impossi
ble to convince them that' the crucified Jesus could be
their Christ ; so to this end Paul first addressed his re
marks, and when he had proved according to the
prophets " that it behoved the Christ to suffer, and to
rise again from the dead," it was a very easy task to show
that "this Jesus whom I preach to you is the Christ.''
It was well known that he had suffered death ; and Paul
had abundant means of proving that he had risen. This
latter proof was not limited to the testimony of the
original witnesses, but he gave ocular demonstration of
the living and divine power of Jesus, by working mira
cles in his name. This we learn from the first epistle to
the church which he established here, in which he savs :
" Our gospel came not to you in word only, but also in
power, and in the Holy Spirit, and in much assurance ;
even as ye know what manner of men we showed our
selves toward you for your sake " (I. Thess. i. 5). The
power of the Holy Spirit working miracles before them
gave an assurance of the resurrection and glorification of
him in whose name they were wrought, which " the word
only " of all the men on earth could not give. With
out such attestation the word of man in reference to
the affairs of heaven has no claim on our confidence ;

xvii. 1-9.] ACTS. Ill
but with it, it has a claim which none can honestly
reject. During the two weeks intervening between the three
Sabbaths mentioned, the two brethren carefully avoided
everything which might raise a suspicion of selfish mo
tives. They would not burden any one by even asking
for their daily bread ; and although they received some
contributions from the church at Philippi, the amount
was so scanty as to leave them to the necessity of " labor
ing night and day" (I. Thess. ii. 9; Phil. iv. 15, 16).
Ver. 4. Such arguments and demonstrations, ac
companied by such a life, could not fail of good results.
(4) And some of them were _ persuaded, and consorted
with Paul and Silas ; and of the devout Greeks a great
multitude, and of the chief women not a few. It seems
from this statement that the largest class of the converts
were " devout Greeks," that is, Gentiles who had learned
to worship God according to the example of the Jews.
Next to these were the chief women, also Gentile pros
elytes ; and least of all, Jews. The great majority, then,
were Gentiles ; and Paul, on account of this preponder
ance, could afterward write to them, " Ye turned unto
God from idols, to serve a living and true God" (I.
Thess. i. 9).
Vv. 5-9. Such a movement among the devout Gen
tiles, whose presence in the synagogue was a source of
pride to the Jews, was exceedingly mortifying to those
Jews who remained in unbelief, and they were able, by
their number and their influence with the rabble of the
city, to give serious trouble to Paul and Silas, which
they were not slow to do. (5) But the Jews, being
moved with jealousy, took unto them certain vile fellows
of the rabble, and gathering a crowd, set the city on an

112 COMMENTARY. [xvii. 5-9.
uproar ; and assaulting the house of Jason, they sought
to bring them forth to the people. (6) And when they
found them not, they dragged Jason and certain brethren
before the rulers of the city, crying, These that have
turned the world upside down are come hither also ; (7)
whom Jason hath received : and these all act contrary
to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another
king, one Jesus. (8) And they troubled the multitude
and the rulers of the city, when they heard these things.
(9) And when they had taken security from Jason and
the rest, they let them go. The Jews seem not to have
had the same influence with the chief men of the city
as in Antioch of Pisidia (xiii. 50) ; so they stirred up
the rabble, and through them brought the affair before
the rulers. .Knowing that Paul and Silas lodged in the
house of Jason, " they sought to bring them forth to the
people," with the evident purpose of subjecting them to
mob violence ; but failing to find them, their proceedings
with Jason himself were more orderly — they dragged
him and some of the other disciples before the officers,
styled in the Greek politarchs (city-rulers). The charge
of turning the world "upside down" was based on the
mob violence which had attended their labors in other
cities, of which these Jews of Thessalonica had evidently
heard a great deal, and for which they unjustly laid the
blame on the apostles, while they were themselves re
peating the wicked procedure of other mobs. The other
charge was true in a proper sense, for they had preached
Jesus as a king ; but the charge was a perversion, delib
erate and intentional, on the part of the Jews, though
not detected as such by the rabble. The people and the
rulers were troubled, because they feared the conse
quences of permitting treasonable plots against Csesar to

xvii. 5-10.] ACTS. 113
be propagated in the city. If Paul and Silas had them
selves been brought before the politarchs, it is not cer
tain that they would have fared better than at the hands
of the praetors of Philippi; but as the only accusation
against Jason was that he had entertained the preachers,
he was released after giving bond to keep the peace.
The title politarch, which Luke here applies to the
chief magistrates of Thessalonica, is nowhere else found
as an official title in all Greek literature ; and it is easy
to see what a clamor the enemies of the faith would
have made over this use of the term, but for the fact that
an ancient triumphal arch of marble until recently
spanned the principal street of the city, with an inscrip
tion in which this very title is applied, and the names of
seven of the politarchs are preserved. When the arch
was torn down, the slabs containing the inscription were
secured by the British consul then at Thessalonica, and
they are now kept in the British Museum. Three of the
names are Sosipater, Secundus and Gaius, the names of
three well known fellow laborers of Paul (xix. 29 ;
xx. 4). 9. Success in Bercea, 10-15.
Ver. 10. Although Paul and Silas suffered less in
Thessalonica than in Philippi, their departure from the
former was more humilating than from the latter. When
they heard the result of the attempt to seize them, they
saw at once that their further continuance in the city
would be likely to involve Jason and the others in a for
feiture of their bond, and would bring personal violence
to themselves ; so they sought safety for all in flight.
(io) And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and
Silas by night unto Bercea : who when they were come

114 COMMENTARY. [xvii. 10.
thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. This
flight by night must have reminded Paul of that from
Damascus in the beginning of his apostolic career ; and
it may have been effected by a similar method of escape.
From Philippi to Thessalonica, Paul and Silas had
followed one of those splendid military roads constructed
by the Romans for the passage of armies at all seasons of
the year, which were properly graded, and then paved
with flag-stones. Remnants of them are still found in
almost every country then included in the empire ;
and this one, called the Via Egnatia, connecting the
Hellespont with the Adriatic sea, was the great thorough
fare across the peninsula of Macedonia toward the dis
tant East. On leaving Thessalonica in the night they
did not have to grope their way ; for they still followed
the same highway westward till, probably after daylight,
they left it and turned more to the southwest in order to
reach Bercea. Their route all the way lay across a level
country traversed by historic streams ; and Bercea itself,
about sixty miles from Thessalonica, is thus described :
" Bercea, like Edessa, is on the eastern slope of the
Olympian range, and commands an extensive view of
the plain which is watered by the Haliacmon and the
Axius. It has many natural advantages, and is now
considered one of the most agreeable towns of Rumili.
Plane trees spread a grateful shade over its gardens.
Streams of water are in every street. Its ancient name
is said to have been derived from the abudance of its
waters ; and the name still survives in the modern
Verria, or Kara-Verria." 1 It is still a walled city with
a population of between fifteen and twenty thousand
1 Conybeare and Howson, following the description of the
traveler Leake.

xvii. 11, 12.] ACTS. 115
Here again the apostle found a synagogue, and made
it the starting point of his labors.
Vv. 11, 12. We now have the pleasure of seeing one
Jewish community listen to the truth and examine it like
rational beings, (ii) Now these were more noble than
those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with
all readiness of mind, examining the Scriptures daily,
whether these things were so. (12) Many of them there
fore believed ; also of the Greek women of honorable
estate, and of men, not a few. The conduct of these
Jews can not be too highly commended, or too closely
imitated. A common sin of men is a refusal to examine
candidly and patiently the claims of the gospel. The
Jews, having fallen into error by their traditions, re
sisted with passion and uproar every attempt to give
them the true light ; and their folly has been imitated
ever since by both unbelievers and the partisans of relig
ious error. If such persons live and die in ignorance of
the truth, and in consequent neglect of duty, their ignor
ance, instead of excusing them, will be one of their chief
sins. There is scarcely a greater sin than to stop our
ears when God speaks, or to close our eyes to truth
which he brings before us. All who profess to be dis
ciples of Christ should search the Scriptures upon the
presentation of everything offering a decent claim to
be God's truth, and see " whether these things are
so." To follow implicitly wherever the word of God
leads can never be unacceptable to its Author. As a
consequence of the noble conduct of the Bercean
Jews, the result was not, as in Thessalonica, that some
of them believed, and a great multitude of the Greeks^
but many of them believed, and not a few of the
Greeks. Let us not fail to notice, too, that their believing

116 COMMENTARY. [xvii. 11-14.
is ascribed by Luke expressly to the fact that they
searched the Scriptures, whether these things were so;
again showing that faith comes by hearing the word of
God. Vv. 13, 14. There seems to have been no serious
obstacle to the gospel in Bercea, and the disciples may
have begun to flatter themselves with the hope of turn
ing the whole city to the Lord, when an unexpected foe
assailed them from the rear. (13) But when the Jews of
Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was
proclaimed by Paul at Bercea also, they came thither
likewise, stirring up and troubling the multitudes. (14)
And then immediately the brethren sent forth Paul to go
as far as to the sea : and Silas and Timothy abode there
still. (15) But they who conducted Paul brought him as
far as Athens : and receiving a commandment unto Silas
and Timothy that they should come to him with all
speed, they departed.
Here is an exhibition of that same malevolent zeal
which characterized the Jews of Antioch and Iconium
when they pursued Paul to Lystra (xiv. 19), showing
that the Jews were the same the world over. Again it-
was the heathen population that they stirred up, and one
of their pleas, no d.oubt, as in the case at Lystra, was
that these men had been compelled to fly from the city
of Thessalonica. Thus one persecution was made the
plea for another.
When Paul left Bercea, it seems from the expressions
used, that he had formed his plans only so far as to go
to the sea, which was about sixteen miles distant at the
nearest point ; but on going that far it was determined
that he should sail to Athens, and this determination
made it necessary for him to send back word to Silas

xvii. 13-17.] ACTS. 117
and Timothy. The obvious purpose of leaving these two "
brethren behind, at some risk no doubt to their personal
safety, was to still further instruct and encourage the
newly baptized disciples ere they were left to their own
resources for edification. As Timothy had been left
with Luke at Philippi (xvi. 40), and now first appears/
again in the narrative, it is uncertain whether or not he
overtook Paul in Thessalonica. In leaving Macedonia
Paul left behind him three churches, planted at radiating
points, from which the gospel could be successfully
spread throughout the province, if the disciples proved
faithful and zealous. Thessalonica occupied the central
position, with Philippi one hundred miles to the north
east, and Bercea sixty miles to the southwest. We
have the testimony of Paul that from at least one of
these the light shone with great brilliancy ; for he after
ward wrote to the Thessalonians : " From you hath
sounded forth the word of the Lord, not only in Mace
donia and Achaia, but in every place your faith to God
ward is gone forth ; so that we need not to speak any
thing" (I. Thess. i. 8). There was no need of Paul's
voice at any but central points when he could leave
such congregations behind him. No doubt much of their
zeal and fidelity was due to the fostering care of Luke,
Timothy and Silas, who alternately lingered behind the
apostle for this purpose.
10. Paul in Athens, 16-21.
Vv. 16, 17. In the ancient world there were two
distinct varieties of civilization, which had reached their
culmination in the days of the apostles. One was the
result of human philosophy ; the other, of a divine reve
lation. The chief center of the former was the city of

118 COMMENTARY. [xvii. 16, 17.
Athens ; ofthe latter, the city of Jerusalem. If we com
pare them with respect either to the moral character of
the peoples brought under their influence respectively,
or with reference to their preparation for thej perfect
religion of Christ, we shall find the advantage in favor
of the latter. Fifteen hundred years before, God had
placed the Jews under the influence of revelation, and
left the other nations of the earth to " walk in their own
ways." By a severe discipline, continued through many
centuries, the former had been lifted out of the idolatry
in which they were sunk at the beginning, and which
still prevailed over all other nations. As a consequence
they presented an example of purity in private morals
which stands unrivaled in ancient history previous to
the advent of Christ. On the other hand, the most ele
gant ofthe heathen nations were now exhausting in their
social life, as Paul testifies in the first chapter of his
epistle to the Romans, the catalogue of base and beastly
practices of which men and women can be guilty. In
Athens itself, where flourished the most profound phil
osophy, the most glowing eloquence, the most exquisite
poetry, aud the most refined creative art which the
world has ever seen, there was the most complete and
studied abandonment to every vice which passion could
prompt or imagination invent. In the center of Jewish
civilization the gospel had now been preached, and
many thousands who had embraced it had attained to an
excellence in human virtue not known before since the
fall of man. In surrounding countries, and in distant
lands, wherever the Jewish synagogue was found, devout
and honorable men and women by tbe thousands had
done the same; but nowhere had this blessed light
penetrated far into the darkness of heathenism. The

xvii. 16-18.] ACTS. 119
struggle now about to take place in Athens is to dem
onstrate still further, by contrast, how successful a
"schoolmaster to bring us to Christ" had been the
law and the prophets. Paul knew well the reputa
tion of Athens, but he could not have realized, until he
saw it, the extent to which it was given to idolatry.
(16) Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his
spirit was provoked within him, as he beheld the city
full of idols. (17) So he reasoned in the synagogue with
the Jews and the devout persons, and in the market
place daily with them that met with him. Though a
lonely stranger, who might have been awed into silence
by the magnificence with which sin had fortified itself
in this great city, his soul was stirred to make a mighty
struggle for the triumph of the gospel even here. His
first effort, as usual, was in the Jewish synagogue ; but
the Jews and proselytes were so completely under the
spell of the gilded iniquity around them, that his efforts
were unsuccessful. Having access to no other formal
assembly, he next goes upon the streets, and the places
of public concourse, and discourses with " them that met
with him."
Ver. 18. By persistent efforts Paul succeeded in
attracting some attention from the idle throng, but it
was of a character at first not at all flattering. (18) And
certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers
encountered him. And some said, What would this
babbler say ? Other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth
of foreign demons : J because he preached Jesus and the
1 Instead of " strange gods," as in our version, the more cor
rect rendering is " foreign demons." Our English translators have
dealt very strangely with the term Saipo\<iov. In every other place
they have rendered it devils, though there is but one devil, and

120 COMMENTARY. [xvii. 18.
resurrection. The persistency with which he pressed
his message on every one he met suggested the epithet
babbler, while the prominence which he gave to the
name of Jesus, a man who had died and risen again,
suggested the idea of demon-worship, because the demons
worshiped by the Greeks were dead men deified.
The two classes of philosophers which he encoun
tered were the antipodes of each other, and the practical
philosophy of each was antipodal to the doctrine of Paul.
The Stoics taught that the greatest good in life was to be
attained through a total indifference to both the sorrows
and the pleasures of the world ; the Epicureans, that it
was to be obtained through the prudent gratification of
every passion and propensity ; and they united in denying
conscious existence after death. In opposition to the
former, Paul taught that we shbuld weep with those who
weep, and rejoice with those who rejoice ; in opposition
here they have most inconsistently rendered it gods. But while
demons were worshiped by the Greeks, they were a class of
beings distinct in the minds of Jews from the devil and fallen
angels, and distinct in the minds of Greeks from those gods
which they styled " The Immortals ;" and it is inexcusable in a
translator to confound to the minds of his readers things which
are so distinct in the original. A uniform use of the word demon
throughout the N. T., which was insisted upon by the American
Committee of the Revisers, is plainly demanded by fidelity to the
original. The term C,faoi, here rendered strange in our version, as
it is everywhere else except in one passage where there is a
necessity for a variation (Rom. xvi. 23), has a more definite mean
ing than our word strange. It means foreign, in the'sense of be
longing to another country, or a different system. Here, and in
verse 20, it has specific reference to the origin in a foreign land,
that is, in Judea, of the teaching to which it is applied ; and in
verse 21 those called strangers in our version were foreigners, and
not mere strangers to the Athenians, which they might have
been if they were Greeks who had not visited Athens before.

xvii. 18-21.] ACTS. 121
to the latter, that we should deny all ungodliness and
worldly lusts ; and in opposition to both, that the final
goal of human hopes is a resurrection from the dead to
life everlasting.
Vv. 19-21. Notwithstanding the contempt with
which Paul was regarded by many, he succeeded at last
in arresting the earnest attention of a few. (19) And they
took hold of him, and brought him unto the Areopagus,
saying, May we know what this new teaching is, which
is spoken by thee ? (20) For thou bringest certain for
eign things to our ears : we would know therefore what
these things mean. (21) (Now all the Athenians and the
foreigners sojourning there spent their time in nothing
else, but either to tell or hear some new thing.) They
" took hold of him " in a familiar way, to lead him from
the noisy crowd to a better place of hearing. The agora
(inaccurately rendered " market place " in our version),
iu which Paul was talking to the people, was bounded
on the whole northern side by a ridge of coarse marble
which rises abruptly to the height of about thirty feet.
Toward the west it slopes downward gradually until in
the course of about a quarter of a mile it descends to the
level of the plain. This is the Areopagus, or, as ren
dered into English, the hill of Mars — so called because a
temple of Mars once stood on its summit. Its summit
is reached from the agora by a flight of steps cut in the
natural rock, the most of which remain unbroken to the
present day ; and here in the open air sat the court of
the Areopagus, by whose decisions grave questions in
religion were settled, and sometimes great criminals were
condemned. The informal character of the proceedings
on this occasion shows that it was not the court that had
summoned Paul ; but merely that the philosophers who

122 COMMENTARY. [xvii. 21-23.
wished to give him a quiet hearing chose this spot for the
purpose. The agora was spread out in full view below,
and the hum of its confused sounds could be distinctly
heard ; but these would not prevent the small audience
from hearing the voice of the speaker.
Luke's parenthetical statement, that al,l the Athen
ians and the foreigners dwelling there spent their time
in nothing but hearing and telling something new,
though not true, of course, of the laboring classes and
tradesmen, who are evidently not contemplated in the
remark, was strictly true of the great mass ; for in those
days men came to Athens from every nation to extend
their education by hearing the numerous lecturers on all
topics ; and to learn about countries foreign to their own
from visitors therefrom ; so that every one was both a
hearer and a teller of something that was new to others-
It was in perfect keeping with this habit that these
philosophers desired to hear the foreign teaching which
Paul seemed anxious to impart.
11. Paul's Discourse on " The Unknown God,"
22-31.
Vv. 22, 23. After his persevering but necessarily
disconnected conversations in the agora, Paul was de
lighted to have now an audience assembled for the ex
press purpose of hearing him. He could not begin by
opening the Scriptures, and speaking of the long expect
ed Messiah ; for of the Scriptures, and even of the God
who gave them, his auditors were profoundly ignorant.
Before he could preach to them Jesus as the Son of God
he must make them acquainted with God himself- and
for this purpose his observations in the city had supplied
him with a most admirable text, (22) And Paul stood

xvii. 22, 23.] ACTS. 123
in the midst of the Areopagus, and said, Ye men of
Athens, in all things I perceive that ye are very demon-
fearing.1 (23) For as I passed along, and observed the
objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this
inscription, TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. What therefore
ye worship in ignorance, this set I forth unto you. The
people of Athens were worshipers of demons, or of dead
men deified, and they regarded it as a virtue to be scru
pulous in all the forms of this worship.2 Paul's audi-
1 The Greek word here rendered " too superstitious " in the
A. V., and " somewhat superstitious " (margin, " religious ") in
the R. V., is Seicidaifjuyvearkpovq, the comparative degree of SeusiSaijuw,
which means demon-fearing. It is compounded of deitiu, to fear,
and Sai/xav, a demon. As deoaeftfic is properly .translated god-fearing,
ieiaidalpuv is with equal propriety rendered dernon- fearing. The
comparative degree of the adjective does not institute an explicit
comparison between the Athenians and others in this respect ;
for the context furnishes no basis for such a comparison ; and
therefore, according to a common rule of Greek grammar, it is to
be construed as indicating an unusual degree of the quality re
ferred to, and should be preceded by the adverb very in the Eng
lish rendering of it. " Very demon-fearing," then, is the exact
meaning of the word. While the Athenians were, from either a
Jewish or a Christian point of view, "somewhat superstitious,"
" too superstitious," and " somewhat religious," in thus fearing
demons, these expressions fail to translate the term employed by
Paul, and therefore they should not be employed. They really
express an inference of the translators, and therefore have the
nature of a comment, rather than that of a translation. It is as
if one were translating a single word from some foreign tongue
which meant the fear of ghosts, and were to render it too super
stitious ; or a Chinese word meaning ihe fear of Joss, and were to
render it somewhat religious. See more on the subject of demon
worship in the next note below, and the note under xxv. 19.
s Paul says (I. Cor. x. 20) : " The things which the Gentiles
sacrifice they sacrifice to demons, and not to God." He probably
meant to stigmatize all of their deities as demons ; or it may be
that he had in mind their own distinction between demons and

124 COMMENTARY. [xvii. 23.
tors therefore were complimented by his opening re
mark. His next remark presented a proof of the first.
gods, and meant that not all, but the great mass of their sacri
fices were offered to the former, which was true. One of the most
prominent of the complaints brought against the Christians of
the second century by Celsus was based on their refusal to honor
the demons, and in making it he seems to have been in earnest.
He says : " We must either not live, and indeed not come into
this life at all, or we must do so on condition that we give thanks
and first fruits and prayers to demons, who have been set over
the things of this world ; and that we must do as long as we live,
that they may prove good and kind." (Origen vs. Celsus, viii. 33).
" The satrap of a Persian or Roman monarch, or ruler, or gov
ernor, or general, yea, even those who fill lower offices of trust or
service in the state, would be able to do great injury to those
who despised them, and will the satraps and ministers ot earth
and air be insulted with impunity?" (ib. 35). He styles Jesus
the Christian's demon, and says : "Do you not see, gcod sir
that even your own demon is not only reviled, but banished from
every land and sea, and you yourself, who are as it were an
image dedicated to him, are bound and led to punishment, and
fastened to the stake, whilst your demon, or, as you call him, the
Son of God, takes no vengeance on the evil-doer?" (ib. 39 ; see
also vii. 67-69). As to the nature of these beings, there was in
the minds of Greek writers some confusion ; but Plato says :
" The poets speak excellently who affirm that when good men
die they obtain great honor and dignity, and become demons "
(Cratulus). He also says, "Every demon is a middle between
God and mortal;" and he shows the ground of the worship of
these good demons by the further statement : " Demons are re
porters and carriers from men to the gods, and again from the
gods to men, of the supplications and prayers of the one, and of
the injunctions and rewards of devotion from the other " [Syinpos.
iii. 202, 203). It is not difficult to see here the source ot the invo
cation of saints practiced by Greek and Roman Catholics- But
in the Greek system there were also wicked demons. Plutarch
writes : " It is a very ancient opinion that there are certain wick
ed and malignant demons, who envy good men, and endeavor to
hinder them in their pursuit of virtue, lest they should be par
takers of greater happiness than they enjoy " (Dion. i. 958). The

xvii. 23.] ACTS. 125
The unknown god, to which the altar mentioned had
been erected, could not be one of the immortals, who
were all well known, and therefore he must have been a
demon not hitherto worshiped by name. After erecting
altars and statues to all the known gods, so that a Ro
man satirist l said that it was easier to find a god than a
man in Athens, they had shown their zeal for demon-
worship by honoring a being whom they did not know.
The commentators have suggested many hypotheses to
account for the erection of this altar ; but there are so
many causes which may have led to it,2 that it is im
possible to fix upon any one with much assurance. It
is sufficient that it answered Paul's purpose in proving
that the Athenians were very demon-fearing, and in in
troducing to them the only true and living God, as
though he were the God whom they thus already wor
shiped. In this way he avoided the appearance of in
viting them to a worship which was foreign to their cus
toms, and which they otherwise might have regarded as
unlawful.
Jewish conception was precisely the same, except that they
limited their use of the term to the spirits of wicked men. Thus
Josephus says: " Demons are no other than the spirits of the
wicked, that enter into men that are alive, and kill them, unless
they can obtain some help against them" (Wars, vii. 6. 3). This
being the accepted meaning of the term with both Jews and
Greeks, we must understand it when used by Jesus and by Paul
in the same sense. Similar information is furnished in a con
densed form in the Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, under the
word Saljiav.
1 Petronius, Satire 17.
5 Individuals as well as the state were in the habit of erecting
small marble altars to the honor of gods or goddesses from whom
they supposed themselves to have received special favors. Some
of these, recovered from the ruins, are even now standing, as
they did in ancient times, in the court of the Acropolis.

126 COMMENTARY. [xvii. 24-28-
Vv. 24r-28. He next introduces the God to whom
he refers, by making a series of statements concerning
him, every one of which presents him in striking con
trast with the gods of the Greeks. (24) The God that
made the world and all things therein, he, being Lord
of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with
hands ; (25) neither is he served by men's hands, as
though he needed anything, seeing he himself giveth to
all life, and breath, and all things ; (26) and he made
of one every nation of men for to dwell on all the face of
' the earth, having determined their appointed seasons, and
the bounds of their habitation; (27) that they should
seek God, if haply they might feel after him, and find
him, though he is not far from each one of us : (28) for
in him we live, and move, and have our being ; as cer
tain even of your own poets have said, For we are also
his offspring. With Paul's hearers there was no God
who " made the world and all things therein ;" so, by
this thought he lifted his God above all that they con
ceived of theirs. As he had made all things, this made
him Lord, not of the sea, as Neptune, nor of the sky,
as Jupiter, but " Lord of heaven and earth." From
this it was easy to see the conclusion, that he dwells not
in handmade temples — that these are too small to con
tain him. Here Paul had allusion to the magnificent
marble temples which were in sight all around him, and
especially to the Parthenon, the glory of Greek archi
tecture, which towered above the Areopagus just to the
east. Both from this consideration, and from another
next mentioned, this God is not served by men's hands,
as though he needed something which men could supply,
seeing that from him, as the final source, men receive
their life, their breath, and all that they enjoy. Of no

xvii. 28.] ACTS. 127
heathen god had this been said ; for to none of them did
their worshipers ascribe such power. He next shows
that this God, instead of being the god of some single
nation, over whose destiny he presides, while he defends
it against all other nations, actually created every nation,
made them all from one man, to dwell on the face of the
whole earth ; and further, that the seasons of prosperity
and adversity of all these nations, together with their
national boundaries, instead of being regulated, as the
heathen supposed, by separate national gods, were all
controlled by this one God. Finally he shows them
that the purpose of God in all these things was to induce
men to obtain the very knowledge of himself which Paul
was now trying to impart to his hearers. What nobler
pursuit of knowledge than to seek such a God, even
though we have to " feel after him " like blind men.
But such obscure seeking, he lets them know in the same
breath, is not needful, seeing that he is not far away, but
round about us at all times and in all places. One of
their own poets had very nearly expressed this thought,
in saying, " We are also his offspring ;" for God, like an
earthly father, would not leave his children to grope
after him in the dark, and to call him an " unknown
god." By this train of thought, more fully expressed
no doubt than we have it iu Luke's epitome, the God
whom they had worshiped without knowing him was
brought before them ; and let it be observed that they
had worshiped him in a closer sense than we are apt to
suppose ; for whatever may have been the benefit re
ceived, which had led some one to set up the altar in
question, that benefit had really come from the true God,
and this expression of gratitude had been offered un
wittingly.

128 COMMENTARY. xvii. 29-31.]
Ver. 29. Prom these reflections, and especially
from the last, Paul next draws a logical conclusion
inimical to all forms of idol worship. (29) Being then
the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the God
head is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art
and device of man. Their own self-respect should forbid
them to think of him from whom they derived their be
ing as like these dead works of their own hands, how
ever skillfully and beautifully wrought out.
The statement in verse 26, that God " made of one
all the nations of men," is an incidental assertion of the
unity of the human race ; and it accords with the Mosaic
history. To deny it because we find some difficulty in
reconciling it with the present diversities in the types of
men, is to deny an assertion of the Scriptures, not be
cause of what we know, but because of what we do not
know ; for if we knew the whole history of our race, we
should doubtless know the causes of these varieties, and
the times in which they came into existence.
Vv. 30, 31. Having now made known the true God
to his hearers, Paul next calls upon them to repent of
their idolatry ; and he presents, as a motive to this, the
solemn fact of the future judgment. (30) The times of
ignorance therefore God overlooked ; but now he com
mandeth men that they should all everywhere repent :
(31) inasmuch as he hath appointed a day, in the which he
will judge the world in righteousness by the man whom
he hath ordained ; whereof he hath given assurance
unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.
By saying that God had overlooked the times of ignor
ance, Paul does not mean that he had excused it ; for
this would be inconsistent with this call to repentance.
He means that God had not hitherto attempted to break

xvii. 31.] ACTS. 129
it up, as he now does, by sending forth preachers of the
truth". True, the message of Jonah to Nineveh, the
proclamations concerning the true God forced from the
pens of Nebuchadnezzar, Darius and Cyrus, together
with many overthrows of heathen armies like that o/
Sennacherib, were loud voices from heaven reminding
heathen nations of the God whom they had forgotten ;
but these were isolated acts, and not parts of a continu
ous and systematic call to repentance, such as was sent
forth by the mission of the apostles.
The soul-stirring fact that God has " appointed a day
in which he will judge the world in righteousness," is a
powerful motive to repentance, because a judgment in
righteousness must inevitably involve the condemnation
of all the unrighteous ; and Paul's hearers could now
see the unrighteousness of their idolatry. In thus pre
senting the final judgment as the first and foremost mo
tive to bring men to repentance, Paul was but following
the example of Jesus, and proceeding according to the
demands of human nature. The terrors of that great
day, and of the awful fate awaiting those who shall then
be condemned, constitute the heavy artillery of the gos
pel, by which the fortification that sin has constructed
about the hearts of wicked men must be battered down,
ere the tenderer motives of the gospel can be brought to
bear. The wicked man must be made afraid to continue
in sin, before the goodness of God can lead him to re
pentance ; and the preacher of the gospel who neglects
to employ the thunders of this heavenly artillery not
only fails to preach according to the divine model, but
he will preach a feeble gospel that can never work deep
seated repentance

130 COMMENTARY. [xvii. 31-33.
It is just at this point in his discourse that Paul first
introduces Jesus ; and he introduces him first, not as a
loving Saviour, but as a universal judge; he introduces
him not in his birth of the virgin, or in his baptism by
John, or in his healing power, or in his death for the
sins of men; but in the closing act of his Messianic
reign, the everlasting j udgment ; and he presents, as the
proof that Jesus will thus judge, the fact that God has
raised him from the dead. This fact, considered in it
self alone, would not furnish this proof; but considered
in connection with the statement of Jesus before his
death, that all judgment had been given into his hands
(Jno. v. 22-29), it does. Of course Paul's hearers did
not yet see the force of this ; for what is here said about
Jesus, even without naming him, was evidently intended
by Paul as the mere introduction of a theme which he
intended to expand in the remainder of his remarks.
Indeed, he had just now reached that which was to be
the chief theme of his discourse ; and we can see that
his plan of discourse was, first, to make these idolaters
acquainted with the true God ; second, to call on them
to repent toward God ; and third, to present Christ as he
through whom their repentance might be available in
enabling them to obtain forgiveness of sins and ever
lasting life.
Vv. 32, 33. But Paul was not permitted to finish
his discourse. Just as he had reached its most vital part
he was interrupted. (32) Now when they heard of the
resurrection of the dead, some mocked ; but others said,
We will hear thee concerning this yet again. (33) Thus
Paul went out from among them. From a modern point
of view there are two strange features in the conduct of
this audience : first, that they listened quietly while Paul

xvii. 33, 34.] ACTS. 131
was demonstrating the folly of their idolatrous worship,
which we should naturally expect them to defend ; and
second, that they interrupted him when he spoke of a
resurrection from the dead, which we should have ex
pected them to welcome as a relief from the gloom tbat
shrouded their thoughts of death. But the former is
accounted for by the infidelity which then prevailed
among philosophers in reference to the heathen deities,
rendering formal and heartless with them the worship
which was still observed by the ignorant masses with
some devoutness and sincerity ; while the latter is ex
plained by their pride of opinion and their party zeal.
The two sects of philosophy to -which they belonged
had long ago proved, by arguments which the Platonists,
they fondly thought, could never set aside, that there is
no future, state, and that therefore the idea of a resurrec
tion from the dead is preposterous. Thus a false phil
osophy had crushed out of their hearts some of the bet
ter instincts of our nature, and caused them to mock at
that which is the dearest of all hopes to the chief part
of mankind. Still, those who said, " We will bear thee
concerning this yet again," began, perhaps, to feel a re
kindling of their better instincts ; and let us hope that
some of these may yet be found among the sons of
light. Ver. 34. Although his discourse was broken off by
the mockery of a portion of his audience, the apostle's
effort was not altogether fruitless. (34) But certain men
clave unto him, and believed : among whom also was
Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris,
and others with them. Among these converts Dionysius
is selected for special mention, because, as his title indi
cates, he was one of the judges of the Areopagus, and

132 COMMENTARY. [xvii. 34— xviii. 1.
therefore a man of high official standing in the city ; and
Damaris is made conspicuous because it was unusual for
a woman to be found in an audience of philosophers.
That she was there, however, proves the freedom of the
Greek women of the period, and is quite inconsistent
with the notions often expressed by shallow interpreters
concerning some of Paul's remarks about women in his
epistles.1
12. Paul Begins the Work in Corinth,
xviii. 1-4.
Ver. 1. Paul's comparative failure in Athens aptly
illustrates, if it did not suggest, his subsequent remark to
the Corinthians, " God made foolish the wisdom of the
world. For seeing that in the wisdom of God the world
through its wisdom knew not God, it was God's good ,
pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to save
them that believe" (I. Cor. i. 21). Having thus failed
in the literary capital of Greece, he next resorts to its
political and commercial capital, (i) After these things
he departed from Athens, and came to Corinth. This
city was situated on the western coast of the isthmus
which connects the Peloponnesus with Attica. It
was only nine miles distant across the isthmus from
Cenchrea at the head of the Saronic gulf, and in this
direction it had easy communication with all the great
cities of Asia ; and, being at the head of the gulf of
Corinth on the west, it enjoyed, through it and the Adri
atic sea, close communication with Italy and the west.
It was therefore a city of great commercial advantages,
and these had drawn into it a large Jewish popula-
lation. 1 1. Cor. xiv. 34-37 ; I. Tim. ii. 8-15.

xviii. 2-4.] ACTS. 133
Vv. 2-4. Paul entered this great city alone, a total
stranger, and penniless. The little means which he had
brought with him from Macedonia was exhausted, and
his attention was turned first to the supply of his daily
bread. By a combination of providences he found most
desirable lodgings, and the means of livelihood. (2)
And he found a certain Jew named Aquila, a man of
Pontus by race, lately come from Italy, with his wife
Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all the Jews
to depart from Rome : and he came unto them ; (3) and
because he was of the same trade, he abode with them,
and they wrought ; for by their trade they were tent-
makers. (4) And he reasoned in the synagogue every
Sabbath, and persuaded Jews and Greeks. To be thus
under the necessity of laboring as a journeyman tent-
maker, when he was aiming to evangelize a .proud and
opulent city, was anything but encouraging. From the
calm and unimpressive style *of Luke's account, we
might imagine that Paul's feelings were callous to such
considerations ; but his own pen, which often reveals
emotions unnoticed by Luke, gives a far different repre
sentation. Writing to the Corinthians several years
afterward, when all transient emotions had been for
gotten, he says : " I was with you in weakness, and in
fear, and in much trembling" (I. Cor. ii. 3). He was
keenly sensitive to the weakness of his situation ; he
feared a failure similar to that in Athens; and he
trembled at the thought that the salvation of so many
souls was dependent on so feeble an instrumentality.
Whether he found in Aquila and Priscilla immediate
Christian fellowship and encouragement, we are not able
to determine ; for while it is possible that they were
among the Jews from Pontus who were present on the

134 COMMENTARY. [xviii. 4-7.
great day of Pentecost (ii. 9) ; or that they may have
been baptized more recently in Rome by disciples there
who had heard Peter's great sermon (ib.) ; and while
there is nothing said by Luke about their being baptized
by Paul ; yet if they were already disciples, it is very
difficult to account for Luke's entire silence in reference
to the fact. At any rate, Paul found them true hearted
worshipers of God, and formed a personal attachment
to them which lasted to the latest day of his life. We
shall meet them again and again in the course of the
narrative, and always to hear of something praiseworthy
in their conduct.
The preaching in the synagogue, which [continued
through several Sabbaths, seems to have been slower
than usual in taking effect. Perhaps this was because
the preacher was a tent-maker, as well as a stranger;
and possibly it was due in part to the less aggressive
manner of Paul, superinduced by the weakness and fear
and trembling of which we have just spoken.
13. The Arrival of Silas and Timothy, and a
Breach with the Jews, 5-11.
Vv. 5-7. The loneliness of Paul's situation was at
length relieved, and a change came over his manner of
preaching. (5) But when Silas and Timothy came down
from Macedonia, Paul was constrained by the word,
testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ. (6)
And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he
shook out his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood
be upon your own heads ; I am clean : from henceforth I
will go unto the Gentiles. (7) And he departed thence,
and went intd the house of a certain man named Titus
Justus, one that worshiped God, whose house joined

xviii. 7.] ACTS. 135
hard to the synagogue. It will be remembered by the
reader that Silas and Timothy, whose arrival is here
mentioned, had tarried in Bercea, that Paul had sent
them word to rejoin him as soon as possible, and that
he had waited for them in Athens (xvii. 15, 16). Luke
is silent as to whether they overtook him at Athens ; but
we learn from Paul that Timothy did. He writes :
" When we could no longer forbear, we thought it good to
be left behind at Athens alone, and sent Timothy ... to
establish you and comfort you concerning your faith "
(I. Thess. iii. 1, 2). This remark not only shows that
Timothy had overtaken Paul at Athens, but that he had
been sent back thence to Thessalonica. It also proves the
correctness of our judgment as to why Paul had habitu
ally left behind him for a time, with almost every
church planted, some one of his fellow laborers — that is,
"to establish them and comfort them concerning the
faith." Timothy's present arrival in Corinth, as we
now see, was not from his original stay in Bercea, but
from a recent visit to Thessalonica. Probably Silas had
remained until now in Bercea.
The statement that on the arrival of Silas and
Timothy Paul was " constrained by the word, testifying
to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ," implies, I think,
that hitherto he had ouly argued, as at the beginning in
Thessalonica, that according to the Scriptures the Christ
must suffer and rise again from the dead, without ad
vancing as yet to the further proposition, that " this
Jesus whom I preach to you is the Christ." The former
might cause no outbreak; the latter was sure to do so
among Jews who had already heard something of Jesus,
as the Corinthian Jews almost certainly had. The antici
pated crisis came, and the breach followed. Fortu-

136 COMMENTARY. [xviii. 7-10.
nately, one Gentile proselyte, who was a man of means,
was favorably impressed by Paul ; and as he had a house
close to the synagogue, he threw it open for the subse
quent meetings. Justus was not yet a disciple, but, as
suits the meaning of his name, he desired to see justice
done to the apostle and his cause.
Ver. 8. Although Paul left the synagogue in appar
ent discomfiture, he was not without fruits of his labor.
(8) And Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in
the Lord with all his house ; and many of the Corin
thians, hearing, believed, and were baptized. It was
very seldom that men of high positions in the synagogue
obeyed the gospel ; and it is therefore greatly to the
credit of Crispus that he did so, and this at the moment
when the opposition and blasphemy of the other Jews
was at its height. He must have been a man of inde
pendence and sincerity — the very kind of man to form
the nucleus for a congregation of disciples. His conver
sion, and that of the other Corinthians here mentioned,
are not so fully described as those of the eunuch, of
Saul, and of Cornelius ; yet enough is said to show that
the process was the same. " Hearing, they believed and
were baptized." To hear the gospel preached, to believe
it, and to be baptized, is the whole process briefly
expressed. Vv. 9, 10. Although his success when leaving the
synagogue must have been a source of comfort to Paul,
we have evidence that he was far from being relieved as
yet from the " weakness, and fear, and much trembling,"
which had oppressed him since his coming to Corinth.
We have now reached the period of his letter-writing,
and we shall henceforth have his epistles as contempo
rary documents to fill some ofthe blanks in his personal

xviii. 8-10.] ACTS. 137
history left by Luke. The first epistle to the Thessa
lonians was written from Corinth soon after the arrival
of Silas and Timothy, as is proved by the concurrence
of the two facts, that these two brethren overtook Paul
in Corinth, and tbat in the epistle Paul speaks of
Timothy's arrival as having just taken place at the time
of writing (iii. 6). Several statements in this epistle
throw light on the inner experience of Paul at the time.
He was racked by uncontrollable anxiety for the breth
ren in Thessalonica, for whom he would willingly have
laid down his life, and who were suffering the severest
persecution (ii. 8; 14-16). The good report of their
constancy brought to him by Timothy gave him much
joy; but it was joy in the midst of distress; for he says :
" When Timothy came even now unto us from you, and
brought us glad tidings of your faith and love, and that
ye have good remembrance of us always, longing to see
us, even as we also to see you ; for this cause, brethren,
we are comforted over you in all our distress and afflic
tion through your faith : for now we live if ye stand
fast in the Lord " (iii. 6-8). Undoubtedly a part of
this " distress and affliction " was the result of his failure
to save those Jews in Corinth who were now reviling
him, and who, he well knew, would leave untried no
device by which they might hope to drive him from the
city. It was just at this crisis that the Lord Jesus, in
whose behalf he was suffering, drew aside the interven
ing veil, and gave a word of cheer. (9) And the Lord
said unto Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but
speak, and hold not thy peace : (10) for I am with thee,
and no man shall set on thee to harm thee : for I have
much people in this city. The Lord never broke his
accustomed silence to comfort a servant except when

138 COMMENTARY. [xviii. 10, 11.
comfort was needed. The comfort which he gave on
this occasion was not the assurance of personal safety
alone, but that which Paul valued far higher, the assur
ance that his labors and sufferings in Corinth would yet
be rewarded by the salvation of many souls.
In the words, " I have much people in this city,"
the Lord speaks of persons who were as yet unblievers,
and perhaps idolaters. This accords with the Calvin
istic idea that God's people are a definite number whom
he has individually selected from all eternity ; but it
does not prove it ; for the language equally accords with
the supposition that he called them his merely because
he foresaw that under Paul's preaching they would yet
believe. The same style is employed in Revelation,
when the angel, announcing the downfall of mystic
Babylon, cries, " Come out of her, my people, that ye be
not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her
plagues " (xviii. 4). God knew that in answer to his
call a people would come out of Babylon whom he
would accept, and he calls them his people by way
of anticipation. Vv. 11. Supported by the assurance given in the
vision, Paul continued his labors long and patiently.
(ii) And he dwelt there a year and six months, teach
ing the word of God among them. This is longer than
he had ever yet stayed in any one city, and the word
"teaching," which describes his work, shows that during
this long period he was executing chiefly the second part
of the apostolic commission, " teaching them to observe
all that I have commanded you " (Matt, xxviii. 20).
From this we can see that, notwithstanding the many
disorders which were afterward found in the Corinthian
church, it was probably the best taught of all the

xviii. 11-16.] ACTS. 139
churches thus far planted by Paul. If they had been
less fully instructed, what might have been their later
condition ?
14. Paul Arraigned Before Gallio, 12-17.
Vv. 12, 13. The attempt ofthe Jews to suppress the
preaching, which Paul had been looking for ever since
he left the synagogue, came at last, but it came in an
unusual form, and with unusual results. (12) But when
Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews with one
accord rose up against Paul, and brought him before
the judgment seat, (13) saying, This man persuadeth
men to worship God contrary to the law. The charge
preferred was that of law-breaking, as in Philippi and
Thessalonica ; but in those instances it was preferred by
Gentiles with reference to Roman law, while in this the
Jews had the boldness to prefer it in their own name,
and with reference to their own law. This indicates a
degree of confidence in their own influence which we
have not met with in any other Gentile city. They
hoped that Gallio would be willing to silence a Jew who
was teaching contrary to the law of his own people.
Vv. 14-16. In this instance, however, the Jews
had to deal with a man far different from the praetors of
Philippi, or the politarchs of Thessalonica. Gallio was a
brother of Seneca, the famous Roman moralist, who
speaks of him as a man of admirable integrity, amiable
and popular.1 He was true to this representation on the
'He says: "No mortal man is so sweet to any single person
as he is to all mankind." "Even those who love my brother
Gallio to the very utmost of their power, yet do love not him
enough" (Quxstiones Naturales, iv. praef. Sees. 10, 11.) It is a
sad comment on the superstition which shrouded their minds,
that both the brothers perished by suicide.

140 COMMENTARY. [xviii. 14-17.
present occasion. (14) But when Paul was about to
open his mouth, Gallio said to the Jews, If indeed it
were a matter of wrong or of wicked villainy, 0 ye
Jews, reason would that I should bear with you : (15) but
if they are questions about words and names and your
own law, look to it yourselves ; I am not minded to be a
judge of these matters. (16) And he drove them from
the judgment seat. Gallio's phraseology, " words and
names and your law," shows that he had a very confused
conception of the issue between Paul and the Jews ; but
he knew enough to justify his decision. This is the
only instance in all the experience of Paul in which his
accusers were dealt with justly and summarily.
Ver. 17. Prompt and energetic vindication of the
right nearly always meets the approval of the masses of
the people, and it sometimes reverses the tide of popular
prejudice. We do not know how the masses of the city
stood toward Paul before this decision, but they ex
pressed themselves very vigorously as soon as the deci
sion was rendered. (17) And they all laid hold on Sos
thenes, the ruler of the synagogue, and beat him before
the judgment seat. And Gallio cared for none of these
things. The judgment seat, the chair of state in which
the .proconsul sat, was not erected inside of a court
room, as with us, but in the open air, and usually in the
agora, or forum. Consequently, all trials which excited
public interest were witnessed by a crowd of spectators
made up largely of the idlers on the streets. These are
the only parties who could have been tempted to thus
lay hands on Sosthenes, who, as the leader of the Jews,
had preferred the charge against Paul. With that keen
sense of the fitness of things which often characterizes
such a crowd, they saw that Sosthenes deserved the beat-

xviii. 17.] ACTS. 141
ing which he had laid up for Paul ; and perhaps with a
laugh and a yell they gave it to him.1 The reason that
Gallio " cared for none of these things " was because, as
respects the question between Paul and the Jews, he did
not understand it ; and as respects the beating of Sos
thenes, he rather enjoyed it, because Sosthenes so richly
deserved it. The disappointment and rage of the Jews
were unbounded, but they had learned from bitter ex
perience how to choke down such feelings, and to keep
quiet. Before Paul left Corinth, and perhaps previous to
the arraignment before Gallio, he wrote the second
epistle to the Thessalonians. The indications of time and
place in the epistle are meager, but in the absence of
conflicting evidence they are conclusive. First, there is
such a connection in thought and subject matter between
it and the first epistle as to indicate that there was no
long interval between them ; and second, Silas joined
with Paul in the salutation (i. 1) ; but Silas was not with
Paul after the latter left Corinth. If we knew just
when the separation from Silas took place, whether on
Paul's departure from Corinth, or at some previous
time, we could come nearer fixing the exact date ; but it
is commonly supposed that it was written within the'
1 The grammatical connection points to the term Jews in the
preceding context as the antecedent of " they ; " but this would
make the Jews the party that beat Sosthenes, which is altogether
improbable ; for why should they beat their own synagogue
ruler merely because Gallio had driven both him and them from
the court ? The grammatical connection must then yield, as it
does in xix. 33, and John viii. 33, two parallel cases, to the de
mands of the context, in determining the meaning. Farrar, who
takes the same view of the meaning, says of it, " I give the view
which- seems to me most probable, passing over masses of idle
conjecture " (Life of Paul, 323, n 4).

142 COMMENTARY. [xviii. 17.
same year as the first, and this would fix the date of
both in the year 52.1 The epistle reveals the fact that
this church was still suffering severe persecution, but
that they were enduring it with marvelous patience, so
that Paul could say to them, " We are bound to give
thanks to God always for you, brethren, even as it is meet,
for that your faith groweth exceedingly, and the love of
each one of you all toward one another aboundeth ; so that
we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for
your patience and faith in all your persecutions and in
the afflictions which ye endure" (i. 3, 4). The extreme
anxiety which he had felt for them at the time of
writing the first epistle, and his diligence both in send
ing Timothy back to them and in writing to them, had
been abundantly rewarded by their perseverance. Paul
was moved not only to thanksgiving, but to many tender
prayers in their behalf, which he briefly quotes in the
epistle.1 He had heard that " either by spirit, or by
word, or by epistle " as from him, they had been
troubled concerning the second coming of the Lord
(ii. 2) ; and in order to guard against imposture in the
future, he gives them a token by which they may test
the genuineness of any epistle claiming to come from
him. He says : " The salutation of me Paul with mine
own hand, which is the token in every epistle : thus I
write " (iii. 17). This shows that he ordinarily em
ployed an amanuensis in writing his epistles (cf. Rom.
xvi. 22), but that he wrote the salutation with his own
hand as an evidence of genuineness. The employment
of a skillful scribe, such as could be found in every city,
if he had no companion possessed of this accomplish-
JSee Vol. I. Intro., pages xxxix, xxxiv. 2See i. 11, 12; ii. 16>
17; iii. 16.

xviii. 17, 18.] ; ACTS. 143
ment, insured such perfection in the manuscript as to
leave no word illegible, while the autographic salutation
attested the genuineness of the document. As these two
epistles are the earliest of the New Testament books, we
can readily believe that Paul's example, in thus guarding
the inspired documents against liability to misreading or
to imposture, was followed by the other writers.
15. Paul's Return to Antioch, 18-22.
Ver. 18, The last incident which Luke chooses to
mention in Corinth was the arraignment before Gallio,
though Paul continued there yet for a considerable time.
(18) And Paul, having tarried after this yet many days,
took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence for
Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila ; having shorn
his head in Cenchrea : for he had a vow. His stay of
eighteen months in Corinth may be taken as an indica
tion of the time which he would have spent with some
other churches had he been permitted to do so. Thanks
to Gallio, this was the only church in Macedonia and
Greece in which he was permitted to remain as long
as he thought proper. We shall hereafter see, however
that this church, which was free from persecution, was
none the better for it as compared with those in Thessa
lonica and Philippi.
In aiming to sail to Syria, it was necessary to cross
the isthmus to Cenchrea, where we find a church at a later
period, which had probably been planted during Paul's
stay in Corinth. On arriving at this port, the time of
some vow which he had taken expired. In imitation of
the Nazirite, he had permitted his hair to grow during
the period of the vow, and at its close he resumed the
regular shaving of his head which is customary with

144 COMMENTARY. [xviii. 18-22.
turban-wearing nations. Many have mistaken this for
the Nazirite vow itself, through failure to remember
that at the close of this vow the hair was to be shaved
off at the temple, and burned in the fire of the altar
(Num. vi. 13-18).
Vv. 19-22. A vessel sailing from Cenchrea to
Syria could very conveniently touch at Ephesus, which
was the destination of Aquila and Priscilla. (19) And
they came to Ephesus, and he left them there : but he
himself entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with
the Jews. (20) And when they asked him to abide a
longer time, he consented not ; (21) but taking his leave
of them, and saying, I will return again unto you, if
God will, he set sail from Ephesus. (22) And when he
had landed at Caesarea, he went up and saluted the
church, and went down to Antioch. Paul had now
decided that it was time for him to return once more to
Antioch, and report progress, before undertaking the
evangelization of another great city. Having fixed on
Ephesus as his next point of attack, he feels the pulse,
as it were, of the Jews there, by a few remarks in the
synagogue; and finding it to beat favorably, he leaves
Priscilla and Aquila there for the evident purpose of
preparing the ground as well as they can, and of being
there when he returns, to help him as they had done in
Corinth ; then, promising to return, he hurries on. The
voyage to Csesarea, and thence to Antioch, is without
recorded incident, except that on landing at the former
city he " went up and saluted the church." This is the
church which had been planted there by the baptism of
Cornelius and his friends.1 On reaching Antioch we
1 The commentators in general, misled by the interpolated
clause in the Textus Receptus, and the old English versions, '" I

xviii. 22, 23.] ACTS. 145
can not doubt that he once more gladdened the hearts of
the brethren who had commended him and Silas to the
favor of the Lord, by rehearsing to them all that God
had done with him, and how he had opened still wider
" the door of faith to the Gentiles." It may be that
Silas had preceded him ; if not, he doubtless stated to
them, as Luke has not stated to us, the circumstances
under which they had separated. As to the changes
which may have taken place in Antioch during the three
years of Paul's absence, Luke is equally silent ; for he
has his eye, as Paul had his, on the contemplated labors
in Ephesus, which, he hastens to describe.

SEC. IV. PAUL'S THIRD TOUR.
(xviii. S3 — xxi. le.)
1. Second Visit to Galatia and Phrygia, 23.
Ver. 23. In a single brief sentence Luke disposes of a
journey which must have occupied several months at least ;
for it covered five or six hundred miles. (23) And having
spent some time there, he departed, and went through
the region of Galatia and Phrygia in order, establishing
all the_disciples. In order to reach Galatia and Phrygia
must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem "
(21), assume that the church which Paul went up and saluted
was the Jerusalem church ; but in the absence of that clause
there is nothing to justify this conclusion. He had doubtless
landed at Csesarea because the shi p in which he sailed was bound
for that harbor, and he had been contented to sail in that ship
rather than lose time waiting for another, because it was but a
short sail from Csesarea to Antioch, and coasting vessels for the
voyage could be found almost daily.

146 COMMENTARY. [xviii. 23-26.
the only districts in the route that are mentioned, he
must have made the"1 circuit once more from Antioch
around through Syria into Cilicia, and thence by way
of the Gates of Cilicia into the elevated tablelands of
Lyeaonia and Pisidia, past Derbe, Lystra, Iconium and
the Pisidian Antioch, This was his third visit to these
communities, and his passage through Galatia and
Phrygia was a second visit to the churches which he had
planted there. If we may judge from the rapidity of
his passage, he found the churches in all the regions in
such a condition that they did not specially need a pro
tracted visit from him, yet his work among them, brief
as it was, consisted in " establishing all the disciples."
He had this work in view, as well as the report in Anti
och, when he declined the invitation to stay in Ephesus
(20, 21).
2. Apollos in Ephesus and Achaia, 24-28.
VV. 24-26. We have expressed the opinion that
Paul's purpose in leaving Aquila and Priscilla in Ephe
sus was that they might do such preparatory work as
they could during his absence (19) ; and now Luke gives
us a specimen of the work of this kind which they did.
(24) Now a certain Jew named Apollos, an Alexandrian
by race,1 a learned man, came to Ephesus ; and he was
mighty in the Scriptures. (25) This man had been in
structed in the way of the Lord ; and being fervent in
spirit, he spake and taught carefully the things con
cerning Jesus, knowing only the baptism of John : (26)

1 Apollos is here called "an Alexandrian by race," (rpyivet),
rather than by birth, as in the A. V., to indicate that he was not
only born there, but born of an ancestry native to that city. The
term serves a similar purpose when used of Aquila in xviii. 1.

xviii. 26.] ACTS. 147
and he began to speak boldly in the synagogue. But
when • Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him
unto them, and expounded unto him the way of the
Lord more carefully. The distinguished position which
Apollos afterward acquired in the church at Corinth, and
the familiarity of his name among the disciples of sub
sequent ages, make it a matter of interest to observe
closely what is here said of him. That he was an Alex
andrian accounts in part for his learning, and indicates
the character of it ; for Alexandria, having been for at
least two centuries the chief point of contact between
Greek and Hebrew literature, had now become the chief
seat of Hebrew learning. This learning included a
knowledge of the Greek version of the Old Testament,
of the other Greek literature of the later Jewish ages,
and to some extent of Greek philosophy. The state
ment that he was "mighty in the Scriptures" means
not merely that he was familiar with them, but that he
knew how to handle them in argument and exposition
with great effect. In a day when a knowledge of tho
Scriptures had to be acquired from manuscripts, and in
which even the art of reading was acquired by only a
few, it was no ordinary accomplishment to be thus
familiar with the Scriptures. Such an attainment is rare
even in this day of printed Bibles, and even among
preachers, who are presumed by those who know no bet
ter to devote their whole lives to the study of the Bible.
Preachers would be more mighty in preaching, and would
have less need to search for might where it can not be
found, if they would be more careful to follow the ex
ample of Apollos.
But while Apollos was mighty in the Scriptures, and
while with a fervent spirit he " taught carefully the

148 COMMENTARY. [xviii. 26-28.
things concerning Jesus," Aquila and Priscilla, on hear
ing him, soon discovered that he did not understand
Christian baptism — that he knew " only the baptism of
John." They were not so ignorant on this subject as to
suppose, with some of our moderns, that there is no dif
ference between the two baptisms ; nor so indifferent to
it, as a " mere external rite," that they considered the
difference of no importance. On the contrary, they took
the powerful and zealous preacher to their own home,
and taught him the truth on the subject. To bis credit
as a candid seeker after truth, he appears to have accept
ed gladly the correction. He learned that? while John's
baptism had attached to it no promise of the Holy
Spirit, this was one of the distinctive features of Christian
baptism ; and that while John baptized into no name,
the apostles were taught to baptize into the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (ii. 3;
Matt, xxviii. 1 9). The question, whether he was rebap
tized, will come before us in connection with xix. 5.
It should be observed that Priscilla took part with
her husband in giving more perfect instruction to
Apollos, and this illustrates the manner in which cer
tain faithful women were eminent helpers of the apostles
and evangelists in the spread of the gospel ; yet it can
not, without a deceitful handling of the Scriptures, be
urged as proof that even the most eminent of the female
helpers took part in public preaching.
Vv. 27, 28. For a reason not given, Apollos decided
to leave Ephesus, and visit the churches planted by Paul
in Achaia. (27) And when he was minded to pass over
into Achaia, the brethren encouraged him, and wrote to
the disciples to receive him : and when he was come, he
helped them much who had believed through grace r (28)

xviii. 28.] ACTS. 149
for he powerfully confuted the Jews, and that publicly,
showing by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.
This is the first mention of letters of commendation
given to disciples going from one Christian community
to another. They are mentioned at a later period as be
ing in common use (II. Cor. iii. 1, 2). The brethren
" encouraged him" to go, because they knew his pecu
liar power, and they knew that the churches needed it in
their controversies with the Jews. Who these brethren
were, besides Aquila and Priscilla, Luke does not just
here inform us; but we learn a little farther on (xix. 1).
Their expectations concerning the labors of Apollos in
Achaia were happily realized in the great help which he
gave to the disciples, and his successful confutation of
the Jews. His special power being in the use of the
Scriptures, he was the very man to reach the Jews, and
to strengthen the faith of the believers. To confute is
not always to convince ; but we have evidence that in
addition to confuting the Jews, Apollos brought many
into the church ; for Paul afterward referred to his labors
as a watering of the church which he had planted,
and then, changing his figure, said, " I laid the founda
tion, and another buildeth thereon " (I. Cor. iii. 6-10).
As Paul had made a comparative failure with the Jews
of Corinth, the success of Apollos illustrates the value
of a variety of talents and acquirements among preach
ers, in order to the successful evangelization of the great
variety of minds and characters often found in a single'
community.

150 COMMENTARY. [xix. 1-7.
3. Paul Reaches Ephesus, and Rebaptizes a
Dozen Men, xix. 1-7.
Vv. 1-7. The historian now reaches the point for
which he had so hurriedly passed over the voyage of
Paul from Ephesus to Antioch, and his land journey
thence through Galatia and Phrygia. Paul is permitted
at last to begin a work which he had in mind when, on
his preceding tour, he was "forbidden by the Holy
Spirit to speak the word in Asia " (xvi. 6) ; and also to
fulfill the appointment which he had left here on his
journey homeward (xviii. 21). (i) And it came to pass,
that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed
through the upper country came to Ephesus, and found
certain disciples : (2) and he said unto them, Did ye re
ceive the Holy Spirit when ye believed ? And they said
unto him, Nay, we did not so much as hear whether the
Holy Spirit was given. (3) And he said, Into what then
were ye baptized ? And they said, Into John's baptism.
(4) And Paul said, John baptized with the baptism of
repentance, saying unto the people, that they should be
lieve on him who should come after him, that is, on
Jesus. (5) And when they heard this, they were bap
tized into the name of the Lord Jesus. . (6) And when
Paul had laid his hands upon them the Holy Spirit came
on them ; and they spoke with tongues, and prophesied.
(7) And they were in all about twelve met. This pass
age, in connection with what is said in the previous par
agraph about Apollos (xviii. 25), shows that -John's bap
tism was still preached and practiced in some places ; and
it also shows how the apostles dealt with persons thus
baptized. These men were introduced to Paul s»s disci
ples of Jesus, and they were doubtless " the bretfc"-*n "

xix. 7.] ACTS. 151
who had united with Aquila in giving a letter to Apollos
(xviii. 27). Paul's first question, " Did ye receive the
Holy Spirit when ye believed?" had reference not to the
ordinary indwelling of the Spirit ; for this all receive
who repent and are baptized (ii. 38), and therefore he
could have no ground for doubting that they received
this. But some disciples, after baptism, received through
imposition of apostolic hands the miraculous gift of the
Spirit; and it is of this that Paul inquired, as is proved
not only by these considerations, but by the fact that it
is this which he conferred upon them at the close of the
conversation. When they answered, "We did not so
much as hear that the Holy Spirit was given," he saw at
once that there was something wrong about their bap
tism ; hence his next question, " Into what then were ye
baptized?" He meant not into what baptism, but into
what name ; for when he hears their answer, he directs
them to be baptized " into the name of the Lord Jesus,"
which is but an abbreviation for " into the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit," the
form of expression employed by Jesus himself (Matt.
xxviii. 19). If they had been thus baptized they could
not have been ignorant about the Holy Spirit into whose
name they were baptized. Moreover, in that case they
would already have been told, as Peter told the people
on Pentecost, that on being baptized they would receive
the Holy Spirit. Having no knowledge of this baptism
into a name, and therefore missing the aim of Paul's sec
ond question, the men answered, " Into John's baptism ; "
and thus Paul discovered the cause of their ignorance
about the Holy Spirit ; for John's baptism had no promise
of the Holy Spirit, and he did not baptize into any name.
Paul's brief explanation was promptly accepted, and when

152 COMMENTARY. [xix. 7.
the men were baptized he bestowed upon them the mirac
ulous gift to which his first inquiry had reference.
As this is an instance of the rebaptism of men who
had received John's baptism, it raises the question
whether all of John's disciples were rebaptized in order
to admission into the church; and if not, why were
these ? It seems necessary to answer the first part of
this inquiry in the negative ; for the reason that the
apostles, some (if not all) of whom had received John's
baptism, and the one hundred and twenty who with the
twelve constituted the church before Pentecost, of whom
the same is almost certainly true, were not rebaptized ; 1
and if these were not, then the same must be true of the
rest of John's original disciples. Why then were these
at Ephesus baptized again? The most probable answer,
and the only one which harmonizes with the facts, is
that they had been baptized by Apollos, or by some one
teaching as he taught, since John's baptism had ceased
to be a valid ordinance. It certainly had not been valid
since the baptism of the apostolic commission was intro
duced on the great day of Pentecost ; and no one had
rightly administered it since John was shut up in prison.
'That these were not rebaptized is evident from the state
ment that those who were baptized on Pentecost " were added
unto them " (ii. 41). But if they were not baptized at that time,
they must have been previously ; and as the only baptism admin
istered previously, even that ministered by the disciples of Jesus
(Jno. iv. 1. 2), was John's baptism, it was this which they had
received. Furthermore, as Jesus insisted that it was the duty of
all to submit to John's baptism (Luke vii. 29, 30), it is in the
highest degree improbable that he acknowledged any as his
own disciples who had refused to do so. Certainly the five dis
ciples whom he gained at the Jordan shortly after his own bap
tism were John's disciples before they became his, and had been
baptized already (Jno. i. 35-51).

xix 7-9.] ACTS. 153
Even Jesus, who administered it for a short time before
John's imprisonment, did so no longer. From the very
nature of the case it could be no longer accepted as a
baptism when it had ceased to be a living ordinance.
These twelve were accordingly regarded as not having
been baptized at all ; and now for the first time they re
ceived real baptism. If Aquila was acquainted with
their condition before Paul's arrival in Ephesus, he had
evidently awaited Paul's decision in the case, instead of
settling the question himself. It is not certain that he
felt competent to say what should be done. It is more
probable, however, that Paul's question, intended to as
certain whether they had as yet received any miraculous
gifts, brought to Aquila at the same moment that it did
to Paul a knowledge of the facts. If Apollos was not
rebaptized (and the implication is rather that he was not),
the reason may be that Aquila did not know what should
be done in such cases ; or it may be that Apollos, while on
some visit to Judea, had been baptized by John himself.
This incident shows that Paul was in the habit of in
specting the condition of the disciples already found in a
place, before adding to their number ; and it is a prec
edent worthy of careful imitation by modern evangelists.
4. Preaching in the Synagogue, and in the
School op Tyrannus, 8-12.
Vv. 8, 9. Having corrected what he found wrong
in the little band of disciples, Paul next grapples with
the Jewish and pagan errors which abounded in the city.
(8) And he entered into the synagogue, and spake boldly
for the space of three months, reasoning and persuading
as to the things^ concerning the kingdom of God. (9) But
when some were hardened and disobedient, speaking

154 COMMENTARY. [xix. 8-12.
evil of tjie Way before the multitude, he departed from
them ; and separated the disciples, reasoning daily in
the school of Tyrannus. The scene in the synagogue
is quite uniform in its details with others which we have
observed — the same earnest argument and persuasion by
Paul, on the same invariable theme ; the same increasing
obstinacy and evil speaking on the part of the unbe
lieving Jews ; and the final separation of Paul and the
believers from the synagogue and the majority that
controlled it. As a private dwelling had been Paul's
refuge in Corinth, the school-room of Tyrannus was his
resort in Ephesus. Such incidents have their counter
part in the history of all men who have attempted to
correct the religious teachings of their contemporaries.
Vv. 10—12. Here once more, as in the case of Paul's
stay in Corinth, Luke gives us a definite note of time, (io)
And this continued for the space of two years ; so that all
they who dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord, both
Jews and Greeks, (i i) And God wrought special mir
acles by the hands of Paul : (12) insomuch that unto the
sick were carried away from his body handkerchiefs or
aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the
evil spirits went out. The two years here mentioned
added to the three months in the synagogue, give us two
years and three months as the length of Paul's stay in
Ephesus — his longest stay in any one city, and men
tioned, no doubt, on that account.1 The miracles men
tioned are styled " special," because of their extraordinary
character, reminding us of some witnessed once in the
career of Peter (v. 15), and ence in that of the Master
1 When Paul himself afterward spoke of the time as three
years (xx. 31), he followed the uniform Jewish method of counting
a part of a year at the close or the beginning of a, period as if it
were a whole year (cf. note under x. 30).

xix. 12-18.] t ACTS. 155
(Mark vi. 56). Such miracles are no more incredible
than others. They were brought about by tbe increas
ing zeal of the people in seeking the benefit of the
healing power. No wonder that "all who dwelt in
Asia," by which is meant all in the Roman province of
that name, " heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both
Jews and Greeks." All who could would naturally
come to Ephesus to hear, and all who came would
instinctively repeat what they had heard wherever they
went. The result was that we read later of " the seven
churches of Asia" (Rev. i. 4).
5. Exorcists Exposed, and Books of Magic
Burned, 13-20.
Vv. 13-17. It is difficult to imagine how men
could witness these miracles,, and not acknowledge the
presence of divine power. We should suppose that even
atheism would be confounded before them, and that the
most hardened sinner would tremble. Yet Simon the
sorcerer had sought to purchase such power from Peter
with money ; Barjesus had sought to convince Sergius
Paulus that it was a cheat ; and a similar display of
human depravity, followed by a castigation almost as
severe as in the last instance, occurred here in Ephesus.
(13) But certain also of the strolling ¦ Jews, exorcists,
took upon them to name over them who had the evil
spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, Saying, I adjure
thee by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. (14) And there
were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, a chief priest, who
did this. (15) And the evil spirit answered and said
unto them, Jesus I know, and Paul I know ; but who are
ye ? (16) And the man in whom the evil spirit was
leaped on them, and mastered both of them, and pre-

156 COMMENTARY. . [xix. 15-17.
vailed against them, so that they fled out of that house
naked and wounded. (17) And this became known to
all, both Jews and Greeks, that dwelt at Ephesus ;
and fear fell upon them all, and the name of the Lord
Jesus was magnified. These exorcists, as their title in
dicates, pretended to the power of casting out demons;
and they appeared to the people to succeed often enough
to keep up some reputation. Doubtless the fact that they
were seven brothers added to the mystery of their pre
tensions, just as a fortune-teller at the present day who
is the seventh daughter of the seventh daughter is more
highly credited than others of her class. They employed
for the purpose incantations over the demoniacs, in
which they uttered certain unmeaning words that they
claimed to have derived from Solomon,1 and they natu
rally supposed that the secret of Paul's power was some
thing of the same kind ; so they watched him as he cast
out demons, to see if they could discover his talismanic
word. They were not long in observing that in every
instance he used the name of Jesus; and they concluded
that the charm was in that word; so two of them put
the matter to a test by getting a demoniac into a room
where they would be unobserved if they met with a fail
ure, and intending, if they succeeded, to go before the
public as rivals 6f Paul. The evil spirit seems to have
been outraged by the wickedness of the two villains,
and the manner in which he exposed them seems like a
grim joke. Certainly all Ephesus must have laughed at
them as they fled naked and bruised along the street;
but when the people took a second thought, and remem-
1 Josephus gives a detailed account of an expulsion of a
demon in the presence of Vespasian during the siege of Jerusa
lem (Ant., viii. 2, 5 ; Wars.?)

xix. 17-20.] ACTS. 157
bered that this discomfiture jiad come from a misuse of
the name of Jesus, it was but natural that this name was
magnified, and that fear came upon all.
Vv. 18-20. The exposure of the seven exorcists, by
the mysterious but very effective way in which it was
accomplished, threw discredit on all the pretenders to,
magic in Ephesus. The visible results were immense and
astonishing. (18) Many also of them that had believed
came, confessing, and declaring their deeds. (19) And
not a few of them that practiced curious arts brought their
books together, and burned them in the sight of all ; and
they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thou
sand pieces of silver. (20) So mightily grew the word of
the Lord and prevailed. It is not to be understood
that the believers who confessed had continued to prac
tice magic after they became believers; but only that
they now confessed and declared the secret processes by
which they had formerly deceived the people. Of the
book-burners, many, apparently, and possibly all, were
not as yet disciples, though they were deeply impressed
with the wickedness of their deceptive practices. The
fifty thousand pieces of silver were doubtless Attic di-
drachmas ; for Ephesus was a Greek city, and this was
the most common silver coin. Its value was about
the same as that of the Roman denarius, so often trans
lated " penny " in our version, which equals a little more
than sixteen cents of American money. The whole
value then of the books was more than $8,000. Their
value depended not so much on their number or their
size, as on their contents ; for they contained plainly
written directions for the performance of tricks of jug
glery, and the purchaser, by a little practice, could be as
skillful a juggler as the original owner. The book, like

158 COMMENTARY. [xix. 20-22.
the secret in the compound of a patent medicine, which
could be written on a small scrap of paper, was "be stock
in trade of the juggler, and its value depended upon its
being kept secret. This wholeaccount fully confirms the
reputation assigned to Ephesus by ancient writers as the
chief center of magical arts in the wh^le Roman em
pire.1
6. Paul Forms a Plan for Future Journeys,
21, 22.
Vv. -21, 22. The great triumph of the word of the
Lord which followed the book-burning brought the
affairs of the church to such a point that Paul began to
think of leaving Ephesus. (21) Now after these things
were ended, Paul purposed in the spirit, when he had
passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem,
saying, After I have been there, I must also see Rome.
(22) And having sent into Macedonia two of them who
ministered to him, Timothy and Erastus, he himself
stayed in Asia for a while. We shall see hereafter that
this plan of future journeying was carried out to the
letter, but in a way far different from that which Paul
purposed. The words, "he purposed in the Spirit,"
have been taken by the majority ofthe commentators to
mean no more than that he formed the purpose ; and our
revisers seem from their use of the small s with the word
spirit, to have understood them in the same way. But
if this is the meaning of the expression, it is tautology
cal, the words " in the spirit " being redundant. These
writers forget the facts mentioned before by Luke,
which account for the expression. When Paul first pur-
1 See the citations on this subject in Conybeare and Howson.
ii. 21, and in Farrar's Life of Paul, 358.

*_*. 22.] ACTS. 159
posed to come to this very city of Ephesus, as the
capital of Asia, he was forbidden by the Holy Spirit to
do so ; and when he then purposed to go into Bithynia
he was likewise forbidden (xvi. 6, 7) ; and by this expe
rience he had learned to lay out no plans for the future
without an expressed allowance for this divine overrul
ing. Even when he promised, on leaving Aquila and
Priscilla at Ephesus, to return thither, his words were,
" I will return again unto you if God will" (xviii. 21).
So now, when forming a purpose concerning journeys
which might require years for. their accomplishment, he
purposes " in the Spirit " to make them. A few inter
preters understand the expression as meaning that the
Spirit moved him to form the purpose ; but in that case
.we should not find him so uncertain as he afterward was,
as to whether they could be carried out (see Rom. xv.
24; 30-32). The real meaning, determined by both his
previous and his subsequent experience, is that he
formed this purpose subject to the approval ofthe Holy
Spirit, and with a conscious reference to the probability
that the Spirit might overrule it. Timothy was sent
into Macedonia, that he niight go thence to Corinth,
and give the brethren there some instruction concerning
Paul's ways and teaching (I. Cor. iv. 17) ; while Erastus
was sent because, being the .treasurer of Corinth (Rom.
xvi. 23), that was his home ; and perhaps, also, that he
might render assistance to Timothy.
Some scholars have argued with much plausibility
that Paul had made a short visit to Corinth before this,
and returned to Ephesus, using as evidence certain state
ments in Second Corinthians. The question is not an
important one; and consequently, while I regard the
evidence for the position as inconclusive, I will not dis-

160 COMMENTARY. [xix. 22.
cuss it. The reader who is curious to investigate it will
find the arguments in the affirmative well set forth by
Mr. Howson, and those in the negative by Paley*
The first epistle to the Corinthians was written from
Ephesus, and at a time of great prosperity in the work
there, as appears from the following words in the epistle :
" I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost ; for a great
and effectual door is opened to me, and there are many
adversaries" (I. Cor. xvi. 8, 9). This language fixes
not only the place of writing, but almost exa<?tly its
date. The opening ofthe "great and effectual door"
can refer only to the triumph attending the book-burn
ing. The epistle was written, then, about the time that
Timothy and Erastus were sent forward into Macedonia
on their way to Corinth, and there can be no reasonable
doubt that one of them was the bearer of it.
This is not really the first epistle written by Paul to
the church at Corinth ; for in it he speaks of another
which he wrote previously on the subject of fornication :
" I wrote you an epistle not to keep company with forni
cators " (v. 9). This single statement contains all we
know of this epistle ; and perhaps the document was
allowed to perish because the contents of it were re
peated, and the subject treated more elaborately in the
epistle now called the first.
Subsequent to the date of the lost epistle some mem
bers of the household of Chloe, a sister in the church at
Corinth, had brought Paul information of great disorders
and corruption in the church (i. 11), and it was for the
purpose of correcting these that the epistle was written.
He learned that the congregation was distracted by
party strife (i. 12 ; iii. 1-4) ; that fornication, and even
incest were being tolerated (v. 1-13); that some mem-

xix. 22-27.] ACTS. 161
bers were engaged in litigation against the brethren in
the civil courts (vi. 1-8) ; that his own apostolic author
ity was being called in question (iv. 1-6 ; 14-21) ; that
their women, contrary to the prevailing rules of mod
esty, engaged in the public worship with unveiled faces
(xi. 1—16) ; that some confusion and jealousy had arisen
in reference to spiritual gifts (xii. xiii. xiv.) ; that some
among them were even denying the resurrection (xv.
12) ; and that the Lord's supper was profaned by feast
ing (xi. 17-34). Besides, he had received a letter from
the church calling for information in reference to mar
riage and divorce, and the eating of meats offered to
idols (vii. 1 ; viii. 1). Although the epistle in which these
questions are answered, and all these disorders rebuked,
is calm and severe in its tone, it is not conceivable
that Paul could hear of this state of things in a church
which had cost him so much labor and anxiety, with
out great pain and sorrow. He suppressed these feelings
as he wrote, but afterward he confessed them, saying,
" Out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to
you with many tears" (II. Cor. ii. 4). It was with a
heart full of anguish, then, in reference to some of the
results of his past labors, but buoyed by the opening of
a wide and effectual door in his present field, that he
sent forward Timothy and Erastus with thisj epistle,
while he tarried for a season longer in Asia.
7. The Mob of the Silversmiths, 23-41.
' Vv. 23-27. By the same stroke of the pen with
which Paul wrote to the Corinthians, " a great and
effectual door is opened unto me," he also wrote, " and
there are many adversaries " (I. Cor. xvi. 8, 9) ; which
shows that he was not unmindful of the power of that

162 COMMENTARY. [xix. 23-27.
foe over which he had won a great victory. Idolatry
and superstition had been crippled in one of their strong
holds, but they could not be expected to die without a
desperate struggle. Sooner than Paul may have antici
pated, the powers of darkness rallied. (23) And about that
time there arose no small stir concerning the Way. (24)
For a certain man named Demetrius, a silversmith, who
made silver shrines for Diana, brought no little business
unto the craftsmen ; (25) whom he gathered together,
with the workmen of like occupation, and said, Sirs, ye
know that by this business we have our wealth. (26)
And ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but al
most throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and
turned away much people, saying that they be no gods,
which are made with hands : (27) and not only is there
danger that this our trade come into disrepute ; but also
that the temple of the great goddess Diana be made
of no account, and that she should even be deposed from
her magnificence, whom all Asia and the world wor-
shipeth. This is the most truthful and candid of all the
speeches made against Paul by any of his contemporaries.
All the charges were strictly true, and the dangers
apprehended from his influence were accurately stated.
Even the motive actuating the speaker was not dis
guised. He was not ashamed to acknowledge that his
love of gain was that which inspired his zeal. At the
same time, he and the craftsmen whom he addressed had
reason to know, even better than any one else in Ephe
sus, that the pieces of silver which they had hammered
and polished with their own hands were not gods. His
allusion to the temple can be better appreciated when
we remember that it was one of the seven wonders of

xix. 27.] ACTS. 163
the ancient world, and the glory of the city of Ephesus.
It was four hundred and twenty-five feet long, and one
hundred and twenty wide. All around this vast space
stood a row of white marble columns sixty feet high,
and less than four feet apart. They were one hundred
and twenty in number, and they supported an entablature
of vast marble slabs which constituted the roof of the
peristyle. The interior was adorned with paintings and
sculptured figures wrought by the most famous artists of
antiquity, and an inner sanctuary contained a rude image
of a many-breasted woman, the symbol of fecundity,
which was believed to have been dropped down from
heaven by Jupiter. Three or four temples like Solo
mon's could have been placed within the circuit of its
magnificent colonnade. No wonder that the wrath of
the heathen populace was kindled against Paul, when it
appeared that by his preaching this magnificent structure
was to be brought into contempt.1
JThe process by which, through a long series of ages, this
temple was brought to utter ruin, is so happily sketched by
Plumptre, that we quote his words entire : " The first real blow
to the worship which had lasted for so many ages was given by
the two years of Paul's work of which we read here. As by the
strange irony of history the next stroke aimed at its magnificence
came from the hand of Nero, who robbed it, as he robbed the
temples of Delphi, and Pergamos, and Athens, not sparing even
villages, of many of its art treasures for the adornment of his golden
house at Eome. Trajan sent its richly sculptured gates as an
offering to a temple at Byzantium. As the Church of Christ ad
vanced, its worship, of course, declined. Priests and priestesses
ministered in deserted shrines. When the empire became Chris
tian the temple of Ephesus, in common with that of Delphi, sup
plied materials for the church erected by Justinian in honor of
the divine wisdom, which is now the mosque of St. Sophia. When
the Goths devastated Asia Minor, in the reign of Callienus (A. D.
263), they plundered it with a reckless hand, and the work which

1C4 COMMENTARY. [xix. 28-31.
Vv. 28, 29. The artisans were enraged at the pros
pect of financial ruin, but they were shrewd enough to
see that reverence for the temple and the goddess was
the better theme on which to cry out before the people.
(28) And when they heard this they were filled with
wrath, and cried out, saying, Great is Diana of the Ephe
sians. (29) And the city was filled with the confusion :
and they rushed with one accord into the theater, having
seized Gaius and Aristarchus, men of Macedonia, Paul's
companions in travel. The outcry, and the tone in
which it was uttered, awakened the old-time enthusiasm
of the idolaters who heard it, suggesting, as it did, some
assault on the honor of the goddess. The gathering
mob was in a frenzy, and it was a kind providence that
Paul was out of their reach. They rushed into the
theater because there was not room in the narrow streets
common to all Asiatic cities for such a multitude. That
theater still remains with its marble seats intact, by far
the best preserved ruin on the site of Ephesus.1 It was
capable of seating several thousand spectators.
Vv. 30, 31. When Paul heard that his two com
panions had been seized by the mob and dragged within
the theater, he feared that they would be torn to pieces
in his stead, and he instantly resolved that this should
not be. (30) And when Paul was minded to enter in
unto the people, the disciples suffered him not. (31)
And certain also of the chief officers of Asia, being his
friends, sent unto him, and besought him not to adven-
they began was completed centuries later by the Turks " (Com
mentary in loco).
1 When the author visited the spot in 1879 he took a solemn
pleasure in standing on one of the highest tiers of marble seats
and reciting to his companions the speech of the town clerk
which follows below.

xix. 31-31 ] ACTS. 165
ture himself into the theater. The feelings which im
pelled him were confessed afterward to his brethren in
Corinth : " We would not have you ignorant, brethren,
concerning our affliction which befell us in Asia, that we
were weighed down exceedingly, beyond our power, inso
much that we despaired even of life ; yea, we ourselves
have had the answer of death within ourselves, tnat we
should not trust in ourselves, but in God who raiseth the
dead : who delivered us out of so great a death, and will
deliver " (II. Cor. i. 8-10). Both he and his friends
were fully persuaded that to go into the theater was cer
tain death ; and his resolve to go in was a resolve then
and there to die. The timely inhibition of his brethren
and the friendly officials he regarded as the hand of God
delivering him from " so great a death." The words,
" chief officers of Asia," represent only the single word
Asiarchs in the original, the title of ten men of wealth
and reputation, who were chosen annually to preside
over the athletic games of the province. That some of
these were friends of Paul, is an indication of the extent
to which his preaching and his personal character had
become known in the highest circles of heathen society
in Asia. Vv. 32-34. After showing what it was that kept
Paul out of the theater, and saved his life, Luke next
leads us inside that enclosure, to witness the further pro
ceedings of the mob. (312) Some therefore cried one
thing and some another : for the assembly was in con
fusion ; and the more part knew not wherefore they were
come together. (33) And they brought Alexander out
of the multitude, the Jews putting him forward. And
Alexander beckoned with the hand, and would have
made a defense unto the people. (34) But when they

166 COMMENTARY. [xix. 34-41
perceived that he was a Jew, all with one voice about
the space of two hours cried out, Great is Diana of the
Ephesians. The Jews had good reason to fear the
wrath of this mob ; for it was well known in Ephesus
that they were as much opposed to idolatry as Paul was,
and it was also known that Paul himself was a Jew.
Fidelity to their own principles should have prompted
them to stand by Paul ; but if the defense which they
wished to make through Alexander had been heard, it
would have been an attempt to show that Paul was an
apostate from the Jewish faith, and that the Jews must
not be held responsible for what he might say. The
quick-witted in the crowd saw through the trick at once,
and gave it the rebuke which it deserved by drowning
Alexander's voice in their yells.
Vv. 35-41. The fury of a mob, when at its height,
is always inflamed by opposition, as a fire by fresh fuel ;
but when it begins to be exhausted a few well chosen
words will often restore quiet, Recognizing this, the
city authorities did not at first interfere ; but when the
long continued vociferation of the people had nearly ex
hausted their strength, the following well timed and well
worded speech was addressed to them. (35) And when
the town clerk had quieted the multitude, he saith, Ye
men of Ephesus, what man is there who knoweth not how
that the city of the Ephesians is temple-keeper of the
great Diana, and of the image which fell down from
Jupiter ? (36) Seeing then that these things can not be
gainsaid, ye ought to be quiet, and to do nothing rash.
(37) For ye have brought hither these men who are
neither robbers of temples, nor blasphemers of our god
dess. (38) If therefore Demetrius, and the craftsmen
who are with him, have a matter against any man, the

¦six. %¦ «.] ACTS. 167
courts are open, and there are proconsuls : let them accuse
one another. (39) But if ye seek anything about other
matters, it shall be settled in the regular assembly. (40)
For indeed we are in danger to be accused concerning this
day's riot, there being no cause for it : and as touching
it, we shall not be able to give account of this concourse.
(41) And when he had thus spoken, he dismissed the
assembly. This is evidently the speech of a man well
skilled in the management of excited crowds; and we
may suppose that the town clerk was selected for the
task by those in authority, because of his known skill
in this particular. His assertion that no man could be
ignorant of the devotion of Ephesus to the worship of
Diana, or of the fact that the image was heaven-descend
ed, was an open espousal of their cause ; and the remark,
that the unquestionable certainty of these facts ought to
make them feel quiet, even though some one should con
tradict them, was the very remark to bring about the
composure at which he aimed. Advancing then to the
cause of the disturbance, like a trained advocate he
ignores the real charge against the disciples, that of
denying that images made with hands are gods, and de
clares that the men are neither temple-robbers, nor blas
phemers of the goddess. Clearing them of this charge
appeared to the majority, who " knew not wherefore
they had come together," a complete vindication of the
prisoners. Then, as for the men who had disturbed the
multitude with private matters of their own, their proper
recourse was to the proconsular court. This was calcu
lated to turn the feeling of the people against the silver
smiths, as having made tools of their neighbors for the
benefit of their craft. Finally, the remark about the
unlawfulness of the assembly, and their inability to

168 COMMENTARY. [xix. 41— xx. 1.
account for the riot, was a hint of danger from the
Roman authorities in the way of fines which might be
imposed on the whole community ; it made every man
of property feel anxious to get away. The formal dis
mission, as if the assembly had gotten through with its
business, and a motion to adjourn had been adopted,
was the last skillful device of the olerk, and it sent the
people down the streets in perfect quiet. The city au
thorities congratulated themselves and their clerk that so
fierce a mob had been so easily quelled ; and the disci
ples were very thankful to God that they had escaped so
easily. Even Gaius and Aristarchus, who had doubtless
despaired of life, escaped, and lived to labor and suffer
much longer in the Master's cause.1
8. Paul's Second Visit to Macedonia and
Greece, xx. 1-6.
Ver. 1. (i) And after the uproar was ceased, Paul
having sent for the disciples and exhorted them, took
leave of them, and departed to go into Macedonia. Thus
ended the long-continued abode of Paul in Ephe
sus. The " great and effectual door " which was open
to him but a few weeks previous had been suddenly
closed ; and the " many adversaries," for the noble pur
pose of resisting whom he had resolved to remain in
Ephesus until after Pentecost (I. Cor. xvi. 8, 9), had
prevailed against him. He had accomplished much in
the city and province, but there had come a fearful re
action in favor of the time-honored idolatry, threatening
to crush out the results of his protracted and arduous
1 Both of them traveled with Paul afterward from Corinth to
Jerusalem (xx. 3, 4), and Aristarchus was his fellow prisoner on
his voyage from Jerusalem to Rome (xxvii. 1, 2 ; Col. iv. 10).

xx. 1.] ACTS. 169
labors. When the disciples, whom he had taught and
warned with tears both publicly and from house to house
for the space of three years (verse 31), were gathered
about him for the last time, and he was about to leave
them in a great furnace of affliction, no tongue can tell
the bitterness of the farewell. All was dark behind
him, and all forbidding before him, as he turned his face
toward that shore across the iEgean on which he had
been welcomed before with stripes and imprisonment.
We have no expression of his feelings until he reached
Troas, where he was to embark for Macedonia, and
where he expected to meet Titus with news from
Corinth. At this point a remark of his own reveals the
pent up sorrow of his heart. He writes to the Corinth
ians : " When I came to Troas for the gospel of Christ,
and when a door was open to me in the Lord, I had no
relief for my spirit, because I found not Titus my
brother ; but taking my leave of them, I went forth into
Macedonia" (II. Cor. ii. 12, 13). We have followed
him through many disheartening scenes, and will yet
follow him through many more ; but only on this occasion
do we find his heart so sinking within him that he can
not enter an open door to preach the gospel. He had
hoped that the weight of sorrow which was pressing him
down, above his strength to bear, would be lightened by
the sympathy of Titus, and especially by some good
news from the distracted church in Corinth ; but the
pang of disappointment added the last ounce to the
weight that was crushing him, and he rushed on, blinded
with tears, in the direction from which Titus was coming.
A heart so strong to endure, when once crushed, can not
readily resume its wonted buoyancy. Even after the
sea was between him and Ephesus, and he was once more

170 COMMENTARY. [xx. 1.
among the beloved disciples of Philippi, he was con
strained to confess, " When we came into Macedonia,
our flesh had no relief, but we were afflicted on every
side ; without were fightings, within were fears " (II. Cor.
vii. 5). Finally, the long-looked-for Titus met him with
good news from Corinth, and thus the Lord, who never
forgets his servants in their affliction, brought relief to
the overburdened heart of Paul, and enabled him to
change the tone of his second epistle to the Corinthians,
and to say : " Nevertheless he that comforteth the lowly,
even God, comforted us by the coming of Titus; and
not by his coming only, but also by the comfort where
with he was comforted in you, while he told us of your
longing, your mourning, your zeal for me ; so that I re
joice yet more" (ib. 6, 7). And this shows us that it
was not on account of himself, but on account of his
children in the gospel, that he had been so distressed.
Titus told him of the good effects of the former epistle ;
that the majority of the church had repented of their
evil practices; that they had excluded the incestuous
man (ii. 5-11) ; and that they were forward in their
preparation for a contribution to the poor saints in Judea
(ix. 1, 2). But the news was not all of a cheering kind.
He also brought word that Paul had some personal ene
mies in the church who were endeavoring to impair his
influence and break down his apostolic authority (x. 1;
xi. 13-15). For the purpose of counteracting the machi
nations of these " ministers of Satan," encouraging the
faithful brethren in their renewed zeal, and presenting to
all many touching reflections suggested by his own suf
ferings, he addressed to them another epistle, and for
warded it by the hands of Titus and two other brethren
whose names are not given (viii. 16-20). That we are

xx. 1-3.] -ACTS. 171
right in regard to the date of this epistle, is easily
proved ; for first, Paul refers in the epistle to having re
cently come from Asia into Macedonia (i. 8 ; vii. 5) ;
and this he had j ust done according to the paragraph of
the history now before us. Second, he wrote from Mace
donia when about to start from that province to Corinth
(ix. 3, 4; xii. 14; xiii. 1), which he had not done pre
vious to this, except when there was as yet no church in
Corinth, and which he never did afterward. The time
was the summer of the year 57, the first epistle to the
same church having been written in Ephesus the previ
ous spring.1
Vv. 2, 3. The labors of the apostle on this visit to
Macedonia and Greece are summed up in this brief
statement. (2) And when he had gone through those
parts, and had given them much exhortation, he came
into Greece. (3) And when he had spent three months
there, and a plot was laid against him by the Jews as he
was about to set sail for Syria, he determined to return
through Macedonia. Several events of great importance
occurred in the interval thus hurriedly passed over, a
knowledge of which can be gleaned from Paul's epistles.
We remember the promise made by Paul to Peter
James and John, that while laboring among the Gen
tiles he would " remember the poor " in Judea (Gal. ii.
6-10). In accordance with this agreement we find that
Paul was now urging a general collection in the churches
of Macedonia and Achaia, as he had done in Galatia,
for this purpose (I. Cor. xvi. 1, 2; II. Cor. viii. 1-15).
For prudential considerations, such as prompted him so
often to labor without compensation, he declined to bear
the gift himself, though the churches in Macedonia had
1 See Introduction, Chronology, xxviii.

172 COMMENTARY. [xx. 3.
entreated him to do so (II. Cor. viii. 4). At first indeed
he had not fully intended to go to Jerusalem in connec
tion with it, but had said to the churches, " Whomsoever
ye shall approve by letters, them will I send to carry
your bounty unto Jerusalem : and if it be meet for me
to go also, they shall go with me " (I. Cor. xvi. 3, 4).
The importance of the mission, however, grew as time
advanced, so that he resolved to go himself; and the en
terprise assumed a most .absorbing interest.
The circumstance which led to this change of pur
pose was the increasing alienation between the Jews and
the Gentiles within the church. The decree of the apos
tles, as we have seen, gave great comfort to the church
in Antioch, where the controversy originated, and it had
done good everywhere it had been carried (xv. 31 ; xvi.
4, 5) ; but other judaizing teachers had renewed the con
troversy, and were ignoring the decree. They had per
sisted in their schismatical efforts until there was now a
widespread disaffection between the two sections of the
church. By their influence the churches in Galatia had
become alienated from Paul, for whom they once would
have been willing to pluck out their own eyes, and they
wrere being rapidly led back under the bondage of the
law (Gal. i. 6; iv. 15-20). The church in Rome, at the
western extremity of the territory which had been evan
gelized, was also disturbed by the controversy, the Jews
insisting that justification was by works of law, and that
the distinction of meats and holy days should be perpet
uated in the church (Rom., iii. , iv., v., xiv.). This state of
affairs filled Paul with inexpressible anxiety, and while
the danger was imminent he bent all his energies to the
task of averting it.

xx. 3.] ACTS. 173
Already engaged in a general collection among Gen
tile churches for the poor in Judea, and knowing the
tendency of kindness to win back alienated affection, he
pushed the work forward for this additional considera
tion, as we see from the following appeal which he ma.de
to the Corinthians : " For the ministration of this serv
ice not only filleth up the measure of the wants of the
saints, but aboundeth also through many thanksgivings
unto God; seeing that through the proving of you by
this ministration they glorify God for the obedience of
your confession unto the gospel of Christ,' and for the
liberality of your contribution unto them and unto all ;
while they themselves also, with supplication on your
behalf, long after you by reason of the exceeding grace
of God in you " (II. Cor. ix. 12-14). So great was his
confidence in the good results of the enterprise that he
here speaks as if they were already accomplished — as if
the Jews were already offering many thanksgivings and
prayers for the Gentiles in consideration of their kind
ness. Thus Paul felt while he was stimulating the liber
ality of his brethren ; but when the collections had all
been made, and he was about to start from Corinth to
Jerusalem with the money, he began to fear that the
Jews in Palestine would not accept the gift, and that by
their refusal the breach which he was trying to close
would be opened wider. We know this by the almost
painful earnestness with which he besought the brethren
in Rome to pray with him that this calamity might be
averted. He says : " Now I beseech you, brethren, by
our Lord Jesus Christ, and by the love of the Spirit,
that ye strive together with me in your prayers to God
for me ; that I may be delivered from them that are dis-

174 COMMENTARY. [xx. 3.
obedient in Judea, and that my ministration which I
have for Jerusalem may be acceptable to the saints ; that
I may come unto you in joy through the will of God,
and together with you find rest" (Rom. xv. 30-32). If
he called thus earnestly for the prayers of the distant
church in Rome, how much more must he have enlisted
those of the churches in Achaia and Macedonia, who
were immediate participants in the enterprise. We
have here the spectacle of a man who was regarded with
suspicion, if not with positive dislike, by a large portion
of his brethren, securing from others, who were involved
with him in the same reproach, a self-denying contribu
tion for the temporal wants of the disaffected party ; and
then, fearing lest their disaffection was so great as to
cause them to reject the gift — a fear which would cause
most men to withhold it entirely — he calls upon all the
donors to unite in persistent prayer that it might not be
rejected. No nobler example of disinterested benevo
lence can be found in the history of men. The prose
cution of the enterprise, as we shall see hereafter, was
in keeping with the magnanimity of its inception. But
before we consider it further we must notice briefly some
kindred facts.
For the same noble purpose which prompted the
great collection, Paul wrote, during his three months in
Corinth, his epistles to the Galatians and the Romans.
This date we have already assumed in referring to
them as contemporaneous documents. The most con
clusive evidence for assigning them this date may be
briefly stated as follows : In the epistle to the Romans
Paul expressly states that he was about to start for Jeru
salem with a contribution which had been made by the
churches in Macedonia and Achaia (xv. 25, 26) ; and

xx. 3.] ACTS. 175
this could have been said only at the close of his present
stay in Corinth. Moreover, Gaius, who lived in Corinth,
was his host at the time of writing (xvi. 23 ; cf. I. Cor. i.
14); and Phoebe, of the Corinthian seaport Cenchrea,
was the bearer ofthe epistle (xvi. 1). As for Galatians,
it contains an allusion to Paul's first visit to Galatia,
implying that he had been there a second time. His
words are : " Ye know that by an infirmity ofthe flesh
I preached the gospel unto you the first time" (iv. 13).
It was written then, after this second visit, and another re
mark shows that it was not very long after that visit. He
says, " I marvel that ye are so quickly removing from
him that called you in the grace of Christ unto a differ
ent gospel " (i. 6). When at Corinth he had been away
from Galatia only a little more than three years ; and
this was a short time for so great a revolution in senti
ment and faith as had occurred in those churches. Fi
nally, the close correspondence in subject matter between
this epistle and that to the Romans, both being devoted
principally to setting forth the doctrine of justification by
faith, in opposition to the scheme of salvation by works
of law which was propagated by the judaizers, indicates
that they were both written under the same condition of
affairs, and therefore about the same time. As in Ro
mans Paul speaks of his departure to Jerusalem as
imminent, it is probable that Galatians had been written
a short time previous. In both the apostle contended by
argument and by authority against the destructive teach
ing of the judaizers, at the same that he was aiming, by
a noble act of self-denial, to win back their good will
both to himself and the Gentiles whose cause he had
espoused.

176 COMMENTARY. [xx. 3-5.
Having dispatched these two epistles, and collected
about him the messengers of the various churches, the
apostle was about to start for Syria by water, which was
much the swifter route, when, as the text last quoted
affirms, he learned that a plot was laid against him by
the Jews, which led him to change his course. This
plot probably consisted in a notification to highwaymen
to lie in wait for the company in the mountains between
Corinth and Cenchrea, and rob them ofthe money which
they were bearing to Jerusalem. By the change of
route, the road to Cenchrea could be avoided, and the
waiting robbers left in the lurch. A much longer jour
ney was necessitated; but it led Paul once more by the
way of churches which he would otherwise have failed
to revisit. Vv. 4, 5. (4) And there accompanied him as far as
Asia Sopater of Bercea, the son of Pyrrhus ; and of the
Thessalonians, Aristarchus and Secundus ; and Gaius of
Derbe, and Timothy ; and of Asia, Tychicus and Tro
phimus. (5) But these had gone before, and were wait
ing for us at Troas. These seven brethren were the
messengers chosen by the churches, as Paul had direct
ed (I. Cor. xvi. 3), to bear their contributions to Jeru
salem. There being no banks or paper currency in those
days, the money had to be carried in silver on the
persons of the messengers, and it was important that no
one should be so loaded as to indicate the fact to the
sharp eyes of robbers : hence the necessity for so many
messengers to carry it. Sopater (abbreviation of Sosi
pater) was a kinsman of Paul, one of his converts at
Bercea, and had united with him in saluting the church
in Rome (Rom. xvi. 21). Aristarchus was doubtless the
same Macedonian who was seized by the mob in Ephesus

xx. 5, 6.] ' ACTS. Yll
(xix. 29), but had escaped and reached his home in
Thessalonica. Secundus (second) was probably so named
^ because he was his father's second son, as were Tertius
and Quartus (third and fourth), because they were the
third and fourth sons (Rom. xvi. 22, 23). As they were
all three with Paul at Corinth, it is not improbable that
they were brothers. Gaius of Derbe was not of course
the Macedonian Gaius who had suffered in the silver
smith mob with Aristarchus. His presence here, so far
west from his home, implies that he had followed Paul
through interest in his labors. Tychicus (fortunate) and
Trophimus (foster-child) are new names among the
companions of Paul. As they are of Asia, they had
doubtless turned to the Lord while Paul was preaching
in Ephesus, and had followed him thence into Greece.
Luke's " us," here introduced once more, implies that
he too joined the company at Philippi. It was here, on
the first tour, that this pronoun was dropped, "and the
presumption is that Luke had remained at Philippi ever
since the departure of Paul and Silas therefrom, six or
seven years previous. During this absence from the
narrative, many parts of it have been hurried and ellipti
cal ; but we shall henceforth find it much more circum
stantial. Ver. 6. If Paul's only purpose in passing through
Macedonia was to reach Asia in safety, he would have
had no occasion to revisit Philippi, which was at least a
day's journey out his way ; but the next verse finds him
in that city and leaving it for Troas. (6) And we sailed
away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread,
and came unto them to Troas in five days : where we
tarried seven days. The other brethren, in going before
unto Troas, had probably set sail from Thessalonica, or

178 COMMENTARY. [xx. 6, 7.
Neapolis, without making the detour northward to
Philippi ; and their design in going before may have
been to get speedily out of the country in which many
enemies knew ofthe money on their persons, while Paul,
freed from anxiety on that account, might make another
short visit to the church at Philippi, whose honored
teacher was to join him in the journey to Jerusalem. It
so happened that the days of unleavened bread, the seven
days following the paschal supper, had just expired when
he and Luke set sail for Troas, and thus we are able to
see that nearly a whole year had passed since he left
Ephesus ; for he left there earlier than he had expected,
and therefore earlier than Pentecost the previous year
(I. Cor. xvi. 8).
The fact that the voyage from Philippi to Troas occu
pied five days, whereas on a former occasion they sailed
from Troas to Philippi in two days (xvi. 11, 12), is sug
gestive of adverse winds.
When Paul was last in Troas an effectual door was
opened to him by the Lord, but he passed on without
entering it (II. Cor. ii. 12). Now at last some of the
work then neglected was done ; for the seven brethren
had preceded him more than five days, and the whole
company remained there seven days ; and nine such men
as these could accomplish much in a town like this in
the course of two weeks.
9. A Lord's Day Meeting in Troas, 7-12.
Ver. 7. The stay of seven days in Troas termi
nated on the Lord's day. (7) And upon the first day of
the week, when we were gathered together to break
bread, Paul discoursed with them, intending to depart on
the morrow ; and prolonged his speech until midnight.

xx. 7.] ACTS. 179
This passage shpws that the first day ofthe week was the
day in which the disciples broke the loaf; and also
that the prime purpose of their meeting on that day
was to observe this ordinance. Paul's preaching on the
occasion was incidental. In the original institution of
the Lord's supper, nothing was said as to the frequency
with which it was to be observed. The Lord's words
are, " This do, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of
me " (I. Cor. xi. 25). Had nothing more been said, every
congregation of believers would have been left to its own
judgment as to frequency of observance. But the apos
tles were afterward guided by the Holy Spirit in this, as
in other matters left indefinite by the Lord's personal
teaching, and their example is our guide. Little is said
on the subject, but that little is decisive in favor of a
weekly observance of the ordinance. Here it is repre
sented as furnishing the chief purpose of the Lord's
day meeting; and the same appears in the rebuke ad
ministered to the Corinthians : " When therefore ye
assemble yourselves together, it is not possible to eat the
Lord's supper; for in your eating each one taketh before
other his own supper" (I. Cor. xi. 20, 21). Such being
the purpose of the Lord's day meeting, as surely as the
disciples met eve*ry Lord's day, they broke the loaf on that
day. Slight as this evidence is, when taken in connection
with the universal practice ofthe church in the second
century, and for a long period afterward, it has proved
sufficient to win universal agreement among biblical
scholars, that this was the apostolic custom ; and as the
example ofthe apostles acting under the guidance ofthe
Holy Spirit shows plainly the will of the Lord, our cus
tom should be the same, and all the excuses which we
ingeniously frame for rejecting this custom are invalid.

180 COMMENTARY. [xx. 7-10.
It is this ordinance which brings us nearest of all to
the sufferings of our Redeemer; and if we commemorate
weekly the fact that he arose again for our justification,
why should we not as frequently commemorate the
fact that he died for our sins ?
. The extreme length of Paul's discourse on this, oc
casion is accounted for in the remark tbat he was
"intending to depart on the morrow;" and we learn
further on, that he expected never to see these disciples
again (38) ; hence his desire to give them all possible
instruction and admonition while he was with them.
Vv. 8-10. The long, solemn discourse was broken
off at midnight by an incident which caused great alarm
and confusion in the audience. (8) And there were many
lights in the upper chamber, where we were gathered
together. (9) And there sat in the window a certain
young man named Eutychus, borne down with deep
sleep; and^as Paul discoursed yet longer, being borne
down by his sleep he fell down from the third story, and
was taken up dead. (10) And Paul went down, and fell
on him, and embracing him said, Make ye no ado ; for
his life is in him. This passage shows that the meeting
was held in the night, and in the third story of the
building. The third story is suggestive of cheap rent,
and also of precaution against interruption of the wor
ship by the heathen rabble on the street. If some of
ithe members were slaves, a night meeting was the
only one which they could attend, and this hour may
have been selected to suit them. It is probable that on
account of Paul's presence the room was crowded,
and that Eutychus had taken a seat in the window
to make room for some older person ; and, being most
likely a laboring man, unaccustomed to loss of sleep,

xx. 10, 11.] ACTS. 181
he found it impossible, even though deeply interested, to
keep awake. It is not always a sin to go to sleep under
a sermon. Eutychus was dead when they picked him
up; but when Paul had embraced him his life was in
him, and the embrace brought back the life which was
extinguished by the fall. It was a case of resuscitation
like that ofthe daughter of Jairus (Luke viii. 49-55).
Ver. 11. The alarm caused by the fall of Eutychus,
the astonishing display of divine power in his restoration,
and the stillness of the midnight hour in which it all
occurred, could but add to the solemnity which already
pervaded the assembly. They could not think of sleep,
and the meeting was still protracted. They returned to
the upper chamber, where the lights were still burning,
and where the elements of the Lord's supper were as
yet undistributed. Paul, notwithstanding the length
and earnestness of his discourse, was unexhausted, (ii)
And when he was gone up, and had broken the bread,
and eaten, and had talked with them a long while, even
till break of day, so he departed. Thus the whole
night was spent in religious discourse and conversation,
interrupted at midnight by a death and a resurrection,
and this followed by the commemoration of the Lord's
death which brings hope of a resurrection far better. At
daybreak the meeting terminated in one of those tender
farewells so often spoken among believers, in which the
pain of parting and the hope of meeting to part no more
struggle so tearfully for the mastery. It was a night
never to be forgotten by those who were there, and in
eternity it will be a theme for much conversation.
It is a question of some interest, whether it was on
Sunday morning or Monday morning that this parting
took place. The brethren met in the early part of the

182 COMMENTARY. [xx. 11-13.
night, yet it was "the first day ofthe week." We have
no evidence that either Jews or Gentiles had yet adopted
the custom of counting the hours ofthe day from mid
night ; consequently we must suppose that the night in
question was that belonging to Sunday, as it was then
reckoned, or Saturday night, as we now style it. It was
the night following the Jewish Sabbath, which was still
observed by all Jewish disciples, and the incident shows
that the disciples at Troas were in the habit of meeting
on this night to break bread. Any time after sunset on
that evening would be the Lord's day as they counted
it, and after midnight, which was the time of breaking
the loaf on that occasion, was on the Lord's day as we
count it.
Ver. 12. Recurring again to the case of Eutychus,
Luke next remarks : (12) And they brought the lad
alive, and were not a little comforted. This means that
they brought him from the meeting to his home. This
was done in the morning after the separation from Paul
and his company, and four or five hours after the fall
from the window. Having expected to take him home
dead, and to be charged, perhaps, with fault in reference
to his death, they were not a little comforted that they
could bring him home with such a story as they could
now tell to his friends and neighbors.
10. The Voyage from Troas to Miletus, 13-16.
Ver. 13. The brethren of Troas returned to their
homes, while Paul and his companions resumed their
long journey. (13) But we, going before to the ship, set
sail for Assos, there intending to take in Paul : for so had
he appointed, intending himself to go by land. Troas
and Assos are on opposite sides of a peninsula which

xx. 13.] ACTS. 183
terminates in Cape Lectum. The distance across from
city to city is about twenty miles, while the coast line
around is about forty. Paul could easily walk across
while the ship was sailing around. But why did Paul
choose, after spending a sleepless night in preaching and
conversing, to still further tax his power of endurance by
this walk of twenty miles ? One would suppose that he
would have preferred resting upon a hammock in the
ship. Nothing short of an excitement which eschews
rest for either mind or body can account for it. But
Paul had received in every city on his journey prophetic
warnings of bonds and imprisonment awaiting him (23) ;
he was agitated by the critical state of the churches
everywhere ; he was saddened by the final farewells
which he was giving to the churches on his way ; and he
longed for a season of meditation and prayer which could
be found only in solitude. Amid the more stirring
scenes of the apostle's life, while announcing with oracu
lar authority the will of God, and confirming the word
to tremGling thousands by signs and wonders following,
we are apt to lose our human sympathy for the man in
our admiration for the apostle. But when we contem
plate him under circumstances like the present, worn
down by the sleepless labors of a whole night ; burdened
in spirit too heavily to enjoy the society of sympathizing
friends ; and yet, with all his weariness, choosing a long
day's journey on foot that he might indulge to satiety
the gloom which oppressed him, we are so much remind
ed of our own seasons of afflictions as to feel the
human tie which binds our hearts to his. No ardent
toiler in the vineyard of the Lord, ready to sink at times
beneath his load of anxiety and disappointment, but
finds relief in permitting the excess of his sorrow to

184 COMMENTARY. [xx. 13-16.
waste itself in silence and solitude. In such hours it
will do us good to walk with Paul from Troas to Assos,
and to remember how much has been endured by greater
and better men than ourselves.
Vv. 14-16. The ship and the footman were not far
apart in reaching Assos. (14) And when he met us at
Assos, we took him in, and came to Mitylene. (15) And
sailing from thence, we came the next day over against
Chios ; and the next day we touched at Samos ; and the
day after we came to Miletus. (16) For Paul had deter
mined to sail past Ephesus, that he might not have to
spend time in Asia ; for he was hastening, if it were pos
sible for him, to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost. The
ship was coasting among the islands scattered along the
eastern shore of the iEgean Sea, as a glance at the map
will show; and the part of the voyage here described
occupied four days. They cast anchor in the harbor of
Mitylene the first night. This city, beautifully situated
on the northern shore of the island then called Lesbos,
but now Mitylene, from the name of the city, is still a
handsome town with a considerable trade. On the
second night anchorage was found " over against Chios,"
without entering a harbor. On the third day they crossed
the mouth of the bay which leads up to Ephesus, and
" touched at Samos," perhaps for business as well as for
a safe anchorage at night ; and a short run on the fourth
day brought them to the important seaport of Miletus
on the main shore. As they passed by Ephesus, and
were yet so near to that scene of protracted labor and
suffering, Luke felt called upon for the explanation
which he gives. If the ship had been under Paul's con
trol, he could have spent at Ephesus the time afterward
spent at Miletus (17, 18), without delaying his arrival

xx. 14-21.] ACTS. 185
in Jerusalem ; but as the vessel was going on its way
without regard to his wishes, he could visit Ephesus
only by running in on some other vessel from Chios,
and taking the risk of finding one in good time sailing
from Ephesus to Syria. The reason for his anxiety to
reach Jerusalem by Pentecost was, that then brethren
from every village in Palestine would be in the city, and
he could see to the distribution of the alms which his
companions bore, without the necessity of visiting all
the churches. We will yet see that he made the journey
in time for the feast.
11. An Interview with the Elders of the
. Church at Ephesus, 17-38.
Ver. 17. As Paul's vessel was to lie at anchor in
the harbor of Miletus for at least two or three days, he
took advantage of the delay to gratify in part his desire
to communicate once more with the brethren of Ephesus.
(17) And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called to
him the elders of the church. The distance was about
thirty miles. He might have gone to Ephesus instead
of sending for the elders, but for some uncertainty as to
the time of the ship's departure, ff he should miss this
vessel, it might defeat his purpose to attend the feast;
whereas, if the elders should arrive after his departure,
they would suffer only the inconvenience of the short
journey. Vv. 18-21. The interview which Paul now holds
with these elders may be regarded as a type of all those
which he held with various bodies of disciples on this
mournful journey. He begins his remarks to them by a
brief review of his labors in their city. (18) And when
they were come to him, he said to them, Ye yourselves

186 COMMENTARY. [xx. 18-21.
know, from the first day that I set foot in Asia, after
what manner I was with you all the time, (19) serving
the Lord with all lowliness of mind, and with tears, and
with trials which befell me by the plots of the Jews :
(20) how that I shrank not from declaring unto you any
thing that was profitable, and teaching you publicly and
from house to house, (21) testifying both to Jews and to
Greeks repentance toward God, and faith toward our
Lord Jesus Christ. These elders must have been among
the first fruits of Paul's preaching in Ephesus, seeing
that they knew so perfectly his manner of life from the
first day that he set foot in Asia. His remark about the
lowliness of mind, and the tears which had characterized
him, shows that the great distress which we have seen
attendant on the wild proceedings of the silversmith
mob, was by no means the beginning of this kind of ex
perience in Ephesus. The reference, too, to trials which
befell him by the plots of the Jews, brings out a new
feature of his experience there; for in the narrative Luke
has mentioned only one indication of the existence of
such plots, the attempt to put forward Alexander before
the mob in the theater (xix. 33, 34). It was Paul's sad
experience to suffer more, throughout his career, from
his own countrymen than from the heathen.
The statements, that he had not shrunk from de
claring to the brethren anything that was profitable for
them, and that he had taught from house to house, as
well as publicly, are both worthy of solemn considera
tion by the preachers of the present age. The former
presents Paul in striking contrast with the time-servers
so abundant in our modern pulpits, who never rebuke
sin except at a long distance ; who speak none but
smooth words about corruption in the church ; and

xx. 18-21.] ACTS. 187
whose whole study is personal popularity. Such men
care for souls only as these souls may in some way glo
rify them. They are too faithful to their own aggrandise
ment to think of being faithful to God. The second
statement places Paul in contrast with another class of
modern preachers, who either neglect to go from house'
to house in their ministrations, and study paltry excuses
for the neglect ; or who go from house to house, not to
teach the people, but to enjoy society and to engage in
gossip. Let all such take notice that, in the true apos
tolic method of evangelizing a community, and of edify
ing a congregation, earnest work from house to house
was on a par with that in the pulpit.
The order in which Paul here mentions repentance
toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, has been
an occasion of confusion to some minds, and has fur
nished a proof text to some who have espoused the posi
tion that in the sinner's conversion to Christ repentance
precedes faith. It is true that Paul preached repentance
toward God before faith in Jesus Christ, and that his
aim was to induce men to repent toward God as a
preparation for faith in Christ. John the Baptist pre
pared the people for Christ by preaching repentance
toward God; Jesus did the same; and Paul, in address
ing the heathen in Athens, first presented to them the
true God, then called on them to repent of their idola
tries which had dishonored God; and then presented to
them the risen Christ (xvii. 29-31). The two themes
were not presented in this order because it was impossi
ble for men to believe in Christ before repenting toward
God; but because, if they are brought to repentance
toward God in whom they already believe, they are in a
better frame of mind for hearing the gospel of Christ,

188 COMMENTARY. [xx. 18-27.
and believing in him. In general terms, if we repent of
sinning against the light we have, we are better prepared
to receive any new light which God may see fit to give
us; whereas, if we are impenitent in regard to the
former, we will almost certainly despise the latter. To
sinners of all ages and countries, who know something
of God, but nothing of Christ, this method of preaching
faith and repentance is doubtless the best ; but it may
not be so with sinners reared in Christian lands, who
have by tradition the same faith in Christ which they
have in God, and who realize that their past sins are
really sins against Christ. This method, however, is
very far from supporting the idea that repevitance pre
cedes faith in the sense usually attached to that proposi
tion ; for this would require men to repent toward God
before they believe in God, and toward Christ before
they believe in Christ — an obvious absurdity.
Vv. 22-27. After this very brief review of hh
labors in Ephesus, the apostle next speaks of his own
future, and reveals to the elders the cause of the gloom
which had shrouded his spirit on this journey. (22) And
now, behold, I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not
knowing the things that shall befall me there : (23)
save that the Holy Spirit testifies unto me in every city,
saying that bonds and afflictions abide me. (24) But I
hold not my life of any account as dear unto myself, so
that I may accomplish my course, and the ministry
which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify the gos
pel of the grace of God. (25) And now, behold, I know
that ye all, among whom I went about preaching the
kingdom, shall see my face no more. (26) Wherefore I
testify unto you this day, that I am pure from the blood
of all men. (27) For I shrank not from declaring unto

xx. 22-27.] ACTS. 189
you the whole counsel of God. By the expression,
" bound in the spirit," he has reference to the bonds
that awaited him in Jerusalem, and he means that he
felt in spirit as if the bonds were already upon him.
He was so certain that the predictions of the Holy Spirit
would be fulfilled, that they seemed a present reality.
This testimony of the Spirit had undoubtedly been given
to him through prophets whom he had met in every
city; for if it had been given to him directly, it would
not have been confined to the cities. This is another
evidence that the prophetic power of the apostles was
not used to foresee their own future, as their healing
power was not used to cure their own diseases. When
he adds, " I know that ye all among whom I went about
preaching the gospel, shall see my face no more," we are
not to understand that the Holy Spirit, who had previ
ously revealed some o£ his future to him through others,
had now revealed this to him directly ; but rather that
he here expresses a strong conviction, based on these pre
dictions, and also on his own fixed purpose, God willing,
to spend the remnant of his days in new fields of labor
(xix. 21 ; Rom. xv. 23, 24). When therefore we learn
from his first epistle to Timothy (i. 1-3) that he did
afterward revisit Ephesus, the fact should occasion no
great surprise.
In the closing remark of this part of the address
(26, 27), Paul recurs to his fidelity in declaring every
thing that was profitable to them, and he holds this up
as proof that he is free from every man's blood. " I
am pure from the blood of all men. For I shrank not
from declaring unto you the whole counsel of God." It
is implied that if a religious teacher does shrink, through
any personal or selfish consideration, from declaring the

190 COMMENTARY. [xx. 27-35.
whole counsel of God to those whom he teaches, in so me
sense the blood of those who may be lost through his
neglect will be upon him (cf. xviii. 6; Ezek. iii. 16-21).
This is an unspeakably fearful responsibility, and it
should never be lost sight of.
Vv. 28-35. Having spoken of his own past and his
own future, the apostle next speaks of the future of the
elders and their church ; and he places his own example
before them for imitation. (28) Take heed unto your
selves, and to all the flock, in the which the Holy Spirit
has made you bishops, to feed the church of God, which
he purchased with his own blood. (29) I know that after
my departing grievous wolves shall enter in among you,
not sparing the flock ; (30) and from among your own
selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw
away the disciples after them. (31) Wherefore watch ye,
remembering that by the space of three years I ceased
not to admonish every one night and day with tears.
(32) And now I commend you to God, and to the word of
his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you
the inheritance among all them that are sanctified. (33)
I coveted no man's silver, or gold, or apparel. (34) Ye
yourselves know that these hands ministered unto my
necessities, and to them that were with me. (35) In all
things I gave you an example, how that so laboring ye
ought to help the weak, and to remember the words of
the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, It is more blessed
to give than to receive.
Here the apostle styles bishops those whom Luke at
verse 17 calls elders, which shows that the two titles
were applied to the same church officer, and that the bish
ops of the apostolic church were not diocesan bishops,
such as now rule in episcopal bodies, but officers of sin-

xx. 28-35.] ACTS. 191
gle congregations. While the word bishop is derived
from the original term here used (intaxonoc:) , it does not
translate it, because the idea commonly attached to the
one is quite different from the meaning of the other.
The exact English equivalent o£ the Greek word is over
seer, which is used here in the A. V., and should have
been retained by the revisers. In order to impress
these brethren more deeply in regard to their responsi
bility, Paul reminds them that they had been made over
seers of the flock in Ephesus by the Holy Spirit. The
Holy Spirit had made them overseers by giving them
the spiritual qualifications which rendered them eligible
to the office, and by guiding the church in selecting
them, as well as the apostle in "appointing them. They
are exhorted, first, to take heed to themselves ; second,
to take heed to "all the flock;" and third, to be shep
herds to the church; for this is the meaning of the word
rendered to feed. The first required that personal godli
ness without which no man's ministrations in the church
have any value ; the second required such watchfulness
as would allow nothing in the condition of the church
to escape their notice ; and the third required them to do
for the church all that an eastern shepherd does for his
flock. They were reminded that this church was pur
chased by God with his own blood shed in the person of
his Son, in order that they might be willing, on account
of the price God paid for it, to make all needed sacri
fices for its good. They were warned against two dan
gers which Paul's prophetic vision could foresee : the en
tering in of men from abroad, whom he styles " grievous
wolves " who would not " spare the flock ;" and the up
rising from among themselves of factionists, who would
draw the disciples away from the Lord to follow them.

192 COMMENTARY, [xx. 28-35.
It would have been useless to tell them of these dangers,
if there were no means of guarding against them ; so
they are told, first, to watch. Watchfulness would enable
them to see the first symptoms of coming trouble, and
to attack it while it was weak. The shepherd of the
church who is not watchful as to the teachers who come
from abroad, and as to ambitious men within the con
gregation, is like the literal shepherd who sleeps until
the wolf has entered the fold, or until the flock begins
to scatter. Secondly, they are told to remember how he
had done in such matters during his stay among them —
to remember it that they might imitate it — that is, he
had " not ceased to admonish every one night and day
with tears." By such admonitions, on the first appear
ance of trouble from within or from without, they were
to keep in safety the flock committed to their care. In
leaving them to this great responsibility, he points them
to the only source of courage and strength sufficient for
them, by commending them to God and to his word, assur
ing them that the word was able to build them up, and
to give them inheritance among the sanctified. After
this benediction, which appears as if intended to close
the address, he adds still another admonition, which he
enforces by both his own example and some treasured
words of the Lord Jesus. It has reference to caring for
God's poor; and it required them, elders though they
were, to labor with their own hands that they might be
able to " help the weak." His own example was most
graphically and touchingly depicted in the words : " I
have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or apparel. Ye
yourselves know that these hands [lifting them up] have
ministered to my necessities, and to them that were with
me ;" and the sentence quoted from the Lord Jesus, " It

xx. 28-38.] ACTS. 193
is more blessed to give than to receive," was one of
those precious morsels of divine truth, of which many
thousands fell from his lips that are not recorded in our
brief gospels.
Vv. 36-38. An address so solemn, so tender, so
heart- crushing both to speaker and hearers, could be
followed with propriety only by prostration before the
throne of grace. (36) And when he had thus spoken,
he kneeled down, and prayed with them all. (37) And
they all wept sore, and fell on Paul's neck, and kissed
him, (38) sorrowing most of all for the word which he had
spoken, that they should behold his face no more. And
they brought him on his way unto the ship. Luke records
not a word of that prayer. There are some prayers that
are so broken with emotion, so interrupted by weeping,
that though they leave a holy benediction on the soul,
no connected words in them are remembered. The tears
of women and of children are sometimes shallow ; but
when full grown men like these, men of gray hairs, who
have been hardened to endurance by years of danger
and suffering, are seen to weep like children, and to fall
upon one another's necks, the depth of their grief can
not be questioned. When the man of the world is thus
overcome with grief, his heart often grows harder while
it is breaking ; but the sorrow of the man of faith is
softening and purifying ; it binds the afflicted more
closely to one another and to God, while it is sanctified
by prayer. It is a sorrow which we are willing to feel
again, and which we love to remember. The pathway
of the church is strewn with scenes like this. When
the paths of many pilgrims meet, and for a few days they
mingle together their prayers, their songs of praise, their
counsels, and their tears, the hour of. parting is often a

194 COMMENTARY. [xx. 36-38.
repetition of this scene on the sea shore at Miletus.
Tears and heavings of the breast, which tell of grief and
love and hope struggling within, the parting hand, the
fond embrace, the blessing of God invoked, and the sad
turning away to duties which the soul feels for the mo
ment too weak to attempt — these are all familiar to the
toiling servants of God.
If Paul had been parting from these brethren under
cheerful anticipations for himself and them, the parting
would have been painful ; but added to the pain of a
final parting was the gloom of their own uncertain
future, and of the undefined afflictions which certainly
awaited him. He had already, twelve months before this,
recounted a catalogue of sufferings more abundant than
had fallen to the lot of any other man. He had been
often in prison, and often on the verge of death. From
the Jews he had five times received forty stripes save
one, and three times he had been beaten with rods,
Once he was stoned, and left on the ground, supposed to
be dead. He had been shipwrecked three times, and
had spent a day and a night in the waters of the great
deep. In his many journeys he had been exposed to
perils by water, by robbers, by his own countrymen, by
the heathen; in the city, in the wilderness, in the sea,
and among false brethren. He had suffered from weari
ness and painfulness and wakefulness. He had endured
hunger and thirst, and he had suffered from cold for
want of sufficient clothing. Throughout all he had
borne, and was still bearing, that which was little less
painful, the care of all the churches. At the same time
there was a thorn in his flesh, a messenger of Satan to
buffet him, which was so irritating and humiliating that
he had three times prayed the Lord to take it from him.

xx. 36— xxi. 3.] ACTS. 195
He had been constrained to write to the brethren in
Galatia, " From henceforth let no man trouble me :
for I bear branded on my body the marks of the Lord
Jesus."1 Most men would have said, I have suffered
enough : the success of my present enterprise is doubtful
at best, and it is certain to bring me once more into prison,
and into untold afflictions : I will therefore remain where
I am, amid brethren who love me, and let my companions
complete this work of benevolence which I have -under
taken. But no such thoughts were entertained; and
when the Ephesian elders were parting from such a man,
well might they weep, and stand mute upon the shore
till the sails of his vessel grew dim in the distance, ere
they turned in loneliness to the toils and dangers which
they now knew they must encounter without the pres
ence or the counsel of their great teacher. We are not
permitted to return with them to Ephesus, or to hear
their sorrowful conversation by the way ; for we must
follow the receding vessel, and witness the bonds and
afflictions which await its most noted passenger.
12. The Journey from Miletus to Caesarea,
xxi. 1-9.
Vv. 1-3. The vessel proceeded for a time on its
coasting voyage along the shore of Asia Minor, and then
struck out into the open sea. (i) And when it came to
pass that we were parted from them, and had set sail, we
came with a straight course unto Cos, and the next day
unto Rhodes, and from thence unto Patara ; (2) and having
found a ship crossing over unto Phoenicia, we went aboard,
and set sail. (3) And when we had come in sight of
Cyprus, leaving it on the left hand, we sailed unto Syria,
1 II. Cor. xi. 21-28 ; xii. 7-10 ; Gal. vi. 17.

196 COMMENTARY. [xxi. 1-3.
and landed at Tyre : for there the ship was to unlade her
burden. That they sailed with a " straight course " from
Miletus to the island of Cos, implies a favorable wind on
the first day. At the city of Rhodes, on the island of the
same name, they cast anchor for the. night in the harbor,
the mouth of which had once been ornamented by a
colossus which was one of the seven wonders of the
world. It was a brazen statue of Helios, one hundred and
five feet in height. It was prostrated by an earthquake,
224 B. C. ; but its fragments were still on the spot at the
time of Paul's visit. Patara, where they changed vessels)
is on the southern coast of Lycia. They made the
change because the new vessel was going directly to the
port of Tyre, nearly in the exact direction in which they
desired to sail ; and this implies either that the vessel
which they left was going no farther than Patara, or
that it was intending still to hug the shore of Asia
Minor. On passing in sight of Cyprus, Paul must have
been reminded of his early experience in that island,
when he and Barnabas had preached there on his first
missionary tour (xiii. 4-12). The ship's run from Patara
to Tyre was one of several days and nights in the open
sea, without casting anchor as they had done every
night since leaving Troas. Such a run the ships of that
day never made, except when they could hope for the light
of the moon or stars at night ; and it is a singular circum
stance that we are able to determine the phase of the
moon at the time of this run. Paul left Philippi seven
days after the full moon ; and he was five days reaching
Troas, where he spent seven days (xx. 6). This makes
nineteen days after the full moon. Leaving Troas, they.
reached Miletus in four days, and from Miletus they
sailed to Patara in three days (xx. 13-15 ; xxi. 1).

xxi. 1-4.] ACTS. 197
These seven days added to the nineteen make twenty-
six ; and if they spent three days in Miletus, these would
make the aggregate twenty-nine since the last full moon,
when it would be full moon again. Any traveler who
has sailed by moonlight in the summer time on the Medi
terranean Sea, when the water was smooth, remembers it
as a delightful experience, and it must have helped to
soothe the troubled spirits of Paul and his companions.
Ver. 4. The time employed by the sailors in put
ting out freight, and perhaps in taking in a fresh cargo,
gave another opportunity for communing with brethren
onshore. (4) And having found the. disciples, we tar
ried there seven days : and these said to Paul through
the Spirit, that he should not set foot in Jerusalem.
The words, "having found the disciples," imply that
some search had to be made for them ; and this followed
from the fact that Paul had not been there before since
the church was established, and his companions, being
"all of foreign birth, were total strangers in the city.
But a church was at any rate found in Tyre, verifying
the words of our Lord addressed to cities of Galilee : " If
the mighty works had been done in Tyre and Sidon
which were done in you, they would have repented
long ago in sackcloth and ashes" (Matt. xi. 21). We
are not to understand that the entreaties of these Tyrian
brethren were dictated by the Holy Spirit ; for this
would have made it Paul's duty to comply with them,
and he certainly would have done so ; but we are to
understand that the Holy Spirit revealed to some of
them, as he had done in other cities, what awaited
Paul in Jerusalem, while they of their own accord
entreated him not to go thither. Their entreaties show
that although they had not been evangelized by Paul,

198 COMMENTARY. [xxi. 4-7.
they knew and appreciated his worth to the cause of
Christ. Vv. 5, 6. When the seven days were past, including,
as they must, a Lord's day in which the disciples came
together to break bread, another scene of painful parting
occurred like that at Miletus. (5) And when it came to
pass that we had accomplished the days, we departed
and went on our journey ; and they all, with wives and
children, brought us on our way, till we were out of the
city : and kneeling down on the beach, we prayed, (6)
and bade each other farewell ; and we went on board
the ship, but they returned home again. Here the part
ing scene was even more tender than that at Miletus ;
for the sobs of women and children were mingled with
those of the men. All, however, were sanctified by a
prayer which must have soothed every heart, and have
remained in blessed remembrance with the saints at
Tyre. Ver. 7. The rest of the journey by water was com
pleted in a single day ; for the distance is not more than
a day's journey by land. (7) And when we had finished
the voyage from Tyre, we arrived at Ptolemais ; and
we saluted the brethren, and abode with them one day.
Ptolemais was the name at that time of the modern city of
Acre. Its original name, Accho, which it bore while in
possession of the Canaanites, had been changed to Ptol
emais by one of the Ptolemies of Egypt, in honor of him
self; but, as is the case with many cities of Palestine
whose names were changed by < its Greek and Roman
conquerors, when the conquering power passed away the
original name in a slightly different form was restored.
That Paul found brethren here as well as in Tyre, is
proof of the thoroughness with which this region had

xxi. 7-9.] ACTS. 199
been evangelized. Acre was situated in the territory
formerly occupied by the tribe of Asher, but it had
become a Greek city in the interval since the captivity.
Vv. 8, 9. The single day spent with the brethren in
Ptolemais was sufficient for the admonitions which Paul
was leaving with all the churches, and for another pain
ful farewell. (8) And on the morrow we departed, and
came unto Caesarea : and entering into the house of
Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, we
abode with him. (9) Now this man had four daughters,
virgins, who did prophesy. From Ptolemais the road
leads around the Bay of Acre, almost in a semicircle,
along a smooth beach, to the sea end of Mt. Carmel,
whence it leads in a direct line almost due south along
the Mediterranean shore to Csesarea. The distance is
about thirty-five miles, and it must have occupied the
greater part of two days.
The designation of Philip the evangelist, as " one of
the seven," clearly identifies him as the Philip whose
early labors are recounted in the eighth chapter. At the
close of that account he is said to have preached in all
the cities from Azotus to Caesarea (viii. 39, 40), and now
we fiud him residing in the latter city. His four maiden
daughters who had the gift of prophecy had been well
trained no doubt by their godly father, and were there
fore suitable in character for the distinction conferred
upon them by the Holy Spirit. His house must have
been a capacious one, as it enabled him to entertain the
nine men who made up Paul's company.

200 COMMENTARY. [irxi. 10-14.
13. Agabus Predicts the Imprisonment of
Paul, 10-14.
Vv. 10-14. During the time spent with the family
of Philip, another, and the last, of the prophetic warn
ings which Paul met with on this journey was given*
and it caused a scene similar to those at Miletus and
Tyre, (io) And as we tarried there many days, there
came down from Judea a certain prophet, named Agabus.
(ii) And coming to us, and taking Paul's girdle, he
bound his own feet and hands, and said, Thus saith the
Holy Spirit, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the
man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into
the hands of the Gentiles. (12) And when we heard these
things, both we and they of that place besought him not
to go up to Jerusalem. (13) Then Paul answered, What
do ye, weeping and breaking my heart ? for I am ready
not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the
name of the Lord Jesus. (14) And when he would not be
persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be
done. Although Luke here introduces Agabus as if he
had not been mentioned before, he is doubtless the same
prophet who predicted in Antioch the famine which led
to the first mission of Paul and Barnabas from Antioch to
Jerusalem (xi. 27-29). The dramatic manner in which
the prediction was delivered, in imitation of some of the
Old Testament prophets,1 made it the more impressive,
while the words uttered gave Paul a more distinct con
ception of the affliction which awaited him. If his
traveling companions had hitherto been silent when
brethren were entreating him not to go up to Jerusalem,
their courage now failed them, and they joined in the
1 See Jer. xxvii. 1-11 ; xxviii. 1-17 ; Zech. xi. 7-14.

xxi. 10-16.] ACTS. 201
entreaties of the brethren in Csesarea. The prospect
was sufficiently trying while he enjoyed the silent sym
pathy of his brave fellow-laborers ; but when they threw
the weight of their own entreaties on the heavy burden
he was already bearing, the effect was crushing to his
heart, though the steadfastness of his purpose was not
shaken. Whatever he might suffer would be for the
name of Jesus, because it was for the church which up
held the honor of that name among men ; and to serve this
high purpose was paramount to all personal considera
tions. Men of less faith in divine providence than were
his companions,, when they found all their entreaties
were in vain, might have reproached him for his self-
will ; but these men saw in this very fixedness of purpose
the guiding hand of God, and hence their exclamation,
"The will of the Lord be done."
14. The Journey From C-esarea to Jerusalem,
15, 16.
Vv. 15, 16. It seems that the prediction by Agabus
was uttered about the close of the time which Paul's com
pany spent in Csesarea ; and though we may believe that
the first part of that stay was rich in religious com
munion to the saints gathered there from the east and
the west, it had a sorrowful termination. (15) And after
these days we took up our baggage, and went up to
¦Jerusalem. (16) And there went with us also certain of
the disciples from Caesarea, bringing with them one
Mnason of Cyprus, an early disciple, with whpm we
should lodge. The journey had been completed in time
for the Pentecost : for to the twenty-nine days which we
have already counted between the previous Passover
and the arrival at Patara (see under 3), we have to add,

202 COMMENTARY. [xxi. 15, 16.
say three days from Patara to Tyre, seven days at Tyre,
and four in passing thence to Csesarea, which make an
aggregate of forty-three out of the fifty between the
Passover and the Pentecost, leaving six for the stay in
Csesarea. But it is almost certain that in this count some
pieces of days are counted as whole days, and that the
time in Csasarea was more than six days. This last stay
is styled " many days " by Luke, not because it was
many compared with other stops on this journey, but
because it was many for men going to Jerusalem on an
important mission, and now within two short days'
journey of the Holy City. Naturally, they would have
been expected to hasten to their journey's end. The
fact that Mnason of Cyprus had a house in Jerusalem in
which all of Paul's company could lodge, implies that he
was a man of means, if not of wealth, who, besides his
home in Cyprus, kept one also in Jerusalem. He is
styled " an early disciple," because he had become one
in the early history of the church.

COMMENTARY ON ACTS.

PART FOURTH.
PAUL'S FIVE YEARS' IMPRISONMENT
(XXI. 17.— XXVIII. SI.)

SEC. I.— HIS IMPRISONMENT IN JERUSALEM.
(xxi. it— xxi r i. ao.)
1. His Reception by the Elders, and Their
Advice, 17-25.
Ver. 17. The hour which bad been looked forward
to for months with prayerful anxiety had now come,
and Paul was to know, without further delay, whether
the service which he had for Jerusalem would be accept
ed by the saints (Rom. xv. 31). The historian was able
to say : (17) And when we were come to Jerusalem, the
brethren received us gladly. If Luke had said anything
at all about the contribution which Paul brought, we
should have expected him to say something more definite
about its reception than is implied in this remark. But
as he saw fit to omit all mention of the enterprise, we
are at liberty to infer from the glad reception of the
messengers the grateful, reception also of their gift.
The main purpose of Paul's visit, and of his prayers,
was now accomplished. He had finished this part of his
203

204 COMMENTARY. [xxi. 17-26.
course and of his ministry with joy, and whether the
Lord would deliver him from the disobedient in Jeru
salem was to him a matter of minor importance.
Ver. 18-26. After the general statement that they
were gladly received by the brethren, Luke states more
in detail what followed. (18) And the day following
Paul went in with us unto James ; and all the elders
were present. (19) And when he had saluted them, he
rehearsed one by one the things which God wrought
among the Gentiles by his ministry. (20) And they,
when they heard it, glorified God ; and they said unto
him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands there
are among the Jews of them who have believed ; and
they are all zealous for the law : (21) and they have
been informed concerning thee, that thou teachest all the
Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, tell
ing them not to circumcise their children, neither to
walk after the customs. (22) What is it therefore ? they
will certainly hear that thou art come. (23) Do there
fore this that we say to thee : We have four men
who have a vow on them : (24) these take, and purify
thyself with them, and be at charges for them, that they
may shave their heads : and all shall know that there is
no truth in the things whereof they have been informed
concerning thee ; but that thou thyself also walkest or
derly, keeping the law. (25) But as touching the Gentiles
who have believed, we wrote, giving judgment that they
should keep themselves from things sacrificed to idols,
and from blood, and from what is strangled, and from
fornication. (26) Then Paul took the men, and the next
day purifying himself with them went into the temple,
declaring the fulfillment of the days of purification, until
the offering was offered for every one of them.

xxi. 18-26.] ACTS. 205
In verse 18 a distinction is made between James and
the elders, which indicates that he did not bear the latter
title. In a later age, when the organization of the
church had been changed by uninspired men, it
became customary, as it still is among episcopalian
bodies, to call him bishop of the church in Jerusalem,
because he seems here to have had precedence over the
elders. But nowhere in the New Testament is the title
bishop thus used; and consequently this custom reads
into the inspired record most improperly an unauthor
ized conception of a later age. As we have seen before
(Vol. I. 189), James ranked as an apostle of the
secondary class, and this fully accounts for his position
at the head of the Jerusalem church, when none of the
twelve was present. Paul's minute rehearsal, " one by
one," of the things which God had wrought by his min
istry, most probably went back no farther than the time
of the conference described in the fifteenth chapter ; for
then he had rehearsed to James and others all that had
preceded that date (xv. 4). The fact that when they
heard it all " they glorified God," shows plainly enough
that they were in full accord with Paul in his teaching
and practice, and contradicts flatly the modern assump
tion of rationalists, that there was antagonism between
Paul and the leading men of the Jerusalem church.
The remarks addressed to Paul by these brethren,
doubtless through James as their spokesman, show very
plainly the position held by the Jerusalem church as to
the law and circumcision, and also the exact ground of
the prejudice entertained against Paul by members who
were laboring under false information concerning him.
They show, first, that these disciples were " zealous foi
the law " (20) ; second, that they continued to circumcise

206 COMMENTARY. [xxi. 18-26.
their children (21) ; third, that the. purifications of the
law, though they involved in some instances the offering
of sacrifices, were still regarded as proper for Christians
(23, 24) ; and fourth, that they imposed none of these ob
servances on the Gentile brethren, but still adhered to the
decision which had been issued in the name of the whole
church at the time of the conference (25). The ground
of prejudice against Paul on the part of the multitude
is stated with equal clearness. It was that he had
taught the Jews who were among the Gentiles to forsake
Moses ; and there were two specifications under this gen
eral charge : first, that he, taught them not to circumcise
their children ; second, that he taught them not " to walk
after the customs " — an expression for those observances
which had acquired the force of law in the Jewish con
science, although they were not specified in the law itself
(21). The advice given in the address, having in view
the specific purpose of proving to the multitude that
there was no truth in these things, and that Paul did
walk orderly, keeping the law (24), shows that James
and the elders understood that these reports were false ;
while Paul's agreement to do as they advised shows that
they certainly were false. He had not taught the Jews
not to circumcise their children ; on the contrary, he
had with his own hand circumcised Timothy, who
was one-half a Jew. He had not taught them to forsake
the customs ; on the contrary, he had written to the Cor
inthians more than a year previous, that he had been a
Jew to the Jew, that he might win the Jew ; and as to
the law in general, he had been " as under the law," that
he might gain them who considered themselves still
bound to keep the law (I. Cor. ix. 20, 2L> In order to
reconcile this position with Paul's teaching in those

xxi. 18-26.] ACTS. 207
epistles written previous to this time, we have only
to observe the distinction which he never lost si"ht of.
between that which we are at liberty to do for the sake
of others, and that which we are bound to do in order
to obey God. He had taught that the law had been
"our tutor to bring us to Christ;" and that since faith
is come "we are no longer under a tutor" (Gal. iii.
24-25) ; that the Jews had been made " dead to the law
through the body of Christ" (Rom. vii. 4) ; and that in
Christ neither circumcision availeth anything, nor un
circumcision (Gal. v. 6; vi. 15; I. Cor. vii. 19). But
while teaching thus, he had found no fault with the
Jews who continued the observances of the law ; he had
only tried to convince them that the observance was no
longer binding on their consciences. The only differ
ence between him and the most extreme Judaizers, of
whom .there were doubtless some in the multitude of
believers to whom James referred, was that the latter
held these observances to be matters of duty, while
he held them to be matters of indifference.
The device of uniting himself with the four disciples
who had a vow, in order to convince the multitude that
they had been misinformed, sets the whole subject of
Paul's relation to the law in a still stronger light.
These four, as a comparison of what is said of them
with the law of Nazirite clearly shows, were under the
Nazirite vow, and had become unclean from a dead body
before the termination of the time included in the vow
(23, 24, 26, cf. Num. vi. 2-12). This necessitated their
purification, which required seven days for its com
pletion, the shaving of their heads at the altar, the
sacrifice of a sin offering and a burnt offering for each
of them, and the loss of the time passed, under the vow.

208 COMMENTARY. [xxi. 13-26.
Paul's part with them was, first, " to be at charges for
them," meaning that he paid part or all the expenses of
the victims which they had to offer ; and second, to go
into the temple and notify the priests when their days of
purification would be fulfilled, so that a priest might bo
prepared to sacrifice their offerings (23, 26). The last
they could not do themselves, because the law shut them
out of the Jewish court during their uncleanness ; but
as Paul was unclean not from contact with a dead body,
but from some of the many other causes mentioned in
the law, he could purify himself in a single day by wash
ing his clpthes and bathing his flesh and remaining un
clean until evening (Lev. xv. 1-30, et al.). That which
renders this proceeding a more striking exhibition of
Paul's present attitude toward the law is the fact that in
it he participated in the offering of sacrifices, which
seems to be inconsistent with his repeated declaration of
the all-sufficiency of the blood of Christ as an atone
ment for sin. I think it must be admitted that subse
quent to the writing of the epistle to the Ephesians, and
more especially that to the Hebrews, he could not con
sistently have done this ; for in those epistles it is clearly
taught, that in the death of Christ God has broken
down and abolished " the law of commandments con
tained in ordinances," which he styles " the middle wall
of partition " (Eph. ii. 13-15) ; that the Aaronic priesthood
had been abolished (Heb. vii., viii.) ; and that the sacri
fice of Christ had completely superseded that of dumb
animals (ix., x.). But in Paul's earlier epistles, though
some things had been written which, carried to their logi
cal consequences, involved all this, these points had not
yet been clearly revealed to his mind, and much less to
the minds of the other disciples ; for it pleased God to

xxi. 18-30.] ACTS. 209
make Paul the chief instrument for the revealatiou of
this part of his will. His mind, and those of all the
brethren, were as yet in much the same condition on
this question that those of the early disciples had been
in before the conversion of Cornelius in reference to the
salvation of the Gentiles. If Peter, by the revelation
made to him in connection with Cornelius, was made to
understand better his own words uttered on Pentecost
(ii. 39), it should cause no surprise that Paul in his early
writings uttered sentiments the full import of which he
did not apprehend until later revelations made them
plain. That it was so, is but another illustration of the
fact that the Holy Spirit guided the apostles into all the
truth, not at one bound, but step by step. In the wis
dom of God the epistle to the Hebrews, the special value
of which lies in its clear revelations on the distinction
between the sacrifices and priesthood under Moses and
those under Christ, was written but a few years previous
to the destruction of the Jewish temple, and the compul
sory abrogation of all the sacrifices of the law ; and that
thus any Jewish Christian, whose natural reverence for
ancestral and divinely appointed customs may have pre
vented him from seeing the truth on this subject, might
have his eyes opened in spite of himself.
2. Paul is Assailed by thk Mob, and Arrested
by the Chief Captain, 27-36.
Vv. 27-30. Thus far Paul's reception iu Jerusalem
was gratifying, and to all human foresight his prospect
for escaping personal violence was good ; and so it con
tinued for several days. (27) And when the seven days
were almost completed, the Jews .from Asia, when they
saw him in the temple, stirred up all the multitude, and

210 COMMENTARY. [xxi. 27-34.
laid hands on him, (28) crying out, Men of Israel,
help : This is the man, that teacheth all men everywhere
against the people, and the law, «and this place : and
moreover he brought Greeks also into the temple, and
hath defiled this holy place. (29) For they had before
seen with him in the city Trophimus the Ephesian,
whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the
temple. (30) And all the city was moved, and the peo
ple ran together : and they laid hold on Paul, and
dragged him out of the temple : and straightway the
doors were shut. The " Jews from Asia " who raised
this outcry were a portion of those from whose plots
Paul had suffered so much in Ephesus (xx. 19). Their
false accusation as to what he had taught everywhere
was that, the report of which had excited the prejudices
of bis own Jewish brethren, as stated by James (21).
They had no reason whatever to believe that Paul had
brought Trophimus into the temple ; but, having recog
nized Trophimus with him in the city, it occurred to
them to bring this accusation as the quickest way to ex
cite the wrath ofthe multitude. Perhaps the success of
Demetrius in rousing the heathen population of their own
city by the outcry concerning the temple of Diana, sug
gested the device (xix. 23-28). The part of the temple
which they charged him with defiling was the Jewish
court ; for Gentiles were admitted within the outer court ;
and so, when it is said that they dragged him out of the
temple, its meaning is that they dragged him out of the
Jewish into the Gentile court. Outside the latter court,
which now includes thirty-five acres of ground, there was
no room in the narrow streets for such a mob to move.
Vv. 31-34. For the second time'in his life a Roman
officer rescued Paul from the hands of his countrymen,

xxi. 31-34.] ACTS. , 211
the first having occurred in Corinth. (31) And as they
were seeking to kill him, tidings came up to the chief
captain of the hand, that all Jerusalem was in confusion.
(32) And forthwith he took soldiers and centurions, and
ran down upon tbem : and they, when they saw the chief
captain and the soldiers, left off beating Paul. (33)
Then the chief captain came near, and laid hold on him,
and commanded him to be bound with two chains ; and
inquired who he was, and what he had done. (34) And
some shouted one thing, some another, among the crowd :
and when he could not know the certainty for the
uproar, he commanded him to brought into the castle.
The expression, " chief captain of the band," should be
chiliarch of the cohort ; for such is the exact meaning
of the original. The Roman legions were divided into
cohorts of a thousand men each, and the commander of
the cohort was called chiliarch, leader of a thousand,
just as the commander of one hundred was entitled cen
turion, leader of a hundred.
That he took centurions, in the plural number, each
of course accompanied by his command, shows that he
came at the head of several hundred men. A smaller
number migbt have been overpowered by the furious
mob. The expression, " ran down upon them," is the
language of an eye-witness; for the tower of Antonia,
the fortress in which the Roman garrison was quartered,
stood at the northwestern angle of the temple court ; its
foundations were laid on solid rock which rises about
twenty feet above the level of the court ; a-nd a flight of
stone steps descended from its door to the floor of the
court which is here the natural rock.1 The chiliarch
saw at a glance that the man whom they were beating
1 For a full description, see Lands of the Bible, 177.

212 COMMENTARY. [xxi. 31-40.
was in some way the occasion of the disturbance ; and
jumping to the conclusion that he was a criminal on
whom the Jews were inflicting summary vengeance, he
had him chained for safe keeping, and demanded who he
was, and what he had done, so that he might know how
to deal with him. But the majority of the mob did not
know who he was or what he had done, and the confused
answers in their outcries made it plain to the chiliarch
that he must wait and seek the information in some
other way ; hence the order to take him into the castle.
Vv. 35, 36. The soldiers very promptly and vigor
ously obeyed the order of their commander. (35) And
when he came upon the stairs, so it was that he was
borne of the soldiers for the violence of the crowd ; (36)
for the multitude of the people followed after, crying out,
Away with him. Paul was so stunned by the beating, or
so reluctant to running from the face of his foes, that he
did not move fast enough to suit the soldiers, so two of
them lifted him in their arms, or threw him across their
shoulders, and thus hurried him along. As the pursuers
could not get hold of him, they affected to acquiesce in
what was being done, by the outcry, " Away with him."
3. Paul Obtains Permission to Address the
Mob, 37-40.
Vv. 37-40. Though Paul was suffering from many a
bruise, which, together with mental distress, would have
prevented any other man from wishing to make a speech,
when he saw those prison doors about to shut him out
from his enraged countrymen, and leave them a prey to
passion aroused by falsehood, he conceived the thought
of at once attempting to appease them. (37) And as
Paul was about to be brought into the castle, he saith

xxi. 37-40.] ACTS. 213
unto the chief captain, May I say something unto thee ?
And he said, Dost thou know Greek ? (38) Art thou not
then the Egyptian, who before these days stirred up to
sedition and led out into the wilderness the four thou
sand men of the Assassins ? (39) But Paul said, I am a
Jew, of Tarsus in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city : and
I beseech thee, give me leave to speak unto the people.
(40) And when he had given him leave, Paul, standing
on the stairs, beckoned with the hand unto the people ;
and when there was made a great silence, he spake
unto them in the Hebrew language, saying,
This brief conversation shows how utterly the chili
arch, in the excitement of the moment, had misconceived
his prisoner. The Egyptian for whom he mistook him
is doubtless the one mentioned by Josephus, but whom
the latter represents as leading thirty thousand men in
stead of four thousand.1 He was the only man the chili
arch could think of at the moment against whom the
Jews could feel such violent hatred. When he learned
that Paul was a Jew, and a citizen of such a city as Tar
sus, his wonder as to the cause ofthe trouble was greatly
increased, and he at once concluded that by allowing him
to speak as requested he could learn from the speech the
real charges laid against him ; for he expected of course
that Paul would speak of them explicitly. When per
mission was given, the soldiers placed him on his feet,
and they appear to have released at least one of his arms
1 He claimed to be a prophet, and promised his dupes that
they should take Jerusalem from the Romans, as a proof of
which he declared that when he reached the top of the Mount
of Olives he would cause the walls of the city to fall by his
miraculous power. Josephus is somewhat inconsistent with
himself in regard to the numbers that were captured and slain.
(Ant. xx. 8, 6 ; Wars, ii. 13, 5).

214 COMMENTARY. [xxi. 37— xxii. 5.
from the chains ; for he " beckoned with his hand to the
people," using his habitual gesture,1 to secure silence-
It was the same tbat had been used in vain by Alexan
der, in the mob at Ephesus (xix. 23). The silence which
followed is probably called " great " because it was diffi
cult to obtain any silence at all in such a multitude. It
was still greater when they heard him speaking in the
native tongue (xxii. 2).
4. Paul's Address to the Mob, xxii. 1-21.
i. an account of himself before his conversion,
1-5.
Vv. 1-5. Seeing that the chiliarch had so miscon
ceived his .personality, and knowing from the outcries of
the people in answer to the chiliarch's inquiry, that
many of them were equally ignorant of him, Paul begins
his speech with an account of himself, (i) Brethren
and fathers, hear ye the defense which I now make unto
you. (2) And when they heard that he spake unto them in
the Hebrew language, they were the more quiet : and he
saith, (3) I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought
up in this city, at the feet of Gamaliel, instructed accord
ing to the strict manner of the law of our fathers, being
zealous for God, even as ye all are this day : (4) and I
persecuted this Way unto the death, binding and deliver
ing into prisons both men and women. (5) As also the high
priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the
elders : from whom also I received letters unto the breth-
1 In addition to the instan.ee above, we see it noted by Luke in
the opening of the address in Antioch of Pisidia, and in the one
before king Agrippa (xiii. 16 ; xxvi. 1).

xxii. 1-16.] ACTS. 215
ren, and journeyed to Damascus, to bring them also who
were there unto Jerusalem in bonds for to be punished.
Some in the audience, Paul's old companions in persecu
tion, and his subsequent enemies, knew all the facts here
recited, but they were unknown to the majority of the
crowd; and his evident purpose in reciting them was,
first, to disabuse the minds of any who may have made
similar mistakes to that of the chiliarch, and secondly, to
awaken some sympathy toward hiniself as having once
stood in the same attitude with themselves toward the
Christian Way.
II. AN ACCOUNT OF HIS CONVERSION, 6-16.
Vv. 6-16. The preceding division of the speech,
which is its introduction, was calculated not only to
awaken sympathy toward the speaker, but while it
presented him as once a persecutor like his hearers, it
awakened at the same moment a desire to know what
could have turned him from that position to the one he
now occupied; and this desire he next proceeds to
gratify. (6) And it came to pass, that, as I made my
journey, and drew nigh unto Damascus, about noon,
suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round
about me. (7) And I fell unto the ground, and heard a
voice say unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
(8) And I answered, Who art thou, Lord ? And he said
unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou perse
cutest. (9) And they that were with me beheld indeed
the light, but they heard not the voice of him that spake
to me. (10) And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And
the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus ; and
there it shall be told thee of all things which are appoint
ed for thee to do. (1 1) And when I could not see for the

216 COMMENTARY. [xxii. 6-16.
glory of that light, being led by the hand of them that
were with me, I came into Damascus. (12) And one An
anias, a devout man according to the law, well reported of
by all the Jews that dwelt there, (13) came unto me, and
standing by me said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy
sight. And in that very hour I looked up on him. (14)
And he said, the God of our fathers hath appointed thee
to know his will, and to see the Righteous One, and to
hear a voice from his mouth. (15) For thou shalt be a
witness for him unto all men of what thou hast seen
and heard. (16) And now, why tarriest thou ? arise,
and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on his
name. This account furnishes several interesting details
omitted by Luke in his brief narrative (ix. 3— 8).1 It in
forms us that the light from hea'ven flashed around him
" about noon ; " that his companions, though they heard
the voice, did not hear it, that is, so as to catch the
words that were spoken; and that the command to go
into Damascus, where he should be told what to do,
was given in answer to his inquiry, " What shall I do,
 ¦¦  * 
1 The statement of Luke that they heard the voice (ix. 7), and
this of Paul that they heard it not, have long been treated by un.
friendly critics as contradictory, notwithstanding the well known
fact that it is common among all classes of men to say, I did not
hear, when they mean that they did not hear the words spoken,
though they did hear the sound of the speaker's voice. Paul
himself furnishes another instance of the usage when, writing
about the employment of unknown tongues in the congregation,
he says : " For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto
men, but unto God ; for no man heareth " (I. Cor. xiv. 2). Here
our translators have obscured the usage by rendering the word
" understand," instead of " hear." If they had taken the same
liberty in the passage before us, the question of a contradiction
would never have been raised, at least by an English reader ;
and the idea of Paul would have been expressed, but not in his
way of expressing it.

xxii. 6-16.] ACTS. 217
Lord ? " On the other hand, Paul does not state the
duration of his blindness; he says nothing of the fasting
and praying; and instead of telling what the Lord said
to Ananias, he speaks of the good reputation which the
latter enjoyed among the Jews of Damascus. He told
this in order to reflect respectability in the minds of his
hearers on the proceedings connected with his baptism.
He also omits the words of Ananias quoted by Luke,
and mentions others. The whole speech of Ananias is
to be obtained by putting together these two pieces of it.
The miracle wrought upon him by Ananias was men
tioned, not merely to show how his eyesight was re
stored, but more especially to show that God's approval
attended his baptism. The words, " why tarriest thou ? "
were suggested by the unusual delay of baptism after
believing, a delay of which Ananias did not then know
the cause. In the expression, " wash away thy sins,"
there is undoubtedly a reference to the forgiveness of
sins which takes place in baptism, and the metaphor in
the term wash away (dnolooaac) was suggested by the
washing of the body which takes place in baptism. He
was to wash his sins away, by undergoing that washing
in which God forgives them. He was to do this, " calling
on his name," because it is through the name of Jesus
that we now receive every blessing, and especially the
forgiveness of sins.
The evident purpose of this division of the speech
was to win the Jews to a favorable consideration of his
cause, by showing them that he had been turned from
the position of a persecutor like themselves, to that of a
believer aud advocate of the claims of Jesus, by miracu
lous evidence from heaven which could not be miscon
strued, and which, according to all the maxims of tha

.218 COMMENTAR Y. [xxii. 6-21.
fathers, made it his indispensable duty to do as he had
done ; and at the same time he accomplished the additional
purpose of furnishing his hearers evidence of the resur
rection and glorification of Jesus, which ought to con
vince them as it had him. He was aiming to defend
himself by winning his accusers over to his own position.
III. HIS MISSION TO THE GENTILES, 17-21.
Vv. 17-21. Paul's next step was to show that the
divine authority which had changed him from a persecu
tor into an advocate of the Way had determined for
him the peculiar field of labor which distinguished him
from the other apostles. ,(17) And it came to pass, that,
when I had returned to Jerusalem, and while I prayed in
the temple, I fell into a trance, (18) and saw him saying
unto me, Make haste, and get thee quickly out of Jeru
salem : because they will not receive of thee testimony
concerning me. (19) And I said, Lord, they themselves
know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue
them that believed on thee : (20) and when the blood
of Stephen thy witness was shed, I also was stand
ing by, and consenting, and keeping the garments of
them that slew him. (21) And he said unto me, Depart :
for I will send thee forth far hence unto the Gentiles.
Paul here reveals to us the interesting fact, omitted by
Luke in tbe previous narrative, that when the brethren
sent him away from Jerusalem to Tarsus (ix. 28-30), he
did not consent to go until commanded by the Lord ;
and that even when thus commanded he mildly re
monstrated with the Lord for so commanding him.
His plea for wishing to remain was based on the belief
that as the Jews knew of his connection with the death
of Stephen, and the dispersion of the church, he was

xxii. 17-24.] ACTS. 219
now the very man to bring them over to the truth. He
was forgetting the intense malice always felt by partisans
toward a man whom they can stigmatise as a deserter, or
as a traitor to their cause. That he had urged this plea
when the Jews were just then laying plots to kill him, is
at once proof of his courage, and of his willingness to
die, if need be, on the very spot where he had witnessed
the death of Stephen.
5. The Immediate Effects of the Speech, 22-29.
Vv. 22-24. The unbelieving Jews had learned by
this time to endure the preaching of Christ among the
circumcised, but they still had the greatest abhorrence for
the admission of the uncircumcised into religious fellow
ship with Jews ; consequently it was Paul's position as
the apostle to the Gentiles which excited their especial
animosity toward him. This mob bad now listened in
perfect silence to his vindication of his position as a
Cliristian, and had heard for the first time in their lives
Paul's pecular testimony to the resurrection and glorifi
cation of Jesus ; and if he had concluded his remarks at
that point, they might have gone away with favor
able impressions ; but when he claimed that his going
to the Gentiles, which they looked upon as a shameful
procedure, was due to an express command from heaven
overriding his own preferences, and was about, as they
supposed, to justify all the charges which they had heard
against him, they could listen no longer. (22) And they
gave him audience unto this word ; and they lifted up
their voice, and said, Away with such a fellow from the
earth : for it is not fit that he should live. (23) And as
they cried out, and threw off their garments, and cast
dust into the air, (24) the chief captain commanded him

220 COMMENTARY. [xxii. 22-29.
to be brought into the castle, bidding that he should be
examined by scourging, that he might know for what
cause they so shouted against him. They did not dare
to throw stones at him, lest they should strike the sol
diers ; so they vented their rage like maddened brutes
by throwing dust into the air. What the rest of his
speech would have been but for this interruption, we can
judge only by what had already been said. It certainly
w»uld have been a still farther attempt to convince his
hearers of the divine authority under which he had ever
acted ; for he sought no vindication for himself that did
not involve the vindication of the cause to which he had
committed his life. Whether Lysias understood the
Hebrew tongue in which Paul spoke, or had his words
repeated by an interpreter, he was certainly disappointed
in his hope of learning from the speech what the charges
were which the Jews held against Paul, so he imme
diately determined on the more direct method of extort
ing the desired information from Paul himself. It was
quite a common practice among Roman provincial
rulers to scourge into a confession of their crimes men
whom they held as criminals, and against whom suitable
evidence was not at hand.
Vv. 25-29. When Paul was led within the castle,
the executioner, under the direction of a centurion, made
immediate preparation for the cruel task. (25) And when
they had tied him up with the thongs, Paul said unto
the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you to
scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncondemned ? (26)
And when the centurion heard it, he went to the chief
captain, and told him, saying, What art thou about to
do ? for this man is a Roman. (27) And the chief cap
tain came, and said unto him, Tell me, art thou a

xxii. 25-29.] ACTS. 221
Roman ? (28) And he said, Yea. And the chief captain
answered, With a great sum obtained I this citizenship.
And Paul said, But I am a Roman born. (29) They then
who were about to examine him straightway departed
from him : and the chief captain also was afraid, when
he knew that he was a Roman, and because he had
bound him. Previous to applying the scourge the victim
was bent forward upon a reclining post, and bound to
it by leather thongs. It was this binding which alarmed
the chiliarch, and not the previous binding with chains.
The latter was legal, and Paul continued to be thus
bound (30 ; xxvi. 29.) Paul gave no evidence but his
own word that he was a citizen ; but the lofty manner in
which he had declared himself a citizen by birth, while
Lysias had to acknowledge that he had obtained the
same distinction by bribery,1 together with the impressive
deportment of Paul before the mob, left no room to
doubt the truth of his claim ; so it was respected, and the
executioners did not wait to be told to depart from him.
Thus a second time Paul saved himself from ignominy,
and this time from incalculable suffering, by the quiet
proclamation of his rights as a Roman citizen. We can
but admire the majesty of the law, which, in a remote
Drovince, and within the walls of a prison, could thus
'Citizenship was lawfully obtained in three different ways.
It was conferred by the senate for meritorious conduct ; it was in
herited from a father who was a citizen ; and it was the birthright
of one who was born in a free city ; that is, a city which, for
some especial service to the empire, was rewarded by granting
citizenship to all born within its limits. It was unlawfully ob
tained by the use of money in the absence of meritorious con
duct. In the reign of Claudius, this distinction had become such
an article of merchandise that Messalina, the wife of the emperor,
is said to have openly sold it, at first for a large sum, and at last
for a trifle.

222 COMMENTARY. [xxii. 30— xxiii. 2;
dash to the ground the uplifted instruments of torture
under the simple declaration, " I am a Roman citizen."
6. Paul is Brought Before the Sanhedrin,
xxii. 30 — xxiii. 10.
Ver. 30. The chiliarch was disposed to do his duty
by the prisoner thrown fortuitously into his hands, but
he was puzzled to know what his duty was. He had
first inquired of the mob ; then be had listened to a
speech from Paul ; then he had gone as far as he dared
toward the trial by scourging; yet he knew nothing
more about the charges than he did at first. He deter
mined to make one more effort. (30) But on the mor
row, desiring to know the certainty, wherefore he was
accused of the Jews, he loosed him, and commanded the
chief priests and all the council to come together, and
brought Paul down, and set him before them. This
meeting was held in the Gentile court, if anywhere about
the temple ; for Lysias and his soldiers would not have
been admitted within the Jewish court ; and to this agree
the words " he brought Paul down," seeing that the
tower of Antonia, in which the soldiers were quartered,
stood at a higher elevation than this court (see under
xxi. 31-34).
Vv. 1, 2. No sooner had the prisoner and his accus
ers met face to face than the chiliarch must have sus
pected another disappointment ; for, instead of preferring
formal charges against Paul, they required him to speak
first. (1) And Paul, looking steadfastly on the council,
said, Brethren, I have lived before God in all good con
science until this day. (2) And the high priest Ananias
commanded them that stood by him to smite him on the
mouth. No doubt the blow was as prompt as the word.

xxiii. 1-5.] ACTS. 223
Ananias affected to regard it as an insult to tbe council
for a man who was arraigned before them as a criminal
of the deepest dye to proudly declare that he had lived
in all good conscience before God. To smite him in the
mouth for it, was much easier than to disprove it. To
us Paul's remark is most credible, and the only question
is, Did he intend it to cover the period before his conver
sion, when he was persecuting the church, or only the
period within which the Jews condemned him? It cer
tainly covered the latter ; and a later statement, that he
verily thought he ought to do many things contrary to
the name of Jesus (xxvi. 9), makes it probable that he
had the former also in mind.
Vv. 3-5. The interruption, so unexpected aud so
exasperating, called forth from Paul a burst of indigna
tion similar to that with which he had long ago de
nounced Bar-jesus in the presence of Sergius Paulus
(xiii. 10). (3) Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite
thee, thou whited wall : and sittest thou to judge me ac
cording to the law, and commandest me to be smitten
contrary to the law ? (4) And they that stood by said,
Revilest thou God's high priest ? (5) And Paul said, I
knew not, brethren, that he was high priest : for it is
written, Thou shalt not speak evil of a ruler of thy people.
This remark was not an outburst of improper passion.
It was rather an angry expression of a righteous j udgment
as to how God would deal with a man so unjust and
hypocritical. It was an incident like that in the experi
ence of our Lord, when he looked around " with anger "
on a similar set of men, and then immediately did the
act which they held to be a sin (Mark iii. 5). It was, in
Paul's own phraseology, to " be angry, and sin not "
(Eph. iv. 26). When told, however, that it was the high

224 COMMENTARY. [xxiii. 3-10.
priest whom he had thus denounced, Paul at once admit
ted, not that the rebuke was unjust, but that it would
have been improper to so address this dignitary, had he
known who he was. And here is a proper distinction.
A rebuke which is perfectly just and right in itself may
be improper on account of the official relations of the
person addressed. Had Paul known that Ananias was the
high priest, and had he been left to himself without the
guidance of the Holy Spirit promised for such occasions
(Matt. x. 17-20), he would have withheld the rebuke;
and the world would have been the loser ; for rebukes
like this help to strengthen the moral sense of men. He
knew not Ananias personally, for he was not the Ananias
of the Gospels, but a new usurper of the high priest
hood ; and it is certain that on this occasion he wore no
robe or badge to indicate his office, or Paul could not
have failed to know his position. The fact that he pre
sided on this occasion did not show it, because the high
priest was not always present at meetings of the sanhe
drim, and especially at meetings called unexpectedly, as
this one was. This Ananias was one of the worst men
who ever wore the robes of a high priest. His career of
crime and extortion, fully set forth in various chapters
of Josephus, finally ended in assassination.
Vv. 6-10. The presence in which Paul stood was
not unfamiliar to him. He doubtless remembered the
faces of many in the council, and he was intimately
acquainted with the party feuds which often distract
ed their deliberations. He knew that the chief insti
gators of the persecution were the Sadducees, as they
had been at the beginning ; and he determined to enlist,
if possible, the Pharisees in his own behalf; so we read :
(6) But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sad-

xxiii. 6-10.] ACTS. 225
ducees, and the. other Pharisees, he cried out in the
council, Brethren, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees:
touching the hope and resurrection of the dead, I am
called in question. (7) And when he had so said, there
arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Saddu
cees : and the assembly was divided. (8) For the Sad
ducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel,
nor spirit ; but the Pharisees confess both. (9) And there
arose a great clamor: and some of the scribes of the
Pharisees' part stood up, and strove, saying, We find no
evil in this man : and what if a spirit hath spoken to
him, or an angel ? (10) And when there arose a great
dissension, the chief captain, fearing lest Paul should be
torn in pieces by them, commanded the soldiers to go
down and take him by force from among them, and bring
him into the castle. Paul's declaration that he was a
Pharisee has been treated by some writers as deceptive ;
and he has been censured for stirring up such a row
among his enemies. The charge is unfounded ; 1 for while
it is true that he was not in every particular a Pharisee, <
he was one in the sense attached to his remark by his
hearers. All present knew that he was a Christian, and
consequently they knew that he claimed to be a Phari
see only in the sense of agreeing with that party in their
1 Farrar indulges in this censure. He says : " His belief in
the risen Messiah was not the point on which he was mainly be
ing called in question." " Did not then the words of the apostle
suggest a false issue ?" " Had he a right to inflame an existing
animosity? And could he worthily say, I am a Pharisee?"
" Was there not the least little touch of a suggestio falsi in what
he said ?" These insinuations are sufficiently answered above ;
and it is worthy of note that Farrar does not repeat them in con
nection with the same declarations of Paul made before king
Agrippa (xxvi. 6-8), and before the unbelieving Jews in Rome
(xxviii. 20).

226 COMMENTARY. [xxiii. 6-10.
points of antagonism with the Sadducees. His state
ment, that it was touching the hope of the resurrection
that he was called in question,. must be understood with
the same qualification. All knew that this was not the
immediate cause of his arrest ; but all knew equally well
that this was the ultimate ground of the hatred of him
by the Sadducees. Both remarks were strictly true in
the sense attached to them, and this sense was distinctly
perceived by both parties. As to the row which fol
lowed, there is no evidence that Paul aimed, at or expect
ed such violence. He aimed at enlisting the sympathy
ofthe Pharisees, in the hope of securing a more just con
sideration of his own cause ; and he doubtless desired a
more peaceable procedure ; but for the violence which
followed he was not responsible. And even if he had
anticipated all that followed, it would seem too great a
refinement of moral distinctions to blame him : as well
blame a man for putting two bulldogs at each other's
ears to keep them from devouring him.
The more surprising circumstance in the proceedings
is that some of the Pharisees (not all) were so quickly
turned in Paul's favor. But the whole council were in
an awkward predicament. They were called together by
the chiliarch, to show cause why they and their followers
had clamored so for the death of Paul, and they knew
themselves utterly unable to render a reason that would
appear even plausible to the mind of this heathen officer.
It was for this cause that, instead of preferring charges
against Paul at the beginning of the proceedings, they
had required him to. speak first. All must have felt
anxious for some turn in the affair which would relieve
them of their embarrassment ; and when Paul boldly pro
claimed that he was a Pharisee, the shrewder men of that

xxiii.6-11.] ACTS. 227
party saw at once that this was their chance to slip out
and leave the Sadducees in the mire. The latter were
exasperated by the trick, and thus the row came on. The
trick was the more exasperating, because the speaker for
the Pharisees pointed his arrow with the intimation that
Paul may have heard the voice of an angel or a spirit,
the very existence of whom the Sadducees denied. It is ¦
not necessary to suppose that the Pharisees thought it
probable that an angel or a spirit had spoken to Paul;
for if they were known as not believing any such thing,
this only poisoned with irony the shaft which they
hurled at the Sadducees.
In Luke's remark, that while the Sadducees say there
is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit, the Phari
sees confess both, we should naturally expect him to
say all three, instead of both ; but fie doubtless included
in the thought of angels and spirits the single idea of
beings without fleshly bodies.
Lysias was once more disappointed in his efforts
to learn the truth about Paul's case ; but he certainly
learned that his enemies had no charge against him
which they were willing to formulate.
7. Paul is Encouraged by a Vision, 11.
Ver. 11. If we had an epistle from Paul's pen
written at this time, it would probably speak of great
distress and despondency ; for such a state of mind is
clearly implied in the incident next mentioned, (n)
And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said,
Be of good cheer : for as thou hast testified concerning me
at Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome.
Such words of cheer from the Lord himself are not
spoken except when they are greatly needed ; and this

228 COMMENTARY. [xxiii. 11-16.
makes it certain that Paul was sorely troubled in spirit
that night. Well he might be. The bonds and affliction
which had been predicted all along his journey from Cor
inth to Jerusalem had now befallen him, and it was not
apparent whether the earnest prayers which he and
others in his behalf had offered to God, that he might be
delivered from those who were disobedient in Jerusalem,
were to be granted. Outside the prison he could hope
for nothing but death, and inside there was no field of
usefulness. In whatever direction he could look, prison
walls or a bloody death confronted him, and hedged his
way. At this opportune moment he was cheered by the
first ray of light in regard to his future; and though
it was impossible for him to conjecture as yet how it was
to be brought about, he had the assurance that in the
Lord's own way and time he should yet escape the
present danger, and preach the gospel in Rome.
8. A Conspiracy Formed and Exposed, 12-22.
Vv. 12-16. Notwithstanding the gleam of hope
granted to Paul in the night, his prospects grew darker
than ever the next morning. (12) And when it was day,
the Jews banded together, and bound themselves under a
curse, saying that they would neither eat nor drink until
they had killed Paul. (13) And they were more than
forty who made this conspiracy. (14) And they came to
the chief priests and the elders, and said, We have bound
ourselves under a great curse, to taste nothing until
we have killed Paul. (15) Now therefore do ye with
the council signify to the chief captain that he bring him
down unto you, as though ye would judge of his case
more exactly : and we, or ever he come near, are ready
to slay him. (16) But Paul's sister's son heard of their

xxiii. 12-16.] ACTS. 229
lying in wait, and he came and entered into the castle,
and told Paul. (17) And Paul called unto him one of the
centurions, and said, Bring this young man unto the
chief captain : for he hath something to tell him. (18)
So he took him and brought him to the chief captain, and
saith, Paul the prisoner called me unto him, and asked
me to bring this young man unto thee, who hath some- -
thing to say to thee. (19) And the chief captain took
him by the hand, and going aside asked him privately,
What is that thou hast to tell me ? (20) And he said,
The Jews have agreed to ask thee to bring down Paul
to-morrow unto the council, as though thou wouldst inquire
somewhat more exactly concerning him. (21) Do not thou
therefore yield unto them : for there lie in wait for him of
them more than forty men, who have bound themselves
under a curse, neither to eat nor drink till they have
slain him : and now are they ready, looking for the prom
ise from thee. (22) So the chief captain let the young
man go, charging him, Tell no man that thou hast signi
fied these things to me. It is difficult to imagine the
malignity which animated these conspirators, both the
prime movers in it, and the priests and elders who gave
it their sanction. The latter classes were of course Sad
ducees who had been enraged by the proceedings of the
previous day, whilst the former were desperate roughs of
the city. Their scheme, if left unexposed, would almost
certainly have been successful ; for Lysias, in his per
plexity, would have gladly complied with their request ;
and as the prisoner was led along the narrow street, or
along the pavement of the great court, it would have
been easy for forty desperate men, having chosen their
position in advance, to have rushed in among the unsus
pecting soldiers, and slain Paul before a blow could have

230 COMMENTARY. [xxiii. 12-30.
been struck in his defense. But a conspiracy so desper
ate, known to so many persons, and aimed against a man
concerning whom the whole community was excited to a
white heat, could not well be kept secret. It leaked into
the ears of some of Paul's friends, and this nephew, who
for some unknown cause was in the city, was charged with
the hazardous task of revealing it to Paul and to the
chiliarch. The young man trembled no doubt when he
was ushered into the presence of the Roman officer ; but
Lysias, with kindly consideration, reassured him by tak
ing his hand and leading him aside, that he might deliver
his message in secret. Then, fearing for the young
man's life if his act should become known, and desir
ing to keep hid from the conspirators the cause of the
move on which he at once determined, he dismissed him
with a charge ofthe strictest secresy.
9. Paul is Removed to Cesarea, 23-30.
Vv. 23-30. On receiving this information, Lysias
had at least three lines of policy between which to choose.
Had he been disposed to gratify the Jews, he might have
permitted them to carry out their plot without proba
bility of being known to his superiors as accessory to the
murder. Had he preferred to defy their power and dis
play his own, he might have sent Paul down under a
guard so strong and so instructed that they would have
slain the conspirators. Or if he desired to protect Paul,
and to avoid offense to the Jews and bloodshed, he might
send him away that night before their request had been
laid before him. It reflects credit on his military skill,
and on his character as a man, that he chose the course
which both justice and prudence dictated. (23) And he
called unto him two of the centurions, and said, Make

xxiii. 23-30.] ACTS. 231
ready two hundred soldiers to go as far as Caesarea, and
horsemen three score and ten, and spearmen two hun
dred, at the third hour of the night : (24) and he bade
them provide beasts, that they might set Paul thereon
and bring him safe unto Felix the governor. (25) And
he wrote a letter after this form :
(26) Claudius Lysias, unto the most excellent gover
nor Felix, greeting. (27) This man was seized by the
Jews, and was about to be slain by them, when I came
upon them with the soldiers, and rescued him, having
learned that he was a Roman. (28) And desiring to
know the cause wherefore they accused him, I brought
him down unto their council : (29) whom I found to be
accused about questions of their law, but to have nothing
laid to his charge worthy of death or of bonds. (30)
And when it was shown to me that there would be a plot
against the man, I sent him to thee forthwith, charging
his accusers also to speak against him before thee. But
for one slight misrepresentation in this letter, there
would be nothing in the whole procedure of Lysias dis
creditable to him. He had acted like a just and prudent
man ; but in reporting to his superior he so stated the
facts as to give himself credit for rescuing Paul because
he was a Roman citizen ; whereas he Lid only learned
this fact when he was about to scourge him. The state
ment that he had commanded Paul's accusers to appear
before Felix, though not absolutely true at the moment
it was written, he intended to make true before the letter
could be read ; consequently it was not intended to de
ceive. The letter also shows that, although he did not
understand the nature of the charge against Paul, he had
learned enough to know that he was not accused of any
thing criminal. Under this conviction, he would soon

232 COMMENTARY. [xxiii. 26-35.
have released him but for the plot of the Jews, and so,
as they must have learned afterward, the conspiracy over
reached itself, and really caused their intended victim to
slip out of their hands. The sound judgment and pru
dence of Lysias was still farther shown by the fact of
his sending so strong a body of troops with Paul as to
prevent bloodshed even had his movement been discov
ered by the Jews, because the guard was too formidable
to be attacked by an unarmed mob.
10. Paul is Delivered to Felix, 31-35.
Vv. 31-35. The centurion in command executed
his commission with judgment and fidelity. (31) So the
soldiers, as it was commanded them, took Paul, and
brought him by night to Antipatris. (32) But on the
morrow they left the horsemen to go with him, and re
turned to the castle : (33) and they, when they came to
Caesarea, and delivered the letter to the governor, pre
sented Paul also before him. (34) And when he had read
it, he asked of what province he was ; and when he un
derstood that he was of Cilicia, (35) I will hear thy cause,
said he, when thine accusers also are come : and he com
manded him to be kept in Herod's palace. Antipatris
was reached after decending from the mountains ot
Ephraim into the plain of Sharon, where its ruins have
been identified at the source of the river Aujeh.1 It was
1 The place is called Ras el Ain (Promontory of the Spring), from
the large body of water which rises out of the ground under its
northern and western sides and forms the river Aujeh. The top
of the hill is crowned with the ruins of a large castle built by the
crusaders, and the place is known to represent Antipatris, be
cause the latter is represented by Josephus to be in the plain,
close to the hills, with a river encompassing it (Antiq xvi.
5. 2), and this is the only ruin answering to the description. It is

xxiii. 35-xxiv. 1.] ACTS. 233
about half way between Jerusalem and Caesarea, and
about thirty miles from either place. As the rapid
march through the night had brought the little army be
yond all possible danger of attack from Jerusalem, the
seventy horsemen were a sufficient guard the rest of the
way. To Paul, unaccustomed to riding on horseback,
this long and rapid ride through a whole night was doubt
less very fatiguing It is not quite certain for what reason
Felix inquired as to Paul's province. It may have been
from natural curiosity; or it may have been with the
purpose of sending him to the governor of his province,
if it should be one near by ; but when he learned that it
was Cilicia, accessible only by sea, he did not hesitate to
keep him in his own hands. It seems that Herod's
palace, more properly praetorium, in which Paul was
now kept under guard, had a guard-room in it for the
confinement of such prisoners.

SEC. II. PAUL'S IMPRISONMENT IN
CESAREA.
(xxiv. 1— xxvi. 32.)
1. He is Accused Before Felix, 1-9.
Ver. 1. When the Jews of Jerusalem were com
manded by Lysias to present their accusations against
Paul before Felix, though they had been bitterly disap
pointed by the miscarriage of their plot, they still hoped
11J miles from Lydda, and 30J from Csesarea. " From it," says
Conder (Tent- Work iu Palestine), " the stream flows rapidly away
westward, burrowing between deep banks, and rolling to the sea,
a yellow, turbid, sandy volume of water, unfordable in winter,
and never dry, even in summer. "

234 COMMENTARY. [xxiv. 1-9.
to secure his death, and they followed up the prosecution
without delay, (i) And after five days the high priest
Ananias came down with certain elders, and with an
orator, one Tertullus ; and they informed the governor
against Paul. It is most natural, in counting these five
days, to suppose that they extended from the next day
after Paul left Jerusalem, which was the day on which
they received notice from Lysias, till their arrival in
Caesarea. Tertullus was a Roman, as his name indi
cates, and they brought him, as a paid attorney, because
they now had to appear in a regular Roman court, and
they must have a man familiar with the proceedings in
such a court to represent them.
Vv. 2-9. The formal proceedings were opened, very
much as in our modern courts, by a speech from the
prosecuting'attorney, presenting the accusation ; and this
was followed by the testimony of the witnesses for the
plaintiff. (2) And when he was called, Tertullus began
to accuse him, saying,
Seeing that by thee we enjoy much peace, and that
by thy providence evils are corrected for this nation, (3)
we accept it in all ways, and in all places, most excellent
Felix, with all thankfulness. (4) But that I be not fur
ther tedious unto thee, I intreat thee to hear us of thy
clemency a few words. (5) For we have found this man
a pestilent fellow, and a mover of insurrection among all
the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect
of the Nazarenes : (6) who moreover assayed to profane
the temple ; on whom also we laid hold : (8) from whom
thou wilt be able, by examining him thyself, to take
knowledge of all these things, whereof we accuse him.
(9) And the Jews also joined in the charge, affirming
that these things were so. While Felix was guilty of

xxiv. 2-21.] ACTS. 235
much corruption in his administration of affairs, the
complimentary words with which Tertullus opened
his speech were not undeserved; for he had restored
tranquility to the country when it was disturbed, first,
by bands of robbers ; second, by organized assassins ; and
lastly, by that Egyptian for whom Lysias at first mis
took Paul (xxi. 38).
The accusation against Paul was the general one of
being a " pestilent fellow," and the specifications under
this charge were three ; first, that he had excited the
Jews in many places to insurrections ; second, that he
was a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes; and third,
that he had attempted to profane the temple. Any one
of these specifications, sustained, would sustain the
charge ; and Tertullus closed by affirming that Felix
could find proof of them all by examining Paul himself
— a hint of the examination by scourging, which Paul
had escaped, Tertullus knew not how, at the hands of
Lysias. The witnesses supported the charges by affirm
ing that these things were so.
2. Paul's Defense, 10-21.
Vv. 10-21. Paiil was now required, without previous
notification of the charges, and without a moment for
premeditation, to make his defense against an accusation
which, if sustained in the judgment of the court, would
have cost him his life. Without a single witness to
support his representations, he could rely only upon the
self-evident truthfulness of what he might say ; but he
had the support of the words of Jesus : " Settle it there
fore in your hearts, not to meditate beforehand how to
answer : for I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which
all your adversaries shall not be able to withstand or

236 COMMENTARY. [xxiv. 10-21.
gainsay " (Luke xxi. 15). On this assurance he could
and did rely, (io) And when the governor had beckoned
unto him to speak, Paul answered,
Forasmuch as I know that thou hast been of many
years a judge unto this nation,1 I do cheerfully make
my defense: (n) seeing that thou canst take knowl
edge, that it is not more than twelve days since I
went up to worship at Jerusalem: (12) and neither in
the temple did they find me disputing with any man,
or stirring up a crowd, nor in the synagogues, nor in the
city. (13) Neither can they prove to thee the things
whereof they now accuse me. (14) But this I confess
unto thee, that after the Way which they call a sect, so
serve I the God of our fathers, believing all things which
are according to the law, and which are written in the
prophets : (15) having hope toward God, which these also
themselves look for, that there shall be a resurrection
both of the just and unjust. (16) Herein do I also exer
cise myself to have a conscience void of offense toward
God and men alway. (17) Now after many years2 I
came to bring alms to my nation, and offerings : (18)
amidst which they found me purified in the temple, with
no crowd, nor yet with tumult : but there were certain
Jews from Asia (19) who ought to have been here before
thee, and to make accusation, if they had aught against
me. (20) Or else let these men themselves say what
wrong-doing they found, when I stood before the council,
1 He was now in the seventh year of his procuratorship of
Judea. This was " many years," in comparison with those of his
predecessors in the same office.
3 If we omit, as we have done, the visit supposed by many to
be referred to in xviii. 22, he had not been in the city since
the visit of chapter xv., which was eight years previous. See
Chronology, Ihtr. xxvii, xxix.

xxiv. 10-21.] ACTS. 237
(21) except it be for this one voice, that I cried standing
among them, Touching the resurrection of the dead I am
called in question before you this day.
This speech contains a direct reply to every specifica
tion made by Tertullus. The statement that it was
only twelve days since he went up to Jerusalem, answers
the charge of stirring up sedition, at least in that city ;
for as he had been away from there five days, and was
in prison there one, this left only six, which were insuf
ficient for such movements. Moreover, he had not engaged
in disputation with any one, in the temple, in the syna
gogues, or in any part of the city. As to being a ring
leader of the sect of the Nazarenes, without alluding to
the title ringleader he admits that he belongs to the sect
so-called, yet he believes all the law and the prophets,
hopes for a resurrection ofthe dead, and leads a consci
entious life. Finally, the statement that, when found in
the temple by certain Jews from Asia, he was purified as
the law required, and that he was engaged about alms
giving and the offerings ofthe temple, refuted the charge
of profaning the temple (xxi. 28), now changed into
attempting to profane it (6). In conclusion, he notes the
significant fact, that those who first seized him, and who
were the only personal witnesses of what he did in the
temple, were not present to testify ; and then he calls
upon Ananias and the elders, who witnessed only what
was done in the Sanhedrin, to testify as to any wrong
doing there, unless it was that remark in reference to
being a Pharisee, which had set Ananias and his friends
in a fierce quarrel with the rest of the elders. He
makes this last reference, not because he was conscious
of wrong in the matter, but in order to taunt his

238 COMMENTARY. [xxiv. 22-24.
Sadducee accusers, and to show Felix that they were
moved against him by party jealousy.
3. The Case Continued, 22, 23.
Vv. 22, 23. A3 Paul's defense consisted in nothing
but his own statements, it was doubtless a surprise to
both him and his accusers, that Felix virtually decided
in his favor. (22) But Felix, having more exact knowl
edge concerning the Way, deferred them, saying, When
Lysias the chief captain shall come down, I will deter
mine your matter. (23) And he gave order to the centur
ion that he should be kept in charge, and should have in
dulgence ; and not to forbid any of his friends to minister
unto him. This decision is ascribed to his having more
accurate knowledge of the Way, by which we are to
understand, not that he had just acquired such knowl
edge from Paul's speech, for it contained very little in
formation on this point, but that Felix had already more
exact knowledge than to be deceived by the representa
tions of the Sadducees. Having been in Judea now for
six years more, he had been compelled, whether willing
or not, to become acquainted with the religious parties
into which his subjects were divided, and he well knew
the jealousies which existed among them. The reason
which he gave for postponing a decision in the case
was a mere subterfuge, as must have been apparent to
the Sadducees. Paul's confinement was now the least
irksome that was consistent with safe keeping.
4. Paul Preaches to Felix and Drusilla,
24-27.
Ver. 24. The freedom which Paul enjoyed of re
ceiving his friends not only left open to him the frater-

xxiv. 24.] ACTS. 239
nal visits of Philip and other brethren who lived in
Csesarea, but also gave him opportunity to preach the
gospel to any unbelievers who might be induced to hear
him. It may have been his activity in this work that led
to the incident next related. (24) But after certain days
Felix came with Drusilla, his wife, who was a Jewess,
and sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in
Christ Jesus. The word " came " indicates either that
he had been absent from the city and returned to it, or
that he came from his usual place of residence to an
apartment in Herod's prsetorium where Paul was kept.
Drusilla, as we learn from Josephus, was a daughter of
Herod Agrippa, who murdered the apostle James, and
miserably perished soon afterward (xii. 1, 2; 20-23).
She was but six years old when her father perished, and
as that was in the year 44, and her present appearance in
our narrative was in 58, she was now only twenty. She
had been given in marriage at an early age to Aziz, king
of Emesa; but Felix, having seen her and become
enamored of her beauty, had, through the machinations
of a sorcerer named Simon, induced her to abandon her
husband and come to him, so she was now living in open
adultery with Felix.1 Concerning Felix it is asserted
by Tacitus, one of the most j udicious and fair-minded of
Roman historians, that "with every kind of cruelty and
lust, he exercised the authority of a king with the temper
of a slave."2 He and his brother Pallas had actually
been slaves in the household of Agrippina, the mother of
the emperor Claudius, and by the latter he had been sent
from the position of a slave to that of ruler over a province.
1 Josephus, Antiquities, xx. 7. 2.
1 " Antonius Felix, per omnem ssevitiani et libidinem, jus
regium servili ingenio exercuit" (History, v. 9).

240 COMMENTARY. [xxiv. 25.
Ver. 25. Under the summons to speak concerning
the faith in Christ, Paul was at liberty to choose for
himself the special topic of discourse, and he did so with
direct reference to the spiritual wants of his hearers.
(25) And as he reasoned of righteousness, and temper
ance, and the judgment to come, Felix was terrified, and
answered, Go thy way, for this time ; and when I have
a convenient season, I will call thee unto me. Nothing
could be more terrifying than to speak of righteousness
to a man of such iniquity ; of temperance in all things to
a man of such unbridled lust; or to drive home what
was said on these topics by depicting the judgment to
come. I here adopt the burning words of Farrar : " As
he glanced back over the stained and guilty past, he was
afraid. He had been a slave in the vilest of all posi
tions, at the vilest of all epochs, in tbe vilest of all cities.
He bad crept with his brother Pallas into the position of
a courtier at the most morally degraded of all courts.
He had been an officer of those auxiliaries who were the
worst of all troops. What secrets of lust and blood lay
hidden in his earlier life we do not know ; but ample and
indisputable testimony, Jewish and Pagan, sacred and
secular, reveals to us what he had been — how greedy,
how savage, how treacherous, how unjust, how steeped
in thej blood of private murder and public massacre —
during the eight years which he had now spent fn the
government, first of Samaria, then of Palestine. There
were footsteps behind him ; he began to feel as though
'the earth were made of glass'" (Life of Paul, 550).
The terror which seized him was the beginning necessary
to a change of life ; but lust and ambition smothered the
kindling fires of conscience, and he made the common
excuse of alarmed but impenitent sinners to get rid of

xxiv. 25-27.] ACTS. 241
his too faithful monitor. The " convenient' season " to
which he deferred the matter, never came, and it never
could come : for how could it ever be convenient for a
man to put away a beautiful woman with whom he was
living in sin, and to radically revolutionize the whole
course of his previous life? This change must be made
at a sacrifice of much convenience and much pride by
every wicked man who makes it. How Drusilla was
affected we are not told; but it is scarcely possible that
she was more composed than the hardened Felix.
Vv. 26, 27. Felix maintained the character in which
Tacitus paints him to the very last. (26) He hoped,
withal, that money would be given him of Paul : where
fore also he sent for him the oftener, and communed
with him. (27) But when two years were fulfilled,
Felix was succeeded by Porcius Festus ; and desiring to
gain favor with the Jews, Felix left Paul in bonds.
From having incidentally learned, through Paul's speech
at his trial, tbat he had been up to Jerusalem to bear
alms from distant churches, and knowing, besides, the
general liberality of the disciples toward one another
in distress, he had not a doubt that Paul could raise a
large sum to secure his release from imprisonment, and
that it would be forthcoming on the merest hint that it
would be accepted. Undoubtedly, had Paul thought it
right to obtain release in this way, the money would
have been in hand soon ; for what would not his breth
ren have given to relieve him from the ignominy of im
prisonment, and to set him free in apostolic usefulness.
But bribe-giving is next in turpitude to bribe-taking,
and Paul could be no party to a criibe.
The removal of Felix was brought about by accusa
tions of misgovernment preferred against him by the

242 COMMENTARY. [xxiv. 26— xxv. 5.
Jews. He was called to Rome by Nero to answer for
his crimes, and, barely escaping execution, he was ban
ished into Gaul, where he died. Drusilla clung to him
in his failing fortunes ; but a son whom she bore to him,
and who was named Agrippa, after her brother, perished
in the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius, which engulfed the
cities of Pompeii and Herculaneum.1
These two years of imprisonment in Caesarea, if w'e
may judge from the silence of history, were the most in
active of Paul's career. There are no epistles which
bear this date ; and though his brethren and others had
free access to him, we have no recorded effects of their
interviews with him. The only moments in which he
emerges into view are those in which he appears be
fore his judges.
5. Paul's Trial before Festus, xxv. 1-12.
Vv. 1-5. The long imprisonment of Paul seems
not in the least to have moderated the hatred of his
enemies ; so, on the change of governors, they renewed
their efforts for his destruction, (i) Festus therefore,
having come into the province, after three days, went
up to Jerusalem from Caesarea. (2) And the chief priests
and the principal men of the Jews informed him against
Paul ; (3) and they besought him, asking favor against
him, that he would send for him to Jerusalem ; laying
wait to kill him on the way. (4) Howbeit Festus
answered, that Paul was kept in charge at Caesarea, and
that he himself was about to depart thither shortly. (5)
Let them therefore, saith he, who are of power among
you, go down with me, and if there is anything amiss
in the man, let them accuse him. He also told them, as
1 Josephus, Ant. xx. 7. 2.

xxv. 1-9.] ACTS. 243
we learn from a later speech (16), that it was contrary to
Roman law to condemn a man before he had an oppor
tunity for defense, face to face with his accusers. All
this shows that Festus was disposed to act justly. He
of course knew nothing then of the plot to waylay Paul.
Vv. 6-8. He made no delay in granting them the/
promised hearing. (6) And when he had tarried among'
them not more than eight or ten days, he went down un
to Caesarea ; and on the morrow he sat on the judgment-
seat, and commanded Paul to be brought. (7) And when
he was come, the Jews who had come down from Jerusa
lem stood round about him, bringing against him many
and grievous charges, which they could not prove ; (8)
while Paul said in his defense, Neither against the law of
the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar, have
I sinned at all. The specifications which Paul makes in
his defense are the same as in his defense against the
charges preferred by Tertullus before Felix (xxiv. 10-21),
showing that the charges were also the same. Being a
"ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes" was his sin
against the law ; attempting to profane the temple, his
sin against the holy place ; and the incitement of insur
rections among the Jews, his sin against Csesar. In the
last specification, reference was had to the mobs which
the Jews were in the habit of stirring up against him,
whose crimes were thus charged upon him.
Ver. 9. As the accusers were not able to prove their
charges (7), and the prisoner pleaded " not guilty " to
every one of them, he should have been unconditionally -
released ; but Festu«, at this point, allowed his sense of
justice to be biased by his desire for popularity. (9) But
Festus, desiring to gain favor with the Jews, answered
Paul, and said, Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem, and there

244 COMMENTARY. [xxv. 9-12.
be judged of these things before me ? As Csesarea
was the seat of government for the province, he had no
right to order the trial of a citizen elsewhere ; hence the
inquiry whether Paul was willing to be tried in Jerusalem.
It is probable thathe knew nothing of the plot mentioned
in verse 3, but he must have known that the petition of
the Jews that Paul be carried to Jerusalem for trial, was
prompted by some sinister motive, and he should have
rejected it without hesitation.
Vv. 10-12. The purpose ofthe Jews was well un
derstood by Paul. He had not forgotten the vow of the
forty conspirators, and, although they must have broken
their vow in breaking their fast before this time (xxiii.
12, 13), this made them only the more determined to
kill him, if they could. Fortunately, his very imprison
ment, which exposed him to this new danger, furnished
him the means of escaping it, and in the resolution which
he instantly formed he saw a glimpse, at last, of Rome.
(io) But Paul said, I am standing before Caesar's judg
ment-seat, where I ought to be judged ; to the Jews
have I done no wrong, as thou also very well knowest.
(i i) If, then, I am a wrong-doer, and have committed any
thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die ; but if none
of those things is true, whereof these accuse me, no man
can give me up unto them; I appeal unto Caesar. (12)
Then Festus, when he had conferred with the council,
answered, Thou hast appealed unto Caesar ; unto Caesar
shalt thou go. The ' statement, " I stand at Caesar's
judgment-seat, where I ought to be judged," was
his protest against being sent to Jerusalem ; and his
declaration that Festus knew that he had done the Jews
no wrong, was based upon the developments of the trial.
The appeal to Csesar, which was the right of every Roman

xxv. 10-13.] ACTS. 245
citizen, required the judge before whom the appeal was
made to instantly suspend proceedings in the case, and
to send the prisoner, together with his accusers, to Rome,
that the case might be adjudged by the imperial court.
In Paul's case, this appeal was not a call upon a military
power by a free man for protection, but a demand made
upon the military power which held him in unjust con-
jfinement, not to add to this injustice that of exposing
him to assassination. The answer of Festus betrays
some bitterness of feeling, tbe natural effect of the re
proach implied in the appeal, and at the same time it
hints at the inconvenience to wbich Paul would himself
be subjected by it. It subjected him to being sent to
Rome as a prisoner under a military guard, and to all the
delay which might attend the coming of the witnesses to
testify against him, as well as that often resulting from the
dilatoriness of the imperial court itself. This incon
venience deterred citizens from making the appeal except
in extreme cases.
6. Paul's Case Stated to King Agrippa, 13-22.
Ver. 13. The custom among princes of extending
congratulations to those of like rank who are newly ap
pointed in neighboring provinces, led to the next re
corded incident of Paul's confinement. (13) Now when
certain days were passed, Agrippa the king and Bernice
arrived at Caesarea, and saluted Festus. This Agrippa
was the only- son of the Herod who had murdered the
apostle James (xii. 1, 2). He was only seventeen years
old when his father died, and, being thought too young
for the government of his father's dominions, he was
made by the emperor king of Chalcis, a small district
east of the Jordan. He was now thirty-one years of

246 COMMENTARY. [xxv. 13-21.
age. Bernice was his sister, and like the younger sister^
Drusilla, she was remarkable for her beauty. She had
been the wife of her own uncle, the former king of
Chalcis, but she was now a widow, and living with her
brother.1 Vv. 14-21. Festus knew that the charges against
Paul had reference to the Jewish law, but he was still
very much in the dark as to their exact nature ; and as
he was now under the necessity of sending a statement
of them to the emperor, he determined to seek for light
by appealing to Agrippa's more intimate knowledge of
Jewish affairs. (14) And as they tarried there many days,
Festus laid Paul's case before the king, saying, There
is a certain man left a prisoner by Felix ; (15) about
whom, when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and
the elders of the Jews informed me, asking for sentence
against him. (16) To whom I answered, that it is
not the custom of the Romans to give up any man before
that the accused have the accusers face to face, and have
had opportunity to make his defense concerning the
matter laid against him. (17) When, therefore, they
were come together here, I made no delay, but on the
next day sat down on the judgment seat, and commanded
the man to be brought. (18) Concerning whom, when the
accusers stood up, they brought no charge of such evil
things as I supposed; (19) but had certain questions
against him of their own demon-worship,2 and of one
Jesus, who was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.
(20) And I, being perplexed how to inquire concerning
these things, asked whether he would go to Jerusalem,
1 Josephus, Ant. xx. 7. 3.
2 For a justification of this rendering, see remarks under xvii.
18. 23.

xxv. 14-22.] ACTS. 247
and there be judged of these matters. (21) But when
Paul had 'appealed to be kept for the decision of the em
peror, I commanded him to be kept till I should send him
to Caesar. From this speech we learn the exact con
ception which Festus had' thus far formed of Paul's case.
He had discovered that Paul contended for the worship,
with divine honors, of Jesus, a man who was dead ; and
as this, to the mind of a Greek or a Roman, was demon-
worship, he so styles it here. He supposed that the
Jews, like other nations, were accustomed to such wor
ship, and consequently that the dispute between them
and Paul was over the question whether they should
worship Jesus in common with other demons. His ig
norance of the religious ideas of the Jews, and his still
more susprising ignorance about Jesus, whom he styles
" one Jesus," as though he had never heard of him be
fore, shows that, like most politicians in that day as in
our own, he had made no study of religious questions.
Agrippa must have smiled at his ignorance.
Ver. 22. This could not have been the first time
that Agrippa had heard of either Paul or Jesus. Being
the son of the Herod who tried to suppress the Christian
faith by killing the apostle James, and imprisoning
Peter with the purpose of killing him ; a nephew of the
Herod who had killed John the Baptist, and mocked
Jesus on the day of his crucifixion ; and a great grand
son of the one who attempted to kill Jesus in his cradle
at Bethlehem, the names of Jesus and his apostles had
been household words in his family for generations back.
The name of Paul was doubtless less familiar than those
of the original apostles, but of him he could not have
been ignorant. He would not have deigned, as would
none of his ancestors, to visit a congregation for the

248 COMMENTARY. [xxv. 22, 23.
purpose of hearing an apostle ; but in the privacy of the
pretorium in which Paul was a prisoner he could gratify
his curiosity by hearing him, and at the same time ren
der some assistance to Festus. (22) And Agrippa said
unto Festus, I also could wish to hear the man myself.
To-morrow, saith he, thou shalt hear him. The pro
posal pleased Festus, because of the information which
he hoped to obtain, and also, perhaps, because it pro
vided another day's entertainment for his royal guests.
8. Paul's Case Publicly Stated, 23-27.
Ver. 23. Without intending to honor Paul, but
rather to suitably entertain his royal guests, Festus pro
vided for Paul the most magnificent audience, from a
worldly point of view, that he had ever been permitted
to address. (23) So on the morrow, when Agrippa was
come, and Bernice, with great pomp, and they were en
tered into the place of hearing, with the chief captains,
and the principal men of the city, at the command of
Festus Paul was brought in. If the officer who was
sent for Paul had told him that king Agrippa wanted
him brought out that he might behead him, as his father
had beheaded James, he would probably have been but
little surprised. But who can imagine his surprise when
told that this scion ofthe Herod family desired to hear
him preach? Could it be true 'that the gulf between
Christ and this bloodiest of all the families which had
stood against him | since the beginning, was so nearly
bridged .over that one of them, and he a king, really de
sired to hear the gospel? This question must have
flashed upon Paul's mind, as he made hasty preparation
to appear before the splendid audience awaiting him.
The bare possibility of winning a Herod over to the

xxv. 23-27.] ACTS. 249
cause of Christ must have thrilled his soul, and stirred
him up to an effort worthy of the auspicious occasion.
He began to feel almost repaid for two years of confine
ment, by the privilege now afforded him. For the first
time, and perhaps the last, an apostle stood face to face
with a Herod, unless James had enjoyed that privilege
just before he was beheaded.
Vv. 24-27. The proceedings were conducted with
all the dignity and formality suited to so august an au
dience. (24) And Festus saith, King Agrippa, and
all men who are here present with us, ye behold this
man, about whom all the multitude of the Jews made suit
to me, both at Jerusalem and here, crying that he ought
not to live any longer. (25) But I found that he had
committed nothing worthy of death ; and as he himself
appealed to the emperor, I determined to send him. (26)
Of whom I have no certain thing to write unto my Lord.
Wherefore I have brought him forth before you, and es
pecially before thee, king Agrippa, that, after examina
tion had, I may have somewhat to write. (27) For it
seemeth to me unreasonable, in sending a prisoner, not
withal to signify the charges against him. This was a
very candid confession, before a brilliant audience, of his
heathenish ignorance concerning a faith which had been
propagated in every part of the Roman empire, and had
established itself even in the imperial city of Rome.
There were probably many in the audience besides
Agrippa who were surprised at such ignorance ; for it is
scarcely possible that the " chief men of the city " who
were present, and even some of the chiliarchs under his
own command, did not understand the position of Paul.
But all could see that Festus was in a bad predicament,
in having held as a prisoner a man who was entitled to

250 COMMENTARY. [xxv. 24— xxvi. 3.
his liberty, until, now that he had appealed to Csesar,
there was no chance to get rid of him.
8. Paul's Defense before Agrippa, xxvi. |l-29.
1. HIS INTRODUCTION, 1-3.
Vv. 1-3. When Festus took his seat, Agrippa as
sumed control of the proceedings, (i) And Agrippa
said unto Paul, Thou art permitted to speak for thy
self. Then Paul stretched forth his hand, and made
his defense :
(2) I think myself happy, king Agrippa, that I am
to make my defense before thee this day touching all
the things whereof I am accused by the Jews ; (3) es
pecially because thou art expert in all customs and ques
tions which are among the Jews : wherefore I beseech
thee to hear me patiently. This was a sincere expression
of his happiness on the occasion. He was happy for a
reason which it would have been unwise for him to ex
press — the hope of winning the young king to Jesus;
and for the especial reason, that now he had an oppor
tunity to speak before one who, unlike' Lysias, Felix,
and Festus, being familiar with Jewish questions and
customs, would be able to understand the case. Agrippa
had been brought up in the Jewish faith, and on this
account had been entrusted by the emperor with the
oversight of religious affairs in Jerusalem, while Judea
was under Roman procurators.1
2. HIS POSITION TOWARD JEWISH PARTIES, 4-8.
Vv. 4-8. After the exordium he proceeds to de
clare that he had been reared a Pharisee, and that he
still adhered to the hope peculiar to that party. (4) My
1 Josephus, Ant. kx. i. 3.

xxvi. 4-8.] ACTS. 251
manner of life then from my youth up, which was from
the beginning among mine own nation, and at Jerusalem,
know all the Jews ; (5) having knowledge of me from the
first, if they be willing to testify, how that after the
straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee. (6)
And now I stand here to be judged for the hope of the
promise made of God unto our fathers ; (7) unto which
promise our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night
and day, hope to attain. And concerning this hope
I am accused by the Jews, 0 king ! (8) Why is it
judged incredible with you, if God doth raise the dead?
His purpose in these statements was not to defend him
self against any charge ; for they meet no charge which
had been preferred ; but to awaken within the heart of
the king a chord of sympathy with himself, and thus to
open the way for more serious impressions which he
hoped to make. To this end also he emphasized the
fact that he had spent his youth among his own nation,
and in Jerusalem ; for, had he spent it among foreigners,
he might have been indifferent to Jewish hopes and in
terests. His declaration that he was brought into judg
ment because ofthe hope ofthe resurrection, is to be un
derstood here, as in xxiii. 6, and xxiv. 21. He means
that his persecution by the Sadducees, the real authors of
his present imprisonment, was instigated chiefly by his
preaching the resurrection, and preaching it through the
risen Jesus. In the demand, " Why is it judged incred
ible with you, if God doth raise the dead ? " he turned, as
the plural number of the pronoun shows, from Agrippa,
whom he had addressed exclusively before, to the rest of
the assembly, who were, including Festus, unbelievers
in the resurrection. The purpose ofthe demand was to
challenge them to produce in their own minds a reason

252 COMMENTARY. [xxn. 4-11.
for their incredulity. It was calculated also to strengthen
the hold 6n Agrippa which he may have gained by his
previous remarks.
3. HIS FORMER POSITION TOWARD JESUS, 9-11.
Vv. 9-11. In the next division ofthe speech, Paul
makes another and more obvious attempt to enlist the
sympathy ofthe king. (9) I verily thought with my
self, .that I ought to do many things contrary to the
name of Jesus of Nazareth. (10) And this I also did in
Jerusalem ; and I jboth shut up many of the saints in
prisons, having received authority from the chief priests,
and when they were put tojdeath, I gave my vote 1 against
them. (11) And punishing them oftentimes in all the
synagogues, ,1 strove to make them blaspheme ; 2 and
being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them
even unto foreign cities. This brief review of his ca
reer as a persecutor, which, brief as it is, adds several
new items of information to those given by Luke (viii.
1-3; ix. 1, 2), must have caused Agrippa to say within
himself: Why, the man was once on the same side
with my family, and he showed the same zeal to sup
press the cause of the Nazarene as did my father, my
uncle, and my grandfather. It was intended to have
this effect, and also to start within the astonished young
lThis remark shows that Paul had a vote in deciding who
among the victims of persecution should be slain. This is usu
ally construed as proving that he was a member of the Sanhe
drin ; but it may be that his vote was cast as a member of a
commission appointed by the Sanhedrin to conduct the persecu
tion, and that he had reference to this when he said that he had
received " authority and commission " from the chief priesta
(xxvi. 12.)
2 Not blaspheme the name of God, which he would not de
sire them to do • but the name of Jesus.

xxvi. 9-18.] ACTS. 253
man the question : How did this persecutor come to un
dergo so great a change ?
4. HIS INTERVIEW WITH JESUS, 12-18.
Vv. 12—18. As if to answer the question which he
had raised in the mind of Agrippa, Paul next gives the
cause of his change from a bloodjr persecutor to an ardent
advocate of the cause of Jesus. (12) Whereupon, as I
journeyed to Damascus with the authority and commis
sion of the chief priests, (13) at midday 0 king, I saw on
the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the
sun, shining round about me and them that journeyed
with me. (14) And when we were all fallen to the earth,
I heard a voice saying unto me in the Hebrew language,
Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me ? It is hard for
thee to kick against the goad. (15) And I said, Who
art thou, Lord ? And the Lord said, I am Jesus
whom thou persecutest. (16) But arise, and stand up
on thy feet ; for to this end have I appeared unto thee,
to appoint thee a minister and a witness both of the
things wherein thou hast seen me, and of the things
wherein I will appear unto thee ; (17) delivering thee
from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom I
send thee, (18) to open their eyes, that they may turn
from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan un
to God, that they may receive remission of sins, and an
inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in
me. On the supposition that Paul told the truth,
Agrippa must have seen in these statements enough evi
dence of the resurrection and glorification of Jesus to
convince him as well as Paul ; and it was probably new
evidence to him ; for, although he must have heard long
before something about the testimony of the original

254 COMMENTARY. [xxvi. 12-20.
witnesses of the resurrection, he may never before have
heard of Paul's. The evidence conveyed with it proof
also that Paul had been like an unruly ox, kicking when
goaded, and thereby adding to his own pain while he
persecuted the church; and this had doubtless been the
experience of Agrippa's ancestors ; for no man can per
secute unto death unresisting men and women without
many pangs of regret, even when he thinks, as Paul did,
that he was doing God a service (cf. 9).1 Furthermore,
Agrippa learned from this portion of the discourse that
Paul had a commission from heaven, even from the
glorified Jesus, to pursue the very course in life which
he was now pursuing.
5. WHY HE WAS NOW IN BONDS, 19-27.
Vv* 19, 20. Having received such a commission,
the speaker next tells the king how he had executed it.
(io) Wherefore, 0 king Agrippa, I was not disobedient
unto the heavenly vision; (20) but declared both to
them of Damascus first, and at Jerusalem, and through
out all the country of Judea,2 and also to the Gentiles,
that they should repent and turn to God, doing works
worthy of repentance. Did not the king respond within
himselfj You are right, Paul; if you saw what you say
'The fact that he thought he was dniiig God service must
prevent us from interpreting the remark about kicking against
the goad as referring to the goadings of conscience.
2 By construing Paul's language here as if he were aiming to
mention the countries which he evangelized in the order in
whieh he visited them, and comparing it with the previous re
cord in Acts, he has been made to contradict Luke. But he
uses no expression to indicate that he is following such an order.
He follows the order of place instead of the order of time, and
therefore there is no contradiction. This statement is to be
understood in the light of the preceding narrative.

xxvi. 19-24.] ACTS. 255
you did, you were right to obey the heavenly vision, and
our people have done wrong in opposing you.
Vv. 22, 23. To show still further that his enemies
were in the wrong, he proceeds to tell how they had
acted. (21) For this cause the Jews seized me in the
temple, and assayed to kill me. (22) Having therefore
obtained the help that is from God, I stand unto this day
testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but
what the prophets and Moses did say should come ; (23)
how that the Christ must suffer, and how that he first
by the resurrection of the dead should proclaim light
both to the people and to the Gentiles. Unless Paul
was insincere in these statements of what he had done
and taught, Agrippa had no alternative but to acknowl
edge that he had been unjustly dealt with by the Jews ;
and he could certainly see no ground for doubting Paul's
sincerity. Furthermore, while claiming that he had
taught nothing contrary to the law and the prophets,
Paul very ingeniously wove into his argument the claim
that the essential feature of his preaching, the resurrec
tion of the Christ from the dead, was itself a matter of
inspired prediction. Indeed, he shows that according to
prophecy the Christ by his own resurrection was to
throw clear and unmistakable light on that very hope of
resurrection which had been the glory of Israel, and es
pecially of the Pharisees. All of this was calculated to
very deeply impress the mind of the king.
6. AN INTERRUPTION, AND THE CONCLUSION, 24-29.
Ver. 24. At this point in the speech Paul was in
terrupted by Festus. In the ears of that benighted
heathen the speech was a very strange one. It presented
to him a man who from his youth had lived in a faith

256 COMMENTARY. [xxvi. 24, 25.
whose chief tenet was belief in the resurrection of the
dead ; who had once persecuted to the death his present
friends, but had been led to change his course by a
vision from heaven ; and who, from the moment of that
change, had been enduring stripes, imprisonment, and
constant exposure to death, in his efforts to inspire
others with his own hope of a resurrection. Such a
career, on the part of a man of great learning and talent,
he could not reconcile with those maxims of ease or of
ambition which he regarded as the highest rule of life.
Moreover, he saw this strange 'man, when called to
answer the accusations of his enemies, appear to forget
himself in his zeal to convert his judges. There was a
magnanimity in both the past and the present of his
career, which rose above the comprehension of the sen
suous politician, and which he knew not how to recon
cile with soundness of mind. He seems to have for
gotten the proprieties of the occasion, so deeply was he
absorbed in listening to and thinking of Paul. (24) And
as he thus made his defense, Festus saith with a loud
voice, Paul, thou art mad ; thy much learning doth turn
thee to madness. How darkened the mind that could
regard in this light the life which has been the admiration
of enlightened men, both believers and unbelievers, in
every subsequent age !
Ver. 25. Paul saw from the tone and manner of
Festus, as well as from the admission of his own great
learning, that the charge of madness was not intended as
an insult, but was rather the sudden outburst of an excited
and puzzled brain; so his answer was respectful, and
even courteous. (25) But Paul saith, I am not mad,
most excellent Festus ; but speak forth words of truth
and soberness. This reply is the only remark in the

xxvi. 25-28.] ACTS. 257
whole speech expressly intended for Festus. Paul knew
before, and the charge of madness was only an additional
proof of it, that Festus was beyond the reach of the
gospel ; so he seems to have had no thought of him while
he was reaching after king Agrippa.
Vv. 26, 27. In Agrippa Paul had a very different
hearer. His Jewish education enabled him to appreciate
Paul's arguments, and to see repeated in that noble life
of self-sacrifice, which was an enigma to Festus, the
heroism of the old prophets. As Paul turned his eyes
away from Festus and fixed them again on the king, he
saw the hold which he had obtained on the latter, and he
pressed the advantage to the utmost. (26) For the king
knoweth of these things, unto whom also I speak freely ;
for I am pursuaded that none of these things is hidden
from him ; for this hath not been done in a corner.
(27) King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets ? I
know that thou believest. He could speak thus confi
dently of Agrippa's knowledge and of his belief, because
he knew his past history. He knew that the name of
Jesus and his apostles had been household words in the
family of Agrippa for generations, and that the questions
between them and the unbelieving Jews had been dis
cussed in his presence from his childhood, though always
from the view of the enemies of the faith. The remark
that " this hath not been done in a corner " was intended
for Festus, to let bim know that his ignorance of the
matter was no proof of its obscurity.
Ver. 28. With matchless skill the aposile had
brought his evidences to bear upon his principal hearer,
and with the boldness which only those orators can feel
who are determined upon success, he pressed this per
sonal appeal so unexpectedly that the king, like Festus,

258 COMMENTARY. [xxvi. 28-32.
was surprised into an open expression of his thoughts.
(28) And Agrippa said unto Paul, With but little
pursuasion thou wouldst fain make me a Christian.1
The remark shows that Agrippa saw very clearly the
aim of the apostle. It is to his credit, being a Herod,
that he did not take offense at an obvious attempt
of the kind. It was evidently embarrassing to him ;
but while he turned it off in this cool manner, he
evidently regarded Paul with a respect far beyond that
ever entertained , for an apostle by any of his ancestors.
This was a great gain for the gospel ; for it showed that
by the patient endurance of persecution, and the continue
ous pressing of the gospel's claims upon men, the later
generations of its bloodiest foes had been made willing
to give it a respectful hearing.
Ver. 29. Paul's reply was never excelled for pro
priety of diction and magnanimity of sentiment. (29) And
Paul said, I would to God, that whether with little, or
with much, not thou only, but also all that hear me this
day, might become such as I am, except these bonds. It
was not till he came to express a good wish for his hearers
and his jailers, a wishforthat blessedness which he himself
enjoyed in Christ, that he seems to have thought again
of himself, and to have remembered that he was in chains.
9. The Immediate Result of the Speech, 30-32.
Vv. 30-32. The heart that beats beneath a royal
robe is too deeply absorbed in worldly cares to often or
1 Except for the needless introduction of the obsolete word
" fain," this rendering is sustained by the scholarship of this age,
the expression Iv KUyy, on which the whole meaning turns
never having the meaning " almost," which is given it in the
rendering of A. V.

xxvi. 30-32.] ACTS. 259
seriously entertain the claims of the religion of Jesus.
A corrupted Christianity, which shifts its demands to
suit the rank of its hearers, has been acceptable to the
great men of the nations, because it helps to soothe an
aching conscience, and it is often useful in controlling
the ignorant masses; but men of rank and power are
seldom willing to become altogether such as the apostle
Paul. They turn away from a close pressure of the
truth, as did Paul's royal auditor. (30) And the king rose
up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat
with them : (3 1) and when they had withdrawn, they
spake one to another, saying, This man doeth nothing
worthy of death or of bonds. (32) And Agrippa said
unto Festus, This man might have been set at liberty if
he had not appealed unto Caesar. The decision of those
who had not heard Paul before, that he was not worthy
of death, or even of bonds, was based on nothing but
the speech to which they had listened ; and in that there
was no attempt to state the charges, or to make a formal
reply to them. The decision then was evidently the re
sult of the. tone of honesty and sincerity which breathed
all through the speech, and which could not be feigned
so as to deceive these experienced men of the world.
As Agrippa coincided with the rest, Festus was led to
regret that he had not released Paul before he made his
appeal to Csesar ; for now he is in the same predicament
precisely as when he first stated the case to the audience.
He was under the painful necessity of sending to the em
peror a prisoner, the charges against whom he was not
able to express in writing, and of whom he would be
compelled to say, that he had done nothing worthy of
being sent at all. The fact that he did send such a state
ment (elogeum was its official title) must have much to

260 COMMENTARY. [xxvi. 30— xxvii. 2,
do with the mildness of Paul's imprisonment when he
reached Rome (xxviii. 16, 30, 31), and with his subse
quent release.

SEC. III. PAUL'S VOYAGE TO ROME.
(XXVII 1— xxviii. is.)
1. From Cjssarea to Fair Havens, 1-8.
Vv. 1, .2. Very soon after the speech before Agrippa,
Paul found himself about to begin the long expected
voyage to Rome. The answer to his prayers was about
to be realized (Rom. xv. 30-32), and the promise made
by night in the prison of Claudius Lysias, that he should
yet testify of Jesus in Rome, was about to be fulfilled.
This was brought about, not by any miraculous interpo
sition, but by a providential combination of circum
stances. The machinations of the Jews, the avarice of
Felix, the indecision of Festus, the prudence of Paul,
and the Roman statute for the protection of citizens, had
very strangely, yet very naturally, combined to fulfill
a promise of God made in answer to prayer, (i) And
when it was determined that he should sail for Italy,
they delivered Paul and certain other prisoners to a cen
turion named Julius, of the Augustan band. (2) And
embarking in a ship of Adramyttium which was about
to sail unto the places on the coast of Asia, we put to sea,
Aristarchus, a Macedonian of Thessalonica, being with
us. Here once more we see the significant " we " ot
Luke, showing that he was in Paul's company at this
time, and started with him to Rome. As he had come
with Paul to Jerusalem (xxi. 17, 18), the probability is

xxvii. 1-3.] ACTS. 261
that he had been close to him during his imprisonment.
This stay of more than two years in Palestine gave
Luke the opportunity, if he had not enjoyed one before,
to gather up all the information contained in his gospel ;
and it is highly probable that he also composed his
gospel at this interval of comparative inactivity.1,
Aristarchus had also come up with Paul to Jerusalem •
(xx. 4), and as Paul, in an epistle written after his ar
rival in Rome, styles him his fellow-prisoner (Col. iv. 10),
it is probable that, for some cause not mentioned in the
text, he also had been arrested in Judea, and was sent to
Rome on an appeal to Csesar.2
The Augustan band (cohort), in which Julius was a
centurion, was so called in honor of the emperor. As
the ship was of Adramyttium, a city on the western
coast of Mysia, it was homeward bound ; and it was not
expected to convey the soldiers and their prisoners to
Rome. The centurion started out with the expectation,
afterward realized, of falling in with some vessel sailing
to Italy, into which he could transfer his prisoners and
soldiers. Ver. 3. Luke's account of the voyage on which
Paul and his company are now embarked is the only
•If the book of Acts was completed, as I have argued in the
Introduction (xxiii. ff.), during the Roman imprisonment, Luke's
gospel, which certainly was written earlier (Acts i. 1), was prob
ably written during the first part of the same imprisonment, or
during that in Csesarea ; for there was probably no earlier interval
in which he had the leisure and the opportunity to gather all the
information which he claims in his introduction (i. 1-4).
2 This is held in doubt by Alford and Gloag (see their com
mentaries), who suppose that the term '' fellow prisoner " is used
figuratively when applied to Aristarchus ; but there is no fact
noted by either of them to justify the figurative interpretation of
the term.

262 COMMENTARY. [xxvii. 3-6.
narrative of the kind in the Bible, and it is full of in
terest from beginning to end. (3) And the next day we
touched at Sidon ; and Julius treated Paul kindly, and
gave him leave to go unto his friends and refresh him
self. The friends found in Sidon were doubtless breth
ren in Christ ; and from this we infer that Sidon, as
well as Tyre, had received the gospel (cf. xxi. 3-6).
With the brethren in the latter place Paul had spent a
week on his sad voyage to Jerusalem, and now, on his
voyage to Rome, he is cheered by the hospitality of those
in the former. That he needed refreshing the next day
after he had set sail is best accounted for by supposing
that he was subject to seasickness, and the side wind
them prevailing (4), which caused the ship to rock, ac
counts for the seasickness. A few hours on shore afforded
great relief, although it was but temporary.
Vv. 4-6. The vessel continued to sail northward
for a time, and avoided striking out into the open sea.
(4) And putting to sea from thence, we sailed under the
lee of Cyprus, because the winds were contrary. (5) And
when we had sailed across the sea which is off Cilicia
and Pamphylia, we came to Myra, a city of Lycia. (6)
And there the centurion found a ship of Alexandria sail
ing for Italy ; and he put us therein. As the proper
course of the ship was westward, the lee of Cyprus must
have been its eastern end, whereas the southern coast
would have been chosen had the wind -been favorable.
Another reason for passing into the waters north of
Cyprus and south of Cilicia may have been that sailors
then knew, as they do now, that a sea current there
runs to the westward, by the aid of which they could
make better headway in tacking against a contrary wind.
The ship from Alexandria, which they met according

xxvii. 4-8.] ACTS. 263
to their expectation, must also have encountered the
prevailing westerly winds, and was therefore far to the
east of the direct line from Alexandria to Italy. She
had a cargo of wheat (38) brought from the granaries of
Egypt, and she was a vessel of the largest size, accommo
dating, after her new passengers were taken aboard, two-
hundred and seventy-six souls, including the crew (37).
Vv. 7, 8. When they left Myra in the new ship the
wind was still contrary. (7) And when we had sailed
slowly many days, and were come with difficulty over
against Cnidus, the wind not further suffering us, we
sailed under the lee of Crete, over against Salmone ; (8)
and with difficulty coasting along it we came unto a cer
tain place called Fair Havens ; nigh whereunto was the
city of Lasea. The distance from Myra to the Island of
Cnidus is only about one hundred and thirty miles,
and as they were "many days " making that distance,
the sailing must have been slow indeed. From that
island to Cape Salmone, the eastern extremity of Crete,
the direction is nearly due south ; and this run was there
fore made at a right angle to the wind. The purpose of
this tack was to avoid the open sea west of Cnidus, and
also to take advantage of the lee shore of Crete, by
which they could make about one hundred miles to
ward their destination before reaching the open sea
again. In the meantime they were hoping every day
for a change of the wind. The difficulty of sail
ing along the coast of Crete grew out of the unfavor
able course of the wind, which constantly threatened to
drive them out to sea, and compelled them to make
short tacks, as the headlands, causing counter currents
in the wind, afforded them opportunity. Good seaman
ship was required for this, as it had been all the way.

264 COMMENTARY. [xxvii. 7-12-
Fair Havens was about halfway the length of the
island. 2. Discussion about Continuing the Voyage, 9-12.
Vv. 9-12. The voyage had thus far been so tedious
that winter was now approaching, and it was deemed
unsafe to attempt to complete it before spring. It was a
question, however, whether they should spend the winter
where they were, or try to reach a more desirable win
ter haven. (9) And when much time was spent, and
the voyage was now dangerous, because the Fast was
now already gone by, Paul admonished them, (10) and
said unto them, Sirs, I perceive that the voyage will be
with injury and much loss, not only of the lading and
the ship, but also of our lives, (n) But the centurion
gave more heed to the master and to the owner of the ship,
than to those things which were spoken by Paul. (12)
And because the haven was not commodious to winter in,
the more part advised to put to sea from thence, if by
any means they could reach Phcenix, and winter there ;
which is a haven of Crete, looking north-east and south
east. The fast here mentioned is the Jewish fast on the
day of atonement, which was the tenth day of the seventh
Jewish month (Lev. xxiii. 26, 27), and it occurs usually
within our month of October. Paul's advice was the be
ginning of an activity on his part which forms the chief
matter of interest in the remainder of the voyage. He
spoke from experience, and not from inspiration (see un
der 21-26)>, but his words, as we shall see, came very
near being fulfilled. It was quite natural that the cen
turion credited the judgment of the sailing master and
the owner of the ship, rather than that of Paul, of whose
nautical experience he knew nothing. The centurion

xxvii. 9-20.] ACTS. 265
had control of the ship, notwithstanding the presence on
board of the owner, because he had taken it into the
service of the emperor. As the harbor of Phcenix looked
(seaward) to the north-east and the south-east, being
open in those directions, and closed in others, it was
well adapted to protecting vessels from such winds as
had been prevailing. It was westward of Fair Havens
on the southern coast of Crete, and only thirty-four
miles distant.
3. A Vain Attempt to Reach Phoenix, 13-20.
Ver. 13. The harbor called Fair Havens lay on
the east side of Cape Matala, which the sailors would
have to double in order to reach Phoenix, and this they
could not do in the face of a west or northwest wind ; so
they waited for the wind to change. (13) And when the
south wind blew softly, supposing that they had obtained
their purpose, they weighed anchor and sailed along
Crete, close in shore. The words, " thinking they had
gained their purpose," express the thought that they
were " as good as there " when they started with this
soft wind from the south, the very wind for which they
had waited. It was a deceitful lull, the prelude to a
fearful change.
Vv. 14-20. The ship sailed smoothly for awhile
over an unruffled sea, with its boat hanging astern ready
for the debarkation at Phoenix. (14) But after no long
time there beat down from it a tempestuous wind,
which is called Euraquilo ; (15) and when the ship was
caught, and could not face the wind, we gave way to it,
and were driven. (16) And running under the lee of
a small island called Cauda, we were able, with diffi
culty, to secure the boat; (17) and when they had

266 ¦ COMMENTAR Y. [xxvii. 14-20.
hoisted it up, they used helps, undergirding the ship ;
and, fearing lest they should be cast upon the Syrtis,
they lowered the gear, and so were driven. (18) And
as we labored exceedingly with the storm, the next day
they began to throw the freight overboard ; (19) and the
third day they cast out with their own hands the tack
ling of the ship. (20) And when neither sun nor stars
shone upon us for many days, and no small tempest lay
on us, all hope that we should be saved was now taken
away. The name Euraquilo, given to this wind, is
equivalent to North-easter, and it indicates the direction
from which it blew. It rushed down suddenly from the
mountain tops of Crete, and struck the vessel when she
was within but a few hours of her destination. Under
the lee of Cauda the water was not so rough, and this en
abled the sailors, before getting out into the rough water
again, to take the three precautions here mentioned,
They got the boat on board to prevent it from being
dashed to pieces against the side ofthe vessel. The un
dergirding consisted in passing cables around the hull of
the vessel, and drawing them tight by the capstan, so as
to add their strength to that ofthe vessel's hull, and pre
vent her timbers from parting. The gear, or rigging,
was lowered, all except sail sufficient for steering the
vessel, in order to impede her progress toward the dreaded
Syrtis, the great banks of quicksand near the coast of
Africa, toward which the wind was driving them. The
vessel was lightened on the following day by tossing
overboard a part of the freight, that in consequence of
drawing less water, the waves might strike her sides
with less force. The tackling was thrown overboard the
next day for the same purpose ; and it consisted in the
spars, planks, cordage, and so forth, which were carried

xxvii. 14-26.] ACTS. 267
for the purpose of making repairs. As the mariners of
the age were dependent on the sun and the stars exclu
sively for a knowledge of the direction in which they
were sailing, when they had seen neither for many days,
and the storm was unabated, they had no definite idea as
to where they were, and hence their despair of being
saved. Vv. 21-26. The owner of the ship, the master, the
^ centurion, and all on board had formed by this time a
better estimate of Paul's judgment, and they were pre
pared to listen with respect when he addressed to them
the following speech : (21) And when they had been long
without food, then Paul stood forth in the midst of them,
and said, Sirs, ye should have hearkened unto me, and
not have set sail from Crete, and have gotten this
injury and loss. (22) And now I exhort you to be of
good cheer ; for there shall be no loss of life among you,
but only of the ship. (23) for there stood by me this
night an angel of the God whose I am, whom also I serve,
(24) saying, Fear not, Paul; thou must stand before
Caesar ; and lo, God hath granted thee all them that sail
with thee. (25) Wherefore, sirs, be of good cheer ; for
I believe God, that it shall be even so as it hath been
spoken unto me. (26) Howbeit we must be cast upon a
certain island. Paul's former prediction had come so
near being fulfilled, that his hearers were not disposed to
be captious about the apparent discrepancy between that
and what he now says ; and when they heard him now
predict their safety on the ground of a direct revelation
from heaven, which he had not claimed before, they
could see clearly that the former prediction was only his
judgment. Moreover, the words ofthe angel, " I have
granted thee all them that sail with thee," conveyed the

268 COMMENTARY. [xxvii. 21-32.
idea that but for this grant they all would have perished,
and that this grant was made in answer to his prayers in
their behalf. Let it be noted, too, that foremost of all in
this answer to Paul's prayers is the assurance that he
" must stand before Csesar ; " for with Paul the chief
ground of wishing to escape the present danger was that
he might at last see Rome, answer before Csesar as he
had before Agrippa, and then, being set free, preach to
the Jews and the Gentiles in the "eternal city."
4. The Ship at Anchor, and Paul on the
Watch, 27-32.
Vv. 27-32. Notwithstanding the assurance of safety
given by Paul, the peril for a time became more immi
nent. (27) But when the fourteenth night was come, as
we were driven to and fro in the sea of Adria, about mid
night the sailors surmised that they were drawing near to
some country ; (28) and they sounded, and found twenty
fathoms ; and after a little space, they sounded again,
and found fifteen fathoms. (29) And fearing lest haply
we should be cast ashore on rocky ground, they let go
four anchors from the stern, and wished for day. (30)
And as the sailors were seeking to flee out of the ship,
and had lowered the boat into the sea, under color as
though they would lay out anchors from the foreship,
(31) Paul said to the centurion and to the soldiers, Ex
cept these abide in the ship, ye can not be saved. (32)
Then the soldiers cut away the ropes of the boat, and let
her fall off. The ship was nearing the island now called
Malta, which is farther south than that portion of the
sea now called the Adriatic, so this name covered a
greater space in geography then than nowv The ground
of the surmise among the sailors, that they were nearing

xxvii. 27-32.] ACTS. 269
land, must have been the roar of breakers on the rocky
shore, at first so indistinct that they could not be certain
what it was. The sounding tested the surmise, the rap
idly decreasing depth proving that land was near. To
run ashore in such a storm, and on such a coast, would
be certain destruction to the ship and all on board. To
cast out all the anchors at hand would be in all proba-'
bility to wreck the vessel where she was by attempting
to hold her stiff against the rushing waves, even if the
cables did not part and leave her to drift upon the rocks.
The sailors felt so sure that the one fate or the other
would befall the ship before morning, that they resolved
to risk their own lives in an attempt to get ashore, not
withstanding the darkness and the rocks. They easily
deceived the landsmen by their pretense of putting another
anchor out at the bow, where it could not possibly be of
any service ; but Paul was too much of a seafaring man to
be so deceived, and his watchfulness saved the lives of
all the passengers. Although he had assurance from
God, which he implicitly believed, that not a life on
board would be lost, he remembered that the promise
was, " God hath granted thee all them that sail with
thee," and so he was just as watchful to save those com
mitted to his care as if no promise of their escape had
been given. Indeed he goes so far as to tell the soldiers
that none would be saved if the sailors were allowed to
leave the ship. This was because none but skillful sail
ors could run the vessel safe ashore in such a wind and
on such a coast. From this we gather the lesson, that
when God makes us any promise the realization of which
can in any part be promoted by our own exertion, such
exertion is an understood condition of the promise. The
rule has many applications in matters both temporal and

270 COMMENTAR Y. [xxvii. 27-36.
spiritual, which we can not pause to specify. In decree
ing that a thing shall be done, or predicting that it will
be done, God anticipates the voluntary actions of the
parties concerned, and interferes directly only when the
purpose would otherwise fail ; and in our dealings with
God we are therefore to be as active and laborious as
though we had no promise of his help, and yet as confi
dent of help as though all were to be done by God alone.
5. Paul Comforts the Crew, and the Ship
is Lightened, 33-38.
Vv. 33-36. When the treacherous attempt of the
sailors had been frustrated, there seemed to be nothing
to do but to trust to the anchors and wait for day. The
deck was swept from stem to stern by every large wave
so doubtless the hatchways were closed, and all descended
below. In moments of supreme terror like this, when
the stoutest heart is apt to quail, a man who maintains
complete self-possession is instinctively leaned upon by
the rest. Paul was this man. By outwitting the sailors
he had impressed both them and the soldiers with a sense
of his coolness and watchfulness, ind this at once made
him the leading spirit in the whole ship's company ; and
now, while they were swinging at anchor, and had noth
ing to do except to keep themselves from rolling about
on the floor, he imparted to them all a portion of his owii
cheerfulness and strength. (33) And while the day was
coming on, Paul besought them to take some food, say
ing, This day is the fourteenth day that ye wait and con
tinue fasting, having taken nothing. (34) Wherefore I
beseech you to take some food, for this is for your safety ;
for there shall not a hair perish from the head of any
of you. (35) And when he had said this, and had

xxvii. 33-38.] ACTS. 271
taken bread, he gave thanks to God in the presence of
all, and he brake it, and began to eat. (36) Then were
they all of good cheer, and themselves also took food.
Paul knew that there is nothing so cheering to tired and
hungry men as a good meal ; and he knew that in order
to safely reach the shore, there was exertion yet to be
required of them for which they were not capable in
their present enfeebled condition. His statement that
they had taken no food for fourteen days, if taken liter
ally, would not be incredible to those who are familiar
with the famous fast of forty days by Dr. Tanner, of
Philadelphia; but in rightly judging it we are tore-
member that this is not Luke's statement to his readers,
but Paul's to his hearers ; and that if they had taken
any food at all, they knew how to interpret his remark
accordingly. When a kind hostess in these days asserts
that her guests have eaten nothing at all, and insists that
they shall take a little more, no one misunderstands her,
or charges her with misrepresentation. It is a colloquial
exaggeration which is common and admissible. Those
addressed by Paul had certainly eaten but little ; those
of them who were much given to seasickness had scarcely
raised their heads from their couches during the time;
and those who had suffered the least had not been able to
sit down in quiet to eat. Certainly no cooking could
have been done on the vessel. The free and easy way in
which Paul spoke of the matter was in itself cheering,
and the statement that the eating which he advised was
for their safety, still further exhibits his conviction that
the promised escape of every one was dependent in part
on their own exertions (cf. note under 31).
Vv. 37, 38. The assembling of the whole ship's
company at the time of this meal seems to have suggested

272 COMMENTARY. [xxvii. 37-41.
the mention of the number of persons on board ; and
perhaps it was at this moment, that a count was first
made, in order that, by another count when they landed,
it should be known whether any perished, and if so, how
many. (37) And we were in all in the ship two hundred
three score and sixteen souls. (38) And when they had
eaten enough, they lightened the ship, throwing out the
wheat into the sea. This further lightening of the ship
was for the purpose of enabling her to run nearer in
shore than she otherwise could, ere she would strike bot
tom. It was no easy task to raise the sacks of grain from
the hold ofthe vessel and get them overboard when she
was pitching and rolling as she must have been. They
needed for it all the renewed strength imparted by the
food they had taken.
6. The Ship is Stranded, but the Men
Escape, 39-44.
Vv. 39-41. All was now done that could be until
daylight should reveal the exact nature of the breakers
ahead, and of the shore beyond. (39) And when it was
day, they knew not the land ; but they perceived a cer
tain bay with a beach, and they took counsel whether
they could drive the ship upon it. (40) And casting off
the anchors, they left them in the sea, at the same time
loosing the bands of the rudders ; and hoisting up the
foresail to the wind, they made for the beach. (41) But
lighting upon a place where two seas met, they ran the
vessel aground ; and the foreship struck and remained
unmovable, but the stern began to break up by the vio
lence of the waves. It seems, from the consultation of the
sailors, that they thought it barely possible to so guide
the ship as to strike the only smooth spot on the

xxvii. 39-44.] ACTS. 273
shore ; and the difficulty was occasioned by the inter
vening rocks between which the ship must be safely
steered. This revealed to the passengers the wisdom of
Paul in keeping the sailors on board when they tried to
leave the ship the night before. The anchors were left
in the sea, both because they would be of no further use
to the ship, and because, if ever so much needed, they
could not have been recovered. The rudders were only
paddle-rudders, one at each corner of the stern, and
while the ship was riding at anchor their handles were
pressed down on deck, and fastened there, so that their
paddle ends would be lifted out of the water, and saved
from being broken by the waves. These were now
loosed that they might be used in steering, and at the
same moment the foresail was hoisted to give the vessel
the forward movement through the water without which
the rudders would have little effect. By skillful use of
both sail and rudders, the ship was steered clear of the
rocks, and landed at or near the point aimed at. The
impetus with which wind and wave sent her forward
caused her bow to plow its way deep into the sand, so
that she was held fast. Two heavy waves (in sailor's
phraseology, "two seas"), coming from different direc
tions around the rocks, alternately struck the immovable
stern like two immense hammers in the hands of giants,
and the timbers, which had already been greatly strained
by swinging at the cables all night, immediately began
to give way. If the persons on board were to escape,
there was now no time to be lost in leaving the vessel.
Vv. 42-44. At this critical juncture the soldiers
proved themselves as unfeeling as the sailors had in
the night. They could now see plainly that they owed
their lives to Paul, yet they had no sense of gratitude

274 COMMENTARY. [xxvii. 42— xxviii. 2.
for it. (42) And the soldiers' counsel was to kill the
prisoners, lest any of them should swim out and escape.
(43) But the centurion desiring to save Paul, stayed
them from their purpose ; and commanded that they who
could swim should cast themselves overboard, and get
first to the land : (44) and the rest, some on planks, and
some on other things from the ship. And so it came to
pass that they all escaped safe to the land. The centu
rion, who showed himself a kind and discreet man
throughout the voyage, seems to have been the only
soldier on board who had the right sense of gratitude to
Paul for his invaluable services, and yet for the other
prisoners he seems to have had little or no concern, seeing
that it was for Paul's sake that he saved them. The
necessity for swimming, even after the vessel struck,
grew partly out ofthe fact that she was still in water too
deep for wading; for a ship of her size draws not less
than eight or ten feet when she is light ; and partly be
cause large waves were rolling in from the deep and
sweeping high up on the shore. It was no easy task to
reach the shore, and the escape of all was truly remark
able, the more so in that it had been predicted by Paul.
7. Paul Escapes Another Peril, xxviii. 1-6.
Vv. 1, 2. Fortunately for the shipwrecked voy
agers, they struck a hospitable shore, and one that was
well populated. Doubtless as soon as daylight appeared
the inhabitants along the coast saw the distressed vessel
and watched with eagerness her perilous run ashore.
They were at the spot in crowds when the vessel stranded.
(1) And when we were escaped, then we knew that the
island was called Melita. (2) And the barbarians showed
us no common kindness; for they kindled afire, and re-

xxviii. 1-6.] ACTS. 275
ceived us all because of the present rain, and because of the
cold. They knew the name of the island (now Malta) by
what the islanders told them. Luke calls the islanders
barbarians because thus the Greeks and Romans styled
all people except themselves. The term bore less of re
proach then than it does with us. These barbarians were
very far from being savages. It was with no little labor
that they kindled a fire in the rain, and a fire so large
that two hundred and seventy-six men could get near it.
These men were already drenched from swimming ashore,
and the rain that was falling prevented them from get
ting dry ; but still the warmth of a large brush fire made
them much less uncomfortable. The rain was ono of
those chilling October or November drizzles, which are
sometimes more disagreeable than a colder rain in the
middle of winter.
Vv. 3-6. Paul was not a preacher after the style of
a modern clergyman, who is particular not to soil his
hands with menial labor, and who expects everybody to
be ready to serve him, while he preserves his dignity ,and
looks on. He did not stand by the fire which others
had kindled, and allow others without his help to keep
it burning; but he took a band in the disagreeable job
with the barbarians and the sailors. (3) But when Paul
had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the
fire, a viper came out by reason of theheat, and fastened
on his hand. (4) And when the barbarians saw the
beast hanging from his hand, they said one to another,
No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he has
escaped from the sea, yet Justice hath not suffered to
live. (5) Howbeit he shook off the beast into the fire,
and took no harm. (6) But they expected that he would
have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly; but wher

276 COMMENTARY. [xxviii. 3-10.
they were long in expectation, and beheld nothing amiss
come to him, they changed their minds,- and said that he
was a god. This is Lystra reversed. There Paul was
first taken for a god, and afterward stoned. Here he
was first taken for a murderer, and then for a god. The
bad opinion of him was not based on the naked fact that
he had been bitten by the viper ; for they knew that
good men were liable to that ; but by the occurrence of
this fatality in so close connection with bis escape from
an apparently hopeless shipwreck. If they had discov
ered that he was a prisoner, this contributed to their
conclusion. They ascribed his punishment to the god
dess of justice, (Savj) who appeared to be determined
that he should not escape her hands. But when they
discovered that the bite, the fatality of which they knew
so well, had no effect on him, their conclusion that he
was a god was as natural to them as the previous con
clusion that he was a murderer. The miracle was
wrought by the direct power of God, and it was intended
to make the very impression on the islanders that it did
— a temporary impression which must have been followed
before many days by a true conception of Paul's person
and office.0 8. Paul's Usefulness in Melita, 7-1Q.
Vv. 7-10. The voyagers were fortunate in the place
at which they landed, not only in its being inhabited)
but in the character of its principal inhabitants. (7)
Now in the neighborhood of that place were lands be-
1For the nautical information connected with this voyage,
not found in the text, I am largely indebted to Mr. Howson's ex
haustive treatise on the Bubject in Life and Epistles of Paul, vol.
ii. chap, xxiii.

xxviii. 7-10.] ACTS. 277
longing to the chief of the island named Publius, who
received us, and entertained us three days courteously.
(8) And it was so, that the father of Publiuslay sick of
fever and dysentery ; unto whom Paul entered in, and
prayed, and laying his hands on him healed him. (9)
And when this was done, the rest also who had diseases
in the island came and were cured : (10) who also hon
ored us with many honors : and when we sailed, they
put on board such things as we needed. The title here
given to Publius, " the chief man of the island," is am
biguous ; but the Greek words so translated (o npwzoc: ri^c
vr)oou) have been found on inscriptions in the island, as
the title of the Roman ruler, and this justifies the con
clusion that Publius held this office. If by " us," in
verse 7, Luke means the whole ship's company, which is
the most natural reference, the hospitality of Publius in
entertaining with food and lodging two hundred and sev
enty-six men was worthy of all commendation. Per
haps he placed some of them in the houses of his tenants
on the estate, but they were provided for at his expense
for thi;ee days, after which some other arrangement
seems to have been made. He was w<dl rewarded how
ever by Paul in the healing of his father, whose disease,
even in our own days of medical skill, is considered a
very dangerous one. It is probable, too, that the ship's
company found accommodations in the homes of the
others in the island whose sick were healed in the same
manner. In this way Paul, who at the beginning of the
voyage was one of the most unobserved of all the pas
sengers, at last became the mainstay of the whole com
pany, and exercised an ascendancy over every mind. It
was gratitude to him that caused the islanders at last to
supply the ship's company with all the comforts needed

278 COMMENTARY. [xxviii. 10-14
for the remainder of their voyage. By this time the
soldiers were doubtless glad that they had not killed him
before they left the ship (xxvii. 42).
We can not suppsse that Paul healed diseases among
the islanders so generally without mentioning the name
of Jesus. On the contrary, though Luke makes no men
tion of it, we must think that from the palace of the
governor to the remotest hamlet of the island the name
and power of Jesus were fully made known during the
three months of his stay.
9. The Journey Completed, 11-16.
Vv. 11-14. It was the winter months which were
spent in the island ; and so soon as navigation was con
sidered safe in the early spring, the voyage was resumed.
(ii) And after three months we set sail in a ship of
Alexandria, which had wintered in the island, whose
sign was The Twin Brothers. (12) And touching at
Syracuse, we tarried there three days. (13) And from
thence we made a circuit, and arrived at Rhegium : and
after one day a south wind sprang up, and on the second
day we came to Puteoli ; (14) where we found brethren,
and were intreated to tarry with them seven days ; and
so we came to Rome. This ship of Alexandria, like the .
one that had been wrecked, was doubtless loaded with
wheat for the Italian market ; and it had been checked
in its course the previous fall by the same tempest which
had wrecked the other ship. It was kept in port three
months or more when it was within three or four days'
sail of its destination. The Twin Brothers, whose
wooden images, standing at the bow or the stern, consti
tuted her sign, or, as we would say in modern phraseol
ogy, her name, were Castor and Pollux, the two fabled

xxviii. 14-16.] ACTS. 279
sons of Jupiter who were the special guardians of sailors.
Thus the emblems of heathenism were kept constantly
before the eyes of the early Christians. The stay at
Syracuse, the famous city of ancient Sicily, may have
been occasioned either by contrary winds, or by the dis
charge of freight. It is distant from Malta something
less than one hundred miles, and the run was made in
less than twenty-four hours. Rhegium, the next port
at which they touched, was at the southern extremity of
Italy, and not far from the mouth of the straits of
Massena. It is now called Reggio. The circuitous
sail in reaching it was doubtless the result of unfavorable
winds. The south wind which sprang up after they left
Rhegium was directly in their favor, and the run of
one hundred and eighty miles thence to Puteoli, in a
single day, was a swift one. Puteoli, the ruins of which
are still visited by travelers, was situated on the northern
shore of the bay to which Naples afterward gave its
name. The latter city, which was then a mere hamlet,
superseded Puteoli in the course of time as the seaport
cf that portion of Italy, while the latter gradually sank
into decay. That Paul found brethren in Puteoli, is
proof of the extent to which the gospel had already been
preached in Italy ; and that he obtained permission from
the centurion to remain with them seven days, is proof
additional ofthe respect with which Julius had come to
regard him. The seven days included a Lord's day, in
which Paul and his companions had the privilege of
breaking the loaf with these newly found brethren.
Vv. 15, 16. The journey from Puteoli was over a
paved road, which was a branch of the famous Appian
Way that led. from Rome to Brundusium, the modern
Brindisi. The space is now traversed by a railroad.

280 COMMENTARY. .[xxviii. 15, 16.
This main road was reached at Capua, thirty-three miles
from Puteoli, whence the route lay along this road to
Rome, the whole distance by land being about one hun
dred and fifty miles. The reason that the ship had
landed so far from Rome, was that Puteoli had the near
est harbor that would admit vessels of the deepest draft.
The delay at Puteoli. and the long journey by land, had
given time for the brethren in Rome to hear that Paul
was coming. (15) And from thence the brethren, when
they heard of us, came to meet us as far as the Market
of Appius, and the Three Taverns : whom when Paul
saw, he thanked God, and took courage. (16) And when
we entered into Rome, Paul was suffered to abide by
himself with the soldier who guarded him. The market
(more properly forum) of Appius, was a town on the
Appian Way forty-three miles from Rome ; and the
place called Three Taverns was a village ten miles far
ther toward the city. The group of brethren who met
Paul at the latter place started later, no doubt, than the
others. That Paul thanked God and took courage when
he met them, implies that he had until then experienced
some fear as to his reception by these brethren. As he
was coming to this proud city a prisoner in chains, they
might have felt that the reputation ofthe cause in Rome
forbade their recognition of him as one of their great
men; and if the brethren in the city should thus stand
aloof from him, it would be vain to hope to accomplish
any great good there while a prisoner, or even after se
curing his freedom. When, however, the brethren
showed themselves so true in Christian sympathy as to
ignore time-serving considerations, and to come as
though they were meeting a man who would reflect hon
or upon them, all gloomy doubts were dissipated, and

xxviii. 15-16.] ACTS. 281
courageous hope took their place. Among those breth
ren we may suppose that he recognized some, at least, of
that noble band whose names he had mentioned with
high encomiums in the last chapter of his epistle to their
church, and who had passed with him through trials of
the faith in years gone by. He had a thrilling story to
tell these faithful brethren about his voyage, and it was cer
tainly a matter of delight to them to find that, although he
was a prisoner, he had won the esteem and confidence ofthe
centurion who had him in charge, and as we may safely
suppose, of all the soldiers who had once thought of
killing him to prevent the possibility of his escape. They
witnessed, too, on the arrival in Rome, the extension to
him of the further and unusual courtesy of permitting
him, instead of being placed in the common military pri
son, to dwell by himself, with no restraint other than that
of having a single soldier to guard him. This favor was
the result of the representation made by Festus, that he
had done nothing worthy of death or of bonds, and also
ofthe representation made by the centurion Julius of his
conduct on the journey. Like Joseph when a slave in
the house of Potiphar, and a prisoner in the king's
prison, he had so conducted himself as to win the im
plicit confidence of those who had him in charge, from
the beginning to the end of his confinement. So it must
ever be with him who maintains under all circumstances
a strictly Christian deportment.

282 COMMENTARY. [xxviii. 17-20.
SEC. IV. PAUL'S PRISON LABORS IN ROME,
(XXVIII- 17--31.)
1. He Obtains an Interview with the Leading
Jews, 17-22.
Vv. 17-20. Paul had now completed a journey which
he had contemplated for many years, and he had met
with some brethren whom he had requested more than
three years before to strive together with him in prayer
to God, that he might come to them with joy, and with
them find rest (Rom xv. 24; 30-32). But how different
his entrance into the imperial city from that for which
he had hoped. Instead of coming a free man, to appear
in the synagogue and the forum for the name of Jesus,
he had been marched in between files of soldiers, pre
sented to the authorities as a prisoner sent up for trial,
and was being kept under a military guard night and
day. How dismal his prospect for preaching the gospel
to those who were in Rome ! If Paul the tent-maker,
a stranger and penniless, had commenced his labors in
the commercial emporium of Greece, " in weakness and
in fear and in much trembling " (I. Cor. ii. 3), how
must Paul the chained prisoner have felt when he began
a similar work in the capital city of the whole world ?
The prospect was sufficiently disheartening ; but he had
one ground of encouragement which he did not enjoy in
Corinth ; he was supported by a band of tried lieutenants,
both men and women, as brave and true as ever executed
the orders of a great leader ; and every one of these was
a hand which he could stretch out to lead interested
hearers to his place cf confinement. He made no delay
in beginning his work, and his first movement was to

xxviii. 17-22.] ACTS. 283
call the principal unbelieving Jews of the city to a fra
ternal interview. (17) And it came to pass, that after
three days, he called together those that were the chief
of the Jews ; and when they were come together, he said
to them, I, brethren, though I had done nothing against
the people, or the customs of our fathers, yet was deliv
ered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Ro
mans ; (18) who, when they had examined me, desired to
set me at liberty, because there was no cause of death in
me. (19) But when the Jews spake against it, I was
constrained to appeal unto Caesar ; not that I had aught
to accuse my nation of. (20) For this cause therefore did
[ intreat you to see and to speak with me ; for because
of the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain. Paul's
wisdom. in seeking this interview, and in making these
particular statements, is quite obvious. It would natur
ally have been supposed, from the fact that he was ac
cused by his own countrymen m Judea, that he had
committed some crime; and from his appeal to Csssar,
that he intended to prefer grave charges against his ac
cusers. The statement that the Romans would have re
leased him but for the opposition of the Jews, was much
in his favor on the first point ; and on the latter, his own
disavowal was sufficient. His closing remark, that it
was for the hope of Israel that he was bound with a
chain, which is to be understood in the same sense as
when made on two previous occasions (xxiii. 6 ; xxvi.
67), was calculated to enlist their sympathies, because it
was no uncommon thing for Jews to be persecuted, and
because it gave them assurance that he still cherished the
fondest hope ofthe pious Jew.
Vv. 21, 22. The response of the Jews was candid
and becoming. (21) And they said unto him, We nei-

284 COMMENTARY. [xxviii. 21-24.
ther received letters from Judea concerning thee, nor did
any of the brethren come hither and report or speak any
harm of thee. (22) But we desire to hear of thee what
thou thinkest : for as concerning this sect, it is known
to us that everywhere it is spoken against. It is rather
surprising that they had heard nothing from Judea con
cerning Paul ; but it often happens that events pass
almost unnoticed by a living generation, which become
afterward the important events of history. By hearing
nothing they had heard " no harm " of him, though they
had heard much prejudicial to the "sect" which he re-
represented. If they had acted as many do now, they
would have refused to hear him at all because of the evil
report of his sect: but the fact that the latter was every
where spoken against was the very reason they wished
to hear Paul in reference to it. Perhaps they had them
selves refused to hear the preachers that preceded Paul
in Rome ; but the courteous manner in which he had in
vited them to his lodging, and the conciliatory manner
of his address to them, had won them to a better feeling.
Had they always felt as they now did, they would doubt
less have heard of him before, and most favorably,
through the epistle which he had written to the church
in their city more than three years previous.
2. A Second Interview with the Jews, 23-28.
Vv. 23, 24. Before/ the Jews took leave of Paul
they made an appointment to come again and give him
a formal hearing. (23) And when they had appointed
him a day, they came to him into his lodging in great
number : to whom he expounded the matter, testifying
the kingdom of God, and persuading them concerning
Jesus, both from the law of Moses and from the prophets,

xxviii. 24-28.] ACTS. 285
from morning till evening. (24) And some believed the
things which were spoken, and some disbelieved. The
discourse was a long one, occupying sufficient time to
place the whole subject before them, and to support
every separate proposition with adequate evidence ; but
the result was the one always experienced in a congrega
tion of Jews.
Vv. 25-28. From what follows we have reason to
suppose that the disbelieving party gave some unbecom
ing expression to their sentiments. (25) And when they
agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that
Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Spirit
by Isaiah the prophet unto your fathers, (26) saying,
Go thou unto this people and say,
By hearing ye shall hear, and shall in no wise un
derstand ;
And seeing ye shall see, and shall in nowise per
ceive :
(27) For this people's heart is waxed gross,
And their ears are dull of hearing,
And their eyes they have closed ;
Lest haply they should perceive with their eyes,
And hear with their ears,
And understand with their heart,
And should turn again,
And I should heal them.
— (28) Be it known therefore unto you, that this salva
tion of God is sent unto the Gentiles : they will also
hear. So skillful a preacher as Paul would not have
closed his discourse with a warning like this, had he not
seen or heard something in his audience to call forth
these burning words from the sixth chapter of Isaiah.
The passage had been quoted before by Jesus, and ap-

286 COMMENTARY. [xxviii. 25-28.
plied to the unbelieving Jews of Galilee (Matt. xiii. 14,
15) ; and it was after this used by the apostle John in
explaining the unbelief of those who heard Jesus in Je
rusalem (Jno. xii. 40). It furnishes the true explanation
ofthe failure ofthe gospel to win some who hear it fully
proclaimed ; and the explanation is contradictory to the
once popular doctrine, that the Holy Spirit must regen.
erate the soul by an immediate exercise of its power be
fore the gospel can be received. According to this doc
trine, the reason why some of Paul's hearers went away
unbelievers was that a divine influence was withheld
from them whieh was granted to the others. But accord
ing to the view expressed in this passage, the Lord had
done as much for the one class as he had for the other ;
and the reason some were believers and the others not,
was because the latter were " dull of hearing, and their
eyes were closed." Their eyes and ears were not closed
by some power above themselves ; for they are expressly
charged with closing them. As they closed them volun
tarily, they had the power to keep them open ; and it is
implied that, had they done so, the result would have
been reversed — that they would have seen the truth,
that they would have heard it favorably, that they would
have understood it, and that they would have turned to
the Lord and been healed. This was precisely the ex
perience of the party who believed. They had them
selves been gross of heart and dull of hearing, and had
closed their eyes against the previous preachers in Rome ;
but now they opened their eyes and ears te what Paul
presented, and as a consequence they understood with
their hearts, they turned, and were healed. In this or
der of things there is no respect of persons with God,
neither can any man ascribe his final ruin to a with-

xxviii. 30, 31.] ACTS. 287
holding of saving influences on the part of the Holy
Spirit.
3. Duration of the Imprisonment, and
Continued Labors, 30, 31.
Vv. 30, 31. The narrative is now brought abruptly/
to a close. (30) And he abode two whole years in his
own hired dwelling, and received all that went in unto
him, (31) preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching
the things concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all
boldness, none forbidding him. This hired dwelling is
the one alluded to in verse 16, where it is said that " Paul
was suffered to abide by himself with the soldier that
guarded him." This soldier, as we see in the remark, " I
am bound with this chain," (20) was chained to him day
and night. The guard was changed according to uni
form custom every three hour3, unless an exception was
made of the sleeping hours in this particular case. In
this way it became the privilege of not less than five or
six different soldiers to be present and hear his preaching
and teaching every day. As this continued for two whole
years, it is by no means surprising to hear Paul say in
his epistle to the Philippians, " My bonds became man
ifest in Christ throughout the whole prsetorian guard,
and to all the rest" (i. 13). The prsetorian guard was a
body of soldiers kept at Rome, in a camp outside the
citv, for the purpose of guarding the emperor, and keep
ing prisoners awaiting trial in the imperial court. As
each soldier returned to the camp from guarding Paul, he
had a strange story to pour into the ears of his com
panions, and so it spread from lip to lip. It even reached
some of the household of Csesar, perhaps by means of
the guards about the palace (ib. iv. 22).

288 COMMENTARY. [xxviii. 30 31.
The remark, ihat "he received all that went in unto
him," implies many visitors. These were in part drawn
together by the increasing fame of the imprisoned
preacher ; but chiefly we may assume by the activity of
Paul's brethren in the city, who would naturally busy
themselves in this way. By the zeal of the same breth
ren the rent of his hired dwelling was paid ; but such
was their own poverty, that when a contribution was
forwarded to him by the distant church in Philippi, it
relieved a felt want (Phil. iv. 10, 11, 18).
Preaching and teaching are here distinguished, as
they are throughout the book of Acts, the former being
addressed to the unbelievers, and the latter to the be
lievers. That he did both shows that both believers and
unbelievers were drawn to his lodging. His activity
was unforbidden, because, being limited to those who
voluntarily sought him in his private dwelling, it could
cause no such outbreak, as it had in other cities. The
results of these labors Luke does not see fit to enu
merate, neither does he gratify the natural curiosity of
the reader by telling us the result of Paul's appeal to
Csesar. This last circumstance can be accounted for, as
we have argued in the Introduction (xxiii.-xxvi.) only
by the supposition that the last sentence of the book was
written just at the end ofthe two years, and previous to
the trial. But with the exception of this omission, the
leading purpose of the narrative suggests this as a fitting
close. Having started out to show the manner in which
the apostles executed their commission in turning sinners
to the Lord, the writer has now led us from Jerusalem
through Judea, Samaria, the provinces of Asia Minor,
the islands of the Mediterranean, Macedonia, and Achaia,
to the imperial city of Rome; and leaving the principal

ACTS. 289
laborer here, still " preaching the kingdom of God, and
teaching the things concerning the Lord Jesus Christ,"
his main purpose is accomplished, and the narrative
closes. A commentary on Acts, strictly confined to the text,
would here be brought to a close ; but as it has been a
part of our plan to give more fullness to the narrative by
drawing from other inspired sources, we have yet a few
paragraphs to pen. The desire inspired in the thought
ful reader by the closing chapters, to trace a little far
ther the career of Paul, may in some degree be gratified.
This desire has reference especially to the two questions,
what were the results to the cause of Christ of his long
imprisonment ? and what was the issue of his appeal to
Csesar ?
In reference to the first question, we have already re
marked that his entrance into Rome was so different
from that which he had hoped for, that his prospect for
doing good there must have been very gloomy. But as
he was permitted without interruption to teach and
preach for two whole years in his hired dwelling, we can
not doubt that he accomplished much, notwithstanding
his confinement as a prisoner. We learn something of
the results from epistles written during the time. Ephe
sians, Colossians, and Philemon were the earliest of these
epistles. They were all written at one time, and for
warded, the first two by Tychicus, and the last by Onesi
mus, the two messengers traveling together.1 In the
1 As he sent Onesimus back to Philemon, and had to send the
epistle by some messenger, we conclude that he sent it by him
(8-12) ; and as he sent Tychicus to the brethren to whom the two
other epistles were directed, we likewise conclude that he sent
those epistles by him (Eph. vi. 21, 22; Col. iv.7, 8); and it is stated
expressly that Onesimus was sent with Tychicus (Col. iv. 8, 9).

290 COMMENTARY.
two former he shows a sense of the embarrassments of
his situation, by exhorting the brethren to pray for him)
that a " door of utterance " might be opened to him, and
that he might have boldness to speak the gospel as it
ought to be spoken. The last reveals the fact that at
the same time he had already accomplished something.
Out of the very dregs of the dissolute society of the
metropolis, a runaway Greek slave had been induced to
visit the apostle, and hear the gospel. It proved the
power of God to free him from a bondage far worse than
that from which he had fled. After he became a disciple
Paul found him " profitable to him for the ministry," be
ing of service, no doubt, in bringing within the sound of
the gospel many of his former companions. His master
was Philemon, a convert of Paul's residing in Colosse.
Paul desired to retain him in his service ; but out of re
spect to the legal rights of Philemon he sent him home
with an epistle in which he delicately intimates the pro
priety of setting free a slave capable of such usefulness ;
and thinking it probable that Onesimus had defrauded
his master in some way, promises to pay the sum, what
ever it might be (Philemon, 8-21). His preaching had
begun to take effect on the most hopeless class of the
city's population, at the time when he was urging distant
brethren to pray that God would open to him a door of
utterance (Eph. vi. 18-20; Col. iv. 2, 3). But eventu
ally a door of utterance was opened far wider than he
had dared to expect. In the epistle to the Philippians,
written at a later period, when he was expecting his
trial and release, he says : " Now I would have you
know, brethren, that the things which have happened to
me have "fallen out rather unto the progress of the gospel ;
so that my bonds became manifest in Christ through-

ACTS. 291
out the whole prsstorian guard, and to all the rest ; and
that most of the brethren in the Lord, being confident
through my bonds, are more abundantly bold to speak
the word of God without fear " (i. 12-14). He also says,
near the close of the same epistle, " All the saints salute
you, especially they that are of Csesar's household " (iv.
22). These results, as we have stated before, sprang
most naturally from the word carried into the barracks
of the prsetorian guard by the many soldiers who alter
nately guaided Paul, and heard what he taught and
preached to his visitors ; for the soldiers of the guard,
and the employes about the palace of Csesar, would nat
urally be among the very last to visit the apostle's lodg
ing for the purpose of hearing him.
During these arduous and embarrassing labors, Paul
enjoyed the cooperation not only of the true and brave
men and women whom he found in the church at Rome,
but also of other fellow-laborers who had toiled with him
in other fields, and who came to him from a distance.
Timothy, last mentioned before in the journey from
Corinth to Jerusalem, united with him in the salutations
of Colossians, Philemon, and Philippians. Aristarchus
and Epaphras were his fellow prisoners (Col. iv. 10 ;
Philemon 23) ; Mark, who once forsook him, and went
not with him and Barnabas to the work, was now with
him, and about to go on a distant journey at his request
(Col. iv. 10) ; Demas, who afterward forsook him and
went to Thessalonica, " having loved this present world,"
was as yet by his side (Col. iv. 14 ; II. Tim. iv. 10) ; and
Luke, the beloved physician, who shared the perils of
his voyage from Csesarea, was his constant companion
(Col. iv. 14).

292 COMMENTARY.
In reference to Paul's appeal to Csesar nothing is said
expressly in the New Testament ; yet there is conclusive
inferential ground for the belief that it was successful in
securing his release. This evidence is found in the
events and journeys described in the epistles to Timothy
and Titus, for which no place ean be found in the period
covered by Acts. Among these are his leaving Tim
othy in Ephesus to counteract the influence of certain
^teachers, while he went into Macedonia (I. Tim. i. 3) ;
his leaving Titus in Crete to set in order the things
that were wanting there (Titus i. 5.) ;'his visit to Mile
tus when he left Trophimus there sick (II. Tim. iv. 20) ;
and his journey toward Nicopolis to spend the winter
(Tit. iii. 12.)
It would be interesting, were it not going beyond the
limits of a commentary on Acts, to follow in the details
of these labors till the curtain of authentic history drops
and shuts out from our view his departure to be with
Christ. When he obtained a hearing under the appeal
which brought him to Rome, his enemies could have
nothing to say against him worse than they had said be
fore Felix and Festus ; and his defense before them, to
gether Nwith that before King Agrippa, suggests the line
in matter and method of that which he most probably
laid before the emperor and his council. We shall not
tax our imagination in an attempt to depict the scene.
We bid him adieu till the resurrection morning, well
pleased that the course of the narrative on which we
have commented has kept us for so long a time in his
company.

INDEX.

Adding to the Church, i. 45, 49.
Agabus, i. 229; ii. 200.
Agrippa the elder,— his early life, i, 231; he beheads James and
imprisons Peter, 231, 232; he slays the guards, 239; his death, 240.
Agrippa the younger, ii. 245-261.
Ananias and Sapphira, i. 82-90.
Antioch,— a church founded there, i. 222-224; Barnabus sent thither,
225; he brings Paul thither, 226; the name Christian given there,
228; relief sent thence to Judea, 229; teachers in the church there,
ii. 1-3; Barnabus and Saul sent thence to the Gentiles, 4, 5: they
return thither, 51, 52; controversy there on circumcision, 53-55; the
question settled there, 71; Paul rebukes Peter there, 72; Paul and
Barnabas separate there, 75, 76; Paul's last visit there, 144, 145.
Antipatris, ii. 232.
ApoUos,— at Ephesus, 146-148 ; in Corinth, 149.
Aquila and Priscilla, ii. 133, 143, 148.
Areopagus, ii. 121.
Aristarchus, ii. 261.
Ascension of Jesus, i. 3, 7.
Athens, ii. 117-119.
Author of Acts, Int. viii.
Baptism, — its connection with remission of sins, i. 38, 62, 161, 178, 243;
ii. 26, 103, 136, 217; of those on Pentecost, i. 42-45; of the Samar
itans, 139; of the eunuch, 157-159; of Saul, 177; of Cornelius, 216,
217; of Lydia, ii. 91; of the jailer, 104, 105; of many Corinthians,
136; of disciples of John, 150-153.
Barnabas,— his name changed, i. 81; he befriends Saul, 188; he is sent
to Antioch, 225; he is sent thence to Judea, 229; he returns, to
Antioch, 242; he is sent to tha Gentiles, ii. 3/4: with Saul in
Cyprus, 5 ; becomes second to Paul, 10 ; with Paul in Antioch of
Pisidia, 12; in Iconium. 36; taken for Jupiter in Lystra, 40; styled
an apostle, 42; returns to Antioch, 48-51; separates from Paul and
goes again to Cyprus, 75.
Bar- Jesus, ii. 8.
Bernice, ii. 245.
Beroea, ii. 114-116.
Books of magic burned, ii. 157.
Breaking bread, i.I47; 49; ii. 178-182.
Csesarea, i. 197, n. 1.

294 INDEX.
Children, — promise to. i. 40.
Christian, — origin of the name, i. 227, 228.
Chronology, of Acts, Int. xxxiv.
Circumcision, — controversy on; its beginning, i. 219-221; second stage
of, ii. 53-71; decree of the apostles on, 68-71; Timothy circum
cised, 79-81 ; position of the Jerusalem church, 205, 206.
Citizenship, ii. 107, 221,222, 224.
Collections for the saints in'Judea, ii. 171, 172, 173, 174, 176, 241.
Community of goods, i, 48, 80, 103, 230.
Corinth, ii. 132; " much people in," 138; disorder in the church there,
160, 161.
Cornelius, i. 197-202; 205-208 ; 213-218.
Credibility of Acts, Int. xii.
Crispus, ii. 136.
Date of Acts, Int. xxiii.
Deacons appointed, i. 103-108.
Demon-worship, ii. 119, n. 1, 123, n. 1.
Demetrius, ii. 162.
Design of Acts, Int. xv.
Discipline, — good effects of, i. 89.
Dispersion of Jerusalem church, i. 134-136.
Divisions of Acts, Int. xiv.
Drusilla, ii. 239, 242.
Elders, — in the churches of Judea, i. 229, 230; appointed in churches
of Asia Minor, ii. 49; in thechurcli at Ephesus, 185; styled bishops
or overseers , 190 ; their duty to be shepherds, 191-193 ; in the Jeru
salem church, 205.
Epicureans, ii. 120, 131.
Epistles,— I. Thess., ii. 136-138; II. Thess., 141-143; I.Cor., 160; II. Cor.,
170; Romans and Galatians, 174^176; Ephesians, Colossians and
Philemon, 289, 290; Philippians, 290.
Eunuch, The Ethiopian, i. 149-163.
Euraquilo, ii. 266.
Faith, — its connection with healing, i. 55; itsjconnection with repent
ance, ii. 187.
Felix, ii. 232, 242.
Fellowship, i. 46.
Festus, ii. 242-261.
Free Agency and Divine Sovereignty, i. 57.
Freedmen (libertines), i. 111.
Galatia, ii. 83, 84.

INDEX. 295

Gallio, ii. 139-141.
Gamaliel, i. 97, 98, 166.

Herod,— (see Agrippa the elder). »
Holy Spirit,— last promise of i. 5; baptism in, 22, 23; effects of on the
multitude, 24, 25; prediction of by Joel, 26, 27; gift of, 38, 39;
Peter filled with, 71; the apostles filled with, 78; a witness for
Jesus, 95 ; " the seven ' ' full of, 104 ; Stephen, full of, 132 ; imparted
by Peter and John, 141-144; Simon's proposal respecting, 145;
speaks to Philip, 153; catches Philip away, 156, 160; Saul to be
filled with, 177; speaks to Peter, 204; received by the uncircum
cised, 213-217 ; the last a baptism in the Spirit, 220; Barnabas
full of, 225; Agabus inspired by, 229; commands the setting
apart of Barnabas and Saul, ii. 3 ; Saul filled with at Paphos, 9 ;
disciples in Antioch of Pisidia filled with, 35 ; the apostolic de
cree inspired by, 69, 70; Paul's journey overruled by, 84, 85; sup
ported Paul's preaching in Thessalonica, 110; imparted by Paul
to twelve disciples in Ephesus, 151; Paul's imprisonment pre
dicted by, 188, 189, 197, 200; men made overseers of the church
by, 191.
Immersion,— evidence of, i. 42-45; 159, 160; 177; ii. 104, 105.
Infant baptism, ii. 93-95; 104.
Jailer at Philippi, ii. 99-103.
James, the apostle, i. 231, 232.
James, the Lord's brother, — in Jerusalem with Peter, i. 189; head of
Jerusalem church, 238 ; speech on the circumcision of Gentiles,
ii. 65-67; receives and advises Paul, 204.
John, the apostle, — with Peter in Solomon's porch, i. 50, 52; arrested,
66; sent to Samaria with Peter, 141, 149; in the conference at
Jerusalem, but silent, ii. 61.
Judas,— his fate, i. 11-13; his place filled, 15-18.
Julius, the centurion, ii. 260, 261, 262, 264, 274, 279, 281.
Justus, ii. 134.
Laying on hands, i. 105; ii, 3-5.
Literature of Acts, Int. xxxiv.
Lydia, ii. 88-95.
Lysias, ii. 220-232.
Luke,— appears first in the narrative, ii. 85; remains at Philippi, 109;
goes with Paul to Jerusalem, 177; with Paul on the voyage to
Eome, 260, 261 ; with Paul during bis Koman imprisonment, 291.
Mark,— his mother's house in Jerusalem, i. 236; he goes with Barna
bas and Saul to Antioch, 242; goes with the °ame to Cyprus and

296 INDEX.
Perga, ii. 6; turns back from Perga, 11, 12; goes with Barnabas to
Cyprus, 75; 'with Paul in Bome, 291.
Mars HiU, ii. 121.
Neglect of Acts, Int. vii.
Ordained to eternal life, ii. 29-33.
Paul, — his earlier labors, his childhood and youth, i. 164-167 jhis'career
as a persecutor, 134, 168, 169; his conversion, 169-180; he preaches
in Damascus, 180-182; he flees from Damascus, 183; his visit to
Arabia, 184-186; his return to Jerusalem, 187, 188; he is sent to.
Tarsus, 189, 190; he preaches in Syria and CiUcia, 190; he is
caUed thence to Antioch, 226; he is sent thence to Judea, 229, 230;
he returns to Antioch, 242.
Paul, — his first tour among the Gentiles; he is set'apart to the work,
ii. 3-5; he preaches in Cyprus, where his name is changed, 6-9;
goes thence to Antioch in Pisidia, 7-9 ; his sermon in Antioch, 13-
27 ; his second sermon there, 27-33 ; he is expeUed from Antioch, 34,
35; his labors in Iconium, 36, 39; he preaches in Lystra, and is
stoned, 39-48 : he preaches in Derbe, and returns to Antioch in
Syria, 48-52; has a controversy on circumcision in Antioch, 53-71;
his second visit to Jerusalem, 57, n. 1 ; he separates from Barna
bas, and chooses Silas, 76.
Paul, — his second tour among the Gentiles ; he starts in company with
SUas, 77-81 ; his first experience in Galatia, 83, 84 ; is forbidden to
visit Asia or Bithynia, 84, 85, 89 ; he is caUed to Macedonia, 85-87 ;
he baptizes Lydia and her household, 88-95 ; he is scourged and
imprisoned, 96-99; he baptizes his jailer and is released, 90-107 ;
his preaching in Thessalonica, 109-111 ; he is driven from Thessa
lonica, but succeeds in Bercea, 112,113; he preaches in Athens,
119-132; in Corinth, 133-142; he shaves his head at Cenchrea, 143;
calls at Ephesus on his voyage to Antioch, 144.
Paul,— his third tour among the Gentiles ; he revisits Galatia and
Phrygia, 145, 146; his labors in Ephesus, 150-168; he revisits Mace
donia and Greece, 168-176; he starts for Jerusalem, 176; spends a
week in Troas, 178-182; walks from Troas to Assos, 182, 183; sails
thence to Miletus, 184; has an interview with the Ephesian elders,
185-19.5 ; his voyage from Miletus to Tyre, 195-197; spends a week
with the disciples in Tyre, 197, 198; calls on those at Ptolemais,
198; reaches Csesarea, 199; is there warned by Agabus, 200: he
arrives in Jerusalem, 201, 202.
Paul,— his five years imprisonment; his kind reception in Jerusalem,
202-204; his connection with the Nazarites, 204, 209; he is assailed
by a mob, and taken to prison, 209-212; he addresses the mob.
212-220; he is brought before the Sanhedrin, 222-227; he is sent

INDEX. 297
to Caesarea, 228-232; he is tried by Felix, 233-238: he preaches to
FeUx, 238-241 ; his trial before Festus, 242-244 ; his appeal to Cassar
244; his case stated by Festus, 246-250; his defense before Agrippa
250-260; he is sent to Rome, 260-264; he opposes the departure
from Fair Havens, 261; he is shipwrecked, 265-274; he is bitten
by a viper, 274-276; he heals the father Jof Publius, 276-278; his
voyage from Melita to Rome, 278-281; his interviews with the
Jews of Rome, 282-287; his other labors in Rome, 287-292.
Pentecost, i. 19; ii. 184, 201.
Persecution of the Twelve, i. 90-102.
Peter, — his speech about Judas, i. 11-15 ; his sermon on Pentecost,
26-41; he heals a lame man, 50; his second sermon, 53-56; he is
arrested and tried, 68-78; his mission to Samaria, 141-145, 149;
his work in Lydda, 192 ; in Joppa, 193-197 ; his vision in Joppa.
202-205; his sermon in the house of Cornelius, 1 209-213 ; he is ac
cused in Jerusalem, 218-221; he is imprisoned, and miraculously
released, 233-235; his speech on the circumcision of the Gentiles,
ii. 62, 63 ; he is rebuked by Paul in Antioch, 72-74.
Pharisees, — they lead in the persecution of Stephen, i. 112-115 ; they
contend for the circumcision of GentUe converts, ii. 58, 59.
Philip, — his work in Samaria, i. 137-141; his mission to the eunuch,
149-156; his labors in Philistia, 163; his daughters, and his resi
dence in Caesarea, ii. 199.
Philippi, its situation, ii. 87.
Pools of Jerusalem, i. 42-45.
Prayer, — of the disciples about filling the place of Judas, i. 16; of the
twelve about their persecution, 75-78; of Stephen when dying,
132; of Peter and John for the Holy Spirit, 141 ; of Saul when
blinded, 174; of Peter over the body of Tabitha, 195; of Cornelius,
199-201 ; of Peter on the house-top, 202 ; of the disciples for Peter,
236 ; of those who laid hands on Barnabas and Saul, ii. 3 ; of Lydia
and her friends, 87, 89; of Paul and Silas in prison, 100; of Paul
at Miletus, 193; of Paul on the beach at Tyre, 198.
Priests obey the faith, i. 109, 110.
Promise to Abraham, i. 65; 117, 118; ii. 21; 251.
Psalm ex. ascribed to David, i. 35, n. 1.
Python spirit cast out, ii. 96, 97.
Repentance, — what it is, i. 38. n. 1 ; 58-62 ; its connection with remis
sion of sins, 38, 62, 243-262; enjoined upon Simon, 146: granted to
the Gentiles, 220; its connection with faith, ii. 187.
Sadducees, — they begin the persecution, i. 67; they persecute Paul, ii.
224-226.
Samaritans, — the conversion of, i. 137-140.
Sergius Paulus,— his title, ii. 7, n. 1 ; his conversion, 8, 9.

298 INDEX.
Sila3, — sent to Antioch, ii 69, 72 ; labors with Paul, 76; scourged and
imprisoned at Philippi, 96^99; flees from Thessalonica, 113,114;
tarries in Bercea, 116 ; reaches Cornith, 135; separates from Paul,
141, 145.
Simon the sorcerer, i. 138, 140, 145.
Sorcery vs. miracles, i. 139, 140 ; ii. , 89 ; 155-158.
Sosthenes, ii. 141, 142; sources of information in Acts, Int. xi.
Starting point of Acts, i. 1.
Stephen, — his activity and arrest, i. 111-115 ; his discourse, 116-136 ;
his death and burial, 131-134.
Stoics, 120, 131.
Tabitha, i. 193-197.
Tarsus, i. 165.
Temple of Diana, 162, 163.
Thessalonica, ii. 109.
Theudas, — reference to by Gamaliel, i. 97, 98. '
Title of Acts, Int. vii.
Timothy, — a witness of the stoning'of Paul, ii. 47; his parentage and
education, 79; chosen by Paul and circumcised, 78-81; tarries in
Philippi, 109; tarries in Beroea, 116, 117; at Athens and Cornith,
135 ; sent into Macedonia, 158 ; goes with Paul from Corinth to
Jerusalem, 176; with Paul in Rome, 291; left by Paul in Ephesus,
292.
Town clerk, — his speech to the mob, ii. 166-168.
Troas, — Paul's first arrival at, ii. 85; Paul's second visit to, 169; his
third visit, 178 ; Lord's day meeting in, 178-182. _
Tyrannus,— school of, ii. 154.
Unity of the Jerusalem church, i. 78, 79.
What to do to be saved, ii. 102-104.

3 9002 05118 6105