Acts 10:34-48 The Gentile Pentecost

Acts 10:34-43 Peter delivers the gospel. This is the simple gospel, stripped to its core essentials.

•   Jesus is Lord

•   Jesus was anointed by the Holy Spirit with power to heal and deliver those oppressed by the devil

•   Jesus was put to death

•   God raised Jesus from the dead

•   Everyone who believes in Him is forgiven of their sins

And Peter includes that he and his fellow apostles personally witnessed all of these things.

Acts 10:44-48 Cornelius and his entire household are baptized in the Holy Spirit. Peter didn't even get to finish his message before the Holy Spirit empowered the Gentiles to speak with tongues and exalt God. At least God's message to him was unmistakable. Recognizing that God's sovereignty had brought these circumstances, Peter immediately said that they should be baptized in water, as he saw the close connection between the two baptisms, as he had in Acts 2:38. And then he stayed for a few days, most likely to give them instruction in the faith. We have to wonder if he was able to arrange fellowship with Jewish believers in Christ in the area of Caesarea. No mention is made of it here.

          The importance of these events for the world cannot be passed by. Although Paul would ultimately become the apostle to the Gentiles (e.g. Romans 11:13), the preaching of Jesus outside the Jewish community would not have been sanctioned by the completely Jewish apostles unless Peter was willing to take a strong stand and effectively veto the Pharisees who had become believers. Peter himself had habits of behavior to overcome (Galatians 2:11-14). This second Pentecost, or Gentile Pentecost as it might be termed, put God's seal of approval, not just on allowing Gentiles to become Christians, but on seeking them out aggressively. And He demonstrated that He would empower them with the same supernatural spiritual gifts and endowments that He gave to Jewish Christians. 

Acts 10:9-33 Peter's vision and the trip to Cornelius

          Acts 10:9-23 Peter has a vision, which coincides with the arrival of Cornelius' messengers. This seems a little strange. The vision is repeated three times, which according to Genesis 41:32 indicates that it will quickly come to pass. Why would Peter, who had known The Lord in the flesh before His death, and seen Him in His glorified body after the resurrection, hear an abstract voice from heaven? And then, when Cornelius' messengers arrive, the Holy Spirit speaks to Peter in a manner much more consistent with the rest of the New Testament. Perhaps the vision is a concession to Peter's Jewish roots, or perhaps the combination of the vision and the Holy Spirit speaking to Peter indicates that he is on the cusp of an event that will bring the old covenant and the new covenant revelations of God into a single, unified architecture of faith.

          The vision itself uses the metaphor of unclean food to symbolize God's acceptance of stuff outside of the old covenant. In the case of kosher laws, which are laid out in great detail in the Pentateuch (Leviticus 11), Jesus had indicated that true cleanness and uncleanness come from the heart, not from things external to a person. (Mark 7:18-19) So this Gentile who is outside the covenant of Moses is to be recognized by Peter as someone who has been cleansed by God and therefore should not be considered unholy.

          From an external view, this entire interaction was complete orchestrated by God, on both ends.  If either party to the events had not been spoken directly to supernaturally, it would never have happened. God, in His sovereignty, brought this to pass. Perhaps, in the end, God chose to bring Peter and Cornelius together so that later on, when the question arose of what Gentiles need to do to be saved, Peter would have in his mind this experience (Acts 15:7-11).

Acs 10:24-33 Peter travels to Caesarea and enters Cornelius' house. Each summarizes what had happened the previous few days by way of supernatural revelation. Perhaps at this point both sensed that God was at work in a powerful way. Cornelius can perhaps be excused for attempting to worship Peter; this is not the last time that God's anointing on the apostles was so strong that those acquainted with pagan worship mistook them for divine beings. (Acts 14:11-15) At least Peter, knowing his own shortcomings, immediately put a stop to it. Humans under the anointing of the Holy Spirit take on many of the characteristics of God, but worship is reserved for God alone.

Acts 10:1-8 Cornelius and the angel

Acts 10:1-8 Cornelius is visited by an angel. We first learn of Cornelius' character, that he was devout and gave alms to the Jews. As a gentile, he was evidently not a proselyte, at least the text does not say that. It simply says that he feared God, and all his household, and prayed continually to God. At 3PM an angel appears to him. Cornelius was much alarmed, as is the case with most people who see angels, since in most cases the angels' first words are 'Fear Not!' But in this case, the angel tells him to send to Joppa for Simon Peter, and where to find him. Evidently, those who were servants, and his soldiers also reverenced God, enough that Cornelius was able to entrust this mission to them.

          This is not the first time a centurion is mentioned. In Luke 7:2-10 a centurion asks Jesus to heal his servant, simply by speaking a word, which elicits the response from Jesus that he has not found such great faith in all of Israel. There is no indication in the text that this is the same centurion, or that it isn't. Why would centurions, or soldiers in general, be such actors in the cross-cultural spread of the gospel? There are probably several factors. One might be simply that soldiers travel more than most other people, except possibly for traders, and therefore they are the most numerous representatives of a foreign culture present in Israel. Another factor is described in Luke 7:6-8, in which the centurion explains that he understands authority in the military context, and is therefore able to recognize spiritual authority present in Jesus. Or perhaps there is an element of the life of a soldier dealing with life and death, with the fog of war, with experiencing a life in which one is not able to control everything but sees things happening, both good and bad, that emerge from unknown causes. Such a life could give a person an insight that we cannot control our own circumstances, that there is another level of existence that has a higher degree of causality, and recognize that the gospel provides a true explanation of that spiritual world.

Acts 9:32-43 Another one returns from the dead

Acts 9:32-43 Peter travels to Lydda and heals a man who has been paralyzed for eight years, then to Joppa and prays for a woman who is raised from the dead. At least, Peter has ventured a few kilometers outside Jerusalem, and the signs that Jesus promised and the Holy Spirit empowered continued. This appears to be the first recorded New Testament instance of someone being raised from the dead through the apostle' ministry. Jesus had raised a few people from the dead while He was alive on the earth. (Matthew 9:25, Luke 7:15, John 11:44) And in the Old Testament there were a few instances as well. (I Kings 17:22, 2 Kings 4:35, 2 Kings 13:21)

          How are we to understand these instances of people returning from the dead? The first and most obvious observation is that they were temporary, since there is no indication that when these people returned from the grave, they had entered into the permanent state of glorification that Christ promised. So they must have eventually died again. However, these resurrections do show that God has power over death. In the case of Lazarus, the onlookers commented that he had been dead for four days so that his body would have started to decompose and smell (John 11:39), so Jesus demonstrated that God's power triumphs over the decay of the body. Modern medicine indicates that brain death occurs if it is deprived of oxygen for fifteen minutes (or less), so any resurrection after that period has to be based on a regenerative miracle, not just a simple cure of whatever caused death in the first place. Paul described the state of the resurrected in imperishable bodies that bear the image of the glory of God. (I Cor 15:35-54) That resurrection, which has not yet happened to anyone other than Christ, goes far beyond the regeneration of the body as we know it, because the new body is imperishable.

          In no case is there a record of what the person who was raised said about what they experienced during the period of their death. That remains a mystery. Prior to the death and resurrection of Christ, the few passages that bear on this suggest that those in the grave are in a place called Abraham's bosom, if they died in faith, or a place of torment, if they died apart from faith. (Luke 16:19-31) The point of Jesus' story there was that the miraculous raising of the dead, although a sign, will still only cause those who listen to Moses and the prophets to repent. Those who reject or ignore Moses and the prophets will not be persuaded by a miracle as powerful as the resurrection from the dead. But this does say that prior to the resurrection of Christ, those who died in faith were with Abraham and received good things. However, since Christ rose from the dead and led captivity captive (Ephesians 4:8-10) one has to wonder if Dorcas (or Tabitha) was in the presence of Christ during the period when her body lay dead. There is no indication how she felt about being brought back to the earth from that glorious abode.

          None of the resurrections recorded seem to be based on the merit of the person raised, or at least, not as much as it is a result of the pleas of others who loved, needed or depended on that person. In the case of Dorcas, there obviously was merit in her character, but the text notes that all of the widows showed Peter the garments that Dorcas had made for them (Acts 9:39). And so, could this be a sign relating to the eventual resurrection of believers that we are not going to be raised in the final judgment for any reason other than God wants us to be around so that He can fellowship with us? And if that will be the case then, should it not also motivate us now to fellowship with Him? In practical terms, such as daily time spent with Him in prayer, and in church on a frequent basis? In that final state, perhaps He will be with us continuously because we will be continuously with Him. If that is an ideal, how much of that can we experience now?

          Why do people who do not want to become Christians want to go to heaven? Specifically, if heaven exhibits the continuous presence of the unveiled face of Christ, why would people who do not want to be in the presence of Christ now, while His presence is veiled on earth, want to go there? Perhaps people have misperceptions about what heaven is, or is like. The worldly view of heaven is perhaps a place of unending joy and pleasure, without consideration of what that really means.  We can be quite certain, on Jesus' authority, that these joys and pleasures are not worldly. 

Acts 9:23-31 Saul's early travels

Acts 9:23-25 A plot by the Jews against Saul is foiled. In these verses we see an echo of the Jews' murder of Stephen. They could not win arguments with him, so they planned to murder him. At least Saul's partners in the murder of Stephen had gone through the motions of a trial. It is not stated how the Jews planned to kill Saul, but it couldn't have included the Sanhedrin since he was in Damascus and the Sanhedrin met in Jerusalem. The disciples must have been familiar with Joshua, since lowering Saul over the wall in a basket closely mimics Rahab's protection of the spies (Joshua 2:15). Or perhaps this was a common means of escaping from a walled city in ancient times.

Acts 9:26-30 Saul travels to Jerusalem but the believers there are afraid of him. Saul's reception in Jerusalem was difficult, a foreshadowing of the rest of his life. The Christians were afraid of him because he had not very long before been instrumental in arresting them and had participated in the murder of Stephen. The Jews reacted just as those in Damascus had; unable to refute his preaching, they tried to kill him. In addition, it must have been supremely embarrassing to have their most vocal and aggressive advocate suddenly change sides and join the opposition.

          Barnabas brought Saul to the apostles when they were afraid of him, and explained about his encounter with Christ on the Damascus road.  There is no hint of how Barnabas knew about this. We can only infer that he must have listened to Saul at some point and actually heard what had happened to him. Later in Acts, Barnabas travels with Paul, and later still parts company with him because of a disagreement. Barnabas emerges as one of those people who is around to listen and relate, to encourage those who are on the outs. Paul could later operate effectively without him, but at this juncture his actions helped Paul establish his connection with the church leadership. Since he could not minister effectively in Jerusalem and was in danger, they sent him far away. We read in Galatians 1:17 that he spent three years in Arabia. It is a bit confusing as to whether this was before his trip to Jerusalem, or after he was sent away. It appears that the time he spent in exile was used very effectively, as Galatians 1:12 suggests that it was there that The Lord spoke directly to him and revealed profound truths of the gospel.

Acts 9:31 The church continues to grow.  This verse suggests that church growth was a direct result of Saul no longer arresting believers, and also the on-going work of the Holy Spirit. The key point is that the church was growing throughout Galilee and Samaria, not just in Jerusalem, not yet taken beyond their borders, although Acts 9:10 suggests that there were also believers in Damascus.

Acts 9:19-22 Saul's First Witness for Christ

Acts 9:19-22 Saul begins to preach Christ. The Jews who heard Saul preaching Jesus were amazed at his abrupt change of heart, and equally amazed that he was able to use the Old Testament scriptures so eloquently to prove that Jesus was the promised Messiah. In fact, like Stephen, his intellectual antagonists were unable to cope with his arguments. One has to suspect that he quickly found that they were no more persuaded by intellectual arguments and logic than he had been. Conversion is more a matter of the heart than the head. They may not have been able to counter his arguments, but they weren't going to change their minds based on logic alone.

          This human attribute of choosing to adhere to a position which one knows is logically indefensible is a characteristic of God's initial plan. It derives from our deeply held conviction that logic and evidence are not everything, that there are other things that transcend logic, and trump it, so to speak. Unfortunately, until we are converted, we use this ability to choose sin, just as Adam chose to eat the forbidden fruit. But the redemption of this attribute enables us to persevere in faith, when such perseverance promises to bring us nothing but trials and heartache, because the spiritual truly does transcend the physical.

          Is there a truth here that might unlock the conversion of the hard-headed? If anything, there is a need to acknowledge that for each person, there is something at the apex of their value system, and for most people, it is not logic and evidence. Whatever that thing is, in order to replace it with Jesus, that persons's summum bonum must be in some way defaced or destroyed. If it is a good thing, it must be subordinated to Him, shown that He transcends every good thing because He created all things. If it is not a good thing, it must be destroyed. If it is a value-neutral thing, it must be redeemed so that its attributes reflect Christ. In many cases, we cannot on our own do anything to bring this about in the life of another, but pray that God will intervene supernaturally. And make sure that whoever we are praying for recognizes what is going on. A person whose highest value has been destroyed will fall into despair unless they understand that Someone greater is standing at the door, knocking, offering them eternal life.

Acts 9:10-19 Ananias prays for Saul

Acts 9:10-19 Ananias goes to Saul and prays for him. The conversation in prayer between Ananias and Jesus is rather revealing, because although Saul did not argue with Jesus, Ananias did. Paraphrasing - Ananias said, 'Are you sure, Lord?' And The Lord confirmed to Ananias what he was supposed to do, so Ananias went and did it.

          We have no insight into the physical mechanism of Saul's temporary blindness, or how scales fell from his eyes. The more likely explanation is that he was blinded by the unveiled vision of Jesus, which caused John to fall to the ground as if dead (Rev 1:17). When the metaphorical scales fell from his eyes, he could then understand the gospel, which he immediately began to proclaim (Acts 9:20 & 22). In truth he had always been blind to the truth of the gospel. When confronted by a direct revelation of spiritual reality, that spiritual blindness was manifest as physical blindness. Only when he had the humility to be prayed for by a lay person in the name of Jesus was his blindness lifted.

          How is it possible for those with great intellectual gifts to be used of God, without becoming so puffed up that they lose sight of Him? Humility does not come easily to those who see and understand things that others do not. Most people think themselves superior to others around them. But the key is what one does with the gifts God has endowed them with. Saul initially used his position and gifts to persecute the church. After he was converted, he could have easily used the greatness of his revelations as a basis to continue to be arrogant and lord it over others. However, we find that God forestalled this by giving Paul a thorn in the flesh. (2 Corinthians 12:1-10) The key that Paul revealed there is that God's strength is perfected in weakness. Once Paul intellectually grasped this principle, he was able to operate, to live with his pervasive weakness and his great revelation, because he realized that however smart he was, it amounted to nothing compared to what God wanted to reveal to and through him. So if God chose to use a believer named Ananias, who had no intellectual gifts to speak of, to pray for him and through him to free him from blindness, he would accept it from the hand of God. In this respect, it appears he responded more quickly than Moses, who argued with God about his call for quite a while, according to Exodus 3-4.

Acts 9:1-9 Jesus confronts Saul

Acts 9:1-9 Saul of Tarsus is confronted by Christ on the road to Damascus and is blinded. Acts 8:1-3 recount Saul's attacks on the church members in Jerusalem. In Acts 9:1-2 Saul expands his assault on the followers of the Way, following on the heels of those who had scattered carrying to gospel outside of Jerusalem. If the gospel spread, he was determined to follow it and snuff it out. So great was his devotion to his cause that he would not listen to and hear the gospel. And so it was that Jesus appeared to him on the road, being perceived as a blinding light from heaven.

          Why was Saul uniquely confronted by Jesus in this fashion - maybe it's not one of a kind, but rare? The primary answer is that God is sovereign and does not explain to use the why's and wherefore's of what He chooses to do. But there are hints. Among them, as Paul later reminisces about his encounter with Christ on the Damascus road (Acts 22:4-21) in explaining to the Jews in Jerusalem about his life, he recounts (Acts 22:20) that he stood by holding the cloaks of those who were executing Stephen. Clearly, years later, this still weighed on him as one of the principle things that pierced his heart. Was it Stephen's final words that he could not deal with? The version he tells Agrippa (Acts 26:12-18) includes additional things that Christ told him. One was that it was hard to kick against the goads (kentra - often rendered pricks, also translated as a sting). Stephen's forgiveness of his murderers as he died must have stung Paul's conscience.

          Another addition in Paul's description to Agrippa (Acts 26:16-18) is Jesus' commission to him at that time, that He would send Paul to witness to the Gentiles so that they would receive forgiveness of sins and obtain an inheritance among those who have faith in Him. So there is a hint that Jesus chose Paul as His emissary, a chosen instrument (Acts 9:15), to carry the gospel to the gentiles, because the Jewish apostles were struggling to break free of their cultural background (Galatians 2:11-14).

          Paul's ultimate impact on Christianity cannot be measured simply by the fact that he wrote 2032 of the 7956 verses in the New Testament. Paul's spiritual depth and intellectual rigor enabled him to uniquely articulate the fundamental truths of Christianity. Although it is likely true that every fundamental truth of Christianity has its basis in the words of Jesus as recorded in the gospel, they are there embedded in a single cultural context, i.e., Judaism. Paul recast these truths in a conceptual framework that is both comprehensible by and acceptable to Gentiles, specifically drawing on the Greek philosophical tradition of the eastern Mediterranean. In other words, is it possible that the primary reason Jesus went to such extraordinary lengths to confront Saul and reveal Himself to him is that Saul was uniquely capable of uniting Jewish learning (from studying under Gamaliel per Acts 22:1) with Greek intellectual rigor (2 Peter 3:15-16) and also receiving direct revelation from God via the Holy Spirit (Galatians 1:11-12) leading uniquely to knowledge of Christ in all His power (Philippians 3:8-11)?

          For each of us, God has a plan to get our attention, to present His truth and invite us to join Him. We cannot judge it fair or unfair that He uniquely plans each person's opportunities. What we can do is purpose in our hearts to have the same zeal that Saul had when opposing Christianity, and then that Paul had in advocating and advancing Christianity.

          Throughout the Bible, when God chooses to directly reveal Himself to mankind, there is an overwhelming sense of God's transcendence. In this case, Saul did not argue with Jesus. He simply asked, "Who are You, Lord?" Saul knew without asking that this was God, The Lord, YHWH. He didn't argue about what he was supposed to do. He fasted three days and nights, awaiting the next step. When God pursues us, for many and perhaps for most, there is a season where we know beyond any doubt that it is God that is at work. Is our response as straightforward as Paul's? Once Jesus had revealed Himself as God, Saul simply awaited direction. Later we will see he took the initiative to spread the gospel and carry out his commission, but in this initial phase, he knew only that this was God and he needed to find out what God required of him.

Acts 8:26-40 Phillip the evangelist

Acts 8:26-39 Phillip and the Ethiopian eunuch. One might almost be tempted to ask, why did the Holy Spirit select Philip and tell him to go minister to one person in an out of the way place? Perhaps the easiest answer is, because he would go! Since the apostles had set everything in order in Samaria, perhaps he realized his evangelistic ministry there was ebbing; perhaps simply because he demonstrated his willingness to be used by the Holy Spirit; perhaps because he had a very powerful gift of evangelization. Even though he was in Samaria and the Holy Spirit told him to go south on the desert road from Jerusalem to Gaza, which was 40 to 50 kilometers away.

          The Holy Spirit told Philip to run up and join the chariot of the court official of Candace, who was returning home to Ethiopia after worshiping in Jerusalem. We don't know if this man was a Jew of the dispersion or a Jewish convert in Ethiopia. The evidence that he had gone to Jerusalem to worship and that he was reading the scroll of Isaiah while he traveled certainly suggests that he was committed. And obviously he was puzzled by Isaiah 53:7-8. In the innocence of faith, he had not had that passage explained away. Philip knocked on the metaphorical the door with a simple inquiry, and the eunuch opened the door with an invitation to join him. Philip then had the opportunity to explain how Jesus was in this Scripture, and no doubt many others, and all that Jesus had said and done. We don't really know what he said. But the eunuch was convinced because he asked if he could be baptized, so Philip must have explained something about baptism. And Philip baptized him on the spot.

          One imagines there must have been quite a number of people in this eunuch's traveling party, as he was the court official in charge of all the finances of the queen of Ethiopia. How much did they hear? What did they think of seeing their boss being baptized?

Acts 8:40 Phillip evangelizes from Azotus to Caesarea. These are both coastal cities, approximately 100 km apart. There are no details about this evangelistic campaign but clearly Philip was a gifted evangelist on both in a group and on the personal level. 

Acts 8:14-25 Simony

Acts 8:14-17 The apostles travel to Samaria so that new converts will receive the Holy Spirit. It is ironic that the apostles were the "sent ones" in name, but it was a deacon, Phillip, who is the first recorded missionary who went outside of his home town to carry the gospel to others. The apostles came from Jerusalem after hearing of Phillip's success in leading people to Christ. Apparently Philip either did not have the authority, or the calling, to minister the filling of the Holy Spirit, so the apostles came and the Samaritans received the Holy Spirit.

Acts 8:18-25 Simon the sorcerer tries to buy the ability to bestow the Holy Spirit. We don't know what Simon saw or understood, but he obviously misunderstood the way God works. He thought he could buy authority or capability to bestow the Holy Spirit. The evidence of the Holy Spirit must have been tangible, so that an unspiritual person like Simon would be impressed. Perhaps it was speaking in tongues and exalting God, as is recorded in Acts 2 and Acts 10. Regardless, when he offered money to the apostles, Peter rebuked him harshly. In the context of the Deuteronomy passage, Peter knew that this man in his former way of life was detestable to God. His offering of money indicated that he did not yet have a changed heart - he still wanted power and recognition for supernatural ability. The intention of his heart was still focused on himself, not on Jesus. He may have believed the good news in the sense of a set of doctrines, but he had not yet received Christ to be changed by him. At least at the conclusion of Peter's rebuke, Simon asked for prayer, to be delivered from what Peter had warned him of: the gall of bitterness and the bondage of iniquity. It is interesting that Peter told Simon to repent, but Simon requested prayer, rather than making any statement regarding repentance.

          The term Simony is derived from this passage. It refers to the practice of paying money for spiritual benefits. The modern usage is broader than the act of offering money to obtain the power to impart the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands. Modern usage is to apply this to any situation in which money or other earthly valuables are offered in exchange for any spiritual benefit. There are several variations on this. For example, a church office such as elder or bishop or pastor may not convey with it any divine unction of power, so trying to buy an appointment to such a position does not bring what Simon was seeking. Because God sovereignly gives His gifts (described in I Cor 12 & 14), man's response should be to recognize what God has done. Trying to buy the office to gain authority in the spiritual world is exactly backwards. Another example would be to pay money to the church in exchange for forgiveness for some sin, either past or planned. There is no Biblical basis for granting an indulgence for a planned sin. And when Jesus told the rich young ruler to give all that he had to the poor and follow Him, it was not that the young man would be buying forgiveness with his wealth. In fact, the conversation suggests that the young man did not have any glaring sins, just a recognition of a spiritual need. Rather, it was his wealth that kept him from close communion with God, and Jesus said he could only resolve that by getting rid of the dead albatross of wealth hanging from his life (to mix metaphors).

          There is an aspect of the connection between the world and spiritual things, but it is the way of the disciple - walking the Jesus road. Jesus said, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake, he is the one who will save it. For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits himself?"  (Luke 9:23-25) This is not Simony, this is discipleship.

          Our world is filled with people craving things supernatural. It is a desire that is in the heart of every person, because God created man with a God-shaped vacuum, as Pascal worded it (see also Ecclesiastes 3:11). In the modern world, nonbelievers attempt to fill this vacuum with innumerable substitutes, including all of the things mentioned in Deuteronomy. The names have changed slightly in the modern world. Examples include: transcendental meditation, Tarot cards, mediums (haven't changed much), innumerable religious cults and sects (both Western and Eastern), New Age spirituality....  The sad thing is that the gospel is usually presented without enough power so that the sorcerers of this age will recognize that the power is real and true, comes from God, and trumps their attempts to find spiritual experience apart from God. Evidently Phillip demonstrated the power of the gospel; would that we could similarly do so.

Acts 8:5-13 Phillip and a sorcerer

Acts 8:5-13 Phillip evangelizes in Samaria. The effect of the persecution in Jerusalem was for Christians to scatter, and carry the gospel to Samaria, as Jesus had told the apostles in Acts 1:8. Philip was mentioned in Acts 6:5 as one of the deacons, right after Stephen. We find that after waiting on tables for a while, he was now empowered with a gospel of power, which included deliverance and miraculous healings. So great was his witness that a man, Simon the sorcerer, who had formerly practiced magic and astonished people, claiming to be great, not only lost his followers to Christianity, but also himself believed the gospel. This was a guy who knew how to fake magic and impress people, and yet when he saw real supernatural power, he was able to recognize it and respond.

          In Deuteronomy 18:9-22, Moses had described the stark opposition between God's prophets and other people who practiced (or pretended to practice) supernatural actions apart from God. In this section he included those who make their children pass through the fire, use divination, practice witchcraft, interpret omens, sorcerers, anyone who casts a spell, a medium, a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. In the time just before Israel enters the promised land, God warns Israel that these practices are detestable, and that even though people are looking for supernatural connection, the only connection to Him will be through a prophet that He will raise up. And that prophet will be known by the fact that what he says in God's name will come to pass. If someone prophesies falsely in God's name, i.e., what he says doesn't happen, they can ignore him. So Phillip is in this circumstance the prophet that God raised up, to tell the good news to the people of Samaria. And Simon, whether he was really a practitioner of supernatural power apart from God, or was just a fake who had learned how to trick people, would have been driven out (according to Deut 18:12). But evidently there was enough repentance in Simon's heart that he was not driven out.

Acts 8:1-4 Persecution

Acts 8:1-4 Persecution and scattering of the church. The trial and execution of Stephen appears to have emboldened the enemies of the church. Saul specifically began dragging men and women off to prison. Some of the members of the church moved to other cities, scattering but continuing to bring the news of Jesus where they went. Is it ironic or fitting that before his conversion, while he was still an enemy of Christ, God used Saul to initiate the spreading of the disciples and the gospel outside Jerusalem.

          We have to wonder what the Romans thought of all this. They were reluctant participants in the execution of Christ, and at that time it seemed that the Sanhedrin complained to Pilate that they did not have the authority for capital punishment. (John 18:31) Now the Sanhedrin had executed Stephen without Roman authorization (or so the account seems to indicate) and they were arresting many others and throwing them in prison. What prison? Did the Jews have their own prison?

          In the modern world, we have become complacent in that tolerance has become politically correct, and generally the law of the land, in most Western countries. Persecution for the sake of Christ seems confined mostly to Islamic, Communist, and some third-world countries. But Jesus had forewarned of persecution and most of church history is one of persecution, if not by the government, then by each other. We have both the promises of and empowerment by Christ, and examples of how to act in these circumstances.

          Jesus said that He came to bring abundant life to whoever would receive Him. (John 10:10) Stephen's life doesn't seem to have been too abundant after he was arrested. Most likely those imprisoned didn't feel they were experiencing abundant life. The problem with these observations is that they pertain to the physical or natural realm. Jesus brought abundant spiritual life - abundance of the presence of God. The Holy Spirit would flow out of one's innermost being like a river of living water. (John 7:38-39) When Stephen died, he went immediately to a heavenly reception in which Jesus was standing at the right hand of God to receive him. There is nothing in imprisonment that can keep us from experiencing the flow of the Holy Spirit, as for example, in Acts 16:25. Paul & Silas were singing worship to God at midnight in prison.

Acts 7:54-60 Stephen's Death

Acts 7:54-60 Stephen is stoned to death. Apparently the Council had listened without interrupting up to this point.  But when Stephen accused them of betraying and murdering the Messiah, and not keeping the Law of Moses, they were cut in their hearts. It is a little hard to figure out what is meant by them gnashing their teeth at or on Stephen. It almost sounds like they started chewing him, although perhaps that is metaphorical. Maybe they were grinding their teeth. But the outcome was that they drove Stephen out of the city and began stoning him. There is no record of the Sanhedrin delivering a verdict. Most likely the charges were based on Deuteronomy 17, and since they laid their garments at the feet of Saul, this implies some kind of official sanction for Stephen's execution.

          What do we make of all this? Stephen is the first recorded martyr in the New Testament. He looked into heaven and saw the glory of God with Jesus standing at the right hand of God, which he described.  This transcendent vision gave him strength and comfort as he endured mortal agony, and the grace to forgive his own murderers. (Acts 7:59-60) We sing of this in the second stanza of the hymn 'The Son of God Goes Forth to War' by Reginald Heber.

The martyr first whose eagle eye could pierce beyond the grave,

Who saw his Master in the sky and called on Him to save:

Like him with pardon on his tongue in midst of mortal pain,

He prayed for them that did the wrong. Who follows in His train?

Visions of God’s throne are recorded only a few times in Scripture. (Isaiah 6, Ezekiel 1 & 10, and Revelation 4-5). In every case there are circumstances of grave tribulation or distress. So perhaps we should not, at least from the viewpoint of this life, be seeking such a vision, unless we are prepared for the accompanying life-conditions.

As he was dying from the stones, Stephen called on The Lord to receive his spirit. His final words were forgiveness - asking The Lord to not count this sin against them. Thus in the truest sense he witnessed (marturos) for Christ - showing love and forgiveness for his enemies as commanded by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount. (Matthew 5:44, Luke 6:27)

Acts 7:2-50 Stephen's Defense

Acts 7:2-8 Stephen cites how God dealt with Abraham. He quotes Genesis 12:1 to the effect that God told Abraham to leave Mesopotamia and Haran and move to a land He would show him. He quotes Gen 15:7, the promise that God gave Abraham to give him and his offspring the land. And then quotes Gen 15:13-14 to the effect that God warned Abraham that his offspring would be enslaved in Egypt and that He would bring them out of slavery after that, to serve Him in this land. And finally he references the covenant of circumcision that God gave Abraham long before Moses (Genesis 17:9-14).

 Acts 7:9-16 Stephen discusses how God dealt with Jacob and his twelve sons. God rescued Joseph after his brothers had sold him into slavery in Egypt and made him governor of Egypt. And through these circumstances, Jacob and his entire family were saved from famine, and moved to Egypt, and settled there. Why did Stephen mention the relatively minor point that Jacob and Joseph were buried in the tomb in Shechem that Abraham had purchased? (Gen 50:4-13 and Joshua 24:32). Most likely this was in reference to God's fulfillment of the promise to give Abraham and his offspring the land of Canaan.

Acts 7:17-29 Stephen discusses how Moses grew up and was exiled from Egypt. He quotes Exodus 1:8 regarding the new king in Egypt who did not know Joseph. He recounts Moses' birth, upbringing, and how Moses killed an Egyptian who was treating a Hebrew unjustly, thinking he was delivering Israel. And then when he tried to get two Israelites who were fighting to reconcile, recognized that this was not going to work, and in quoting Exodus 2:14-15, Stephen shows that Moses realized he would be wanted for murder and fled to Midian. So Moses did not initially understand God or His plan at all and on top of that was a murderer.

Acts 7:30-36 Stephen discusses how God called Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt. Quoting Exodus 3:2-8, Stephen explains how God called Moses even though he was a most unlikely candidate, because He was God, the God of the patriarchs, and He was holy. And He was the one who would deliver Israel out of Egypt, even though Exodus 2:14 indicates the Israelites had little reason, in the natural, to accept Moses' leadership. He was chosen by God so that it was God who performed wonders and signs with Moses as His designated ruler and deliverer. It was all God.

Acts 7:37-44 Stephen discusses how the Israelites rebelled against Moses and God in the wilderness. In Deut 18:15 Moses told Israel that God would raise up for them a leader, just as He had spoken with Moses on Mount Sinai, He would speak to other leaders. But this was after they had tried to find their own leaders and asked Aaron to make a golden calf for them to worship (Exodus 32:1). Stephen quotes Amos 5:25-26 to the effect that God was not really worshipped by Israel even in the wilderness, not just with the golden calf that Aaron had made, but also took along the tabernacle of Moloch and the star of Rompha. And they worshipped these other gods even though they had the tabernacle in the wilderness that was built just as God had told Moses and shown him the pattern for it. They had a copy of the heavenly tabernacle (Hebrews 8:5), yet rather than worship the true God, the God who delivered them out of Egypt, in the manner He had shown and directed them, they clung to worship of other Gods.

Acts 7:45-47 Stephen continues the story with Joshua leading Israel into the land, David finding favor in God's sight, and Solomon building the temple. Joshua, David, and Solomon each obeyed God and were successful in service to Him, in the particular role God had called them. Leading up to the building of the Temple in Jerusalem by Solomon, which ought to have established permanently the worship of the true God by Israel, according to His commands, so that He would dwell among them.

Acts 7:48-50 Stephen quotes Isaiah on the point of God not dwelling in a house made by human hands. The problem with Solomon's temple (and later, Herod's temple) is that an earthly tabernacle or temple in simply not equal to the task of being a dwelling place for the God who is the creator of all things, who is Himself uniquely not subject to the law of causality, but created it. Isaiah 66:1-2 quite simply states this question to Israel by God: "What kind of house will you build for Me?" At this point, it appears that Stephen is headed for a summation in which he can explain that Jesus was God incarnate and that the house that God really desires to dwell in is the church, the assembly of those who have surrendered to Christ, and that all of Israel's history was a picture and type of this truth, now actually present. 

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

Acts 6:8-15 Stephen serves in the power of the Holy Spirit, and is arrested and brought before the Sanhedrin on the charge of blasphemy. Some Jews attempted to argue with Stephen about the gospel, most likely disputing specific facts or perhaps the interpretation of the Old Testament. But the Holy Spirit gave such a powerful revelation to Stephen that he was able to answer with wisdom and the power of the Spirit that these Jews were unable to respond to the arguments.

          As an indication of the extent to which the Jews had bought into the world's system, they turned to the legal system in an attempt to get rid of Stephen, since they could not answer his religious arguments. But their accusation reflects a partial understanding of what he was saying. They accused him of saying that Jesus will destroy the Law of Moses, which is true in one respect. Because the redemption that Jesus offers brings grace with the power of the resurrection from the dead, the good news transcends the law. Paul elaborates this in great detail. (Romans 2-8) It is not that the law is gone, but that the law could not save. Jesus could and would save. Stephen understood this. His accusers did not. So they brought him to the Sanhedrin where he was to be questioned.

Acts 7:1-53 Stephen's defense. In this chapter there is a theme and there are points made, but we have to accept on faith that this was inspired by the Holy Spirit, first because of Acts 6:15, and second as a fulfillment of Jesus' promise in Luke 12:11-12. It is possible the construct an outline of this message. But it is more likely that the Spirit led Stephen to say specific words fit to the occasion, and as Acts 8:1, 22:20, and 26:14 suggest, they pierced deeply into Paul's heart, ultimately being part of what led to his conversion. And so it must be that when the Holy Spirit gives us words to speak, we must commit our words and our lives to Him, because in such circumstances, God is at work in ways we do not fathom.

Acts 7:1 The high priest asks if the accusations are true. What were the accusations? According to Acts 6:13-14:

•   Stephen incessantly spoke against the holy place (the Temple), saying that Jesus will destroy it;

•   He incessantly spoke against the law, saying that Jesus will alter the customs that Moses gave them

Stephen's response is filled with quotes from the Old Testament. A significant aspect of Stephen's discussion is that God's dealing with the patriarch's precedes the Law of Moses, and the building of the Temple.

Acts 6:1-7 The first deacons

Acts 6:1-6 Seven deacons are selected to serve tables. The first thing we notice is grumbling. In Acts 4:32 they were all of one heart and soul. In Acts 6:1 the culturally Greek Jews complained because they thought the Jewish widows were getting more food service than the Hellenistic widows. The first chink in the unity of the church. However, the twelve apostles treated this complaint seriously and told the congregation to select seven men to put in charge of the food service, so that they could focus on teaching. This is perhaps the first indication that not every person has every gift, or is called to do every work. The apostles were gifted to teach and pastor and exhibited gifts of healing, but they recognized that others were gifted to organize and lead practical ministries (gifts of administration and helps).

          There is no record of how the congregation chose the seven men. Perhaps they had a nominating committee and an election. Perhaps they prayed and the Holy Spirit made it plain to them through consensus. The emphasis of the record is that the chosen men were full of faith and the Holy Spirit. This is further evidenced by what follows. Although these men are chosen to serve tables, this is perhaps merely a test of their humility, as the Holy Spirit has also gifted at least Stephen and Phillip with other more spiritual gifts. Are we willing to serve in menial jobs?

Acts 6:7 The word continues to spread in Jerusalem. Perhaps there is a hint here that the church stopped growing when the grumbling started. At least grumbling in the church was not a capital offense as it was in Exodus 16, or as serious as lying to the Holy Spirit in Acts 5. And the outcome of the apostles dealing with the situation in a godly manner was for the church to continue growing.

          Many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith. Although the high priest, the senior leadership, and of course the Sadducees would never be willing to receive the gospel and follow Christ, on theological and political grounds, it appears that many priests were touched by the Holy Spirit and responded to the truth of the gospel. This no doubt created tension within the ranks of the priesthood. But it is another test of character. Were they willing to risk conflict with the high priest, and possibly their career, for the sake of the truth when it became evident to them? Are we?

Acts 5:33-42 Gamaliel

Acts 5:33-39 Gamaliel's counsel. Apparently Gamaliel was a Pharisee, not a Sadducee. The minority party in this case, but still with the right to speak in the Sanhedrin. His advice, while not necessarily born of the Holy Spirit, nevertheless carries a great deal of wisdom.  He cites two examples (apparently in the recent past) in which people rose up as leaders of various groups, but their rebellion came to nothing and their followers were scattered. Most likely he was reflecting on the contrast to what had happened during the Maccabean rebellion, in which God granted supernatural victory to free the Jews from Greek domination; these leaders had likely intended to recreate this success but as their efforts came to naught, they were obviously not being led by God. But they must not forget that the Maccabees were themselves supernaturally gifted for success. So from Gamaliel's human perspective, the priests would be well-advised to pay close attention to the evidence; if this was from God, they had best not oppose it.

          The only other reference to Gamaliel is in Paul's defense in the Temple in Jerusalem (Acts 23:2) in which he states that he sat at the feet of Gamaliel. When we read the scholarship and the logical thoroughness with which Paul constructed his epistles, we can infer that Gamaliel was indeed an honest and gifted scholar, who understood both the scriptures and the way that God had worked with the Jews over the course of their history. He was respected by all - apparently even the Sadducees. Whether he became a follower of Christ would be speculation. Was he ever influenced by Nicodemus?

Acts 5:40-42 The disciples are flogged and continue teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ. The priests repeated their orders that the apostles stop speaking in Jesus' name. Most likely at this point no one thought the apostles would obey this order, but for the record the priests had to repeat it. The apostles rejoiced that they had been considered worthy to suffer for Jesus' name. The battle lines continue to be drawn. But we shall see that God has a way of building His kingdom despite the opposition of those who claim to speak for Him. It is not that the church directly confronts the Jewish priesthood; rather, they become irrelevant to the work of God in the new covenant. They didn't have to become irrelevant, but they marginalized themselves by rejecting what God was doing.