CHAPTER 7
Introduction
THIS chapter contains the defence of Stephen before the sanhedrim,
or great council of the Jews. There has been great diversity of
opinion about the object which Stephen had in view in this defence,
and about the reason why he introduced at such length the history
of the Jewish people. But a few remarks may perhaps show his
design, He was accused of blasphemy in speaking against the
institutions of Moses and the temple, that is, against everything
held sacred among the Jews. To meet this charge, he gives a
statement, at length, of his belief in the Mosaic religion, in the great
points of their history, and in the fact that God had interposed in a
remarkable manner in defending them from dangers. By this historical
statement he avows his full belief in the Divine origin of the Jewish
religion, and thus indirectly repels the charge of blasphemy. It is
further to be remembered, that this was the best way of securing the
attention of the council. Had he entered on an abstract defence, he
might expect to be stopped by their cavils or their clamour. But the
history of their own nation was a favourite topic among the Jews. They
were always ready to listen to an account of their ancestors; and to
secure their attention, nothing more was necessary than to refer to
their illustrious lives and deeds. Comp. Psalm 78, 105, 106, 135,
Ezekiel 20. In this way Stephen secured their attention,
and practically repelled the charge of speaking reproachfully of
Moses and the temple. He showed them that he had as firm a belief
as they in the great historical facts,of their nation. It is to be
remembered, also, that this speech was broken off in the midst,
Acts 7:53,54, and it is therefore difficult to tell what the design
of Stephen was. It seems clear, however, that he intended to convict
them of guilt, by showing that they sustained the same character as
their fathers had manifested, Acts 7:51,52) and there is some
probability that he intended to show that the acceptable worship of God
was not to be confined to any place particularly, from the fact that the
worship of Abraham, and the patriarchs, and Moses, was acceptable
before the temple was reared, (Acts 7:2, etc.,) and from the
declaration in Acts 7:48, that God dwells not in temples made with
hands. All that can be said here is, that Stephen
(1) showed his full belief in the Divine appointment of Moses, and the
historical facts of their religion.
(2.) That he laid the foundation of an argument to show that those
things were not perpetually binding, and that acceptable worship
might be offered in other places and in another manner than at the
temple.
It has been asked in what way Luke became acquainted with this speech
so as to repeat it. The Scripture has not informed us. But we may
remark,
(1.) that Stephen was the first martyr. His death, and the
incidents connected with it, could not but be a matter of interest to
the first Christians; and the substance of his defence, at least,
would be familiar to them. There is no improbability in supposing that
imperfect copies might be preserved by writing, and circulated among
them.
(2.) Luke was the companion of Paul. (See Introduction to the
Gospel by Luke.) Paul was present when this defence was delivered, and
was a man who would be likely to remember what was said on such an
occasion. From him Luke might have derived the account of this defence.
In regard to this discourse, it may be further remarked, that it is not
necessary to suppose that Stephen was inspired. Even if there
should be found inaccuracies, as some critics have pretended, in the
address, it would not militate against its genuineness. It is the defence
of a man on trial under a serious charge; not a man of whom there is
evidence that he was inspired, but a pious, devoted, heavenly-minded
man. All that the sacred narrative is responsible for is the
correctness of the report. Luke alleges only that such a speech
was in fact delivered, without affirming that every particular in it
is correct.
Verse 1. Then said the High Priest. See Barnes "Matthew 2:4".
In this case the high priest seems to have presided in the council.
Are these things so? To wit, the charge alleged against him of
blasphemy against Moses and the temple, Acts 6:13,14.
Verse 2. Men, brethren, and fathers. These were the usual titles by
which the sanhedrim was addressed. In all this Stephen was perfectly
respectful, and showed that he was disposed to render due honour to the
institutions of the nation.
The God of glory. This is a Hebrew form of expression denoting
the glorious God. It properly denotes his majesty, or splendour, or
magnificence; and the word glory is often applied to the splendid
appearances in which God has manifested himself to men, Deuteronomy 5:24;
Exodus 33:18; 16:7,10; Leviticus 9:23; Numbers 14:10. Perhaps Stephen meant
to affirm that God appeared to Abraham in some such glorious or
splendid manifestation, by which he would know that he was addressed by
God. Stephen, moreover, evidently uses the word glory
to repel the charge of blasphemy against God, and to show that he
regarded him as worthy of honour and praise.
Appeared, etc. In what manner he appeared is not said. In
Genesis 12:1, it is simply recorded that God had said unto Abraham,
etc.
Unto our father. The Jews valued themselves much on being the
children of Abraham, See Barnes "Matthew 3:9". This expression was
therefore well calculated to conciliate their minds.
When he was in Mesopotamia. In Genesis 11:31, it is said that Abraham
dwelt in Ur of the Chaldees. The word Mesopotamia properly denotes
the region between the two rivers, the Euphrates and the Tigris.
See Barnes "Acts 2:9". The name is Greek, and the region had also other
names before the Greek name was given to it. In Genesis 11:31; 15:7,
it is called Ur of the Chaldees. Mesopotamia and Chaldea might not
exactly coincide; but it is evident that Stephen meant to say that
Ur was in the country afterwards called Mesopotamia. Its precise
situation is unknown. A Persian fortress of this name is mentioned by
Ammianus, (xxv. 8,) between Nesibis and the Tigris.
Before he dwelt in Charran. From Genesis 11:31, it would seem that
Terah took his son Abraham of his own accord, and removed to Haran. But,
from Genesis 12:1; 15:7, it appears that God had commanded Abraham
to remove, and he so ordered it in his providence that Terah was
disposed to remove his family with an intention of going into the land
of Canaan, (Charran.) This is the Greek form of the Hebrew word
Haran, Genesis 11:31. This place was also in Mesopotamia, in
36ř 52' N. lat. and 39ř 5' E. lon. Here Terah died, (Genesis 11:32;)
and to this place Jacob retired when he fled from his brother Esau,
Genesis 27:43. It is situated "in a flat and sandy plain, and is
inhabited by a few wandering Arabs, who select it for the delicious
water which it contains."--Robinson' s Calmet.
{a} "brethren" Acts 22:1
{*} "Charran" "Haran"
Verse 3. And said unto him. How long this was said unto him before
he went is not recorded. Moses simply says that God had commanded him to
go, Genesis 12:1.
Thy kindred. Thy relatives, or family connexions. It seems that
Terah went with him as far as to Haran; but Abraham was apprized
that he was to leave his family, and to go almost alone.
Into the land, etc. The country was yet unknown. The place was to
be shown him. This is presented in the New Testament as a strong
instance of faith, Hebrews 11:8,9. It was an act of simple
confidence in God. And to leave his country and home, to go into a
land of strangers, not knowing whither he went, required strong
confidence in God. It is a simple illustration of what man is always
required to do at the commands of God. Thus the gospel requires him to
commit all to God; to yield body and soul to his disposal; and to be
ready at his command to forsake father and mother, and friends, and
houses, and lands, for the sake of the Lord Jesus, Luke 14:33;
Matthew 19:27,29. The trials which Abraham might have anticipated may be
readily conceived. He was going, in a rude and barbarous age of the
world, into a land of strangers. He was without arms or armies, almost
alone. He did not even know the nature or situation of the land, or the
character of its inhabitants. He had no title to it; no claim to urge;
and he went depending on the simple promise of God that he would give it
to him. He went, therefore, trusting simply to the promise of God.
And thus his conduct illustrated precisely what we are to do in all
the future--in reference to all our coming life, and to the eternity
before us-we are to trust simply to the promise of God, and do that
which he requires. This is faith. In Abraham it was as simple
and intelligible an operation of mind as ever occurs in any instance.
Nor is faith in the Scripture regarded as more mysterious than any
other mental operation. Had Abraham seen all that was to result
from his going into that land, it would have been sufficient reason
to induce him to do as he did. But God saw it; and Abraham was
required to act just as if he had seen it all, and all the reasons
why he was called. On the strength of God's promises he was called to
act. This was faith. It did not require him to act where there was
no reason for his so acting, but where he did not see the reason.
So in all cases of faith. If man could see all that God sees, he would
perceive reasons for acting as God requires. But the reasons of
things are often concealed, and man is required to act on the
belief that God sees reasons why he should so act. To act under
the proper impression of that truth which God presents, is faith--as
simple and intelligible as any other act or operation of the mind.
See Barnes "Mark 16:16".
Verse 4. Land of the Chaldaeans. From Ur of the Chaldees,
Genesis 11:31.
When his father was dead. This passage has given rise to no small
difficulty in the interpretation. The difficulty is this: From
Genesis 11:26, it would seem that Abraham was born when Terah was
seventy years of age--" And Terah lived seventy years and begat
Abram, Nahor, and Haran." From Genesis 12:4, it seems that Abraham
was seventy-five years of age when he departed from Haran to
Canaan. The age of Terah was therefore but one hundred and forty-five
years. Yet, in Genesis 11:32, it is said that Terah was two hundred and
five years old when he died; thus leaving sixty years of Terah's life
beyond the time when Abraham left Haran. Various modes have been
proposed of meeting this difficulty.
(1.) Errors in numbers are more likely to occur than any other. In
the Samaritan copy of the Pentateuch, it is said that Terah died in
Haran at the age of one hundred and five years; which would suppose that
his death occurred forty years before Abraham left Haran. But the
Hebrew, Latin Vulgate, Septuagint, Syriac, and Arabic, read it two
hundred and five years.
(2.) It is not affirmed that Abraham was born just at the time when
Terah was seventy years of age. All that the passage in Genesis 11:26
proves, according to the usual meaning of similar expressions, is, that
Terah was seventy years old before he had any sons, and that the
three were born subsequently to that. But which was born first, or how
long intervals intervened between their birth, does not appear.
Assuredly it does not mean that all were born precisely at the time when
Terah was seventy years of age. Neither does it appear that Abraham was
the eldest of the three. The sons of Noah are said to have been Shem,
Ham, and Japheth, (Genesis 5:32;) yet Japheth, though mentioned
last, was the eldest, (Genesis 10:21.) As Abraham afterwards became
much the most distinguished, and as he was the father of the Jewish
people of whom Moses was writing, it was natural that he should be
mentioned first. If it cannot be proved that Abraham was the eldest,
as assuredly it cannot be, then there is no improbability in supposing
that his birth might have occurred many years after Terah was
seventy years of age.
(3.) The Jews unanimously affirm that Terah relapsed into idolatry
before Abraham left Haran; and this they denominate death, or a
moral death.--Kuin”el. It is certain, therefore, that, from some
cause, they were accustomed to speak of Terah as dead, before
Abraham left him. Stephen only used language which was customary among
the Jews; and would use it doubtless correctly, though we may not be
able to see precisely how it can be reconciled with the account in
Genesis.
{a} "Then came he out" Genesis 12:5
{*} "Charran" "Haran"
Verse 5. And he gave him none inheritance. Abraham led a wandering
life; and this passage means, that he did not himself receive a
permanent possession or residence in that land. The only land
which he owned was the field which he purchased of the children
of Heth, for a burial-place, Genesis 23. As this was obtained by
purchase, and not by the direct gift of God, and as it was not
designed for a residence, it is said that God gave him no
inheritance. It is mentioned as a strong instance of his faith, that
he should remain there without a permanent residence himself, with only
the prospect that his children, at some distant period, would inherit it.
Not so much as to set his foot on. This is a proverbial
expression, denoting in an emphatic manner that he had no land,
Deuteronomy 2:5.
Would give it to him. Genesis 13:15. Abraham did not himself
possess all that land; and the promise is evidently equivalent to
saying that it should be conferred on the family of Abraham, or the
family of which he was the father, without affirming that he should
himself personally possess it. It is true, however, that Abraham
himself afterwards dwelt many years in that land as his home,
Genesis 13, etc.
For a possession. To be held as his own property.
When as yet he had no child. When there was no human probability
that he would have any posterity. Comp. Genesis 15:2,3; 18:11,12.
This is mentioned as a strong instance of his faith: "Who against hope
believed in hope," Romans 4:18.
{b} "he promised" Genesis 13:15
Verse 6. And God spake on this wise. In this manner,
Genesis 15:13,14.
His seed. His posterity; his descendants.
Should sojourn. This means that they should have a temporary
residence there. The word is used in opposition to a fixed,
permanent home, and is applied to travellers or foreigners.
In a strange land. In the Hebrew, (Genesis 15:13,) "Shall be a
stranger in a land that is not theirs." The land of Canaan and the land
of Egypt were to them strange lands, though the obvious reference here
is to the latter.
Should bring them into bondage. Or, should make them slaves,
Exodus 1:11.
And entreat them evil. Should oppress or afflict
them.
Four hundred years. This is the precise time which is mentioned by
Moses, Genesis 15:13. Great perplexity has been experienced in explaining
this passage, or reconciling it with other statements. In Exodus 12:40,
it is said that their sojourning in Egypt was four hundred and thirty
years. Josephus (Antiq. b. ii.chap. ix. 2 ]) also says, that the time in
which they were in Egypt was four hundred years; though in another place
(Antiq. b. ii. chap. xv. & 2) he says, that they left Egypt four hundred
and thirty years after their forefather Abraham came to Canaan, but two
hundred and fifteen years after Jacob removed to Egypt. Paul also
(Galatians 3:17) says, that it was four hundred and thirty years from
the time when the promise was given to Abraham to the time when
the law was given on Mount Sinai. The Samaritan Pentateuch says
also, (Exodus 12:40,) that the "dwelling of the sons of Israel, and
of their fathers, which they dwelt in the land of Canaan, and in
the land of Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years." The same
is the version of the Septuagint. A part of this perplexity is
removed by the fact that Stephen and Moses use, in accordance with
a very common custom, round numbers in speaking of it; and thus
speak of four hundred years, when the literal time was four hundred
and thirty. The other perplexities are not so easily removed. From
the account which Moses has given of the lives of certain persons,
it would seem clear that the time which they spent in Egypt was
not four hundred years. From Genesis 46:8,11, it appears that
Kohath was born when Jacob went into Egypt. He lived one hundred and
thirty-three years, Exodus 6:18. Amram, his son, and the
father of Moses, lived one hundred and thirty-seven years, Exodus 6:20.
Moses was eighty years old when he was sent to Pharoah, Exodus 7:7.
The whole time thus mentioned, including the time in which the father
lived after his son was born, was only three hundred and fifty years.
Exclusive of that, it is reasonable to suppose that the actual time of
their being in Egypt could not have been but about two hundred years,
according to one account of Josephus. The question then is, how can
these accounts be reconciled? The only satisfactory way is, by supposing
that the four hundred and thirty years includes the whole time from the
calling of Abraham to the departure from Egypt. And that this was the
fact is probable from the following circumstances:
(1.) The purpose of all the narratives on this subject is to trace
the period before they became finally settled in the land of Canaan.
During all this period from the calling of Abraham, they were in a
wandering, unfixed situation. This constituted substantially one period,
including all their oppressions, hardships, and dangers; and it was
natural to have reference to this entire period in any account which
was given.
(2.) All this period was properly the period of promise, not of
possession. In this respect, the wanderings of Abraham and the
oppressions of Egypt came under the same general description.
(3.) Abraham was himself occasionally in Egypt. He was unsettled; and
since Egypt was so pre-eminent in all their troubles, it was natural
to speak of all their oppressions as having occurred in that country.
The phrase, "residence in Egypt," or" in a strange land," would come to
be synonymous, and would denote all their oppressions and trials.
They would speak of their sufferings as having been endured in Egypt,
because their afflictions there were so much more prominent than
before.
(4.) All this receives countenance from the version of the LXX., and
from the Samaritan text, showing the manner in which the ancient Jews
were accustomed to understand it.
(5.) It should be added, that difficulties of chronology are more likely
to occur than any others; and it should not be deemed strange if there
are perplexities of this kind found in ancient writings which we cannot
explain. It is so in all ancient records; and all that is usually
expected in relation to such difficulties is, that we should be able to
present a probable explanation.
{+} "on this wise" "In this manner"
{c} "that his seed" Genesis 15:13,16
{++} "strange land" "Foreign"
{*} "evil" "Afflict them"
{d} "four hundred years" Exodus 12:40,41
Verse 7. And the nation, etc. Referring particularly to the Egyptians.
Will I judge. The word judge, in the Bible, often means to
execute judgment, as well as to pronounce it; that is, to punish.
See John 18:31; 3:17; 8:50; 12:47; Acts 24:6; 1 Corinthians 5:13, etc.
It has this meaning here. God regarded their oppressive acts as
deserving his indignation, and he evinced it in the plagues
with which he visited them, and in their overthrow in the Red Sea.
Shall serve me. Shall worship me, or be regarded as my people.
In this place. That is, in the place where God made this promise to
Abraham. These words are not found in Genesis; but similar
words are found in Exodus 3:12; and it was a practice, in making
quotations, to quote the sense only, or to connect two or more promises
having relation to the same thing.
{a} "serve me in this place" Exodus 3:12
Verse 8. And he gave him. That is, God appointed, or commanded this,
Genesis 17:9-13.
The covenant. The word covenant denotes, properly, a compact or
agreement between two or more persons, usually attended with seals, or
pledges, or sanctions. In Genesis 17:7, and elsewhere: it is said
that God would establish his covenant with Abraham; that is, he made
him certain definite promises, attended with pledges and seals, etc.
The idea of a strict compact or agreement between God and man, as
between equal parties, is not found in the Bible. It is commonly used,
as here, to denote a promise on the part of God, attended with
pledges, and demanding, on the part of man, in order to avail himself
of its benefits, a stipulated course of conduct. The covenant is
therefore another name for denoting two things on the part of God:
(1.) A command, which man is not at liberty to reject, as he
would be if a literal covenant; and,
(2.) a promise, which is to be fulfilled only on the condition of
obedience. The covenant with Abraham was simply a promise to give him
the land, and to make him a great nation, etc. It was never proposed to
Abraham with the supposition that he was at liberty to reject it, or
to refuse to comply with its conditions. Circumcision was appointed
as the mark or indication that Abraham and those thus designated were the
persons included in the gracious purpose and promise. It served to
separate them as a peculiar people; a people whose peculiar
characteristic it was, that they obeyed and served the God who had made
the promise to Abraham. The phrase, "covenant of circumcision," means,
therefore, the covenant or promise which God made to Abraham, of which
circumcision was the distinguishing mark or sign.
The twelve patriarchs. The word patriarch properly denotes the
father and ruler of a family. But it is commonly applied, by way of
eminence, to the progenitors of the Jewish race, particularly to the
twelve sons of Jacob. See Barnes "Acts 2:29".
{b} "he gave him the covenant" Genesis 17:9-11
{c} "so Abraham" Genesis 21:1-4
{d} "Isaac begat" Genesis 25:26
{e} "Jacob begat twelve patriarchs" Genesis 29:32
Verse 9. Moved with envy. That is, dissatisfied with the favour
which their father Jacob showed Joseph, and envious at the dreams which
indicated that he was to be raised to remarkable honour above his
parents and brethren, Genesis 37:3-11.
Sold Joseph into Egypt. Sold him, that he might be taken to Egypt.
This was done at the suggestion of Judah, who advised it that Joseph
might not be put to death by his brethren, Genesis 27:28. It is
possible that Stephen, by this fact, might have designed to prepare the
way for a severe rebuke of the Jews for having dealt in a similar
manner with their Messiah.
But God was with him. God protected him, and overruled all these
wicked doings, so that he was raised to extraordinary honours.
{f} "envy" Genesis 37:28; Psalms 105:17
{g} "God was with him" Genesis 39:2,21
Verse 10. And delivered him, etc. That is, restored him to liberty
from his servitude and humiliation, and raised him up to high honours
and offices in Egypt.
Favour and wisdom. The favour was the result of his wisdom. His
wisdom was particularly evinced in interpreting the dreams of Pharaoh,
Genesis 41.
And he made him governor, etc. Genesis 41:40.
All his house. All the family, or all the court and government of
the nation.
{h} "he made him" Genesis 41:40
{*} "house" "Palace"
Verse 11. Now there came a dearth. A famine. Genesis 41:54.
And Chanaan. Jacob was living at that time in Canaan.
Found no sustenance. No food; no means of living.
{i} "there came a dearth" Genesis 41:54
Verse 12. Was corn in Egypt. The word corn here rather denotes
wheat. See Barnes "Matthew 12:1".
Our fathers. His ten sons; all his sons except Joseph and Benjamin,
Genesis 42:2. Stephen here refers only to the history, without
entering into details. By this general reference he sufficiently
showed that he believed what Moses had spoken, and did not intend to
show him disrespect.
{k} "But when Jacob heard" Genesis 13:1,2
{+} "sent out our fathers first" "The first time"
Verse 13. Joseph was not known. Genesis 14:4.
Joseph's kindred, etc. His relatives, his family. Genesis 14:16.
{l} "Joseph was made known" Genesis 14:4,16
Verse 14. All his kindred. His father and family, Genesis 45:17-28
Genesis 46:1-26.
Threescore and fifteen souls. Seventy-five persons. There has been
much perplexity felt in the explanation of this pas sage. In
Genesis 46:26; Exodus 1:5; Deuteronomy 10:22, it is expressly said that the
number which went down to Egypt consisted of but seventy persons. The
question is, in what way these accounts can be reconciled? It is
evident that Stephen has followed the account which is given by the
Septuagint. In Genesis 46:27, that version reads, "But the sons of
Joseph who were with him in Egypt, were nine souls; all the souls
of-the house of Jacob which came with Jacob into Egypt, were
seventy-five souls." This number is made out by adding these nine
souls to the sixty-six mentioned in Genesis 46:26. The difference between
the Septuagint and Moses is, that the former mentions five descendants of
Joseph who are not recorded by the latter. The names of the sons of
Ephraim and Manasseh are recorded in 1 Chronicles 7:14-21. Their
names were Ashriel, Machir, Zelophehad, Peresh, sons of Manasseh; and
Shuthelah, son of Ephraim. Why the Septuagint inserted these, it may
not be easy to see. But such was evidently the fact; and the fact
accords accurately with the historic record, though Moses did not
insert their names. The solution of difficulties in regard to
chronology is always difficult; and what might be entirely apparent to
a Jew, in the time of Stephen, may be wholly inexplicable to us.
{m} "all his kindred" Genesis 46:27; Deuteronomy 10:22
Verse 15, 16. And died. Genesis 49:33.
He, and our fathers. The time which the Israelites remained in
Egypt was two hundred and fifteen years; so that all the sons of Jacob
were deceased before the Jews went out to go to the land of Canaan.
And were carried over. Jacob himself was buried in the field of
Machpelah, by Joseph and his brethren, Genesis 1:13. It is expressly said
that the bones of Joseph were carried by the Israelites when they went
into the land of Canaan, and buried in Shechem, Joshua 24:32. Comp.
Genesis 1:25. No mention is made in the Old Testament of their carrying
the bones of any of the other patriarchs; but the thing is highly
probable in itself. If the descendants of Joseph carried his bones, it
would naturally occur to them to take also the bones of each of
the patriarchs, and give them an honourable sepulchre together in
the land of promise. Josephus (Antiq. b. ii. chap. viii. & 2) says,
that "the posterity and sons of these men, (of the brethren of
Joseph,) after some time, carried their bodies and buried them in
Hebron; but as to the bones of Joseph, they carried them into the
land of Canaan afterward, when the Hebrews went out of Egypt."
This is the account which Josephus gives, and it is evidently in
accordance with the common opinion of the Jewish writers, that
they were buried in Hebron. Yet the tradition is not uniform.
Some of the Jews affirm that they were buried in Sychem. (Kuin”el.)
As the Scriptures do not anywhere deny that the fathers were buried
in Sychem, it cannot be proved that Stephen was in error. There
is one circumstance of strong probability to show that he was correct.
At the time this defence was delivered, Sychem was in the
hands of the Samaritans, between whom and the Jews there was a
violent hostility. Of course the Jews would not be willing to concede
that the Samaritans had the bones of their ancestors; and
hence perhaps the opinion had been maintained that they were
buried in Hebron.
Into Sychem. This was a town or village near to Samaria. It was
called Sychar, See Barnes "John 4:5",) Schechem, and Sychem.
It is now called Naplous, or Napolose, and is ten miles
from Shiloh, and about forty from Jerusalem, towards the north.
That Abraham bought. The word Abraham here has given rise to
considerable perplexity; and it is now pretty generally conceded
that it is a mistake. It is certain, from Genesis 33:19; Joshua 24:32,
that this piece of land was bought not by Abraham, but by Jacob,
of the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem. The land which Abraham
purchased was the cave of Machpelah, of the sons of Heth, in Hebron,
Genesis 23. Various solutions have been proposed of this difficulty,
which it is not necessary to detail. It may be remarked, however,
(1.) that as the text now stands, it is an evident error. This is clear
from the passages cited from the Old Testament, above.
(2.) It is not at all probable that either Stephen or Luke would have
committed such an error. Every consideration must lead us to the
conclusion that they were too well acquainted with such prominent
points of the Jewish history to commit an error like this.
(3.) The probability therefore is, that the error has arisen since;
but how is not known, nor is there any way of ascertaining. All the
ancient versions agree in reading Abraham. One Ms. only reads
"Abraham our Father." Some have supposed, therefore, that it was
written, "which our father brought," and that some early transciber
inserted the name Abraham. Others, that the name was omitted entirely
by Stephen; and then the antecedent to the verb "bought" will be
"Jacob," in Acts 7:15, according with the fact. Other modes have been
proposed also, but none are entirely satisfactory. If there was positive
proof of Stephen's inspiration, or if it were necessary to make that out,
the difficulty would be much greater. But it has already been remarked,
that there is no decisive evidence of that; and it is not necessary to
make out that point to defend the Scriptures. All that can be demanded
of the historian is, that he should give a fair account of the defence
as it was delivered; and though the probability is that Stephen would
not commit such an error, yet, admitting that he did, it by no
means proves that Luke was not inspired, or that Luke has committed
any error in recording what was actually said.
Of the sons of Emmor. In the Hebrew, Genesis 33:19, the "children of
Hamor"--but different ways of rendering the same word.
Verse 16. No Barnes text on this verse.
{a} "Was carried over into Sychem" Joshua 24:32
{*} "Sychem" "Shechem"
{+} "Emmor" "Hamor"
Verse 17. The times of the promise. The time of the fulfillment
of the promises.
The people grew, etc. Exodus 1:7,8
{b} "the people grew" Exodus 1:7-9
Verse 18. Till another king arose. This is quoted from Exodus 1:8.
What was the name of this king is not certainly known. The common
name of all the kings of Egypt was Pharaoh, as Caesar became the
common name of the emperors of Rome after the time of Julius Caesar:
thus we say, Augustus Caesar, Tiberius Caesar, etc. It has commonly been
supposed to have been the celebrated Rameses, or Ramses Meiamoun, the
sixth king of the eighteenth dynasty; and the event is supposed to
have occurred about 1559 years before the Christian era. But
M. Champollion supposes that his name was Mandonel, whose reign
commenced 1585, and ended 1565 years before. Christ. (Essay on the
Hieroglyphic System, pp. 94, 95.)
Which knew not Joseph. It can hardly be supposed that he would be
ignorant of the name and deeds of Joseph; and this expression,
therefore, probably means that he did not favour the designs of
Joseph; he did not remember the benefits he had conferred on the nation;
or furnish the patronage for the kindred of Joseph which had been
secured for them by Joseph under a former reign. National ingratitude
and forgetfulness of favours have not been uncommon in the world; and a
change of dynasty or succession has often obliterated all memory of
former obligations and compacts.
Verse 19. Dealt subtilly. He acted deceitfully; he used fraud, The
cunning or deceitful attempt which is referred to, is his endeavour
to weaken and destroy the Jewish people by causing their male
children to be put to death, Exodus 1:22.
Our kindred. Our nation, or our ancestors.
And evil entreated. Was unjust and cruel towards them.
So that, etc. For that purpose, or to cause them to cast them out.
He dealt with them in this cruel manner, hoping that the Israelites
themselves would destroy their own sons, that they might not grow up to
experience the same sufferings as their fathers had. The cunning or
subtilty of Pharaoh extended to everything that he did to oppress, to
keep under, and to destroy the children of Israel.
{c} "so that they cast out" Exodus 1:22
Verse 20. In which time, etc. During this period of oppression. See
Exodus 2:2, etc.
Was exceeding fair. Greek, "was fair to God;" properly rendered,
was very handsome. The word God is used in the Greek here in
accordance with the Hebrew usage, by which anything that is very
handsome, or lofty, or grand, is thus designated. Thus, Psalms 36:7,
mountains of God mean lofty mountains; Psalms 80:10,
[ver. 11, Heb.,] cedars of God mean lofty, beautiful cedars.
Thus Nineveh is called "a great city to God," (Jonah 3:3, Greek,)
meaning a very great city. The expression here means simply, that
Moses was very fair, or handsome. Comp. Hebrews 11:23, where he is
called a "proper child," i.e., a handsome child. It would seem from
this, that Moses was preserved by his mother on account of his
beauty; and this is hinted at in Exodus 2:2. And it would also seem
from this, that Pharaoh had succeeded by his oppressions in what he had
attempted; and that it was not unusual for parents among the Jews
to expose their children, or to put them to death.
{d} "Moses was born" Exodus 2:2
{1} "exceeding fair" or, "fair to God"
{+} "exceeding fair" "Very Beautiful"
Verse 21. Was cast out. When he was exposed on the banks of the
Nile, Exodus 2:3.
And nourished him. Adopted him, and treated him as her son,
Exodus 2:10. It is implied in this, that he was educated by her. An
adopted son in the family of Pharaoh would be favoured with all the
advantages which the land could furnish for an education.
{e} "nourished him" Exodus 2:10
Verse 22. Moses was learned. Or, was instructed. It does not mean
that he had that learning, but that he was carefully trained or
educated in that wisdom. The passage does not express the fact that
Moses was distinguished for learning, but that he was carefully
educated, or that pains were taken to make him learned.
In all the wisdom, etc. The learning of the Egyptians was confined
chiefly to astrology, to the interpretation of dreams, to medicine, to
mathematics, and to their sacred science or traditionary doctrines about
religion, which were concealed chiefly under their hieroglyphics.
Their learning is not unfrequently spoken of in the Scriptures,
1 Kings 4:30; Comp. Isaiah 19:11,12. And their knowledge is equally
celebrated in the heathen world. It is known that science was
carried from Egypt to Phenicia, and thence to Greece; and not a
few of the Grecian philosophers travelled to Egypt in pursuit of
knowledge.
And was mighty. Was powerful, or was distinguished. This means
that he was eminent in Egypt, before he conducted the children of
Israel forth. It refers to his addresses to Pharaoh, and to the
miracles which he wrought before their departure.
In words. From Exodus 4:10, it seems that Moses was "slow of speech,
and of a slow tongue." When it is said that he was mighty in
words, it means that he was mighty in his communications to Pharaoh,
though they were spoken by his brother Aaron. Aaron was in his
place, and Moses addressed Pharaoh through him, who was appointed to
deliver the message, Exodus 4:11-16.
Deeds. Miracles, Exodus 7, etc.
{*} "Learned" "Instructed"
{f} "mighty in words" Luke 24:19
Verse 23. Full forty years of age. This is not recorded in the Old
Testament, but it is a constant tradition of the Jews that Moses
was forty years of age when he undertook to deliver them. Thus
it is said, "Moses lived in the palace of Pharaoh forty years; he
was forty years in Midian; and he ministered to Israel forty years."
(Kuin”el.)
To visit, etc. Probably with a view of delivering them from their
oppressive bondage. Comp. Acts 7:26.
{a} "And when he was" Exodus 2:11
Verse 24. Suffer wrong. The wrong or injury was, that the Egyptian
was smiting the Hebrew, Exodus 2:11,12.
Smote the Egyptian. He slew him, and buried him in the sand.
Verse 25. For he supposed. This is not mentioned by Moses; but it
is not at all improbable. When they saw him alone contending with
the Egyptian, when it was understood that he had come and taken
vengeance or one of their oppressors, it might have been presumed that
he regarded himself as directed by God to interpose, and save the
people.
{1} "For he supposed" "Now"
Verse 26. And the next day. Exodus 2:13.
He shewed himself. He appeared in a sudden and unexpected manner
to them.
Unto them. That is, to two of the Hebrews, Exodus 2:13.
As they strove. As they were engaged in a quarrel.
Have set them at one. Greek, "would have urged them to peace." This
he did by remonstrating with the man that did the wrong.
Saying. What follows is not quoted literally from the account which
Moses gives, but it is substantially the same.
Sirs. Greek, "men."
Ye are brethren. You belong not only to the same nation, but you are
brethren and companions in affliction, and should not, therefore,
contend with each other. One of the most melancholy scenes in
this world, is that where those who are poor, and afflicted, and
oppressed, add to all their other calamities, altercations and strifes
among themselves. Yet it is from this class that contentions and
lawsuits usually arise. The address which Moses here makes to the
contending Jews, might be applied to the whole human family, in
view of the contentions and wars of nations: "Ye are brethren,
members of the same great family, and why do you contend with
each other?"
{*} "at one again" "Would have reconciled them"
Verse 27. But he that did, etc. Intent on his purpose, filled with
rage and passion, he rejected all interference, and all attempts at
peace. It is usually the man that does the injury that is unwilling to
be reconciled; and when we find a man that regards the entreaties of
his friends as improper interference, when he becomes increasingly
angry when we exhort him to peace, it is usually a strong evidence
that he is conscious that he has been at fault. If we wish to
reconcile parties, we should go first to the man that has been injured.
In the controversy between God and man, it is the sinner who has
done the wrong that is unwilling to be reconciled, and not God.
His neighbour. The Jew with whom he was contending.
Who made thee, etc. What right have you to interfere in this matter?
The usual salutation with which a man is greeted who attempts to prevent
quarrels.
Verse 28. Wilt thou kill me, etc. How it was known that he had
killed the Egyptian does not appear. It was probably communicated by
the man who was rescued from the hands of the Egyptian, Exodus 2:11,12.
Verse 29. Then fled Moses, etc. Moses fled because he now
ascertained that it was known. He supposed that it had been unobserved,
Exodus 2:12. But he now supposed that the knowledge of it might
reach Pharaoh, and that his life might thus be endangered. Nor
did he judge incorrectly; for as soon as Pharaoh heard of it, he
sought to take his life, Exodus 2:16.
Was a stranger. Or became a sojourner--\~paroikov\~--one who had a
temporary abode in the land. The use of this word implies that he did
not expect to make that his permanent dwelling.
In the land of Madian. This was a part of Arabia. It was situated
on the east side of the Red Sea. The city of Midian is placed there by
the Arabian geographers; but the Midianites seem to have spread
themselves along the desert east of Mount Seir, to the vicinity of the
Moabites. To the west they ex, tended also to the neighbourhood of
Mount Sinai. This was extensively a desert region, an unknown land;
and Moses expected there to be safe from Pharaoh.
Where he begat two sons. He married Zipporah, the daughter of
Reuel, (Exodus 2:18,) or Jethro, (Numbers 10:29; Exodus 3:1,)
a priest of Midian. The names of the two sons were Gershom and
Eliezer, Exodus 18:3,4.
{+} "stranger" "Sojourned"
Verse 30. And when forty years, etc. At the age of eighty years.
This, however, was known by tradition. It is not expressly mentioned
by Moses. It is said, however, to have been after the king of Egypt
had died, (Exodus 2:23;) and the tradition is not improbable.
In the wilderness of mount Sina. In the desert adjacent to, or that
surrounded Mount Sinai. In Exodus 3:1, it is said that this occurred
at Mount Horeb. But there is no contradiction; Horeb and Sinai
are different peaks or elevations of the same mountain. They are
represented as springing from the same base, and branching out in
different elevations. The mountains, according to Burckhardt, are
a prodigious pile, comprehending many peaks, and about thirty
miles in diameter. From one part of this mountain, Sinai, the law
was given to the children of Israel.
An angel of the Lord. The word angel means, properly, a
messenger, (See Barnes "Matthew 1:20",) and is applied to the
invisible spirits in heaven, to men, to the winds, or pestilence, or to
whatever is appointed as a messenger to make known the will of God. The
mere name, therefore, can determine nothing about the nature of the
messenger. That name might be applied to any messenger, even an
inanimate object. The nature and character of this messenger are to be
determined by other considerations. The word may denote that the
bush on fire was the messenger. But a comparison with the other
places where this occurs will show that it was a celestial messenger,
and perhaps that it was the Messiah who was yet to come, appearing to
take the people of Israel under his own charge and direction. Comp.
John 1:11, where the Jews are called "his own." In Exodus 3:2,
it is said that the angel of the Lord appeared IN a flame of fire; in
Exodus 3:4, it is said that Jehovah spake to him out of the midst of
the bush; language which implies that God was there, and which is
strongly expressive of the doctrine that the angel was Jehovah. In
Exodus 23:20,21, God says, "I send an angel before thee, to keep thee
in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.
Beware of him, and obey his voice," Exodus 23:23; 32:34; 33:2.
In all these places this angel is mentioned as an extraordinary messenger
to conduct them to the land of Canaan. He was to guide them, defend them,
and drive out the nations before them. All these circumstances seem to
point to the conclusion that this was no other than the future
Deliverer of the world, who came then to take his people under his
own guidance, as emblematic of the future redemption of mankind.
In a flame of fire. That is, in what appeared to be a flame of fire.
The bush or clump of trees seemed to be on fire, or to be illuminated
with a peculiar splendour. God is often represented as encompassed
with this splendour, or glory, Luke 2:9; Matthew 17:1-6; Acts 9:3; 12:7.
In a bush. In a grove, or clump of trees. Probably
the light was seen issuing from the midst of such a grove.
{b} "And when forty years" Exodus 3:2
Verse 31. He wondered, etc. What particularly attracted his
attention was the fact that the bush was not consumed, Exodus 3:2,3.
The voice of the Lord. Jehovah spake to him from the midst of the
bush. He did not see him, but he simply heard a voice.
Verse 32. Saying, I am the God, etc. See this explained
See Barnes "Matthew 22:32".
Then Moses trembled. Exodus 3:6.
{a} "God of thy fathers" Matthew 22:32; Hebrews 11:16
Verse 33. Then said the Lord, etc. In Exodus 3 this is introduced
in a different order, as being spoken before God said, "I am the God,"
etc.
Put off thy shoes, etc. Exodus 3:5. To put off the shoes, or
sandals, was an act of reverence. Especially the ancients were not
permitted to enter a temple or holy place with their shoes on. Indeed,
it was customary for the Jews to remove their shoes whenever they
entered any house, as a mere matter of civility. Comp.
See Barnes "John 13:6". See Joshua 5:15.
Is holy ground. Is rendered sacred by the symbol of the Divine
Presence. We should enter the sanctuary, the place set apart for Divine
worship, not only with reverence m our hearts, but with every external
indication of veneration. Solemn awe, and deep seriousness, become the
place set apart to the service of God.
{b} "Put off thy shoes" Joshua 5:15; Ecclesiastes 5:1
Verse 34. I have seen, etc. The repetition of this word is in
accordance with the usage of the Hebrew writers when they wish to
represent anything emphatically.
Their groaning. Under their oppressions.
Am come down. This is spoken in accordance with human conceptions.
It means that God was about to deliver them.
I will send this, etc. This is a mere summary of what is
expressed at much greater length in Exodus 3:7-10.
{*} "seen the affliction" "I have surely seen"
Verse 35. When they refused. That is, when he first presented
himself to them, Exodus 2:13,14. Stephen introduces and dwells upon
this refusal in order, perhaps, to remind them that this had been the
character of their nation; and to prepare the way for the charge
which he intended to bring against those whom he addressed, as
being stiff-necked and rebellious. See Acts 7:51,52, etc.
A ruler. A military leader, or a governor in civil matters.
A deliverer. A Redeemer--\~lutrwthn\~--. It properly means one who
redeems a captive or a prisoner by paying a price or ransom. And
it is applied thus to our Lord Jesus, as having redeemed or purchased
sinners by his blood as a price, Titus 2:14; 1 Peter 1:18; Hebrews 9:12.
It is used here, however, in a more general sense to denote the
deliverance, without specifying the manner. Comp. Exodus 6:6;
Luke 24:21; 1:68; 2:38.
By the hand of the angel. Under the direction and by the help of the
angel, Numbers 20:16. See Barnes "Acts 7:30".
{c} "the angel" Exodus 14:19; Numbers 20:16
Verse 36. Wonders and signs.Miracles, and remarkable interpositions
of God. See Barnes "Acts 2:22".
In the land of Egypt. By the ten,plagues, Exodus chapters 4-12.
In the Red sea. Dividing it, and conducting the Israelites in safety,
and overthrowing the Egyptians, Exodus 13.
In the wilderness. During their forty years' journey
to the promised land. The wonders or miracles were, providing
them with manna daily; with flesh in a miraculous manner; with
water from the rock, etc., Exodus chapters 16 and 17.
{d} "after that he had showed" Exodus chapters 7-11,14
{e} "forty years" Exodus 16:35
Verse 37. Which said, etc. Deuteronomy 18:15,18. See this explained,
Acts 3:22. Stephen introduced this to remind them of the promise
of a Messiah; to show his fait in it; and particularly to remind
them of their obligation to hear and obey him.
{f} "said unto the children on Israel" Deuteronomy 18:15,18; Acts 3:22
{1} "like unto me" "as myself"
{g} "him shall ye hear" Matthew 17:5
Verse 38. In the church. The word church means, literally, the
people called out; and is applied with great propriety to the
assembly or multitude called out of Egypt, and separated from the world.
It has not, however, of necessity our idea of a church; but means the
assembly, or people called out of Egypt, and placed under the con-
duct of Moses,
With the angel. In this place there is undoubted reference to the
giving of the law on Mount Sinai. Yet that was done by God himself,
Exodus 20. It is clear, therefore, that by the angel here Stephen
intends to designate him who was God. It may be observed, however, that
the law is represented as having been given by the ministry of an angel
(in this place,) and by the ministry of angels, Acts 7:53
Hebrews 2:2. The essential idea is, that God did it by a messenger, or
by mediators. The character and rank of the messengers, or of the
principal messenger, must be learned by looking at all the circumstances
of the case.
The lively oracles. See Romans 3:2. The word oracles here
means commands or laws of God, The word lively, or
living--\~zwnta\~--stands in opposition to that which is dead, or
useless, and means that which is vigorous, efficacious; and in this
place it means that the commands were of such a nature, and given in
such circumstances, as to secure attention; to produce obedience; to
excite them to act for God--in opposition to laws which would fall
powerless, and produce no effect.
{h} "This is he" Hebrews 2:2
{+} "church" "Congregation"
{i} "angel" Isaiah 63:9; Galatians 3:19
{k} "in the mount Sina" Exodus 19:3,17
{l} "who received" Deuteronomy 5:27,31; John 1:17
{m} "received" Romans 3:2
{*) "lively" "Life giving"
Verse 39. Would not obey, etc. This refers to what they said of him
when he was in the mount, Exodus 32:1,23.
In their hearts turned, etc. They wished to return to Egypt. They
regretted that they had come out of Egypt, and desired again the things
which they had there, as preferable to what they had in the desert,
Numbers 11:5. Perhaps, however, the expression means, not that they
desired literally to return to Egypt, but that their hearts inclined
to the habits and morals of the Egyptians. They forsook God, and
imitated the idolatries of the Egyptians.
Verse 40. Saying unto Aaron. Exodus 32:1
Make us gods. That is, idols.
{n} "Saying unto Aaron" Exodus 32:1
{=} "wot" "know"
Verse 41. And they made a calf. This was made of the ear-rings and
ornaments which they had brought from Egypt, Exodus 32:2-4.
Stephen introduces this to remind them how prone the nation had
been to reject God, and walk in the ways of sin.
{o} "calf" Deuteronomy 9:16
Verse 42. Then God turned. That is, turned away from them;
abandoned them to their own desires.
The host of heaven. The stars, or heavenly bodies. The word host
means armies. It is applied to the heavenly bodies, because they are
very numerous, and appear to be marshalled or arrayed in military
order. It is from this that God is called JEHOVAH of hosts, as being
the Ruler of these well-arranged heavenly bodies, Isaiah 1:9. The proof
that they did this, Stephen proceeds to allege by a quotation from the
prophets.
In the book of the Prophets. Amos 5:25,26. The twelve
minor prophets were commonly written in one volume, and were called
the Book of the Prophets; the book containing these several prophecies,
Daniel, Hosea, Micah, etc. They were small tracts separately, and
were bound up together to preserve them from being lost. This passage
is not quoted literally; it is evidently made from memory; and though
in its main spirit it coincides with the passage in Amos, yet in
some important respects it varies from it.
0 ye house of Israel. Ye people of Israel.
Have ye offered, etc.
That is, ye have not offered. The interrogative is often an
emphatic way of saying that the thing had not been done. But it
is certain that the Jews did offer sacrifices to God in the
wilderness, though it is also certain that they did not do it with a
pure and upright heart. They kept up the form of worship to idols.
Through the continuous space of forty years they did not honour
God, but often departed from him, and worshipped idols.
{p} "gave them up" Psalms 81:12
{q} "host of heaven" Deuteronomy 4:19
{r} "as it is written" Amos 5:25,26
{*} "wilderness" or, "Desert"
Verse 43. Yea, ye took up. That is, you bore, or you carried
with you, for purposes of idolatrous worship.
The tabernacle. This word properly means a tent; but it is also
applied to the small tent or house in which was contained the image of
the god; the house, box, or tent, in which the idol was placed. It is
customary for idolatrous nations to bear their idols about with them,
enclosed in cases or boxes of various sizes, usually very small, as
their idols are commonly small. Probably they were made in the shape of
small temples or tabernacles; and such appear to have been the
silver shrines for Diana, made at Ephesus, Acts 19:24. These
shrines, or images, were borne with them as a species of amulet, or
charm, or talisman, to defend them from evil. Such images the
Jews seem to have borne with them.
Moloch. This word comes from the Hebrew word signifying king.
This was a god of the Ammonites, to whom human sacrifices were offered.
Moses in several places forbids the Israelites, under penalty of death,
to dedicate their children to Moloch, by making them pass through
the fire, Leviticus 18:21; 20:2-5. There is great probability that
the Hebrews were addicted to the worship of this deity after they
entered the land of Canaan. Solomon built a temple to Moloch on the
Mount of Olives, 1 Kings 11:7; and Manasseh made his son pass
through the fire in honour of this idol, 2 Kings 21:3,6. The image
of this idol was made of brass, and his arms extended so as to embrace
any one; and when they offered children to him, they heated the statue,
and when it was burning hot, they placed the child in his arms, where
it was soon destroyed by heat. It is not certain what this god was
supposed to represent. Some suppose it was in honour of the planet
Saturn, others the sun, others Mercury, Venus, etc. What particular
god it was, is not material. It was the most cutting reproof that could
be made to the Jews, that their fathers had been guilty of worshipping
this idol.
And the star. The Hebrew in this place, is "Chiun your images, the
star of your god." The expression here used leads us to suppose that
this was a star which was worshipped, but what star it is not
easy to ascertain; nor is it easy to determine why it is called
both Chiun and Remphan. Stephen quotes from the LXX. They have
rendered the word Chiun by the word Raiphan, or Rephan,
easily changed into Remphan. Why the LXX. adopted this is not known.
It was probably, however, from one of two causes.
(1.) Either because the word Chiun in Hebrew meant the same as
Remphan in the language of Egypt, where the translation was made; or,
(2.) because the object of worship called Chiun in Hebrew, was
called Remphan in the language of Egypt. It is generally agreed that
the object of their worship was the planet Saturn, or Mars,
both of which planets were worshipped as gods of evil influence. In
Arabic, the word Chevan denotes the planet Saturn. Probably
Rephan, or Remphan, is the Coptic name for the same planet,
and the Septuagint adopted this because their translation was made in
Egypt, where the Coptic language was spoken.
Figures which ye made. Images of the god which they made. See the
article Chuin in Robinson's Calmet.
And I will carry you away, etc. This is simply expressing in
few words what is stated at greater length in Amos 5:27. In Hebrew it
is Damascus; but this evidently denotes the eastern region, in which
also Babylon was situated.
Verse 44. The tabernacle of witness. The tent or tabernacle
which Moses was commanded to make. It was called a tabernacle of
witness, or of testimony, because it was the visible witness or
proof of God's presence with them; the evidence that he to whom it was
devoted was their protector and guide. The name is given either to the
tent, or to the two tables of stone, or to the ark; all of which were
witnesses or evidence, of God's relation to them as their
Lawgiver and Guide, Exodus 16:34; 25:16,21; 27:21; 30:6,36; 31:18
Numbers 1:50,53. The two charges against Stephen were that he had spoken
blasphemy against Moses, or his law, and against the temple,
Acts 6:13,14. In the previous part of this defence he had shown his
respect for Moses and his law. He now proceeds to show that he did not
design to speak with disrespect of the temple, or the holy places of
their worship. He therefore expresses his belief in the Divine
appointment of both the tabernacle Acts 7:44-46 and of the temple,
Acts 7:47.
According to the fashion, etc. According to the pattern
that was shown to him, by which it was to be made, Exodus 25:9,40;
Exodus 26:30. As God showed him a pattern, it proved that the
tabernacle had his sanction. Against that Stephen did not intend to speak.
{+} "witness" "Testimony"
{1} "speaking" "who spake"
{a} "that he should make" Exodus 25:40; 26:30; Hebrews 8:5
Verse 45. Our fathers that came after. None of the generation that
came out of Egypt were permitted to enter into the land of Canaan
on account of their rebellion, except Caleb and Joshua,
Numbers 14:22-24; 32:11,12. Hence it is said that their fathers
who came after, i.e. afar the generation when the tabernacle was
built. The Greek, however, here means, properly, "which also our fathers,
having received, brought," etc. The sense is not materially
different. Stephen means that it was not brought in by that generation,
but by the next.
With Jesus. This should have been rendered, "with Joshua."
Jesus is the Greek mode of writing the name Joshua. But the
Hebrew name should by all means have been retained here, as also in
Hebrews 4:8.
Into the possession of the Gentiles. Into the land possessed by the
Gentiles; that is, into the promised land then occupied by the
Canaanites, etc.
Whom God, etc. That is, he continued to drive them out until the
time of David, when they were completely expelled. Or it may mean that
the tabernacle was in the possession of the Jews, and was the up,
pointed place of worship, until the time of David, who desired to
build him a temple. The Greek is ambiguous. The connexion
favours the latter interpretation.
{b} "Which also" Joshua 3:14
{2} "Which also our fathers" or, "having received"
{*} "Jesus" "Joshua"
{=} "possession of the Gentiles" "When they possessed the land of the
nations"
{c} "whom God Drave out" Nehemiah 9:24; Psalms 44:2; 78:55
Verse 46. Who found favour. That is, God granted him great him
great prosperity, and delivered him from his enemies.
To find a tabernacle. To prepare a permanent dwelling place for the
ark and for the visible symbols of the Divine Presence. Hitherto
the ark had been kept in the tabernacle, and had been borne about from
place to place. David sought to build an house that would be
permanent, where the ark might be deposited, 2 Samuel 7, 1 Chronicles 22:7.
{d} "favour before God" 1 Samuel 16:1
{e} "desired to find a tabernacle" 1 Chronicles 22:7
Verse 47. But Solomon, etc. Built the temple. David was not
permitted to do it, because he had been a man of war, 1 Chronicles 22:8.
David prepared the principal materials for the temple, but Solomon built
it, 1 Chronicles 22; comp. 1 Kings 6.
{f} "Solomon" 1 Kings 8:27; 8:20
{=} "house" "Temple"
Verse 48. Howbeit. But. Why Stephen added this, is not very clear.
He was charged with speaking against the temple. He had now
shown that he had due veneration for it, by his declaring that it had
been built by the command of God. But he now adds, that God
does not need such a temple. Heaven is his throne; the universe
his dwelling-place; and therefore this temple might be destroyed.
A new, glorious truth was to be revealed to mankind, that God was
not confined in his worship to any age, or people, or nation. In
entire consistency, therefore, with all proper respect for the temple
at Jerusalem, it might be maintained that the time would come
when that temple would be destroyed, and when God might be worshipped
by all nations.
The Most High. God. This sentiment was expressed by Solomon when the
temple was dedicated, 1 Kings 8:27.
As saith the prophet. Isaiah 66:1,2. The place is not literally
quoted, but the sense is given.
{g} "Howbeit" 1 Kings 8:27; Acts 17:24
Verse 49. Heaven is my throne. See Barnes "Matthew 5:34".
Earth is my footstool. See Barnes "Matthew 5:35".
What house, etc. What house or temple can be large or magnificent
enough for the dwelling of Him who made all things?
The place of my rest. My home, my abode, my fixed seat or habitation.
Comp. Psalms 95:11.
{h} "Heaven is my throne" Isaiah 66:1,2
Verse 50. No Barnes text on this verse.
Verse 51. Ye stiffnecked. The discourse of Stephen has every
appearance of having been interrupted by the clamours and opposition of
the sanhedrim. This verse has no immediate connexion with that
which precedes; and appears to have been spoken in the midst of
much opposition and clamour. If we may conjecture in this case, it
would seem that the Jews saw the drift of his argument; that they
interrupted him; and that when the tumult had somewhat subsided, he
addressed them in the language of this verse, showing them that they
sustained a character precisely similar to their rebellious fathers. The
word stiff-necked is often used in the Old Testament, Exodus 32:9;
Exodus 33:3,5; 34:9; Deuteronomy 9:6,13; 10:16, etc. It is a figurative expression
taken from oxen that were refractory, and that would not submit to be
yoked. Applied to men, it means that they were stubborn, contumacious,
and unwilling to submit to the restraints of law.
Uncircumcised in heart. Circumcision was a sign of being a Jew--
of acknowledging the authority of the laws of Moses. It was also
emblematic of purity, and of submission to the law of God. The expression
uncircumcised in heart denotes those who were not willing to
acknowledge the law, and submit to it. They had hearts filled with
vicious and unsubdued affections and desires.
And ears. That is, who are unwilling to hear what God says. Comp.
Leviticus 26:41; Jeremiah 9:26; See Barnes " :".
Resist the Holy Ghost. You oppose the message which is brought to
you by the authority of God, and the inspiration of his Spirit. The
message brought by Moses, by the prophets, by the Saviour, and by the
apostles--all by the infallible direction of the Holy Ghost--they and
their fathers opposed.
As your fathers did, etc. As he had specified in
Acts 7:27,35,39-43.
{a} "stiffnecked" Exodus 32:9; Isaiah 48:4
{b} "uncircumcised" Leviticus 26:41; Jeremiah 9:26; Romans 2:28,29
{*} "Holy Ghost" "Holy Spirit"
Verse 52. Which of the prophets, etc. The interrogative form here is
a strong mode of saying that they had persecuted all the prophets.
It was the characteristic of the nation to persecute the messengers
of God. This is not to be taken as literally and universally true; but
it was a general truth; it was the national characteristic. See
Notes, Matthew 21:33-40; 23:29-35.
And they have slain them, etc. That is, they have slain the prophets,
whose main message was that the Messiah was to come. It was a great
aggravation of their offence, that they put to death the messengers which
foretold the greatest blessing that the nation could receive.
The Just One. The Messiah. See Barnes " :".
Of whom ye, etc. You thus show that you resemble those who rejected
and put to death the prophets. You have even gone beyond them in guilt,
because you have put the Messiah himself to death.
The betrayers. They are called betrayers here, because they
employed Judas to betray him--agreeable to the maxim in law, He
who does anything by another, is held to have done it himself.
{c} "Which of the prophets" 2 Chronicles 36:16; 1 Thessalonians 2:15
{d} "Just One" Acts 3:14
Verse 53. Who have received the law. The law of Moses given on Mount
Sinai.
By the disposition of angels. There has been much diversity of
opinion in regard to this phrase, \~eiv diatagav aggelwn\~. The word translated
disposition does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament. It
properly means the constituting or arranging of an army;
disposing it into ranks and proper divisions. Hence it has been supposed
to mean that the law was given amidst the various ranks of angels,
being present to witness its promulgation. Others suppose that the angels
were employed as agents or instruments to communicate the law. All that
the expression fairly implies is the former; that the law was given
amidst the attending ranks of angels, as if they were summoned to witness
the pomp and ceremony of giving law to an entire people, and through
them to an entire world. It should be added, moreover, that the Jews
applied the word angels to any of the messengers of God; to fire, and
tempest, and wind, etc. And all that Stephen means here may be to
express the common Jewish opinion, that God was attended on this
occasion by the heavenly hosts; and by the symbols of his presence, the
fire, and smoke, and tempest. Comp. Psalms 104:4; 68:17.
Other places declare that the law was spoken by an angel, one
eminent above all attending angels, the peculiar messenger of God.
See Barnes "Acts 7:38". It is plain that Stephen spoke only the
common sentiment of the Jews, Thus Herod is introduced by Josephus,
(Antiq. b. xv. chap. v. & 3,) as saying, "We have learned
from God the most excellent of our doctrines, and the most holy
part of our law by angels," etc. In the eyes of the Jews, it justly
gave increased majesty and solemnity to the law, that it had been
given in so grand and imposing circumstances. And it greatly
aggravated their guilt, that, notwithstanding this, they had not kept
it.
{e} "law by the disposition of angels" Galatians 3:19
Verse 54. They were cut to the heart. They were exceedingly
enraged and indignant. The whole course of the speech had been such as
to excite their anger, and now they could restrain themselves no
longer.
They gnashed on him, etc. Expressive of the bitterness and
malignity.
{f} "heard these things" Acts 5:33
Verse 55. Full of the Holy Ghost. See Barnes "Acts 2:4".
Looked up stedfastly. Fixed his eyes intently on heaven.
Foreseeing his danger, and the effect his speech had produced--seeing
that there was no safety in the great council of the nation, and no
prospect of justice at their hands-he cast his eyes to heaven and
sought protection them. When dangers threaten us, our hope of safety
lies in heaven. When men threaten our persons, reputation, or lives, it
becomes us to fix our eyes on the heavenly world; and we shall not look
in vain.
And saw the glory of God. This phrase is commonly used to
denote the visible symbols of God. It means some magnificent
representation; a splendour, or light, that is the appropriate
exhibition of the presence of God, Matthew 16:27; 24:30.
See Barnes "Luke 2:9". In the case of Stephen there is every
indication of a vision, or supernatural representation of the heavenly
objects; something in advance of mere faith, such as dying Christians
now have. What was its precise nature, we have no means of ascertaining.
Objects were often represented to prophets by visions; and probably
something similar is intended here. It was such an elevation of view,
such a representation of truth, and of the glory of God, as to be
denoted by the word see; though it is not to be maintained that
Stephen really saw the Saviour with the bodily eye.
On the right hand of God. That is, exalted to a place of honour and
power in the heavens. See Barnes "Matthew 26:64".
See Barnes "Acts 2:25".
{g} "being full of" Acts 6:5
{*} "Holy Ghost" "Holy Spirit"
Verse 56. I see the heavens opened. A figurative expression,
denoting that he was permitted to see into heaven, or to see what
was there, sd if the firmament was divided, and the eye was
permitted to penetrate the eternal world. Comp. Ezekiel 1:1.
{h} "heavens opened" Ezekiel 1:1
{i} "the Son of man" Daniel 7:13
Verse 57. Then they cried out. That is, probably, the people,
not the members of the council. It is evident he was put to death in a
popular tumult. They had charged him with blasphemy; and they
regarded what he had now said as full proof of it.
And stopped their ears. That they might hear no more blasphemy.
With one accord. In a tumult; unitedly.
{+} "accord" "consent"
Verse 58. And cast him out of the city. This was in accordance with
the usual custom. In Leviticus 24:14, it was directed to bring forth him
that had cursed without the camp; and it was not usual, the Jewish
writers inform us, to stone in the presence, of the sanhedrim. Though
this was a popular tumult, and Stephen was condemned without the
regular process of trial, yet some of the forms of law were
observed, and he was stoned in the manner directed in the case of
blasphemers.
And stoned him. This was the punishment appointed in the case
of blasphemy, Leviticus 24:16. See Barnes "John 10:31".
And the witnesses. That is, the false witnesses who bore testimony
against him, Acts 6:13. It was directed in the law Deuteronomy 17:7
that the witnesses in the case should be first in executing the
sentence of the law. This was done to prevent false accusations by the
prospect that they must be employed as executioners. After they had
commenced the process of execution, all the people joined in it,
Deuteronomy 17:7; Leviticus 24:16.
Laid down their clothes. Their outer garments. They were accustomed
to lay these aside when they ran or worked. See Barnes " :".
At a young man's feet, etc. That is, they procured him to take care
of their garments. This is mentioned solely because Saul, or Paul,
afterwards became so celebrated, first as a persecutor, and then an
apostle. His whole heart was in this persecution of Stephen; and he
himself afterwards alluded to this circumstance as an evidence of his
sinfulness in persecuting the Lord Jesus, Acts 22:20.
{k} "cast him out" Luke 4:29; Hebrews 13:12,13
{l} "witnesses" Acts 6:13
{m} "whose name was Saul" Acts 8:1,3; 22:20
{+} "clothes" "mantles"
Verse 59. Calling upon God. The word God is not in the original,
and should not have been in the translation. It is in none of the ancient
Mss. or versions. It should have been rendered, "They stoned Stephen,
invoking, or calling upon, and saying, Lord Jesus," etc.
That is, he was engaged in prayer to the Lord Jesus. The word is
used to express prayer in the following, among other places:
2 Corinthians 1:23, "I call God to witness." 1 Peter 1:17,
"And if ye call on the Father," etc. Acts 2:21, "Whosoever shall call
on the name of the Lord," etc.; Acts 9:14; 22:16; Romans 10:12-14.
This was, therefore, an act of worship; a solemn invocation of the Lord
Jesus, in the most interesting circumstances in which a man can be placed
--in his dying moments. And this shows that it is right to worship
the Lord Jesus, and to pray to him. For if Stephen was inspired,
it settles the question. The example of an inspired man, in such
circumstances, is a safe and correct example. If it should be said
that the inspiration of Stephen cannot be made out, yet the
inspiration of Luke, who has recorded it, will not be called in
question. Then the following circumstances show that he, an inspired
man, regarded it as right, and as a proper example to be followed.
(1.) He has recorded it without the slightest expression of an opinion
that it was improper. On the contrary, there is every evidence that
he regarded the conduct of Stephen in this case as right and
praiseworthy. There is, therefore, this attestation to its propriety.
(2.) The Spirit that inspired Luke knew what use would be made of this
case. He knew that it would be used as an example, and as an evidence
that it was right to worship the Lord Jesus. It is one of the
cases which has been used to perpetuate the worship of the Lord
Jesus in every age. If it was wrong, it is inconceivable that it
should be recorded without some expression of disapprobation.
(3.) The case is strikingly similar to that recorded in John 20:28,
where Thomas offered worship to the Lord Jesus, as his God, without
reproof. If Thomas did it in the presence of the Saviour without reproof,
it was right. If Stephen did it without any expression of disapprobation
from the inspired historian, it was right.
(4.) These examples were used to encourage Christians and Christian
martyrs to offer homage to Christ. Thus Pliny, writing to the emperor
Trajan, and giving an account of the Christians in Bithynia,
says, that they were accustomed to meet and sing hymns to Christ as
to God.-Lardner.
(5.) It is worthy of remark, that Stephen in his death offered the same
act of homage to Christ, that Christ himself did to the Father, when he
died, Luke 23:46. From all these considerations, it follows that the
Lord Jesus is an object of worship; that in most solemn circumstances it
is proper to call upon him, to worship him, and to commit our dearest
interests to his hands. If this may be done, he is Divine.
Receive my spirit. That is, receive it to thyself; take it to thine
abode in heaven.
{a} "receive my spirit" Psalms 31:5; Luke 23:46
Verse 60. And he kneeled down. This seems to have been a
voluntary kneeling; a placing himself in this position for the
purpose of prayer, choosing to die in this attitude.
Lord. That is, Lord Jesus. See Barnes "Acts 1:24".
Lay not, etc. Forgive them. This passage strikingly resembles the
dying prayer of the Lord Jesus, Luke 23:34. Nothing but the Christian
religion will enable a man to utter this passage in his dying moments.
He fell asleep. This is the usual mode of expressing the death of
saints in the Bible. It is an expression indicating
(1.) the peacefulness of their death, compared with the alarm of
sinners;
(2.) the hope of a resurrection--as we retire to sleep with the hope of
again awaking to the duties and enjoyments of life. See John 11:11,12;
1 Corinthians 11:30; 15:51; 1 Thessalonians 4:14; 5:10; Matthew 9:24.
In view of the death of this first Christian martyr, we may remark,
(1.) That it is right to address to the Lord Jesus the language of
prayer.
(2.) It is peculiarly proper to do it in afflictions, and in the
prospect of death, Hebrews 4:15.
(3.) Sustaining grace will be derived in trials chiefly from a view
of the Lord Jesus. If we can look to him as our Saviour, see him
to be exalted to deliver us, and truly commit our souls to him, we
shall find the grace which we shall need in our afflictions.
(4.) We should have such confidence in him, as to enable us to
commit ourselves to him at any time. To do this, we should live a
life of faith. In health, and youth, and strength, we should seek
him as our first and best Friend.
(5.) While we are in health, we should prepare to die. What an
unfit place for preparation for death would have been the situation
of Stephen! How impossible then would it have been to have made
preparation! Yet the dying bed is often a place as unfit to prepare
as were the circumstances of Stephen.--When racked with pain;
when faint and feeble; when the mind is indisposed to thought, or
when it raves in the wildness of delirium, what an unfit place is
this to prepare to die! I have seen many dying beds; I have seen
many in all stages of their last sickness; but never have I yet seen a
dying bed which seemed to me to be a proper place to make preparation
for eternity.
(6.) How peaceful and calm is a death like that of Stephen, when
compared with the alarms and anguish of a sinner! One moment
of such peace, in that trying time, is better than all the pleasures
and honours which the world can bestow. And to obtain such peace,
the dying sinner would be willing to give all the wealth of the
Indies, and all the crowns of the earth. So may I die--and so may
all my readers--enabled, like this dying martyr, to commit my de-
parting spirit to the sure keeping of the great Redeemer! When
we take a parting view of the world; when our eyes shall be turned
for the last time to take a look of friends and relatives; and when the
darkness of death shall begin to come around us, then may we be
enabled to cast the eye of faith to the heavens, and say, "Lord
Jesus, receive our spirits;" and thus fall asleep, peaceful in death,
in the hope of the resurrection of the just.
{b} "lay not this sin" Matthew 5:44; Luke 23:34
Printer friendly version
HOME
TOP