Satan had already attacked the church by using Jewish officials. Now he begins to attack it from the inside. He does this by using two Christians, a husband and wife, Ananias and his wife Sapphira, Acts 5:1.
This is the first recorded sin in the church. Certainly, there was already sin simply because all Christians will sin. The name Ananias means “Jehovah has been gracious.” Sapphira means “beautiful.”
Their sin was not what we would think of as being a major sin, such as murder, theft, fornication, or drunkenness. It was not in their owning and selling their property.
They might have sold it for a profit, Acts 5:2, but that is not sinful. Also, to sell a possession and plan to give a part of it to the Lord would even be considered a commendable thing to do. To keep back a part of the amount they had received would not be wrong in itself.
In Acts 5:4, Peter makes it clear that what they gave was under their control, and it was up to them how much of the original price they would give. The sin is the fact that Ananias and Sapphira plotted to deceive the apostles and others. Peter says that they had “agreed together” to lie about their gift, Acts 5:9.
Their sin was bringing part of the sale price, but saying it was the full price they had received. They lied to the apostles, but more importantly, they lied to the Holy Spirit, Acts 5:-3-4.
We do not know for certain their motive for entering into this deception. We can only guess. Barnabas had received special recognition for his liberal gift, Acts 4:36-37, (the full amount he received for his property.) This may be the reason why Barnabas is introduced at this point in the New Testament.
It could be that his generous gift is to be contrasted with the gift of Ananias and Sapphira. The gift of Barnabas was highly commended. Did Ananias and Sapphira want to receive fame and attention as Barnabas had received for his unselfish gift? People like flattery and compliments.
No doubt Barnabas had received many compliments for his liberal gift, and now this couple seizes the chance to receive the same kind of attention and praise Barnabas had received.
The plot to lie probably went something like this. They received a good price for their land, but greed would not let them give the full amount they had sold it for. They thought about Barnabas and how he had been praised. So, why not keep back part of the amount received and bring the rest to Peter? Acts 5:1.
This way, they would receive the kind of praise given to Barnabas without making the same kind of sacrifice Barnabas made. So, they would lie about the price they had received, which was the amount they laid before Peter, Acts 5:4 / Acts 4:8.
So, Ananias started off with his money bag to find Peter. No one would know that there may have been another sack of money, probably hidden away in his house.
We do not know what he said when he reached Peter, but he probably said that a good piece of land had been in the family. Then, with an act of piety, he laid the money at the feet of Peter, Acts 5:1.
He may have emptied his bag, saying Here is what we received for the land. No doubt he waited to receive a commendation from Peter, but instead he received a rebuke, forgetting the Holy Spirit resided with Peter and the other apostles, Acts 5:3-4.
At the beginning of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit had come upon Peter and the other apostles, enabling them to do miraculous things, Acts 2:1-4. Thus, the Holy Spirit enabled Peter to know about the plot of Ananias and Sapphira. Peter said to him, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself?” Acts 5:3.
Several things can be deducted from Peter’s words to Ananias. First, Peter attributed Ananias’ sin to Satan, who had filled his heart with the plot of deceit. Ananias had allowed Stan to control his thoughts and actions.
However, Satan did not force Ananias to do what he did. Ananias had to be open to Satan’s influence. We often fail to realise that Satan still operates in the hearts of men today.
We can also come under his control. The property of Ananias and Sapphira was under their control. They could do with it whatever they wished without sinning if they had wanted to. It was within their power not to give themselves to Satan’s urging.
While we cannot read between the lines, it may be that Ananias had time to repent and ask for forgiveness, but refused to do so. Another observation is that Peter said, “You have not lied to men but to God,” Acts 5:4.
Fundamentally, all sin is against God. Also, it is to be noted that Peter did not place a curse of death upon Ananias. The fact that he fell over dead, Acts 5:5-6, was probably as surprising to Peter as it was to the others who were present.
The story is not over. Sapphira, a partner in the plot, comes in. It has been about three hours since Ananias died, Acts 5:7. She does not know what has happened. She probably wonders why he has not come home and goes to look for him.
It is somewhat amazing that in this short time, Ananias had been buried and the word had not yet gotten out about his death, Acts 5:6. It may be that Peter had instructed those present not to tell anyone, as Sapphira would also have to be dealt with.
It would be just a matter of time, and she would show up. When she arrived, Peter immediately brought up the subject of the gift, Acts 5:8. Their gift may still have been lying there before Peter.
He asked her if the land had been purchased for the amount that had been brought to him. She said yes, Acts 5:8. Peter asked her why she and her husband had agreed to lie to “the Spirit of the Lord?” Acts 5:9. The same men who had carried Ananias away would also carry away her body to be buried, Acts 5:10 / Acts 5:6.
The result was that “great fear came on all the church and on all who heard these things,” Acts 5:11. She too could have repented and asked for forgiveness, as there are cases where someone caught up in an evil motive did repent, Acts 8:22.
The punishment given out may seem harsh to some, but God used this to serve as an object lesson for Christians living then and for us today. We see a number of such object lessons in the Old Testament, as in the cases of Achan, Joshua 7:18-26, Nadab and Abihu, Leviticus 10:1-2, and Uzzah, 2 Samuel 6:6-7 / 1 Chronicles 13:9-10.
The integrity of the apostles was at stake. This great time of sharing their possessions could not be compromised by such actions. They could not lie to God and get by with it. What if God treated sin in the church today as He did on this occasion? We would be having a lot of funerals.
Thankfully, today God allows us to think and repent. In Palestine in those days, a person’s body would be buried the same day they died. However, the rather quick burial of Ananias and Sapphira without any kind of funeral ceremony may have some significance.
It may signify that, due to the nature of their sin, they did not deserve what we would consider a decent burial. As a result of this event, we are told that “great fear came on all the church and on all who heard these things,” Acts 5:11.
It was fearful then, and it is a fearful thing today. God wants and approves of unselfish deeds. At the same time, He wants us to know that we cannot deceive Him, because He knows all that we do.
Probably one of the more striking lessons to be learned is why we do something is just as important as what we do. The work of Peter, John and the other apostles continued to take place in spite of the threats of the Sanhedrin. Many “signs and wonders were done among the people,” Acts 5:12.
The new Christians were a united front. They continued to meet at Solomon’s Porch. New believers were being added to the Lord; this included both men and women, Acts 5:14.
People would bring their sick and lay them out in the streets that perchance the shadow of Peter walking by might fall on some of them, Acts 5:15. People came from surrounding cities, brought sick people and those possessed by unclean spirits, and as a result, they were healed, Acts 5:16.
From the standpoint of the Jewish leaders, things were getting completely out of hand, Acts 5:17. This group was composed primarily of the Sadducees. They were extremely jealous of what the Apostles were doing. They were drawing large crowds to hear them preach. So, this time they put all the apostles in jail and locked them up for the night, Acts 5:18.
However, an angel of the Lord opened the jail door and charged them to go to the temple and speak the word of God, Acts 5:19-20. This must have given the apostles great confidence to know that God stood by them and approved their preaching at the temple.
Early in the morning, there they were, standing in the temple and preaching Jesus, Acts 5:21. Many of us would probably seek a place of safety, but these apostles went to the most dangerous place they could possibly go, right into the temple area and near to where the council met.
Without knowing what had happened, the High Priest called the leaders together with plans to bring the apostles in before them to face whatever charges they could bring against them, Acts 5:22.
What a shock when they arrived at the prison. There were guards outside standing before the doors to the prison, and the prison was securely locked, but there were no apostles to be found anywhere in or around the prison, Acts 5:22-23.
They learn that they are all in the temple area preaching. How could this possibly be? The guards were careful to guard the prison. The doors are securely locked, Acts 5:23.
How was it possible for twelve men to walk out undetected? Prejudice and false pride prevented them from admitting a miracle had occurred. They no doubt felt threatened that this would get out and more people would begin to listen to the preaching of the apostles.
Were they gravely concerned about the end result of this? You would think this would have shocked these Sadducees into reality, but they are determined to stop the apostles, Acts 5:25-26.
Officers are dispatched to bring them before the council but not to use force. They feared that the people might throw stones at them, Acts 5:26. They were well aware that a mob could easily get out of control. The high priest had strictly admonished not to preach anymore in the name of Jesus, Acts 5:28.
Now they are again in the temple preaching. He said, “You have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this Man’s blood on us!” Acts 5:28. One of the reasons they were so intent on stopping the apostles was that in preaching about Jesus, they kept reminding the people that they were responsible for the death of Jesus.
With a large number of people being converted, they were afraid they might turn on them in revenge, although Christianity is not a violent religion that physically attacks those who oppose it.
The Crusades of the Middle Ages were in direct contradiction to what Jesus taught. The horrible “Inquisitions” under Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain in the sixteenth century had the blessings of the Pope. Christianity has never forced itself on anyone. It is left to each individual to accept Jesus or to reject him.
Peter’s and the other apostles answered that they would continue to preach Jesus because it was God’s will, Acts 5:29. This Jesus that God raised from the dead, whom they had killed by hanging him on a cross, has been exalted to the right hand of God to be a “Prince and Saviour,” to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins,” Acts 5:30-31.
Israel, as well as the Council, could repent if they would. The apostles spoke boldly to these spiritual leaders of the people. Again, Peter accused them of putting Jesus on the cross to suffer agonising pain as he died on the cross. There is no mincing of words with Peter.
The apostles were witnesses to the things they accuse the council of doing, Acts 5:32. Not only that, but the Holy Spirit whom God had given to them witnessed to the truthfulness of all they said! Acts 5:32.
The Council might plead innocent, but it would do no good. They could not deny what the Holy Spirit knew. Thus, they are not about to stop preaching Jesus. They will continue to speak about his death and resurrection at every opportunity.
How dare this Galilean speak in such a manner to the Council? They were infuriated and decided to kill them, Acts 5:33. But a wiser head now stands and speaks.
His name is Gamaliel, a highly respected teacher of the Law, Acts 5:34. He is a Pharisee in contrast to the majority of Sadducees who were present, Acts 5:34. He has the apostles put out of the room for a short time.
He begins by warning them that they needed to stop and think about what they were about to do before carrying out their intent to have them killed, Acts 5:35. He obviously was a man of great wisdom. He gives them a lesson from their own recent history.
In the past, there was a man by the name of Theudas who claimed to be somebody important, Acts 5:36. He had about four hundred men who followed him. But he was killed, and his followers ended up being scattered, and thus nothing ever happened to his uprising, Acts 5:36.
Then there was another man by the name of Judas of Galilee who rose up at a time when a census was being taken and drew after him many people. He also perished, and his followers were scattered, Acts 5:37. He concludes his remarks by saying they should leave these men alone. If what they were doing was merely of men, it would die out, Acts 5:38.
On the other hand, if what they preached was true, they would find themselves fighting against God, Acts 5:39. You gain nothing by opposing error with violence. You fight error with truth.
Gamaliel’s calmness and wisdom prevailed. Emotions have calmed down by now. So, they had the apostles brought in and had them beaten (flogged), Acts 5:40.
Again, they charged that they should not speak in the name of Jesus, and then they let them go, Acts 5:40. The flogging that these apostles received was not a light punishment.
It may not have been forty stripes minus one, but it was a flogging which could crippled one for life. Some even died as a result. You usually carried scars on your back for the rest of your life.
The church had reached its first serious crisis point on this occasion. Maybe they thought the gospel could be halted by beating them. Then the church would soon cease to exist.
If there are no sowers, then the seed (the word) would not be sown, and there will be no church, for its survival depends on the word being sown in the hearts of men.
If the apostles had been like some people, they would have left the Council complaining how bad their backs ached and feeling pity for themselves. Instead, we read in Acts 5:41 that “they went on their way, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for His name.” They considered it an honour to be able to suffer for the name of Jesus.
The result was they could be found “daily in the temple, and in every house, they did not cease teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ,” Acts 2:47. Jesus said that the “gates of hades” (death) could not prevail against the church, Matthew 16:18. You can kill Christians but it will not stop the church because the seed will always be sown by someone.
Acts 6 begins “And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplying.” Acts 6:1. Some estimate that by now, “in those days,” probably three to four years have passed since the establishment of the church. The church has been growing steadily since Pentecost.
The last numerical count was five thousand men, Acts 4:4, and this did not include the women. Then in Acts 5:14 we are told multitudes, “were added to the Lord.” Some estimate there could have been twenty to thirty thousand Christians by this time. This would be a large number for the apostles to oversee.
Sometimes certain things tend to fall through the cracks. We learn that “there arose a murmuring against the Hebrews by the Hellenists, because their widows were neglected in the daily distribution,” Acts 6:1.
We have already noticed how the church in Jerusalem took care of those in need by selling possessions, including land and even houses, Acts 4:32-37. Among those in need would be widows. They were the most vulnerable since they had no family to care for them. Seemingly, there was a daily serving of food to these women.
In the beginning, it seems the apostles were responsible in some way for this, as all monies were brought and laid at their feet. The number of disciples has greatly increased since those beginning days.
While this arrangement worked for a while, as the church grew, this procedure became inadequate, and thus some of the Hellenistic Jewish widows were being overlooked, Acts 6:1.
Hellenistic Jews were those with a Greek background, and their native tongue was Greek. The earlier dispersion of the Jews into so many different countries would lead to their adopting the universal language of that day, which was Greek.
They did not speak Hebrew or Aramaic. The word “Hellenistic” means “Greek-speaking.” Most of those who could speak Hebrew lived in Palestine and looked down on those who spoke Greek.
It is obvious that both of these groups had come to make up the church in Jerusalem. However, we have been told that they had been of one heart and one mind, Acts 4:32.
At Pentecost, people had come from all over the world for that feast day, Acts 2:9-11. It seems many who were converted probably returned to their home country; however, many who had been added to the church decided to remain in Jerusalem.
Satan could use such a situation to cause internal trouble. Some think it was an intentional oversight. However, considering that the apostles were under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, this does not seem likely.
However, even under the best of situations and with the best intentions, there can be a failure in oversight. This would especially be true where you have two groups of people who speak different languages.
The best way to look at this situation is that their numbers were so large that the older system they had been using to take care of those in need was no longer working, and there needed to be a new and better way of handling the needs of these Hellenistic Jews. As a result, people under the old system were being neglected.
The murmuring of those who were neglected probably took the route of talking to others (those who were not involved in the distribution) instead of the ones who may have caused the offence. If this problem had not been resolved, immediate consequences could have resulted.
Also, in the near future, the church will be confronted with incorporating Gentiles into the church. If the problem between Hebrew-speaking and Greek-speaking members could not be resolved then the problem of getting Jewish and Gentile Christian work together later on would be difficult.
To the credit of the apostle, immediate action was taken. They did not wait, hoping the problem would somehow go away. Good leaders will handle internal problems quickly, and the sooner the better.
The first response of the apostles was “And the twelve called the multitude of the disciples to them and said, it is not desirable that we should leave the word of God and serve tables,” Acts 6:2.
The text indicates the complaint was against the native members, but in reality, it was against the apostles, for they were responsible for the distribution. Rather than ignore the situation, they acknowledge that the distribution system needed to be corrected.
First, they “called the multitude of the disciples together and said, it is not desirable that we should leave the word of God and serve tables,” Acts 6:2. The primary work of the apostles was to teach and preach.
To put it another way, they were to be witnesses of the resurrection and declare what people must do to be saved. The Holy Spirit empowered them to do this specific work.
If Satan could redirect their first responsibility, then fewer souls would be saved, and the spiritual growth of the church would suffer. So, they did a wise thing. Seek out others who would be qualified to take care of these widows. “Serving tables” is a figure of speech referring to the distribution of food to these widows who had been neglected.
This would enable the apostles to devote themselves “continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word,” Acts 6:3-4. This was good advice. In fact, we are told that it “pleased the whole multitude,” Acts 6:5.
So, they chose seven men. Their names were Stephen, Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch, Acts 6:5. The qualifications were that they must have a good reputation, be full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, Acts 6:3. We must keep in mind that their task did not just involve a few people but probably several thousand.
The significance of providing food for the needy has always been a priority with God. We find it in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. Under God’s plan His people did not go hungry or die of starvation.
The instructions of the apostles were that they (the members of the church), not the apostles, were to seek out men who could be appointed over this task, Acts 6:2.
The names of these seven men are Greek names, Acts 6:6. It looks as if this was done on purpose. Since it was the Greek-speaking widows who were hurting then with these men, there was no likelihood they would be partial to only the Jewish-speaking Jews.
Two of these men are more familiar than the rest. Stephen will be the main character in Acts 7, and Philip will become well-known as an evangelist, converting many people.
These men are brought before the apostles, and after praying, the apostles laid their hands on them, Acts 6:6, giving them miraculous gifts and at the same time their full approval to the men and as a sign they were being set aside for this specific work.
We will see later on that elders began to replace the apostles, and deacons will begin to replace specially appointed servants who took care of specific matters. It is questionable if these seven men were deacons in the sense of those described in 1 Timothy 3:8-13.
Apparently, this effort brought about good results, for we are told, “And the word of God spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith,” Acts 6:7. This is the climactic statement regarding the growth of the church in Jerusalem.
It shows what can happen when good leadership responds in a positive way when people fall through the cracks. Preachers are sometimes looked upon as the leaders of the church, but God’s plan calls for leadership to be placed on the shoulders of elders.
Stephen is considered to be the first Christian martyr. We have already been introduced to him in Acts 6:5. By the end of Acts 7, he is dead. It is said that the name Stephen means a crown of victory, such as the wreaths placed on the heads of those who won in the Olympic Games.
He is introduced as a man full of faith and power, Acts 6:8. Evidently, the apostles had already started imparting spiritual gifts with the laying on of their hands, Acts 6:6.
He is performing miracles. He evidently had gone into the synagogue of the Freedmen, composed of Cyrenians, Alexandrians and those from Cilicia and Asia, Acts 6:9.
It has been estimated that Jerusalem had at least four hundred synagogues. Those of this synagogue were made up of men who had been freed from slavery. Some were from Cyrene, Alexandria, Cilicia and Asia, Acts 6:9. They were Hellenistic Jews from other countries.
The capital of Cilicia was Tarsus, and Saul was from there but is now living in Jerusalem. It is possible he was in the synagogue in Jerusalem when Stephen entered and spoke. At this point in his life, he would have been greatly offended by the sermon of Stephen.
In fact, no one in the synagogue could answer the arguments of Stephen because he had been enabled by the Holy Spirit to say what he said, Acts 6:10. They became so enraged that they seized Stephen and had him brought before the Council, Acts 6:11-12.
They had false witnesses to say he had spoken blasphemous words against the temple, Moses and the law, Acts 6:13. Furthermore, they had heard him say Jesus would destroy the temple and change the customs which Moses had delivered in the Law, Acts 6:14. This was enough to stir up everyone.
Up until this point, the Christians had enjoyed the respect of the Jewish community as a whole. Now we begin to see the situation change. After the charges are filed, they all begin to stare at Stephen. His face became like the face of an angel, Acts 6:15.
The high priest demanded: “Are these things so?” Acts 7:1. Now begins the sermon of Stephen, the longest sermon in Acts. His defence is found in Acts 7:2-60. He accused the Jews of doing the very things they were accusing him of doing. He begins his sermon with respect toward the Council.
He recalls the story of Abraham, noting how God had worked in the lives of Abraham and others, Acts 7:7. He mentions the promise made to Abraham, Acts 7:3 / Genesis 12:1. He briefly mentions Isaac and Jacob, Acts 7:8. By now, we begin to see a theme running throughout the sermon.
Throughout their history, they had rejected God’s appointed deliverers. The first was Joseph. He plainly tells them that Joseph’s brothers (the patriarchs) rejected Joseph, Acts 7:9-10. But God gave them a second chance. The heart of the sermon deals with Moses.
Beginning with background information, he moves on to speak of Moses, who, he understood, was a Hebrew and his first effort to help his people by killing an Egyptian, he was rejected by his brethren. God then sent Moses to be a deliverer and ruler over His people, Acts 7:9-38.
For forty years, Moses tried to lead them to the promised land. During this time, they rebelled and rejected his authority. He says, “In their hearts they turned back to Egypt,” Acts 7:39.
They demanded that Aaron make a golden calf to offer sacrifices to. Moses told them, “The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren,” Acts 7:37 / Deuteronomy 18:15.
This should have aroused their thinking, but they were blind to what had taken place. Again, in the wilderness, God gave them an opportunity to inhabit a good land, but they rejected Moses again; thus, God sent them back into the wilderness.
In Acts 7:42-43, Stephen compresses history using the words of Amos to show that God does not tolerate rejection, Amos 5:25-27. The mention of the temple of Moloch and the god Remphan, Acts 7:43, shows they were guilty of idolatry even as they carried the tabernacle with them through the wilderness.
They brought the tabernacle over into the Promised Land when Joshua was their leader, Acts 7:45-46. David wanted to build a House of God but was not permitted to do so. Solomon built the House, Acts 7:47.
Then Stephen said, “However, the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands,” Acts 7:48. This no doubt infuriated those who listened to Stephen. In Acts 7:49-50, he then quotes Isaiah 66:1-2 that all of creation is God’s temple. He could have added that God dwells in His people.
Stephen suddenly moves from defending himself to the offence by charging his accusers of being guilty of the very accusation they had brought against him: “You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you. Which of the prophets have your fathers not persecuted? And they have killed those who foretold the coming of the Just One, of whom you now have become the betrayers and murderers who have received the law by the direction of angels and have not kept it,” Acts 7:51-53.
They had accused him of blaspheming God, His Law and the Temple, Acts 6:11 / Acts 6:13-14. He has shown that they are the ones who are guilty of these charges, and he has recited their history to prove it. When they heard this, they were furious; they “were cut to the heart,” Acts 7:54.
They began gnashing their teeth at him, Acts 7:54. They clenched their jaws so hard that their teeth would grind against each other. There was no Gamaliel present to cool down their hatred. He looked around at the angry crowd and must have known that death was near.
At this moment, being “full of the Holy Spirit”, Acts 7:55. God gave him a special vision to sustain him with what this mob was about to do. He “gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, and said, “Look! I see the heaven opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!” Acts 7:55-56.
It has been suggested that when Jesus returned to heaven, He sat down at the right hand of God, but now, He stood out of respect for this one who was willing to die for his faith. Stephen’s claim to see Jesus was the last straw! They started yelling at the top of their voices, Acts 7:57.
Here is this distinguished Council (Their Supreme Court) in their robes acting like wild men. They stopped their ears with their hands so as to shut out Stephen’s infuriating words and then ran and mobbed him. What occurred next was illegal according to both Roman and Jewish law.
It almost came to this earlier when the apostles stood before the Council and Gamaliel spoke up and calmed them down. He was taken outside the city since the death penalty could not be carried out inside the city, so they had to take him outside Jerusalem, Acts 7:58.
We are told that they “laid down their clothes as the feet of a young man whose name was Saul,” Acts 7:58. There is every indication that he was involved in this entire affair.
In Acts 8:1, we find that Saul was consenting to his death: “And they stoned Stephen as he was calling on God and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit,” Acts 7:59. Later in Acts 22:20, we are told by Paul that he kept their clothes while they stoned Stephen.
Stephen then knelt down and cried out with a loud voice, ‘Lord, do not charge them with this sin. And when he had said this, he fell asleep,” Acts 7:60. How could he pray such a prayer? Luke 23:34.
Because he knew he could entrust His soul to God. Augustine has suggested that the church owes the preaching of Paul to the prayer of Stephen. This must have left a profound impression on Paul’s mind.
As we closed the story of Stephen, we found Saul “consenting to his death,” Acts 8:1. Certain men came and carried the body of Stephen to be buried, Acts 8:2. They did not hold back their emotions as they “made great lamentation over him,” Acts 8:2. He is the first evangelist we read of.
It is said that a man named Saul “made havoc of the church,” Acts 8:3. He would enter the houses of Christians and drag them off to prison, Acts 8:3. Stephen’s death sparked a great persecution against the church, Acts 8:1. We know the Jewish leaders were furious and this no doubt set off the persecution.
The result was that Christians were scattered northward into parts of Judea and Samaria. Some went as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch. Up until this time, it seems Christians chose to remain in Jerusalem, but God used persecution to spread them out.
Jesus had previously told the apostles, “You will be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth,” Acts 1:8. While many Christians were scattered, Acts 8:4, it seems that the apostles remained behind. We do not know why they chose to do this, but there must have been a reason.
One of the seven men previously chosen to take care of the widows was Philip, Acts 6:5-6, who went down into Samaria and began preaching in the city of Samaria with considerable success, Acts 8:5-7.
We are told the number of those who believed ran into multitudes. There was “great joy in that city,” Acts 8:8. One reason for his success was the miracles Philip performed, Acts 8:6-7.
We already know that he was “of good reputation” and that he was “full of the Spirit and wisdom,” Acts 6:3. We have already observed that the apostles had started laying their hands on various ones so that they would receive the Holy Spirit, Acts 6:6.
In the case of Philip, unclean spirits came out of those possessed, and the paralysed and lame were healed, Acts 8:7. This brought great joy to the city, Acts 8:8. We wonder if this could be the city of Sychar, which was located near the place where Jacob’s well was located?
It was here that Jesus met the woman at the well, who brought out the entire city to hear Jesus preach, John 4:4-42. He was well received, thus remained over for two days, Acts 4:40. He told his disciples they were like a field white unto harvest, John 4:35.
Up to this time, the gospel was only preached to the Jews. Even many who were scattered as a result of the persecution only spoke to the Jews. In Philip’s situation, the gospel is being preached to the Samaritans who were part Jew and part Gentile.
When the ten northern tribes were carried away into captivity, some of the poorer Jews remained behind. Gentiles came in to occupy the land. The result was that they intermarried with the Jews.
Their connection with paganism resulted in part in God worshipers, and part idol worshipers. Later in history, those in the south of Palestine were carried away into Babylonian captivity, where they remained for seventy years. A remnant returned to reoccupy the land.
Those who returned had maintained their racial and religious purity. One of their first tasks was to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem and then later on the temple itself. The Samaritans offered to help them rebuild, but those returning from Babylon refused their help, Ezra 4:1-3.
They looked down upon the Samaritans, and this led to a high degree of hatred between the Samaritans and Jews. It is mentioned in John 4:9 that “Jews have no dealings with Samaritans”, and the same can be said about how the Samaritans felt toward the Jews. This feeling remained down to the time of Jesus.
Suddenly, we are introduced to a man who had received much attention in the city. His name was Simon, and he practised sorcery, Acts 8:9. He was able to astonish the people, claiming he was someone great, Acts 8:9-11.
However, after they listened to Philip preach and saw his miracles, we are told that “both men and women were baptised,” Acts 8:12. Even Simon became a believer and was baptised, Acts 8:13.
He knew that his sorcery (magic) did not begin to measure up to what Philip had done by the Holy Spirit. Word reached Jerusalem of Philip’s success, Acts 8:14-15. Considering that “multitudes” had been baptised, no doubt more help was needed; thus Peter and John are sent down to Samaria.
We are told that as yet the Holy Spirit had not fallen on any of them, Acts 8:16. This does not have reference to the “gift of the Holy Spirit”, which all baptised believers received at baptism, Acts 2:38, but rather they could not yet perform any miracles.
When the apostles and Philip would leave the Samaritans, they would be left on their own. Thus, it was essential that they had the Holy Spirit so that they would be able to preach and perform various miracles.
So, we are told that Peter and John prayed for them, Acts 8:17. Note that Peter and John are the ones who can impart the Holy Spirit, Acts 8:17. Philip could not do this. Previously, the apostles had laid their hands on Philip and Stephen, Acts 6:6.
One result was that Stephen was able to preach that great sermon to the Council, and Philip was able to preach to the Samaritans. But Philip did not have the authority or ability to pass these special miraculous abilities on to others. All this time, Simon had been following behind the apostles, observing the bestowing of these gifts.
It is said, “And when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, the Holy Spirit was given; he offered them money. He said, “Give me this power also, that on whomever I lay hands he may receive the Holy Spirit,” Acts 8:18-19.
In many ways, this is a rather brazen request. You don’t pay money for spiritual gifts. You don’t purchase your salvation with money either. Also, no one can buy their way into heaven, Acts 8:20.
Did Simon really think Peter and John would give him some of these spiritual gifts if he paid them? What was Simon’s motive? We do not know specifically, but it would certainly make him look good, much more powerful than being just a magician.
It is obvious that Simon still had a long way to go if he was to become a faithful servant of the Lord. He had the wrong motive. He is severely rebuked by Peter.
“Your money perish with you, because you have thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money! You have neither part nor portion in this matter, for your heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore of this your wickedness, and pray God if perhaps the thought of your heart may be forgiven you. For I perceive that you are poisoned by bitterness and bound by iniquity,” Acts 8:21-23.
Several things about Peter’s words that stand out. Simon need not think he could be a part of the Lord’s church with his attitude, Acts 8:21. What he had done was wicked, Acts 8:22.
He needed to pray to God for forgiveness, Acts 8:22. He had already been baptised, Acts 8:31. When Christians sin, must they repent and ask God for forgiveness, 1 John 1:9.
Peter said he perceived that Simon was “poisoned by bitterness and bound by iniquity,” Acts 8:23. The bitterness refers to the condition of his heart. It was not fit to be accepted by Christ. His heart was full of iniquity. Simon asked the apostles to pray for him, Acts 8:24.
Some think that Simon did not repent because he asked the apostles to pray for him rather than asking God to forgive him and not let any evils come upon him. The text, however, indicates that Simon did repent. He did not evade his sin or pretend that he had not sinned.
After preaching the word, the apostles returned to Jerusalem. As they went back, they preached the gospel to many villages in Samaria, Acts 8:25. The church is now beginning to get involved in evangelism. It has now fully developed beyond its original infant state.
In the last section of this study, we found that as a result of persecution began to spread northward from Jerusalem, which was God’s desire from the very beginning, Acts 1:8.
In this part of the study, we will see it spread south. Philip is in Samaria when an angel of the Lord spoke to him, telling him to go to the road that goes down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, Acts 8:26.
Gaza was an old Philistine city on the coast. Considering the success Philip was having in Samaria, he might have voiced an objection, but he did not hesitate to obey the angel, Acts 8:27.
The purpose of his going there was to meet an Ethiopian eunuch. He was a man of great authority, who was over the treasury of the Candace, queen of Ethiopia, Acts 8:27.
Candace was a title that was given to queens. He no doubt had a tremendous responsibility in overseeing the treasury of that country. Its location then may have been further north along the River than it is today.
It has been assumed he was a black man. Also, from Luke’s description of him, we assume he was a proselyte (a Gentile converted to Judaism). We know he was a very religious man.
The distance from Ethiopia to Jerusalem would have been around one thousand miles, a trip that would take days to travel. Being a eunuch, he could not enter the sacred assembly, Deuteronomy 23:1.
The closest that he could get would be the Court of the Gentiles, which was some distance away from the Temple. Yet this man wanted to go there to worship. He may have been there due to a special feast day and maybe remained over a few days to attend classes taught by the Rabbis. He now returns to Ethiopia riding in a chariot, Acts 8:28.
This probably would have been a caravan with his chariot in the middle of the procession. Due to his high position, he would have had servants to travel with him. This would not have been a small chariot such as we see in many pictures, but more like a fancy wagon with four wheels.
He would have had a driver; thus, he is seated and is reading from a scroll containing the writings of Isaiah, Acts 8:28. He may have purchased this scroll while in Jerusalem, which would have been very expensive, as all such writings were copied by hand. He is reading aloud so Philip can hear him. It was common to read aloud.
Philip is told to join himself to the chariot, Acts 8:29. Philip begins running alongside the chariot, Acts 8:30. In our present-day culture, this was an unusual way to get acquainted, especially with someone of such high authority.
Philip began with a question. “Do you understand what you are reading?” The eunuch replied, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” Acts 8:30-31. Many of us today are like the eunuch. We need someone to teach us.
This reminds us of Romans 10:14, “How shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?” Most people need help in understanding the scriptures simply because they are not familiar with them.
Philip arrived at an opportune time. In fact, the timing could not have been better. There are many stories that could be told about how a seeker of truth has crossed the path of someone who could teach them.
The first thing that strikes us about the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch was that Philip used God’s Word to convert him. He was not converted as a result of some religious experience or a direct operation of the Holy Spirit. He was not told to confess all his sins.
He is converted by hearing Philip preach the word to him. Philip began with the scriptures that the Ethiopian was reading. We are told that he “preached Jesus unto him,” Acts 8:35.
The passage the eunuch was reading from was Isaiah 53:7-8. Luke quotes the Septuagint, which was the Greek translation of the Old Testament made around 270 B.C. in Alexandria, Egypt.
It is this Greek translation that most of the New Testament writers quote from rather than the Hebrew Bible. This prophecy was made seven hundred years before Jesus lived.
The eunuch wanted to know who the prophet (Isaiah) is speaking of. Philip began with the passage the eunuch was reading, Acts 8:34-35. His first task was to show that these verses referred to the Messiah.
As a lamb is led to be slaughtered and is silent before its shearer, so was Jesus when he was taken to be crucified. He offered no resistance or a cry of protest. His judgment was taken away.
Not even his friends stood by him. He did not receive a fair trial. He died a swift and violent death at a young age, Acts 8:32-33 / Isaiah 53:7-8. Probably Philip noted other prophecies found in Isaiah 53.
The eunuch, having been in Jerusalem, would have heard the name of Jesus. Too much was going on in Jerusalem. Disciples were telling everyone about Jesus. On the other hand, there would be enemies who denounced him over time. The treasurer would know that what Philip said about Jesus was true. The passage was very clear when he understood who Isaiah was speaking of.
He saw water in the near distance and exclaimed, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptised?” Acts 8:36. Why would the eunuch suddenly bring up the subject of baptism?
It is impossible to preach Jesus without preaching on baptism, for it is through baptism that one gets into Christ, Galatians 3:27, and makes contact with His blood, which cleanses one from sins. It is important to know about Jesus, but it is essential to be baptised into Him.
When John came, preparing the way for Jesus, he baptised people. Jesus Himself walked more than sixty miles to be baptised. The disciples of Jesus were baptised.
Jesus, in giving the great commission to his disciples, said, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” Matthew 28:19-20. These are the marching orders of the church.
Philip was following these orders when he preached Jesus to the Ethiopian. The eunuch wanted to be baptised, but did he believe in Jesus? Philip needed to know if he believed after he had preached about Jesus. He says to the Ethiopian, “If you believe with all your heart, you may,” Acts 8:37.
The eunuch immediately responded, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God,” Acts 8:37. Some translations do not have this in the text but in the footnotes because it is not found in some old manuscripts. It is an interesting observation that the eunuch asked a question in Acts 8:36, and Philip answered his question in Acts 8:37.
If we take out Acts 8:37, then we have no answer to his question. It would seem wise to retain this verse in the text. Also, there are other scriptures which teach that confession was a part of God’s plan of salvation, Romans 10:9-10 / 1 Timothy 6:12-13.
The chariot stops, and “both Philip and the eunuch go down into the water, and Philip baptised him,” Acts 2:38. Many have tried to justify sprinkling water on a person’s head as baptism. Baptism is the English word for the Greek word baptizo, which means to immerse, bury, to plunge beneath, to submerge.
If sprinkling was the practice, it is likely the eunuch would have carried water along on his journey in his chariot, and he would not have had to go down into the water because Philip could have taken a little water and sprinkled his head.
One scholar says they went down beside the water, and Philip scooped up some water and sprinkled the head of the eunuch. It should be obvious why they both went down into the water. It is strange that Bible scholars deny what happened.
I never cease to be amazed at how scholarly men attempt to eliminate baptism as a part of our salvation. No new convert ever prayed, “Lord Jesus, come into my heart”. In every case where there is a conversion, baptism is a part of that person’s becoming a Christian.
Up until now, the emphasis has been on the early years of the Jerusalem church, but we now notice the church begins to exist in the immediate area around Jerusalem and begins to “go into all the world,” Acts 1:8. Focus will begin to turn to Paul and others as they go into foreign areas.
We have seen the church as it began to reach out to areas beyond Jerusalem with the gospel. This, along with other activities, indicates the church is now becoming a mature church. We discover it is now equipped with elders, deacons, evangelist, teachers. Other special services are being performed by the women.
We see that women were teaching others. There were other special needs that needed special attention. The church is now beginning to go outside of Palestine, preaching the gospel.
Multitudes will now hear the gospel and be added to the church. The Holy Spirit will continue to inspire teachers when needed. He will see that the New Testament is completed and circulated among the churches.
During those early years, the church suffered opposition from both the Jews and the Romans, who tried to eradicate it. These were difficult years. Many Christians suffered extreme hardships. Some lost their lives.
The good news is that the church did not fold and cease to exist, but stood firm and was victorious in the face of all the hardships. The survival of the church was paramount in God’s plan to reach the lost throughout the world.