BIBLE IN TEN

Acts 7:3

Saturday, 9 April 2022
 
and said to him, ‘Get out of your country and from your relatives, and come to a land that I will show you.’ Acts 7:3
 
The previous verse revealed that God had appeared to Abraham in Mesopotamia, even before he dwelt in Haran. Continuing that thought, and still speaking of God, it next says, “and said to him.”
 
The Lord has a purpose for Abraham. As such, He sovereignly entered into his life and spoke to him in order for His will to come about within the stream of human existence. Note that this is a communication to Abraham, and not some type of overwhelming impulse. It doesn’t say, “God appeared to Abraham and impelled him to do such and so.” Instead, He speaks to him. With that understood, it next says, “Get out of your country.”
 
The Lord is now directing the steps of Abraham, calling him out of Ur of the Chaldees in Mesopotamia. There is no indication concerning how long his family had lived there, but it was not a short span as can be determined from the next words, “and from your relatives.”
 
Abraham’s family had moved to Ur at some point in time, and they had become established there long enough to grow into an extended family of relatives. This is certain because when he left, he took along his immediate family, leaving other relatives behind. Because of this, it wasn’t just a temporary home that a traveling Bedouin might pick up and move from. Rather, it was a place of family, memories, and roots. But the Lord directed him, and he responded after hearing the words, “and come to a land that I will show you.”
 
The same Greek word was used in the previous clause as in this clause. It should be translated as such –
 
Get out of your land and from your relatives
And come to a land that I will show you.
 
The land in which Abraham lived was known, it had family, it was what he knew. On the other hand, the land to which the Lord directed him was unknown, it had no family, and he had no idea what awaited him. But it was known to the Lord. Abraham, hearing the call of the Lord, now had a choice to make. Although it may seem obvious to us now that he would say, “Well, God has spoken and so I must do as He instructs.” But that is not the case at all, is it?
 
Life application: The Lord appeared to Abraham and told him to pick up and move on. Even if it was only one generation that he lived in Ur, the fact is that it was his home. He had family there, and it was his land. Would he be obedient to the Lord’s direction? We can say, “Well, what did he have to lose, and how much he had to gain!”
 
But this is all because of our knowledge of the story and how it plays out. He had no idea at all what lay ahead, and we have no idea at all what he was leaving behind. All we have is the fact that the Lord has spoken and that Abraham, as we now know, did as the Lord said. Again, as noted above, we might think, “Of course, he went. God told him to do so, and he would be a fool to not do so!”
 
But then, we would probably be pointing at ourselves, right? We say that we believe in Jesus. We claim that He is the Lord, and we are His people. If that is so, then we are claiming that we have a knowledge of who He is and that if He speaks to us, we will do just as he has said. But wait... He has “said.” His word is what we call the Bible. It is the only source of who Jesus is. We have used information from that source to say that we believe He is the Lord and that He is our Savior.
 
So, what is the difference? The difference is great! Abraham did not have the story as we do. He did not know the end from the beginning. He did not know what would happen along the way or what it would be like when he got there. And yet, Abraham obeyed.
 
We do have the story, from the beginning (Genesis 1:1) to the end (Revelation 22:21). We know the major plan of what will happen along the way because the Bible has laid it out. And we know just what the land we are heading to will be like because its marvelous description is given in Revelation. And yet, we – unlike Abraham – do not simply hear and obey.
 
In fact, quite often, we don’t hear at all because we don’t listen. How can we hear unless we read what He has spoken out for us? And in the times when we do hear, we often still fail to do as instructed. How great was the faith of Abraham! How failing and weak is our faith! Let us be people of faith. Let us be obedient to the word. May the Lord find us faithful to comply. May it be so, to our benefit and to His glory.
 
Heavenly Father, we have Your precious word. It is not overburdensome at all. Instead, it is a guide for us to use as we head to the fairer land which You have promised us. Help us to see this, and to be obedient to Your will and Your word as we take our steps along this journey of life. Yes, help us in this Lord God. Amen.
 

Acts 7:2

Friday, 8 April 2022
 
And he said, “Brethren and fathers, listen: The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Haran, Acts 7:2
 
At the beginning of Chapter 7, as seen in the last verse, the high priest asked if the charges against Stephen were true. Stephen now begins his response without even providing an answer to the charge. Instead, he dives right into giving a dissertation on the history of Israel. Luke records his words, beginning with, “And he said, ‘Brethren and fathers, listen.’”
 
The word “brethren” is stated as a general address. It is directed to all who hear as equal members of the society of those of Israel as far as cultural affiliation is concerned. The word “fathers” indicates the members of the council specifically, acknowledging that they are in authority positions and thus it is an extra note of courtesy and honor.
 
The idea would be the same as addressing a church where all are one in Christ (Galatians 3:28). And yet, the elders are to be given double honor (1 Timothy 5:17). Stephen is acknowledging both at the same time. He is noting that he is of Israel, just as they are, but they are also elders of the society and are due an additional mark of respect.
 
With this opening address complete, he begins his general discourse, saying, “The God of glory.” The phrase is a rare one in the way it is presented. The Greek has an article that is often left untranslated, but it should probably be rendered in this statement – “The God of the glory.” The same idea is expressed in Psalm 24:7 where the Hebrew also uses a definite article before the word “glory” –
 
“Lift up, gates, your heads
And be lifted up, doors, everlasting
And shall come in the King of the glory.” (CG)
 
Though the expression used by Stephen is unusual, the idea behind it is quite common. The glory of God is expressed throughout both testaments of Scripture in various ways. Some scholars explain the term as denoting the visible glory manifested at times by the Lord. There is no reason at all to assume this.
 
The word “glory” is from the Greek word “dóksa (from dokeō, ‘exercising personal opinion which determines value’) – glory. ... dóksa (‘glory’) corresponds to the OT word, kabo (OT ... ‘to be heavy’). Both terms convey God’s infinite, intrinsic worth (substance, essence)” (HELPS Word Studies).
 
Stephen is certainly referring to His state of worth, being the Creator of all things. Whether there is an outward expression of this or not at any given time, He remains of the same worth. The reason for Stephen stating the description of Him in this manner may be to alert the council that he regards the glory of God as something uniquely tied to Him. As such he would not be one to blaspheme Him in any manner. Next, he says that God “appeared to our father Abraham.”
 
This is something that happened quite a few times in the life of Abraham. At key points in his life, the Bible records the visitations of the Lord to him. Sometimes, only a conversation is recorded. At other times, the Lord appeared in a human form (see Genesis 18:1, 2). In such an instance, it is surely a visit of the Lord by the eternal Christ, meaning Jesus. 
 
However, until Stephen’s speech, this particular visitation now being noted by him has been left unstated. He says that God appeared to him “when he was in Mesopotamia.” That is seen in the words, “before he dwelt in Haran.”
 
The meaning then is that the Lord appeared to him in Ur of the Chaldeans, the place from which Abraham originally came. The only thing said of this in Genesis is recorded in a few passages, such as –
 
“And Terah took his son Abram and his grandson Lot, the son of Haran, and his daughter-in-law Sarai, his son Abram’s wife, and they went out with them from Ur of the Chaldeans to go to the land of Canaan; and they came to Haran and dwelt there.” Genesis 11:31
 
“Then He said to him, ‘I am the Lord, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans, to give you this land to inherit it.’” Genesis 15:7
 
“And Joshua said to all the people, ‘Thus says the Lord God of Israel: ‘Your fathers, including Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, dwelt on the other side of the River in old times; and they served other gods. 3 Then I took your father Abraham from the other side of the River, led him throughout all the land of Canaan, and multiplied his descendants and gave him Isaac.’” Joshua 24:2, 3
 
Other such references are found in Scripture, but – like these – they do not explicitly speak of the Lord appearing to Abraham while in Mesopotamia. Instead, they only speak in a general way, without any note of a personal appearance, even if it may be implied.
 
Some will tie Stephen’s words into Genesis 12:1, but that is then explained in Genesis 12:4 as being a departure from Haran, not Ur. As such, Stephen’s words provide explicit details not previously seen. This is the first of several times that Stephen will give insights into the biblical narrative that are not explicitly stated elsewhere, thus making his speech a most important source for understanding some key things that would otherwise not be known.
 
Life application: There are times when we can make inferences about what is going on in Scripture, but unless something is explicitly stated, it is best to acknowledge our inference as such. In the case of the Lord appearing to Abraham, without Stephen’s words in Acts, such an inference would have to be stated in this way.
 
But because Stephen said what he said, we are no longer bound to a mere inference, and we can rightly state that the Lord explicitly appeared to Abraham even before the first recorded appearance in the book of Genesis. This then means that we must be familiar with all of Scripture in order to make such a statement.
 
Therefore, it is incumbent on us to check things out when they are presented to us by pastors, preachers, and teachers. It is also incumbent on us to read the word again and again until we are familiar with it. And finally, it means that when we find that our initial analysis of something was wrong, we should go about correcting it in the future.
 
The Bible is a big and complicated book, and it involves a lifetime of study. Let us diligently pursue it each and every day of our lives. It is certain that such a priority on His word is pleasing to the Lord. Read and study it!
 
Glorious Heavenly Father, help us to be people of study, knowing that You have given us Your word so that we can know it and then act in accord with Your will. We can certainly see Your glorious hand at work in the pages of Scripture and as it is revealed in the ongoing movement of human history. Thank You for Your wonderful word! Amen.

Acts 7:1

Thursday, 7 April 2022
 
Then the high priest said, “Are these things so?” Acts 7:1
 
Chapter 6 ended with the charge of blasphemy raised against Stephen while he stood confidently before the council. As it noted of him, “his face was like the face of an angel.” He had nothing to fear because the truth was on his side, even if he was falsely accused, and even if the false accusations prevailed in the court, they could not prevail over his security in Christ. Hence there was nothing to be timid about.
 
Chapter 7 now opens with a simple question from the high priest who is obviously in the position to lead the council. Luke records this, saying, “Then the high priest said.” As this is a matter of a religious nature, it is handled under the authority of the high priest. Rome decided if a conquered nation could worship its god or gods, and to what extent they were allowed to do so. They understood that a nation that can practice its religion openly was likely to be less of a threat than one that could not.
 
The religious life of Israel was found acceptable to the Romans and so it was allowed to continue, even if politics were involved in the matter of appointing high priests and the like. With this authority allowed, the Sanhedrin met, and the high priest conducted his duties for the nation, leading the religion accordingly. In this case, the question asked of Stephen is, “Are these things so?”
 
It is a simple question, anticipating a plea of guilt or innocence, but with the allowance that the one charged could speak in his own defense. In this case, the simple question addressed to Stephen will turn into 52 verses of response, none of which directly answers the high priest’s query. Instead, it will be a history lesson concerning the state of Israel’s relationship with, and continued rejection of, the Lord. Stephen’s words ahead are much more of an accusation against the nation than were the simple charges of blasphemy against him.
 
The events now, even the questioning by the high priest, are similar to what happened at the trial of Jesus –
 
Those who had arrested Jesus took him to Caiaphas the high priest, where the teachers of the law and the elders had assembled. 58 But Peter followed him at a distance, right up to the courtyard of the high priest. He entered and sat down with the guards to see the outcome.
59 The chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin were looking for false evidence against Jesus so that they could put him to death. 60 But they did not find any, though many false witnesses came forward.
Finally two came forward 61 and declared, “This fellow said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God and rebuild it in three days.’”
62 Then the high priest stood up and said to Jesus, “Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?” 63 But Jesus remained silent. Matthew 26:57-63
 
Life application: Stephen has a choice concerning his response. Should he try to defend himself against the false charges, or will his response serve a greater purpose if he speaks of other matters? In his case, he will actually go on the offensive. Though he may not have fully realized it at the time, his words now form a lengthy note of accusation against Israel.
 
As this is recorded in the word of God, it stands as a testimony to why Israel was punished, sent into exile, and has lived under the curses of Deuteronomy 28 for the past two millennia. It is up to Israel, meaning the leadership of the nation, to acknowledge their guilt and to call on Jesus (see Matthew 23:37-39).
 
Although it is right and proper to support the nation of Israel, it is not right to blindly support them without calling out their guilt. They bear guilt in rejecting the Lord, and they bear the guilt of failing to measure up to the laws found within the covenant they agreed to at Mount Sinai. Until they come into the New Covenant, they remain bound to the Old. Pray that those in Israel will have their eyes opened to their state before the Lord – both as individuals and as a nation.
 
Heavenly Father, the Bible is Your witness to the world – both Israel and the world at large – as to what You are doing in redemptive history. Help us to never withhold telling the entire story that we are aware of when it is needed to open people’s eyes to whatever truth they have not yet grasped. May we be ready to tell anyone and everyone about those things that are clearly presented in Your word that will help them understand the things You expect of them. Amen.

Acts 6:15

Wednesday, 6 April 2022
 
And all who sat in the council, looking steadfastly at him, saw his face as the face of an angel. Acts 6:15
 
To get the proper sense of the flow of the words, the verbs must be corrected, and the order of the clauses needs to be reversed. The NKJV says, “And all who sat in the council, looking steadfastly at him...”
 
Rather, the original text reads, “And having looked steadfastly at him, all those sitting in the council...” When reading the previous verses together with this, it comes alive. The action moves from the accusers of the previous verse to Stephen. The council is held, they are looking at the accusers as each presents his case. With their words complete, only then are the eyes turned to the accused. This includes “all those sitting in the council.”
 
The verb is an aorist participle. They are sitting there with their eyes fixed on the accused. It is as if the reader is actually viewing the trial as it happens. What the council is now seeing is what the reader is also able to mentally see. And that is, as Luke notes, that they “saw his face as the face of an angel.”
 
Unfortunately, many commentaries unnecessarily state what is compared here to a shining or radiant countenance, as if Stephen has already started to be glorified. Or some say that the illumination of God is coming forth from his countenance. For example, the Pulpit Commentary says that he was “illuminated with a Divine radiance.” There is no reason to assume anything like this, nor would it agree with what actually happens to Stephen towards the end of Chapter 7.
 
Rather, the idea being expressed here is one of confidence, serenity, discernment, being undisturbed by the challenge against him, and so on. Three examples where a similar expression is used will give the sense. None of these are referring to a supernatural shining or illumination. Rather, they speak of a human who is in control of his circumstances and exudes confidence –
 
“And Jacob said, ‘No, please, if I have now found favor in your sight, then receive my present from my hand, inasmuch as I have seen your face as though I had seen the face of God, and you were pleased with me.’” Genesis 33:10
 
“Your maidservant said, ‘The word of my lord the king will now be comforting; for as the angel of God, so is my lord the king in discerning good and evil. And may the Lord your God be with you.’” 2 Samuel 14:17
 
“And he has slandered your servant to my lord the king, but my lord the king is like the angel of God. Therefore do what is good in your eyes.” 2 Samuel 19:27
 
Life application: It is true that angels (messengers) are seen at times in Scripture to have a radiance that is beyond human, but when that is the case, it is also explicitly stated. At other times, angels – even the angel of the Lord (meaning the eternal Christ) – appear completely human. So much is this the case that the one who sees Him will not even realize He is the Lord. For example, this is seen in Judges 6.
 
When something is beyond what is normally experienced, it will say so. And so, as you read the Bible, consider each passage just as it is presented, just as if you were reading any normal book. When the sensational comes, it will be explained in the text. This is actually an important lesson because the more sensational we make the passage in our own minds (or as someone has presented it), the less it may be reflecting what the actual intent is.
 
In this state, the Bible becomes something that goes beyond a book about the redemption of man, and the focus becomes like a Hollywood movie. This type of approach is hugely popular, and videos like this will get countless views, but the people are also desensitized to the main point of what Scripture is telling us.
 
God loves us, God sent His Son (in an otherwise unremarkable human form) in order to redeem us, and we are being brought back to Him through His wonderful program of redemption. That alone is the most sensational news of all! Let us not miss the beauty of God’s workings by going off into many over-sensationalized paths. 
 
What a treasure! What a gift! What a marvelous wonder is Your word, O God. It gives us the details of the most glorious thing we could imagine. It tells us of restoration with You through Jesus Christ our Lord. Thank You for what this precious word conveys concerning Him! Amen.

Acts 6:14

Tuesday, 5 April 2022
 
for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and change the customs which Moses delivered to us. Acts 6:14
 
False witnesses were presented before the council to speak against Stephen. They began with “This man does not cease to speak blasphemous words against this holy place and the law.” They will now state the actual words they claim Stephen said. That begins with, “for we have heard him say.”
 
In order to make a charge of blasphemy against another, the words that are claimed to have been said must be presented. Further, according to the law, there had to be at least two or three witnesses in order for the words to be accepted as true. Hence, they say “we.” It is not that two false witnesses have come forward, each with his own different statement. Rather, they combine their voices into one accusation. When this is not done, the charges cannot be accepted. This was seen at the trial of Jesus –
 
“Then some rose up and bore false witness against Him, saying, 58 ‘We heard Him say, “I will destroy this temple made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.”’ 59 But not even then did their testimony agree.” Mark 14:57-59
 
There must be a minimum number of witnesses, and if they are making the same charge, the charge must be consistent with any others coming forward with the same accusation. In this case, they jointly state their words, saying, “that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place.”
 
The first point of these words concerns the way the Greek is structured, there is great contempt for the name they refer to – “Jesus of Nazareth, this.” It sets the tone for their testimony as being biased against the Lord. Also, there are two possible references to what they are speaking about –
 
Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”
20 Then the Jews said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?”
21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body. 22 Therefore, when He had risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this to them; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said. John 2:19-22
 
Then, as some spoke of the temple, how it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations, He said, 6 “These things which you see—the days will come in which not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down.” Luke 21:5,6
 
In the first example, the reference – as John notes – was clearly to Jesus’ body. It is something that could be easily defended against because the apostles had already proclaimed that Jesus resurrected on the third day.
 
The second point to consider is what “this place” means. As noted in Acts 6:13, it could be either the temple or the entire city of Jerusalem. Jesus also said in Luke 21 –
 
 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.” Luke 21:20-24
 
Either way, Jesus did not say that he would destroy the temple or Jerusalem. Rather, His words were a prophecy against the temple and the city, confirming that they would be destroyed. As distasteful as that may be to the Jews listening to the charges, it is not something that they could condemn Stephen or anyone else over.
 
A comparable passage is found in Jeremiah 26:1-19. Jeremiah prophesied against the temple and the city, the people wanted to stone him to death, but then Scripture provided previous testimony that what Jeremiah prophesied would come to pass. Therefore, they could not stone him without being guilty of his blood.
 
With the first charge stated, the second charge is next given, saying, “and change the customs which Moses delivered to us.” Charles Ellicott says the following concerning these words –
 
“The words seem to have been used in a half-technical sense as including the whole complex system of the Mosaic law, its ritual, its symbolism, its laws and rules of life, circumcision, the Sabbath, the distinction of clean and unclean meats (Acts 15:1; Acts 21:21; Acts 26:3; Acts 28:17).”
 
He is correct in this analysis. It is an all-encompassing ending of the Mosaic Law. In whatever way Stephen worded his statement, it certainly included the words of Jesus that a New Covenant had been instituted. The author of Hebrews explains the meaning of this, and it is something that the young church took time to grasp. But it appears to be something that Stephen understood from the outset –
 
“In that He says, ‘A new covenant,’ He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.” Hebrews 8:13
 
Again, the Jews may dislike what he has said, but it is nothing that was not already fully supported by their own Scriptures –
 
“Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— 32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord. 33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.” Jeremiah 31:31-34
 
As this is the case, and as Jesus claimed to be the Initiator of that New Covenant, the burden of proof now rested on the council to prove that it was not so. Stephen has both past precedent and also the weight of prophecy in Scripture on his side, both from the same source – Jeremiah the prophet. When the accusations were rightly considered within the context of when and how Jesus spoke His words, there could be no doubt that Stephen was innocent of the charges against him.
 
Life application: The Bible is a big book, filled with wonderful stories, prophetic utterances, praises to God, insightful analyses of what God is doing in the stream of time and human existence, and so much more. It is a self-confirming word as well. One section may seem to bring in an impossible to resolve the dilemma, and then another section will come along and take care of the issue, confirming that the Lord is in control of things.
 
However, the only way you will ever be able to know how these various things are presented is to read your Bible. Until you read it, you cannot know the treasure and wonder that is to be found in it. It is God’s gift to you. Open it up and revel in it. You can start today by reading Jeremiah 26:1-19 which is referred to above.
 
How precious is Your word, O God! It is more delightful than the sweetest honey. Thank You for Your wonderful word. Amen.

Acts 6:13

Monday, 4 April 2022
 
They also set up false witnesses who said, “This man does not cease to speak blasphemous words against this holy place and the law; Acts 6:13
 
Stephen has been seized and brought to the council. Now that he stands before it, charges will be laid against him. However, Luke sadly notes that “They also set up false witnesses.” This is not unlike Jesus’ trial –
 
“Now the chief priests, the elders, and all the council sought false testimony against Jesus to put Him to death, 60 but found none. Even though many false witnesses came forward, they found none. But at last two false witnesses came forward 61 and said, ‘This fellow said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God and to build it in three days.’” Matthew 26:59-61
 
The description of them as false witnesses is based upon twisting the words that he surely spoke in order to make them say something he actually would not have said. The charge is stated in this verse, but then the explanation of what is said will come in the next verse. They are words that bear some truth, and yet they are cunningly manipulated. For now, the charge is, “This man does not cease to speak blasphemous words.”
 
The word “blasphemous” is not in some ancient texts. Rather, it simply says, “This man does not cease to speak words.” Either way, the intent is the same. The false witnesses are making a claim based upon words only. Stephen has actually done nothing other than speak, and because this is so, his words can be easily manipulated to reflect something that will raise the ire of the council. The words they claim he has said are, first, “against this holy place.”
 
The meaning is “against the temple,” or the words may even extend to the holy city itself. Exactly what they claim Stephen said is yet to be noted, but it is true that the temple in particular, and the location of it in general, is considered holy –
 
The temple:
“O God, the nations have come into Your inheritance;Your holy temple they have defiled;They have laid Jerusalem in heaps.” Psalm 79:1
 
Jerusalem:
“Now the leaders of the people dwelt at Jerusalem; the rest of the people cast lots to bring one out of ten to dwell in Jerusalem, the holy city, and nine-tenths were to dwell in other cities. 2 And the people blessed all the men who willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem.” Nehemiah 11:1, 2
 
But the accusation doesn’t stop there. After noting that Stephen spoke words against “this holy place,” they next add, “and the law.”
 
The “law” specifically refers to the Law of Moses. It was considered as divinely inspired by the Lord and written out by Moses. This would explain the earlier words of verse 11 that said, “against Moses and God.” The law is the covenant that established Israel as the Lord’s people, and it is the foundation of their society, culture, and lives. Everything Israel did from day to day, throughout the months, annually, and even throughout their lives rotated around precepts found in the law. To speak against the law would be considered both blasphemous and treasonous.
 
Life application: To speak against the word of God by those who profess to be Christians is something that should not be tolerated. It is the document that establishes the faith, and it is the document that records what God has done, is doing, and will do in order to bring men back to Himself.
 
As it is the document that details this, the implication is that it is divinely inspired. If it is not so, then what is the basis for the faith of the Christian? Man’s word? If so, then how can it be an accurate record of God’s workings? In other words, the Bible is either the word of God or it is not. If it is not, then the person who claims to be a Christian, and yet dismisses it, is basing his faith on pretty much nothing.
 
And this will be true in varying degrees as well. Some claim that the first eleven chapters of Genesis are not an accurate record of what actually occurred. Some hold to the New Testament, but not the Old. And so on. And yet, these stances show a complete disconnect in how those people perceive God.
 
Jesus clearly held to the absolute integrity of the first eleven chapters of Genesis, as well as all of the Old Testament. The apostles did as well. And it is they who have explained the life of Jesus to us. Because of this, those who say that they believe in Jesus suddenly believe in a false (or maybe incompetent) Jesus. How can someone put their faith in a man who was wrong about something so basic as what the word of God actually contains? If this is so, He is not God. And if He is not God, then why on the earth would anyone follow Him?
 
The thinking is unclear at best, but it carries the same blasphemous undertones that are presented right in Acts 6:13. To speak against the word is to speak against Jesus who confirmed the word. It is a scary place to be while claiming to be a Christian. Have faith. Trust the word of God as it is presented, and let God sort out for you the things you may not currently understand when you come before Him.
 
Lord God, we may not understand everything that is in Your word, but we can take what it says as absolute truth when we accept it by faith. And so, help us to be people of faith. Your word confirms Your doings, and Your doings are bringing us back to You. Thank You for the glorious and precious gift that tells us of these things. Amen.

Acts 6:12

Sunday, 3 April 2022
 
And they stirred up the people, the elders, and the scribes; and they came upon him, seized him, and brought him to the council. Acts 6:12
 
Charges of speaking blasphemous words against Moses and God have been made against Stephen. With that, it now reads, “And they stirred up the people, the elders, and the scribes.” The word translated as “stirred up” is found only here in the Bible. It comes from two other words signifying “together” and “move.” As such, it is to take the entire mass and to stir, resulting in an excited mixture.
 
The sense then isn’t that it was just the common people, but even the elders and scribes had been stirred up. It was as if the entire population was brought to a frenzy. A good example of the resulting mayhem is found in Acts 21 and 22 where Paul found himself in a similar pickle as the people beat him and shouted accusations against him. There is somewhat of an irony in the matter though, because Paul refers to this exact event in Acts 6 & 7 while stating his case concerning Christ –
 
“And when the blood of Your martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by consenting to his death, and guarding the clothes of those who were killing him.” Acts 22:20
 
For now, the crowd around Stephen has been stirred up against him. Therefore, Luke next records, “and they came upon him.” The verb is an aorist participle and should be rendered, “and having come upon him.” That then naturally leads into the action whereby they “seized him.”
 
The word used here is found only in Luke and Acts. It is a compound word coming from sun (together with) and harpazó (to snatch away). In other words, it wasn’t that a group of people came upon him, and then one grabbed him. Rather, a whole group grabbed him. Maybe one took an arm while another took a leg. Pretty soon, he was lifted up and hauled away. Or it could be that they surrounded him like a mob, everyone laying a hand on him, and he was manhandled like someone in the process of being tackled in a football game.
 
The entire scene is active and alive as they jostled with their captive “and brought him to the council.” It is the same council that the apostles had been taken to, and it is the same council to which Jesus had been brought.
 
Life application: During the January 6 rally in Washington, there were people who stirred up the crowd, somewhat like what happened to Stephen. They were government informants and government operators who purposefully stirred up the people in order to later target those in the crowd as insurgents and insurrectionists.
 
Those who were otherwise innocent were brought into the fray and taken along with the miscreants who riled the people up in the first place. From there, those who actually stirred up the crowds were carefully ignored and any photos of them were excised from the public’s attention.
 
This is how such things get started. The tactics are recorded by Luke so that we can see that this is how humans work against one another in order to meet a set and perverse agenda. As this is so, it is wise to always be aware of your surroundings. If you suspect someone is stirring up the masses in order to incite them in an inappropriate way, be watchful and attentive to their actions.
 
This will probably become a more common tactic to be used against Christians in the days ahead. So, watch and be prepared to call out anyone who is seen to be setting up those of the faith for later accusation. Be alert and be ready to record any such person so that he can be identified when it is necessary to make a proper defense.
 
Heavenly Father, people have been wrongly accusing Your faithful all along. Help us to be prepared at such times to have a proper defense for our words and our actions. Today we have cameras on almost every phone. Help us to take advantage of them when needed so that we can single out such miscreants, thus protecting Your people from unjust accusations and harm. Amen.
 

Acts 6:11

Saturday, 2 April 2022
 
Then they secretly induced men to say, “We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and God.” Acts 6:11
 
The words prior to this verse revealed that those of the Synagogue of the Freedmen were not able to resist the wisdom and the Spirit by which Stephen spoke. As this is so, they were obviously filled with jealousy, and they were also surely miffed at the surety of what he was saying, finding it wholly distasteful.
 
But this brings in an immediate problem. If Stephen’s words could not be resisted, and if they were based upon what is stated in Scripture, then what is stated in Scripture supports Stephen’s words. As this is so, who are they resisting? Stephen or the one Stephen is proclaiming. But the situation is unpalatable to them and so Luke records, “Then they secretly induced men.”
 
The word translated as “secretly induced” is found only here in Scripture, hupoballó. It comes from hupo, meaning “under,” and balló, signifying “to cast down.” As such, it gives the sense of throwing something in stealthily or introducing by collusion. A word that gives the proper sense is “suborn.” Vincent’s Word Studies gives examples to better understand its meaning –
 
“The verb originally means to put under, as carpets under one's feet; hence, to put one person in place of another; to substitute, as another's child for one’s own; to employ a secret agent in one's place, and to instigate or secretly instruct him.”
 
These deceivers then are bringing a false accusation against Stephen, replacing the true intent of his words with a different meaning. It is what happened several times to Jesus, such as –
 
“Now the chief priests, the elders, and all the council sought false testimony against Jesus to put Him to death, 60 but found none. Even though many false witnesses came forward, they found none. But at last two false witnesses came forward 61 and said, ‘This fellow said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God and to build it in three days.’” Matthew 26:59-61
 
However, in John, the true meaning of Jesus’ words is explained, there it says, “But He was speaking of the temple of His body” (John 2:21). The same type of false accusation will be brought forth by those who have been induced “to say, ‘We have heard him speak blasphemous words.’”
 
The exact words in the charge against him are found in verses 6:13, 14. They are words that have certainly added spice to those presented by Stephen, even if the substance of them may actually be close to what he said. This is because what Stephen said was, as already noted, surely in accord with Scripture. If it was not, then his words could have been easily resisted. However, they are falsely charging him with blasphemy “against Moses and God.”
 
The Greek has an additional force that is left untranslated. It reads indefinitely at first and then definitely, building to a climax by saying, “against Moses and the God.” As such, it is comparable to saying, “against Moses and God Himself.” The NLT gives the sense by saying, “We heard him blaspheme Moses, and even God.”
 
To this day, what is recorded as Stephen’s words (in 6:13, 14, and which will be evaluated then) are charged by both Jews and unschooled Christians as being points of blasphemy. And yet, it is certain that they are words that are in accord with what is stated later in Acts and the epistles. As such, they are not only not words of blasphemy, but they are proper statements concerning the final, forever, and finished work of Jesus Christ.
 
Life application: Finding something distasteful to our senses in the word of God is not an excuse to argue against the word of God. In fact, it shows a rather dull sense in a person to do so. We might look at the actions of those from the Synagogue of the Freedmen as ridiculous – “If God’s word clearly reveals that Stephen’s words are correct, then why would they attack Stephen? It doesn’t change God’s word!”
 
But that is how we are. We will shoot the messenger, even when the army he represents is a thousand times larger, as if shooting the messenger will solve the problem. But the army is still outside the city, and it will only be more enraged and ready to destroy because of the offense against it.
 
The same is true with God’s word. We find the Freedmen’s actions ridiculous, but do we do the same thing? There is a point of doctrine laid out in the New Testament that we just don’t like. We disagree with it, and we hide it away or ignore it. For example, maybe the church we attend has a female pastor. The Bible is explicit that this is not allowed, but we don’t like that part of the word, and so we ignore it.
 
This does not change what the word says. Rather, it demonstrates an unwillingness to be obedient to the very word we have wrongly used to allow a female pastor. This is because she claims to be a Christian. Being a Christian is something that is derived from precepts laid out in the Bible. She claims to follow Jesus. But the proper way to follow Jesus is laid out in the Bible. She reads Scripture from the Bible each week. But she ignores the parts of the word that she disagrees with that are found in the same book from which she reads her Scripture and of which she bases her sermons on each week.
 
All of what she does ignores precepts in the very same book that she claims as the authority for her ordination, instruction, faith, and practice. It is confused, it is illogical, and it is as common as cans in the soup section of the grocery store.
 
When something is explicit in the word, we are to be obedient to it. It doesn’t matter a hill of beans if we agree with it or not, God is God. His word is our instruction. And we are to be honoring of the sanctity of the faith we profess by being obedient to His word.
 
Lord God, help us to be molded into Your image by being obedient to Your word. We are humans, and it is in our nature to buck against things we don’t like or things we find unpalatable. And so, Lord, change us from within. May we be pleasing to You in all ways and at all times. Amen.
 

Acts 6:10

Friday, 1 April 2022
 
And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spoke. Acts 6:10
 
The previous verses referred to Stephen. It next referred to some arising from the Synagogue of the Freedmen who disputed with him. With that noted, it next says, “And they were not able to resist.” The word translated as “resist” signifies “to withstand.” It is a compound word coming from anti (opposite) and hístēmi (to stand). It is a 180 degree, opposing position on a matter. And so here we have Stephen laying out his case, and those who oppose what he says are completely unable to stand against it.
 
As they obviously must be dealing with Scripture, because they are arguing a position concerning Christ, Stephen is giving his evidence and the men of this synagogue are unable to refute the evidence that is presented. One can have a stand on a matter while another may oppose that stand when it is merely a philosophical argument. Either side can claim that their idea about what is stated is better than the other. However, when there is an established basis for a claim, such as Scripture concerning an issue involving the Messiah, there will ultimately be one side whose argument cannot stand against the other.
 
Stephen’s position is obviously the one that is supported by the very writings the sides are striving over. Specifically, they were not able to resist “the wisdom and the Spirit.” On several occasions, the Bible repeats this same general sentiment, such as in Proverbs 9:10 –
 
“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,And the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.”
 
In order to fear the Lord, one must know who the Lord is, what He is capable of, what He expects, and so on. The same is true with having a knowledge of the Holy One. There must be a source for understanding the knowledge of Him. That source is, first and foremost, Scripture. Stephen obviously possessed this knowledge.
 
Further, as the Spirit is the One who inspired men to write out and compile Scripture (2 Peter 1:21), then it is the Spirit who will illuminate it in order for it to be properly understood. In other words, there may be two (or more) sides arguing over the meaning of Scripture, but they cannot all be correct. The Spirit inspired it, and the one who is properly in sync with the Spirit’s intent concerning the passage is the one whose argument is sound. Stephen’s handling of the word could not be refuted by these others.
 
None of this is explicitly stated, but it is to be inferred from the passage. There is a claim being presented, there is an argument against it, and there is an inability to support the argument against it or to dismiss the argument itself. As such, there must be a basis for the argument. That basis must be Scripture. This must be the source “by which he spoke.”
 
If it were not, he would be making claims pulled out of the thin air. There would be no basis to argue with such a person because one cannot argue against something that actually doesn’t exist except in the head of another. Stephen is speaking words that cannot be withstood. They are words of wisdom, and they are Spirit-led. What will be the outcome of it? Jesus gave words to those who followed Him concerning this –
 
“And He said, ‘Woe to you also, lawyers! For you load men with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not touch the burdens with one of your fingers. 47 Woe to you! For you build the tombs of the prophets, and your fathers killed them. 48 In fact, you bear witness that you approve the deeds of your fathers; for they indeed killed them, and you build their tombs. 49 Therefore the wisdom of God also said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and persecute,’ 50 that the blood of all the prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world may be required of this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah who perished between the altar and the temple. Yes, I say to you, it shall be required of this generation.’” Luke 11:46-51
 
Stephen is not specifically identified as either a prophet or an apostle, but his words of the coming chapter demonstrate that he fills a role suitable to at least that of a prophet. He will speak out the word of God to the people and there will be a resulting reaction to what he says that is in accord with what Jesus says in Luke 11.
 
Life application: In the proverbs, one right after another, the two seemingly contradictory proverbs are given –
 
“Do not answer a fool according to his folly,Lest you also be like him.5 Answer a fool according to his folly,Lest he be wise in his own eyes.” Proverbs 26:4, 5
 
The meaning here is that there is a time to argue a point and there is a time to not argue a point. In the case of the first proverb, Solomon is asking us to be wise. When there is a fool out there spouting off nonsense that is obviously nonsense, we are admonished to not even respond to him.
 
The reason why is that if we do, there will be nothing that is valid that we can say to refute him. His words come out of his own head and so it doesn’t matter what you say, more retorts will continue to come out of that same vacuous place. You will be arguing against a maker of wind. When you do this, you will end up just like him with petty little arguments blowing back and forth. As such, you will only look foolish.
 
However, if a fool is arguing over something that can be refuted, especially something as important as Scripture, and if a defense against his foolish interpretation is not given, then he will walk away feeling vindicated in his stand. Anyone who sees his challenge go unmet will think that this fool is actually correct. Soon, a whole cohort of fools will be out claiming what is utterly foolish, simply because no one is there to correct what is obviously incorrect.
 
Stephen demonstrated wisdom and the filling of the Spirit. These men stood against him. However, because he was Spirit-filled, and because it is the Spirit who gave Scripture in the first place, they were unable to stand against his wisdom. The opposite must have been true as well. They foolishly tried to make their own case and Stephen stood against them so that they would not be vindicated in their heads and feel wise in their own eyes.
 
In all such matters, be careful to evaluate the situation and respond with wisdom. Is this person a bag of hot air? Ignore him. Is this person foolishly handling Scripture to the detriment of himself and others? Respond to him. Consider, contemplate, and respond accordingly. Demonstrate your own wisdom by demonstrating the wisdom of God.
 
Lord God, help us not to get caught up in endless ramblings against fools who do not have the sense to listen to reason. It is unproductive and unhealthy. But, Lord, give us the wisdom to refute those who are simply following the wrong path and making an error in their thinking. Maybe they will listen. Yes, give us wisdom in such things. Amen.
 

Acts 6:9

Thursday, 31 March 2022
 
Then there arose some from what is called the Synagogue of the Freedmen (Cyrenians, Alexandrians, and those from Cilicia and Asia), disputing with Stephen. Acts 6:9
 
The previous verse referred to the faith and power of Stephen as he did great wonders and signs among the people. Now, another group is introduced. Luke states, “Then there arose some.”
 
Because of the wording, one can assume they either have arisen to join, or to argue against, Stephen. Stephen is the main character of the narrative, and these now to be mentioned are brought in to define the narrative further. Those who have arisen are said to be “from what is called the Synagogue of the Freedmen.”
 
A short explanation of who these men are is given by Vincent’s Word Studies –
 
“In Jerusalem, and probably in other large cities, the several synagogues were arranged according to nationalities, and even crafts. Thus we have in this verse mention of the synagogues of the Cyrenians, Alexandrians, Cilicians, and Asiatics. Libertines is a Latin word (libertini, freedmen), and means here Jews or their descendants who had been taken as slaves to Rome, and had there received their liberty; and who, in consequence of the decree of Tiberius, about 19 a.d., expelling them from Rome, had returned in great numbers to Jerusalem. They were likely to be the chief opponents of Stephen, because they supposed that by his preaching, their religion, for which they had suffered at Rome, was endangered in Jerusalem.”
 
However, Albert Barnes provides much more information on this designation –
 
----------
 
The word is Latin, and means properly a ‘freedman,’ a man who had been a slave and was set at liberty. Many have supposed that these persons were manumitted slaves of Roman origin, but who had become proselyted to the Jewish religion, and who had a synagogue in Jerusalem. This opinion is not very probable; though it is certain, from Tacitus (Ann., lib. 2:c. 85), that there were many persons of this description at Rome. He says that 4,000 Jewish proselytes of Roman slaves made free were sent at one time to Sardinia.
 
A second opinion is, that these persons were Jews by birth, and had been taken captives by the Romans, and then set at liberty, and were thus called ‘freedmen’ or ‘liberties.’ That there were many Jews of this description there can be no doubt. Pompey the Great, when he subjugated Judea, sent large numbers of the Jews to Rome (Philo, In Legat. a.d. Caium). These Jews were set at liberty at Rome, and assigned a place beyond the Tiber for a residence. See Introduction to the Epistle to the Romans. These persons are by Philo called "libertines," or ‘freedmen’ (Kuinoel, in loco). Many Jews were also conveyed as captives by Ptolemy I. to Egypt, and obtained a residence in that country and the vicinity.
 
Another opinion is, that they took their name from some ‘place’ which they occupied. This opinion is more probable from the fact that all the "other" persons mentioned here are named from the countries which they occupied. Suidas says that this is the name of a place. And in one of the fathers this passage occurs: ‘Victor, Bishop of the Catholic Church at Libertina, says, unity is there, etc.’ from this passage it is plain that there was a place called ‘Libertina.’ That place was in Africa, not far from ancient Carthage. See Dr. Pearce's Commentary on this place.
 
----------
 
Whatever the exact meaning of the name, the group was comprised of “Cyrenians, Alexandrians, and those from Cilicia and Asia”
 
The Cyrenians are those who dwelt in Cyrene in Africa, a location west of Egypt. This is where Simon of Cyrene, who carried Jesus’ cross in Matthew 27:32 was from.
 
Alexandrians are those who dwelt in Alexandria in Egypt. A great deal of Jews lived there inhabiting large sections of the city. This is the location where the Greek translation of the Bible, the Septuagint or LXX, came from.
 
Cilicia was in Asia Minor, a province on the seacoast, located at Cyprus’ north. Its capital, Tarsus, is where the Apostle Paul came from – as is recorded in Acts 9:11 (and as is noted elsewhere). As such, it makes it appear likely that Paul attended this synagogue and participated in what will be said in this verse.
 
Finally, Asia is noted. This is not Asia as we think of it today. Rather, it is the same as was referred to in Acts 2:9. It is a term that may refer to a jurisdiction according to the layout of the provinces of Rome. Of this location, Vincent’s Word Studies says –
 
“Not the Asiatic continent nor Asia Minor. In the time of the apostles the term was commonly understood of the proconsular province of Asia, principally of the kingdom of Pergamus left by Attalus III. to the Romans, and including Lydia, Mysia, Caria, and at times parts of Phrygia. The name Asia Minor did not come into use until the fourth century of our era.”
 
It is from this synagogue, filled with people from these various locations, that men arose “disputing with Stephen.”
 
The word translated as “disputing” essentially means “to examine together.” It is rendered as “question,” “debate,” “discuss,” “argue,” and so on. It does not necessarily indicate any animosity, but it can. Or it can be a debate that eventually leads to an argument. It is probable that Stephen voiced his words concerning Jesus and they came back against him in a debate that will eventually lead to the forming of a charge against him. It is to be noted again (as stated in the previous verse) that Stephen was “full of faith and power,” and he “did great wonders and signs among the people.”
 
This is a key thought that certainly set in motion the debate.
 
Life application: In Christianity, there are Calvinists, there are Free Grace proponents, there are Baptists, Presbyterians, and Episcopalians. In fact, there are so many sects and divisions within the church that it is almost impossible to know them all, much less what they all believe.
 
Because of this, there are obviously disagreements between them concerning valid points of doctrine. In the end, there can only be one completely correct idea about any particular point. Is Jesus God? Yes or No. Is salvation eternal? Yes or No. Does man have free will to choose Christ? Yes or No. And so on.
 
The Bible is the source of our knowledge of who Jesus is. It is where we are to build our doctrine from. Anything that is said about our theology and doctrine must find its source there or be in accord with what is said there. If it isn’t, then it is something that came out of the head of man.
 
The more one knows the Bible, the less likely it is that he will be duped into believing something incorrect. It is still possible, but it is less likely. For those who do not know Scripture, the probability is that they will be more easily led astray from what is sound.
 
Read your Bible. Think about what you have read. Study theology after you know your Bible. And set your doctrine in accord with the Bible. It is important.
 
Glorious God Almighty, You have provided us with a source of knowledge in order for us to know You, to know what You are doing, and to know why You have done those things. How can we neglect such a great and precious treasure? Help us, Lord, to make Your word our priority all the days of our lives. Amen.

Acts 6:8

Wednesday, 30 March 2022
 
And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and signs among the people. Acts 6:8
 
The previous verse spoke of the multiplication of the number of disciples. It also referred to the fact that many of the priests were obedient to the faith. The words now bring in Stephen again who was introduced as one of the seven in verse 6:5, saying he was a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit. Of him, it reconfirms this saying, “And Stephen, full of faith and power.”
 
It is of note that some manuscripts say “grace” rather than “faith” here. The word “faith” is more suited to verse 6:5, confirming that thought. Either way, he is carefully described here, being singled out from the other six chosen with him. The narrative will continue focusing on him throughout Chapter 6 and Chapter 7. As noted, saying that he is full of faith and power is given to parallel verse 6:5 –
 
And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit
And Stephen, full of faith and power
 
As such, the “power” is set in parallel to “the Holy Spirit.” That is then further defined by saying that he “did great wonders and signs.”
 
The verb is imperfect. More rightly, it should be rendered saying he “was performing great wonders and signs.” It wasn’t that he simply did these things once, or a year ago, or when he was a certain age. Rather, it is speaking of him doing them during the entire time of the record set before us, and he continued doing them as well. Luke’s words further define his doing these things as being “among the people.”
 
It is an important inclusion. Stephen didn’t just do these things in the courts of a king. Nor did he do them in a traveling show for money. He was among the people and his actions were personally witnessed by them. What he did is not defined, but it can be supposed that it included miraculous healings and the like.
 
Or it could be that the coming words concerning him define what he did – that he was a great and effective orator. No matter what, so full of faith and of the Holy Spirit was he that he was able to do great things right among the people.
 
Life application: From time to time it is good to remember that being filled with the Holy Spirit is a passive thing. One is prepared to receive the Spirit. If a cup has a lid on it, it must have the lid removed in order for it to be filled. But the cup simply sits there and is filled. It happens passively. The cup doesn’t reach up and start filling itself.
 
Likewise, we need to be prepared for the reception of the Spirit. The way to do this is to have our lives opened up for His coming. Stephen was a man of faith. If we lack faith, we will not receive the Spirit. One can sing praises to God in a church band, but if he doesn’t believe in God (he was simply hired to sing for $150.00 a gig), then there is nothing about him that would allow the Spirit to fill him.
 
If we prepare ourselves through true faith, and if we live our lives in accord with the word and in a state of being opened up to God, then we will be filled. The more opened we are (through faith, love of God, appreciation for His goodness, in praising Him, in telling others about Him, and so on), the more we will be filled.
 
Let us live our lives totally in tune with God as He is presented in Scripture. Let us think on Him at all times. Let us overflow with His goodness in praise, prayer, and thanks! Be filled with the Spirit by being open receptacles prepared to receive Him.
 
Lord God, how good it is to read Your word, to think on You and Your goodness, to hold fast to You even in times of trial and difficulty. How good it is to know You in the most intimate of ways. Fill us with all of who You are, O God. Amen.
 

Acts 6:7

Tuesday, 29 March 2022
 
Then the word of God spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith. Acts 6:7
 
The words now follow immediately after the choosing of seven men to handle the daily distribution. There appears to be no logical connection between the two, and so it seems as if Luke is simply moving on to a new matter now that the previous issue has been resolved.
 
However, Acts 6:5 and Acts 6:8 both mention Stephen. And it is he who is the focus of the narrative through all of Acts 7. As such, it appears that Luke is implicitly tying what he will now say into the ministry and testimony of Stephen. With that noted, the verse begins with, “Then the word of God spread.”
 
The word translated as “spread,” signifies growing or increasing. It is an imperfect verb signifying an ongoing process. For example, the same verb in the same form is used in Luke 1 to describe the growing up of John the Baptist from a child into a man strong in the spirit.
 
The effect of the apostles has been rather profound, but because of their being Galileans, they were looked down on by those who were more educated (see Acts 2:7). Stephen has been noted as “a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit.” In the next verse, he will be noted as “full of faith and power.” And in Acts 7, he will demonstrate intimate knowledge of Scripture and of the history of his people.
 
Thus, it may be that Luke is now tying some of the present growth into the efforts and knowledge of Stephen. Next, Luke records, “and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem.”
 
At this time, Jerusalem remains the central hub of the faith. It is a logical place for the apostles to remain because there were three annual pilgrim feasts to the city. All people were to come and rejoice in the presence of the Lord during these feasts. During the rest of the year, the city was still full and bustling with activity and evangelism would be ongoing. With the addition of more people, especially people like Stephen, the number of believers would, in fact, greatly multiply. It is a natural consequence of such things. Included in this growth come Luke’s next words, saying, “and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith.”
 
This is a key point in the development of the faith, meaning the body of believers in Jesus, and it is based on the faith, meaning acceptance of the gospel, of the priests. The word translated “obedient” is exactly right. It signifies “to obey.” But the underlying meaning is “to believe” or “to have faith.” In other words, the priests “have faith” in “the faith.”
 
This is not double talk, but it is exactly what is being presented. For example, Hebrews explicitly demonstrates this –
 
“For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt, led by Moses? 17 Now with whom was He angry forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose corpses fell in the wilderness? 18 And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey? 19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.” Hebrews 3:16-19
 
The account that is cited by the author is that of Numbers 14, where the spies returned from Canaan and gave the people a bad report. The people failed to believe God, and thus they did not obey. Despite many poor translations that use the word “command” in that Numbers passage, there was no direct command spoken forth.
 
Rather, the word of the Lord said the people would enter, and the people simply failed to believe. Instead, they feared because of the negative report and failed to trust the Lord who had already proven Himself to them, time and again. It was because of their unbelief that they failed to enter into the promised rest.
 
These priests have now “obeyed” by believing. And it appears based on the placement of the verse that Stephen is to be considered a large part of this coming about.
 
Life application: Far too often, people take words and concepts out of their intended context, thus forming a pretext. The word “obey” has a meaning, but the substance behind that must be properly understood. If one is commanded to do something, then obedience is expected. That is the context.
 
However, if someone is told that they should simply trust and accept that another will safely guide him through the waters of disaster, then “obey” takes on a more subtle meaning. There was no command. Instead, there is only a hope that faith will be demonstrated.
 
God does not “command” anybody into salvation. He also does not “regenerate” people in order for them to believe. He set forth His proposition, and He asks us to believe: “I have sent My Son into the world. He has fulfilled the law and died for the sins of the world. I ask you to simply trust that and be saved.” That is the proposition. Obedience to it is “to believe.”
 
To add to that by stating that we must first believe His commands – whatever ones we decide upon – is to damage the simple message of obedience to faith (the gospel) and it is thus a false message, not given by God. It is a false gospel.
 
Be sure to understand these nuances of what is stated, and then effectively communicate them to others when presenting the gospel. If you tell someone that he does not have free will, and that a person must first be regenerated in order to believe (Calvinism), that person will have no idea what you are talking about, because what you are saying both makes no sense and it is unbiblical.
 
If you tell someone that they must obey Jesus in order to believe, and then start telling them that he has to observe the Sabbath, get circumcised, stop eating pork, quit cussing, and etc., you are presenting a false gospel of works. The gospel is about Jesus –
 
“that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures.” 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4
 
Explain this message to them and don’t turn “obey” into something that doesn’t exist or something that is unintended. Keep it simple and you will be doing what God has done and expects us to do. Despite all of the complicated theology in Scripture, the gospel is the simplest message of all. Don’t add to it or change it! If you do, then it is no longer the gospel.
 
Heavenly Father, thank You for the simplicity of the gospel. You have taken the thing that has complicated all other things, meaning sin, and You have made the resolution to it so simple that even a young child can understand it. And it is rightfully so. We are prone to complicating things. And so, You have laid it out for us, and done so in the most wonderful way. You sent Jesus to do it all. All we need to do is believe. Hallelujah and Amen.