The Book of Acts
Lesson Number 26
TRANSLATION LEGEND: ALT = Analytical-Literal Translation (2005), AMPLIFIED = Amplified Bible (1965), ASV = American Standard Version (1901), BBE=Bible in Basic English (1949), DRA = Douay-Rheims (1899), ERV = English Revised Version (1885), ESV = English Stand Version (2001), GNB = Good News (1966), GWN = God’S Word (1995), IE = International English, ISV = International Standard Version (1967), JPS = Jewish Publication Society (1917), KJV = King James Version (1611), L.ITV = Literal Translation of the Bible ((1976), LIVING = Living Bible (1971), MKJV = Modern KJV (1962), MONTGOMERY = Montgomery’s New Testament (2001), MRD = Peshitta-James Murdock Translation (1852), NAB = New American Bible (2002), NASB = New American Standard Bible (1977), NAU = New American Standard Bible (1995), NIB = New International Bible, NIV = New International Version (1984), NJB = New Jerusalem Bible (1985), NKJV = New King James Version (1979), NLT =New Living Translation (1996), NRSV = New Revised Standard Version (1989), PHILLIPS = J B Phillips New Testament (1962), PNT = BISHOP’S New Testament (1595), RSV = Revised Standard Version (1952), TNK = JPS Tanakj (1985), Webster = The Webster Bible (1833),WEYMOUTH = Weymouth’s New Testament (1903), WILLIAMS = William’s New Testament (1937), TYNDALE = Tyndale’s Bible (1526), WYCLIFFE = Wycliffe New Testament (1382), YLT =Young’s Literal Translation (1862).
---------- Lexicon and Bible Translation Codes with Identification -----------
LEXICON LEGEND: FRIEBERG = Friberg Lexicon, UBS = UBS Lexicon, LOUW-NIDA = Louw-Nida Lexicon, LIDDELL SCOTT = Liddell Scott Lexicon, THAYER = Thayer’s Greek Lexicon, LEH = LEH Lexicon, GINGRICH = Gingrich Lexicon
DISCLAIMER: The quoting of other translations is not to be taken as a condoning of them. My purpose is rather to show the remarkable diversity, and sometimes outright contradictions that exist among these various versions of Scripture. Our understanding of the Word of God ultimately depends upon our comprehension of the Lord Himself and His eternal purpose. Where this understanding is not present, we are shut up to scholasticism and conjecture, both of which are of the world, not of God.
STEPHEN IS OPPOSED
“ 6:8 And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people. 9 Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen. 10 And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake. 11 Then they suborned men, which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God. 12 And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the council, 13 And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law: 14 For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us. 15 And all that sat in the council, looking steadfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel.” (Acts 6:8-15)
INTRODUCTION
Satan now picks up the pace of his aggression against the church. He is depicted as walking about, stalking, as it were, and “seeking whom he may devour” (1 Pet 5:8). He is not merely attempting to pull men into the quagmire of immorality. That has never been his focus. His very first effort to seduce mankind was on an intellectual level, not a sensual one. His efforts are directed toward driving a wedge between God and man – to cause men to loosen their hold on eternal life. Even the devil knows that those who are not devoted to the Lord will be available to him for all manner of diabolical deeds.
WHEN MEN CORRUPT RELIGION, IT LEADS TO DEEP MORAL CORRUPTION
Men have often marveled that prominent religious figures have fallen into deep immorality. Some have adopted a spurious theology that allows them to easily explain these
moral plummets. They tell us that we are all weak, and thus such occurrences are readily understandable. I suggest to you that this is not a spiritually rational assessment. In such cases, the religion that a person has embraced is largely responsible for moral failure. Perhaps it would be better said, the manner in which the religion has been embraced has been fundamentally flawed.
In the case of “pure religion and undefiled before the Father” (James 12:27), faith is the compelling factor in life, for “the just shall life by faith” (Rom 1:17; Heb 10:38). Where that faith is not found, there is a certain distance that forms between the individual and the God of heaven. This is because “without faith, it is impossible to please Him” (Heb 11:6). In fact, the absence of faith is what causes one to “draw back,” increasing the distance between him and God. In such a case, God has no pleasure in that person. As it is written, “but if any man draw back, My soul shall have no pleasure in him” (Heb 10:38). God once said to wayward Israel, “I have no pleasure in you” (Mal 1:10). The insightful Psalmist wrote, “For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness: neither shall evil dwell with thee” (Psa 5:4).
It is possible for the sophist to present all manner of explanation about how God loves the individual, desires the best for them, and will patiently endure their folly. However, they will find it exceedingly difficult to establish that persuasion with the Word of God – particularly when it concerns someone professing the name of Christ..
THE CASE WITH THE GENTILES
Deep immorality is more a sign of Divine abandonment than it is of Satanic ensnarement. This is how the Spirit accounts for the deep moral degradation that pervaded the Gentile world. When men became corrupt in their religion, God gave them over to uncleanness, or moral corruption. Here is how it is stated in Scripture. “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves” (Rom 1:22-24). To clarify he matter, He continues, “Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen” (Rom 1:25).
This, then, became the justification for Divine abandonment, so that men lost their power to avoid the expressions of profound corruption. Therefore it is written, “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet. and even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful” (Rom 1:26-31).
The eruption of especially reprehensible conduct among the Gentiles is therefore traced back to the Lord’s attitude toward them. He removed restraining influences, like pulling the moral floor out from under them. When He did this, they plummeted into the bottomless pit of moral corruption.
THE CASE OF THE JEWS
God did the same thing after He had revealed certain aspects of Himself in the Law, making a covenant with Israel. When they corrupted an even more extensive revelation than nature, He also gave them over to do things they would not ordinarily have done. The Psalmist refers to this Divine abandonment. “But my people would not hearken to my voice; and Israel would none of me. So I gave them up unto their own hearts' lust: and they walked in their own counsels” (Psa 81:11-12). Stephen also covers this in his convicting testimony to the Jewish counsel, accounting for the historical propensity of Israel to idolatry. “And they made a calf in those days, and offered sacrifice unto the idol, and rejoiced in the works of their own hands. Then God turned, and gave them up to worship the host of heaven; as it is written in the book of the prophets, O ye house of Israel, have ye offered to me slain beasts and sacrifices by the space of forty years in the wilderness?” (Acts 7:42).
Lest men be driven to erroneous conclusions, the magnitude of this circumstance is succinctly expressed in Scripture. “Therefore was the wrath of the LORD kindled against His people, insomuch that He abhorred His own inheritance” (Psa 106:40). Early in their history, God warned them that it was entirely possible for Him to view them as He did the heathen who occupied the land of Canaan before them. “And ye shall not walk in the manners of the nation, which I cast out before you: for they committed all these things, and therefore I abhorred them” (Lev 20:23).
In his valedictory address to Israel, Moses rehearsed the affect that their iniquity had upon their God. “Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee. And when the LORD saw it, He abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters” (Deut 32:18-19). That abhorrence aggravated their fallen condition.
When men persist in not taking their relationship to God seriously, and when they consistently ignore His Word, all the while choosing to still retain His name, God will deliver them over to reprehensible conduct which they cannot imagine themselves doing. In the case of the Jews, Paul said, they “both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men” (1 Thess 2:15).
WHY SAY THESE THINGS
It is necessary to say these things because of the nature of our text. In it we find religious men of high rank increasing their opposition to Christ and His spokesmen. They have a growing hostility toward the church – the body of Christ. This is especially true of those who speak publicly. There is no end to which the religiously corrupt will not go to suppress the preaching of the Gospel. The only restraint upon them will be civil law, and they will do everything in their power to work around that.
This is a direct result of God’s withdrawal from them. While that situation can be remedied by repentance and conversion (Acts 3:19), it cannot be done as long as they continue their moral plummet. Because God is not in it, their religion has allowed them to think more highly of themselves than they ought to think – a condition against which the saints are solemnly warned (Rom 12:3).
SATAN CONTINUES TO WORK IN THIS MANNER
Satan continues to work through established and dead religion. Where men have only a form of godliness, they become tools through which Satan can oppose Christ, the truth, and those who speak it.
TO THIS POINT
In the book of Acts, to this point, all of opposition has been directed toward those who have spoken – who have declared the Gospel and expounded it with power. No one has come against the church because of its manner of life.
Now, those who can declare the Gospel with competency and power begin to increase. A relatively new believer surfaces who has an excellent grasp of the Scriptures, and is able to correlate them with the salvation of God wrought in Christ. This circumstance propels him into the limelight, for he cannot keep silent. His influence is so significant that it strikes into the hearts of those who only have the letter of the Law. The result is that they also cannot keep quiet. They must oppose what is being said, for it contradicts what they have embraced.
FULL OF FAITH AND POWER
“ 6:8a And Stephen, full of faith and power . . .” Other versions read, “full of grace and power,” NASB “full of God’s grace and power,” NIV “filled with God’s favor and power,” GWN “the man so full of faith and the Holy Spirt’s power,” LIVING “full of grace (divine blessing and favor) and power (strength and ability),” AMPLIFIED “full of grace and spiritual power,” PHILLIPS “full of grace and fortitude,” DARBY and “a man richly blessed by God and full of power.” GNB
The different translations are based on differing manuscripts. Those that read “faith and power” include the following: KJV, NKJV, GENEVA, PNT, RWB, TNT, WEB, YLT, LIVING, ALT, BISHOPS, EMTV, KJVR, LITV, MKJV.
Those that read “grace and power” include the following: ASV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, RSV, BBE, CSB, DARBY, ERV, ESV, MRD, NAB, NAS, NAU, NET. NJB, NLT, WEYMOUTH, ISV, MONTGOMERY, AMPLIFIED, PHILLIPS.
Actually, both statements are correct, and in no way contradict each other. One emphasizes the BASIS – grace. The other accents the MEANS – faith. In my judgment, the expression “faith and power” most precisely conforms to the revealed manner of speaking of Kingdom realities. It emphasizes the means through which Stephen appropriated the grace that accompanied his power, or ability. In all of its various involvements, salvation is always “by grace through faith” (Eph 2:8). Grace accents God as the Source, and faith punctuates the experiential quality that takes hold of grace.
There is no need to further address this matter as it is not really an issue. I will proceed with a preference for the reading “faith and power.”
FULL OF FAITH
What does it mean to be “full of faith?” It is certainly an intriguing expression. As I have mentioned before, only Stephen and Barnabas are expressly said to have been “full of faith” (Acts 6:5,8; 11:24).
As used here, the word “full” means “filled up, as opposed to empty . . . covered in every part . . . thoroughly permeated with . . . complete, lacking nothing,” THAYER “space fully occupied . . . rich or abounding in,” FRIBERG “complete, full grown,” UBS and “abundant.” LEH
There are a number of perspectives seen in this word, and all of them provide us with some very challenging concepts.
➪ “Full” in the sense of a glass of water being filled to the top. In this perspective, the flesh is crucified, self is denied, and the devil is being resisted.
➪ “Full” in the sense of maturity – being fully grown. Here faith would be accompanied by mature understanding and insight.
➪ “Full” in the sense of covering every aspect of life, like a roof covers a house. In this case, the person would be wholly devoted to Lord, living unto Him and reckoning himself to be dead indeed unto sin, and alive unto God.
➪ “Full” in the sense of occupying every facet of life, or thoroughly permeating every aspect of life. Here, whatsoever if done in word or in deed is deliberately and consciously done for the glory of God.
➪ “Full” in the sense of abundant, like a full harvest. In this view, the realities that are obtained by faith would be found in abundance in the individual.
There is more to being “full of faith” than this, but this will suffice to confirm the nature of such a condition. To be “full of faith” means that the things that are appropriated by faith were found in abundance in Stephen. The following, though not a thorough listing, are included in the things faith brings to the individual.
➪ A purified heart (Acts 15:9).
➪ The living of new life (Rom 1:17).
➪ The righteousness of God (Rom 3:22).
➪ Access to the grace of God (Rom 5:2).
➪ Standing firm (Rom 11:20).
➪ Waiting for the hope of righteousness (Gal 5:5).
➪ Christ dwelling in the heart (Eph 3:17).
➪ Understanding (Heb 11:3).
➪ Being kept by God.
When one is “full of faith,” these qualities are flourishing within him. Such a person is “rich in faith” (James 2:5), and “strong in faith” (Rom 4:20). This is an individual that trusts in the Lord with all of his heart, and does not lean to his own understanding (Prov 3:5). Such people are doing what others are admonished to do. They are walking where others are exhorted to walk. They are spiritually intelligent, and can handle the Word aright, for “faith cometh by hearing,” and they have leaned their ear toward the Word of God.
Stephen was such a man – even though he was a relatively new Christian – two years of at the most. He had made rapid progress because he had availed himself of the “treasures of wisdom and knowledge” that are hidden in Christ, and are available to all believers (Col 2:3). He had seen in the Gospel something of the magnitude of salvation, and, like Joshua and Caleb, had eagerly possessed the land. That, of course, is one of the distinct advantages of hearing a clear and undiluted proclamation of the Gospel of Christ.
FULL OF POWER
The word “power” comes from a word meaning, “strength, power, ability,” THAYER “able to produce a strong effect,” FRIBERG “supernatrural power,” UBS “the ability to perform a particular activity or to undergo some experience - 'ability, capability' ,” LOUW-NIDA and “authority.” LEH
In a nutshell, “power,” as used in this text, is the ability to do something that cannot be achieved through natural aptitude. This kind of power cannot be learned in the schools of men. It is not the result of personal discipline. It is not an ability that is the result of a disciplined approach to development. No person is born of a woman with this kind of power. Furthermore, it has to do wholly with the work of the Kingdom, and matters pertaining to life and godliness.
There is a lower form of “power” that comes from God, yet is limited to the affairs of life in this world. That power brings no eternal advantage. Thus Samson could defeat a thousand Philistines, yet fall prey to the subtlety of a dishonest woman (Judges 15:16; 16:20). Solomon was expert in all manner of earthly wisdom, yet was led astray into idolatry by his wives (1 Kgs 4:29-30; 11:7-9). God can give people “power to get wealth,” yet a quest for that wealth can lead them astray so that they “fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts” (Deut 8:18; 1 Tim 6:9). The kind of power that is realized “in the flesh” – even though it comes from God – gives a person no Kingdom advantage. God gave Nehuchadnezzar a kingdom (Dan 5:18-19), yet he was judged for his pride (Dan 4:30-32; 5:20).
Stephen was not “full” of that kind of power. This was power of a higher order, that is directly related to the “great salvation” being implemented by the exalted Christ. The exploits that are accomplished through this power cannot be replicated by those who are not reconciled to God. In fact, we have an example in Scripture of a man who sought to purchase the ability to confer the gift of the Spirit on other people. It is written, “And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost” (Acts 8:18-19). The nature of his person and request are seen in the answer of Peter: “But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God” (Acts 8:20-21). He was a vessel into which the power of reference could be placed.
There are certain moral and spiritual boundaries within which Divine power is given. Those who are outside of those boundaries are wrong in seeking such power. Their attention must rather be given to the appropriation of grace and truth.
All of this means that Stephen’s heart was right. His thoughts were acceptable. He was, in fact, “a vessel unto honor, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work” (2 Tim 2:21).
A Word About Unusual Response
In the modern church scene, those with an usually good response to preaching are very unusual. Stephen stood out among a group of fervent and consistent disciples – even among seven of them who were publicly noted for being “full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom” (Acts 6:3). How is it that such a response is possible? For some, this is possible only when there are a set of strictly enforced rules, together with a rigorous form of accountability. The leader of the people is perceived as a demanding one, who imposes his own will upon the people. This, in fact, is how our own fellowship is perceived by many. Seeing that we have a core of young men and women who are able to express themselves intelligently and engage in many Kingdom activities, some have imagined that it is owing to my own demanding and imposing nature.
However, such a fleshly trait is not capable of sustaining steady growth up into Christ in all things. The cause of such growth is directly owing to the Gospel that is being declared. It is the truth that, when known, brings men such marvelous liberty (John 8:32). It is the truth that sanctifies the people, equipping them to do the work of the Lord (John 17:17). It is the Gospel that is the assigned domain in which men “stand” (1 Cor 15:1). There are no exceptions to these things.
Stephen’s excellence can be traced back to the message he had embraced – the preaching of insightful and spirit-filled men. That preaching, coupled with his faith, is what discovered the particular gifts that He was given, enabling him to fulfill a specific role in the body of Christ.
HE DID GREAT SIGNS AND WONDERS
GREAT SIGNS AND WONDERS
The power with which Stephen was endued was made known in “great signs and wonders.” He was able to extend his works beyond the circumference of nature.
“: 8b . . . did great wonders and miracles . . . ” Other versions read, “performing great wonders and signs,” NASB “did great wonders and miraculous signs,” NIV “wrought great wonders and signs,” ASV “was doing great wonders and signs,” ESV “He did amazing things and performed miracles,” GWN “as working great wonders and signs,” NAB “began to work miracles and great signs,” NJB “did spectacular miracles,” LIVING “he was working miracles,” IE “performed great marvels and signs,” WEYMOUTH “went on performing great signs and wonders,” WILLIAMS and “continued to perform miracles and remarkable signs” PHILLIPS
Prior to this, on the day of Pentecost, Peter had associated the working of miracles, signs, and wonders, with the approval of God – particularly as related to Jesus Christ. “Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know” (Acts 2:22). He had also declared that when the Spirit was poured forth “upon all flesh,” there would be “signs in the earth” (Acts 2:19). In other words, these would be wrought in Divine discretion, and not indiscriminately.
Up to this point in the book of Acts, only the apostles are said to have worked signs, wonders, and miracles.
➪ “And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles” (Acts 2:43).
➪ “Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk. And he took him by the right hand, and lifted him up: and immediately his feet and ankle bones received strength . . . For the man was above forty years old, on whom this miracle of healing was showed” (Acts 3:6-7; 4:22).
➪ “And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomon's porch” (Acts 5:12).
Now, for the first time since Jesus ascended into heaven, someone other than an Apostle is working “great signs and wonders.” Immediately following the first opposition faced by Peter and John, the church had asked God to grant “that with all boldness” they might speak His word, by stretching forth His hand “to heal; and that signs and wonders” would be “done by the name” of His “Holy Child Jesus” (Acts 4:30). That did, in fact happen, as recorded in Acts 5:12. Now, the answer to that prayer is extended beyond the apostles to another member of the body of Christ.
In Stephen we see the word fulfilled that was later given by Paul concerning the gifts God places in the body: “To another . . . the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; to another the working of miracles . . . ” (1 Cor 12:9-10). The church in Galatia is also reported to have had miracle workers among them. “He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?” (Gal 3:5).
These gifts, of course, were given at the discretion of the Lord Himself, and are driven by Divine purpose. That discretion was confirmed in the aptitude, ability, and appropriateness of the one receiving a gift, as well as the particular work the Lord was doing among the people. That is, what Stephen did was a revelation of the ability God had given to him through the Spirit. It was an example of “the manifestation of the Spirit,” which “is given to every man to profit withal” (1 Cor 12:7). As is made known in Scripture, the Spirit is “distributing to each individual as He wills” (1 Cor 12:11). In strict accord with the nature of the Kingdom of God, this involves the recipient having faith, which is the means of appropriation. It also requires pureness of heart in the individual, and a humble and contrite spirit. If a person is going to be used by God, he must have separated from defiling influences, thus being made “meet for the Master’s use, and prepared unto every good work” (2 Tim 2:19-21).
An Illustration of Appropriate Gifts
Men often dispute about whether or not gifts of this sort are even intended for our day. All of this is like beating the air, for it involves nothing more than human speculation. It is more wise for men to devote themselves to being ready to be used by God, instead of hypothecating about the manner in which they can be used, or what gifts may be available to them. The Head of the church will see to it that the gifts are in strict accord with His own purpose, and what is needed at that particular time. When, for example, a man was sent to prepare the way of the Lord, it proved to be a man of great holiness and sobriety. In fact, he was a ascetic man who received the word of the Lord while He was “in the wilderness” (Lk 3:2). His parents were strictly charged by a holy angel to raise him in the strictest manner: “For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb” (Luke 1:15). When his ministry began, it is written that he came “neither eating bread nor drinking wine” (Lk 7:33). This was John the Baptist, and indicates that he was a Nazarite, raised in the strictest fashion. The law provided more details concerning how such a man was to spend his life. “Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When either man or woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazarite, to separate themselves unto the LORD: he shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and shall drink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink, neither shall he drink any liquor of grapes, nor eat moist grapes, or dried. All the days of his separation shall he eat nothing that is made of the vine tree, from the kernels even to the husk. All the days of the vow of his separation there shall no razor come upon his head: until the days be fulfilled, in the which he separateth himself unto the LORD, he shall be holy, and shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow. All the days that he separateth himself unto the LORD he shall come at no dead body. He shall not make himself unclean for his father, or for his mother, for his brother, or for his sister, when they die: because the consecration of his God is upon his head. All the days of his separation he is holy unto the LORD” (Num 6:2-8).
Yet, of John the Baptist it is written, “John did no miracle” (John 10:41). This was certainly not owing to any lack of qualification on John’s part, for Jesus said of him, “Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he” (Mat 11:11).
John the Baptists’ gifts were adapted to his ministry, and were appropriate for the times during which he ministered. They had nothing to do with what was possible, but rather dealt with what God willed. It was not that the time of the miraculous had ceased, for his own birth was of a miraculous order, his parents being “well stricken in years,” and the woman who bore him being “barren” prior to conceiving John (Lk 1:7). His ministry did not require working miracles.
At this position in time, and in strict accord with the purpose of God, Stephen was granted to be “full of power.” In him we have an example of the fulfillment of a statement made by Hanai the seer. “For the eyes of the LORD run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to show Himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward Him” (2 Chron 16:9). God found such a man in Stephen, who had also “used the office of a deacon well,” and therefore obtained “a good standing and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus” NKJV (1 Tim 3:13).
AMONG THE PEOPLE
“ . . . among the people.” Every version reads the same, except the God’s Word Translation, GWN which omits the phrase.
A Principle to be Seen
When we read the words “among the people,” we must understand that they are not equivalent to “among society in general.” As used in this text, this phrase is often equated with speaking to those with no acquaintance of God, those who had plummeted into deep sin, or are generally unacquainted with the Bible. This is such a common perception that people often refer to Jesus Himself as always being around sinners – publicans, harlots, and the more degraded members of society. “That,” they ignorantly affirm, “is where you would find the Lord today.” This stems from a completely erroneous view of the manner in which truth is disseminated.
To be sure, our Lord commanded that the Gospel is to be “preached to every creature,” as the disciples were sent “into all the world” (Mk 16:15). However, no preaching of Scriptural reference began or concentrated on those who were in total darkness. However noble such an approach may appear to be, one will have a difficult time supporting it with the Word of God.
First, we are categorically told that “the Gospel of Christ” is “the power of God unto salvation to the Jew first” (Rom 1:16). That does not mean first in time alone, but first in order as well. When instructing His disciples to preach the Gospel throughout the world, He said, “beginning at Jerusalem” (Lk 24:47) – which is the location of activity in our text. Just before He ascended into heaven Jesus said to His disciples, “ye shall be witnesses unto Me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth” (Acts 1:8).
In the record of the spread of the Gospel, Christ’s ambassadors were most particular in following this approach, and it is duly noted in the book of Acts.
➪ After being converted, Paul began preaching “in the synagogues” (Acts 9:20).
➪ Following the Holy Spirit’s call of Barnabas and Saul, they “preached the word of God in the synagogues” (Acts 13:5).
➪ When they went into Antioch of Pisidia in Asia Minor, they “went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day” (Acts 13:14-15).
➪ The Gentiles that were reached in that area were also in the synagogue (Acts 13:42).
➪ When they went into Iconium, they “went into the synagogue of the Jews,” and there “a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed” (Acts 14:1).
➪ When Paul was called by the Lord into Macedonia, the first thing he did was go out on the Sabbath day to a river side, where certain devout women met for prayer. It was there that he confronted Lydia (Acts 16:13-14). In that area, when Paul and Silas had been released from prison, they first went to Lydia’s house, and met with the brethren there (Acts 16:40).
➪ When entering into Thessalonica, Paul first “reasoned” with the Jews in the synagogue for three Sabbath days (Acts 17:1).
➪ When they came into Berea, they “went into the synagogue of the Jews” (Acts 17:10).
➪ When Paul came into Athens, he “disputed in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him” (Acts 17:17).
➪ After coming to Corinth, he “reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and Greeks” (Acts 18:4).
➪ When he entered Macedonia, Paul first “testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ” (Acts 18:5).
➪ After being rejected by the Jews there, he went into the home of devout Jew named Justus, who lived next door to the synagogue. There “Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized” (Acts 18:7-8).
➪ When Paul came to Ephesus, he “entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with the Jews” (Acts 18:19).
➪ When Apollos came into Ephesus, he also “began to speak boldly in the synagogue.” Although he “knew only the baptism of John,” it was there in the synagogue that he met Aquila and Priscilla, who “expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly” (Acts 18:24-26).
➪ Paul remained for three months in Ephesus, “disputing and persuading the things concerning the Kingdom” in the synagogue, also ministering to the Gentiles there (Acts 19:8).
➪ When the door of faith was opened to the Gentiles at the house of Cornelius, the Spirit makes note of the fact that he was “a devout man, and one that feared God with his house” (Acts 10:2).
➪ In Thessalonica, certain “devout Greeks” and some “chief” women were the recipients of Paul’s ministry (Acts 17:4).
➪ In Athens Paul reasoned disputed with “devout persons” (Acts 17:17).
There should be no need to recount these instances, for they are a matter of Scriptural record – and they are not at all ambiguous. However amidst a staggering ignorance of the word of God, erroneous conceptions and emphases are being pawned off on the people of God. Statements are regularly made concerning Christ and the obligations of believers that have their genesis in the minds of men who are unlearned in the things of God. Furthermore, men are being judged, evaluated, and commended or condemned upon the basis of these erroneous suppositions.
With remarkable consistency, the Scriptures confirm that the spreading of the Gospel consistently started among those with some knowledge of God, yet who were not cognizant of the truth of Christ. Truth was first anchored in the minds of devout and stable people, and it spread from there. This was also true of the ministry of the Prophets, John the Baptist, and our Lord Jesus Christ Himself. If a people will simply subject their minds to the Scriptures, it will not be possible to miss this emphasis.
The strategy of the modern church is partly responsible for its deplorable condition. It has majored preeminently on reaching what it calls “the lost,” giving little or no heed to devout people who have an imperfect knowledge of the Lord. As a result, the church is filled with novices who have no working knowledge of Scripture. Consequently, owing to their supposed sincerity, certain things have crept into the church that are fundamentally of this world. This is because the larger part of the professing church is enveloped with spiritual ignorance. There are few converts of the caliber of Cornelius, or Lydia, or other Jews and devout people. In other words, the nucleus of the church is weak, and that is a near-hopeless condition. The fact that the professed leaders have allowed this to happen reveals the unacceptable level of their understanding.
The Gospel is called “glad tidings of good things” (Rom 10:15). But why is this so? Do not imagine that this suggests the message of the Gospel is primarily good news to the immoral, those enslaved by drugs, strong drink, and the likes. This is not “good news” to those whose marriages are falling apart, or whose children have gone astray, or who have lost all of their financial resources. That is not the emphasis of the words “good news,” and men do are wrong in suggesting that it is. Paul said it most precisely when he announced in Antioch, “And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten Thee” (Acts 13:31-32). The “good news” is not that you can be saved – although, for the humble and contrite soul, that is a refreshing announcement!
The good news is what God has done, not what you can be! That is precisely what Paul said. This presumes some familiarity with what God has promised, as well as a longing for its fulfillment. In the case of devout people, it presumes they have come to see their need of the Lord, and long to be accepted by Him. I do not believe you can establish that the Gospel can possibly be “glad tidings of good things” to anyone else. This is why Paul preached as He did in Athens (Acts 17:22-31). He brought the people to a point where they saw there need of the Lord by reminding them they were made by God, were responsible to Him, and were going to be judged by his Son.
When the fundamental objective of men is to rescue others from bad life-styles, and to correct their behavior, they must, of necessity, turn their attention from Christ Jesus. This is because Christ’s primary work was to do the will of God. It is within the framework of that will that true human need is addressed.
Why Say These Things?
It may appear on the surface as though all of this is nothing more than a distraction from the text. However, this is not the case at all. Our text is a sterling example of the very thing I have just sought to establish. When it is written that Stephen “did great wonders and miracles among the people,” the Jews are the people of reference. These were the people who had been cultured by Moses to have some acquaintance with the God of might. They had been cultures for the day of salvation, with ALL Divine benefits being given to them (Rom 9:4-5). Their history had been filled with examples of the signs and wonders that had been wrought in their behalf. No heathen God had ever worked in such a manner, or been represented as working in such a way.
This was not a way Stephen had of simply getting the attention of the people. Rather it was attesting that he was a man sent by God. These “great wonders and miracles” were not mere displays of raw power. They doubtless brought some kind of benefit to the people, like the healing of the lame man (3:1-6), and the many healings that had been wrought by the apostles (5:16). He was not like a magician, performing feats of wonder before the people. That is not the nature of salvation, nor is it the manner of those who bring the good news of that salvation.
You see also in this that Stephen’s ministry was of a public nature, confirming that he was not ashamed of the Gospel, and that the ability he had been given was genuine. What now follows confirms that what Stephen said was the primary thing, not what he did. The “great wonders and miracles” that he “did among the people” confirmed that what he was saying was the truth – and that was the critical factor. In the Divine economy, there is no point to a wonder-worker who does not have a unique and beneficial message. Stephen was not simply ministering to the people, he was primarily representing the living God.
THE FIRST CASE OF DISPUTATION
“ 9 Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen.”
Following Christ’s ascension, and up to this point, no one speaking for the Lord had encountered an argument against the truth. A debate had never ensued that sought to disprove the truth of the Gospel. Peter and John faced opposition, but not disputation (4:1-2). Later, the apostles were incarcerated, threatened, and beaten – but noone argued with them. Now, quite possibly as long as two years after Pentecost, a man full the Holy Spirit, wisdom, faith, and power, faces disputation. This is the first instance. In fact, this is the first time the word “dispute” in any of its varied forms, occurs in the book of Acts. Among other things, this confirms the powerful reasoning that is contained in the Gospel. When it is preached in purity and power, it is most difficult for those who do not receive it to contend with it.
THE SYNAGOGUE – THE PLACE OF DISPUTATION
“Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines . . .” Other versions read, “synagogue of the Freedmen,” NKJV “Synagogue of the Freedmen (as it was called),” NIV “the Synagogue named that of the Libertines,” BBE “called the Freedmen's Synagogue,” DARBY “a synagogue called Freedmen's Synagogue,” GWN “the Synagogue of Freed Slaves,” NLT “the Jewish cult of’ ‘The Freedmen,’” LIVING “the synagogue of the Freedmen (freed Jewish slaves), as it was called,” AMPLIFIED and “the synagogue, the ones being called Freed Slaves. ALT
Once again, behold the locus, or locale, of Stephen’s ministry – the synagogue, where devout men were gathered. This was a particular synagogue within Jerusalem – “the synagogue of the Libertines.”
In the Jewish economy, and by Divine design, their religion was the heart of their culture. Family life, as fundamental as it was, was not the heart of their acculturation. The very existence of the synagogue was confirmation of this fact. The synagogue largely represented the religious life of the people. It was not a family center, entertainment center, or place of leisurely activity. Much of Christ’s ministry, as well of many of His great miracles, were performed in the synagogues (Matt 12:9; Mk 1:23; Lk 13:11). Some of his most marvelous words, concerning eating His flesh and drinking His blood, were spoken in the synagogue (John 6:44-59). This is where early believers frequently met, as confirmed by Saul of Tarsus seeking Christians there (Acts 9:2; 22:19; 26:11).
The origin of the Synagogue
The word “synagogue” means “a bringing together, gathering . . . an assembling together.” THAYER It is a parallel of the Greek word ejkklhsi>a, which is translated “church.” Although Jewish tradition states that synagogues were among the Jews from of old, there are no direct references of them in the writings of Moses and the Prophets. Jewish tradition affirms that when Nebuchadnezzar burned “all the houses of Jerusalem,” the reference was to 480 synagogues that existed in the city. Jerusalem Megillah, 3, 1 This cannot be satisfactorily proved, but it does confirm how the synagogue came to be central in Jewish life.
It is generally understood that the synagogues arose during the exile, when the mass of Jews were no longer located in their own land. The Assyrians had captured the Israelites (2 Kgs 18:9-11), and the Babylonians had enslaved Judah (2 Kgs 14:11-16). Both captivities removed the people from their Temple and homeland. However, it did not remove their Temple and homeland from their hearts. We know that during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah there were solemn gatherings of the Jews (Ezra 8:15; Neh 8:2; 9:1; Zech 7:5). Furthermore, these became the occasion for instructing the people concerning the Law of God, and exhorting them to keep the laws of the Lord (Ezra 10:1-9; Neh 8:1; 9:1-3; 13:1-3). Jewish history affirms that these circumstances formed the beginning of the concept of a synagogue – a gathering place where the people of God were subjected to the scriptures and taught.
Thus the nature of true religion is unveiled by the people who were cultured by exposure to God’s law and will. They saw a need to come together and expose their hearts and minds to what was available to them from God. This was before the coming of Christ. It was, however, a frame of mind that must be possessed if any advantage from Christ is to be realized. At some point, men must regard the company of the godly and the word of God to be worthy of extended effort, regardless of whether of not it is convenient. The men who pioneered this effort were consistently godly men – generally prophets or priests. They were men who had seen the implication of God speaking to and directing men. Those experiences imply that the emphasis of life lies outside of mere human experience. Oh, that men were more able to see this in our time!
The Synagogue Firmly Established
By the time of Jesus’ birth, the synagogue was established as an integral part of Jewish life. Jesus Himself regularly attended the synagogue (Luke 4:16). It was wholly related to religious life, reflecting the nature of God’s dealings with them. Among serious Jews, there was no thought of religious life being in subordination to social life. It was central. If they had a special “hour,” it was for prayer, not for lunch or extracurricular activities (Acts 3:1). Now, in our time, under the domination of the Gentile church, this concept has all but been destroyed. It is no wonder that their predominance in this age of grace has an appointed conclusion, being called “the times of the Gentiles” (Lk 21:24). Under their regime, religious buildings are largely devoted to secular purposes, entertainment, etc.
One further observation: the synagogue was not something God commanded, yet it was something He received and honored. His Son honored it, and so did the apostles and the early church. Those who “forsake the assembling” of themselves together have fallen beneath the level of the ancient Jews, to say nothing of their Lord and Savior. Such a miserable practice is indefensible. It contradicts both reason and revelation.
Stephen Speaks in the Synagogue
Here is a man filled with faith, wisdom, the Spirit, and power. Where will a man like this go? What kind of people will he address? Believe it or not, he took his message inside the four walls – where devout religious people were gathered! The account that follows took place in the synagogue.
Godly men must have contact with devout people in order to maintain their spiritual advancement, whether in defense of the truth, or in the matter of edification. The newness of life, as experienced in this world, is calculated to develop in the midst of competing influences. In this way it is confirmed to the hearts of those possessing the life that God is “greater than all” (John 10:29). Until a person experiences the victory that comes from faith (1 John 5:4-5), his religion is largely philosophical. Faith, by its very nature, compels the individual to express that faith, even in a hostile arena. This is what we see taking place in this text.
The Libertines
The word “libertine” means “one who has been liberated from slavery, a freedman.” THAYER “a designation for a Jew who had gained freedom from slavery.” FRIBERG
These were people who had been slaves, but were freed. It is quite possible that they spoke in different languages because of their circumstance. However, they had not lost their interest in the Lord, and upon their freedom had either formed a synagogue, or one was formed for them while they were in Jerusalem.
This also confirms the centrality of religious life to the Jews. That centrality was not the result of their own emphasis, but was rather traced to the manner in which God Himself had cultured them. It is a national example of the domestic circumstance of raising a child “in the nurture and admonition of the Lord” (Eph 6;4). In is inconceivable that the highest expression of the involvement of Deity with humanity – the New Covenant – would relegate spiritual activity to a lesser role than was inculcated under the Old Covenant.
THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE DISPUTATION
“ . . . and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia . . .” Other translations read, “including both Cyrenians and Alexandrians, and some from Cilicia and Asia,” NASB “Jews of Cyrene and Alexandria as well as the provinces of Cilicia and Asia,” NIV “Jews from Cyrene, Alexandria in Egypt, and the Turkish provinces of Cilicia, and Asia Minor,” LIVING “(This synagogue was also for Jews from the cities of Cyrene and Alexandria.) Jews from Cilicia and Asia were with them,” IE “Cyrenaeans, Alexandrians, Cilicians and men from Roman Asia,” WEYMOUTH and “ Cyrenians and of the Alexandrians and of those from Cilicia and [the province of] Asia,” AMPLIFIED
These people were all Jews, but were from other countries, and spoke different languages because of that circumstance.
It ought to be noted that at this time, even though a considerable number of Jews were living in the promised land, most of them remained in a state of dispersion. From an historical point of view, that dispersion was the result of the Assyrians and Chaldeans conquering them. As it is written, “Israel is a scattered sheep; the lions have driven him away: first the king of Assyria hath devoured him; and last this Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon hath broken his bones” (Jer 50:17). However, from the higher and more precise viewpoint, God Himself had scattered them because of their waywardness. There are a number of references made to this scattering in the Prophets.
➪ “For I am with thee, saith the LORD, to save thee: though I make a full end of all nations whither I have scattered thee, yet will I not make a full end of thee: but I will correct thee in measure, and will not leave thee altogether unpunished” (Jer 30:11).
➪ “Hear the word of the LORD, O ye nations, and declare it in the isles afar off, and say, He that scattered Israel will gather him, and keep him, as a shepherd doth his flock” (Jer 31:10).
➪ “Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Although I have cast them far off among the heathen, and although I have scattered them among the countries, yet will I be to them as a little sanctuary in the countries where they shall come” (Ezek 11:16).
➪ “And I scattered them among the heathen, and they were dispersed through the countries: according to their way and according to their doings I judged them” (Ezek 36:19).
➪ “But I scattered them with a whirlwind among all the nations whom they knew not. Thus the land was desolate after them, that no man passed through nor returned: for they laid the pleasant land desolate” (Zech 7:14).
Now we are provided with a prelude to what God promised the whole of the people He would do – gather them again. As it si written, “Hear the word of the LORD, O ye nations, and declare it in the isles afar off, and say, He that scattered Israel will gather him, and keep him, as a shepherd doth his flock:” (Jer 31:10). And again, “And I will bring you out from the people, and will gather you out of the countries wherein ye are scattered, with a mighty hand, and with a stretched out arm, and with fury poured out” (Ezek 20:34).
To this very day, Israel remains scattered, with only a remnant dwelling in the promised land. The nation never did recover from the scattering facilitated by the king of Assyria and Nehuchadnezzar of the Chaldeans. If anyone doubts that they can be gathered, the book of Acts begins with a first fruit offering of this very nation to the Lord.
We are also reading of the Lord saving people while they are in a scattered state. He has drawn a number of them to Jerusalem in order to enlighten their eyes and confirm His promises to them. This ought to be of special comfort to those who are aware of the present scattered state of the church. While it is not a pleasant circumstance, it is not a hopeless one.
The Kind of People Before Us
In our text we are provided a picture of how seriously a people cultured by God can take their religion – something provided them for understanding. It is important to note how vastly different that culture is from the present culture of the America church in particular, and the whole country in general. There are proportionately few of this kind of people in our quadrant of the world. However, this IS how people who have been exposed to the real God, and have taken it seriously, react. Even though these were not ideal people, they were a zealous people.
They Came From various Areas
These freed slaves had come from various areas, but had gravitated back to Jerusalem, no doubt to attend the feasts that were at hand. They may well have been in that number of “devout Jews out of every nation under heaven,” that are mentioned in Acts 2:5. The number included the following.
➪ CYRENIANS. These were freed Jewish slaves from Cyrene, which was the chief city in North Africa.
➪ ALEXANDRIANS. These were freed Jewish slaves from Alexandria in Egypt.
➪ CILICIA. These were freed Jewish slaves from Cilicia, a province in Asia Minor, that was on the seacoast north of Cyprus.
➪ ASIA. These were freed Jewish slaves from Asia Minor, an area that embraced Mysia (Acts 16:7-8), Aeolis, Ionia, Caria, and Lydia (Ezek 30:5). This was also the area in which the seven churches of Revelation were located (Rev 1:4).
The map shown here shows something of the size of Asia Minor, referred to as “Asia” in Scripture, where it is mentioned no less than twenty-one times (Acts 2:9; 6:9; 16:6; 19:10,22,26, 27,31; 20:4,16,18; 21:27; 24:18; 27:2; 1 Cor 16:19; 2 Cor 1:8; 2 Tim 1:15; 1 Pet 1:1; Rev 1;4,11). We are told in the book of Acts that during Paul’s two year stay in Ephesus, “all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks” (Acts 19:10). Much of this was accomplished by Paul himself, as his enemies confirmed: “Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands” (Acts 19:26). That section of the world was noted for the worship of “Diana of the Ephesians” (Acts 19:27). Later Paul wrote to Timothy about the time he was in Asia, confessing that at that time “all they which are of Asia turned away from me” (2 Tim 1:15).
Now, in our text, a number of former Jewish slaves from that region will engage Paul in disputation. How will these former slaves react to the preaching of Stephen. Will we find them to be basically untaught because they were slaves?
THE DISPUTATION
“ . . . disputing with Stephen.” Other versions read, “rose up and argued with Stephen,” NASB “These began to argue with Stephen,” NIV “had arguments with Stephen,” BBE “came forward and disputed with Stephen,” CSB “started an argument with Stephen,” GWN “came forward and debated with Stephen,” NAB “They all came and argued with Stephen,” IE “were roused to encounter Stephen in debate,” WEYMOUTH “got to debating with Stephen,” WILLIAMS “arose [and undertook] to debate and dispute with Stephen,” AMPLIFIED and “tried debating with Stephen.” PHILLIPS
We know from other Scriptures that it was the custom of Jewish people to have others speak in their synagogues – particularly if they were obviously devout people. Thus, without personally knowing Paul, the rulers of a synagogue in Antioch of Pisida “after the reading of the law and the prophets . . . sent unto them, saying, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on” (Acts 13:15). In some way, this had occurred in the synagogue of the Libertines, and Stephen, conducting himself in decency and order, had been speaking. We are not told of his specific words, but they were doubtless in strict harmony with the words through which he himself had been converted since the day of Pentecost. They obviously centered in the Lord Jesus Christ, whom the Jews had crucified, and whom God had raised from the dead and exalted to His right hand. I do not doubt that his words were parallel with those that Peter and the apostles had been speaking (Acts 2:14-27; 3:12-26; 4:8-12; 5:29-32).
Disputing
Our text says these men “arose.” That is, the “rose up,” NASB “stood up,” NRSV or “came forward.” CSB It was the manner for the persons speaking to come forward and stand before the people to speak. That is what Jesus did (Lk 4:16). It is also what Paul did in Antioch (Acts 13:16). Now, being no longer able to endure what Stephen was saying, these men come forward to began disputing with him, attempting to disprove what he was saying.
At once you see that the synagogue was not only a place for formal teaching, but for examining an issue more closely that was not seen alike by all of the people. This practice would frighten many would-be preachers from the pulpit. However, it did not have that effect upon Stephen.
To “dispute” means “to seek to examine together . . .to discuss, dispute, or question,” THAYER “debate, argue with,” FRIBERG “to express forceful differences of opinion without necessarily having a presumed goal of seeking a solution.” LOUW-NIDA In other words, in such a discussion, the aim of the ones initating the dispute is not to arrive at the truth. It is rather an attempt to justify a view that is already held, yet contradicts what the speaker has been saying.
These were religious men, and they took their religion seriously – a religion that had been revealed by God himself. Their presence in Jerusalem at this time confirms this to be true Yet, they were not like the devout men on the day of Pentecost who cried out, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 237). Instead they begin to argue with Stephen, disputing what he has said, seeking to undermine it, and establish their own way of thinking. How will this two-yea-old disciple of Jesus be able to handle their disputation? Or will he shrink back from it, avoiding all controversy, as some are wont to do?
In a sense, these are Stephen’s Jewish fellows, coming from the same background as himself. It is assumed that because he was in this synagogue for freed slaves, that he himself was in that category. If this assumption is true, what marvelous progress this man had made. A foreign-born slave, or son of a slave, who held on to “the Jew’s religion” (Gal 1:13,14), taking the time to travel to Jerusalem for the Passover. During that time he must have heard and believed the Gospel, and heartily embraced the truth. He rose above his peers, being recognized as an unusual man in both knowledge and commitment. Now he is in the synagogue of the Libertines so powerfully proclaiming the Gospel of Christ that some have stood up and began to oppose him, disputing with him. Apparently, he was speaking extensively.
How will this young man fare among these zealous Jewish brethren? Will his boldness wither, or will it increase?
THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO RESIST
“ 10 And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake.”
Stephen does not back down from these men. He does not extend the scepter of peace and give them some time to catch up to him in their understanding. He does not tell them he is willing to consider their view of whatever they were disputing. He had been where they were, and already knew the ins and outs of their position. He had, like all believers, been “illuminated” (Heb 10:32). Like Caleb of old, he had “another spirit” (Num 14:24), and, for al practical purposes, that set him apart..
It appears from the text that Stephen waxed even more bold, and accelerated in his proclamation of the truth of Christ. In fact, as this account progresses it becomes very evident that this is precisely what happened. Some time later Paul will write to Timothy that those who “use the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves . . . great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus” (1 Tim 3:13). This is precisely what is being seen in Stephen. He began as a deacon, serving tables. Now we find him boldly declaring the word of the Lord in the face of contradiction and disputation.
The Sacred Art of Holy Disputation
There is a place for proper disputation in the Kingdom of God. There are strong arguments that must be “cast down” (2 Cor 10:5), and mouths of gainsayers that are to be “stopped” (Tit 1:11). One of the requirements of an elder is that he “may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers” (Titus 1:9). It was said of Apollos that he “mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, showing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ” (Acts 18:28). In a church world that is grasping after fame and records, this is certainly not the fashionable thing to do. But it is the godly thing to do!
When Paul was first converted, “he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians: but they went about to slay him” (Acts 9:29). Over ten years after the day of Pentecost, when the apostles and elders met to consider the acceptance of the Gentiles, there was “much disputing.” Because of the hearts of the people, and the strong arguments that were presented, they concluded in perfect accord (Acts 15:7-7-22). In Athens, Paul “disputed . . in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him” (Acts 17:17). In Ephesus Paul “went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God” (Acts 19:8). When some of the people were hardened “he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus” (Acts 19:9).
There is a sense in which the servants of God are in the marketplace of ideas. There comes a time when it is not enough to simply say, “Well, that is what I believe, and that is all there is to it.” At some point, the professing church must come to grips with erroneous ideas, dismantle them, and hold forth the truth of God as superior in every way. It is to be understood that everyone cannot to do this with the same effectiveness. However, there is a place for being ready to give an answer to every man that asks a reason for the hope that is in you (1 Pet 3:15).
In my judgment there are too many incapable and unlearned men in religious leadership. They have not gained “excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus” NIV (1 Tim 3:13). This is one of the reasons for the proliferation of error within the Christian community. It lacks competent men who can effectively dispute with these charlatans. This is something that cannot be taught. It is learned in the crucible of service in which one keeps the faith and presses toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.
It is good to keep in mind that Stephen was not an apostle, yet here he is, himself doing some of the things that the apostles also did. Some might conjecture that this was possible because the apostles had laid hands on him (Acts 6;16). I prefer to trace his effectiveness to his own faithfulness in serving tables, through which he obtained “great boldness in the faith,” just as Paul said.
THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO RESIST
”And they were not able to resist . . .” Other versions read, “they were unable to cope,” NASB “they could not stand up against,” NIV “they could not withstand,” NRSV “they were not able to get the better of him,” BBE “they couldn’t argue,” GWN “the Jews could not argue with him,” IE “found themselves quite unable to stand up against,” PHILLIPS “they wee no match for Stephen,” CEV “they could not refute him,” GNB and “they had no strength to stand against.” LITV
Stephen was not simply an overpowering personality. He was a man “full of faith and power,” and the Holy spirit and wisdom as well. The point here is that these men could not answer Stephen’s arguments. He left them speechless. Peter would say he put them “to silence” (1 Pet 2:15). Paul would say he “stopped” their mouths (Tit 1:11). As Gamaliel would say, they “could not overthrow it” (Acts 5:39). As Isaiah said, every tongue that rose up against Stephen was “condemned” (Isa 54:17).
In Stephen the promise of Jesus was fulfilled, “For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist” (Luke 21:15). Although that word was spoken to only four men during the Olivet discourse, yet it was fulfilled in a man who was not even there – Stephen.
God Is To Be Honored in Our Presentations
Our God is to be honored by what we say in His name. Our presentations should solicit the attention of holy angels as well as men of humble and hungry hearts, and inquisitive spirits. Let it be clear,