Chapter 7

1 Stephen, permitted to answer to the accusation of blasphemy, 2 sheweth that Abraham worshipped God rightly, and how God chose the fathers 20 before Moses was born, and before the tabernacle and temple were built: 37 that Moses himself witnessed of Christ: 44 and that all outward ceremonies were ordained according to the heavenly pattern, to last but for a time: 51 reprehending their rebellion, and murdering of Christ, the Just One, whom the prophets foretold should come into the world. 54 Whereupon they stone him to death, who commendeth his soul to Jesus, and humbly prayeth for them.

1. Are these things so? The high priest’s question served to interrupt the astonishment of the onlookers as they beheld Stephen’s countenance, but it was normal to the opening of a formal trial, and analogous to the question put to the Lord (Matt. 26:62). The accused was called upon to plead guilty or not guilty, and Stephen’s defense follows.

2. He said. Stephen’s reply was a declaration of faith. It was also an indictment of his accusers. See Additional Notes at end of chapter, Note 1.

Men, brethren, and fathers. Stephen’s address is dignified, yet on a more familiar basis than Peter’s (cf. ch. 4:8). The accused man addresses the Jewish leaders as brethren, and pays respect to the elders. Paul used the same words when he addressed the throng from the castle stairs (ch. 22:1).

God of glory. Literally, “God of the glory,” that is, the God manifested to Israel in the glory of the pillars of cloud and fire and of the Shekinah (Ex. 13:21, 22; Ex. 40:34, 35). The glory of God is His character (see on Ex. 34:6). This was impressively revealed in the life and work of Jesus Christ (see on Isa. 40:5; John 1:14; cf. James 2:1). The phrase “God of glory” forms a wise opening to Stephen’s speech. It rebuts the charge of blasphemy and prepares the way for a fresh concept of the God whom the Jews claimed to worship.

Appeared. Showing that God manifested Himself before the Temple existed. Genesis lists five manifestations to Abraham, aside from those connected with the calls to leave his family and homeland (chs. 12:1–3; 15:7): the promise (ch. 12:7), the covenant (ch. 13:14–17), the covenant sealed (ch. 15), the covenant of circumcision (ch. 17:10), the covenant renewed at Mamre (ch. 18:1).

Mesopotamia. Literally, “between the rivers,” the name used for the country lying between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers (cf. on Gen. 24:10). Stephen seems to limit the name to the southern area, above the Persian Gulf. The ancestral home of Abraham is called “Ur of the Chaldees” (Gen. 11:31; see Acts 7:4), and is spoken of as “on the other side of the flood” (Joshua 24:2, 3), that is, beyond the Euphrates. The site of Ur has not yet been identified with certainty.

Charran. The Greek form of the OT Haran (see on Gen. 11:31). Stephen appears to separate Haran from Mesopotamia, although the city was actually in the northwestern part of what is loosely called Mesopotamia.

3. Get thee out. Stephen quotes from Gen. 12:1, but omits “from thy father’s house,” probably because he applies the passage to Abraham’s departure with his father’s household from Ur, whereas Genesis refers it to Abraham’s leaving his relatives at Haran.

4. Land of the Chaldжans. Approximately the land of Babylonia (see on Gen. 10:22).

When his father was dead. For a discussion of the relationship between this statement and Gen. 11:26, 32; 12:1 see on Gen. 11:26. Terah died at the age of 205 years; Abraham was then 75 years old.

He removed him. That is, God removed Abraham, or caused him to migrate. The Greek is less vague than the English. The change of subject (cf. ch. 6:6) may be noted as more natural in a speaker than a writer. This supports the view that ch. 7 is an actual report of Stephen’s speech.

5. None inheritance. This fact is confirmed rather than challenged by Abraham’s purchase of a burial site in Machpelah (Gen. 23), for the possession of a grave site can hardly be called an inheritance. Indeed, if he had acquired a possession, he would not have needed to buy a grave site. He made use of the largely unoccupied grazing lands of central and southern Canaan for his large herds of cattle, but such land was not exclusively his, and was certainly not an inheritance.

His foot. The phrase literally reads, “not even a foot’s breadth.”

Yet he promised. Rather, “but he promised.” See Gen. 12:7; 13:15, 16.

For a possession. Rather, “in possession.”

No child. Abraham was 75 years old when he left Haran (Gen. 12:4), and was 100 years old when Isaac was born (Gen. 21:5).

6. God spake. The words are substantially as in the LXX of Gen. 15:13, 14.

In a strange land. Referring to both Canaan and Egypt (see on Gen. 15:13).

Four hundred years. See on Gen. 15:13; Ex. 12:40.

7. Shall they come forth. With the natural freedom of narrative Stephen combines the promise to Abraham with a free rendering of the promise given to Moses (Ex. 3:12).

8. The covenant of circumcision. That is, a covenant of which circumcision was the sign (see on Gen. 17:10–14).

Begat Isaac. The birth of Isaac constituted objective evidence that God indeed would fulfill His covenant with Abraham. By circumcising Isaac, Abraham continued to fulfill his responsibilities under the same covenant.

Patriarchs. For the term, see on ch. 2:29. Here the expression is applied to the twelve sons of Jacob, each of whom was the founder of a family.

9. Moved with envy. The record is that his brethren “hated him” (Gen. 37:4, 5) and “envied him” (v. 11). This is the first step in Stephen’s argument that the messengers of God have always been opposed by those who were for a given time representatives of the Hebrew nation.

Sold Joseph into Egypt. Actually Joseph was sold to the Midianites and Ishmaelites (Gen. 37:25, 28), but since the result was Joseph’s enslavement in Egypt, objection to Stephen’s phrasing is trivial. Joseph himself said to his brethren, “Ye sold me hither” (Gen. 45:5).

But God. Rather, “and God.” This reflects the account in Gen. 39:2, 21, 23. God’s presence is not limited, for the Lord was with Joseph even in heathen Egypt. Remembrance of this fact must have brought comfort to Stephen during his trial.

10. Delivered. Gr. exaireoµ, “to pluck out,” “to choose out,” “to rescue.” The deliverance of Joseph was not out of Egypt, but out of his afflictions in Egypt. Thus it is with God’s deliverance of His people. God gives them strength to triumph over their troubles and afflictions.

Governor. See Gen. 41:38–45.

11. Found no sustenance. Rather, “could not find sustenance.” The word translated “sustenance” is generally used for “fodder” for cattle (see LXX of Gen. 24:25, 32). But more than food for cattle was affected by the famine, and therefore the term must be taken as applying to food for both man and beast.

12. Corn. Gr. sitia, “food,” “provisions.” “Corn,” or a small hard grain such as wheat, is sitos. This is not the “corn” of North America, which is properly called “maize.”

Our fathers. That is, the ten sons whom Jacob first sent into Egypt (Gen. 42:1–3). If Stephen is doing more here than developing a historical sequence, he is seeking to show that the very ones who afflicted Joseph came to be dependent upon the bounty resulting from his wisdom. And so the Jews of Stephen’s day must needs turn for their spiritual sustenance to Jesus Christ, whom they have afflicted.

13. Second time. See Gen. 45:1–4.

Was made known. This phrase appears twice in this verse in the KJV. In the second instance, the Greek original is different and should be translated “became manifest.”

Kindred. Gr. genos, “race.” Joseph had not sought to conceal his Hebrew origin (Gen. 41:12), but until this crisis it was not generally known. Now Pharaoh himself was aware of it (Gen. 45:16).

14. Kindred. Gr. suggeneia, “kindred,” or “family,” used also in v. 3 and Luke 1:61.

Threescore and fifteen souls. See on Gen. 47:26, 27. There are many Jewish traditions as to the number who went down into Egypt (see Talmud Baba Bathra 123a, 123b, Soncino ed., pp. 511, 512).

15. Jacob went down. Now begins the 215-year sojourn (see on Gen. 15:13; Ex. 12:40) of the Hebrews in Egypt, away from the Land of Promise.

Died. Rather, “and he died, himself.” Some commentators take this as referring to Joseph rather than to Jacob.

16. Were carried. Apart from the burial of the bones of Joseph in Shechem (Gen. 50:25; Ex. 13:19; Joshua 24:32) there is no record in Scripture of the carrying of the bodies of the patriarchs to Canaan. Josephus says, “Their bodies were carried some time afterwards by their descendants [and their sons] to Hebron and buried there” (Antiquities ii. 8. 2 [199]; Loeb ed., vol. 4, p. 251). An ancient Jewish tradition has the bodies of the patriarchs carried out from the land of Egypt with the departing Israelites.

Into Sychem. This Sychem is the Shechem of the OT (see on Gen. 12:6).

Abraham bought. Abraham’s purchase of the cave of Machpelah, to the east of Mamre, near Hebron, is the only recorded transaction of this kind (see on Gen. 23:3–20). Here Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Rebecca, and Leah were buried. However, the region of Shechem was the place of Abraham’s first settlement upon his entrance into Canaan, and there he built an altar (Gen. 12:6, 7). It may be that he bought land for that purpose, although there is no record of the purchase.

Jacob’s purchase of the field at Shechem is the only recorded transaction in which the sons of Hamor appear as sellers (Gen. 33:19). Here an altar was erected (Gen. 33:20), and Joseph’s bones were buried, but there is no record of its being a burial place for his brothers (“our fathers,” Acts 7:15). Jerome, a Christian writer of the 4th century, states (86th Epistle, Benedictine ed.) that the tombs of the 12 patriarchs were shown at Shechem in his day, and this corresponds to a Samaritan tradition preserved for many centuries. This may coincide with information available to Stephen but unknown to us today.

Emmor. The Greek form of the OT Hamor.

Father of Sychem. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the reading “in Sychem [Shechem].”

17. But when. Rather, “but as,” suggesting that the time was approaching rather than that it had arrived.

Time of the promise. That is, the time of its fulfillment, in the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt (see on Gen. 15:13, 14; Ex. 12:40; see Vol. I, pp. 188–195). The fathers “all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off” (Heb. 11:13).

Drew nigh. Rather, “was drawing nigh,” harmonizing with “but as.”

God had sworn. Rather, “had vouch-safed.”

Grew and multiplied. See on Ex. 1:7; 12:37.

18. Another king arose. Textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for adding the words “over Egypt.” Not simply an additional king, but a different kind of king (see on Ex. 1:8), and certainly having a different attitude toward the Hebrews.

Knew not. Rather, “had not known.” This may mean that the new ruler was ignorant of Joseph’s great services to Egypt, or that he deliberately ignored them (cf. the use of “to know” in Matt. 7:23; 25:12).

19. Subtilly. Or, “craftily” (see on Ex. 1:10).

Evil entreated. An archaic expression for “treated badly.” Josephus (Antiquities ii. 9. 1 [203]) says that the Egyptians made the Israelites cut channels and dikes for the Nile.

They cast out. Rather, “in causing their young children to be cast out.” The phrase refers to what Pharaoh did to the hated Hebrews (see on Ex. 1:22).

20. In which time. While infants were being exposed.

Exceeding fair. Literally, “fair to God” (see on Ex. 2:2). Josephus (ibid. 9. 6 [231]) describes the beauty of the infant Moses as such that those who met him turned to look upon him in admiration.

21. Cast out. Jochebed, the mother of Moses, fulfilled the king’s command and, at the same time, executed her own plan (see on Ex. 2:3).

Took him up. Literally, “lifted him up,” referring either to Moses’ being taken out of the Nile, or more likely, to his being adopted by Pharaoh’s daughter. The root form of the verb means “to choose,” and is so used in Phil. 1:22. Its force is made clear in the next phrase.

Her own son. See on Ex. 2:5, 10. Josephus (ibid. ii. 9. 7 [232–237]) declares that according to Jewish tradition the then-ruling Pharaoh had no son, and Moses was selected to be the heir.

22. Learned. Rather, “trained,” or “instructed.” The OT does not plainly state this, but it is implied in Moses’ relationship to the household of Pharaoh.

Wisdom of the Egyptians. See on Ex. 2:11; 1 Kings 4:30. There are many legends about the first 40 years of Moses’ life. Philo (Life of Moses i. 5) claims to give details concerning the curriculum Moses followed, but the Bible is silent on the subject.

Mighty in words. This primarily applies to Moses’ speech while the great leader was in the Egyptian court, and involves no conflict with his later statement, “I am not eloquent, … I am slow of speech” (see on Ex. 4:10), which was uttered after his 40-year sojourn in Midian.

In deeds. There is no Biblical record of his deeds, but it would be strange if one who proved so able in later life had not also shown great gifts during early manhood (see on Ex. 2:11).

23. Full forty years old. Literally, “when a time of forty years was being fulfilled for him,” that is, when he was about forty years old. The OT gives no information about his age at this juncture. It indicates that Moses was 80 years old when he was sent to Pharaoh (Ex. 7:7), and that he was 120 when he died (Deut. 34:7). Ancient Jewish tradition divides Moses’ life into three 40-year periods (Midrash Rabbah, on Gen. 50:22, Soncino ed., p. 1001), and Stephen follows a similar division: (1) the 40 years in Egypt, (2) the 40 years as a shepherd in the wilderness, (3) the 40 years in which he led his people from Egypt to the borders of Canaan.

To visit. Gr. episkeptomai, “to look upon,” in order to see how a person fares, “to inspect” (cf. Ex. 4:31; Luke 7:16; James 1:27). Moses was bent on helping his compatriots (see on Ex. 2:11).

24. Suffer wrong. By smiting or blows (cf. Ex. 2:11).

Avenged him. Literally, “wrought an avenging,” and thereby undertook what should have been left to the Lord.

Smote the Egyptian. That is, killed him (see on Ex. 2:12).

25. For he supposed. Rather, “but he was supposing,” even as he slew the Egyptian. He took for granted that the Hebrews would understand his deed and its motives. He was quickly disillusioned. This insight into the mind of Moses is not drawn from the OT, but could have been given to Stephen by the Holy Spirit. The speaker may also be suggesting a comparison between Moses and Jesus, who were both rejected by the people whom they sought to help.

By his hand. Apparently it had been revealed to Moses that he was to deliver Israel, but he was under the misapprehension that the work was to be accomplished by the same sort of means the Egyptians commonly used to enforce their power.

They understood not. A terse but effective phrase, highlighting the obtuseness of the chosen people. God’s people too often do not understand, and are unready for, God’s acts of deliverance (cf. the Jewish attitude toward Christ, John 1:11).

26. As they strove. That is, two men of the Hebrews (Ex. 2:13).

Set them at one. Literally, “was bringing them into peace,” that is, was reconciling them.

Sirs. Rather, “men.” His newly awakened fraternal feeling is so strong that Moses seems unable to tolerate anything less than a brotherly unity among the Hebrews as they suffer together.

27. Who made thee a ruler? As shown in v. 35, Stephen stresses this early challenge of Moses’ authority to show that the whole history of Israel had been marked by the rejection of God’s messengers, who had been sent for the good of the nation. The rejection of Jesus was the climatic rejection.

28. Wilt thou? Compare on Ex. 2:14.

29. Then fled Moses. Stephen’s quick survey passed over the fact that Pharaoh became aware of what had happened, and was searching for Moses. Josephus (Antiquities ii. 11. 1 [254–256]) assigns the flight of Moses to the jealousy of the Egyptians, who feared that he would lead a revolt.

Was a stranger. Literally, “became a sojourner,” that is, an alien.

Madian. Gr. Madiam, for Heb. Midyan, “Midian” (see on Ex. 2:15, 16).

He begat two sons. Gershom and Eliezer. The mother was Zipporah, the daughter of Jethro (see on Ex. 4:20; 18:2–4).

30. Forty years. With the 40 years mentioned in v. 23, this makes Moses 80 years of age when he was called to deliver Israel (see on Ex. 7:7).

Mount Sina. The OT form is “Sinai,” which is often called “Horeb” (see on Ex. 3:1).

An angel of the Lord. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of the words “of the Lord.” Stephen’s reference to Moses’ experience at the burning bush was indirectly an answer to the charge that he spoke against Moses, for he is here giving him full honor as one who had personal experience with his God. For the identification of the angel as the Lord see on Ex. 3:2.

A flame of fire. See on Ex. 3:2.

Bush. Gr. batos, “a thornbush,” or “bramblebush.” It is not possible to identify this bush accurately.

31. To behold. Compare Ex. 3:3.

Voice of the Lord. See on Ex. 3:2.

32. God of Abraham. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of “the God of” before the names Isaac and Jacob. If, as tradition declares, Stephen had been one of the Seventy (see on ch. 6:5), he doubtless had heard these words cited by the Lord as witnessing against the unbelief of the Sadducees concerning the resurrection (Matt. 22:32). If any of those Sadducees were in the council, they would have been reminded of the citation as Stephen addressed them. The majestic words would bring to their minds the promise of the resurrection, and its demonstration in the raising of Jesus from the dead.

33. Put off thy shoes. In Ex. 3 this command quite logically comes before God identifies Himself to Moses, who would hardly have needed instruction when once he recognized God’s presence. Stephen’s use of this experience would emphasize his true respect for holy places, and show that God’s presence was not limited to the precincts of the Jerusalem Temple (see on Ex. 3:5).

34. I have seen. The repetition of this phrase is a reflection, in Greek, of an emphatic Hebrew construction, and is well rendered “I have surely seen” in Ex. 3:7. This verse is an abbreviated and composite quotation taken from Ex. 3:7, 8, 10.

I will send thee. Stephen may have used the present verse to suggest to his hearers the way in which Christ, like Moses, had been sent in answer to prayer to relieve affliction and to deliver His people (see on v. 35).

35. This Moses. This passage is phrased to emphasize that it was Moses who was the honored one to whom the Lord had appeared.

Whom they refused. Here again is emphasis upon the rejection of Moses by the Hebrew people, although he was so well attested as a messenger of God. Perhaps Stephen implied that his hearers were acting similarly in rejecting Jesus Christ.

Deliverer. Gr. lutroµteµs, “liberator,” “redeemer.” This word is not found elsewhere in the NT, but it appears in the LXX as a translation of the Hebrew term goХel (see on Ps. 19:14; cf. on Ruth 2:20). Thus, while it has the basic sense of “liberator,” in Biblical usage it carries the overtones of meaning associated with the Hebrew idea of the kinsman-redeemer. Moses liberated, and so redeemed, his people from Egypt, but Christ liberates, redeems, His people from sin and death.

By the hand of the angel. Literally, “with the hand of an angel.” The word “with” stresses that Moses’ work was done in cooperation with the heavenly powers. For the identity of the angel see on Ex. 3:2; cf. on Acts 7:30.

36. Brought them out. Moses was able to do this, having God’s power with him (see on Ex. 3:12).

Wonders and signs. See on chs. 2:19, 22; 6:8; cf. Vol. V, p. 208.

Red sea. This is the name given by the Greeks to the water the Hebrews called the Sea of Reeds (see on Ex. 10:19). The reason for either name cannot be definitely ascertainead.

Forty years. See Num. 14:33; Deut. 29:5.

37. A prophet. Stephen, like Peter (see on ch. 3:22), refers to the prophecy given in Deut. 18:15–18. Like Peter, he sees it fulfilled in Jesus. He is now intent on confronting the Sanhedrin with this Prophet in the person of the Jesus whom they had crucified.

Him shall ye hear. Important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the omission of these words. However, they are well attested in the quotation of the same passage in ch. 3:22.

38. This is he. The reference is still to Moses.

The church. Gr. ekkleµsia, “assembly,” or “congregation” (see on Matt. 18:17).

In the wilderness. Stephen has in mind the assembling of the Hebrew nation at Mt. Sinai prior to the giving of the law (Ex. 19).

With the angel. As in v. 35, the angel is the Lord Himself, even as in v. 31 the voice that spoke is called “the voice of the Lord.”

Who received. That is, Moses.

Lively oracles. Gr. logia zoµnta, “living oracles.” Logia is the diminutive of logos, “word.” In the LXX it is used for the words of God (Num. 24:4, 16), and in Philo (see Vol. V, p. 93) for the Decalogue. In the KJV, logia is translated “oracle” (Rom. 3:2; Heb. 5:12; 1 Peter 4:11). Here, the reference is to the law received by Moses and passed on to succeeding generations. These oracles are described as “lively,” that is, living, in the sense that they abide and endure from generation to generation (cf. Heb. 4:12; 1 Peter 1:23).

39. Would not obey. Literally, “were not willing to become obedient.” This rebellion by the children of Israel broke out one month after their deliverance at the Red Sea, and before they reached Sinai (Ex. 16:2, 3). While Moses was in the mount their discontent led to apostasy (Ex. 32:1), as outlined by Stephen in succeeding verses. By inference, he is presenting a parallel between the Israelites’ attitude toward Moses, and the Jews’ attitude toward Christ. The people of both eras were disobedient to their would-be redeemer. For obedience see on Acts 5:32.

In their hearts. They did not actually return, but longed for the so-called good things they had enjoyed in the country of their captivity (see on Ex. 16:3; cf. on Num. 11:4–6). So Lot’s wife looked back to Sodom and died (Gen. 19:26). The Lord condemns the man, who, having put his hand to the plow, looks back (Luke 9:62).

Turned back again. Or, simply, “turned.” The immediate reference of Stephen’s words is to the experiences recorded in Ex. 16:2, 3; 32:1–6, but there were many others (Ex. 17:1–3; Num. 11:1–5; 14:1–4; etc.).

40. Make us gods. See on Ex. 32:1. Stephen shows how their lack of faith in Moses’ leadership led the Israelites to one of the worst forms of sin—idolatry.

41. They made a calf. See on Ex. 32:4, 5. The Hebrews had probably seen the Egyptians worshipping the bull Mnevis at Heliopolis or the bull Apis at Memphis, and desired a similar beast-image to represent the great God of the universe.

Idol. The Hebrews claimed that the golden calf was a god (see Ex. 32:4), but Stephen rightly calls it an “idol.”

Rejoiced. Rather, “were rejoicing,” that is, they continued in their idol worship and its accompanying orgies. The verb especially expresses the joy of a feast, as in Luke 15:23, 24, 29 (cf. on Ex. 32:5, 6). Moses heard, not the cries of conflict, but “the noise of them that sing” (Ex. 32:18).

Works of their own hands. Not only is the worship of an image a denial of God, but, what is worse, it sets up a man-made object in His place. The idolater turns his back upon his Maker, and bows down, instead, to that which he himself has made. See Hosea 6:6.

42. Then God turned. Rather, “But God turned.” Israel had turned from Moses, God’s representative, and now God turns from them (cf. Joshua 24:20). Men have come to a fearful state when God must give them up (see on Hosea 4:17; 5:6). It is this appalling condition that Paul describes in Rom. 1:24, 26, 28.

To worship. Gr. latreuoµ, “to serve for hire,” and, by extension, “to render religious service,” “to worship.”

The host of heaven. See on Deut. 4:19; Zeph. 1:5. Israel had been warned against such worship as being a form of idolatry (Deut. 4:19; 17:3). But both historians (2 Kings 17:16; 23:5; 2 Chron. 33:3, 5) and prophets (Jer. 8:2; 19:3; Zeph. 1:5) record that the warning was in vain. This worship of the heavenly bodies is known as Sabaism. It is alluded to in such NT references to astrology as this.

The book of the prophets. That is, the prophets of the OT (see on Luke 24:44). The Jews generally considered the writings of the twelve so-called minor prophets one book. Stephen, following the general custom, does not identify the author of his quotation.

Have ye offered? Rather, with the emphasis of the Greek word order, “Did ye offer unto me slain beasts and sacrifices forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel?” The quotation is, with minor changes, from the LXX of Amos 5:25, 26. In terms of historical fact, the question is to be answered in the affirmative, for sacrifices were offered to God during the wilderness wanderings. But spiritually, the answer is in the negative, for many of the people, though making the sacrifices, were also worshipping false gods, and the Lord rejected their divided worship.

43. Ye took up. Rather, “and ye took up.” This verse is a quotation, with a few variations, from Amos 5:26 as it appears in the LXX, which at this point is quite different from the Masoretic Hebrew text. The passage connects Israel’s unacceptable worship and their devotion to idols. In their wanderings Israel should have “taken up” only the tabernacle of the Lord, but too often they also “took up” the tabernacle, or tent, housing a heathen image.

Moloch. The Greek form of the name of the god variously known in the OT as Molech, Milcom, Malcham (see on Lev. 18:21; 20:2; Jer. 7:31). In these texts the worship of Molech is sternly prohibited. But the prohibition was in vain (see 2 Kings 16:2, 3; 23:10; Jer. 7:31; 32:35; Eze. 23:37; etc.).

Remphan. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) among the readings Rhemphan, Rhempham, Rhempha, Rhompha, Rhaiphan, and Rhephan. The LXX of Amos 5:26, from which this verse is taken, has Rhaiphan, which appears to have been taken as equivalent to the Hebrew Kywn, or KйЖyyuЖn (KJV, “Chiun”), supposed by many scholars to be a Hebrew term for the planet Saturn of which Rhaiphan was the Coptic, or Egyptian, name. But no Egyptian word similar to the Greek term is known. However, Amos, whom Stephen quotes, clearly condemns star worship. Hence Stephen stands fully justified in condemning the ancient Jews as idolaters.

Beyond Babylon. In Amos 5:26, from which the present verse is quoted, both the Hebrew and the LXX give “Damascus.” Up to the time of Amos, Syria, represented by Damascus, had been a serious enemy of both Israel and Judah. The Babylonian captivity had not then taken place, but as Stephen looks back, it is Babylon that stands out as the archenemy of the Jews, and doubtless for that reason he, by inspiration, substituted “Babylon” for “Damascus.” In vs. 37–43 Stephen has pointed out the apostasies of the Hebrews, who turned against God by turning against Moses, and in Stephen’s own day turned against God by turning against Jesus.

44. Tabernacle of witness. See on Ex. 25:8; Num. 9:15.

Appointed. The clause reads literally, “even as he appointed who spake unto Moses.” See on Ex. 25:8, 9.

According to the fashion. Rather, “according to the pattern,” as in Heb. 8:5 (see on Ex. 25:9). Stephen’s argument implies that the heavenly sanctuary is the important and central institution, and thus emphasizes the temporary nature of the tabernacle as the focal point in the worship of God.

45. That came after. Gr. diadechomai, “to receive in turn,” that is, they inherited the tabernacle from their fathers. It was the generation following that of the Exodus that took the tabernacle into Canaan, for all who came out of Egypt, except Caleb and Joshua, died in the wilderness.

Jesus. Gr. Ieµsous, equivalent to the Heb. YehoshuaФ, “Joshua” (see on Matt 1:1). Here the reference is obviously to Joshua, who brought the Israelites and the tabernacle into Canaan.

Into the possession. Literally, “in the taking possession.”

Gentiles. That is, “nations,” or “heathen,” with particular reference to the Canaanites.

Whom God drave out. See on Deut. 9:3; Ps. 44:2.

Days of David. This phrase may have two applications: (1) the original Canaanite population of Palestine was not wholly conquered until David’s day; (2) the tabernacle was the focal point of Israelitish worship up to and including the reign of David. After his time the Temple took the place of the tabernacle.

46. Found favour. David, favored of God, wished to build the Temple, but God would not permit him to do so (see on 2 Sam. 7:1–17; 1 Chron. 22:6–10).

Desired. Rather, “requested.”

Find a tabernacle. These words, which appear unusual in the present context, are drawn from the LXX of Ps. 132:5. Here the Greek word translated “tabernacle” (skeµnoµma) is perhaps better rendered “habitation,” as the tabernacle (skeµneµ) had existed since the days of Moses, and David wished to build a permanent temple.

God of Jacob. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between the readings “God of Jacob” and “house of Jacob,” but the context favors the text as it stands in the KJV. The LXX of Ps. 132:5, from which these words are drawn, reads “God of Jacob.”

47. Solomon built. See on 1 Kings 6:1.

48. Howbeit. That is, but, on the other hand. This points the contrast between the immediately preceding verses, which speak of the tabernacle and Temple as God’s meeting places with men, and verses 48, 49, which emphasize that God does not dwell in man-made buildings.

The most High. Since, apart from the article, the title is but one word in Greek, the word “most” should be capitalized. For comment on the title see on Gen. 14:18.

Dwelleth not. The clause may be translated, “does not dwell in handmade things” (cf. on Heb. 9:11, 24), for there is no word for “temple” in the original. The Jews should not have needed this reminder about the omnipresence of God, for they had been well instructed concerning this aspect of His nature (see on 1 Kings 8:27; Ps. 139:7–13). But they had concentrated on the truth that He had promised to grace the Temple with His presence until their thought confined Him to its precincts. Even worse, they came to have a greater reverence for the building than for the One for whom the building was erected. In so doing they unfitted themselves to recognize and receive God “manifest in the flesh” (1 Tim. 3:16) when He became incarnate and lived among them.

Paul, who had heard Stephen’s defense, used a similar argument in talking to the philosophers of Athens (Acts 17:24, 25).

Saith the prophet. The quotation is from the gospel prophet, Isaiah (ch. 66:1, 2), who saw God in His heavenly temple (ch. 6:1–7).

49. Heaven is my throne. Stephen quotes the LXX almost verbatim. For comment on vs. 49, 50 see on Isa. 66:1, 2. Isaiah points out that the Most High cannot be confined within human limitations, but will dwell with those who are “poor and of a contrite spirit.” These words were a rebuke to the Jews who heard them. With their worship centered upon the earthly Temple, they were far from being “poor and of a contrite spirit.” Stephen’s unspoken appeal is to accept the Divine One, who had walked among them so humbly, and had shown them their heavenly Father’s lovely character. Many of the priests had already accepted the gospel (see Acts 6:7); more would do so. These converts from the old typical system were building a spiritual temple in the hearts of men.

51. Ye stiffnecked. The sudden change in the tenor of Stephen’s address doubtless is to be accounted for by the growing excitement of the Sanhedrin, and the resentment aroused by his words (cf. AA 100; Matt. 26:65). Apparently realizing that his end was near, and that no further discussion would affect the issue, Stephen broke forth in a stern rebuke. The adjectives he used had been applied to the sins of ancient Israel: “stiffnecked” in Ex. 33:3, 5; 34:9, and “uncircumcised” in Lev. 26:41. “Stiffnecked” is applied to stubborn oxen (see on Ex. 32:8). The actual phrase “uncircumcised in heart” had been used by Ezekiel (ch. 44:7) of “strangers.” Now at the very moment when Stephen had been telling them that their veneration of the Temple was excessive and futile, he put them in the class of the Gentiles. No worse insult could have been directed against these furious people.

Always resist the Holy Ghost. An accurate historical summary, for from the days of Moses, whom their fathers had disobeyed, down to the days of Jesus Christ, whom they had crucified, the people of Israel had resisted the Holy Spirit. The Greek word for “resist” (antipiptoµ) implies active, strenuous opposition.

52. Which of the prophets? Here is an echo of Christ’s own words (Matt. 5:12; Luke 11:47; 13:34). For comment on the history of such persecution of prophets see on Matt. 5:12; 23:37 (cf. 1 Thess. 2:15; cf. on 2 Chron. 36:16).

Shewed. Rather “announced.”

The Just One. Or, “Righteous One.” This high title is also used of the Lord in chs. 3:14; 22:14 The name had already been applied in Jewish literature to the expected Messiah (Enoch 38:2), and may have been suggested by Isa. 11:4, 5. Pilate’s wife used the description in referring to Jesus (Matt. 27:19). The early church seems to have accepted it, and an example of its application may be seen in 1 John 2:1, where the Greek word for “righteous” is the same as that used here for “Just One.” The Christ who had been condemned as a malefactor was distinguished from all men as the “Righteous One,” the “Just One.” By an impartation of this same righteousness, Stephen stood out in contrast with the men who were about to execute him in wicked fury.

Have been. Rather, “have become.”

Betrayers and murderers. Reading in the faces of his tormentors the fate that is soon to be his own, Stephen reminds them of their former actions with respect to Christ.

53. Who have received. An emphatic form, “Ye who received.”

By the disposition of angels. More literally, “as ordinances of angels.” It was Christ, the Son of God, who gave the law on Mt. Sinai (see on Ex. 20:2). He was also the Angel of the covenant (see on Ex. 23:20). But a host of angels were with the Lord on Mt. Sinai (cf. on Deut. 33:2; Ps. 68:17; Gal. 3:19; Heb. 2:2). The LXX of Deut. 33:2 reads, “on his right hand angels were with him,” and Josephus (Antiquities xv. 5. 3) presents the same idea.

Have not kept it. Rather, “Ye did not keep it.” This is said in dramatic contrast with the earlier phrase “received the law,” and must have dealt a telling blow to those who heard it. They had kept neither the letter of the law nor its intent. The law, given by angels, could have been their glory; its perversion was precipitating their shame and destruction.

54. When they heard. Rather, “Now while they were hearing.”

Cut to the heart. See on ch. 5:33. The word used describes a keener pang than the “pricked” of ch. 2:37, and it produced now, not repentance, but furious wrath.

Gnashed on him. Literally, “gnashed their teeth at him.” The figurative expression is not infrequent (Matt. 8:12; 13:42; etc.). Here, however, it is a literal manifestation of wrath. The Jews had allowed their rage to pass beyond control. Speechless with anger, they wanted to rend him as brute beasts would tear their prey with their teeth.

55. But he. Pointing the simple, stark contrast to his raving opponents.

Being full. Implying not a sudden inspiration, but a continuing experience. As at the beginning (ch. 6:5), so at the end, Stephen is “full of the Holy Ghost.”

Looked up stedfastly. See on ch. 1:10.

Into heaven. Stephen saw “the heavens opened” (Acts 7:56; cf. on Isa. 6:1). None of the onlookers saw the glory of the heavens thus opened, and the statement that Stephen saw this glory seemed to them to aggravate his guilt. But only the prophets can tell us whether what they see is with the inward spiritual eye or through an extension of the physical sense (cf. Matt. 3:16; 2 Cor. 12:1–6).

Saw the glory of God. Compare on Gen. 3:24; Ex. 13:21; John 1:14; Acts 7:2. Stephen’s speech begins with a reference to “the God of glory,” and ends by reporting a vision of divine glory that shines upon his mind. With what a rapt expression he must have gazed into that glory. He forgot the deadly peril of the moment, and gave himself entirely to the heavenly vision.

Jesus standing. Christ is usually spoken of as sitting at the right hand of God.

Right hand of God. See on Matt. 26:64. This sight of the Father and the Son fortified their faithful suffering servant.

56. Son of man. In the NT outside the Gospels only here and in Rev. 1:13; 14:14. Stephen may have heard it from the Lord’s own lips, or he may have learned it from the early church, since his speech was made before any of the Gospels were written. The members of the Sanhedrin probably remembered that Christ Himself had used this phrase at the time of His trial before them (Matt. 26:64). They had then condemned the Lord’s claims as blasphemous. For comment on the title see on Mark 2:10; cf. Vol. V, p. 917.

57. Then they cried out. Rather, “But they cried out,” that is, in an attempt to silence Stephen, instead of listening and becoming convicted in the presence of the glory of God.

Stopped. Gr. sunechoµ, “to compress,” “to hold together.” They regarded Stephen’s words as blasphemous, and did not wish to hear more. They thus proved that they deserved the description given in v. 51. They, and not Stephen, were the blasphemers.

Ran upon him. Rather, “rushed upon him with one accord.” Satan had brought into the Sanhedrin the kind of unity required by the Law (Deut. 13:9, 10) when a man was to be executed. There was no waiting for an official verdict; they were unanimous in their desire and decision. For the judicial aspects of such summary proceedings compare on Matt. 26:59.

58. Cast him out. According to Lev. 24:14 the one to be stoned must be taken outside the camp, which, in the time of Stephen, meant outside the walls of Jerusalem.

Stoned him. Literally, “were stoning him,” as though the act of execution went on while the martyr was praying (vs. 59, 60). Stoning was the penalty for blasphemy under the Mosaic law (Lev. 24:14–16; see on John 8:7). But however closely the Sanhedrin may have been following this law, under the Romans they had no right to take life, particularly if Stephen was a Roman citizen (see on Acts 6:5). But Roman officials could be bribed into convenient silence (AA 98, 101). Pilate, who was still procurator (see Vol. V, pp. 67, 68), may have been out of the city at the time, but would be unlikely to interfere with the attack on Stephen after his humiliating experience at the trial of Jesus.

Laid down their clothes. The Law required that the accuser should be the first to use the deadly stones (Deut. 17:7; cf. on John 8:7). The loose flowing cloaks worn as outer garments would have impeded the free action of the arms of the executors, and hence were laid aside (cf. Acts 22:20).

Young man’s. Gr. neanias, “youth,” is used with great latitude for men between 20 and 40 years of age. The term, therefore, gives no help in determining the chronology of Paul’s life (cf. on Philemon 9:1). For a possible dating of Stephen’s martyrdom see p. 99.

Saul. For the meaning of the name see on 1 Sam. 9:2. For comment on Saul’s previous history, his presence at the martyrdom of Stephen, and subsequent change of name to Paul see Additional Note 2 at end of chapter.

59. They stoned. Rather, “as they were stoning.” Stephen prayed while he was being stoned.

Calling upon God. As indicated by italics in the KJV, the word “God” is not in the original. The prayer itself shows that Stephen called upon the Lord Jesus, whom he had just seen standing at the right hand of God (v. 56).

Receive my spirit. See on Matt. 27:50; Luke 8:55; Acts 7:60. Note how Luke also records a similar prayer on the part of Jesus as He died (Luke 23:46).

60. Kneeled down. In prayer to and adoration of the One whom he had seen on the right hand of God, though he was doubtless forced to his knees by the stoning.

Lay not this sin. Literally, “do not reckon to them this sin.” Stephen could do little with respect to his persecutors’ past sins, but he had a personal right to request forgiveness for their present transgression. In pleading for them he revealed how fully he had acquired the forgiving spirit that had characterized his Master (cf. Luke 23:34).

Fell asleep. See on Mark 5:39; John 11:11. Throughout his defense Stephen’s conduct is in marked contrast with that of his accusers. They are filled with vindictive fury, but he maintains a calm such as possessed Christ in the judgment hall. Now Luke, in closing his account of the martyr’s ministry, preserves that hallowed atmosphere in his final phrase, “he fell asleep.” The battle is over, the victory is won; God’s faithful warrior leaves the tumult and quietly sleeps until the resurrection day. Succeeding chapters show that his death was not in vain.

additional notes on chapter 7

Note 1

The speech of Stephen presents some difficulties as to its purpose, the matters it presents, and its questions of fact. In approaching these problems certain considerations should be borne in mind: (1) The speech is reported, not as Luke might have understood its matter and import 30 years later, when he wrote Acts, but probably as it was reported to him by one or more of the hearers, such as Saul (Paul) or one of the converted priests (ch. 6:7). Of course, it must be remembered that God could have given a knowledge of the sermon directly to Luke. (2) The speech was never finished, because his hearers rushed upon him in fury, dragged him outside the city, and stoned him to death. (3) Stephen’s speech was historical, as had been Peter’s speeches before him (chs. 2; 3), and Paul’s afterward (chs. 13; 22; 26), and to that extent records little of his theological thinking. Stephen’s theology, as it had developed up to this time, must be seen in the implications of the history he traced, and in the accusations of his enemies. (4) His discourse was doubtless a continuation of the evangelistic message given by the seven following their ordination (ch. 6:7–10), and of the presentation of the gospel Stephen had been making in the synagogues of the Hellenists (see on v. 9). Therefore his defense took for granted much that would be of help to the present-day student in analyzing and evaluating it. (5) Some of the historical and exegetical difficulties that his discourse appears to present—such as the matter of Abraham’s not leaving Haran until after Terah’s death (ch. 7:4); the 75 persons as the total of the Hebrew clan with Joseph in Egypt (v. 14); the parcel of ground said to have been purchased in Shechem by Abraham (v. 16); the burial of Jacob in that plot of ground (vs. 15, 16); the citation from Amos 5:26, 27, in which Stephen substitutes “Babylon” for “Damascus”; and the names of the pagan deities mentioned (Acts 7:43)—can be viewed as arising, in part or in whole, from our lack of information that may have been known to Stephen.

Three fairly obvious objectives can be inferred for Stephen’s speech:

1. To win approval, or rather to temper disapproval, by showing the Sanhedrin that he had familiarity with Hebrew history, and to provide ground for proving his orthodoxy.

2. To show historically how God had sought to lead the Hebrews, and how persistently they had rejected that leadership as given through Moses, the prophets, and the long-foretold Messiah.

3. To show the nature and meaning of the worship that God had prescribed for the patriarchs and for His chosen people, in relation, as must be recognized, to Christ’s newly inaugurated work at the right hand of God. This may be considered the most important, but least clearly stated, objective. Four facts are to be observed in connection with it:

a. When the deacons, of whom Stephen emerges as the leading evangelist, began their public ministry, “a great company of the priests,” it is noted for the first time, “were obedient to the faith” (ch. 6:7). This result may have arisen from a particular emphasis in the presentation of the gospel by Stephen and the other deacons.

b. The serious accusation was brought against Stephen that he taught what was contrary to “this holy place,” that is, the Temple; to “the law”; and to the “customs” (ch. 6:13, 14).

c. Stephen stressed the call of Abraham and God’s providential care of Jacob and his descendants (ch. 7:2–17); the liberation of the Hebrews from Egypt under the leadership of Moses (vs. 18–36); Moses’ witness to a future prophet for the church in the wilderness (vs. 37, 38); the false worship and unconsecrated sacrifices of the Hebrews (vs. 39–43); the wilderness tabernacle built according to the pattern shown to Moses (vs. 44, 45); Solomon’s Temple (vs. 46, 47); and the fact that God is in no need of man-made temples (vs. 48–50). This emphasis upon worship would suggest that Stephen was leading to the subject of Christ’s ministry in heaven.

d. Stephen’s experience bears a recognizable relationship to the prophecy of the 70 weeks (Dan. 9:24–27), which began in 457 b.c., in the last week of which Messiah was to be cut off, “not for himself,” and the typical, earthly sacrificial system was to end as an effective means of intercession, which result would mean also the end of the earthly priesthood. This commentary accepts the view that the crucifixion took place in a.d. 31 (see Vol. V, pp. 251–265), “in the midst of the week.” Therefore the last of the 70 prophetic weeks must end in a.d. 34. Thus Stephen’s ministry can be viewed as dramatically symbolizing God’s appeal to His chosen people during the last prophetic week, before the gospel is offered to the Gentiles. Accordingly, it seems reasonable to date Stephen’s martyrdom in a.d. 34, for the killing of Stephen may be viewed as a final act of rejection of the gospel by the Jews as a nation.

When Stephen’s speech is viewed against this background, it is seen to be a dramatic, vital episode in a critical period of early church history.

Note 2

The young man, Saul, introduced in ch. 7:58, plays so important a part in the NT scene as to warrant close attention from the first mention of his name. Direct biographical details are scanty, but indirect references permit a reasonably certain reconstruction of his early life.

Apart from an oblique mention of his mother (Gal. 1:15), and general references to his Hebrew ancestors (Acts 24:14; Gal. 1:14; 2 Tim. 1:3), the Scriptures give no clue to Saul’s parentage. That he was not an only child is clear from Acts 23:16, where “Paul’s sister’s son” is introduced. It is possible that his family, regarding him as an apostate when he became a Christian, was alienated, and severed all connections with him (see Phil. 3:8), and that this made mention of them painful to him, although Rom. 16:7 may be understood to mean that some of his relatives were Christians.

A tradition of the 2d century, first recorded by Jerome, states that Saul’s parents originally lived in Gischala, of Galilee. About 4 b.c. they are supposed to have been captured and taken as slaves to Tarsus, the chief city of Cilicia, in Asia Minor, where they eventually gained their freedom, prospered, and became Roman citizens. Later, a son, Saul, was born to them there.

Saul’s life began at Tarsus (Acts 22:3), where, on the eighth day, he was circumcised (Phil. 3:5) and, in accordance with custom, named (see on Luke 1:59). Since he was of the tribe of Benjamin (Rom. 11:1; Phil. 3:5), he may have been named after the first king of Israel, who came from the same house.

From birth he possessed certain enviable privileges. He was born a Roman citizen (Acts 22:28). In the 1st century a.d., Roman citizenship was still jealously guarded, and it is probable that Saul’s family was one of some distinction and of more than average wealth. The holder of such citizenship had every reason to be proud, and would naturally be favorably inclined toward imperial Rome. But, in addition, Saul had a local loyalty to his own distinguished city. He was a citizen of Tarsus (ch. 21:39). This means that he was not merely resident there, but possessed citizen rights. This privilege he probably enjoyed because of services rendered to the city by his family.

Over and above these social privileges, however, Saul valued his racial and religious heritage. He gloried in the description, “an Hebrew of the Hebrews” (Phil. 3:5; cf. 2 Cor. 11:22), and was jealous of his ancestral traditions. This was quite compatible with his pride in Roman and Tarsian citizenship, for until a.d. 70, when Vespasian abolished their legal rights, the Jews were allowed to preserve their distinctive nationality, even in the pagan Roman setting. To this satisfaction with his religious background he added a special pride in his Pharisaism. He “lived a Pharisee” “after the most straitest [Jewish] sect” of his religion (Acts 26:5; cf. ch. 23:6; Phil. 3:5). Some commentators suggest that this Pharisaism was inherited from his father, but it is just as possible that he became a Pharisee because of his training under Gamaliel (cf. on Acts 5:34).

At an early age, probably when he was 12, Saul was sent to Jerusalem (ch. 26:4), where he was educated by the famous Gamaliel I (ch. 22:3; see on ch. 5:34). He was trained in “the perfect manner of the law,” “believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets,” growing to be “zealous toward God” and “more exceedingly zealous of the traditions” of his fathers (Acts 22:3; 24:14; Gal. 1:14). It seems that he became a more fanatical supporter of his sect than did his master (cf. on Acts 5:34). He thus laid the foundation for his future energetic crusade against the Christian church (chs. 8:1, 3; 22:4, 5; 26:9–12). With this background, and in this setting, Saul enters the narrative of the book of Acts (ch. 7:58). As a zealous member of the strictest section of Judaism, he lends the weight and assent of his presence to the death of Stephen who seems to be a critic of Judaism. His presence suggests that he had continued to live in Jerusalem. He would therefore be well aware of Christ’s ministry and death, and the increasingly powerful apostolic witness that followed. But since he mentions only his supernatural encounter with Jesus on the Damascus road (Acts 22:7, 8; 26:14, 15; 1 Cor. 15:8), it is unlikely that he ever met Him in the flesh. Nevertheless, Saul was well equipped as an anti-Christian persecutor, and there is nothing anomalous in his participation in the first martyr’s death.

Considerable discussion has centered on the change of name that occurs about halfway through the book of Acts. Chapter 13:9 speaks of “Saul (who also is called Paul),” or, to give a variant translation, “Saul, otherwise Paul.” Why should a second name be here introduced when “Saul” has already been used 18 times between chs. 7:58 and 13:9? From the days of Jerome the newly introduced name has been connected with that of Sergius Paulus, the deputy (proconsul) of Cyprus. It has been suggested that Saul took the name Paul at this juncture to honor the deputy’s conversion to the Christian faith. Such an explanation seems improbable, for there are weighty reasons for concluding that Saul must have had more than one name from his earliest years.

Saul was born into a multilingual world. A heterogeneous population spoke an amazing babel of differing tongues, but each group had its own native speech. Superimposed on this base were Greek, the lingua franca of the civilized world (see Vol. V, p. 103), and Latin, the official language of the Roman Empire. As a result, many men of the day spoke not only their native tongue but also Greek and Latin. Because of this, many of them came to have more than one name, or differing forms of the same name according to the language or society in which it was being used. In other cases they bore names that had no linguistic connections with each other—that is, were not translations from one language to another. In Saul’s case the process may have worked as follows: At circumcision he was given a Jewish name, Saul, but since he lived in a Gentile community, he also bore a not uncommon Latin name, Paulus. Many examples of double names may be quoted: Belteshazzar-Daniel, Esther-Hadassah, John Mark (cf. Acts 1:23; 13:1; Col. 4:11). Luke shows his awareness of the apostle’s two names, Saul and Paul. Prior to Acts 13:9, he has portrayed him in a predominantly Hebrew environment, and has therefore used his Hebrew name, Saul. Now, in ch. 13:9, Luke sees him face to face with a Roman official, who would naturally ask him such questions as, “What is your name?” “Where is your home?” To such queries the Roman citizen would not reply, “Saul, a Pharisee of Jerusalem,” but “Paul, a Roman citizen of Tarsus.” Thus it appears that Luke’s revelation of his hero’s other name is particularly felicitous—it is true to circumstance, and scarcely needs any other explanation. From this point on, Luke uses the Gentile name, apart from three reminiscent references to “Saul” (chs. 22:7, 13; 26:14), which show how accurately Luke reported Paul’s speeches. This is entirely appropriate, for Paul’s ministry during the second half of Acts is almost entirely for non-Jews. The name Paul is thus interwoven with his service to the Gentiles. This receives the strongest possible support from the apostle’s own invariable use of “Paul” in his epistles (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:12; 2 Cor. 10:1; Gal. 5:2; Col. 4:18; etc.).

One other interpretation merits consideration. The Latin word paulus (its Greek equivalent is pauros) means “little,” or “small,” and has been taken as a description of Saul’s stature. The idea receives some support from the apocryphal Acts of Paul and Thecla, which dates from a.d. 160–180, and though not wholly reliable, may possibly reflect a genuine tradition concerning the personal appearance of the great apostle. The relevant passage says: “A man small in size, bald-headed, bandy-legged, well-built, with eyebrows meeting, rather long-nosed, full of grace. For sometimes he seemed like a man, and sometimes he had the countenance of an angel” (ANF, vol. 8, p. 487). It must be recognized, however, that such an explanation involves acceptance of a later date for the name Paul, since it could not have been given until physical characteristics were pronounced.

Whatever the origin of Saul’s alternative name, the name itself was Roman and was eminently appropriate to the apostle’s ultimate aim of taking the gospel to the imperial capital (cf. on Acts 19:21; Rom. 1:15). Furthermore, as Luke enters upon the main topic of his book, the Gentile ministry of Paul, he consistently uses only the apostle’s Roman name.

For a tentative chronology of the life of Saul, otherwise and more commonly known as Paul, see pp. 97–102.

Ellen G. White comments

1–60AA 99–102; SR 264–267

4 PP 127

5 PP 169

6 8T 207

22 CT 406, 417; Ed 62; FE 342, 360, 393; MH 474; PP 245; SR 108; 4T 343

23–25CT 407

25 PP 246

29, 30 FE 360, 423; MH 508

37 AA 99

44 PP 357

48 EW 198

48–50AA 99; SR 264

51, 52 EW 198

51–55AA 100

51–56SR 265

55 AA 115

55, 56 EW 198, 208; SL 91

56 AA 116; ML 67; MYP 113; SR 270

56–60AA 101

57, 58 EW 199

58–60PK 699

59 AA 575, 597; 4T 525

59, 60 ML 67; SR 206

60 EW 199; MB 33