Act 6:13-14, 9:23-24, 17:5, 21:27-31 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 13. And set up false witnesses . It has been made a question why these persons are called false witnesses, since it is supposed by many that they reported merely the words of Stephen. It may be replied, that if they did report merely his words, if Stephen had actually said what they affirmed, yet they perverted his meaning. They accused him of blasphemy , that is, of calumnious and reproachful words against Moses, and against God. That Stephen had spoken in such a manner, or had designed to reproach Moses, there is no evidence. What was said in the mildest manner, and in the way of cool argument, might easily be perverted so as in their view to amount to blasphemy. But there is no evidence whatever that Stephen had ever used these words on any occasion. And it is altogether improbable that he ever did, for the following reasons: (1.) Jesus himself never affirmed that he would destroy that place, he uniformly taught that it would be done by the Gentiles , . It is altogether improbable, therefore, that Stephen should declare any such thing. (2.) It is equally improbable that he taught that Jesus would abolish the peculiar customs and rites of the Jews. It was long, and after much discussion, before the apostles themselves were convinced of it; and when those customs were changed, it was done gradually. See , etc.; , etc. ; , etc. The probability therefore is, that the whole testimony was false , and was artfully invented to produce the utmost exasperation among the people, and yet was at the same time so plausible as to be easily believed. For on this point the Jews were particularly sensitive; and it is clear that they had some expectations that the Messiah would produce some such changes. Comp. , with . The same charge was afterwards brought against Paul, which he promptly denied. See . This holy place . The temple. The law . The law of Moses.

Acts 6:13-14

Verse 13. And set up false witnesses. It has been made a question why these persons are called false witnesses, since it is supposed by many that they reported merely the words of Stephen. It may be replied, that if they did report merely his words, if Stephen had actually said what they affirmed, yet they perverted his meaning. They accused him of blasphemy, that is, of calumnious and reproachful words against Moses, and against God. That Stephen had spoken in such a manner, or had designed to reproach Moses, there is no evidence. What was said in the mildest manner, and in the way of cool argument, might easily be perverted so as in their view to amount to blasphemy. But there is no evidence whatever that Stephen had ever used these words on any occasion. And it is altogether improbable that he ever did, for the following reasons:

(1.) Jesus himself never affirmed that he would destroy that place, he uniformly taught that it would be done by the Gentiles, Mt 24. It is altogether improbable, therefore, that Stephen should declare any such thing.

(2.) It is equally improbable that he taught that Jesus would abolish the peculiar customs and rites of the Jews. It was long, and after much discussion, before the apostles themselves were convinced of it; and when those customs were changed, it was done gradually. See Acts 10:14, etc.; Acts 11:2, etc. Acts 15:20; Acts 21:20, etc. The probability therefore is, that the whole testimony was false, and was artfully invented to produce the utmost exasperation among the people, and yet was at the same time so plausible as to be easily believed. For on this point the Jews were particularly sensitive; and it is clear that they had some expectations that the Messiah would produce some such changes. Comp. Mt 26:61, with Dan 9:26,27. The same charge was afterwards brought against Paul, which he promptly denied. See Acts 25:8.

This holy place. The temple.

The law. The law of Moses. Verse 14. Shall change. Shall abolish them; or shall introduce others in their place.

The customs. The ceremonial rites and observations of sacrifices, festivals, etc. appointed by Moses.

Acts 9:23-24

Verse 23. And after that many days, etc. How long a time elapsed before this, is not recorded in this place; but it is evident that the writer means to signify that a considerable time intervened. There is, therefore, an interval here which Luke has not filled up; and if this were the only narrative which we had, we should be at a loss how to understand this. From all that we know now of the usual conduct of the Jews towards the apostles, and especially towards Paul, it would seem highly improbable that this interval would be passed peaceably or quietly. Nay, it would be highly improbable that he would be allowed to remain in Damascus many days without violent persecution. Now it so happens that, by turning to another part of the New Testament, we are enabled to ascertain the manner which this interval was filled up. Turn then to Gal 1:17, and we learn from Paul himself that he went into Arabia, and spent some time there, and then returned again to Damascus. The precise time which would be occupied in such a journey is not specified; but it would not be performed under a period of some months. In Gal 1:18, we are informed that he did not go to Jerusalem until three years after his conversion; and as there is reason to believe that he went up to Jerusalem directly after escaping from Damascus the second time, Acts 9:25,26 it seems probable that the three years were spent chiefly in Arabia. We have thus an account of the "many days" here referred to by Luke. And in this instance we have a striking example of the truth and honesty of the sacred writers. By comparing these two accounts together, we arrive at the whole state of the case. Neither seems to be complete without the other. Luke has left a chasm which he has nowhere else supplied. But that chasm we are enabled to fill up from the apostle himself, in a letter written long after, and without any design to amend or complete the history of Luke: for the introduction of this history into the epistle to the Galatians was for a very different purpose--to show that he received his commission directly from the Lord Jesus, and in a manner independent of the other apostles. The two accounts, therefore, are like the two parts of a tally; neither is complete without the other; and yet being brought together, they so exactly fit as to show that the one is precisely adjusted to the other. And as the two parts were made by different individuals, and without design of adapting them to each other, they show that the writers had formed no collusion or agreement to impose on the world; that they are separate and independent witnesses; that they are honest men; that their narratives are true records of what actually occurred; and the two narratives constitute, therefore, a strong and very valuable proof of the correctness of the sacred narrative. If asked why Luke has omitted this in the Acts, it may be replied, that there are many circumstances and facts omitted in all histories from the necessity of the case. Comp. Jn 21:25. It is remarkable here, not that he has omitted this, but that he has left a chasm in his own history which can be so readily filled up.

Were fulfilled. Had elapsed.

Took counsel, etc. Laid a scheme; or designed to kill him. Comp. Acts 23:12, 25:3. His zeal and success would enrage them, and they knew of no other way in which they could free themselves from the effects of his arguments and influence.

(a) "took counsel" Acts 23:12, 25:3 Verse 24. But their laying await. Their counsel; their design.

Was known of Saul. Was made known to him. In what way this was communicated we do not know. This design of the Jews against Saul is referred to in 2Cor 11:32, 33, where it is said, "In Damascus, the governor under Aretas the king kept the Damascenes with a garrison, desirous to apprehend me; and through a window in a basket was I let down by the wall, and escaped their hands."

And they watched the gates. Cities were surrounded by high walls; and of course the gates were presumed to be the only places of escape. As they supposed that Saul, apprized of their designs, would make an attempt to escape, they stationed guards at the gates to intercept him. In 2 Cor. xi. 32, it is said that the governor kept the city for the purpose of apprehending him. It is possible that the governor might have been a Jew, and one, therefore, who would enter into their views. Or if not a Jew, the Jews who were there might easily represent Saul as an offender, and demand his being secured; and thus a garrison or guard might be furnished them for their purpose. See a similar attempt made by the Jews recorded in Mt 28:14.

(b) "watched the gates" 2Cor 11:26, Ps 21:11, 37:32,33

Acts 17:5

Verse 5. Moved with envy. That they made so many converts, and met with such success.

Certain lewd fellows of the baser sort. This is an unhappy translation. The word lewd is not in the original. The Greek is, "And having taken certain wicked men of those who were about the forum," or market-place. The forum, or market-place, was the place where the idle assembled, and where those were gathered together that wished to be employed, Mt 20:3. Many of these would be of abandoned character --the idle, the dissipated, and the worthless; and, therefore, just the materials for a mob. It does not appear that they felt any particular interest in the subject; but they were, like other mobs, easily excited, and urged on to any acts of violence. The pretence on which the mob was excited was, that they had everywhere produced disturbance, and that they violated the laws of the Roman emperor, Acts 17:6,7. It may be observed, however, that a mob usually regards very little the cause in which they are engaged. They may be roused either for or against religion, and become as full of zeal for the insulted honour of religion as against it. The profane, the worthless, and the abandoned, thus often become violently enraged for the honour of religion, and fun of indignation and tumult against those who are accused of violating public peace and order.

The house of Jason. Where Paul and Silas were, Acts 17:7. Jason appears to have been a relative of Paul, and for this reason it was, probably, that he lodged with him, Rom 16:21.

Acts 21:27-31

Verse 27. And when the seven days were almost ended. Gr., As the seven days were about to be fulfilled. εμελλονσυντελεισθαι. The seven days which were to complete the observance of the vow, Acts 21:26. Perhaps the whole observance in this case was intended to be but seven days, as the time of such a vow was voluntary. The translation, "were almost ended," is not quite correct. The Greek implies no more than that the period of the seven days was about to be accomplished, without implying it was near the close of them when he was seized. By comparing the following places-- Acts 21:18,26, 22:30, 23:12,32, 24:1,11 --it appears that the time of his seizure must have been near the beginning of those days. (Doddridge,)

The Jews which were of Asia. Who resided in Asia Minor, but who had come up to Jerusalem for purposes of worship. Acts 2:1 and following.

(c) "Jews" Acts 24:18 (d) "laid hands on him" Acts 26:21 Verse 28. Men of Israel. Jews. All who are the friends of the law of Moses.

This is the man, etc. This implies that they had before given information to the Jews at Jerusalem that there was such a man; and they now exulted in the fact that they had found him. They, therefore, called on all these to aid in securing and punishing him.

That teacheth, etc. Acts 6:13, Acts 6:14.

Against the people. The people of the Jews. That is, they pretended that he taught that the customs and laws of the Jewish nation were not binding, and endeavoured to prejudice all men against them.

And the law. The law of Moses.

And this place. The temple. Everything against the law would be interpreted also as being against the temple, as most of the commandments of the law were celebrated there. It is possible also that Paul might have declared that the temple was to be destroyed. Comp. Acts 6:13,14.

And further, brought Greeks, etc. The temple was surrounded by various areas called courts. Mt 21:12. The outermost of these courts was called the court of the Gentiles, and into that it was lawful for the Gentiles to enter. But the word "temple" here refers, doubtless, to the parts of the area appropriated especially to the Israelites, and which it was unlawful for a Gentile to enter. See the area marked G G G G in the plan of the temple, Mt 21:12.

And hath polluted, etc. He defiled the temple by thus introducing a Gentile. No greater defilement, in their view, could scarcely be conceived. No more effective appeal could be made to the passions of the people than this.

(e) "teacheth" Acts 6:13,14, 24:5,6 Verse 29. In the city. In Jerusalem. As he was with Paul, it was inferred that he would attend him everywhere.

Trophimus. He had accompanied Paul on his way from Ephesus, Acts 20:4.

Whom they supposed, etc. This is a most striking illustration of the manner in which accusations are often brought against others. They had seen him with Paul in the city; they inferred, therefore, that he had been with him in the temple. They did not even pretend that they had seen him in the temple; but the inference was enough to inflame the angry and excitable passions of the multitude. So in the accusations which men now often make of others. They see one thing, they infer another; they could testify to one thing, but they conclude that another thing will also be true, and that other thing they charge on them as the truth. If men would state facts as they are, no small part of the slanderous accusations against others would cease. An end would be made of most of the charges of falsehood, and error, and heresy, and dishonesty, and double-dealing, and immorality. If a statement is made, it should be of the thing as it was. If we attempt to state what a man has done, it should not be what we suppose he has done. If we attempt to state what he believes, it should not be what we suppose he believes.

(f) "Trophimus" Acts 20:4 Verse 30. The city was moved. Was agitated; was thrown into commotion.

Drew him out of the temple. Under the pretence that he had defiled it. The evident design was to put him to death, Acts 21:31.

The doors were shut. The doors leading into the courts of the temple.

(*) "forthwith" "Immediately" Verse 31. And as they were about to kill him. Gr., They seeking to kill him. This was evidently done in a popular tumult, as had been done in the case of Stephen, Acts 7. They could not pretend that they had a right to do it by law.

Tidings came. The news, or rumour came; he was told of it.

The chief captain of the band. This band or body of Roman soldiers was stationed in the tower Antonia, on the north of the temple. This tower was built by John Hyrcanus, high priest of the Jews, and was by him called Baris. It was beautified and strengthened by Herod the Great, and was called Antonia, in honour of his friend Mark Antony. Josephus describes this castle as consisting of four towers, one of which overlooked the temple, and which he says was seventy cubits high. Jewish Wars, b. v. chap. 5, 8. In this tower a guard of Roman soldiers was stationed, to secure the temple, and to maintain the peace. The commander of this cohort is here called "the chief captain." Reference is made to this guard several times in the New Testament, Mt 27:65,66, Jn 18:12, Acts 5:26. The word translated" chief captain"--χιλιαρχω--denotes, properly, one who commanded a thousand men. The band--σπειρης--was the tenth part of a legion, and consisted sometimes of four hundred and twenty-five soldiers, at others of five hundred, and at others of six hundred, according to the size of the legion. The name of this captain was Claudius Lysias, Acts 23:26.

In an uproar. That the whole city was in commotion.

(g) "kill" 2Cor 11:23 (++) "tidings" "A report" (&) "chief captain" "Commander"