Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 11:20
And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus.
20. And [But] some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene ] in whose minds, from their more cosmopolitan education, there was less scruple about mixing with Gentiles than existed among the Jews of Palestine, the home of the nation, and by consequence the stronghold of their prejudices.
spake unto the Grecians ] The best MSS. have Greeks, and this is clearly the correct reading. The N. T. uses Hellenist = Grecians, to mean those Jews who had been born abroad and spoke the Greek language, or else for proselytes, but Hellenes = Greeks, when the heathen population is spoken of. Now it is clear that it would have been no matter of remark had these men preached to Greek-Jews, for of them there was a large number in the Church of Jerusalem, as we see from the events related in chap. Act 6:1, and most probably these Grecian and Cyprian teachers were themselves Greek-Jews; but what calls for special mention by St Luke is that they, moved perhaps by some spiritual impulse, addressed their preaching in Antioch to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Were men of Cyprus and Cyrene – Were natives of Cyprus and Cyrene. Cyrene was a province and city of Libya in Africa. It is at present called Cairoan, and is situated in the kingdom of Barca. In Cyprus the Greek language was spoken; and from the vicinity of Cyrene to Alexandria, it is probable that the Greek language was spoken there also. From this circumstance it might have happened that they were led more particularly to address the Grecians who were in Antioch. It is possible, however, that they might have heard of the vision which Peter saw, and felt themselves called on to preach the gospel to the Gentiles.
Spake unto the Grecians – pros tous Hellenistas. To the Hellenists. This word usually denotes in the New Testament those Jews residing in foreign lands, who spoke the Greek language. See the notes on Act 6:1. But to them the gospel had been already preached; and yet in this place it is evidently the intention of Luke to affirm that the people of Cyprus and Cyrene preached to those who were not Jews, and that thus their conduct was distinguished from those (Act 11:19) who preached to the Jews only. It is thus manifest that we are here required to understand the Gentiles as those who were addressed by the people of Cyprus and Cyrene. In many mss. the word used here is Hellenas, Greeks, instead of Hellenists. This reading has been adopted by Griesbach, and is found in the Syriac, the Arabic, the Vulgate, and in many of the early fathers. The Aethiopic version reads to the Gentiles. There is no doubt that this is the true reading; and that the sacred writer means to say that the gospel was here preached to. Those who were not Jews, for all were called Greeks by them who were not Jews, Rom 1:16. The connection would lead us to suppose that they had heard of what had been done by Peter, and that, imitating his example, they preached the gospel now to the Gentiles also.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 20. Men of – Cyrene] The metropolis of the Cyrenaica; a country of Africa, bounded on the east by Marmarica, on the west by the Regio Syrtica, on the north by the Mediterranean, and on the south by the Sahara. Cyrene is now called Cairoan. This city, according to Eusebius, was built in the 37th Olympiad, about 630 years before Christ. In consequence of a revolt of its inhabitants, it was destroyed by the Romans; but they afterwards rebuilt it. It was for a long time subject to the Arabs, but is now in the hands of the Turks.
Spake unto the Grecians] , The Hellenists. Who these were, we have already seen Acts 6 and Ac 9:29, viz. Jews living in Greek cities and speaking the Greek language. But, instead of , Grecians, , Greeks, is the reading of AD*, Syriac, all the Arabic, Coptic, AEthiopic, Vulgate, some copies of the Itala, Eusebius, Chrysostom, Theophylact, and OEcumenius. On this evidence, Griesbach has admitted it into the text; and few critics entertain any doubt of the genuineness of the reading. This intimates that, besides preaching the Gospel to the Hellenistic Jews, some of them preached it to heathen Greeks; for, were we to adopt the common reading, it would be a sort of actum agere; for it is certain that the Hellenistic Jews had already received the Gospel. See Ac 6:1. And it is likely that these Cyprians and Cyrenians had heard of Peter’s mission to Caesarea, and they followed his example by offering the Christian faith to the heathen. It is worthy of remark that the Jews generally called all nations of the world Greeks; as the Asiatics, to the present day, call all the nations of Europe Franks.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Men of Cyprus and Cyrene; they were such as were born in Cyprus and Cyrene, but had their habitation in Jerusalem, and now upon the persecution there fled unto Antioch; which by this means in time became the Jerusalem of the Gentile Christians, whither their greatest resort was.
Spake unto the Grecians: here they of the dispersion taught not only such Hellenists as are spoken of, Act 6:1, who were born of Hebrew parents, though living out of the country of Judea; but such also amongst the Gentiles, (who are generally called Greeks since Alexanders time, who conquered all those nations round about, and brought in his own language amongst them), who, forsaking idolatry, and worshipping the true God, were called , devout or religious persons, such as Cornelius is said to be, Act 10:2. And thus God by degrees brought in the knowledge of himself, and his Son Jesus Christ.
Preaching the Lord Jesus; which knowledge only is that which is necessary unto salvation, and that only which Saul determined to know, 1Co 2:2.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
20. some of them were men of Cyprusand Cyrene(see on Lu 23:26);as Lucius, mentioned in Ac 13:1.
spake unto theGreciansrather, “the Greeks,” that is,uncircumcised Gentiles (as the true reading beyond doubt is). TheGospel had, from the first, been preached to “the Grecians”or Greek-speaking Jews, and these “men of Cyprus andCyrene” were themselves “Grecians.” How, then, can wesuppose that the historian would note, as something new and singular(Ac 11:22), that some of thedispersed Christians preached to them?
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And some of them were men of Cyprus,…. That is, some of the preachers, that were scattered abroad, were Jews born at Cyprus: such was Barnabas particularly, Ac 4:36 though he was not among these, as appears from Ac 11:22 “and Cyrene”; such were Simon that carried the cross after Christ, and his sons Alexander and Rufus, Mr 15:21 and others that heard the apostles speak with tongues on the day of Pentecost, Ac 2:10
which when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians; or Hellenist Jews, who were born and brought up in Greece, and spoke the Greek language; though the Alexandrian copy, and the Syriac version, read “Greeks”, as if they were native Greeks, and properly Gentiles, to whom these ministers spoke the word of the Lord; but the former seems most likely.
Preaching the Lord Jesus; the dignity of his person, as the Son of God; what he did and suffered to obtain salvation for lost sinners; his resurrection from the dead, ascension to heaven, and intercession; the virtue of his blood for peace and pardon of his sacrifice for atonement of sin, and of his righteousness for justification.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Spake (). Inchoative imperfect active, began to speak. For them it was an experiment.
Unto the Greeks also ( H). This is undoubtedly the correct reading in spite of Hellenists (H) or Grecian Jews in B E H L P. H is read by A and D and a corrector of Aleph. The presence of “also” or “even” () in Aleph A B makes no sense unless “Greeks” is correct. Hellenists or Grecian Jews as Christians were common enough as is seen in Acts 11:2; Acts 11:6. Saul also had preached to the Hellenists in Jerusalem (9:29). Hellenists were merely one kind of Jews in contrast with those who spoke Aramaic (Ac 6). It is true that the case of Cornelius was first in importance, but it is not clear that it was before the work in Antioch. Probably the report of the work among the Greeks in Antioch reached Jerusalem after Peter’s defence in 11:1-18. That explains the calm tone about it and also why Barnabas and not Peter was sent to investigate. Peter and John (Ac 8) had condoned Philip’s work in Samaria and Peter was the agent in the work among the Romans in Caesarea. His position was now well-known and his services discounted for this new crisis. These Greeks in Antioch were apparently in part pure heathen and not “God-fearers” like Cornelius. A man of wisdom was called for. These preachers were themselves Hellenists (verse 19) and open to the lessons from their environment without a vision such as Peter had at Joppa. “It was a departure of startling boldness” (Furneaux) by laymen outside of the circle of official leaders.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
The Greeks (%Ellhnav). Some, however, read ‘Ellhnistav, the Grecian Jews. See on ch. Act 6:1. The express object of the narrative has been to describe the admission of Gentiles into the church. There would have been nothing remarkable in these men preaching to Hellenists who had long before been received into the church, and formed a large part of the church at Jerusalem. It is better to follow the rendering of A. V. and Rev., though the other reading has the stronger MS. evidence. Note, also, the contrast with the statement in ver. 19, to the Jews only. There is no contrast between Jews and Hellenists, since Hellenists are included in the general term Jews.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene,” (esan de tines eks auton andres Kuprioi kai Kurenaioi) “But some of them were mature men who were Cypriotes and Cyrenians,” who were preaching the word as they went, Act 1:8; Act 8:4. Cyrene was the city of Simon who was compelled to bear the cross of Jesus to Calvary, Mat 27:32.
2) “Which, when they were come to Antioch, ‘(oitines elthontes eis Antiocheian) “Who when they had come into Antioch,” capitol of Syria, third city of importance in the Roman Empire to Rome, Italy and Alexandria, Egypt. The city was said to be overrun with Greek parasites, quacks, impostors, with rival debaucheries.
3) “Spake unto the Grecians,” (elaloun kai pros tous Hellenas) “Also spoke to the reeks,” the intellectual debauching contentious rabble, perhaps Grecian Jews, half-breeds, Rom 1:16.
4) “Preaching the Lord Jesus,” (euangelizomenoi ton Kurion lesoun) “Continually preaching the Lord Jesus,” that Jesus was Saviour and Master, faithfully, obediently witnessing as members of the Lord’s empowered and commissioned church, to whom He had pledged His eternal presence, Mat 28:18-20; Joh 15:16; Joh 20:21; Luk 24:49; Act 1:8; Act 4:12; Joh 14:16-17.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
20. Luke doth at length declare that certain of them brought this treasure even unto the Gentiles. And Luke calleth these Grecians not Ελληνες, but Ελληνισται. Therefore, some say that those came of the Jews, yet did they inhabit Greece; which I do not allow. For seeing the Jews, whom he mentioned a little before, were partly of Cyprus, they must needs be reckoned in that number, because the Jews count Cyprus a part of Greece. But Luke distinguisheth them from those, whom he calleth afterward Ελληνιστας. Furthermore, forasmuch as he had said that the word was preached at the beginning only to the Jews, and he meant those who, being banished out of their own country, did live in Cyprus and Phenice, correcting as it were this exception, he saith that some of them did teach the Grecians. This contrariety doth cause me to expound it of the Gentiles. For Luke’s meaning is, that a few did more freely preach the gospel, (738) because the calling of the Gentiles was not unknown to them. But the constancy of them all deserveth no small praise; because, being delivered, as it were, out of the midst of death, they are not afraid to do their duty toward God even with danger. Whence we gather to what end, and how far forth Christians may fly persecution; to wit, that they may spend (739) the residue of their life in spreading abroad the glory of God. If any man demand how it came to pass that strangers lately coming, and such as might have been suspected among all the Jews, and hated of them, because they were banished out of Jerusalem, were so bold, I answer, that this came to pass through the singular motion of God, and that they consulted suddenly according to the occasion offered them. For this deliberation is not of flesh and blood.
(738) “ Evangelii doctrinam sparsisse,” did spread the doctrine of the gospel.
(739) “ Strenue impendant,” may strenously spend.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(20) And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene.Better, But some. These were, from the nature of the case, Hellenistic or Greek-speaking Jews. Who they were we can only conjecture. Possibly Lucius of Cyrene, who appears in the list of prophets in Act. 13:1; possibly Simon of Cyrene, of whom we have seen reason to think as a disciple of Christ. (See Notes on Mat. 27:32; Mar. 15:21.) The founders of the Church of Antioch, like those of the Church of Rome, must remain unknown.
Spake unto the Grecians.The MSS. present the two readingsHellenist Greek-speaking Jews, and Hellenes, Greeks or Gentiles by descent. As far as their authority is concerned, the two stand nearly on the same level, the balance inclining slightly in favour of Hellenist, which is found in MSS. B and D, while A gives Hellenes. The Sinaitic has the almost incomprehensible reading they spake unto the Evangelist, which is obviously wrong, but which, so far as it goes, must be thrown into the scale in favour of Hellenist, as the word which the transcriber had before him, and which he misread or misheard. If we receive that reading, then we must suppose St. Luke to lay stress upon the fact that the preachers of whom he speaks, instead of speaking to the Jews at large, many of whom, being Syrians, would speak Aramaic, addressed themselves specially to the Greek-speaking Jews and proselytes, and were thus following in St. Stephens footsteps, and indirectly preparing the way for St. Paulthe Hellenist being, as a body, the link between the Jews as a race and the Hellenes. On the whole, however, internal evidence seems to turn the scale in favour of the other reading. (1) As the Hellenist were Jews, though not Hebrews, they would naturally be included in the statement of Act. 11:19, and so there would be no contrast, no new advance, indicated in Act. 11:20 in the statement that the word was spoken to them. (2) The contrast between Jews and Hellenes is, on the other hand, as in Act. 14:1; Act. 18:4, a perfectly natural and familiar one, and assuming this to be the true reading, we get a note of progress which otherwise we should miss, there being no record elsewhere of the admission of the Gentiles at Antioch. (3) It does not necessarily follow, however, that the Hellenes who are spoken of had been heathen idolaters up to the time of their conversion. Probably, as in Act. 18:4, they were more or less on the same level as Cornelius, proselytes of the gate, attending the services of the synagogue. (4) The question whether this preceded or followed the conversion of Cornelius is one which we have not sufficient data for deciding. On the one hand, the brief narrative of Act. 11:19 suggests the thought of an interval as long as that between the death of Stephen and St. Peters visit to Csarea, and it may have been part of the working of Gods providence that there should be simultaneous and parallel advances. On the other, the language of those of the circumcision to Peter in Act. 11:3, implies that they had not heard of such a case before; and that of the Apostle himself, in Act. 15:7, distinctly claims the honour of having been the first (possibly, however, only the first among the disciples at Jerusalem) from whose lips the Gentiles, as such, had heard the word of the gospel. On the whole, therefore, it seems probable that the work went on at Antioch for many months among the Hellenistic and other Jews, and that the men of Cyprus and Cyrene arrived after the case of Cornelius had removed the scruples which had hitherto restrained them from giving full scope to the longings of their heart. We must not forget, however, that there was one to whom the Gospel of the Uncircumcision, the Gospel of Humanity, had been already revealed in its fulness (Act. 20:21; Gal. 1:11-12), and we can hardly think of him as waiting, after that revelation, for any decision of the Church of Jerusalem. His action, at any rate, must have been parallel and independent, and may have been known to, and followed by, other missionaries.
Preaching the Lord Jesus.As before, preaching the glad tidings of the Lord Jesus.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
20. Cyrene If Lucius of Cyrene in Act 13:1 (where see our note) be identical with our Luke, then it is clear that he was one of these exiles from Jerusalem. The men of Cyprus and Phenicia were moving toward home, the men of Cyrene were tending to the great Syrian metropolis.
The Grecians It is now settled that the true reading here is not Grecians, that is, Hellenists, but Greeks, that is, pure Gentiles. This preaching the Gospel to the uncircumcised in Antioch probably was after the conversion of Cornelius at Cesarea. In contrast with those of Act 11:19, who preached to Jews only, these of Act 11:20 preached to Gentiles also. Of these preachers to Gentiles, Luke, who so modestly relates this, was likely to be the leader. This was, in fact, the great transition step from Jerusalem to Antioch, from Judaism to Gentilism.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘But there were some of them, men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who, when they were come to Antioch, spoke to the Greeks also, preaching the Lord Jesus.’
But on their arrival in Syrian Antioch some of them who were men of Cyprus and of Cyrene (North Africa) spoke to ‘Greeks’, proclaiming the Good News about the Lord Jesus. We may probably assume that news concerning the new situation caused by the conversion of Cornelius had reached them, and it would seem that on hearing it they went immediately among the Greeks proclaiming ‘the LORD, Jesus’. The idea of a ‘divine lord’ was common in various mystery cults, as one who would bring salvation and immortality to his adherents. Now here was One Who had come as the divine Lord, and was prophesied in the ancient Scriptures of the Jews. Furthermore He was real, for He had walked on earth as a man, and had died and risen again (compare for the title Act 10:36; Act 16:31; Act 20:21; Act 28:31).
Syrian Antioch (now Antakaya in south east Turkey) was at this stage the third largest city in the Roman Empire (after Rome itself and Alexandria in Egypt), with over half a million population. It overlooked the River Orontes and was a fine seaport. Large numbers of Jews had settled there with the encouragement of the Seleucids who gave them full citizenship rights. It had become the capital of the Roman province of Syria, and was full of magnificent temples and buildings, being renowned for its culture. Near the city were the famous groves of Daphne, which were a centre of moral depravity, and a sanctuary dedicated to Apollo in which orgiastic rites took place. But Antioch would also become a centre for Christianity.
‘Greeks.’ The MS disagree as to whether we should read ‘Hellenas’ (Greeks – A, D*) or ‘Hellenistas’ (Hellenists – B, E). But either way the reference would seem to be to non-Jews.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Act 11:20. And some of them were men of Cyprus But some of them, &c. St. Peter having opened the door of Christian faith, and laid the foundation of a Christian church among the Gentiles, after God had testified very plainly that it was agreeable to his mind and will,otherChristians, hearing of this event, took occasion thence to imitate St. Peter’s example: particularly, some Jewish Christians of the island of Cyprus and of the country of Cyrene in Africa, travelling in their dispersions to Antioch in Syria, preached the Christian doctrine there, not to the Jews only, but also to the Gentiles; and God blessed and prospered their labours. The Jews frequently called all nations except their own, Greeks, from the time of the Macedonian or Grecian empire, just as the Roman empire was afterwards called the whole world, because it extended over the most considerable part of the then known world. See Rom 10:12. 1Co 12:13. Gal 3:28. Col 3:11. See also on Act 11:26.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
20 And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus.
Ver. 20. Spake unto the Grecians ] Not the Grecizing Jews, as Act 6:1 but the Grecians which were Gentiles, to whom the light now began to break forth, and the partition wall to be broken down.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
20. ] not, of these, last mentioned Jews : but, of the . This both the sense and the form of the sentence ( . ) require.
] of whom Lucius mentioned ch. Act 13:1 , as being in the church at Antioch, must have been one. Symeon called Niger , also mentioned there, may have been a Cyrenean proselyte.
] The retaining and advocacy of the reading has mainly arisen from a mistaken view that the baptism of Cornelius must necessarily have preceded the conversion of all other Gentiles. But that reading gives, in this place, no assignable sense whatever: for (1) the Hellenists were long ago a recognized part of the Christian church, (2) among these themselves in all probability there were many Hellenists, and (3) the term includes the Hellenists, the distinctive appellation of pure Jews being not , but , ch. Act 6:1 . Nothing to my mind can be plainer, from what follows respecting Barnabas, than that these were GENTILES, uncircumcised ; and that their conversion took place before any tidings had reached Jerusalem of the divine sanction given in the case of Cornelius . See below: and Excursus ii. at the end of Prolegg. to Acts.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 11:20 . . ., cf. Act 4:36 , Act 21:16 ; Act 2:10 , Act 6:9 . , see critical notes. . .: on construction with accusative of the message, Simcox, Language of the N. T. , p. 79. We can scarcely take the phrase given here, instead of “preaching that Jesus was the Christ,” as a proof that the word was preached not to Jews but to Gentiles. : on the Orontes, distinguished as . , or , and bearing the title . There appear to have been at least five places in Syria so called under the Seleucids. For the Arabs Damascus was the capital, but the Greeks wanted to be nearer the Mediterranean and Asia Minor. The city built in 500 B.C. by Seleucus Nicator I. became more and more beautiful, whilst all the trade of the Mediterranean was connected with it through its harbour Seleucia. All the varied elements of the life of the ancient world found a home there. From the first there were Jews amongst its inhabitants. But in such a mixed population, whilst art and literature could gain the praise of Cicero, vice as well as luxury made the city infamous as well as famous. Josephus calls it the third city of the empire, next to Rome and Alexandria, but Ausonius hesitates between Antioch and Alexandria, as to the rank they occupied in eminence and vice . The famous words of Juvenal: “in Tiberim defluxit Orontes,” Sat. , iii., 62, describe the influences which Antioch, with its worthless rabble of Greeks and parasites, with its quacks and impostors, its rivalries and debaucheries, exercised upon Rome. Gibbon speaks of the city in the days of Julian as a place where the lively licentiousness of the Greek was blended with the hereditary softness of the Syrian. Yet here was the , not merely of Syria, but of the Gentile Christian Churches, and next to Jerusalem no city is more closely associated with the early history and spread of the Christian faith. See “Antioch” (G. A. Smith) in Hastings’ B.D.; Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire , chaps. xxiii., xxiv.; Renan, Les Aptres , chaps. xii., xiii. : “used to speak,” so Ramsay.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Acts
THE FIRST PREACHING AT ANTIOCH
Act 11:20 – Act 11:21
Thus simply does the historian tell one of the greatest events in the history of the Church. How great it was will appear if we observe that the weight of authority among critics and commentators sees here an extension of the message of salvation to Greeks, that is, to pure heathens, and not a mere preaching to Hellenists, that is, to Greek-speaking Jews born outside Palestine.
If that be correct, this was a great stride forward in the development of the Church. It needed a vision to overcome the scruples of Peter, and impel him to the bold innovation of preaching to Cornelius and his household, and, as we know, his doing so gave grave offence to some of his brethren in Jerusalem. But in the case before us, some Cypriote and African Jews-men of no note in the Church, whose very names have perished, with no official among them, with no vision nor command to impel them, with no precedent to encourage them, with nothing but the truth in their minds and the impulses of Christ’s love in their hearts-solve the problem of the extension of Christ’s message to the heathen, and, quite unconscious of the greatness of their act, do the thing about the propriety of which there had been such serious question in Jerusalem.
This boldness becomes even more remarkable if we notice that the incident of our text may have taken place before Peter’s visit to Cornelius. The verse before our text, ‘They which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled, . . . preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only,’ is almost a verbatim repetition of words in an earlier chapter, and evidently suggests that the writer is returning to that point of time, in order to take up another thread of his narrative contemporaneous with those already pursued. If so, three distinct lines of expansion appear to have started from the dispersion of the Jerusalem church in the persecution-namely, Philip’s mission to Samaria, Peter’s to Cornelius, and this work in Antioch. Whether prior in time or no, the preaching in the latter city was plainly quite independent of the other two. It is further noteworthy that this, the effort of a handful of unnamed men, was the true ‘leader’-the shoot that grew. Philip’s work, and Peter’s so far as we know, were side branches, which came to little; this led on to a church at Antioch, and so to Paul’s missionary work, and all that came of that.
The incident naturally suggests some thoughts bearing on the general subject of Christian work, which we now briefly present.
I. Notice the spontaneous impulse which these men obeyed.
Such a spontaneous impulse is ever the natural result of our own personal possession of Christ. In regard to worldly good the instinct, except when overcome by higher motives, is to keep the treasure to oneself. But even in the natural sphere there are possessions which to have is to long to impart, such as truth and knowledge. And in the spiritual sphere, it is emphatically the case that real possession is always accompanied by a longing to impart. The old prophet spoke a universal truth when he said: ‘Thy word was as a fire shut up in my bones, and I was weary with forbearing, and I could not stay.’ If we have found Christ for ourselves, we shall undoubtedly wish to speak forth our knowledge of His love. Convictions which are deep demand expression. Emotion which is strong needs utterance. If our hearts have any fervour of love to Christ in them, it will be as natural to tell it forth, as tears are to sorrow or smiles to happiness. True, there is a reticence in profound feeling, and sometimes the deepest love can only ‘love and be silent,’ and there is a just suspicion of loud or vehement protestations of Christian emotion, as of any emotion. But for all that, it remains true that a heart warmed with the love of Christ needs to express its love, and will give it forth, as certainly as light must radiate from its centre, or heat from a fire.
Then, true kindliness of heart creates the same impulse. We cannot truly possess the treasure for ourselves without pity for those who have it not. Surely there is no stranger contradiction than that Christian men and women can be content to keep Christ as if He were their special property, and have their spirits untouched into any likeness of His divine pity for the multitudes who were as ‘sheep having no shepherd.’ What kind of Christians must they be who think of Christ as ‘a Saviour for me,’ and take no care to set Him forth as ‘a Saviour for you’? What should we think of men in a shipwreck who were content to get into the lifeboat, and let everybody else drown? What should we think of people in a famine feasting sumptuously on their private stores, whilst women were boiling their children for a meal and men fighting with dogs for garbage on the dunghills? ‘He that withholdeth bread, the people shall curse him.’ What of him who withholds the Bread of Life, and all the while claims to be a follower of the Christ, who gave His flesh for the life of the world?
Further, loyalty to Christ creates the same impulse. If we are true to our Lord, we shall feel that we cannot but speak up and out for Him, and that all the more where His name is unloved and unhonoured. He has left His good fame very much in our hands, and the very same impulse which hurries words to our lips when we hear the name of an absent friend calumniated should make us speak for Him. He is a doubtfully loyal subject who, if he lives among rebels, is afraid to show his colours. He is already a coward, and is on the way to be a traitor. Our Master has made us His witnesses. He has placed in our hands, as a sacred deposit, the honour of His name. He has entrusted to us, as His selectest sign of confidence, the carrying out of the purposes for which on earth His blood was shed, on which in heaven His heart is set. How can we be loyal to Him if we are not forced by a mighty constraint to respond to His great tokens of trust in us, and if we know nothing of that spirit which said: ‘Necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!’ I do not say that a man cannot be a Christian unless he knows and obeys this impulse. But, at least, we may safely say that he is a very weak and imperfect Christian who does not.
II. This incident suggests the universal obligation on all Christians to make known Christ.
Whatever may be our differences of opinion as to Church order and offices, they need not interfere with our firm grasp of this truth. ‘Preaching Christ,’ in the sense in which that expression is used in the New Testament, implies no one special method of proclaiming the glad tidings. A word written in a letter to a friend, a sentence dropped in casual conversation, a lesson to a child on a mother’s lap, or any other way by which, to any listeners, the great story of the Cross is told, is as truly-often more truly-preaching Christ as the set discourse which has usurped the name.
We profess to believe in the priesthood of all believers, we are ready enough to assert it in opposition to sacerdotal assumptions. Are we as ready to recognise it as laying a very real responsibility upon us, and involving a very practical inference as to our own conduct? We all have the power, therefore we all have the duty. For what purpose did God give us the blessing of knowing Christ ourselves? Not for our own well-being alone, but that through us the blessing might be still further diffused.
‘Heaven doth with us as men with torches do,
Not light them for themselves.’
III. Observe, further, the simple message which they proclaimed.
Surely anybody can deliver that message who has had that experience. All have not the gifts which would fit for public speech, but all who have ‘tasted that the Lord is gracious’ can somehow tell how gracious He is. The first Christian sermon was very short, and it was very efficacious, for it ‘brought to Jesus’ the whole congregation. Here it is: ‘He first findeth his brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias.’ Surely we can all say that, if we have found Him. Surely we shall all long to say it, if we are glad that we have found Him, and if we love our brother.
Notice, too, how simple the form as well as the substance of the message. ‘They spake .’ It was no set address, no formal utterance, but familiar, natural talk to ones and twos, as opportunity offered. The form was so simple that we may say that there was none. What we want is that Christian people should speak anyhow. What does the shape of the cup matter? What does it matter whether it be gold or clay? The main thing is that it shall bear the water of life to some thirsty lip. All Christians have to preach, as the word is used here, that is, to tell the good news. Their task is to carry a message-no refinement of words is needed for that-arguments are not needed. They have to tell it simply and faithfully, as one who only cares to repeat what he has had given to him. They have to tell it confidently, as having proved it true. They have to tell it beseechingly, as loving the souls to whom they bring it. Surely we can all do that, if we ourselves are living on Christ and have drunk into His Spirit. Let His mighty salvation, experienced by yourselves, be the substance of your message, and let the form of it be guided by the old words, ‘It shall be, when the Spirit of the Lord is come upon thee, that thou shalt do as occasion shall serve thee.’
IV. Notice, lastly, the mighty Helper who prospered their work.
So this is a statement of a permanent and universal fact. We do not labour alone; however feeble our hands, that mighty Hand is laid on them to direct their movements and to lend strength to their weakness. It is not our speech which will secure results, but His presence with our words which will bring it about that even through them a great number shall believe and turn to the Lord. There is our encouragement when we are despondent. There is our rebuke when we are self-confident. There is our stimulus when we are indolent. There is our quietness when we are impatient. If ever we are tempted to think our task heavy, let us not forget that He who set it helps us to do it, and from His throne shares in all our toils, the Lord still, as of old, working with us. If ever we feel that our strength is nothing, and that we stand solitary against many foes, let us fall back upon the peace-giving thought that one man against the world, with Christ to help him, is always in the majority, and let us leave issues of our work in His hands, whose hand will guard the seed sown in weakness, whose smile will bless the springing thereof.
How little any of us know what will become of our poor work, under His fostering care! How little these men knew that they were laying the foundations of the great change which was to transform the Christian community from a Jewish sect into a world-embracing Church! So is it ever. We know not what we do when simply and humbly we speak His name. The far-reaching results escape our eyes. Then, sow the seed, and He will ‘give it a body as it pleaseth Him.’ On earth we may never know the fruits of our labours. They will be among the surprises of heaven, where many a solitary worker shall exclaim with wonder, as he looks on the hitherto unknown children whom God hath given him, ‘Behold, I was left alone; these, where had they been?’ Then, though our names may have perished from earthly memories, like those of the simple fugitives of Cyprus and Cyrene, who ‘were the first that ever burst’ into the night of heathendom with the torch of the Gospel in their hands, they will be written in the Lamb’s book of life, and He will confess them in the presence of His Father in heaven.
Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren
some. Greek. tis. App-123.
of Cyprus, &c. Cypriotes and Cyrenians.
Grecians. See note on Act 6:1. Most texts read Hellenes, Greeks. There was nothing strange in speaking to the Greek-speaking Jews.
preaching. Greek. euangelizo. App-121.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
20. ] not, of these, last mentioned Jews: but, of the . This both the sense and the form of the sentence ( . ) require.
] of whom Lucius mentioned ch. Act 13:1, as being in the church at Antioch, must have been one. Symeon called Niger, also mentioned there, may have been a Cyrenean proselyte.
] The retaining and advocacy of the reading has mainly arisen from a mistaken view that the baptism of Cornelius must necessarily have preceded the conversion of all other Gentiles. But that reading gives, in this place, no assignable sense whatever: for (1) the Hellenists were long ago a recognized part of the Christian church,-(2) among these themselves in all probability there were many Hellenists,-and (3) the term includes the Hellenists,-the distinctive appellation of pure Jews being not , but , ch. Act 6:1. Nothing to my mind can be plainer, from what follows respecting Barnabas, than that these were GENTILES, uncircumcised; and that their conversion took place before any tidings had reached Jerusalem of the divine sanction given in the case of Cornelius. See below: and Excursus ii. at the end of Prolegg. to Acts.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 11:20. , men of Cyrene) ch. Act 13:1, Lucius of Cyrene; Act 2:10, The dwellers in the parts of Libya about Cyrene. These, as well as the Cyprians, were more accustomed to be conversant with Gentiles.-) The more common reading is .1[66] But the Hellenists are opposed to the Hebrews, ch. Act 6:1, with which comp. ch. Act 9:29. The Greeks are opposed in this place to the Jews, as everywhere. [ are either Hebrews or Hellenists: ch. Act 6:1.-Not. Crit.] Ussher on A. M. 4045 rightly approves of this reading.
[66] 1 This had been preferred by the larger Ed., but both the 2d Ed. margin and the Germ. Vers. answers to the Gnomon.-E. B.
is the reading of B (judging from the silence of the collators) E. But AD corrected have . This seems to be required by the sense: for it was nothing new to preach to Hellenists or Grecian Jews; but it was a special grace of God, taken particular notice of by the Church, ver. 22, 23, that the Gospel should be preached to idolatrous Gentiles. Even Cornelius had been a devout Gentile, or proselyte of the gate; but these converts were made of Greeks, idolaters. Hence the need of the new name, then first given, Christians, to distinguish them altogether from the Jews; whereas before they might seem to have been a mere sect of Judaism. Vulg. has Grcos, but it does not seem to distinguish Hellenists and Hellenes-E. and T.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Grecians
Hellenists, i.e. Grecian Jews.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Cyrene: Act 2:10, Act 6:9, Act 13:1, Mat 27:32
the Grecians: Act 6:1, Act 9:29
preaching: Act 8:5, Act 8:35, Act 9:20, Act 17:18, 1Co 1:23, 1Co 1:24, 1Co 2:2, Eph 3:8
Reciprocal: Ecc 11:6 – thou knowest Mat 22:4 – other Mar 15:21 – a Cyrenian Act 4:36 – Cyprus Act 8:12 – concerning Act 15:39 – and sailed Act 27:4 – Cyprus Phi 1:15 – preach Col 1:28 – Whom
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THE SUBJECT OF ALL PREACHING
And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus.
Act 11:20
At the very beginning of Christian history we find the Church gaining greatly from persecution.
I. The first result of the tribulation that arose about Stephen was to threaten the infant Church with destruction. The Society at Jerusalem was dispersed. The Apostles now stood to their posts, but the probabilities pointed to their early martyrdom as the only result of their heroism. Luke, looking back on the whole episode from the standpoint of the next generation, is able to recognise the influence of that first persecution. It compelled two most necessary things.
(a) On the one hand, the Church was forced to engage in missionary labours.
(b) On the other, Christianity was forced to become catholic. There was considerable danger that the disciples in Jerusalem should settle down to the decent position of an estimable and pious sect. But even this was not all.
(c) A catholic propaganda cannot work with a particular Gospel. The zealots of particularism are the foster-parents of universalism. The creed must be worthy of the Church. And so we find that these exiles, who had become by force of circumstances missionaries, were the first to solve the problem which so gravely perplexed the Apostles. They forced the hands of their rulers by boldly offering their message to all who would listen to it.
II. Notice the suggestive summary of the catholic Gospel as it was first proclaimedpreaching the Lord Jesus. How should this new Jewish religion present itself to these Greeks? What should be the means of access to their hearts? How would it appeal to them? The answer must be found in the spiritual power of the Personality of Jesus. The missionaries, of course, built on the foundation of the universal belief in God. They started from the assumptions of theism, and they presented to their hearers the living Christ, the true Exponent of the Divine, the true Representative of the human. This intensely personal character of their preaching continually merges into view in the records of the Acts.
III. The Person of Christ is that element of Christianity which is neither temporal, nor local, nor transitory.And other elements only come to have a certain permanence as they vindicate a relationship with that. Ecclesiastical systems, dogmatic systems, are growths conditioned in their growing by the myriad circumstances which condition all terrestrial developments. They have a relative fitness, a relative authority, a relative truth; but they fail and pass as conditions of existence change, and they who build their faith on them and entwine about them the deep affections of their hearts are predestined to infinite disappointment. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away, saith the Lord; and as we regard the long story of Christianity we can understand what He meant. Everything has changed. Mens notions of social order have changed, and their habits of life and modes of thought, and their codes of honour, and their systems of belief, and their organisations of worship. We live amid a world of extinct beliefs; we are girded with the wreckage of the century. Here alone is the thing that changes not; here the rock on which we build, on which our feet may find firm treading; here the unity which gathers into itself all the ages, and vindicates from the remotest past a living fellowship in the most distant future. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever. Here is the secret of all the Churchs continuous life.
IV. There is no escape from the duty of missions.If we may venture to divine the purposes of God from the opportunities which He places within mans reach, and the responsibilities which accumulate upon them, then we can hardly be mistaken in thinking that it is His purpose to convert the world mainly by the agencies of the English-speaking race. We are constantly reminded, not always by the pleasantest experiences, that our Empire has attained gigantic dimensions. We have gathered under our flag one-fourth of the human race. The notion of Empire is native to the English mind as two millenniums since it was native to the Roman mind. The Church of the English-speaking race stands towards the populations of Asia and Africa as the Church of Rome stood in the fifth century towards the populations of Europe. If the past may provide an interpretation for the future, then Canterbury is destined in the religious history of mankind to equal, nay, to eclipse, the fame of Rome.
Rev. Canon Henson.
Illustration
The explanation of much of our missionary failure abroad, and here at home, must be sought in the fact that we have weighted our missions with the scandals of divisions and the distractions of our controversies. We have preached systems, we have preached causes, we have preached theology rather than the living Person of our Divine Lord. We have tried to make men members of something or other before we have brought them to be disciples. We have need to go back to the first methods, to revert to the first principles. It is the urgent necessity of our time, as well for the preservation of religion at home as for the bringing to the heathen the life-giving message of the Gospel, that this degrading warfare of competing denominations shall cease; and it can only cease by raising again into its true central prominence the apostolic creed which underlies all Christian beliefs, and is the common platform of all Christian discipleshipJesus as Lord!
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
0
Act 11:20. The Grecians were Jews who spoke the Greek language.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 11:20. Men of Cyprus. It would be reasonable to imagine that one of them may have been Mnason, who in Act 21:16 is spoken of as an old disciple. We should have been sure, but for what follows, that Barnabas was one of them; and there is little doubt that he had influence in promoting the active missionary work of his fellow-Cypriotes. It has been noted above (on Act 4:36) that the Jews were very numerous in Cyprus; and it is worth while to add, in reference to the mention of Cyrene which follows, that about this time Cyprus and Cyrene were united in one Roman Province. Thus there was close political connection between them, as well as active mercantile intercourse.
Cyrene. In that part of the coast of Africa, of which Cyrene was the capital, immediately to the west of Egypt, and opposite Cyprus on the south, the Jews were very numerous. We have a proof of this in Act 6:9, where we find that Cyrenaus had a synagogue of their own in Jerusalem. Again, Jews from the parts of Libya about Cyrene were in Jerusalem at the Great Pentecost; and one such Cyrenian Jew at least (Luk 23:26) was there at the solemn Passover immediately preceding. It is a reasonable conjecture that the occasion before our attention here may have been the time of a great festival. Another incidental proof of the existence of a strong Jewish element in Cyrene, and of the connection of this place with the early spread of Christianity, is found in Act 13:1, where Lucius of Cyrene is named as one of the prophets who were inspired to originate St. Pauls first missionary expedition.
When they were come to Antioch. We should observe how our thoughts are drawn to this place, as to a focus on which all our attention is presently to be concentrated. The name of this city occurs six times in nine verses.
Spake unto the Grecians. We here encounter one of the most important textual difficulties in the Acts of the Apostles. It always has been, and still is, a debated question whether the true reading here is (i.e. Greeks or Heathens) or (i.e. Grecians or Hellenistic Jews). The manuscripts are very evenly balanced. We might have looked to the Sinaitic MS. to have settled the question; but in this instance it presents a strange anomaly, its reading here being which is clearly wrong, while on the one hand it seems to point to as that which was intended, and on the other hand was clearly influenced by the word , which immediately succeeds. On the whole, the evidence is in favour of . The Bishop of Lincoln argues strongly in favour of it. Dr. Alexander, whose (American) commentary is excellent, is inclined to the same view. So also is Dr. Kay, in a paper printed when he was Principal of Bishops College, Calcutta. On the other hand, the majority of modern commentators feel strongly in the opposite direction, because of the obvious advantage which the reading would give us as to the coherence and point of the history. With this reading all is easy in the interpretation of the passage; and the sequence of events flows on naturally. It is urged most truly, that with the other reading there is no sharp contrast between those who now received the Gospel and those who had received it previously, and that there is no apparent reason why the historian should mark the occurrence as anything new. Thus writers of the most various shades of opinion have confidently asserted that the true word here must be , not . Dean Alford says that the latter reading gives no assignable sense whatever, and that nothing to his mind is plainer than that these men were uncircumcised Gentiles. Canon Norris (Key to the Acts of the Apostles, p. 135) uses similar language. Renan (Les Apotres, p. 225) says, La bonne lecon est est venu dun faux approchement avec ix. 29. Reuss (Histoire Apostolique, p. 133) says, La lecon Hellenistes est dautant plus absurde, qua Antioche et dans les contrees environnantes on naura guere trouve des Juifs parlant lhebreu. La conversion des paiens disparait ainsi du rcit et tout ce qui suit na plus raison dtre. It is difficult to resist such unanimity of opinion, based on arguments so strong. Yet the very facility with which the problem is solved inspires some doubt. It is always hazardous, in such cases, to adopt the easier reading. The question must be left in some uncertainty; and it may be urged that there is really some contrast between the words and , that the Hellenistic Jews and the Heathen Greeks were probably in very free intercourse with one another at Antioch, and that the Gospel would naturally pass from the former to the latter. This too is to be added, that, if the received text is retained, the case of Cornelius stands on a much higher pinnacle than it would otherwise occupy.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
20, 21. Among the brethren engaged in these labors, Luke chooses to follow in a narrative only those who founded the Church in Antioch. (20) “And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who, having come into Antioch, spoke to the Hellenists, preaching the Lord Jesus. (21) The hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number believed and turned to the Lord.” These men were not immediately from Cyprus and Cyrene, but were a part of those dispersed from Jerusalem. The expression, “Some of them,” referring to the preceding sentence, thus designates them. The Hellenists were doubtless numerous in Antioch, from the fact if its being the chief commercial city of Western Asia; and these brethren, being also Hellenists, were best suited for reaching their ears.
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Verse 20
Grecians. It is supposed that Gentile Greeks, not Grecian Jews, are meant here, and that this fact is mentioned to show the progress of the new principle in respect to preaching the gospel to the Gentiles.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
11:20 {4} And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus.
(4) The church of Antioch, the new Jerusalem of the Gentiles, was extraordinarily called.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Some Jews from Cyprus, Barnabas’ homeland not far from Antioch, and Cyrene, in North Africa (cf. Act 2:10; Act 6:9; Act 13:1), visited Antioch (cf. Act 13:1). Antioch was at this time the third largest city in the Roman world, after Rome and Alexandria. [Note: Josephus, The Wars . . ., 3:2:4.] These Jews may have travelled there on business. Antioch was about 15 miles inland from the Mediterranean Sea on the Orontes River and 300 miles north of Jerusalem. It was the capital of the Roman province of Syro-Cilicia, north of Phoenicia, and it was one of the most strategic population centers of its day. It contained between 500,000 and 800,000 inhabitants about one-seventh of whom were Jews. [Note: Longenecker, p. 399; Neil, p. 143.] Many Gentile proselytes to Judaism lived there. [Note: Josephus, The Wars . . ., 7:3:3.] Antioch was also notorious as a haven for pleasure-seekers. [Note: Longenecker, p. 399; Barclay, pp. 93-94. See Rackham, p. 165, for a background sketch of this city.]
"The Roman satirist, Juvenal, complained, ’The sewage of the Syrian Orontes has for long been discharged into the Tiber.’ By this he meant that Antioch was so corrupt it was impacting Rome, more than 1,300 miles away." [Note: Toussaint, "Acts," p. 383.]
"It seems incredible but nonetheless it is true that it was in a city like that that Christianity took the great stride forward to becoming the religion of the world. We have only to think of that to discover there is no such thing as a hopeless situation." [Note: Barclay, p. 94.]
"In Christian history, apart from Jerusalem, no other city of the Roman Empire played as large a part in the early life and fortunes of the church as Antioch of Syria." [Note: Longenecker, p. 399.]
Some of the Hellenistic Jews also began sharing the gospel with Gentiles. This verse documents another significant advance in the mission of the church: for the first time Luke recorded Jews aggressively evangelizing non-Jews. The Ethiopian eunuch and Cornelius, who were both Gentiles, had taken the initiative in reaching out to Jews and had obtained salvation. Now believing Jews were taking the initiative in reaching out to Gentiles with the gospel.
The Antiochian evangelists preached "the Lord Jesus." For Gentiles "Christ" (Messiah) would not have been as significant a title as "Lord" (sovereign, savior, and deity). Many pagan Gentiles in the Roman Empire regarded Caesar as Lord.