Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 20:7

And upon the first [day] of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

7 12. Paul preaches at Troas. Eutychus is restored to life

7. And upon the first day of the week ] Which had now, in memory of the Resurrection, begun to be observed as a holy day by Christians. In an Epistle written before this visit to Troas (1Co 16:2) the day is appointed by St Paul as the special time when the Christian alms should be laid aside.

when the disciples came together to break bread ] The oldest authorities give (and the Rev. Ver. represents) “ when we were gathered together,” &c. We can see how the alteration has been introduced by some one who felt the awkwardness of the following “ them.” Wherever a congregation was organized the natural service of the Christian worshippers was the communion of the body and blood of Christ.

Paul preached unto them ] Except here and in Act 20:9 the verb is nowhere else rendered “preach.” Better, “ discoursed with them.” The meeting was one where reasoning and conversation were used to solve doubts and clear away difficulties which might be in the minds of the Christians at Troas. For we can perceive that there was a Church established here. Indeed wherever St Paul came he was enabled to leave that mark of his visit behind him. It is true the meeting was only still in an upper chamber, but the “many lights” shews that it was not a mere gathering of one or two with the Apostle and his friends, but a settled Christian congregation.

ready [ intending ] to depart on the morrow ] They had met first for an evening service, but the consolation of Christian intercourse and the additional zeal infused into the church by the Apostle’s visit caused the irregular conversational meeting to be protracted beyond the intended time.

and continued his speech until midnight ] The “prolonged” of the Rev. Ver. is no improvement. It rather gives the impression that the Apostle had worn out all his hearers.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

And upon the first day of the week – Showing thus that this day was then observed by Christians as holy time. Compare 1Co 16:2; Rev 1:10.

To break bread – Evidently to celebrate the Lords Supper. Compare Act 2:46. So the Syriac understands it, by translating it, to break the eucharist; that is, the eucharistic bread. It is probable that the apostles and early Christians celebrated the Lords Supper on every Lords day.

And continued his speech until midnight – The discourse of Paul continued until the breaking of day, Act 20:11. But it was interrupted about midnight by the accident that occurred to Eutychus. The fact that Paul was about to leave them on the next day, probably to see them no more, was the principal reason why his discourse was so long continued. We are not to suppose, however, that it was one continued or set discourse. No small part of the time might have been passed in hearing and answering questions, though Paul was the chief speaker. The case proves that such seasons of extraordinary devotion may, in special circumstances, be proper. Occasions may arise where it will be proper for Christians to spend a much longer time than usual in public worship. It is evident, however, that such seasons do not often occur.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 7. Upon the first day of the week] What was called , the Lord’s day, the Christian Sabbath, in which they commemorated the resurrection of our Lord; and which, among all Christians, afterwards took the place of the Jewish Sabbath.

To break bread] To break [Syriac] eucaristia, the eucharist, as the Syriac has it; intimating, by this, that they were accustomed to receive the holy sacrament on each Lord’s day. It is likely that, besides this, they received a common meal together. Some think the , or love feast, is intended.

Continued his speech until midnight.] At what time he began to preach we cannot tell, but we hear when he concluded. He preached during the whole night, for he did not leave off till the break of the next day, Ac 20:11, though about midnight his discourse was interrupted by the fall of Eutychus. As this was about the time of pentecost, and we may suppose about the beginning of May, as Troas was in about 40 degrees of north latitude, the sun set there at seven P.M. and rose at five A.M., so that the night was about eight hours long; and taking all the interruptions together, and they could not have amounted to more than two hours, and taking no account of the preceding day’s work, Paul must have preached a sermon not less than six hours long. But it is likely that a good part of this time was employed in hearing and answering questions; for , and , may be thus understood.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

The first day of the week; this was the day which the Lord had made, it being called from his resurrection, which was on this day, the Lords day, Rev 1:10. On this day the disciples met, and Christ honoured them with his presence, Joh 20:19,26. And when he was ascended, this day was appointed for the Christians to meet in, 1Co 16:2; which must necessarily infer the abrogation of the Saturday, or Jewish sabbath: for it being part of the command, Six days shalt thou labour, they could not in ordinary have rested the last day of the week and the first day too, without sinning against the law of God.

To break bread; to take a meal in common together, which they called agapae, or the love feast, so great a harmony and natural love was manifested in it; which was concluded with celebrating the Lords supper; and this is chiefly, if not only, intended in this place. The love feasts being abused, were soon laid aside; but the other must continue until the Lord come, 1Co 11:26.

Continued his speech until midnight; a long sermon indeed, at least it would be now thought so; and yet we must have the same spirit, or we are not members of that catholic church.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

7. upon the first day of the week,when the disciples came togetherThis, compared with 1Co16:2, and other similar allusions, plainly indicates that theChristian observance of the day afterwards distinctly called “theLord’s Day,” was already a fixed practice of the churches.

Paul preacheddiscoursed.The tense implies continued action”kept discoursing.”

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

And upon the first day of the week,…. Or Lord’s day, Re 1:10 and which Justin Martyr calls Sunday; on which day, he says i, all, both in city and country, met in one place for religious worship; and on this day, it appears from hence, and from other places, that the apostles and primitive churches did meet together for religious exercises; see Joh 20:19 and so they did at Troas at this time, as follows:

when the disciples came together to break bread; not to eat a common meal, or to make a feast, or grand entertainment for the apostle and his company, before they departed; but, as the Syriac version renders it, “to break the eucharist”, by which the Lord’s supper was called in the primitive times; or as the Arabic version, “to distribute the body of Christ”, which is symbolically and emblematically held forth in the bread at the Lord’s table. Now on the first day of the week, the disciples, or the members of the church at Troas, met together on this occasion, and the apostle, and those that were with him, assembled with them for the same purpose; the Alexandrian copy, the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions read, “when we were come together”; Paul and his company, together with the church at Troas; for it is plain from hence that there was a church in this place, not only by disciples being here, but by the administration of the Lord’s supper to them; and so there was in after ages. Who was the first pastor or bishop of this church, is not certain; perhaps Carpus, of whom mention is made in 2Ti 4:13 though he is said to be bishop of other places;

[See comments on 2Ti 4:13]. In the “second” century, in the times of Ignatius, there were brethren at Troas, from whence he wrote his epistles to the churches at Smyrna, and Philadelphia, and who are saluted in them by the brethren at Troas k: in the third century, several martyrs suffered here, as Andreas, Paulus, Nicomachus, and Dionysia a virgin: in the “fifth” century, Pionius, bishop of Troas, was present at Constantinople at the condemnation of Eutyches, and afterwards he was in the council at Chalcedon; and even in the “eighth” century mention is made of Eustathius, bishop of Troas, in the Nicene council l.

Paul preached unto them; to the disciples that were gathered together, either before, or after, or at the time of breaking of bread; for this ordinance was not administered without some instructions about the nature, use, and design of it.

Ready to depart on the morrow; this seems to be mentioned as a reason for what follows,

continued his speech until midnight: since he was about to take his leave of them, and not knowing when he should see them again, or whether ever any more, he delivered a long discourse to them; which not only shows that he was full of matter, but that his affection for these saints, and his desire of doing them good, were very great, by imparting as much spiritual light and knowledge as he could unto them; and also his great zeal for the glory of God, and the interest of Christ, though he was to set forth on a journey the next morning.

i Apolog. 2. p. 98. k Ignatii Epist. p. 9. 46. Ed. Voss. l Magdeburg. Hist. Eccles. cent. 3. c. 3. p. 11. cent. 5. c. 10. p. 603. cent. 8. c. 2. p. 4.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Paul Preaches at Troas; The Recovery of Eutychus.

      7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.   8 And there were many lights in the upper chamber, where they were gathered together.   9 And there sat in a window a certain young man named Eutychus, being fallen into a deep sleep: and as Paul was long preaching, he sunk down with sleep, and fell down from the third loft, and was taken up dead.   10 And Paul went down, and fell on him, and embracing him said, Trouble not yourselves; for his life is in him.   11 When he therefore was come up again, and had broken bread, and eaten, and talked a long while, even till break of day, so he departed.   12 And they brought the young man alive, and were not a little comforted.

      We have here an account of what passed at Troas the last of the seven days that Paul staid there.

      I. There was a solemn religious assembly of the Christians that were there, according to their constant custom, and the custom of all the churches. 1. The disciples came together, v. 7. Though they read, and meditated, and prayed, and sung psalms, apart, and thereby kept up their communion with God, yet that was not enough; they must come together to worship God in concert, and so keep up their communion with one another, by mutual countenance and assistance, and testify their spiritual communion with all good Christians. There ought to be stated times for the disciples of Christ to come together; though they cannot all come together in one place, yet as many as can. 2. They came together upon the first day of the week, which they called the Lord’s day (Rev. i. 10), the Christian sabbath, celebrated to the honour of Christ and the Holy Spirit, in remembrance of the resurrection of Christ, and the pouring out of the Spirit, both on the first day of the week. This is here said to be the day when the disciples came together, that is, when it was their practice to come together in all the churches. Note, The first day of the week is to be religiously observed by all the disciples of Christ; and it is a sign between Christ and them, for by this it is known that they are his disciples; and it is to be observed in solemn assemblies, which are, as it were, the courts held in the name of our Lord Jesus, and to his honour, by his ministers, the stewards of his courts, to which all that hold from and under him owe suit and service, and at which they are to make their appearance, as tenants at their Lord’s courts, and the first day of the week is appointed to be the court-day. 3. They were gathered together in an upper chamber (v. 8); they had no temple nor synagogue to meet in, no capacious stately chapel, but met in a private house, in a garret. As they were few, and did not need, so they were poor, and could not build, a large meeting-place; yet they came together, in that despicable inconvenient place. It will be no excuse for our absenting ourselves from religious assemblies that the place of them is not so decent nor so commodious as we would have it to be. 4. They came together to break bread, that is, to celebrate the ordinance of the Lord’s supper, that one instituted sign of breaking the bread being put for all the rest. The bread which we break is the communion of the body of Christ, 1 Cor. x. 16. In the breaking of the bread, not only the breaking of Christ’s body for us, to be a sacrifice for our sins, is commemorated, but the breaking of Christ’s body to us, to be food and a feast for our souls, is signified. In the primitive times it was the custom of many churches to receive the Lord’s supper every Lord’s day, celebrating the memorial of Christ’s death in the former, with that of his resurrection in the latter; and both in concert, in a solemn assembly, to testify their joint concurrence in the same faith and worship.

      II. In this assembly Paul gave them a sermon, a long sermon, a farewell sermon, v. 7. 1. He gave them a sermon: he preached to them. Though they were disciples already, yet it was very necessary they should have the word of God preached to them, in order to their increase in knowledge and grace. Observe, The preaching of the gospel ought to accompany the sacraments. Moses read the book of the covenant in the audience of the people, and then sprinkled the blood of the covenant, which the Lord had made with them concerning all these words,Exo 24:7; Exo 24:8. What does the seal signify without a writing? 2. It was a farewell sermon, he being ready to depart on the morrow. When he was gone, they might have the same gospel preached, but not as he preached it; and therefore they must make the best use of him that they could while they had him. Farewell sermons are usually in a particular manner affecting both to the preacher and to the hearers. 3. It was a very long sermon: He continued his speech until midnight; for he had a great deal to say, and knew not that ever he should have another opportunity of preaching to them. After they had received the Lord’s supper, he preached to them the duties they had thereby engaged themselves to, and the comforts they were interested in, and in this he was very large and full and particular. There may be occasion for ministers to preach, not only in season, but out of season. We know some that would have reproached Paul for this as a long-winded preacher, that tired his hearers; but they were willing to hear: he saw them so, and therefore continued his speech. He continued it till midnight; perhaps they met in the evening for privacy, or in conformity to the example of the disciples who came together on the first Christian sabbath in the evening. It is probable he had preached to them in the morning, and yet thus lengthened out his evening sermon even till midnight; we wish we had the heads of this long sermon, but we may suppose it was for substance the same with his epistles. The meeting being continued till midnight, there were candles set up, many lights (v. 8), that the hearers might turn to the scriptures Paul quoted, and see whether these things were so; and that this might prevent the reproach of their enemies, who said they met in the night for works of darkness.

      III. A young man in the congregation, that slept at sermon, was killed by a fall out of the window, but raised to life again; his name signifies one that had good fortune–Eutychus, bene fortunatus; and he answered his name. Observe,

      1. The infirmity with which he was overtaken. It is probable his parents brought him, though but a boy, to the assembly, out of a desire to have him well instructed in the things of God by such a preacher as Paul. Parents should bring their children to hear sermons as soon as they can hear with understanding (Neh. viii. 2), even the little ones, Deut. xxix. 11. Now this youth was to be blamed, (1.) That he presumptuously sat in the window, unglazed perhaps, and so exposed himself; whereas, if he could have been content to sit on the floor, he had been safe. Boys that love to climb, or otherwise endanger themselves, to the grief of their parents, consider not how much it is also an offence to God. (2.) That he slept, nay, he fell into a deep sleep when Paul was preaching, which was a sign he did not duly attend to the things that Paul spoke of, though they were weighty things. The particular notice taken of his sleeping makes us willing to hope none of the rest slept, though it was sleeping time and after supper; but this youth fell fast asleep, he was carried away with it (so the word is), which intimates that he strove against it, but was overpowered by it, and at last sunk down with sleep.

      2. The calamity with which he was seized herein: He fell down from the third loft, and was taken up dead. Some think that the hand of Satan was in it, by the divine permission, and that he designed it for a disturbance to this assembly and a reproach to Paul and it. Others think that God designed it for a warning to all people to take heed of sleeping when they are hearing the word preached; and certainly we are to make this use of it. We must look upon it as an evil thing, as a bad sign of our low esteem of the word of God, and a great hindrance to our profiting by it. We must be afraid of it, do what we can to prevent our being sleepy, not compose ourselves to sleep, but get our hearts affected with the word we hear to such a degree as may drive sleep far enough. Let us watch and pray, that we enter not into this temptation, and by it into worse. Let the punishment of Eutychus strike an awe upon us, and show us how jealous God is in the matters of his worship; Be not deceived, God is not mocked. See how severely God visited an iniquity that seemed little, and but in a youth, and say, Who is able to stand before this holy Lord God? Apply to this story that lamentation (Jer 9:20; Jer 9:21), Hear the word of the Lord, for death is come up into our windows, to cut off the children from without and the young men from the streets.

      3. The miraculous mercy shown him in his recovery to life again, v. 10. It gave a present distraction to the assembly, and an interruption to Paul’s preaching; but it proved an occasion of that which was a great confirmation to his preaching, and helped to set it home and make it effectual. (1.) Paul fell on the dead body, and embraced it, thereby expressing a great compassion to, and an affectionate concern for, this young man, so far was he from saying, “He was well enough served for minding so little what I said!” Such tender spirits as Paul had are much affected with sad accidents of this kind, and are far from judging and censuring those that fall under them, as if those on whom the tower of Siloam fell were sinners above all that dwelt at Jerusalem; I tell you, nay. But this was not all; his falling on him and embracing him were in imitation of Elijah (1 Kings xvii. 21), and Elisha (2 Kings iv. 34), in order to the raising of him to life again; not that this could as a means contribute any thing to it, but as a sign it represented the descent of that divine power upon the dead body, for the putting of life into it again, which at the same time he inwardly, earnestly, and in faith prayed for. (2.) He assured them that he had returned to life, and it would appear presently. Various speculations, we may suppose, this ill accident had occasioned in the congregation, but Paul puts an end to them all: “Trouble not yourselves, be not in any disorder about it, let it not put you into any hurry, for his life is in him; he is not dead, but sleepeth: lay him awhile upon a bed, and he will come to himself, for he is now alive.” Thus, when Christ raised Lazarus, he said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me. (3.) He returned to his work immediately after this interruption (v. 11): He came up again to the meeting, they broke bread together in a love-feast, which usually attended the eucharist, in token of their communion with each other, and for the confirmation of friendship among them; and they talked a long while, even till break of day. Paul did not now go on in a continued discourse, as before, but he and his friends fell into a free conversation, the subject of which, no doubt, was good, and to the use of edifying. Christian conference is an excellent means of promoting holiness, comfort, and Christian love. They knew not when they should have Paul’s company again, and therefore made the best use they could of it when they had it, and reckoned a night’s sleep well lost for that purpose. (4.) Before they parted they brought the young man alive into the congregation, every one congratulating him upon his return to life from the dead, and they were not a little comforted, v. 12. It was matter of great rejoicing among them, not only to the relations of the young man, but to the whole society, as it not only prevented the reproach that would otherwise have been cast upon them, but contributed very much to the credit of the gospel.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

Upon the first day of the week ( ). The cardinal used here for the ordinal (Mr 16:9) like the Hebrew ehadh as in Mark 16:2; Matt 28:1; Luke 24:1; John 20:1 and in harmony with the Koine idiom (Robertson, Grammar, p. 671). Either the singular (Mr 16:9) or the plural as here was used for the week (sabbath to sabbath). For the first time here we have services mentioned on the first day of the week though in 1Co 16:2 it is implied by the collections stored on that day. In Re 1:10 the Lord’s day seems to be the day of the week on which Jesus rose from the grave. Worship on the first day of the week instead of the seventh naturally arose in Gentile churches, though Joh 20:26 seems to mean that from the very start the disciples began to meet on the first (or eighth) day. But liberty was allowed as Paul makes plain in Ro 14:5f.

When we were gathered together ( ). Genitive absolute, perfect passive participle of , to gather together, a formal meeting of the disciples. See this verb used for gatherings of disciples in Acts 4:31; Acts 11:26; Acts 14:27; Acts 15:6; Acts 15:30; Acts 19:7; Acts 19:8; 1Cor 5:4. In Heb 10:25 the substantive is used for the regular gatherings which some were already neglecting. It is impossible for a church to flourish without regular meetings even if they have to meet in the catacombs as became necessary in Rome. In Russia today the Soviets are trying to break up conventicles of Baptists. They probably met on our Saturday evening, the beginning of the first day at sunset. So these Christians began the day (Sunday) with worship. But, since this is a Gentile community, it is quite possible that Luke means our Sunday evening as the time when this meeting occurs, and the language in Joh 20:19 “it being evening on that day the first day of the week” naturally means the evening following the day, not the evening preceding the day.

To break bread ( ). First aorist active infinitive of purpose of . The language naturally bears the same meaning as in 2:42, the Eucharist or the Lord’s Supper which usually followed the . See 1Co 10:16. The time came, when the was no longer observed, perhaps because of the abuses noted in 1Co 11:20ff. Rackham argues that the absence of the article with bread here and its presence ( ) in verse 11 shows that the is ] referred to in verse 7 and the Eucharist in verse 11, but not necessarily so because may merely refer to in verse 7. At any rate it should be noted that Paul, who conducted this service, was not a member of the church in Troas, but only a visitor.

Discoursed (). Imperfect middle because he kept on at length.

Intending (). Being about to, on the point of.

On the morrow ( ). Locative case with understood after the adverb . If Paul spoke on our Saturday evening, he made the journey on the first day of the week (our Sunday) after sunrise. If he spoke on our Sunday evening, then he left on our Monday morning.

Prolonged his speech ( ). Imperfect active (same form as aorist) of , old verb to stretch beside or lengthwise, to prolong. Vivid picture of Paul’s long sermon which went on and on till midnight ( ). Paul’s purpose to leave early next morning seemed to justify the long discourse. Preachers usually have some excuse for the long sermon which is not always clear to the exhausted audience.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

First [ ] . Lit., “the one day.” The cardinal numeral here used for the ordinal.

Week [] . The plural used for the singular, in imitation of the Hebrew form. The noun Sabbath is often used after numerals in the signification of a week. See Mt 28:1; Mr 16:1; Joh 20:19. To break bread. The celebration of the eucharist, coupled with the Agape, or love – feast.

Preached [] . Better, as Rev., discoursed with them. It was a mingling of preaching and conference. Our word dialogue is derived from the verb.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “And upon the first day of the week,” (en de te mia ton sabbaton) “Then in (during) the first day of the sabbath This indicates that the church disciples observed the first day of the week on which they broke bread in worship capacity, evidently observed the Lord’s Supper. The term (Gk. mia) is a cardinal, instead of ordinal number, indicating that the one day of worship to Christians was day “one,” not day “seven” of the week.

2) “When the disciples came together to break bread,” (sunegmanon hemon klasai arton) “As we were assembled to break bread,” in accord, in colleague, in fellowship, as a church (the church) in Troas. As they worshipped on the first, not the seventh day of the week, indicating that allegiance to the Law of Christ, not Moses, came first with them, Mat 6:33; 1Co 16:1-2; Heb 10:24-25. It was the day for worship and alms giving.

3) “Paul preached unto them,” (ho Paulo dielegeto autois) “Paul lectured to them,” to the disciples, or church assembling in Troas. As he delivered to them matters regarding the gospel and its observance, 1Co 11:1-2; 1Co 11:23-25; 1Co 15:1-4. It is believed that they here observed the Lord’s Supper, after fasting into the evening, not engaging in a festive meal that led to drunkenness of some, as had been rebuked at Corinth, 1Co 11:1-34.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

−

7. And in one day. Either doth he mean the first day of the week, which was next after the Sabbath, or else some certain Sabbath. Which latter thing may seem to me more probable; for this cause, because that day was more fit for all assembly, according to custom. But seeing it is no new matter for the Evangelists to put one instead of the first, according to the custom of the Hebrew tongue, ( Mat 28:1; Luk 24:1; Joh 20:1) it shall very well agree, that on the morrow after the Sabbath they came together. Furthermore, it were too cold to expound this of any day. For to what end is there mentioned of the Sabbath, save only that he may note the opportunity and choice of the time? Also, it is a likely matter that Paul waited for the Sabbath, that the day before his departure he might the more easily gather all the disciples into one place. And the zeal of them all is worth the noting, in that it was no trouble to Paul to teach until midnight, though he were ready to take his journey, neither were the rest weary of learning. For he had no other cause to continue his speech so long, save only the desire and attentiveness of his auditory. −

To break bread. Though breaking of bread doth sometimes signify among the Hebrews a domestical banquet, yet do I expound the same of the Holy Supper in this place, being moved with two reasons. For seeing we may easily gather by that which followeth that there was no small multitude gathered together there, it is unlikely that there could any supper be prepared in a private house. Again, Luke will afterward declare that Paul took bread not at supper time, but after midnight. Hereunto is added that, that he saith not that he took meat that he might eat, but that he might only taste. Therefore, I think thus, that they had appointed a solemn day for the celebrating of the Holy Supper of the Lord among themselves, which might be commodious for them all. And to the end Paul might remedy after a sort the silence of longer absence, he continueth his speech longer than he did commonly use to do. That which I spake of the great number of men is gathered thence, because there were many lights in the upper chamber, which was not done for any pomp or ostentation, but only for necessity’s sake. For when there is no need, it is ambition and vanity which maketh men bestow cost. Furthermore, it was meet that all the whole place should shine with lights, lest that holy company might be suspected of some wickedness or dishonesty. Add also another conjecture, if the chamber had been empty, those which were present would not have suffered Eutychus to sit upon a window. For it had been filthy licentiousness in despising − (403) the heavenly doctrine to depart aside into a window, seeing there was room enough elsewhere. −

(403) −

“

Spernendae ac respuendae,” in spurning and rejecting.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL REMARKS

Act. 20:7. The first day of the week.Lit., the first of the Sabbath, as in 1Co. 16:2, meaning not on one of the Sabbaths or Jewish festivals, but on the first day of the week, the term Sabbaths being put for the period of seven days (compare Mat. 28:1).

Act. 20:8. Many lights.Mentioned that all suspicion might be removed from the assembly (Calvin, Bengel); to account for the young mans drowsiness (Alford); to show how his fall was observed (Meyer); but most likely to impart liveliness to the scene (Hackett).

Act. 20:9. In a window should be in the window of the upper chamberi.e., on the seat of it. The windows of Oriental houses had no glass. They were only latticed, and thus gave free passage to the air and admitted light, while birds and bats were excluded (Kittos Cyclopdia: art. House). The third loft.Or story. The middle classes usually lived in large houses in flatsthe artizans in the third stories, just under the roofson the same plan as in some of our great cities (Stapfer, Palestine in the Time of Christ, pp. 172, 173). Taken up dead.Not (Mar. 9:26) (Holtzmann), but , dead.

Act. 20:10. Fell on him.As formerly Elijah and Elisha acted in performing similar awakenings (1Ki. 17:17; 2Ki. 4:34). Trouble not yourselves.Make ye no ado. Compare Christs words in Jairuss house (Mar. 5:39).

Act. 20:11. Broken (sc. the) bread.Points to the celebration of the Lords Supper.

Act. 20:12. Brought the young man alive.The miracle is certainly a parallel to Tabithas awakening by Peter (Act. 9:36-40), but yet not on that account an invented story. According to Ramsay, who in this follows Blass, this verse shows a very harsh change of subject, the persons who brought the youth alive, not being those who were comforted. But this is surely unmeaning criticism. One would naturally conclude that they who brought the lad alive were Paul and those who assisted him; and that these were greatly comforted as well as the other Christians present.

HOMILETICAL ANALYSIS.Act. 20:7-12

A Communion Festival at Troas; or, the Story of the Young Man Eutychus

I. The crowded congregation.

1. The persons composing it.

(1) The disciples at Troas (Act. 16:8), who must have been present in considerable numbers, since Eutychus could only obtain a seat in the window. The Troas Christians forsook not the assembling of themselves together (Heb. 10:25).

(2) The apostle and his company (Act. 20:4) These, though parted at Corinth or Philippi had rejoined each other in Troas.

2. The time of meeting. On the first day of the week, the Lords day (Rev. 1:10), an intimation that thus early the practice of meeting for worship on Sunday was observed by the followers of Christ. In the evening, as is indicated by the many lights or lamps that are said to have been burning. The cessation of work on this day, though it may have been the custom with some, was manifestly not as yet common.

3. The place of assembly. Not the Jewish synagogue, which shows that a separation of the Christians from the Jewish community had here taken place. Not a public academy or school as in Ephesus (Act. 19:9), scarcely even a house of any pretensions like that of Justus at Corinth (Act. 18:7), which perhaps reveals that not many mighty or wise had been converted in Troas, but an upper chamber, doubtless a room in some obscure house, on the third story and next the roof (see Act. 1:18; Act. 9:37).

4. The business of the hour. Twofold.

(1) To break breadi.e., to celebrate the Lords Supper, which consisted then, as now, in the breaking of bread and drinking of wine in remembrance of Christ, and was then, though not now, followed or accompanied by a lovefeast.

(2) To hear Paul preaching, or rather to hear the word discoursed by Paul, who doubtless sat at table while he talked, since the modern practice of formally orating on a text of Scripture had not then been introduced.

II. The protracted preaching.Two things noticeable:

1. The preacher wearied not in speaking.

(1) A remarkable phenomenon. Though Paul appears to have commenced discoursing in the early hours of evening, midnight arrived, and still the stream of holy converse flowed onyea, when the interruption which occurred through Eutychuss death and resuscitation had passed, the talk was resumed and sustained through a sleepless night till dawn. As a mere physical effort it would have taxed the energies of a strong man; how much more then must it have tested the powers of one so infirm as the apostle! Besides, since a speaker like Paul cannot be supposed to have kept on repeating the same things over and over, what a demand must that midnight preaching have made on his mental resources! And if to this be added the tender emotions which constantly uprose within his bosom when he either spoke or wrote to his converts about his Lord and theirs, it will not be hard to see that the strain on the apostles body, soul, and spirit, must have been immense, must, in fact, have been almost unparalleled.

(2) A reasonable explanation. Three things must have contributed to enable Paul to undergo such a laborious performance. First, the circumstances in which he and his hearers were then assembled. It was a flying visit he had made to their town; it was the last time, probably, they would look each other in the face, it was a farewell sermon; and it was the most solemn of all occasions on which Christs people could meet. Second, the theme upon which he descanted to his hearers was one that inspired him with thoughts that breathe and words that burn, that drew him on from topic to topic with never-failing enthusiasm, that so lifted him out of himself that he never felt his weariness or weakness, and probably knew not whether he was in the body or out of the body (2Co. 12:2). Thirdly, the grace of his glorified Master, which never failed him, would no doubt strongly support him that night, so that he could achieve what to common men would seem impossibilities (2Co. 12:9; Php. 4:13).

2. The audience wearied not in hearing. How different from modern congregations of Christs professed followers, who, so far from listening to the preached gospel from evening until midnight, and from midnight until dawn, cannot, without impatience, endure a thirty minutes sermon, and would almost clap their hands with joy if the preachers discourse could be huddled through in ten minutes, or perhaps dispensed with altogether. No doubt modern congregations have not Pauls for preachers; but if they had it is to be questioned whether their behaviour would be different. The present-day outcry against long sermonsby which are meant discourses of half an hourhas its origin not in the small ability of the preachers, but in the lack of religious zeal on the part of the hearers.

III. The alarming accident.

1. The sleeper in the window. Eutychus (concerning whose antecedents nothing is known) has often been held upunjustly and unkindlyto reproach on account of his unseemly conduct (as it is called) of sleeping in the church. But there are times when it is wholly inexcusable to yield to the drowsy god when engaged in Divine worship; on the other hand, there are occasions when it may be justified, and this it may be reasonably maintained was one.

(1) Eutychus was obviously a youth to whom sleep, especially at midnight, was a natural right, a physical necessity, a heaven-prepared boon which he could not be blamed for accepting.
(3) The upper chamber was as manifestly crowded, and the hot breaths must have speedily produced such an atmosphere that the wonder is not that Eutychus dropped over into slumber, but that many more did not follow his example.
(3) The strain of listening to Pauls preachingin which it may be assumed Eutychus was interestedcould not fail to exhaust the young mans nervous energy, and cause him to drop off through sheer weariness into a sound sleep. All who have as satisfactory excuses as Eutychus may sleep in church with easy consciences.
2. The fall into the court. How it happened is not explained. The window, after the manner of the eastern houses, opened into the area below. Most likely the shutter was closed when the young man ensconced himself in the recess. Perhaps the fastening gave way while he leant upon the shutter, or wakening with a start from his deep sleep he may have unwittingly pressed against and burst it open. In any case he fell from the third flat to the ground, a distance probably of twenty feet, and was taken up, not as, but reallydead.

IV. The gracious miracle.

1. The young mans restoration.

(1) By whom it was effected. Really, of course, by God, but instrumentally by Paul.

(2) How it was effected. Though not so mentioned, doubtless by prayer. Paul went down and fell upon the young man as Elijah (1Ki. 17:21) and Elisha (2Ki. 4:34) did, using, it may be supposed, words borrowed from the former, Lord! let this young mans soul come into him again.

2. The credibility of the story. Baur and his disciples find in this miracle only a counterpart of the raising of Dorcas by Peter (Act. 9:36-42), and accordingly pronounce it unauthentic. But the reality of the miracle was attested by those who saw the young man after he had been restored to life while the truthfulness of the account is vouched for by the extreme likeliness of the narration, and can only be disputed by those who are unwilling to believe in the supernatural.

Learn.

1. The duty of Christians to assemble for worship on the Lords day.
2. The place assigned to both the preaching of the word and the administration of the sacraments in the edification of believers.
3. The justification accorded to long sermons, at least on speciale.g., sacramental occasions.

4. The danger of sleeping in church, since if not always sinful it may sometimes be hurtful.
5. The inferiority of modern preachers, who, if they excel Paul in the art of setting men to sleep, fall immeasurably below him in the power of working miracles.
6. The reality of the communion of saints.
7. The solemnity and sadness of earths farewells.

HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS

Act. 20:7. Light from Early Christian Practice.

I. On the sanctity of the Lords day.That they kept the first day of the week as a memorial of Christs resurrection is apparent, though it is more than likely Jewish Christians, for a considerable time after, continued also to observe the seventh day as a day of rest. Gentile Christians may not have been able to devote the first day entirely to rest; the narrative shows they consecrated its evening hours to worship.

II. On the nature of Christian worship.This consisted:

1. In the administration of the Lords Supperwhich perhaps has not so high a place as properly belongs to it in modern Christian worship.

2. In listening to edifying discourse upon the gospelwhich also in some modern Churches is not accorded the place to which it is entitled.

3. In the enjoyment of Christian fellowshipwhich, again, is largely overlooked in modem congregations of believers. Without reviving the love-feasts of those early times, that which they pointed to and promoted, the spirit of love and the sense of brotherhood, should be diligently cultivated.

III. On the length of gospel sermons.These should be:

1. Neither so short as to admit no room for the utterance of any valuable doctrine, or the expression of any holy feeling.

2. Nor so long as to exhaust the physical, mental, and spiritual energies of either preacher or hearer.

3. But always suited to the audience and the occasion. Some audiences and occasions require long, and others short discourses.

The First Day of the Week

I. A solemn religions assembly.

1. The time was the first day of the week.
2. The occasion was the observance of the Lords Supper.
3. The place was an upper room with many lightsobscure, but not secret.

II. The preacher.

1. The preacher was Paul.
2. He preached a farewell sermon.
3. He preached a long sermon.

III. A careless hearer.

1. His infirmity.
2. His death.
3. His restoration to life.G. Brooks.

Act. 20:7-12. Communion at Troas.

I. The congregation.The disciples at Troas. Who were:

1. Probably many. May be inferred from the fact that Paul had previously visited and preached in Troas.

2. Certainly poor. Their meeting place, an upper chamber or room in a top story, showed this.

3. Obviously eager. Longed to hear the word, not afraid of long sermons. Not a good sign when Christians are impatient of preaching.

4. Intensely sympathetic. Their hearts beat in unison with both the service and the preacher.

II. The preacher.Paul, the apostle of the Gentiles. An object of interest from:

1. His personal character and history. A man of feeble body but of tremendous spiritual power.

2. His missionary labours and travels. No doubt full information about these would have been imparted during the week, if not by Paul himself, at least by his companions.

3. His previous visit and preaching. Most likely all regarded him in the light of an old friend, while many would behold in him their spiritual father.

III. The sermon.About which many things were worth noting; as, e.g., that it was:

1. A spoken sermon. Not read, but delivered face to face. Read discourses neither unlawful nor unprofitable; but not the best for either preacher or hearer.

2. A farewell sermon. Therefore without doubt uttered with much tender and solemn feeling, and listened to with avidity. Compare farewell address to elders at Miletus (Act. 20:17).

3. A communion sermon. Whence the subject may be guessed. Not the story of his travels, but the story of the cross. Not himself the hero but Christ.

4. A long sermon. Probably three hours to begin with. And yet the Troans wearied not, but heard for three hours more. Short sermons may be often best; but occasions surely arise when long discourses are befitting.

IV. The miracle.The raising of Eutychus.

1. The accident.

(1) The subject of ita young man, Eutychus, otherwise unknown.
(2) The manner of it. Falling from a window (see Critical Remarks).
(3) The issue of it. Death. Sad that he should have met his death through attending Church; but better that he died so than in a drunken brawl.
(4) The effect of it. Produced great commotion in the meeting. Many lamentations over the poor boys untimely fate, and much sympathy for his mother if she was present.
2. The restoration.

(1) Effected by Paul, who, in recalling the lad to life, followed the example of Elijah and Elisha.
(2) Attested by the people, who witnessed the miracle, saw the young man alive again, and were comforted.

V. The communion.

1. The solemn impressions under which it was celebrated. Those who took part in it had just been listening to a discourse about the risen Saviour, and had just witnessed a display of that Saviours power. What must have been their emotions when they returned to the upper room to celebrate their memorial feast?

2. The sacramental actions were unquestionably those of the Lords Supper. Breaking of bread alone mentioned; but drinking of wine implied. The narrative affords no countenance to the idea of Communion in one kind.

3. The post communion address was not omitted. Paul talked with his hearers a long while till break of day, about the significance of the meal, and its foreshadowing of heaven, about how they should live and walk in the world, and about their impending separation. And so the sacred service ended. With the dawning of the day the apostle departed.

Act. 20:8-12. The Night Service at Troas.

I. An admonitory example of Christian zeal for Gods word.

1. On the part of the apostle, who wearies not of preaching.
2. On the part of the congregation, who grow not tired of hearing.

II. A warning example of human weakness and sloth.The sleep and the fall of Eutychus. Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.

III A consolatory example of Divine grace and faithfulness.The resuscitation of the young man, the comfort of the Church.Gerok.

Act. 20:9. On sleeping in Church.

I. Pardonable.When it results from physical causes, over which one has no control; such as:

1. Exhaustion through previous labour.
2. The imperative demands of nature which call for such repose as sleep gives.
3. The soporific atmosphere of the church through defective ventilation.
4. The weariness induced by a too constant strain upon the mental faculties in listening to the preacher.

II. Inexcusable.When it springs either:

1. From indifference to the truth that is preached; or
2. From dislike to the preacher by whom it is spoken; or
3. From lack of interest in the object which the preacher by his preaching seeks to attain.

III. Hurtful.

1. It disconcerts and discourages the preacher.
2. It infects and contaminates the hearers. Sleeping in Church is contagious.
3. It inflicts loss and sometimes positive hurt upon the sleeper.

IV. Preventable.By removing its causes.

1. Providing comfortable and well-ventilated churches.
2. Preaching interesting and not too long sermons.
3. Preparing the heart by previous prayer and meditation, for the reception of the truth.

The young man Eutychus; an example to all the unsteadfast in the Church.

I. By his dangerous sleep.In the midst of the assembled congregation, during the hearing of the divine word, the heart may be overpowered by the sleep of false security.

II. By his terrible fall.From the third storey to the street pavement; an admonitory representation of the great fall from an imaginary height of faith to sin and perdition.

III. By his miraculous deliverance.In the arms of a Paul, who penetrates him with his power of life and warmth of love, even the deeply fallen, he who is thought dead, may by the wonderful grace of God again become living.Gerok.

The Accident at Troas. Thoughts suggested.

I. The uncertainty of life.Even to the good, and the consequent necessity of preparing for death. Eutychus, a young man, full of life, hope, and promise, employed also at the best of work, and yet he died suddenly as the result of an accident.

II. The moral and spiritual uses of accidents.This accident at Troas was fitted to remind the Christians there of the propriety and duty of exercising common prudence and foresight even when engaged about the things of religion and eternal life.

III. The power of a great calamity to open the flood-gates of human sympathy.How deeply the congregation was moved by the young mans death is revealed by the comfort they experienced in his resuscitation (Act. 20:12).

IV. The mission and the power of the gospel.To quicken dead souls as Paul restored Eutychus to life. As Gods power flowing through Pauls body reanimated the dead youth, so the might of Gods grace streaming through the gospel can revive dead souls.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

(7) Upon the first day of the week . . .This and the counsel given in 1Co. 16:2, are distinct proofs that the Church had already begun to observe the weekly festival of the Resurrection in place of, or, where the disciples were Jews, in addition to, the weekly Sabbath. It lies in the nature of the case that those who were slaves, or freed-men still in service, under heathen masters could not transfer to it the rigid abstinence from labour which characterised the Jewish Sabbath. And on this day they met together, obviously in the evening after sunset, to break bread. On the half- technical significance of that phrase, as applied specially to the Lords Supper, the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, see Notes on Act. 2:46, and 1Co. 10:16. Two further questions, however, present themselves(1) On what evening was the meeting held? (2) How far was a meal such as was known as the Agap, or Feast of Charity, united with the Lords Supper? In answer to (1), it seems probable that in churches which were so largely organised on the framework of the Jewish synagogue, and contained so many Jews and proselytes who had been familiar with its usages, the Jewish mode of reckoning would still be kept, and that, as the Sabbath ended at sunset, the first day of the week would begin at sunset on what was then or soon afterwards known as Saturday. In this case, the meeting of which we read would be held on what we should call the Saturday evening, and the feast would present some analogies to the prevalent Jewish custom of eating bread and drinking wine at that time in honour of the departed Sabbath (Jost, Gesch. Judenthums, i. 180). (2) Looking to St. Pauls directions in 1Co. 11:33-34, it is probable that the hour of the breaking bread became gradually later, so as to allow those who would otherwise have been hungry to take their evening meal at home before they came. The natural result of this arrangement was, as in the instance now before us, to throw the Eucharistic rite forward to midnight, or even later; and, as this was obviously likely to cause both inconvenience and scandal, the next step was to separate it entirely from the Agap, and to celebrate the purely symbolic feast very early in the morning of the first day of the week, while the actual meal came later in the evening of the same day. That this was so in the regions of Troas and Asia we see from Plinys letter to Trajan (Epp. x. 96), in which he describes the Christians as meeting on a fixed day, for what he calls a sacramentum at break of day, and again in the evening to partake of a simple and innocent repast. At Troas we have the connecting-link between the evening communion of the Church of Corinth, and the morning celebration which has been for many centuries the universal practice of the Church.

Paul preached unto them.The fact has a liturgical interest as showing that then, as in the more developed services of the second and third centuries, the sermon, and the lessons from Scripture which it implied, preceded what we now know as the Celebration.

Ready to depart on the morrow.It may perhaps seem to some strange, taking the view maintained in the previous Note, that the Apostle and his companions should thus purpose to travel on a day to which we have transferred so many of the restrictions of the Jewish Sabbath. But it must be remembered (1) that there is no evidence that St. Paul thought of them as so transferred, but rather the contrary (Gal. 4:10; Col. 2:16); and (2) that the ship in which his friends had taken their passage was not likely to alter its day of starting to meet their scruples, even had those scruples existed.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

Eutychus Raised from the Dead 7-12.

All event divinely dispensed for the confirmation of the young Church at Troas.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

7. First day of the week This Church was founded the year before by Paul, and it seems by the phrase, when the disciples came together to, etc., that the practice of Sunday meetings was already established under Paul’s authority. The Roman philosopher Pliny, in a letter to the Emperor Trajan, from the near province of Bithynia, about fifty years after this period, well illustrates this fact in the following words: “They (the Christians) are accustomed to meet together on a stated day ( stato die) before it is light, and sing among themselves alternately a hymn to Christ as God, and bind themselves by an oath ( sacramento) not to the commission of any wickedness, but, on the contrary, not to be guilty of theft, or robbery, or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor to deny a pledge committed to them; and, when these things were ended, it was their custom to separate, and then to come together again to a meal, which they ate in common, without any disorder.”

It was, doubtless, at this second or evening meeting of Sunday night that Paul here preached, expecting to embark on Monday morning.

To break bread Either the Lord’s supper, or the lovefeast, or both.

Speech Rather, converse; implying an interchange of discourse.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘And on the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, intending to depart on the morrow, and prolonged his speech until midnight.’

When the first day of the week arrived the church in Troas met together to break bread. This presumably included a fellowship meal culminating in the Lord’s Supper (1Co 11:23-26). This confirms that, as well probably as observing the Sabbath (for the sake of the Jewish members at least), the church was now also observing the first day of the week (Sunday).

We note that the prime purpose in meeting was ‘to break bread’. It is difficult to decide whether the emphasis in this statement is on the fellowship meal or the Lord’s Table. They would at this stage probably partake of both. However, the statement in Act 20:11, which demonstrates that they had been so eager to hear Paul that they had not yet commenced eating, and that Paul did then break the bread and begin to eat, suggests that the emphasis is on the fellowship meal. If both were seen as part of one whole, however, the difference in emphasis is minimal. Fellowship with the Lord and fellowship together went hand in hand

The meeting would probably begin in the evening when work was over and darkness had fallen. They may well also have met early in the morning before work. In a letter to Trajan written from Bithynia in the early second century, Pliny the Younger described Christian practise as he knew it. “They meet regularly before dawn on a fixed day to chant verse alternately among themselves in honour of Christ as if to a god. . . . After this ceremony it had been their custom to disperse and reassemble later to take food of an ordinary, harmless kind”.

The seven day period coming to an end Paul was ready to set sail on the next day. Being his last day with them he continued preaching until midnight. He had so much that he longed to pass on to them, and such long sessions of teaching were commonplace to him. Compare the long sessions in the School of Tyrannus (Act 19:9). But we need to recognise also that these early churches too were used to long meetings. It was their general practise, so as to make the best opportunity of their time.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Sign of The Raising of Eutychus: Paul Hurries On (20:7-16).

At this point in the account we are informed of a remarkable confirmation of God’s presence with Paul in the raising from the dead of a young man. The significance of this story is threefold. Firstly it provides comfort and consolation both to Paul and his companions, and to the churches who are anxiously watching his progress towards Jerusalem (Act 20:12). Secondly it is a sign that God is with him in what lies ahead (as are the later parallel events of being saved from snake bite, and the healing of Publius – Act 28:1-10). Thirdly it is a reminder that they serve the God Who raises men from the dead. We can compare here Act 9:36-42. Here was living and continuing proof of the power of the resurrection.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Paul at Troas Act 20:7-12 gives us the account of Paul’s ministry at Troas. The most significant event during this stay was the raising from the dead of a certain man named Eutychus. It is very possible that Eutychus was mentioned in the book of Acts because he played an important role in the church at a later date.

At some point there was a church planted at Troas. We have a record of Paul preaching the Gospel in this city in 2Co 2:12 where an effectual door had been opened for him. This was when Paul had left Ephesus and was planning on spending the winter in Greece. Mostly like Paul planted a church here at this time.

2Co 2:12, “Furthermore, when I came to Troas to preach Christ’s gospel, and a door was opened unto me of the Lord,”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Act 20:7. The disciples came together to break bread, That is, to celebrate the eucharist. It is strange, that Barclay, in his Apology, (prop. 13: sect. 8.) should argue from Act 20:11 that this was only a common meal, and not the Lord’s supper. It is well known, that the primitive Christians administered the eucharist every Lord’s day; and as that was the most solemn and appropriate as well as the concluding act of their worship, there is no wonder that it should be mentioned as the end of their assembly: whereas had nothing more than a common meal been intended, St. Luke would hardly have thought that worth mentioning; especially when, St. Paul being with them on a Lord’s day, they would naturally have something far nobler and more important in view: in which accordingly we find them employed; and it is quite unreasonable to suppose that they spent their time in feasting, which neither the occasion nor the hour would well admit. The argument which some over-zealous Papists have drawn from this text, for denying the cup in the sacrament to the laity, was so solemnly given up in the council of Trent, that it is astonishing any who profess to believe the divine authority of that council, should ever have presumed to plead it again. See Father Paul’s History, b. 3: p. 486.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Act 20:7 . But on the first (see on Mat 28:1 ; 1Co 16:2 ) day of the week . That the Sunday was already at this time regularly observed by holding religious assemblies and Agapae ( ; see on Act 2:42 ), cannot, indeed, be made good with historical certainty, since possibly the observance of the Agapae in our passage might only accidentally occur on the first day of the week (because Paul intended to depart on the following day), and since even 1Co 16:2 , Rev 1:10 , do not necessarily distinguish this day as set apart for religious services . But most probably the observance of Sunday is based on an apostolic arrangement yet one certainly brought about only gradually and in the spirit of Christian freedom [109] the need of which manifested itself naturally (importance of the resurrection of Jesus and of the effusion of the Spirit at Pentecost) and indeed necessarily, in the first instance, when the gospel came to be diffused among the Gentiles who had no Sabbath festival; and the assumption of which is indispensable for the explanation of the early universal observance of that day ( , , Justin, Apol . I. 67; comp. c. Tryph . p. 34; Ignat. ad Magnes . 9; Barnab. 15), although for a long time the observance of the Sabbath along with it was not given up by the Jewish Christians and even by others ( Constitt. ap . ii. 59. 2, vii. 23. 2, can. 66; Orig. Hom . 28; Eus. iii. 27), a circumstance which was doubtless connected with the antignostic interest. Rightly, therefore, is the . in our passage regarded as a day of special observance . See on the whole subject, Augusti, Denkw . III. p. 345 ff.; Schne, ber die kirchl. Gebruche, I. p. 335 ff.; Neander, apost. K . I. p. 198; Ewald, p. 164 ff.; Harnack, christl. Gemeindegottesd . p. 115 ff. The observance of Sunday was not universally introduced by law until A.D. 321 by Constantine. See Gieseler, K. G. I. l, p. 274, Exo 4 .

] to the assembled. Luke changes his standpoint (previously ), as the discourse was held with the Christians of that place .

-g0- -g0- .] On Sunday (not Saturday) evening they had assembled for the love-feast. On and its compounds, used of long speaking , see Heind. ad Plat. Gorg . p. 465 D; Pflugk, ad Eur. Med . 1351.

[109] See Neander in the Deutsch. Zeitschr . 1850, p. 203 ff.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

DISCOURSE: 1797
PAULS SERMON AT TROAS

Act 20:7. And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

IF we look at Christianity as it exists at this day, it appears little else than a name, and a form: but if we contemplate it as it existed in the apostolic age, it will be found an active and invigorating principle in the minds of men, engaging all their affections, and stimulating them to the greatest exertions. As for St. Pauls labours for the propagation of the Gospel in the world, we forbear to speak of them at present, any farther than they are connected with the passage which is immediately before us: but his preaching from evening to midnight, and then continuing his discourse afterwards till break of day, will give us some idea of the exertions he made in the cause of Christ, and of the interest which his hearers also felt in all that related to their Christian course.
The account given of his discourse, will lead us to notice,

I.

The proper employment of the Sabbath

The Jewish Sabbath was appointed by God himself to be spent in holy exercises. On it the sacrifices were twice as numerous as on other days; and the law of Moses was read for the instruction of the people. But under the Christian dispensation, the time of its observance was changed from the seventh day of the week to the first; in commemoration of the resurrection of our blessed Lord, and of the descent of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. It is probable that, for a considerable time, the seventh day still continued to be observed by those who were proselyted from the Jewish religion, lest their neglect of that day should put a stumbling-block in the way of their brethren: but the first day was that which from the beginning was held sacred by the early Christians; and it was dignified with the peculiar title of the Lords-day [Note: Compare 1Co 16:2. with Rev 1:10.]. On this day the Church at Troas were assembled, to offer unto God their accustomed sacrifices of prayer and praise, and particularly to break bread, that is, to commemorate the death of Christ agreeably to the directions given by our Lord himself on the night previous to his crucifixion. This ordinance constituted an essential part of the service on every Lords-day: it called the attention of the Church to that great mystery which was the foundation of all their hopes, even to the body of Christ as broken for them, and the blood of Christ as shed for them. Moreover, it led them to apply to Christ by faith for a continued interest in his death, and a more abundant communication of his blessing to their souls.

Amongst us, the Lords Supper is not administered so often; but our employment on the Sabbath ought to be, in fact, the same: it should consist in these two things:

1.

A personal intercourse with Christ as dying for us

[In entering into the house of prayer, we come, it is true, to worship the Father; but we must never forget that it is only in and through Christ that we can have access to him; and that every prayer must be offered to the Father in the name of Christ We assemble, too, to hear the word of God; but it is the Gospel, the glad tidings of salvation through a crucified Redeemer, that we must desire to hear: and the faithful minister will determine to know nothing among his people, but Jesus Christ, and him crucified. If he preach the law, it will be as a schoolmaster to bring men to Christ: or if he insist upon any particular duty, it will be, not to lead his hearers to establish a righteousness of their own by their obedience to it, but to shew them how they are to manifest the sincerity of their faith, and how they are to glorify their God and Saviour Both minister and people must remember, that they meet, not as Mahometans, who acknowledge one God; not as Jews, who confess their obligation to obey his revealed will; but as Christians, who have their hopes fixed entirely on Christ, and expect every thing as the purchase of his blood. Whether the Lords Supper is administered or not, Christ is to be evidently set forth crucified before us; and to know him, to win him, to be found in him; and to receive out of his fulness, must be the great object of our assembling together ]

2.

A personal surrender of ourselves to him, as his redeemed people

[When the first Christians met thus constantly to break bread, they confessed openly, that they were disciples of that crucified Saviour; and they engaged themselves, as it were by a solemn oath, to live and die in his service. Thus do we profess, in all our solemn acts of worship, that we have been bought with a price, even with the inestimable price of the Redeemers blood; and that we are bound, by every possible tie, to glorify him with our bodies and our spirits which are his We do not in general associate this idea with any thing but the Lords supper; but we ought to associate it with all the services of the Sabbath; and to consider ourselves as living thus upon Christ by the renewed exercises of faith, in order that we may live to Christ in the more enlarged exercise of holy obedience ]
Let us now proceed to notice,

II.

The particular circumstances of that meeting

The place where they were assembled was an upper chamber
[It was a room three stories high, and so small and crowded, that the windows, even at night, were forced to be open for the admission of air, whilst some were constrained to sit in them for want of more convenient accommodation. Little do we think what a blessing it is to us that we have houses built on purpose for the service of our God. True it is that even in them the poor do not always find such commodious seats as one could wish: but, if there were no other places for our reception than such as they possessed at Troas, we fear that multitudes who now receive instruction from Sabbath to Sabbath, would never trouble themselves to seek it, where they must submit to so much inconvenience for the attainment of it.]
In that room, there were many lights
[The enemies of the Church were ready to raise all manner of evil reports against the Disciples; and they would gladly have represented these nocturnal meetings as scenes of much iniquity. To cut off all occasion for such calumnies, the Disciples took care to have the place of their assemblies well lighted in every part; and it is probable that it was for the express purpose of obviating all such remarks, that the historian recorded this otherwise unimportant fact. It teaches us, however, that we should be always on our guard against even the appearance of evil, and cut off occasion from them that seek occasion against us, and not let our good be evil spoken of.]
There Paul preached his farewell discourse
[At what precise hour he began, we know not; but he continued his discourse till midnight; and after a short interruption, resumed it till break of day. Do we wonder that he should so long detain his audience? No: the occasion was very peculiar; he was about to depart on the morrow, never probably to see their face again: his heart was full; the subject was inexhaustible: the hearts of his audience were deeply impressed, and they drank in the word with insatiable avidity. What a glorious meeting must that have been; the preacher so animated with his subject, and the people so penetrated with the truths they heard! Doubtless, it would not be expedient, under common circumstances, so to lengthen out the service of our God; but, if we could always meet under similar impressions, and have our hearts so engaged, how glorious would be the ordinances, and how exalted the benefit arising from them!]
A distressing occurrence, which for a time interrupted his discourse, tended ultimately to impress it more deeply on their minds
[A youth, named Eutychus, being overcome with sleep, fell down out of the window from the third loft, and was taken up dead. O, what grief must have seized the whole assembly! but the Apostle went down to him, and fell upon him, as Elijah and Elisha had done upon the persons they had raised to life, and by prayer to God prevailed for the restoration of his life. At the sight of this they were not a little comforted. As it respected the youth, it would have been most distressing to think that he should be taken into the eternal world in such a state; as though he had been made, like Lots wife, a warning to all future generations. But more especially were they concerned for the honour of God and his Gospel. What a stumbling-block would it have been to the ungodly, that such an accident should have been occasioned by the unreasonable length of the Apostles discourse! How bitterly would they have inveighed against him, and against these meetings that were encouraged by him! Truly it was no little joy to have such great occasions of offence removed. But further, the miracle thus wrought before their eyes, was a striking confirmation of what they had heard: it was, as it were, a seal put by God himself to attest the truth of all that had been delivered to them, and an emblem, yea, a pledge and earnest also, of the blessings which all who received his Gospel might expect at his hands. Thus was this occurrence, so afflictive in itself, overruled for the furtherance of their joy, and for the more abundant display of Gods grace and mercy.]

As an improvement of this subject, let us see,
1.

How deep an interest we should take in the Gospel of Christ!

[It is much to be regretted that we see but little of this fervour in our religious assemblies: neither we who minister, nor you who hear, are affected with the Gospel in any measure as we ought to be. In many congregations there may be found persons sleeping, like Eutychus, though the sermon be not an hour long: and where they are not actually asleep, how many hear in such a drowsy, listless, inattentive manner, that they evidently take no interest in the subject, nor could give any good account of what has been spoken to them. O brethren, let it not be so with us. Let us rather come together as that assembly did; I to preach, and you to hear, as though we were never to meet again in this world. The subjects of the Apostles discourse are as important to us, as they were to the primitive Christians: let us beg of God to impress them more deeply on our minds, that they may be to us a savour of life unto life, and not, as they are to too many, a savour of death unto death.]

2.

How earnestly we should improve our present intercourse with each other!

[It is but a little while, at all events, that our present connexion can be continued: I must soon go to give an account of my ministry, as you also must to answer for the way in which you have improved it: and even from Sabbath to Sabbath we know not whether the present opportunity shall not be our last. Surely this thought should make us exceeding anxious to obtain increasing edification in faith and love, that so I may be your rejoicing, and you be mine, in the great day of the Lord Jesus.]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. (8) And there were many lights in the upper chamber, where they were gathered together. (9) And there sat in a window a certain young man named Eutychus, being fallen into a deep sleep: and as Paul was long preaching, he sunk down with sleep, and fell down from the third loft, and was taken up dead. (10) And Paul went down, and fell on him, and embracing him said, Trouble not yourselves; for his life is in him. (11) When he therefore was come up again, and had broken bread, and eaten, and talked a long while, even till break of day, so he departed. (12) And they brought the young man alive, and were not a little comforted.

I admire the expression, the first day of the week; meaning the day in which the Lord Jesus arose from the dead. For the whole body of believers ‘ from that time, made it the great day of public meeting. And, from that period, they considered it for their sabbath. And before the beloved Apostle left the Church upon earth, to join the Church in glory, the name by which this first day was known, was the Lord’s day. Hence John saith: I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, Rev 1:10 . And, as in the first ages of the Church, the name by which the holy Supper Christ instituted was called, breaking of bread and prayer: Act 2:42 . So, before Paul’s ministry ended, the believers called this solemn service, the Lord’s Supper, 1Co 11:20 . And what can be more sweet and suited, in reference to both? Is it not the Lord’s day, and the Lord’s Supper? Is not Jesus Lord of both; yea, the sum, and substance of both? Reader! do you not love the Lord’s day, and the Lord’s Supper? And can anything be more suited, than that all true believers, celebrate the Supper of the Lord on the Lord’s day? Not indeed to the exclusion of other days, when the Lord invites his members to his table. All days, and all times, are blessed, when the King sitteth at his table, and when the sweet Spikenard of his people’s graces, planted and brought into exercise by His Spirit, send forth the smell thereof: Son 1:12 ; 1Co 10:16 . But, there is a peculiar sweetness and sacredness, on the Lord’s day, and is endeared to the Lord’s people by every tie of affection. And, what blessedness have the saints of God in all ages, yea, the whole Church of God, during the whole time, state of her pilgrimage here below, found in it? The Jews say, that it was the first day when Jehovah, in his three-fold character of Persons, went forth, in the creation of the world. And we know, that it was the first day when the Son of God, in our nature, triumphed by his resurrection; over death, hell, and the grave. And, is it not the first day as such of the everlasting world to all his redeemed? Hail! thou holy day of the Lord! Sweet pledge and emblem of the eternal and unceasing Sabbatism of heaven!

The farewell sermon of Paul was lengthened to the midnight hour. His heart was with the people, and he knew not how to leave off; It is truly blessed, when the sent servants of the Lord, like the Apostle, are so affectionately desirous of the flock of Christ, as not to impart only the Gospel of God, but their own souls also, because they are dear to them. See a beautiful portrait of this in the Apostle himself: 1Th 2 throughout. And it is a lovely sight, when a congregation, under the teachings and influences of God the Spirit, hang upon the Preacher’s words, and forget the length of the discourse in the sweetness of it, from Christ being both text, sermon, and substance. Reader! think, what a Preacher must have been Jesus himself! Look at one instance of the Lord’s preaching, when the people pressed upon him to hear his word? Luk 5:1 .

I stay not to make any further observation on this certain young Man’s infirmity of sleeping under the word, than to remark, his sin, and the Lord’s mercy. Had not the Lord’s grace been greater than even his undeservings, what would have been the consequence? The Evangelists have been particular, in telling the Church how the disciples slept, when Christ was in his agony. But, the Lord himself hath taught us from what quarter the temptation came. It was the hour of the power of darkness, See Mat 26:36-45 ; Mar 14:32-42 ; Luk 22:39-53 . And who shall say, even now in the present hour, how often the deadly foe attempts to drench the people of God in sleep, when sitting under the word, in the house of prayer, to render it unfruitful? Let the Lord’s people seek grace from the Lord, to counteract Satan’s devices. Pray, saith Jesus, that ye enter not into temptation, Luk 22:40 . And, every sinner that reads this history of Eutychus, (though his life was restored to him by a miracle) hath reason to tremble, if sleeping in the house of God, conscious that he thereby insults the majesty of the Lord, and exposes himself both to the divine wrath, and to the devil’s devices, Mar 4:15 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 75

Prayer

Almighty God, may there be in us, as in thee, no darkness at all! May Jesus Christ, who is the Light of the world, reign in us! We would love the light; it is the robe of God. We would dwell in light, that we may see more and more of thy wonder and of thine almightiness. Fill us with the light of heaven. Men love darkness rather than light when they are in their natural state; we would love light rather than darkness, because in thy light we see light, and walking in the day, we are made strong. Take away from us everything that is not of the nature of light. May our understanding be as a lamp that burneth! May our heart be as a fire that cannot be put out! May our whole character burn and gleam with the presence of God! But this also cometh forth from the heavens; it is not the work of our hands, nor the issue of our vain imaginations. Thou alone canst work this miracle of light. We meet thee at the Cross to see the miracle consummated. There thou dost crown thy mighty works with mightier marvels. In the Cross of Christ thou hast accomplished all miracles in one stupendous sign. For Jesus Christ, how can we bless thee? He is a whole heaven of light and grace, sweetness and truth. He is red in his apparel. He cometh up from the eternities as a man of war to fight the great enemy of man; he has trodden the winepress alone, and of the people there was none with him. He is glorious in strength, as he is perfect in wisdom and infinite in pitying love. In him we rest; in him we grow; in him we begin to be; in him we complete our immortality. He is Alpha and Omega the First and the Last the Beginning and the End, and every point of the infinite line between. He is throned above all heaven. He is the Head over all things unto his Church. Not only does he give grace, but grace upon grace, like shower upon shower of pure rain from the fountains of eternity. May we, this day, be caught in the sacred baptism, and feel the holy dew falling upon us from infinite heights, but made no burden because of the hand which administers it. We have to bless thee without end, for there is no period to all the utterance of thy grace and love toward us. Were our hymn equal to thy gift, we should talk down the sun and speak through all the shining of the stars, and ask the loan of eternity in which to sing our noble psalm. We will take the cup of salvation and call upon the name of the Lord. Thou wilt take a word for a sign; thou wilt receive a sigh in place of much speaking; one throb of the loving heart thou wilt accept as a whole liturgy. We give thee our poor love. It is a stained and ruined thing; but if thou wilt accept so bruised an offering, we would now tremblingly lay it upon the altar of the sanctuary. Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that we love thee. Even in the hell of our sin we are groping about for the forgiving One. Even in the pit of darkness our hearts would fain turn upward to the light, and, at least, try to pray. Lord, thou knowest all things. We bless thee for a love, how feeble and staggering soever, that can appeal to thine omniscience and rest upon the infiniteness of thy knowledge. For all thy care we bless thee. When we said we would die, behold, we began to be young again at that very moment. When we were about to fall into despair, thou didst open a great door of glory into light unimaginable and heavens without measure. When we said, “This is the end,” thou didst lead us to see that it was but a new beginning. There is no end in almightiness; there is no conclusion in infinity. Were we, through Christ thy Son, partakers of thy nature, we would triumph over all things, yea, set our feet upon all difficulties and obstacles; yea, we would glory in tribulation also, so great would be our love, so confident our faith. Now we give one another again to thee. The poorest may be the richest; the weakest may be the strongest; but be we what we may, with one accord we give one another into thy holy keeping. All the road is thine. Thou dost see what we ourselves cannot behold the pathway which we make upon the great waters. The night is thine, and thou hast the key of every door hanging at thy girdle. Thou knowest where we are, what is our thought, our purpose, our supremest wish; so we will now, taking hold of hands, touching the Cross, give one another in sacred pledge into thy keeping, for the city is well kept which thou dost watch, and the men are safe who are within the folding of thine arms. We give the old, and the young, and the poor, and the friendless, we give those who have no other joy but in thy house, who cannot go far from home, but whose Sundays are green places in life’s broad desert specially and lovingly we give these to thee. Thou canst work wonders even for them; the way is long, the discipline high; but they complain not, because they know that their days are in the hand of God, and the whole guiding of life is not from earth but from heaven. And if thou shouldst break in upon us during our separation, so that we cannot put the links together again quite in this shape, thou wilt take according to thy wisdom and according to thy love. Give us the resigned heart, yea, the thankful spirit. Wherein any man is setting up his house, do thou examine the foundations for him and keep the roof strong; the rest he may do himself. Wherein any man is beginning a new business, opening an untried career, attempting unfamiliar experiments, the Lord inspire him with wisdom and comfort him with hope. Wherein any man says he will God helping him turn right round in the black land and try to find the way back to the light, the Lord send more than twelve legions of angels to confirm him in his sacred vow. Oh, that we may live before thee a great, rich, joyous life! This we can do if Christ be in us the hope of glory. Even so, Lord Jesus, come quickly! Amen.

Act 20:7-12

Points In Paul’s Preaching

This was the close of a ministry. Is there anything in human relationship more pathetic than the conclusion of a spiritual intercourse and fellowship? So many things may happen to prevent to taking up of the scattered threads, and the weaving of them into a complete fabric. Then there is no substitute for a deeply and intensely spiritual influence. Everything beside is a child’s toy offered to a man’s ambition; all other things fall not only into insignificance, but into positive contempt. To be lifted clear up above the cloud and fog, and to be set for a few shining hours high in heaven’s own quietness, and to hear voices not to be heard upon the earth’s surface, and to be caught in thrilling prayer which tells the soul itself what it wanted to say but could not, and which by that sacred mystery turns prayer itself into an answer what can replace that infinite quantity? Thus we live in personal ministries. We chide ourselves and others chide us for doing so, but it is natural after all, and not wrong. Some men can speak to me and others cannot. It is precisely the same with every one of us. The very same words may be spoken, and yet they fall a few inches short of the target of the heart, because not delivered by the archer whom we love and trust. Paul is now leaving, and cannot leave. He began in the morning, and he was so filled with the spirit of grace that he never looked at the time; he took no note of it; he would have destroyed it. When was love ever patient with the clock? When did love ever turn upon the timekeeper anything but a suspicious or angry glance? For all things seem to have a grudge against it, and to run and fly with indecent eagerness. It is difficult for Paul to close. When the whole man is in the work, he ends often but only to begin again. He talks right down to midnight, and then thinks he may as well talk till the sun comes back, for it is better to walk in the daylight than in the cold darkness. There is no long preaching so long as the thought continues. There are no long prayers so long as the heart has another desire to express. It is when we have said all that is in us that the long preaching begins. It is when we have uttered our last wish, and then begin again to enumerate the desires we have already uttered, that long prayer sets in. When was love ever quite done? When did love ever write a letter without a postscript? When did love ever post a letter without some sign outside that it could begin again if it had the chance? When Jesus Christ ceased it was out of compassion to the weariness of the flesh, not because the Spirit of God had yielded its conclusion. And love-hearing is just the same as love-preaching. Give me the attention of the heart; then you hear so much more than I say. That is the mystery of the hearing ear. It hears tones that have not uttered themselves to inattentiveness. It makes as much of the voice as of the vocable. It magnifies the hint into a revelation. Give it one dawning ray of light, and out of that it will make a whole heaven of glory. The hearers were attentive; Paul was eloquent; the opportunity was closing; the ship was to sail next day, and the miracle was how to make the sun stand still until love wrote another line and put in another appeal. What long days the old churches had! They had but one joy, and that was in doing their work. The Church now is one of a hundred other institutions. We now set our claims in a row, and one is nearly equal to the other. In early times there was only one claim the claim of prayer, the claim of love, the claim of sacrifice. Men prosper according to the intensity of their devotedness. When preaching becomes one of a hundred other engagements, it will go down. When church-going becomes the amusement or recreation of Sunday, then it will be compared with what was seen yesterday and what will probably be heard tomorrow. Religion will not stand up in independent uniqueness, having no rival, and putting down all envy, and reigning until all enemies are put under its feet.

How hard it is in many cases to say “Good-bye”! When was “Good-bye” said quite snappingly and briefly and with abruptness and without repetition? When a friend leaves a friend, he never says “Good-bye” less than six times! Have you noted that? He begins early, then says a little more, and then says, “Well, good bye,” and then begins again. Another object attracts his attention, a few moments more are spent, and then he says “he must go.” Not he; he will turn round again without reason for the evolution. Then he will see some other object, stoop to bless some hitherto unseen little child, look eagerly at some flower which has just attracted him, and then say, “Now I must go.” Not he! Even when he has gone he has not gone. He waits at the gate, he shuts it twice, but it will not easily bolt, so he opens it again to see the reason why; then he waves “Good-bye,” then takes a few steps and turns round and says “Good-bye.” Why this delay? Do not ask; it is the mystery of love, the secret of heart tearing itself from heart, fibres, intertwined, disentangling themselves one from the other. That, indeed, is the sweet secret of living; but for it death would be better.

But the preaching was interrupted: “And there sat in a window a certain young man named Eutychus, being fallen into a deep sleep; and as Paul was long preaching, he sunk down with sleep, and fell down from the third loft, and was taken up dead.” He was not in the congregation. I do not know exactly where he was; he was in the room, and yet not in it, as many persons are in the church building but not in the spiritual sanctuary. I do not blame Eutychus. When a man is not in the sweep and run of the great thought and the inspiring revelation, he is asleep. Well for some of us if we were now in a deep slumber! That somnolence might be set down to physical weariness, and might be forgiven, “For God knoweth our frame, He remembereth that we are dust.” But there is a deadlier sleep, and we may be in that unholy slumber. How many of us now are really awake? Consider that inquiry, for there is more in it than may at first appear. Have I not seen some of you more awake in changing money, in making bargains, in investigating claims, covenants, and obligations? Have you not a church-look and a marketplace look? I want to see the eager look, the soul in the eyes; I do not want a mimicked saintliness, but your real intense self. Who ever is awake in church? It makes the heart cold with sadness to see how men strip themselves of energy and fire, and conquering enthusiasm, when they come into the church. Do not blame the little child that lays its little head upon its mother’s lap and falls into a church-sleep. God bless the little sleeper! It is a beautiful oblation on the altar, is that natural sleep; but blame the soul that leaves the body in the church whilst itself goes out to turn six days’ business into seven, whilst itself steals out like a cunning felon to complete what it left unfinished yesterday in the marketplace. He is asleep who looks without seeing, who has but a body in the church, whilst his soul is in other places drinking forbidden wine, enjoying interdicted fruit, and will steal back so quietly as to suppose that it has deceived every observer, and got in again without ever having been missed. “Whence comest thou, Gehazi? And he said, Thy servant went no whither. And he said unto him, Went not mine heart after thee?” There is no successful truancy from the church. We leave stealthily, but we are followed as quietly as we go, and the record is completed, though we know it not.

Then there is an immoral attention. There is a profane way of listening; there is a wakefulness that is not godly. What are men listening for? For the truth tuneful, pure, holy truth? Then they are listening well. But if for any other thing I care not how strained may be their attention their listening is an oblation on the altar of selfishness, and their attention is a compliment which they are paying to the vanity of their own imagination. Who can listen? Who can be quite awake awake all over, and answer by fire the God that answers himself in flame? Awake! awake! put on thy beautiful garments, O Zion! Let it be a Sabbath day indeed. Get out the very best robe, and let us have a whole Sabbath, a long Sabbath, a cloudless Sabbath, a beginning of heaven itself!

In this incident there are two or three little circumstances worthy of a moment’s notice. “There were many lights in the upper chamber, where the disciples were gathered together.” Christianity has no dark seances; Christianity has no dark meetings, no closed shutters and drawn curtains, and enforced and mysterious silencings; Christianity is not a piece of magic. “Light the lamp,” it says. “Throw back the shutters, and let the sun come in.” This thing was not done in a corner. There is morality in publicity. Christianity is a mighty challenge to the attention of the universe. It only asks for silence that its speech may be heard the better. The magician wants arrangements made to suit him; the light must be so much and no more; the curtain must be hung thus, and not otherwise; the ropes, and bells, and pulleys must be set in this order, and in no other. When a man makes stipulations of that kind with a view to give you a new revelation, he is going to befool you. When did Christianity ask for curtains or screens, or the aid of artificial mechanisms and adaptations? Christianity can preach anywhere. Christianity can go up steps of glory and stand upon a floor of diamonds, or sapphire, and preach its infinite truth; or it can go up the meanest staircase ever laid by unskilful hands, and talk with the same divine eloquence. Paul preaches as eloquently in the upper chamber to the two hundred people who are hearing him as he would preach on Mars’ Hill with all the gathered and cultured hosts of Athens or of Greece. That is the test of reality always. It is enough for the preacher to see one man in the house; he is only discouraged when there is not one soul present. Give him a soul, and you give him a universe! He is not being a truly ardent messenger of God able only to preach when the church is full; he does not see whether the church is full or not. The true preacher only sees one, but he is a host, an army, a whole heavenful or a whole hellful of human nature.

When Paul came down and stretched himself upon Eutychus, he said, “His life is in him.” Christianity does not try to make a reputation for doing miracles where no miracles are to be done. What an opportunity for a magician! The people are panic-struck; they all believe that Eutychus is dead. Paul might say, “Yea, verily, he is stone-dead, cold through and through, and only by a mighty miracle on my part can the vitality be restored.” He makes the least of the occasion. Nothing has occurred that need excite alarm, or beget for him an additional reputation. Christianity tells no lies. Christianity is awfully stern about having the bare truth. It is so real; it will have no covering, no false medium of observation, no adaptable standard of criticism. It will know the thing as it is, just as it is, and represent it so, and have nothing to do with manufactured statements.

Paul stopped his service to look after one injured man. In that particular he followed the example of Jesus Christ. The Saviour suspended the Sabbath day until he got the ox or the ass out of the pit. He said to the Sabbath sun, “Stand still! Here is a work of necessity to be done we must have time.” How can men reject such a Christianity, such a philosophy of life, such a religion, so stern, so tender, so rigorous, so bland, so ready, so redeeming? Let us say to its Author and Founder, “My Lord and my God.” When did Christianity ever undervalue human nature? When did the Divine Founder of Christianity say, “Continue the service, and never mind the man”? On the contrary, he said, “The very hairs of your head are all numbered.” Every life is of importance to God. Eutychus was not a great man; as his name implies, he was of the freedmen class. He and his ancestors had probably all been slaves, but he had become a freedman. He belonged to the plebeian side of life, but to God there are no plebeians, except men who never pray, never love, never do works of mercy, or perform acts of sacrifice; they are the commonalty, the plebeians. But as for those who love him, serve him, pray to him, ask to know his will, and try in his strength to do it, though they have not bread to eat, and no pillows to lay their heads upon, they are nobles, princes, jewels, kings; they are of the very quality of heaven.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

Ver. 7. Continued his speech till midnight ] Media nocte vigilabant, ut eos condemnent qui media die dormiunt, saith Chrysostom. Jacob, fearing his brother, slept not all that night. If Samuel thought it had been God that spake to him, he would not have slept. While lshbosheth slept, Baanah and Rechab took off his head. After the disciples slept, being bidden watch, they fled from Christ and forswore him,Mat 26:40Mat 26:40 .

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

7. . .] We have here an intimation of the continuance of the practice, which seems to have begun immediately after the Resurrection (see Joh 20:26 ), of assembling on the first day of the week for religious purposes. (Justin Martyr, Apol. i. 67, p. 83, says, .) Perhaps the greatest proof of all, that this day was thus observed, may be found in the early (see 1Co 16:2 ) and at length general prevalence, in the Gentile world , of the Jewish seven-day period as a division of time , which was entirely foreign to Gentile habits. It can only have been introduced as following on the practice of especial honour paid to this day. But we find in the Christian Scriptures no trace of any sabbatical observance of this or any day: nay, in Rom 14:5 (where see note), Paul shews the untenableness of any such view under the Christian dispensation. The idea of the transference of the Jewish sabbath from the seventh day to the first was an invention of later times.

] See note on ch. Act 2:42 . The breaking of bread in the Holy Communion was at this time inseparable from the . It took place apparently in the evening (after the day’s work was ended), and at the end of the assembly, after the preaching of the word ( Act 20:11 ).

, in the third person, the discourse being addressed to the disciples at Troas: but the first person is used before and after, because all were assembled, and partook of the breaking of bread together. Not observing this, the copyists have altered above into , and , into to suit .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Act 20:7 . ., “on the first day of the week,” being used, the cardinal for the ordinal , like Hebrew , in enumerating the days of the month, see Plummer’s note on Luk 24:1 ; cf. Luk 18:12 (so Blass). We must remember that 1 Cor. had been previously written, and that the reference in 1Co 16:2 to “the first day of the week” for the collection of alms naturally connects itself with the statement here in proof that this day had been marked out by the Christian Church as a special day for public worship, and for “the breaking of the bread”. On the significance of this selection of the “first day,” see Milligan, Resurrection , pp. 67 69; Maclear, Evidential Value of the Lord’s Day , “Present Day Tracts” 54; and for other references, Witness of the Epistles , pp. 368, 369; Wendt (1899), p. 326. : Burton, Moods and Tenses , p. 71. , see , Arist., Poet. , xvii., 5, , and Act 9:4 , . , cf. Act 16:25 .

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Act 20:7-12

7On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight. 8There were many lamps in the upper room where we were gathered together. 9And there was a young man named Eutychus sitting on the window sill, sinking into a deep sleep; and as Paul kept on talking, he was overcome by sleep and fell down from the third floor and was picked up dead. 10But Paul went down and fell upon him, and after embracing him, he said, “Do not be troubled, for his life is in him.” 11When he had gone back up and had broken the bread and eaten, he talked with them a long while until daybreak, and then left. 12They took away the boy alive, and were greatly comforted.

Act 20:7 “On the first day of the week when we were gathered together to break bread” This shows the early Church’s procedure of meeting on Sundays (the first workday of the week) to have a communal fellowship meal (Act 20:11) and the memorial supper (“breaking bread” is a NT idiom for the Lord’s Supper). Jesus Himself set the precedent of Sunday worship by His three post-resurrection appearances (cf. Joh 20:19; Joh 20:26; Joh 21:1; Luk 24:36; 1Co 16:2).

The Helps for Translator series (The Acts of the Apostles by Newman and Nida, p. 384) says that Luke is referring to Jewish time and that this would have been Saturday evening (cf. TEV), but most translations are more literal, “the first day of the week.” This is the only use of this phrase in Acts. Paul uses the phrase “first day of the week” only in 1Co 16:2, where it implies Sunday.

“prolonged his message” Paul wanted to teach and encourage as much as possible (cf. Act 20:2; Act 20:31).

“until midnight” The Jews began the day at twilight or evening because of Genesis 1, while the Romans began the day at midnight.

Act 20:8 “There were many lamps” This must have been a hot, stuffy, even smokey, atmosphere. It almost seems Luke is trying to explain why Eutychus fell asleep.

Act 20:9 “a young man” The term here denotes a man in the prime of life. A different term is used in Act 20:12. It denotes a child. Eutychus was a young adult.

“Eutychus. . .was sinking into a deep sleep, and as Paul kept on talking” This present passive participle shows the biblical evidence both for long sermons and sleeping listeners!

“was picked up dead” Apparently he was dead! See Act 20:12.

Act 20:10 “fell on him and embraced him” Paul acted much like Elijah and Elisha in the OT, who also raised the dead in this same manner (cf. 1Ki 17:21; 2Ki 4:34). He tells his audience not to be troubled, but in point of fact, I feel sure Paul was distressed by this event!

“Do not be troubled” This is a present imperative with a negative article which usually means to stop an act already in process.

Act 2:12

NASB, TEV”and were greatly comforted”

NKJV, NRSV”they were not a little comforted”

NJB”and were greatly encouraged”

The NKJV and NRSV are literal and show Luke’s propensity for negated understatements (cf. Act 12:18; Act 15:2; Act 19:11; Act 19:23-24; Act 20:12; Act 26:19; Act 26:26; Act 27:20; Act 28:2).

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

first, &c. = first day of the sabbaths, i.e. the first day for reckoning the seven sabbaths to Pentecost. It depended upon the harvest (Deu 16:9), and was always from the morrow after the weekly sabbath when the wave sheaf was presented (Lev 23:15). In Joh 20:1 this was the fourth day after the Crucifixion, “the Lord’s Passover. “Compare App-156. This was by Divine ordering. But in A.D. 57 it was twelve days after the week of unleavened bread, and therefore more than a fortnight later than in A.D. 29.

the disciples. The texts read “we”.

came together = were gathered together, as in Act 20:8.

break bread. See note on Act 2:42.

preached. Greek. dialegomai. Often translated “reason”. See note on Act 17:2.

unto = to.

ready = being about. Same as in verses: Act 20:20, Act 20:3, Act 20:13, Act 20:38,

depart. Greek. exeimi. See note on Act 13:42.

continued = was extending. Greek. parateino. Only here.

his speech = the word. Greek. logos, as in Act 20:2.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

7. . .] We have here an intimation of the continuance of the practice, which seems to have begun immediately after the Resurrection (see Joh 20:26), of assembling on the first day of the week for religious purposes. (Justin Martyr, Apol. i. 67, p. 83, says, .) Perhaps the greatest proof of all, that this day was thus observed, may be found in the early (see 1Co 16:2) and at length general prevalence, in the Gentile world, of the Jewish seven-day period as a division of time,-which was entirely foreign to Gentile habits. It can only have been introduced as following on the practice of especial honour paid to this day. But we find in the Christian Scriptures no trace of any sabbatical observance of this or any day: nay, in Rom 14:5 (where see note), Paul shews the untenableness of any such view under the Christian dispensation. The idea of the transference of the Jewish sabbath from the seventh day to the first was an invention of later times.

] See note on ch. Act 2:42. The breaking of bread in the Holy Communion was at this time inseparable from the . It took place apparently in the evening (after the days work was ended), and at the end of the assembly, after the preaching of the word (Act 20:11).

, in the third person, the discourse being addressed to the disciples at Troas: but the first person is used before and after, because all were assembled, and partook of the breaking of bread together. Not observing this, the copyists have altered above into , and , into to suit .

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Act 20:7. , when we were met together) as already at that time they were wont, on the Lords day. Therefore it is probable that by the breaking of bread is denoted here a feast of the disciples conjoined with the Eucharist, especially since it was so solemn a taking of leave.-, preached to them) Spiritual teachers ought not to be too strictly tied down to a given time (ad clepsydram), especially on a solemn and rare occasion.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

first day

It was the breaking of bread for which the disciples were assembled. The passage indicates the use by the apostolic churches of the first day, not the seventh. Cf. 1Co 16:2.

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

the first: Joh 20:1, Joh 20:19, Joh 20:26, 1Co 16:2, Rev 1:10

the disciples: 1Co 11:17-21, 1Co 11:33, 1Co 11:34

to break: Act 20:11, Act 2:42, Act 2:46, Luk 22:19, Luk 24:35, 1Co 10:16, 1Co 11:20-34

and continued: Act 20:9, Act 20:11, Act 20:31, Act 28:23, Neh 8:3, Neh 9:3, 1Co 15:10, 2Ti 4:2

Reciprocal: Exo 20:11 – General Exo 29:30 – seven days Psa 118:24 – the day Mat 26:26 – and brake Mar 16:9 – the first Act 16:13 – on Act 20:2 – given Act 21:4 – we 1Co 11:23 – took Heb 10:25 – forsaking

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

PUBLIC WORSHIP

And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them.

Act 20:7

In the present day there is a marked decline in the habit of people, generally, to attend public worship regularly, yet the present tendency is not peculiar to this age; it appeared in an aggravated form in the eighteenth century, which was commented on by Bishop Butler in the introduction to his Analogy of Religion.

I. There is a tendency in the present day to regard a service in church far too much as a human performance.When it is over, people converse about the service just as they would about the merits of a concert or any other entertainment. They praise or blame the eloquence or the dullness of the preacher, they discourse on the solos or the choruses of the anthem, or on the reading of the prayers, or on the size and quality of the congregation; but when do we find the main thought of the departing congregation to be centred on the spiritual presence of God which they have felt and realised? Yet this is the one all-important consideration. The most suitable remark at the conclusion of a service would be, It was well seen to-day how God, our God and King, went in the sanctuary.

II. Those who really pray to God and meditate on His goodness cannot be satisfied without the visible manifestation.In some careless, worldly families there is no gathering of the household for family prayer, and no public acknowledgment of Gods bounty in grace said before meals. The religious tone of a household is profoundly influenced by these observances. If a Christian family gave them up, and arranged that each individual was to say his or her prayers in private, and think his or her grace in silence, it would not be long until it was manifest that all difference between the family life of the godly and the careless households had disappeared. Public worship and public thanksgiving bear the same relationship to the nation as family prayer and grace at meals do to the household. Both to be effective must be well seen. When they are not seen there is sure evidence that the decay of true religion has begun, which, if allowed to continue, must result in spiritual death. France is an example in the present day of the truth of this fact.

III. There are two ways in which we may take part in a service.

(a) Either as mere spectators coming to be entertained by music or to receive gratuitously the enjoyment of a service for which other people have paid; or

(b) We may come as true worshippers who desire to take our full share in promoting the glory of God, both by our presence and our offerings.

The services of the Church cannot be maintained in efficiency without the offerings of the people by which they are made real partakers in the whole service. Then, along with our offerings, we present ourselves, our souls and bodies, to be a reasonable, holy, and lively sacrifice unto our Lord God.

Dean Ovenden.

Illustration

For many years past the men of France have forsaken public worship, especially in the towns, where women and children formed the bulk of the congregations. The natural result has been a growing disbelief in the religion of that Church of which they were nominal members. We have reason to fear that the growing tendency of men among ourselves to absent themselves from public worship shows a tendency in our day which may lead to similar results in our land. Sunday work and Sunday amusements are certainly on the increase, and especially we may note the increase in family entertainments on Sunday, the result of week-end gatherings, which all point in the same direction, viz. the forsaking of the habit of attendance at public worship.

Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

7

Act 20:7. Break is from the same Greek word as it is in other places, regardless of whether a common meal is meant or that of the Lord’s Supper. The connection must determine in each case as to what sense is used. In the present passage it could not mean a common meal, for the disciples would not come together for that purpose; they went “from house to house” (chapter 2:46). Likewise, they would not have done so especially on the Lord’s day any more than on some other day. The conclusion, then, is that it means the Lord’s Supper. Another unavoidable conclusion is that the Lord’s Supper is to be observed by disciples who come together, and not done as a private performance in some convenient place suitable to the personal program of temporal entertainment. The preaching of Paul was incidental because he chanced to be present, not that they came together for that purpose. However, the incident gives us an apostolic precedent for having preaching at the time of the regular Lord’s day assembly if a preacher is present. The long sermon was occasioned by the plans of Paul who intended continuing his journey the next day, and the interest in such a rare opportunity of hearing this great apostle held the services to the late hour.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

The Journey to JerusalemThe Communion Feast and Miracle at Troas, 7-12.

Act 20:7. And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together. This was evidently no accidental coincidence, this meeting together of the disciples on the first day of the week, because Paul was about to depart on the morrow. The particular daythe first day of the weekneed not have been mentioned if it had only been a farewell gathering for the old teacher to share in. We have here an unmistakable allusion to the practice, which began evidently immediately after the resurrection of the Lord, of assembling on the first day of the week for religious purposes (see Excursus A., On the Universal Observance of Sunday by the Early Christians, at the end of this chapter).

To break bread. This solemn assembly of disciples met together evidently for no ordinary meal The breaking bread can only signify the Lords Supper, the communion of the body and blood of Christ, which, in these early days, seems to have been generally united with the Agape or love-feast. Well-nigh all commentators, Protestant and Roman, are agreed that this is the signification of this expression. The ceremonial took place on the first day of the week, as Alford remarks, in the evening, after the days work was ended; and at the end of the assembly, after the preaching of the word.

Paul preached unto them. Thus, in this early period of the Church of the first days, the liturgical order was much the same as that developed and elaborate service which has come down to us after eighteen centuries. The disciples came together; and the especial object of their assembling was then, as now, the celebration of the sacrament of the Lords Supper; then, as now, the prayers and sermon preceded the solemn breaking of bread.

And continued his speech until midnight. The assembly was held at night; this was the ordinary practice among the early Christians. The breaking of bread in the Holy Communion followed, at this early period of the Churchs history, the Agape meal. It seems that this brotherhood on the Lords day, after the days work was ended, met together, partook of the simple evening meal, after which prayer and preaching of the word followed; and before they separated, each Christian shared in the solemn breaking of bread, in compliance with their dear Masters last command the evening before His death on the Cross.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Paul’s Stay In Troas

Luke’s seemingly casual comment that Paul and his company stayed seven days in Troas actually serves to enlighten us as to the custom of worship in New Testament times. They came together on the first day of the week to break bread. They were there on every other day of the week, yet they partook on the Lord’s day. Though an inspired apostle spoke on that occasion, mention of that fact takes a back seat to remembering the Lord’s death. The first day was also the day Jesus was raised and the day his church was established ( Mar 16:9 ; Act 2:1-47 : Lev 23:15-16 ). Now, when God said, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy” ( Exo 20:8 ), the Jews understood that he meant every Sabbath.

Gus Nichols wrote a good article on the frequency of our Lord’s supper observance. In it, he quoted 1Co 11:20-22 and said, “If a school teacher should say to some naughty boys, “You did not come here to learn,” she would be understood to mean that they should have come for that purpose. Hence the apostle’s meaning is clear when in reproving the church he said they had not assembled to eat the Lord’s supper.” From this excellent analysis, we conclude that early Christians assembled to partake of the Lord’s supper. Nichols also tells us “the Greek preposition ‘ Kata’ is used in this passage, and means ‘every,’ with reference to week.” ( 1Co 16:2 ) Thus, we have the early church assembling every first day of the week. We know they assembled to break bread and Paul tells them to give every first day of the week.

Paul’s lesson continued until midnight. The church assembled in a third story room. A young man, named Eutychus, who was sitting in a window listening, went to sleep and fell out of the window. After he was pronounced dead, Paul took him up in his arms and announced that his life was still in him. The miraculous restoration of life having been completed, the Christians again assembled in their upper room to eat a meal together. The conversation lasted until daybreak, which indicates just how highly the brethren thought of the apostle. They, along with the young man raised just hours before, walked with the apostle as he departed. Luke notes they were more than a little comforted ( Act 20:7-12 ).

Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books

Act 20:7-10. And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples As was usual with them on that day; came together From different parts; to break bread That is, to celebrate the Lords supper. It is well known the primitive Christians administered the eucharist every Lords day, and as that was the most solemn and appropriate, as well as the concluding act of their worship, it is no wonder that it should be mentioned as the end of their assembling. Paul preached unto them With great fervency, being now to take his leave of them, and depart on the morrow And his heart was so enlarged in love to his hearers, and concern for their salvation, that he continued his speech until midnight Through uncommon fervour of spirit. And there were many lights Or lamps; in the upper chamber where they were assembled For, whatever the malice of their enemies might insinuate, the Christians held not their assemblies in darkness, but took all prudent precautions to avoid every circumstance that might incur censure, or even suspicion. And there sat in a window Kept open to prevent heat, both from the lamps and the number of people; a young man, named Eutychus, who, having fallen into a deep sleep, as Paul was long preaching, fell down from the third loft And no wonder, if, like the eastern windows, described by Chardin, this was very large, and even with the floor; and was taken up dead Really and properly so; and (the whole assembly, doubtless, being thrown into disorder) Paul Breaking off his discourse; went down and fell on him It is observable, our Lord never used this gesture, but Elijah and Elisha did, as well as Paul; and embracing high In his arms; said, Trouble not yourselves Be not in any disorder about it; for his life is in him He is come to life again. Paul, doubtless, restored him to life by a miracle. When he therefore was come up again Into the chamber where the assembly met; (for, having composed and quieted their minds, he returned to his work;) and had broken bread And conversed a considerable time; even till break of day, he departed From Troas, without taking any rest at all. And they brought the young man alive And well into the room; and were not a little comforted At so happy an event; and the rather, as they might apprehend that some reproach would have been occasioned by his death, if he had not been so recovered, because it happened in a Christian assembly, which had been protracted so long beyond the usual bounds of time, on this extraordinary occasion. But, alas! how many of those that have allowed themselves to sleep under sermons, or, as it were, to dream awake, have perished for ever, with the neglected sound of the gospel in their ears; have slept the sleep of eternal death, and are fallen to rise no more!

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

7. The last period of seven days included and was terminated by the Lord’s day. (7) “And on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break the loaf, Paul discoursed to them, about to depart on the next day, and continued his discourse till midnight.” This passage indicates both the day of the week in which the disciples broke the loaf, and the prime object of their meeting on that day. It shows that the loaf was broken on the first day of the week; and we have no apostolic precedent for breaking it on any other day.

The disciples came together on that day, even though Paul and Luke and Timothy, and all he brethren who had come from Greece, were present, not primarily to hear one or more of them discourse, but “to break the loaf.” Such is the distinct statement of the historian. That such was an established custom in the Churches is implied in a rebuke administered by Paul to the Church at Corinth, in which he says: “When you come together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s supper.” Now, for this they would not have deserved censure, had it not been that to eat the Lord’s supper was the proper object of their assemblage. These facts are sufficient to establish the conclusion that the main object of the Lord’s-day meeting was to break the loaf.

This conclusion will be of service to us in seeking to determine the frequency with which the loaf was broken. If the prime object of the Lord’s-day meeting was to celebrate the Lord’s supper, then all the evidence we have of the custom of meeting every Lord’s day is equally conclusive in reference to the weekly observance of the Lord’s supper. But the former custom is universally admitted by Christians of the present day, and therefore there should be no dispute in reference to the latter.

It must, in candor, be admitted, that there is no express statement in the New Testament that the disciples broke the loaf every Lord’s day; neither is it stated that they met every Lord’s day. Yet the question, how often shall the congregation meet together to break the loaf, is one which can not be avoided, but must be settled practically in some way. The different religious parties have hitherto agreed upon a common principle of action, which is, that each may settle the question according to its own judgment of what is most profitable and expedient. This principle, if applied by congregations instead of parties, is a safe one in reference to matters upon which we have no means of knowing the divine will, or the apostolic custom. But when we can determine, with even a good degree of probability, an apostolic custom, our own judgment should yield to it. So all parties have reasoned in reference to the Lord’s day. The intimations contained in the New Testament, together with the universal custom known to have existed in the Churches during the age succeeding that of the apostles, has been decided by them all as sufficient to establish the divine authority of the religious observance of the Lord’s day; and yet they have not consented to the weekly observance of the Lord’s supper, the proof of which is precisely the same.

As a practical issue between the advocates of weekly communion and their opponents, the questions really has reference to the comparative weight of evidence in favor of this practice, and of monthly, quarterly, or yearly communion. When it is thus presented, no one can long hesitate as to the conclusion; for in favor of either of the intervals last mentioned there is not the least evidence, either in the New Testament, or in the uninspired history of the Churches. On the other hand, it is the universal testimony of antiquity that the Churches of the second century broke the loaf every Lord’s day, and considered it a custom of apostolic appointment. Now it can not be doubted that the apostolic Churches had some regular interval at which to celebrate this institution, and seeing that all the evidence there is in the case is in favor of a weekly celebration, there is no room for a reasonable doubt that this was the interval which they adopted.

It is very generally admitted, even among parties who do not observe the practice themselves, that the apostolic Churches broke the loaf weekly; but it is still made a question whether, in the absence of an express commandment, this example is binding upon us. This question is likely to be determined differently by two different classes of men. Those who are disposed to follow chiefly the guide of their own judgment, or of their denominational customs, will feel little influenced by such a precedent. But to those who are determined that the very slightest indication of the divine will shall govern them, the question must present itself in this way: “We are commanded to do this in memory of Jesus. We are not told, in definite terms, how often it shall be done; but we find that the apostles established the custom of meeting every Lord’s day for this purpose. This is an inspired precedent, and with it we must comply. We can come to no other conclusion without assuming an ability to judge of this matter with more wisdom than did the apostle.”

We return to the meeting in Troas. The extreme length of Paul’s discourse on this occasion is in striking contrast with the brevity of his other speeches, as reported by Luke. It is to be accounted for by the anxiety of the apostle, in bidding them a final farewell, to leave the brethren as well guarded as possible against the temptations which awaited them.

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

THE SABBATH CHANGED

7. On the first day of the week we assembling to break bread, i. e., to celebrate the love-feast and the eucharist. Paul spoke to them, being about to depart the following day, and continued his discourse till midnight. Justin Martyr was a disciple of Polycarp, a disciple of the Apostle John. Hence he lived, wrote and suffered martyrdom within a generation of the apostles. I have now before my eye his testimony in his native Greek, certifying that all the saints kept Sunday, in his day, as a day of sacred rest, devoted to the worship of God in commemoration of our Lords resurrection, in consequence of which it was denominated the Lords day, a phrase never applied to the Jewish Sabbath. As a confirmation of this we find the Hebdomidal division of time prevailing throughout the whole Gentile world very early in the Christian era, there being no such a seventh day division of time among the heathens. As the first converts of Christianity were all Jews, of course they kept the seventh day during their generation, and while the Jewish element remained in the church, as we see from this verse and other Scriptures, and the corroborations of Justin Martyr and other Christian fathers, also observing the first day of the week, i. e., Sunday, as a day of sacred rest, devoted to the worship of God. The Seventh Day Adventists most glaringly and erroneously tell us that the pope of Rome made the change of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday! What an awful mistake! when there never was a pope until the seventh century, while we see right here, in New Testament times, they kept Sunday as we do, and history shows that it was ever afterward continued, down to the present day. The Roman historians, Suetonius and Pliny, who lived and wrote in the first centuries of the Christian era, during the bloody martyr ages, are good witnesses in this problem. As they were neither Christians nor Jews, but heathens, and not concerned in the controversy in any respect, their incidental historic testimony is unimpeachable. They certify, in their simple accounts of the Christian martyrdom, that when persons were arrested on suspicion that they were Christians, tried and put to death under the imperial edict prescribing all the Christians and interdicting their worship on penalty of death, their persecutors propounded to them the question: Dominicum servaste? Hast thou kept the Lords day? The Christian responded: Christianus sum I am a Christian. Intermittere non possum I can not omit it. Then they proceeded with the bloody work of death. It is a well-known fact that the Jewish Sabbath never was called the Lords day, but simply the Sabbath day. If the primitive Christians had kept the seventh day, they would have been asked: Sabbaticum servaste? Hast thou kept the Sabbath day? But this question never was asked by their persecutors. It is utter folly to deny that the Lords day was kept from the Apostolic age. The relegation of the change to the pope is preposterous, as there never was a pope until Procas, king of Italy, crowned Boniface III., A. D. 666. Suppose my conscience tells me to keep Saturday as a holy Sabbath? Then, be sure you satisfy your conscience, and keep that day holy. But be equally sure that you keep the day holy for the sake of the conscience of all Christendom (1Co 8:12). The Lord will enable you to make a living in five days in the week.

So rest and attend church both Saturday and Sunday. Then you will cover all the ground. I speak to you whose conscience requires you to keep Saturday. Duty to God is a matter on which we can not afford to take any risk.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

Act 20:7-12. Story of Eutychus.Paul speaks of the first day of the week in 1Co 16:2, but not of a breaking of bread on that day, which appears here as an established usage (cf. Act 24:2). It is Pauls last interview with these people, and he makes the most of it. The lights may be mentioned because of the accusation in early days that the Lords Supper was partaken of in darkness and was accompanied by excesses. Eutychus (Act 20:9) is a common name. The treatment is like that by Elijah (1Ki 17:21), but the incident may be quite natural: it is reported by an eyewitness. It does not interrupt the proceedings nor, except for a short time, Pauls preaching, which goes on till dawn, after the bread is broken.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 7

The first day of the week; the Christian Sabbath; the Jewish Sabbath being on the seventh day.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

20:7 {3} And upon the {b} first [day] of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

(3) Assemblies in the night-time cannot be justly condemned, neither should they be, when the cause is good.

(b) Literally, “the first day of the Sabbath”, that is, upon the Lord’s day: so that by this place, and by 1Co 16:2 we properly understand that in those days the Christians habitually assembled themselves solemnly together upon that day.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

Paul’s raising of Eutychus in Troas 20:7-12

"From Act 20:5 through the end of Acts (Act 28:31), Luke’s narrative gives considerable attention to ports of call, stopovers, and time spent on Paul’s travels and includes various anecdotes. It contains the kind of details found in a travel journal, and the use of ’we’ in Act 20:5-15; Act 21:1-18; and Act 28:16 shows its eyewitness character." [Note: Longenecker, p. 508.]

"This claim to be an eyewitness was considered vital in Greek historiography, unlike Roman historiography where being an armchair historian was much more acceptable." [Note: Witherington, p. 605.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

We do not know if Paul or someone else planted the church in Troas (cf. Act 16:8-9; 2Co 2:12-13). This is the first clear reference in Scripture to the early Christians meeting to worship on the first day of the week rather than on the Sabbath, the seventh day (cf. Joh 20:19; Joh 20:26; 1Co 16:2; Rev 1:10). This day has continued to be the generally preferred one for Christian worship. They selected Sunday because it was the day on which the Lord Jesus Christ arose from the dead. This group of believers met "to break bread" (Gr. klasai arton).

"The breaking of the bread probably denotes a fellowship meal in the course of which the Eucharist was celebrated (cf. Act 2:42)." [Note: Bruce, Commentary on . . ., p. 408. Cf. Act 20:11; 1 Corinthians 10:16-17; 11:17-34.]

"In the early Church there were two closely related things. There was what was called the Love Feast. To it all contributed, and it was a real meal. Often it must have been the only real meal that poor slaves got all week. It was a meal when the Christians sat down and ate in loving fellowship and in sharing with each other. During it or at the end of it the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper was observed. It may well be that we have lost something of very great value when we lost the happy fellowship and togetherness of the common meal of the Christian fellowship. It marked as nothing else could the real homeliness, the real family spirit of the Church." [Note: Barclay, pp. 162-63.]

"Breaking bread is not merely the occasion for the Eutychus story, as Act 20:7 might suggest. Because Paul is departing, the community’s breaking of bread becomes a farewell meal, resembling Jesus’ farewell meal with his apostles, when he ’took bread’ and ’broke’ it (Luk 22:19). The echoes of Jesus’ Jerusalem journey and its consequences that begin in Act 19:21 and continue thereafter may suggest that this resemblance has some importance, even though it is not developed." [Note: Tannehill, 2:250-51.]

Luke did not record when Paul began his address, but the apostle kept speaking all night. Probably some of the Christians present would have been slaves or employees who would have been free to attend a meeting only at night. Luke’s references to time are Roman rather than Jewish. For him days ran from sunrise to sunrise, not from sunset to sunset (cf. Act 20:7; Act 20:11).

"I tell congregations very frankly that I’m a long-winded preacher. I’m known as that. I love to teach the Word of God. I have a system of homiletics that I never learned in the seminary. I picked it up myself-in fact, I got it from a cigarette commercial. This is it: It’s not how long you make it but how you make it long. I believe in making it long; my scriptural authority for it is that Paul did it. He spoke until midnight [really until daybreak, Act 20:11]." [Note: McGee, 4:602.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 16

ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY.

Act 20:1; Act 20:7; Act 20:17-19; Act 20:28

THE period of St. Pauls career at which we have now arrived was full of life, vigour, activity. He was in the very height of his powers, was surrounded with responsibilities, was pressed with cares and anxieties; and yet the character of the sacred narrative is very peculiar. From the passover of the year 57, soon after which the Apostle had to leave Ephesus, till the passover of the next year, we learn but very little of St. Pauls work from the narrative of St. Luke. The five verses with which the twentieth chapter begins tell us all that St. Luke apparently knew about the Apostles actions during that time. He gives us the story of a mere outsider, who knew next to nothing of the work St. Paul was doing. The Apostle left Ephesus and went into Macedonia, whence he departed into Greece. Three months were occupied in teaching at Corinth, and then, intending to sail from Cenchreae to Ephesus, he suddenly changed his mind upon the discovery of a Jewish plot, altered his route, disappointed his foes, and paid a second visit to Macedonia. In this narrative, which is all St. Luke gives, we have the account, brief and concise, of one who was acquainted merely with the bare outlines of the Apostles work, and knew nothing of his inner life and trials. St. Luke, in fact, was so much taken up with his own duties at Philippi, where he had been labouring for the previous five years, that he had no time to think of what was going on elsewhere. At any rate his friend and pupil Theophilus had simply asked him for a narrative so far as he knew it of the progress of the gospel. He had no idea that he was writing anything more than a story for the private use of Theophilus, and he therefore put down what he knew and had experienced, without troubling himself concerning other matters. I have read criticisms of the Acts-proceeding principally, I must confess, from German sources-which seem to proceed on the supposition that St. Luke was consciously writing an ecclesiastical history of the whole early Church which he knew and felt was destined to serve for ages. But this was evidently not the case. St. Luke was consciously writing a story merely for a friends study, and dreamt not of the wider fame and use destined for his. book. This accounts in a simple and natural way, not only for what St. Luke inserts, but also for what he leaves out, and he manifestly left out a great deal. We may take this passage at which we have now arrived as an illustration of his methods of writing sacred history. This period of ten months, from the time St. Paul left Ephesus till he returned to Philippi at the following Easter season, was filled with most important labours which have borne fruit unto all ages of the Church, yet St. Luke dismisses them in a few words. Just let us realise what happened in these eventful months. St. Paul wrote First Corinthians in April A.D. 57. In May he passed to Troas, where, as we learn from Second Corinthians, he laboured for a short time with much success. He then passed into Macedonia, urged on by his restless anxiety concerning the Corinthian Church. In Macedonia. he laboured during the following five or six months. How intense and absorbing must have been his work during that time! It was then that he preached the gospel with signs and wonders round about even unto Illyricum, as he notes in Rom 16:19, an epistle written this very year from Corinth. The last time that he had been in Macedonia he was a hunted fugitive fleeing from place to place. Now he seems to have lived in comparative peace, so far at least as the Jewish synagogues were concerned. He penetrated, therefore, into the mountainous districts west of Beroea, bearing the gospel tidings into cities and villages which had as yet heard nothing of them. But preaching was not his only work in Macedonia. He had written his first Epistle to Corinth from Ephesus a few months before. In Macedonia he received from Titus, his messenger, an account of the manner in which that epistle had been received, and so from Macedonia he despatched his second Corinthian Epistle, which must be carefully studied if we desire to get an adequate idea of the labours and anxieties amid which the Apostle was then immersed. {see 2Co 2:13, and 2Co 7:5-6} And then he passed into Greece, where he spent three months at Corinth, settling the affairs of that very celebrated but very disorderly Christian community. The three months spent there must have been a period of overwhelming business. Let us recount the subjects which must have taken up every moment of St. Pauls time. First there were the affairs of the Corinthian Church itself. He had to reprove, comfort, direct, set in order. The whole moral, spiritual, social, intellectual conceptions of Corinth had gone wrong. There was not a question, from the most elementary topic of morals and the social considerations connected with female dress and activities, to the most solemn points of doctrine and worship, the Resurrection and the Holy Communion, concerning which difficulties, disorders, and dissensions had not been raised. All these had to be investigated and decided by the Apostle. Then, again, the Jewish controversy, anti the oppositions to himself personally which the Judaising party had excited, demanded his careful attention. This controversy was a troublesome one in Corinth just then, but it was a still more troublesome one in Galatia, and was fast raising its head in Rome. The affairs of both these great and important churches, the one in the East, the other in the West, were pressing upon St. Paul at this very time. While he was immersed in all the local troubles of Corinth, he had to find time at Corinth to write the Epistle to the Galatians and the Epistle to the Romans. How hard it must have been for the Apostle to concentrate his attention on the affairs of Corinth when his heart and brain were torn with anxieties about the schisms, divisions, and false doctrines which were flourishing among his Galatian converts, or threatening to invade the Church at Rome, where as yet he had not been able to set forth his own conception of gospel truth, and thus fortify the disciples against the attacks of those subtle foes of Christ who were doing their best to turn the Catholic Church into a mere narrow Jewish sect, devoid of all spiritual power and life.

But this was not all, or nearly all. St. Paul was at the same time engaged in organising a great collection throughout all the churches where he had ministered on behalf of the poor Christians at Jerusalem, and he was compelled to walk most warily and carefully in this matter. Every step he took was watched by foes ready to interpret it unfavourably; every appointment he made, every arrangement, no matter how wise or prudent, was the subject of keenest scrutiny and criticism. With all these various matters accumulating upon him it is no wonder that St. Paul should have written of himself at this very period in words which vividly describe his distractions: “Beside those things that are without, there is that which presseth upon me daily, the care of all the churches.” And yet St. Paul gives us a glimpse of the greatness of his soul as we read the epistles which were the outcome of this period of intense but fruitful labour. He carried a mighty load, but yet he carried it lightly. His present anxieties were numerous, but they did not shut out all thoughts upon other topics. The busiest man then was just the same as the busiest man still. He was the man who had the most time and leisure to bestow thought upon the future. The anxieties and worries of the present were numerous and exacting, but St. Paul did not allow his mind to be so swallowed up in them as to shut out all care about other questions equally important. While he was engaged in the manifold cares which present controversies brought, he was all the while meditating a mission to Rome, and contemplating a journey still farther to Spain and Gaul and the bounds of the Western ocean. And then, finally, there was the care of St. Pauls own soul, the sustenance and development of his spirit by prayer and meditation and worship and reading, which he never neglected under any circumstances. All these things combined must have rendered this period of close upon twelve months one of the Apostles busiest and in-tensest times, and yet St. Luke disposes of it in a few brief verses of this twentieth chapter.

After St. Pauls stay at Corinth, he determined to proceed to Jerusalem according to his predetermined plan, bringing with him the proceeds of the collection which he had made. He wished to go by sea, as he had done some three years before, sailing from Cenchreae direct to Syria. The Jews of Corinth, however, were as hostile as ever, and so they hatched a plot to murder him before his embarkation. St. Paul, however, having learned their designs, suddenly changed his route, and took his journey by land through Macedonia, visiting once more his former converts and tarrying to keep the passover at Philippi with the little company of Christian Jews who there resided. This circumstance throws light upon verses 4 and 5 of this twentieth chapter, which run thus: “There accompanied him as far as Asia Sopater of Beroea, the son of Pyrrhus; and of the Thessalonians, Aristarchus and Secundus; and Gaius of Derbe, and Timothy; and of Asia, Tychicus and Trophimus. But these had gone before, and were waiting for us at Troas.” St. Paul came to Philippi, found St. Luke there, celebrated the passover, and then sailed away with St. Luke to join the company who had gone before. And they had gone before for a very good reason. They were all, except Timothy, Gentile Christians, persons therefore who, unlike St. Paul, had nothing to do with the national rites and customs of born Jews, and who might be much more profitably exercised in working among the Gentile converts at Troas, free from any danger of either giving or taking offence in connection with the passover, a lively instance of which danger Trophimus, one of their number, subsequently afforded in Jerusalem, when his presence alone in St. Pauls company caused the spread of a rumour which raised the riot so fatal to St. Pauls liberty: “For they had seen with him in the city. Trophimus the Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.” {Act 21:29} This incident, together with St. Pauls conduct at Jerusalem, as told in the twenty-sixth verse of the twenty-first chapter, illustrates vividly St. Pauls view of the Jewish law and Jewish rites and ceremonies. They were for Jews national ceremonies. They had a meaning for them. They commemorated certain national deliverances, and as such might be lawfully used. St. Paul himself could eat the passover and cherish the feelings of a Jew, heartily thankful to God for the deliverance from Egypt wrought out through Moses centuries ago for his ancestors, and his mind could then go on and rejoice over a greater deliverance still wrought out at this same paschal season by a greater than Moses. St. Paul openly proclaimed the, lawfulness of the Jewish rites for Jews, but opposed their imposition upon the Gentiles. He regarded them as tolerabiles ineptiae, and therefore observed them to please his weaker brethren; but sent his Gentile converts on before, lest perhaps the sight of his own example might weaken their faith and lead them to a compliance with that Judaising party who were ever ready to avail themselves of any opportunity to weaken St. Pauls teaching and authority. St. Paul always strove to unite wisdom and prudence with faithfulness to principle lest by any means his labour should be in vain.

St. Luke now joined St. Paul at Philippi, and henceforth gives his own account of what happened on this eventful journey. From Philippi they crossed to Troas. It was the spring-time, and the weather was more boisterous than later in the year, and so the voyage took five days to accomplish, while two days had sufficed on a previous occasion. They came to Troas, and there remained for a week, owing doubtless to the exigencies of the ship and its cargo. On the first day of the week St. Paul assembled the Church for worship. The meeting was held on what we should call Saturday evening; but we must remember that the Jewish first day began from sundown on Saturday or the Sabbath. This is the first notice in the Acts of the observance of the Lords Day as the time of special Christian worship. We have, however, earlier notices of the-first day in connection with Christian observances. The apostles, for instance, met together on the first day, as we are told in Joh 20:19, and again eight days after, as the twenty-sixth verse of the same chapter tells. St. Pauls first Epistle to Corinth was written twelve months earlier than this visit to Troas, and it expressly mentions {1Co 16:2} the first day of the week as the time ordered by St. Paul for the setting apart of the Galatian contribution to the collection for the poor saints at Jerusalem; and so here again at Troas we see that the Asiastic Christians observed the same solemn time for worship and the celebration of the Eucharist. Such glimpses-chance notices, we might call them, were there not a higher Providence watching over the unconscious writer-show us how little we can conclude from mere silence about the ritual, worship, and government of the Apostolic Church, and illustrate the vast importance of studying carefully the extant records of the Christian Church in the second century if we wish to gain fresh light upon the history and customs of the apostolic age. If three or four brief texts were blotted out of the New Testament, it would be quite possible to argue from Silence merely that the apostles and their immediate followers did not observe the Lords Day in any way whatsoever, and that the custom of stated worship and solemn eucharistic celebrations on that day were a corruption introduced in post-apostolic times. The best interpreters of the New Testament are, as John Wesley long ago well pointed out in his preface to his celebrated but now almost unknown Christian Library, the apostolic fathers and the writers of the age next following the apostles. We may take it for a certain rule of interpretation that, whenever we find a widely established practice or custom mentioned in the writings of a Christian author of the second century, it originated in apostolic times. It was only natural that this should have been the case. We are all inclined to venerate the past, and to cry it up as the golden age. Now this tendency must have been intensified tenfold in the case of the Christians of the second century. The first century was the time of our Lord and the age of the apostles. Sacred memories clustered thick round it, and every ceremony and rite which came from that time must have been profoundly reverenced, while every new ceremony or custom must have been rudely challenged, and its author keenly scrutinised as one who presumptuously thought he could improve upon the wisdom of men respired by the Holy Ghost and miraculously gifted by God. It is for this reason we regard the second-century doctors and apologists as the best commentary upon the sacred writers, because in them we see the Church of the apostolic age living, acting, displaying itself amid the circumstances and scenes of actual life.

Just let us take as an illustration the case of this observance of the first day of the week. The Acts of the Apostles tells us but very little about it, simply because there is but little occasion to mention what must have seemed to St. Luke one of the commonest and best-known facts. But Justin Martyr some eighty years later was describing Christianity for the Roman Emperor. He was defending it against the outrageous and immoral charges brought against it, and depicting the purity, the innocency, and simplicity of its sacred rites. Among other subjects dealt with, he touches upon the time when Christians offered up formal and stated worship. It was absolutely necessary therefore for him to treat of the subject of the Lords Day. In the sixty-seventh chapter of Justins First “Apology,” we find him describing the Christian weekly festival in words which throw back an interesting light upon the language of St. Luke touching the Lords Day which St. Paul passed at Troas. Justin writes thus on this topic: “Upon the day called Sunday all who live in cities or in the country gather together unto one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And those who are well to do and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows, and those who through sickness or any other cause are in want, and those who are in bonds, and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead.” This passage gives us a full account of Christian customs in the first half of the second century, when thousands must have been still alive who remembered the times of the apostles, enabling us to realise what must have been the character of the assembly and of the worship in which St. Paul played a leading part at Troas.

There was, however, a difference between the celebration at Troas and the celebrations of which Justin Martyr speaks, though we learn not of this difference from Justin himself, but from Plinys letter to Trajan, concerning which we have often spoken. St. Paul met the Christians of Troas in the evening, and celebrated the Holy Communion with them about midnight. It was the first day of the week according to Jewish computation, though it was what we should call Saturday evening. The ship in which the apostolic company was travelling was about to sail on the morrow, and so St. Paul gladly joined the local church in its weekly breaking of bread. It was exactly the same here at Troas as reported by St. Luke, as it was at Corinth, where the evening celebrations were turned into occasions of gluttony and ostentation, as St. Paul tells us in the eleventh of First Corinthians. The Christians evidently met at this time in the evening to celebrate the Lords Supper. It has been often thought that St. Paul, having referred just twelve months before in the First Corinthian Epistle to the gross abuses connected with the evening celebrations at Corinth, and having promised to set the abuses of Corinth in order when he visited that church, did actually change the time of the celebration of Holy Communion from the evening to the morning, when he spent the three months there of which this chapter speaks. Perhaps he did make the change, but we have no information on the point; and if he did make the change for Corinth, it is evident that he did not intend to impose it as a rule upon the whole Christian Church, when a few weeks after leaving Corinth he celebrated the Lords Supper at Troas in the evening. By the second century, however, the change had been made. Justin Martyr indeed does not give a hint as to the time when Holy Communion was administered in the passages to which we have referred. He tells us that none but baptised persons were-admitted to partake of it, but gives us no minor details. Pliny, however, writing of the state of affairs in Bithynia, -and it bordered upon the province where Troas was situated, -tells us from the confession extracted out of apostate Christians that “the whole of their fault lay in this, that they were wont to meet together on a stated day, before it was light, and sing among themselves alternately a hymn to Christ as God, and to bind themselves by a sacrament (or oath) not to the commission of any wickedness, but not to be guilty of theft or robbery or adultery.” After this early service they then separated, and assembled again in the evening to partake of a common meal. The Agape or Love-Feast was united with the Holy Communion in St. Pauls day. Experience, however, showed that Such a union must lead to grave abuses, and so in that final consolidation which the Church received during the last quarter of the first century, when the Lords Second Coming was seen to be not so immediate as some at first expected, the two institutions were divided; the Holy Communion being appointed as the early morning service of the Lords Day, while the Agape was left in its original position as an evening meal. And so have matters continued ever since. The Agape indeed has almost died out. A trace of it perhaps remains in the blessed bread distributed in Roman Catholic Churches on the Continent; while again the love feasts instituted by John Wesley and continued among his followers were an avowed imitation of this primitive institution. The Agape continued indeed in vigorous existence for centuries, but it was almost always found associated with grave abuses. It might have been innocent and useful so long as Christian love continued to burn with the fervour of apostolic days, though even then, as Corinth showed, there were lurking dangers in it; but when we reach the fourth and fifth centuries we find council after council denouncing the evils of the Agape, and restricting its celebration with such effect that during the Middle Ages it ceased to exist as a distinctive Christian ordinance. The change of the Holy Communion to the earlier portion of the day took almost Universal effect, and that from the earliest times. Tertullian (“De Corona,” 3.) testifies that in his time the Eucharist was received before daybreak, though Christ had instituted it at a mealtime. Cyprian witnesses to the same usage in his sixty-third Epistle, where he speaks of Christ as instituting the Sacrament in the evening, that “the very hour of the sacrifice might intimate the evening of the world,” but then describes himself as “celebrating the resurrection of the Lord in the morning.” St. Augustine, as quoted above, writing about 400, speaks of fasting communion as the general rule; so general, indeed, that he regards it as having come down from apostolic appointment. At the same time St. Augustine recognises the time of its original institution, and mentions the custom of the African Church which once a year had an evening communion on Thursday before Easter in remembrance of the Last Supper and of our Lords action in connection with it. My own feeling on the matter is, that early fasting communion, when there are health and strength, is far the most edifying. There is an element of self-denial about it, and the more real self-denial there is about our worship the more blessed will that worship be. A worship that costs nothing in mind, body, or estate is but a very poor thing to offer unto the Lord of the universe. But there is no ground either in Holy Scripture or the history of the primitive Church justifying an attempt to put a yoke on the neck of the disciples which they cannot bear and to teach that fasting communion is binding upon all Christians. St. Augustine speaks most strongly in a passage we have already referred to (Epist. 118., “Ad Januar.”) about the benefit of fasting communion; but he admits the lawfulness of non-fasting participation, as does also that great Greek divine St. Chrysostom, who quotes the examples of St. Paul and of our Lord Himself in justification of such a course.

The celebration of the Eucharist was not the only subject which engaged St. Pauls attention at Troas. He preached unto the people as well; and following his example we find from Justin Martyrs narrative that preaching was an essential part of the communion office in the days immediately following the apostles age; and then, descending to lower times still, we know that preaching is an equally essential portion of the eucharistic service in the Western Church, the only formal provision for a sermon according to the English liturgy being the rubric in the service for the Holy Communion, which lays down that after the Nicene Creed, “Then shall follow the sermon or one of the Homilies already set forth, or hereafter to be set forth, by authority.” St. Pauls discourse was no mere mechanical homily, however. He was not what man regarded as a powerful, but he was a ready speaker, and one who carried his hearers away by the rapt, intense earnestness of his manner. His whole soul was full of his subject. He was convinced that this was his last visit to the churches of Asia. He foresaw, too, a thousand dangers to which they would be exposed after his departure, and he therefore prolonged his sermon far into the night, so far indeed that human nature asserted its claims upon a young man named Eutychus, who sat in a window of a room Where they were assembled. Human nature indeed was never for a moment absent from these primitive Church assemblies. If it was absent in one shape, it was present in another, just as really as in our modern congregations, and so Eutychus fell fast asleep under the heart-searching exhortations of an inspired apostle, even as men fall asleep. under less powerful sermons of smaller men; and as the natural result, sitting in a window left open for the sake of ventilation, he fell down into the courtyard, and was taken up apparently lifeless. St. Paul was not put out, however. He took interruptions in his work as the Master took them. He was not upset by them, but he seized them, utilised them, and then, having extracted the sweetness and blessedness which they brought with them, he returned from them back to his interrupted work. St. Paul descended to Eutychus, found him in a lifeless state, and then restored him. Men have disputed whether the Apostle worked a miracle on this occasion, or merely perceived that the young man was in a temporary faint. I do not see that it makes any matter which opinion we form. St. Pauls supernatural and miraculous powers stand on quite an independent ground, no matter what way we decide this particular case. It seems to me indeed from the language of St. Paul-“Make ye no ado; for his life is in him”-that the young man had merely fainted, and that St. Paul recognised this fact as soon as he touched him. But if any one has strong opinions on the opposite side I should be sorry to spend time disputing a question which has absolutely no evidential bearing. The great point is, that Eutychus was restored, that St. Pauls long sermon was attended by no fatal consequences, and that the Apostle has left us a striking example showing how that, with pastors and people alike, intense enthusiasm, high-strung interest in the affairs of the spiritual world, can enable human nature to rise superior to all human wants, and prove itself master even of the conquering powers of sleep: “And when he was gone up, and had broken the bread, and eaten, and had talked with them a tong while, even till break of day, so he departed.”

We know nothing of what the particular topics were which engaged St. Pauls attention at Troas, but we may guess them from the subject-matter of the address to the elders of Ephesus, which takes up the latter half of this twentieth chapter. Troas and Ephesus, in fact, were so near and so similarly circumstanced that the dangers and trials of both must have been much alike. He next passed from Troas to Miletus. This is a considerable journey along the western shore of Asia Minor. St. Paul was eagerly striving to get to Jerusalem by Pentecost, or by Whitsuntide, as we should say. He had left Philippi after Easter, and now there had elapsed more than a fortnight of the seven weeks which remained available for the journey to Jerusalem. How often St. Paul must have chafed against the manifold delays of the trading vessel in which he sailed; how frequently he must have counted the days to see if sufficient time remained to execute his purpose! St. Paul, however, was a rigid economist of time. He saved every fragment of it as carefully as possible. It was thus with him at Troas. The ship in which he was travelling left Troas early in the morning. It had to round a promontory in its way to the port of Assos, which could be reached direct by St. Paul in half the time. The Apostle therefore took the shorter route, while St. Luke and his companions embarked on board the vessel. St. Paul evidently chose the land route because it gave him a time of solitary communion with God and with himself. He felt, in fact, that the perpetual strain upon his spiritual nature demanded special spiritual support and refreshment, which could only be obtained in the case of one who led such a busy life by seizing upon every such occasion as then offered for meditation and prayer. St. Paul left Troas some time on Sunday morning. He joined the ship at Assos, and after three days coasting voyage landed at Miletus on Wednesday, whence he despatched a messenger summoning the elders of the Church of Ephesus to meet him. The ship was evidently to make a delay of several days at Miletus. We conclude this from the following reason. Miletus is a town separated by a distance of thirty miles from Ephesus. A space therefore of at least two days would be required in order to secure the presence of the Ephesian elders. If a messenger-St. Luke, for instance-started immediately on St. Pauls arrival at Miletus, no matter how quickly he travelled, he could not arrive at Miletus sooner than Thursday at midday. The work of collecting the elders and making known to them the apostolic summons would take up the afternoon at least, and then the journey to Ephesus, either by land or water, must have occupied the whole of Friday. It is very possible that the sermon recorded in this twentieth of Acts was delivered, on the Sabbath, which, as we have noted above, was as yet kept sacred by Christians as well as by Jews, or else upon the Lords Day, when, as upon that day week at Troas, the elders of Ephesus had assembled with the Christians of Miletus in order to commemorate the Lords resurrection.

We have already pointed out that we know not the subject of St. Pauls sermon at Troas, but we do know the topics upon which he enlarged at Miletus, and we may conclude that, considering the circumstances of the time, they must have been much the same as those upon which he dwelt at Troas. Some critics have found fault with St. Pauls sermon as being quite too much taken up with himself and his own vindication. But they forget the peculiar position in which St. Paul was placed, and the manner in which the truth of the gospel was then associated in the closest manner with St. Pauls own personal character and teaching. The Apostle was just then assailed all over the Christian world wherever he had laboured, and even sometimes where he was only known by name, with the most frightful charges; ambition, pride, covetousness, deceit, lying, all these things and much more were imputed to him by his opponents, who wished to seduce the Gentiles from that simplicity and liberty in Christ into which he had led them. Corinth had been desolated by such teachers; Galatia had succumbed to them; Asia was in great peril. St. Paul therefore, foreseeing future dangers, warned the shepherds of the flock at Ephesus against the machinations of his enemies, who always began their preliminary operations by making attacks upon St. Pauls character. This sufficiently explains the apologetic tone of St. Pauls address, of which we have doubtless merely a brief and condensed abstract indicating the subjects of a prolonged conversation with the elders of Ephesus, Miletus, and such neighbouring churches as could be gathered together. We conclude that St. Pauls conference on this occasion must have been a long one for this reason. If St. Paul could find matter sufficient to engage his attention for a whole night, from sundown till sunrise, in a place like Troas, where he had laboured but a very short time, how much more must he have found to say to the presbyters of the numerous congregations which must have been flourishing at Ephesus, where he had laboured for years with such success as to make Christianity a prominent feature in the social and religious life of that idolatrous city!

Let us now notice some of the topics of this address. It may be divided into four portions. The first part is retrospective, and autobiographical; the second is prospective, and sets forth his conception of his future course; the third is hortatory, expounding the dangers threatening the Ephesian Church; and the fourth is valedictory.

I We have the biographical portion. He begins his discourse by recalling to the minds of his hearers his own manner of life, -“Ye yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in Asia, after what manner I was with you all the time, serving the Lord with all lowliness of mind, and with tears, and with trials which befell me by the plots of the Jews”; words which show us that from the earliest portion of his ministry at Ephesus, and as soon as they realised the meaning of his message, the Jews had become as hostile to the Apostle at Ephesus as they had repeatedly shown themselves at Corinth, again and again making attempts upon his life. The foundations indeed of the Ephesian Church were laid in the synagogue during the first three months of his work, as we are expressly told in Act 19:8; but the Ephesian Church must have been predominantly Gentile in its composition, or else the language of Demetrius must have been exaggerated and the riot raised by him meaningless. How could Demetrius have said, “Ye see that at Ephesus this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods which are made with hands,” unless the vast majority of his converts were drawn from the ranks of those pagans who worshipped Diana? These words also show us that during his extended ministry at Ephesus he was left at peace by the heathen. St. Paul here makes no mention of trials experienced from pagan plots. He speaks of the Jews alone as making assaults upon his work or his person, incidentally confirming the statement of Act 19:23, that it was only when he was purposing to retire from Ephesus, and during the celebration of the Artemisian games which marked his last days there, that the opposition of the pagans developed itself in a violent shape.

St. Paul begins his address by fixing upon Jewish opposition outside the Church as his great trial at Ephesus, just as the same kind of opposition inside the Church had been his great trial at Corinth, and was yet destined to be a source of trial to him in the Ephesian Church itself, as we can see from the Pastoral Epistles. He then proceeds to speak of the doctrines he had taught and how he had taught them; reminding them “how that I shrank not from declaring unto you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly, and from house to house, testifying both to Jews and Greeks repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” St. Paul sets forth his manner of teaching. He taught publicly, and public teaching was most effective in his case, because he came armed with a double power, the powers of spiritual and of intellectual preparation. St. Paul was not a man who thought that prayer and spiritual life could dispense with thought and mental culture. Or again, he would be the last to tolerate the idea that diligent visitation from house to house would make up for the neglect of that public teaching which he so constantly and so profitably practised. Public preaching and teaching, pastoral visitation and work, are two distinct branches of labour, which at various periods of the Churchs history have been regarded in very different lights. St. Paul evidently viewed them as equally important; the tendency in the present age is, however, to decry and neglect preaching and to exalt pastoral work-including under that head Church services-out of its due position. This is, indeed, a great and lamentable mistake. The “teaching publicly” to which St. Paul refers is the only opportunity which the majority of men possess of hearing the authorised ministers of religion, and if the latter neglect the office of public preaching, and think the fag end of a week devoted to external and secular labours and devoid of any mental study and preparation stirring the soul and refreshing the spirit, to be quite sufficient for pulpit preparation, they cannot be surprised if men come to despise the religion that is presented in such a miserable light and by such inefficient ambassadors.

St. Paul insists in this passage on the publicity and boldness of his teaching. There was no secrecy about him, no hypocrisy; he did not come pretending one view or one line of doctrine, and then, having stolen in secretly, teaching a distinct system. In this passage, which may seem laudatory of his own methods, St. Paul is, in fact, warning against the underhand and hypocritical methods adopted by the Judaising party, whether at Antioch, Galatia, or Corinth. In this division of his sermon St. Paul then sets forth the doctrines which were the sum and substance of the teaching which he had given both publicly and from house to house. They were repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, and that not only in the case of the Jews, but also of the Greeks. Now here we shall miss the implied reference of St. Paul unless we emphasise the words “I shrank not from declaring unto you anything that was profitable.” His Judaising opponents thought there were many other things profitable for men besides these two points round which St. Pauls teaching turned. They regarded circumcision and Jewish festivals, washings and sacrifices, as very necessary and very profitable for the Gentiles; while, as far as the Jews were concerned, they thought that the doctrines on which St. Paul insisted might possibly be profitable, but were not at all necessary. St. Paul impresses by his words the great characteristic differences between the Ebionite view of Christ and of Christianity and that catholic view which has regenerated society and become a source of life and light to the human race.

II. We have, then, the prospective portion of his discourse. St. Paul announces his journey to Jerusalem, and professes his ignorance of his fate there. He was warned merely by the testimony of the Holy Spirit that bonds and afflictions were his portion in every city. He was prepared for them, however, and for death itself, so that he might accomplish the ministry with which the Lord Jesus Christ had put him in trust. He concluded this part of his address by expressing his belief that he would never see them again. His work among them was done, and he called them to witness that he was pure from the blood of all men, seeing that he had declared unto them the whole counsel of God. This passage has given rise to much debate, because of St. Pauls statement that he knew that he should never see them again, while the Epistles to Timothy and that to Titus prove that after St. Pauls first imprisonment, with the notice of which this book of the Acts ends, he laboured for several years in the neighbourhood of Asia Minor, and paid lengthened visits to Ephesus.

We cannot now bestow space in proving this point, which will be found fully discussed in the various Lives of St. Paul which we have so often quoted: as, for instance, in Lewin, vol. 2; Pg 94, and in Conybeare and Howson, vol. 2. P. 547. We shall now merely indicate the line of proof for this. In the Epistle to Phm 1:22, written during his first Roman imprisonment, and therefore years subsequent to this address, he indicates his expectation of a speedy deliverance from his bonds, and his determination to travel eastward to Colossae, where Philemon lived. {cf. Php 1:25; Php 2:24} He then visited Ephesus, where he left Timothy, who had been his companion in the latter portion of his Roman imprisonment, {cf. Phm 1:1 and 1Ti 1:3} expecting soon to return to him in the same city; {1Ti 3:14} while again in 2Ti 1:18 he speaks of Onesiphorus having ministered to himself in Ephesus, and then in the same Epistle, {Eph 4:26} written during his second Roman imprisonment, he speaks of having just left Trophimus at Miletus sick. This brief outline, which can be followed up in the volumes to which we have referred, and especially in Appendix II in Conybeare and Howson on the date of the Pastoral Epistles, must suffice to prove that St. Paul was expressing a mere human expectation when he told the Ephesian elders that he should see their faces no more. St. Luke, in fact, thus shows us that St. Paul was not omniscient in his knowledge, and that the inspiration which he possessed did not remove him, as some persons think, out of the category of ordinary men or free him from their infirmities. The Apostle was, in fact, supernaturally inspired upon occasions. The Holy Ghost now and again illuminated the darkness of the future when such illumination was necessary for the Churchs guidance; but on other occasions St; Paul and his brother apostles were left to the guidance of their own understandings and to the conclusions and expectations of common sense, else why did not St. Peter and St. John read the character of Ananias and Sapphira or of Simon Magus before their sins were committed? why did St. Peter know nothing of his deliverance from Herods prison-house before the angel appeared, when his undissembled surprise is sufficient evidence that he had no expectation of any such rescue? These instances, which might be multiplied abundantly out of St. Pauls career and writings, show us that St. Pauls confident statement in this passage was a mere human anticipation which was disappointed by the course of events. The supernatural knowledge of the apostles ran on precisely the same lines as their supernatural power. God bestowed them both for use according as He saw fit and beneficial, but not for common ordinary everyday purposes, else why did St. Paul leave Trophimus at Miletus sick, or endure the tortures of his own ophthalmia, or exhort Timothy to take a little wine on account of his bodily weakness, if he could have healed them all by his miraculous power? Before we leave this point we may notice that here we have an incidental proof of the early date of the composition of the Acts. St. Luke, as we have often maintained, wrote this book about the close of St. Pauls first imprisonment. Assuredly if he had written it at a later period, and above all, if he wrote it twenty years later, he would have either modified the words of his synopsis of St. Pauls speech, or else given us a hint that subsequent events had shown that the Apostle was mistaken in his expectations, a thing which he could easily have done, because he cherished none of these extreme notions about St. Pauls office and dignity which have led some to assume that it was impossible for him ever to make a mistake about the smallest matters.

III. This discourse, again, is hortatory, and its exhortations contain very important doctrinal statements. St. Paul begins this third division with an exhortation like that which our Lord gave to His Apostles under the same circumstances, “Take heed unto yourselves.” The Apostle never forgot that an effective ministry of souls must be based on deep personal knowledge of the things of God. He knew, too, from his own experience that it is very easy to be so completely taken up with the care of other mens souls and the external work of the Church, as to forget that inner life which can only be kept alive by close communion with God. Then, having based his exhortations on their own spiritual life, he exhorts the elders to diligence in the pastoral office: “Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Ghost hath made you bishops, to feed the Church of God, which He purchased with His own blood.” St. Paul in these words shows us his estimate of the ministerial office. The elders of Ephesus had been all ordained by St. Paul himself with the imposition of hands, a rite that has ever been esteemed essential to ordination. It was derived from the Jewish Church, and was perpetuated into the Christian Church by that same spirit of conservatism, that law of continuity which in every department of life enacts that everything shall continue as it was unless there be some circumstance to cause an alteration. Now there was no cause for alteration in this case; nay, rather, there was every reason to bring about a continuance of this custom, because imposition of hands indicates for the people the persons ordained, and assures the ordained themselves that they have been individually chosen and set apart. But St.. Paul by these words teaches us a higher and nobler view of the ministry. He teaches us that he was himself but the instrument of a higher power, and that the imposition of hands was the sign and symbol to the ordained that the Holy Ghost had chosen them and appointed them to feed the flock of God. St. Paul here shows that in ordination, as in the sacraments, we should by faith look away beyond and behind the human instrument, and view the actions of the Church of Christ as the very operations and manifestations in the world of time and sense of the Holy Ghost Himself, the Lord and Giver of life. He teaches the Ephesian elders, in fact, exactly what he taught the Corinthian Church some few months earlier, “We have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the exceeding greatness of the power may be of God, and not from ourselves”; {2Co 4:7} the treasure and the power were everything, the only things, in fact, worth naming, the earthen vessels which contained them for a little time were nothing at all. How awful, solemn, heart-searching a view of the ministerial office this was! How sustaining a view when its holders are called upon to discharge functions for which they feel themselves all inadequate in their natural strength! Is it any wonder that the Church, taking the same view as St. Paul did, has ever held and taught that the ministerial office thus conferred by supernatural power is no mere human function to be taken up or laid down at mans pleasure, but is a life-long office to be discharged at the holders peril, -a savour of life unto life for the worthy recipient, a savour of death unto death for the unworthy and the careless.

In connection with this statement made by St. Paul concerning the source of the ministry we find a title given to the Ephesian presbyters round which much controversy has centred. St. Paul says, “Take heed unto the flock, over which the Holy Ghost has made you Bishops.” I do not, however, propose to spend much time over this topic, as all parties are now agreed that in the New Testament the term presbyter and bishop are interchangeable and applied to the same persons. The question to be decided is not about a name, but an office, whether, in fact, any persons succeeded in apostolic times to the office of rule and government exercised by St. Paul and the rest of the apostles, as Well as by Timothy, Titus, and the other delegates of the Apostle, and whether the term bishop, as used in the second century, was applied to such successors of the apostles. This, however, is not a question which comes directly within the purview of an expositor of the Acts of the Apostles, as the appointment of Timothy and Titus to manage the affairs of the Church in Ephesus and in Crete lies beyond the period covered by the text of the Acts, and properly belongs to the commentary on the Pastoral Epistles. St. Pauls words in this connection have, however, an important bearing on fundamental doctrinal questions connected with the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. St. Paul speaks of the presbyters as called “to feed the Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood.” These words are very strong, so strong indeed that various readings have been put forward to mitigate their force. Some have read “Lord” instead of “God,” others have substituted Christ for it; but the Revised Version, following the text of Westcott and Hort, have accepted the strongest form of the verse on purely critical ground, and translates it as “the Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood.” This passage, then, is decisive as to the Christological views of St. Luke and the Pauline circle generally. They believed so strongly in the deity of Jesus Christ and His essential unity with the Father that they hesitated not to speak of His sacrifice on Calvary as a shedding of the blood of God, an expression which some fifty years afterwards we find in the Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians, where St. Ignatius speaks of them as “kindled into living fire by the blood of God,” and a hundred years later still, in Tertullian, “Ad Uxor.,” 2:3. This passage has been used in scientific theology as the basis of a principle or theory called the “Communicatio Idiomatum,” a theory which finds an illustration in two other notable passages of Scripture, Joh 3:13 and 1Co 2:8. In the former passage our Lord says of Himself, “No man hath ascended into heaven, but He that descended out of heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven,” where the Son of man is spoken of as in heaven as well as upon earth at the same time, though the Son of man, according to His humanity, could only be in one place at a time. In the second passage St. Paul says, “Which none of the rulers of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory,” where crucifixion is attributed to the Lord of Glory, a title derived from His Divine nature. Now the term “Communicatio Idiomature,” or “transference of peculiar properties,” is given to this usage because in all these texts the properties of the nature pertaining either to God or to man are spoken of as if they belonged to the other; or, to put it far better in the stately language of Hooker, 5, 53., where he speaks of “those cross and circulatory speeches wherein there are attributed to God such things as belong to manhood, and to man such as properly concern the deity of Jesus Christ, the cause whereof is the association of natures in one subject. A kind of mutual commutation there is, whereby those concrete names, God and man, when we speak of Christ, do take interchangeably one anothers room, so that for truth of speech it skilleth not whether we say that the Son of God hath created the world and the Son of man by His death hath saved it, or else that the Son of man did create and the Son of God did die to save the world.” This is a subject of profound speculative and doctrinal interest, not only in connection with the apostolic view of our Lords Person, but also in reference to the whole round of methodised and scientific theology. We cannot, however, afford further space for this subject. We must be content to have pointed it out as an interesting topic of inquiry, and, merely referring the reader to Hooker and to Liddons Bampton Lectures (Lect. 5.) for more information, must hurry on to a conclusion. St. Paul terminates this part of his discourse with expressing his belief in the rapid development of false doctrines and false guides as soon as his repressive influence shall have been removed; a belief which the devout student of the New Testament will find to have been realised when 1Ti 1:20, in 2Ti 1:15, and 2Ti 2:17-18 he finds the Apostle warning the youthful Bishop of Ephesus against Phygelus and Hermogenes, who had turned all Asia away from St. Paul, and against Hymenaeus, Philetus, and Alexander, who had imbibed the Gnostic error concerning matter, which had already led the Corinthians to deny the future character of the Resurrection. St. Paul then terminates his discourse with a solemn commendation of the Ephesian elders to that Divine grace which is as necessary for an apostle as for the humblest Christian. He exhorts them to self-sacrifice and self-denial, reminding them of his own example, having supported himself and his companions by his labour as a tentmaker at Ephesus, and above all of the words of the Lord Jesus, which they apparently knew from some source which has not come down to us, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.”

When the Apostle had thus terminated his address, which doubtless was a very lengthened one, he knelt down, probably on the shore, as we shall find him kneeling in the next chapter {Act 21:5-6} on the shore at Tyre. He then commended them in solemn prayer to God, and they all parted in deep sorrow on account of the final separation which St. Pauls words indicated as imminent; for though the primitive Christians believed in the reality of the next life with an intensity of faith of which we have no conception, and longed for its peace and rest, yet they gave free scope to those natural affections which bind men one to another according to the flesh and were sanctified by the Master Himself when He wept by the grave of Lazarus. Christianity is not a religion of stoical apathy, but of sanctified human affections.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary