Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 6:9
Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called [the synagogue] of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen.
9. Then there arose certain ] It is better to render the connecting particle But, it is no note of time.
of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines ] Lit. of them that were of the synagogue called, &c. The number of synagogues in Jerusalem was very great. The Libertines were most likely the children of some Jews who had been carried captive to Rome by Pompey (b.c. 63), and had been made freedmen ( libertini) by their captors, and after their return to Jerusalem had formed one congregation and used one synagogue specially. There is an interesting illustration of this severance of congregations among the Jews from a like cause in the description of the modern Jewish communities in Malabar and Cochin. It is in a MS. in the Cambridge University Library (Oo. 1. 47) which was written in 1781. “At this time are found in their dwelling-places about forty white householders, and in all the other places are black Jews found, and their forefathers were the slaves of the white Jews, and now the black Jews as found in all the places are about five hundred householders, and they have ten synagogues while the white Jews have only one. And the white Jews dwell all together and their ritual is distinct from that of the black Jews, and they will not count them [the black Jews] among the ten [necessary for forming a congregation] except a few families of them; but if any of the white Jews go to their [the black Jews’] synagogues, they will admit him as one of the ten.”
and Cyrenians ] Read, and of the Cyrenians. On the Jews in Cyrene see Act 2:10 note.
and Alexandrians ] Read, and of the Alexandrians. There were in Christ’s time, and had been long before, as we learn from the account of the Septuagint translation, Jews resident in Alexandria. In the Talmud we are told that they were very numerous. Thus T. B. Succah 51 b it is said, “Rabbi Jehudah said: He that hath not seen the amphitheatre at Alexandria (apparently used for the Jewish worship) in Egypt has not seen the glory of Israel. They say it was like a great Basilica with gallery above gallery. Sometimes there were in it double the number of those who went out from Egypt, and there were in it seventy-one seats of gold corresponding to the seventy-one members of the great Sanhedrin, each one of them worth not less than twenty-one myriads of talents of gold, and there was a platform of wood in the midst thereof, and the minister of the synagogue stood upon it with flags in his hand, and when the time [in the service] came that they should answer Amen, then he waved with the flag and all the people answered Amen.” In spite of the exaggeration of the numbers in this story we may be certain from it that there was a very large Jewish population in Alexandria, and that they were likely to have a separate synagogue in Jerusalem. For another portion of this story see note on Act 18:3.
and of them of Cilicia ] Cilicia was at the S.E. corner of Asia Minor. One of its principal towns was Tarsus, the birthplace of St Paul, and there were no doubt many other Jews there, descendants of those Jews whom Antiochus the Great introduced into Asia Minor (Joseph. Antiq. xii. 3. 4), two thousand families of whom he placed there as well disposed guardians of the country.
and of Asia ] See note on Act 2:9.
disputing with Stephen ] The original word is used frequently of the captious questionings of the Pharisees (Mar 8:11), and the scribes (Mar 9:14), with Jesus and His disciples.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Then there arose – That is, they stood up against him, or they opposed him.
Of the synagogue – See the notes on Mat 4:23. The Jews were scattered in all parts of the world. In every place they would have synagogues. But it is also probable that there would be enough foreign Jews residing at Jerusalem from each of those places to maintain the worship of the synagogue; and at the great feasts, those synagogues adapted to Jewish people of different nations would be attended by those who came up to attend the great feasts. It is certain that there was a large number of synagogues in Jerusalem. The common estimate is, that there were four hundred and eighty in the city (Lightfoot; Vitringa).
Of the Libertines – There has been very great difference of opinion about the meaning of this word. The chief opinions may be reduced to three:
1. The word is Latin, and means properly a freedman, a man who had been a slave and was set at liberty. Many have supposed that these persons were manumitted slaves of Roman origin, but who had become proselyted to the Jewish religion, and who had a synagogue in Jerusalem. This opinion is not very probable; though it is certain, from Tacitus (Ann., lib. 2:c. 85), that there were many persons of this description at Rome. He says that 4,000 Jewish proselytes of Roman slaves made free were sent at one time to Sardinia.
2. A second opinion is, that these persons were Jews by birth, and had been taken captives by the Romans, and then set at liberty, and were thus called freedmen or liberties. That there were many Jews of this description there can be no doubt. Pompey the Great, when he subjugated Judea, sent large numbers of the Jews to Rome (Philo, In Legat. a.d. Caium). These Jews were set at liberty at Rome, and assigned a place beyond the Tiber for a residence. See Introduction to the Epistle to the Romans. These persons are by Philo called libertines, or freedmen (Kuinoel, in loco). Many Jews were also conveyed as captives by Ptolemy I. to Egypt, and obtained a residence in that country and the vicinity.
3. Another opinion is, that they took their name from some place which they occupied. This opinion is more probable from the fact that all the other persons mentioned here are named from the countries which they occupied. Suidas says that this is the name of a place. And in one of the fathers this passage occurs: Victor, Bishop of the Catholic Church at Libertina, says, unity is there, etc. from this passage it is plain that there was a place called Libertina. That place was in Africa, not far from ancient Carthage. See Dr. Pearces Commentary on this place.
Cyrenians – Jews who dwelt at Cyrene in Africa. See the notes on Mat 27:32.
Alexandrians – Inhabitants of Alexandria in Egypt. That city was founded by Alexander the Great, 332 b.c., and was populated by colonies of Greeks and Jews. It was much celebrated, and contained not less than 300,000 free citizens, and as many slaves. The city was the residence of many Jews. Josephus says that Alexander himself assigned to them a particular quarter of the city, and allowed them equal privileges with the Greeks (Antiq., Rom 14:7, Rom 14:2; Against Apion, Rom 2:4). Philo affirms that of five parts of the city, the Jews inhabited two. According to his statement, there dwelt in his time at Alexandria and the other Egyptian cities not less than ten hundred thousand Jews. Amron, the general of Omar, when he took the city, said that it contained 40,000 tributary Jews. At this place the famous version of the Old Testament called the Septuagint, or the Alexandrian version, was made. See Robinsons Calmet.
Cilicia – This was a province of Asia Minor, on the seacoast, at the north of Cyprus. The capital of this province was Tarsus, the native place of Paul, Act 9:11. As Paul was of this place, and belonged doubtless to this synagogue, it is probable that he was one who was engaged in this dispute with Stephen. Compare Act 7:58.
Of Asia – See the notes on Act 2:9.
Disputing with Stephen – Doubtless on the question whether Jesus was the Messiah. This word does not denote angry disputing, but is commonly used to denote fair and impartial inquiry; and it is probable that the discussion began in this way, and when they were overcome by argument, they resorted, as disputants are apt to do, to angry criminations and violence.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 9. The synagogue – of the Libertines, c.] That Jews and proselytes from various countries had now come up to Jerusalem to bring offerings, and to attend the feast of pentecost, we have already seen, Ac 2:9-11. The persons mentioned here were foreign Jews, who appear to have had a synagogue peculiar to themselves at Jerusalem, in which they were accustomed to worship when they came to the public festivals.
Various opinions have been entertained concerning the Libertines mentioned here: Bp. Pearce’s view of the subject appears to me to be the most correct.
“It is commonly thought that by this name is meant the sons of such Jews as had been slaves, and obtained their freedom by the favour of their masters but it is to be observed that with these Libertines the Cyrenians and Alexandrians are here joined, as having one and the same synagogue for their public worship. And it being known that the Cyrenians (Ac 2:10) lived in Libya, and the Alexandrians in the neighbourhood of it, it is most natural to look for the Libertines too in that part of the world. Accordingly we find Suidas, in his Lexicon, saying, upon the word , that it is , the name of a people. And in Gest. Collationis Carthagine habitae inter Catholicos et Donatistas, published with Optatus’s works, Paris, 1679, (No. 201, and p. 57,) we have these words: Victor episcopus Ecclesiae Catholicae LIBERTINENSIS dixit, Unitas est illic, publicam non latet conscientiam. Unity is there: all the world knows it. From these two passages it appears that there was in Libya a town or district called Libertina, whose inhabitants bore the name of , Libertines, when Christianity prevailed there. They had an episcopal see among them, and the above-mentioned Victor was their bishop at the council of Carthage, in the reign of the Emperor Honorius. And from hence it seems probable that the town or district, and the people, existed in the time of which Luke is here speaking. They were Jews, (no doubt,) and came up, as the Cyrenian and Alexandrian Jews did, to bring their offerings to Jerusalem, and to worship God in the temple there. Cunaeus, in his Rep. Hebr. ii. 23, says that the Jews who lived in Alexandria and Libya, and all other Jews who lived out of the Holy Land, except those of Babylon and its neighbourhood, were held in great contempt by the Jews who inhabited Jerusalem and Judea; partly on account of their quitting their proper country, and partly on account of their using the Greek language, and being quite ignorant of the other. For these reasons it seems probable that the Libertines, Cyrenians, and Alexendrians, had a separate synagogue; (as perhaps the Cilicians and those of Asia had;) the Jews of Jerusalem not suffering them to be present in their synagogues, or they not choosing to perform their public service in synagogues where a language was used which they did not understand.”
It is supposed, also, that these synagogues had theological, if not philosophical, schools attached to them; and that it was the disciples or scholars of these schools who came forward to dispute with Stephen, and were enraged because they were confounded. For it is not an uncommon custom with those who have a bad cause, which can neither stand the test of Scripture nor reason, to endeavour to support it by physical when logical force has failed; and thus: –
“Prove their doctrine orthodox,
By apostolic blows and knocks.”
In the reign of Queen Mary, when popery prevailed in this country, and the simplest women who had read the Bible were an overmatch for the greatest of the popish doctors; as they had neither Scripture nor reason to allege, they burned them alive, and thus terminated a controversy which they were unable to maintain. The same cause will ever produce the same effect: the Libertines, Cilicians, Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, pursued this course: Stephen confounded them by Scripture and reason, and they beat his brains out with stones! This was the most effectual way to silence a disputant whose wisdom they could not resist. In the same way were the Protestants treated, when by Scripture and reason they had shown the absurdity and wickedness of that anti-christian system which the fire and the sword were brought forth to establish. These persecutors professed great concern at first for the souls of those whom they variously tortured, and at last burned; but their tender mercies were cruel, and when they gave up the body to the flames, they most heartily consigned the soul to Satan. Scires sanguine natos: their conduct proclaimed their genealogy.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Certain of the synagogue; synagogues were as colleges in our universities, being used for instruction and learning; and were distinguished according to the persons that frequented them.
Libertines; some think these were natives of a certain country in Africa, from whence they were so called; but more probably they were such as were manumitted or made free, (as the word is commonly used for such), and in a middle condition between such as were free born and such as were bond slaves, and might desire to frequent with those of their own rank.
Cyrenians, &c.; the Jews spake of no less than four hundred and eighty synagogues at Jerusalem; a vast number, and probably increased by them: though several places are called Cyrene, this (from whence they took their name) was in Africa in all likelihood, it being joined with that of the Alexandrians. So God pleased to sever the Hellenists, (or Jews by traduction), for the Gentiles were not yet called, that they might all hear the gospel in the language they understood best.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
9, 10. synagogue of theLibertinesJewish freedmen; manumitted Roman captives, or thechildren of such, expelled from Rome (as appears from JOSEPHUSand TACITUS), and nowresiding at Jerusalem.
CyreniansJews ofCyrene, in Libya, on the coast of Africa.
them of Ciliciaamongstwhom may have been Saul of Tarsus (Act 7:58;Act 21:39).
and of Asia(See on Ac16:6).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Then there arose certain of the synagogue,…. Being filled with indignation at the doctrine of Stephen, and with envy at his miracles, they rose up in great wrath, and warmly opposed him: and they be longed to that synagogue
which is called the synagogue of the libertines; or free men: it is a Roman name, and signifies the sons of free men; and these were either the sons of such Jews, who of servants, or slaves, had been made , “free men”; or rather such Jews whose parents were born free, or had obtained their freedom at Rome, or in some free city under the Roman government, as Paul at Tarsus; since it is not so easy to account for it, that there should be a peculiar synagogue for the former, whereas there might be for the latter, seeing they could not speak the language of the native Jews. The Arabic version reads, “of the Corinthians”, as if they were the Jews from Corinth: and some have thought the word “Libertines” to be the name of a nation or people, as well as the names that follow; and some think it designs the Lybians or Lybistines in Africa; but neither of these is likely:
and Cyrenians: natives of the city or country of Cyrene, from whence were many Jews; see Ac 2:10 such as Simon the Cyrenian, the father of Alexander, and Rufus, who carried the cross of Christ after him, Mr 15:21 these, with those that follow, either belonged to the same synagogue with the Libertines, or rather they severally had distinct synagogues: and this will not seem strange, when it is said g, that there were in Jerusalem four hundred and eighty synagogues; though it is elsewhere said h four hundred and sixty:
and Alexandrians; for that there were a peculiar synagogue of these at Jerusalem is certain; for there is express mention made of it in Jewish writings i.
“It happened to R. Eleazar bar Tzadok, that he bought
“the synagogue of the Alexandrians”, which was at Jerusalem, and he did with it whatever he pleased.”
And that they should have a synagogue at Jerusalem need not be wondered at, when there was such an intercourse and correspondence between Jerusalem and Alexandria: it is said k,
“the house of Garmu were expert in making of the shewbread, and they would not teach it; the wise men sent and fetched workmen from Alexandria in Egypt, and they knew how to bake as well as they.—-The house or family of Abtines were expert in the business of the incense, and they would not teach it; the wise men sent and fetched workmen from Alexandria in Egypt, and they knew how to mix the spices as well as they.”
Again it is said l,
“there was a brass cymbal in the sanctuary, and it was cracked, and the wise men sent and brought workmen from Alexandria in Egypt, and they mended it—and there was a mortar in which they beat spices, and it was cracked, and the wise men sent and fetched workmen from Alexandria, and they mended it.”
Hence many of them doubtless settled here, and had a synagogue of their own:
and of them of Cilicia; the metropolis of which country was Tarsus, Ac 21:39. I make no doubt of it, that Saul of Tarsus was among them, or belonged to this synagogue, and was one of the fierce disputants with Stephen; at least violently opposed him, since he afterwards held the clothes of those that stoned him; we read m of
, which I should be tempted to render, the “synagogue of the Tarsians”, the same with the Cilicians here; but that it is elsewhere said n, that
“it happened to the synagogue of the Tursians, which was at Jerusalem, that they sold it to R. Eliezer, and he did all his business in it.”
Where the gloss explains the word “Tursians” by “brass founders”; and it seems to design the same synagogue with that of the Alexandrians, who may be so called, because many of them wrought in brass, as appears from a citation above. There was a synagogue of these Tarsians at Lud, or Lydda o: it is added, and of Asia; that is, the less; which joined to Cilicia, and in which were great numbers of Jews; see Ac 21:27 this clause is left out in the Alexandrian copy: at Jerusalem, there were synagogues for the Jews of different nations; as here in London, are places of worship for protestants of several countries; as French, Dutch, Germans, Danes, Swedes, c. Now several persons out of these synagogues, met together in a body,
disputing with Stephen about the doctrine he preached, and the miracles he wrought, and by what authority he did these things.
g T. Hieros, Megilla. fol. 73. 4. Echa Rabbati, fol. 52. 1. h T. Hieros, Cetubot. fol. 35. 3. i Juchasin, fol. 26. 2. e Talmud. Hieros. Megilla, fol. 73. 4. k T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 38. 1. & Hieros. Yoma, fol. 41. 1. l T. Bab. Erachin, fol. 10. 2. m T. Hieros. Shekalim, fol. 47. 1. n T. Bab. Megilla, fol. 26. 1. o Vajikra Rabba, sect. 35. fol. 175. 3.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The synagogue of the Libertines ( ). The Libertines (Latin libertinus, a freedman or the son of a freedman) were Jews, once slaves of Rome (perhaps descendants of the Jews taken to Rome as captives by Pompey), now set free and settled in Jerusalem and numerous enough to have a synagogue of their own. Schuerer calls a Talmudic myth the statement that there were 480 synagogues in Jerusalem. There were many, no doubt, but how many no one knows. These places of worship and study were in all the cities of the later times where there were Jews enough to maintain one. Apparently Luke here speaks of five such synagogues in Jerusalem (that of the Libertines, of the Cyrenians, of the Alexandrians, of Cilicia, and of Asia). There probably were enough Hellenists in Jerusalem to have five such synagogues. But the language of Luke is not clear on this point. He may make only two groups instead of five since he uses the article twice (once before , again before ). He also changes from the genitive plural to before Cilicia and Asia. But, leaving the number of the synagogues unsettled whether five or two, it is certain that in each one where Stephen appeared as a Hellenist preaching Jesus as the Messiah he met opposition. Certain of them “arose” () “stood up” after they had stood all that they could from Stephen, “disputing with Stephen” ( ). Present active participle of , to question together as the two on the way to Emmaus did (Lu 24:15). Such interruptions were common with Jews. They give a skilled speaker great opportunity for reply if he is quick in repartee. Evidently Stephen was fully equipped for the emergency. One of their synagogues had men from Cilicia in it, making it practically certain that young Saul of Tarsus, the brilliant student of Gamaliel, was present and tried his wits with Stephen. His ignominious defeat may be one explanation of his zest in the stoning of Stephen (Ac 8:1).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Synagogue. See on Church, Mt 16:18.
Of the libertines. In Jerusalem, and probably in other large cities, the several synagogues were arranged according to nationalities, and even crafts. Thus we have in this verse mention of the synagogues of the Cyrenians, Alexandrians, Cilicians, and Asiatics. Libertines is a Latin word (libertini, freedmen), and means here Jews or their descendants who had been taken as slaves to Rome, and had there received their liberty; and who, in consequence of the decree of Tiberius, about 19 A. D., expelling them from Rome, had returned in great numbers to Jerusalem. They were likely to be the chief opponents of Stephen, because they supposed that by his preaching, their religion, for which they had suffered at Rome, was endangered in Jerusalem.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1 ) “Then there arose certain of the synagogue,” (anestesan de tines ton ek tes sunagoges) “Then there stood up some of those of (from) the synagogue,” the center of local religious teaching and worship among the Jews.
2) “Which is called the synagogue of the,” (tes legomenes) “The one that is called,” of the ones of the synagogue order known as, identified as, or called by the names following, from five areas, Paul (Saul) was from Cilica, Act 7:58.
3) “Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians,” (libertinon kai kurenaion kai aleksandreon) “Of Freedmen and Cyrenians and of Alexandrians,” which seem to have been a group of language, dialect, and racial identity of a different social level and emotion from the masses of Judea. It is believed they had once been Jewish slaves to the Romans, set free and returned to establish a synagogue in the Jerusalem area.
4) “And of them of Cilicia and of Asia,” (kai ton apo
kilikias kai asias)”And of those from Cilicia and from Asia,” in localities considerably removed from the Jerusalem and Judean area, but who had come, returned, to Judea and established their own dialect and social level of teaching and worshipping synagogue.
5) “Disputing with Stephen,” (suzetountes to Stephano) “Discussing or having a continuing dispute with Stephen,” differing sharply, emotionally, with strong opposition toward the teaching and preaching of Stephen regarding Jesus Christ. For Stephen did “earnestly contend for the faith,” Jud 1:3; 1Co 15:58.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
9. And there arose certain. This was the beginning of persecution, because the wicked, after that they have essayed in vain to set themselves against Christ by disputing, when they saw that that former attempt did take none effect, they fly unto slanders, (caviling,) and tumults, and at length they break out into violence and murder. Therefore, Luke meaneth by the word rise, that those of whom he speaketh did assault the gospel with their tongue, and did not, by and by, bring Stephen before the judgment-seat, but did first set upon him, by disputing against him. Furthermore, he signifieth that they were strangers, which lived in Judea, either that they might exercise merchandise, or else get learning. Therefore he saith that some of them were Cyrenians, some of Alexandria, some of Cilicia, some of Asia. He saith that they were all of the synagogue of the Libertines. It is to be thought that the free men of the citizens of Rome had caused a synagogue to be builded of their own charges, that it might be proper to the Jews which came together out of the provinces. (355)
Therefore, those which were brought thither by the grace of God, and ought to have embraced Christ so much the more willingly, assault him first, and inflame the fury of others, as it were with a trumpet. Also Luke will in many other places afterward declare that the Jews, which were scattered abroad in the provinces, were most deadly enemies to sound doctrine: and most venomous (356) in moving tumults. He reckoneth up many, to the end the victory of the truth may be more famous, whilst that in any, gathered of divers countries, depart, being vanquished by one man; and it is not to be doubted but that they were enforced to hold their peace with shame. Stephen had already won great favor, and gotten great dignity by miracles. (357) He answereth the disputers now in such sort that he getteth the upper hand much. He putteth not that wisdom and spirit which he saith his adversaries could not gainstand, as divers things. Therefore resolve these words thus: They could not resist the wisdom which the Spirit of God gave him. For Luke meant to express that they fought not on both sides as men; but that the enemies of the gospel were therefore discouraged and overcome, because they did strive against the Spirit of God, which spake by the mouth of Stephen. And forasmuch as Christ hath promised the same Spirit to all his servants, let us only defend the truth faithfully, and let us crave a mouth and wisdom of him, and we shall be sufficiently furnished to speak, so that neither the wit, neither yet the babbling of our adversaries, shall be able to make us ashamed. So the Spirit was as effectual in our time in the mouth of the martyrs which were burnt, and it uttereth the like force now daily, that though they were ignorant men, (never trained up in any schools,) yet did they make the chief divines which maintained Popery no less astonished with their voice only, than if it had thundered and lightned. (358)
(355) “ Quae peculiaris esset Judaeis qui Jerosolymam ex provinciis comeabant,” that it might be appropriated to Jews coming to Jerusalem form the provinces.
(356) “ Virulentos,” virulent.
(357) “ Fides et miracula,” faith and miracles.
(358) “ Ut quum homines essent idiotae, summos Papatus theologes sola voce non minus quam fulmine attonitos redderent,” that though they were unlearned men, they, by their voice alone, astonished the chief theologians of the Papacy, as much as if it had been by a thunderbolt.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
16.
AT THE SYNAGOGUE OF THE LIBERTINES. Act. 6:9 to Act. 12:9
Act. 6:9
But there arose certain of them that were of the synagogue called the synagogue of the Libertines, and of the Cyrenians, and of the Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and Asia, disputing with Stephen.
Act. 6:10
And they were not able to withstand the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spake.
Act. 6:11
Then they suborned men, who said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God.
Act. 6:12
And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and seized him, and brought him into the council,
a. Those who opposed. Act. 6:9
Act. 6:9 To whom did Stephen preach? To those of Jerusalem to be sure, but can we be any more specific than that? In looking into these verses we can secure at least a little suggestion of the persons to whom Stephen addressed his message. As we have mentioned, Stephen was doubtless a Grecian Jew. With whom would it be more logical to imagine Stephen laboring than with those of his own background? This thought finds support when we are told that those of the Grecian provinces of Cyrene, Alexandria, Cilicia, and Asia disputed with Stephen. The ones who opposed Stephens work were evidently all members of one synagogue called The Synagogue of the Libertines. It is to be concluded from the use of the word Libertines that these Grecian Jews were at one time slaves but now were Libertines or Freedmen. They either purchased or earned their freedom.
b. The evil means used by those who refused. Act. 6:10-12.
Act. 6:10-12 These disputants although they strongly opposed the position of their countrymen, could not withstand the logical conclusion to which he led them. Rather than yield their hearts to the Lordship of Jesus, they stiffened their necks. Not only were they stubborn but also dishonest. Deceit is the first step in defending a position maintained only because of stubbornness. Men can be found almost anywhere who will do almost anything for a price. In this case money was paid to twist the truth. By this twisting Stephen was to be implicated in blasphemy. These suborned men were very zealous in their efforts. They spread the word throughout the city that this man had spoken against both God and Moses. Since the minds of the populace were filled with the thought of God through the message and miracles of the apostles, this was a serious charge.
It was not long until this malicious lie had done its work. Word reached the Sanhedrin that there was a great stir among the people; that a certain man was accused of blasphemy. This was a charge to be investigated. Especially so since the one accused was a member of the movement the Sanhedrin hated.
The elders and scribes came upon Stephen as they had upon the apostles and brought him into the council. This charge was punishable by death. It was the one for which Jesus was tried. (Mat. 26:65; Mar. 14:58).
210.
To whom did Stephen preach? Prove your answer.
211.
What is the meaning of the term Synagogue of the Libertines? How is it used here?
212.
What was the response of the Libertines?
213.
What is the first step in supporting a position maintained only through stubbornness? How is it shown here?
214.
What was the work of these suborned men? How did they carry it out?
215.
Why did this false accusation receive such a ready response?
216.
Why would the Sanhedrin be especially interested in the charge against Stephen?
217.
What do you know about the importance of the charge?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(9) Certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines.The structure of the sentence makes it probable that the Libertines, the Cyrenians, and the Alexandrians attended one synagogue, those of Cilicia and Asia another. Each of the names has a special interest of its own. (1) The Libertini. These were freed-men, emancipated Roman Jews, with probably some proselytes, descendants of those whom Pompeius had led captive, and who were settled in the trans-Tiberine district of Rome in large numbers, with oratories and synagogues of their own. When Tacitus (Ann. ii. 85) describes the expulsion of the Jews under Claudius, he speaks of four thousand of the freed-men, or Libertine class, as banished to Sardinia. From this class, we have seen reason to believe, Stephen himself had sprung. Andronicus and Junias were probably members of this synagogue. (See Note on Rom. 16:7.)
Cyrenians.At Cyrene, also, on the north coast of Africa, lying between Egypt and Carthage, there was a large Jewish population. Strabo, quoted by Josephus, describes them as a fourth of the whole (Jos. Ant. xiv. 7, 2). They were conspicuous for the offerings they sent to the Temple, and had appealed to Augustus for protection against the irregular taxes by which the provincial governors sought to intercept their gifts (Jos. Ant. xvi. 6, 5). In Simon of Cyrene we have had a conspicuous member, probably a conspicuous convert, of this community. (See Note on Mat. 27:32.) Later on, clearly as the result of Stephens teaching, they are prominent in preaching the gospel to the Gentiles of Antioch. We may think of Simon himself, and his two sons Alexander and Rufus (Mar. 15:21), as probably members of this society.
Alexandrians.Next to Jerusalem and Rome, there was, perhaps, no city in which the Jewish population was so numerous and influential as at Alexandria. Here, too, they had their own quarter, assigned to them by Ptolemy Philadelphus, and were governed, as if they were a free republic, by an ethnarch of their own (Jos. Ant. xiv. 7, 2). They were recognised as citizens by their Roman rulers (Ibid. xiv. 10, 1). From Alexandria had come the Greek version of the Old Testament, known from the legend of the seventy translators who had all been led to a supernatural agreement, as that of the Septuagint, or LXX., which was then in use among all the Hellenistic Jews throughout the empire, and largely read even in Palestine itself. There, at this time, living in fame and honour, was the great teacher Philo, the probable master of Apollos, training him, all unconsciously, to be the preacher of a wisdom higher than his own. The knowledge, or want of knowledge, with which Apollos appears on the scene, knowing only the baptism of John, forbids the assumption that he had been at Jerusalem after the Day of Pentecost (Act. 18:25), but echoes of the teaching of Stephen are found in that of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and it is not improbable that thoughts had been carried back to Alexandria by those who had thus been brought under his influence.
Of them of Cilicia.Here we feel at once the interest of the name. The young Jew of Tarsus, the disciple of Gamaliel, could not fail to be among the leading members of this section of the second synagogue, exercising, in the fiery energy of his zeal, a dominant influence even over the others.
And of Asia.The word is taken, as throughout the New Testament, in its later and more restricted sense, as denoting the pro-consular province so called, including the old Lydia and Ionia, and having Ephesus as its capital. Later on in the history, we find Jews of Asia prominent in their zeal for the sacredness of the Temple (Act. 21:27).
Disputing with Stephen.The nature of the dispute is not far to seek. The tendency of distance from sacred places which are connected with mens religion, is either to make men sit loose to their associations, and so rise to higher and wider thoughts, or to intensify their reverence. Where pilgrimages are customary, the latter is almost invariably the result. Men measure the sacredness of what they have come to see by the labour and cost which they have borne to see it, and they resent anything that suggests that they have wasted their labour, as tending to sacrilege and impiety. The teaching of Stephen, representing as it did the former alternative, guided and perfected by the teaching of the Spirit, was probably accepted by a few in each community. The others, moved by their pilgrim zeal were more intolerant of it than the dwellers in Jerusalem, to whom the ritual of the Temple was a part of their every-day life. Those who were most familiar with it, the priests who ministered in its courts, were, as we have seen (Act. 6:7), among the first to welcome the new and wider teaching.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
VII. PENTECOSTAL CHURCH IN ITS LAST STRUGGLE AND DISPERSION, Act 6:8 to Act 8:4.
2. Zeal and Arraignment of Stephen, Act 6:9-15 .
As the name of Peter stands at the head of the catalogue of apostles to indicate that he was preeminent in character, though possessed of no official authority over the rest, so the name of Stephen (whose name signifies crown) crowns the list of deacons. It was thereby his mission to disturb the delusive repose into which the Pentecostal Church was forgetfully declining by bringing out into uncompromising prominence the doctrine of our Lord’s discourse (Matthew 25,) that the ritual was to disappear and merge into the Universal Church.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
9. Certain of the synagogue The five synagogues here mentioned, out of the four hundred and eighty synagogues in Jerusalem, were all held by Hellenists or foreign Jews, and so glad, perhaps, to signalize their zeal for Judaism against their brother Hellenist, Stephen.
Libertines That is, freedmen, emancipates from slavery. They probably belonged to the Roman Jews, who were mostly of this class. (See section on the Roman Church in our Introduction to Romans.) About seventeen years before this period Tiberius had ordered the Jews to depart from Rome, and we may thence infer that some of them immigrated to Jerusalem and built their synagogues. Libertines here would therefore be equivalent to Roman Jews.
The structure of the verse implies a twofold classification into Roman and African Jews, and Asiatic Jews.
Cyrenians See Mar 15:21. About one fourth of the African city of Cyrene were Jews. This city had representatives at the Pentecost, (Act 2:10,) and probably from among them it was that certain came and preached at Antioch, (Act 11:20,) and Lucius of Cyrene was one of the eminent men who commissioned Barnabas and Paul from Antioch, (Act 13:1.)
The more fully we investigate the subject the more strongly we incline to the belief that Luke is identical with “Lucius of Cyrene” in Act 13:1, (where see our note,) and so was himself a Cyrenian and an attendant at this synagogue. Supposing, according to our note on Luk 24:13, that he was one of the two from Emmaus, he arrived in Jerusalem (from Cyrene by way of Alexandria perhaps) at the Passover of the crucifixion, and was some way connected with the Christian disciples. He was a physician, and both Cyrene and Alexandria were medically celebrated. He was, thence, at the Pentecost, as his full narrative of the preparations and of the Pentecost, as well as his full report of the speeches of Peter, show. He was part of the Pentecostal Church through the whole six or seven years of its history. Then upon the Stephanic dispersion he was one of the “ men of Cyrene,” who went first to Cyprus (Act 11:19-20) and thence to Antioch, where he is the “Lucius of Cyrene,” of Act 13:1, where see note.
Alexandrians Alexandria, the chief maritime city, and for a long time the metropolis, of lower Egypt, received its name from its founder, Alexander the Great. Its advantageous commercial position raised it among the most eminent cities of its period, and well attested the wisdom of its founder in its selection. Alexander was a favourer of the Jewish race, and gave them such advantages in this new metropolis that they became numerous, wealthy, educated, and influential. The Jews never had a man of greater erudition than Philo, who adorned this city with his genius, and left works extant and valued at the present day. Here the Hebrew Old Testament was translated into the Greek, forming the celebrated Septuagint. (Vol. II, p. 10 . )
Cilicia Paul’s native province. It was the long, narrow strip of territory lining the northern shore of the eastern part of the Mediterranean. It was bounded, or rather walled in from the rest of Asia Minor, by the almost impassable line of Taurus mountains. Yet, though thus isolated, it formed the marching route of armies between Europe and Asia. At the eastern extremity, where the Taurus range nearly touches the great northeast corner of the sea, was the narrow pass into Syria and Asia, generally called the Cilician Gates, (Issus,) where more than one memorable battle was fought for the right of way. The inhabitants were Asiatic Greeks mixed with Syrians. The aboriginal population, as well as the name, is probably Phenician. Antiochus the Great introduced two thousand Jews into Asia Minor, and the Jewish population appears from this verse to have been numerous enough to need a synagogue in Jerusalem.
Asia The Asia of the New Testament never includes, as in modern times, the eastern great quarter of the globe, (called by a late Roman writer, Justin, Asia Major.) Nor was the term Asia Minor used until the fourth century. Asia under Roman dominion, “proconsular Asia,” usually included the provinces of Phrygia, Mysia, Caria, and Lydia, of which the capital was Ephesus, and this was the Asia of Acts and the Epistles.
Disputing with Stephen It is probable that some of the synagogues of large cities consisted of two apartments, one for public worship, the other for theological education and discussion.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘But there arose certain of those who were of the synagogue called the synagogue of the Libertines, and of the Cyrenians, and of the Alexandrians, and of those of Cilicia and Asia, disputing with Stephen.’
So Stephen boldly went into the Hellenistic Jewish synagogues in Jerusalem and proclaimed Christ. And the description suggests that there he disputed with many who disagreed with him. We do not know whether this was one synagogue where all these types met, or a number of synagogues such as a synagogue of the Freedmen (Libertines), a synagogue for Cyrenians, a synagogue for Alexandrians (Egyptians), and one for Cilicians and Asians. But the participants were all firm in their beliefs, and we can almost certainly presume that some Pharisees were involved, for as knowledgeable in the Law and in the Scriptures they would unquestionably involve themselves in such a situation.
The Libertines were possibly composed of freedmen who having been released from slavery tended to group together and make common cause. They may well have formed a separate synagogue, for a synagogue could be set up by ten or more adult males. The Cyrenians and Alexandrians were from North Africa. The Cilicians and Asians were from the north. The Cilicians may well have included Saul (Paul) among their number.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Testimony of Stephen. Act 6:9-15
v. 9. Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia, and of Asia, disputing with Stephen.
v. 10. And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake.
v. 11. Then they suborned men, which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and against God.
v. 12. And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the Council,
v. 13. and set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place and the Law;
v. 14. for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us.
v. 15. And all that sat in the Council, looking steadfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel. The activity which Stephen displayed in the interest of his Lord was not confined to the congregation. The zeal of every true Christian will show itself in true missionary effort, in the attempt by testimony and by apology to gain believers for Christ. Stephen soon attracted the attention and excited the jealousy and enmity of the unbelieving Jews. Among the great number of synagogues in Jerusalem (rabbinic writers state that there were there were also such as were formed by Jews from certain countries in the Diaspora, since they would naturally be attracted to one another by language and customs. There was one whose membership consisted of Roman freedmen, former captive Jews that were brought to Rome by Pompey; another was made up of Jews hailing from Cyrene in Africa, a third of such as had lived in Alexandria; a fourth had members exclusively from Cilicia, a fifth such as hailed from the province of Asia on the Aegean Sea. All these synagogues sent representatives, probably to the Temple, where the public meetings of the congregation were held, to debate with Stephen in disputatious questioning. It is more than likely that among these men there was also Saul of Tarsus in Cilicia, a Pharisee of the Pharisees in orthodoxy and zeal. But whatever methods of argumentation these able debaters used, they were of no avail in this case; they were unable to withstand the wisdom and the spirit with which Stephen spoke. For it was the Holy Spirit Himself who was present and spoke in and through this disciple, Luk 21:15. The proofs which Stephen adduced in this battle of intellects were of such a nature that they could not be questioned by the opponents. They were routed all along the line and were obliged to retire in confusion.
This defeat in a field in which they had supposed themselves undisputed masters rankled in the minds of these enemies of Christ. And, open warfare having failed, they resorted to slander and violence. They deliberately suborned men, hired them to repeat certain statements under oath which were directed against Stephen. The latter had probably stated that the true believers are no longer under the Law and warned the unbelieving Jews of the judgment which was to strike the Holy City and the Temple. These words could easily be made to represent a blasphemy against the teaching of Moses in the sense of the Jews and against God. With this construction placed upon the statements of Stephen, it was an easy matter to stir up, to excite and move deeply, the fanatical Jews, the common people as well as the elders and the scribes. It was a part of the cunning design to gain the people first, since the Sanhedrin would more readily take action if they felt that the people were on their side in this matter, and no longer favored the apostles and their followers. Having thus prepared the way, they came upon Stephen suddenly, surprised him while he was still unaware of any hostile intention on their part, took him by force, and brought him before the Sanhedrin for trial. Whether the Council was in regular session or had convened in anticipation of this arrest, is immaterial. No sooner was Stephen arraigned than they brought forth their lying witnesses, who had been carefully drilled in the part they were to play. And the perjurers followed orders very strictly, testifying that they had heard the prisoner say that Jesus of Nazareth would utterly destroy this place, and would completely change the customs that had been transmitted to them by Moses. Note: The enemies of Jesus had evidently learned something from the trial of Christ and from subsequent experience. The Pharisees had definite charges framed against Stephen, and they produced witnesses that had been carefully drilled in their role. It was an intensely dramatic, impressive moment when the charges had been fully presented and all the testimony of the witnesses had been heard. The eyes of all the members of the Council were firmly fixed upon Stephen, expecting, of course, that he would answer upon the charges in one way or the other. And here God gave visible evidence that He supported His servant and would be with him to the end. Fur the judges saw Stephen’s face as though it had been the face of an angel. This is not a description of extraordinary physical beauty, but of a supernatural brightness, like that on the face of Moses after he had spoken with God. Such a heavenly brilliance was fitting on the face of one to whom the glory of the Lord had been revealed. Note: Like Stephen, every Christian preacher that testifies fearlessly concerning Christ and His Word, may easily become involved in debate with the enemies of Christ. And when the unbelievers have been conquered by facts from the Word of God, they try to take revenge by threatening and blaspheming, and, if possible, they try to suppress the truth with violence. Many a witness for Christ has thus been branded as a blasphemer, a traitor, and a rebel in both spiritual and temporal courts.
Summary. To remedy an urgent need, the congregation at Jerusalem, at the suggestion of the apostles, elects seven deacons to minister to the poor and the widows, one of whom, Stephen, testifies for Christ and is arraigned before the Sanhedrin.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Act 6:9. The synagogue of the Libertines, These were Jews born at Rome, whose grandfathers had been in slavery there, and then made free. Great numbers of Jews taken captive by Pompey, and carried into Italy, were set at liberty, and obtained their freedom from their masters. Their children, therefore, would be libertini, in the proper sense of the word. Agreeably to this, the Jews banished from Rome by Tiberius are spoken of by Tacitus as of the libertine race, who might easily constitute one of the 480 synagogues, said to have been at Jerusalem.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Chapter 15
Prayer
Almighty God, how good it is to draw unto thee in the name of Jesus Christ the Priest. Our souls warm at the thought of thy love. Our spirits are filled with noble desires when the door of thine house is opened, and the way to thine altar made clear. We turn away from thee, and for a moment may be glad with social joy; we return unto the Lord, and are made glad with the delight of heaven. We are here this day to magnify thee as thou art revealed by thy Son to call thee Father to hide our hearts in thy love to ask thee for Christ’s sake to forgive all our sins. This is our sacred business with thee. This is our one concern. We have come to hold communion with God, through Christ, by the Holy Spirit, and we would that our communion might be simple, deep, loving, long-continued, a hint and pledge of the fellowship of heaven. We have come to thy house without worthiness of our own. We have spoiled every day of the week. We have sent back every moment to thee, stained with some evil. We have not seen thee in all the way of our life as we ought to have done. We have imagined thee to be absent when thou wast really near at hand. We have broken the two tables of the law. We have done despite to the Spirit of thy grace. We have grieved the Spirit. There is no sin we have not attempted, and our success is our ruin. Thou art revealed in Jesus Christ as the Saviour of all men. He has disclosed thee to us as the God of pardon, and grace, and tender love. Infinite in righteousness, yet boundless in mercy. Stern as thine own law, yet tender with unutterable love. To thee we want all to come; and the least and feeblest standing back on the outskirts of the host would feel after thee by a spirit of reverent inquiry. Oh! that we knew the place where we might find thee; our hearts desire one look of thy glory. This we could not bear, but thou wilt surely cause thy goodness to pass before us. Show us the unseen day. Teach us that this light we now see is but the dim emblem of the further glory, infinite in lustre, which makes the very burning and splendour of heaven. Help us to see the unseen meaning of all things; so that in time we may see the going of eternity, so that above the clouds we may see the shining home of the good, and across the roaring flood may see the green shores of the everlasting garden.
We come with our psalm of adoration, our hymn of praise, our anthem of triumph, our chant of holy delight. Few and poor are the offerings we bring, but we bring them by the way of the cross, and they are enlarged into sacrifices and are made precious by the baptism of blood. We remember all the way along which we have come, sometimes a weary way, hot because of the scorching sun, cold because of the wintry wind, often up hill, and then steeply down again, with turns sudden, and precipices deep and threatening, so that we cannot tell whether we shall arrive at home. Yet there we shall surely arrive, because we do not guide our own way; the reins are not in our hands; the Lord is sovereign, and all things work together for good to them that love him. Thou dost teach us in many ways. Thou dost make us strangers and foreigners in our own land. Thou takest away the friend that made the land our home. Thou dost suddenly put out with a great flood the fire at which our friendship warmed itself. The grave holds all that is precious of our social life. So dost thou make the old man long for heaven. He does not know those who touch him, nor is he known by them. His history is a sealed book, and he longs to rejoin those who can go over the pages with him. Thou hast given unto us a strange life, full of mystery, full of pain, brightened with occasional lights, thrilling with occasional joys, and then a great burden, an infinite blackness, a night without a star to break its gloom. Lord, be pitiful and kind unto us all in Christ Jesus. Spare us a little while that our repentance may be made complete, and our contrition may shed its last tear of regret and pain over days misspent.
Undertake all our life for us, make us rich or poor, put us in chariots of gold, or thrust us into the dark corner; give us purple and fine linen, and fare most sumptuous every day, or shut us out of the castle and make us lie at the gate, hungry and weary, desolate and full of sorrow, as thou wilt, but in all the process give us the sweet sense of thy nearness as purifier of our life. The Lord made the great sky like shining wings stretched over us in sign of infinite protection. In every wind that blows may we now catch some odour of heaven. As the days come and go with hastening rapidity, give us to feel that they do but bring the nearer and the sooner the house of liberty and the land of summer. Amen.
Act 6:9-15
9. Then [rather, But ] there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, [ libertini , freedmen] and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, [Jews resident in Alexandria] and of them of Cilicia [at the south-east corner of Asia Minor. Chief town, Tarsus] and of Asia, disputing with Stephen.
10. And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake.
11. Then they suborned [Suborn provide, but nearly always in a bad sense] men, which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God.
12. And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the council,
13. And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place [the Temple was the object of great admiration and pride] and the law:
14. For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered U6.
15. And all that sat in the council, looking steadfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel.
The Trial of Stephen
IN the 8th verse you will find the twofold and complete character of Stephen. The verse divides itself into two parts, and so gives the two phases of Stephen’s great character. First of all, he was “full of faith and power.” That was his spiritual condition. His inner life was made up of these two elements. Instead of “faith” read “grace,” and then the representation will be “Stephen, full of grace and power.” Not all power, so as to be stern, tyrannous, overwhelming, but also characterized by grace, tenderness, love, geniality, sympathy, gentleness. Not all grace, lest he should be mistaken as a mere sentimentalist, a man who uttered beautiful words without deep meanings, and who contented himself with exquisite expressions without seeking their realization in the sterner qualities of character. Stephen was by so much a complete man; full of grace and full of power. Approach him on the one side of his character, and you would suppose he was “all tears;” so soft was the touch of his hand, so gentle and tender the glance of his eye, so winsome his smile, that you would suppose it impossible for such a man ever to utter one sharp or harsh word. Approach him on the other side of his nature, he was stern, unbending, rigorous, insisting upon right and justice, and utterly unaware of the sentiment or practice of concession. Read again the second part of the 8th verse, and you find Stephen “did great wonders and miracles among the people.” That was his outer life. Mark the beautiful correspondence between the spiritual and the active. The one accounts for the other. With less of a spiritual quality there would have been less of social demonstration and influence. The “wonder” was not a trick of the hand; it was an expression of the deep spiritual history of the soul’s life. The “miracle” was not painted on a board; it flamed forth from an inner and sacred fire.
This description of Stephen should be the description of the Christian Church. Not a line can be added to this picture. It does not admit of an additional line of colour that can add to its ineffable beauteousness. In this verse, then, we find a complete delineation of the Christian man and of the Christian Church.
We
This becomes a question of serious import to us, whether we have not been looking at this business at the wrong end, looking about for effects, instead of inquiring into the causes; touching with regretful look, the cheek so pale, instead of feeding the fire of the heart. This, then, is Stephen, the man who is for a little while to figure so largely and nobly in our outlook.
Compare him with the men that assailed him. Their character is also divisible into two parts. First of all, they were controversial, they “disputed” with Stephen. Controversy is not Christianity. It is most difficult for any man to be both a debater and a Christian. The spirit of debate is opposed to the spirit of love. It delights in victory. It gets itself up for occasions. It addresses itself to technicalities, and to transient details. It is clever in the trick of words. It seizes with eagerness upon an epithet misapplied. Debate is sometimes large, noble, magnanimous, inspired, self-sacrificing, self-forgetting. So long as the Church was in the era of suffering she had no time for debate. Her controversies were then fights for life. They were not fencings in words, small duels, paper wars, column of abuse answering some other column of abuse. The Christian life is always a controversy; but “we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world.” Let us all beware of the spirit of controversy, which delights in the rearrangement of words and forgets that Christianity is a sacrifice, a life of obedience, an offering up of the whole nature to the Divine will, to be inspired and sanctified by God the Holy Ghost.
Being controversial, the enemies of Stephen were also, as if by a necessary logic, unjust. Injustice and controversy are twins. The enemies of Stephen “suborned” men hired and primed men to tell lies; instructed men to utter false words; bribed them to commit spiritual suicide. This is the almost necessary direction of all controversy. Controversy seems to make up its mind to win. The aim of debate is not to secure truth, but to secure some petty triumph, or to carry out to its melancholy end some rooted prejudice, or some discreditable antipathy. This is my fear of some collateral institutions which are formed in Christian churches. I do not take special delight in the formation of men into companies for the purpose of debating. There are limits within which debate may be conducted to high intellectual advantage; but whoever enters upon a course of debate merely as such, and merely for the purpose of striving in words, without having as a supreme end and purpose the illumination of the subject with a view to knowing, loving, accepting, and obeying the truth, puts his spiritual life to a severe strain. The temptation is a strong one. It is particularly strong in the time of youth. Who does not love to hear the echoing applause which follows a smart reply, a happy retort, an unexpected and felicitous criticism? There may be no harm in such applause, within given limits; but the man who is the subject and occasion of it may be urged on to further lengths in which he will find nothing but danger and ultimate discomfiture. The enemies of Christianity, as represented by these men, were mere controversialists trying to find flaws in the statement and reasoning and conduct of the argument: they were not inquirers after truth, pledged to find it, and bound to obey its mandate. To hear men controvert and dispute about Christian truth, one would suppose to be a sign of intense earnestness and sincerity. You will always find behind intellectual hostility to Christianity an explanatory moral condition. A man who does not love the light will use any excuse for getting out of it. Christianity disdains to accept any merely intellectual homage. Christianity will not be called astute, well-contrived, admirably-adapted, keen of insight, and potent in eloquence. Christianity comes among men to save them, by first humbling them into penitence, breaking them down with contrition, causing them to burn with penitential shame, and then leading them to reverent thought only out of death can life come, and only by sacrifice is exaltation.
Further looking into the case, you will observe the danger which often accrues to truth from its supposed friends. You find men saying, “We have heard Stephen speak blasphemous words against Moses and against God.” Imagine the irony of such men supposing that they could distinguish between orthodoxy and heterodoxy! This is one of the earliest instances in the Christian Church of heresy-hunting. Once for all, let us lay it down as an impossibility that bad men are judges of truth and falsehood. Men who had accepted a bribe came up to defend orthodoxy! We have heard it said more than once that “such and such a man may not be morally all that he ought to be, but he knows the truth when he hears it.” No! No bad matt knows the truth. No man with a lie in his right hand can tell whether the sermon was good or bad. These are the pains to which rectitude of opinion has been subjected, that righteousness in doctrine should be judged by unrighteousness in conduct. No man who keeps a false balance can tell whether the doctrine was orthodox or heterodox as no blind man can tell whether the colour was ardent or subdued. Some of you are probably hardly aware that in some cases bad men go to churches for the purpose of discovering whether the doctrine is orthodox! This is an irony that would not be allowed on common ground. No blind man will be appointed as a judge of pictures in the Academy this year or any other year; no deaf man will be appointed to adjudge the merits of competitive students in music. But a bad man goes to church, and ventures upon an opinion as to the orthodoxy or heterodoxy of the preacher, and says, with intolerable impertinence, that he himself may not be what he ought to be, but he knows the truth when he hears it! I would say, shame be upon him only that he has passed out of the region of shame altogether, and is not worthy of the dignified condemnation he would otherwise deserve. Who dares arise in the Church of Christ and say, this man is orthodox that man is heterodox? Who after drinking wine up to the point of dizziness, and eating beyond the boundary of gluttony, and grasping with both hands as iron avarice only can grasp will dare to say where orthodoxy begins and ends? What is your life? What is your spirit? What are your wonders and miracles? And what is the interior condition of heart which explains them? These are the questions that ought to be answered; when men who listen to doctrine and examine Christian argument are pure of heart, true, and upright of mind, noble in spirit, catholic in sympathy the one man that will be dreaded more than another is the man who imagines that he was fated by heaven to find out the heterodoxy of other people.
They said, “We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and against God!” The men who had just put a bribe into their pockets were horrified at the blasphemy of another man! Those who had done blasphemy were horrified at the man who had only spoken it! Search into narrow, envenomed, and ignoble criticism in every age, and you will find that the men who speak most against blasphemy in doctrine are often the men who could not live otherwise than by telling lies.
What was Stephen’s condition at the time? Hearing these lies spoken about him, he will surely spring from his seat and indignantly deny the impeachment! Some men say they “cannot sit still and hear false statements about themselves.” If they were greater men they would learn the art of patience. Great bodies are calm. Stephen sat still, but his face gleamed like an angel. Could you have seen the other faces with the significant leer, the harsh mouths, and the unresponsive features you would have known, without hearing the defence, who was right and who was wrong. Would that we could look more and say less!
If we could watch the accused and the accuser, we should very rarely call upon the defendant for his case. I have heard a debate in which, judging merely by the tone and facial expression, and the graciousness of manner of the speakers, I should have supposed that the Christian was the Atheist and the Atheist the Christian. The man who undertakes to advocate Christianity without the Christian light, the Christian voice, the Christian expression, is a man who has undertaken the cause at other bidding than God’s.
The face of Stephen shone like the face of an angel. This is typical of character. Whenever character is under the influence of Christian inspiration it shines. “Ye are the light of the world.” It is typical also of the resurrection, the last grand miracle that shall be performed upon these common bodies. The face once dull shall be lighted up with an inward light that shall transfigure it into nobility and gracious expressiveness. “It doth not yet appear what we shall be.” Christianity never takes hold of any man without making him a new creature, and without investing him, I would say, with new beauty, nobility, and occasionally even splendour of expression. Not beauty by the rules of art, but a subtle, spiritual, marvellous, argumentative beauty that carries with it its own exposition and defence. But whether this can take place in the body or not, it always takes place in the character, and the character determines the man.
The modern uses of this incident I have not failed altogether to indicate in the course of these remarks. But if you would hear more about its modern uses, let me tell you we can all be full of faith or grace, and we can all do miracles and wonders.
I cannot believe the ages are living backward. I never could accept the suggestion that the world is getting less advanced, less glorious, less competent, than men were three thousand or two thousand years ago. Why, this would be an inversion that would constitute the deadliest of all arguments against Christian inspiration and Divine supremacy. We can all do miracles, wonders, and mighty deeds. Perhaps some of us only needed the suggestion, as the fuel in the cold grate only needs the spark to make it glow and burn. We have been too content to sit down under the impression that miracles and wonders and signs have all ceased, and that the world is now living towards a dwindling point instead of expanding into wider development. What a wonder it would be, for example, if some of us ever helped a fellow-creature under any circumstances whatsoever! That wonder is possible to you. What a wonder it would be for some of us could we ever be met in a good humour! What an astonishing miracle to be really good, magnanimous, sympathetic! Not with a painted smile upon the mocking face, but a laugh from the heart, diffusing itself all over the gladdened and shining countenance! What a “wonder” it would be for some of us to ever give a sovereign to any good cause upon earth! Wonders, miracles, signs! Why, the difficulty is to escape them! What a wonder it would be if some of us could be patient under suffering! If they could honestly say downstairs, “He suffers much, but he is nobly patient; very thankful; and it is a means of grace to be near him!”
You thought the age of “wonders” was passed, because the merely introductory signs have disappeared! The blossom is gone that the fruit may come. And we of these latter times are called to exhibit the wonder of a disciplined character, the marvel of a sanctified temper, the glittering phenomenon of a truly obedient sonship.
Who then will do wonders and miracles and signs in the name of Christ? What a wonder it would be for some of us to forgive. It is hard for some of us to pardon. We pardon with reservations and qualifications, and with long parentheses, and the liberty of construing which we reserve to ourselves. Forgiveness with a parenthesis is no forgiveness, but an aggravation of the original obduracy. The bolder heroism which gives history new themes, and makes the poet’s lyre quiver into new music, it is not for us in these days to realize. There is now no persecutor to “drag us into fame and chase us up to heaven.” The fagot and the axe are words faint as echoes in the immemorial past. But we can toil with loving diligence; we can suffer with uncomplaining patience; in the morning we can sow our seed, and in the evening we can still be busy in the field; we can stifle the hot word of passion, and extend the warm hand of forgiveness; to the blind we can be as eyes, and to the dumb as a tongue of noble eloquence! A thousand acts of charity may glitter in our daily life, like dew transfigured by the sun. In ways so modest, yet so useful so unknown on earth, and yet so prized in heaven it is possible for us to show that Jesus Christ is not merely a figure in the horizon of the religious imagination, but the living power of the renewed and adoring heart. To such miracles let us rise.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
9 Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen.
Ver. 9. Certain of the synagogue ] There were colleges at Jerusalem, as now at our Universities, whither foreigners came for learning sake. These withstood Stephen; like as in the beginning of the Reformation, Eckius, Roffensis, More, Cajaton, Faber, Cochlaeus, Catharinus, Pighius, all these wrote against Luther (besides the two kings of England and Hungary), summo conatu, acerrimo desiderio, non vulgari doctrina, as one saith, a In like sort Rochester, Rastal, More, set at once against John Frith, martyr; whereof the one by the help of the doctors, the other by wresting the Scriptures, and the third by the help of natural philosophy, had conspired against him. But he, as another Hercules, fighting with all three at once, did so overthrow and confound them, that he converted Rastal to his part.
a Pareus in Medal. Hist.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
9. ] is rightly explained by Chrysostom: . Philo, Legat. ad Caium, 23, vol. ii. p. 568, speaks of , and adds, , , (p. 1014, Potter). Tacitus, Ann. ii. 85 (A.D. 19), relates, ‘Actum et de sacris gyptiis Judaicisque pellendis: factumque Patrum consultum, ut quatuor millia libertini generis, ea superstitione infecta, queis idonea tas, in insulam Sardiniam veherentur cteri cederent Italia, nisi certam ante diem profanos ritus exuissent.’ In this Josephus agrees, Antt. xviii. 3. 5, relating a story as one of its causes, in which Ida, a freedwoman, was the agent of the mischief. Here then we have abundant reason for numbers of these Jews ‘libertini generis’ having come to Jerusalem, being among the cteri who were ordered to quit Italy: and what place so likely a refuge for Jews as Jerusalem?
Those who find a difficulty in this interpretation suppose them to have been inhabitants of Libertum, a town in Africa propria, or proconsularis, from which we find an episcopus Libertinensis sitting in the synod of Carthage in 411 (so Suidas, , , Schleusn., al.); or conjecture to have been the true reading (so the Arm. version, Libyorum , cum., Lyra, Beza, Le Clerc, al.), or even (Schulthess); or suppose them (Lightf.) to have been freedmen from Jewish servitude, or Italian freedmen, who had become proselytes. (The Arabic version given in the Paris polyglott curiously renders it Corinthiorum .) But none of these suppositions will bear examination, and the best interpretation is the usual one that they were the descendants of Jewish freedmen at Rome, who had been expelled by Tiberius. There is no difficulty in their having had a synagogue of their own: for there were 460 or 480 synagogues at Jerusalem (Vitringa, Synag. p. 256. Lightf., Meyer).
] See ch. Act 2:10 , note.
] Two of the five regions of Alexandria were inhabited by Jews (see Jos. Antt. xiv. 7. 2, 10. 1; xix. 5. 2 al.). It was also the seat of the learning and philosophy of the Grecian Jews, which was now at its height. This metropolis of the Hellenists would certainly have a synagogue in Jerusalem. I understand three distinct synagogues to be meant, notwithstanding the somewhat equivocal construction, and only to apply to the unusual term .
.] It seems doubtful whether this genitive also depends on . At first sight it would seem not, from the repetition of , answering to the before. But then we must remember, that as and both belong to towns , and towns well known as the residences of Jews, a change of designation would be necessary when the Jews of whole provinces came to be mentioned, and the synagogue would not be called that of the or (ch. Act 20:4 ), but that of . . . : and, this being the case, the article could not but be repeated, without any reference to the before.
Cilicia was at this time a Roman province, the capital being the free city of Tarsus, see note on ch. Act 9:11 .
Asia , not exactly as in ch. Act 2:9 , where it is distinguished from Phrygia, here and usually in the Acts implies Asia proconsularis, a large and important Roman province, including Mysia, Lydia, Caria, and Phrygia known also as Asia cis Taurum.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 6:9 . : in a hostile sense, cf. Luk 10:25 , Mar 14:57 , and see above on Act 5:17 . : in Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome and the larger towns there was no doubt a considerable number of synagogues, but the tradition that assigned no less than four hundred and eighty to Jerusalem alone is characterised by Schrer as a Talmudic myth ( Jewish Temple , div. ii., vol. ii., p. 73, E.T., so too Edersheim, Jewish Social Life , pp. 83, 252, but see also Renan, Apostles , p. 113, E.T.). The number four hundred and eighty was apparently fixed upon as the numerical equivalent of the Hebrew word for “full,” in Isa 1:21 , a city “full of judgment”. The names which follow have been variously classified, but they have always proved and still prove a difficulty. Ramsay considers that the bad form of the list is due to the fact that St. Luke is here dependent on an authority whose expressions he either translated verbatim or did not understand, Expositor (1895), p. 35. One thing seems certain, viz. , that does not refer to any town Libertum in the neighbourhood of Carthage, which has been urged as an explanation of the close juxtaposition of Cyrene, also in Africa. The existence of a town or region bearing any such name is merely conjectural, and even if its existence could be demonstrated, it is improbable that many Jews from such an obscure place should have been resident in Jerusalem. There is therefore much probability that St. Chrysostom was correct in referring the word to the Libertini, . The Libertini here were probably Roman “freedmen” who were formerly captive Jews brought to Rome by Pompey, B.C. 63 (Suet., Tib. , 36; Tac., Ann. , ii., 85; Philo, Legat. ad Gaium , 23), and afterwards liberated by their Roman masters. These men and their descendants would enjoy the rights of Roman citizenship, and some of them appear to have returned to Jerusalem, where they had their own community and a synagogue called . (according to Grimm-Thayer, sub v . ., some evidence seems to have been discovered of a “synagogue of the Libertines” at Pompeii), see Schrer, Jewish Temple , div. ii., vol. ii., pp. 57, 276, 277; O. Holtzmann, Neutest. Zeitgeschichte , p. 89; and Zckler, Apostelgeschichte , p. 201 (second edition). But a further question arises as to the number of synagogues intended. Thus it has been maintained that they were five in number. This is Schrer’s decided view, Weiss, Meyer (in earlier editions), so Hackett, so Matthias, Handbuch zum N. T., V. Apostelgeschichte , 1897. By other writers it is thought that reference is made to two synagogues. This is the view advocated by Wendt as against Meyer. Wendt admits that as in the places named there were undoubtedly large numbers of Jewish inhabitants, so it is possible that in Jerusalem itself they may have been sufficiently numerous to make up the five synagogues, but his own view is based upon the ground that before . . is parallel with the after (so Holtzmann, Felten). So too Zckler, who depends upon the simple before and . as pointing to one group with the Libertines; . forming a second group. Dr. Sanday, Expositor , viii., p. 327 (third series), takes the same view of two synagogues only, as he considers that it is favoured by the Greeks (so too Dean Plumptre and Winer-Moulton, xix., 5 a , note, but see also Winer-Schmiedel, p. 158; cf. critical note above). Mr. Page is inclined to think that three synagogues are intended: (1) i.e. , of the Libertini, (2) another of the men of Alexandria and Cyrene, (3) another of the men of Cilicia and Asia; whilst many writers from Calvin, Bengel and others to O. Holtzmann and Rendall hold that only one synagogue is intended; so Dr. Hort maintains that the Greek suggests only the one synagogue of the Libertines, and that the other names are simply descriptive of origin from the south, Cyrene, and Alexandria; from the north, Cilicia, and Proconsular Asia. On the whole the Greek seems, to favour the view of Wendt as above; . . seem to form, as Blass says, a part of the same appellation with . Blass himself has recently, Philology of the Gospels , p. 49 ff., declared in favour of another reading, , which he regards as the correct text, being corrupt although differing only in two letters from the original. In the proposed reading he is following Oecumenius and Beza amongst others; the same reading is apparently favoured also by Wetstein, who gives both the passages to which Blass refers, one from Catullus, lx., 1, “Lena montibus Libystinis,” and the other from the geographical Lexicon of Stephanus Byzantinus. would mean Jews inhabitants of Libya, not Libyans, and the synagogue in question bore the name of . ., thus specifying the African Jews in the geographical order of their original dwelling-places. , see on Act 2:9 , and below, Act 11:20 , Act 13:1 . .: probably there was no city, next to Jerusalem and Rome, in which the Jewish population was so numerous and influential as in Alexandria. In his new city Alexander the Great had assigned the Jews a place: their numbers rapidly grew, and, according to Philo, two of the five districts of the town, named after the first five letters of the alphabet, were called “the Jewish,” from the number of Jews dwelling in them, one quarter, Delta, being entirely populated by them. Julius Caesar and Augustus confirmed their former privileges, and they retained them for the most part, with the important exception described by Philo, during subsequent reigns. For some time, until the reign of Claudius, they had their own officer to represent them as ethnarch (alabarch), and Augustus appointed a council who should superintend their affairs according to their own laws, and the Romans evidently recognised the importance of a mercenary race like the Jews for the trade and commerce of the city. Here dwelt the famous teacher Philo, B.C. 20 A.D. 50; here Apollos was trained, possibly under the guidance of the famous philosopher, and here too St. Stephen may have belonged by birth and education (Edersheim, Jewish Social Life , p. 253). St. Paul never visited Alexandria, and it is possible that the Apostle may have felt after his experience at Corinth, and the teaching of Apollos (1Co 1:12 ), that the simplicity of his own message of Christ Crucified would not have been acceptable to hearers of the word of wisdom and the lovers of allegory. On the causes which tended to produce a distinct form of the Jewish character and faith in the city, see B.D. 2 “Alexandria,” and Hastings, B.D., sub v. ; Stanley’s Jewish Church , iii., xlvii.; Hamburger, Real-Encyclopdie des Judentums , ii., 1, 47. We know that Alexandria had, as was only likely, a synagogue at Jerusalem, specially gorgeous (Edersheim, Jewish Social Life , p. 253); on the history of the place see, in addition to literature already mentioned, Schrer, Jewish People , div. ii., vol. ii., pp. 73, 228, 229, 244, E.T.; Jos., Ant. , xiv., 7, 2; x., 1; xix., 5, 2. : of special interest because Saul of Tarsus would probably be prominent amongst “those of Cilicia,” and there is no difficulty in supposing with Weiss and even Spitta ( Apostelgeschichte , p. 115) that he belonged to the members of the Cilician synagogue who disputed with Stephen. To the considerable Jewish community settled in Tarsus, from the time of the Seleucid, Saul belonged. But whatever influence early associations may have had upon Stephen, Saul by his own confession was not merely the son of a Pharisee, but himself a Pharisee of the Pharisees in orthodoxy and zeal, Gal 1:14 , Phi 3:5 . It would seem that there was a synagogue of the Tarsians at Jerusalem, Megilla , 26 a (Hamburger, u. s. , ii., 1, 148); see also B.D. 2 “Cilicia,” Schrer, u. s. , p. 222; O. Holtzmann, Neutest. Zeitgeschichte , p. 100. The “Jews from Asia” are those who at a later date, Act 21:27 , are again prominent in their zeal for the sacredness of the Holy Place, and who hurl against Paul the same fatal charge which he now directs against Stephen (Plumptre, in loco ; Sabatier, L’Aptre Paul , p. 20). : not found in LXX or other Greek versions of the O.T., or Apocrypha, although it may occur, Neh 2:4 , in the sense of request, but the reading is doubtful (see Hatch and Redpath). In the N.T. it is used six times by St. Mark and four times by St. Luke (twice in his Gospel), and always in the sense of questioning, generally in the sense of disputatious questioning. The words of Josephus in his preface (sect. 5), B. J. , may help us to understand the characteristics of the Hellenists. The same verb is used by St. Paul himself, as in this same Jerusalem he disputed, possibly in their synagogue, with the Hellenists on behalf of the faith which he was now seeking to destroy, Act 9:29 . In modern Greek the verb has always the meaning to discuss, to dispute (Kennedy).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
arose. App-178.
certain. App-123.
of = out of. App-104.
synagogue. App-120.
Libertines. During the Civil Wars many Jews had been enslaved, and afterwards set free by their masters. A manumitted slave was called libertinus. These were probably the descendants of such freedmen who had returned to Jerusalem, after the decree of Tiberius expelling the Jews from Rome about 20 A.D.
of = from. App-104.
Cilicia. A province of Asia Minor, of which Tarsus was the capital. See Act 21:39. Probably Saul was one of these disputers.
disputing. Greek. suzeteo, generally translated “question”. Compare Mar 1:27; Mar 8:11; Mar 9:10, Mar 9:14, Mar 9:16.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
9.] is rightly explained by Chrysostom: . Philo, Legat. ad Caium, 23, vol. ii. p. 568, speaks of , and adds, , , (p. 1014, Potter). Tacitus, Ann. ii. 85 (A.D. 19), relates, Actum et de sacris gyptiis Judaicisque pellendis: factumque Patrum consultum, ut quatuor millia libertini generis, ea superstitione infecta, queis idonea tas, in insulam Sardiniam veherentur cteri cederent Italia, nisi certam ante diem profanos ritus exuissent. In this Josephus agrees, Antt. xviii. 3. 5, relating a story as one of its causes, in which Ida, a freedwoman, was the agent of the mischief. Here then we have abundant reason for numbers of these Jews libertini generis having come to Jerusalem, being among the cteri who were ordered to quit Italy: and what place so likely a refuge for Jews as Jerusalem?
Those who find a difficulty in this interpretation suppose them to have been inhabitants of Libertum, a town in Africa propria, or proconsularis, from which we find an episcopus Libertinensis sitting in the synod of Carthage in 411 (so Suidas, , ,-Schleusn., al.); or conjecture to have been the true reading (so the Arm. version, Libyorum, cum., Lyra, Beza, Le Clerc, al.),-or even (Schulthess);-or suppose them (Lightf.) to have been freedmen from Jewish servitude,-or Italian freedmen, who had become proselytes. (The Arabic version given in the Paris polyglott curiously renders it Corinthiorum.) But none of these suppositions will bear examination, and the best interpretation is the usual one-that they were the descendants of Jewish freedmen at Rome, who had been expelled by Tiberius. There is no difficulty in their having had a synagogue of their own: for there were 460 or 480 synagogues at Jerusalem (Vitringa, Synag. p. 256. Lightf., Meyer).
] See ch. Act 2:10, note.
] Two of the five regions of Alexandria were inhabited by Jews (see Jos. Antt. xiv. 7. 2, 10. 1; xix. 5. 2 al.). It was also the seat of the learning and philosophy of the Grecian Jews, which was now at its height. This metropolis of the Hellenists would certainly have a synagogue in Jerusalem. I understand three distinct synagogues to be meant, notwithstanding the somewhat equivocal construction,-and only to apply to the unusual term .
.] It seems doubtful whether this genitive also depends on . At first sight it would seem not, from the repetition of , answering to the before. But then we must remember, that as and both belong to towns, and towns well known as the residences of Jews, a change of designation would be necessary when the Jews of whole provinces came to be mentioned, and the synagogue would not be called that of the or (ch. Act 20:4), but that of . . .:-and, this being the case, the article could not but be repeated, without any reference to the before.
Cilicia was at this time a Roman province, the capital being the free city of Tarsus, see note on ch. Act 9:11.
Asia,-not exactly as in ch. Act 2:9, where it is distinguished from Phrygia,-here and usually in the Acts implies Asia proconsularis, a large and important Roman province, including Mysia, Lydia, Caria, and Phrygia-known also as Asia cis Taurum.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 6:9. -, of the synagogue-of Asia) This whole description applies to one and the same synagogue, which was at Jerusalem, and was then in a most flourishing state, attracting the eyes of all to it, consisting of foreign nations, Europeans, Africans, and Asiatics: for instance, it had in it Saul of Cilicia. Whence furthermore it is very probable that Gamaliel, the famous teacher (doctor) of the law, as being the preceptor of Saul, presided over this very synagogue, and that this commotion was excited either without his privity, or against his will.-, of the Libertines) A Roman term. For many Jews were at Rome; ch. Act 18:2, Act 28:17 : and of these, many who had been made captives in former wars, and had been brought to Rome, having readily recovered their liberty (for the Romans had no liking for Jews), had returned to Jerusalem, and perhaps had brought with them many proselytes in the same condition, that is Libertini. See Reineccii Annot. on this passage. Therefore, instead of Romans, they are called Libertines. Add the note on ch. Act 2:10.- ) Construe, .
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
there: Act 13:45, Act 17:17, Act 17:18
the synagogue: Act 22:19, Act 26:11, Mat 10:17, Mat 23:34, Mar 13:9, Luk 21:12
Cyrenians: Act 2:10, Act 11:20, Act 13:1, Mat 27:32
Alexandrians: Act 18:24, Act 27:6
Cilicia: Act 15:23, Act 15:41, Act 21:39, Act 22:3, Act 23:34, Act 27:5, Gal 1:21
Asia: Act 2:9, Act 16:6, Act 19:10, Act 19:26, Act 21:27
disputing: 1Co 1:20
Reciprocal: Ecc 10:13 – beginning Mar 15:21 – a Cyrenian Luk 12:11 – General Luk 23:26 – a Cyrenian Act 9:2 – the synagogues Act 9:22 – confounded Act 9:29 – disputed Act 28:11 – a ship 1Co 1:27 – General 1Th 2:2 – much 1Pe 1:1 – Asia
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
9
Act 6:9. Certain of the synagogue. The first definition in the lexicon for synagogue is, “In the New Testament, an assembly of men.” It is used in the same sense as “a congregation.” For a full description of the subject, see the notes at Mat 4:23. Libertines. In his historical comments of this word Thayer gives the following: “Jews who had been made captives by the Romans under Pompey but were afterward set free; and who, although they had fixed their abode at Rome, had built at their own expense a synagogue at Jerusalem which they frequented when in that city. The name Libertines adhered to them to distinguish them from the free-born Jews who had subsequently [afterward] taken up their residence in Rome.” Cyrenians were Jewish dwellers in Cy-renaica who were in Jerusalem at Pentecost (Act 2:10), and gave their name to one of the synagogues of that city. Alexandrians were Jewish colonists of Alexandria in Egypt, who were admitted to the privileges of citizenship and had a synagogue in Jerusalem. Cilicia was a province lying on the northeast shore of the Mediterranean Sea, and was the native country of Paul. The Asia that is meant here is a part of the province of Asia Minor (today known as Turkey). Jews from these various places were in Jerusalem on account of the feast of Pentecost, and were displeased with the teaching of Stephen.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 6:9. Then there arose. The more accurate translation is, But there arose. The connection of thought is, the teaching and work of Stephen struck a new chord in the heart of the people. Many who had been deaf before, like the priests, were now constrained to listen. A new tide of success apparently had commenced to flow, but there arose new enemies; the success stirred up a new hindrance.
Certain of the synagogue. An exact classification of these synagogues, which are mentioned here as the scenes of Stephens disputation, is perhaps impossible; the Greek here is perplexed, and the precise definition of each of these Jewish congregations somewhat doubtful. In the great Jewish city, the common metropolis of the race, all shades of opinion, Greek and Aramaic (Hebrew), of course found a home. The Rabbinic writers tell us that there were in Jerusalem 480 synagogues. This is no doubt an exaggeration, and the number probably a mystic one; still, it is certain that most of the great foreign colonies of Jews, whose members for religious purposes or for business were constantly passing and repassing between their distant homes and the holy city, were represented by a synagogue settled in Jerusalem. Five of these nations are here mentioned as possessing congregations in the capital. They seem to represent generally the three great divisions of Jews settled abroad,Roman, Grecian, Asiatic. The Libertine and Cyrenian synagogues represent Rome; the Alexandrian, Greece; the Cilician and Asian, the East. With the teachers of these different schools of Jewish thought, Stephen came in contact.
Which is called the synagogue of the Libertines. This is not, as some have supposed, a geographical designation, but it stands for a great class of Roman Jews whose fathers were originally sold as captives in Rome after the Expedition of Pompey about B.C. 53. These were for the most part freed, and, by a decree of Tiberius some twelve or thirteen years previous to the present time, had been banished from Rome, and great numbers had taken up their abode in Jerusalem.
And Cyrenians. Cyrene was a great city of the province of Cyrenaica, in North Africa. Josephus relates how one-fourth of its inhabitants were Jews. They had originally been settled there by Ptolemy Lagus. Simon the Cyrenian is mentioned as carrying the cross of Jesus. Cyrenian Jews were present at the feast of Pentecost of Acts 2 (see also Act 11:20; Act 13:1).
And Alexandrians. Alexandria was considered at this time to be the second city of the empire. It was the seat of Hellenistic learning and culture. A special quarter of the city was assigned to the Jews, who were estimated as numbering 100,000. Alexander the Great settled them there as colonists, and gave them extraordinary privileges. They had a governor of their own named the Alabarch, and were ruled by their own laws. The famous writer Philo was at this period living in Alexandria.
And of them of Cilicia. This province, geographically speaking, occupied the south-eastern division of what is now known as Asia Minor. Many Jews were settled here. A colony of Jews was settled here by Antiochus the Great. It was at this time a Roman province. St. Paul was a native of Cilicia, and there is no doubt but that among the Rabbis and teachers of the Cilician synagogue, who met and argued with Stephen, not the least distinguished was the brilliant pupil of Gamaliel, the young man Saul.
And of Asia. Not Asia Minor in the modern geographical division, but a province including Mysia, Lydia, and Caria, with Ephesus as the principal city.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
9, 10. The activity of Stephen, though probably not greater than that of the apostles during the same period, naturally attracted to him more especial attention, because he was a new actor in the scene, and one who had hitherto occupied a subordinate position. The opponents of the gospel were aroused into renewed activity. The first persecution occurred upon the surprising success of Peter and John in Solomon’s Portico; the second, upon the triumphs which followed the death of Ananias and Sapphira; and the third now springs up upon the appearance of new advocates of the faith. (9) “Then there arose certain persons from the synagogue called the synagogue of the Freedmen and Cyrenians, and those from Cilicia and Asia, disputing with Stephen; (10) and they were not able to withstand the wisdom and the spirit by which he spoke.”
The policy of the opposition is now changed. Having been deterred, by fear of the people, and by division of sentiment in their own ranks, from resorting to extreme violence, and finding that threats and scourging were unavailing, they now resort to discussion, expecting, by superior learning, to confound men who could not be forced into silence. The parties who entered the lists of debate were all foreign-born Jews. The Freedmen were Jews who had been set free from Roman slavery; the Cyrenians and Alexandrians were from the north of Africa; the Asians and Cilicians from the peninsula of Asia, the last-named being from the native country of Saul of Tarsus.
The fact that Saul was a leader in the contest now begun identifies the attacking party as Pharisees; for he was a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee, and “brought up in this city, at the feet of Gamaliel.” The violent proceedings of the Sadducees having been checked, in part, by the counsel of Gamaliel-the great teacher of the Pharisees-the apostles had gone on in their ministry, not merely proclaiming the resurrection of Jesus, but prosecuting the second part of their commission, “teaching them to observe and do all whatsoever Christ had commanded.” This somewhat relieved the Sadducees from the brunt of attack, and turned it upon the Pharisees, whose traditions were directly assailed by the maxims of true piety and morality. The consequence was, a rallying of this party to an activity not manifested before since the death of Christ. Having nearly all the learning and talent of their nation in their ranks, and especially the literary culture and wealth of the foreign Jews, they resorted with great confidence to disputation. The seven deacons, who were also foreigners, were naturally brought into more direct contact with these foreign-born disputants; and Stephen, who was the most gifted of the seven, soon found himself engaged, single-handed, in a conflict with them all.
This is the first time the disciples measured the strength of their cause in open discussion. Hitherto the young converts had enjoyed no opportunity to compare the arguments by which they had been convinced with those which learning and ingenuity might frame against them. But now they were to hear both sides of the great question presented, with the odds of number, learning, and social position all on the side of their opponents. It was an interesting crisis, and it needs no very vivid imagination to realize the palpitating anxiety with which the disciples resorted to the place of discussion. Their fondest hopes were realized; for it soon became evident that Stephen had all the facts and the statements of Scripture in his favor, so that “they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spoke.” By the “spirit by which he spoke,” I suppose Luke refers to the Holy Spirit, who supplied him with whatever knowledge and wisdom he may have lacked.
In entering freely into this discussion, Stephen acted in accordance with the example of his master, and that of all the apostles. Their example makes it the duty of all disciples to whom God has given the necessary wisdom, to defend in discussion, against all opposition, the truth as it is in Jesus. Whoever does so, in the fear of God, and with a devout zeal for the salvation of men, will find his enemies unable to resist him.
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Verse 9
These are different classes of Jews from the countries around, but resident then in Jerusalem. The names generally denote the places from which they came.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
6:9 {7} Then there arose certain of the {h} synagogue, which is called [the synagogue] of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen.
(7) Schools and universities in ancient times were addicted to false pastors, and were the instruments of Satan to spread abroad and defend false doctrines.
(h) Of the people and the school, as it were.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Many different synagogues existed in Jerusalem at this time (cf. Act 24:12). The Talmud said there were 390 of them before the Romans destroyed the city. [Note: See Fiensy, p. 234.] Other rabbinic sources set the number at 460 and 480, but these may be exaggerations. [Note: See Edersheim, The Life . . ., 1:119.] Like local churches today, they tended to attract people with similar backgrounds and preferences. Many families that had experienced liberation from some kind of slavery or servitude evidently populated the Synagogue of the Freedmen. Some scholars believe that as many as five synagogues are in view in this reference, but the best interpretation seems to be that there was just one. [Note: See Riesner, pp. 204-6.]
"The Freedmen were Roman prisoners (or the descendants of such prisoners) who had later been granted their freedom. We know that a considerable number of Jews were taken prisoner by the Roman general Pompey and later released in Rome, and it is possible that these are meant here." [Note: Marshall, The Acts . . ., p. 129. See also Barrett, pp. 323-24.]
These people had their roots in North Africa (Cyrene and Alexandria) and Asia Minor (Cilicia and Asia). Thus these were Hellenistic Jews, the group from which Stephen himself probably came. Since Saul of Tarsus was from Cilicia, perhaps he attended this synagogue, though he was not a freed man. The leading men in this congregation took issue with Stephen whom they had heard defend the gospel. Perhaps he, too, attended this synagogue. However they were unable to defeat him in debate. Stephen seems to have been an unusually gifted defender of the faith, though he was not one of the Twelve. He was a forerunner of later apologists. God guided wise Stephen by His Spirit as he spoke (cf. Luk 21:15).
This is the first occurrence in Acts of someone presenting the gospel in a Jewish synagogue. Until now we have read that the disciples taught and preached in the temple and from house to house (Act 5:42). We now learn that they were also announcing the good news in their Jewish religious meetings. Paul normally preached first in the synagogue in towns he evangelized on his missionary journeys.
"While not minimizing the importance of the apostles to the whole church, we may say that in some way Stephen, Philip, and perhaps others of the appointed seven may well have been to the Hellenistic believers what the apostles were to the native-born Christians." [Note: Longenecker, p. 335.]