Notes on

Acts
2 0 2 0 E d i t i o n
Dr. Thomas L. Constable

TITLE

The title "Acts of the Apostles" is very ancient. The Anti-Marcionite

Prologue to the Gospel of Luke (A.D. 150-180) contains the oldest
reference to the book by this name. The title is a bit misleading, however,
because the book contains only a few of the "acts" of some of the apostles,
primarily Peter and Paul. The book is more a story of the extension of the
church from Jerusalem to Rome than it is a complete history of the
apostles' acts. Whereas Jesus is the chief character in the Gospels, the
Holy Spirit working through the apostles is in Acts.

WRITER

Two lines of argument lead to the conclusion that Luke, the friend, fellow
missionary, and physician of Paul wrote this book, under the inspiration of
the Holy Spirit. First, there is the internal evidence, the passages written in
the first person plural that can refer to Luke (16:10-40; 20:5—21:18;
27:1—28:16). Second, we have external evidence indicating that Luke
wrote Acts. This evidence includes references by early church fathers,1
comments in collections of New Testament books,2 and editorial
statements in early notes on certain New Testament books.3 Luke's name
does not appear in Acts, but it is a shortened Greek form of a Latin name—
either Lucanus, Lucianus, Lucius, or Lucillus. Eusebius and Jerome wrote

1E.g., Irenaeus, c. 180 A.D.

2E.g., the Muratorian Canon, second century A.D. See Documents of the Christian Church,
pp. 28-29, for an English translation of the text.
3E.g., the Anti-Marcionite Prologue to the Gospel of Luke, second century A.D. See T. W.

Manson, Studies in the Gospels and Epistles, p. 49, for an English translation.
Copyright Ó 2020 by Thomas L. Constable

w w w . s o n i c l i g h t . c o m
2 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

that Luke was a native of Syrian Antioch.1 There is also some tradition that
he was from Philippi.2

DATE AND PLACE OF COMPOSITION

The date of composition was probably in the early sixties, A.D. 60-63. In
view of his emphases, Luke probably would have mentioned several
important events had they occurred by the time he wrote. These include
the Neronian persecution of Christians that began in A.D. 64, Paul's death
in A.D. 68, and the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

We do not know for sure where Luke was when he wrote Acts. Perhaps he
composed it over a period of years, drawing on various sources, and then
put it into its final form in Rome where Paul was in confinement for two
years (28:30-31; A.D. 60-62).

"Fortunately the intelligibility and value of the book are largely

independent of a knowledge of the precise situation in which
it was written. While the finer points of the interpretation of
Acts can still cause intense discussion among scholars, the
essential themes of the book are basically clear and simple."3

SCOPE

The events recorded in Acts cover a period of about 30 years: beginning

with the Lord Jesus' ascension in A.D. 33, and extending to Paul's two-year
Roman house arrest that ended about A.D. 62.4 The Delphic Inscription and
several references in Josephus, plus one in Suetonius, enable us to identify
key dates in Acts.5

1J. S. Howson, in The Life and Epistles of St. Paul, p. 241.

2A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, 2:x.
3I. Howard Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 49.
4See Appendix 1 at the end of these notes for a table of Paul's activities.
5See Darrell L. Bock, Acts, p. 30, for a chart of these.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 3

GENRE

Most scholars believe that Acts fits within the literary classification of
ancient history. The Greek word praxeis, "acts," identifies a specific genre
or subgenre in the ancient world: narratives of the heroic deeds of
individuals or cities. However, it was not the name of a technical genre as
such.1 Acts bears all the marks of a book of ancient history. Luke was on a
par with other writiers of ancient history in his day regarding his skill and
methods.2

PURPOSE

There seems to have been a three-fold purpose for the writing of Acts. As
with the other books of the Bible that record history in narrative form,
certainly the Holy Spirit had a historical purpose.3 He intended to provide
an inspired record of selected events that show the spread of the gospel
and the church. They branched out from Jerusalem, the center of Judaism
where the church began, to Rome, the uttermost part of the Gentile earth
in Luke's day.

"This book may be called an account of the beginning of the

bringing of God's supply to humanity to meet its need."4

"Streeter suggested that an alternative title for the book of

Acts might be 'The Road to Rome', for this is indeed the
significance of Luke's work. Whatever minor motifs Luke had
in mind, such as the establishment of Christianity in men's
minds as a constructive and not destructive element in the
social order, his main concern was to show that, in God's plan
for the renewal of the life of mankind, Jerusalem, the heart of
old Israel, was the goal of Stage I [i.e., the Book of Luke], while
Rome, the centre of the world, was the goal of Stage II [i.e.,
the Book of Acts]."5

1Donald A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, pp. 285,
300-01.
2Ibid., pp. 316-21.
3William Barclay, The Acts of the Apostles, p. xvii.
4G. Campbell Morgan, The Unfolding Message of the Bible, p. 334.
5William Neil, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 27.
4 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

However, the fact that Luke included what he did, and omitted much other
historical data, indicates a second, theological purpose. He showed how the
plans and purposes of God were working out through history. In particular,
he showed how Jesus Christ was faithfully and irresistibly building His
church (Matt. 16:18).1 This involved clarifying how God's dealings with
humankind had taken a different course because of the Jews' rejection of
their Messiah.2

"… Luke in Acts is not merely concerned to draw a link

between the time of Jesus and the time of the early church,
as is commonly noticed, but also between the time of Israel
and the time of Jesus and His church. Acts insists that the God
who was at work in the history of his ancient people, Israel,
bringing them salvation, is the same God who is at work in the
church."3

Third, Luke evidently had an apologetic purpose in writing. He frequently

pointed out the relationship of the church to the Roman state by referring
to many Roman officials, not one of whom opposed Christianity because of
its doctrines or practices. This would have made Acts a powerful defensive
tool for the early Christians in their struggle to survive in a hostile pagan
environment.

Longenecker identified Luke's purposes as kerygmatic, apologetic,

conciliatory, and catachetical.4

"I propose that forging a vision for what life could be like in the
gathered church, while certainly not his only priority and
perhaps not his highest, was clearly one of Luke's major
concerns in writing Acts. … I believe Luke deliberately chose
positive aspects of church life for inclusion in the summary
narratives [2:42-47; 4:32-35; and 5:12-16]. He did this in
order to present his portraits of church life as a positive

1See Stephen J. Strauss, "The Purpose of Acts and the Mission of God," Bibliotheca Sacra
169:676 (October-December 2012):443-64.
2For a very good discussion of the major theological emphases in Acts, see Marshall, pp.

23-34.
3Brian S. Rosner, "Acts and Biblical History," in ibid., p. 82. Cf. George E. Ladd, "The Acts

of the Apostles," in The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1123-24.

4Richard N. Longenecker, "Acts," in John-Acts, vol. 9 of The Expositor's Bible

Commentery, pp. 216-21.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 5

example for readers to study and emulate in their own

churches. For Luke, the summary narratives describe what life
could be like in an exemplary church."1

"We agree with a growing number of scholars who think that

Luke wrote with a variety of specific purposes and that these
purposes are part of a larger, general purpose—the edification
of Christians."2

UNIQUE FEATURES

Acts is the only New Testament book that continues the history begun in
the Gospels. Whereas Luke's Gospel focuses on the vertical universalization
of the gospel (up and down the social scale), Acts focuses on its horizontal
universalization (from Jerusalem to the uttermost parts of the world).

"… the Acts is to be seen in close literary association with the

Gospel [of Luke]. They form two parts of one work, conceived
in its final form as a unity, whether or not the original
composition of the Gospel took place independently of the plan
to produce the two-part work. Although there are other
examples of literary compositions in two parts (Josephus,
Contra Apionem, is one of the nearest parallels to Luke-Acts
in time and cultural context), Luke's work appears to be unique
among Christian writings and to have no close secular
precedents in its combination of the stories of a religious
leader and of his followers."3

"The book which we call the Acts of the Apostles may be said
to complete the Pentateuch of New Testament history. Four
of these books present the Person of our Lord; while the fifth
gives the first page of the history of the Church …"4

"This book is to the Gospels what the fruit is to the tree that
bears it. In the Gospels we see the corn of wheat falling into

1Andy Chambers, Exemplary Life, p. 5.

2Carson and Moo, p. 305.
3I. Howard Marshall, "Acts and the 'Former Treatis,'" in The Book of Acts in Its First

Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting, p. 182.
4G. Campbell Morgan, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 9.
6 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

the ground and dying: in the Acts we see it bearing forth much
fruit (John 12:24)."1

Acts is also an indispensable historical record for understanding the Apostle

Paul's epistles; without it we could not understand some of the things he
wrote. It is the only Bible book that records the historical transition from
Judaism to Christianity. It provides basic information about and insight into
the early church. And it challenges every modern Christian.2

Richard Longenecker has shown that Luke's method of writing history was
in line with current historiography of his day.3 Ben Witherington observed
that Luke-Acts is more typical of ancient Greek history writing than Roman
(Latin).4 Others have argued that it is more like the Hebrew Scriptures than
anything else.

The Gospel of Luke is the longest book in the New Testament with 1,151
verses, Matthew is the second longest with 1,071 verses, and Acts is the
third longest with 1,003 verses.

Arno Gaebelein pointed out similarities between the Gospels and Genesis,
Acts and Exodus, the Pauline epistles and Leviticus, the General epistles
and Numbers, and Revelation and Deuteronomy.5

STRUCTURE

Longenecker identified five phenomena about the structure of Acts that

the reader needs to recognize to appreciate what Luke sought to
communicate.

"1. It begins, like the [Third] Gospel, with an introductory

section of distinctly Lukan cast dealing with the
constitutive events of the Christian mission (1:1—2:41)
before it sets forth the advances of the gospel 'in

1Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown, Commentary Practical and Explanatory
on the Whole Bible, p. 1080.
2Stanley D. Toussaint, "Acts," in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, p.

349.
3Longenecker, pp. 212-14.
4Ben Witherington III, The Acts of the Apostles: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary, p. 28.
5Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 7

Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends

of the earth' (1:7).

"2. This introductory section is followed by what appears to

be a thematic statement (2:42-47). This material, while
often viewed as a summary of what precedes, most
probably serves as the thesis paragraph for what
follows.

"3. In his presentation of the advance of the Christian

mission, Luke follows an essentially geographical outline
that moves from Jerusalem (2:42—6:7), through Judea
and Samaria (6:8—9:31), on into Palestine-Syria
(9:32—12:24), then to the Gentiles in the eastern part
of the Roman Empire (12:25—19:20), and finally
culminates in Paul's defenses and the entrance of the
gospel into Rome (19:21—28:31).

"4. In his presentation, Luke deliberately sets up a number

of parallels between the ministry of Peter in the first half
of Acts and that of Paul in the last half.1

"5. Luke includes six summary statements or 'progress

reports' (6:7; 9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; and 28:31),
each of which seems to conclude its own 'panel' of
material.2

"Taking all these literary and structural features into account,

we may conclude that Luke developed his material in Acts
along the following lines:

"Introduction: The Constitutive Events of the Christian Mission

(1:1—2:41)

1W. H. Griffith Thomas, The Acts of the Apostles: Outline Studies in Primitive Christianity,
pp. 25-26, offered some helpful comparisons between Peter's ministry and Paul's in Acts.
For two lists of 16 parallels between Acts 1—12 and 13—28, see Charles H. Talbert,
Literary Patterns, Theological Themes, and the Genre of Luke-Acts, pp. 23-24. This book
contains many tables of interesting parallels within Acts, within Luke, and between Luke
and Acts.
2Cf. A Dictionary of the Bible, s.v. "The Chronology of the New Testament," by C. H.

Turner, 1:421. Turner's first panel included 1:1—2:41.

8 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"Part I: The Christian Mission to the Jewish World (2:42—

12:24)

Panel 1—The Earliest Days of the Church at Jerusalem

(2:42—6:7)

Summary Statement: 'So the word of God spread. The

number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly,
and a large number of priests became obedient to
the faith' (6:7).

Panel 2—Critical Events in the Lives of Three Pivotal Figures

(6:8—9:31)

Summary Statement: 'Then the church throughout

Judea, Galilee and Samaria enjoyed a time of
peace. It was strengthened; and encouraged by
the Holy Spirit, it grew in numbers, living in the
fear of the Lord' (9:31)

Panel 3—Advances of the Gospel in Palestine-Syria (9:32—

12:24)

Summary Statement: 'But the word of God continued to

increase and spread' (12:24)

"Part II: The Christian Mission to the Gentile World (12:25—

28:31)

Panel 4—The First Missionary Journey and the Jerusalem

Council (12:25—16:5)

Summary Statement: 'So the churches were

strengthened in the faith and grew daily in
numbers' (16:5).

Panel 5—Wide Outreach Through Two Missionary Journeys

(16:6—19:20)

Summary Statement: 'In this way the word of the Lord

spread widely and grew in power' (19:20).
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 9

Panel 6—To Jerusalem and Thence to Rome (19:21—

28:31)

Summary Statement: 'Boldly and without hindrance he

preached the kingdom of God and taught about
the Lord Jesus Christ' (28:31)."1

THEOLOGY

Darrell Bock has identified the key subjects in Acts as God, Jesus, and the
Holy Spirit. More particularly, he noted the following theological emphases:
the plan and work of the mighty God; mission, opposition, and the inclusion
of the Gentiles; Jesus, the Lord of all for a gospel sent to all; the new
community's emerging separate identity; the law; the triumph of the
gospel; and eschatology.2

OUTLINE

I. The witness in Jerusalem 1:1—6:7

A. The founding of the church 1:1—2:47

1. The resumptive preface to the book 1:1-5

2. The command to witness 1:6-8
3. The ascension of Jesus 1:9-11
4. Jesus' appointment of a twelfth apostle 1:12-26
5. The birth of the church 2:1-41
6. The early state of the church 2:42-47

B. The expansion of the church in Jerusalem 3:1—6:7

1. External opposition 3:1—4:31

2. Internal compromise 4:32—5:11

1Longenecker, pp. 233-34. For further study of background issues such as the history,
authorship, unity, text, composition, theology, church, and ministry of the Book of Acts,
see the Introduction in Richard B. Rackham, The Acts of the Apostles, pp. xiii-cxv.
2Bock, pp. 32-42.
10 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

3. Intensified external opposition 5:12-42

4. Internal conflict 6:1-7

II. The witness in Judea and Samaria 6:8—9:31

A. The martyrdom of Stephen 6:8—8:1a

1. Stephen's arrest 6:8—7:1

2. Stephen's address 7:2-53
3. Stephen's death 7:54—8:1a

B. The ministry of Philip 8:1b-40

1. The evangelization of Samaria 8:1b-25

2. Philip's ministry to the Ethiopian eunuch 8:26-40

C. The mission of Saul 9:1-31

1. Saul's conversion and calling 9:1-19a

2. Saul's initial conflicts 9:19b-30
3. The church at peace 9:31

III. The witness to the uttermost part of the earth 9:32—28:31

A. The extension of the church to Syrian Antioch 9:32—12:24

1. Peter's ministry in Lydda and Joppa 9:32-43

2. The conversion of Cornelius 10:1—11:18
3. The initiatives of the Antioch church 11:19-30
4. The persecution of the Jerusalem church 12:1-24

B. The extension of the church to Cyprus and Asia Minor 12:25—

16:5

1. The divine appointment of Barnabas and Saul 12:25—

13:3
2. The mission to Cyprus 13:4-12
3. The mission to Asia Minor 13:13—14:21a
4. Paul and Barnabas' return to Antioch of Syria 14:21b-28
5. The Jerusalem Council 15:1-35
6. The strengthening of the Gentile churches 15:36—16:5
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 11

C. The extension of the church to the Aegean shores 16:6—

19:20

1. The call to Macedonia 16:6-10

2. The ministry in Macedonia 16:11—17:15
3. The ministry in Achaia 17:16—18:17
4. The beginning of ministry in Asia 18:18-22
5. The results of ministry in Asia 18:23—19:20

D. The extension of the church to Rome 19:21—28:31

1. Ministry on the way to Jerusalem 19:21—21:16

2. Ministry in Jerusalem 21:17—23:32
3. Ministry in Caesarea 23:33—26:32
4. Ministry on the way to Rome 27:1—28:15
5. Ministry in Rome 28:16-31

MESSAGE

The message of Acts is that the church of Jesus Christ is God's instrument
to glorify Himself in the present age. The subject of the Book of Acts, what
is its primary focus of attention, is the church of Jesus Christ.

Acts contains three major revelations regarding the church.

The first of these concerns is the origin of the church. Jesus Christ created
the church.

During His earthly ministry, Jesus Christ prepared for the creation of the
church. He instructed His disciples with truth they did not fully understand
at the time, and He demonstrated for them life that they did not fully
appreciate at the time (John 14:6). We have this record in the Gospels.

After His ascension, Christ poured out His Holy Spirit on the day of
Pentecost. This was the birthday of the church. The baptism of the Spirit
did something God had never done before in history. It united believers with
Christ in a new relationship: as fellow members of the spiritual body of
Christ (John [Link] "He abides with you and will be in you."). Believers then
shared the life of Christ in a way never before experienced. God united them
with Him. The same Spirit of God that indwelt Him now indwells us. The
unity of the church is not external: what we believe (creeds), how we
12 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

organize ourselves (polity), or where and how we meet (culture). It is

internal: through Him who indwells us. The basis of our unity in the church
goes back to the origin of the church. It began when the Holy Spirit first
baptized believers on the day of Pentecost (1 Cor. 12:13; Rom. 8:9). The
"church" is not just a new name for Israel.

The second major revelation of the church that we receive in Acts concerns
the nature of the church. The church is one with Jesus Christ. That is its
nature. It shares one life with its risen Lord.

In Luke's Gospel, Luke presented Jesus Christ as the Head of a new race.
As Adam was the head of one race, Christ is the last Adam, the Head of a
new race. As Adam was the first man, Christ is the second man, the Head
of a new race. As the first-born from the dead, Christ is the Head of a new
race.

In Acts, we see the new race springing from "The Firstborn from the Dead."
We see the brotherhood of which Christ is the Elder Brother. We see the
body growing of which Christ is the Head. The spiritual bonds that unite the
members of Christ's race are stronger than the physical bonds that unite
the members of Adam's race (cf. Matt. 12:47-50). The members of the
new race are often feeble, faulty, and foolish, but they possess the life of
Christ. Christ is manifesting His life through those who have become
partakers of His life by Holy Spirit baptism. The nature of the church is that
it is one organic whole (one body) empowered by the life of Christ. The
Holy Spirit has joined us organically to Christ. Whenever Christians partake
of the Lord's Supper, they should remember that just as the bread and
wine (or juice) become part of the participant's physical body, so Christ
has become part of us spiritually.

The third major revelation of the church that Acts gives us concerns the
function of the church. The function of the church is to be the instrument
of Jesus Christ, His hands and feet and mouth, to carry out His will in the
world. What is the will of Christ? There are three things that Acts
emphasizes.

The will of God is the imparting of life where there is death. Jesus Christ
ministers divine life through His human instruments. We see Peter, Paul,
and all God's other servants in Acts, doing the same kinds of things Jesus
did when He walked this earth. They even did the same types of miracles.
Christ, by His Spirit, was working through them (cf. 1:1-2). References to
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 13

their being filled with the Spirit reflect Christ's control of these people as
His instruments. He wants to impart life through us too, and He does so as
we herald the gospel.

The will of God is also the manifesting of light where there is darkness. The
light of the gospel shines through Spirit-filled believers, effectually bringing
the lost into the light of God's presence. In Acts we see Christ, through the
Holy Spirit, choosing the persons to whom the gospel would go. We see
Him indicating the places where the gospel would reach. We see Him
initiating the procedures by which the gospel would penetrate the darkness
caused by Satan. This is what Christ wants to do today too. He wants to
manifest light through believers. Spiritual ignorance is taking over in the
post-modern world. Our world needs to see light through Christians.

Third, the will of God is the producing of love where there is apathy,
bitterness, and hatred. Christ's love reaches through believers, His
instruments, by the Holy Spirit. It produces in the believer love for the Lord,
love for Christian brothers and sisters, and love for the world. We see this
illustrated in Acts. This is what Christ wants to do through Christians:
produce love.

In summary, there are three great revelations of the church in Acts: As to

its origin, Jesus Christ created it (Matt. 16:18). As to its nature, the church
is one with Christ (1 Cor. 12:13). As to its function, the church is the
instrument of Christ. Second Corinthians 6:1 says that we are "workers
together" with God. It is a tremendous privilege to be Christ's members!

Acts also warns us of three major antagonists facing the church.

The first of these is prejudice. Prejudice means prejudging, judging on the

basis of limited information. The outstanding example of this type of
opposition in Acts is the unbelieving Jews. They refused to accept the
witness of the Christians. They would not tolerate the evidence that the
Christians presented. They became the major enemies of the church, as
well as missing the blessings that could have been theirs if they had
acknowledged their Messiah. The church faces the same opposition today
(e.g., traditional concepts as opposed to Scriptural revelation). Many
Christians are simply playing church. The commitment of many Christians
to non-biblical traditions, as though they were biblical, is frightening.
14 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

The root cause of this problem is lack of confidence in the Holy Spirit.
Prejudice says, "I do not trust what the Holy Spirit has said in Scripture."
We must always interpret experience in the light of revelation, not the other
way around. Many Christians feel safer with tradition. Many Christians
simply want to be told what to believe and do. They do not want to think
for themselves, or even read the Bible for themselves.

The second antagonist the church faces that Acts identifies is personal
agendas. By this I mean the desire for something other than the will of God.
There are several examples of this peril in Acts. Ananias and Sapphira
wanted a reputation for spirituality, not just spirituality itself. Simon Magus
wanted a supernatural gift for his own personal glory, not just for the glory
of God. Our flesh also tempts us to serve ourselves while we serve God.
This is compromising with the will of God.

The root cause of this problem seems to me to be lack of passive yielding

to the Holy Spirit. The Spirit does not fill or control such Christians. They
are double-minded. We need to yield total control to Him (cf. Rom. 6:12-
13).

A third antagonist the church faces that we also see in Acts is pride. Two
men provide perhaps the outstanding examples of this peril: Felix and
Agrippa. Their desire for personal prestige determined their response to
God's will. Many a person's career goals and ego needs have kept that one
from salvation, or limited God's use of him or her as a Christian.

The cause of this problem is lack of active obedience to the Holy Spirit.
When the Spirit through His Word says, "Do this," and we refuse, it is
because we set our wills against His. That is pride. We need to humble
ourselves under the mighty hand of God. In 10:14, Peter said, "By no
means, Lord." What a contradiction!

These are three major perils to the church corporately, as well as to

Christians individually. Luke warned us of them in Acts. They are major
obstacles to Christ building His church in the world: prejudice, personal
agendas, and pride.

Acts also presents three major lessons for the church that it should always
keep in view.

First, the church's passion must be the glory of God. This was the driving
motive in the lives of Peter, Paul, and the other faithful missionaries and
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 15

witnesses that Luke recorded in this book. Their passion was not their own
personal safety or their physical comfort, or the opportunity to relieve the
sufferings of others, or the desire to create better living conditions in the
world. They subordinated all these worthy ambitions to God's glory in their
hearts. We too must commit ourselves to glorifying God above everything
else, personally and corporately. The cry of the Protestant Reformers was,
"Sola gloria dei; Only the glory of God." Jesus taught us to pray, "Hallowed
be thy name" (Matt. 6:9; Luke 11:2).

Second, the church's governing principle must be loyalty to Christ. Again,

the leaders of the early church modeled this for us. They put Christ's
interests before their own, and they were single-minded in their living. This
is the evidence of their being filled with the Spirit. Their primary
commitment was to letting His life work in and through them, and to
carrying out His work, not their own. How loyal are we to Christ individually
and corporately? John the Baptist said, "He must increase, but I must
decrease" (John 3:30). We must be single-minded and radical in our
commitment to please the Lord (cf. 2 Tim. 2:4).

Third, the church's power must be the Holy Spirit. The many references to
prayer in Acts show us how conscious the early Christians were of their
dependence on God's power. They did not go out in self-confidence, but in
God-confidence. They called on Him to reveal Christ's life in and through
them (4:24-30). They called on Him to direct Christ's works in and through
them (12:12; 20:36). We must not only be obedient and yielded to the
Holy Spirit but also dependent on Him, because He is our power individually
and corporately (John 15:5).

Finally, three challenges grow out of the emphases of Acts.

First, what is your motivation as a Christian? Why do you do what you do?
What motivated the Spirit-filled believers in Acts was the desire that God
should get the glory above everything else. Who do you want to get the
credit for what you do? Former President Ronald Reagan reportedly had a
sign on his desk in the White House that said, "There is no limit to what
you can accomplish, if you don't care who gets the credit."

Second, what is your method as a Christian? How do you do what you do?
Our models in Acts cooperated with God so Christ could work through them
by His Holy Spirit. This involved having confidence in His revelation, yielding
to His will, obeying His Word, and depending on His Holy Spirit.
16 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Third, what is your emphasis as a Christian? What do you do? In Acts, the
leaders of the church gave priority to what is most important to God, not
to what was most important to themselves personally. Furthermore, they
emphasized the essentials, not the incidentals. Let us not get so fascinated
with the incidentals, such as how God manifested His power (healings,
speaking in tongues, etc.), that we fail to give priority to the essentials.

One essential is that He is powerful enough to do anything to accomplish

His purposes. Many Christians are very reluctant to believe that God can do
whatever needs to be done. Let us give ourselves to the task before us
wholeheartedly and enthusiastically. In Matthew 28:18, Jesus said: "All
authority has been given unto Me in heaven and on earth." In Acts 1:8, He
said, "You shall receive power after the Holy Spirit has come upon you." In
Matthew 16:18, He said: "I will build My church, and the gates of hell shall
not prevail against it." Acts is a fantastic book, because in it we see Him
doing just that, and we find encouragement to participate in His great
program of church building.1

1Adapted from G. Campbell Morgan, Living Messages of the Books of the Bible, [Link]-
91.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 17

I. THE WITNESS IN JERUSALEM 1:1—6:7

This first major section of Acts contains the record of the founding of the
church on the day of Pentecost, and its expansion in the city of Jerusalem.

A. THE FOUNDING OF THE CHURCH 1:1—2:47

In his account of the founding of the Christian church, Luke gave

background information that ties Jesus' giving of the Great Commission to
the day of Pentecost. He showed how Jesus enabled His disciples to obey
His command to evangelize the nations.

1. The resumptive preface to the book 1:1-5

Luke wrote these introductory statements to connect the Book of Acts

with his Gospel.1 In his former book, Luke had recorded what Jesus had
begun to do and to teach during His earthly ministry. In this second book,
he wrote what Jesus continued doing to build His church through Spirit-
indwelt Christians (cf. John 14:12).2

1:1 Luke referred to his Gospel as "the first account." The Greek
word proton means "first," but it does not imply that Luke
intended to write more than two books. This has been the
unnecessary conclusion of some scholars.3 It simply means
that Luke was the first of these two books that he wrote.

"Theophilus" means lover of God. Some interpreters have

suggested that Theophilus was not an actual person and that
Luke was writing to all lovers of God whom he personified by
using this name (cf. Luke 1:3). All things considered, it seems
more likely that Theophilus was a real person. There is no
reason he could not have been. Such is the implication of the

1See Longenecker, p. 252, for an explanation of the parallel structures of Luke 1—2 and
Acts 1—2.
2See Craig S. Keener, "The Spirit and the Mission of the Church in Acts 1—2," Journal of

the Evangelical Theological Society 62:1 (March 2019):25-45.

3E.g., E. M. Blaiklock, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 49.
18 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

address, and Theophilus was a fairly common Greek proper

name.1 (Flavius Josephus similarly addressed his Antiquities of
the Jews to a man named Epaphroditus.2) A few writers have
identified Theophilus as King Herod Agrippa II (Acts 26),3 but
this is a minority view.

Luke wanted his readers to be careful to note that the

remarkable supernatural events he was to unfold were
ultimately the work of Jesus Christ. They were not just those
of His enthusiastic followers.

"The order of the words 'doing' and 'teaching' is

noteworthy. Deeds first; then words. The same
order is found in Luke 24:19 (contrast Acts 7:22).
The 'doing' comes first, for Christianity is primarily
life. The teaching follows afterwards, for 'the life
is the light of men.'"4

1:2 Jesus was "taken up" at His ascension (Luke 24:51). The
orders that He had given His apostles were that they should
remain temporarily in Jerusalem (1:4; Luke 24:49). Then they
should go out into the whole world to herald the good news of
salvation (1:8; Luke 24:47; Matt. 28:19-20).

Apostles are by definition "sent ones." However, this term

here has specific reference to the few disciples Jesus gave this
command to personally. Their calling was unique; these men
laid the foundation of the church (Eph. 2:20). All Christians are
"apostles," in the sense that Christ has sent all of us who are
believers on this mission. Yet the 12 apostles (and Paul) were
a unique group with special powers the Lord did not give to
the rest.5

1R.J. Knowling, "The Acts of the Apostles, in The Expositor's Greek Testament, 2:50.
2FlaviusJosephus, Antiquities of the Jews, preface, par. 2. Cf. idem, The Life of Flavius
Josephus, par. 76.
3Alberto S. Valdés, "The Acts of the Apostles," in The Grace New Testament Commentary,

1:481.
4Thomas, pp. 18-19. Cf. Ezra 7:10.
5See Robert D. Culver, "Apostles and the Apostolate in the New Testament," Bibliotheca

Sacra 134:534 (April-June 1977):131-43.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 19

"Each of these four factors—the witness

mandate, the apostles, the Holy Spirit, the
ascended Lord—is a major emphasis that runs
throughout Acts; each receives special attention
in chapters 1 and 2."1

1:3 The Greek word tekmeriois, translated "proofs," occurs only

here in the New Testament. It refers to proof by
incontrovertible evidence as contrasted with the proof claimed
by a witness. Luke asserted that Jesus Christ's resurrection
was beyond dispute.

"The fact of the resurrection was to be the solid

foundation of the apostles' faith and the chief
ingredient of their early message."2

As 40 days of temptation in the wilderness preceded Jesus'

earthly ministry (Luke 4:2), so He introduced His present
ministry with a 40-day period of preparation. Jesus' baptism
with the Spirit occurred before his 40-day test, whereas the
reverse order of events appears here in Acts. God had
instructed Moses for 40 days on Mt. Sinai in preparation for
Israel's mission in the world. Now Jesus instructed the Apostles
for 40 days in preparation for the church's mission in the world.

"What Luke is describing is a new beginning, yet a

beginning which recalls the beginning already
made in the Gospel and with which the story of
Acts is continuous. The forty days, therefore, is a
vital vehicle for conveying Luke's theology of
continuity …"3

The term "kingdom" occurs only eight times in Acts, but 39

times in Luke, and 18 times in the New Testament epistles.
The "kingdom of God," of which Jesus taught His disciples
between His resurrection and ascension, probably refers to

1Longenecker, p. 253.
2Blaiklock,
p 49.
3John F. Maile, "The Ascension in Luke-Acts," Tyndale Bulletin 37 (1986):54.
20 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

God's rule in its largest sense, including His rule over the
church, and His messianic kingdom.1

Dispensationalists believe that Jesus Christ will rule on the

earth as Messiah in the future. Progressive dispensationalists,
along with covenant premillennialists, amillennialists, and
postmillennialists, believe that the messianic kingdom began
during Jesus' first advent ministry and that the church is the
present form of the messianic kingdom on earth.

Normative dispensationalists (i.e., those other than

"progressives") believe that the Jews' rejection of Jesus
resulted in a temporary withdrawal or postponement (delay)
of the kingdom and that the church is a distinct entity, not
another name for the messianic kingdom. They believe that
the messianic kingdom is an earthly kingdom and that it will
begin when Jesus Christ returns to reign personally on the
earth. I believe there is better scriptural support for the
normative view.2

Since I will be referring to these various groups of Bible

interpreters throughout these notes, let me digress briefly and
take a few paragraphs to define them. "Dispensationalists"
believe that references to Israel in the New Testament always
refer to ethnic Jews. This is how "Israel" is used in the Old
Testament. "Non-dispensationalists" believe that some
references to Israel in the New Testament refer to Christians
who may be either Jewish or Gentile. They speak of the church
as "the new Israel." They believe that the church has replaced
Israel as the people of God, and that there is no special future
for Israel as a people; God will fulfill His promises to Israel in
the church—all Christians—in a spiritual rather than a literal
way.

Among dispensationalists, there are those who believe that

God will fulfill His promises concerning the reign of Christ as
Messiah after Jesus returns to the earth at His Second Coming.

1Alva J. McClain, The Greatness of the Kingdom, p. 424-25.

2See Appendix 2 "Views of the Kingdom," and Appendix 3 "The Kingdoms of God," at the
end of these notes, for a diagram and a chart of these matters.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 21

These are "normative" or "traditional" dispensationalists.

Sometimes this group is further divided into "classical"
dispensationalists (who represent the earlier forms of
dispensational teaching) and "revised" dispensationalists (who
represent later refinements in dispensational teaching).

In contrast to "normative" (traditional) dispensationalists,

there are "progressive" dispensationalists. They believed that
God has already begun to fulfill His promises concerning the
reign of Christ as Messiah from heaven as the Head of the
Church, and that He will fulfill the promises concerning Christ's
earthly reign after He returns at His Second Coming.
"Ultradispensationalists" believe that the church did not begin
at Pentecost but later.

"Non-dispensationalists" are for the most part covenant

theologians. These can be divided into "amillennialists" (who
believe that the Messianic reign of Christ will not be on the
earth but is Christ's present reign from heaven),
"postmillennialists" (who believe that the present age will
improve, this will culminate in Messianic kingdom conditions on
earth, and then Christ will return to the earth), and "historic
(covenant) premillennialists" (who believe that Christ will
return to earth and then set up an earthly kingdom, but
presently the church is the new Israel).

Sometimes the phrase "kingdom of God" refers to God's

heavenly rule over humans throughout history. Both are biblical
uses of the term "kingdom of God."1 An earthly kingdom
seems clearly in view in this passage, since the disciples had
expected Jesus to inaugurate the messianic kingdom predicted
in the Old Testament on earth then (v. 6). However, God
postponed (delayed) that kingdom because Israel rejected her
King (v. 7).2 Evidently, during those 40 days before His
ascension, Jesus gave His disciples further instruction

1For a synopsis of the New Testament revelation concerning the kingdom of God, see
Robert L. Saucy, "The Presence of the Kingdom and the Life of the Church," Bibliotheca
Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1987):30-46.
2J. Dwight Pentecost, Thy Kingdom Come, pp. 214, 225-28. See also Cleon L. Rogers Jr.,

"The Davidic Covenant in the Gospels," Bibliotheca Sacra 150:600 (October-December

1993):458-78.
22 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

concerning the future and the postponed kingdom. There may

be some significance in the fact that God renewed the broken
Mosaic Covenant with Moses on Mt. Sinai in 40 days (Exod.
34:5-29).1

1:4 What Jesus told His disciples to wait for in Jerusalem was the
promised baptism of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:49; cf. 1:5; John
14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7). It must have been difficult for these
disciples to wait for God to do what He had promised, as all
Christians find it to be. Jesus viewed the Spirit as a significant
gift of God's grace to His people (cf. Luke 11:13). He is not
just a means to an end but a major part of the blessings of
salvation.

"No New Testament writer more clearly

emphasises [sic] the Divine Personality and
continuous power of the Spirit of God. Thus in the
two-fold emphasis on the Exalted Lord and the
Divine Spirit we have the most marked feature of
the book, namely, the predominance of the Divine
element over the human in Church life and work."2

1:5 "Baptized" (Gr. ebaptisen) means "dipped" or "immersed," and

results in union with something (cf. 1 Cor. 10:1-2). John the
Baptist predicted that Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit
(Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; cf. John 7:39). Jesus now announced
that this baptism would take place in just a few days (v. 5). It
took place 10 days after His ascension (ch. 2). As the Holy
Spirit had baptized Jesus and had thereby empowered Him for
service, so His successors also needed such a power-producing
baptism.

"Luke's purpose in writing his history is not

primarily apologetic. He writes in order to provide
his readers with an orderly account of the rise and
progress of Christianity.3 But since this movement
was 'everywhere spoken against' (Acts 28:22), it

[Link], "The New Exodus in the Books of Luke," Novum Testamentum 2 (1957):8-23.
2Thomas, p. 15.
3See L. C. Alexander, "Luke's Preface in the Context of Greek Preface-Writing," Novum

Testamentum, 28 (1986):48-74.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 23

seemed desirable to refute some of the current

objections to it. The first Christian historian found
himself accordingly obliged to be the first
Christian apologist. Of three main types of
Christian apologetic in the second century Luke
provided first-century prototypes: apologetic in
relation to pagan religion (Christianity is true;
paganism is false); apologetic in relation to
Judaism (Christianity represents the fulfillment of
true Judaism); apologetic in relation to the
political authorities (Christianity is innocent of any
offense against Roman law)."1

2. The command to witness 1:6-8

The key to the apostles' successful fulfillment of Jesus' commission was

their baptism with, and consequent indwelling by, the Holy Spirit. Without
this divine enablement, they would only have been able to follow Jesus'
example, but with it, Jesus could literally continue to do His work and teach
His words through them. Consequently their preparation for the baptism of
the Spirit was very important. Luke recorded it to highlight its foundational
significance.

Verses 6-8 announce the theme of Acts and set the stage for all that
follows.

"The concept of 'witness' is so prominent in Acts (the word in

its various forms appears some thirty-nine times) that
everything else in the book should probably be seen as
subsumed under it—even the primitive kerygma [preaching]
…"2

1:6 The Old Testament associated Spirit baptism with the

beginning of the messianic (millennial) kingdom (Isa. 32:15-

1F. F. Bruce, "Paul's Apologetic and the Purpose of Acts," Bulletin of the John Rylands
University Library 89:2 (Spring 1987):389-90. See also pp. 390-93; and David Peterson,
"The Motif of Fulfilment and Purpose of Luke-Acts," in The Book of Acts in Its First Century
Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting, p. 104, who agreed that
primarily Luke's purpose was edification and secondarily apologetic.
2Longenecker, p. 256.
24 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

20; 44:3-5; Ezek. 39:28-29; Joel 2:28—3:1; Zech. 12:8-10).

It was natural, therefore, that the disciples would ask if that
kingdom was about to begin, in view of Jesus' promise that
the Spirit would baptize them in a few days. "This time" refers
to "not many days from now" (v. 5). In the Septuagint, the
term "restoration" (Gr. apokatastaseos) technically refers to
God's political restoration of Israel (Ps. 16:5; Jer. 15:19;
16:15; 23:7; Ezek. 16:55; 17:23; Hos. 11:11).1 The Gentiles
had taken the Jews' kingdom from them, which occurred with
Nebuchadnezzar's conquest in 586 B.C. Clearly the messianic
kingdom is in view here, not the church.2

"In the book of Acts, both Israel and the church

exist simultaneously. The term Israel is used
twenty times and ekklesia (church) nineteen
times, yet the two groups are always kept
distinct."3

Fruchtenbaum listed 73 occurrences of "Israel" in the New

Testament.4

1:7 Jesus did not correct the disciples for believing that the
messianic kingdom would come.5 He only corrected their
assumption that they could know when the kingdom would
begin and that the kingdom would begin in a few days.

Amillennialists do not believe that God will restore an earthly

kingdom to Israel as Israel, but that He will restore a spiritual
kingdom to the church, which they believe has replaced
physical Israel as "spiritual Israel" or "the new Israel."6
Premillennialists believe that since the promises about
Messiah's earthly reign have not yet been fulfilled, and since
every reference to Israel in the New Testament can refer to

1J. Carroll, Response to the End of History, p. 146, footnote 124.

2See J. Sidlow Baxter, Explore the Book, 6:14-15; Ladd, p. 1125; Darrell L. Bock, "Evidence
from Acts," in A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 187-88.
3Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, "Israel and the Church," in Issues in Dispensationalism, p. 118.
4Ibid., pp. 118-20.
5See John A. McLean, "Did Jesus Correct the Disciples' View of the Kingdom?" Bibliotheca

Sacra 151:602 (April-June 1994):215-27.

6See Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, p. 1637.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 25

physical Israel, we should anticipate an earthly reign of Messiah

on the earth following His Second Coming.

"Jesus' answer to the question about restoring

the reign to Israel denies that Jesus' followers can
know the time and probably corrects their
supposition that the restoration may come
immediately, but it does not deny the legitimacy
of their concern with the restoration of the
national life of the Jewish people."1

"This passage makes it clear that while the

covenanted form of the theocracy has not been
cancelled and has only been postponed, this
present age is definitely not a development of the
Davidic form of the kingdom. Rather, it is a period
in which a new form of theocratic administration
is inaugurated. In this way Jesus not only
answered the disciples' question concerning the
timing of the future Davidic kingdom, but He also
made a clear distinction between it and the
intervening present form of the theocratic
administration."2

Jesus' disciples were not to know yet when the messianic

kingdom would begin. God would reveal the "times" (Gr.
chronous, length of time) and "epochs" (Gr. kairous, dates, or
major features of the times) after Jesus' ascension, and He
would make them known through His chosen prophets (cf. 1
Thess. 5:1; Rev. 6—19). Amillennialists take this reference to
the times and epochs to be general—the apostles would not
know how things would happen before they happened—not to
the events preceding the earthly messianic kingdom.3
However, it appears that Jesus was speaking of the times and
epochs preceding the coming of the kingdom, in view of the
context (v. 6).

1Robert C. Tannehill, The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts, 2:15.

2Pentecost, p. 269.
3Cf. Henry, pp. 1637-38.
26 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"In Acts 3:20 [sic 19], the phrase chosen is kairoi

anapsuxeos (seasons of refreshing). … In other
words, the last days of fulfillment have two parts.
There is the current period of refreshing, which is
correlated to Jesus' reign in heaven and in which
a person shares, if he or she repents. Then at the
end of this period Jesus will come to bring the
restoration of those things promised by the Old
Testament."1

"There is a close connection between the hope

expressed in 1:6 and the conditional promise of
Peter in 3:19-21, indicated not only by the
unusual words 'restore' and 'restoration …' but
also by the references to 'times …' and 'seasons
…' in both contexts. The 'times of restoration of
all that God spoke' through the prophets include
the restoration of the reign to Israel through its
messianic King."2

1:8 Rather than trying to figure out when the kingdom would
come, the disciples were to give their attention to something
different, namely, worldwide witness. Moreover, the disciples
would receive divine enablement for their worldwide mission
(cf. Luke 24:47-49). As God's Spirit had empowered both the
Israelites—and Jesus—as they executed their purposes, so
God's Spirit would empower the disciples as they executed
their purpose. The power promised was not to enable the
apostles to live godly lives, though the Holy Spirit does enable
believers to do that.

"What is promised to the apostles is the power to

fulfil their mission, that is, to speak, to bear oral
testimony, and to perform miracles and in general
act with authority. This power is given through the
Spirit, and conversely the Spirit in Acts may be

1Darrell L. Bock, Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church, p. 57.

2Tannehill, 2:15-16.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 27

defined as the divine agency that gives this

power."1

"You shall be" translates a future indicative verb (as in "you

shall receive"). Is the clause "You shall be" a prediction or a
command? Grammatically it could be either. The apostles
clearly felt compelled to preach (cf. 10:42). However, if it was
a command, it could have been stated more forcefully.
Therefore both verbs ("you shall be" and "you shall receive")
are probably predictions, and statements of fact, rather than
commands.

"They were now to be witnesses, and their

definite work was to bear testimony to their
Master; they were not to be theologians, or
philosophers, or leaders, but witnesses. Whatever
else they might become, everything was to be
subordinate to the idea of personal testimony. It
was to call attention to what they knew of Him
and to deliver His message to mankind. This
special class of people, namely, disciples who are
also witnesses, is therefore very prominent in this
book. Page after page is occupied by their
testimony, and the key to this feature is found in
the words of Peter: 'We cannot but speak the
things which we have seen and heard' (4:20)."2

This verse contains an inspired outline of the Book of Acts.

Note that it refers to a person (Jesus Christ), a power (the
Holy Spirit), and a program (ever expanding worldwide
witness). Luke proceeded to record that the fulfillment of this
prediction would continue until the gospel and the church had
reached Rome. From the heart of the empire, God would pump
the gospel out to every other remote part of the world.
Starting from Jerusalem, the gospel message radiated farther
and farther, as ripples do when a stone lands in a placid pool
of water. Rome was over 1,400 miles from Jerusalem.

1C. K. Barrett, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, 1:79.
2Thomas, p. 21.
28 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"The Christian church, according to Acts, is a

missionary church that responds obediently to
Jesus' commission, acts on Jesus' behalf in the
extension of his ministry, focuses its proclamation
of the kingdom of God in its witness to Jesus, is
guided and empowered by the self-same Spirit
that directed and supported Jesus' ministry, and
follows a program whose guidelines for outreach
have been set by Jesus himself."1

Jerusalem was the most wicked city on earth, in that it was

there that Jesus Christ's enemies crucified Him. Nevertheless
there, too, God manifested His grace first. The linking of
"Judea and Samaria" preserves an ethnic distinction, while at
the same time describing one geographic area. The phrase "to
the remotest part of the earth" is literally "to the end of the
earth." This phrase is rare in ancient Greek, but it occurs five
times in the Septuagint (Isa. 8:9; 48:20; 49:6; 62:11; Pss. Sol.
1:4). Jesus was evidently alluding to Isaiah's predictions that
God would extend salvation to all people, Gentiles as well as
Jews.2

"Witnessing to the Jews meant witnessing to

those who held a true religion, but held it for the
most part falsely and unreally [sic].

"Witnessing in Samaria meant witnessing to those

who had a mixed religion, partly true, and partly
false, Jewish and Heathen.

"Witnessing to the uttermost part of the earth

meant witnessing to those who had no real and
vital religion at all."3

1Longenecker, p. 256.
2Tannehill, 2:16. Cf. Thomas S. Moore, "'To the End of the Earth': The Geographical and
Ethnic Univarsalism of Acts 1:8 in Light of Isaianic Influence on Luke," Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 40:3 (September 1997):389-99.
3Thomas, p. 22. See also Steve Walton, "What Does 'Mission' in Acts Mean in Relation to

the 'Powers That Be'?" Journal of the Evangleical Theological Society 55:3 (September
2012):537-56.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 29

GOSPEL OUTREACH IN ACTS

Reference Center Chief Gospel to Evangelism

Person

Acts 1— Jerusalem Peter Judea and Samaria Primarily

12 Jewish

Acts 13— Antioch Paul The uttermost part Primarily

28 of the earth Gentile

This pericope (vv. 6-8) is Luke's account of Jesus' farewell address to His
successors (cf. Gen. 49; Num. 20:26; 27:16-19; Deut. 31:14-23; 34:9; 2
Kings 2; et al.). Luke used several typical features of a Jewish farewell
scene in 1:1-14.1

3. The ascension of Jesus 1:9-11

1:9 Jesus Christ's ascension necessarily preceded the descent of

the Holy Spirit to baptize and indwell believers, in God's plan
(John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7; Acts 2:33-36). "While they
were looking on" stresses the fact that the apostles really saw
Jesus ascending, which they bore witness to later. This
reference supports the credibility of their witness. In previous
post-resurrection appearances Jesus had vanished from the
disciples' sight instantly (Luke 24:31), but now He gradually
departed from them.

The "cloud" seems clearly to be a reference to the shekinah, a

visible symbol of the glorious presence of God (cf. Exod.

1See D. W. Palmer, "The Literary Background of Acts 1:1-14," New Testament Studies
33:3 (July 1987):430-31, for more information concerning the literary forms Luke used
to introduce Acts—namely, prologue, appearance, farewell scene, and assumption. See
William J. Larkin Jr., "The Recovery of Luke-Acts as 'Grand Narrative' for the Church's
Evangelistic and Edification Tasks in a Postmodern Age," Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 43:3 (September 2000):405-15, for suggestions for using Luke-Acts
in a postmodern age.
30 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

40:34; Matt. 17:5; Mark 1:11; 9:7).1 Thus what the disciples
saw was the symbol of God's presence receiving and
enveloping Jesus into heaven. This connoted God's approval of
Jesus and Jesus' entrance into the glorious presence of God.2

"It was necessary that as Jesus in a moment of

time had arrived in the world in a moment of time
He should leave it."3

1:10-11 "Intently" (Gr. atenizein) further stresses that these men really
did see Jesus ascend (v. 2; Luke 24:51). Luke used this
dramatic Greek word 12 times. It only appears two other times
in the New Testament. "Into the sky" (lit. "into heaven," eis
ton ouranon) occurs four times in these two verses. Luke
emphasized that Jesus was now in heaven. From there He
would continue His ministry on earth through His apostles and
other witnesses. The two "men" were angelic messengers who
looked like men (cf. Matt. 28:3; John 20:12; Luke 24:4).

Some commentators have suggested that the "two men" may

have been Enoch and Elijah, or Moses and Elijah, but this seems
unlikely. Probably Luke would have named them if they had
been such famous individuals. Besides, the similarity between
Luke's description of these two angels and the ones that
appeared at Jesus' tomb (Luke 24:1-7) suggests that they
were simply angels.

The 11 disciples were literally "men of Galilee" (v. 11). Judas

Iscariot was the only one of the Twelve who originated from
Judea. This conclusion assumes the traditional interpretation
that "Iscariot" translates the Hebrew 'ish qeriyot, "a man of
Kerioth," Kerioth being Kerioth-Hezron, which was 12 miles
south of Hebron.4 The "men" announced two things: the Jesus
they had known had entered into His heavenly abode, and the

1See Richard D. Patterson, "The Imagery of Clouds in the Scriptures," Bibliotheca Sacra
165:657 (January-March 2008):18.
2See Jack Finegan, Light from the Ancient Past, pp. 535-37, for a history of the church

that Helena, the mother of emperor Constantine, built to commemorate the site.
3Barclay, p. 6.
4See The New Bible Dictionary, 1962 ed., s.v. "Judas Iscariot," by R. P. Martin, pp. 673-

75.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 31

Jesus they had known would return to the earth. Jesus

ascended in a cloud personally, bodily, visibly, and gloriously,
and He will return the same way (Dan. 7:13; Matt. 24:30; Mark
13:26; 14:62; Luke 24:50-51; Rev. 1:7).1 He will also return
to the same place, the Mount of Olives (Zech. 14:4).

Jesus' own descriptions of His return to the earth appear in

Matthew 24:30; 26:64; Mark 13:26; 14:62; and Luke 21:27.
This was no repetition of the Transfiguration (Luke 9:27-36).

"Throughout the period of the post-resurrection

forty days, Jesus had frequently appeared to the
disciples, and during the intervals he had
disappeared. Each time, apparently, they had no
reason to suppose that he would not reappear
shortly, and until this time he had not
disappointed them."2

What filled these disciples with great joy (Luke 24:52) was
probably the hope that they would see Jesus again soon.
Without this hope His departure would have made them very
sad. The joyful prospect of the Lord's return should have the
same effect on us.

John Maile summarized the significance of the ascension narratives in Luke-

Acts as follows. First, he stated, "The ascension is the confirmation of the
exaltation of Christ and his present Lordship." Second, it is "the explanation
of the continuity between the ministry of Jews and that of the church."
Third, it is "the culmination of the resurrection appearances." Fourth, it is
"the prelude to the sending of the Spirit." Fifth, it is "the foundation of
Christian mission." Sixth, it is "the pledge of the return of Christ."3

"Rightly understood, the ascension narratives of Luke …

provide a crucial key to the unlocking of Luke's theology and
purpose."4

1See John F. Walvoord, "The Ascension of Christ," Bibliotheca Sacra 121:481 (January-
March 1964):3-12.
2Homer A. Kent Jr., Jerusalem to Rome: Studies in the Book of Acts, p. 23.
3Maile, pp. 55-59.
4Ibid., p. 59.
32 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"Luke's point is that the missionary activity of the early church

rested not only on Jesus' mandate but also on his living
presence in heaven and the sure promise of his return."1

"In Luke's mind the Ascension of Christ has two aspects: in the
Gospel it is the end of the story of Jesus, in Acts it is the
beginning of the story of the Church, which will go on until
Christ comes again. Thus for Luke, as Barrett says, 'the end of
the story of Jesus is the Church, and the story of Jesus is the
beginning of the Church'."2

4. Jesus' appointment of a twelfth apostle 1:12-26

Peter perceived the importance of asking God to identify Judas' successor

in view of the ministry that Jesus had said the Twelve would have in the
future. He led the disciples in obtaining the Lord Jesus' guidance in this
important matter (cf. vv. 21, 24). From his viewpoint, the Lord could have
returned very soon to restore the kingdom to Israel (v. 6), so the Twelve
had to be ready for their ministry of judging the twelve tribes of Israel when
He did.

The disciples' spiritual preparation 1:12-14

1:12-13 The disciples returned to Jerusalem to await the coming of the

Holy Spirit.

"They are about to undergo a spiritual

transformation; to pass, so to speak, from the
chrysalis to the winged stage. They are on the eve
of the great illumination promised by Jesus before
His death. The Spirit of Truth is about to come and
lead them into all Christian truth."3

The short trip from where Jesus ascended on Mt. Olivet to "the
upper room" was only "a Sabbath day's journey away" (about
2,000 cubits, two-thirds of a mile, or one kilometer; cf. Exod.

1Longenecker, p. 258.
2Neil, p. 26.
3A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, p. 538.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 33

16:29; Num. 35:5).1 This "upper room" may not have been the
same one in which the disciples had observed the first Lord's
Supper with Jesus (Luke 22:12). Different Greek words
describe the places. It may have been the place where He had
appeared to them following His resurrection (Luke 24:32, 36;
John 20:19, 26), but this too is unclear. Richard Lenski inferred
from the Greek word katamenontes ("staying") that the
believers were making this room their headquarters in
Jerusalem.2

The definite article "the" with "upper room" in the Greek text
(to hyperoon), and the emphatic position of this phrase, may
suggest that Luke meant to identify a special upper room that
the reader would have known about from a previous reference
to it. One writer suggested that this upper room, as well as the
ones mentioned in 9:37, 39, and 20:8, may have been part of
a synagogue.3 The repetition of the apostles' names recalls
Jesus' previous appointment of them as apostles (cf. Luke
6:13-16).4 This list, however, omits Judas Iscariot and sets the
stage for the selection of his replacement.

1:14 The apostles gave (devoted) "themselves to prayer" (Gr.

proseuche), probably for the fulfillment of what Jesus had
promised would take place shortly (cf. Dan. 9:2-3; Luke
11:13). "The" prayer (in Greek) suggests that they may have
been praying at the Jewish designated times of prayer (cf.
2:42; 6:4). Proseuche sometimes has the wider meaning of
worship, and it may mean that here. Luke stressed their unity
("all with one mind"), a mark of the early Christians that Luke
noted frequently in Acts. The disciples were "one" in their
purpose to carry out the will of their Lord. Divine promises
should stimulate prayer, not lead to abandonment of it.

"In almost every chapter in Acts you find a

reference to prayer, and the book makes it very

1Mishnah Sotah 5:3.

2Richard C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles, p. 39.
3Rainer Riesner, "Synagogues in Jerusalem," in The Book of Acts in Its First Century

Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, p. 206.

4See Margaret H. Williams, "Palestinian Jewish Personal Names in Acts," in ibid., pp. 79-

113.
34 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

clear that something happens when God's people

pray."1

"… when God is going to do some great thing He

moves the hearts of people to pray; He stirs them
up to pray in view of that which He is about to do
so that they might be prepared for it. The
disciples needed the self-examination that comes
through prayer and supplication, that they might
be ready for the tremendous event which was
about to take place …"2

The women referred to were apparently the same ones who

accompanied the disciples from Galilee to Jerusalem (Luke 8:1-
3; cf. 23:49; 23:55—24:10). Luke's interest in women, which
is so evident in his Gospel, continues in Acts.

"Mary, the mother of Jesus, was there, but you

will notice they were not praying to Mary, nor were
they burning candles to her; they were not
addressing themselves to her, nor asking her for
any blessing; but Mary, the mother of Jesus, was
kneeling with the eleven and the women, and all
together they prayed to the Father."3

This is, by the way, the last reference to "Mary the mother of
Jesus" in the Bible. Jesus' half-brothers (John 7:5; Mark 6:3),
among those "devoting themselves to prayer," apparently had
become believers following His death and resurrection (cf. 1
Cor. 15:7).

1Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, 1:405.

2Harry A. Ironside, Lectures on the Book of Acts, pp. 28-29. For evidence of the cause
and effect relationship of prayer and revival, see J. Edwin Orr, The Fervent Prayer: The
Worldwide Impact of the Great Awakening of 1858, ch. 1: "The Sources of the Revival."
3Ironside, pp. 26-271.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 35

The choice of Matthias 1:15-26

1:15 In view of Peter's leadership gifts, so obvious in the Gospels, it

is no surprise that he is the one who took the initiative on this
occasion.

"Undoubtedly, the key disciple in Luke's writings

is Peter. He was the representative disciple, as
well as the leading apostle.1

"Brethren" is literally "disciples" (Gr. matheton). The group of

120 that Peter addressed on this occasion (cf. vv. 13-14) was
only a segment of the believers living in Jerusalem at this time
(cf. 1 Cor. 15:6, which refers to more than 500 brethren).
Nonetheless this was a tiny group from which the church grew.
God can take a small number of people, multiply them, and
eventually fill the earth with their witness.

1:16-17 Peter addressed the assembled disciples in a way that was

evidently customary when speaking to Jews. Here "brethren"
is literally "men, brothers" (andres, adelphoi). This same
salutation occurs elsewhere in Acts always in formal addresses
to Jews (cf. 2:29, 37; 7:2; 13:15, 26, 38; 15:7, 13; 22:1;
23:1, 6; 28:17).

Notice the high regard with which Peter viewed the Old
Testament. He believed David's words came from the Holy
Spirit (2 Tim. 3:16), and he viewed them as Scripture (holy
writings). Peter interpreted David's words about false
companions and wicked men who opposed God's servants as
applying to Judas. What God had said through David about
David's enemy was also true of Jesus' enemy, since Jesus was
the LORD's Anointed whom David anticipated.

"Since David himself was God's appointed king,

many times Scripture treats him as typical of

1Darrell L. Bock, "A Theology of Luke-Acts," in A Biblical Theology of the New Testament,
p. 148.
36 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Christ, the unique Anointed One, and David's

enemy becomes a type of Jesus' enemy."1

"Of course the betrayal of the Messiah by one of

his followers, leading to his death, required such
an explanation, since this was no part of early
Jewish messianic expectation."2

Peter said this Scripture "had" (Gr. dei, by divine necessity) to

be fulfilled.

"The understanding [of Peter] here is … (1) that

God is doing something necessarily involved in his
divine plan; (2) that the disciples' lack of
comprehension of God's plan is profound,
especially with respect to Judas who 'was one of
our number and shared in this ministry' yet also
'served as guide for those who arrested Jesus';
and (3) that an explicit way of understanding what
has been going on under divine direction is
through a Christian understanding of two psalms
that speak of false companions and wicked men
generally, and which by means of the then widely
common exegetical rule qal wahomer ('light to
heavy,' or a minore ad majorem) can also be
applied to the false disciple and wicked man par
excellence, Judas Iscariot."3

1:18-19 Luke inserted these verses, assuming his readers were

unfamiliar with Judas' death and did not know Aramaic, the
language spoken in Palestine in the first century. This helps us
understand for whom he wrote this book. Judas purchased the
"Field of Blood" indirectly by returning the money he received
for betraying Jesus to the priests who used it to buy the field
(Matt. 27:3-10). Perhaps the name "field of blood" was the
nickname the residents of Jerusalem gave it since "blood
money" had purchased it.

1Kent, p. 27.
2Witherington, p. 122.
3Longenecker, p. 263.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 37

This account of Judas' death differs from Matthew's, who

wrote that Judas hanged himself (Matt. 27:5). Undoubtedly
both accounts were true. Perhaps Judas hanged himself and in
the process also fell (lit. "flat on his face") and tore open his
abdomen. Perhaps the rope or branch with which he hanged
himself broke. Or perhaps when others cut his corpse down it
fell and broke open, as Luke described. The traditional location
of Hakeldama is southeast of Jerusalem, near where the
Hinnom and Kidron Valleys meet. This description of Judas'
death stressed the awfulness of that apostle's situation.

It was Judas' defection which led to his horrible death, and not
just his death, that led to the need for a successor. Matthias
succeeded Judas because Judas had been unfaithful, not just
because he had died. Thus this text provides no support for
the view that Christ intended one apostle to succeed another
when the preceding one died. We have no record that when
the apostle James died (12:1-2) anyone succeeded him.

1:20 Peter's quotations are from Psalms 69:25 and 109:8. Luke's
quotations from the Old Testament are all from Greek
translations of it.1 Psalm 69 is an Old Testament passage in
which Jesus Himself, as well as the early Christians, saw
similarities to and foreviews of Jesus' experiences (cf. John
2:17; 15:25; Rom. 11:9-10; 15:3).2 Jesus fulfilled the passage
Peter cited, in the sense that His situation proved to be the
same as David's, only on a more significant messianic scale.

Peter did not appeal to Psalm 69:25 to justify replacing Judas

with another apostle, however. He used the quotation from
Psalm 109:8 to do that. It is another verse that Peter applied
to Jesus' case, since it described something analogous to
Jesus' experience. He used what David had written about
someone who opposed the LORD's king—and was replaced—to
support the idea that someone should replace Judas in his
office as one of the Twelve.

1Witherington, pp. 123-24.

2See C. H. Dodd, According to the Scriptures, pp. 61-108.
38 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

1:21-22 Why did Peter believe it was "necessary" to choose someone

to take Judas' place? Evidently he remembered Jesus' promise
that the 12 disciples would sit on 12 thrones in the messianic
kingdom, judging the 12 tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:28; Luke
22:30; cf. Rev. 21:14). To be as qualified for this ministry as
the other 11 disciples, the twelfth had to have met the
conditions Peter specified.

"In 1:21 Peter speaks not of being with Jesus but

of going with him on his journeys. … This
emphasis on journeying with Jesus, particularly on
his final journey to the cross, suggests that the
apostolic witnesses are qualified not simply
because they happened to be present when
something happened and so could report it, like
witnesses to an accident. Rather they have been
taught and trained by Jesus for their work. They
shared Jesus' life and work during his mission. In
the process they were tested and discovered their
own defects. That discovery may also be part of
their preparation. The witness of the Galileans
does not arise from casual observation. They
speak out of a life and mission shared with Jesus,
after being taught and tested. From this group the
replacement for Judas is chosen."1

"The expression 'went in and out among us' [NIV]

is a Semitic idiom for familiar and unhindered
association (cf. Deut 31:2; 2 Sam 3:25; Ps 121:8;
Acts 9:28)."2

Having been a witness to Jesus Christ's resurrection was

especially important. The apostles prepared themselves, so
that if Jesus Christ had returned very soon and set up His
kingdom on the earth—they would have been ready. Often, in
biblical history, God replaced someone who proved unworthy

1Tannehill, 2:23.
2Longenecker, p. 265.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 39

with a more faithful steward (e.g., Zadok for Ahithophel,

Shebna for Eliakim, Samuel for Samson, David for Saul, et al.).

These two verses provide the basis for distinguishing a

technical use of "apostle" from the general meaning of the
word. By definition, an "apostle" (from apo stello, "to send
away") is anyone sent out as a messenger. Translators have
frequently rendered this word "messenger" in the English Bible.
Barnabas, Paul's fellow workers, James, and Epaphroditus—
were apostles in this sense (Acts 14:4, 14; 2 Cor. 8:23; Gal.
1:19; Phil. 2:25).

Every Christian should function as an apostle, since Christ has

given us the Great Commission. Nevertheless, the Twelve were
apostles in a special sense. They not only went out with a
message, but they went out having been personally discipled
by Jesus Christ during His earthly ministry. They were the
official apostles, the apostles who occupied the apostolic
office (v. 20), which Jesus established when He first chose and
sent out the Twelve (Luke 6:13). As we shall see, Paul was
also an official apostle, even though he had not been
personally discipled by Jesus as the Twelve had been.

This address of Peter (vv. 16-21) is the first of some 23 or 24

speeches that Luke reported in Acts. About one third of the
content of Acts is speeches.1 This one is an example of
deliberative rhetoric, in which the speaker seeks to persuade
his hearers to follow a certain course of action in the near
future.2 How accurate did Luke attempt to be when he
recorded the speeches in Acts?

"To an extent, of course, all the speeches in Acts

are necessarily paraphrastic, for certainly the
original delivery contained more detail of
argument and more illustrative material than Luke
included—as poor Eutychus undoubtedly could
testify (Acts 20:7-12)! Stenographic reports they

1See Appendix 4 "Sermons and Speeches in Acts," at the end of these notes, for a chart
of them. See Neil, pp. 38-45, for a helpful discussion of the speeches in Acts; and M.
Soards, The Speeches in Acts: Their Content, Context, and Concerns.
2George A. Kennedy, New Testament Interpretation through Rhetorical Criticism, p. 116.
40 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

are not, and probably few ever so considered

them. They have been reworked, as is required in
any précis, and reworked, moreover, in accord
with the style of the narrative. But recognition of
the kind of writing that produces speeches
compatible with the narrative in which they are
found should not be interpreted as inaccurate
reporting or a lack of traditional source material.
After all, a single author is responsible for the
literary form of the whole."1

Josephus "recorded" many speeches in his histories, but he

clearly put them in his own words. One example is Herod the
Great's speech to the Jews encouraging them to defend
themselves against the attacking Arabians. The same speech
appears in both the Antiquities of the Jews and The Wars of
the Jews, but the content is somewhat different.2 Another is
Herod Agrippa I's speech to the Jews discouraging them from
getting into war with the Romans.3

1:23-26 Those present, probably the other apostles, nominated two

apparently equally qualified men. "Joseph" is a Hebrew name,
"Barsabbas" is Aramaic, meaning "Son of the Sabbath," and
"Justus" is Roman. "Matthias" is Hebrew, and is a short form
of "Mattithia." The apostles then prayed for the Lord to
indicate which one He chose (cf. 6:6; 13:3; 14:23; 1 Sam.
22:10; 23:2, 4, 10-12). "The Lord" (v. 24) probably refers to
Jesus (cf. v. 21), in which case this is the first instance of
prayer to the risen Christ. Those praying acknowledged that
only God (Jesus) knows people's hearts (1 Sam. 16:7), and He
would not make the mistake that the Israelites did when they
chose King Saul. They wanted God to identify the man after
His own heart, as He had done with David.

Next they cast "lots," probably by drawing one of two

designated stones out of a container, or by throwing down

1Longenecker, p. 230. See Witherington's excursus on the speeches in Acts, pp. 116-20.
2Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]; idem, The Wars of the Jews, [Link].
3Ibid.,
[Link]. Note especially the footnote, which explains that ancient writers typically
put speeches in their own words.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 41

specially marked objects (cf. Lev. 16:8; Josh. 14:2; 1 Sam.

14:41-42; Neh. 10:34; 11:1; Prov. 16:33). The ancient Greeks
often used pebbles in voting, black for condemning and white
for acquitting.1 The Lord identified "Matthias" as His sovereign
choice to fulfill the ministry (service) and apostleship (office)
of Judas. Judas' "own place" was a place different from that
of the Eleven, namely: perdition (hell). Matthias received no
further mention in the New Testament. Legend has it that he
died as a martyr in Ethiopia.2

"… it was not enough to possess the

qualifications other apostles had. Judas's
successor must also be appointed by the same
Lord who appointed the Eleven."3

This instance of casting lots to determine God's will is the last

one the New Testament writers recorded. This was not a vote.
"Casting lots" was necessary before the permanent indwelling
of the Holy Spirit, but when He came, He provided the
guidance, inwardly, that God had formerly provided externally.
Christians do not need to cast lots to determine God's will,
since now the indwelling Holy Spirit provides that guidance. He
does so objectively through Scripture, and subjectively by
impressing His will on yielded believers in response to prayer.

Was Peter correct in leading the believers to recognize a twelfth apostle,

or did God intend Paul to be the replacement? Several commentators
believed that Paul was God's intended replacement.4 Paul was, of course,
an apostle with authority equal to that of the Twelve. However, Paul had
not been with Jesus during His earthly ministry. Luke, Paul's friend, spoke
of the Twelve without equivocation as an official group (Acts 2:14; 6:2; cf.
1 Cor. 15:5). Furthermore the distinctly Jewish nature of the future
ministry of the Twelve (Matt. 19:28) supports Paul's exclusion from this
group. His ministry was primarily to the Gentiles (Gal. 2:9). Paul never
claimed to be one of the Twelve, though he did contend that his official

1Robertson, 3:19, 446.

2Blaiklock, p. 53; Knowling, 2:86.
3Longenecker, p. 266.
4E.g., Blaiklock, p. 53; Morgan, The Acts …, p. 24; idem, An Exposition of the Whole Bible,

p. 450; J. Vernon McGee, Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee, 4:514.
42 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

apostleship had come to him as a direct commission from the Lord.

However, it came from the risen Lord, and he considered himself abnormally
born as an apostle (1 Cor. 15:7-8). Finally, there is no hint in Scripture that
the decision made on this occasion was a mistake.

"… the pericope suggests that a Christian decision regarding

vocation entails (1) evaluating personal qualifications, (2)
earnest prayer, and (3) appointment by Christ himself—an
appointment that may come in some culturally related fashion,
but in a way clear to those who seek guidance."1

"Matthew concludes with the Resurrection, Mark with the

Ascension, Luke with the promise of the Holy Spirit, and John
with the promise of the Second Coming. Acts 1 brings all four
records together and mentions each of them. The four Gospels
funnel into Acts, and Acts is the bridge between the Gospels
and the Epistles."2

5. The birth of the church 2:1-41

The Holy Spirit's descent on the day of Pentecost inaugurated a new

dispensation in God's administration of the human race.3 Luke featured the
record of the events of this day to explain the changes in God's dealings
with humankind that followed in the early church and to the present day.
This was the birthday of the church. Many non-dispensationalists, as well
as most dispensationalists (except ultradispensationalists), view the
coming of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost as the beginning of the church.4

"This event is a fulcrum account in Luke-Acts."5

1Longenecker, p. 266.
2McGee, 4:515.
3For more information about the dispensations, see Charles C. Ryrie, Dispensationalism

Today, or idem, Dispensationalism.

4E.g., James D. G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit, p. 49; Theological Dictionary of the

New Testament, s.v. "pneuma, et al.," by Hermann Kleinknecht, et al., 6(1968):411; Emil
Brunner, The Misunderstanding of the Church, p. 161; Neil, p. 71; Longenecker, p. 271;
and Morgan, The Acts …, p. 22). For a summary of the views of ultradispensationalists,
see Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today, ch. 10; or idem, Dispensationalism, ch. 11.
5Bock, Acts, p. 92.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 43

"The plot of a work can often be illuminated by considering the

major conflict or conflicts within it. Although Jesus' witnesses
face other conflicts, the central conflict of the plot, repeatedly
emphasized and still present in the last major scene of Acts, is
a conflict within Judaism provoked by Jewish Christian
preachers (including Paul). Acts 2:1—8:3 traces the
development of this conflict in Jerusalem."1

The descent of the Spirit 2:1-4

Luke had introduced the beginning of Jesus' earthly ministry with His
baptism with the Spirit (Luke 3:21-22). He now paralleled that with the
beginning of Jesus' heavenly ministry with the Spirit baptism of His disciples
(Acts 2:1-4). The same Spirit who indwelt and empowered Jesus during His
earthly ministry would now indwell and empower His believing disciples.
John the Baptist had predicted this Pentecost baptism with the Spirit (Matt.
3:11; Luke 3:16), as had Jesus (Acts 1:8). Jesus had already done the
baptizing, and now the Spirit "came upon" the disciples.

2:1 The day of Pentecost was an annual spring feast at which the
Jews presented the first-fruits of their wheat harvest to God
(Exod. 34:22a). The Jews also called Pentecost the Feast of
Harvest and the Feast of Weeks in earlier times. They
celebrated it at the end of seven weeks (i.e., a week of weeks)
following the Feast of Passover. God received a new crop of
believers, Christians, on this particular day of Pentecost. The
Jews also celebrated Pentecost as the anniversary of the
giving of the Mosaic Law (cf. Exod. 19:1). Paul regarded the
Spirit's indwelling presence as God's replacement for the
external guidance that the Mosaic Law had provided believers
under that old covenant (Gal. 3:3, 23-29).

"Pentecost" is a Greek word, transliterated into English, that

means "fiftieth." This feast fell on the fiftieth day after
Passover. It was one of the feasts at which all the male Jews
had to be present at the central sanctuary (Exod. 34:22-23).
Jews who lived up to 20 miles from Jerusalem were expected
to travel to Jerusalem to attend these feasts. Pentecost
usually fell in late May or early June. Traveling conditions that

1Tannehill, 2:34.
44 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

time of year made it possible for Jews who lived farther away
to visit Jerusalem, too. These factors account for the large
number of Jews present in Jerusalem on this particular day.
This feast was the most crowded in Jerusalem, and the most
attended by foreigners, of any of the Jewish festivals.1

"… by paralleling Jesus' baptism with the

experience of Jesus' early followers at Pentecost,
Luke is showing that the mission of the Christian
church, as was the ministry of Jesus, is dependent
upon the coming of the Holy Spirit. And by his
stress on Pentecost as the day when the miracle
took place, he is also suggesting (1) that the
Spirit's coming is in continuity with God's
purposes in giving the law and yet (2) that the
Spirit's coming signals the essential difference
between the Jewish faith and commitment to
Jesus, for whereas the former is Torah centered
and Torah directed, the latter is Christ centered
and Spirit directed—all of which sounds very much
like Paul."2

The antecedent of "they" is apparently the believers Luke

mentioned in 1:15. However, it could refer to the Twelve, since
Luke later wrote that the multitude marveled that those who
spoke in tongues were "Galileans" (v. 7). It is not possible to
identify the place (lit. "the house," Gr. ton oikon) where they
assembled with certainty. Perhaps it was the "upper room"
already mentioned (1:13), or another house. Clearly the
disciples were indoors (v. 2).

2:2 The sound like "a violent rushing wind" came from heaven, the
place where Jesus had gone (1:10-11). This noise symbolized
the coming of the Holy Spirit in power. The same Greek word
(pneuma) means either "wind" or "spirit." Ezekiel and Jesus
had previously used the wind as an illustration of God's Spirit
(Ezek. 37:9-14; John 3:8).

1Knowling, 2:429.
2Longenecker, p. 269.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 45

"Luke particularly stresses the importance of the

Spirit in the life of the church [in Acts]."1

Jesus' earlier breathing on the disciples and giving them the

Holy Spirit (John 20:22) may have been only a temporary
empowerment with the Spirit along the lines of Old Testament
empowerments. Others believe that Jesus was giving these
disciples a symbolic and graphic reminder, an advance example
as it were, of the Spirit who would come upon them later. It
was a demonstration of what Jesus would do when He returned
to the Father, and which He did do on Pentecost. He was not
"imparting" the Spirit to them in any sense then. I prefer this
second explanation.

"A friend of my daughter lives in Kansas and went

through the experience of a tornado. It did not
destroy their home but came within two blocks of
it. When she wrote about it to my daughter, she
said, 'The first thing we noticed was a sound like
a thousand freight trains coming into town.'
Friend, that was a rushing, mighty wind, and that
was the sound. It was that kind of sound that they
heard on the Day of Pentecost."2

2:3 "Fire," as well as wind, symbolized the presence of God (cf.

Gen. 15:17; Exod. 3:2-6; 13:21-22; 19:18; 24:17; 40:38;
Matt. 3:11; Luke 3:16). The believers received a visual as well
as an audio indication that the promised Holy Spirit of God had
come. Evidently, at first the apparent fire came in one piece,
and then separated into individual flames, which always
resemble tongues of fire. "Distributing themselves" translates
diamerizomenai, a present and probably a middle participle,
suggesting that the fire was seen dividing itself.

Each one of these "flames" abode (settled) on a different

believer present. God could hardly have depicted the
distribution of His Spirit to every individual believer more
clearly. The Spirit had in the past abode on the whole nation

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 32.

2McGee, 4:516.
46 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

of Israel corporately, symbolized by the pillar of fire. Now He

abode on each believer, as He had on Jesus. This fire was
obviously not normal fire because it did not burn up what it
touched (cf. Exod. 3:2-6).

Probably the Jews present connected the "tongues," by which

the believers spoke miraculously, with the "tongues of fire."
They probably attributed the miracle of speaking in tongues to
the God whose presence they had identified with fire in their
history and who was now obviously present among them.

Was this the fulfillment of John the Baptist's statement that

Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire (Matt. 3:11;
Luke 3:16; cf. Joel 2:28-29; Mal. 3:2-5)? Some believe it was
a complete fulfillment of those prophecies and that we should
expect no further subsequent fulfillment. This seems doubtful,
since these prophecies occur in contexts involving the
experiences of all Israel.

Others believe that what happened on the day of Pentecost

was an initial, partial, or similar fulfillment, and that complete
fulfillment is still future. Some who hold this second view
believe that the prophecy about the baptism with the Holy
Spirit was fulfilled on Pentecost, but that the prophecy about
baptism with fire was not fulfilled at that time, and will be
fulfilled in the Tribulation. Others who hold this second view
believe that both baptisms occurred on Pentecost, and both
will occur again in the future and will involve Israel.

A third view is that what happened on Pentecost was not what

the Old Testament predicted at all, since those predictions
have Israel in view. I view what happened on Pentecost as a
foreview of what will happen for Israel in the future. What we
have in this verse is a gracious baptizing—that involved the
Holy Spirit and the presence and power of God—symbolized by
fire.1

2:4 "Spirit filling" and "Spirit baptism" are two distinct ministries
of the Holy Spirit. Both occurred on this occasion, though Luke

1See also my comments on 2:16-21 below.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 47

only mentioned filling specifically. We know that Spirit baptism

also took place, because Jesus predicted it would take place
"not many days from now" before His ascension (1:5).
Moreover, Peter spoke of it as having taken place on Pentecost
a short time later (11:15-16).1

Filling with the Spirit was a phenomenon believers experienced

at various times in the Old Testament economy (Exod. 35:30-
34; Num. 11:26-29; 1 Sam. 10:6, 10), as well as in the New.
An individual Christian can now experience it many times. God
can fill a person with His Spirit on numerous separate occasions
(cf. Acts 4:8, 31; 6:3, 5; 7:55; 9:17; 13:9, 52). Furthermore,
God has commanded all believers to "be filled with the Spirit"
(Eph. 5:18). Luke used "filling" to express the Holy Spirit's
presence and enablement.2

Filling by (or with) the Spirit results in the Spirit's control

(influence) of the believer (Eph. 5:18). The Spirit controls a
believer to the degree that He fills the believer and vice versa.
Believers experience Spirit-control to the extent that they yield
to His direction. On the day of Pentecost, the believers
assembled were under the Spirit's control because they were
in a proper personal relationship of submission to Him (cf.
1:14). In the Book of Acts, whenever Luke said the disciples
were Spirit-filled, their filling always had some connection with
their gospel proclamation or some specific service related to
outreach (2:4; 4:8, 31; 9:17; 13:9).3

"… Luke always connects the 'filling of the Holy

Spirit' with the proclamation of the gospel in Acts
(Acts 2:4; 4:8, 31; 9:17; 13:9). Those who are
'full of the Holy Spirit' are always those who are
faithfully fulfilling their anointed task as
proclaimers (Acts 6:3, 5; 7:55; 11:24; 13:52)."4

1See Fruchtenbaum, pp. 116-17.

2Bock, "A Theology …," pp. 98-99.
3Frederick R. Harm, "Structural Elements Related to the Gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts,"

Concordia Journal 14:1 (January 1988):30.

4Walt Russell, "The Anointing with the Holy Spirit in Luke-Acts," Trinity Journal 7NS (Spring

1986):63.
48 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"No great decision was ever taken, no important

step was ever embarked upon, by the early Church
without the guidance of the Spirit. The early
Church was a Spirit-guided community.

"In the first thirteen chapters of Acts there are

more than forty references to the Holy Spirit. The
early Church was a Spirit-filled Church and
precisely therein lay its power."1

The Christian never repeats Spirit baptism (in contrast to

filling), God never commanded Spirit baptism, and it does not
occur in degrees. Spirit baptism normally takes place when a
person becomes a Christian (Rom. 8:9). However, when it took
place on the day of Pentecost, the people baptized were
already believers. This was also true on three later occasions
(8:17; 10:45; 19:6). (Chapter 19 does not clearly identify
John's disciples as believers, but they may have been.) These
were unusual situations, however, and not typical of Spirit
baptism.2

Spirit baptism always unites a believer to the body of Christ (1

Cor. 12:13). The "body of Christ" is a figure that the New
Testament writers used exclusively of the church, never of
Israel or any other group of believers. Therefore this first
occurrence of the baptizing work of the Holy Spirit marks the
beginning of the church, the body of Christ (cf. Matt. 16:18).

Speaking with other tongues (unlearned languages) was the

outward evidence that God had done something to these
believers inwardly (i.e., controlled them and baptized them into
the body). The same sign identified the same thing on the
other initial instances of Spirit baptism (10:46; 19:6). In each
case, it was primarily for the benefit of Jews present, who as

1Barclay, pp. 12, 13.

2See my comments on these verses in these notes for further explanations.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 49

a people sought a sign from God to mark His activity, that God
gave this sign (Luke 11:16; John 4:48; 1 Cor. 1:22).1

One of the fundamental differences between charismatic and

non-charismatic Christians is the issue of the purpose of the
sign gifts (speaking in tongues, healings on demand,
spectacular miracles, etc.). Charismatic theologians have
urged that the purpose of all the gifts is primarily edification
(cf. 1 Cor. 12:7).2

They "always seem to be spoken of as a normal

function of the Christian life … [in which the
Spirit] makes them willing and able to undertake
various works for the renewal and upbuilding of
the Church."3

Many non-charismatics believe that the purpose of the sign

gifts was not primarily edification but the authentication of
new revelation.

There is an "… inseparable connection of miracles

with revelation, as its mark and credential; or,
more narrowly, of the summing up of all
revelation, finally, in Jesus Christ. Miracles do not
appear on the page of Scripture vagrantly, here,
there, and elsewhere indifferently, without
assignable reason. They belong to revelation
periods, and appear only when God is speaking to
His people through accredited messengers,
declaring His gracious purposes. Their abundant
display in the Apostolic Church is the mark of the
richness of the Apostolic Age in revelation; and
when this revelation period closed, the period of

1See William G. Bellshaw, "The Confusion of Tongues," Bibliotheca Sacra 120:478 (April-
June 1963):145-53; Stanley D. Toussaint, "Rethinking Tongues," Bibliotheca Sacra
172:686 (April-June 2015):177-89.
2E.g., Jack Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, pp. 134-36.
3E. D. O'Connor, The Pentecostal Movement in the Catholic Church, pp. 280, 283. See

also Ernest Swing Williams, a classic Pentecostal theologian, Systematic Theology, 3:50;
Bernard Ramm, Rapping about the Spirit, p. 115; John Sherrill, They Shall Speak with Other
Tongues, pp. 79-88; and Catalog of Oral Roberts University (1973), pp. 26-27.
50 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

miracle-working had passed by also, as a mere

matter of course."1

"… glossolalia [speaking in tongues] was a gift

given by God, not primarily as a special language
for worship; not primarily to facilitate the spread
of the gospel; and certainly not as a sign that a
believer has experienced a second 'baptism in the
Holy Spirit.' It was given primarily for an evidential
purpose to authenticate and substantiate some
facet of God's truth. This purpose is always
distorted by those who shift the emphasis from
objective sign to subjective experience."2

Other non-charismatics believe that the specific purpose of the

sign gifts was to identify Jesus Christ as God's Son and to
authenticate the gospel message that the apostles preached.

Most non-charismatics grant that the sign gifts were edifying

in their result, but say their purpose was to authenticate new
revelation to the Jews (Acts 2:22; Mark 16:20; Acts 7:36-39,
51; Heb. 2:2-4; 1 Cor. 14:20-22).3 Jews were always present
when tongues took place in Acts (chs. 2, 10, and 19). It is
understandable why God-fearing Jews, whom the apostles
asked to accept new truth in addition to their already
authenticated Old Testament, would have required a sign.
They would have wanted strong proof that God was now giving
new revelation that seemed on the surface to contradict their
Scriptures.

God had told the Jews, centuries earlier, that He would

someday speak to them in a foreign language—because they
refused to pay attention to Isaiah's words to them in their own
language (Isa. 28:11; cf. 1 Cor 14:21). Jews who knew this
prophecy and were listening to Peter should have recognized

1Benjamin B. Warfield, Counterfeit Miracles, pp. 25-26.

2Joel C. Gerlach, "Glossolalia," Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 70:4 (October 1973):251.
See also John F. Walvoord, The Holy Spirit at Work Today, p. 41; and Culver, p. 138.
3See S. Lewis Johnson Jr., "The Gift of Tongues and the Book of Acts," Bibliotheca Sacra

120:480 (October-December 1963):309-11.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 51

that what was happening was evidence that it was God who
was speaking to them.

"Barclay and others have puzzled over the

necessity for using various dialects when it would
have been more expedient to simply use either
Greek or Aramaic—languages known to speaker
and hearer alike.1 However to suggest this is to
miss the point of the record. The Spirit desired to
arrest the attention of the crowd. What better
means could He adopt than to have men who quite
evidently did not speak the dialects in question
suddenly be endowed with the ability to speak
these languages and 'declare the wonders of God'
before the astonished assembly? The effect
would be a multiple one. Attention would be
gained, the evidence of divine intervention would
be perceived, the astonished crowd would be
prepared to listen with interest to the sermon of
Peter, and thus the Spirit's purpose in granting the
gift would be realized."2

"As has been pointed out by various scholars, if

simple ecstatic speech was in view here, Luke
ought simply to have used the term glossais
[tongues], not eterais glossais [other tongues]."3

"… the startling effect of the phenomenon on

those who in difficult circumstances desperately
wished otherwise (as in Acts 4:13-16; 10:28-29;
11:1-3, 15-18; and 15:1-12) supports the
purpose of authentication (and not edification) for
the sign gifts."4

1Barclay, p. 16.
2Harm, p. 30.
3Witherington, p. 133.
4J. Lanier Burns, "A Reemphasis on the Purpose of the Sign Gifts," Bibliotheca Sacra

132:527 (July-September 1975):245.

52 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

God gave the gift of tongues also to rouse the nation of Israel
to repentance (1 Cor. 14:22-25).1

It is clear from the context of Acts 2:4 that this sign involved
the ability to speak in another language that the speaker had
not previously known (vv. 6, 8). However, the ability to speak
in tongues does not in itself demonstrate the baptism of the
Holy Spirit. Satan can give the supernatural ability to speak in
other languages, as the blasphemous utterances of some
tongues speakers have shown. Sometimes an interpreter was
necessary (cf. 1 Cor. 14), but at other times, as at Pentecost,
one was not

INSTANCES OF SPEAKING IN TONGUES IN ACTS

Text Speakers Audience Relation to Purpose

conversion

2:1-4 Jewish Unsaved Jews Sometime To validate (for

believers and Christians after Jews) God's
conversion working as Joel
prophesied

10:44- Gentile Jewish believers Immediately To validate (for

47 believers who doubted after Jews) God's
God's plan conversion working among
Gentiles as He
had among Jews

19:1-7 Believers Jews who Immediately To validate (for

needed after Jews) Paul's
confirmation of conversion gospel message
Paul's message

1Zane C. Hodges, "The Purpose of Tongues," Bibliotheca Sacra 120:479 (July-September

1963):226-33. Some good books that deal with speaking in tongues exegetically include
Robert G. Gromacki, The Modern Tongues Movement; Robert P. Lightner, Speaking in
Tongues and Divine Healing; John F. MacArthur Jr., The Charismatics: A Doctrinal
Perspective; and Joseph Dillow, Speaking in Tongues: Seven Crucial Questions.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 53

Were the tongues here the same as in Corinth (1 Cor. 12; 14)?
If so, was ecstatic speech present on both occasions, and or
were foreign languages present on both occasions? Or were
the tongues here foreign languages and the tongues in Corinth
ecstatic speech?1

"It is well known that the terminology of Luke in

Acts and of Paul in 1 Corinthians is the same. In
spite of this some have contended for a difference
between the gift as it occurred in Acts and as it
occurred in Corinth.[2] This is manifestly
impossible from the standpoint of the
terminology. This conclusion is strengthened
when we remember that Luke and Paul were
constant companions and would have, no doubt,
used the same terminology in the same sense. …
In other words, it is most likely that the early
believers used a fixed terminology in describing
this gift, a terminology understood by them all. If
this be so, then the full description of the gift on
Pentecost must be allowed to explain the more
limited descriptions that occur elsewhere."3

Probably, then, the gift of tongues was a term that covered

speaking in a language or languages that the speaker had never
studied. Note that the miracle was not hearing one's own
language, but speaking in another language. This gift was very
helpful as the believers began to carry out the Great
Commission, especially in their evangelization of Jews. Acts
documents and emphasizes the Lord's work in executing that
mission.

Evidently most, if not all the believers present, spoke in

tongues (vv. 3, 7-11). It has been suggested that the tongues
speaking on the day of Pentecost was not a normal

1See Kent, pp. 30-32, for a clear presentation of these views.

2[E.g.,F. J. Foakes-Jackson, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 11.]
3Johnson, pp. 310-11. See also Henry Alford, The Greek Testament, [Link]-16; Rackham,

p. 21. Longenecker, p. 271, pointed out the differences between tongues in Acts 2 and
1 Cor. 12 and 14.
54 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

manifestation of the gift of tongues. It may have been a unique

divine intervention (miracle) instead.1

If these early Christians spoke in tongues, should not modern

Christians do so too? Speaking in tongues is never commanded
in the New Testament. Its purpose was to authenticate new
revelation to Jews. And it was not a practice that the apostles
valued highly, even in the early church (cf. 1 Cor. 12—14).
Therefore, I would say they should not.

God gave three signs of the Spirit's coming to the Jews who were
celebrating the Feast of Pentecost in Jerusalem: wind, fire, and inspired
speech. Each of these signified God's presence in Jewish history.

"At least three distinct things were accomplished on the Day

of Pentecost concerning the relationship of the Spirit with
men:

(1) The Spirit made His advent into the world here to abide
throughout this dispensation. … [i.e., permanent indwelling]

(2) Again, Pentecost marked the beginning of the formation

of a new body, or organism which, in its relation to Christ, is
called 'the church which is his body.' … [i.e., Spirit baptism]

(3) So, also, at Pentecost the lives that were prepared were
filled with the Spirit, or the Spirit came upon them for power
as promised." [i.e., Spirit filling]2

The amazement of the onlookers 2:5-13

2:5-6 The Jews living in Jerusalem were probably people from the
"Diaspora" ("dispersion," residing outside the land of
Palestine) who had returned to settle down in the Jewish
homeland. Luke's other uses of katoikountes ("living") are in
Acts 1:20; 7:2, 4, 48; 9:22; 11:29; 13:27; 17:24, 26; and
22:12, and these suggest permanence compared with
epidemeo ("sojourning") in verse 10.

1See my note on 19:6 for further comments on the cessation of the gift of tongues.
2L. S. Chafer, He That Is Spiritual, pp. 19-21.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 55

"It was … customary for many pious Jews who had

spent their lives abroad to return to end their days
as close to the Temple as possible."1

A list of nations from which they had come follows in verses 9

and 10. The sound that attracted attention may have been the
wind (v. 2) or the sound of the tongues speakers (v. 4). The
Greek word translated "noise" in verse 2 is echos, but the word
rendered "sound" in verse 6 is phones. The context seems to
favor the sound of the tongues speakers. Verse 2 says the
noise filled the house where the disciples were, but there is no
indication that it was heard outside the house. Also verse 6
connects the sound with the languages being spoken. The text
does not clearly identify when what was happening in the
Upper Room became public knowledge, or when the disciples
moved out of the Upper Room to a larger venue. Evidently
upon hearing the sound, these residents of Jerusalem
assembled to investigate what was happening.

When they found the source of the sound, they were amazed
to discover Galileans speaking in the native languages of the
remote regions from which these Diaspora Jews had come. The
Jews in Jerusalem who could not speak Aramaic would have
known Greek, so there was no need for other languages. Yet
what they heard were the languages that were common in the
remote places in which they had lived.

Perhaps the sound came from the Upper Room initially, and
then when the disciples moved out into the streets, the people
followed them into the temple area. Since about 3,000 people
became Christians that day (v. 41), the multitude (v. 6) must
have numbered many thousands. As many as 200,000 people
could have assembled in the temple area.2 This fact has led
some interpreters to assume that that may have been where
this multitude congregated.

1Neil, p. 73. Cf. Kent, p. 30, n. 9.

2J. P. Polhill, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 118, footnote 135; Joachim Jeremias, Jerusalem
in the Time of Jesus, p. 83.
56 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

2:7-11 Most of the disciples were Galileans at this time, and all of the
Twelve evidently were. They were identifiable by their rural
appearance and their accent (cf. Matt. 26:73).

"Galileans had difficulty pronouncing gutturals and

had the habit of swallowing syllables when
speaking; so they were looked down upon by the
people of Jerusalem as being provincial (cf. Mark
14:70). Therefore, since the disciples who were
speaking were Galileans, it bewildered those who
heard because the disciples could not by
themselves have learned so many different
languages."1

Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and Mesopotamians lived to the

east and north of Palestine. Some of them were probably
descendants of the Jews who did not return from the Assyrian
and Babylonian captivities. Many texts do not include "Judea,"
but if authentic it probably refers to the Roman province of
Judea that included Syria. Pontus, Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia
were all provinces in Asia Minor to the northwest. Egypt, Libya,
and Cyrene lay to the south and west. Simon of Cyrene, in
North Africa, had carried Jesus' cross (Luke 23:26). Rome, of
course, lay farther northwest in Europe.

Luke had a special interest in the gospel reaching "Rome," so

that may be the reason he singled it out for special mention
here. It may be that some of these Roman expatriates returned
to Rome and planted the church there. Ambrosiaster, a fourth-
century Latin father, wrote that the Roman church was
founded without any special miracles and without contact with
any apostle.2 Josephus wrote that visitors to Jerusalem for a
great feast could swell the population to nearly 3,000,000.3

"The Roman Empire had an estimated population

of fifty to eighty million, with about seven million
free Roman citizens (Schnabel 2004: 558-59).

1Longenecker, p. 272.
2Ibid., p. 273.
3Josephus, The Wars …, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 57

About two and a half million people inhabited

Judea, and there were about five million Jews
altogether in the empire, 10 percent of the whole
population."1

A "proselyte" was a Gentile who had adopted Judaism, and had

become a part of the nation of Israel by submitting to three
rites. Acts and Matthew are the only New Testament books
that mention proselytes. These rites were circumcision (if a
male), self-baptism before witnesses, and ideally the offering
of a sacrifice.2 "Cretans" lived on the island of Crete, and
"Arabs" refers to the Arabians who lived east of Palestine
between the Red Sea and the Euphrates River. All of these
ethnic groups heard "the mighty deeds of God" (i.e., the
gospel) in their own languages. This was a reversal of what
took place at Babel (Gen. 11), and illustrated the human unity
that God's unhindered working produces.

"Although every Jew could not be present for

Peter's speech, the narrator does not hesitate to
depict representatives of the Jews of every land
as Peter's listeners. This feature shows a concern
not just with Gentiles but with a gospel for all
Jews, which can bring the restoration of Israel as
a united people under its Messiah."3

"The point [of Luke's list] is not to provide a tour

of the known world but to mention nations that
had known extensive Jewish populations, which of
course would include Judea.4 More to the point,
Luke's arrangement involves first listing the major
inhabited nations or regions, then those from the
islands (Cretans), then finally those from desert
regions (Arabs)."5

1Bock, Acts, p. 43.

2F. F. Bruce, Commentary on the Book of Acts, p. 64.
3Tannehill,2:27.
4See D. J. Williams, Acts, pp. 28-29.
5Witherington, p. 136.
58 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

2:12-13 Unable or unwilling to accept the miraculous working of God in

their midst, some observers charged that the believers were
under the control ("full") of wine rather than the Holy Spirit
(cf. Eph. 5:18; 1 Cor. 14:23). The Greek word for wine here
(gleukous) means "sweet wine," which had a higher alcoholic
content than regular wine.1

Peter's Pentecost sermon 2:14-41

"The miraculous is not self-authenticating, nor does it

inevitably and uniformly convince. There must also be the
preparation of the heart and the proclamation of the message
if miracles are to accomplish their full purpose. This was true
even for the miracle of the Spirit's coming at Pentecost. … All
this prepares the reader for Peter's sermon, which is the initial
proclamation of the gospel message to a prepared people."2

Barclay pointed out four different kinds of preaching that the early
Christians practiced.3 I would add two more. The first is kerugma, which
means proclamation of the clear facts of the Christian message. The second
is didache or teaching. This was explanation and interpretation of the
facts—the "So what is the point?" Third, there was paraklesis, exhortation
to apply the message. Fourth, there was homilia, the treatment of a subject
or area of life in view of the Christian message. Fifth, there was prophesia,
the sharing of a word from God be it new revelation or old. Sixth, there was
apologia, a defense of the Christian message in the face of hostile
adversaries. Often the speaker combined two or more of these kinds of
address into one message, as Peter did in the sermon that follows. Here we
find defense (vv. 14-21), proclamation (vv. 22-36), and exhortation (vv.
37-41). This speech is an excellent example of forensic rhetoric, the
rhetoric of defense and attack.4

Peter's defense 2:14-21

2:14-15 Peter, again representing the apostles (cf. 1:15), addressed

the assembled crowd. He probably gave this speech in the
temple's outer courtyard (the court of the Gentiles). He

1Blaiklock,p. 58.
2Longenecker, p. 273.
3Barclay, pp. 16-17.
4Witherington, p. 138.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 59

probably spoke in the vernacular—in Aramaic or possibly in

Koine (common) Greek—rather than in tongues. Peter had
previously denied that he knew Jesus, but now he was publicly
representing Him. The apostle distinguished two types of Jews
in his audience: native Jews living within the province of Judea,
and all who were living in Jerusalem.

The Diaspora contingent was probably the group most curious

about the tongues phenomenon. Peter began by refuting the
charge of drunkenness. It was too early in the day for that to
be a reasonable explanation, since it was only 9:00 a.m. The
Jews began each day at sundown. There were about 12 hours
of darkness, and then there were 12 hours of daylight. So the
third hour of the day would have been about 9:00 a.m.

"Unfortunately, this argument [i.e., that it was too

early in the day for these people to be drunk] was
more telling in antiquity than today."1

"Scrupulous Jews drank wine only with flesh, and,

on the authority of Ex. xvi. 8, ate bread in the
morning and flesh only in the evening. Hence wine
could be drunk only in the evening. This is the
point of Peter's remark."2

2:16-21 Was Peter claiming that the Spirit's outpouring on the day of
Pentecost fulfilled Joel's prophecy (Joel 2:28-32)?
Conservative commentators express considerable difference
of opinion on this point. This is an interpretive problem because
not only Joel but other Old Testament prophets prophesied
that God would give His Spirit to individual believers in the
future (Isa. 32:15; 44:3; Ezek. 36:27; 37:14; 39:29; Zech.
12:10). Moreover John the Baptist also predicted the pouring
out of God's Spirit on believers (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke
3:16; John 1:33).

1Longenecker, p. 275.
2Blaiklock, p. 58
60 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Some commentators believe that Peter was claiming that all of

what Joel prophesied happened that day.1

"The fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel which the

people had just witnessed was a sign of the
beginning of the Messianic age …"2

"What was happening was to be seen as the

fulfillment of a prophecy by Joel. … Peter regards
Joel's prophecy as applying to the last days, and
claims that his hearers are now living in the last
days. God's final act of salvation has begun to
take place."3

"For Peter, this outpouring of the Spirit began the

period known in Scripture as the 'last days' or the
'last hour' (1 John 2:18), and thus the whole
Christian era is included in the expression."4

Other scholars believe that God fulfilled Joel's prophecy only

partially.5 Some of these, for example, believed that He fulfilled
verses 17-18 on the day of Pentecost, but He will yet fulfill
verses 19-21 in the future.6 I believe the following explanation
falls into this category.

"This clause does not mean, 'This is like that'; it

means Pentecost fulfilled what Joel had described.
However, the prophecies of Joel quoted in Acts

1E.g., Henry, p. 1642.

2Foakes-Jackson, p. 15.
3Marshall, The Acts …, p. 73. For refutation of the view that the fulfillment of Joel 2 in

Acts 2 has removed any barriers to women clergy, see Bruce A. Baker, "The New Covenant
and Egalitarianism," Journal of Dispensational Theology 12:37 (December 2008):27-51.
4Kent, p. 32. See also Longenecker, pp. 275-76; John R. W. Stott, The Message of Acts,

p. 73; Barrett, 1:135-39; and Robertson, 3:26-28.

5E.g., Jamieson, et al., p. 786.
6Ironside, pp. 46-48; Zane C. Hodges, "A Dispensational Understanding of Acts 2," in

Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 168-71; Steven Ger, The Book of Acts, p. 45. See also
Homer Heater Jr., "Evidence from Joel and Amos," in A Case for Premillennialism: A New
Consensus, pp. 157-64; Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Back Toward the Future: Hints for Interpreting
Biblical Prophecy, p. 43; and Daniel J. Treier, "The Fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32: A Multiple-
Lens Approach," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:1 (March 1997):13-26.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 61

2:19-20 were not fulfilled. The implication is that

the remainder would be fulfilled if Israel would
repent."1

"Certainly the outpouring of the Spirit on a

hundred and twenty Jews could not in itself fulfill
the prediction of such outpouring 'upon all flesh';
but it was the beginning of the fulfillment."2

Still others believe Peter was not claiming the fulfillment of any
of Joel's prophecy. They believe he was only comparing what
had happened that day with what would happen in the future
as Joel predicted.

"Peter was not saying that the prophecy was

fulfilled at Pentecost or even that it was partially
fulfilled; knowing from Joel what the Spirit could
do, he was simply reminding the Jews that they
should have recognized what they were then
seeing as a work of the Spirit also. He continued
to quote from Joel at length only in order to be
able to include the salvation invitation recorded in
verse 21."3

"It seems quite obvious that Peter did not quote

Joel's prophecy in the sense of its fulfillment in
the events of Pentecost, but purely as a prophetic
illustration of those events. As a matter of fact,
to avoid confusion, Peter's quotation evidently
purposely goes beyond any possible fulfillment at
Pentecost by including events in the still future
day of the Lord, preceding kingdom establishment
(Acts 2:19-20). … In the reference there is not

1Toussaint, "Acts," p. 358. Cf. Pentecost, p. 271.

2F.F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 68. See also Bock, Dispensationalism, …, pp. 47-48;
Ladd, pp. 1127-28; Kenneth L. Barker, "The Scope and Center of Old and New Testament
Theology and Hope," in Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church, pp. 325-27; Robert L.
Saucy, The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 74, 178-80; and D. A. Carson,
Exegetical Fallacies, p. 61.
3Charles C. Ryrie, The Acts of the Apostles, pp. 20-21. See also McGee, 4:519; and Warren

W. Wiersbe, "Joel," in The Bible Exposition Commentary/Prophets, p. 333.

62 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

the slightest hint at a continual fulfillment during

the church age or a coming fulfillment toward the
end of the church age."1

"Virtually nothing that happened in Acts 2 is

predicted in Joel 2. What actually did happen in
Acts two (the speaking in tongues) was not
mentioned by Joel. What Joel did mention
(dreams, visions, the sun darkened, the moon
turned into blood) did not happen in Acts two.
Joel was speaking of the outpouring of the Holy
Spirit on the whole of the nation of Israel in the
last days, while Acts two speaks of the outpouring
of the Holy Spirit on the Twelve Apostles or, at
most, on the 120 in the Upper Room. This is a far
cry from Joel's all flesh. However, there was one
point of similarity, an outpouring of the Holy Spirit,
resulting in unusual manifestations. Acts two does
not change or reinterpret Joel two, nor does it
deny that Joel two will have a literal fulfillment
when the Holy Spirit will be poured out on the
whole nation of Israel. It is simply applying it to a
New Testament event because of one point of
similarity."2

"Peter did not state that Joel's prophecy was

fulfilled on the day of Pentecost. The details of
Joel 2:30-32 (cp. Acts 2:19-20) were not realized
at that time. Peter quoted Joel's prediction as an
illustration of what was taking place in his day, and
as a guarantee that God would yet completely
fulfill all that Joel had prophesied. The time of that

1Merrill F. Unger, "The Significance of Pentecost," Bibliotheca Sacra 122:486 (April-June

1965):176-77. See also J. N. Darby, Meditations on the Acts of the Apostles, 1:17; and
idem, Synopsis of the Books of the Bible, 4:13. Underlining added for clarification.
2Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology, pp. 844-

45. See also Arno C. Gaebelein, The Acts of the Apostles: An Exposition, p. 53; Thomas
D. Ice, "Dispensational Hermeneutics," in Issues in Dispensationalism, p. 41; Renald E.
Showers, Maranatha: Our Lord, Come! A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church, pp.
36-38; Merrill F. Unger, Zechariah, p. 215; and Wiersbe, 1:409. Underlining added for
clarification.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 63

fulfillment is stated here ('aferward,' cp. Hos.

3:5), i.e. in the latter days when Israel turns to the
LORD."1

I prefer this third view. Some writers have pointed out that the
phrase "this is what" (touto estin to) was a particular type of
expression called a "pesher."

"His [Peter's] use of the Joel passage is in line

with what since the discovery of the DSS [Dead
Sea Scrolls] we have learned to call a 'pesher'
(from Heb. peser, 'interpretation'). It lays all
emphasis on fulfillment without attempting to
exegete the details of the biblical prophecy it
'interprets.'"2

Peter seems to have been claiming that what God had

predicted through Joel for the end times was analogous to the
events of Pentecost. The omission of "fulfilled" here may be
deliberate to help his hearers avoid concluding that what was
happening was the complete fulfillment of what Joel predicted.
It was similar to what Joel predicted.

Peter made a significant change in Joel's prophecy as he

quoted it from the Septuagint, and this change supports the
view that he was not claiming complete fulfillment. First, he
changed "after this" (Joel 2:28) to "in the last days" (Acts
2:17). In the context of Joel's prophecy, the time in view is
the day of the Lord: the Tribulation (Joel 2:30-31) and the
Millennium (Joel 2:28-29). Peter interpreted this time as the
last days.

Many modern interpreters believe that when Peter said "the

last days," he meant the time in which he lived. However, he
was not in the Tribulation or the Millennium. Thus he looked
forward to the last days as being future. The "last days" is a
phrase that some New Testament writers used to describe the
age in which we live (2 Tim. 3:1; Heb. 1:2; James 5:3; 1 Pet.

1The New Scofield Reference Bible, p. 930. Underlining added for clarification.
2Longenecker, p. 275.
64 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

1:5, 20; 2 Pet. 3:3; 1 John 2:18; Jude 18), but in view of what
Joel wrote, that must not be its meaning here. In the Old
Testament, "the last days" refers to the days just before the
age to come, namely, just before the age of Messiah's earthly
reign. That is what it means here.

There are some similarities between what Joel prophesied

would come "after this" (Joel 2:28) and what happened on
Pentecost. The similarities are why Peter quoted Joel. Yet the
differences are what enable us to see that this prophecy was
not completely fulfilled then. For example, God had not poured
out His Spirit on "all mankind" (v. 17), as He will in the future.
He had only poured out His Spirit on some Jewish believers in
Jesus. Joel referred to deliverance in the Tribulation (Joel
2:32), but Peter applied this offer to those who needed
salvation in his audience. Joel referred to Yahweh as the LORD,
but Peter probably referred to Jesus as the Lord (cf. 1:24).

Many dispensationalists understand Peter as saying that Joel's

prophecy was fulfilled initially or partially on Pentecost (view
two above). Progressive dispensationalists believe that the
eschatological kingdom age of which Joel spoke had begun.
Therefore the kingdom had come in its first phase, which they
view as the church. The New Covenant had begun, and the
Holy Spirit's indwelling was a sign of that, but that does not
mean the messianic reign had begun.

The Old Covenant went into effect some 500 years before any
king reigned over Israel, and the New Covenant went into
effect at least 2,000 years before Messiah will reign over Israel
and the world. Thus the beginning of these covenants did not
signal the beginning of a king's reign. One progressive
dispensationalist wrote, "… the new covenant is correlative to
the kingdom of God …"1 I disagree with this.

Not all normative dispensationalists agree on the partial

fulfillment interpretation. By the term "normative
dispensationalists," I mean traditional dispensationalists, not

1Saucy, The Case …, p. 134.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 65

progressives, including classical and revised varieties.1 Some

normative dispensationalists, like Toussaint, see a partial
fulfillment on Pentecost, while others, like Ryrie, see no
fulfillment then.

How one views the church will affect how he or she

understands this passage. If one views the church as the first
stage of the messianic kingdom, as progressive
dispensationalists do, then he or she may see this as the
fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies about the outpouring
of the Spirit in the eschatological age. If one views the church
as distinct from the messianic (Davidic) kingdom, then one
may or may not see this as a partial fulfillment.

It seems more consistent to me not to see the Pentecost

outpouring as a partial fulfillment, but as a similar outpouring
to others, specifically the one Jesus predicted in the Upper
Room (John 14:16-17, 26; 15:26; 16:7). Some normative
dispensationalists, who hold the "no fulfillment" position,
distinguish baptism with the Spirit, the future event, from
baptism by the Spirit, the Pentecost event.2 There does not
seem to me to be adequate exegetical basis for this
distinction.3

"Realized eschatologists and amillennialists

usually take Peter's inclusion of such physical
imagery [i.e., "blood, and fire, and vapor of
smoke," and "the sun will be turned into darkness,
and the moon into blood"] in a spiritual way,
finding in what happened at Pentecost the
spiritual fulfillment of Joel's prophecy—a
fulfillment not necessarily tied to any natural
phenomena. This, they suggest, offers an
interpretative key to the understanding of similar

1See Craig A. Blaising, Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 9-56, for these labels.
2E.g.,Merrill F. Unger, The Baptizing Work of the Holy Spirit.
3See Saucy, The Case …, p. 181.
66 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

portrayals of natural phenomena and apocalyptic

imagery in the OT."1

By repeating, "And they will prophesy" (v. 18), which is not in

Joel's text, Peter stressed prophecy as a most important
similarity between what Joel predicted and what his hearers
were witnessing. God was revealing something new through
the apostles. Peter proceeded to explain what that was.

Another variation of interpretation concerning the Joel passage that some

dispensationalists espouse is this. They believe that Peter thought Joel's
prophecy could have been fulfilled quite soon if the Jewish leaders had
repented and believed in Jesus.2 This may be what Peter thought, but it is
very difficult to be dogmatic about what might have been in Peter's mind
when he did not explain it. Jesus had told the parable of the talents to
correct those "who supposed that the kingdom of God was going to appear
immediately" (Luke 19:11-27). He also predicted that "the kingdom of God
will be taken away from you [Jews], and given to a nation producing the
fruit of it" (Matt. 21:43).

Daniel predicted that seven years of terrible trouble were coming on the
Jews (Dan. 9:24-27; cf. Matt. 24—25). So there had to be at least seven
years of tribulation between Jesus' ascension and His return. If advocates
of this view are correct, Peter either did not know this, or he forgot it, or
he interpreted the Tribulation as a judgment that God would not send if
Israel repented. Of course, Peter did not understand, or he forgot, what the
Old Testament revealed about God's acceptance of Gentiles (cf. ch. 10).
Peter may have thought that Jesus would return and set up the kingdom
immediately if the Jewish leaders repented, but it is hard to prove
conclusively that God was reoffering the kingdom to Israel at this time.
There are no direct statements to that effect in the text. More comments
about this re-offer of the kingdom view will follow later.

"It is observable that though Peter was filled with the Holy
Ghost, yet he did not set aside the scriptures, nor think himself
above them. Christ's scholars never learn above their Bible."3

1Longenecker, p. 276.
2E.g.,Robert B. Chisholm Jr., "Joel," in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament,
p. 1421.
3Henry, p. 1641.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 67

Peter's proclamation 2:22-36

In this part of his speech Peter cited three proofs that Jesus was the
Messiah: His miracles (v. 22), His resurrection (vv. 23-32), and His
ascension (vv. 33-35). Verse 36 is a summary conclusion.

2:22 Peter argued that God had attested to Jesus' Messiahship by

performing miracles through Him. "Miracles" is the general
word, which Peter defined further as "wonders" (miracles
eliciting awe) and "signs" (miracles signifying something).
Jesus' miracles attested the fact that God had empowered Him
(cf. John 3:2), and they led many people who witnessed them
to conclude that He was the Son of David (Matt. 12:23).
Others, however, chose to believe that He received His power
from Satan rather than God (Matt. 12:24).

2:23 Peter pointed out that Jesus' crucifixion had been no accident,
but was part of God's eternal plan (cf. 3:18; 4:28; 13:29).
Some of the Jews who had recently cried "Crucify Him" may
very well have heard Peter's speech. Peter laid the guilt for
Jesus' death at the Jews' feet (cf. v. 36; 3:15; 4:10; 5:30;
7:52; 10:39; 13:28) and on the Gentile Romans (cf. 4:27; Luke
23:24-25). Note Peter's reference to both the sovereignty of
God and the responsibility of man in this verse.

"God had willed the death of Jesus (John 3:16)

and the death of Judas (Acts 1:16), but that fact
did not absolve Judas from his responsibility and
guilt (Luke 22:22). He acted as a free moral
agent."1

The ultimate cause of Jesus' death was God's plan and

foreknowledge, but the secondary cause was the antagonism
of godless Jewish and Roman men. Really the sins of every
human being put Jesus on the cross.

2:24 God, a higher Judge, reversed the decision of Jesus' human

judges by resurrecting Him. God released Jesus from the
"pangs (finality) of death" (Gr. odinas tou thanatou), namely,
its awful clutches (cf. 2 Sam. 22:6; Ps. 18:4-6; 116:3). A

1Robertson, 3:29.
68 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

higher court in heaven overturned the decision of the lower

courts on earth. It was impossible for Death to hold Jesus
because He had committed no sins Himself. He had not
personally earned the wages of sin (Rom. 6:23), but He
voluntarily took upon Himself the sins of others.

2:25 Peter appealed to Psalm 16:8-11 to prove that David

prophesied Messiah's resurrection in the Jewish Scriptures.1
Psalm 16 is perhaps the clearest prediction of Messiah's
resurrection in the Old Testament. As earlier (1:20), Peter saw
that Messiah's (Jesus') experiences fulfilled David's words.

In this Psalm, David spoke of Christ as being at God's "right

hand," a figure for close association and powerful assistance.
Peter saw Jesus' presence in heaven at God's right hand as an
extension of what David had written.

2:26 God's presence with David made him happy and hopeful.
Likewise, the fact that Jesus was now at God's right hand,
made Peter happy and hopeful.

2:27 David said he would not go "to Hades" (the place of departed
spirits, Old Testament Sheol), and his body would not "suffer
(undergo) decay." This was a poetic way of expressing his
belief that God would not allow him to experience ultimate
humiliation. David referred to himself as God's devout one.
Peter saw this fulfilled literally in Jesus' resurrection from the
grave after only three days. Jesus was the supremely Devout
One.

2:28 David ended this psalm by rejoicing that, in spite of his

adversaries, God would spare his life and enable him to enjoy
God's presence in the future. Peter interpreted these
statements as referring to Jesus entering into new life
following His resurrection, and into God's presence following
His ascension.

1See Gregory V. Trull, "Views on Peter's Use of Psalm 16:8 in Acts 2:25-32," Bibliotheca
Sacra 161:642 (April-June 2004):194-214, for seven views; and idem, "Peter's
Interpretation of Psalm 16:8-11 in Acts 2:25-32," Bibliotheca Sacra 161:644 (October-
December 2004):432-48.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 69

"Peter quotes from Psalm 16, not to teach that

Christ is on the Davidic throne, but rather to show
that David predicted the resurrection and
enthronement of Christ after His death. The
enthronement on David's throne is a yet-future
event while the enthronement at His Father's right
hand is an accomplished fact."1

2:29-31 Peter next argued that David's words just quoted could not
refer literally to David, since David had indeed died and his
body had undergone corruption. Ancient tradition places the
location of King David's tomb south of the old city of David,
near the Pool of Siloam. David's words were a prophecy that
referred to Messiah as well as a description of his own
experience. God's oath to place one of David's descendants on
his throne as Israel's king is in Psalm 132:11 (cf. 2 Sam.
7:16).2

Peter did not say that Jesus now sits on David's throne (v.
30), which is what many progressive dispensationalists affirm.3
He said that David prophesied that "God had sworn … to seat"
a descendant of David on David's throne. Jesus now sits on a
throne in heaven, but He has yet to sit on David's throne, which
is a throne on earth. He will sit on David's throne when He
returns to the earth to reign as Messiah.

2:32 Peter equated Jesus with the Christ (Messiah, v. 31). He also
attributed Jesus' resurrection to "God" again (cf. v. 24). The

1Pentecost, pp. 273.

2See Robert F. O'Toole, "Acts 2:30 and the Davidic Covenant of Pentecost," Journal of
Biblical Literature 102:2 (1983):245-58.
3E.g., Bock, Dispensationalism, …, pp. 49-50; Blaising, Progressive Dispensationalism, pp.

175-87; and Saucy, The Case …, p. 59-80. For refutations of the progressive
dispensationalist view, see John F. Walvoord, "Biblical Kingdoms Compared and
Contrasted," in Issues in Dispensationalism, especially pp. 89-90; David A. Dean, "A Study
of the Enthronement of Christ in Acts 2 and 3" (Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary,
1992); McLean, pp. 223-24; Ryrie, Dispensationalism, pp. 168-69; Hodges, "A
Dispensational …," pp. 174-78; Stanley D. Toussaint, "The Contingency of the Coming of
the Kingdom," in Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 231-32; Valdés, 1:491. See
Charles C. Ryrie, The Basis of the Premillennial Faith, pp. 81-82; and John F. Walvoord,
Jesus Christ Our Lord, pp. 224-26, for the normative dispensational interpretations of the
Davidic Covenant passages.
70 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

resurrection of Jesus Christ was one of the apostles' strongest

emphases (cf. 3:15, 26; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30, 33-34, 37;
17:31; 26:23). They proceeded to bear witness to what they
had seen and heard as Christ had commanded and foretold
(1:8).

2:33 Peter next explained that it was Jesus, now at God's right
hand, who had "poured forth" the promised Holy Spirit from
the Father (John 14:16-17, 26; 15:26-27). The evidence of
this was the tongues of fire and demonstration of tongues
speaking that his audience saw and heard. "The right hand of
God" figuratively represents supreme power and authority, and
reference to it sets up the quotation of Psalm 110:1 in the
next verse.

Peter mentioned all three members of the Trinity in this verse.

"Throughout Acts, the presence of the Spirit is

seen as the distinguishing mark of Christianity—it
is what makes a person a Christian."1

2:34-35 Peter then added a second evidence that Jesus was the Christ.
He had proved that David had prophesied Messiah's
resurrection (v. 27). Now he said that David also prophesied
Messiah's ascension (Ps. 110:1). This was a passage from the
Old Testament that Jesus had earlier applied to Himself (Matt.
22:43-44; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-42). It may have been
Jesus' use of this passage that enabled His disciples to grasp
the significance of His resurrection. It may also have served as
the key to their understanding of these prophecies of Messiah
in the Old Testament.

David evidently meant that "the LORD" (Yahweh, God the

Father) said the following to David's "my Lord" (Adonai,
Master, evidently a reference to Messiah or possibly Solomon).
David may have composed this psalm on the occasion of
Solomon's coronation as Israel's king. Clearly it is an
enthronement psalm. Yahweh, the true King of Israel, extended

1Witherington, p. 140.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 71

the privilege of serving as His administrator to Messiah (or

Solomon), His vice-regent.

Yahweh included a promise that He would subdue His vice-

regent's enemies ("until I make Your enemies a footstool for
Your feet"). Peter took this passage as a prophecy about
David's greatest son, Messiah. Yahweh said to David's Lord:
"Messiah, sit beside Me and rule for Me, and I will subdue Your
enemies." This is something God the Father said to God the
Son. Peter understood David's reference to his Lord as
extending to Messiah, David's ultimate descendant.

"Peter's statement that Jesus is presently at 'the

right hand of God,' in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1,
has been a focal point of disagreement between
dispensational and non-dispensational
interpreters. Traditional dispensationalists have
understood this as teaching the present session
of Christ in heaven before his return to fulfill the
Davidic messianic kingdom promise of a literal
reign on earth. They are careful to distinguish
between the Davidic throne and the position that
Christ presently occupies in heaven at the right
hand of God (Ac 2:30).1

"Non-dispensationalists, by contrast, see Peter's

statement as a clear indication that the New
Testament has reinterpreted the Davidic
messianic prophecies. The messianic throne has
been transferred from Jerusalem to heaven, and
Jesus 'has begun his messianic reign as the
Davidic king.'"2

"This does not mean that Jesus is at the present

time ruling from the throne of David, but that He

1E.g.,McClain, p. 401.
2Saucy, The Case …, pp. 69-70. His quotation is from George E. Ladd, A Theology of the
New Testament, p. 336. Cf. Oswald T. Allis, Prophecy and the Church, p. 136. Saucy's
discussion of "the right hand of God," pp. 72-74, is helpful.
72 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

is now at 'the right hand of the Father' until His

enemies are vanquished (Acts 2:33-35)."1

"… it is preferable to see David's earthly throne

as different from the Lord's heavenly throne,
because of the different contexts of Psalms 110
and 132. Psalm 110 refers to the Lord's throne
(v. 1) and a Melchizedekian priesthood (v. 4) but
Psalm 132 refers to David's throne (v. 11) and
(Aaronic) priests (vv. 9, 16). …

"Because the Messiah is the anointed Descendant

of David and the Davidic Heir, He presently
possesses the right to reign though He has not
yet assumed David's throne. This was also true of
David, who assumed the throne over Israel years
after he was anointed.

"Before Christ will be seated on David's throne

(Ps. 110:2), He is seated at the right hand of God
(v. 1). His present session is a position of honor
and power, but the exercise of that power is
restricted to what God has chosen to give the
Son. God the Father reigns and has decreed that
Christ dispense blessings from the Holy Spirit to
believers in this present age. When Christ returns
to earth to begin His messianic reign on David's
throne, He will conquer His enemies (Ps. 110:2, 5-
7). Until then, He is now seated at God's right
hand (v. 1), exercising the decreed role of the
Melchizedekian King-Priest (v. 4), the believer's
great High Priest (Heb. 2:17; 4:14-15; 5:10; 6:20;
7:26; 8:1; 9:11; 10:21)."2

"Christ's enthronement at the time of His

ascension was not to David's throne, but rather
was a restoration to the position at His Father's

1Cleon L. Rogers Jr., "The Davidic Covenant in Acts-Revelation," Bibliotheca Sacra

151:601 (January-March 1994):74.
2Elliott E. Johnson, "Hermeneutical Principles and the Interpretation of Psalm 110,"

Bibliotheca Sacra 149:596 (October-December 1992):434, 436.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 73

right hand (Heb. 1:3; Acts 7:56), which position

He had given up at the time of the Incarnation
(Phil. 2:6-8). It was for this restoration that Christ
had prayed to His Father in John 17:5. Since Christ
had never occupied David's throne before the
Incarnation it would have been impossible to
restore Him to what He had not occupied
previously. He was petitioning the Father to
restore Him to His place at the Father's right hand.
Peter, in his message, establishes the fact of
resurrection by testifying to the Ascension, for
one who had not been resurrected could not
ascend."1

Normative Christ's messianic reign will be on earth.

dispensationalists:

Progressive Christ's messianic reign is now from

dispensationalists: heaven and will be on earth.

Non-dispensational Christ's messianic reign is now from

premillenarians: heaven and will be on earth.

Non-millennarians: Christ's messianic reign is now and will be

from heaven.

2:36 Peter wanted every Israelite to consider the evidence he had

just presented, because it proved "for certain" that Jesus of
Nazareth (cf. v. 22) was God's sovereign ruler (Lord) and
anointed Messiah (Christ). It is clear from the context that by
"Lord," Peter was speaking of Jesus as the Father's co-regent.
He referred to the same "Lord" he had mentioned in verse 21.

"This title of 'Lord' was a more important title

than Messiah, for it pictured Jesus' total authority

1Pentecost, pp. 272. Cf. Hodges, "A Dispensational …," pp. 172-78.
74 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

and His ability and right to serve as an equal with

God the Father."1

Normative dispensationalists (both classical and revised, to

use Blaising's labels) hold that Peter only meant that Jesus of
Nazareth was the Davidic Messiah. Progressive
dispensationalists, along with covenant theologians (i.e., non-
dispensationalists), believe that Peter meant that Jesus not
only was the Davidic Messiah but that He was also reigning as
the Davidic Messiah then. Thus, for them, the Davidic
messianic kingdom had begun. Its present (already) phase is
with Jesus on the Davidic throne ruling from heaven, and its
future (not yet) phase will be when Jesus returns to earth to
rule on earth.

Progressive dispensationalists (and covenant theologians) also

believe that Jesus' reign as Messiah began during his earthly
ministry.2 They see the church as the present stage in the
progressive unfolding of the messianic kingdom (hence the
name "progressive dispensationalism").3 Normative
dispensationalists interpret the Davidic kingdom as entirely
earthly, and say that Jesus has not yet begun His messianic
reign. He now sits on the Father's throne in heaven, ruling
sovereignly as God, not on David's throne fulfilling Old
Testament prophecies concerning the Davidic king's future
reign (cf. Rev. 3:21).

Peter again mentioned his hearers' responsibility for crucifying

Jesus, in order to convict them of their sin and to make them
feel guilty (cf. v. 23).4

1Bock, "A Theology …," p. 104. See Witherington's excursus on Luke's Christology, pp.
147-53.
2Blaising, Progressive Dispensationalism, p. 248.
3Ibid., p. 49.
4See Darrell L. Bock, "Jesus as Lord in Acts and in the Gospel Message," Bibliotheca Sacra

143:570 (April-June 1986):147-48.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 75

"Peter did not present the cross as the place

where the Sinless Substitute died for the world,
but where Israel killed her own Messiah!"1

"Peter's preaching, then, in vv. 14ff. must be seen

as essentially a message to the Jews of the world,
not to the whole world."2

"The beginning and ending of the main body of

the speech emphasize the function of disclosure.
Peter begins, 'Let this be known to you,' and
concludes, 'Therefore, let the whole house of
Israel know assuredly …,' forming an inclusion
(2:14, 36). In the context this is a new disclosure,
for it is the first public proclamation of Jesus'
resurrection and its significance. Acts 2:22-36 is
a compact, carefully constructed argument
leading to the conclusion in v. 36: 'God made him
both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you
crucified.' Peter not only proclaims Jesus'
authority but also reveals the intolerable situation
of the audience, who share responsibility for
Jesus' crucifixion. The Pentecost speech is part of
a recognition scene, where, in the manner of
tragedy, persons who have acted blindly against
their own best interests suddenly recognize their
error."3

"The Pentecost speech is primarily the disclosure

to its audience of God's surprising reversal of their
intentions, for their rejection has ironically
resulted in Jesus' exaltation as Messiah, Spirit-
giver, and source of repentance and
forgiveness." 4

1Wiersbe, 1:410.
2Witherington, pp. 140-41.
3Tannehill, 2:35.
4Ibid., 2:37.
76 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

God bestowed His Spirit on the believers on Pentecost (and

subsequently) for the same reason He poured out His Spirit on
Jesus Christ when He began His earthly ministry. He did so to
empower them to proclaim the gospel of God's grace (cf. 1:8).
Luke recorded both outpourings (Luke 3:21-22; Acts 2:2-4;
cf. Acts 4:27; 10:28). This fact is further evidence that Luke
wanted his readers to view their own ministries as the
extension of Jesus' ministry (1:1-2).

"Luke's specific emphasis (and contribution) to

NT pneumatology is that the Holy Spirit was
poured out on the church not just to incorporate
each believer into the body of Christ or provide
the greater new covenant intimacy with him, but
also to consecrate the church to the task of
worldwide prophetic ministry as defined in Luke
4:16-30."1

Peter mentioned that Jesus was now at "the right hand of God"—in
"heaven"—four times in this part of his speech (vv. 25, 30, 33, 34). This
had particular relevance for "all the house of Israel" (cf. vv. 14, 22, 29).

"Apparently, therefore, the messiahship of Jesus was the

distinctive feature of the church's witness within Jewish
circles, signifying, as it does, his fulfillment of Israel's hopes
and his culmination of God's redemptive purposes.

"The title 'Lord' was also proclaimed christologically in Jewish

circles, with evident intent to apply to Jesus all that was said
of God in the OT . … But 'Lord' came to have particular
relevance to the church's witness to Gentiles just as 'Messiah'
was more relevant to the Jewish world. So in Acts Luke reports
the proclamation of Jesus 'the Christ' before Jewish audiences
both in Palestine and among the Diaspora, whereas Paul in his
letters to Gentile churches generally uses Christ as a proper
name and proclaims Christ Jesus 'the Lord.'"2

1Russell, p. 63.
2Longenecker, p. 281.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 77

Peter's exhortation 2:37-41

2:37 The Holy Spirit used Peter's sermon to bring conviction, as

Jesus had predicted (John 16:8-11). He convicted Peter's
hearers of the truth of what he said and of their guilt in
rejecting Jesus. Their question arose from this twofold
response.

Notice the full meaning of their question. These were Jews who
had been waiting expectantly for the Messiah to appear. Peter
had just explained convincingly that He had come, but the
Jewish nation had rejected God's anointed King. Jesus had
gone back to heaven. What would happen to the nation over
which He was to rule? What were the Jews to do? Their
question did not just reflect their personal dilemma but the
fate of their nation. What should they do in view of this terrible
situation nationally as well as personally?

2:38 Peter told them what to do. They needed to "repent."

Repentance involves a change of mind and heart first, and
secondarily a change of conduct. The Greek word translated
repentance (metanoia) literally means a change of outlook
(from meta and noeo meaning to reconsider). The Jews had
just recently regarded Jesus as less than Messiah, and had
rejected Him. Now they needed to accept Him and embrace
Him. John the Baptist and Jesus had previously called for
repentance in their audiences (Matt. 3:2; 4:17; et al.), and the
apostles continued this emphasis, as Luke reported in Acts
(Acts 3:19; 5:31; 8:22; 10:43; 11:18; 13:24; 17:30; 19:4;
20:21; 26:18, 20).

"The context of repentance which brings eternal

life, and that which Peter preached on the day of
Pentecost, is a change of mind about Jesus Christ.
Whereas the people who heard him on that day
formerly thought of Him as mere man, they were
asked to accept Him as Lord (Deity) and Christ
78 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

(promised Messiah). To do this would bring

salvation."1

When people speak of "repentance," they may mean one of

two different things. We use this English word in the sense of
a conduct change (turning away from sinful practices). We also
use it in the sense of a conceptual change (turning away from
false ideas previously held). These two meanings also appear
in Scripture. This has led to some confusion concerning what a
person must do to obtain salvation.

"The Greek verb [metanoeo, translated "to

repent"] means 'to change one's mind,' but in its
Lucan usage it comes very close to the Hebrew
verb for repent which literally means 'to turn or
turn around' (sub). … A change of perspective,
involving the total person's point of view, is called
for by this term. In fact, John called for the
Israelites to bring forth fruit worthy of repentance
([Luke] 3:8). This passage is significant for it
separates repentance from what it produces, and
also expresses a link between repentance and
fruit. One leads to the other.

"In summary, Luke saw repentance as a change of

perspective that transforms a person's thinking
and approach to life."2

If a person just thinks of repentance as turning from sinful

practices (reforming oneself), repentance becomes a good
work that a person does. This kind of repentance is not
necessary for salvation for two reasons. First, this is not how
the gospel preachers in the New Testament used the word, as
one can see from the meaning of the Greek word metanoia
(defined above). Second, other Scriptures make it clear that
good works, including turning from sin, have no part in
justification (e.g., Eph. 2:8-9). God does not save us because

1Charles C. Ryrie, Balancing the Christian Life, p. 176.

2Bock, "A Theology …," pp. 129-30, 132.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 79

of what we do for Him but because of what He has done for us

in Christ.1

Repentance by definition is not an act separate from trusting

Christ. It is part of the process of believing.2 A few scholars
believe that repentance plays no part in salvation, but that
repentance is a condition for harmonious fellowship with God.3
This is a minority view, however.

When a person trusts Christ, he or she abandons his or her

false notions about the Savior and embraces the truth. The
truth is that Jesus Christ is God's provision for our eternal
salvation. When we rest our confidence in Him and the
sufficiency of His cross work for us, God gives us eternal life.
This is not just giving mental assent to facts that are true.
Saving faith does that, but also places confidence in Christ,
rather than in self, for salvation.4

"… it needs ever to be insisted on that the faith

that justifies is not a mere intellectual process—
not simply crediting certain historical facts or
doctrinal statements; but it is a faith that springs
from a divinely wrought conviction of sin which
produces a repentance that is sincere and
genuine."5

Peter called for individual repentance ("each of you," Gr.

second person plural). The Jews thought corporately about
their responsibilities as God's chosen people, but Peter
confronted them with their individual responsibility to believe
in Jesus.

The New Testament uses the word "baptism" in two ways:

Spirit baptism and water baptism. This raises the question of
which type Peter was calling for here. In verse 38, "baptism"

1See Joseph C. Dillow's excellent discussion of the true and false definitions of repentance
in The Reign of the Servant Kings, pp. 30-36. See also Kent, pp. 33-34.
2See John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, [Link] and 9.
3E.g., Zane C. Hodges, Absolutely Free, pp. 145-6.
4See Thomas L. Constable, "The Gospel Message," in Walvoord: A Tribute, p. 207.
5Harry A. Ironside, Except Ye Repent, pp. 9-10.
80 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

probably refers to water baptism, as most commentators point

out. A few of them believe that Peter was referring to Spirit
baptism, in the sense of becoming identified with Christ.

"The baptism of the Spirit which it was our Lord's

prerogative to bestow was, strictly speaking,
something that took place once for all on the day
of Pentecost when He poured forth 'the promise
of the Father' on His disciples and thus
constituted them the new people of God; baptism
in water continued to be the external sign by
which individuals who believed the gospel
message, repented of their sins, and
acknowledged Jesus as Lord, were publicly
incorporated into the Spirit-baptized fellowship of
the new people of God."1

This verse is a major proof text for those who believe that
water baptism is essential for salvation.2 Many people refer to
this viewpoint as sacramental theology as contrasted with
evangelical theology. It encounters its greatest problem with
passages that make the forgiveness of sin, and salvation in
general, dependent on nothing but trust in Christ (e.g., Acts
16:31; 10:43; 13:38-39; 26:18; Luke 24:47; John 3:16, 36;
Rom. 4:1-17; 11:6; Gal. 3:8-9; Eph. 2:8-9).3 Peter later
promised forgiveness of sins on the basis of faith alone (5:31;
10:43; 13:38; 26:18). Over 100 verses that deal with how to
become a Christian make faith in Christ the only condition.

"… Christian [water] baptism was an expression

of faith and commitment to Jesus as Lord."4

I must disagree with Lutheran commentator Lenski who wrote:

1F.F. Bruce, Commentary on …, pp. 76-77.

2See Aubrey M. Malphurs, "A Theological Critique of the Churches of Christ Doctrine of
Soteriology" (Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1981).
3See Charles C. Ryrie, So Great Salvation; Hodges, Absolutely Free! and Robert N. Wilkin,

"Repentence and Salvation," Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 1:1 (Autumn
1988):11-20, and 2:1 (Spring 1989):13-26.
4Marshall, The Acts …, p.81.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 81

"This baptism was not only symbolical. As

practiced by both John and Jesus and then as
being appointed for all nations it bestowed the
remission of sins and was thus a true sacrament."1

I do not believe that the Scriptures teach that baptism

bestows the remission of sins. God remits (forgives) our sins
when we trust in Jesus Christ (16:31; etc.).

What is the relationship of repentance, water baptism,

forgiveness, and the gift of the Spirit that this verse brings
together? At least three explanations are possible if we rule
out the idea that water baptism results in the forgiveness of
sins.2

1. One acceptable option is to take the Greek preposition

translated "for" (eis) as "because of" or "on the basis
of." This is not the usual meaning of the word. The usual
meaning is "for" designating aim or purpose. However,
it clearly means "because of" in some passages (e.g.,
Matt. 3:11; 12:41; Mark 1:4). This explanation links
forgiveness with baptizing. We could paraphrase this
view as follows. "Repent and you will receive the gift of
the Spirit. Be baptized because your sins are forgiven."3

2. Other interpreters emphasize the correspondence

between the number (singular and plural) of the verbs
and pronouns in the two parts of the sentence. "Repent"
is plural as is "your," and "be baptized" and "you" (in
"each of you") are singular.

Repent (second person plural)

1Lenski,p. 106.
2Lanny T. Tanton, "The Gospel and Water Baptism: A Study of Acts 2:38," Journal of the
Grace Evangelical Society 3:1 (Spring 1990):27-52, discussed six interpretations of this
passage.
3Advocates of this view include Ryrie, The Acts …, p. 24; W. A. Criswell, Acts, p. 96; H.

E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, pp. 103-
4; Kenneth S. Wuest, Word Studies in the Greek New Testament, 3:76-77; Robertson,
3:35-36; and Wiersbe, 1:410.
82 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

be baptized (third person singular)

each (third person singular) of you

for the forgiveness of your (second person plural) sins

According to this view Peter was saying, "You [all]

repent for [the purpose of] the forgiveness of your sins,
and you [all] will receive the Spirit." Then he added
parenthetically, "And each of you [singular] be baptized
[as a testimony to your faith]." This explanation links
forgiveness with repentance.1 This seems to me to be
the best explanation.

"Repentance demands the witness of

baptism; forgiveness is followed by the gift
of the Holy Spirit [i.e., Spirit baptism]."2

3. A third, less popular, view is that God withheld Spirit

baptism from Palestinian converts to Christianity when
the church was in its infancy. He did so until they had
entered into communion with God by obeying His
command to undergo baptism in water (Acts 2:38;
22:16). Their Christian experience unfolded in this
sequence of events: regeneration, water baptism,
forgiveness of sins, fellowship with God, Spirit baptism.
These Palestinian converts were individuals who had
exposure to but had rejected the ministries of both John
the Baptist and Jesus.

One advocate of this view felt that it accounts best for

the instances of Spirit baptism in Acts 2:38; 8:12-17;
19:1-7; and 22:16. He took these occurrences as non-
normative Christian experience unique in the early years
of Christianity. Acts 10:43-48 reflects normative

1See Toussaint, "Acts," p. 359; Ned B. Stonehouse, "The Gift of the Holy Spirit,"
Westminster Theological Journal 13 (1949-51):1-15; Frank Stagg, The Book of Acts, p.
63; Bob L. Ross, Acts 2:38 and Baptismal Regeneration, pp. 45-49; Malphurs, pp. 167-69;
and Luther B. McIntyre Jr., "Baptism and Forgiveness in Acts 2:38," Bibliotheca Sacra
153:609 (January-March 1996):53-62.
2Blaiklock, p. 60.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 83

Christian experience where regeneration, forgiveness,

and Spirit baptism take place simultaneously with water
baptism following. By the time Paul wrote Romans, this
later sequence had become normative (Rom. 8:9; cf. 1
Cor. 12:13).1

Baptism in water was common in both Judaism and early

Christianity. The Jews baptized themselves for ceremonial
cleansing. Gentile converts to Judaism commonly baptized
themselves in water publicly as a testimony to their
conversion. The apostles evidently took for granted that the
person who trusted in Christ would then submit to baptism in
water.

"… the idea of an unbaptized Christian is simply

not entertained in [the] NT."2

"Since baptism signifies association with the

message, group, or person involved in authorizing
it [cf. 1 Cor. 10:1-2], baptism in the name of
Jesus Christ meant for these people a severing of
their ties with Judaism and an association with the
messages of Jesus and His people. Baptism was
the line of demarcation. Even today for a Jew it is
not his profession of Christianity nor his
attendance at Christian services nor his
acceptance of the New Testament, but his
submission to water baptism that definitely and
finally excludes him from the Jewish community
and marks him off as a Christian."3

Was Peter violating the Lord Jesus' instructions when the

apostle told his hearers to be baptized in the name of Jesus
Christ alone? Jesus had commanded His disciples to baptize
"in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit"
(Matt. 28:19). I do not think so. When Jesus gave the Great
Commission, He had in view the discipling of the nations:

1Rackham, p. 30; and Zane C. Hodges, The Gospel Under Seige, pp. 101-4.
2F.F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 77. See also Longenecker, p. 284.
3Ryrie, The Acts …, pp. 23-24. See also Longenecker, p. 286.
84 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

everyone. When evangelizing non-Christians, it was necessary

to have them identify with the triune God of Christianity
through water baptism.

Peter's audience on the day of Pentecost, however, was

Jewish. They needed to identify with the true God too, but
identification with Jesus Christ is what Peter stressed, since
baptism "in the name of Jesus" would have been a particular
problem for Jews. It meant acknowledging Jesus as their God.
Jews already accepted the fatherhood of God and the idea that
God is a Spirit.

The "gift of the Holy Spirit" was baptism with the Spirit. The
Spirit is the gift. Peter connected reception of the Spirit with
repentance. The Holy Spirit immediately baptized those who
repented (11:15). Their Spirit baptism was not a later "second
blessing."

Notice that Peter said nothing in this verse about

acknowledging Jesus as Lord, in the sense of surrendering
completely to His Lordship to receive eternal life. Those who
contend that submission to the Lordship of Christ is essential
for salvation must admit that Peter did not make that a
requirement here. This would have been the perfect
opportunity for him to do so. Peter did not mention submission
to the Lordship of Christ because he did not believe it was
essential for salvation. Admittedly he referred to Jesus as Lord
in verse 36, but as I have explained, the context there argues
for "Lord" meaning God rather than master. Further discussion
of the "Lordship Salvation" view will follow in these notes.

2:39 The "promise" is the gift of the Holy Spirit (1:5, 8; 2:33).
Peter's reference to "your children" reflects the strong
influence that Jewish fathers exercised in their homes. When a
father became a Christian, his children would normally follow
his lead and become Christians too. Those "far off" probably
include the Diaspora Jews, future generations of Jews, and the
Gentiles. Peter had already expressed his belief that Gentiles
could be saved (v. 21; cf. Joel 2:32), a fact taught repeatedly
in both the Old and the New Testament.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 85

Peter's later problem involving the salvation of Cornelius was

not due to a conviction that Gentiles were unsaveable. It was
a question of the manner by which they became Christians
(i.e., not through Judaism, but directly—without becoming
Jews first). Note, too, Peter's firm belief in God's sovereignty
(cf. v. 23). God takes the initiative in calling the elect to
salvation, and then they repent (v. 38; cf. John 6:37; Rom.
8:28-30).

2:40 The Greek word translated "generation" (genea) sometimes

has a wider scope than simply all the people living within the
same generational period. It has a metaphorical meaning here
as elsewhere (e.g., Matt. 17:17; Mark 9:19; 13:30; Luke 9:41;
16:8). It means "a race of men very like each other in
endowments, pursuits, character; and especially in a bad sense
a perverse race."1 Here the reference seems to be to
unbelieving Jews of all time, but particularly those living during
Peter's lifetime. "Generation" in this larger sense is virtually
the same as "race."

Jesus had announced that the actual generation of Jews who

had rejected Him would experience God's judgment on
themselves and their nation (Matt. 21:41-44; 22:7; 23:34—
24:2). In view of that prediction, it seems that Peter may have
had that impending judgment in mind when he issued this call
to his hearers. Jesus' promised judgment fell in A.D. 70 when
Titus invaded Jerusalem, destroyed the temple, and scattered
the Jews.

"This exhortation shows that Peter viewed that

generation under the physical, temporal judgment
about which Christ had spoken so forcefully and
clearly. What Jesus had warned them about earlier
(Matt. 12:31-32) had come on them and was
inescapable. …

"While judgment on the nation was inescapable,

individuals could be delivered from it. Peter's
answer was, 'Be baptized, every one of you, in the

1A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, s.v. "genea," p. 112.

86 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be

forgiven,' that is, they were no longer to
participate in the repeated sin of the nation in
rejecting Christ. The confession of their faith in
Christ and of their identification with him by
baptism would demonstrate their separation from
the nation. They would be put out of the
synagogue and lose all identity in the nation. Thus,
by this separation they would individually not
undergo the judgment on that generation since
they ceased to be a part of it. Baptism did not
save them. Only their faith in the One in whose
name they were being baptized could do that. But
baptism did terminate their identity with the
nation so that they could escape its judgment."1

2:41 Peter had called on his audience to repent and to be baptized

(v. 38). Luke recorded the response of the believers. This
reference, too, is probably to water baptism.

More people may have become Christians on this one day than
did so during the whole earthly ministry of our Lord Jesus
Christ (cf. John 14:12). Luke evidently meant that 3,000 were
added to the 120 mentioned in 1:15, since he was describing
the visible relationships of the believers.2 When the Israelites
apostatized with the golden calf, 3,000 people died (Exod.
32:28). "The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Cor. 3:6).

Some interpreters believe that this verse does not describe

what took place immediately following the conclusion of
Peter's sermon, however. Luke may have been summing up the
results of Peter's preaching as a new point of departure in his
narrative. He often used the Greek word translated "then"
(men) in Acts to do this. Furthermore "day" (hemera) can refer
to a longer time as well as to one 24-hour period. Here it could
refer to the first period in the church's life.3

1J. Dwight Pentecost, "The Apostles' Use of Jesus' Predictions of Judgment on Jerusalem
in A.D. 70," in Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 139-40.
2Kent, p. 34, footnote 14.
3Rackham, pp. 31-32; Neil, p. 80.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 87

"When we take God for our God, we must take his

people to be our people."1

Still other interpreters believe that we should not understand

Luke's description literally, as the follow quotation illustrates:

"In the early chapters of Acts the condition of

affairs is idealized with the object of shewing what
the Church ought to be."2

The period between the death of Christ and the destruction of Jerusalem
in A.D. 70 was a transitional period. The tearing of the temple veil when
Jesus died (Matt. 27:51) symbolized the termination of the old Mosaic
order and the beginning of a new order. The new order began when Jesus
Christ died. However, it took several decades for God's people to make the
transition in their thinking and practice. The Book of Acts documents many
of those transitions.

"The transition was extensive. Ethnically, there was a

transition from dealing primarily with Jews to dealing with both
Jew and Gentile without distinction. There was also a transition
in the people with whom God was dealing, from Israel to the
church. Likewise, there was a transition in the principle on
which God was dealing with men, from Law to grace. There was
a transition from the offer to Israel of an earthly Davidic
kingdom to the offer to all men of salvation based on the death
and resurrection of Jesus Christ. There was a transition from
the prospect of Messiah's coming to the historical fact that
the promised One had come. There was a transition from the
promise that the Spirit would be given to the historical fact
that the Spirit had come.

"Again, all these transitions were made positionally in the brief

period of time from the death of Christ to the Day of
Pentecost. Yet experientially these truths were understood
and entered into only over a span of some four decades. The
Book of Acts records the positional transition as well as the

1Henry, p. 1644.
2Foakes-Jackson, p. 22.
88 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

experiential transition in the development of the theocratic

kingdom program."1

"… the Book of the Acts is particularly valuable as giving to us

the earliest models of several ordinances and institutions which
have since become part of the life of the Christian Church.
These first occasions should be studied as types and models
of what all subsequent occasions should be.

"The first descent of the Spirit (chap. 2); the first Christian
preaching (chap. 2); the first Christian Church (chap. 2); the
first opposition to Christianity (chap. 4); the first persecution
(chap. 4); the first prayer meeting (chap. 4); the first sin in
the Church (chap. 5); the first Church problem (chap. 6); the
first martyr (chap. 7); the first Church extension (chap. 8); the
first personal dealing (chap. 8); the first Gentile Church (chap.
11); the first Church Council (chap. 11).

"The first missionary (chap. 13); the first missionary methods

(chaps. 13, 14); the first Church contention (chap. 15); the
first Church in Europe (chap. 16); the first address to Christian
ministers (chap. 20)."2

This list could be developed even further.

"… what Acts aims to do is to give us a series of typical

exploits and adventures of the great heroic figures of the early
Church."3

6. The early state of the church 2:42-47

Luke now moved from describing what took place on a particular day to a
more general description of the life of the early Jerusalem church (cf.
4:32—5:11; 6:1-6). Interestingly he gave comparatively little attention to
the internal life of the church in Acts. His selection of content shows that
his purpose was to stress its outward expansion.

1Pentecost, Thy Kingdom …, pp. 266-67.

2Thomas, pp. 86-87.
3Barclay, p. xiii.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 89

This is the first of three summary narratives that describe life in the early
church (cf. 4:32-35; 5:12-16).1

2:42 These new converts, along with the disciples, gave ("devoted,"
Gr. proskartereo, cf. 1:14) themselves to two activities
primarily: the apostles' teaching and fellowship. The grammar
of the Greek sentence sets these actions off as distinct from
the following two activities that define fellowship. The
apostles' teaching included the Jewish Scriptures as well as the
teachings of Christ on earth and the revelations He gave to the
apostles from heaven. This means the early Christians gave
priority to the revealed Word of God.2

"The steady persistence in the apostles' teaching

means (a) that the Christians listened to the
apostles whenever they taught and (b) that they
assiduously practised what they heard."3

The "fellowship" (Gr. te koinonia) refers to sharing things with

others. The presence of the article with fellowship indicates
that this fellowship was distinctive. It was a fellowship within
Judaism. Even though their fellowship included material goods,
its primary reference must be to the ideas, attitudes,
purposes, mission, and activities that the Christians shared.

Two distinctive activities marked the fellowship of the early

church. The "breaking of bread" is a term that here probably
included the Lord's Supper as well as eating a meal together
(cf. v. 46; 20:7; 1 Cor. 10:16; 11:23-25; Jude 12).4 Elsewhere
the phrase describes both an ordinary meal (Luke 24:30, 35;
Acts 20:11; 27:35) and the Lord's Supper (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor.
10:16; 11:24). Probably these early Christians ate together
and as part of the meal, or after it, used their common food,
bread and wine, to commemorate Christ's death.5

1See Chambers, pp. 61-84.

2See Steven J. Lawson, "The Priority of Biblical Preaching: An Expository Study of Acts
2:42-47," Bibliotheca Sacra 158:630 (April-June 2001):198-217.
3Barrett, 1:163.
4Kent, pp. 34-35; Blaiklock, p. 61.
5Neil, p. 81.
90 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

In "the prayers," the believers must have praised and thanked

God, as well as petitioning and interceding for His glory (cf.
Matt. 6:9-13). The article with prayer probably implies formal
times of prayer (cf. 1:14), though they undoubtedly prayed
together at other times too.1

"Just as Luke has set up in Luke-Acts the

parallelism between the Spirit's work in relation to
Jesus and the Spirit's work in the church, so he
also sets up the parallelism between prayer in the
life of Jesus and prayer in the life of the church."2

"Prayer is an expression of dependence, and when

the people of God really feel their need you will
find them flocking together to pray. A neglected
prayer meeting indicates very little recognition of
one's true need."3

Their persistence in these activities demonstrated their felt

need to learn, to encourage one another, to refocus on Christ's
death, and to praise and petition God (1:1).

2:43 The feeling of "awe" that the obvious working of God in their
midst inspired, continued among all the people in Jerusalem.
The wonder-inspiring miracles that the apostles performed
pointed to God's hand at work and kept this spirit alive. Not
the least of these wonders must have been the remarkable
unity and self-sacrifice of the believers. Compare 2:22, where
Peter said Jesus had done "wonders and signs," with this
verse, where Luke wrote that the apostles performed
"wonders and signs." This shows again Jesus' continuing work
through His servants following His ascension.4

1See Daniel K. Falk, "Jewish Prayer Literature and the Jerusalem Church," in The Book of
Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp.
267-301.
2Longenecker, p. 290. Cf. 1:14, 24; 4:24-31; 6:4, 6; 9:40; 10:2, 4, 9, 31; 11:5; 12:5;

13:3; 14:23; 16:25; 22:17; 28:8.

3Ironside, Lectures on …, p. 77.
4For a good evaluation of the "signs and wonders movement," which teaches that

believers today may perform the same kind of miraculous works Jesus and the apostles
performed to authenticate the gospel message, see Ken L. Sarles, "An Appraisal of the
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 91

2:44-45 These early believers had frequent contact with each other.
Communal living was voluntary and temporary in the Jerusalem
church (4:32, 34-35; 5:4); it was not forced socialism or
communism. No other New Testament church practiced
communal living to the extent that the Jerusalem Christians
did. The New Testament nowhere commands communal living,
and Acts does not refer to it after chapter five.1

The believers' willingness to sell their property (real estate, cf.

5:37) and personal possessions to help others in need
demonstrated true Christian love. One writer argued that
Luke's portrait of the early church was true to reality and not
an idealized picture.2 Others have disputed this claim.3 The
believers were probably giving to non-believers as well as to
their Christian brethren, but what Luke stressed was their
sacrificial giving to one another. Besides Christian love, it may
have been their hope that Jesus Christ would return very soon
that motivated them to live as they did. Furthermore since
Jesus had predicted judgment on Jerusalem, what was the use
of keeping property?

2:46-47 This progress report summarizes the growth of the church

thus far. It is one of seven in Acts, each of which concludes a
major advance of the church in its worldwide mission (cf. 6:7;
9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; 28:30-31).4

The believers met with one another daily, enjoying the unity of
the Spirit. They congregated in the temple area, probably for
discussion and evangelization (cf. 3:11; 5:12). Probably these
Jewish believers considered themselves the true remnant

Signs and Wonders Movement," Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1988):57-82;

or idem, "All Power & Signs," Kindred Spirit 13:2 (Summer 1989):8-11.
1See Brian Capper, "The Palestinian Cultural Context of Earliest Christian Community of

Goods," in The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its
Palestinian Setting, pp. 323-56; and Jerome Murphy-O'Connor, "The Cenacle—
Topographical Setting for Acts 2:44-45," in ibid., pp. 303-22.
2Alan J. Thompson, "Unity in Acts: Idealization or Reality?" Journal of the Evangelical

Theological Society 51:3 (September 2008):523-42.

3E.g., S. S. Bartchy, "Community of Goods in Acts: Idealization or Social Reality?" in The

Future of Christianity: Essays in Honor of Helmut Koester, pp. 309-18).

4See Witherington's excursus on the summaries in Acts, pp. 157-59.
92 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

within Israel until they began to realize the distinctiveness of

the church. They ate meals and observed the Lord's Supper
together in homes.

"… the apostolic practice of partaking the Lord's

Supper every Lord's-day may have been in
imitation of the priests eating the shewbread
every Sabbath."1

In the ancient Near East, eating together reflected a common

commitment to one another and deep fellowship. A meal
shared together was both a symbol and a seal of friendship. In
contemporary pagan religions, the meal formed the central rite
of the religion, because it established communion between the
worshippers and between the worshippers and their god. In
Judaism, too, eating some of the offerings of worship
symbolized these things, especially the peace offering.

Public church buildings were unknown until the third century.

At the general time that chapter 2 records, there was no
significant opposition to the Christian movement, though there
was, of course, difference of opinion about Jesus. The
believers enjoyed the blessing of their Jewish brethren. People
trusted Christ daily, and the Lord added these to the church
so that it grew steadily. Luke, in harmony with his purpose
(1:1-2), stressed the Lord Jesus' work in causing the church
to grow (v. 47; cf. Matt. 16:18). R. J. Knowling noted a
similarity between the growth of the church and the growth of
Jesus Christ (cf. Luke 2:52).2

"… this is one of the few references in Acts to the

Christians worshipping God in the sense of
rendering thanks to him. The fewness of such
phrases reminds us that according to the New
Testament witness Christian gatherings were for
instruction, fellowship, and prayer; in other words
for the benefit of the people taking part; there is

1AlfredEdersheim, The Temple, p. 188. See Calvin, [Link]-46, who advocated frequent
observance of the Lord's Supper.
2Knowling, 2:98.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 93

less mention of the worship of God, although of

course this element was not absent."1

"Christianity was no proletarian movement. It

appealed to a broad spectrum of classes."2

B. THE EXPANSION OF THE CHURCH IN JERUSALEM 3:1—6:7

Luke recorded the events of this section to document the continued

expansion of the church and to identify the means God used to produce
growth. In chapters 3—5 the emphasis is on how the Christians' witness
brought them into conflict with the Jewish leaders.

1. External opposition 3:1—4:31

Opposition to the Christians' message first came from external sources,

particularly the leaders of Judaism.

The healing of a lame man 3:1-10

Luke had just referred to the apostles' teaching, to the awe that many of
the Jews felt, to the apostles doing signs and wonders, and to the
Christians meeting in the temple (2:43-44, 46). Now he narrated a specific
incident that included these elements. The Gospel writers also chose a
healing to illustrate the nature of Jesus' early ministry (Matt. 8:2-4; Mark
1:40-45; Luke 5:12-16, 24; John 4:46-54). The healing of this man
resulted in the leaders of the Jews changing their attitudes toward the
disciples from favorable to antagonistic (4:1-4). The Christians were not
able to continue to enjoy favor with all the people (2:47).

This is the first of 14 miracles in Acts (by Peter: 3:1-10; 5:1-11; 9:32-35,
36-42; by an angel: 5:17-26; 12:1-19, 20-23; and by Paul: 13:4-12; 14:8-
11; 16:16-19, 20-42; 20:7-12; 28:3-6, 7-8). These include four healings
(three paralytics and one involving fever), two raisings from the dead, four
liberations (two from physical bondage and two involving exorcisms), three
acts of judgment, and one preservation miracle. There are also 10 summary

1Marshall, The Acts …, pp. 85-86.

2David A. Fiensy, "The Composition of the Jerusalem Church," in The Book of Acts in Its
First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, p. 230.
94 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

notices of miracles in Acts (2:43; 5:12, 15, 16; 6:8; 8:6-7, 13; 14:3;
19:11-12; 28:9).1

"This event shows the community's compassion and how it

meets needs beyond merely material concerns [cf. 14:8-11;
Luke 5:17]."2

3:1-2 The "John" in view was undoubtedly the writer of the fourth
Gospel, the brother of James. The temple was Herod's Temple,
and the Jewish hour of prayer in view was 3:00 p.m., the other
key prayer time for the Jews being 9:00 a.m. (cf. 2:15; 10:9,
30; Dan. 6:10; 9:21; Judith 9:1).3 The early Jewish Christians
continued to follow their former habits of worship in
Jerusalem. The lame man had been in his condition for over 40
years (4:22). Furthermore he had to be carried by others. His
was a "hopeless case."

The term "Beautiful Gate" is descriptive rather than specific.

We do not know exactly which of the three main entrances into
the temple from the east Luke referred to.4 He could have
meant the Shushan (or Golden) Gate that admitted people into
the Court of the Gentiles from the outside world.5 He could
have meant the Corinthian (or Eastern) Gate that led from the
Court of the Gentiles into the Women's Court.6 Another
possibility is that it was the Nicanor Gate that led from the
Women's Court into the Court of Israel.7 Josephus'
descriptions of the temple do not solve the problem, since he
described both of these latter gates as very impressive.8 The

1Bock, Acts, p. 157.

2Ibid.,p. 158.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link].
4See Barrett, pp. 179-80, for a brief discussion of the problem, or Martin Hengel, "The

Geography of Palestine in Acts," in The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4:
The Book of Acts in Its Palestinain Setting, pp. 37-41, for a long discussion of the
alternatives.
5Jack Finegan, The Archaelolgy of the New Testament, pp. 129-30; Ger, p. 61.
6Longenecker, p. 294; Kent, p. 37; Wiersbe, 1:412; Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times

of Jesus the Messiah, 1:245; idem, The Temple, p. 47; McGee, 2:422; The Nelson Study
Bible, p. 1820.
7Lenski, p. 125; Witherington, p. 174.
8Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]-7; idem, The Wars …, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 95

last two of the above options appear more probable than the
first.

Women’s Outside
Court of Priests Court World
(Treasury)

Temple
Altar
Nicanor Corinthian Shushan
Gate Gate Gate
Court of Israel

Court of Gentiles

3:3-6 "In the East it was the custom for beggars to sit
begging at the entrance to a temple or a shrine.
Such a place was, and still is, considered the best
of all stances because, when people are on their
way to worship God, they are disposed to be
generous to their fellow men."1

Peter told the beggar to look at him and John because Peter
needed his full attention. Peter then gave him a gift far better
than the one he expected to receive. This is typical of how God
deals with needy people. When we give people the gospel, we
give them God's best gift.

"In effect, Peter has given him a new life, which is

precisely what the miracles represent, as Peter's
subsequent speech will show."2

"… the Church's opportunity is lame humanity,

lame from its birth."3

The name of a person represented that person. When Peter

healed this man in the name of Jesus, he was saying that it
was Jesus who was ultimately responsible for the healing, not

1Barclay,p. 28.
2Bock,Acts, p. 161.
3Morgan, The Acts …, p. 82.
96 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Peter. Peter healed him in the power of and with the authority
of Jesus of Nazareth (cf. v. 16).

This was the first of three crippled people that Luke recorded
the apostles healing in Acts (9:32-34; 14:8-10; cf. John 5; 9).

The gift of healing as it existed in the early church was quite

different from the so-called gift of healing some claim to
possess today. Examples of people using this gift in the New
Testament seem to indicate that the person with this gift
could heal anyone, subject to God's will (cf. Matt. 10:1, 8;
Acts 28:8-9; et al.). The sick person's belief in Jesus Christ
and in God's ability to heal him or her also seems to be a factor
(v. 16; cf. Mark 6:5-6). There is a similar account of Paul
healing a lame man in Lystra, in 14:8-10, where Luke said the
man's faith was crucial. Jesus Christ gave this gift to the early
church to convince people that He is God, and that the gospel
the Christians preached had divine authority. He gave it for
the benefit of Jewish observers primarily (1 Cor. 1:22).

"The New Testament gift of healing is a specific

gift to an individual enabling him to heal. It is not
to be confused with the healing performed by God
in answer to prayer.

"There is little correspondence between modern-

day charismatic 'healings' and the healings
recorded in the New Testament. The differences
are so vast that many of today's healers are
careful to point out that they do not have the gift
of healing, but are merely those to whom God
often responds with healing."1

Of course, many other modern healers do claim that their

healings are the same as what the New Testament records.

3:7-8 Peter evidently did not touch the lame man to heal him
("seized him by the right hand"), as much as to help him to
his feet. God healed this man completely and instantaneously.

1ThomasR. Edgar, "The Cessation of the Sign Gifts," Bibliotheca Sacra 145:580 (October-
December 1988):376, 378.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 97

The healed beggar began to test the capability of his

strengthened limbs immediately. He evidently followed Peter
and John into whatever part of the temple they were entering
("entered the temple with them"), "walking and leaping" and
"praising God."

3:9-10 Almost everyone in Jerusalem would have known this beggar,

since he had sat for so long at an entrance to the temple.
Jesus may have passed this man many times as He walked in
and out of the temple. There would have been no doubt about
the genuineness of his healing. Peter performed this sign (a
miracle with significance), just like Jesus had healed lame
people before His crucifixion. By doing it in Jesus' name, it
would have been evident to all present that the power of Jesus
was now at work through His apostles. Isaiah had predicted
that in Israel's future "the lame will leap like a deer" (Isa. 35:6).
The healing of this lame man, as well as the healing of other
lame people in the Gospels and Acts, indicated to the Jews
present that the Messiah had come. Peter claimed that Jesus
was that Messiah!

"… the similarity between Jesus' healing of the paralytic and

Peter's healing of the lame man lies less in the healing itself
than in the function of these scenes in the larger narrative. In
both cases the healing becomes the occasion for a
fundamental claim about Jesus' saving power, emphasizing its
importance and general scope ('on earth,' Luke 5:24; 'under
heaven,' Acts 4:12). In both cases the healing leads to
proclamation of a saving power that goes beyond physical
healing. In both cases the claim is made in the face of new
opposition and is directly related to the mission announced in
the Scripture quotation in the inaugural speech."1

This incident and the other miracles recorded in Acts have led readers of
this book to wonder if God is still working miracles today. He is. God can
and does perform miracles whenever and wherever He chooses.
Regeneration is one of God's greatest miracles. Perhaps a better question

1Tannehill, 2:51-52.
98 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

would be, does God still give the gift of working miracles to believers
today as He gave this ability to Peter, Paul, and other first-century
apostles?

Significantly, each of the three periods in biblical history when God

dramatically manifested this gift to selected servants, was a time when
God was giving new revelation through prophets. These three periods are
the times of Moses and Joshua, Elijah and Elisha, and Jesus and the
apostles. However, God has performed miracles throughout history. Each
period of miraculous activity was brief, spanning no more than two
generations of people. When the miraculous gift was present not even
those who had it healed everyone who could have benefited from it (e.g.,
Mark 6:5-6; Phil. 2:27; 2 Tim. 4:20; et al.).

Peter's address in Solomon's colonnade 3:11-26

As is often true in Acts, an event led to an explanation (cf. ch. 2).

"It seems strange, at first glance, that in his narrative Luke

would place two such similar sermons of Peter so close
together. But his putting the Pentecost sermon in the
introductory section of Acts was evidently meant to be a kind
of paradigm of early apostolic preaching—a paradigm Luke
seems to have polished for greater literary effectiveness. As
for the Colonnade sermon, Luke seems to have included it as
an example of how the early congregation in Jerusalem
proclaimed the message of Jesus to the people of Israel as a
whole."1

"In his sermon at Pentecost, Peter had to refute the accusation

that the believers were drunk. In this sermon, he had to refute
the notion that he and John had healed the man by their own
power [cf. 14:8-18]."2

The setting of the sermon 3:11

Peter and John, with the healed lame man clinging to them, moved into the
"portico" of the temple, and a large crowed, amazed by the healing,
followed them (cf. 21:30). A covered porch supported by a series of

1Longenecker, p. 296.
2Wiersbe, 1:412.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 99

columns surrounded the outer temple courtyard, the Court of the Gentiles.
The eastern portion of this porch bore the name Solomon's portico
"because it was built on a remnant of the foundations of the ancient
temple."1 Peter addressed the curious throng from this convenient shaded
area, where Jesus had formerly taught (John 10:23).

Herod’s Temple Area

Antonia
Fortress

Portico

Solomon’s Portico
Court of Gentiles
Portico

Temple Precincts
Solomon’s Portico

Royal Portico

1Robertson, 3:42.
100 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Peter's proclamation 3:12-16

"In his former address Peter had testified to the power and
presence of the Spirit of God at work in a new way in the lives
of men through Jesus. Now he proclaims the power and
authority of the name of Jesus by which his disciples are
enabled to continue his ministry on earth. In both speeches
there is a call for repentance for the crime of crucifying the
Messiah, but here Peter stresses the role of Jesus as the
Suffering Servant of God and as the new Moses who must be
obeyed."1

3:12-15 Luke recorded seven of Peter's addresses in Acts (1:16-22;

2:14-36; 3:12-26; 4:8-12: 10:34-43; 11:4-17; 15:7-11).2 It
is noteworthy that in these sermons, Peter did not discuss
abstract doctrines or reason about profound theological
problems. He presented the person and work of Christ in simple
terms.

Peter spoke to his audience as a fellow Jew. First, he denied

that it was the power or good character of himself, or John,
that was responsible for the healing. Rather it was the God of
the patriarchs, the God of their fathers, who was responsible.
He had performed this miracle through the apostles to glorify
His Servant Jesus (cf. 2:22). It was God's Servant, Jesus,
whom Peter's hearers had disowned and put to death—
preferring a murderer, Barabbas, to Him.

Peter called Jesus the Servant (Gr. paida) of the Lord, the
subject of messianic prophecy (Isa. 42:1; 49:6-7; 52:13;
53:11; cf. Mark 10:45); the Holy One, a title of Messiah (Ps.
16:10; Isa. 31:1; cf. Mark 1:24; 1 John 2:20); the Righteous
One (Isa. 53:11; Zech. 9:9; cf. 1 John 2:1); and the Prince
(Author) of Life (Ps. 16; cf. John 1:1-18; Col. 1:14-20; Heb.
1:2-3; 2:10; 12:2).

Peter charged these Jews with four things: First, handing Jesus
over to be killed. He then pointed out three inconsistencies in

1Neil, p. 84.
2For the rhetorical forms of the speeches in Acts, see Witherington's commentary.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 101

the Jews' treatment of Jesus and contrasted their treatment

of Him with God's. They had condemned Him when Pilate was
about to release Him (v. 13). They rejected the Holy and
Righteous One out of preference for a murderer, Barabbas (v.
14; Luke 23:18-19). Furthermore they executed the Author
of Life whom God raised from the dead, of which the apostles
were witnesses (v. 15). "Prince" or (better here) "Author of
Life" presents Jesus as the resurrected Messiah who gives life
that overcomes death.1

3:16 The proclamation portion of Peter's sermon expounds "the

name of Jesus" (cf. v. 6). The "name" of Jesus summarizes
everything about Him here as elsewhere in Scripture. Peter
attributed the beggar's healing to the power of Jesus and to
the man's trust in what he knew about Jesus. Jesus had given
him faith. If the beggar had had no confidence in the deity and
divine power of Jesus, he would not have responded to Peter's
invitation to walk (v. 6). His response demonstrated his faith.
Undoubtedly this man had previously seen and heard Jesus
when He was in the temple. Jesus, now unseen but present in
Peter, had given him "perfect health."

"The Christian knows that so long as he thinks of

what I can do and what I can be, there can be
nothing but failure and frustration and fear; but
when he thinks of 'not I, but Christ in me' there
can be nothing but peace and power."2

Peter's exhortation 3:17-26

3:17-18 If Peter's charges against his hearers were harsh (vv. 13-15),
his concession that they "acted out of (in) ignorance" was
tender. He meant that they did not realize the great mistake
they had made. Peter undoubtedly hoped that his gentle
approach would win a reversal of his hearers' attitude.

"Israel's situation was something like that of the

'manslayer' who killed his neighbor without prior

1Neil, p. 85.
2Barclay, p. 31.
102 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

malicious intent, and fled to the nearest city of

refuge (Num. 35:9-34)."1

Jesus did not demonstrate His deity as convincingly as He

might have during His earthly ministry. Consequently the
reaction of unbelief, that many rulers as well as common
Israelites demonstrated, was partially due to their ignorance.
They were also ignorant of the fact that Jesus fulfilled many
messianic prophecies in the Old Testament. Peter hastened to
point out that Jesus' sufferings harmonized with those
predicted of the Messiah by Israel's prophets. It was the
prophets' revelations about the death of Messiah that the
Jews in Peter's day, including Jesus' own disciples, had
difficulty understanding.

"Doubtless many in Peter's Jewish audience would

have been agreeable to much of the preceding
statement. They would not have been averse to
accepting the idea of a genuine miracle, nor were
they unfamiliar with Jesus' reputation as a miracle
worker. The problem they faced was identifying
Jesus as their conquering Messiah in the light of
the crucifixion."2

3:19-21 If Jesus was the Messiah, where was the messianic kingdom?
Peter proceeded to explain from Scripture that the Jews
needed to accept their Messiah before the messianic kingdom
would begin. He again called on his hearers to repent, in view
of what he had pointed out (cf. 2:38). He also invited them to
"return" to a proper relationship to God, which was possible
only by accepting Jesus. The result would be forgiveness of
their sins. Note that there is no reference to baptism as being
essential to either repentance or forgiveness in this verse (cf.
2:38).

What is repentance, and what place does it have in salvation?

The Greek noun translated "repentance" (metanoia) literally
means "after mind," as in afterthought, or change of mind.

1Wiersbe, 1:413.
2Kent, p. 41. Cf. Blaiklock, p. 63.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 103

Concerning salvation, it means to think differently about sin,

oneself, and the Savior than one used to think. Peter's hearers
had thought Jesus was not the Messiah. Now they needed to
change their minds and believe He is the Messiah.

"True repentance is admitting that what God says

is true, and because it is true, to change our mind
about our sins and about the Saviour."1

The Greek verb metanoeo, translated "repent," does not mean

to be sorry for sin or to turn from sin. These are the results or
fruits of repentance.

"The conclusive evidence that repentance does

not mean to be sorry for sin or to turn from sin is
this: in the Old Testament, God repents. In the
King James Version, the word repent occurs forty-
six times in the Old Testament. Thirty-seven of
these times, God is the one repenting (or not
repenting). If repentance meant sorrow for sin,
God would be a sinner."2

People can repent concerning many things, not just sin, as the
Scriptures use this term. They can change their minds about
God (Acts 20:21), Christ (Acts 2:37-38), and works (Heb.
6:1; Rev. 9:20; 16:11), as well as sin (Acts 8:22; Rev. 9:21).
This shows that in biblical usage, repentance means essentially
a change of mind.

Repentance and faith are not two steps in salvation, but one
step looked at from two perspectives. Appeals to repent do
not contradict the numerous promises that faith is all that is
necessary for salvation (e.g., John 1:12; 3:16, 36; 5:24; 6:47;
20:30-31; Rom. 4; et al.). The faith that saves includes
repentance (a change of mind). One changes from unbelief to
belief (Acts 11:17-18). Sometimes the New Testament
writers used the two terms, "repent and believe," together
(e.g., Mark 1:15; Acts 20:21; Heb. 6:1). Sometimes they used

1Wiersbe, 1:413.
[Link] Cocoris, Evangelism: A Biblical Approach, pp. 68-69. See especially his chapter
"What is Repentance?"
104 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

repentance alone as the sole requirement for salvation (Acts

2:38; 3:19; 17:30; 26:20; 2 Pet. 3:9). Nonetheless whether
one term or both occur, they are as inseparable as the two
sides of a coin.

"… true repentance never exists except in

conjunction with faith, while, on the other hand,
wherever there is true faith, there is also real
repentance."1

"Biblical repentance may be described thus: the

sinner has been trusting in himself for salvation,
his back turned upon Christ, who is despised and
rejected. Repent! About face! The sinner now
despises and rejects himself, and places all
confidence and trust in Christ. Sorrow for sin
comes later, as the Christian grows in appreciation
of the holiness of God, and the sinfulness of sin."2

"We believe that the new birth of the believer

comes only through faith in Christ and that
repentance is a vital part of believing, and is in no
way, in itself, a separate and independent
condition of salvation; nor are any other acts, such
as confession, baptism, prayer, or faithful service,
to be added to believing as a condition of
salvation."3

"Therefore, in a word, I interpret repentance as

regeneration, whose sole end is to restore in us
the image of God that had been disfigured and all
but obliterated through Adam's transgression."4

1Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, p. 487. See also L. S. Chafer, Systematic Theology,
3:373.
2Donald G. Barnhouse, God's River, p. 202. See also Robert N. Wilkin, "Repentance and

Salvation: A Key Gospel Issue," Grace Evangelical Society News 3:6 (June-July 1988):3.
3Doctrinal Statement of Dallas Theological Seminary, Article VII: "Salvation Only Through

Christ."
4Calvin, [Link]. For an analysis of the view of H. A. Ironside concerning repentance, see

Bob Wilkin, "Did H. A. Ironside Teach Committment Salvation?" Grace Evangelical Society
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 105

The phrase "times of refreshing" (v. 19) seems to refer to the

blessings connected with the day of the Lord, particularly the
Millennium, in view of how Peter described them in verses 20-
21.1 They connect with the second coming of Messiah, the
"period" of restoration of all things. They are the subjects of
Old Testament prophecy. Zechariah predicted that the Jews
would one day accept Messiah whom they had formerly
rejected (Zech. 12:10-14; cf. Deut. 30:1-3; Jer. 15:19; 16:15;
24:6; 50:19; Ezek. 16:55; Hos. 11:11; Rom. 11:25-27). Peter
urged them to do that now.

Some dispensational expositors believe that if the Jews had

repented as a nation, in response to Peter's exhortation, Christ
might have returned and set up His kingdom.

There seems to be nothing in scriptural prophecy that would

have made this impossible. Peter, therefore, may have been
calling for both individual repentance and national repentance.
The result of the former was individual forgiveness and
spiritual salvation. The result of the latter would have been
national forgiveness and physical deliverance from Rome, and
the inauguration of the messianic (millennial) kingdom.

"Was Peter saying here that if Israel repented,

God's kingdom would have come to earth? This
must be answered in the affirmative for several
reasons: (1) The word restore (3:21) is related to
the word 'restore' in 1:6. In 3:21 it is in its noun
form (apokatastaseos), and in 1:6 it is a verb
(apokathistaneis). Both occurrences anticipate
the restoration of the kingdom to Israel (cf. Matt.
17:11; Mark 9:12). (2) The concept of restoration
parallels regeneration when it is used of the
kingdom (cf. Isa. 65:17; 66:22; Matt. 19:28; Rom.
8:20-22). (3) The purpose clauses are different in
Acts 3:19 and 20. In verse 19 a so that translates
pros to (some mss. have eis to) with the infinitive

News 4:6 (June 1989):1, 3. Ironside did not teach that repentance is a separate step in
salvation.
1See Bock, "Evidence from …," p. 189.
106 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

[in the NIV]. This points to a near purpose. The

two occurrences of that in verses 19b and 20 are
translations of a different construction (hopos
with subjunctive verbs), and refer to more remote
purposes. Thus repentance would result in
forgiveness of sins, the near purpose (v. 19a).
Then if Israel as a whole would repent, a second
more remote goal, the coming of the kingdom
(times of refreshing at the second coming of
Christ) would be fulfilled. (4) The sending of the
Christ, that is, Messiah (v. 20) meant the coming
of the kingdom. (5) The Old Testament 'foretold
these days' (v. 24; cf. v. 21). The Old Testament
prophets did not predict the church; to them it
was a mystery (Rom. 16:25; Eph. 3:1-6). But the
prophets often spoke of the messianic golden age,
that is, the Millennium.

"This offer of salvation and of the Millennium

pointed both to God's graciousness and to Israel's
unbelief. On the one hand God was giving the Jews
an opportunity to repent after the sign of Christ's
resurrection. They had refused the 'pre-Cross'
Jesus; now they were being offered a post-
Resurrection Messiah. On the other hand Peter's
words underscore Israel's rejection. They had
been given the sign of Jonah but still they refused
to believe (cf. Luke 16:31). In a real sense this
message confirmed Israel's unbelief.

"Some Bible scholars oppose the view that the

kingdom was offered by Peter. They do so on the
basis of several objections: (1) Since God knew
Israel would reject the offer, it was not a
legitimate offer. But it was as genuine as the
presentation of the gospel to any nonelect
person. (2) This puts kingdom truth in the Church
Age. However, church truth is found before the
church began at Pentecost (cf. Matt. 16:18;
18:17; John 10:16; 14:20). (3) This view leads to
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 107

ultradispensationalism. But this is not a necessary

consequence if this offer is seen as a transition
within the Church Age. Acts must be seen as a
hinge book, a transition work bridging the work of
Christ on earth with His work through the church
on earth.

"In conclusion, Acts 3:17-21 shows that Israel's

repentance was to have had two purposes: (1) for
individual Israelites there was forgiveness of sins,
and (2) for Israel as a nation her Messiah would
return to reign."1

"Just as in the period of the Gospels the Kingdom

had been offered to the nation of Israel, even so
during the history of Acts the Kingdom was again
offered to Israel. In both periods the offer was
authenticated by the same 'signs and wonders'
which, according to the prophets, belonged
properly to such an offer. And its establishment,
in both periods, was conditioned upon repentance
and acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah on the
part of the nation. Furthermore, in both periods
there was Jewish opposition which moved to a
crisis of rejection."2

Other dispensational interpreters believe that this was not a

reoffer of the kingdom to Israel.

"Here Peter was not reoffering the kingdom to the

nation, nor was he telling them that if the nation
repented the kingdom would be instituted at that
time. Rather he was telling the nation—the same
nation that had committed the sin for which there
is no forgiveness [cf. Matt. 12:22-37]—what they
must do as a nation in order to enter into the
benefits of the kingdom that had been

1Toussaint, "Acts," pp. 361-62. Bold type omitted. See also idem, "The Contingency …,"
pp. 228-30; and idem and Jay A. Quine, "No, Not Yet: The Contingency of God's Promised
Kingdom," Bibliotheca Sacra 164:654 (April-June 2007):141-45; Baxter, 6:17, 27, 41.
2McClain, p. 429. See also Gaebelein, The Annotated …, [Link].
108 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

covenanted and promised to them. In a word, they

must 'repent.' …

"The time 'for God to restore everything,' to

which Peter refers in Acts 3:21, is the same
restoration referred to in 1:6. Therefore, this
statement does not constitute a reoffer of the
kingdom, since the necessary prerequisites are
not at hand. Jesus Christ is not personally present
and offering Himself to the nation. Only He could
make a genuine offer of the kingdom. …

"… Peter was not offering the kingdom to Israel,

nor was he stating that the kingdom had already
been instituted; instead he was stating the
conditions by which the nation will eventually
enter into their covenanted blessings."1

Some individual Jews did repent, but the nation as a whole did
not in response to Peter's exhortation (4:1-4).2

"Luke's manner of representing the nationalistic

hopes of the Jewish people implies that he himself
believed that there would be a future, national
restoration. If Luke really believed that there
would not be a restoration, he has certainly gone
out of his way to give the contrary impression."3

"In his first sermon S. Peter had explained the

Lord's absence by the necessity for the
outpouring of the Spirit: now he answers the
difficulty about the Messianic kingdom by
unfolding its true nature."4

1Pentecost, Thy Kingdom …, pp. 275, 276. See also McLean, p. 225; Ger, p. 67.
2See The New Scofield …, p. 1166.
3Larry R. Helyer, "Luke and the Restoration of Israel," Journal of the Evangelical

Theological Society 36:3 (September 1993):329. See also J. Randall Price, "Prophetic
Postponement in Daniel 9 and Other Texts," in Issues in Dispensationalism, p. 137.
4Rackham, p. 49.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 109

3:22-23 Peter proceeded to quote from the first writing prophet to

confirm what he had just stated. Moses had predicted that
God would provide prophets, similar to himself, through whom
He would make His will known to His people (Deut. 18:15-19;
cf. Lev. 23:29). As time passed, the Jews saw that this
prophecy referred to one Prophet in particular who would
appear and who would be like Moses in other respects as well.1
He would deliver and judge His people.

Thus believers in Peter's day regarded this passage as

messianic prophecy (cf. John 1:21b, 25; 7:40). Peter, by
quoting this prophecy, affirmed that Jesus was the Messiah,
then urged his readers to accept Him or face destruction (v.
23). Destruction followed in A.D. 70. Belief in Moses should
have led to belief in Jesus, and belief in Jesus would have made
Peter's hearers obedient to Moses.

"The particular interest of this sermon lies in the

way in which it gives further teaching about the
person of Jesus, describing him as God's servant,
the Holy and Righteous One, the Author of life and
the prophet like Moses. This indicates that a
considerable amount of thinking about Jesus,
based on study of the Old Testament, was taking
place [in Jerusalem following Jesus' death and
resurrection]."2

3:24 "Samuel" announced that David would replace Saul (1 Sam.

13:14; 15:28; 28:17; cf. 1 Sam. 16:13), but we have no
record that he ever gave an explicitly messianic prophecy.
Peter seems to have meant that in announcing David's reign,
Samuel was also anticipating Messiah's reign. The other
prophets whom Peter apparently had in mind were all those
who spoke of David's continuing dynastic rule. Peter's
statement in this verse, by the way, shows that Joshua did
not fulfill Moses' prophecy about the coming prophet.

1Darrell L. Bock, Proclamation from Prophecy and Pattern: Lucan Old Testament
Christology, pp. 191-94.
2Marshall, The Acts …, p. 89.
110 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

3:25-26 Peter's hearers were "the sons of the prophets" in that they
were the descendants of those people, not prophets
themselves. They were "sons … of the covenant" God made
with Abraham because they were Abraham's physical
descendants. They were part of Abraham's physical seed
through whom God purposed to bring blessing to all the
families of the earth (Gen. 12:3; 22:18; 26:4). Their
acceptance of God's Messiah was essential to their fulfilling all
of God's purposes through them and in them.

God desired to bless all people, but He purposed to bless

humanity by first blessing the Jews. It was to bless the Jews
first, and after that all humanity, that God had called Jesus
forth as a Prophet. "For you first" (v. 26, Gr. hymin proton)
reflects the emphatic position of this phrase in the Greek text,
which stresses the primacy of Jewish blessing.

It seems that in view of the context, the phrase "raised up"

(v. 26) refers to God raising up Jesus as a prophet like Moses
(v. 22). He probably did not mean that God raised Him up from
the grave by resurrection, though obviously God did that too.

The gospel went to the Jews before it went to the Gentiles

(cf. Matt. 10:5-6; Acts 13:46; Rom. 1:16) because the
establishment of Christ's earthly kingdom depends on Israel's
acceptance of her Messiah (Matt. 23:39; Rom. 11:26). Before
Christ can reign on the earth, Israel must repent (Zech. 12:10-
14).

"… as the original offer of the Kingdom by the

King was made to Israel first during the 'days of
his flesh,' so now again, having been raised from
the dead, He is offered 'first' to the chosen nation
for the purpose of turning them away from their
iniquities (Acts 3:25-26)."1

"This speech is one of the most christologically rich addresses

in Acts, as Jesus is the servant, the Holy and Righteous One,

1McClain, p. 405.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 111

the Author of life, the prophet like Moses, the Christ, and the
seed of Abraham."1

Should modern Christians evangelize Jews before they evangelize Gentiles?

We are not commanded to do so. The Great Commission passages make
no Jew-Gentile distinction regarding who should get the gospel first.
Evangelizing Jews first was the practice of the early church, but we are not
commanded to do so. How can we tell whether we should practice a New
Testament practice? We should ask ourselves: "Is it commanded, and is
the practice trans-cultural (not limited to one particular situation)?"

By the way, there are several meanings of the word "Jew," and it is helpful
to distinguish them. Biological or ethnic Jews are the physical descendants
of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Some were "saved" in Old Testament times,
but some were not. Today, most ethnic Jews are unbelievers in Jesus: non-
Christians. Religious Jews are people who have practiced the religion of
Israel in one of its various forms throughout history. Some Gentiles became
adherents to Judaism as a faith (cf. Ruth). Some of these were "saved,"
and others were not. Today, a person may follow the religion of Judaism
without being an ethnic Jew, and Christian ethnic Jews do not normally
adhere to Judaiam. They adhere to Christianity. "Saved" Jews are ethnic
Jews who believe in God like Abraham did, trust in Jesus Christ as their
Savior, and have the Holy Spirit indwelling them. Today, many "saved" Jews
refer to themselves as Messianic or completed Jews.

In Old Testament times, “Jew” was a term that non-Jews used to describe
the Israelites. It comes from the name “Judah.” The Israelites typically
referred to themselves as Israelites.

When we read about the Israelites in the New Testament, we have to

decide who is in view. Dispensationalists believe that “Israel” always refers
to ethnic Jews in the New Testament, either "saved" or "unsaved," as is
true in the Old Testament. Sometimes "saved" Jews are in view (e.g., Gal.
6:16), but they are "saved" ethnic Jews. Non-dispensationalists believe
that in the New Testament, "Israel" sometimes refers to the new people
of God: Christians, including both ethnic Jews and ethnic Gentiles.

1Bock, Acts, p. 165.

112 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

The arrest of Peter and John 4:1-4

In chapters 4—7 there is a series of similar confrontations, with each one

building up to the crisis of Stephen's death and the persecution that
followed. The first four verses of chapter 4 conclude the incident recorded
in chapter 3 ("As they were speaking," v. 1), and they introduce what
follows in 4:5-31.

4:1 Evidently John spoke to the people as did Peter ("they").

Three separate though related (5:17) individuals and groups
objected to Peter and John addressing the people as they did.
Jesus had also encountered opposition from leaders who
questioned His authority when He taught in the temple (Mark
11:27-28; Luke 20:1-2). The captain (Gr. strategos) of the
temple guard was the commanding officer of the temple police
force. The Talmud referred to this officer as the Sagan. This
individual was second in command under the high priest.1 He
apparently feared that this already excited throng of hearers
might get out of control.

The Sadducees were Levitical priests who claimed to represent

ancient orthodoxy. They opposed any developments in biblical
law, and they denied the doctrine of bodily resurrection
(23:8)—and therefore disagreed with Peter's teaching on that
subject (cf. John 12:10). They believed that the messianic age
had begun with the Maccabean heroes (168-134 B.C.) and
continued under the Sadducees' supervision, so they rejected
Peter's identification of Jesus as the Messiah.2

"For them the Messiah was an ideal, not a person,

and the Messianic Age was a process, not a
cataclysmic or even datable event. Furthermore,
as political rulers and dominant landlords, to whom
a grateful nation had turned over all political and
economic powers during the time of the
Maccabean supremacy, for entirely practical
reasons they stressed cooperation with Rome and

1Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]; [Link]; idem, The Wars …, [Link]; [Link]).

2See Steve Mason, "Chief Priests, Sadducees, Pharisees and Sanhedrin in Acts," in The
Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting,
pp. 147-56.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 113

maintenance of the status quo. Most of the

priests were of Sadducean persuasion; the temple
police force was composed entirely of Levites; the
captain of the temple guard was always a high-
caste Sadducee, and so were each of the high
priests."1

4:2 Two things disturbed these leaders. First, the apostles were
teaching the people. This was the Sadducees' function, since
they were the recognized leaders of the Jews. Second, the
apostles were teaching that Jesus had risen from the dead and
that there was a resurrection from the dead.

"… a woman called and asked me to serve on a

committee that was trying to clean up downtown
Los Angeles. I agreed it needed cleaning up, but I
told her that I could not serve on the committee.
She was amazed. 'Aren't you a minister?' she
asked. 'Aren't you interested in cleaning up Los
Angeles?' I answered, 'I will not serve on your
committee because I don't think you are going
about it in the right way.' Then I told her what the
late Dr. Bob Shuler had told me years ago. He said,
'We are called to fish in the fish pond, not to clean
up the fish pond.' This old world is a place to fish.
Jesus said He would make us fishers of men, and
the world is the place to fish. We are not called
upon to clean up the fish pond. We need to catch
the fish and get the fish cleaned up.

"I have found that the biggest enemies of the

preaching of the gospel are not the liquor folk. The
gangsters have never bothered me. Do you know
where I had my trouble as a preacher? It was with
the so-called religious leaders, the liberals, those
who claimed to be born again. They actually
became enemies of the preaching of the gospel. It

1Longenecker, p. 301.
114 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

was amazing to me to find out how many of them

wanted to destroy my radio ministry."1

Having worked with Dr. McGee in his church, I know that he

sought to help people physically as well as spiritually. His point
here was that spiritual help is more important than physical
help.

4:3 It was too late in the day to begin a hearing to examine Peter
and John formally, though this had not stopped the Sanhedrin
from abusing Jesus (cf. Luke 22:63-66). Therefore the temple
officials arrested the two and put them in jail, probably the
Antonia Fortress. Thus the Sadducees became the first
opponents of Christianity (cf. 2:47).

"Some of the most glorious traditions in Jewish

history were connected with this castle, for there
had been the ancient 'armoury of David,' the
palace of Hezekiah and of Nehemiah, and the
fortress of the Maccabees."2

4:4 Belief was the key factor in many more becoming Christians
(cf. 3:19), not believing plus being baptized (2:38). Note that
Luke simply wrote that they "believed" the message they had
heard. The total number of male converts in Jerusalem now
reached 5,000 (cf. 1:15; 2:41) because of Peter's message.
The Greek word andron specifies males rather than people.
Normally most of the people in the temple courtyard who
would have witnessed these events would have been males.

Estimates of Jerusalem's total population at the time range

from 25,000 to 250,000, though the lower figure seems more
probable.3 One writer argued for 60,000 or more inhabitants.4
Another believed 100,000 to 120,000 people inhabited the

1McGee, 4:526.
2Edersheim, The Temple, p. 32.
3Marshall, The Acts …, pp. 98-99.
4Fiensy, p. 214.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 115

city in the forties.1 Obviously there is a wide range of

speculation.

Peter's explanation before the Sanhedrin 4:5-12

4:5 The "Council" (v. 15) before which soldiers brought Peter and
John the next day was the Sanhedrin, which was the senate
and supreme court of Israel. It consisted of the high priest,
who served as its presiding officer, and 70 other men. Its
aristocratic members, the majority, were Sadducees, and its
lay leaders were Pharisees. Most of the experts in the Jewish
law were Pharisees who were also nationalistic, but the
Sadducees supported Rome. The Sadducees were more
conservative, though rationalistic theologically, and the
Pharisees were more liberal since they accepted oral traditions
as authoritative in addition to the Old Testament.

The Sanhedrin normally held its meetings, including the one

described in this chapter, in a hall adjoining the southwest part
of the temple courtyard, the Chamber of Hewn Stone.2
"Rulers" were priests who represented the 24 priestly courses
(cf. 23:5; Matt. 16:21), "elders" were tribal and influential
family heads of the people, and "scribes" were teachers of the
law. Individuals from these three groups made up this body (cf.
Luke 9:22). The rulers and elders were mainly Sadducees, while
most of the scribes were Pharisees.

"The Sanhedrin was acting within its jurisdiction

when it convened to examine Peter and John. The
Mosaic Law specified that whenever someone
performed a miracle and used it as the basis for
teaching, he was to be examined, and if the
teaching were used to lead men away from the
God of their fathers, the nation was responsible to
stone him (Deut. 13:1-5). On the other hand, if
his message was doctrinally sound, the miracle-

1Wolfgang Reinhardt, "The Population Size of Jerusalem and the Numerical Growth of the
Jerusalem Church," in The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of
Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, p. 263.
2Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link].
116 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

worker was to be accepted as coming with a

message from God."1

This is the first of four times some of Jesus' followers stood

before the Sanhedrin according to Acts. The others were Peter
and the apostles (5:27), Stephen (6:12), and Paul (22:30).

4:6 "Annas," whom Luke called the high priest here (v. 6), was
technically not the high priest at this time. He had served as
high priest from A.D. 6 to 15, but from A.D. 18 on, his son-in-
law Caiaphas had been the high priest. However, Annas
continued to exert great influence (cf. Luke 3:2; John 18:13-
24). He was so powerful that Luke could refer to him as "the
high priest," even though he was only the power behind the
office (cf. Luke 3:2; John 18:13; Acts 7:1). During this time,
former high priests seem to have kept their titles and
membership in the Sanhedrin.2 At this time in Israel's history,
the Roman governor of Palestine appointed the high priest.
"John" may refer to Jonathan, a son of Annas who succeeded
Caiaphas as high priest in A.D. 36. Luke did not mention
"Alexander" elsewhere, and he is presently unknown.

THE HIGH PRIESTS OF ISRAEL

CA. A.D. 6-66

Annas (c. A.D. 6-15)

• Unofficial high priest with Caiaphas during Jesus' trial (Luke 3:2;
John 18:13, 24
• Unofficial high priest who, with Caiaphas, tried Peter and John (Acts
4:6)

Eleazar (ca. A.D. 16-17)

• Son of Annas whose name does not appear in the New Testament

Caiaphas (ca. A.D. 18-36)

1Kent, pp. 45-46.

2Jeremias, p. 157.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 117

• Son-in-law of Annas
• Official high priest during Jesus' earthly ministry (Matt. 26:3, 57;
Luke 3:2; John 11:49-50)
• With Annas tried Peter and John (Acts 4:6)

Jonathan (ca. A.D. 36-37)

• Son of Annas, and possibly the "John" of Acts 4:6

Theophilus (ca. A.D. 37-41)

• Son of Annas

Matthias (ca. A.D. 42)

• Son of Annas

Ananias (ca. A.D. 47-59)

• Tried Paul in Jerusalem and Caesarea (Acts 23:1-10; 24:1-23)

Annas (ca. A.D. 61)

• Son of Annas

Matthias (ca. A.D. 65-66)

• Son of Theophilus, grandson of Annas

4:7 The healed lame man was also present (v. 14), though we do
not know if he had been imprisoned with Peter and John, or
was simply brought in for the hearing. The Sanhedrin wanted
to know by what authority—or in whose "name" (under whose
jurisdiction)—Peter and John (plural "you") had behaved as
they had.

"The judges sat cross-legged in a half-circle on a

raised platform."1

4:8 Jesus had promised that when the disciples stood before
hostile adversaries, God would give them the words to speak

1Lenski, p. 158.
118 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

(Luke 21:12-15). This special filling appears to be in view in

this verse. Again, filling reflects control by the Holy Spirit. The
Holy Spirit filled (controlled) Peter as he served as a witness
in obedience to Jesus (1:8). The aorist passive participle
plestheis ("filled") indicates an act performed on Peter rather
than a continuing state. Peter addressed all the Sanhedrin
members as "rulers and elders" of the Jews.

4:9-10 Peter referred to the "trial" as a preliminary hearing (Gr.

anakrinomai), which it was. Jewish law required that people had
to be informed of the consequences of their crime before
being punished for it.1 Peter's answer was straightforward and
plain: "the power (name) of Jesus Christ" had benefited a sick
man by healing him. This was good news not only for the
Sanhedrin but for all the people of Israel. Peter used a Greek
word that means saved (sothenai), which some English
translators have rendered "made well." His use of this word
anticipates the use of the same word in verse 12 where it has
a broader meaning.

Peter's intent was obviously to prick the consciences of these

men, too (cf. 2:23, 36; 3:13-15). He laid the guilt for Jesus'
death at their feet, and gave witness that God had raised Him
from the dead. The Sanhedrin did not now or at any later time
attempt to deny the fact that Jesus had arisen.

4:11 Peter showed that this teaching did not lead the people away
from God, but rather fulfilled something that God had
predicted. In quoting Psalm 118:22, Peter applied to Jesus
Christ what David had said about the nation of Israel (cf. Matt.
21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17). Israel's leaders had
"rejected" Jesus as an unacceptable Messiah ("stone which
was rejected"), but He would prove to be the most important
part of what God was building.

Some scholars believe Peter meant that Jesus was the

cornerstone ("chief corner stone"), the foundation of what

1Joachim Jeremias, "Untersuchungen zum Quellenproblem der Apostelgeschichte,"

Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschrift 36 (1937):208-13.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 119

God was building (cf. Isa. 28:16; 1 Pet. 2:7).1 Others believe
he meant the "capstone," the final piece of what God was
building (cf. Dan. 2:34-35).2 If the former interpretation is
correct, Peter was probably anticipating the church as a new
creation of God (cf. 1 Pet. 2:4-8). In the latter view, he was
viewing the Messiah as the long-expected completion of the
house of David. Since Peter was addressing Israel's rulers, I
think he probably meant that Jesus was the capstone, their
Messiah. These rulers, the builders of Israel, had rejected their
Messiah.

4:12 The verses immediately following Psalm 118:22 in the Book of

Psalms refer to Messiah's national deliverance of Israel. It
seems that Peter was referring to both national deliverance
and personal salvation in this address, as he had in the
previous one. The former application would have been
especially appropriate in view of his audience here. The
messianic age to which the Jews looked forward could only
come if Israel's leaders repented and accepted Jesus as their
Messiah.

Peter boldly declared that "salvation" comes through "no one

else" but Jesus ("no other name"), not the Maccabean heroes
or the Sadducees or anyone else. Zechariah (Luke 1:69),
Simeon (Luke 2:30), and John the Baptist (Luke 3:6) had
previously connected God's salvation with Jesus. Peter
stressed that Jesus was a man: He lived "under heaven" and
"among men." Jesus, the Messiah, the Nazarene (v. 10), is
God's only authorized savior. Apart from Him there is no
salvation for anyone (cf. John 14:6; 1 Tim. 2:5).

"Peter (and/or Luke) is no advocate of modern

notions of religious pluralism."3

"… when we read the speech of Peter, we must remember to

whom it was spoken, and when we do remember that it
becomes one of the world's great demonstrations of courage.

1E.g.,
Knowling, 2:127.
2E.g.,
Longenecker, pp. 304-5.
3Witherington, p. 194.
120 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

It was spoken to an audience of the wealthiest, the most

intellectual and the most powerful in the land, and yet Peter,
the Galilaean fisherman, stands before them rather as their
judge than as their victim. But further, this was the very court
which had condemned Jesus to death. Peter knew it, and he
knew that at this moment he was taking his life in his hands."1

The Sanhedrin's response 4:13-22

4:13-14 The Sanhedrin observed in Peter and John what they had seen
in Jesus, namely, courage to speak boldly and authoritatively
without formal training (cf. Matt. 7:28-29; Mark 1:22; Luke
20:19-26; John 7:15). They may also have remembered
seeing them "with Jesus" (John 18:15-16), but that does not
seem to be Luke's main point here.

"They spoke of the men as having been with

Jesus, in a past tense. What was the truth? Christ
was in the men, and speaking through the men;
and the similarity which they detected was not
that lingering from contact with a lost teacher,
but that created by the presence of the living
Christ."2

These powerful educated rulers looked on the former

fishermen with contempt. What a change had taken place in
the apostles in the short time since Peter had denied that he
knew Jesus (Luke 22:56-60)! The rulers also observed facility
in handling the Scriptures that was extraordinary in men who
had not attended the priests' schools. This examining board
could not dispute the apostles' claim that Jesus' power had
healed the former beggar. The obvious change in the man
made that impossible. They had no other answer, and "had
nothing to say." Unwilling to accept the obvious, the Sanhedrin
could offer no other explanation.

Several details in the stories of the apostles' arrests recall

Jesus' teaching concerning the persecution that the disciples

1Barclay, p. 36.
2Morgan, The Acts …, p. 96.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 121

would experience (cf. Luke 12:12 and Acts 4:8; Luke 21:12
and Acts 4:3 and 5:18; Luke 21:13 and Acts 4:8-12 and 5:29-
32; Luke 21:15 and Acts 4:13).

4:15-17 Evidently someone in the Sanhedrin, or someone else present

in the room who was then or later became a Christian, reported
the information in these verses to Luke. Perhaps Gamaliel told
Paul, and Paul told Luke. Perhaps Nicodemus or some other
believing member of the Sanhedrin was the source of this
information. The most the Sanhedrin felt it could do was to
"warn" and try to intimidate the apostles. The Sanhedrin
members acknowledged that a miracle had taken place.

It seems clear that the Jewish leaders could not disprove the
miracle. They were completely silent about the apostles'
claims that Jesus was alive. After all, the simplest way to
discredit the apostles would have been to produce Jesus' body
or in some other way prove to the people that Jesus had not
risen.

4:18-20 The Sanhedrin ordered ("commanded") the apostles "not to

speak or teach at all" as Jesus' spokesmen. This order
provided a legal basis for further action should that be
necessary (cf. 5:28). Peter and John saw the command of the
Sanhedrin as contradicting the command that Christ had given
them (1:8; Matt. 28:19-20). They could not obey both, so
they had to obey ("give heed to") God (cf. Jer. 20:9). This is
the only basis for civil disobedience that Scripture permits. In
all other matters we must obey those in authority over us
(Rom. 13:1-7; 1 Pet. 2:13-17).1 Speaking what one has seen
and heard (v. 20) is the essence of witnessing (1:8).
Contempt and threats have silenced many witnesses, but
these tactics did not stop the Spirit-filled apostles.2

In many parts of the world these days, Christians wonder if

they should break the law in order to evangelize. The principle
that the apostles followed, and that we should follow is:

1See Charles C. Ryrie, "The Christian and Civil Disobedience," Bibliotheca Sacra 127:506
(April-June 1970):153-62. This article was reprinted with minor changes in idem, You
Mean the Bible Teaches That …, pp. 11-22.
2See Barrett, p. 238.
122 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

breaking the law is only legitimate when it requires (not just

permits) us to disobey the Lord.

4:21-22 Even in the face of open defiance, the Sanhedrin could do no

more than threaten the apostles again. Peter and John had
done nothing wrong. Furthermore they had become popular
heroes by this healing. By punishing them, the rulers would
have antagonized the people.

"Yet a legal precedent had been set that would

enable the council to take, if necessary, more
drastic action in the future."1

The church's reaction 4:23-31

4:23-28 After hearing the apostles' report, the Christians sought the
Lord (Gr. Despota, sovereign ruler) in prayer.

"Three movements may be discerned in this

prayer of the early church: (1) God is sovereign
(v. 24). (2) God's plan includes believers' facing
opposition against the Messiah (vv. 25-28). (3)
Because of these things they petitioned God to
grant them boldness to preach (vv. 29-30)."2

The believers contrasted God's position with that of His

servants: David (v. 25), Jesus (vv. 27, 30), and themselves
(v. 29). The word translated "servant" (pais), used of David
and Jesus, contrasts appropriately with the word rendered
"bond-servants" (doulos), used of the disciples.

The opening reference to God's creative power in the disciples'

prayer (v. 24) has many parallels in other Old Testament
prayers (e.g., Exod. 20:11; Neh. 9:6; Ps. 146:6; Isa. 42:5; cf.
Acts 14:15; 17:24). This was a common and appropriate way
to approach God in prayer, especially when a request for the
exercise of that power followed, as it did here (cf. 2 Kings
19:15-19; Isa. 37:15-20).

1Longenecker, p. 307.
2Toussaint, "Acts," p. 364.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 123

Note the testimony to the divine inspiration of Psalm 2

contained in verse 25. God is the author of Scripture who has
worked through human instruments to announce and record
His revelations (cf. 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:21).

The believers saw a parallel to Jesus' crucifixion in the

psalmist's prophecy that Messiah would experience opposition
from Gentiles and leaders. This prophecy will find its fullest
fulfillment in events still future from our time in history. God
anointed Jesus at His baptism (cf. 10:38). David's references
to "Gentiles," "the peoples," "kings," and "rulers" (vv. 25-26)
applied to: the Roman Gentiles, the Israelites, Herod, and
Pontius Pilate (v. 27). However, the believers again saw God's
sovereign hand (the ultimate effective cause) behind human
actions (the secondary instrumental cause, v. 28; cf. 2:23a;
3:18).

"They see in this beginning of persecution the

continued fulfilment [sic] of Scripture which had
been evident in the Passion of Jesus."1

4:29-30 The disciples called on God to "take note of" the "threats" of
the Sanhedrin. They may have done so, more to stress their
need for more of His grace, than to call down His wrath on
those rulers. The will of God was clear. The disciples were to
witness for Christ (1:8; Matt. 28:19-20). Consequently they
only needed enablement to carry out their task. They did not
assume that God would automatically give them the courage
to witness boldly, as He had done in the past. They voiced a
fresh appeal for this grace, since additional opposition and
temptations lay ahead of them (cf. Mark 9:29). They also
acknowledged that God, not they, was doing a spiritual work.
In these respects their prayer is a helpful model for us.

"Prayer is not an escape from responsibility; it is

our response to God's ability. True prayer
energizes us for service and battle."2

1Neil, p. 91.
2Wiersbe, 1:416.
124 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"It might have been thought that when Peter and

John returned with their story a deep depression
would have fallen on the Church, as they looked
ahead to the troubles which were now bound to
descend upon them. The one thing that never
even struck them was to obey the Sanhedrin's
command to speak no more. Into their minds at
that moment there came certain great
convictions and into their lives there came a tide
of strength."1

It is noteworthy that these Christians did not pray for

judgment on their persecutors, nor freedom from persecution,
but for strength and enablement in their persecution (cf. Isa.
37:16-20). They rightly saw that their number one priority was
preaching Jesus to a needy world.2

4:31 It is not clear whether we should understand the shaking of

the place where the disciples had assembled literally or
metaphorically (cf. Exod. 19:18; 1 Kings 19:11-12; Isa. 6:4;
Acts 16:26). In either case, those assembled received
assurance from this phenomenon that God was among them
and would grant their petition.

"This was one of the signs which indicated a

theophany in the Old Testament (Ex. 19:18; Isa.
6:4), and it would have been regarded as
indicating a divine response to prayer."3

The same control by the Spirit, that had characterized Peter

(v. 8) and the disciples earlier (2:4), now also marked these
Christians. They now spoke boldly (Gr. parresias, with
confidence, forthrightly; cf. v. 13, 29) as witnesses, as Peter
had done.

1Barclay, p. 39.
2Bock,Acts, p. 202.
3Marshall, The Acts …, p. 107.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 125

"'The place was shaken, and that made them all

the more unshaken."1

Note that tongues speaking did not occur here. This was not
another baptism with the Spirit but simply a fresh filling.

"In Luke 22:39-46, just before Jesus' arrest and just after
Peter's assertion of readiness to suffer, Jesus urged the
disciples to pray in order that they might not enter into
temptation. Instead, the disciples fell asleep and were
unprepared for the following crisis. In Acts 4:23-31 Jesus'
followers are again confronted with the dangerous opposition
of the Sanhedrin. Now they pray as they had previously been
told to do. As a result they receive power from God to continue
the mission despite the opposition. We have already noted
that Peter's boldness before the Sanhedrin in Acts contrasts
with his denial of Jesus in Luke. The church in Acts, finding
power for witness in prayer, also contrasts with the disciples
who slept instead of praying in Luke. These contrasts
contribute to the narrator's picture of a dramatic
transformation in Jesus' followers."2

2. Internal compromise 4:32—5:11

As was true of Israel when she entered Canaan under Joshua's leadership,
failure followed initial success in the early church. The source of that failure
lay within the company of believers, not their enemies.

"The greater length of the story of Ananias and Sapphira

should not lead to the conclusion that it is the important
incident, the preceding section being merely an introduction to
give it a setting; on the contrary, it is more likely that 4:32-35
describes the pattern of life, and is then followed by two
illustrations, positive and negative, of what happened in
practice."3

1Chrysostom, quoted by Knowling, 2:136.

2Tannehill, 2:71-72.
3Marshall, The Acts …, p. 108.
126 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

The unity of the church 4:32-35

This brief pericope illustrates what Luke wrote earlier, in 2:44-46, about
the early Christians sharing and selling their possessions, as well as giving
verbal witness. Luke recorded this description to emphasize the purity and
unity in the church that resulted from the Spirit's filling (v. 31). This is the
second summary narrative that pictures exemplary life in the church (cf.
2:42-47; 5:12-16).1

4:32 The unity of the believers extended beyond spiritual matters

to physical, material matters (cf. Matt. 22:37-39). They
owned personal possessions, but they did not consider them
private possessions. Rather, they viewed their belongings as
"common (Gr. koina, cf. koinonia, "fellowship") property."
Customarily they shared what they had with one another (cf.
2:44, 46; Deut. 15:4). Their unity manifested itself in a sense
of responsibility for one another. Love, not law, compelled
them to share (cf. 1 John 3:17-18).

"Their generosity sprang not from coercive

legislation (as modern Socialists and Marxists
demand) but from a true union of hearts made
possible by regeneration."2

The economic situation in Jerusalem was deteriorating at this

time due to famine and political unrest.3 Employment
opportunities were declining, and unsaved Jews were beginning
to put economic and social pressure on the Christians.

4:33 The "great power" in the witness of the believers was their
love for one another (cf. John 13:35), not just their rhetorical
(homiletical) and miraculous power. Notice the central place
"the resurrection of the Lord Jesus" occupied in their witness.
His resurrection fulfilled prophecy and identified Jesus as the
Messiah (cf. 2:29-32). The "abundant grace" that rested upon
these Christians was the divine enablement that God granted
them to speak and to live as they did. This grace was on the

1See Chambers, pp. 85-99.

2Kent,p. 50. Cf. Witherington, p. 206.
3Jeremias, Jerusalem in …, pp. 121-22.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 127

young church as it had been on the young Jesus (cf. Luke

2:40).

4:34-35 The voluntary sharing described in verse 32 seems to have

been customary, but the occasional selling mentioned here was
evidently exceptional (cf. 2:45). The imperfect tense verbs
here imply "from time to time" (NIV). The apostles were in
charge of distributing help to those in need (cf. 6:1-4). The
Christians were witnessing with their works (vv. 32, 34-35) as
well as with their words (v. 33).

Sincerity or insincerity could motivate these magnanimous deeds. An

example of each type of motivation follows.

The generosity of Barnabas 4:36-37

Luke now gave a specific instance of what he had just described in verses
34 and 35. This reference to "Barnabas" is significant because it introduces
him to the reader. Barnabas becomes an important character in Acts later,
mainly as a missionary (apostle) and preacher.1 Furthermore Barnabas
provides a vivid contrast to Ananias in chapter 5.

4:36 His given Jewish name was "Joseph," but people called him by
his Jewish nickname (cognomen), Barnabas, which means "Son
of Encouragement" (Gr. huios parakleseos). The Jews often
called a person "son of ___" to denote his or her
characteristics (e.g., "son of Beliel"). They probably did so
because Barnabas was a constant positive influence on those
around him, as further references to him in Acts will
demonstrate (cf. 9:27; 11:22-30; 13:1—14:28; 15:2-4, 12,
22, 36-41; 1 Cor. 9:6).2 Luke probably mentioned that he was
"a Levite" just to identify him more specifically, not to throw
a cloud of suspicion over him. The Mosaic Law forbade Levites
from owning property in the Promised Land (Num. 18:24).

1See S. Jonathan Murphy, "The Role of Barnabas in the Book of Acts," Biblitheca Sacra
167:667 (July-September 2010):319-41.
2See Michael Pocock, "The Role of Encouragement in Leadership," in Integrity of Heart,

Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 301-7.

128 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"… the rule was no longer rigidly adhered to, and

would not have applied to those living overseas."1

Levites had connections to the temple, but not everyone with

temple connections opposed the apostles (cf. 4:1). Barnabas
had lived on the island of Cyprus at some time, though he had
relatives in Jerusalem, namely: John Mark, Mark's mother, and
perhaps others (cf. 12:12; Col. 4:10).

4:37 Barnabas evidently "sold" some of his "land"—where it was we

do not know—to provide cash for the needs of the church
members. He humbly presented the proceeds of the sale to
the apostles for their distribution.

"Barnabas is a first example in Acts of the tendency to

introduce an important new character first as a minor
character, one who appears and quickly disappears. Philip (6:5)
and Saul (7:58; 8:1, 3) are similarly introduced before they
assume important roles in the narrative. This procedure ties
the narrative together, and in each case the introductory
scene contributes something significant to the portrait of the
person."2

The hypocrisy of Ananias and Sapphira 5:1-11

We might conclude from what precedes that the church was a sinless
community at this time. Unfortunately this was not the case. There were
sinning saints in it. This episode reveals that God was working dramatically
in the church's early days in judgment as well as in blessing. Luke did not
idealize his portrait of the early church but painted an accurate picture,
"warts and all."

"The passage shows that God knows the hearts of believers.

Peter is not the major figure in the text: God is. Luke is
teaching about respect for God through one's action."3

1Neil,
p. 94. Cf. Jer. 1:1; 32:6-15.
2Tannehill,
2:78.
3Bock, Acts, p. 219.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 129

The death of Ananias 5:1-6

5:1-2 "But" introduces another sacrificial act that looked just as

generous as Barnabas' (4:37). However, in this case, the
motive was quite different. Ananias' Jewish name, "Hananiah,"
means "Yahweh is gracious," and Sapphira's Aramaic name,
"Sappira," means "beautiful." Their names proved as ironic as
their behavior was hypocritical.

The Greek word nosphizo, ("kept back") also appears at the

beginning of the record of Achan's sin in the Septuagint (Josh.
7:1, translated "took"). Ananias presented their gift to the
apostles exactly as Barnabas had done (4:37).

5:3-4 Rather than allowing the Holy Spirit to fill him (cf. 2:4; 4:8,
31), Ananias had allowed Satan to control his heart. However,
Ananias was personally responsible for his action. He could not
claim: "The devil made me do it." Peter said, "… you have
conceived this deed in your heart."

Ananias' sin was lying. He sought to deceive the Christians by

trying to gain a reputation for greater generosity than he
deserved. By deceiving the church, Ananias was also trying to
deceive the Holy Spirit who indwelt the church. In attempting
to deceive the Holy Spirit, he was trying to deceive God. Note
the important identification of the Holy Spirit as "God" in these
verses. His sin was misrepresenting his gift by claiming that it
was the total payment that he had received when it was really
only "a portion" of it. Since believers were free to keep their
money, the Jerusalem church did not practice socialism or
communism. Ananias' sin was hypocrisy, a particular form of
lying.

"I am a preacher of the Word—a glorious

privilege—and if I have prayed once I have prayed
a thousand times and said, 'Don't let me be able
to preach unless in the power of the Holy Ghost.'
I would rather be struck dumb than pretend it is in
the power of the Spirit if it isn't; and yet it is so
easy to pretend. It is so easy to come before men
and take the place of an ambassador for God, and
130 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

still want people to praise the preacher instead of

giving the message only for the Lord Jesus."1

Achan, as well as Ananias and Sapphira, fell because of the love

of material possessions (cf. 1 Tim. 6:10; 2 Tim. 4:10).

"Like Judas, Ananias was covetous; and just as

greed of gain lay at the bottom of most of the
sins and failures in the Acts—the sin of Simon
Magus, the opposition of Elymas, of the Philippian
'masters' and the Ephesian silversmiths, the
shortcomings of the Ephesian converts and the
injustice of Felix—so Ananias kept back part of the
price."2

Lying to the Holy Spirit is a sin that Christians commit

frequently today. When Christians act hypocritically by
pretending a devotion that is not theirs, or a surrender of life
they have not really made, they lie to the Holy Spirit. If God
acted today as He did in the early Jerusalem church,
undertakers would have much more work than they do.

"Those that boast of good works they never did,

or promise good works they never do, or make the
good works they do more or better than really
they are, come under the guilt of Ananias's lie."3

Acts clearly presents the Holy Spirit as a Person who can be

lied to (v.3), tested (v. 9), who bears witness (v. 32), is
resisted (7:51), gives orders (8:29; 10:19; 13:2), refuses
permission (16:7), and speaks (28:25).4

5:5 Peter identified Ananias' sin, but God judged it (cf. Matt.
16:19). Luke did not record exactly how Ananias died, even
though he himself was a physician. His interest was solely in
pointing out that he died immediately because of his sin. The
Greek word ekpsycho ("breathed his last") occurs in the New

1Ironside, Lectures on …, p. 129.

2Rackham, p. 65.
3Henry, p. 1652.
4Ger, p. 84.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 131

Testament here and only where God strikes someone in

judgment (v. 10; 12:23; cf. Judg. 4:21, LXX, where Sisera was
the victim). Ananias' sin resulted in premature physical death.1
It was a sin unto death (cf. 1 John 5:16; 1 Cor. 11:30).

We should not interpret the fact that God rarely deals with
sinners this way as evidence that He cannot or should not. He
does not do so out of mercy. He dealt with Ananias and
Sapphira, Achan, Nadab and Abihu, and others—severely—
when He began to deal with various groups of believers. He did
so for those who would follow in the train of those judged, in
order to illustrate how important it is for God's people to be
holy (cf. 1 Cor. 10:6). Furthermore God always deals more
severely with those who have greater privilege and
responsibility (cf. Luke 12:48; 1 Pet. 4:17).

5:6 Immediate burial was common in Palestine at this time, as the

burial of Jesus illustrates. Evidently some of the younger and
stronger believers disposed of Ananias' corpse by preparing it
for burial.2 Many people were buried in caves or holes in the
ground that had been previously prepared for this purpose, as
we see in the burials of Lazarus and Jesus.

"Burial in such a climate necessarily followed

quickly after death, and such legal formalities as
medical certification were not required."3

"… when a man had been struck down by the hand

of Heaven (as Joshua specifically says was the
case with Achan: Josh. 7.25) his corpse must
surely be consigned rapidly and silently to the
grave. No one should mourn him. The suicide, the
rebel against society, the excommunicate, the
apostate, and the criminal condemned to death by
the Jewish court would be buried … in haste and
without ceremonial, and no one might (or need)

1See Stanley D. Toussaint, "Suffering in Acts and the Pauline Epistles," in Why, O God?
Suffering and Disability in the Bible and Church, pp. 188-89.
2Barrett, p. 269.
3F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 114.
132 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

observe the usual lengthy and troublesome rituals

of mourning for him."1

The death of Sapphira 5:7-11

5:7 The answers to questions such as whether someone tried to

find Sapphira to tell her of Ananias' death lay outside Luke's
purpose in writing. He stressed that she was as guilty as her
husband, and therefore experienced the same fate.

5:8 Peter graciously gave Sapphira an opportunity to tell the truth,

but she did not. He did not warn her ahead of time by
mentioning her husband's death because he wanted her to
speak honestly. She added a spoken lie to her hypocrisy.

5:9-10 Peter's "why" question to her means virtually the same thing
as his "why" question to Ananias (v. 3). "Putting God to the
test" means seeing how far one can go in disobeying God—in
this case lying to Him—before He will judge (cf. Deut. 6:16;
Matt. 4:7). This is very risky business.

Some readers of Acts have criticized Peter for dealing with

Sapphira and Ananias so harshly. Nevertheless the text clearly
indicates that in these matters Peter was under the Holy
Spirit's control (4:31), even as Ananias and Sapphira were
under Satan's control (v. 3). Peter had been God's agent of
blessing in providing healing to people (3:6), but he was also
God's instrument to bring judgment on others, as Jesus Christ
had done.

"Peter was severe, and the fate of the two

delinquents shocking, but the strictures of Christ
on hypocrisy must be borne in mind (Mt. xxiii). …
The old 'leaven of the Pharisees' was at work, and
for the first time in the community of the saints
two persons set out deliberately to deceive their
leaders and their friends, to build a reputation for
sanctity and sacrifice to which they had no right,
and to menace, in so doing, all love, all trust, all

1J. D. M. Derrett, "Ananias, Sapphira, and the Right of Property," in Studies in the New
Testament Volume One, pp. 198.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 133

sincerity. And not only was the sin against human

brotherhood, but against the Spirit of God, so
recently and powerfully manifest in the Church."1

5:11 Luke reemphasized the sobering effect these events produced

in all who heard about them (v. 5; cf. 2:43). People probably
said, "There but for the grace of God go I!"

Here is the first of 23 uses of the word "church" in Acts. The

Western (Beza) text used it in 2:47, but it is probably
incorrect there. The Greek word, ekklesia, means "called out
assembly." This was a common word that writers often used
to describe assemblies of people that congregated for political
and various other types of meetings. The word "church," like
the word "baptism," can refer to more than one thing.
Sometimes it refers to the body of Christ as it has existed
throughout history, the universal church. Sometimes it refers
to Christians living in various places during one particular
period of time (e.g., the early church). Sometimes it refers to
a group of Christians who live in one area at a particular time,
a local church. Here it seems to refer to the local church in
Jerusalem.

"When Luke speaks of 'the church' with no

qualification, geographical or otherwise, it is to
the church of Jerusalem that he refers."2

The writers of Scripture always referred to the church, the

body of Christ, as an entity distinct from the nation of Israel.
Every reference to Israel in the New Testament refers to the
physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. This is
true in the Old Testament also.3

Ananias and Sapphira presented an appearance of commitment to God that

was not true of them. They were insincere, appearing to be one way but
really not being that way. Had Ananias and Sapphira never professed to be

1Blaiklock,p. 69.
2F. F. Bruce, "The Church of Jerusalem in the Acts of the Apostles," Bulletin of the John
Rylands University Library of Manchester 67:2 (Spring 1985):641.
3See Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today, pp. 132-55; and C. I. Scofield, Rightly Dividing the

Word of Truth, pp. 5-12.

134 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

as committed as they claimed when they brought their gift, God probably
would not have judged them as He did. They lacked personal integrity.

"So familiar are we with 'spots and wrinkles' in the church that
we can with difficulty realize the significance of this, the first
sin in and against the community. It corresponds to the
entrance of the serpent into Eden with the fall of Eve in the
OT: and the first fall from the ideal must have staggered the
apostles and the multitude. … The sin really was not the
particular deceit, but the state of heart [cf. v. 3]—hypocrisy
and unreality."1

Some interpreters have wondered if Ananias and Sapphira were genuine

believers. Luke certainly implied they were; they were as much a part of
the church as Barnabas was. Are true Christians capable of deliberate
deceit? Certainly they are. One writer gave four reasons to conclude that
they were real Christians.2

"It is plain that the New Testament not only teaches the
existence of the carnal Christian [1 Cor. 3:1-3; Gal. 5:16; Eph.
5:18] but of true Christians who persisted in their carnality up
to the point of physical death.3

3. Intensified external opposition 5:12-42

God's power, manifest through the apostles in blessing (3:1-26) as well as

in judgment (5:1-11), made an increasingly powerful impact on the
residents of Jerusalem. The Jewish leaders increased their opposition to
the apostles, just as they had increased their opposition to Jesus. Luke
preserved the record of the developing attitudes that resulted. The
Sadducees became more jealous and antagonistic, the Pharisees chose to
react with moderation, and the Christians gained greater joy and
confidence.

1Rackham, p. 64.
2Kent, pp. 53-54.
3Dillow, The Reign …, p. 64. Cf. 1 Cor. 3:15; 5:5; 11:30; Heb. 10:29; and 1 John 5:16-

17.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 135

The expanding influence of the apostles 5:12-16

This pericope is another of Luke's summaries of conditions in the church

that introduces what follows (cf. 2:42-47; 4:32-35).1 It also explains why
the Sadducees became so jealous that they arrested, not only Peter and
John, but other apostles as well. The apostles were gaining great influence,
not only in Jerusalem, but also in the outlying areas. The healing of one
lame man had triggered initial opposition (3:1-10), but now many people
were being healed.

5:12 The lame beggar was not the only person who benefited from
the apostles' ministry of performing miracles. Many other
needy people did as well. These miracles signified who Jesus
really was ("signs"), and they filled the people with awe
("wonders"). The believers continued to meet in Solomon's
portico (cf. 3:11).

5:13 The "rest" (Gr. hoi loipoi) were probably the unbelieving Jews.2
Other possibilities are that they were the apostles, other
Christians, or other Jerusalemites. They steered clear of the
Christians because of the Jewish leaders' opposition (4:18)
and the apostles' power (vv. 1-10). The "people" (Gr. ho laos),
the responsive Jews, honored the believers ("held them in high
esteem").

5:14 Luke stopped giving numbers for the size of the church (cf.
1:15; 2:41; 4:4) and just said that God was adding
"multitudes" of both "men and women" to the church
constantly.

5:15 Peter's powerful influence reminds us of Jesus' influence during

the early days of His Galilean ministry when all Capernaum
gathered at His door (Mark 1:32-34). Elsewhere Luke
described the power of God's presence overshadowing
someone (cf. Luke 1:35; 9:34). The text does not say that
Peter's "shadow" healed people. It says that people wanted to
get close to Peter because he was so powerful.3

1See Chambers, pp. 101-14.

2See Kent, pp. 55-56.
3See Barrett, pp. 276-77.
136 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"In the ancient world many people believed that a

person's shadow could possess magical healing
powers. The people referred to in this verse were
not necessarily Christians, but those who believed
that Peter, as an advocate of a new religion, had
magical powers. The people imposed their
superstitions upon this new faith."1

Even today, some people superstitiously believe that a

person's shadow carries his power. Some parents have pulled
their children away from the shadow of a wicked person and
thrust them into the shadow of an honored individual. The
action of these first-century Near Easterners shows their
respect for Peter, who was God's instrument to heal. These
signs and wonders authenticated the apostles as Jesus' and
God's representatives (cf. 19:11-12; Matt. 10:8).

"All healings emanate from the Lord and his will;

the apostles are not more than his instruments."2

"We need find no stumbling-block in the fact of

Peter's shadow having been believed to be the
medium (or, as is surely implied, having been the
medium) of working miracles. Cannot the 'Creator
Spirit' work with any instruments, or with none, as
pleases Him? And what is a hand or a voice, more
than a shadow, except that the analogy of the
ordinary instrument is a greater help to faith in the
recipient? Where faith, as apparently here, did not
need this help, the less likely medium was
adopted."3

"I have often told how my oldest son at one time

had an eclipse of faith until one day several of us
were invited to spend an afternoon with William
Jennings Bryan in his Florida home, and I was
asked to bring my son. During that visit, for two

1The Nelson …, p. 1824.

2Lenski, p. 210.
3Alford, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 137

or three hours we discussed the Word of God and

exchanged thoughts on precious portions of
Scripture. The young man sat apart and said very
little, but as we left that place he turned to me
and exclaimed, 'Father, I have been a fool! I
thought I couldn't believe the Bible, but if a man
like that with his education and intelligence can
believe, I am making a fool of myself to pretend I
cannot accept it.' So much for the shadow
ministry of William Jennings Bryan."1

5:16 News of the apostles' powers was spreading beyond

Jerusalem. People from outlying areas were "bringing" their
"sick" friends to them, just as people had brought sick friends
to Jesus from miles around (cf. Luke 5:15). Luke probably
meant that "all" whom the apostles intended to heal
experienced restoration, not that they healed every single
individual who was sick (cf. Matt. 8:16). Even Jesus' healings
were limited in their scope (cf. Luke 5:17).2 This verse is one
of the texts that advocates of the "prosperity gospel" appeal
to as proof that it is never God's will for anyone to be sick.
Other texts they use include Exodus 15:26; 23:25; Psalm
103:3; Proverbs 4:20-22; Isaiah 33:24; Jeremiah 30:17;
Matthew 4:23; 10:1; Mark 16:16-18; Luke 6:17-19; and Acts
10:38.3

This section is very similar to 4:32-35, though this summary shows the
church gaining many more adherents and much greater influence than the
former one documented.

The apostles' appearance before the Sanhedrin 5:17-33

The popularity and effectiveness of the apostles riled the Sadducees just
as Jesus' popularity and effectiveness had earlier.

1Ironside,Lectures on …, p. 136.
2See Deere, pp. 58-64.
3For a critique of this movement, see Ken L. Sarles, "A Theological Evaluation of the

Prosperity Gospel," Bibliotheca Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):329-52.

138 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"One of the central motifs of Acts is the rejection of the Gospel

by the Jewish nation. This section [vv. 17-42] traces a further
step in rejection and persecution by the Jewish officials."1

5:17-18 The high priest "rose up" (Gr. anastas, cf. v. 34), taking official
action as leader of the Sanhedrin. As mentioned above, the
high priest and most of the Sanhedrin members were
"Sadducees" (4:1). The Holy Spirit filled the believers, Satan
had filled Ananias and Sapphira, and now "jealousy" filled the
Sanhedrin members, particularly the Sadducees. They had the
apostles arrested and confined "in a common (public) jail" (Gr.
teresis demosia). This is one of some 27 instances of
Christians being persecuted in the New Testament.2

"The Sadducees are often seen as more hostile to

the new movement than the Pharisees in Acts,
whereas in Luke's Gospel the Pharisees are major
opponents of Jesus. This fits the shift of attention
to Jerusalem from the setting of Jesus's ministry
outside the city. The Sadducees have more to
lose, since they control the council and have
worked out a compromise with the Romans to
share power."3

"Sadduceeism is rampant, so is Pharisaism; they

are represented to-day by rationalism and
ritualism. These are the opponents of living, vital
Christianity to-day, just as they were in
Jerusalem."4

"It is amazing how much envy can be hidden under

the disguise of 'defending the faith.'"5

Peter and John have been the apostles in view to this point,
but now we read that "Peter and the apostles (plural) stood

1Ladd, "The Acts …," p. 1133.

2See Eckhard J. Schnabel, "The Persecution of Christians in the First Century," Journal of
the Evangelical Theological Society 61:3 (September 2018):525-47.
3Bock, Acts, pp. 237-38.
4Morgan, The Acts …, p. 129.
5Wiersbe, 1:424.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 139

before the (Council) Sanhedrin" (vv. 27, 29). It is probable,

therefore, that more apostles than just Peter and John are in
view in this whole incident beginning with verse 17.

5:19 "Angel" (Gr. angelos) means messenger. Wherever this word

occurs, the context usually determines whether the
messenger is a human being or a spirit being. Luke did not
identify which kind of messenger God used here. His point was
that "the Lord" secured the apostles' release. The
messenger's message had a very authoritative ring, so
probably he was a spirit being (cf. 12:6-10; 16:26-27). This
is one of three "jail door miracles" that Luke recorded in Acts
(cf. Peter in 12:6-11; and Paul and Silas in 16:26-27).

"There is no prison so dark, so strong, but God can

both visit his people in it, and fetch them out of
it."1

5:20 The angel instructed the apostles to "go" (Gr. poreuesthe)

and "stand" their ground (stathentes). They were to resist the
opposition of the Sanhedrin. They were to continue addressing
"the people," the Jews, with the full message that they had
been heralding. They were not to back down or trim their
words. The "whole message of this life" is a synonym for the
message of salvation (cf. 4:12; 13:26).2 The Greek words zoe
("life") and soteria ("salvation") both translate the same
Hebrew word, hayyah.

5:21 The apostles obeyed their instructor and began teaching in

the temple again early the next morning. At this same time,
the full Sanhedrin assembled to try the apostles, whom they
assumed were still in jail.

5:22-23 Luke's account of the temple police's bewilderment is really

quite amusing. This whole scene calls to mind scenes from old
Keystone Cops movies. The people readily accepted the
miracles that the apostles were performing, but their leaders
seem to have been completely surprised by this miracle.

1Henry, p. 1654.
2Longenecker, p. 319.
140 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

5:24 The major concern of the leaders ("captain of the temple" and
"chief priests") was the potential public reaction when what
had happened became known. They appear again to have been
more concerned about their own reputation and security than
about the facts of the case.

"If they had only known how this grain of mustard

seed would grow into the greatest tree on earth
and how dwarfed the tree of Judaism would be
beside it!"1

5:25 Eventually word reached the Sanhedrin that the prisoners were
"teaching" the people "in the temple." Probably they expected
to discover that the apostles had fled the city.

5:26 The apostles were so popular with the people that the captain
and his temple police had to be very careful not to create the
impression that they were going to harm the apostles. The
apostles had become local heroes, as Jesus recently had been
in the eyes of many. Earlier when Israel's leaders had wanted
to arrest Jesus, they were careful about how they did so,
because they feared the reaction of the people (Luke 20:19;
22:2).

5:27-28 Perhaps the apostles accompanied "the captain" and his

"officers" submissively ("without violence") because they
remembered Jesus' example of nonviolence and nonretaliation
when He was arrested (Luke 22:52-53). Furthermore the
guards' power over them was inferior to their own. They may
have offered no resistance, as well, because their appearance
before the Sanhedrin would give them another opportunity to
witness for Christ.

The high priest introduced his comments with a reference to

the authority of Israel's leaders. Pilate had similarly threatened
Jesus with his authority (cf. John 19:10-11). The high priest
showed his dislike for Jesus by not referring to the Lord by
name, referring instead to "this name." Official Jewish
opposition to Jesus was firm. He believed the authority of the

1Robertson, 3:64-65.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 141

Sanhedrin was greater than the authority of Jesus (cf. Matt.

28:18).

The leaders earlier had instructed Peter and John not to teach
"in the name of Jesus" (4:18, 21), but Peter had said they
would continue to do so because of Jesus' authority (4:19-
20). Moreover Peter had charged Israel's leaders with Jesus'
death (4:10-11). These rulers had rationalized away their guilt
for Jesus' death, probably blaming it on Jesus Himself and the
Romans (cf. 3:15). The Jewish leaders felt the disciples were
unfairly heaping guilt on them for having shed Jesus' blood.
However, only a few weeks earlier they had said to Pilate, "His
blood be on us and on our children" (Matt. 27:25; cf. Matt.
23:35).

5:29 This verse clarifies that the authorities had arrested other
apostles besides Peter and John. Peter, as spokesman for the
apostles, did not attempt to defend their civil disobedience,
but simply repeated their responsibility to "obey God rather
than men," specifically the Sanhedrin (4:19; cf. Luke 12:4-5).
This is Peter's fourth speech that Luke reported.

5:30 Peter also reaffirmed that "the God of their (our) fathers" had
"raised up Jesus" from the dead, and that the Sanhedrin was
responsible for His crucifixion, an extremely brutal and
shameful death. "Hanging Him on a cross" is a euphemism for
crucifying Him (cf. Deut. 21:22-23; 1 Pet. 2:24).

5:31 Peter further claimed that "God" had "exalted" Jesus to the
place of supreme authority, namely, at "His right hand." The
Sanhedrin had asked Jesus if He was the Christ, and Jesus had
replied that they would see Him seated at God's right hand
(cf. Luke 22:67-71). Jesus was Israel's national "Prince"
(leader, Messiah) and the Jews' individual and collective
"Savior" (deliverer). Jesus had the authority to "grant
repentance" (a change of mind) about Himself to the nation,
and consequently "forgiveness of sins." Jesus' authority to
forgive sins had been something Israel's leaders had resisted
from the beginning of the Lord's ministry (Luke 5:20-24).
142 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

5:32 The apostles thought of themselves, not just as heralds, but

as eyewitnesses ("witnesses") of that to which they now
testified. The witness of "the Holy Spirit," to which Peter
referred, was evidently the evidence that Jesus was the
Christ—which the Spirit provided through fulfilled messianic
prophecy. The apostles saw themselves as the human
mouthpieces of the Holy Spirit, Whom Jesus had promised to
send to bear witness concerning Himself (John 15:26-27).

They were announcing the fulfillment of what the Holy Spirit

had predicted in the Old Testament, namely, that Jesus was
the promised Messiah. Furthermore, God had now "given" the
"Holy Spirit" to those who obeyed God by believing in Jesus
(John 6:29). The Holy Spirit was also the greatest gift God had
given people who lived under the Old Covenant (cf. Luke
11:13). These leaders needed to "obey" God by believing in
Jesus, and then they too would receive this wonderful gift.

The early gospel preachers never presented belief in Jesus

Christ as a "take it or leave it" option in Acts. God has
commanded everyone to believe in His Son (e.g., 2:38; 3:19;
17:30). Failure to do so constitutes disobedience and results
in judgment. The Holy Spirit now baptizes and indwells every
person who obeys God by believing in His Son (John 3:36;
6:29; Rom. 8:9). This must be the obedience Peter had in
mind.

5:33 Peter's firm but gracious words so infuriated the Sadducees

that they were now about to order the death of the apostles—
regardless of public reaction!

"While the Sanhedrin did not have authority under

Roman jurisdiction to inflict capital punishment,
undoubtedly they would have found some pretext
for handing these men over to the Romans for
such action—as they did with Jesus himself—had
it not been for the intervention of the Pharisees,
as represented particularly by Gamaliel."1

1Longenecker, p. 321.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 143

Gamaliel's wise counsel 5:34-40

Gamaliel's advocacy of moderation is the main point and reason for Luke's
record of the apostles' second appearance before the Sanhedrin. Whereas
the Sadducees "rose up" against the apostles (v. 17), Gamaliel "rose up"
against the Sadducees (v. 34). He proved to be God's instrument for
preserving the apostles, and perhaps all the early Christians in Jerusalem,
at this time. This is the first speech by a non-Christian that Luke recorded
in Acts, which shows its importance.

5:34 As mentioned previously, the Pharisees were the minority

party in the Sanhedrin, though there were more than 6,000 of
them in Israel at this time.1 They were, notwithstanding, far
more influential with the masses than the Sadducees were.
The Pharisees looked for a personal Messiah. They believed in
the resurrection of the dead and the existence and activity of
angels and demons. They tried to live a simple life, in contrast
to the Sadducees' luxurious living.2

The name "Pharisee" evidently comes from the Aramaic verb

peras, meaning "to separate." They considered themselves to
be separated to holiness and dedicated entirely to God. Most
of the scribes, the Bible expositors of that day, were Pharisees.
Consequently the Sadducees listened to the Pharisees and
especially to Gamaliel.

"In short, theologically the Christian Jews had a lot

more in common with the Pharisees than they did
with the Sadducees."3

Gamaliel was the leader of the more liberal school of Hillel, one
of the two most influential parties within Pharisaism. He had
been a protégé of Hillel, who may have been Gamaliel's
grandfather.4 Saul of Tarsus was one of his own promising
young disciples (22:3). People called him Rabban Gamaliel.
Rabban (lit. "our teacher") was a title of higher honor than
rabbi (lit. "my teacher"). Gamaliel was the most "respected"

1Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link].

2Ibid.,[Link]; [Link]-3; idem, The Wars …, [Link].
3Witherington, p. 234.
4Neil, p. 98; Kent, p. 58; Witherington, p. 233.
144 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Pharisee of his day ("respected by all the people"). The

Mishnah, a collection of commentaries on the oral laws of Israel
published toward the end of the second century A.D., contains
the following statement about him.

"Since Rabban Gamaliel the elder died there has

been no more reverence for the law; and purity
and abstinence died out at the same time."1

Gamaliel was able to direct the Sanhedrin as he did through his

personal influence, not because he had any superior official
authority within that body.

5:35-36 After the apostles had left the meeting room, Gamaliel
addressed his colleagues with the traditional designation "Men
of Israel" (cf. 2:22). He warned his brethren to do nothing
rash. He pointed to two similar movements that had failed
when their leaders had died. Historians do not know anything
about this "Theudas," though he may have come to
prominence shortly after Herod the Great's death (ca. A.D. 4).2
Josephus referred to a revolt led by a (different?) Theudas,
but this occurred more than a decade after Gamaliel's speech.3

5:37 "Judas of Galilee" led a revolt against Rome in A.D. 6.4 The
"census" in view was probably the one that Quirinius, legate
of Syria, took in A.D. 6 when Archelaus was deposed and Judea
became part of the Roman province of Syria.5 Judas founded
the Zealot movement in Israel that sought to throw off Roman
rule violently.

"Judas was a fanatic who took up the position that

God was the King of Israel; to Him alone tribute

1Mishnah Sotah 9:15. Cf. F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 124.

2See Longenecker, p. 228, or any of the conservative commentaries for discussion of the
problem of this Theudas' identification.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link].
4Ibid., [Link]; [Link], 6; idem, The Wars …, [Link]; [Link].
5Neil, p. 100.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 145

was due; and that all other taxation was impious

and to pay it was a blasphemy."1

His influence was considerable, though it declined after his

death. Gamaliel seems to have been playing down the influence
of Judas a little more than it deserved.

5:38-39 Gamaliel's point was that if God was not behind the apostles,
their efforts would prove futile in time. Obviously Gamaliel
believed this was the case, or else he would likely have become
a Christian. He offered the theoretical option that if the
apostles were "of God," the Sanhedrin would find itself in the
terrible position of "fighting against God." Obviously Gamaliel
believed in the sovereignty of God. He advised his brethren to
wait and see. He did not believe that the apostles presented
as serious a threat to the leaders of Judaism as the Sadducees
believed they did.

Saul of Tarsus, on the other hand, took a different view of how

the Jews should respond to the growing threat of Christianity.
He executed many Christians, but that was after the number
and influence of the Christians had increased dramatically (cf.
chs. 6—7).

"The point made … by Gamaliel … has already

been made by the narrator through the rescue
from prison and the ensuing scene of discovery.
Here we have an instance of reinforcement
through reiteration. A message is first suggested
by an event and then clearly stated in the
interpretive commentary of a story character."2

Gamaliel's counsel helps us understand how objective

unbelieving Jews were viewing the apostles' claims at this
time. There had been others besides the apostles who had
insisted that their leaders were great men. Yet their claims had
eventually proved false. Many of the Jews, whom Gamaliel
represented, likewise viewed the apostles' preaching as well-

1Barclay, pp. 48-49.

2Tannehill, 2:66.
146 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

meaning but mistaken. Jesus to them was no more special than

Theudas, or Judas of Galilee, had been. Other than their ideas
about Jesus being the Messiah, the apostles held views that
did not challenge fundamental Pharisaic theology. However the
disciples, like Jesus, rejected the authority of oral tradition
over Scripture, which the Pharisees accepted.

"Gamaliel belongs to that class of men whom the

most convincing evidence does not convince.
They still demand other evidence, more and more
signs, Matt. 12:39, etc."1

"No credence whatever can be attributed to the

tradition that Gamaliel became a Christian, or that
he was secretly a Christian, although we may
sympathise with St. Chrysostom's words, 'it
cannot be that he should have continued in
unbelief to the end'. The Talmud distinctly affirms
that he died a Jew, and, if he had betrayed his
faith, we cannot understand the honour which
Jewish tradition attaches to his name, …"2

5:40 Gamaliel convinced his fellow Sanhedrin members. They

decided to settle for flogging the apostles, probably with 39
lashes (Deut. 25:3; Acts 22:19; 2 Cor. 11:24). The Mishnah
contains a description of how the Jews normally did this.3 This
flogging (whipping) was for disobeying the Sanhedrin's former
order to stop preaching (4:18). This is the first recorded
instance, by Luke in Acts, of Christians receiving a physical
beating for witnessing. The rulers also threatened the apostles
again and then released them (cf. 4:21). The official ban
against preaching in Jesus' name remained in force.

The response of the apostles 5:41-42

5:41 Rather than emerging from their beating repentant or

discouraged, the apostles "went home (on their way)
rejoicing." They did not enjoy the lashes, but they considered

1Lenski,p. 235.
2Knowling, 2:162.
3Mishnah Makkoth 3:10-15a.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 147

it an honor to "suffer" dishonor for the sake of Jesus' name

(cf. 3:6; 16:25). Jesus had predicted that people would hate
and persecute His disciples, and had instructed them to rejoice
in these responses (Matt. 5:10-12; Luke 6:22-23). Peter later
wrote that Christians should count it a privilege to suffer for
Christ's sake (1 Pet. 4:13; cf. 2:18-21; 3:8-17; Phil. 1:29). As
the Master had suffered abuse from His enemies so, too, His
servants were suffering abuse for their witness.

5:42 This treatment did not deter the apostles at all. Instead they
continued explaining (Gr. didasko) and evangelizing
(euaggelizomai) daily, publicly "in the temple" and privately
"from house to house" (cf. 2:46), declaring that Jesus was
the Messiah (cf. 28:31).

"It [v. 42] is a statement that has nuances of

defiance, confidence, and victory; and in many
ways it gathers together all Luke has set forth
from 2:42 on."1

4. Internal conflict 6:1-7

The scene shifts back to life within the church (cf. 4:32—5:11). Luke wrote
this pericope to explain some administrative changes that the growth of
the church made necessary. He also wanted to introduce the Hellenistic
Jews, who took the lead in evangelizing the Gentiles. Their activity began
shortly after the event he recorded here.

In this chapter we see two of Satan's favorite methods of assailing the

church that he has employed throughout history: internal dissension (vv.
1-7) and external persecution (vv. 8-15).

6:1 The number of the disciples of Jesus continued to grow. This

is the first mention of the word "disciple" in Acts, where it
occurs 28 times. In addition, the word appears about 238
times in the Gospels, but nowhere else in the New Testament.
This is probably because when Jesus was present, or had just
departed to heaven, the New Testament writers referred to

1Longenecker, p. 325.
148 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

His followers in relationship to Him. Afterward they identified

them in relation to one another and society.1

Two types of Jews made up the Jerusalem church. Some were

native "Hebrews," who had lived primarily in Palestine, spoke
Aramaic predominantly but also Greek, and used the Hebrew
Scriptures. The others were "Hellenists," who originally lived
outside Palestine (Jews of the Diaspora), but were now living
in Palestine. Many of these Jews returned to Palestine to end
their days in their ancestral homeland. They spoke Greek
primarily, as well as the language of the area where they had
lived, and they used the Septuagint translation of the Old
Testament. The Apostle Paul classed himself among the
Hebrews (2 Cor. 11:22; cf. Phil. 3:5), even though he grew up
outside Palestine.

"It is enough to say, generally, that in the

Aramaean ["Hebrew"] theology, Oriental
elements prevailed rather than Greek, and that the
subject of Babylonian influences has more
connection with the life of St. Peter than that of
St. Paul."2

The basic distinction between the Hebrews and Hellenists

appears to have been linguistic.3 Those who could speak a
Semitic language were Hebrews, and those who could not were
Hellenists.4 Philo of Alexandria was the great intellectual
representative of the Hellenists. Within Judaism, frequent
tensions arose between these two groups, and this cultural
problem carried over into the church. The Hebrews observed
the Mosaic Law much more strictly than their Hellenistic
brethren. Conversely the Hellenists typically regarded the
Hebrews as quite narrow-minded and self-centered.

1Blaiklock,p. 74.
2Howson, p. 30.
3Witherington, pp. 240-43.
4C. F. D. Moule, "Once More, Who Were the Hellenists?" Expository Times 70 (October

1958-September 1959):100.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 149

The Hebrews and the Hellenists had their own separate

synagogues in Jerusalem.1 But when they became Christians,
they came together in one fellowship. As the church grew,
some of the Christians believed that the church leaders were
discriminating against the Hellenists unfairly (cf. Eph. 4:31;
Heb. 12:15). The conflict ("complaint") arose over the
distribution of food to church "widows" (cf. 2:44-45; 4:32—
5:11). Care of widows and the needy was a priority in Judaism
(Exod. 22:22; Deut. 10:18; et al.). The Jews provided for their
own widows weekly—in their own synagogues—along with the
poor.2

"… it is quite possible that the Hellenistic widows

had previously been helped from the Temple
Treasury, but that now, on their joining the
Christian community, this help had ceased."3

"It is not here said that the murmuring arose

among the widows, but because of them. Women
and money occasion the first serious disturbance
in the church life."4

6:2-4 The 12 apostles wisely delegated responsibility for this

ministry to other qualified men in the congregation, so that it
would not distract them from their primary duties.

"They will no more be drawn from their preaching

by the money laid at their feet than they will be
driven from it by the stripes laid on their backs.
Preaching the gospel is the best work that a
minister can be employed in. He must not

1The Jewish Encyclopaedia, s.v. "Alexandrians in Jerusalem," by Emil Schürer, 1:371-72.

See also Alfred Edersheim, Sketches of Jewish Social Life in the Days of Christ, ch. xvi:
Synagogues: Their Origin, Structure, and Outward Arrangements."
2B. W. Winter, "Providentia for the Widows of 1 Timothy 5:3-16," Tyndale Bulletin 39

(1988):89. See also Barclay, p. 50; Emil Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the
Age of Christ, 2:437, n. 49; and Jeremias, Jerusalem in …, pp. 126-34.
3Knowling, 2:166.
4Robertson, 3:72-73.
150 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

entangle himself in the affairs of this life, no, not

in the outward business of the house of God."1

This is the only reference to "the Twelve" in Acts (cf. 1 Cor.

15:5), though Luke referred to the Eleven earlier (2:14).
"Serving tables" probably involved the organization and
administration of ministry to the widows, rather than simply
serving as waiters or dispensers (cf. Matt. 21:12; Luke
19:23).2

The leaders of the church asked the congregation to nominate

("select") "seven" qualified "men" whom the apostles would
officially appoint. Many churches today take this approach in
selecting secondary church leaders, basing their practice on
this model. For example, the congregation nominates deacons,
and the elders appoint some or all of them. This approach was
common in Judaism. It was not a new method of leadership
selection that the apostles devised, though it was new for the
church.

"Selecting seven men may go back to the tradition

in Jewish communities where seven respected
men managed the public business in an official
council."3

These men needed to have "good reputation(s)," to be under

the Spirit's control ("full of the Spirit"), and to be wise ("full
of wisdom"; v. 3). Note that these are character traits, not
special talents or abilities (cf. 1 Tim. 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9). The
Twelve then would be free to concentrate on their primary
responsibilities: "prayer" and "the ministry of" God's "Word"
(v. 4).

"It is not necessarily suggested that serving

tables is on a lower level than prayer and teaching;
the point is rather that the task to which the

1Henry,p. 1657.
2Longenecker, p. 331.
3Toussaint, "Acts," p. 367.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 151

Twelve had been specifically called was one of

witness and evangelism."1

As elsewhere in Scripture, prayer is the primary way God has

ordained whereby His people secure His working in human
affairs.

"Observe here, that the apostles put prayer

before preaching in their work, their conflict with
the power of evil being more especially carried on
in it, as well as their realization of the power of
God for the strength and wisdom they needed
…"2

"Prayer is the most powerful and effective means

of service in the Kingdom of God … It is the most
dynamic work which God has entrusted to His
saints, but it is also the most neglected ministry
open to the believer.

"The Bible clearly reveals that believing prayer is

essential for the advancement of the cause of
Christ. It is the essential element for Christian
victory …

"We may marvel at the spiritual power and

glorious victories of the early apostolic church,
but we often forget that its constant prayer life
was the secret of its strength …

"If the church today would regain the spiritual

power of the early church it must recover the
truth and practice of prayer as a vital working
force."3

6:5 All seven men whom the congregation chose had Greek
names. Luke gave the impression, by using only Greek names,
that these seven were from the Hellenistic group in the church,

1Marshall,
The Acts …, p. 126.
2Darby,Synopsis of …, 4:25.
3D. Edmond Hiebert, Working With God: Scriptural Studies in Intercession, pp. 19-20.
152 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

though many Palestinian Jews at that time had Greek names.1

Thus Hellenists appear to have been given responsibility for
settling a Hellenist complaint—a wise approach.

"One commentator has called it the first example

of affirmative action—'Those with political power
generally repressed complaining minorities; here
the apostles hand the whole system over to the
offended minority.'"2

"Stephen" and "Philip" appear later in Acts, in important roles

as apologist and evangelist, respectively. Luke did not mention
"Prochorus," "Nicanor," "Timon," or "Parmenas" again.
"Nicolas" was a Gentile who had first become a Jew by the
"proselyte" process, and then became a Christian. He came
"from Antioch" of Syria, which Luke may have mentioned
because of Antioch's later prominence as a center of
Christianity. Traditionally Antioch was Luke's hometown.
Tradition also links this Nicolas with the doctrine of the
Nicolaitans (Rev. 2:6, 15), but this connection is questionable
since there is no solid evidence to support it. Many Jews lived
in Syria because of its proximity to Judea, and most of these
lived in the city of Antioch.3

6:6 Laying hands on someone symbolized the bestowal of a

blessing (Gen. 48:13; et al.). It also represented identification
with the person (Lev. 1:4; 3:2; et al.), commissioning as a kind
of successor (Num. 27:23), and granting authority (8:17-19;
9:17; 13:3; 19:6; 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:22; Heb. 6:2). Here,
commissioning for a task is in view (cf. 13:1-3), rather than
formal ordination, which came later in church history.4 Prayer
accompanied this ceremony on this occasion, as was
customary.

Many Bible students regard these seven men as the first

deacons of the church. However, the text never uses the term

1Knowling, 2:170.
2Witherington, p. 248. His quotation is from Craig Keener, Bible Background Commentary,
p. 338.
3Irena Levinskaya, The Book of Acts in Its Diaspora Setting, p. 128.
4Witherington, p. 251; Foakes-Jackson, p. 54.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 153

"deacon" to describe them (cf. 21:8). The Greek word

diakonos (deacon) does not occur in Acts at all, though related
forms of the word do, even in this pericope. Diakonia
("serving" or "distribution" and "ministry") appears in verses
1 and 4, and diakonein ("serve" or "wait on") occurs in verse
2. I think it is more likely that these seven men represent a
stage in the development of what later became the office of
deacon. They probably served as a model for this office. Office
typically follows function.

The historical origin of deacons lies in Jewish social life. The

historical origin of the elder office, incidentally, lies in Jewish
civil and religious life, most recently in synagogue
organization. As the Jerusalem church grew and as its needs
and activities proliferated, it adopted some of the
organizational features of Jewish culture that these Jewish
believers knew well.1

"The early church had problems but, according to

Acts, it also had leaders who moved swiftly to
ward off corruption and find solutions to internal
conflicts, supported by people who listened to
each other with open minds and responded with
good will."2

6:7 This verse is another one of Luke's summary progress reports

that ends each major section of Acts (cf. 2:47; 9:31; 12:24;
16:6; 19:20; 28:31). It also corresponds to other summary
paragraphs within this section of the book (cf. 4:32-35; 5:12-
16). Luke linked the spread of God's Word with church
growth.3 This cause-and-effect relationship has continued
throughout history. The advances of the gospel and the
responses of the people were his primary concern in 3:1—6:7.
"Many" of the numerous "priests" in Jerusalem were also
becoming Christians. One writer estimated that about 2,000

1See Phillip W. Sell, "The Seven in Acts 6 as a Ministry Team," Bibliotheca Sacra 167:665
(January-March 2010):58-67.
2Tannehill, 2:81.
3See Benjamin R. Wilson, "The Depiction of Church Growth in Acts," Journal of the

Evangelical Theological Society 60:2 (June 2017):317-32.

154 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

priests lived in Jerusalem at this time.1 The gospel did not win
over only the "laity" in Israel.

"The ordinary priests were socially and in other

ways far removed from the wealthy chief-priestly
families from which the main opposition to the
gospel came. Many of the ordinary priests were no
doubt men holy and humble of heart, like
Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, men who
would be readily convinced of the truth of the
gospel."2

This pericope helps us see several very important things about the
priorities of the early church. First, the church showed concern for both
spiritual and physical needs. Its leaders gave priority to spiritual needs
(prayer and the ministry of the Word), but they also gave attention to
correcting injustice and helping the poor. This reflects the Christians'
commitment to loving God wholeheartedly and loving their neighbors as
themselves, God's great ethical demands.

Second, the early church was willing to adapt its organizational structure
and administrative procedures: to minister effectively and to meet needs.
It did not view its original structure and practices as binding, but adapted
traditional structures and methods to facilitate the proclamation of the
gospel and the welfare of the church. In contrast, many churches today try
to duplicate the form and functions of the early church because they feel
bound to follow these.

Third, the early church did not practice some things that the modern
church does. Rather than blaming one another for the problem that arose,
the disciples corrected the injustice and continued to give prayer and the
ministry of the Word priority. Rather than paternalistically feeling that they
had to maintain control over every aspect of church life, the apostles
delegated authority to a group within the church (that had the greatest
vested interest) and let them solve the distribution problem.3

1Fiensy,p. 228.
2F.F. Bruce, Commentary on …, pp. 131-32. Cf. Jeremias, Jerusalem in …, pp. 198-213.
3Longenecker, pp. 331-32.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 155

Verse 7 concludes Luke's record of the witness in Jerusalem. From that

city the gospel spread out into the rest of Judea, and it is that expansion
that Luke emphasized in the chapters that follow next.

II. THE WITNESS IN JUDEA AND SAMARIA 6:8—9:31

In this next major section of Acts, Luke narrated three significant events
in the life and ministry of the early church. These events were the
martyrdom of Stephen, the ministry of Philip, and the conversion of Saul
of Tarsus. Luke's presentation of these events was primarily biographical.
In fact, he began his account of each event with the name of its major
character (6:8; 8:5; 9:1). The time when these events took place was
probably shortly after those reported in the preceding chapters of the
book.

A. THE MARTYRDOM OF STEPHEN 6:8—8:1A

Luke presented the events surrounding Stephen's martyrdom in Jerusalem

next. He did so to explain the means God used to scatter the Christians
and the gospel from Jerusalem into Judea, Samaria, and the uttermost
parts of the earth. This record also throws more light on the spiritual
strength and vitality of the church at this time. Stephen's experiences as
recorded here resemble those of our Lord, as Peter's did in the earlier
chapters. Witherington listed 10 parallels between the passions of Jesus
and Stephen.1

1. Stephen's arrest 6:8—7:1

6:8 Stephen was "full of grace" (cf. cf. 4:33; Luke 4:22) "and
power" (cf. 2:22; 4:33), as well as the Holy Spirit (vv. 3, 5),
wisdom (v. 3), and faith (v. 5). His ability to perform miracles
seems unrelated to his having been appointed as one of the
Seven (v. 5; cf. 21:8). Jesus and the Twelve were not the only
ones who had the ability to perform miracles (cf. 2:22, 43;
5:12).

1Witherington, p. 253.
156 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

6:9-10 Many different synagogues existed in Jerusalem at this time

(cf. 24:12). The Talmud said there were 390 of them before
the Romans destroyed the city.1 Other rabbinic sources set
the number at 460 and 480, but these may be exaggerations.2
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." Alford
believed that those who attended this synagogue were mainly
descendants of freed Jews who had been expelled from Rome
by Tiberius.3 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.4

"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."5

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.
He had been born free (22:28). 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

1See Fiensy, p. 234.

2See Edersheim, The Life …, 1:119.
3Alford, [Link].
4See Riesner, pp. 204-6.
5Marshall, The Acts …, p. 129. See also Barrett, pp. 323-24; and Robin G. Thompson,

"Diaspora Jewish Freedmen: Stephen's Deadly Opponents," Bibliotheca Sacra 173:690

(April-June 2016):166-81.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 157

later apologists. God guided wise Stephen by His Spirit as he

spoke (cf. Luke 21:15).

"They [Stephen's critics] thought they had only

disputed with Stephen; but they were disputing
with the Spirit of God in him, for whom they were
an unequal match."1

It is not clear where this confrontation initially took place, but

it may have been in this synagogue. Until now we have read
that the disciples taught and preached in the temple and from
house to house (5:42). Paul normally preached first in the
synagogue in the 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."2

6:11 Failing to prove Stephen wrong by intellectual argumentation,

his adversaries falsely accused him of slandering Moses and
God (cf. Matt. 26:61, 65). The Greek word blasphemia means
"slander, detraction, speech injurious to another's good
name."3 At this time in history, the Jews defined blasphemy as
any defiant sin.4

6:12 Stephen's accusers "stirred up" the Jewish "people," the

Jewish "elders" (family and tribal leaders), and the "scribes"
(Pharisees) against Stephen. Soldiers then arrested him and
"brought him before the Sanhedrin (Council)," as they had
done to Jesus, Peter, John, and the other apostles (4:15; 5:27;
cf. 22:30). Until now we have read in Acts that Jewish

1Henry, p. 1658.
2Longenecker, p. 335.
3A Greek-English Lexicon …, s.v. blasphemia, p. 102.
4Gustaf H. Dalman, The Words of Jesus, p. 314.
158 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

persecution focused on the apostles, but now we read that

other Christians began to experience this persecution.

6:13-14 The false testimony against Stephen was that he was saying
things about the temple ("this holy place") and the Mosaic
"Law" that the Jews regarded as untrue and unpatriotic (cf.
Matt. 26:59-61). Stephen appeared to be challenging the
authority of the Pharisees, the Mosaic Law, and a major
teaching of the Sadducees, namely, the importance of the
temple. He was evidently saying the same things Jesus had
said (cf. Matt. 5:21-48; 12:6; 24:1-2; Mark 14:58; John 2:19-
21).

"Like the similar charge against Jesus (Matt.

26:61; Mark 14:58; cf. John 2:19-22), its
falseness lay not so much in its wholesale
fabrication but in its subtle and deadly
misrepresentation of what was intended.
Undoubtedly Stephen spoke regarding a recasting
of Jewish life in terms of the supremacy of Jesus
the Messiah. Undoubtedly he expressed in his
manner and message something of the subsidiary
significance of the Jerusalem temple and the
Mosaic law, as did Jesus before him (e.g., Mark
2:23-28; 3:1-6; 7:14-15; 10:5-9). But that is not
the same as advocating the destruction of the
temple or the changing of the law—though on
these matters we must allow Stephen to speak for
himself in Acts 7."1

"For Luke, the Temple stands as a time-honored,

traditional place for teaching and prayer in Israel,
which serves God's purpose but is not
indispensable; the attitude with which worshippers
use the temple makes all the difference."2

1Longenecker, p. 336.
2Francis D. Weinert, "Luke, Stephen, and the Temple in Luke-Acts," Biblical Theology
Bulletin 17:3 (July 1987):88.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 159

6:15 Luke may have intended to stress Stephen's being full of the
Holy Spirit, that resulted in his confidence, composure, and
courage, by drawing attention to "his face." What does "the
face of an angel" look like? Moses' face shone when he
descended from Mt. Sinai after seeing God (cf. 7:55-56; Exod.
34:29, 35). Perhaps Stephen's hearers recalled Moses' shining
face. If so, they should have concluded that Stephen was not
against Moses, but was like Moses. Perhaps Stephen's face
shone with "a divine radiance."1

Stephen proceeded to function as "an angel" (a messenger

from God), as well as looking like one, by bringing new
revelation to his hearers, as Moses had. The Old Covenant had
come through angelic mediation at Mt. Sinai (Deut 33:2 LXX;
cf. Heb. 2:2). Now revelation about the New Covenant was
coming through one who acted and even looked "like … an
angel." As on the day of Pentecost, God was giving both audio
and visual evidence that what the speaker was saying came
from Him.

7:1 The "high priest" probably refers to Caiaphas, the official high
priest then, but possibly Luke meant Annas (cf. 4:6).2 Jesus
had stood before both of these men, separately, to face similar
charges (John 18:13-14, 24; Matt. 26:57). This was the third
time that Christian leaders had defended their preaching
before the Sanhedrin that Luke recorded in Acts. Previously
Peter and John had been arraigned (cf. 4:15; 5:27).

2. Stephen's address 7:2-53

As a Hellenistic Jew, Stephen possessed a clearer vision of the universal

implications of the gospel than did most of the Hebraic Jews. It was this
breadth of vision that drew attack from the more temple-bound Jews in
Jerusalem and led to his arrest. His address was not a personal defense
designed to secure his acquittal by the Sanhedrin. It was instead an
apologetic for the new way of worship that Jesus taught, and which His

1Alford, [Link].
2See my comments on 5:6.
160 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

followers embraced. Hopefully Israel's leaders would this time repent and
believe in Jesus.

"On the surface it appears to be a rather tedious recital of

Jewish history [cf. 13:16-33] which has little relevance to the
charges on which Stephen has been brought to trial; on closer
study, however, it reveals itself as a subtle and skilful [sic]
proclamation of the Gospel which, in its criticism of Jewish
institutions, marks the beginning of the break between
Judaism and Christianity, and points forward to the more
trenchant exposition of the difference between the old faith
and the new as expressed by Paul and the author of the Letter
to the Hebrews."1

Luke evidently recorded this speech, the longest one in Acts, to explain
and defend this new way of worship quite fully. He showed that the
disciples of Jesus were carrying on God's plan, whereas the unbelieving
Jews had committed themselves to beliefs and behavior that God had left
behind and disapproved. The story of his speech opens with a reference to
"the God of glory" (v. 2), and it closes with mention of "the glory of God"
(v. 55).

The form of Stephen's defense was common in his culture, but it is

uncommon in western culture. He reviewed the history of Israel and
highlighted elements of that history that supported his contentions. He
built it mainly around outstanding personalities: Abraham, Joseph, Moses,
and, to a lesser degree, David and Solomon.

The first section of Stephen's defense (vv. 2-16) deals with Israel's
patriarchal period and refutes the charge of blaspheming God (6:11). The
second major section (vv. 17-43) deals with Moses and the Law, and
responds to the charge of blaspheming Moses (6:11) and speaking against
the Law (6:13). The third section (vv. 44-50) deals with the temple, and
responds to the charge of speaking against the temple (6:13), and
Stephen's allegedly saying that Jesus would destroy the temple and alter
Jewish customs (6:14). Stephen then climaxed his address with an
indictment of (accusation against) his hardhearted hearers (vv. 51-53).2

1Neil,pp. 107-8.
2See Brian Peterson, "Stephen's Speech as a Modified Prophetic Rib Formula," Journal of
the Evangelical Theological Society 57:2 (June 2014):351-69.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 161

Longenecker believed Stephen's main subjects were the land (vv. 2-36),
the Law (vv. 37-43), and the temple (vv. 44-50), plus a concluding
indictment (vv. 51-53).1

"Stephen … was endeavoring to show how the Christian

message was fully consistent with and the culmination of OT
revelation."2

Stephen's purpose was also to show that Jesus experienced the same
things Abraham, Joseph, and Moses had experienced as God's anointed
servants. As the Sanhedrin recognized them as men whom God had
anointed for the blessing of Israel and the world, so should they recognize
Jesus. The people to whom these three patriarchs went as God's
representatives all initially rejected them—but later accepted them—which
is also Jesus' history.

Stephen quoted from the Septuagint (Greek) Old Testament. This was the
translation most commonly used by Hellenistic Jews such as himself. His
selective history of Israel stressed the points that he wanted to make.

"In this discourse three ideas run like cords through its fabric:

1. There is progress and change in God's program. …

2. The blessings of God are not limited to the land of Israel

and the temple area. …

3. Israel in its past always evidenced a pattern of

opposition to God's plans and His men."3

Stephen's view of God 7:2-16

The false witnesses had accused Stephen of blaspheming God (6:11). He

proceeded to show the Sanhedrin that his view of God was absolutely
orthodox. However, in relating Israel's history during the patriarchal period,
he mentioned things about God and the patriarchs that his hearers needed
to reconsider.

1Longenecker, pp. 337-48. For a rhetorical analysis of Stephen's forensic oratory, see
Witherington, p. 260-66.
2Kent, p. 66.
3Toussaint, "Acts," p. 369. Italics omitted.
162 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

The Abrahamic Covenant 7:2-8

Stephen began his defense by going back to Abraham, the father of the
Jewish nation, and to the Abrahamic Covenant, God's foundational
promises to the Jews.

7:2-3 Stephen called for the Sanhedrin's attention, addressing his

hearers respectfully as "brethren and fathers" (cf. 22:1).
These men were his brethren, in that they were fellow Jews,
and fathers, in that they were older leaders of the nation.

He took the title "God of glory" from Psalm 29:2, where it

occurs in a context of God revealing His glory by speaking
powerfully and majestically. God had revealed His glory by
speaking this way to their "father (ancestor) Abraham" when
he was in Mesopotamia (cf. Gen. 15:7; Neh. 9:7). Genesis
12:1-3 records God's instruction for Abraham to leave his
homeland to go to a foreign country that God would show him.
It appears that this call came to Abram when he was in Haran
(cf. Gen. 11:31-32). Stephen was quoting from the Septuagint
translation of Genesis 12:1.1 According to Rackham, this is one
of 15 historical problems in Stephen's speech, but these
problems include additions to previous revelation as well as
apparent contradictions.2 The problem is: Did God call Abram
when he was in Mesopotamia or in Haran?

At least three solutions are possible. First, Stephen may have

been referring to a Jewish tradition that God first called
Abraham in Ur.3 Second, he may have been telescoping
Abraham's moves, from Ur and then from Haran, and viewing
them as one event. Third, he may have viewed Genesis 15:7
as implying Abraham's initial call to leave Ur.4

God directed Abraham to a promised land. The Promised Land

had become a Holy Land to the Jews, and in Stephen's day the
Jews venerated it too greatly. We see this in the fact that they

1Barrett, p. 342.
2Rackham, pp. 99-102. See Gleason L. Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, pp. 378-
82, for suggested solutions to problems in verses 4, 14, 16, and 43.
3Knowling, 2:179-80.
4See Bock, Acts, pp. 282-83.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 163

looked down on Hellenistic Jews, such as Stephen, who had not

lived there all their lives. What was a good gift from God, the
land, had become a source of inordinate pride that made the
Jews conclude that orthodoxy was bound up with being in the
land.

7:4 Obeying God's call, Abraham "left" Mesopotamia, specifically

Ur "of the Chaldeans" (cf. Gen. 15:7; Josh. 24:3; Neh. 9:7),
and "settled" temporarily "in Haran," near the top of the Fertile
Crescent. After Abraham's father Terah died, God directed
Abraham south into Canaan, the land the Jews occupied in
Stephen's day (Gen. 12:5).

"A comparison of the data in Genesis (11:26, 32;

12:4) seems to indicate that Terah lived another
60 years after Abraham left [Haran]. … The best
solution seems to be that Abraham was not the
oldest son of Terah, but was named first because
he was the most prominent (11:26)."1

"It is more likely that Stephen is using an old and

alternate Jewish tradition here that has left its
trace in the LXX and the Samaritan Pentateuch,
although the possibility also exists that Gen.
11:26 should be read differently, so that the MT
and the LXX are closer than it might appear."2

The father of Judaism was willing to depart from where he was,

in order to follow God into unknown territory, on the word of
God alone. The Jews in Stephen's day were not willing to
depart from where they were in their thinking, even though
God's word was leading them to do so, as Stephen would point
out. Stephen wanted them to follow Abraham's good example
of faith and courage.

7:5 Stephen also contrasted Abraham's lack of, or "no inheritance"

in the land with God's promise to give the land to Abraham's
descendants as an inheritance (Gen. 12:7; cf. Heb. 11:8). God

1Kent, p. 68.
2Bock, Acts, p. 284.
164 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

promised this when the patriarch had no children. Thus, the

emphasis is on God's promise of future possession of the land
through descendants to come. Of course, Abraham did
possess the cave of Machpelah in Canaan (Gen. 23:3-20), but
perhaps Stephen meant that God gave no continuing or full
possession to Abraham.

The Jews of Stephen's day needed to realize that God had not
exhausted (finished or used up) His promises to Abraham in
giving them what they presently had and valued so highly.
There was greater inheritance to come, but it would come to
future generations of their descendants, not to them.
Specifically, it would come to those who continued to follow
Abraham's good example of faith by believing in Jesus. God
sought to teach these Jews that there were spiritual
descendants of Abraham who were not his physical
descendants (Gal. 3:6-9, 29).

7:6 God also told Abraham that his offspring would be slaves and
suffer mistreatment outside their land "for 400 years" (Gen.
15:13), namely, from the year their enslavement began,
evidently 1845 B.C., to the Exodus, 1446 B.C. Some
interpreters take the 400 years as a round number.1

REFERENCES TO ISRAEL'S YEARS IN EGYPT

1875 1845 1446 1395

The 430 year sojourn in Egypt
(Exod. 12:40-41; Gal. 3:17)

The 400 years of bondage in Egypt

(Gen. 15:13, 16; Acts 7:6)

The "about" 450 years of bondage, wandering, and conquest

(Acts 13:19-20)

The Exodus
Jacob and the The
Israelites giving of Conquest
moves
enslaved the Mosaic completed
to Egypt
Covenant

The Israelites were currently under Roman oppression, but

were again about to lose their freedom and experience

1See also Harold W. Hoehner, "The Duration of the Egyptian Bondage," Bibliotheca Sacra
126:504 (October-December 1969):306-16.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 165

antagonism, outside the land, for many years. Jesus had

predicted this (Matt. 23:1—25:46).

7:7 God promised to punish ("judge") the nations that oppressed

Israel (Gen. 12:3), and to bring her back into the land ("this
place") eventually (Gen. 15:13). God had told Moses that He
would bring the Israelites out of Egypt, and that they would
worship Him at Mt. Sinai (Exod. 3:12). Stephen's point was
that God had promised to punish those who oppressed His
people. The Jews had been oppressing the Christians by
prohibiting their preaching and even flogging them (4:18;
5:40). Gamaliel had warned that if the Christians were correct,
the Jewish leaders would be fighting against God by opposing
them (5:39). God's promise to judge His people's oppressors
went back into the Abrahamic Covenant, which the Jews
treasured and Stephen reminded them of here.

7:8 Stephen probably referred to God giving Abraham "the

covenant of circumcision" (Gen. 17), because this was the sign
that God would deliver what He had promised. It was the seal
of the Abrahamic Covenant. God's promise was firm. Moreover,
God supernaturally enabled Abraham to father "Isaac," whom
Abraham obediently "circumcised," and later Isaac begot
"Jacob," who fathered "the 12 patriarchs." Thus, this chapter
in Israel's history ends with emphasis on God's faithfulness to
His promises to Abraham. The Sanhedrin needed to reevaluate
these promises in the light of how God was working in their
day.

Stephen affirmed belief that the God of glory had given the Abrahamic
Covenant, which contained promises of land (vv. 2-4), seed (v. 5), and
blessing (vv. 6-7). He had sealed this covenant with a sign, namely,
circumcision (v. 8). Circumcision was one of the Jewish customs that would
pass away in view of the new revelation that had come through Jesus Christ
(cf. 6:14).

Throughout his speech, Stephen made many statements that had

revolutionary implications for traditional Jewish thinking of his day. He did
not expound these implications, but they are clear in view of what the
disciples of Jesus were preaching. As such his speech is a masterpiece of
understatement, or rather non-statement. That the Sanhedrin saw these
166 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

implications and rejected them, becomes clear at the end of the speech,
when they reacted as negatively as possible.

God's faithfulness to His people 7:9-16

Stephen next proceeded to show what God had done with Joseph and his
family. He apparently selected this segment of the patriarchal narrative
primarily for two reasons. First, it shows how God miraculously preserved
His people in faithfulness to His promises. Second, it shows the remarkable
similarity between the career of Joseph, a "savior" God raised up, and that
of Jesus. Jesus repeated many of Joseph's experiences, thus illustrating
God's choice of Him. Also, the Israelites in the present were similar to
Joseph's brothers in the past. Stephen's emphasis continued to be on
God's faithfulness to His promises, despite the fact that Joseph's brothers
were wicked and the chosen family was outside the Promised Land.
Stephen mentioned Jesus explicitly only once in his entire speech, in his
very last sentence (v. 52). Nevertheless, he referred to Him indirectly
many times, by drawing parallels between the experiences of Joseph and
Moses and those of Jesus.

7:9-10 The "patriarchs," Joseph's brothers, "became jealous of" him

(Gen. 37:11), and "sold him" as a slave "into Egypt" (Gen.
37:28). One of Jesus' 12 disciples was responsible for selling
Him, even as one of Joseph's 11 brothers had been responsible
for selling him. Nevertheless, "God was with Joseph" (Gen.
39:2, 21) "and rescued him" from prison, gave him "favor and
wisdom before (in front of) Pharaoh (lit. 'Great House')," and
"made him ruler (governor) over Egypt" (Gen. 41:41) and his
father's family. God was with Joseph, even though his brothers
rejected him, because he was one of God's chosen people and
because he followed God faithfully. This is what the Christians
were claiming to be and do.

"The treatment of Joseph by his Hebrew brothers

should have been a pointed reminder of the way
Jesus had been dealt with by the Jewish nation."1

Like Joseph, Jesus' brethren rejected and literally sold Him for
the price of a slave. Nevertheless, God was with Joseph and

1Kent, pp. 67-68.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 167

Jesus (v. 9). God exalted Joseph under Pharaoh, and placed
him in authority over his domain. God had done the same with
Jesus.

7:11-12 The Jews' forefathers suffered from "a famine" in the Promised
Land, and were sent to Egypt for "food" (Gen. 41:54-55; 42:2,
5). When hard times came upon God's people, He sustained
them and brought them into blessing and under the rule of
Joseph. So will it be in the future with Jesus. The Jews would
first suffer hardship (in the destruction of Jerusalem and in the
Tribulation), and then God will bring them into blessing under
Jesus' rule (in the Millennium).

7:13-14 On their "second" visit, Joseph revealed himself "to his

brothers," who could not believe he was their ruler, and he
revealed his family's identity "to Pharaoh" (Gen. 45:1-4). In
the future, similarly, Israel will finally recognize Jesus as her
Messiah (Zech. 12:10-14). Joseph then "invited Jacob" and
"all his family (relatives)," who numbered "75," to move to
Egypt (Gen. 45:9-10). I take it that this was the number of
people invited to Egypt. Some interpreters believe 75 people
entered Egypt.

"Stephen apparently cited the LXX figure which

really was not an error, but computed the total
differently by including five people which the
Masoretic text did not."1

"One of the most widely accepted solutions is to

recognize that the Hebrew text includes Jacob,
Joseph, and Joseph's two sons, Ephraim and
Manasseh (a total of 70), but that the Septuagint
omits Jacob and Joseph but includes Joseph's
seven grandchildren (mentioned in 1 Chron. 7:14-
15, 20-25). This is supported by the Hebrew in
Genesis 46:8-26 which enumerates 66 names,
omitting Jacob, Joseph, and Joseph's two sons."2

1Ibid.,
p. 69.
2Toussaint, "Acts," p. 370. See also J. A. Alexander, Commentary on the Acts of the
Apostles, pp. 226-67.
168 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

7:15 The number of people who made the trip and entered Egypt
was probably 70 (Gen. 46:26-27; Exod. 1:5; Deut. 10:22).
"Jacob … died," safe and blessed under Joseph's rule. Likewise
Israel will end its days under Jesus' rule in the Millennium. Jacob
died in "Egypt," as did his sons and their immediate
descendants. Thus verses 11-15 record both a threat to the
chosen people and God's preservation of them, a second
testimony to God's faithfulness in this pericope (cf. vv. 9-10).

7:16 From Egypt the chosen people eventually returned to the

Promised Land. God had been with them away from the land,
and He now returned them to the land. Believers in Jesus will
end up in the final resting place of Jesus: heaven.

"Shechem" was of special interest to Stephen. The Israelites

buried Joseph's bones there after their initial conquest of the
land (Josh. 24:32). Stephen's allusion to this event was his
way of concluding this period of Israel's history.

Moses wrote that Jacob, not Abraham, "had purchased" the

"tomb" from "Hamor in Shechem" (Gen. 33:19; cf. 23:16;
50:13). This may be a case of attributing to an ancestor what
one of his descendants did (cf. Heb. 7:9-10). In the ancient
Near Eastern view of things, people regarded an ancestor as in
one sense participating in the actions of his descendants (Gen.
9:25; 25:23; cf. Mal. 1:2-3; Rom. 9:11-13). Abraham had
"purchased" Joseph's burial site, in the sense that his
grandson Jacob eventually purchased it (cf. Heb. 7:9-10).

Stephen probably intended that his reference to Abraham,

rather than to Jacob, would remind his hearers of God's
faithfulness in fulfilling the promises God gave to Abraham. He
did this in one sense when Israel possessed Canaan under
Joshua's leadership. Israel will experience the ultimate
fulfillment of God's land promises to Abraham when she enters
rest under Jesus' messianic rule in the Millennium.

Two other explanations of this apparent error are these.

Stephen telescoped two events into one: Abraham's purchase
from Ephron in Hebron (Gen. 23:1-20), and Jacob's purchase
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 169

from Hamor in Shechem.1 Second, Abraham really did purchase

the plot in Shechem, though Moses did not record that (cf.
Gen. 12:6-7), and Jacob repurchased it later because the
Canaanites had retaken it.2

In Stephen's day, Shechem was in Samaritan territory. Stephen

reminded the Sanhedrin that their ancestral deliverer Joseph
was buried in the land that orthodox Jews despised and
avoided. This was yet another instance of helping them
understand that they should not think the only place God
worked was in the Promised Land. Stephen had previously
referred to Mesopotamia as the place where God had revealed
Himself to Abraham (v. 2).

Stephen's view of Moses and the Law 7:17-43

Stephen continued his review of Israel's history by proceeding into the

period of the Exodus. He sought to refute the charge that he was
blaspheming against (slandering) Moses (6:11) and was speaking against
the Mosaic Law (6:13).

The career of Moses 7:17-36

Stephen's understanding of Moses was as orthodox as his view of God, but

his presentation of Moses' career made comparison with Jesus' career
unmistakable. As in the previous pericope, there is a double emphasis in
this one, first, on God's faithfulness to His promises in the Abrahamic
Covenant and, second, on Moses as a precursor of Jesus.

"More specifically than in the life of Joseph, Stephen sees in

the story of Moses a type of the new and greater Moses—
Christ himself."3

7:17-18 Stephen had gotten ahead of himself briefly in verse 16. Now
he returned to his history of Israel just before the Exodus. "The
promise" God had made to Abraham was that He would judge
his descendants' enslaving nation and free the Israelites (Gen.

1F.F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 149, n. 39.

2Lenski, p. 271; J. Rawson Lumby, The Acts of the Apostles, pp. 164-65. See also
Wiersbe, 1:431.
3Neil, p. 110.
170 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

15:14). This was a particular way that He would fulfill the

earlier promises to give Israel the land, to multiply the
Israelites, and to curse those nations that cursed Israel (Gen.
12:1-3, 7). The Israelites "increased" in Egypt until another
Pharaoh ("king") arose who disregarded ("did not know")
Joseph (Exod. 1:7-8).

Similarly, Christ had come in the fullness of time (Gal. 4:4).

Before Moses appeared on the scene, Israel increased in
numbers and fell under the control of an enemy that was
hostile to her. Likewise, before Jesus appeared, Israel had
increased numerically and had fallen under Roman domination.

7:19 This Pharaoh "took advantage" of the Israelites, and

"mistreated" them by decreeing the death of "their infants"
(Exod. 1:10, 16, 22). Like Pharaoh, Herod the Great had tried
to destroy all the Jewish babies at the time of Jesus' birth.

7:20-22 "Moses," the great deliverer of his people, was "born,"

preserved, protected ("nurtured" by "Pharaoh's daughter" no
less), and "educated" in Egypt.

"… the pillar of the Law was reared in a foreign

land and in a Gentile court."1

Moses became a powerful man "in word" (his writings?) "and

deed." All this took place outside the Promised Land, which
further depreciated the importance of that land in Stephen's
account.

Like Moses, Jesus was lovely in God's sight when He was born,
because God chose Him, and Mary nurtured Him at home,
temporarily, before He came under the control of the Romans
(cf. Matt. 1:18-21). Moses had great knowledge, as did Jesus;
both became powerful men in words and deeds (v. 22).

"… after forty years of learning in Egypt, God put

him [Moses] out into the desert. There God gave
him his B. D. degree, his Backside of the Desert

1Ibid., p. 111.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 171

degree, and prepared him to become the

deliverer."1

7:23-29 Moses' presumptive attempt to deliver his people resulted in

his having to flee Egypt to "Midian," where he "became an
alien" (cf. v. 6). These verses relate another story of an
anointed leader of God's people who, like Joseph, was rejected
by those people. Yet God did not abandon Moses or His people.
God blessed Moses in a foreign land, Midian, by giving him "two
sons."

Although Moses offered himself as the deliverer of his

brethren, they did not understand him. The same thing
happened to Jesus. Moses' Jewish brethren, who did not
recognize that God had appointed him as their ruler and judge,
rejected him even though Moses sought to help them.
Likewise, Jesus' Jewish brethren rejected Him. Moses' brethren
feared that he might use his power to destroy them rather
than help them. Similarly, the Jewish leaders feared that Jesus,
with His supernatural abilities, might bring them harm rather
than deliverance and blessing (cf. John 11:47-48). Moses'
rejection led him to leave his brethren and to live in a distant
land where he fathered "sons" (v. 29). Jesus, too, had left His
people (the Israelites), and had gone to live in a distant land
(heaven) where He was producing descendants (i.e.,
Christians).

7:30-34 It was in Midian, "after 40 years," that God appeared to Moses

in the "burning bush." The "angel" that appeared to Moses was
the Angel of the Lord, very possibly the pre-incarnate Christ
(vv. 31-33; cf. Exod. 3:2, 6; 4:2; John 12:41; 1 Cor. 10:1-4;
Heb. 11:26). God commanded Moses to return "to Egypt" as
His instrument of deliverance for the Israelites. Again, God
revealed Himself and His Law outside the Holy Land.

Moses received a commission from God, in Midian, to return to

his brethren in order to lead them out of their oppressed
condition. Jesus, upon God's order, will return to the earth to

1McGee, 4:539.
172 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

deliver Israel from her oppressed condition during the

Tribulation, when He returns at His Second Coming.

7:35-36 The very man ("This man Moses") whom the Israelite leaders
had rejected as their "ruler and judge" (v. 27) "God sent" back
to fulfill that role "with" His "help" (cf. 3:13-15). Moses
proceeded to perform "wonders and signs in … Egypt," at the
"Red Sea," and "in the wilderness."

The third reference to 40 years (cf. vv. 23, 30, 36) divides
Moses' career into three distinct parts. These stages were: (1)
preparation ending with rejection by his brethren, (2)
preparation ending with his return to Egypt, and (3) ruling and
judging Israel. The parallels with the career of Jesus become
increasingly obvious as Stephen's speech unfolds.

"Jesus too had been brought out of Egypt by

Joseph and Mary, had passed through the waters
of Jordan at his baptism (the Red Sea), and had
been tempted in the wilderness for forty days."1

As Moses became Israel's ruler and judge with angelic

assistance, so will Jesus. As Moses had done miracles, so had
Jesus. The ultimate Prophet, whom Moses had predicted would
follow him, was Jesus (cf. 3:22).

"Stephen naturally lingers over Moses, 'in whom

they trusted' (Jn. v. 45-47), showing that the
lawgiver, rejected by his people (35),
foreshadowed the experience of Christ (Jn. i.
11)."2

The teaching of Moses 7:37-43

Stephen continued dealing with the Mosaic period of Israel's history, but
he focused next, more particularly, on Moses' teaching: the Mosaic Law.
This is what the Jews of his day professed to venerate and follow exactly,
but Stephen showed that they really had rejected what Moses taught.

1Neil, p. 111.
2Blaiklock, p. 76.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 173

7:37-38 Stephen stressed the fact that "this" Moses was the man who
had given the prophecy about the coming Prophet (Deut.
18:15), and had received other divine oracles for the Israelites.
"This" (Gr. houtos estin) with the articular adjectival participle
in verses 37 and 38 is an intensified form of the demonstrative
pronouns translated "this" in verses 35 (touton) and 36
(houtos). Stephen clearly respected Moses, but he noted that
Moses himself had predicted that a Prophet like himself would
appear (cf. Acts 3:22). Therefore, the Jews should not have
concluded that the Mosaic Law was the end of God's revelation
to them. The fact that Stephen spoke of the Mosaic Law as
"living oracles" suggests that he viewed it more in its
revelatory than in its regulatory aspect.1

"… preaching Christ was not disloyalty to an

ancient tradition, but its fulfilment. This was
powerful argument, and a continuation of Peter's
theme (iii. 22, 23). (This truth was to be more
fully developed for similar minds in the Epistle to
the Hebrews; see iii. 1-6, ix. 18-20, xii. 24).)"2

Jesus had spent a time of temptation "in the wilderness" (40

days), and had heard God "speaking" audibly from heaven at
His baptism. He, too, had rubbed shoulders with Israel's
leaders, and had received revelations from God for His people.

7:39 The Israelites in the wilderness refused to listen ("were

unwilling to be obedient") to Moses, and "repudiated" his
leadership of them (Num. 14:3-4; Exod. 32:1, 23). By insisting
on the finality of the Mosaic Law so strongly, as they did,
Stephen's hearers were in danger of repudiating what Moses
had prophesied about the coming Prophet.

The Israelites refused to follow Moses, wanting instead to

return to their former place of slavery. So had Israel refused to
follow Jesus, but "turned back" instead to her former condition
of bondage under the Law (cf. Gal. 5:1).

1See Ronald Y. K. Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians, p. 61.

2Blaiklock, p. 76.
174 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

7:40-43 The Israelites turned from Moses to idolatry (the golden calf
"idol"), and in this rebellion their high priest, Aaron, helped
them. Consequently, God gave them over to what they wanted
(cf. Rom. 1:24). He also purposed to send them into captivity
as punishment (Amos 5:25-27).

By implication, turning from the revelation that Jesus had given

amounted to idolatry. Stephen implied that by rejecting Moses'
coming Prophet—Jesus—his hearers could expect a similar
fate, despite the sacrifices they brought to God.

"Stephen's quotation of Amos 5:27, 'I will carry

you away beyond Babylon,' differs from the OT.
Both the Hebrew text and the LXX say
'Damascus.' The prophet Amos was foretelling the
exile of the northern kingdom under the Assyrians
which would take them beyond Damascus. More
than a century later, the southern kingdom was
captured because of her similar disobedience to
God and was deported to Babylon. Stephen has
merely substituted this phrase in order to use this
Scripture to cover the judgment of God on the
entire nation."1

Israel had turned from Jesus to idolatry, and her high priest
had helped her do so. One of Stephen's concerns in this
speech, therefore, was false worship. The Israelites had
previously rejoiced in their idolatry, in the wilderness, and once
again more recently, since Jesus was out of the way. God had
turned from them because of their apostasy in the past, and
He was doing the same in the present. They did not genuinely
offer their sacrifices to God, and He did not accept them, since
they had rejected His Anointed Ruler and Judge. The Israelites
were heading for another wilderness experience. They adopted
a house of worship, and an object of worship, that were not
God's choice—but their own creations. God would remove
them far from their land in punishment (in A.D. 70).

1Kent, pp. 70-71.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 175

Stephen had answered his accusers' charge that he had spoken against
Moses (6:11, 13) by showing that he believed what Moses had predicted
about the coming Prophet. It was really his hearers, like Jesus' hearers
earlier, who rejected Moses—since they refused to allow the possibility of
prophetic revelation that superseded the Mosaic Law.

"Joseph's brethren, rejecting the beloved of their father,

Moses' people, turning with scorn and cursing on the one who
only sought to give them freedom—these were prototypes
which the audience would not fail to refer to themselves."1

Stephen's view of the temple 7:44-50

Stephen effectively refuted the general charges that he had blasphemed

God and Moses (6:11; cf. vv. 2-16) and had spoken against the Law (6:13;
cf. vv. 17-43). He next addressed the charge that he spoke against the
temple (6:13). The charges that he had said Jesus would destroy the
temple and alter Jewish customs (6:14) were really specific accusations
growing out of Stephen's view of the temple.

The Jewish leaders of Stephen's day attached inordinate importance to the

temple, as they did to the Mosaic Law and the Promised Land. They had
distorted God's view of the temple, as they had distorted His meaning in
the Law. Instruction concerning both the Law, which specified Israel's walk
before people, and "the tabernacle," which specified her worship of God,
came to Moses when he was not in the Promised Land, but at Mt. Sinai.

7:44 Stephen pointed out that it was the "tabernacle of testimony"

in the wilderness that God had ordered built, not the temple.
God even gave Moses blueprints ("the pattern") to follow in
constructing it, because its design had instructive value. The
tabernacle of testimony was important, primarily because it
contained God's revealed will, and it was the place that God's
presence dwelt in a localized sense. The "testimony" was the
tablets of the Mosaic Law that rested within the ark of the
covenant.

7:45 The tabernacle was so important that the Israelites "brought

it in" to the Promised Land when they conquered Palestine
under Joshua's leadership. The Greek form of "Joshua" is

1Blaiklock, p. 76.
176 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"Jesus." God drove out the Canaanites in faithfulness to His

promise to give the land to His people. The tabernacle
continued to be God's ordained center of worship throughout
David's reign.

7:46 God blessed David's reign, and it was the tabernacle—not the
temple—that existed then. The initiative to build the temple
("a dwelling place for the God of Jacob") was David's, not
God's. It had been David's desire to build God a more glorious
place in which to dwell. However, God did not "jump" at this
suggestion, because He did not need another place in which to
dwell.

"The temple, Stephen implies, was a royal whim,

tolerated of God."1

7:47 God did not even permit David to build the temple. He was not
that eager to have a temple. However, He allowed "Solomon,"
a king who did not find as much favor in God's sight as David
did, to build it.

7:48-50 Stephen hastened to clarify that the "Most High" God, for
whom a suitable house was certainly a reasonable desire, does
not restrict Himself to a habitation constructed by human
"hands." Solomon himself had acknowledged this when he
dedicated the temple (cf. 1 Kings 8:27; Isa. 66:1-2).

"Judaism never taught that God actually lived in

the temple or was confined to its environs but
spoke of his 'Name' and presence as being there.
In practice, however, this concept was often
denied. This would especially appear so to
Stephen, when further divine activity was refused
out-of-hand by the people in their preference for
God's past revelation and redemption as
symbolized in the existence of the temple."2

Stephen quoted Isaiah 66:1-2 for support. He referred to Isaiah

as "the prophet." As a prophet, Isaiah was worthy of as much

1Ibid., p. 77.
2Longenecker, p. 346.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 177

respect as Moses. Significantly, the last part of Isaiah 66:2

says that God esteems those who are humble and contrite in
spirit, and who tremble at His Word. Stephen left this timely
and powerful challenge unstated for his hearers.

"It would seem that these verses form the real

thrust of Stephen's speech. In quoting with
approval Isaiah's words, Stephen would appear to
imply that, as Christ is the new Moses, he is also
the new Temple. In him and through him alone can
men approach God."1

Stephen reminded the Sanhedrin that the temple, which they venerated
excessively, was not the primary venue of God's person and work. He was
arguing that Jesus was God's designated replacement for the temple, as
the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews also taught (Heb. 8:1-2; 9:11-28).

There have been three major interpretations of Stephen's view of the

temple: (1) God would replace it; (2) God had rejected it; and (3) God is
above it. All three views are implications of Stephen's words.2

"Throughout his speech he has, of course, been undermining

the superstition which exalted a place of worship. The first
great revelations of God had, in fact, taken place in foreign
lands, Ur, Sinai, Midian, long before the temple existed (2-4,
29-34, 44-50)."3

Stephen's accusation 7:51-53

Stephen concluded his defense by indicting (formally accusing, charging)

his accusers. They had brought charges against him, but now he brought
more serious charges against them.

In his first speech to the Sanhedrin, Peter had been quite brief and
forthright (4:8-12). He had presented "Jesus" as the only name by which
people must be saved (4:12). In his second speech to that body, Peter had
again spoken briefly but more directly (5:29-32). He had charged the

1Neil, p. 114. Cf. John 2:19, 21; Eph. 2:19-22; Heb. 9:1-10; 1 Pet. 2:5.
2See Dennis D. Sylva, "The Meaning and Function of Acts 7:46-50," Journal of Biblical
Literature 106:2 (1987):261-75.
3Blaiklock, p. 77.
178 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Sanhedrin with crucifying the Prince and Savior whom God had provided for
His people (5:30-31). In this third speech before the Sanhedrin, Stephen
spoke extensively, giving even more condemning evidence. The Sanhedrin
was guilty of unresponsiveness to God's Word, and of betraying and
murdering the Righteous One (v. 52).

7:51 By rejecting Jesus, the Sanhedrin was doing just what their
forefathers had done in rejecting God's other anointed
servants, such as Joseph and Moses. They were "stiff-necked,"
a figure of speech for being self-willed. Moses used this
expression to describe the Israelites when they rebelled
against God and worshipped the golden calf (cf. Exod. 33:5;
Deut. 9:13). While Stephen's hearers had undergone physical
circumcision, and were proud of it, they were "uncircumcised"
in their affections and responsiveness to God's Word. They
were resisting the Holy Spirit, rather than allowing Him to
control (fill) them. They were similar to the apostates in
Israel's past (cf. Lev. 26:41; Deut. 10:16), whom the former
prophets had rebuked (cf. Jer. 4:4; 9:26). By resisting
Stephen, who was full of the Holy Spirit (6:3, 5), they were
resisting the Holy Spirit.

7:52 The Sanhedrin members were behaving just as their

forefathers had. Note that Stephen had previously associated
himself with "our fathers" (vv. 2, 11-12, 15, 19, 39, 44-45),
but now he disassociated himself from the Sanhedrin by
referring to "your fathers." "Our fathers" were the trusting and
obeying patriarchs, but "your fathers" were the unresponsive
apostates (cf. Matt. 23:29-32).

The Jews' ill treatment of their prophets was well known and
self-admitted (cf. 2 Chron. 36:15-16; Neh. 9:26; Jer. 2:30).
They had consistently resisted God's messengers sent to
them, even killing the heralds ("those who had previously
announced the coming") of God's "Righteous One" (cf. 3:14;
1 Kings 19:10, 14; Neh. 9:26; Jer. 26:20-24; Luke 6:23;
11:49; 13:34; 1 Thess. 2:15; Heb. 11:36-38). Stephen said
the Sanhedrin members were responsible for the betrayal and
murder of that same One, Jesus.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 179

7:53 Their guilt was all the greater because they had received God's
"law," which "angels" had delivered (Deut. 33:2 LXX; cf. Gal.
3:19; Heb. 2:2), but they had disobeyed it. They were the real
blasphemers (defiant sinners). Stephen, as an angel (cf. 6:15),
had brought them new insight, but they were about to reject
it too.

The primary theme of Stephen's speech is that Israel's leaders had failed
to recognize that God had told His people ahead of time that they could
expect a change. They had falsely concluded that the present state of
Judaism was the final stage in God's plan of revelation and redemption.
We, too, can become so preoccupied with the past and the present that
we forget what God has revealed about the future. We need to keep
looking ahead.

"He [Stephen] saw that the men who played a really great part
in the history of Israel were the men who heard God's
command, 'Get thee out,' and who were not afraid to obey it
[cf. vv. 3, 15, 29, 36, 45]. The great men were the men who
were prepared to make the adventure of faith. With that
adventurous spirit, Stephen implicitly contrasted the spirit of
the Jews of his own day, whose one desire was to keep things
as they were and who regarded Jesus and His followers as
dangerous innovators."1

A second, related theme, is that Israel's leaders had departed from God's
priorities to give prominence to secondary issues for their own glory (the
Holy Land, Moses, the temple). We also can think too highly of our own
country, our leaders, and our place of worship.

Another related theme, the theme of Israel's rejection of the Lord's

anointed servants, also runs through Stephen's speech. Jesus was another
of God's anointed servants. The Jews had dealt with Him as they had dealt
with the other anointed servants whom God had sent them. They could
expect to experience the consequences of their rejection as their
forefathers had. We need to anticipate the pattern of humiliation followed
by glorification, that has marked the careers of God's servants in the past,
and to observe that pattern in our own careers.

1Barclay, p. 53.
180 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"… it [Stephen's defense] is not designed to secure Stephen's

acquittal of the charges brought against him, but to proclaim
the essence of the new faith. It has been well said that,
although the name of Christ is never mentioned, Stephen is all
the while 'preaching Jesus'. He is demonstrating that
everything in Israel's past history and experience pointed
forward to God's culminating act in his plan for the redemption
of the world in sending the Christ. The witness of Abraham,
Joseph, Moses and David in one way or another underlined the
transitory nature of existing Jewish institutions and the
hollowness of Jewish claims to have the monopoly of the way
to salvation. The presence of God could not be restricted to
one Holy Land or confined in one holy Temple, nor could his
Law be atrophied in the ceremonialism of the Sadducees or the
legalism of the Pharisees."1

Stephen's speech demonstrated remarkable insight, but this was more

than mere human genius, because the Holy Spirit was controlling (filling)
him (6:5, 10). While it is easy to overstate Stephen's importance, he seems
to have understood the changes that would take place because of the
Jews' rejection of Jesus. He did so earlier, and more clearly, than some of
the other leaders of the Jerusalem church, such as Peter (cf. ch. 10). He
appears to have been an enlightened thinker, whom God enabled to see
the church's future in relationship to Israel, as few did this early in the
church's history. Many Jewish Christians—who still observed the Jewish
hour of prayer, feasts, and temple ritual—probably did not appreciate this
relationship. Stephen was in a real sense the forerunner of Paul, who
became the champion of God's plan to separate Christianity from Judaism.2

"So he [Stephen] perceived, and evidently was the first to

perceive clearly, the incidental and temporary character of the
Mosaic Law with the temple and all its worship. This was the
first germ of doctrine which S. Paul was afterward to carry out
to its full logical and far-reaching consequences, viz. the
perfect equality of Jew and Gentile in the church of God …

"S. Stephen then is the connecting link between S. Peter and

S. Paul—a link indispensable to the chain. Stephen, and not

1Neil, p. 116.
2See Howson, pp. 59-60, for comparisons of the form and content of their defenses.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 181

Gamaliel, was the real master of S. Paul. … For 'the work' of

Stephen lasts on till chapter xii (see xi 19), and then it is taken
up by his greater pupil and successor—Paul."1

There have been scholars who believed that Stephen probably did not
understand the issues behind the cause for which he died.2 However, a
careful study of his speech reveals that he did.

3. Stephen's death 7:54—8:1a

Stephen's speech caused a revolution in the Jews' attitude toward the

disciples of Jesus, and his martyrdom began the first persecution of the
Christians.

Luke recorded the Sanhedrin's response to Stephen's message in order to

document Jesus' continued rejection by Israel's leaders. He did so to
explain why the gospel spread as it did, and why the Jews responded to it
as they did, following this event.

7:54 "Cut to the quick" is a figure of speech that describes being

painfully wounded. Stephen's charge of always resisting God's
Spirit convicted and offended the members of the Sanhedrin.
They retaliated fiercely. "Gnashing (grinding) their teeth" (as
a sign of anger) pictures brutal antagonism.

"The possibilities are that what took place was a

spontaneous act of mob violence or that Stephen
was legally executed by the Sanhedrin, either
because there was some kind of special
permission from the Romans or because there was
no Roman governor at the time and advantage
was taken of the interregnum. The first of these
possibilities is the more likely."3

7:55 Fully controlled by ("Being full of") the "Holy Spirit" (cf. 6:3,
5, 8, 15), Stephen received a vision (a mental image) of "Jesus
standing at the right hand of God" in all His "glory." This vision

1Rackham, p. 87-88.
2E.g.,
Adolph Harnack, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity, 1:50.
3Marshall, The Acts …, p. 148.
182 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

of God's throne room in heaven is similar to visions that Isaiah,

Ezekiel, Daniel, and John saw.

"Stephen, under accusation of blaspheming the

earthly temple, is granted a sight of the heavenly
temple; being cited before the Sadducee High
Priest who believed [in] neither angel nor spirit, he
is vouchsafed a vision of the heavenly HIGH PRIEST,
standing and ministering at the throne amidst the
angels and just men made perfect."1

The unusual fact that Stephen saw Jesus standing rather than
seated, as the biblical writers elsewhere describe Him (e.g., Ps.
110:1), may imply several things. It may imply His activity as
Prophet and Mediator, standing between God and man, and as
a Witness, since He was witnessing through His witnesses on
earth.

"Stephen has been confessing Christ before men,

and now he sees Christ confessing His servant
before God. The proper posture for a witness is
the standing posture. Stephen, condemned by an
earthly court, appeals for vindication to a
heavenly court, and his vindicator in that supreme
court is Jesus, who stands at God's right hand as
Stephen's advocate, his 'paraclete.' When we are
faced with words so wealthy in association as
these words of Stephen, it is unwise to suppose
that any single interpretation exhausts their
significance. All the meaning that had attached to
Ps. 110:1 and Dan. 7:13f. is present here,
including especially the meaning that springs from
their combination on the lips of Jesus when He
appeared before the Sanhedrin; but the
replacement of 'sitting' by 'standing' probably
makes its own contribution to the total meaning
of the words in this context—a contribution

1Alford, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 183

distinctively appropriate to Stephen's present role

as martyr-witness."1

"Standing" may also imply Jesus' welcome of Stephen into His

presence as the first Christian martyr.

"Here Jesus, functioning as Judge, welcomed

Stephen into heaven, showing that despite earthly
rejection, Stephen was honored in heaven."2

Psalm 110:1 describes Messiah as at God's right hand, where

Stephen saw Jesus. Jesus' position in relation to God suggests
His acceptance by Him, His authority under God, and His access
to God.

7:56 Stephen announced his vision and described Jesus as the "Son
of Man," this being the only time after His ascension that
someone used this title of Jesus in speaking of Him (cf. Rev.
1:13 and 14:14 were "Son of Man" was used of Him in writing).
This was a title of the Messiah used by Daniel that implied the
universal aspect of His rule (Dan. 7:13-14). Only Jesus used
this title of Himself in the Gospels. It was His favorite
designation of Himself. He had used it of Himself when He
stood before the Sanhedrin not many weeks earlier (Mark
14:62; Luke 22:69). Stephen was virtually saying that his
vision confirmed Jesus' claim to be the Son of Man. Access to
God is through Jesus Christ, not through temple ritual, as the
Jews taught (1 Tim. 2:5).

7:57-58 Stephen's declaration amounted to blasphemy to the

Sanhedrin. They knew that when he said "Son of Man" he
meant "Jesus." Furthermore, the Jews believed that no one
had the authority to be "at God's right hand" in heaven.3 The
Sanhedrin members therefore cried out in agony of soul,
covered their ears so they would hear no more, and seized
Stephen to prevent him from saying more or escaping.

1F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, pp. 168-69. Cf. Witherington, p. 275.

2Bock, "A Theology …," p. 111. Cf. idem, Acts, p. 312.
3Ibid.
184 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"Stoning" was the penalty for blasphemy in Israel (Lev. 24:16;

Deut. 17:7), and the Sanhedrin members went right to it.

There are two traditions concerning the place of Stephen's

execution: The older one is a site north of the present
Damascus Gate, and a more recent one is east of the present
St. Stephen's Gate.1 The exact location is impossible to nail
down.

In the three trials before the Sanhedrin that Luke recorded

thus far, the first ended with a warning (4:17, 21), the second
with flogging (5:40), and the third with stoning (7:58-60). The
Sanhedrin now abandoned Gamaliel's former moderating
advice (5:35-39). It did not have the authority to execute
someone without Roman sanction, and Jewish law forbade
executing a person on the same day as his trial.2 However,
since witnesses were present to cast the first stones, as the
Mosaic Law prescribed, Stephen's death seems not to have
been simply the result of mob violence, but official action.
Probably it was mob violence precipitated and controlled by
the Sanhedrin, along the lines of Jesus' execution (cf. Matt.
26:67-68).

One of the officially approved methods of punishment, when a

person supposedly violated a positive precept of the Mosaic
Law, or the traditions of the elders, was the "rebel's beating."
Such offenders could be punished on the spot, without a trial.3

"The message of Stephen, it seems, served as a

kind of catalyst to unite Sadducees, Pharisees,
and the common people against the early
Christians."4

"Saul" of Tarsus was there, and cooperated with the

authorities by holding their cloaks, while they carried out their
wicked business (cf. 8:1; 22:20). He was then a "young man"
(Gr. neanias, cf. 20:9; 23:17-18, 22), but we do not know his

1Howson, p. 61.
2Mishnah Sanhedrin 4:1.
3Edersheim, The Temple, pp. 66-67.
4Longenecker, p. 351.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 185

exact age. Since he died about A.D. 68, and since Stephen
probably died about A.D. 34, perhaps Saul was in his early or
mid-thirties. Jesus and Saul appear to have been roughly
contemporaries. This verse does not imply that Saul was a
member of the Sanhedrin.1

This is the first reference to Saul of Tarsus ("Saul," v. 58; later

known as "Paul the Apostle" after his conversion) in the Book
of Acts. Saul's importance in the growth of Christianity can
hardly be overestimated. The famous Jewish historian Abram
Sachar wrote of Him:

"Of Paul we know more than of any other

influential religious character of antiquity [except
Jesus Christ]."2

7:59-60 Stephen "called upon" the Lord (Gr. epikaloumenon), as Peter

had exhorted his hearers to do, for deliverance (2:21): "Lord
Jesus, receive my spirit!" Stephen died as Jesus did, with
prayers for his executioners ("Lord, do not hold this sin against
them!") being his last words (cf. Luke 23:34, 46; cf. 2 Chron.
24:22; Luke 6:27-28). However, Stephen prayed to Jesus,
whereas Jesus prayed to His Father.

"It is good to die praying."3

Luke probably wanted his readers to connect the two

executions, but they were not exactly the same. Some
commentators have argued that Luke presented Stephen's
execution as a reenactment of Jesus' execution.4

"Between Stephen and Jesus there was

communion of nature, there was communion of

1See Simon Légasse, "Paul's Pre-Christian Career according to Acts," in The Book of Acts
in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 365-90.
2Abram Sachar, A History of the Jews, p. 136.
3Henry, p. 1664.
4E.g., Charles H. Talbert, Luke and the Gnostics, p. 76.
186 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

testimony, there was communion of suffering, and

finally there was communion of triumph."1

Stephen's body, not his soul, "fell asleep" to await resurrection

(cf. 8:1; 13:36; John 11:11; 1 Thess. 4:13, 15; et al.).

"For Stephen the whole dreadful turmoil finished

in a strange peace. He fell asleep. To Stephen
there came the peace which comes to the man
who has done the right thing even if the right
thing kills him."2

"As Paul is to become Luke's hero, in that he more

than any other single man was instrumental in
spreading the Gospel throughout the Gentile
world, so Stephen here receives honourable
recognition as the man who first saw the wider
implications of the Church's faith and laid the
foundations on which the mission to the Gentiles
was built."3

8:1a Saul's active approval of Stephen's execution reveals his

commitment to the extermination of Jesus' disciples, which he
proceeded to implement zealously. This verse introduces Saul
and provides a transition to what follows later concerning
Saul's conversion and subsequent ministry.

"What was done unto Stephen was done unto

Saul. The Jews and Saul with them, as we believe,
disputed and resisted Stephen in the synagogue.
The Jews disputed with Paul, resisted him, and
rejected his testimony. Stephen was accused of
blasphemy; so was Paul (Acts xix:37). Stephen
was accused of speaking against Moses, the holy
place and the customs; so was Paul (Acts xxi:28;
xxiv:6; xxv:8; xxviii:17). They rushed upon
Stephen with one accord and seized him. The
same happened to Paul (Acts xix:29). Stephen

1Morgan, The Acts …, p. 142.

2Barclay, p. 62.
3Neil, p. 105.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 187

was dragged out of the city. So was Paul (Acts

xiv:19). Stephen was tried before the Sanhedrim
[sic]; so did Paul appear before the Sanhedrim.
Stephen was stoned and Paul was stoned at
Lystra. Stephen suffered martyrdom; so did Paul
in Rome."1

B. THE MINISTRY OF PHILIP 8:1B-40

Luke next featured other important events in the expansion of the church
and the ministry of another important witness. "Philip" took the gospel into
Samaria, and then indirectly to Ethiopia, one of the more remote parts of
the earth (cf. 1:8). The account of Philip's ministry in this chapter has
several connections with chapters 6 and 7. Philip, like Stephen, was a
member of the Seven (6:5). The persecution begun in chapters 6 and 7
continues in chapter 8, where it became a "great persecution," and the
church continued to feel Saul's antagonism.

1. The evangelization of Samaria 8:1b-25

The first part of Philip's important witness took place in Samaria. Luke
recorded the cause of Philip's ministry there (vv. 1b-3), its nature (vv. 4-
8), and its effects (vv. 9-24).

The dispersion of the witnesses 8:1b-3

This short section sets the stage for Philip's ministry by giving us its cause.

8:1b Stephen's execution ignited the first popular ("great")

"persecution" of Christian Jews.2 Luke showed that the early
Jerusalem Christians first received a warning (4:21), then
flogging (5:40), then martyrdom (7:58-60), then widespread
persecution. Since Stephen was a Hellenistic Jew, the
Hellenistic Jewish Christians were probably the main targets of
this antagonism. The unbelieving Jews living in Jerusalem
turned against the believing Jews. This hostility resulted in

1Gaebelein, The Annotated …, [Link]-76.

2See Ernst Bammel, "Jewish Activity against Christians in Palestine according to Acts," in
The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian
Setting, pp. 357-64.
188 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

many of the believers leaving Jerusalem for more secure places

of residence. They took the gospel seed with them, and
planted churches in all Judea (cf. 1 Thess. 2:14) as well as in
Samaria.

The Greek word diesparesen, translated "scattered" here and

in verse 4, comes from the verb speiro, used to refer to sowing
seed (cf. Matt. 6:26; 13:3-4, 18; 25:24, 26; Luke 8:5; 12:24;
et al.). The word "diaspora" derives from it. This persecution
was hard on the Christians, but it was good for the church
since it resulted in widening evangelization. The apostles
probably stayed in Jerusalem because they believed their
presence there was essential regardless of the danger.
Moreover, the persecution seems to have been against
Hellenistic Jews particularly, and the Twelve were Hebraic
Jews.

8:2 The "devout men" who buried Stephen were probably God-
fearing Jews like Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus who
buried Jesus (Luke 23:50-53). There were undoubtedly many
Jews in Jerusalem who were still sympathetic with the
Christians (cf. 6:7). Some of them evidently gave Stephen a
burial suitable to his importance. The Mishnah considered open
lamentation for someone who had suffered death by stoning
as inappropriate.1 Luke's notation that people "made loud
lamentation" for Stephen may, therefore, be evidence that
there were many Jews, including Christian Jews, who regarded
Stephen's stoning as extremely unfortunate.

8:3 The Greek word translated "ravaging" (lumainomai) occurs

only here in the New Testament. The Septuagint translators
used it in Psalm 80:13 to describe wild boars destroying a
vineyard. In English we use "ravaging" as a synonym for raping.
This is how Saul began behaving. The verb is evidently an
inceptive imperfect, indicating the beginning of the action.
Saul was a leader of the persecution in Jerusalem (9:1-2, 29;
22:4-5; 26:11). Evidently Stephen's execution fueled Saul's
hatred for the Christians, and resulted in his increasing
antagonism toward them. He not only went from house to

1Mishnah Sanhedrin 6:6.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 189

house, arresting Christians (cf. 2:46; 5:42) and putting them

"in prison," but also carried his purges into the synagogues (cf.
6:9), and tried to force believers to "blaspheme" there (22:19;
26:11).

Philip's evangelization of Samaria 8:4-8

8:4 Whereas persecution resulted in the death of some believers,

it also dispersed the disciples over a wider area. Luke described
what they did, as scattered believers, as "preaching the word"
(Gr. euaggelizomenoi ton logon, lit. "proclaiming good news
the word"). The gospel message is in view. Sometimes, what
appears to be very bad, turns out to be very good (Matt.
16:18).

Caesarea

Samaria

Joppa
Lydda
Jerusalem

Gaza
190 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"… persecution faced faithfully can have positive

results for the church (see also Acts 11:19-30 for
more results from this dispersion)."1

"… the thrust of the church into its mission after

the persecution of the Christian community in
Jerusalem is parallel with Luke's portrayal in his
Gospel of the spread of Jesus' fame after the
devil's assault in the wilderness."2

"As the mission begins to move beyond Jerusalem

and Judea, it is useful to distinguish two roles
within it: the role of the initiator and the role of
the verifier. The apostles shift at this point from
the former to the latter role. That is, their function
is reduced to recognizing and confirming the work
of the evangelists who bring the gospel to new
areas and groups, or to working as evangelists in
areas already opened for mission (cf. 8:25; 9:32-
42)."3

8:5 This "Philip" was apparently a Hellenistic Jew like Stephen. He

was Philip the evangelist, who was one of the Seven (cf. 6:5),
not the Philip who was one of the Twelve. He traveled north
from Jerusalem to Samaria, and followed Jesus' example of
taking the gospel to the Samaritans (cf. John 4).

The other Jews (non-Hellenistic) did not like the people who
lived in this area, and had no dealings with them (John 4:9).
They regarded them as racial and religious half-breeds. They
did so because their ancestors were the Jews who had
intermarried with the Gentiles, whom the Assyrians had sent
to live there following Assyria's conquest of Israel in 722 B.C.
Furthermore, the Samaritans had opposed the rebuilding of the
temple in Ezra's day, and had erected their own temple on Mt.
Gerizim, in competition with the temple on Mt. Zion in
Jerusalem.

1Bock, Acts, p. 317.

2Longenecker, p. 355.
3Tannehill, 2:102.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 191

In view of Stephen's recent depreciation of the Jerusalem

temple (7:44-50), it is not incredible to read that Philip took
the gospel to Samaritans. The Samaritans accepted only the
Pentateuch as authoritative, and looked for a personal Messiah
who would be like Moses.

We do not know exactly where Philip went, because Luke did

not identify the place specifically.1 It was "down" from
Jerusalem topographically, not geographically. Some ancient
versions of Acts refer to "a city of Samaria," whereas others
have "the city of Samaria." Probably "the city" is correct, even
though some scholars believe the region of Samaria is in view.2
The capital town stood a few miles west and a little north of
Old Testament Shechem, and very near New Testament Sychar
(cf. John 4:5).

The Old Testament city of Samaria—"Sebaste" was the Greek

name of Caesar Augustus that Herod the Great gave the
city3—had been the capital of the northern kingdom of Israel.
Philip's willingness to preach "the Christ" (cf. v. 12) to the
Samaritans demonstrates an openness that had not
characterized Jesus' disciples formerly (cf. John 4:9).
Sometimes God moves us out of our comfort zone because He
has a job for us to do elsewhere. A whole new people-group
came to faith in Christ.

8:6-8 Philip also could perform miracles like Jesus and the apostles.
He cast out demons and healed "paralyzed" and "lame" people.
These "signs" attracted the attention of multitudes
("crowds") of Samaritans, and supported Philip's claim that
God was with him. Perhaps the fact that the Jerusalem Jews
had rejected Philip made him appealing to the Samaritans,
since they too had experienced rejection by those Jews. Again,
deliverance brought rejoicing (cf. 2:46-47).

"It is not too difficult to imagine what would have

happened had the apostles at Jerusalem first been

1See Hengel, pp. 70-76, for a full discussion of this enigmatic reference.
2E.g.,
Witherington, p. 282; Bock, Acts, pp. 324-25, 337.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]; Howson, p. 22.
192 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

the missioners [sic] to Samaria. Probably they

would have been rebuffed, just as they were
rebuffed earlier in their travels with Jesus when
the Samaritans associated them with the city of
Jerusalem (cf. Luke 9:51-56). But God in his
providence used as their evangelist the Hellenist
Philip, who shared their fate (though for different
reasons) of being rejected at Jerusalem; and the
Samaritans received him and accepted his
message."1

Simon the Sorcerer's conversion 8:9-13

8:9-11 Another person who was doing miracles in Samaria, but by

satanic power, was "Simon," whom people have sometimes
called "Simon Magus." "Magus" is the transliteration of the
Greek word magos meaning "magician" or "sorcerer." The
magic that he did was not sleight of hand deception, but
sorcery: the ability to control people and or nature by demonic
power. This ability had made Simon very popular, and he had
encouraged people to think that he was a "great power" whom
God had sent ("the Great Power of God").2

"As the counterfeit of the true, these false

prophets were among the most dangerous
enemies of Christianity; and the distinction
between the true and the false, between religion
and spiritualism, had to be sharply drawn once for
all."3

8:12 Simon promoted himself, but Philip preached "Christ."

"I believe that Simon is the first religious racketeer

in the church—but, unfortunately, not the last."4

Luke described Philip's message as "the good news about the

kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ" (cf. 1:3, 6;

1Longenecker, p. 359.
2See ibid., p. 358, for the teaching of the early church fathers concerning Simon.
3Rackham, p. 113.
4McGee, 4:543
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 193

8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). Those who trust in

Christ become partakers in His spiritual rule over them now,
and eventually will enter into His future earthly millennial rule.
Both aspects of the "kingdom" are probably in view here (cf.
1:3). The phrase "name of Jesus Christ" points to the fact that
Jesus is the Christ, the anointed Messiah (cf. 1 John 5:1). Note
that water baptism followed conversion almost immediately
(cf. 2:38). Both "men and women" believed, and "were being
baptized." This was clearly water baptism, since they did not
experience Spirit baptism until later (v. 17).

8:13 Even "Simon himself" believed. I see no reason to conclude

that Simon's faith was spurious, though many students of this
passage have concluded that he was an unbeliever.1 The text
says that "Simon himself believed," just like the others Luke
mentioned (v. 12), and there is no reason to doubt the reality
of their faith.

"We have no reason to think that Philip did amiss

in baptizing him. Prodigals, when they return,
must be joyfully welcomed home, though we
cannot be sure but that they will play the prodigal
again. It is God's prerogative to know the heart.
The church and its ministers must go by a
judgment of charity. We must hope the best as
long as we can."2

Having practiced Satan's magic, Simon could hardly believe the

difference between Philip's God-given miracles and his own
magic.

Compromise in the Samaritan church 8:14-24

"… Simon's story is told so fully because it is a parallel to that

of Ananias and Sapphira. Both stand out in the first church as

1E.g.,
Calvin, [Link]; Alexander Whyte, Bible Characters, 2:119-25; McGee, 4:544, 545;
Toussaint, "Acts," p. 373; Wiersbe, 1:435-36; and Witherington, pp. 288-89.
2Henry, p. 1666.
194 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

glaring examples of the frightful attempt by means of money

to obtain what can be obtained only by God's grace."1

8:14-17 The 12 apostles were, of course, the divinely appointed leaders

of the Christians (ch. 1). It was natural and proper, therefore,
that they should send representative apostles to investigate
the Samaritans' response to the gospel.2 This was especially
important in view of the hostility that existed between the
Hebrews and the Samaritans. The way the Jews and the
Samaritans felt about one another was similar to how most
Israelis and Palestinians feel about one another today.

It was important that both the Samaritan Christians and the

Jewish Christians believed that God had united them in Christ.
When "Peter and John … came down," they observed that
these Samaritans had, like themselves, also accepted Jesus as
the Messiah. They asked God in prayer to send His "Holy Spirit"
to baptize them, as He had baptized the Jews who believed in
Jesus (cf. Luke 11:13).

"Being baptized 'into' [Gr. eis, cf. 19:5] … the

name denotes incorporation into the Lord and his
community, declaring one's allegiance and
implying the Lord's ownership …"3

"This was a period of transition from the OT

dispensation to the NT era, and these believers at
Samaria were in a position similar to the believers
at Jerusalem prior to Pentecost."4

However, this baptism of (by) "the Holy Spirit" occurred

somewhat differently than it had in Jerusalem (ch. 2; cf. 8:38;
10:44). There it happened spontaneously, but here it came in
answer to the apostles' prayer and with the laying on of their
hands. There the sound of a mighty wind, visible flames of fire,
and speaking in tongues had accompanied it. Here there is no
mention that these phenomena were present. Perhaps tongues

1Lenski, p. 329.
2See The Nelson …, p. 1873, for a map of Peter's missionary journeys.
3Bock, Acts, p. 331.
4Kent, p. 79.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 195

were not spoken here, if they were not, because the Jews and
the Samaritans spoke the same language. In both places,
Jerusalem and Samaria, the Spirit's reception for permanent
indwelling through Spirit baptism is in view, and the Holy Spirit
baptized people who were already believers in Jesus Christ.

"But what if the Spirit had come upon them [the

Samaritans] at their baptism when administrated
by Philip? Undoubtedly what feelings there were
against Philip and the Hellenists would have
carried over to them, and they would have been
doubly under suspicion. But God in his providence
withheld the gift of the Holy Spirit till Peter and
John laid their hands on the Samaritans—Peter
and John, two leading apostles who were highly
thought of in the mother church at Jerusalem and
who would have been accepted at that time as
brothers in Christ by the new converts in
Samaria."1

Does what happened in Jerusalem and Samaria set a precedent

for a "second blessing" experience (i.e., the baptism of the
Spirit as a separate work of God subsequent to regeneration)?
Paul described normative Spirit baptism in 1 Corinthians 12:13
and Romans 8:9. The person who has not experienced Spirit
baptism is not a Christian (Rom. 8:9). Therefore the instances
of Spirit baptism in Acts, when it followed salvation later, must
have been exceptional occasions. This unusual separation of
salvation and Spirit baptism is understandable. People needed
to perceive Spirit baptism as such at the beginning of the
church's history. God baptized believers with the Spirit—in this
way—to validate Jesus' promise that He would send the Spirit
to indwell believers permanently, something not occuring
previously (John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7).2

In chapter 2, God identified Spirit baptism—which normally

takes place without the believer being aware that it is
happening—with wind, fire, and speaking in tongues. These

1Longenecker, p. 359.
2See Harm, pp. 30-33.
196 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

things served as signs to the Jews present of God's working.

Here in chapter 8, signs apparently did not announce the
baptism of the Spirit, but accompanied Philip's preaching. What
would have convinced the Samaritans that the baptism of the
Spirit was taking place? And what would have convinced the
Jews in Jerusalem that it had taken place in Samaria? The
Spirit's baptizing work taking place in response to "the laying
on of the apostles' hands" (v. 18) would have done so (cf.
9:17; 19:6). This is, of course, exactly what happened.

"Peter used the keys committed to him (Matt.

16:18, 19) to open the door officially to the
Samaritans, just as he did to 3,000 Jews at
Pentecost, and would again a little later to the
gentiles at the house of Cornelius (chap. 10). It
would be a great mistake, however, to treat this
incident at Samaria as normative for all
subsequent believers. A look at the Spirit's
coming upon Saul (9:17) and Cornelius (10:44)
will reveal considerable differences, so that the
Samaritan experience was not the regular pattern
in the Book of Acts."1

8:18-19 Clearly, some external sign accompanied the coming of the

Spirit to baptize, because the people present perceived it as
happening ("when Simon saw that the Spirit was bestowed").
Simon desired to buy the ability to produce Spirit baptism and
its accompanying sign from Peter and John (cf. 19:19). This
practice, the attempt to buy spiritual powers and offices, has
become identified with Simon's name (i.e., "simony").

Simon may have thought that paying for this power was
legitimate, since others had probably paid him for the secrets
of his magic.2 Simon failed to appreciate the uniqueness and
holiness of Spirit baptism. He appears to have wanted to
produce this in anyone, not just believers. Possibly Simon's
error was an innocent mistake, due to theological ignorance. It

1Kent, pp. 79-80.

2The Nelson …, p. 1833.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 197

was clear to Simon that the laying on of hands communicated

Spirit baptism (v. 19).

8:20-23 Peter's stern response, however, revealed the seriousness of

Simon's error. J. B. Phillips paraphrased Peter's opening words,
"To hell with you and your money!"1 Literally Peter said, "Your
silver be with you into perdition." By his request, Simon had
revealed that he hoped he could buy God's gifts, namely: the
Holy Spirit and the ability (or "authority") to impart the Holy
Spirit to others. Peter corrected him harshly. God's gifts are
gifts; people cannot purchase them, because God gives them
freely and sovereignly. Simon had much to learn about the
grace of God.

Peter then told Simon that God would not grant the ability
("authority") he sought ("you have no part or portion"),
because his "heart" was "not right with (before) God." Simon
wanted to be able to bring glory to himself rather than to God.
Barclay referred to James Denney, the Scottish preacher, as
having said that we cannot at one and the same time show
that we are clever and that Christ is wonderful.2 Proper
motives are essential as we seek to serve Jesus Christ. Simon's
flesh, rather than the Holy Spirit, still controlled him.
Bitterness, bondage, and iniquity still characterized him (v.
23). Probably Peter received insight as a prophet into Simon's
motivation (cf. 5:3).3

"Peter describes Simon's offer as poison and a

chain."4

Simon was to the Samaritan church what Ananias and Sapphira

were to the Jerusalem church: an early instance of self-seeking
(cf. 5:1-11). Peter may have wondered if God would judge
Simon as He had Ananias and Sapphira, and if Simon was about
to fall dead at his feet.

1The New Testament in Modern English.

2Barclay,p. 68.
3Witherington, p. 287.
4Robertson, 3:108.
198 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

8:24 Peter's rebuke terrified Simon. A man with the tremendous

power Peter had demonstrated, which Simon himself had
witnessed, was no one to antagonize. Probably Simon's
request for prayer that God would be merciful to him was
sincere.

Many interpreters believe that Simon was not a genuine

believer, but he may have been. True Christians can do, and
have done, everything that Simon said and did. His
background, fresh out of demonism, makes his conduct easier
to understand. I see him as another Ananias, except that
Ananias knew exactly what he was doing, whereas Simon's
error seems to have involved ignorance to some extent.
Probably that is why he did not suffer the same fate as
Ananias. Both men became examples to the Christians, in their
respective geographical and ethnic areas, of how important it
is to behave under the control of the Holy Spirit (cf. Eph. 5:15-
21).

Evangelism elsewhere in Samaria 8:25

The subjects of this verse are evidently Peter and John. The fact that,
while the apostles were returning to Jerusalem they preached the gospel
in other Samaritan towns, shows that they now fully accepted the
Samaritans as fellow believers. Furthermore they welcomed them into the
church. Quite a change had taken place in John's heart, in particular, and
in Peter's, since the time these disciples had first visited Samaria with
Jesus. John had wanted to call down fire from heaven on a Samaritan village
(cf. Luke 9:52-54).

This mission into Samaria constituted a further gospel advance to the

Gentiles. The Jews regarded the Samaritans as half Jew and half Gentile. In
view of Peter's later reluctance to go to the Gentiles (ch. 10), this incident
was clearly part of God's plan to broaden his vision. It prepared him to
accept Gentiles into the church on an equal basis with Jews.

2. Philip's ministry to the Ethiopian eunuch 8:26-40

Luke recorded this incident to show the method and direction of the
church's expansion to God-fearing Gentiles who were attracted to Judaism
at this time. The Ethiopian eunuch had visited Jerusalem to worship, was
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 199

studying the Old Testament, and was open to instruction by a Jew.

Therefore he was much more sympathetic to the Christians' gospel than
the average Gentile. This man appears to have been the first full-fledged
Gentile that Luke recorded being evangelized in Acts, though he could have
been a "diaspora Jew."

"The admirably-told story of the Ethiopian is probably in

Philip's own words, passed on to the author when he and Paul
were entertained in the evangelist's house at Caesarea, twenty
years later (xxi. 8). As a piece of narrative it ranks with the
stories of the Lord's own personal work (e.g. John iii and iv)."1

8:26 God's messenger (an angel? cf. 5:19) directed Philip to "go
south" to a road that ran "from Jerusalem to Gaza." Philip did
not return to Jerusalem with Peter and John. Whenever Luke
introduced "an angel of the Lord" (Gr. angelos kyriou) into his
narrative, he desired to stress God's special presence and
activity (Luke 1:11; 2:9; Acts 12:7, 23; cf. Acts 7:30, 35, 38;
10:3, 7, 22; 11:13; 12:11; 27:23).2 The Lord's direction was
evidently clear and precise because Philip had been involved in
evangelizing multitudes successfully (v. 6). Now God definitely
told him to leave that fruitful ministry to go elsewhere. Luke
did not say exactly where Philip was when he received this
direction, but he was probably somewhere in Samaria or in
Caesarea, where we find him later (v. 40; 21:8).

"The church did not simply 'stumble upon' the

idea of evangelizing the Gentiles; it did so in
accordance with God's deliberate purpose."3

Luke added for the benefit of Theophilus (1:1),

who was evidently not familiar with the geography
of Palestine, that this was desert territory. The
word "desert" can modify either "road" or "Gaza."
"The old town was referred to as 'Desert Gaza',
and this is probably meant here rather than a

1Blaiklock,pp. 80-81.
2Longenecker, p. 362.
3Marshall, The Acts …, p. 161.
200 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

desert road, which properly begins only at Gaza on

the way to Egypt."1

To get from Jerusalem to Gaza, a traveler such as this eunuch

would normally route himself west through the hill country of
Judah, the Shephelah (foothills), and down to the coastal plain.
There he would finally turn south onto the international coastal
highway that ran along the Mediterranean Sea connecting
Damascus and Egypt. Only as it left Gaza, the
southeasternmost city in Palestine, did the road pass through
desert. This is in the modern Gaza Strip.

PHILIP’S TRAVELS

Caesarea

Samaria

Azotos

Jerusalem

Gaza

Coastal
Highway

1Neil, p. 123.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 201

The Ethiopian's spiritual condition when Philip met him was as

arid as the desert. However, when the two men parted, the
eunuch had experienced the refreshing effects of having been
washed by the Water of Life.

8:27-28 We can see Philip's yieldedness to the Spirit's control in his

obedience. Traveling down the road, he met the man who was
evidently "in charge of all" of Queen Candace's (i.e. the
Ethiopian nation's) treasury (cf. Isa. 56:3-8; Ps. 68:31). The
name "Ethiopia" at this time described a kingdom located
south of modern Egypt in Sudan (i.e., Nubia). It lay between
the first Nile cataract at Aswan and the modern city of
Khartoum, many hundreds of miles from Jerusalem.

"When told that a man was Ethiopian, people of

the ancient Mediterranean world would assume
that he was black, for this is the way that
Ethiopians are described by Herodotus and
others."1

There is no evidence that there was prejudice based on skin

color in antiquity.2

"… in ancient Greek historiographical works there

was considerable interest in Ethiopia and
Ethiopians precisely because of their ethnic and
racially distinctive features. … Furthermore, in the
mythological geography of the ancient Greek
historians and other writers as well, Ethiopia was
quite frequently identified with the ends of the
earth … in a way that Rome most definitely was
not. We are entitled, then, to suspect that Luke
the historian has decided to portray in miniature a
foreshadowing of the fulfillment of the rest of
Jesus' mandate (Acts 1:1) in Acts 8 …"3

1Tannehill, 2:109. See Herodotus 2.22, 3.101; and Philostratus, The Life of Apollonius
6.1. See also J. Daniel Hays, "The Cushites: A Black Nation in the Bible," Bibliotheca Sacra
153:612 (October-December 1996):408.
2Witherington, p. 295.
3Ibid., p. 290.
202 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"Candace," according to Pliny the Elder, was the hereditary

name of the queens of Meroe.1 As such it was the title of the
queen mother, who at this time served as the head of the
government in Ethiopia. Her personal name was evidently
Amanitare (sometimes spelled Amantitere; A.D. 25-41).2 The
king of Ethiopia did not involve himself in the routine
operations of his country, since his people regarded him as the
"Child of the Sun."

It was not uncommon for men in high Near Eastern government

positions to be castrated. This prevented them from
impregnating royal women and then making claims on the
throne. However, the word "eunuch" (Gr. eunouchos) appears
often in the Septuagint (e.g., of Potiphar, Gen. 39:1) and in
other Greek writings, as describing a high military or political
figure.3 This eunuch, therefore, might not have been
emasculated but simply a high official. Some scholars believe
he was both.4 Luke repeatedly referred to him as a "eunuch"
(vv. 27, 34, 36, 38, 39). Emasculated men could not
participate fully in Israel's worship (Deut. 23:1)

This official had made a pilgrimage "to worship" Yahweh.

Somehow he had heard of Him, and had come to reverence
Him. He was making the trip home, probably to the capitol city
of Meroe, in his "covered wagon."5 While traveling, he was
reading the Septuagint translation of Isaiah's prophecy (i.e.,
Isa. 53:7-9; cf. Isa. 56:3-8). Perhaps he had purchased this roll
of Isaiah in Jerusalem.

"The chariot would have been in fact an ox-drawn

wagon and would not have moved at much more
than a walking pace, so that it would cause no

1Foakes-Jackson, p. 76.
2Piers T. Crocker, "The City of Meroe and the Ethiopian Eunuch," Buried History 22:3
(September 1986):67.
3Longenecker, p. 363.
4E.g., Barrett, pp. 425-26; Witherington, p. 296; and Bock, Acts, p. 341.
5F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 186.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 203

difficulty for Philip to run alongside it and call out

to the occupant."1

It was unusual for a non-Jew to possess a personal copy of the

Old Testament.2 Scrolls were expensive in the first century,
but this man could afford one. Perhaps he was able to do so
because of his high government position, or perhaps he had
only a part of Isaiah's prophecy, that he or someone else had
copied. In any case, his great interest in the Jews' religion is
obvious.

"In those days the world was full of people who

were weary of the many gods and the loose
morals of the nations. They came to Judaism and
there they found the one God and the austere
moral standards which gave life meaning. If they
accepted Judaism and were circumcised and took
the Law upon themselves they were called
proselytes; if they did not go that length but
continued to attend the Jewish synagogues and
to read the Jewish scriptures they were called
God-fearers. So this Ethiopian must have been one
of these searchers who came to rest in Judaism
either as a proselyte or a God-fearer."3

"Some of the God-fearers were only one step from

becoming converts [to Judaism], while others just
added the Jewish God to their pantheon. So long
as they showed some kind of sympathy with the
Jewish religion they were considered God-
fearers."4

8:29-31 Philip felt compelled by the Holy Spirit's leading to approach

("join") the wagon (cf. v. 26). The Spirit's leading is essential
in evangelism; He sometimes directs us to people whom He
has prepared to trust in Jesus Christ.

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 162.

2Longenecker, p. 363.
3Barclay,p. 70.
4Levinskaya, p. 78. See also pp. 120-26, "God-fearers in the Book of Acts."
204 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"An especial stress is placed throughout this

narrative on God's engineering of this
conversation, and thus that it is part of God's
plan."1

Quite possibly this important official was part of a caravan that

was heading to Africa, and Philip joined it temporarily.2
Evidently the eunuch's vehicle was either standing still or
moving slowly down the road. Luke's comment that Philip "ran
up" to the wagon may reflect the evangelist's willing
compliance, or simply the fact that he needed to run to catch
up with it. There were probably other people besides Philip who
were walking beside the various vehicles in this caravan.

As he approached, Philip "heard" the Ethiopian "reading" aloud.

This was the common method of reading in ancient times, due
to the difficulty of deciphering sentences with no spaces
between words and no punctuation marks.3 Philip recognized
what the Ethiopian was reading and struck up a conversation
with him. The official was having difficulty understanding what
he was reading, so he invited Philip into his wagon to see if he
could get some help.

"The Spirit of God does not eliminate the need for

human teachers or diligent study. The Spirit is not
given to make study needless but to make study
effective."4

8:32-35 Philip responded to the eunuch's perplexity by explaining how

Jesus had fulfilled Isaiah's prophecy of the Suffering Servant.
The phrase "Philip opened his mouth" stresses the importance
of what Philip said.

1Witherington, p. 293.
2Blaiklock,
p. 82.
3See Henry J. Cadbury, The Book of Acts in History, p. 18.
4The Nelson …, p. 1833.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 205

"… there is no evidence that anyone in pre-

Christian Judaism ever thought of the Messiah in
terms of a Suffering Servant."1

Most of the Jews regarded Isaiah 52:13—53:12 as referring

either to their nation or to the Gentile nations. Jesus Himself
had quoted Isaiah 53 as finding fulfillment in His passion (Luke
22:37). Philip here followed Jesus' interpretation, and from
this very passage proceeded to "preach Jesus" to the eunuch.

This is an excellent example of the "Spirit of God" using the

"Word of God" through a "man of God," to bring salvation to
the "elect of God" (cf. 1 Pet. 1:23-25). Note also the parallels
between this story and the one in Luke 24, about Jesus
walking with two disciples on the road to Emmaus.

"There is evidence that Luke has very carefully

structured his narrative [of Philip's ministry to the
Ethiopian eunuch] in the form of a chiasm. Vv. 32-
35, the citation of Isa. 53:7-8, are at the heart of
the passage and serve as its hinge."2

8:36-38 The road on which this conversation took place crossed several
stream beds that empty water from the higher elevations into
the Mediterranean Sea during the wetter months. Even though
the land generally was desert, water was not entirely absent
at some times of the year. The Ethiopian may have already
known about water baptism, since he had held an interest in
Judaism. The Jews required water baptism of Gentile converts.
Philip may have instructed him further on the importance of
baptism (cf. 2:38; 8:12). In any case, the official was eager to
submit to it. The Jews did not baptize physical eunuchs and
take them in as proselytes of Judaism (Deut. 23:1). If the
official was a physical eunuch, perhaps this was why he asked
Philip if there was some reason he could not undergo baptism
as a Christian.

1Longenecker, p. 364.
2Witherington, p. 292.
206 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Obviously there was enough water for Philip to immerse the

Ethiopian ("they both went down into the water"), the normal
method of baptism in Judaism and early Christianity. Some
interpreters have argued, however, that the two men may
have stood in the water while Philip poured water over or
sprinkled the Ethiopian. This is a possibility but, I think, it is
improbable. The normal meaning of the Greek word baptizo (to
baptize) is "to immerse," and this was the common custom.1

"He [Philip] would have met the chariot

somewhere southwest of Latron. There is a fine
steam of water, called Murubbah, deep enough
even in June to satisfy the utmost wishes of our
Baptist friends. This Murubbah is merely a local
name for the great Wady Surar, given to it on
account of copious fountains which supply it with
water during summer."2

The Ethiopian official testified to his faith in Jesus as the

Messiah by submitting to water baptism (cf. 2:38; 8:12).

8:39-40 The Holy Spirit directed Philip to the eunuch (v. 29), and He
led ("snatched") him away from him (v. 39). Luke stressed the
Spirit's leadership in this evangelism of the first Gentile convert
in Acts (cf. Matt. 12:18). God had prepared both Philip (v. 29)
and the eunuch (v. 30) for their especially important
conversation.

Luke described the Lord leading Philip away from the eunuch
very dramatically. Perhaps the Spirit jerked Philip out of the
wagon physically (cf. 1 Kings 18:12; 2 Kings 2:16).3 More
likely, I think, this description reflects the Lord's immediate
relocation of Philip to the place where He wanted him to serve
next.

"Philip's behavior in this incident is reminiscent of

that of Elijah, following impulses which he
recognizes as divine prompting, appearing in

1Knowling, 2:226.
2W. M. Thomson, The Land and the Book, 2:310.
3Jamieson, et al., p. 1092; Kent, p. 82.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 207

unexpected places, and disappearing equally

unexpectedly. It has also often been noted that
there are curious correspondences between Zeph.
2—3 and this passage—among other similarities
Gaza, Ethiopia and Azotus are mentioned in
both."1

"There is a contrast between Simon Magus and

this Ethiopian treasurer which recalls the contrast
between Gehazi and the stranger Naaman who
was baptized in the Jordan."2

The eunuch rejoiced in his new faith (cf. 2:46-47; 8:8; 16:34).
Presumably he returned home and became one of the earliest
Gentile witnesses and missionaries in Africa. This is what
happened according to early Christian tradition.3

Philip proceeded north up the coast, probably along the

international highway, to "Azotus" (Ashdod), and farther on to
"Caesarea." He "preached the gospel" in "all" the intermediate
"cities." About 20 years later we find him living in Caesarea
(21:8). In the Roman world, the average distance that people
would travel in one day on land was about 20 miles.4 If
traveling by camel, it would normally take 10 hours to travel
25 miles.5

Philip was the first Jewish Christian in Acts to evangelize a Gentile who
lived in such a remote country that the first readers of this book regarded
it as "the uttermost part of the earth" (cf. 1:8).

"The conviction that the Ethiopians lived at the ends of the

earth is well documented in ancient literature."6

1Neil,p. 123.
2Rackham, p. 120.
3See Irenaeus, Against Heresies, [Link]-10.
4Robert Jewett, A Chronology of Paul's Life, p. 138.
5Thomson, 2:350.
6Tannehill, 2:109. See Homer, The Odyssey 1.23; Herodotus 3.25, 3.114; Strabo,

Geography 1.1.6, 1.2.24.

208 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

The very first Christians were Jews (2:1-8:4). Then Samaritans became
Christians (8:5-25). Now, a Gentile, who was either a Jewish proselyte or
a near-proselyte, entered the church. Probably all these converts thought
of themselves, at this point, as simply religious Jews who believed that
Jesus was the Messiah. Only later did they learn that what God was doing,
was not just creating a group of believers in Jesus within Judaism, or a
faithful remnant, but a whole new entity, namely: the Christian church (cf.
Eph. 2—3).

C. THE MISSION OF SAUL 9:1-31

The writer next focused our attention on a key figure in the spread of the
Christian mission, and on significant events in the development of that
mission to the Gentiles. Peter's evangelization of Cornelius (ch. 10) will
continue to advance this theme. Luke has given us three portraits of
significant individuals in the evangelization of Gentiles: Stephen, Philip, and
now, climactically, Saul. He stressed that Saul's conversion and calling to
be an apostle to the Gentiles came supernaturally and directly from God,
and Saul himself played a passive role in these events. Saul (Paul) retold
the story of his conversion and calling twice, in Acts 22 and 26, and a third
time in Galatians 1. Its importance in Acts is clear from its repetition.1

"It cannot be stressed enough that these accounts are

summaries and Luke has written them up in his own style and
way."2

Saul (as Paul) became God's primary instrument in taking the gospel to the
Gentile world.

1. Saul's conversion and calling 9:1-19a

Luke recorded the conversion and calling of Saul of Tarsus to demonstrate

the supernatural power and sovereign direction of God. Saul's conversion
was one of the most miraculous and significant instances of repentance
that took place during the early expansion of the church. His calling to be
God's main missionary to the Gentiles was equally dramatic.

1See Ernst Haenchen, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 327.

2Witherington, p. 309.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 209

"The conversion of Saul was like the call of a second

Abraham."1

Saul's conversion on the Damascus road 9:1-9

"Without question, the story of Saul's 'conversion' is one of

the most important events, if not the most important event,
that Luke records in Acts."2

"In this passage we have the most famous conversion story in

all history."3

"The conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch was in a chariot; the

conversion of Saul of Tarsus was down in the dust."4

9:1-2 Since Stephen's martyrdom (cf. 8:3), Saul had been

persecuting Jews who had come to believe that Jesus was the
Messiah.5

"The partitive genitive of apeiles [threats] and

phonou [murder] means that threatening and
slaughter had come to be the very breath that
Saul breathed, like a warhorse who sniffed the
smell of battle. He breathed on the remaining
disciples the murder that he had already breathed
in from the death of the others. He exhaled what
he inhaled."6

The Jewish high priest's Roman overseers gave the high priest
authority to extradite Jews who were strictly religious
offenders and had fled outside the Sanhedrin's jurisdiction.7
Saul obtained "letters" from the high priest (evidently
Caiaphas) giving him the power (legal authority) to arrest

1Howson, p. 68.
2Timothy J. Ralston, "The Theological Significance of Paul's Conversion," Bibliotheca Sacra
147:586 (April-June 1990):303.
3Barclay, p. 71. Cf. Neil, p. 125.
4McGee, 4:548.
5See Appendix 1 "Sequence of Paul's Activities," at the end of these notes; and Carson

and Moo, p. 369.

6Robertson, 3:113. Cf. Knowling, 2:229.
7Longenecker, p. 369; Kent, pp. 82-83.
210 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Jesus' Jewish disciples from Palestine, who had fled to

Damascus because of persecution in Jerusalem. This grand
inquisitor undoubtedly believed that he was following in the
train of other zealous Israelites who had purged idolatry from
Israel (e.g., Moses in Num. 25:1-5; Phinehas in Num. 25:6-15;
Elijah in 1 Kings 18; Mattathias in 1 Macc. 2:23-28, 42-48).

"Saul never forgave himself for that. God forgave

him; the Christians forgave him; but he never
forgave himself … 1 Cor. 15:9[;] Gal. 1:13."1

The King of the Nabateans who governed Damascus at this

time cooperated with Saul. He was Aretas IV (9 B.C.-A.D. 40).2
"Damascus" stood about 135 miles to the north-northeast of
Jerusalem, about a week’s journey. It was within the Roman
province of Syria, and was one of the towns of the Decapolis,
a league of 10 self-governing cities. "The Way" was one of the
earliest designations of Christianity (cf. 18:24-25; 19:9, 23;
22:4; 24:14, 22), and it appears only in Acts. It meant the
path characterized by life and salvation. This title may go back
to Jesus' teaching that He was "the way," and that His way of
salvation was a narrow way (John 14:6; Matt. 7:14).

9:3-4 Other passages throw more light on the details of Saul's

blinding vision. It took place about midday, when the sun would
usually have been shining its brightest (22:6; 26:13). What
blinded Saul was not the sun, however, but a revelation of
Jesus Christ (vv. 17, 27; 22:14; 26:16; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:8). He
now saw the same Person Stephen had seen while Saul
witnessed Stephen dying (7:55). Jesus spoke to Saul "from
heaven," addressing him by his Jewish name and in the
language of the Jews (cf. 26:14). After riveting his attention,
Jesus asked Saul "why" he was "persecuting" Him—not His
followers, but Himself. Saul would have understood the voice
as God's, since in rabbinism a voice from heaven always
connoted a rebuke or instruction from God.3

1Ironside,Lectures on …, pp. 203-4.

2F. F. Bruce, "Chronological Questions in the Acts of the Apostles," Bulletin of the John
Rylands University Library of Manchester 18:2 (Spring 1986):275.
3Longenecker, pp. 370-71.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 211

"Therefore when the voice went on to ask the

question 'Why do you persecute me?' Saul was
without doubt thoroughly confused. He was not
persecuting God! Rather, he was defending God
and his laws!"1

Jesus' question made Saul begin to appreciate the intimate

union that Christians enjoy with Jesus, the Head of the body,
the church. He was in His disciples, not just with them or ruling
over them, by His Spirit (cf. John 14:17). What they suffered
He suffered.

9:5-6 In what sense did Saul address Jesus as "Lord" (Gr. kyrios)? It
seems from Saul's reaction to this vision, and his later
descriptions of it, that he believed the Person addressing him
was God. "Lord" therefore seems to be more than a respectful
"Sir." Yet God was Saul's master already, even before he
became a Christian, so he probably addressed the voice as his
personal master as well as God. The identity of the voice was
not completely clear to Saul. When Stephen had a similar
vision, he recognized Jesus (7:55-56), but Saul did not
recognize Him. This may imply that Saul had never seen Jesus
during His earthly ministry. Or perhaps he asked "Who are
You?" because, even though he believed "God" was speaking
to him, he had never heard a voice from heaven before.

Jesus' self-revelation totally shocked Saul, who until then had

regarded Jesus as a blasphemous pretender to Israel's
messianic throne. Saul now discovered that Jesus was God, or
at least was with God in heaven, yet He was in some sense also
present in His followers whom Saul was persecuting. Jesus
again referred to Saul's persecution of Himself, a doubly
convicting reminder of Saul's erroneous theology and sinful
conduct. Jesus did not condemn him, but graciously
commanded him to enter Damascus and to wait for further
directions from Himself. Saul now learned that Jesus had a
mission for him, although he did not know what or how
extensive it would be ("it will be told you what you must do").

1Ibid., p. 371.
212 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

9:7-9 Evidently Saul's traveling companions heard a voice-like sound,

but only Saul understood Jesus' words (cf. v. 7; 22:9; 26:14;
cf. John 12:29). They all fell to the ground when they saw the
light (26:14), but now they "stood speechless." The intense
light of the vision Saul had just seen blinded him temporarily
("three days"). His companions had to lead him off "into
Damascus," where he waited for three days for further
instructions: blind, fasting, and praying (cf. 1:14; Luke 1:22).1

"He who had intended to enter Damascus like an

avenging fury was led by the hand into that city,
blind and helpless as a child."2

"'He who would strike others was himself struck,

and the proud Pharisee became a deeply humbled
penitent—a guide of the blind' he was himself to
be guided by others (Felten)."3

"In the light of Paul's subsequent career, his single-minded

devotion to Christ, his tireless efforts to bring Jews and
Gentiles alike face to face with the same Lord as he had
encountered on the Damascus road, his remorse for his
vindictive cruelty, his atonement for it in selfless service of the
Church he had tried to crush, it is frivolous to attempt to
explain away Paul's conversion as a hallucination, an attack of
sunstroke, or an epileptic fit [as some Bible critics have
alleged]. It was as is every genuine conversion experience a
miracle of the grace of God."4

Having being a persecutor of Christians, Saul became a proclaimer of the

gospel. Having obtained a commission from the Jewish high priest, he
received a new commission from the High Priest after the order of
Melchizedek. Having received letters from the high priest to destroy
Christians, he wrote letters to edify and exhort Christians. Having

1On the practice of fasting, see Kent D. Berghuis, "A Biblical Perspective on Fasting,"
Bibliotheca Sacra 158:629 (January-March 2001):86-103.
2Barclay, p. 73.
3Knowling, 2:234.
4Neil, p. 128.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 213

unwittingly done what his teacher Gamaliel had warned against, namely
fighting against God, he fought for God.

Saul's calling from the Lord 9:10-19a

9:10-12 Evidently Ananias was not a refugee from Jerusalem (22:12),

but a resident of Damascus. He, too, received "a vision" of the
Lord Jesus (v. 17), to whom he submitted willingly (cf. 1 Sam.
3:4, 10). Jesus gave Ananias specific directions to another
man's house in Damascus where he would find Saul. "Straight
Street" is still one of the main thoroughfares running through
Damascus east-west.

Saul had been "preying on Christians," but now he was "praying

to Christ." Saul, like most Pharisees, was a man of prayer, and
he continued to give prayer priority after his conversion (cf.
16:25; 20:36; 22:17). Luke recorded that Jesus was also a
man of prayer (Luke 3:21; 6:12; 9:18, 28; 11:1; 22:41). The
Lord sovereignly prepared both Ananias and Saul with
revelations of Himself, so that when He brought them
together, they would have no doubt about His personal
dealings with them (cf. Peter and Cornelius in 10:1-23).

"The point of all the visions and the miracle is to

make clear that God is in control of and directing
all these events so that Saul will undertake certain
tasks God has in mind."1

9:13-14 Ananias wanted to make sure he had heard the Lord correctly,
since Saul had become infamous for harming believers in Jesus.
He had heard of Saul's reason for visiting Damascus, and his
new authority to arrest and to extradite, that he had received
from the chief priests. Ananias referred to the believers in
Jerusalem as "saints," set apart ones, the equivalent of those
who call on the Lord's name. This is the first time Luke used
the name "saints" for Christians in Acts.

"The Lord's work is revealed through events that

overthrow human expectations. Humans calculate
the future on the basis of their normal experience.

1Witherington, p. 318.
214 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

These calculations leave them unprepared for the

appearance of the Overruler, who negates human
plans and works the unexpected. This is a problem
not only for the rejectors of Jesus but also for the
church, which, as our narrative indicates, is led by
the Lord into situations beyond its fathoming. The
narrator's sharp sense of God (and the exalted
Messiah) as one who surprises appears again in
this episode, and the reaction of Ananias (and in
9:26 the Jerusalem disciples) shows that the
church, too, has difficulty keeping up with such a
God."1

9:15-16 God revealed (to Ananias) His purpose for Saul in order to
bolster Ananias' courage. The inquisitor (Saul) was to become
Jesus' "chosen instrument" (Paul), the proud Pharisee His
apostle to "Gentiles and kings," and the poster boy of Judaism
a persecuted Christian. "To bear my name" means to bear
witness of Jesus. In the Greek text of verse 16, "I" is emphatic.
Jesus meant that Ananias need not fear going to Saul, because
Jesus Himself would show Saul "how much" he would "suffer"
(i.e., he was now a friend of Ananias and no longer his enemy);
Ananias would not need to balk at his mission. This assurance
would have given Ananias added encouragement to go to
Judas' house in search of Saul.

"In highlighting these features of being a 'chosen

instrument,' sent to 'the Gentiles,' and to 'suffer
for my [Jesus'] name,' Luke has, in effect, given
a theological précis of all he will portray historically
in chapters 13—28—a précis that also
summarizes the self-consciousness of Paul himself
as reflected in his own letters."2

9:17 Ananias communicated his Christian love for his new Christian
brother with a touch ("laying his hands on him") and a loving
word of greeting: "Brother." He then explained his double
purpose for coming to Saul. It was to restore his "sight," as

1Tannehill, 2:117.
2Longenecker, p. 373.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 215

well as to enable Saul to experience the filling of "the Holy

Spirit." Ananias' purpose was not to commission Saul. Saul's
commission came directly from the Lord, though Ananias
announced it (22:14-16).

"The choice of Ananias for this task made it clear

that Saul of Tarsus was not dependent upon the
Twelve, and also that an apostle was not required
for bestowing the Spirit (as might have been
concluded from the case in Samaria)."1

The Holy Spirit filled Saul as he responded to God's Word

appropriately. We may infer that Saul's conversion happened
on the Damascus road and that he received the baptism of the
Spirit at the same time.2 Notice again the importance of being
"filled with (under the control of) the Holy Spirit." This is the
first time that Luke wrote about the Spirit coming on someone
outside of the land of Israel.

9:18-19a God then restored Saul's sight. The impression given in the
text is that the first thing he did ("he got up") was identify
with Christ ("and was baptized") and the disciples of Christ by
water baptism (cf. 8:12, 38). He did this even before breaking
his fast of three days. Then he ate ("took food") and received
strength physically.

Saul later wrote that immediately following his conversion, he

did not consult with others about the Scriptures, but went into
Arabia—and later returned to Damascus (Gal. 1:15-17).
"Arabia" describes the kingdom of the Nabateans that
stretched south and east from Damascus beyond Petra.
Damascus was in the northwest sector of Arabia. After Saul's
conversion and baptism, he needed some time and space for
quiet reflection and communion with God. He had to rethink
the Scriptures, receive new understanding from the Lord, and
revise his Pharisaic theology. So, like Moses, Elijah, and Jesus

1Kent, pp. 83-84.

2Ibid., p. 85.
216 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

before him, he retired into the wilderness. These were Saul's

"Arabian nights."1

2. Saul's initial conflicts 9:19b-30

The changes that took place in Saul were important because of his
subsequent activity. Luke wrote this pericope to note those changes, so
that his readers would understand why Saul acted as he did afterward. Luke
stressed the genuineness of Saul's conversion by showing next the radical
change it made in him.

Tigris R.

Euphrates R.
Damascus

Jerusalem

ARABIA

ETHIOPIA

Saul's preaching in Damascus 9:19b-22

9:19b-20 How verses 19b-20 fit into the chronology of events in Saul's
life is not perfectly clear. They could fit in any number of ways.
We should probably understand "immediately" in a general
sense. As soon as Saul became a Christian ("at once," NIV) he
began to contend that Jesus was the Messiah when he

1Witherington, p. 323.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 217

attended synagogue worship, which he did regularly (cf. 13:5,

14; 14:1; 17:2, 10, 17; 18:4, 19; 19:8). This proclamation
was the result and evidence of his being filled with the Holy
Spirit (v. 17), as well as the result of his conversion.

This is the only mention in Acts of someone proclaiming Jesus

as the "Son of God" (but cf. 13:33). This fact reflects the clear
understanding of Jesus that Saul had—even shortly after his
conversion. As used in the Old Testament, this title referred to
Israel (Exod. 4:22; Hos. 11:1), Israel's anointed king (2 Sam.
7:14; Ps. 89:26), and Messiah (Ps. 2:7). Saul recognized that
Jesus was the Son of God predicted there. He used this title of
Jesus frequently in his epistles (Rom. 1:3-4, 9; 5:10; 8:3, 29,
32; 1 Cor. 1:9; 15:28; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 1:16; 2:20; 4:4, 6; 1
Thess. 1:10).

9:21-22 Saul's unexpected and extreme conduct, understandably

bewildered the Jews who lived in Damascus. Instead of
persecuting the Christians, he was proving that Jesus was the
Christ, the Son of God. This is what people—then and now—
need to believe to obtain salvation (cf. 1 John 5:1). Saul had
made a 180-degree change in his thinking and in his conduct;
he had truly repented. Saul's understanding and commitment
kept growing as he continually sought to convince the
Damascus Jews that Jesus was their Messiah. Perhaps Saul's
sojourn in Arabia occurred between verses 21 and 22 or
between verses 22 and 23.

Saul's escape from Damascus 9:23-25

Luke included this incident to prove the genuineness of Saul's conversion.

He, who had been persecuting "to the death" believers in Jesus, had now
become the target of deadly persecution because of his changed view of
Jesus.

9:23-24a It is hard to determine how "many days" had elapsed, but

evidently Saul remained in Damascus several months. F. F.
Bruce dated his return to Jerusalem about A.D. 35 and his
conversion in 33.1 This would mean that Saul was converted

1F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 205. Cf. Gal. 1:18.

218 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

just a few months after Jesus' ascension to heaven.1 I think it

is more probable that Saul became a Christian a little later,
perhaps in 34, and returned to Jerusalem in A.D. 37.
Regardless of the dates, we know that he finally left Damascus
for Jerusalem "three years" after his conversion (Gal. 1:18).

"No one persecutes a man who is ineffective and

who obviously does not matter. George Bernard
Shaw once said that the biggest compliment you
can pay an author is to burn his books. Someone
has said, 'A wolf will never attack a painted sheep.'
Counterfeit Christianity is always safe. Real
Christianity is always in peril. To suffer
persecution is to be paid the greatest of
compliments because it is the certain proof that
men think we really matter."2

9:24b-25 It would have been natural for Saul's enemies to be "watching

the gates" of Damascus, since he would have had to pass out
of one of them to leave the city under normal circumstances.
"Disciples" everywhere but here in Acts refers to followers of
Jesus. Here it describes followers of Saul, probably to indicate
that his preaching had resulted in some people coming to faith
in Christ. Perhaps it was one of these disciples who owned the
house on the wall from which Saul escaped the city.

Paul described his escape from Damascus in 2 Corinthians

11:32-33, and it is there we learn that someone lowered him
"in a basket" from a house built on the city wall ("through a
window in the wall"). The fact that Paul did not minimize this
ignominious exit in his writings says a lot for his humility and
the transformation God effected in this once self-righteous
Pharisee. The local Jews arranged this attempt on his life, and
their Nabatean governor supported them.

"Saul's plans for persecuting Christians in

Damascus took a strange turn; he had entered the

1Cf. Harold W. Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ, p. 143.

2Barclay, p. 77.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 219

city blind and left in a basket! Ironically he became

the object of persecution."1

Also, ironically, those Christians whom Paul had come to

Damascus to kill actually saved his life.

Saul's reception in Jerusalem 9:26-30

Luke concluded each of his narratives of the Samaritans' conversion (8:4-

25), Saul's conversion (9:1-31), and Cornelius' conversion (10:1—11:18),
with references to the mother church in Jerusalem. He evidently wanted
to stress the fact that all these significant advances were part of one great
plan that God orchestrated, and not just independent occurrences (cf.
Matt. 16:18; Acts 1:8).

9:26 Perhaps the fact that Saul had not sought out the apostles,
and other Christians in Jerusalem—for three years following his
conversion—made the believers there suspicious of him (cf.
Gal. 1:18). They had not met him personally, and since they
were being persecuted, they may have wondered if Saul had
adopted clandestine methods to oppose them.

9:27 "Barnabas" willingly reached out to the new convert in

Jerusalem, as Ananias had done in Damascus. His behavior here
is consistent with what we read of him elsewhere in Acts (cf.
4:36-37; 11:22-30; 13:1—14:28; 15:2-4, 12, 22). Barnabas
proved to be a true "Son of Encouragement" (4:36) for Saul.

"First, the Church owed Paul to the prayer of

Stephen. Then the Church owed Paul to the
forgiving spirit of Ananias. And now we see that
the Church owed Paul to the large-hearted charity
of Barnabas. … The world is largely divided into
people who think the best of others and people
who think the worst of others; and it is one of the
curious facts of life that ordinarily we see our own
reflection in others, and we make them what we
believe them to be."2

1Toussaint, "Acts," pp. 377-78.

2Barclay, p. 78.
220 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

The "apostles" whom Saul met were Peter and James, the
Lord's half-brother (Gal. 1:17-19). Paul wrote later that he
stayed with Peter for 15 days (Gal. 1:15), but he may have
been in Jerusalem somewhat longer at this time. James was an
apostle in the general sense of that term. He was not one of
the Twelve.1

Barnabas pointed out three indications that Saul's conversion

was genuine for the benefit of the Christian skeptics: Saul "had
seen the Lord," he "had talked with" Him, and "he had
witnessed (spoken out) boldly" in Damascus in "Jesus' name."
Imagine how difficult it must have been, for those Christians
who had relatives whom Saul had persecuted, to sit down with
him in church meetings and share the Lord's Supper.

9:28-29 While Saul was in Jerusalem, he resumed Stephen's work of

debating the "Hellenistic Jews." He was himself a Hellenist, as
Stephen apparently was, having been born and reared in
Tarsus. Paul described himself as "a Hebrew of the Hebrews"
(Phil. 3:5; cf. 2 Cor. 11:22), by which he meant that his training
in Jerusalem and his sympathies were more in line with the
Hebrews than with the Hellenists. At first he enjoyed freedom
in the city, but soon the unbelieving Jews as well tried to
silence him. Evidently Saul continued evangelizing in Jerusalem,
until it became obvious to the other believers that he must
leave immediately, or suffer death as Stephen had. They
probably envisioned a recurrence of the persecution of the
disciples that followed Stephen's martyrdom.

9:30 Saul's concerned Christian brethren traveled with him "to

Caesarea." We do not know how long he stayed there, but
Luke's account gives the impression that it was not long. Saul
then departed, apparently by ship, "to Tarsus" in Cilicia, his
hometown (21:39; Gal. 1:21), probably to tell his family and
others about Jesus.2 Saul traveled about 690 miles in these
trips: from Jerusalem to Damascus, back to Jerusalem, then to

1See my comments on 14:4.

2See Finegan, Light from …, pp. 334-36, for more information about Tarsus.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 221

Caesarea and home to Tarsus, excluding his trip into Arabia,

which cannot be calculated (cf. Gal. 1:17-19).1

In 22:17-21, Saul later testified that during this first visit to

Jerusalem as a believer, he had received a vision of Jesus
telling him to leave Jerusalem, because God wanted to use him
to evangelize the Gentiles. Thus his departure from Jerusalem
was willing rather than forced.

Saul remained in the province of Cilicia until Barnabas tracked him down and
brought him to Syrian Antioch (11:19-26). This was some six years later.
We have no record of Saul's activities during this period (probably A.D. 37-
43), except that many of his experiences that he described in 2 Corinthians
11:24-27 and 12:1-9, seem to fit into these silent years. If they do, we
know that Saul was active in ministry gaining experience that fitted him for
what we read he did later in Acts on his missionary journeys.

There are some interesting similarities between the beginning of Saul's

ministry and the beginning of Jesus' ministry (cf. 9:20-35 and Luke 4:16-
30). Both men began their ministries by entering a synagogue and
delivering a salvation message. The audiences in both cases reacted with
shock and astonishment. In Jesus' case, the audience asked if He was not
the son of Joseph, and in Saul's case, the audience asked if he was not the
violent persecutor of Christians. Then both men escaped a violent response
to their messages.2

3. The church at peace 9:31

Notice that "church" is in the singular here. This is probably a reference to

the Christians throughout Palestine—in "Judea," "Galilee," and "Samaria"—
not just in one local congregation, e.g. in Jerusalem, but in the whole body
of Christ. Saul's departure from Palestine brought greater peace to the
churches there. He was an extremely controversial figure among the Jews
because of his conversion. Another reason for the lessening of persecution
of Christians at this time was the Roman Emperor's antagonism against the
Jews.3 Peaceful conditions are conducive to effective evangelism and
church growth (cf. 1 Tim. 2:1-4). The church continued to experience four

1BarryJ. Beitzel, The Moody Atlas of Bible Lands, p. 177.

2Witherington, p. 320.
3See Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]-9.
222 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

things: inward strengthening, a proper attitude and relationship to God (in

contrast to Judaism), the comfort (encouragement, Gr. paraklesis)
provided by the Holy Spirit, and numerical growth.

Besides this verse, there are few references to Galilee in Acts (cf. 10:37;
13:31). This has led some commentators to speculate that Galilee had
been evangelized during Jesus' ministry and was, by this time, fully
Christian. The evidence from church history, however, indicates that there
were few Christians in Galilee at this time and in later years.1

This statement is Luke's third major progress report on the state of the
church (cf. 2:47; 6:7; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; 28:30-31). It closes this section
dealing with the church's expansion in Judea and Samaria (6:8—9:31). The
Lord had first added about 3,000 new believers to the core group of
disciples (2:41). Then He added more who became Christians day by day
(2:47). Shortly after that, He added multitudes of new believers (5:14).
Then we read that the number of disciples increased greatly (6:7). Now we
read that the church "… continued to increase" (9:31).

"When the Spirit of God has His way in the hearts and lives of
believers, then unsaved people are going to be reached and
won for Christ."2

III. THE WITNESS TO THE UTTERMOST PART OF THE EARTH 9:32—28:31

Luke next recorded the church's expansion beyond Palestine to the

"uttermost parts of the earth" (1:8). The Ethiopian eunuch took the gospel
to Africa, but he became a Christian in Judea. Now we begin to read of
people becoming Christians in places farther from Jerusalem and Judea.

A. THE EXTENSION OF THE CHURCH TO SYRIAN ANTIOCH 9:32—12:24

As Jerusalem had been the Palestinian center for the evangelization of

Jews, Antioch of Syria became the Hellenistic center for Gentile
evangelization in Asia Minor and Europe. The gospel spread increasingly to
Gentiles, which Luke emphasized in this section of Acts. He recorded three
episodes: Peter's ministry in the maritime plain of Palestine (9:32-43), the

1See Barrett, pp. 473-74.

2Ironside, Lectures on …, p. 228.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 223

conversion of Cornelius and his friends in Caesarea (10:1—11:18), and the

founding of the Antioch church (11:19-30). Luke then looked back to
Jerusalem again to update us on what was happening there (12:1-23). He
concluded this section with another summary statement of the church's
growth (12:24).

1. Peter's ministry in Lydda and Joppa 9:32-43

Luke now returned to Peter's continuing ministry in Judea. Luke apparently

recorded the healing of Aeneas and the raising of Tabitha in order to show
that the gospel was being preached effectively in a region of Palestine that
both Jews and Gentiles occupied. Peter, the apostle to the Jews, was
responsible for its advancing farther into Gentile territory. Luke thereby
helped his readers see the equality of Gentiles and Jews in the church as it
continued to expand (cf. Eph. 2:11—3:12).

The healing of Aeneas at Lydda 9:32-35

Peter continued his itinerant ministry around Palestine (cf. 8:25).

9:32 "Lydda" (modern Lod, the site of Israel's international airport)

lay on the Mediterranean coastal plain, about 10 miles from
the sea. It was about 25 miles northwest of Jerusalem. It stood
at the junction of the roads from Joppa to Jerusalem and the
highway from Egypt to Syria.1 There were already "saints"
there (cf. vv. 13, 41).

9:33 Peter healed another lame man in Lydda (cf. 3:6-8; Luke 5:17-
26).2 "Aeneas" is a Greek name. He was probably a Hellenistic
Jew. We do not know if he was a Christian. The fact that Luke
called him "a man," but referred to Tabitha as "a disciple" (v.
36), may imply that he was not a believer.

9:34 Peter announced that the healing was Jesus Christ's work (cf.
1:1; 3:6): "Jesus Christ heals you." Jesus had also told a
paralytic in Capernaum to take up his pallet and walk (Matt.
9:6; Mark 2:11; Luke 5:24). He later told another paralytic who

1See the map near my comments on 8:4-8 above.

2See Joshua Schwartz, "Peter and Ben Stada in Lydda," in The Book of Acts in Its First
Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 391-414.
224 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

lay at the Bethesda pool in Jerusalem to do the same thing

(John 5:8). The Greek clause stroson seauto literally means
"spread for yourself," and can refer to making a bed or
preparing a table. The power of Jesus was still at work through
Peter. The formerly paralyzed man arose "immediately." Later
Paul healed Publius' father (28:8).

"I think every one of the different diseases

mentioned in Scripture was intended by God to
illustrate in some way the effects of sin."1

9:35 "Sharon" was the name of the section of maritime plain that
stretched from Joppa to Mt. Carmel. Lydda was near its
southeastern edge, and Caesarea was at its center on the
Mediterranean coast. As with the healing of the lame temple
beggar, and Jesus' healings of the paralytics at Capernaum and
Jerusalem, the healing of Aeneas resulted in many people
hearing the gospel and believing in Jesus ("all who lived at
Lydda and Sharon").

One of the reasons Luke included this healing in his book, seems to have
been because the results of this healing affected "all" the people living in
this area of Palestine. One of these people was the Gentile Cornelius, who
will figure significantly in the next chapter.

The raising of Tabitha at Joppa 9:36-43

9:36 The site of "Joppa" (modern Yafo, a suburb of Tel Aviv) was
on the Mediterranean coast, 10 miles west and a little north of
Lydda. It was the ancient seaport for Jerusalem (cf. 2 Chron.
2:16; Jon. 1:3). "Tabitha" (lit. "Gazelle") was a Jewish
Christian, and she was a "disciple" (Gr. mathetria). This is the
only place in the New Testament where the feminine form of
the Greek word translated "disciple" appears. "Tabitha" was
her Aramaic name, whereas "Dorcas" was her Greek name. She
had a marvelous reputation for helping people in her
community ("abounding in deeds of kindness and charity")—
because she had a servant's heart.

1Ironside, Lectures on …, p. 231.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 225

9:37-38 When "she … died," the believers sent word to Peter in nearby
"Joppa," asking him to come. Apparently they expected him
to raise her back to life, just as Jesus had done, since they
"washed her body," and "laid it in an upper room."

9:39 Luke told this story with much interesting detail. Peter
accompanied the two men, who came to Lydda for him, back
to Joppa (cf. 10:7, 23). The "widows" were evidently wearing
the clothing Tabitha had made for them. The middle voice of
the Greek verb translated "showing" in verse 39 suggests this.
She had made these clothes for the poor widows. This was her
ministry.

"She had the gift of sewing. Do you mean to tell

me that sewing is a gift of the Holy Spirit? Yes, it
was for this woman. May I suggest seeking a gift
that is practical?1

9:40-41 Peter's procedure here was almost identical to Jesus' when He

raised Jairus' daughter (Mark 5:41; Luke 8:51-56). Peter's
praying shows that he was relying on Jesus for his power, just
as his previous announcement, "Jesus Christ heals you," had
manifested that attitude when he healed Aeneas (v. 34).
There is only one letter difference in what Peter said (Tabitha
qumi) and what Jesus had said (Talitha qumi, lit. "Little girl,
get up"). This miracle is yet another evidence of Jesus' working
powerfully through His witnesses in word and deed (1:1-2; cf.
John 14:12). Tannehill pointed out many similarities between
this story and the stories of Elijah, Elisha, and Jesus raising
dead people.2 Jesus had given the Twelve the power to raise
the dead (Matt. 10:8).

9:42 "Many" people "all over Joppa" became believers because of

the news of this miracle, too. The phrase "believed in the Lord"
(v. 42) is similar to "turned to the Lord" (v. 35; cf. 11:21;
15:19). It is another way of saying they "became Christians,"
and emphasizes that the Person they believed in was the Lord

1McGee, 4:552.
2Tannehill, 2:126-27.
226 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Jesus. Notice that "turning" is equated with "believing," and

that Luke mentioned no other conditions for salvation.

9:43 This verse provides a geographical and ideological transition to

the account of Peter's visit to Cornelius (10:1—11:18).
Evidently Peter remained "in Joppa" for quite some time
("many days") to confirm these new converts and to help the
church in that town. His willingness to stay "with a tanner"
shows that Peter was more broad-minded in his fellowship than
many other Jews. Many Jews thought that tanners practiced
an unclean trade because they worked with the skins of dead
animals, so they would have nothing to do with them. However,
Peter was about to receive a challenge to his convictions,
similar to the one that Saul had received on the Damascus
road.

Note how God used the invitation of the people of Joppa to bring Peter
there. Likewise God often uses, what initially appear to be incidental
occurrences, to open up great ministries. Luke illustrated this divine
method repeatedly in Acts.

"It was important to demonstrate that Peter was in the full

stream of his usefulness, and the agent of miracles curiously
like those performed by his Master (Mt. ix. 23-26; Mk. v. 38-
43; Jn. v. 6-9), when the call came to him to baptize a
Gentile."1

2. The conversion of Cornelius 10:1—11:18

Many people consider healing a lame person a great miracle, and raising a
dead person back to life an even greater one. But the spiritual salvation of
a lost sinner is greater than both of them. The Lord performed the first
two miracles through Peter (9:32-35, 36-43), and now He did the third
(ch. 10).

"In a sense this scene is the book's turning point, as from here
the gospel will fan out in all directions to people across a vast

1Blaiklock, p. 94.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 227

array of geographical regions, something Paul's three

missionary journeys will underscore."1

The episode concerning Cornelius is obviously very important, since there

are three lengthy references to it in Acts (chs. 10, 11, and 15). It deals
with an important issue concerning the mission that the Lord gave His
disciples. That issue is how the Christians should carry out that mission in
view of the obstacle of Gentile uncleanness. Gentiles were ritually unclean
and communicated ritual uncleanness to Jews, according to the Mosaic
Law, mainly because they did not observe Jewish dietary distinctions (Lev.
11). This obstacle kept Jews and Gentiles separate in society.

Luke stressed four things in this conversion story particularly: First, the
Christians initially resisted the ideas of evangelizing Gentiles, and of
accepting them into the church apart from any relationship to Judaism
(10:14, 28; 11:2-3, 8). Second, God Himself led the way in Gentile
evangelism and acceptance, and He showed His approval (10:3, 11-16, 19-
20, 22b, 30-33, 44-46; 11:5-10, 13, 15-17). Third, it was Peter, the
leader of the Jerusalem apostles, whom God used to open the door of the
church to Gentiles—rather than Paul (10:23, 34-43, 47-48; 11:15-17).
Fourth, the Jerusalem church accepted the conversion of Gentiles—apart
from their associating with Judaism—because God had validated this in
Cornelius' case (11:18).2

"Although Paul is the primary agent in the mission to the

Gentiles, Luke wishes to make it plain, not only that Peter was
in full sympathy with his position, but that, as head of the
Church, Peter was the first to give its official blessing to the
admission of Gentiles as full and equal members of the New
Israel [i.e., the church] by his action in the case of a Roman
centurion and his friends …"3

Cornelius' vision 10:1-8

10:1 "Caesarea" stood on the Mediterranean coast, about 30 miles

north of Joppa. Formerly its name was Strato's Tower,4 Strato

1Bock, Acts, p. 380.

2Longenecker, p. 383.
3Neil,p. 137. See Howson, p. 77, for parallels between the conversion of Saul and the
conversion of Cornelius.
4Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]; [Link]; idem, The Wars …, [Link].
228 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

being a former king of Sidon (370-358 B.C.).1 But Herod the

Great built this town into a major seaport and renamed it in
honor of Augustus Caesar,2 his patron who was the adopted
heir of Julius Caesar. "Sebaste" is the Greek equivalent of the
Latin "Augustus." Herod the Great had modernized the city,
made it the provincial capital of Judea (Pilate lived there), and
built its magnificent harbor. It was at that time the major
Roman seaport for Palestine and its most important center of
Roman government and military activity.3

"Cornelius" was a common Roman name.4 Centurions were

non-commissioned officers of the Roman army, who each
commanded 100 soldiers, and had about the same level of
authority as a captain in the United States army. A "cohort"
contained 600 soldiers, and Cornelius' "Italian cohort" had
connections with Italy.5 Every reference to centurions in the
New Testament is positive (Matt. 8:5-10; 27:54; Mark 15:44-
45; Acts 22:25-26; 23:17-18; 27:6, 43). These men were
"the backbone of the Roman army."6 Cornelius was similar to
the centurion of Luke 7:1-10 (see especially v. 5).

"The legion was the regiment [cf. an American

division] of the Roman army, and it consisted
nominally of 6000 men. Each legion was divided
into ten cohorts [Amer. battalion], and again each
cohort contained six centuries or 'hundreds' of
men [Amer. company]. The officer in command of
a cohort was called a tribune or in the Greek
chiliarch: Such was Claudius Lysias of xxi 31 and
xxiii 26. A century was under a centurion or
kekatontarch."7

Cornelius represents a new type of person to whom the gospel

had not gone before, as recorded in Acts. The Ethiopian

1A. T. Olmstead, History of the Persian Empire, p. 411.

2Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]; [Link]; idem, The Wars …, [Link]-8.
3See Hengel, pp. 55-58.
4See Longenecker, pp. 384-85.
5See Barrett, p. 499.
6F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 215. Cf. Barclay, p. 82.
7Rackham, p. 147.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 229

eunuch, as well, was a Gentile, but the Jews viewed his

occupation favorably. There was nothing about his occupation
that would have repulsed the Jews. However, Cornelius, in
addition to being a Gentile, was a member of Israel's occupying
army. The Jews would have avoided him solely because of his
occupation, even though he possessed an admirable character
and was friendly to the Jews.

It is interesting to note that the first Gentile whom Jesus dealt

with during His ministry was a Roman centurion, and that he,
too, believed. In response to that man's faith, Jesus announced
that many would come from among the Gentiles to join Jews
in the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 8:11).

10:2 Cornelius lived a moral life because he "feared God," as did "all"
the other members of "his household." His generosity ("alms")
to the people (Gr. to lao, i.e., to the Jews), and his continual
prayers (Gr. deomai, lit. "begging"), were further evidences of
his respect for Israel's God. His relations with God and people
were admirable (cf. Matt. 22:37-39). Cornelius had not
become a full Jewish proselyte (11:3), but he did pray to the
Jews' "God."

The Jews called full Gentile proselytes who had undergone

circumcision "proselytes of righteousness." They referred to
Gentiles who adhered to Judaism to a lesser extent, without
submitting to circumcision, "proselytes of the gate." Luke
called these latter people "God-fearers." Cornelius may have
been one of the latter proselytes or "God-fearers," and the
Ethiopian eunuch may have been another (cf. 8:27). This type
of Gentile constituted fertile soil for the gospel seed (cf. 8:26-
40). It was mainly such God-fearing Gentiles who responded to
Paul's ministry.

Scholars debate the existence of the "God-fearers" as a

distinct group.1 The scriptural evidence points to their

1See, for example, the series of articles featured in Biblical Archaeology Review 12:5
(September-October 1986) under the general title, "The God-Fearers—Did They Exist?":
Robert S. MacLennan and A. Thomas Kraabel, "The God-Fearers—A Literary and
Theological Invention," pp. 46-53; Robert F. Tannenbaum, "Jews and God-Fearers in the
230 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

existence (cf. Acts 10:2, 22, 35; 13:16, 26, 43, 50; 16:14;
17:4, 17; 18:7), and this has been the opinion of the majority
of scholars over the years.

Some students of Acts have contended that Cornelius was a

believer (i.e., an Old Testament saint) before he sent for
Peter.1 Some scholars argue that Cornelius was righteous
before he heard Peter's gospel message, so it is unnecessary
for people to hear the gospel to be saved.2 It seems to many
others, and to me, that, in view of what we read in this chapter
and the next, he was not truly saved (i.e., justified) until verse
44 (cf. 11:14).

10:3-4 The "ninth hour" (3:00 p.m.) was the Jewish hour of prayer
(cf. 3:1),3 so Cornelius may have been praying. Again God
would prepare two people to get together by giving each of
them a vision (Cornelius and Peter; cf. Saul and Ananias).
Cornelius saw "an angel," not Jesus (vv. 7, 22, 30; 11: 13; cf.
1:20). "Lord" here is a respectful address such as "Sir," but
the centurion undoubtedly felt great awe when he saw this
supernatural visitor (cf. v. 30). Cornelius was not calling the
angel his "Savior" or his "Sovereign." God had noted Cornelius'
piety (his prayers Godward, proseuchai, and his alms manward,
cf. v. 2), and was now going to give him more revelation.

"Luke is suggesting that the prayers and the alms

of this Gentile were accepted by God in lieu of the
sacrifices which he was not allowed to enter the
Temple to offer himself. In other words, God had
acted to break down barriers between Jew and

Holy City of Aphrodite," pp. 54-57; and Louis H. Feldman, "The Omnipresence of the God-
Fearers," pp. 58-63.
1E.g., Calvin, [Link]; Gaebelein, The Annotated …, [Link]; Ironside, Lectures on …, pp.

245, 268.
2E.g., John Sanders, "Inclusivism," in What about Those Who Have Never Heard? Three

Views on the Destiny of the Unevangelized, p. 40; but see 10:43; 11:14). For refutation
of this view, see Ramesh Richard, "Soteriological Inclusivism and Dispensationalism,"
Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):85-108.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 231

Gentile by treating the prayers and alms of a

Gentile as equivalent to the sacrifice of a Jew."1

Modern missionaries have told stories of similar seekers after

God. After the missionaries had penetrated some remote tribe
and had preached the gospel, the natives explained how they
had previously worshipped the same God the missionary
preached, and had prayed for more light. Romans 3:11 means
that no one seeks God unless God draws him or her to Himself,
which is what God did with Cornelius.

10:5-6 God told Cornelius to "send (dispatch)" some "men to Joppa"

for "Simon (also called) Peter," who was staying there with
another "Simon," the "tanner" (cf. 9:43). Tanners used quite
a bit of water in practicing their trade, and this may be the
reason this Simon lived by the Mediterranean Sea.

10:7-8 Cornelius immediately (v. 33) "sent … two of his servants,"

probably to assist Peter, plus a spiritually "devout" military
aide ("soldier") to ask Peter to come. These servants appear
to have been God-fearing individuals, and members of his
household (cf. v. 2), who were in sympathy with Cornelius'
purpose. Earlier, a centurion had similarly sent his friends to
entreat Jesus to heal his sick servant (Matt. 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-
10).

Peter's vision 10:9-16

"Though Peter was not by training or inclination an overly

scrupulous Jew, and though as a Christian his inherited
prejudices were gradually wearing thin, he was not prepared to
go so far as to minister directly to Gentiles. A special revelation
was necessary for that, and Luke now tells how God took the
initiative in overcoming Peter's reluctance."2

The original Greek, Roman, and Jewish readers of Acts all put much stock
in dreams, visions, and oracles. They believed they came from "the gods,"
or from the "one true God" in the case of Jews. So it is not surprising that

1P.F. Esler, Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political Motivations of
Lucan Theology, p. 162.
2Longenecker, p. 387.
232 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Luke put much emphasis on these events in his conversion stories of Saul
and Cornelius. This would have put the divine sanction for Christianity
beyond dispute in the readers' minds.1

10:9-10 Most Jews prayed twice a day, but pious Jews also prayed at
noon ("the sixth hour"), a third time of prayer (Ps. 55:17; Dan.
6:10). However, Peter may have been praying—more because
of the recent success of the gospel in Joppa (cf. 9:42)—than
because praying at noon was his habit. The aorist tense of the
Greek verb proseuchomai suggests that Peter may have been
praying about something definite rather than general. This
Greek word also sometimes refers to worship. He probably
"went up on the" flat "housetop" for privacy and the fresh sea
air. Luke's reference to Peter's hunger, which God evidently
gave him, explains partially why God couched his vision in
terms of food. Food was what was on Peter's mind. Peter's
"trance" (Gr. ekstasis, v. 10) was a vision (horama, vv. 17, 19;
11:5).

"… on weekdays Jews ate a light meal in mid-

morning and a more substantial meal in the later
afternoon."2

10:11-13 The sheet-like container, similar perhaps to an awning on the

roof or a ship's sail, was full of "all kinds of animals," clean and
unclean (cf. 11:6). The issue of unclean food was the basic
one that separated observant Jews like Peter from Gentiles.

"Milk drawn by a heathen, if a Jew had not been

present to watch it, bread and oil prepared by
them, were unlawful. Their wine was wholly
interdicted—the mere touch of a heathen polluted
a whole cask; nay, even to put one's nose to
heathen wine was strictly prohibited!"3

"… the point is that the Lord's command frees

Peter from any scruples about going to a Gentile
home and eating whatever might be set before

1Witherington,p. 341.
2Marshall,
The Acts …, p. 185.
3Edersheim, The Life …, 1:92.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 233

him. It would be a short step from recognizing that

Gentile food was clean to realizing that Gentiles
themselves were 'clean' also."1

The Jewish laws distinguishing between clean and unclean

animals appear in Lev. 11.

10:14 Peter protested the Lord Jesus' command, strongly but

politely (Gr. Medamos, kurie), as Ezekiel had done when he
received similar instructions from God (Ezek. 4:14). Peter may
have remembered and recognized the voice as that of Jesus.2
He had either not understood or not remembered Jesus'
teaching in which He had declared all foods clean (Mark 7:14-
19, cf. Rom. 14:14).

Peter's "No, Lord," is, of course, an inconsistent contradiction.

Nevertheless Peter's response was very consistent with his
impulsive personality and former conduct. He had said, "No,"
to the Lord before (cf. Matt. 16:22; John 13:8). His reaction
to this instruction reminds us of Peter's similar extreme
reactions on other, earlier occasions (e.g., John 13:8-9; 21:7).
Saul's response to the voice from heaven on the Damascus
Road, however, had not been negative (9:5-8).

"The cliché, 'If He is not Lord of all, He is not Lord

at all' is simply that—a cliché and not a biblical or
theological truth. He can be Lord of aspects of my
life while I withhold other areas of my life from His
control. Peter illustrated that as clearly as anyone
that day on the rooftop when the Lord asked him
to kill and eat unclean animals. He said, 'By no
means, Lord' (Acts 10:14). At that point was
Christ Lord of all of Peter? Certainly not. Then
must we conclude that He was not Lord at all in
relation to Peter's life? I think not."3

Watch out for the teaching that Christians should observe the
dietary restrictions of the Mosaic Law. This is a modern form

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 186.

2F.F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 220.
3Ryrie, So Great …, p. 73.
234 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

of legalism. Some of what God forbade for Israel had nothing

to do with guaranteeing good health (e.g., wearing mixed fiber
clothing, not yoking an ox with a donkey, etc.).

Why did Peter object to eating unclean food since he had

previously violated Jewish taboos about contact with dead
bodies (cf. 9:43)? Evidently eating unclean food was much
more serious in Peter' mind than contact with dead bodies.

10:15-16 Peter's Jewish cultural prejudices were overriding the Word of

God in his thinking. For this reason God repeated the vision two
more times, so Peter would be sure he understood God's
command correctly.

"The threefold repetition might also remind Peter

of an interview on a familiar beach [cf. John
21:15-17]."1

"The message pervading the whole [of Peter's

vision] … is that the disciples are to receive the
Gentiles, not before cleansing, but after God has
cleansed them as He will do later through the
cleansing Gospel which Peter will share with them
the next day."2

"The particular application had to do with

nullifying Jewish dietary laws for Christians in
accord with Jesus' remarks on the subject in Mark
7:17-23. But Peter was soon to learn that the
range of the vision's message extended much
more widely, touching directly on Jewish-Gentile
relations as he had known them and on those
relations in ways he could never have
anticipated."3

I wonder if Peter remembered Jonah as he thought about the

mission God had given him of preaching to the Gentiles. God
had also called that prophet to carry a message of salvation to

1Blaiklock,
p. 96.
2Harm,p. 35.
3Longenecker, p. 388.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 235

the Gentiles in Nineveh, but Jonah had fled from that very city,
Joppa, to escape his calling. Now Peter found himself in the
same position.

"Because Jonah disobeyed God, the Lord sent a

storm that caused the Gentile sailors to fear.
Because Peter obeyed the Lord, God sent the
'wind of the Spirit' to the Gentiles and they
experienced great joy and peace."1

The invitation from Cornelius' messengers 10:17-23a

10:17-18 Peter did not understand what the vision meant. While he
pondered the subject, being "greatly perplexed in mind,"
Cornelius' messengers called out below, inquiring about Simon
Peter's presence in the house.

"To stand and call is a very common and very

respectful mode; and thus it was in Bible times,
and to it there are many very interesting allusions
[cf. Deut. 24:10; Acts 10:17-18; 12:13, 16]."2

10:19-20 Somehow the Holy Spirit convinced Peter that God wanted him
to accompany the messengers to Cornelius' house.

"… it is both exegetically and experientially

difficult, if not impossible, to draw any sharp lines
between 'an angel of God [vv. 3, 22],' the Holy
Spirit [v. 19], and the ascended Christ [vv. 4,
14]."3

We could also add "God" (v. 28; cf. 8:26, 29, 39; 16:6-7; Rom.
8:9-11; 2 Cor. 3:17-18).

"A God-fearer had no objection to the society of

Jews, but even a moderately orthodox Jew would

1Wiersbe,1:443.
2Thomson, 1:192.
3Longenecker, p. 389. See also Neil, p. 139.
236 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

not willingly enter the dwelling of a Gentile, God-

fearer though he were."1

Peter was to feel free to ("without misgivings") enter the

house of Cornelius, since the centurion was not unclean. Quite
possibly while Peter "was reflecting" (v. 19), he remembered
Jesus' teaching in which He terminated the clean/unclean
distinction (cf. v. 29; Mark 7:19).

10:21-22 Peter probably descended from the roof by using a stairway

on the outside of the house, as was common, and met the
messengers outside the door where they had been standing.
They described Cornelius as a "man well spoken of by the
whole (entire) nation (Gr. ethnos) of the Jews," as well as "a
righteous and God-fearing man" (cf. v. 2). They obviously
wanted their description of their master to influence Peter to
accompany them back to Caesarea.

10:23a After learning their intent, Peter invited them inside and acted
as their host. This was very unusual, since Jews normally did
not provide hospitality for Gentiles. Peter had apparently
already begun to understand the meaning of the vision he had
seen, and right away began to apply it in his relationships with
these Gentiles.

"There may also be some intended irony here,

since Peter had earlier protested his
scrupulousness about food, all the while staying in
the house of a man whose trade made him
unclean!"2

Peter's visit to Cornelius 10:23b-33

10:23b-24 Peter wisely took six other Jewish Christians with him (11:12).
A total of seven believers witnessed what took place in
Cornelius' house. The trip from Caesarea to Joppa took part of
two days (v. 30). Cornelius was so sure Peter would come, that
even before the apostle arrived, he gathered a group of "his
relatives and (close) friends" to listen to him. The text gives

1F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 217.

2Witherington, p. 351.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 237

no reason to assume that Cornelius knew Peter was the

foremost apostle among the early Christians (cf. v. 5).
Cornelius had an exemplary concern for the spiritual welfare of
others even before he became a Christian (cf. v. 27).

10:25-26 Peter entered Cornelius' house, which was taboo for many
Jews (cf. 9:43; 10:14). Cornelius met Peter just like, on
another occasion, the Apostle John responded to God's angelic
messenger: he "fell at his feet and worshipped him."
Nevertheless Peter, like the angel, refused this unwarranted
veneration (cf. Rev. 19:10; 22:8-9).

"… Simon Peter would never have let you get

down to kiss his big toe [as pilgrims to St. Peter's
Basilica in Rome do to the statue of Peter there].
He just wouldn't permit it."1

Later, Paul and Barnabas received a similar reception from the

Lystrans, and likewise refused worship (14:11-15).

10:27-29 It was taboo for Jews "to associate with Gentiles (a foreigner)"
and or "to visit" them in their homes.2 Gentiles did not observe
the strict rules Jews followed in eating, preparing, and even
handling food, nor did they tithe or practice circumcision. Any
physical contact with Gentiles laid a Jew open to becoming
ceremonially unclean because of the Gentiles' failure to
observe these Mosaic laws.

"It may be safely asserted, that the grand

distinction, which divided all mankind into Jews
and Gentiles, was not only religious, but also
social."3

"There is nothing more binding on the average

person than social custom."4

1McGee, 4:556.
2Mishnah Demai 3:4.
3Edersheim, Sketches of …, p. 86.
4Robertson, 3:141.
238 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Food was the crux of the issue that separated them. However,
Peter had gotten the message of the sheet full of food: food
does not make a person unholy or unclean. Consequently he
had come "without" further "objection." Peter's explanation in
these verses stressed the fact that God had convinced him to
go against traditional Jewish custom, which was well-known
among the Gentiles.

"If the food laws of the Jews no longer were valid,

there was no real reason to avoid social contact
with gentiles, for those distinctions lay at the
heart of Jewish clannishness."1

"He [Peter] violates the first rule of homiletics

when he begins his message with an apology.
What he says is not a friendly thing to say. In fact,
it is an insult. … How would you feel, especially if
you are a lady who is a housekeeper, if some
visitor came into your home and his first words
were, 'I am coming into your home, which I
consider dirty'?"2

Nevertheless Peter quickly and humbly explained that he had

been wrong about how he formerly felt about Gentiles (v. 29).

"… the Christian preacher or teacher must call no

man common or unclean."3

10:30-33 Cornelius then related the vision he had seen to Peter. The
angel in Cornelius' vision (v. 2) had looked like "a man" dressed
"in shining garments" (v. 30). The vision God had given him
was a response to the centurion's prayers ("prayer") and
"alms."

"… there are certain things that do count before

God. These are things which can in no way merit
salvation, but they are things which God notes. …
Wherever there is a man who seeks after God as

1Kent,p. 93.
2McGee, 4:557.
3Morgan, The Acts …, p. 218.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 239

Cornelius did, that man is going to hear the gospel

of the grace of God. God will see that he gets it."1

Cornelius had responded to God admirably, by sending for

Peter "immediately" (cf. Peter's "By no means, Lord," v. 14).
Cornelius then invited Peter to tell him and his guests what
God wanted him to say to them. What a prepared and
receptive audience this was!

Luke stressed the significance of Cornelius' experience by

repeating certain details (cf. 11:4-10). This is another example
of his doublet style, which increases emphasis. Other examples
are: the repetition of Jesus' miracles by His followers, and the
repetition of the same types of miracles—that Peter
performed—by Paul.

Peter's message to Cornelius 10:34-43

Peter's sermon on this occasion is the first sermon in Acts addressed to a

Gentile audience (cf. 14:15-17; 17:22-31). It is quite similar to the ones
Peter preached in 2:14-40 and 3:11-26, except that this one has more
information about Jesus' pre-crucifixion ministry. This emphasis was
appropriate, since Peter was addressing Gentiles who would have known
less about Jesus' ministry than the Jews did. Also this speech contains no
quotations from the Old Testament, though there are many allusions to
the Old Testament.

10:34 "Opening his mouth" is a phrase that typically introduces

something very important (cf. 8:35; 18:14; Matt. 5:2; 13:35).

"… in Luke's eyes what Peter was about to say

was indeed momentous in sweeping away
centuries of racial prejudice."2

What Peter confessed that he now understood, was something

God had revealed throughout the Old Testament (e.g., Amos
9:7; Mic. 6:8), but that most Jews had not grasped due to

1McGee, 4:555.
2Longenecker, p. 392.
240 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

centuries of ill-founded pride. God had now clarified this

revelation.

Since "God is not one to show partiality" (cf. Deut. 10:17; 2

Chron. 19:7; Job 34:19), certainly Christians should not do this
either. Peter proceeded to prove that God deals with all people
equally through His Son (cf. vv. 36, 38, 42, 43), not on the
basis of their race (cf. John 10:16). Whenever Christians
practice racial discrimination, they need to reread Acts 10.

10:35 God requires faith in Jesus Christ for total acceptance (v. 43;
cf. 11:17). However, anyone who "fears" God, and "does what
is right" in harmony with His will, as Cornelius did, meets with
His initial acceptance ("is welcome to Him").

10:36 All of this verse is a kind of caption for what Peter proceeded
to announce to Cornelius and his guests. Its three main
emphases are: first, that the message to follow was a
presentation of revelation that God had sent to the Jews.
Second, it was a message resulting in "peace" that comes
through Jesus Christ. Third, Jesus Christ is Lord of all, both
Jews and Gentiles. "Lord of all" was a pagan title for deity,
which the Christians adopted as an appropriate title for Jesus
Christ.1 "He is Lord of all" expressed Peter's new insight. It is
probably the main statement in the verse.

"Since Jesus is Lord over all, Peter could proclaim

to Cornelius and other Gentiles that the gospel is
available to all. This is one of the most central
points in Luke-Acts."2

"What is the nature of Jesus' lordship [v. 36]?

Because of His lordship, He had a ministry of
power as He healed all who were oppressed by the
devil (v. 38). As Lord, He was the object of a
testimony that declared Him to be the Judge of
the living and the dead (v. 42). He is the one of
whom all the prophets testified that forgiveness

1Ibid., p. 393; Barrett, p. 522.

2Bock, "A Theology …," p. 105
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 241

of sins is found in His name (v. 43). Again [as in

2:21, 32-39; 5:14; and 9:42] lordship described
the authority that Jesus has as the Bearer of
salvation—an authority that involves work in the
past (exorcising demons), present (granting
forgiveness of sins), and future (serving as
Judge)."1

That "lord" does not always mean "master" should be clear

from this chapter. In verse 4, it is simply a respectful address
and means "Sir." In verse 14, it means "God." And in this verse,
it means "sovereign." The context helps us to interpret the
meaning in each case. Also in each case, however, the idea of
respect is present.

10:37 Peter proceeded to outline Jesus of Nazareth's career for his

listeners, assuming some knowledge that was common, but
adding more details than Luke recorded in Peter's previous
speeches. This is the most comprehensive review of Jesus'
career found in any speech in Acts. These details would have
been appropriate since Peter's hearers here were Gentiles.
Peter's sketch followed the same general outline as Mark's
Gospel, which, according to early Christian tradition, Peter
influenced.

Luke undoubtedly summarized Peter's message, as he did

most, if not all of the other addresses in Luke-Acts, and
stressed points important to his readers. These points included
the fulfillment of Isaiah 61:1 (in v. 38, cf. Luke 4:14-30), the
importance of apostolic witness (in vv. 39-41, cf. Acts 1:8),
and Jesus' post-resurrection eating and drinking with His
disciples (v. 41, cf. Luke 24:41-43). "The thing" to which
Peter referred was the earthly ministry of Jesus.

10:38 Jesus' anointing by God "with the Holy Spirit" took place at His
baptism by John the Baptist (cf. Luke 3:21-22), when He
became God's officially Anointed One (i.e., the Messiah). The
"all" whom Jesus healed were the many He healed. This is
hyperbole, since Jesus did not heal every needy person He

1Idem, "Jesus as …," p. 149.

242 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

met.1 However, Peter probably meant that Jesus healed all

Jews and Gentiles alike. This is another verse which advocates
of the "prosperity gospel" cite, attempting to prove their
case.2 Jesus' good deeds and supernatural miracles testified
to God's presence with Him (cf. Gen. 39:2).

10:39 The apostles regularly mentioned in their preaching that they

were eye "witnesses" of Jesus' ministry (2:32; 3:15; 5:32;
10:41; 13:30-31). This had tremendous persuasive appeal to
their hearers. Peter divided Jesus' acts into those that He
performed "in the land of the Jews," and the ones "in
Jerusalem," their capital city. Those who "put Jesus (Him) to
death" were the Jews (3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 7:52) and the
Gentiles (4:27). Here Peter referred generally to all those
involved in the Crucifixion. "Hanging him on a cross"
emphasizes the horrible way the enemies of Jesus killed Him.

"It is difficult, after sixteen centuries and more

during which the cross has been a sacred symbol,
to realize the unspeakable horror and loathing
which the very mention or thought of the cross
provoked in Paul's day. The word crux was
unmentionable in polite Roman society (Cicero,
Pro Rabirio 16); even when one was being
condemned to death by crucifixion the sentence
used an archaic formula which served as a sort of
euphemism …"3

"The cross of Christ reveals the love of God at its

best and the sin of man at its worst."4

10:40-41 In contrast to man's treatment of Jesus, God "raised Him" from

the grave after three days (cf. 17:31). Jesus also appeared to
selected individuals whom God chose to be "witnesses" of His
resurrection. Among these was Peter himself, who even "ate
and drank with" the risen Lord, proof that He really was alive!

1See my comment on 3:2.

2See my comments on 5:16.
3F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians, p. 271.
4Anonymous.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 243

"The resurrection appearances were not made to

the people at large. The reason appears to have
been that those who saw Jesus were constituted
to act as witnesses to the many people who could
not see him, and this obligation was not laid on
people who were unfit for it but only on those who
had been prepared by lengthy association with
Jesus and by sharing his work of mission."1

10:42-43 Peter referred to the Great Commission, which Jesus gave His
disciples after His resurrection (v. 41), in verse 42.

"This entire experience is an illustration of the

commission of Matthew 28:19-20. Peter went
where God sent him and made disciples ('teach')
of the Gentiles. Then he baptized them and taught
them the Word."2

Jesus Christ will one day judge all people ("the living and the
dead") as forgiven or not forgiven (cf. Acts 17:31). To be
forgiven one must "believe in Him" (cf. 5:14; 9:42; 11:17).
Peter said this is what the Old Testament prophets taught
(e.g., Isa. 53:11; Jer. 31:34; Ezek. 36:25-26; et al.). The
Messiah (Christ) would be the "Judge" of all people, and Jesus
of Nazareth is that Messiah (cf. John 5:27). The Lord of all (v.
36) is also the Judge of all (v. 42).

Note how Peter stressed the universal benefit of Jesus'

ministry in this message to Gentiles; it was for Gentiles as well
as Jews. Not only is Jesus Lord of all (v. 36), but He went
about healing all (v. 38). Furthermore He is the Judge of all (v.
42) to whom all the prophets bore witness (v. 43a), and God
forgives all who believe in Him (v. 43b).

"This simple outline [vv. 34-43] … is perhaps the clearest NT

example of the kerygma, the earliest form in which the

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 193.

2Wiersbe, 1:447.
244 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

apostolic proclamation of the gospel was apparently

couched."1

The giving of the Holy Spirit to Gentiles 10:44-48

10:44 Peter did not need to call for his hearers to repent on this
occasion (cf. 2:38; 3:19). As soon as he gave them enough
information to trust in Jesus Christ, they did so. Immediately
"the Holy Spirit fell on (upon)" them, filling them (v. 47; 11:15;
cf. 2:4) and baptizing them (11:16; cf. 1:5).

God gave His Spirit to individuals from both groups, Jews and
Gentiles, solely because of their faith in Jesus Christ (11:17).
The Gentiles did not have to do anything but believe on Jesus.
They did not need to become Jewish proselytes, experience
baptism in water, undergo circumcision, turn from their sins,
or even say they were willing to turn from them.2

Note that Spirit baptism took place here without the laying on
of an apostle's hands. The identification of Spirit baptism with
the apostles was not necessary here, as it had been with the
Samaritans (cf. 8:17-19). However, the important point was
the connection between faith in Jesus Christ alone, apart from
any external Jewish rite, and Spirit baptism.

"Through Peter's experience with Cornelius it is

made plain that the norm for this age for both
Jews and Gentiles, is for the Holy Spirit to be given
without delay, human mediation, or other
conditions than simple faith in Jesus Christ for
both Jew and Gentile."3

10:45 The outward evidence that God had given His Spirit to these
Gentile believers as a gift, was that they spoke in tongues and
praised God (cf. 11:15-16). This amazed Peter's Jewish
companions, because it proved that God was not making a

1Kent, p. 94.
2See Roy B. Zuck, "Cheap Grace?" Kindred Spirit 13:2 (Summer 1989):4-7, for a popular
critique of "Lordship Salvation."
3The New Scofield …, p. 1179.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 245

distinction between Jewish and Gentile believers in Jesus

regarding His acceptance of them.

10:46a Probably Peter and his Jewish companions heard these Gentiles
praising God in Aramaic (and classical Hebrew?), which these
Gentiles would not have known previously, since Aramaic was
a language the Jews understood. The Jews present would have
understood Aramaic immediately, and would have recognized
that the ability to speak in an unstudied language was an
evidence of Spirit baptism, as it was at Pentecost.

10:46b-48 There was no reason to withhold "water" baptism from these

Gentile converts; they could undergo baptism in water as a
testimony to their faith immediately. They had believed in
Jesus Christ and had experienced Spirit baptism. Baptism with
the Spirit was Jesus' sign of His acceptance of them, and
baptism with water was their sign of their acceptance of Him.
They had done everything they needed to do. They did not
need to experience anything more such as circumcision, or
admission into the Jewish community, or the adoption of
traditional Jewish dietary laws, or anything else.

"I have heard people say sometimes that if you

are baptized with the Holy Ghost you do not need
to be baptized in water. It is not a question of
what you need—it is a question of what God has
commanded."1

The events Luke recorded in 9:32—10:48 prepared Peter for the Lord's
further expansion of His church to include Gentiles. Peter had unlocked the
door of the church to Jews on Pentecost (Matt. 16:19; cf. Eph. 2:14).
What happened in Cornelius' house was "the Pentecost of the Gentile
world."2 By pouring out His Spirit on these Gentiles, God showed that—in
His sight—Jews and Gentiles were equal. The Jew had no essential
advantage over the Gentile in entering the church. God observes no
distinction in race when it comes to becoming a Christian (cf. Eph. 2:11—
3:12).

1Ironside, Lectures on …, p. 257.

2F. H. Chase, The Credibility of the Acts of the Apostles, p. 79.
246 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

The Ethiopian eunuch was probably a descendant of Ham, Saul was a

descendant of Shem, and Cornelius was a descendant of Japheth (cf. Gen.
10).1 Thus, with the record of their conversions in chapters 8—10, Luke
told us that the church is equally accessible to all branches of the human
family.

Why was the conversion of Cornelius, rather than the earlier conversion of
the Ethiopian eunuch, the opening of the church's door to the Gentiles?
The conversion of the Gentile eunuch was a case of individual private
salvation. The conversion of Cornelius, on the other hand, involved several
Gentiles, and it was public. God had saved individual Gentiles by faith
throughout history (e.g., Rahab, Ruth, Naaman, et al.). With the conversion
of Cornelius, He now, for the first time, publicly brought Gentiles into the
church, the new creation of God, by Spirit baptism. The eunuch had become
a Christian and a member of the church, but that was not evident to anyone
at the time of his conversion.

With Cornelius's conversion, God made a public statement, as He had at

Pentecost, that He was doing something new, namely, forming a new body
of believers in Jesus. In chapter 2, He had shown that it would include Jews,
and here in chapter 10, He now clarified that it would also include Gentiles.
The sole prerequisite for entrance into this group (the church) was faith in
Jesus Christ, regardless of ethnicity, which had separated Jews from
Gentiles for centuries. The distinctive difference between becoming a
Christian and becoming a Jew (religiously), was that God gave the Holy
Spirit to every Christian. The sign of this, for the benefit of the Jews, was
that He enabled those to whom He gave the Spirit to speak in tongues. In
the rest of Acts, Luke proceeded to narrate the conversion of various kinds
of Gentiles in various parts of the Mediterranean world.

The response of the Jerusalem church 11:1-18

Peter's actions in Caesarea drew criticism from conservative Jews. Luke

wrote this pericope to enable his readers to understand and appreciate
more fully God's acceptance of Gentiles into the church as Gentiles. An
additional purpose was to present this acceptance as essential to the
fulfillment of the Great Commission. The leaders of the Jerusalem church
recognized what God was doing in bringing Gentiles into the church, as
they had done formerly with the Samaritan believers in Jesus (8:14-25).

1McGee, 4:545.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 247

Luke documented this recognition, in this pericope, because it plays an

important role in proving the distinction between Israel and the church and
explaining the worldwide mission of the church.

Criticism of Peter's conduct 11:1-3

News of what had happened in Cornelius' house spread quickly throughout

Judea. "The brethren" (v. 1) and "those who were circumcised" (v. 2) refer
to Jewish Christians, not unsaved Jews. Peter's response to their criticism
of him makes this clear (e.g., v. 15). They objected to his having had
contact with "uncircumcised" Gentiles, particularly eating with them (v. 3).
Apparently Peter "ate with" his host while he was with him for several days
(10:48), though Luke did not record this. The same taboo that had
bothered Peter was bothering his Jewish brethren (cf. 10:28). They
undoubtedly would have felt concern over the non-Christian Jews' reaction
to themselves. Peter's actions in Caesarea could only bring more
persecution on the Jewish Christians from the unsaved Jews (cf. 7:54—
8:3).

"It is possible to hear a subtile echo of Jesus' critics in 11:3.

Jesus was also accused of eating with or lodging with the
wrong kind of people. … Now Peter must face the kind of
criticism that Jesus faced, arising this time from the circle of
Jesus' disciples."1

"It is plain that Peter was not regarded as any kind of pope or
overlord."2

"It was one thing for the Ethiopian to be received into the
Church of Christ by the Hellenist Philip, but it was another
thng—and a marked advance—when the principle asserted by
Philip was ratified by the Apostles of the circumcision in the
case of Cornelius."3

Peter's defense of his conduct 11:4-17

Luke recorded Peter's retelling of these events to his critics, in order to

further impress the significance of this incident on his readers. Peter

1Tannehill,2:137.
2Robertson, 3:152.
3Knowling, 2:263.
248 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

particularly stressed God's initiative (vv. v. 8, 9, 12, 15, 16, 17a), as well
as his own inability to withstand God (v. 17b).

Cornelius and "all" his "household" were not "saved" from God's wrath until
they heard and believed the gospel of Jesus Christ that Peter proclaimed
to them (v. 14; cf. 10:43).

Peter was speaking of the day of Pentecost when he referred to "the

beginning" of the church (v. 15, cf. 2:4). Clearly the baptism of the Holy
Spirit is what he referred to (v. 16). Peter justified his actions in Caesarea
(eating with Gentiles) by appealing to what God had done (v. 17a). Note
that Peter identified "believing in the Lord Jesus Christ" as the only
necessary prerequisite to receiving the baptism of the Holy Spirit (v. 17a).
Spirit baptism ("the same gift as He gave to us") was not an experience
subsequent to salvation for Cornelius and his household, but something
that happened simultaneously with salvation.

"Peter's defense did not rest on what he himself did, but on

what God did. God had made no distinction between Jew and
Gentile, so how could Peter?"1

The verdict of Peter's critics 11:18

Peter's explanation was satisfactory to his critics. His Jewish brethren

agreed that God was saving Gentiles simply by faith in Jesus Christ—just
as He was saving Jews—and that they should no longer regard Gentiles as
"unclean." They recognized and yielded to God's initiative in this event. As
a result, the bonds between Jewish and Gentile Christians became stronger,
and the bonds between unbelieving Jews and believing Jews became
weaker.

"The word 'repentance' summarizes Cornelius' conversion in

Acts. 'Repentance' can be a summary term for conversion
stressing that a change of orientation has taken place when
one believes. Faith stresses what the object of belief is. Faith
is directed toward a Person, namely, Jesus. Repentance
stresses what belief involves in that it is a change of mind or
of orientation from oneself and his own works to a reliance on
Jesus to save him. The repentant man of faith recognizes that,
as the hymnwriter puts it, his 'hope is built on nothing less

1Toussaint, "Acts," p. 382.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 249

than Jesus' blood and righteousness' and that he is to 'wholly

lean on Jesus' name.' Metanoeo ('to repent') is used in Acts
2:38 and 3:19 to call Jewish audiences to come to Jesus, and
it is used in the same way in Acts 17:30 and 26:20 to describe
the call to or response of Gentiles. Metanoia ('repentance') is
the summary term of the Great Commission in Luke 24:47. It
is also used in salvation contexts in Acts 5:31 (to Jews); 11:18
(of Cornelius); 20:21 (of Jews and Gentiles who believe on the
Lord Jesus); and 26:20 (in Paul's message to Jews and
Gentiles)."1

It is clear, however, that not all of those who accepted Peter's explanation
also understood the larger issue. Probably few of them did. The larger issue
was that God had created a new entity, the church, and that He was dealing
with humankind on a different basis than He had for centuries. Those whom
God accepted by faith in Christ were now under a new covenant, not the
old Mosaic Covenant, so they did not need to continue to observe the
Mosaic Law. It was no longer necessary for Gentiles to come to God
through Judaism, or to live within the constraints of Judaism. Opposition
to this larger issue, the implications of what happened in Cornelius' home,
cropped up later (15:1; cf. Gal.). Even today, many Christians do not
understand the implications of this change, and or their application in daily
life.

"It is clear that Christianity was accepted [by Peter's critics]

as a reformed Judaism, not as Judaism's successor."2

Whereas the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem did come to agree with Peter,
the non-Christian Jews did not. They still regarded Gentiles as outside the
pale of God's favor. The Christian Jews' new attitude toward Gentiles, on
the one hand, had opened them up to the Gentiles. However, it also
resulted in non-Christian Jews excluding Christian Jews, increasingly, from
the life of Judaism.

"Even though Peter does not convert the first Gentile [in Acts,
i.e., the Ethiopian eunuch], the Cornelius episode is a
breakthrough for the Gentile mission. The conversion of the
Ethiopian was a private and isolated event that had no effect

1Bock, "Jesus as …," p. 154.

2Blaiklock, p. 97.
250 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

[in Acts]. The conversion of Cornelius has consequences in the

following narrative, as the reference back to it in Acts 15
makes clear. It is a breakthrough not simply because Peter and
the Jerusalem church now accept Gentiles for baptism but also
because they recognize the right of Jewish Christians to freely
associate with Gentiles in the course of their mission."1

3. The initiatives of the Antioch church 11:19-30

The scene now shifts to Antioch of Syria. Antioch was a very significant
town, because from there the church launched its major missionary
offensives to "the uttermost parts of the earth."2 Luke recorded events in
the early history of this church because of its significant initiatives. The
disciples in Antioch reached out to Gentiles with spiritual aid, and they
reached out to their Jewish brethren in Jerusalem with material aid.

"With the ratification by the Jerusalem mother church of

Peter's action in admitting the first group of Gentiles into the
Church as his preface, Luke now launches into the main theme
of the book of Acts—the expansion of the Church into the
whole Gentile world. Again he emphasizes the part played by
anonymous believers in spreading Christianity."3

The spiritual initiative of the Antioch church 11:19-26

11:19 Luke's reference back to "the persecution" resulting from

Stephen's martyrdom (7:60) is significant. It suggests that he
was now beginning to record another mission of the Christians
that ran parallel—logically and chronologically—to the one he
had just described in 8:4—11:18.4

1Tannehill, 2:137.
2See Finegan, Light from …, pp. 337-40, for more information about Antioch of Syria.
3Neil, p. 143.
4Longenecker, p. 400; Kent, p. 97.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 251

Rome

Tarsus
Antioch
CYPRUS SYRIA

Caesarea
Jerusalem
CYRENE Alexandria

Luke had already pointed out that as a result of Stephen's

execution, the gospel had spread throughout Judea and
Samaria (8:4). Now we learn that it was that event that also
led to its being taken to the uttermost parts of the earth.
While Philip went to Samaria, other refugees went to the
country of Phoenicia north of Caesarea, the island of "Cyprus"
(cf. 4:36; 21:16), and the city of "Antioch." Those disciples,
who were Jews, were evangelizing other "Jews" exclusively
("alone").

Persecution was good for the church. It frequently causes the

church to grow rather than die. However, peaceful conditions
are normally more conducive to effective evangelism than
persecution (1 Tim. 2:2-4).

11:20 Some Jews from "Cyprus," Barnabas' homeland not far from
Antioch, and "Cyrene," in North Africa (cf. 2:10; 6:9; 13:1),
visited Antioch (cf. 13:1). Antioch was at this time the third
largest city in the Roman world, after Rome and Alexandria.1

1Josephus, The Wars …, [Link].

252 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

These Jews may have traveled there on business. Antioch was

about 15 miles inland from the Mediterranean Sea, on the
Orontes River, and 300 miles north of Jerusalem. It was the
capital of the Roman province of Syro-Cilicia, north of
Phoenicia, and it was one of the most strategic population
centers of its day. It contained between 500,000 and 800,000
inhabitants, about one-seventh of whom were Jews.1 Many
Gentile proselytes to Judaism lived there.2 Antioch was also
notorious as a haven for pleasure-seekers.3

"The Roman satirist, Juvenal, complained, 'The

sewage of the Syrian Orontes has for long been
discharged into the Tiber.' By this he meant that
Antioch was so corrupt it was impacting Rome,
more than 1,300 miles away."4

"It seems incredible but nonetheless it is true that

it was in a city like that that Christianity took the
great stride forward to becoming the religion of
the world. We have only to think of that to
discover there is no such thing as a hopeless
situation."5

"In Christian history, apart from Jerusalem, no

other city of the Roman Empire played as large a
part in the early life and fortunes of the church as
Antioch of Syria."6

Some of the Hellenistic Jews also began sharing the gospel

with Gentiles ("speaking to the Greeks also"). This verse
documents another significant advance in the mission of the
church: For the first time, Luke recorded Jews aggressively
evangelizing non-Jews. The Ethiopian eunuch and Cornelius,
who were both Gentiles, had taken the initiative in reaching out

1Longenecker, p. 399; Neil, p. 143.

2Josephus, The Wars …, [Link].
3Longenecker, p. 399; Barclay, pp. 93-94. See Rackham, p. 165, for a background sketch

of this city.
4Toussaint, "Acts," p. 383.
5Barclay, p. 94.
6Longenecker, p. 399. Cf. Alford, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 253

to Jews and had obtained salvation. Now believing Jews were

taking the initiative in reaching out to Gentiles with the gospel.

The Antiochian evangelists preached "the Lord Jesus." For

Gentiles "Christ" (Messiah) would not have been as significant
a title as "Lord" (sovereign, savior, and deity). Many pagan
Gentiles in the Roman Empire regarded Caesar as "Lord."

11:21 Luke stressed the Lord Jesus' blessing of their witness. "The
hand of the Lord" is an Old Testament anthropomorphism that
pictures God's power (cf. Isa. 59:1; 66:14). The early disciples
put Jesus on a par with Yahweh; His deity was not a late
(recent) development read back into the early history of the
church.1 Response to this evangelistic work was very good.
Perhaps these Gentiles were "God-fearers" similar to the
Ethiopian eunuch and Cornelius.2 Perhaps they were pagans
who were not Jewish proselytes, but were open to the
message of life because of their dissatisfaction with
paganism.3 Probably both types of Gentiles responded.

"The combination of faith (pisteusas) and of

turning (epestrepsen) is another common way to
express salvation in Acts."4

11:22-24 As the apostles had done previously, when they had heard of
the Samaritans' salvation, they once again investigated when
word ("news") of the salvation of Gentiles "reached …
Jerusalem" (8:14-15). They chose a representative to visit the
scene to evaluate what was happening. The Lord obviously
controlled these men in their choice of an observer. "Barnabas"
(cf. 4:36-37) was an excellent man for this mission since he,
like some of the evangelists in Antioch, was from Cyprus. He
was also a more broad-minded Hellenist. Furthermore he was a
positive, encouraging person (4:36), and he was "full of the
Holy Spirit," "faith," and goodness ("a good man").

1Robertson, 3:157.
2Longenecker, p. 401.
3Neil, p. 144.
4Bock, "Jesus as …," p. 149.
254 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"Although he came of a Dispersion family, he was

regarded with complete confidence in Jerusalem
and acted as a pivot point or link between the
Hebrew and Hellenistic elements in the church."1

Barnabas "rejoiced" when he observed God's grace at work in

Antioch, and, true to his name ("Son of Encouragement,"
4:36), he "encouraged" the new converts "to remain faithful
(true) to the Lord." The alternative of not remaining faithful
to the Lord is clearly an option for believers (cf. 13:43; 14:21-
22). Perseverance in faith and good works is neither automatic
nor guaranteed.2 Even more people ("considerable numbers")
became believers because of Barnabas' ministry to these
Christians. According to tradition, Luke came from Antioch.
The second-century Anti-Marcionite Prologue to Luke's Gospel
referred to Luke as an Antiochian of Syria.3 Also, Eusebius
wrote in the fourth century, "… Luke, who was born at Antioch
…"4 So perhaps he was one of the converts.

Discipling in Acts was not done mainly "one on one," but in

community. We see the same emphasis in Ephesians 4. One-
on-one discipling is certainly all right, but it can become self-
centered. Growth in a group is much more conducive to the
discovery and development of spiritual gifts.

Luke may have described Barnabas in such glowing terms,

partly because this situation was such a serious crisis for the
early church. Much depended on how Barnabas would react,
what he would do, and what he would report back to the
mother church in Jerusalem. The evangelization of Gentiles
was at stake.

11:25 As the church in Antioch continued to grow, Barnabas and

perhaps others sensed the need for Saul's help. Consequently,
at this time, Barnabas set out to track him down in "Tarsus,"
where Saul had gone (9:30). "Saul" was an ideal choice for this

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 202.

2See Valdés, 1:542-43.
3See T. W. Manson, Studies in the Gospels and Epistles, p. 49, for an English translation
of the text.
4Eusebius, The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus, p. 85 (bk. 3, ch. 4).
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 255

work, since God had given him a special appointment to

evangelize Gentiles (22:21). Moreover, he had considerable
experience in ministry already, probably about nine years of it
since his conversion.1

Some Bible scholars have deduced that Saul's family in Tarsus

had disinherited him (cf. Phil. 3:8). Some also believe that he
endured some of the afflictions, that he described in 2
Corinthians 11:23-27, while he ministered in and around
Tarsus. These included persecution by the Jews, probably for
trying to evangelize Gentiles. Furthermore, some say that Saul
had the revelation, to which he referred in 2 Corinthians 12:1-
4, while he was ministering near there. He was undoubtedly
very active in missionary work around Tarsus during his
residence there, even though we have no record of it.

11:26 Barnabas had earlier sponsored Saul in Jerusalem (9:27). Now

Barnabas "brought" Saul from Tarsus "to Antioch," a distance
of about 90 miles, where they ministered together "for a (an
entire) year," teaching and leading the church. This was
probably in A.D. 43, ten years after the death and resurrection
of Jesus and the day of Pentecost.

Luke noted another advance for the church in that observers

called the believers "Christians" (lit. "those belonging to
Christ's party," i.e., "Christ followers") "first … in Antioch." In
other words, people now distinguished the Christians as a
group, both from religious Jews as well as from pagan Gentiles
(cf. 1 Cor. 10:32).2 Howson argued that it was probably the
Romans in Antioch who first gave the Christians this name.3
There are only three occurrences of the name "Christian" in
the New Testament, and in each case Christians did not use it
of themselves (cf. 26:28; 1 Pet. 4:16). Similarly, biblical
references indicate that the name "Jew" is one that people
other than the Israelites used to describe them.

1SeeAppendix 1 "Sequence of Paul's Activities," at the end of these notes.

2SeeStephen J. Strauss, "The Significance of Acts 11:26 for the Church at Antioch and
Today," Bibliotheca Sacra 168:671 (July-September 2011):283-300.
3Howson, p. 99.
256 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"Note the three elements in the name [Christian].

(i) It contains Jewish thought, as the equivalent
of Messiah, the Anointed. (ii) It shows the Greek
language in the substantive—'Christ.' (iii) It also
includes the Latin language in the adjectival
ending 'ians' (Latin, iani). This universality is a
reminder of the language of the title on the
Cross."1

For Gentiles, however, the title "Christ" became a personal

name for Jesus.

"They [those who used this name for believers in

Jesus] … voiced an insight that the Christians
themselves only saw clearly later on: Christianity
is no mere variant of Judaism."2

The material initiative of the Antioch church 11:27-30

11:27 Official "prophets" were still active in the church, apparently

until the completion of the New Testament canon. A prophet
was a person to whom God had given ability to speak for Him
(forth-telling, cf. 1 Cor. 14:1-5), which in some cases included
the ability to receive and announce new revelation (fore-
telling). Prophesying also equaled praising God (1 Chron.
25:1).

"The Jews believed that with the last of the [Old

Testament] writing prophets, the spirit of
prophecy had ceased in Israel; but the coming
Messianic Age would bring an outpouring of God's
Spirit, and prophecy would again flourish. The
early Christians, having experienced the
inauguration of the Messianic Age [i.e., the age of
fulfillment], not only proclaimed Jesus to be the
Mosaic eschatological prophet (cf. 3:22; 7:37)
but also saw prophecy as a living phenomenon
within the church (cf. also 13:1; 15:32; 21:9-10)

1Thomas, p. 47.
2Longenecker, p. 402.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 257

and ranked it among God's gifts to his people next

to that of being an apostle (cf. 1 Cor 12:28; Eph
4:11)."1

11:28 God fulfilled Agabus' prophecy (cf. 21:10). "In the reign of"
Emperor "Claudius" (A.D. 41-54), there was a series of severe
famines and poor harvests in various parts of the Roman
Empire.2 The Romans used the Greek word oikoumene
("world," lit. "inhabited world") as an exaggerated reference
for the Roman Empire (cf. Luke 2:1).

11:29 The Christians in Antioch demonstrated love for and unity with
their brethren in Jerusalem by sending them some "relief"
money. Luke previously documented the love and generosity
of the Jerusalem Christians for one another (2:42; 4:32-35).
Now he revealed that the Antioch Christians surpassed even
their sacrifice by sharing what they had with another
congregation. The giving was voluntary and according to the
ability that each Christian possessed (cf. 1 Cor. 16:2; 2 Cor.
9:7).

11:30 The church leaders chose "Barnabas and Saul" to carry the gift
to Jerusalem. There they gave it to the "elders" (Gr.
presbyteroi). This is the first use of that word in Acts. It can
refer to older men, chronologically (cf. 1 Tim. 5:1), or to
officers in the church (Tit. 1:5). Probably the latter meaning is
in view here, since official leaders would probably have been
responsible to distribute the gift. Evidently the apostles had
set up elders, even as they had set up "the Seven," in order to
facilitate the ministry there. Elders were common in Jewish
synagogue worship where they served as overseers. As time
passed, this organizational structure became normal in
Christian churches as well.

The visit to which Luke referred here probably took place

about A.D. 46, when Judea suffered from a severe famine.3

1Ibid.,
p. 403.
2F.F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 243. See also idem, "Chronological Questions …," pp.
278-79; and Longenecker, pp. 403-4.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]; [Link]; [Link].
258 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

This so-called "Famine Visit to Jerusalem" is probably the one

Paul referred to in Galatians 2:1-10.1

As the Jerusalem church had ministered to the church in Antioch by

providing leadership and teaching, the Antioch church now was able to
minister to the Jerusalem church with financial aid (cf. Gal. 6:6). Luke
probably included this reference to this relief to illustrate, among other
things, the strength of the Gentile church outside Jerusalem, Judea, and
Samaria.

"The summary of the establishment of the church in Antioch

presents an important new development, both geographically
and ethnically. The gospel reaches a major city of the empire
and finds a ready response from people of Greek culture,
including Gentiles. The narrator pulls together threads from the
preceding narrative, especially chapters 2 and 8, and weaves
them into a tapestry to describe the new phase of the
mission."2

4. The persecution of the Jerusalem church 12:1-24

The saints in Jerusalem not only suffered as a result of the famine, they
also suffered because Jewish and Roman governmental opposition against
them intensified as time passed. Luke recorded the events in this section
to illustrate God's supernatural protection and blessing of the church, even
though the Christians suffered increased persecution, and Israel's
continued rejection of her Messiah. Looked at another way, this section
confirms Israel's rejection of her Messiah. This is why the church advanced
more dramatically in Gentile territory, as the rest of Acts shows. Contrasts
mark verses 1-23: James dies, God delivers Peter, and Herod dies.

The supernatural deliverance of Peter 12:1-19

"Peter's rescue from prison is an unusually vivid episode in

Acts even when simply taken as a story about Peter. Because
it is not connected with events in the chapters immediately
before and after it, however, it may seem rather isolated and

1F.F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 244; Marshall, The Acts …, p. 205; Longenecker, p.

405; Neil, p. 146; Witherington, p. 375.
2Tannehill, 2:146.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 259

unimportant for Acts as a whole. Yet it becomes more than a

vivid account of an isolated miracle when we probe below the
surface, for this story is an echo of other stories in Luke-Acts
and in Jewish Scripture. An event that is unique, and vividly
presented as such, takes on the importance of the typical
when it reminds us of other similar events. It recalls the power
of God to rescue those chosen for God's mission, a power
repeatedly demonstrated in the past."1

12:1-2 "About that time" probably harks back to the famine visit of
Barnabas and Saul mentioned in 11:30. If that took place in
A.D. 46, and Herod died in A.D. 44, then the events Luke
related in chapter 12 must have antedated the famine visit,
and probably all of 11:27-30, by about two years.

"… Luke seems to have wanted to close his

portrayals of the Christian mission within the
Jewish world (2:42—12:24) with two vignettes
having to do with God's continued activity on
behalf of the Jerusalem church."2

"Herod the king" was Herod Agrippa I, whom the Roman

emperor Gaius appointed king over Palestine in A.D. 37. When
Claudius succeeded Gaius as emperor, he added Judea and
Samaria to Agrippa's territories so that Agrippa governed all
that his grandfather, Herod the Great, had ruled.3 Agrippa ruled
Judea for three years, A.D. 41-444 (cf. v. 23), and moved his
headquarters to Jerusalem. Herod Agrippa I had Jewish blood
in his veins and consistently sought to maintain favor with and
the support of the Jews over whom he ruled, which he did
effectively.5 Josephus referred to Agrippa positively as "a
person that deserved the greatest admiration."6 Herod

1Ibid., 2:151.
2Longenecker, p. 407.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link].
4Ibid.,[Link]; idem, The Wars …, [Link]; F. F. Bruce, "Chronological Questions …," pp.
276-78.
5Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]-5; idem, The Wars …, [Link]. See Alford, [Link],

or Longenecker, pp. 407-8, for a brief biography of Herod Agrippa I.

6Flavius Josephus, Against Apion, 1:9.
260 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Agrippa was the friend of Caligula, as Herod the Great had been
the friend of Augustus.1

As the Christian Jews became increasingly offensive to their

racial brethren (cf. 11:18), Herod took advantage of an
opportunity to please his subjects by mistreating some
believers, and by executing (beheading) the Apostle "James,"
the "brother of John" (cf. Matt. 20:23). Josephus wrote that
"Ananus" (Ananias), the high priest, was responsible for
James' death, but this seems to be inaccurate.2 This is the only
apostle's death that the New Testament recorded. James was
the second Christian martyr whom Luke identified (cf. 7:54-
60). Persecution of the Christians now swung from religious to
include political motivation.

HEROD’S FAMILY TREE

HEROD THE GREAT

King of Palestine 37-4 BC (Luke 1:5)
He built many cities and structures
including the temple in Jerusalem.
He killed the boy babies of Bethlehem
(Matt. 2:1-17).

ANTIPATER ALEXANDER HEROD HEROD HEROD HEROD HEROD

ARISTOBULUS PHILIP I ANTIPAS I ARCHAELAUS PHILIP II
He married Herodius and He ruled Galilee & Perea He ruled Judea, Samaria, He ruled Iturea &
fathered Salome 4 BC-39 AD (Luke 3:1). & Idumaea 4 BC-6 AD Trachonitis 4 BC-34 AD
(Matt. 14:3b; Mark 6:17) He beheaded John the Baptist. (Matt. 2:22) (Luke 3:1).
Jesus called him a fox. He married Salome.
He tried Jesus (Mark 6:14-29;
Luke 13:31-32; 23:7-12).
He married Herodius after
Herod Philip I did (Mark 6:18).

HEROD HEROD OF CHALSIS HERODIUS

AGRIPPA I He ruled 41-48 AD. She married Herod
He was king of Palestine He married Bernice. Philip I and then
37-44 AD. Herod Antipas.
He killed James, imprisoned She asked for John
Peter, and God smote him the Baptist’s head
(Acts 12:1-11, 23). (Matt. 14:3; Mark 6:17).

HEROD DRUSILLA BERNICE SALOME

AGRIPPA II She married Felix the She married Herod of Chalsis. The daughter of Herodius
He ruled Chalsis & the ruler of Judea 52-59 AD She heard Paul with & Herod Philip I.
northern territory 50-70 AD. who tried Paul Herod Agrippa II She danced before Herod
Paul addressed him and Bernice (Acts 23:26—24:27). (Acts 25:13—26:32). Antipas (Mark 6:22)
(Acts 25:13—26:32). She married
Herod Philip II.

1Howson, p. 23.
2Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]ootnote b.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 261

It is noteworthy that the Christians evidently did not seek to

perpetuate the apostolate by selecting a replacement for
James as they had for Judas (ch. 1). They probably believed
that God would reestablish The Twelve in the resurrection.1

12:3 The Feast of Unleavened Bread was a seven-day celebration

that began on the day after Passover each spring. This was
one of the three yearly feasts in Jerusalem that the Mosaic
Law required all Jewish males to attend. As on the day of
Pentecost (ch. 2), the city would have been swarming with
patriotic Jews when Herod made his grandstand political move
of arresting Peter. These Jews knew Peter as the leading
apostle among the Christians, and as a Jew who fraternized
with Gentiles (ch. 10). This was the third arrest of Peter that
Luke recorded (cf. 4:3; 5:18). Note that this persecution of
the Christians did not arise from anything they had done, but
simply because Herod wanted to gain popularity with ("when
he saw that it pleased") the Jews.

12:4 "Four squads of soldiers"—four soldiers made up each squad—

guarded Peter in six-hour shifts, so he would not escape as he
had done previously (5:19-24). Evidently two of the soldiers
on each shift chained themselves to Peter, and the other two
guarded his cell door (vv. 6, 10). "Passover" was the popular
term for the continuous eight-day combined Passover and
Unleavened Bread festival.

12:5 His captors probably imprisoned Peter in the Roman Fortress

of Antonia. It stood against the north wall of the temple
enclosure, and on the western end of this wall.2 Prisons are no
match for prayers, however, as everyone was to learn. The
Christians prayed fervently about Peter's fate, believing that
God could effect his release again.3

"The church used its only available weapon—

prayer."4

1Bock, Acts, p. 422.

2See the diagram of Herod's Temple Area near my comments on 3:12-15 above.
3See Hiebert, pp. 30-32, for some helpful and motivating comments on their praying.
4Kent, p. 102.
262 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

12:6 The night before Peter's trial and probable execution, he lay
sound asleep in his cell. How could he sleep soundly when God
had allowed James to die? Peter, of course, had a record of
sleeping when he should have been praying (cf. Matt. 26:36-
46; Luke 22:45). He had no problem with insomnia.
Nevertheless on this occasion God may have wanted him to
sleep. Perhaps he did not fear for his life because Jesus had
implied that he would live to an old age (John 21:18). Normally
the Romans chained a prisoner by his right hand to his guard's
left hand, but each of Peter's hands was chained to a different
guard on either side of him.1 Herod wanted to make sure Peter
did not get away.

12:7 Again "an angel of the Lord" (Gr. angelos kyriou) visited Peter
in prison (5:19; cf. 8:26; 12:23). "A light" also illuminated
("shone in") his cell (cf. 9:3). The angel instructed him to "Get
up quickly," and when he did, "his chains fell from (off) his
hands." Peter's guards slept through the whole event.

"Luke clearly regards Peter's escape as a miracle,

a divine intervention by a supernatural visitant (cf.
Lk. 2:9) …"2

Thomas Watson, the Puritan preacher, reportedly said, "The

angel fetched Peter out of prison, but it was prayer that
fetched the angel."3

12:8-9 The angel coached Peter, like a parent, to get dressed ("gird"
himself) and to "follow" him out of the prison. Peter was so
groggy that "he did not know" that he was really being set
free. He thought he might be having another "vision" (10:10,
cf. 9:10).

12:10-11 Luke related this incident as though God was orchestrating

Peter's release (cf. 5:18-20; 16:23-29). There is no reason to
take the account as anything less than this. Once outside the
prison, and left alone by his angelic guide, Peter realized that
his release was genuine. God did here for Peter what He had

1Barclay,p. 101; Longenecker, p. 409.

2Neil,
p. 149.
3Wiersbe, 1:452-53.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 263

done for the Israelites in leading them out of their Egyptian

prison in the Exodus. God's enemies can never frustrate His
plans (Matt. 16:18).

Why did God allow Herod to kill James but not Peter?

"The answer is that this is the sovereign will of

God. He still moves like this in the contemporary
church. I have been in the ministry for many years,
and I have seen the Lord reach in and take certain
wonderful members out of the church by death.
And then there are others whom He has left. Why
would He do that? If He had asked me, from my
viewpoint as the pastor, I would say that He took
the wrong one and He left the wrong one! But life
and death are in the hands of a sovereign God. …
This is His universe, not ours. It is God's church,
not ours. The hand of a sovereign God moves in
the church."1

12:12 Peter went directly to a home where he may have known that
Christians would be praying for him. This was "the house of
Mary, the mother of John (Jewish name) … Mark" (Greek
name). Barnabas sold his land and gave it to the church (4:37),
but Mary kept her house. This shows that communal living was
not required among the early Christians.

John Mark (short for "John who was also called Mark") was the
man who accompanied Paul and Barnabas on their first
missionary journey (13:5). "Mark," as he was usually identified
in the New Testament, was also Barnabas' cousin (Col. 4:10)
who traveled with Barnabas to Cyprus, when Paul chose Silas
as his companion for his second missionary journey (15:37-
39). Mark later accompanied Paul again (Col. 4:10; Phile. 24),
as well as Peter (1 Pet. 5:13). According to early church
tradition, he wrote the Gospel that bears his name, served as

1McGee, 4:562.
264 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Peter's interpreter in Rome, and founded the church in

Alexandria, Egypt.1

12:13-16 This amusing incident is very true to life. Rhoda's (Rosebud's)

"joy" at finding Peter "standing in front of the gate," which
admitted people from the street into a courtyard (10:18),
overpowered her common sense. Instead of letting him in, "she
… ran" inside the house "and announced" his arrival. The
believers could not believe that God had answered their
prayers so directly and dramatically, and told Rhoda: "You are
out of your mind!" Peter, meanwhile, stood outside "knocking,"
still trying to get in. Finally they let him in, hardly able to
believe that it really was Peter.

Evidently the Christians at first believed it was Peter's guardian

angel, or an "angel" especially sent to guard him, who had
appeared (v. 15; Dan. 10:21; Matt. 18:10).2 Another
explanation is that we should understand "angel" as a
reference to a human messenger that Peter had sent.3 A third
possibility is that the Christians thought that Herod had
executed Peter, and that the apostle's spirit had come to visit
them.4 This is a problem that we cannot solve for sure.

12:17 The "James" Luke mentioned here was the half-brother of

Jesus (cf. 15:13; 21:18; Gal. 1:19; 2:9, 12: James 1:1). He
became the foremost leader of the Jerusalem church after
Peter's departure. Peter proceeded to disappear from
Jerusalem. Scripture does not tell us where he went next.
Probably he left Judea (cf. 1 Cor. 9:5). Many other believers in
Jerusalem were not present in Mary's house that night. Peter
wanted to be sure they learned of his release, too.

Earlier, Peter had returned from prison to the temple, and had
resumed preaching at the Lord's command (5:19-21). Now the
Jews were much more hostile to the Christians. Saul had
previously left Jerusalem for his own safety (9:29-30), and

1Eusebius, pp. 34-35 (bk. 1, ch. 7), 79 (bk. 2, ch. 24), 188 (bk. 5, ch. 8).
2See Calvin, [Link]; Lenski, p. 481.
3Henry, p. 1682.
4See Witherington, p. 387, for additional options.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 265

this time Peter followed his example. Peter had become

infamous among the Jews in Jerusalem for associating with
Samaritans and Gentiles, as well as for being the leader of the
Christians. Corinth and Rome are two places that Peter
evidently visited (1 Cor. 1:12; 9:5; 1 Pet. 5:13), and various
church fathers wrote that he ministered throughout the Jewish
Diaspora.1 Peter also may have gone to Antioch (Gal. 2:11-
21), and we know he was in Jerusalem again for the Jerusalem
Council (15:7-11, 14), though perhaps only as a visitor.

12:18-19 Understandably there was "no small disturbance" (a litotes, cf.

14:28; 15:2; 17:4, 12; 19:23-24) when the authorities found
Peter's cell empty. Herod evidently concluded that the guards
had cooperated with Peter's escape, or at least had been
negligent. Roman guards who allowed their prisoners to escape
suffered the intended punishment of those prisoners.2 These
guards died (were "led away to execution"). Herod then left
Judea (the old Jewish name for the area around Jerusalem)
and returned "to Caesarea," the nominal capital of the Roman
province of Judea. One wonders if Peter's escape played a role
in Herod's decision to leave the center of Jewish life so he
could save face. Even a Roman authority could not prevent the
church from growing.

"In the New Testament there is a distinction made

between Caesarea and the province of Judaea
(Acts xii, 19; xxi. 10). This affords one of the
indirect evidences not only of the intimate
acquaintance of the writer with strictly Rabbibical
views, but also of the early date of the
composition of the Book of Acts. For, at a later
period Caesarea was declared to belong to Judaea
…"3

"It may remain to us a perplexing question why James was slain

and Peter delivered. There is no explanation. Nevertheless, the
revelation of the facts is reassuring. That God delivered Peter

1Formany sources, see Longenecker, p. 411.

2Barclay,p. 101; Witherington, p. 389, footnote 107.
3Edersheim, Sketches of …, p. 71.
266 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

proves His power to have delivered James. That He did not

deliver James proves that the death of James was also within
the compass of His will, and we know that in the great Unveiling
all will be seen to have been right."1

The supernatural death of Herod Agrippa I 12:20-23

Herod viewed Peter as the enemy of the unbelieving Jews, which he was
not. Really Herod was the enemy of the believing Christians. Having set the
innocent Christian leader free, God now put the guilty Jewish Roman leader
to death.

12:20 King Herod had become displeased ("very angry") with his
subjects who lived in "Tyre and Sidon," on the Mediterranean
coast north of Caesarea. Because these towns depended on
Galilee, part of King Herod's country, for their food supply,
they were eager to get on his good side again. One writer
pointed out parallels between King Herod and the King of Tyre
in Ezekiel 27:17 and 28:4.2 "Blastus," Herod's "chamberlain"
(Gr. koitonos), was one of the king's trusted servants.

12:21-23 Josephus recorded this incident in more detail than Luke did.
He added that Herod appeared in the outdoor theater at
Caesarea. He stood before the officials from Tyre, Sidon, and
his other provinces on a festival day dressed in a silver robe.
When the sun shone brilliantly on his shiny robe, some
flatterers in the theater began to call out words of praise,
acclaiming him "a god." Immediately severe stomach pains
attacked him. Attendants had to carry him out of the theater,
and five days later he died.3

Doctor Luke saw Herod's intestinal attack as a judgment from

God, and gave a more medical explanation of his death than
Josephus did. One writer suggested that Herod suffered from
appendicitis that led to peritonitis complicated by
roundworms.4 Another diagnosed him as having a cyst caused

1Morgan, An Exposition …, p. 454.

2Mark R. Strom, "An Old Testament Background to Acts 12. 20-23," New Testament
Studies 32:2 (April 1986):289-92.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]; cf. [Link]; idem, The Wars …, [Link].
4Marshall, The Acts …, p. 213; cf. Longenecker, p. 413.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 267

by a tapeworm.1 More important than the effect was the

cause, namely, Herod's pride (cf. Isa. 42:8; Dan. 4:30).

"The pride of man had ended in the wrath of

God."2

"The angel of the Lord who had delivered Peter

was now to smite Herod the persecutor. He had
'smitten' Peter, and we see that the same divine
visitation may be for life or for death. Herod
Agrippa is the NT antitype of Pharaoh and
Sennacherib, the oppressor smitten by the angel
of the Lord."3

McGee regarded him as a miniature of Antichrist.4

The continuing growth of the church 12:24

In contrast to Herod, but like Peter, "the word of the Lord," the gospel,
"continued to grow" and "multiply" through God's supernatural blessing.
Therefore the church continued to flourish in Jewish territory as well as
among the Gentiles. This verse is another of Luke's progress reports that
concludes a section of his history (cf. 6:7; 9:31). Nothing seemed capable
of stopping the expansion of the church. Corruption and contention in its
ranks did not kill it (5:1-11; 6:1-7). Its religious enemies could not contain
it (4:1; 8:1, 3; 11:19). Even Roman officials could not control it (vv. 1-
23). In the next section, we see that it broke out into Asia Minor. Jesus'
prediction that even the "gates of Hades" could not overpower it was
proving true (Matt. 16:18; Acts 1:8). God's purposes will prevail!

B. THE EXTENSION OF THE CHURCH TO CYPRUS AND ASIA MINOR 12:25—

16:5

Luke recorded that Jesus came to bring deliverance to the Jews and to the
whole world (Luke 4:14-30). In his Gospel, Luke told the story of Jesus'
personal ministry, primarily to the Jews. In Acts the emphasis is mainly on

1Neil,
p. 152.
2Barclay,p. 103.
3Rackham, p. 381.
4McGee, 4:565.
268 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Jesus' ministry, through His apostles, to the Gentile world. As the mission
to the Gentiles unfolds in Acts, we can see that Luke took pains to show
that the ministry to the Gentiles paralleled the ministry to the Jews. He did
this by relating many things that the missionaries to the Gentiles did, that
were very similar to what the missionaries to the Jews did. This
demonstrates that God was indeed behind both missions, and that they
are really two aspects of His worldwide plan: to bring the gospel to all
people and to build a worldwide church.

The present section of text (12:25—16:5) does more than just present
the geographical expansion of the church into Asia Minor (modern western
Turkey). Primarily it shows the legitimacy of dealing with Gentiles as
Gentiles—rather than through Judaism—before and after their conversion.
It becomes increasingly clear that the church and Judaism are two separate
entities. God was not renewing the remnant in Israel by replentishing it with
Gentiles who believed in Jesus. He was creating a new body: the church.
This section culminates in the Jerusalem Council (ch. 15), in which the
issue of the Gentiles' relationship to the church came to a head. The last
verse (16:5) summarizes these events and issues.

1. The divine appointment of Barnabas and Saul 12:25—

13:3

Luke recorded these verses to set the stage for the account of Barnabas
and Saul's first missionary journey that follows.

"The world ministry which thus began was destined to change

the history of Europe and the world."1

12:25 After delivering the Antioch Christians' gift to the church in

Jerusalem (11:27-30), Barnabas and Saul "returned" to
Antioch, "taking along with them John (also called) Mark"
(12:12), who was Barnabas' cousin (Col. 4:10). The round trip
between Antioch and Jerusalem would have been a distance of
about 560 miles. This verse bridges what follows with the
earlier account of the virile Antioch church (11:19-30). The
reference to "John Mark" here also connects the preceding
section about the Jerusalem church (12:1-24) with what
follows. The effect is to give the reader the impression that

1Blaiklock, p. 102.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 269

what follows has a solid basis in both the Gentile Antioch

church and the Jewish Jerusalem church—which it did.

13:1 There were five prominent prophets and teachers in the

Antioch church at this time. The Greek construction suggests
that Barnabas, Simeon, and Lucius were prophets (forthtellers
and perhaps foretellers), and Manaen and Saul were teachers
(Scripture expositors). The Greek particle te occurs before
"Barnabas" and before "Manaen" in this list, dividing the five
men into two groups.

"A teacher's ministry would involve a less-

spontaneous declaration and preaching than that
of the prophets, including instruction and the
passing on to others of the received apostolic
teaching (… 1 Cor. 12:28-29; Eph. 4:11). This
was how the church taught its doctrine before the
use of the books that later became a part of the
NT."1

"Barnabas" (cf. 4:36-37; 9:27; 11:22-30) seems to have been

the leader among the prophets and teachers. The priority of
his name in this list, as well as other references to his character
qualities, suggests this. "Simeon" is a Jewish name, but this
man's nickname or family name, Niger, is Roman and implies
that he was dark skinned, possibly from Africa. The Latin word
niger means black. Some people think this Simeon was Simon
of Cyrene (in North Africa), who carried Jesus' cross (Luke
23:26). There is not enough information to prove or to
disprove this theory.

"Lucius" was a common Roman name; "Luke" was his Greek

name. He was from North Africa (cf. 11:20). It seems unlikely
that he was the same Luke who wrote this book. Since Luke
did not even identify himself by name as a member of Paul's
entourage, it is improbable that he would have recorded his

1Bock, Acts, p. 439.

270 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

own name here. Some scholars believe that this Luke was the
writer, however.1

"Herod the tetrarch" refers to Herod Antipas, who beheaded

John the Baptist and tried Jesus (Mark 6:14-19; Luke 13:31-
33; 23:7-12).2 Saul was evidently the newcomer (cf. 7:58—
8:3; 9:1-30; 11:25-30). This list of leaders shows that the
church in Antioch was cosmopolitan, and that God had gifted
it with several speakers who exhorted and taught the
believers.

"There in that little band there is exemplified the

unifying influence of Christianity. Men from many
lands and many backgrounds had discovered the
secret of 'togetherness' because they had
discovered the secret of Christ."3

13:2 It was "while" these men were serving ("ministering") that God
redirected them. Many have observed that it is easier to direct
a ship that is in motion than one that is standing still. Similarly,
God often uses His servants who are already serving Him, as
they have opportunity, rather than those who are not serving
Him, but just sitting by idly waiting for direction. Notice also
that the ministry of these men, while to the church, was
primarily "to the Lord" (cf. Col. 3:24). "Fasting" in this
context, undoubtedly involved going without food temporarily,
to give attention to spiritual matters of greater importance
than eating.

"Pious Jews of the time fasted twice each week,

and early Christians may have continued the
custom."4

The Holy Spirit probably revealed His "call" through one or

more of these prophets (cf. 8:29; 10:19; 13:4). How He did it
was less important to Luke than that He did it (cf. v. 4). God

1E.g., John Wenham, "The Identification of Luke," Evangelical Quarterly 63:1 (1991):32-
38.
2See Howson, p. 109, for more information about "Manaen."
3Barclay, p. 105.
4Kent, p. 108.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 271

leads His people though a variety of means that His disciples

who are walking with Him can identify as His leading. If Luke
had revealed just how the Spirit gave this "missionary call,"
every missionary candidate that followed might expect exactly
the same type of leading. One commentator speculated as
follows.

"… this would seem to suggest that at a service

of divine worship one of the prophets was moved
by the Spirit to propose the mission of Paul and
Barnabas."1

13:3 "They" probably refers to the entire congregation together

with its leaders (cf. 14:27; 15:2). The other church leaders did
several things for Barnabas and Saul. They "fasted and
prayed," presumably for God's blessing on them (cf. 14:23;
Neh. 1:4; Luke 2:37). They probably fasted while they prayed,
indicating the priority they placed on seeking God's blessing in
prayer.2 They also "laid their hands on them," evidently not to
bestow a spiritual power, but to identify with and encourage
them (cf. 9:17). Then they released them from their duties in
Antioch so they could depart. This was a commissioning for a
particular work, not ordination to lifetime service.3

"In commissioning Barnabas and Saul by the

imposition of hands, the other office-bearers
invest them with authority to act on behalf of the
Christian community at Antioch, and symbolically
identify the whole congregation with their
enterprise."4

"This short paragraph [13:1-3] marks a major departure in

Luke's story. Up to this point, contacts with Gentiles (one
might almost say, missionary activity in general) have been
almost fortuitous [happening by chance]. Philip was
despatched [sic] along an unusual road not knowing that he

1Neil, p. 154. See George W. Murray, "Paul's Corporate Evangelism in the Book of Acts,"
Bibliotheca Sacra 155:618 (April-June 1998):189-200.
2See Calvin, [Link].
3Marshall, The Acts …, p. 216.
4Neil, p. 154.
272 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

would encounter an Ethiopian eunuch reading Scripture; Peter

was surprised by the gift of the Holy Spirit to an uncircumcised
and unbaptized Gentile; the missionaries to Antioch did not set
out with the intention of evangelizing Gentiles. Here, however,
though the initiative is still ascribed to the Holy Spirit (v. 2),
an extensive evangelistic journey into territory in no sense
properly Jewish (though there was a Jewish element in the
population, as there was in most parts of the Empire) is
deliberately planned, and two associates of the local church
are commissioned to execute it."1

2. The mission to Cyprus 13:4-12

Luke recorded the events of Paul's first missionary journey, in order to

document the extension of the church into new territory, and to illustrate
the principles and methods by which the church grew. He also did so to
show God's supernatural blessing on the witness of Barnabas and Saul.

"… the account of Paul's ministry has two parts: his journeys
(Acts 11—20) and his trials (Acts 21—28)."2

Peter had encountered Simon, a sorcerer, when the Jerusalem church

initiated its first major outreach in Samaria (8:9-24). Similarly, Barnabas
and Saul ran into Bar-Jesus, a false prophet and sorcerer, when the Antioch
church conducted its first major outreach to Gentiles. Luke undoubtedly
wanted his readers to note the parallel, and to draw the conclusion that
God was behind the second outreach to Gentiles, just as He had been
behind the first one to Samaritans.

13:4 Luke carefully noted that the Person ultimately responsible for
the venture that followed was "the Holy Spirit" (cf. 1:1-2).
This mission was another of God's initiatives in building His
church. Barnabas and Saul departed from Antioch's port,
"Seleucia," located about 15 miles to the west, near where the
Orontes River flowed into the Mediterranean Sea. The island of
Cyprus (Kittim, Gen. 10:4; et al.) was Barnabas' homeland

1Barrett, pp. 598-99.

2Bock, "A Theology …," p. 151.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 273

(Acts 4:36).1 On a clear day, the mountains of Cyprus are

visible from Seleucia.2

"Cyprus was an island of great importance from

very early times, being situated on the shipping
lanes between Syria, Asia Minor, and Greece. In 57
B.C. it was annexed by Rome from Egypt and in 55
B.C. incorporated into the province of Cilicia. In 27
B.C. it became a separate province governed on
behalf of the emperor Augustus by an imperial
legate. In 22 B.C. Augustus relinquished its control
to the senate, and, like other senatorial provinces,
it was administered by a proconsul."3

13:5 "Salamis" was the largest town in eastern Cyprus, about 60

miles from Seleucia. It lay on the coast, and there were enough
Jews there to warrant more than one "synagogue" (from the
Greek meaning "gathering together"). Salamis' population was
mainly Greek, but many Jews lived there as well.4 Barnabas and
Saul habitually visited the Jewish synagogues when they
preached the gospel. They undoubtedly did so because this
was where the people who were God-fearers and anticipators
of the Messiah assembled, both Jews and Gentiles.

"… the main object of the synagogue was the

teaching of the people."5

Of course, this was not the first time the Christian gospel had
come to Cyprus, but the Christians had only evangelized Jews
earlier (cf. 11:19). "John" Mark probably provided assistance
in many ways, since they "had [him] as their helper." Timothy

1See Jerome Murphy-O'Connor, "On the Road and on the Sea with St. Paul," Bible Review
1:2 (Summer 1985):38-47, for some very interesting insights into travel conditions over
land and water in the first century Roman world.
2Howson, p. 110.
3Longenecker, p. 419.
4Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link].
5Edersheim, Sketches of …, p. 267. See his whole seventeenth chapter: "The Worship of

the Synagogue."
274 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

served in a similar capacity when Paul and Silas left Lystra on

Paul's second missionary journey (cf. 16:1-3).1

13:6-8 Barnabas and Saul traveled west across Cyprus, coming

eventually to "Paphos," the provincial capital of the island.
Paphos was 90 miles west of Salamis, and lay on the western
coast of Cyprus. Evidently word reached "Sergius Paulus" of
the missionaries' preaching. Since he was "a man of
intelligence" (Gr. aner syneton, an understanding or sagacious
man, cf. v. 12), he ordered them to meet with him so he could
hear their message personally.

"In the Greek world it was the custom for

philosophers, rhetoricians, or religious
propagandists, to travel about from city to city
and give public orations. By this means they often
secured permanent professorships. So when
Sergius Paulus heard of Barnabas and Saul, he
took them for similar professors, and having an
interest in these matters he summoned them to
give a declamation before his court."2

He was a "proconsul," the highest Roman government official

on the island—who was there by appointment of Rome's
senate.3 In contrast, procurators were appointed by the
emperor. Procurators mentioned in the New Testament were
Pontius Pilate, Antonius Felix, and Porcius Festus. Evidently
"Bar-Jesus" (lit. "Son of a Savior") was "a Jewish false
prophet," in the sense that he claimed to be a prophet of God
but was not. He was only a so-called "magician," who may have
had some Satanic power (cf. 8:9).

"And we may also fitly remember that Satan has

his miracles, which, though they are deceitful
tricks rather than true powers, are of such sort as
to mislead the simple-minded and untutored [cf. II

1See the map of Paul's first missionary journey in Longenecker, p. 248; Toussaint, "Acts,"
p. 386; or The Nelson …, p. 1843.
2Rackham, p. 200. See Longenecker, p. 419, for personal background on Lucius Sergius

Paulus.
3See F. F. Bruce, "Chronological Questions …," pp. 279-80; Knowling, 2:286.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 275

Thess. 2:9-10]. Magicians and enchanters have

always been noted for miracles. Idolatry has been
nourished by wonderful miracles, yet these are
not sufficient to sanction for us the superstition
either of magicians or of idolaters."1

The Mosaic Law forbade Jews from practicing magic (Deut.

18:10-11). "Elymas" (wise) seems to have been a nickname.
It describes a "sorcerer," "magician," or "fortune-teller" (Gr.
magos, cf. Matt. 2:1, 7, 16). He may have "opposed" the
missionaries because they brought the true message of God.
(Moses and Aaron had similarly withstood magicians in
Pharaoh's court [Exod. 7:11, 22; 8:7].) Additionally, he may
have felt that if Sergius Paulus believed the gospel, his
relationship to the proconsul would suffer.

"It was not usual for such a character to be

attached to the household of a Roman dignitary."2

Roman officials were notoriously superstitious.3

13:9 Luke now introduced Saul's Greek name "Paul," by which he

referred to him hereafter in Acts (cf. 14:12; 15:12, 25), and
by which Paul always identified himself in his epistles (cf. 2 Pet.
3:15). This indicates an important change in the career of Paul.
(Compare the changing of Abram's name to Abraham, and
Simon's to Peter.) The reason for Luke's change at this point,
seems to be that it was here that Paul's ministry to the
Gentiles really began (cf. 22:21). "Paul" means "Little,"
perhaps an allusion to his physical stature, and obviously
rhymes with his Jewish name "Saul" (lit. "Asked"). "Paul"
therefore may have been a cognomen (nickname). Howson,
however, believed that "Paul" was the apostle's Roman name.4

1John Calvin, "Prefatory Address to King Francis I of France," sec. 3, in Institutes of the
Christian Religion.
2Neil, p. 155.
3Alford, [Link].
4Howson, pp. 39, 121.
276 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Yet others believed that Paul's first and family Roman names
appear nowhere in Scripture.1

"Both names, Saul and Paul, were probably given

him by his parents, in accordance with Jewish
custom, which still prevails, of giving a child two
names, one religious and one secular."2

Note Luke's reference to Paul's being "filled with the Holy

Spirit." We have seen that Spirit-filling marked the early
believers (v. 9; 2:4; 4:8, 31; 6:3, 5; 7:55; 9:17). Paul was
about to announce a divine miracle designed to frustrate
Satan's work in hindering the progress of the gospel (cf. 8:9-
23; 16:16-18; 19:13-17). A true prophet of the Lord was
getting ready to pronounce a curse on a "false prophet" (cf. 2
Chron. 18:9-27). This fresh filling (Gr. plestheis, an aorist
participle) empowered him for the task.

13:10 Instead of being full of wisdom, Paul accused Elymas of being

"full of all deceit and fraud." Instead of being the "son of a
savior" or the "follower of Jesus," Bar-Jesus was a "son of the
devil" and a fraud. Instead of being the promoter of
righteousness, this magician was making the straight way of
the Lord crooked. This is the second of four incidents involving
victory over demonic powers in Acts (cf. 8:9-23; 16:16-18;
19:13-17).

13:11 Paul's stern words recall Peter's, when he dealt with Ananias
and Sapphira, and with Simon the sorcerer (5:3-4, 9; 8:20-23).
Perhaps Paul hoped that when God darkened Elymas' physical
eyesight, He might restore his spiritual eyesight, as had been
his own experience (ch. 9).

13:12 This show of superior power convinced Sergius Paulus of the

truth of Paul's gospel, and he "believed" it. Notice again that
belief is all that was necessary for his salvation (cf. 14:1;
17:34; 19:18). It was Paul's "teaching" concerning the Lord
that Sergius Paulus "believed." There is some extrabiblical

1Longenecker, p. 420.
2Archibald Robertson and Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians, p. 341.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 277

evidence that Sergius Paulus' daughter and other descendants

also became Christians.1

"This blinding of the false prophet opened the

eyes of Sergius Paulus."2

The "blinding" of Elymas shows that Paul possessed the power

of "binding" that God had also given to Peter (cf. Matt. 16:19).
God validated Paul's message by granting a miracle. This was
especially helpful in evangelism before the completion of the
New Testament. Here a Roman Gentile responded to the
gospel, whereas a Jew did not.

This incident is significant in the unfolding of Luke's purpose, because at

Paphos Paul assumed the leadership among the missionaries (cf. v. 13).
The mission of the church also became more Gentile oriented. Jewish
response continued to be rejection, symbolized by Elymas' blindness (cf.
28:26-27). Furthermore, this was the first appearance of Christianity
before Roman aristocracy and high authority, a new benchmark for the
advance of the mission. Paul's conflict with Elymas is also reminiscent of
others, in the Old Testament, in which prophets with rival messages made
presentations to kings and people (cf. 1 Kings 22; Jer. 28—29).

"The conversion of Sergius Paulus was, in fact, a turning point

in Paul's whole ministry and inaugurated a new policy in the
mission to Gentiles—viz., the legitimacy of a direct approach
to and full acceptance of Gentiles apart from any distinctive
Jewish stance. This is what Luke clearly sets forth as the great
innovative development of this first missionary journey
(14:27; 15:3). Earlier Cornelius had been converted apart from
any prior commitment to Judaism, and the Jerusalem church
had accepted his conversion to Christ. But the Jerusalem
church never took Cornelius's conversion as a precedent for
the Christian mission and apparently preferred not to dwell on
its ramifications. However, Paul, whose mandate was to
Gentiles, saw in the conversion of Sergius Paulus further
aspects of what a mission to Gentiles involved and was

1SeeWilliam M. Ramsay, The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the

New Testament, pp. 150-72.
2Howson, p. 120. Also attributed to Felten by Knowling, 2:288.
278 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

prepared to take this conversion as a precedent fraught with

far-reaching implications for his ministry. It is significant that
from this point on Luke always calls the apostle by his Greek
name Paul and, except for 14:14; 15:12; and 15:25 (situations
where Barnabas was more prominent), always emphasizes his
leadership by listing him first when naming the missioners. For
after this, it was Paul's insight that set the tone for the
church's outreach to the Gentile world."1

3. The mission to Asia Minor 13:13—14:21a

Having evangelized Barnabas' homeland, the missionaries next moved into

southern Asia Minor (modern western Turkey).

"The contact with Sergius Paulus is the key to the subsequent

ininerary of the first missionary journey. From Cyprus Paul and
Barnabas struck east [sic north] to the newly founded colony
of Pisiddian Antioch, miles away from any Cypriot's normal
route. Modern scholars have invoked Paul's wish to reach the
uplands of Asia and recover from a passing sickness. … We
know, however, that the family of the Sergii Pauli had a
prominent connection with Pisidian Antioch … the Sergii Pauli's
local influence was linked with their ownership of a great estate
nearby in central Anatolia: it is an old and apt guess that these
connections go back to the time of Paul's governor. They
explain very neatly why Paul and Barnabas left the governor's
presence and headed straight for distant Pisidian Antioch. He
directed them to the area where his family had land, power and
influence. The author of Acts saw only the impulse of the Holy
Spirit, but Christianity entered Roman Asia on advice from the
highest society."2

Arrival in Pamphylia 13:13

"Pamphylia" was a Roman province that lay west of the kingdom of

Antiochus, which was west of Cilicia, Paul's home province. "Perga"
(modern Perge) stood 12 miles inland from the major seaport of Attalia

1Longenecker, pp. 420-21.

2R. L. Fox, Pagans and Christians, pp. 293-94.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 279

(modern Antalya, cf. 14:25-26), but it had an inland harbor on the Cestrus
River.

In Perga, John Mark left Paul and Barnabas to return to Jerusalem. Paul did
not approve of his decision (15:38), but Luke did not record Mark's
motives. The commentators have suggested several reasons, including:
homesickness (cf. 12:12), fear of illness (cf. Gal. 4:13), and fear of danger
in the Taurus Mountains north of Perga (cf. 15:38-39). Paul purposed to
cross these mountains to get to Antioch of Pisidia. Others have cited the
changes that were taking place in the mission's leadership from Barnabas
to Paul. Another probable explanation is disagreement over the validity of
a direct approach to and full acceptance of Gentiles. John Mark, of course,
had strong ties to the Jerusalem church and could well have resisted this
approach, as so many other Jews did.

Ministry in Antioch of Pisidia 13:14-52

Paul and Barnabas proceeded north, inland from the coast, about 100 miles
to Antioch of Pisidia. The road took them from sea level to 3,600 feet
elevation through bandit-infested country.1 They arrived on a lake-filled
plateau. Paul later wrote to the Galatians that he had preached the gospel
to them at first because of a weakness of the flesh (Gal. 4:13). This seems
to indicate that Paul was not in good health when he ministered in Antioch
of Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. Many commentators followed the
theory of William Ramsay, who argued that Paul suffered from malaria,
which he contracted on the lowlands of Perga.2 Antioch of Pisidia was a
Roman colony, as were Lystra, Troas, Philippi, and Corinth. Roman colonies
stood at strategic places in the empire along frequently traveled roads. As
such, Antioch would have been a good place to plant a church. The Via
Sebaste, the Roman road that ran from Ephesus to the Euphrates River,
passed through this Antioch.

"Antioch was the most important city of southern Galatia and

included within its population a rich amalgam of Greek, Roman,
Oriental, and Phrygian traditions. Acts tells us that it also had
a sizeable Jewish population."3

1Blaiklock,
p. 105; Howson, p. 130.
2William
M. Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen, p. 93.
3Longenecker, pp. 422-23.
280 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"In bringing the gospel to Pisidian Antioch, Paul and Barnabas

were planting Christianity in the communication nerve center
and heart of Asia Minor."1

People referred to this town as "Pisidian Antioch" (Antioch of Pisidia),

because it was close to the geographical region of Pisidia, though its site
was in the geographical region of Phrygia. They called it "Antioch of Pisidia"
to distinguish it from another "Antioch" also located in Phrygia.2

"It was founded by Seleucus I Nicator about 281 B.C. as one

of the sixteen cities he named in honor of either his father or
his son, both of whom bore the name Antiochus."3

This town was in the Roman province of Galatia and was the chief military
and political center in the southern part of the Galatian province.4 Luke
recorded that the missionaries had contact with seven different types of
people here: synagogue officials, Jews, proselytes, God-fearers, devout
women of high standing, Gentiles, and leading men of the city. They
reached all levels of society.

The visit to the synagogue in Antioch of Pisidia 13:14-15

Paul and Barnabas attended the Sabbath service in a local synagogue.

"In the Hellenistic and Roman periods Asia Minor had a

substantial Jewish population. …

"The massive influx of a Jewish population into Asia Minor took

place at the end of the third century BC, when Antiochus III
settled two thousand Jewish families from Mesopotamia and
Babylonia in Lydia and Phrygia, in order to maintain the security
of his hold over this region."5

Normally the synagogue service began with the Shema ("Hear, O Israel, …")
and the Shemoneh Esreh (a liturgy of benedictions, blessings, and prayers).
Then the leaders would read two passages from the Old Testament aloud,

1Merrill F. Unger, "Pisidian Antioch and Gospel Penetration of the Greek World," Bibliotheca
Sacra 118:469 (January-March 1961):48.
2See Knowling, 2:289.
3Longenecker, p. 422.
4See Ramsay, St. Paul …, p. 92.
5Levinskaya, p. 138.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 281

one from the Mosaic "Law," and a related passage from the "Prophets"
section of the Hebrew Bible. Then some competent person whom the
synagogue rulers designated would give an address. The service would
conclude with a benediction. On this occasion the synagogue leaders, who
were local Jewish laymen, invited Paul and Barnabas to give an address if
they had some encouraging word to share.

Paul initiated his typical pattern of ministry in Antioch of Pisidia. In every

town with a sizable Jewish population that he visited, except Athens,
according to Luke, the apostle first preached in the synagogue to Jews and
God-fearing Gentiles. When the Jews refused to listen further, he then went
to Gentiles directly with the gospel. Evidently Paul went to the synagogues
first, because his audience there had a theological background that made
it easier for them to understand and believe the gospel.

"There was, of course, a practical matter involved. If they had

begun evangelizing among gentiles first, the synagogue would
have been closed to them."1

Paul's synagogue sermon in Antioch of Pisidia 13:16-41

Luke recorded three of Paul's evangelistic messages to unbelievers: here in

Pisidian Antioch, in Lystra (14:15-17), and in Athens (17:22-31). This is
the longest of the three, though Luke quite certainly condensed all of them.
This one takes most people less than a minute to read.

"He [Paul] may have written out notes of this sermon

afterwards for Luke. The keynotes of Paul's theology as found
in his Epistles appear in this sermon."2

This sermon is very similar to Peter's sermon in 2:14-40, and Stephen's in

7:2-53.3 It contains three parts, marked off by three occurrences of direct
address: preparation for the coming of Messiah (vv. 16-25), the rejection,
crucifixion, and resurrection of Messiah (vv. 26-37), and the application
and appeal (vv. 38-41).4

1Kent,p. 115.
2Robertson, 3:187.
3For comparison with two other important initiation speeches, namely, Jesus' in Luke

4:18-21 and Peter's in Acts 2, see Tannehill, 2:160-62; or Witherington, p. 408. For
comparison of this address with Stephen's, see Rackham, pp. 208-9.
4Toussiant, "Acts," p. 389.
282 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"The variety in these missionary sermons and the speeches of

Christians on trial before Jewish and Roman bodies is no doubt
meant to illustrate the different ways in which the gospel was
presented to different groups of people, Jews and Greeks,
cultured and uncultured, and it is hard to resist the impression
that the sermons are presented as models for Luke's readers
to use in their own evangelism."1

Luke probably recorded this address to help us see how Paul preached to
people who knew the Hebrew Scriptures.2

"Speeches in Acts are differentiated less with reference to the

speakers than with reference to the audience."3

Since this speech is carefully crafted to be persuasive to a Diaspora Jewish

audience, it not only has the form of deliberative rhetoric but it reflects the
patterns of early Jewish augumentation."4

13:16 Paul "stood up" and "motioned with his hand," both gestures
being typical of synagogue exhortations. He addressed his
Jewish hearers as "Men of Israel," and he called the Gentile
God-fearers who were present: "you who fear God."

13:17-22 Paul first reviewed God's preparation for Israel's redemption

from Abraham through David (cf. 7:2-50; Matt. 1:2-17). He
highlighted five important points that the Jews often stressed
in their confessions: (1) God was the God of the Israelites ("of
this people Israel"; v. 17). (2) God "chose" the patriarchs ("our
fathers"; v. 17). (3) God created the Israelite nation ("made
the people great"), redeemed His people out of Egypt, and
patiently led them through the wilderness (vv. 17-18). (4) He
then gave them Canaan ("distributed their [the Canaanites']
land') "as an inheritance" (v. 19). The "about" 450 years
mentioned (v. 19) probably refers to: Israel's 400 years in
Egypt, plus the 40 years in the wilderness, plus the 10 years
of conquest and settlement in the Promised Land (1845—

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 33.

2See also David A. deSilva, "Paul's Sermon in Antioch of Pisidia," Bibliotheca Sacra
151:601 (January-March 1994):32-49.
3Barrett, p. 623.
4Witherington, p. 408.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 283

1395 B.C.; cf. 7:6).1 (5) Finally, God gave the Israelites faithful
King David after a succession of lesser leaders (vv. 20-22). It
was particularly David's heart for God, resulting in his carrying
out God's will, that Paul stressed (v. 22). These qualities
marked David's successor, Jesus Christ, too.

13:23 Paul then announced that the "promised" Messiah had come—
"a Savior"—and that He was "Jesus." The promise in view
seems to be the one in Isaiah 11:1-16, which speaks of Messiah
coming from David's descendants.

13:24-25 Most of the Jews of the dispersion knew of "John" the

Baptist's ministry ("baptism of repentance to all the people").
Often the early Christian preachers began the message of
Jesus with John the Baptist, who announced and prepared for
His coming (cf. Mark 1:2-8). John clarified that he himself was
"not" the Messiah, but was simply His forerunner (Luke 3:15-
18).

"It may be that followers of John the Baptist,

believing him to have been the Messiah, and
constituting a sect which had spread outwards
from Palestine, presented more of a problem to
Christian missionaries about this time than the NT
evidence would suggest; a hint of this is given in
19:3-5. If such were the case, it would account
for Paul's strong emphasis here on John's role as
merely the herald of the Messiah."2

13:26 Before proceeding to prove that Jesus is the Messiah, Paul

paused to address his hearers by groups again (cf. v. 16), and
to personalize the gospel message to them. He noted that the
gospel is for both Jews ("sons of Abraham's family") and
Gentiles ("those … who fear God").

1See the diagram "References to Israel's Years in Egypt" at my notes on 7:2-8. For a
different explanation based on a different textual reading, see Eugene H. Merrill, "Paul's
Use of 'About 450 Years' in Acts 13:20," Bibliotheca Sacra 138:551 (July-September
1981):246-57.
2Neil, pp. 158-59.
284 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

13:27-31 He then proceeded to narrate the rejection, crucifixion, and

resurrection of Jesus (cf. 1 Cor. 15:3-5). He pointed out that
all these events were fulfillments of Old Testament
predictions, which most of the Jews living in Jerusalem did not
recognize at the time (vv. 27, 29). He also noted Jesus'
innocence of the charges ("no ground for … death") brought
against Him (v. 28). Paul stressed Jesus' resurrection
particularly as God's vindication of Him (v. 30), and he
highlighted the apostles' personal witness of His resurrection
(v. 31; cf. 2:32; 3:15; 5:32; 10:39-41). God had vindicated
and prepared Him to reign by raising Him from the dead. This
is the fifth time in Acts that the apostles claimed to be
personal "witnesses" of Jesus Christ's resurrection (cf. 2:32;
3:15; 5:32; 10:39-41; 13:30-31). Paul's point was that
David's promised heir, the Messiah, had come (cf. v. 33).

13:32-37 Paul supported the fulfillment of this promise by quoting three

Old Testament Messianic passages: Psalm 2:7 (v. 33), Isaiah
55:3 (v. 34), and Psalm 16:10 (v. 35; cf. 2:27). These Old
Testament texts all found fulfillment in the raising up of Jesus.
However, Paul used "raised up" in two different senses in this
speech. In verses 33 and 37, he spoke of God raising up Jesus
as the promised Messiah. Psalm 2:7 refers to God similarly
raising up David as Israel's king. Second, Paul spoke in verses
30 and 34 of God raising up Jesus from the dead.

"The 'virgin tomb' (John 19:41) was like a 'womb'

that gave birth to Jesus Christ in resurrection
glory."1

Jesus was always the "Son of God" ontologically (with regard

to His being), but God declared Him to be His "Son" when He
raised Him from the dead, and made Him the Davidic ruler (Ps.
2:7). Similarly, God had declared Solomon His "son" when He
gave David the Davidic Covenant (cf. 2 Sam. 7:10-14).

Progressive dispensationalists believe that Paul meant that

Jesus is now ruling over David's kingdom.2 Though there are

1Wiersbe, 1:458.
2See Blaising, Progressive Dispensationalism, p. 177; and Saucy, The Case …, p. 68.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 285

connections with Jesus' enthronement as the Davidic King in

these Old Testament passages, it seems clear from Paul's
emphasis on God raising up Jesus, in verses 30-37, that he
was using these passages to show that Jesus' resurrection
proved that He is the Davidic King, not that He has begun to
reign as the Davidic King. Here Paul said nothing explicitly
about Jesus' reigning as Israel's King, but he said much about
Jesus' being Israel's King.

"Paul did not say Jesus is now ruling over the

kingdom of David, but only that the Son of David
is now in a position to rule forever when He
returns."1

Since Jesus rose from the dead, God can give people the
blessings that He promised would come through David (v. 34;
Isa. 55:3; cf. 2:25-32). The blessings mentioned in this Old
Testament passage are those of the New Covenant. The facts
that Jesus was "raised from the dead," and "did not undergo
decay," prove that He is the "Holy One" of whom David spoke
in Psalm 16:10 (v. 35).

Paul's argument was that God had first raised up David, and
had promised a Savior from his posterity. God then fulfilled
that promise by raising up Jesus as the Messiah, whom He
identified as "His (My) Son" by raising Him from the dead.2

13:38-39 Paul ended his historical review with an exhortation and appeal
to his readers (cf. v. 15). He now addressed his two types of
hearers collectively as "men brethren" (v. 38, Gr. andres
adelphoi). When it comes to responding to the gospel, all
people, Jews and Gentiles, are on the same level. Through
Jesus, Paul asserted, "everyone who believes" (the only
condition) has "forgiveness of sins" (cf. 2:38; 10:43) and
justification ("is freed from all things"; God's judicial
declaration of righteousness, cf. Deut. 25:1). Justification
could not come through the Mosaic Law, he reminded his

1Rogers, "The Davidic … Acts-Revelation," p. 75.

2Cf. Neil, p. 159.
286 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

hearers. This is the only reference in Acts to justification by

faith in Jesus.

"The apostle so connects forgiveness of sins with

righteousness that he shows them to be exactly
the same."1

"What we have in the application of Paul's

message (despite its cumbersome expression in
its précis form) are his distinctive themes of
'forgiveness of sins,' 'justification,' and 'faith,'
which resound in this first address ascribed to him
in Acts just as they do throughout his extant
letters."2

Paul later developed the truth of justification, or the

forgiveness apart from the Mosaic Law, in his epistle to the
Galatians. He probably wrote Galatians to the same people he
spoke to here, shortly after he completed this first missionary
journey. Later he set forth these themes more fully in his
epistle to the Romans. These verses summarize the arguments
of Galatians and Romans in one sentence.

13:40-41 Paul concluded his message by applying Habakkuk's warning to

all who reject the good news about Jesus Christ. God's working
in their day (i.e., providing the Messiah) was something they
could not afford to disbelieve and scoff at, or they would
"perish."

"Habakkuk 1:5, which Paul quoted here, refers to

an invasion of Judah by a Gentile nation that would
be used as God's disciplinary instrument to punish
Judah for her disobedience. Paul evidently saw his
generation in Israel under a similar disciplinary
judgment. Paul's message, like Peter's [on the day
of Pentecost] was delivered to a generation in
Israel under the judgment Christ had predicted [in

1Calvin, [Link].
2Longenecker, p. 427.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 287

Luke 21:24, i.e., the destruction of Jerusalem in

A.D. 70]."1

In a larger sense, of course, unbelieving "scoffers … perish"

eternally for rejecting the gospel.

"Parallel with the positive theme of the preparation for the

coming of the Christ through Abraham, Moses, Samuel, David
and John the Baptist, he [Paul] has interwoven an admonitory
reminder of those who have failed to recognize the divine plan
and purpose—the Canaanites, Saul, the Jerusalem Jews and
Pilate. Now he presents the Dispersion Jews with a similar
challenge to accept or refuse the Gospel message."2

The consequences of Paul's message 13:42-52

13:42-43 Paul's message created great interest in the hearts of many

people who listened to him. Paul possessed great powers of
persuasion (cf. 18:4; 19:8, 26; 26:28; 28:23; 2 Cor. 5:11; Gal.
1:10), but the Holy Spirit was at work too. Paul and Barnabas
continued clarifying the gospel for their inquirers during the
following week. The English translators supplied "Paul and
Barnabas" (NASB, NIV) or "Jews" (AV), and "the people"
(NASB, NIV) or "Gentiles" (AV), for the third person plural that
appears in the best ancient Greek manuscripts. Here "the
grace of God" refers to the sphere of life into which one enters
by believing in Jesus Christ.

13:44-45 One reason for the unsaved Jews' antagonism was the large
crowd ("nearly the whole city") that Paul's message attracted.
"Jealousy," rather than the Holy Spirit, filled and controlled
these unbelieving Jews—and again led to persecution (cf.
5:17).

"Knowing (as we unfortunately do) how pious

Christian pew-holders can manifest quite un-
Christian indignation when they arrive at church
on a Sunday morning to find their places occupied
by rank outsiders who have come to hear a

1Pentecost, "The Apostles' …," p. 140.

2Neil, p. 160.
288 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

popular visiting preacher, we can readily

appreciate the annoyance of the Jewish
community at finding their synagogue practically
taken over by a Gentile congregation on this
occasion."1

"The majority of the Jews, including undoubtedly

the leaders of the Jewish community, were
apparently unwilling to countenance a salvation as
open to Gentiles as it was to Jews."2

Another reason for the Jews' hostile reaction was that, like
other Jews elsewhere, most of the Jews in Pisidian Antioch did
not believe that Jesus was the Messiah. They were
"blaspheming" by saying that He was not.

13:46 As the apostles in Jerusalem had done, Paul and Barnabas

responded to the opposition with bold words (cf. 4:29). It was
necessary for the gospel to go to the Jews before the Gentiles,
not only because Jewish acceptance of Jesus is a prerequisite
to the messianic kingdom (cf. 3:26). It was also necessary
because Jesus was the Messiah whom God had promised to
deliver the Jews. The gospel was good news to the Jews in a
larger sense than it was to the Gentiles. Paul almost always
preached the gospel to the Jews first in the towns he visited
(cf. 13:50-51; 14:2-6; 17:5, 13-15; 18:6; 19:8-9; 28:23-28;
Rom. 1:16). The Jews' rejection of the gospel led him to offer
it next to the Gentiles.

"Now for the first time Dispersion Jews follow the

example of their Jerusalem counterparts in
rejecting Christ, and for the first time Paul publicly
announces his intention of turning his back on
them and concentrating on the purely Gentile
mission."3

By rejecting Jesus, these Jews were in actuality, though not

consciously, judging themselves "unworthy" of salvation. In

1F.F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 281.

2Longenecker, p. 429. Cf. Blaiklock, p. 106.
3Neil, p. 160. Cf. 18:5-6; and 28:25-28.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 289

irony, Paul said those who rejected ("repudiated") the gospel

were really judging themselves to be "unworthy of eternal life"
(i.e., salvation and its benefits).1 Usually most of the Jews who
heard Paul's preaching would reject it, and only a few of them
would believe, but usually many Gentiles accepted the gospel.

13:47 Paul quoted the Isaiah commission because he was addressing

Jews. Isaiah explained their duty. He and Barnabas were only
carrying out God's will. The "servant of the Lord" is the person
addressed in Isaiah 49:6. Jesus Christ, the perfect Servant of
the Lord, was the ultimate "light to (for) the Gentiles" who
would "bring salvation to the end of the earth" (cf. Luke 2:28-
32). As Israel and Christ had been lights to the Gentiles (Gen.
46:3; Luke 2:29-32), so now were Paul and Barnabas (cf. Matt.
5:14-16). Not only had the Jews received a commission to
reach out to the Gentiles with blessing (Exod. 19:5-6; Isa.
49:6), but so had Jesus' disciples (Matt. 28:19-20).

13:48-49 Luke again stressed that the results of the preaching of the
gospel were due to God's work (1:1-2). The Christian
evangelists were only harvesting the wheat that God had
already prepared. Verse 48 is a strong statement of
predestination: those whom God had previously "appointed to
eternal life believed" the gospel (cf. Eph. 1:4, 11).

"Once again the human responsibility of believing

is shown to coincide exactly with what God in his
sovereignty had planned."2

Good news spreads fast, and the good news of the gospel
"spread through that entire (the whole) region."

"This spreading of the word, along with the

apostles' own outreach to the cities named in
chapters 13 and 14, probably led to the agitation
of the so-called Judaizers that resulted in the
problem Paul dealt with in Galatians."3

1Witherington, p. 415.
2Kent, p. 114.
3Longenecker, p. 430.
290 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

13:50 The "Jews" secured Paul and Barnabas' explusion "from (out
of) their district." They did this through influential local
residents who "brought persecution" on the missionaries.
Some of these people were "devout women," evidently God-
fearers whom the unbelieving Jews turned against Paul and
Barnabas (cf. 10:2).

"… synagogue worship attracted many Gentile

women as adherents of Judaism; in Asia Minor
wealthy matrons exercised much more influence
than was the case in most other parts of the
Empire."1

13:51 Shaking the dust off one's feet was a graphic way that Jews
illustrated separation from unbelievers (cf. Matt. 10:14; Luke
9:5; 10:11). "Iconium" (modern Konia) stood about 90 miles
to the southeast of Antioch, also in Phrygian Galatia. Paul and
Barnabas undoubtedly traveled the southeast branch of the
Via Sebaste to arrive there. Another branch of this major road
went from Antioch to Comana, about 120 miles to the north.

"As the blood of the martyrs has been the seed

of the church, so the banishment of the
confessors has helped to scatter that seed."2

13:52 The identity of the "disciples" in verse 52 is not clear. They

could be Paul and Barnabas or the new converts in Antioch. I
tend to think the word refers to both groups. Fullness of "joy"
and fullness of "the Holy Spirit" marked these disciples.

It is interesting that two references to "joy" (vv. 48, 52) bracket the one
reference to "persecution" in this passage (v. 50), suggesting that the
missionaries' joy overrode the discomforts of persecution (cf. 16:24-25).

Ministry in Iconium 14:1-7

"The fourteenth chapter tells experiences of Christian

missionary work entirely different from those related

1Neil, p. 161.
2Henry, pp. 1689-90.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 291

elsewhere in Acts. All the other adventures of the Apostles are

in Jerusalem and in the larger cities."1

14:1-2 Iconium was a Greek city-state in the geographic region of

Phrygia, the easternmost city in that region.

"… it would appear that the people of Iconium

regarded themselves as Phrygian even after
Iconium had been united with Lycaonia in one
district of Roman administration … Strictly
speaking, Lystra and Derbe were cities of
Lycaonia-Galatica, while Iconium reckoned itself as
a city of Phyrgia-Galatica, all three being
comprised within the Roman province of Galatia."2

"… while Rome chose Antioch of Pisidia and Lystra

as bastions of its authority in the area, Iconium
remained largely Greek in temper and somewhat
resistant to Roman influence, though Hadrian later
made it a Roman colony."3

"Iconium" comes from eikon, the Greek word for "image."

According to Greek mythology, Prometheus and Athena
recreated humanity there after a devastating flood by making
images of people from mud and breathing life into them.4

Iconium was, "… a garden spot, situated in the

midst of orchards and farms, but surrounded by
deserts. … Iconium, too, owed its bustling
business activity to its location on the main trade
route connecting Ephesus with Syria and the
Mesopotamian world, as well as its orchard
industries and farm produce."5

1Foakes-Jackson, p. 121.
2Knowling, 2:301.
3Longenecker, p. 431.
4Ibid., pp. 431-32.
5Merrill F. Unger, "Archaeology and Paul's Visit to Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe," Bibliotheca

Sacra 118:470 (April-June 1961):107-108.

292 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

In Iconium, Paul and Barnabas followed the same method of

evangelizing that they had used in Antioch (13:14). They
visited the synagogue first. They also experienced the same
results: many conversions among both Jews and Gentiles, but
also rejection by some of the Jews (cf. 13:43). These
unbelieving Jews "stirred up" unbelieving Gentiles, and these
Gentiles joined them in opposing the missionaries (13:50).

14:3 Because God was saving many people, the missionaries stayed
on in Iconium "a long time," regardless of opposition that
evidently increased gradually. They testified "boldly" (cf.
13:46), and relied on the Lord Jesus for their success. The
phrase "the word of His grace" (v. 3) describes the gospel
message, stressing the prominence of God's grace in it (cf.
20:24-32). They did many miracles ("signs and wonders")
there, too, thus confirming their message (cf. 2:43; 4:30;
5:12; 6:8; 8:6, 13; 15:12; Gal. 3:5, 2 Cor. 12:12; Heb. 2:3-4).

"… the couplet 'miraculous signs and wonders'

places the ministry of Paul and Barnabas directly
in line with that of Jesus (cf. 2:22) and the early
church (cf. 2:43; 4:30; 5:12; 6:8; 7:36) in
fulfillment of prophecy (cf. 2:19)—as it does also
in 15:12. Later when writing his Galatian converts
(assuming a 'South Galatian' origin for the letter),
Paul appeals to these mighty works performed by
the Spirit as evidence that the gospel as he
preached it and they received it was fully
approved by God (cf. Gal 3:4-5)."1

14:4 The "apostles" were Paul and Barnabas. Luke used the word
"apostle" in a technical sense to describe the Twelve apostles
plus Paul in Acts. He also used it less frequently, in a non-
technical sense, to describe any believer sent out into the
world with the salvation message (e.g., v. 14; cf. Rom. 16:7;
2 Cor. 8:23; Phil. 2:25). There were only 13 men with the
office of apostleship, but there were many others who, with
more or less gift, did the work of an apostle. Similarly there

1Longenecker, p. 432.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 293

were some with the prophetic office, but many more with
prophetic ministries.1

14:5-7 "The schematic description of the mission in

Iconium follows the pattern of the mission in
Jerusalem more closely than the pattern of the
mission in Antioch of Pisidia."2

"Paul never went off into a corner, gathered a

handful, and then thought his task done. Even in
Athens he had the philosophers of the city around
him. So he thoroughly evangelized Iconium."3

The Gentiles and the Jewish rulers took the initiative in

persecuting the evangelists. The attempt "to stone them"
appears to have been an act of mob violence, rather than a
formal Jewish attempt at execution (cf. 7:58-59).

"It would have required a regular Hebrew court to

sanction it [a legal stoning], and it would never
have been tolerated in a Roman colony."4

"Paul and Barnabas had no idea of remaining to be

stoned (lynched) by this mob. It is a wise preacher
who always knows when to stand his ground and
when to leave for the glory of God. Paul and
Barnabas were following the directions of the Lord
Jesus given to the twelve on their special tour of
Galilee (Matt. 10:23)."5

Consequently Paul and Barnabas moved ("fled") south into the

geographical "region" of "Lycaonia," which was also in the
Roman province of Galatia. "Lycaonia" means "land of the

1See John E. Johnson, "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity,"
Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.
2Tannehill,2:176.
3Lenski,p. 565.
4Foakes-Jackson, p. 128.
5Robertson, 3:207.
294 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

wolf." This became the next area for their ministry. They left
one political area to start afresh in another.

"Luke's accuracy was once severely challenged on

this point because abundant records exist
showing that Iconium was also a Lycaonian city,
and thus no border would have been crossed
between Iconium and Lystra. It was careful study
of this matter which changed the British scholar
William Ramsay into a strong defender of Luke's
accuracy when he discovered that Iconium was
Lycaonian earlier and again later, but that Luke's
statement 'was accurate at the period when Paul
visited Lycaonia; that it was accurate at no other
time except between 37 and 72 A.D.'"1

Ministry in Lystra 14:8-20a

14:8 Like Antioch of Pisidia, "Lystra" (modern Zoldera) was a Roman

colony.2 It was the most eastern of the fortified cities of
Galatia.3 Lystra was about 20 miles south of Iconium. Twenty
miles was a normal day's travel in the Roman Empire at this
time. Luke did not mention synagogue evangelism here.
Evidently there were so few Jews that there was no synagogue
in Lystra (or in Philippi).

"The further on Paul and Barnabas went the

further they got from civilisation [sic]."4

Luke stressed the hopeless case of the "lame man" (cf. 3:1-
10; 9:33-35).

"Luke undoubtedly wanted his readers to

recognize the parallel between the healing of this

1Kent, p. 116. His quotation is from Ramsay, St. Paul …, pp. 110-11. Cf. idem, The Bearing
…, pp. 35-52
2See my comments on 13:14-15.
3See Finegan, Light from …, pp. 340-45, for more information about the cities of Galatia.
4Barclay, p. 115.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 295

crippled man and the healing of another one by

Peter (cf. 3:1-8) …"1

"In opposition to those who would challenge Paul's

claim to apostolic authority based on his direct
commission from the risen Christ, Luke is
concerned to show that his hero shares with the
chief Apostle [Peter] the healing power vested in
his disciples by the Lord himself (Jn 14:12) and
exemplified in Jesus' own ministry (Lk. 7:22)."2

"… it must be remembered that ancient historians

looked for and believed in the existence of
repeated cycles or patterns in history, such that
one could learn from what has gone before and to
a certain degree know what to expect from the
future.3 This sort of thinking was characteristic of
various of the Hellenistic historians, especially
Polybius …"4

14:9-10 As is true of other, similar references to a healed person's

"faith," this man's confidence was in God. He believed God
could heal him, not that God would do so. Confidence that God
would heal him, in other words, is not what made him whole. It
was confidence that God, through His servant, could heal him,
that constituted his faith (e.g., Matt. 9:28-29; Mark 9:22-24).
His faith was a factor in his receiving healing (cf. Mark 6:5-6).
Actually, the Greek word translated "healed" is sozo, which
means "saved." So while the man may have had faith to be
saved spiritually ("saved"), the context suggests that he
probably believed that he could be saved physically ("healed").

"… Paul and Barnabas had the gifts of an apostle,

the sign gifts. They came into these places
without any New Testament with the message of
the gospel. What were their credentials? How

1Longenecker, p. 435.
2Neil,p. 163.
3Footnote 273: "See the discussion by [G. W.] Trompf, [The] Idea of Historical Recurrence
[in Western Thought], of Polybius, pp. 78 ff., and of Luke, pp. 170ff."
4Witherington, p. 423.
296 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

could they prove their message was from God?

The sign gifts were their credentials—they needed
them. Today we have the entire Bible, and what
people need today is to study this Bible and to
learn what it has to say."1

14:11-12 Why did Luke refer to the fact that the natives spoke in the
local "Lycaonian language"? He probably did so to explain why
their plans to honor Paul and Barnabas got as far as they did
before the missionaries objected (v. 14). People who lived in
Asia Minor spoke three languages at least: Latin (the official
administrative language), Greek (the lingua franca of the
empire), and the native vernacular, which in this case was
Lycaonian.2

Archaeology has turned up evidence of a legend in Lystra that

Zeus and Hermes once visited an elderly couple who lived
there, a man named Philemon and his wife Baucis.3 This
supposedly took place before Paul and Barnabas' visit.
Apparently the locals concluded that these gods had returned.
Zeus was the chief god in the Greek pantheon, and Hermes was
his herald. The residents of Lystra identified Barnabas with
"Zeus" (whom the Romans called Jupiter). Perhaps he looked
dignified and authoritative. They called Paul "Hermes" (the
Roman Mercury) because he was the chief speaker. According
to Greek legend, Hermes invented speech and was an eloquent
speaker. The English word "hermeneutics," the science of
interpretation, comes from this word.4

If Satan cannot derail Christian witness with persecution, he

will try praise. Too much persecution has destroyed many
preachers, and too much praise has ruined many others. One
of the problems with miracles is that they often draw more
attention to the miracle worker than to God.

1McGee, 4:571. Cf. 17:11.

2Neil, p. 163.
3F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 291; Marshall, The Acts …, p. 237; Longenecker, p.

435. See Witherington, pp. 421-22, for a translation of the story, which appears in Ovid's
Metamorphoses.
4Robertson, 3:210.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 297

14:13 Customarily the pagan Gentiles decorated animals destined for

"sacrifice" to the Greek gods, like these oxen, with woolen
"garlands"—and then led them to the place of sacrifice.

14:14 Tearing one's robe was a common way Jews expressed grief
and, in this case, horror because of blasphemy (cf. Mark
14:63). Usually they tore the robe for about four or five inches
from the neckline.1

14:15-18 By recording the substance of what Paul and Barnabas said

here, Luke preserved a sample of their preaching to pagan
audiences (cf. 13:16-41; 17:22-31).

"With a pagan audience it was necessary to begin

a stage further back with the proclamation of the
one true God."2

In earlier times, God had manifested the knowledge of Himself

to Gentiles mainly through creation and Israel (cf. Rom. 1).
Now He was giving them more special revelation through the
church. This was the first time Luke recorded the preaching of
the gospel to a group that was predominantly, if not
exclusively, Gentile. Thus this incident became another
benchmark of worldwide gospel extension.

Timothy was apparently a native of Lystra (cf. 16:1-2; 20:4;

2 Tim. 1:5). He apparently had a Jewish mother and
grandmother (cf. 16:3; 2 Tim. 1:5). This may indicate that
there were some Jews who lived there.

"Paul's speech here, apart from his address to the

Athenian philosophers (17:22ff.), is the only
example in Acts of his technique in dealing with a
purely pagan audience; it is a striking example of
his ability to reinterpret the Gospel in terms
intelligible to his hearers. It differs widely from his
approach to Jews and adherents of Judaism, as
illustrated by his sermon in the synagogue at

[Link], Sketches of …, pp. 173-74, for how the Jews of Jesus' day tore their
garments when they heard of a death.
2Marshall, The Acts …, p. 238.
298 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Antioch (13:16ff.), where some knowledge of the

scriptures could be assumed on the part of his
listeners. Here, as at Athens, he proceeds on the
basis of natural revelation—the providential order
of the universe—which ought to lead men's
thoughts from the cult of idols to the worship of
a living God, Creator of all that exists; he expounds
this line of argument more fully in Rom. 1:19ff.;
2:14f., and he writes of its successful outcome at
Thessalonica in I Th. 1:9)."1

14:19-20a We do not know how long it took the hostile Jews from Antioch
and Iconium to turn the tide of popular sentiment against Paul
and Barnabas. They convinced the fickle residents of Lystra
that the missionaries were deceivers rather than gods and
deserved to die (cf. 28:4-6; Matt. 12:24). A few days earlier,
the Lystrans had treated the apostles better than angels; now
the treated them worse than animals.

"Disillusioned fanatics are easily led off into

contradictory actions."2

Some scholars believe that Paul died from this stoning and
experienced resurrection.3 However, the text only says that
onlookers supposed that Paul was dead (cf. 2 Cor. 11:25). It
is possible that young Timothy was standing in the group of
disciples who surrounded the apparently lifeless body of Paul.
Ironside believed that this is when Paul was caught up into the
third heaven (2 Cor. 12:2-4).4 There is no way to prove or to
disprove this theory. Luke's description of Paul's speedy
recovery (v. 20) stresses God's powerful hand in restoring His
servant (cf. 1:1-2). Paul courageously returned to Lystra, but
he left town the next day (v. 20b).

"It was John Wesley's advice, 'Always look a mob

in the face.' Paul never did a braver thing than to

1Neil, p. 164.
2Kent, p. 117.
3E.g., Lumby, p. 264; and McGee, 4:573.
4Ironside, Lectures on …, pp. 341-42.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 299

go straight back into the city which had tried to

murder him."1

Ministry at Derbe 14:20b-21a

Paul and Barnabas next moved about 60 miles farther to the southeast, to
Derbe (meaning juniper, modern Kerti Hüyük), on the eastern border of the
Galatian province.2 Many more people became believers and disciples there
(cf. 20:4). Luke did not record what the apostles experienced there, but
this was the home of Gaius, one of Paul's later companions (20:4). Perhaps
Gaius became a convert at this time.

The larger towns of Antioch and Iconium seem to have produced more
influential churches, but the smaller ones of Lystra and Derbe contributed
more young men who became leaders (i.e., Timothy and Gaius).

This is "a pattern not altogether different from today, where

the larger churches often capture the headlines and the smaller
congregations provide much of the personnel."3

4. Paul and Barnabas' return to Antioch of Syria 14:21b-

28

14:21b-22 The missionaries confined their labors to the Galatian province

on this trip. They did not move farther east into the kingdom
of Antiochus, or the province of Cilicia, that Paul may have
evangelized previously during his time in Tarsus. Tarsus stood
some 160 miles east of Derbe. Instead they retraced their
steps to encourage, instruct, and organize the new converts
in "Lystra," "Iconium," and "Antioch" (cf. 18:23).4 Apparently
they did more discipleship ("strengthening the souls …
encouraging … in the faith") than evangelism, on this return
trip to the very cities where the apostles' lives had been in
danger.

1Barclay, p. 118.
2See M. Ballance, The Site of Derbe: A New Inscription.
3Longenecker, p. 438.
4See David F. Detwiler, "Paul's Approach to the Great Commission in Acts 14:21-23,"

Bibliotheca Sacra 152:605 (January-March 1995):33-41.

300 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Paul and Barnabas warned the new converts that they, too,
should expect persecution (cf. Gal. 4:13; 6:17; 2 Tim. 3:11).
The "kingdom of God" evidently refers to the rule of God
generally, including His rule now (in the church) and later (in
the messianic kingdom; cf. 1:3; 8:12). Entrance into Christ's
messianic kingdom was still in the future, for these "disciples,"
from when the missionaries gave them this exhortation.
Though Christians will not go through the Tribulation, we
believers will experience "tribulation(s)" before we enter the
Millennium (2 Tim. 3:12).

14:23 The "elders" (plural) in every "church" (singular) that the

apostles "appointed" must have been the more mature
Christians in each congregation. Note that each of these
churches had more than one leader (cf. 20:17; Phil. 1:1). There
may have been more than one local church in each of these
towns eventually, but at this early stage of pioneer evangelism
there was probably only one church in each town.

"… it would be unwise to read into this basic

administrative necessity later and more developed
ideas of church order."1

Perhaps some of the elders from the synagogues in these

communities, who had become Christians, became elders in the
churches. Elder qualifications may have developed and become
more specific and somewhat stricter, between the time when
these elders assumed office, and when Paul specified their
qualifications in the Pastoral Epistles (1 Tim. 3; Titus 1).

The text does not explain exactly how the appointment of

these elders took place. "They" probably refers to Paul and
Barnabas, since they are the subjects in view in the context.
However, the Greek word used here (cheirotonesantes,
"appointed") sometimes meant to elect by a vote of raised
hands.2 Consequently some interpreters believe that the

1Neil,p. 166. Cf. 1 Tim. 3; and Titus 1.

2Liddell and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, s.v. cheirotoneo; cheirotoneia; Arndt and
Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, s.v. cheirotoneo; cheirotoneia;
Kent, p. 118.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 301

Christians in these churches selected the elders (cf. 6:3).1 I

favor the view that Paul and Barnabas made the selections,
and that the people in the churches indicated their support of
those chosen. The apostles had earlier appointed elders in the
Jerusalem church (11:30).

"Paul showed that it was his conviction that from

the very beginning Christianity must be lived in a
fellowship."2

This verse shows that churches can exist without elders, but
every church should have elders as it matures.3

Note again the importance that Paul and Barnabas placed on

prayer. They went without eating in order to pray (cf. 13:3).
They also committed ("commended") their new converts "to
the Lord" Jesus, the Head of the church, in whom they had
believed. These missionaries did not overestimate their own
importance and become paternalistic, as church planters
sometimes are tempted to do.

14:24-26 "Pisidia" was the southernmost geographic region in the

Roman province of Galatia. "Pamphylia" was the province south
of Galatia and east of the kingdom of Antiochus. "Perga," like
Derbe, was one of the sites the missionaries visited that Luke
chose not to comment on extensively (cf. 13:13-14). Perhaps
Paul and Barnabas planted a church there, too. The apostles
then went down to Attalia, a seaport 10 miles south of Perga,
from where they set sail for Syrian Antioch.

"Ports in antiquity were often satellite towns of

larger and more important cities situated some
distance inland for protection from pirates. So
Luke's mention of Attalia here probably has no
more significance than his mention of Seleucia
(13:4), the port of Syrian Antioch, and merely

1E.g.,Calvin, [Link]; Ramsay, St. Paul …, pp. 121-22; Lenski, pp. 585-86; Kent, pp. 118-
19.
2Barclay, p. 119.
3See Alexander Strauch, Biblical Eldership, pp. 164-68.
302 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

identifies the place of embarkation for the voyage

back to Syria."1

14:27-28 The chronological references in Acts and the Pauline epistles

make it difficult to tell just how long it took Paul and Barnabas
to complete the first missionary journey. Commentators
estimate that it took them from the better part of one year to
almost two years. They traveled a minimum of 500 miles by
sea plus 700 by land. Beitzel estimated that Paul covered a
total of about 1,400 miles on this journey.2

Luke was careful to record again the priority of God's initiative

in this evangelistic mission (cf. 1:1-2). Paul and Barnabas had
accomplished a wonderful work (v. 26), but they were careful
to give God the credit for it. He was the One ultimately
responsible for their success.

"Paul and Barnabas never thought that it was their

strength or their power which had achieved
anything. They spoke of what God had done with
them. … We will begin to have the right idea of
Christian service when we work, not for our own
honour or prestige, but only from the conviction
that we are tools in the hand of God."3

The fact that God had granted salvation to Gentiles on an equal

basis with Jews—simply by faith in Christ—would have been of
special interest to Luke's early readers. This new phenomenon
had taken place before: on the Gaza Road, in Caesarea, and in
Syrian Antioch. However, now large numbers of Gentile
converts were entering the church through the "door of
faith"—without first becoming Jewish proselytes. Paul also
used the figure of a door, in 1 Corinthians 16:9, 2 Corinthians
2:12, and Colossians 4:3. This "door of faith" situation
constituted the background of the Jerusalem Council that Luke
recorded in the next chapter.

1Longenecker, p. 439.
2Beitzel,p. 177.
3Barclay, p. 120. Cf. 2 Cor. 5:20.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 303

It was probably during the time Paul was in Syrian Antioch, after returning
from the first missionary journey and before attending the conference in
Jerusalem (ch. 15), that he wrote the Epistle to the Galatians. He wrote
that letter to instruct the believers in the new churches he and Barnabas
had just planted. This would have been in the late A.D. 40s, probably A.D.
49. Galatians appears to have been the first of Paul's inspired epistles.1

"What about Luke's omission of Paul as letter writer? … Acts

is about beginnings and missionary endeavors. Paul's letters,
so far as we know, were written to congregations [and
individuals] that were already established. This falls outside the
purview of what Luke seeks to describe. Such an omission was
only natural since Luke chose not to record the further
developments of church life within the congregations Paul
founded."2

There are many ways in which Paul's ministry and Peter's corresponded.
Here are a few of the correlations that Luke recorded, apparently to
accredit Paul's ministry—that was mainly to the Gentiles and highly
controversial among the Jews. Peter's ministry was primarily to the Jews.

"1. Both Peter and Paul engaged in three significant tours

journeys [sic] recorded in the Book of Acts. Peter:
8:14ff; 9:32—11:2; 15:1-14 (see Gal. 2:11); Paul:
13:2—14:28; 15:36—18:22; 18:23—21:17.

2. Early in their ministry both healed a lame person. Peter:

3:2ff; Paul: 14:8ff.

3. Both saw extraordinary healings take place apart from

physical contact with the afflicted individual. Peter's
shadow in 5:15; those who brought handkerchiefs and
aprons to Paul in 19:11. [The text does not say Peter's
shadow was God's instrument in healing people.]

4. Both were God's instruments to bring judgment on those

who hindered the growth and purity of the infant church.

1See Appendix 5 "Paul's Epistles," at the end of these notes.

2Witherington, p. 438.
304 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Peter condemned Ananias and Sapphira (5:1-11); Paul

smote Elymas with blindness (13:6-11).

5. Each had at least one long discourse [re]produced in full

which gives a summary of his preaching. Peter at
Pentecost (2:14-40); Paul at Antioch (13:16-42).

6. Both made the resurrection a primary emphasis in their

proclamation. Peter: 2:24-36; 3:15, 26; 5:30; 10:40,
41; Paul: 13:30-37; 17:3, 18, 31; 24:15, 21; 25:19;
26:8, 23.

7. Both exorcised demons. Peter: 5:16; Paul: 16:18.

8. Both communicated the gift of the Holy Spirit by the

laying on of hands. Peter: 8:17; Paul: 19:6.

9. Both had triumphant encounters with sorcerers. Peter:

8:18ff; Paul: 13:6ff.

10. Both raised the dead. Peter: 9:36ff; Paul: 20:9ff.

11. Both received visions to direct them into critical

witnessing efforts. Peter: 10:9ff; Paul: 16:6ff.

12. Both experienced miraculous deliverances from prison.

Peter: 12:7ff; Paul: 16:25ff."1

Peter Paul

First sermon ch. 2 First sermon ch. 13

Lame man healed ch. 3 Lame man healed ch. 14

Simon the sorcerer ch. 8 Elymas the sorcerer (ch. 13)

Influence of shadow ch. 5 Influence of handkerchief ch. 19

Laying on of hands ch. 8 Laying on of hands ch. 19

1Harm, p. 40. See also the chart in The Nelson …, p. 1841.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 305

Peter worshipped ch. 10 Paul worshipped ch. 14

Tabitha raised ch. 9 Eutychus raised ch. 20

Peter imprisoned ch. 12 Paul imprisoned ch. 281

5. The Jerusalem Council 15:1-35

The increasing number of Gentiles who were becoming Christians raised a

problem within the church. What was the relationship of the church to
Judaism? Some Christians, especially the more conservative Jewish
believers, argued that Christianity was a party within Judaism, the party of
true believers. They assumed that Gentile Christians, therefore, needed to
become Jewish proselytes, which involved being circumcised and obeying
the Mosaic Law.

"In truth, there was no law to prevent the spread of Judaism

[within the Roman Empire at this time]. Excepting the brief
period when Tiberius (19 A.D.) banished the Jews from Rome
and sent 4,000 of their number to fight the banditti in Sardinia,
the Jews enjoyed not only perfect liberty, but exceptional
privileges."2

Other Christians, the more broad-minded Jewish believers and the Gentile
converts, saw no need for these restrictions. They viewed the church not
as a party within Judaism, but as a distinct group—separate from
Judaism—that incorporated both believing Jews and believing Gentiles.
This difference of viewpoint led to the meeting Luke recorded in this
section. He described it at length, in order to explain the issues involved,
and to clarify their importance. Therefore not a few students of Acts
believe that chapter 15 is the most crucial chapter in the entire book.3 It
is both structurally and theologically central to Acts.4

"Throughout this commentary [i.e., Witherington's

commentary] we have noted the signs that Luke was following

1Baxter, 6:12.
2Edersheim, The Life …, 1:71.
3E.g.,
H. Conzelmann, Acts of the Apostles, p. 121; and Witherington, p. 439.
4Marshall, The Acts …, p. 242.
306 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

ancient historiographical conventions in the way he presents

his material, in particular his penchant for dealing with matters
from an ethnographic and region-by-region perspective. With
these concerns the extended treatment in Acts 15 comes as
no surprise. Here the matter must be resolved as to what
constitutes the people of God, and how the major ethnic
division in the church (Jew/Gentile) shall be dealt with so that
both groups may be included in God's people on equal footing,
fellowship may continue, and the church remain one. Luke is
eager to demonstrate that ethnic divisions could be and were
overcome, despite the objection of very conservative Pharisaic
Christians."1

Paul and Barnabas' return to Jerusalem 15:1-5

15:1 The "men … from Judea" who "came down" to Antioch appear
to have been Jewish Christians who took the former view of
Christianity described above. They believed a person could not
become a Christian without first becoming a Jew, which
included circumcision. Perhaps they based their theology on
texts such as Genesis 17:14 and Exodus 12:48-49. Their claim
was essentially a denial of the sufficiency of faith in Christ for
salvation. They evidently claimed that James, the Lord's half-
brother and the leader of the Jerusalem church, endorsed their
position (cf. 15:24; Gal. 2:12). Peter, who was in Antioch at
this time, compromised with these men, by withdrawing from
eating with the Gentile Christians there. Barnabas also inclined
to do so. Paul, however, saw the inconsistency and danger in
this practice and rebuked Peter (Gal. 2:11, 13-14).2

This situation posed the fourth crisis in the history of the early
church. The first was selfishness (Ananias and Sapphira, ch. 5),
and the second was murmuring (over the treatment of the
Hellenistic widows, ch. 6). The third was simony (Simon Magus,
ch. 8), and now doctrinal controversy raised its ugly head (the
"Galatian heresy," ch. 15). This was the most serious problem
thus far, both in terms of the issue itself, and its potential

1Witherington, p. 439.
2Some scholars—for example, Howson, p. 177—believe that this confrontation took place
after Paul returned to Antioch from the Jerusalem Council.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 307

consequences. It involved the conditions for becoming a

Christian, and therefore the gospel message.

15:2 This situation led to hot debate ("dissension") among the

Christians generally. It ended with a decision to move the
discussion "to Jerusalem," and to place the whole matter
before the apostles and elders there for a verdict. This general
procedure was common in the Greco-Roman world.1 Men from
Antioch accompanied Paul and Barnabas, as witnesses
undoubtedly, to protect Paul and Barnabas from accusations
of distorting the facts.

15:3 On the way to Jerusalem, the missionaries recounted to the

Christians in "Phoenicia and Samaria" what God had done in
Cyprus and Asia Minor. These believers rejoiced because they
saw a continuation of what had happened to them.

"This undoubtedly means that Gentiles were

converted on a direct basis apart from any
necessary commitment to Judaism, because the
presence of proselytes and 'God-fearing' Gentiles
in the church was hardly newsworthy in A.D. 49."2

15:4 When Paul's party arrived in Jerusalem, the leaders ("apostles

and elders") there "received" them and listened to their story.
Note again that Luke stressed the Lord's initiative in spreading
the gospel (cf. 14:27).

15:5 Some in that meeting, converted "Pharisees" who had a high

view of the Mosaic Law, repeated the same objection Paul and
Barnabas had encountered in Antioch. These were not
necessarily "ex-Pharisees," since a Pharisee could become a
Christian without relinquishing his distinctive beliefs concerning
Scripture and theology.3

"… it is possible that nationalist pressure [against

Rome] was increasing in Judea, and that [Jewish]
Christians were having to tread carefully to avoid

1Witherington, p. 451.
2Longenecker, p. 443.
3See Kent, p. 122, footnote 3.
308 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

being thought of as disloyal to their Jewish

heritage."1

Unsaved Jews also believed that keeping the Mosaic Law is

essential for acceptance by God (cf. 1 Thess. 2:14-16).

The Old Testament taught that Gentiles would share in the promises made
to Israel (Gen. 22:18; 26:4; 28:14; Isa. 49:6; 55:5-7; Zeph. 3:9-10; Zech.
8:22). The Old Testament prophets also spoke of Gentile salvation as
happening in the last days (Isa. 2:2; 11:10; 25:8-9; Zech. 8:23) through
the witness of a restored Israel (Isa. 2:3; 60:2-3; Zech. 8:23).

"It [the revelation stated above] was the underlying

presupposition for Jewish proselytizing (cf. M[ishnah] Pirke
Aboth 1:12; Matt 23:15) and was implicit in the sermons of
Peter at Pentecost (2:39) and in the house of Cornelius
(10:35). But the correlative conviction of Judaism was that
Israel was God's appointed agent for the administration of
these blessings—that only through the nation and its
institutions could Gentiles have a part in God's redemption and
share in his favor."2

Peter's testimony 15:6-11

15:6 Evidently a large group of people observed the meeting that

the church convened to debate the issue (vv. 12, 22). Most
commentators took the whole passage as describing public
proceedings, but a few understood verse 6 as referring to a
private meeting that took place during the public forum.3

15:7-9 First, spokesmen for each side presented arguments pro and
con. Then Peter rose and reminded those assembled that
several years earlier, God had chosen him as the person from
whom Gentiles (i.e., Cornelius and his friends) should "hear …
the gospel." Then God gave these Gentiles His Spirit as soon
as they believed in Jesus Christ. They did nothing but
"believe," and they received "the Holy Spirit," the sign of their

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 249.

2Longenecker, pp. 440-41.
3E.g., Kent, p. 123.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 309

acceptance by God. This was the same thing that had taken
place earlier, among the Jews, on the day of Pentecost.

15:10 Requiring that Gentiles become Jews before God would save
them would "test" God, in that it would question the rightness
of His action in giving the Spirit to Cornelius. When a Gentile
became a Jewish proselyte, the Jew in charge of the ceremony
said the Gentile now "took up the yoke of the kingdom of
heaven" (cf. Matt. 23:4; Gal. 5:1).1 Peter said this "yoke," the
Mosaic Covenant, was an obligation that was both unbearable
and unnecessary (cf. Matt. 11:29-30).

15:11 By referring to the Jews being saved in the same manner as

the Gentiles, instead of vice versa, Peter repudiated any
thought of Jewish superiority. Clearly he had recovered from
his temporary lapse at Syrian Antioch (Gal. 2:11-14). Salvation
is by "grace" (v. 11), through faith (v. 9), plus nothing.

Barnabas and Paul's testimony 15:12

The old order of these two names recurs here. "Barnabas," as a respected
member of this church (4:36-37; 11:22), took the lead in relating the
experiences that he "and Paul" had undergone in ministering to Gentiles.
Barnabas emphasized the "signs and wonders" God had performed,
because these would have persuaded the Jews that God had been at work
in their ministry (cf. 1 Cor. 1:22).

"It was a report not of their successes but of how God had
acted, and its implication was that by his acts God had revealed
his will."2

James' testimony 15:13-21

15:13-14 "James" was Jesus' half-brother, the writer of the Epistle of

James, and the leading figure in the Jerusalem church (12:17;
Gal. 1:19; 2:9, 12).3 "Simeon" was Peter's older Jewish name.
James' use of it would have emphasized Peter's Jewishness as

1F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 307.

2Longenecker, p. 445.
3See Richard Bauckham, "James and the Jerusalem Church," in The Book of Acts in Its

First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 415-80.
310 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

well as implying affection for him. Peter had related the

salvation experience of Cornelius, and James' reference to
"first" was to that experience near the beginning of the
church.

"… he showed how he felt about the question at

issue by speaking of believing Gentiles as a
'people' (laos) whom God had taken 'for himself'
(to onomati autou; lit., 'for his name')—thus (1)
applying to Gentile Christians a designation
formerly used of Israel alone and (2) agreeing with
Peter that in the conversion of Cornelius God
himself had taken the initiative for a direct Gentile
ministry."1

15:15 James reminded his hearers that the Old Testament

"prophets" supported the salvation of Gentiles apart from
Judaism. Note that James did not say the salvation of Gentiles
then was the fulfillment of these prophecies. He said the
prophets' predictions of future Gentile salvation harmonized
with the present salvation of Gentiles apart from Judaism (cf.
2:16).2 James then quoted Amos 9:11-12 as a representative
prophecy. Another view is that by "the prophets," James
meant the Book of the 12 Minor Prophets, of which Amos was
a part. Neither Amos, nor any other prophet, said Gentiles had
to become Jews in order to enjoy the blessings of salvation
(cf. Rom. 11:12).

"The passage in Amos refers primarily to the

restoration of the Davidic empire, but also the
Messiah's Kingdom ([']the throne of David his
father,' Luke 1:32)."3

"James's major contribution to the decision of the

council was to shift the discussion of the
conversion of Gentiles from a proselyte model to
an eschatological one. … James is saying, God's

1Longenecker, p. 446.
2SeeHeater, pp. 147-57; and Bock, "Evidence from …," pp. 195-96.
3Robertson, 3:230.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 311

people will consist of two concentric groups. At

their core will be restored Israel (i.e., David's
rebuilt tent); gathered around them will be a
group of Gentiles (i.e., 'the remnant of men') who
will share in the messianic blessings but will persist
as Gentiles without necessarily becoming Jewish
proselytes."1

15:16-18 Amos predicted the (second) advent of Messiah after "these

things" (i.e., the Tribulation, Amos 9:8-10). Messiah would set
up His kingdom on the earth, and restore the nation Israel
(during the Millennium), under which the Gentiles would seek
the Lord. We should understand the "and" in verse 17 in the
sense of "even" (the epexegetical use of this conjunction).

"A close examination of this passage [vv. 14-17]

reveals that there is a progression of thought
leading to James' conclusion. First, God visits the
Gentiles, taking from them a people for His name.
In other words, God has promised to bless the
Gentiles as well as Israel, but each in his own order.
The Gentile blessing is first. Second, Christ will
return—after the outcalling of the people for His
name. Third, as a result of the coming of the Lord,
the tabernacle of David will be built again; that is,
the kingdom will be established exactly as
promised in the Davidic Covenant. Amos clearly
declared that this rebuilding will be done 'as it
used to be' (Amos 9:11); that is, the blessings will
be earthly and national and will have nothing to do
with the church. Fourth, the residue of men will
seek the Lord; that is, all the Gentiles will be
brought to a knowledge of the Lord after the
kingdom is established. This same truth is taught
in passages like Isaiah 2:2; 11:10; 40:5; and
66:23."2

1Longenecker, p. 446.
2Pentecost, Thy Kingdom …, pp. 145-46. See also Gaebelein, The Annotated …, [Link].
312 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

There have been three main interpretations of James' use of

Amos' prophecy (Amos 9:11-12).1 Some interpreters believe
James meant that the inclusion of Gentiles in the church
fulfilled God's promise through Amos.2 These (generally
amillennial) interpreters see the church as fulfilling God's
promises to Israel. This view seems to go beyond what Amos
said, since his prophecy concerns "the tabernacle of David,"
which literally interpreted would involve Israel, not the church.

Second, some interpreters believe James meant that God

would include Gentiles when He fulfilled this promise to Israel
in the future.3 However, there was no question among the
Jews that God would bless the Gentiles through Israel in the
future. The issue was whether He would do this apart from
Judaism, and this interpretation contributes nothing to the
solution of that problem. This view does not seem to go far
enough.

A third view is that James meant that the present inclusion of

Gentiles in the church is consistent with God's promise to Israel
through Amos (cf. Rom. 16:25; Eph. 3:9).4 In other words, the
present salvation of Gentiles, apart from Judaism, does not
contradict anything Amos said about future Gentile blessing.
This seems to be the best interpretation.

"In other words, James says, God is working out

His own plan: Israel, His covenant people have
been set aside nationally because of their
rejection of the Messiah. God is now taking out a
people, Jew and Gentile, to constitute the Church
of God. When He completes this work, the Lord is
coming back the second time. That will be the

1See Charles Zimmerman, "To This Agree the Words of the Prophets," Grace Journal 4:3
(Fall 1963):28-40; Kent, p. 126.
2E.g., Henry, p. 1695; Lenski, pp. 608-11.
3E.g., F. W. Grant, The Numerical Bible, p. 100.
4E.g., Chafer, Systematic Theology, 4:267-69; 5:328-29; and The New Scofield …, p.

1186. See also Kenneth R. Cooper, "The Tabernacle of David in Biblical Prophecy,"
Bibliotheca Sacra 167:672 (October-December 2011):402-12.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 313

time of blessing for the whole world [i.e., the

millennial reign of Christ]."1

James added the quotation from Isaiah 45:21, in verse 18b,

probably to add authority to the Amos prophecy.

"The thought that the church was the divinely

intended replacement for the temple is probably
to be seen in 15:16-18."2

The typical non-dispensational understanding of this text, is

that James was saying that the messianic kingdom had come,
and that Amos' prediction was completely fulfilled. Progressive
dispensationalists believe he meant that the first stage of the
messianic kingdom had come, and that Amos' prediction was
partially fulfilled.3 Normative dispensationalists view the
messianic kingdom as entirely future. They believe Amos was
predicting the inclusion of Gentiles in God's plan, and that
James was saying that the present situation was in harmony
with God's purpose. Thus the Amos prediction has yet to be
fulfilled.

Deciding between these options depends first on whether or

not one believes the church replaces Israel in God's plan. If it
does, one will side with non-dispensationalists here. If one
believes that the church and Israel are distinct in the purpose
of God, then one has to decide if there is better evidence that
Jesus has begun to rule over David's kingdom now
(progressive dispensationalism), or not yet (normative
dispensationalism). I believe the evidence points to the fact
that David's kingdom is an earthly kingdom, and that Jesus will
begin reigning over it when He returns to earth at His Second
Coming.4

James would have quoted a version of the Old Testament text

that would have been acceptable to his audience, which
included strict Jews. His quotation from Amos differs from the

1Ironside,
Lectures on …, p. 356. Cf. Wiersbe, 1:463.
2Marshall,
The Acts …, p. 131.
3See Saucy, The Case …, pp. 76-80.
4See also Toussaint, "Acts," pp. 394-95.
314 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Hebrew text in meaning, and from the Septuagint in form, but

it is identical to the text of 4QFlorilegium (1:12), an Essene
rendering.1

15:19 "Not" to "trouble" the Gentiles meant not imposing the

requirements of Jewish proselytes on them, namely:
circumcision and observance of the Mosaic Law.

15:20 To help Gentile converts not put a stumbling block in the path
of Jews, James recommended that Christian teachers
encourage their disciples to avoid ("abstain from") four things.
By the way, Acts presents the apostles as more effective at
conflict resolution than the Sanhedrin, and James as a better
problem solver than Gamaliel. Filling (control) by the Holy Spirit
accounts for these differences. These four things were: first,
the "things" (food, etc.) associated with "idols," or idolatry
(cf. 1 Cor. 10:14-22); and second, "fornication" (Gr. porneias,
all kinds of sexual aberrations). The Gentile converts were also
to: third, avoid eating "strangled" animals (those with the
blood not drained out); and fourth, "blood" (the essence of
life; cf. Gen. 9; Lev. 17:11).2 These four restrictions involved
ethical and moral issues, and practices that offended Jews.

One writer argued that smothering rather than strangling is in

view, and that the apostles' intent was to prohibit infanticide,
which was a normal method of birth control in the Graeco-
Roman world.3 This is a minority view that I do not share.

"Concerning the nature of the prohibitions the

most likely explanation is that all four were
associated to some degree with pagan [or Jewish]
religious practices. Since this association was
highly offensive to Jews, Gentile believers were
asked to avoid even the appearance of evil by
avoiding such practices altogether. Thus the
purposes of the decree and its prohibitions [cf.

1J.A. de Waard, A Comparative Study of the Old Testament Text in the Dead Sea Scrolls
and in the New Testament, pp. 24-26, 47, 78-79.
2David Instone-Brewer, "Infanticide and the Apostolic decree of Acts 15," Journal of the

Evangelical Theological Society 52:2 (June 2009):301-21.

3See ibid., p. 395.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 315

15:29; 21:25] were to promote unity among

believing Jews and believing Gentiles."1

15:21 The reason for these restrictions was this: In the weekly
synagogue Scripture readings, teachers of the Mosaic Law had
stressed Jewish scruples regarding these matters for
generations. Consequently the Jews regarded them as
extremely important. If Gentile Christians disregarded the
convictions of these Jews, they would only alienate those they
hoped to bring to faith in Jesus Christ or to growth in Christ
(cf. 1 Cor. 8:13).

"If there was ever a good opportunity to say that

the Gentiles were under the law this was it; for
that would have settled the matter simply and
quickly. But the apostles, who were Jews
themselves, recognized that the law had no force
any longer, and they did not try to impose it."2

James was not putting Gentile converts under the Mosaic Law
by imposing these restrictions. He was urging them to limit
their exercise of Christian liberty to make their witness to
unsaved Jews more effective, and their fellowship with saved
Jews more harmonious (cf. 1 Cor. 9:19-23).

"To sum up, we may say that two types of 'necessary'

questions were raised at the Jerusalem Council. The first had
to do with the theological necessity of circumcision and the
Jewish law for salvation, and that was rejected. The second
had to do with the practical necessity of Gentile Christians
abstaining from certain practices for the sake of Jewish-Gentile
fellowship within the church and for the sake of the Jewish
Christian mission throughout the Diaspora, and that was
approved."3

1Charles H. Savelle, "A Reexamination of the Prohibitions in Acts 15," Bibliotheca Sacra
161:644 (October-December 2004):468.
2Charles C. Ryrie, "The End of the Law," Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September

1967):243. Cf. Mark 7:18-19; Luke 16:16; John 1:17; Acts 10:12; Rom 7:6; 10:4; 14:17;
1 Cor. 8:8; 2 Cor. 3:6-11; Gal. 3:19, 23; 4:9-11; 5:1; 6:2; Col. 2:17; Heb. 7:12; 9:10.
3Longenecker, p. 448.
316 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

The official formulation of the decision 15:22-29

15:22 The Jerusalem leaders chose two witnesses to return to

Antioch, with Paul and Barnabas, to verbally confirm the
decision of this council. The custom of sending four persons,
representing the people and the council, with an official
document has been attested in ancient Greco-Roman
literature.1 Likewise, in many places oral testimony was
regarded more highly than written.2 "Judas" had a Jewish
name, so he may have been a Hebraic Jew, whereas "Silas" had
a Greek name, and probably was a Hellenistic Jew. These men
represented both segments of the Jerusalem church.

Judas had the same surname as Joseph Barsabbas, the

candidate with Matthias for the vacant apostleship (1:23).
Consequently some interpreters have assumed that Judas and
Joseph were brothers.3 We also know Silas by his Roman name,
Silvanus, in Scripture (2 Cor. 1:19). He was a Hellenistic Jew
who had been a leader in the Jerusalem church (vv. 22, 27).
He was a prophet (v. 32), a vocal minister in Antioch (v. 32),
a Roman citizen (16:37), and an effective amanuensis (1
Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:1; 1 Pet. 5:12). Silas became Paul's
primary companion on his second missionary journey (v. 40).

"When one considers the situation of the

Jerusalem church in A.D. 49, the decision reached
by the Jerusalem Christians must be considered
one of the boldest and most magnanimous in the
annals of church history. While still attempting to
minister exclusively to the nation, the council
refused to impede the progress of that other
branch of the Christian mission whose every
success meant further difficulty for them from
within their own nation."4

1Witherington, p. 467.
2Ibid.,p. 469.
3E.g., Kent, p. 127.
4Longenecker, p. p. 450.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 317

"It is interesting to note the process the council

followed in resolving this conflict. First, the
problem was clarly stated: Each side was
presented in a debate. Second, the facts were
presented by those who were acquainted with
them. Third, the counsel was given by a person
who was trusted for his objectivity and wisdom.
Fourth, unanimity was sought in the decision.
Fifth, the attitude of preserving the unity of the
Spirit remained utmost on the council's mind. This
same formula would be helpful in resolving
conflicts found within the church today."1

15:23 The destination of this letter throws light on extensive

missionary activity that had taken place throughout "Syria and
Cilicia," which activity Luke did not record. We know of the
mission to Antioch, but Luke gave no details about the
evangelization of the rest of the surrounding area of "Syria."
We know that Paul had done missionary work in "Cilicia," but
Luke did not tell his readers anything about it. Here we learn
that there were churches in these regions already, as we may
have assumed, but now know for sure (cf. v. 41). "Antioch"
was the capital city of Syria and Cilicia, which Rome
administered as a single province until A.D. 72.2

15:24-29 The men who had come to Antioch from Jerusalem, advocating
"circumcision … " (v. 1) had no authorization ("instruction")
to do so from the Jerusalem church (v. 24). They spoke on
their own authority. The church in Jerusalem had reached a
unified opinion ("become of one mind") on the issue at hand
(v. 25). The apostles presented "Barnabas and Paul" as men
whom the saints in Jerusalem held in the highest regard (vv.
25-26). The church leaders had sensed the Holy Spirit's
control in the decision they had reached (v. 28).3

1The Nelson …, p. 1848.

2Neil, p. 175; The New Bible Dictionary, s.v. "Cilicia," by E. M. B. Green, p. 233.
3On the differences between the Old Uncial and the Western textual readings of verse 29,
see C. K. Barrett, "The Apostolic Decree of Acts 15:29," Austrialian Biblical Review 35
(1987):50-59.
318 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"It should be noted that the letter traced the

unanimity of the decision to the action of the Holy
Spirit (15:28), even though the Spirit was not
mentioned previously as intervening in the
proceedings. This is the way in which the Spirit
usually works in the church. There need not be
miraculous displays to indicate his direction.
Spirit-filled people can detect his presence
through the harmony which prevails when men are
responsive to his will."1

The delivery of the decision to Antioch 15:30-35

The decision reached at the Jerusalem Council was very important. Even
though false teachers continued to propagate the view that Gentiles had
to undergo the rites of proselytes to Judaism before they could enter the
church, this view was now officially unacceptable. The apostles had greatly
strengthened the case for salvation by faith alone. Again, the trip that Paul
and Barnabas made, from Antioch to Jerusalem and back, consisted of
about 560 ground miles (cf. 11:30—12:25; Gal. 2:1-10).

6. The strengthening of the Gentile churches 15:36—16:5

Luke reported Paul and Barnabas' efforts to strengthen the churches they
had planted in Cyprus and Asia Minor to emphasize the importance of this
phase of church extension. He also did so to set the scene for the next
major advance of the church. Paul went next into the provinces around the
Aegean Sea, some of which were on what we now call the European
continent.

The beginning of Paul's second missionary journey 15:36-41

15:36-39 Some commentators have overestimated the "sharp

disagreement" between Paul and Barnabas over John Mark, in
my opinion.2 The text says they disagreed vigorously over this
issue, but there is no statement or implication that they ended
up disliking each other, as some of the commentators have

1Kent, p. 128.
2E.g.,Neil, p. 176; Blaiklock, pp. 118-19; Barclay, p. 128; Robertson, 3:241; Whyte,
2:141.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 319

inferred. It seems that they were both led by the Holy Spirit to
arrive at their respective conclusions regarding the wisdom of
taking John Mark with them. Their separation, I infer, was
friendly.1

Paul later wrote with respectful admiration of both Barnabas

(1 Cor. 9:6) and John Mark (Col. 4:10; Phile. 24; 2 Tim. 4:11).
Their decision to go in separate directions certainly resulted in
greater gospel expansion, since more people became involved
as fellow missionaries, and they covered more area in less time.
Some Christians erroneously feel that any disagreement
between believers is sinful, but there is no indication in the
text that this difference of opinion was sinful.

Barnabas' desire to offer John Mark another opportunity was

certainly commendable and godly, even though Paul viewed it
as unwise. Many of God's servants would have dropped out of
ministry had it not been for a gracious Barnabas who was
willing to give us another chance after we failed.

15:40-41 "Paul" and "Silas" departed from Antioch with the church's
blessing. This time the missionaries traveled first by land, north
through Syria, then through Cilicia where Paul had been born
and had previously labored. They strengthened the young
churches in those Roman provinces.2

At this point Acts takes on a more distinctively Gentile atmosphere, in

contrast to the Jewish flavor of the preceding chapters. Paul, the apostle
to the Gentiles, now becomes the official leader of the mission, having
previously served under Barnabas (chs. 13—14) and having received
official approval to evangelize Gentiles (ch. 15).

The churches of Galatia 16:1-5

16:1 Paul and Silas, now traveling west, probably crossed the Taurus
Mountains at a pass called the Cilician Gates (modern Gülek
Bogaz). Alexander the Great had marched east through this

1See also Lenski, pp. 634-35.

2See the map of Paul's second missionary journey in Longenecker, p. 249; Toussaint,
"Acts," p. 397; or The Nelson …, p. 1855.
320 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

pass to conquer the vast Persian Empire four centuries earlier.1

This route would have led them into the kingdom of Antiochus,
located west of Cilicia, to the south of Galatia, and to the east
of Pamphylia. They proceeded on into Lycaonian Galatia, first
to "Derbe," and then to "Lystra."

At Lystra a young believer named "Timothy" impressed Paul.

Many Bible students have assumed that Timothy was from
Lystra, and had trusted Christ during Paul's first trip to that
town (cf. 1 Cor. 4:17). The text does not state these facts,
but they are certainly strong possibilities. Mixed marriages
between Jews and Gentiles were more common outside
Palestine than within it.2 Timothy's mother Eunice and his
grandmother Lois were both sincere Jews, and had instructed
Timothy in the Hebrew Scriptures (2 Tim. 1:5; 3:15).3 This
young man now filled the place that John Mark had occupied
on the first journey, before Mark returned to Jerusalem.
Timothy was to become one of Paul's closest friends and most
faithful fellow workers.

"He [Paul] was always well aware of the necessity

of training a new generation for the work and for
the days that lay ahead."4

16:2 "The preoccupation with character in those who

assume Christian leadership is a marked feature of
the story of the early Church ([verse 2,] vi. 3, x.
22, xxii. 12)."5

16:3 Paul obviously did not circumcise Timothy because he believed

that rite was necessary for his justification or sanctification
(cf. 1 Cor. 7:19). He did so because it was necessary for
effective evangelistic ministry among Jews (cf. 1 Cor. 9:20-
22; Rom. 14:13-15). Unbelieving Jews would not have given
Paul a hearing, if he had traveled with an uncircumcised Gentile,
even though Timothy was half Jewish (cf. 1 Cor. 9:20). The

1Blaiklock, p. 120.
2F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 322.
3See Levinskaya, pp. 12-17.
4Barclay, p. 129.
5Blaiklock, p. 120.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 321

Jews regarded an uncircumcised son of a Jewish mother to be

an apostate Jew, a violator of the Mosaic Covenant.1 Paul was
being culturally sensitive here.

16:4 Part of Paul's ministry included acquainting the churches in

Galatia with the directives ("decrees") formulated at the
Jerusalem Council.

16:5 This fifth progress report concludes the section on the

church's expansion into Asia Minor (12:25—16:5; cf. 6:7;
9:31; 12:24; 19:20; 28:31). This part of its history was
particularly crucial, since in this phase of its expansion the
church changed from predominantly Jewish to predominantly
Gentile.

C. THE EXTENSION OF THE CHURCH TO THE AEGEAN SHORES 16:6—19:20

The missionary outreach narrated in this section of the book took place in
major cities along the Aegean coastline that major Roman roads
connected.

"In the ensuing chapters we are given pictures of the work of

Paul in five important cities—Philippi, Thessalonica, Athens,
Corinth, and Ephesus—each of which is representative of a
different phase of Christian activity: in Philippi among Roman
colonists; in Thessalonica, a busy Greek free city; in Athens,
the centre of the culture of the ancient world; in Corinth, a
vigorous commercial port; and in Ephesus, amid a Hellenized
population devoted to an Oriental religion."2

1. The call to Macedonia 16:6-10

Luke recorded Paul's vision of the Macedonian man to explain God's

initiative in encouraging Paul and his companions to carry the gospel
farther west into what is now Europe.

1Bock, Acts, p. 523.

2Foakes-Jackson, p. 148.
322 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"… this section [6:6-10] makes it overwhelmingly clear that

Paul's progress was directed by God in a variety of ways, so
that the missionaries were led into new areas of work."1

"His [Luke's] subject is the rapid extension of Christianity

among the Gentiles, especially in three great provinces of the
empire, Macedonia, Achaia, and Asia; and he describes the firm
establishment of the church in their capitals, Thessalonica,
Corinth, and Ephesus … These three great provinces embraced
respectively the northern, western and eastern coasts of the
Aegean Sea, and they were all members of one great Roman
empire, and all enjoyed one great Hellenic civilization …

"The foundation of the churches of Macedonia, Achaia, and

Asia was the work of S. Paul, and it was his greatest
achievement. Ch. xvi 11-xix 19 is really the record of his life
work. It filled a period of five years from 49 to 54; and in the
composition of the book it corresponds to the ministry of the
Lord in the Gospel (Lk iv 16 to xvii 10 or xviii 30) and of S.
Peter in the church of Jerusalem in the first part of the Acts
(ii 14-xi 26)."2

16:6 Phrygia was a geographical region, and Galatia was a Roman

province. Phrygia was part of Galatia, as well as part of the
province of Asia that lay west of Galatia. The province of Asia
was one of several Roman provinces that occupied the larger
district of Asia Minor. Asia Minor was ancient Anatolia and
modern western Turkey. Paul evangelized Asia later (18:19—
19:20). The time was not right for him to go there yet.
Probably Paul intended to follow the Via Sebaste westward to
Ephesus, the chief city and capital of Asia. Luke did not record
how "the Holy Spirit" closed the door to "Asia" at this time.
His emphasis was on the One who directed Paul, not how He
did it (cf. 13:1-3).

"The missionary journeys of Paul reveal an

extraordinary combination of strategic planning
and sensitivity to the guidance of the Holy Spirit

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 261.

2Rackham, p. 272.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 323

in working out the details of the main goals. This

is especially noticeable here."1

"Paul may have had visions or dreams (cf. verse

9, 23:11), or inward prompting. Silas, a prophet
(15:32), may have been moved to utter words of
warning, or they may have had to change their
plans by force of circumstances (e.g. Jewish
opposition), which they afterwards recognized as
the overruling intervention of Providence."2

16:7-8 Paul then turned his attention north, and purposed (was
"trying") to enter the province of "Bithynia." It lay along the
southern shores of the Black Sea, and contained many Roman
cities and Jewish colonies. Mysia was another geographical
region like Phrygia, but located in northwest Asia, "through"
(Gr. parelthontes, not "by," v. 8) which Paul's party passed to
get to Bithynia. Again the Holy Spirit, whom Luke here called
"the Spirit of Jesus" (cf. 1:1-2), prevented their entering that
province. This unusual title of the Holy Spirit highlights Jesus'
leadership in the mission. Other, unidentified Christian
missionaries evangelized Bithynia (cf. 1 Pet. 1:1).3

Consequently Paul turned west from where he was, and

proceeded to Troas. This city was a Roman colony, like Antioch
of Pisidia and Lystra, located at a very strategic site. It was
one of the main seaports from which travelers entered Asia
Minor from the west, or departed from Asia Minor toward the
Roman provinces farther west. It was about 25 miles south of
ancient Troy, and 585 miles from Antioch of Syria.

"To the Greeks, mountains protected but

separated people, whereas the sea, while
frightening, united people. Therefore Troas, at the
mouth of the Dardenelles, was the pivotal port
between the land masses of Europe and Asia Minor

1Longenecker, p. 456.
2Neil, p. 179.
3See Blaiklock, p. 123.
324 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

and the great waterways of the Aegean and Black

seas."1

16:9 This time God gave positive direction to Paul, and Luke
recorded that He did it in "a vision" (cf. 9:10; 10:3, 17, 19;
11:5; 12:9; 13:4).

"Paul could have recognized the man in his dream

as a Macedonian from what he said; but it has
been conjectured that the man might have been
Luke himself, who indicates his presence at this
point by changing the narrative from 'they' to 'we'
in the following verse. If this were so, it would
suggest that Luke, a Macedonian or of Macedonian
ancestry, had encountered Paul at Troas, perhaps
as a medical attendant, and pressed him to preach
the Gospel to the Macedonians. In this case, his
appearance in Paul's dream would make him seem
to be a God-sent messenger, and would clinch the
matter. This is, of course, no more than an
attractive speculation."2

"Macedonia" was a Roman province that comprised roughly the

northern half of ancient and modern Greece. Its name honored
Philip of Macedon, Alexander the Great's father.

16:10 Luke joined Paul's party, which consisted of Silas, Timothy, and
perhaps others, in Troas. This is clear because in his narration
he changed from the third to the first person. This is the
beginning of the first of four so-called "we" sections in Acts,
the sections in which Luke was traveling with Paul (16:10-17;
20:5-15; 21:1-18; 27:1—28:16).3 Paul surrounded himself
with a group of disciples, as Jesus had done.

1Longenecker, p. 458.
2Neil, p. 180.
3For an evaluation of traditional, source critical, redaction critical, and comparative literary
solutions to the problem of first person narration in Acts, see Susan Marie Praeder, "The
Problem of First Person Narration in Acts," Novum Testamentum 29:3 (July 1987):193-
218. See also Witherington, pp. 480-86.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 325

Note that Luke used three terms to stress the fact that the
triune "God" was leading these apostles by His Spirit. He first
referred to the "Holy Spirit" (v. 6), then the "Spirit of Jesus"
(v. 7), and then "God" (v. 10)—as leading them.

"Authentic turning points in history are few. But surely among

them that of the Macedonian vision ranks high. Because of
Paul's obedience at this point, the gospel went westward; and
ultimately Europe and the Western world were evangelized.
Christian response to the call of God is never a trivial thing.
Indeed, as in this instance, great issues and untold blessings
may depend on it."1

This passage has become popular because in it, God gave Paul definite
guidance concerning where He wanted him to minister. Anyone who wants
to propagate the gospel has questions about this kind of guidance. Notice
that Paul was actively ministering, and was seeking to do what appeared
to him to be the wise thing, when God said "no" or "yes" to his efforts. In
providing positive direction, God brought new information to Paul that
impressed the apostle with a particular need that God wanted him to meet.
It seems to me that we should not concern ourselves mainly with the
methods God uses to guide people.

These methods varied in Acts, and were not Luke's primary concern. We
should, however, concentrate on where we can be of most use as the
Lord's servants. This was Paul's dominant concern. If our choices for places
of ministry are equally acceptable to God, He probably will not steer us
away from any of them, as was true in Paul's first missionary journey. We
can go wherever we please. However, if He does not want us in one or
more of these places, I believe He will shut one or more doors for us as He
did for Paul. God often guides us by bringing information to our attention
that enlightens our judgment when we need to make decisions.

"Luke's object in general [in verses 9-15] is to show that all

missionary work Is carried on under the guidance of the
Spirit."2

1Longenecker, p. 458.
2Foakes-Jackson, pp. 151-52.
326 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

2. The ministry in Macedonia 16:11—17:15

Luke recorded Paul's ministry in Philippi, Thessalonica, and Berea to

continue his history of Jesus' works in Macedonia.

The Macedonians were a distinct national group, though they had strong
ties to the Greeks. They had offered the most stubborn resistance against
Rome's efforts to extend its influence. In an attempt to break down their
strong nationalistic spirit of independence, Rome divided Macedonian
territory into four districts, each of which had its own local government
under Rome. We see this stubborn character in the Macedonians' reaction
to Paul's preaching. Nevertheless once won over, the Macedonian converts
became just as loyal to Paul as they had been hostile to him at first.

Ministry in Philippi 16:11-40

Luke devoted more space to Paul's evangelizing in Philippi than he did to

the apostle's activities in any other city on the second and third journeys,
even though Paul was there only briefly. It was the first European city in
which Paul preached the gospel.1

16:11-12 Traveling by sea from Troas, the apostolic band made its way
to the island of "Samothrace." From there they sailed to
Neapolis (modern Cavalla), the port of Philippi in Macedonia, a
journey of 125 miles. Philippi was 10 miles northwest inland.
This town, previously called Crenides (lit. "Fountains"), also
received its newer name of "Philippi" from Philip of Macedon.
It stood at the eastern end of another major Roman highway
that connected the Adriatic and Aegean Seas, the Via Egnatia
(Egnatian Road).2 Macedonia consisted of four parts or
districts, and Philippi was the chief city of one of these four
districts.

"After Mark Antony and Octavian defeated Brutus

and Cassius, the assassins of Julius Caesar, near
Philippi in 42 B.C., the city was made into a Roman
colony. This gave it special privileges (e.g, [sic]

1The ancients did not view the Dardanelles as separating Europe and Asia, as we do today.
Luke's original readers would have viewed Paul's crossing the Hellespont as simply moving
from one region to another within the Roman Empire.
2See Finegan, Light from …, pp. 350-51, for more information about Philippi.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 327

fewer taxes) but more importantly it became like

a 'transplanted' Rome … The primary purpose of
colonies was military, for the Roman leaders felt it
wise to have Roman citizens and sympathizers
settled in strategic locations. So Octavian (who
became Caesar Augustus, the first Roman
emperor, in 27 B.C.) settled more colonists
(primarily former soldiers) at Philippi after his
defeat of Antony at Actium, on Greece's west
coast, in 31 B.C."1

"Augustus" means "the august one" or "the revered one." The

best modern equivalent might be "his majesty."

"Philippi's importance during the NT period …

resulted from its agriculture, its strategic
commercial location on both sea and land routes,
its still functioning gold mines, and its status as a
Roman colony. In addition, it had a famous school
of medicine with graduates throughout the then-
known world."2

Luke's mention of Philippi's status as a "Roman colony" is

unusual; he did not identify Roman colonies as such elsewhere.
Other Roman colonies that feature in Acts, which Luke did not
identify as colonies, were Pisidian Antioch, Lystra, Troas,
Corinth, and Ptolemais. Probably he identified Philippi here as
one, because of the events that followed in Philippi—that we
can understand more easily with this status in mind. Another
possibility is that he did so because of his personal interest in
this town. He spent considerable time there.

Some scholars conjecture that Philippi was Luke's hometown,

or the town in which he lived before joining Paul's party. This
seems unlikely to me, since Paul and his party stayed with
Lydia when they were in Philippi (v. 15). If Luke had a home
there, they probably would have stayed with him. A Roman
colony was a city that the imperial government had granted

1Toussaint, "Acts," p. 399.

2Longenecker, pp. 459-60.
328 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

special privileges for having rendered some special service to

the empire. All of its free citizens enjoyed the rights of Roman
citizens. Living in such a colony was similar to being in Rome
away from Rome (cf. Phil. 3:20).

16:13 Normally Paul went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and
this "place of prayer" may have been a synagogue. On the
other hand, Philippi may have had too few Jews to warrant a
synagogue. It only took 10 Jewish men to establish a
synagogue.1 Whether or not this "place of prayer" was a
synagogue, worshippers of Yahweh met beside the Gangites
"River" one and one-half miles west of town, to pray together,
and to do what the Jews did in a normal synagogue service.

The Greek word proseuche describes both prayer and a place

of prayer.2 Sometimes this word for "a place of prayer" was
used in Jewish writings as a synonym for "synagogue," since
Jewish synagogues were essentially places of prayer. It was
customary for Jews and Gentile God-fearers (sebomene ton
theon, "worshipper of God," v. 14; 13:43; 18:7) to meet in
the open air—by a river or the sea—when a synagogue was
not available.3

"Where there was no Synogogue there was at

least a Proseuche, or meeting-place, under the
open sky, after the form of a theatre, generally
outside the town, near a river or the sea, for the
sake of lustrations [i.e., purification rites]."4

Evidently no men were there the day Paul found the place.

"One reason that no men were present may be the

fact that, when Claudius expelled the Jews from
Rome, the colony city Philippi had followed his
example."5

1Mishnah Sanhedrin 1:6; Mishnah Pirke Aboth 3:6.

2See Levinskaya, pp. 213-25, "The Meaning of PROSEUCHE."
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]. Cf. Ps. 137:1-6.
4Edersheim, The Life …, 1:76.
5Lenski, p. 655.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 329

Nonetheless Paul preached the gospel to the women

assembled. That Paul, a former Pharisee, would preach to an
audience of women reveals much about his changed attitude—
since the Pharisees commonly thanked God that they were not
Gentiles, slaves, or women (cf. Gal. 3:28). This is hardly the
picture of a woman-hater that some have painted Paul as
being.

"I wonder whether that prayer meeting had

anything to do with Paul coming over to Europe
and the vision of the man of Macedonia!"1

16:14-15 At least one of the women was a lady who was in Philippi on
business. She trusted Christ. "Thyatira," her hometown in the
province of Asia, was a city famous for its "purple fabrics,"
dye, and cloth (cf. Rev. 2:18-29).2 During the Roman Period,
laws restricted who could wear clothes dyed purple because it
was the most precious of all colors. Thus "Lydia" undoubtedly
dealt with an exclusive and affluent clientele. It had not been
the right time for Paul to evangelize Asia (v. 6), but God
brought a woman who lived there to him in Macedonia.

Her name, "Lydia," may have had some connection with the
fact that her hometown stood in an area that was formerly
part of the old "kingdom of Lydia." Some scholars have even
surmised that Lydia was not her name but only her place of
origin. We owe coined money to the Lydian kingdom. King
Croesus first produced uniform coins there in the sixth century
B.C. Wealthy King Croesus may have been the person behind
the legend of King Midas, whose touch supposedly turned
anything to gold.

Luke again emphasized God's initiative in opening "her heart"

to the gospel (v. 14, cf. 2 Cor. 4:4), and the hearts of those
in "her household" (cf. v. 33; 11:14). Her "household" included
servants as well as her family (cf. 10:24, 44; 16:31; 18:8;

1McGee, 4:583.
2See Richard S. Hess, Song of Songs, pp. 121-22.
330 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Rom. 16:10-11; 1 Cor. 1:16). Water baptism is in view (v. 15).

It followed her conversion immediately (cf. v. 33; 8:36; et al.).

Lydia offered her large home to Paul and his companions

("come into my house"), as their headquarters ("and stay"),
while they remained in Philippi. This was a common practice in
the Roman world, especially among Christians, since public
housing facilities were few and unpleasant (cf. Rom. 12:13; 1
Pet. 4:9).

"Young people sometimes hear a fervent

missionary from a distant field tell of the need of
young men and young women for work in Africa
or China or in some other country. They say, 'I
must answer the call.' They arrange to leave
everything here and go out to the mission field,
only to find that nobody wants them. And they
say, 'Isn't that queer? They were pleading that we
come, and instead of wanting us they are ready,
in some instances, to kill us.' Was the missionary
wrong? Did he give a false impression of
conditions? Not at all! The heathen do not realize
their need often until the preaching of the true
God gives them a sense of their real condition, but
it is that need, nevertheless, which calls for
someone to help."1

16:16 Luke probably recorded the conversions of three very different

individuals in Philippi (Lydia, the slave-girl, and the jailer), in
order to illustrate the appeal and power of the gospel. The
demon-possessed "slave-girl" (cf. Rhoda, 12:13), who met the
missionaries on their way to the prayer meeting (v. 13), was a
tool of her masters who used her to make money ("much
profit") through "fortune-telling." The demon (Gr. pneuma
pythona) within her knew of Paul, and announced through her
who he was and what he was doing (cf. Mark 1:24; 3:11; 5:7;
Luke 4:34; 8:28).

1Ironside, Lectures on …, p. 368.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 331

"The Python was a mythical serpent or dragon

that guarded the temple and oracle of Apollo,
located on the southern slope of Mount Parnassus
to the north of the Gulf of Corinth. It was
supposed to have lived at the foot of Mount
Parnassus and to have eventually been killed by
Apollo (cf. Strabo Geography 9.3.12). Later the
word python came to mean a demon-possessed
person through whom the Python spoke—even a
ventriloquist was thought to have such a spirit
living in his or her belly (cf. Plutarch De Defectu
Oraculorum 9.414)."1

16:17-18 This girl's screaming recalls the behavior of the demon-

possessed people whom Jesus encountered. The title "Most
High God" would have had meaning for Greeks, Romans, and
Jews. All of these groups had some interest in a (not "the")
"way of salvation." The Greeks called Zeus the "Most High
God."2 However, it is probable that those who heard this girl
associated the Most High God with the God of the Jews.3 In
any case, the girl's crying out would have roused the interest
of Greeks as well as Jews. Paul proceeded to take advantage
of this situation.

The demon-possessed girl seems to have appointed herself the

apostles' herald, announcing them wherever they went. Paul
did not want her to continue doing that, however. Her
presence and public relations work implied that the
missionaries were allies of the demon that people knew indwelt
her (cf. Mark 1:24-25). Jesus, working through Paul, cast the
demon out (Mark 9:14-29; Luke 4:33-35; 6:18; 7:21; Acts
8:9-24; 13:6-12; 19:13-20).

"Possibly one reason why our Blessed Lord Himself

forbade the demoniacs to make Him known, was,

1Longenecker, p. 462.
[Link], T. C. Skeat, and A. D. Nock, "The Guild of Zeus Hypsistos," Harvard Theological
Review 29 (1936):39-88.
3Levinskaya, pp. 98-100.
332 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

that His holy cause would be polluted by resting

on such evidence."1

"Imagine a venerable preacher accompanied by

three colleagues going through town with a girl
behind them pointing to them and crying, 'These
are preachers!' Or think of any other four
professional men. That would certainly be
disconcerting. People would stare, wonder, begin
to talk, and ask all sorts of queer questions about
such men."2

Luke did not record whether this girl became a Christian,

though she probably did. His interest lay in what happened as
a result of this incident.

Verse 18 raises a question about Paul's motivation in

exorcising this demon. The text says that he became "greatly
annoyed" after the girl had accompanied the missionaries "for
many days." Why did he not cast the demon out immediately
if he felt compassion for the girl? We can only conclude that
God did not lead him to cast the demon out sooner, because
He used this witness to bring people to Himself. Undoubtedly
Paul felt compassion for her, since there is plenty of evidence
elsewhere that Paul was a compassionate person. It was
evidently the continued irritation that this girl created in Paul
that God finally used to lead Paul to cast the demon out of her.
The Lord Jesus used the same strong Greek word, paraggello
("command"), when He charged another unclean spirit to come
out (Luke 8:29; cf. Acts 1:4).

16:19-21 Clearly the actions of the girl's masters against Paul and Silas,
whom the people perceived as Jews, were prejudicial. They
wanted to get even for causing them financial loss (cf. 19:24-
27), not for preaching the gospel.

"The slave that had lately been a lucrative

possession had suddenly become valueless; but

1Howson, p. 232.
2Lenski, p. 665.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 333

the law had no remedy for property depreciated

by exorcism."1

Normally only wealthy people took the risk of prosecuting

someone in court, since such action was very expensive.2 This
is the first formal indictment against Paul that Luke recorded
in Acts. The "market place" was the agora.

"Often, if not always, the greatest obstacle to the

crusade of Christ is the selfishness of men."3

"The opposition [to Christianity] of the East has

been religious, mystic, occult; but when Paul came
to Philippi something happened … Christianity
began to interfere with commercial enterprise,
and then the European opposition [to Christianity
of the West] began. And it is still going on."4

Two magistrates (praetors) governed each Roman colony.5

Recently the Emperor Claudius had expelled the Jews from
Rome (18:2). Consequently anti-semitism was running high
throughout the empire, and especially in Philippi, which had an
unusually large military population. It was contrary to Roman
law for local people to try to change the religion of Roman
citizens, of which there were many in Philippi. The girl's
masters assumed that Paul and Silas were proselytizing for
Judaism, since the "customs" Paul proclaimed included worship
of Jesus—a Jew—rather than the emperor.

"The accusation against Paul and Silas in 16:20-

21 is one of a series. In Acts 16—19 we find four
scenes that feature accusations against
Christians, and these accusations are parts of
similar sequences of events. The sequence
contains three basic elements: (1) Christians are
forcefully brought before officials or a public

1Howson, p. 232.
2Witherington, p. 496.
3Barclay, p. 135.
4Morgan, The Unfolding …, p. 368.
5F. J. Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake, The Acts of the Apostles, 4:194-95.
334 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

assembly. (2) They are accused, and this

accusation is highlighted by direct quotation. (3)
We are told the result of this attempt to curb the
Christian mission."1

The Greeks divided humanity into "Greeks" and "Barbarians."

But the Romans divided people into "Romans" and "Strangers."
"Strangers" were those who had no link to the city of Rome,
except that of subjugation.2

16:22 The "crowd" got behind the missionaries' accusers. The

charges against them seemed so clear, that the "chief
magistrates" did not even investigate them, but proceeded to
have Paul and Silas "beaten with rods" and imprisoned (cf. 2
Cor. 11:23, 25). Lictors (police officers) would have done the
beating (caning; cf. v. 35). Acts records only two instances in
which Gentiles threatened or harmed Paul (cf. 19:23-41). In
both cases, people were losing money in vested interests, and
in both cases, a Roman official vindicated Paul.

On another occasion, Paul appealed to his Roman citizenship

to escape a beating (22:25). He may not have done this in
Philippi, or he may have done so and experienced a beating
anyway. Cicero described a situation in which a Roman citizen
was scourged while he claimed his citizenship.3 Perhaps the
mob action in Philippi was so intense that Paul's appeal, if he
made it, was lost in the commotion.

16:23-24 The jailer treated his prisoners as dangerous criminals. His

treatment surely reflected his own attitude more than the
seriousness of their alleged crimes.

"Jailers commonly were retired army veterans,

who could be expected to follow orders and use
their military skills as required."4

1Tannehill,
2:201-2.
2Howson, p. 224.
3See Knowling, 2:350.
4Longenecker, p. 464.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 335

"He was no mere turn-key, but the governor of

the prison,—probably of the rank of a centurion,
like Cornelius at Caesarea, of whose history there
is much to remind us here."1

"If Lydia came from the top end of the social scale
and the slave girl from the bottom, the Roman
gaoler was one of the sturdy middle class who
made up the Roman civil service; and so in these
three the whole gamut of society was complete."2

16:25-26 We can see that Paul and Silas were full of the Spirit by the
way they reacted to the pain that resulted from their beating
and from being locked in stocks (cf. Ps. 42:8). The other
"prisoners" undoubtedly wondered who these men were, and
how they could rejoice, while even "praying and singing hymns
of praise to God." Perhaps some of them became Christians
and members of the Philippian church. If so, Paul's exhortations
to "rejoice in the Lord always," in his epistle to the Philippians,
would have reminded them of his example on this occasion.
Again God miraculously freed His servants from prison (cf.
5:18-20; 12:3-11).

"This was the first sacred concert ever held in

Europe …

"The world is watching Christians, and when they

see Christians shaken by circumstances as they
themselves, they conclude that after all there is
very little to Christianity; but when they find
Christians rising above circumstances and glorying
in the Lord even in deepest trial, then even the
unsaved realize the Christian has something in
knowing Christ to which they are strangers."3

1Rackham, p. 288.
2Barclay, p. 136.
3Ironside, Lectures on …, p. 381.
336 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Some ancient writers wrote that earthquakes were not

uncommon throughout Macedonia and Greece.1

"If we ask, Why did not the prisoners escape? the

answer is that a semi-Oriental mob would be
panic-stricken by the earthquake, and there is
nothing strange in the fact that they made no
dash for safety; moreover, the opportunity must
have been very quickly lost, for the jailor was not
only roused himself, but evidently called at once
to the guard for lights …"2

16:27-28 "In Roman law a guard who allowed his prisoner to

escape was liable to the same penalty the prisoner
would have suffered (Code of Justinian 9.4.4)."3

This jailer was about to commit suicide, and so avoid the

shame of a public execution. He was certain his prisoners "had
escaped." God had restrained the other prisoners from
escaping somehow, possibly out of fear or out of respect for
Paul and Silas.

"… were the other prisoners as terrified as the

jailer at what they believed to be the magical
power of two Jewish sorcerers which could bring
about an earthquake? This might account for their
failure to try to escape."4

Whatever the other prisoners may have thought, Luke's

emphasis was on the love and concern that Paul and Silas
demonstrated for the jailer, by remaining in prison when they
could have escaped, as well as preventing his suicide. It was
primarily this love, I think, that won the jailer over.

"Suicide for an unbeliever results in condemnation

because it takes away the opportunity for belief
in Jesus for eternal life. For a believer suicide cuts

1Ovid, Metamorphoses 9.782-83; 15.669-78; Lucian, Lover of Lies 22.

2Knowling, 2:351.
3Longenecker, p. 464. Cf. 12:19.
4Neil, p. 184.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 337

off the opportunity for continued service to the

Lord and will diminish eternal rewards.
Nevertheless, he or she retains the gift of eternal
life bestowed freely on him or her at the moment
of belief (John 5:24-25; 6:37-40; [sic ,] 47;
11:25-27)."1

16:29-30 Paul and Silas' love for him, in contrast to the hatred they had
received from the magistrates, the police, and the jailer,
transformed the jailer's attitude. Apparently the jailer had
heard the gospel from Paul and Silas previously, or had at least
heard what they were preaching (cf. v. 17), but had hardened
his heart against it (v. 24). Now, because of his brush with
death, he humbled himself, and asked how he could ("what"
he "must do to") "be saved."2 Another, less likely possibility,
is that the jailer only wanted deliverance from his physical
danger.

"… if these were the jailer's exact words they

probably meant: 'How can I be saved from the
consequences of having ill-treated two obviously
powerful magicians?' Paul uses the question as an
opening for his Gospel message (verse 31)."3

"The earthquake has presented him with

irrefutable evidence that God is at work with Paul's
group. He wants to know whatever more Paul can
offer. Is there a way to escape God's reaction to
the injustice in which the jailer has played a role?
In the face of this evidence, the jailer does not
want to be found on the opposing side."4

"… 'the prisoners' chains were loosed, and worse

chains were loosed from himself; he called for a

1Valdés, 1:568.
2See William Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary: Exposition of Philippians and
Exposition of Colossians and Philemon, p. 13.
3Neil, p. 185. See Witherington, pp. 821-43, "Appendix 2. Salvation and Health in Christian

Antiquity: The Soteriology of Luke-Acts in Its First-Century Setting."

4Bock, Acts, pp. 541-42.
338 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

light, but the true heat was lighted in his own

heart' Chrys[ostom]., Hom[ilies]., xxxvi."1

16:31 In this context, "Believe" refers to trusting the sovereign God's

power to deliver, which events had just pictured for the jailer.2

"He must do the believing, every individual in his

household likewise, for no one can do the believing
for others. But faith is not our own production.
Even in ordinary life confidence is awakened and
produced in us by the one in whom we believe.
The same holds true with reference to Jesus who
is most worthy of our confidence and trust. To
come in contact with him is to be moved to trust
him and him alone for salvation. For this reason
unbelief is such a crime. It is the refusal to trust
him who is supremely worthy of trust."3

This verse raises the question of Lordship Salvation most

clearly in Acts. Must a person make Jesus the "Lord (Master)"
of his or her life in order to become a Christian?

Most evangelicals believe that to become a Christian, one need

only trust in the Person and finished work of Jesus Christ. Thus,
it is not necessary to submit to Him completely as one's
personal Master to get saved.4 Some, however, contend that
the sinner must yield his life completely to Jesus as Master—
as well as Savior—to get saved.5

Those who hold the Lordship view insist on the necessity of

acknowledging Jesus as Master of one's life in the same act of
receiving Him as Savior. According to them, these are not two

1Knowling, 2:351-52.
2The NET Bible note on verse 31.
3Lenski, p. 681.
4E.g., Lewis S. Chafer, Salvation, pp. 42-53; Ryrie, So Great Salvation; Hodges, Absolutely

Free!; Toussaint, "Acts," p. 400; and Constable, "The Gospel …".

5E.g., John Murray, Redemption—Accomplished and Applied, pp. 95-116; K. L. Gentry,

"The Great Option: A Study of the Lordship Controversy," Baptist Reformation Review 5
(1976):49-79; John R. W. Stott, "Must Christ be Lord to be Savior? Yes," Eternity,
September 1959, pp. 15, 17-18, 36-37; Marshall, The Acts …, p. 273.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 339

separate, sequential acts or successive steps, but one act of

faith. A few expressions of the Lordship Salvation view are
these:

"The astonishing idea is current in some circles

today that we can enjoy the benefits of Christ's
salvation without accepting the challenge of His
sovereign Lordship."1

"In most instances the modern 'evangelist'

assures his congregation that all any sinner has to
do in order to escape Hell and make sure of
Heaven is to 'receive Christ as his personal Savior.'
But such teaching is utterly misleading. No one
can receive Christ as His Savior while he rejects
Him as Lord. Therefore, those who have not
bowed to Christ's sceptre and enthroned Him in
their hearts and lives, and yet imagine that they
are trusting Him as Savior, are deceived."2

"Where there is no clear knowledge, and hence no

realistic recognition of the real claims that Christ
makes, there can be no repentance, and therefore
no salvation."3

"When we teach (whether it is Matthew, or

Romans, or any other book in the New
Testament—even in comparison to the Old
Testament), we teach that when a person comes
to Christ, he receives Him as Savior and Lord, and
that genuine salvation demands a commitment to
the lordship of Christ."4

"'Unless your righteousness exceeds that of the

scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the
kingdom of heaven' means 'Unless you who call

1John R. W. Stott, Basic Christianity, p. 114.

2Arthur W. Pink, Studies on Saving Faith, pp. 12-13.
3J. I. Packer, Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God, p. 73. Cf. pp. 71-73.
4John MacArthur Jr., Justification by Faith, p. 10. See also idem, The Gospel According to

Jesus, and idem, Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles, pp. 73-85.
340 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

yourselves Christians, who profess to be justified

by faith alone and therefore confess that you have
nothing whatever to contribute to your own
justification—unless you nevertheless conduct
yourselves in a way which is utterly superior to the
conduct of the very best people, who are hoping
to save themselves by their works, you will not
enter God's kingdom. You are not really
Christians.'"1

There are many excellent evangelical scholars and expositors

who believe it is not necessary to fully commit one's life to
Jesus, when one trusts in Him as Savior, in order to experience
salvation. Some of their statements follow:

"The importance of this question cannot be

overestimated in relation to both salvation and
sanctification. The message of faith only and the
message of faith plus commitment of life cannot
both be the gospel; therefore, one of them is false
and comes under the curse of perverting the
gospel or preaching another gospel (Gal. 1:6-9)."2

"The Christian's liberty to do precisely as he

chooses is as limitless and perfect as any other
aspect of grace."3

"A faithful reading of the entire Book of Acts fails

to reveal a single passage where people are found
to acknowledge Jesus Christ as their personal Lord
in order to be saved."4

"If discipleship is tantamount to salvation, then

one must continue in the Word in order to be
saved, for John 8:31 says, 'If ye continue in My
word, then are ye My disciples indeed.'

1James M. Boice, Foundations of the Christian Faith, p. 427.

2Ryrie, Balancing the …, p. 170.
3Lewis. S. Chafer, Grace, p. 345.
4Everett F. Harrison, "Must Christ Be Lord to Be Savior? No," Eternity, September 1959,

p. 16. Cf. also pp. 14 and 48.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 341

Continuance is absolutely demanded for

discipleship. If discipleship and salvation are the
same, then continuance is demanded for
salvation. Yet the New Testament clearly teaches
that salvation is by faith and it is a gift (Eph. 2:8-
9). You have eternal life at the point of faith (John
3:36). Continuance is not a requirement for
salvation."1

"It is an interpretative mistake of the first

magnitude to confuse the terms of discipleship
with the offer of eternal life as a free gift. 'And
whoever desires, let him take the water of life
freely' (Rev. 22:17), is clearly an unconditional
benefaction. 'If anyone comes to me and does not
… he cannot be my disciple' clearly expresses a
relationship which is fully conditional. Not to
recognize this simple distinction is to invite
confusion and error at the most fundamental
level."2

"… I am not a lordship salvation person. I preach

the importance of dedication to Jesus Christ. I talk
about the works that follow faith. But I believe
eternal life is a gift and that I receive it not by
anything I do, or am, or promise to become. I take
the gift that God offers."3

When people trusted Jesus Christ in Acts, what did Luke record
they believed about Him?

"In Acts 2, 10, and 16—passages that present the

most material about salvation in the Book of
Acts—what one confessed was that Jesus was
the Lord in that He was the divine Mediator of
salvation with the total capacity and authority to
forgive sins and judge men. He is the Lord over

1G. Michael Cocoris, Lordship Salvation—Is It Biblical? p. 16.

2Hodges, The Gospel …, p. 37.
3Charles Swindoll, "Dallas's New Dispensation," Christianity Today, October 25, 1993, p.

15.
342 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

salvation because they have turned away from

themselves or their own merit to the ascended
Lord. He is the divine Dispenser of salvation."1

Other New Testament passages corroborate this testimony

(2:38-39; 3:19-26; 4:12; 8:12, 35; 10:43; 13:38-39; John
20:28; Rom. 10:9-13; 1 Cor. 12:3; 2 Cor. 4:5; James 1:1; 2:1;
1 Pet. 3:15; 2 Pet. 3:18; Jude 4, 21, 25; Rev. 19:16).2

Submitting to Jesus' total Lordship is the responsibility of all

people, but not even all Christians do it (Rom. 6:12-14; 12:1-
2). It is therefore not biblical, and it is unrealistic, to make it a
condition for salvation.3

"In many places in the Acts it is impossible to

distinguish whether Lord stands for Jehovah or
the Christ: see Introd. p. lxxii."4

The Philippian jailer now believed that Jesus had the power to
protect and deliver His own. He saw Him as the One with
adequate power and authority to save. Note that he had
previously appealed to Paul and Silas as "Sirs" (lit. "Lords," Gr.
kyrioi, v. 30). Now Paul clarified that there was only one "Lord"
(kyrion) that he needed to believe in, namely: Jesus.

"The word 'Lord' in the phrase, 'Believe in the Lord

Jesus Christ,' is no different than a modern
equivalent such as, 'put confidence in President
Reagan.' The term 'President' is his title. It
indicates his position and his ability to follow
through on promises. In a similar fashion, the term
'Lord,' when applied to Jesus Christ, indicates His

1Bock, "Jesus as …," p. 151.

2See also William D. Lawrence, "The New Testament Doctrine of the Lordship of Christ"
(Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1968).
3S. Lewis Johnson Jr., "How Faith Works," Christianity Today 33:13 (September 22,

1989):21-25, compared the writings of Ryrie, MacArthur, and Hodges on the lordship
issue. Thomas G. Lewellen, "Has Lordship Salvation Been Taught throughout Church
History?" Bibliotheca Sacra 147:585 (January-March 1990):54-68, concluded it has not.
See MacArthur, Faith Works, pp. 235-58, for his interpretation of the history of gospel
preaching.
4Rackham, p. 462, n. 1.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 343

position as God and thus His ability to save us and

grant us eternal life."1

What did the jailer need to do to be lost? Nothing! Absolutely

nothing!

Paul did not mean that the jailer's whole household would be
saved simply because the jailer believed. Other members of
the jailer's household believed individually, and were saved,
just like he believed and was saved (cf. v. 15; 8:36). Personal
salvation always depends on personal belief (John 3:16; et al.).

This verse seems to teach that faith logically precedes

regeneration, not the other way around.2

"Paul and Silas did not say to the Philippian jailer,

'Be saved, and you will believe on the Lord Jesus
Christ'! They said, 'Believe on the Lord Jesus
Christ, and you will be saved'!"3

However, elsewhere regeneration seems to precede faith (cf.

Rom. 8:8).

"Verse 8 [of Romans 8] is one of the clearest

texts teaching that an unbelieving man cannot
please God until a work of the Spirit has been
performed on his inner being. It plainly teaches
that regeneration must precede faith."4

Clearly “a work of the Spirit must be performed on his inner

being” before “an unbelieving man” can “please God,” but that
work may not be regeneration. It may simply be giving the gift

1Cocoris,
Lordship Salvation …, p. 15. Cocoris' unpublished critique of John MacArthur's
The Gospel According to Jesus entitled "John MacArthur Jr.'s System of Salvation" is very
helpful.
2See R. Bruce Compton, "The Ordo Salutis and Monergism: The Case for Faith Preceding

Regeneration, Part 1," Bibliotheca Sacra 175:697 (January-March 2018):34-49; idem, "…
Part 2," Bibliotheca Sacra 175:698 (April-June 2018):159-73.
3Hodges, Absolutely Free! p. 219. See René A. López, "Is Faith a Gift from God or a Human

Exercise?" Bibliotheca Sacra 164:655 (July-September 2007):259-76.

4S. Lewis Johnson Jr., Discovering Romans, p. 128.
344 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

of faith. I think the solution is that saving faith and

regeneration occur simultaneously.

16:32 Paul went on to explain the gospel more fully. The only
condition for salvation was trust in Jesus Christ. As elsewhere,
references to household members trusting Christ presuppose
the ability to do so. Those who were old enough and capable
enough to believe did so.

16:33-34 The jailer proceeded to "wash(ed)" Paul and Silas' "wounds."

Then they washed him with the water of baptism. The jailer no
longer needed to keep his prisoners under lock and key, but
only to deliver them at the required time. He believed they
would not try to escape, so he "brought them into his house,"
and treated them as beloved brothers rather than as
lawbreakers.

"One of the evidences of true repentance is a

loving desire to make restitution and reparation
wherever we have hurt others."1

"The conversion of the jailer is not just one more

of the many conversions in Acts but the
conversion of a member of the oppressive system
that is punishing Paul and Silas."2

16:35-36 The "policemen" (Roman lictors) returned to the jailer the next
morning with orders to "release" Paul and Silas. Lictors carried
bundles of rods tied around axes to symbolize their authority.
Evidently the "chief magistrates" only intended to teach them
a lesson for disturbing the peace, not incarcerate them and
bring them to trial.

16:37 The Roman government guaranteed its citizens a public trial

and freedom from degrading punishment such as beatings.3
Paul was now able to use his (and Silas') citizenship to their
advantage. He may have tried unsuccessfully to communicate

1Wiersbe, 1:469.
2Tannehill, 2:204. Cf. Acts 10.
3A. H. M. Jones, Studies in Roman Government and Law, p. 54. Cicero, Pro Rabirio 12. Cf.

Josephus, The Wars …, [Link].

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 345

their citizenship earlier during his arrest, or he may have waited

for the right moment to do so. Apparently the magistrates did
not challenge Paul's claim (cf. 22:27).

"How would one be able to demonstrate that he

or she was a Roman citizen? Though Acts does
not mention it, it is possible that Paul carried a
testatio, a certified private copy of evidence of his
birth and citizenship inscribed on the waxed
surface of a wooden diptych, in a stereotypical
five-part form …"1

People who made a false claim to having Roman citizenship

suffered death.2 Paul's claim here, resulted not only in his own
protection from mistreatment, but in the authorities looking
on his fellow believers as well with favor, rather than abusing
them. Paul undoubtedly demanded what he did for the
progress of the gospel, not for personal glory or revenge (cf.
Phil. 1:18).

16:38-39 Roman officials charged with mistreating Roman citizens faced

the danger of discipline by their superiors. These magistrates
meekly "appealed to" Paul and Silas not to file a complaint.
They also wanted them to "leave" Philippi, since popular
opinion was still hostile to them because Paul had healed the
slave-girl. Furthermore the local magistrates did not want to
have to protect Paul's party of foreigners from irate local
residents.

16:40 Paul did not leave Philippi immediately. First, he "encouraged"

the Christians. This group (that met at Lydia's house) formed
the nucleus of the church in Philippi, that forever afterward
was a source of joy to Paul and a source of encouragement to
other believers (cf. Phil. 1:3; 4:10-16).

Ministry in Thessalonica 17:1-9

17:1 Paul, Silas, and perhaps others, left Philippi and headed
southwest on the Egnatian Road. Luke evidently stayed in

1Witherington, p. 501.
2Robertson, 3:264.
346 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Philippi, since he once again described Paul's party as "they"

instead of "we" (cf. 20:5-6). Timothy may have departed with
Paul, or he may have remained in Philippi.1 We next read of him
being with Paul and Silas in Berea (17:14).

Paul and Silas probably stayed overnight in "Amphipolis," which

is 33 miles (a day's journey by horse) down the Egnatian Road.
It stood at the mouth of the Strymon River. The next day they
traveled another 27 miles, farther west-southwest, to
"Apollonia." Lastly, a 35-mile day of travel farther west on the
Via Egnatia took them to "Thessalonica" (modern Salonika),
situated on the Thermaic Gulf of the Aegean Sea.2

The text does not state that Paul's party stayed only overnight
in Amphipolis and Apollonia, but most interpreters have
inferred this from the narrative. Luke recorded more
information concerning the apostles' ministry in Thessalonica,
where they stayed for some time. Thessalonica was the chief
city and capital of Macedonia, about 100 miles from Philippi.
As such, it was a strategic center for the evangelization of its
region (cf. 1 Thess. 1:7-8).

"Thessalonica [like Tarsus and Athens] was a 'free

city,' which meant that it had an elected citizens'
assembly, it could mint its own coins, and it had
no Roman garrison within its walls."3

"The local magistrates had the power of life and

death over the citizens of the place. No stationary
garrison of Roman soldiers was quartered within
its territory. No insignia of Roman office were
displayed in its streets."4

17:2-3 Paul evidently "reasoned with them" in the synagogue only

"three" Sabbath days (cf. 13:5, 14; 14:1), but he seems to
have stayed longer in Thessalonica (cf. 1 Thess. 4:1; 2 Thess.

1Howson, p. 240.
2See Finegan, Light from …, pp. 351-52, for more information about Thessalonica.
3Wiersbe, 1:470.
4Howson, p. 257.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 347

2:5).1 We know that Paul supported himself there by making

tents (1 Thess. 2:9; 2 Thess. 3:7-10), and that the Philippians
sent two monetary gifts to him there (Phil. 4:15-16). Perhaps
he ministered primarily to Jews for the first three weeks, and
then turned to the Gentiles.

Luke described Paul's method of evangelizing in Thessalonica

as reasoning (Gr. dielexato, cf. v. 17; 18:4, 19; 19:8-9; 24:25)
from the Scriptures, explaining (dianoigon), giving evidence
(proving, paratithemenos), and proclaiming (katangello).
These terms imply that Paul dealt carefully with his hearers'
questions and doubts. He showed that the facts of gospel
history confirmed what the Scriptures predicted. His subject
was "Jesus," whom Paul believed and proclaimed was "the
Christ." His Jewish hearers needed convincing that their
"Scriptures" taught that Messiah would "suffer" death "and
rise" from the grave (cf. 3:18; 13:30, 34; Luke 24:13-27; 1
Cor. 15:1-4). Paul used the Old Testament to prove that Jesus
was the Messiah (Christ).

"Interpretation of the Scriptures plays a key role

in Paul's message (17:2, 11)."2

17:4 Paul's reasoning "persuaded (epeisthesan) some" in the

synagogue services (cf. 26:28; 28:23). His converts seem to
have been mainly Gentiles (cf. 1 Thess. 1:9), many ("a large
number") of whom were God-fearers, or "God-fearing Greeks"
(cf. 10:4; 13:43; 16:14), but some of them were Jews.
"Jason" (v. 5), Aristarchus (Col. 4:10), and Secundus (20:4)
appear to have been among these new believers. The "leading
women" could have belonged to the upper classes, or they
may have been the wives of the city's leading men.3 In either
case, the gospel had an impact on the leadership level of
society in Thessalonica.

[Link]., pp. 254-55.

2Tannehill, 2:206.
3Marshall, The Acts …, p. 277.
348 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

17:5 The "Jews" treated Paul harshly here, as they had in Galatia
(13:45, 50; 14:2, 19), because they were again "jealous" of
the popularity and effectiveness of his message.

"Loungers of the type employed here by the Jews

to attack Paul and Silas were common in the agora
or forum of Graeco-Roman cities. They invariably
assembled around the rostrum where an orator
was speaking, and applauded or heckled according
to who paid them …"1

The AV translators described these men colorfully as "lewd

fellows of the baser sort." Jason was evidently Paul's host in
Thessalonica, as Lydia had been in Philippi (16:15, 40). This
"Jason" may not be the same one Paul named in Romans
16:21, since that name was common among the Greeks. It is
the Greek equivalent of "Joshua."

17:6-7 The Jewish antagonists charged the missionaries with

revolutionary teaching, namely: that "another king, Jesus,"
would rule and reign (cf. 1 Thess. 3:13; 5:1-11; 2 Thess. 1:5-
10; 2:14).

"'Those,' they said, 'who are upsetting the

civilised world have arrived here.' That is one of
the greatest compliments which has ever been
paid to Christianity. … When Christianity really
goes into action it must cause a revolution both
in the life of the individual and in the life of
society."2

The Jews in Jesus' ministry made similar charges, namely, that

He advocated overthrowing the emperor (Luke 23:2; John
18:33-37). These Thessalonian Jews also claimed no king but
"Caesar" (cf. John 19:15). Jason was guilty of harboring the
fugitives.

1MerrillF. Unger, "Historical Research and the Church at Thessalonica," Bibliotheca Sacra
119:473 (January-March 1962):41.
2Barclay, p. 139.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 349

Several inscriptions found in Thessalonica describe the rulers

of the city as politarchs, the very word Luke used to describe
them here (cf. v. 8).1 One of these is on the still-standing Arch
of Galerius over the Egnatian Way, which commemorates
Roman victories over the Persians in the late third century A.D.
Before the discovery of these inscriptions, critics said Luke
erred when he wrote that there were politarchs who ruled in
Thessalonica. "Politarch" was a title used only in Macedonia to
describe city officials.

"Since the term was unknown elsewhere, the

critics of Luke once dismissed it as a mark of
ignorance. Sixteen epigraphical examples now
exist in modern Salonica, and one is located in the
British Museum on a stone which once formed part
of an archway. It was evidently the Macedonian
term. It was Luke's general practice to use the
term in commmonest use in educated circles.
Hence he called the officials of Philippi 'praetors',
and an inscription has similarly established the
fact that this was a courtesy title given to the
magistrates of a Roman colony."2

17:8-9 The city officials could not find the missionaries (v. 6) to bring
them to trial. Consequently they made Jason and his friends
pay a bond ("pledge"), guaranteeing that Paul would cause no
further trouble but leave town. If trouble continued, Jason
would lose his money. If it did not, he would receive it back.
Paul did leave town, and later wrote to the Thessalonians that
Satan hindered his return (1 Thess. 2:18). His inability to
return may have been the result of this tactic of his enemies.
The Christians, however, carried on admirably, for which Paul
thanked God (1 Thess. 1:7-10; 2:14-16).

Ministry in Berea 17:10-15

17:10 For the second time, Paul fled a city under cover of "night" (cf.
9:25; Matt. 10:23). He and Silas left the Via Egnatia, at

1E. D. Burton, "The Politarchs," American Journal of Theology 2 (1898):598-632.

2Blaiklock, p. 129.
350 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Thessalonica, and took the eastern coastal road toward

Athens. They headed for Berea (modern Verria), about 45
miles west-southwest of Thessalonica. Berea was a very old
Mecedonian city situated on the Astraeus River. In spite of
continued Jewish antagonism, Paul and Silas launched their
ministry in this town, again by visiting "the synagogue."

17:11-12 The Jews in Berea did not react out of jealousy (cf. v. 5), but
listened carefully to what Paul preached ("received the word"),
and compared it to the teachings of their Hebrew Scriptures
("examining the Scriptures daily"). Their example of daily Bible
study has inspired Christians ever since to do the same.
Anyone who listens to new religious truth would do well to
compare it with Scripture, as these Jews did. Many of these
noble skeptics believed because Paul's teaching was
consistent with the Old Testament.

Here there seem to have been "many" Jewish converts, rather

than the usual few that resulted from Paul's preaching. Many
Gentiles also believed. Among them were "a number of
prominent … women" (cf. v. 4), as well as "men." "Sopater,"
who later traveled with Paul, as did Aristarchus and Secundus,
evidently was one of the converts (20:4).

17:13 Hearing of Paul's presence in Berea, the Thessalonian Jews

followed him there. They evidently adopted the same tactics
they had used in Thessalonica ("agitating and stirring up the
crowds") in order to force Paul out of Berea (cf. vv. 5, 9). They
had charged the missionaries with stirring up trouble (v. 6),
but it was really they who were disturbing the peace.

17:14-15 The text is not clear if Paul took a ship to Athens, or traveled
there by land. Perhaps his pursuers did not know either. Paul's
escorts may have taken him to the sea to give the impression
that they intended to put him on a ship (v. 14), but then they
accompanied him to Athens by land instead.1 On the other
hand, he may have traveled by sea.2 In any case he reached
Athens, 195 miles south-southwest of Berea—safely—and

1Henry, p. 1705; Kent, p. 138.

2Howson, pp. 264, 265.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 351

sent instructions back with the Berean brethren who had

accompanied him, that Silas and Timothy should join him soon.
They apparently had stayed behind, or had been sent back, in
order to confirm the new converts (18:5). They appear to have
rejoined Paul in Athens since "they [had] left" Berea as he
requested (cf. 1 Thess. 3:1).

"Then Timothy was sent back to Thessalonica (1

Thess 3:2). Silas, however, seems to have gone
back to Macedonia (cf. 18:5)—probably to
Philippi, where he received from the young
congregation there a gift of money for the
support of the missioners (Phil 4:15). In the
meantime, Paul had moved from Athens to Corinth
(18:1) and was joined there by Silas and Timothy
on their return from Macedonia (18:5; 1 Thess
3:6)."1

Thus Luke's account of Paul's evangelizing in Macedonia concludes. From

there the gospel went south to the neighboring province of Achaia.

3. The ministry in Achaia 17:16—18:17

Luke recorded this section to document the advance of the gospel and the
church into the pagan darkness that enveloped the province of Achaia,
southern modern Greece.

Ministry in Athens 17:16-34

This section of Luke's narrative contains three parts: the experiences of

the missionaries that resulted in Paul preaching to the pagan Greeks there,
the sermon itself, and the results of the sermon.

Paul's preliminary ministry in Athens 17:16-21

17:16 "Athens" stood five miles inland from its port of Piraeus, which
was on the Saronic Gulf of the Aegean Sea. The city had
reached its prime 500 years before Paul visited it, in the time
of Pericles (461-429 B.C.). During that era, the events of the

1Longenecker, p. 471.
352 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Book of Nehemiah transpired (ca. 445-420 B.C.), and the post-

exilic prophets (Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi) ministered.
However, Athens was still the cultural and intellectual center
of the Greek world.1 Paul observed many of the temples and
statues that still stand there today. Today these objects are
of interest mainly for their artistic value, but in Paul's day they
were idols and places of worship that the Greeks regarded as
holy.

"It was said that there were more statues of the

gods in Athens than in all the rest of Greece put
together, and that in Athens it was easier to meet
a god than a man."2

Paul's Jewish upbringing and Christian convictions made all this

idolatry repulsive to him—so while "observing" all the "idols,"
his "spirit" was "provoked within."

"The intellectual capital of the world was

producing idolatry."3

"Paul was about as at home in Athens as a bust

of Luther would be in the Vatican."4

"The greatest pretenders to reason were the

greatest slaves to idols …"5

"The Greek religion was a mere deification of

human attributes and the powers of nature. It was
doubtless better than other forms of idolatry
which have deified the brutes: but it had no real
power to raise him to a higher position than that
which he occupied by nature. It could not even

1See Finegan, Light from …, pp. 352-58, for more information about Athens.
2Barclay,p. 141. Cf. Howson, p. 280.
3Toussaint, "Acts," p. 402.
4Charles R. Swindoll, Paul, p. 204.
5Henry, p. 1705.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 353

keep him from falling continually to a lower

degradation."1

17:17 Paul continued his ministry to "Jews" and "God-fearing" Greeks

"in the synagogue," but also discussed the gospel with any
who wanted to do so "in the market place" (Gr. agora; cf. Jer.
20:9). The latter were probably not God-fearing Gentiles but
simply pagan Gentiles. The Agora was the center of civic life in
Athens. There the philosophers gathered to discuss and
debate their views. It lay to the west of the Acropolis, on which
the Parthenon still stands, and Mars Hill.

17:18 Epicureans were disciples of Epicurus (341-270 B.C.) who

believed that pleasure was the greatest good and the most
worthy pursuit of man. They meant pleasure in the sense of
tranquility and freedom from pain, disquieting passions, and
fears, especially the fear of death. Epicurus taught that the
gods took no interest in human affairs. Thus organized religion
was bad, and the gods would not punish evildoers in the
afterlife. They were atheists.2 Epicurus' followers also believed
that everything happened by chance, and that death was the
end of one's existence. They were similar to "agnostic
secularists."3 This philosophy is still popular today. One of its
fairly modern poets was A. C. Swinburne.

"A motto, written by Diogenes, an Epicurean, in

about A.D. 200, sums up this belief system:
'Nothing to fear in God; Nothing to feel in death;
Good [pleasure] can be attained; Evil [pain] can
be endured.'"4

"… Epicureanism is most fairly described as the

ancient representative of modern utilitarianism."5

"Stoics" followed the teachings of Zeno the Cypriot (340-265

B.C.). The name "Stoic" comes from "stoa," a particular

1Howson, p. 281.
2Ibid.,
p. 285.
3Bock, Acts, p. 561.
4Witherington, p. 514.
5Rackham, p. 304.
354 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

portico (Gr. stoa) where he taught when he lived in Athens. His

followers placed great importance on living in harmony with
nature. They stressed individual self-sufficiency and
rationalism, and they had a reputation for being quite arrogant.
Stoics were pantheists, who believed that God is in everything,
and everything is God. They were also fatalistic. Their teaching
is also common today. A modern poet who set forth this
philosophy of life, W. E. Henley, wrote, "I am the master of my
fate; I am the captain of my soul," in his poem Invictus. Stoics
were also idealists.1

"Christianity is the School of Humility; Stoicism

was the Education of Pride. Christianity is a
discipline of life: Stoicism was nothing better than
an apprenticeship for death."2

"The two enemies it [the gospel] has ever had to

contend with are the two ruling principles of the
Epicureans and Stoics—Pleasure and Pride."3

Knowling compared the Stoics to the Pharisees, and the

Epicureans to the Sadducees, in the world of philosophy. He
wrote that when Paul stood before them in Athens, it was as
though he stood before the philosophical Sanhedrin.4

The Greek word spermologos, translated "babbler," refers to

someone who picked up the words of others as a bird picks up
seeds. Paul's hearers implied that he had put together a
philosophy of life simply by picking up this and that scrap of
an idea from various sources. Others accused him of
proclaiming new gods ("strange deities"), though his critics
may have misunderstood his references to the resurrection
(Gr. anastasis) as being references to a person, perhaps a

1See David A. deSilva, "Paul and the Stoa: A Comparison," Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 38:4 (December 1995):549-64, for a comparison of Paul's teaching
and the Stoics'.
2Howson, p. 284.
3Ibid., p. 286.
4Knowling, 2:366, 370.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 355

female counterpart of Jesus. This is less likely than that they

simply did not believe in resurrection.1

17:19-20 The exact location of the "Areopagus" (Gr., Areios Pagos; lit.
"Court [or Council] of Ares," the Greek god of war) is difficult
to determine. The Athenians used the term in two ways in
Luke's day. It first of all referred to the Hill of Ares (i.e., Lat.,
Mars Hill), on which the Council of the Areopagus conducted
its business in ancient times. Secondly it referred to the group
of about 30 citizens, known as the Council of the Areopagus,
who met in the Royal Portico of the Agora.2 The question is:
Does "the Areopagus" refer to the people or the place? Luke's
description is ambiguous, though I favor the people in view of
the context.3

The Council of the Areopagus had authority over religion,

morals, and education in Athens. Its members wanted to know
what Paul was advocating. Enemies of Socrates had poisoned
him for teaching strange ideas in Athens, so Paul was in some
danger.

17:21 Luke inserted this sentence to help his readers, who might not
be familiar with Athenian culture, to understand how unusually
attracted the Athenians were to "new" ideas. One Athenian
wrote the following.

"We Athenians stay at home doing nothing,

always delaying and making decrees, and asking in
the market if there be anything new."4

They were guiltier of "seed picking" than Paul was, but their
interest gave Paul an opportunity to preach the gospel.

1Bock, Acts, p. 562.

2Barclay,
pp. 141-42.
3SeeKnowling, 2:368-69.
4Demosthenes (384-322 B.C.), quoted by Clarence E. N. Macartney, Paul the Man, p. 107.
356 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Paul's sermon to the Athenians 17:22-31

Luke probably recorded Paul's address (vv. 22-31) as a sample of his

preaching to intellectual pagans (cf. 13:16-41; 14:15-18; 20:18-35).1 In
this speech, Paul began his argument with God as everyone's Creator and
brought his hearers to God as everyone's Judge.

17:22 Paul was not flattering his audience by calling them "very
religious"; this was a statement of fact. The Greek words
simply mean that they were firm in their reverence for their
gods.

"… every god in Olympus found a place in the

Agora. But the religiousness of the Athenians
(Acts xvii. 22) went even further. For every public
place and building was likewise a sanctuary."2

Paul again followed his policy of adapting to the people he was

seeking to evangelize, and met them where they were in their
thinking (cf. 1 Cor. 9:22).

"Paul really began with the note of conciliation,

and from beginning to end there was nothing
calculated to offend, or drive away the men whom
he desired to gain."3

17:23 Paul may have meant that he was going to tell his audience
more about a particular "God," whom they worshipped but did
not know much about, namely: Yahweh. This interpretation
assumes that there were people in Athens who were
worshipping the Creator. Alternatively, Paul may have meant
that he would inform them of a God whom they did not know
at all, but for whom they had built an altar to honor: "The
Unknown God". In either case, Paul began with the Athenians'
interest in gods, and their confessed ignorance about at least
one "god," and proceeded to explain what Yahweh had

1See Dean W. Zweck, "The Areopagus Speech of Acts 17," Lutheran Theological Journal
21:3 (December 1987):11-22. See also Witherington, p. 518, for a rhetorical analysis of
this speech.
2Howson, p. 274.
3Morgan, The Acts …, p. 327.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 357

revealed about Himself (cf. John 4:10; 7:37-38; et al.). Paul

was not implying that the idol "to the unknown God" that he
had observed had been erected in honor of "Yahweh," who was
"unknown" to most Athenians.

"As we are told by a Latin writer that the ancient

Romans, when alarmed by an earthquake, were
accustomed to pray, not to any specified divinity,
but to a god expressed in vague language, as
avowedly Unknown: so the Athenians
acknowledged their ignorance of the True Deity by
the altars 'with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN
GOD,' which are mentioned by Heathen writers
[i.e., Pausanias and Philostratus], as well as by the
inspired historian [Luke]."1

"An altar has been found at Pergamum inscribed

'to the unknown deities'. Such altars had no
special deity in view. The dedication was designed
to ensure that no god was overlooked to the
possible harm of the city."2

"His point, as in Rom. 2:14-16, is that God has

revealed some knowledge of himself and his will to
all men, but that this has been clarified and
illuminated by his special revelation through the
Scriptures and now finally in the Gospel."3

17:24 The true God "created (made) all things." Since He is "Lord of
heaven and earth," human "temples" cannot contain Him. He
is transcendent over all (cf. 7:48-50). This harmonized with
the Epicureans' idea of God as above the world, but it
corrected the Stoics' pantheism. Some Greek philosophers,
including Euripides, agreed that temples did not really house
their pagan gods, but many Greeks thought they did.4

1Howson, p. 281.
2Blaiklock, p. 140. See also Adolf Deissmann, Paul, pp. 287-88.
3Neil, pp. 190-91. Cf. 14:15-17.
4Bock, Acts, p. 565.
358 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

17:25 The true God also sustains all of creation ("all things"); He does
not need people to sustain Him. In other words, He is imminent
as well as transcendent. He participates in human existence.
This contradicted the Epicureans' belief that God took no
interest in human affairs, as well as the Stoics' self-sufficiency.

17:26 The Greeks, and especially the Athenians, prided themselves

on being racially superior to all other people. Yet Paul told them
that they, like all other people, had descended from one
source: Adam. This fact excludes the possibility of the
essential superiority of any race. God also determines the
"times" of nations—their seasons, when they rise and fall—and
their "boundaries." In other words, God is sovereign over the
political and military affairs of nations. The Greeks liked to think
that they determined their own destiny.

17:27 God's purpose in regulating times and boundaries was that

people would realize His sovereignty and "seek … Him" (cf.
Rom. 1; John 6:44; 12:32). God, Paul said, is "not far from"
human contact ("from each one of us"). This, again,
harmonized with some Greek philosophy, but it contradicted
the teachings of other philosophers.

"It is implied in Acts xvii that the pagan world had

made little progress in searching for its Creator. In
Romans it is more vigorously stated that, for all
God's visible presence in His creation, the world at
large had failed to find Him."1

17:28 Here Paul cited lines from two Greek writers who expressed
ideas that were consistent with divine revelation. The Cretan
poet Epimenides (ca. 600 B.C.; cf. Titus 1:12) had written: "For
in thee we live and move and have our being."2 The Cilician
poet Aratus (c. 315-240 B.C.), and Cleanthes (331-233 B.C.)
before him, had written: "We are also his offspring."3 Paul's
purpose in citing these quotations was to get his audience to
continue to agree with him about the truth.

1Blaiklock,p. 142.
2From his poem Cretica, cited by Longenecker, p. 476.
3From Aratus' Phaenomena 5, and Cleanthes' Hymn to Zeus, also cited ibid.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 359

17:29 Paul's conclusion was that idolatry, therefore, is illogical. If God

created people, then God cannot be "an image" or an idol, or
comprised of "gold or silver or stone," the earthly materials
from which idols are made. Paul was claiming that God's divine
nature is essentially spiritual rather than material.

17:30 Before Jesus Christ came, God did not view people as being as
guilty as He does now, now that Christ has come. People
before were guilty of failing to respond to former revelation,
but now they are more guilty, in view of the greater revelation
that Jesus Christ brought at His incarnation (cf. Heb. 1:1-2).
God "overlooked the times of ignorance" (i.e., when people had
only limited revelation; cf. 3:17; 14:16; Rom. 3:25; 2 Pet. 3:9)
in a relative sense only.

Before the Incarnation, people died as unbelievers and were

lost, but now there is more light. Consequently people's guilt
is greater this side of the Incarnation. Obviously many people
have not heard the gospel, and are as ignorant of the greater
revelation of God that Jesus Christ brought, as were people
who lived before the Incarnation. Nevertheless they live in a
time when God has revealed more of Himself than previously.
Therefore God demands that "all people everywhere should
repent."

This makes it all the more important that Christians take the
gospel to everyone. Greater revelation by God means greater
responsibility for people, both for the unsaved and for the
saved. God previously took the relative lack of understanding
about Himself into consideration as He dealt with people. Now
that Christ has come, He will hold people more responsible for
their sins.

"Paul appeals to the relation of Creator and

creature, and to God as universal judge, in order
to provide a foundation for a gospel that can
address the whole of humanity. The internal
impulse for this speech (internal to the implied
author's perspective) comes from the need to
speak of all humanity sharing an essentially similar
relation to God as a basis for an inclusive gospel,
360 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

a gospel commensurate with the inclusive saving

purpose of God announced in Luke 2:30-32."1

"The Bible requires repentance for salvation, but

repentance does not mean to turn from sin, nor a
change in one's conduct. Those are the fruits of
repentance. Biblical repentance is a change of
mind or attitude concerning either God [Acts
20:21], Christ [Acts 2:38], dead works [Heb.
6:1], or sin [Acts 8:22]. When one trusts Christ it
is inconceivable that he would not automatically
change his mind concerning one or more or even
all of these things."2

17:31 The true knowledge of God leads to (encourages) repentance

because it contains information about coming judgment. Paul
concluded his speech by clarifying His hearers' responsibility.

"He has presented God as the Creator in His past

work. He shows God as the Redeemer in His
present work. Now he shows God as the Judge in
His future work."3

Wiersbe outlined Paul's speech as presenting the greatness of

God: He is Creator (v. 24); the goodness of God: He is Provider
(v. 25); the government of God: He is Ruler (vv. 26-29); and
the grace of God: He is Savior (vv. 30-34).4

Note that Paul referred to sin (v. 29), righteousness (v. 31),
and judgment (v. 31; cf. John 16:5-11; Rom. 1—3). The
resurrected Jesus is God's agent of judgment (cf. 7:13; Ps.
96:13; John 5:22, 27), the Son of Man (Dan. 7:13). Paul
stressed that Jesus was a man—rather than an idol or a
mythological character such as the Greek gods—and that it
was He whom the true God has appointed as His agent of
judgment.

1Tannehill, 2:211.
2Cocoris, Lordship Salvation …, p. 12.
3McGee, 4:591.
4Wiersbe, 1:473.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 361

The "proof" of Jesus' qualification to judge humanity was His

resurrection. Jesus' resurrection vindicated His claims about
Himself (e.g., His claim to be the Judge of all humankind, John
5:22, 25-29).

The response to Paul's preaching 17:32-34

Most Greeks rejected the possibility of physical resurrection.1 Many of them

believed that the most desirable condition lay beyond the grave where the
soul would finally be free of the body (e.g., Platonists). Both the Stoics and
the Epicureans believed that there would be no retribution beyond the
grave.2

"As the Greek religion was but the glorification of the present
life, by the worship of all its most beauteous forms, the
Resurrection, which presupposes the vanity of the present life,
and is nothing but life out of the death of all that sin has
blighted, could have no charm for the true Greek. It gave the
deathblow to his fundamental and most cherished ideas; nor
until these were seen to be false and fatal could the
Resurrection, and the Gospel of which it was a primary doctrine
seem otherwise than ridiculous."3

The response of the Athenians to Paul's preaching was typical: some

mocked, others procrastinated, and a few believed. Among the believers
were "Dionysius," a member of the Council of the Areopagus that had
examined Paul, and "Damaris," a woman that we do not read about again
in the New Testament. However, Eusebius wrote that Dionysius became
the first bishop of the church at Athens,4 and Chrysostom, in his book On
Priesthood, claimed that Damaris was his wife.5 Paul later wrote that the
household of "Stephanas" was the firstfruits of Achaia (1 Cor. 16:15), so
he and his household may have been other converts that Luke did not

1See N. Clayton Croy, "Hellenistic Philosophies and the Preaching of the Resurrection (Acts
17:18, 32)," Novum Testamentum 39:1 (1997):21-39, for the Epicurean and Stoic views.
See also Witherington, p. 532, for the view of Apollo at the founding of the Areopagus,
who also rejected the possibility of resurrection.
2Knowling, 2:380.
3Jamieson, et al., p. 1116.
4Eusebius, pp. 85 (bk. 3, ch. 4); 159 (bk. 4, ch. 23).
5Foakes-Jackson, p. 167.
362 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

mention here. Or perhaps Stephanas lived in Corinth but he and his

household became Christians through Paul's early ministry in Achaia.

Some Bible students have interpreted Paul's statements in 1 Corinthians

1:18—2:5 as evidence that the apostle believed he had taken the wrong
approach in Athens.1 In that passage, Paul repudiated worldly wisdom. He
wrote that he determined to "know nothing but Jesus Christ and Him
crucified" when he preached. He also said that he had entered Corinth, his
next stop after Athens, with "fear and trembling." In Athens, Paul had
preached Christ, but he had spent considerable time, assuming Luke's
summary of his sermon accurately reflects the whole, discussing natural
revelation and philosophy.

I agree with those interpreters who do not think Paul's statements in 1

Corinthians reflect belief that he had taken the wrong approach in Athens.
The lack of response in Athens was due to the fact that, although the
Athenians loved to discuss issues, they did not like to take action.
Moreover, unsaved educated, intelligent people generally tend to be more
critical and non-committal than others when they first hear the gospel.
Paul's statements in 1 Corinthians seem to reflect his general commitment
to elevate Jesus Christ in all aspects of his ministry including his preaching,
which he also did in Athens.

The absence of any reference to a church being planted in Athens, in this

passage or elsewhere in the New Testament, is hardly an adequate basis
for concluding there was none. As we have seen repeatedly in Acts, Luke
made no attempt to provide a comprehensive history, but selected only
those facts and events he wished to emphasize. In this section (vv. 16-
34), he emphasized Paul's preaching to cultured pagans. We do not know
if Paul planted a church in Athens; there is no record that he did. I suspect
that if he did, Luke would have mentioned it, since the spread of the gospel
is such a major theme in Acts. However, there is evidence that the gospel
at some point took root in Athens, if not during Paul's visit.

"In the next century that Church at Athens gave to the

Christian church Publius, Quadratus, Aristides, Athenagoras,
and others, bishops, and martyrs; and in the third century the
church there was peaceable and pure. In the fourth century

1E.g., Neil, p. 193.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 363

the Christian schools of Athens gave to the Christian Church

Basil and Gregory."1

Donald Meisner argued that the structure of the record of Paul's missionary
journeys in Acts 12:25—21:16 is chiastic.2

Chiasm is "a stylistic literary figure which consists of a series

of two or more elements (words, phrases, sentences,
paragraphs, or longer sections) followed by a presentation of
corresponding elements in reverse order."3

Writers used this device to highlight the central elements in the structure,
and or to clarify the meaning of paired elements. The central section of
the 12:25—21:16 chiasm, as Meisner saw it, is Paul's sermon in 17:16-34.

"The chiastic structure of the missionary journeys narrative

suggests that, of all the places on the itinerary, Athens is the
most significant intermediate point as the gospel moves to the
end of the earth. …

"The Areopagus speech … is the only sermon reported by Luke

which is preached to Gentiles by 'the apostle to the Gentiles'
(except for the brief Lystra sermon [14:15-17]). … Now that
Paul had preached the word in the spiritual capital of the Greek
world, he turned his face toward the imperial capital of the
Greco-Roman world. It is only after the Athens climax that Luke
noted Paul's expression of his necessity to go to Rome, which
he stated both at Ephesus (19:21), and at Jerusalem
(23:11)."4

To the Philippian jailer, Paul preached Christ as the personal Savior of

individuals. To the Jews in Thessalonica, he presented Him as the promised

1Morgan, The Acts …, p. 332.

2Donald R. Meisner, "Chiasm and the Composition and Message of Paul's Missionary
Sermons" (S.T.D. thesis, Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago, 1974), pp. 273-322;
and idem, "The Missionary Journeys Narrative: Patterns and Implications," in Perspectives
on Luke-Acts, pp. 199-214.
3Ronald E. Man, "The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation," Bibliotheca

Sacra 141:562 (April-June 1984):146.

4Meisner, "Chiasm and …," pp. 315-16.
364 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Messiah. To the intellectual Gentiles in Athens, he proclaimed Him as the

proven Judge of all humankind—appointed by the One True God.

Ministry in Corinth 18:1-17

Silas and Timothy had evidently rejoined Paul in Athens (1 Thess. 3:1).
Before leaving Athens, Paul sent Timothy back to Thessalonica (1 Thess.
3:2) and Silas back to somewhere in Macedonia (18:5), perhaps Philippi (cf.
Phil. 4:16). Paul arrived in Corinth without these brethren, but they joined
him in Corinth later (18:5; 1 Thess. 3:6).

Paul's arrival in Corinth 18:1-4

18:1 "Corinth," the largest city in Greece at this time, was the
capital of the Roman province of Achaia and a Roman colony.
The Romans razed Corinth in 146 B.C., but it was rebuilt a
century later in 46 B.C. Its site lay about 50 miles southwest
of Athens at a very strategic location. Land traffic from
northern Achaia to its southern peninsula, the Peloponnesus,
crossed a land bridge very near Corinth.

Stevedores hauled smaller ships traveling from either of

Corinth's port towns, Lechaeum on the west or Cenchrea on
the east, to the other, overland on wooden rollers. They
handled the cargoes of larger ships the same way. The distance
between the ports was three and a half miles. Sea captains
preferred this inconvenience because they did not want to sail
200 miles around dangerous Cape Malea at the southern tip of
the Peloponnesus. Consequently Corinth constantly buzzed
with commercial activity, and it possessed all the vices that
have typically haunted cosmopolitan ports.1

"The city was in many regards the best place

possible in Greece for making contacts with all
sorts of people and for founding a new religious
group."2

1See Finegan, Light from …, pp. 358-63, for more information about Corinth.
2Witherington, p. 538.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 365

Corinth was about 20 times as large as Athens at this time,

with a population of over 200,000 inhabitants.1 The city was
infamous for its immorality, that issued from two sources: its
numerous transients and its temple to Aphrodite. Aphrodite
was the Greek goddess of love, and here devotees promoted
immorality in the name of religion.2 Her temple, which boasted
1,000 religious prostitutes, stood on the Acrocorinth, a 1,857-
foot flat-topped mountain just outside the city. It is easy to
understand why sexual problems plagued the Corinthian church
(1 Cor. 5; et al.).

"Beginning with the fifth century B.C., the verb 'to

Corinthianize' (korinthiazesthai) meant to be
sexually immoral, a reputation that continued to
be well-deserved in Paul's day."3

"The reputation of Corinth is illustrated by the

fact that the verb 'to act like a Corinthian' was
used of practicing fornication, and the phrase
'Corinthian girls' designated harlots."4

Archaeologists have also discovered the remains of temples

dedicated to: Melkart, the god of sailors; to Apollo, the god of
music and poetry; and to Asclepius, the god of healing; and
there were others.

When Paul entered Corinth he was fearful (1 Cor. 2:1-5),

probably because of the wicked reputation of this city and
perhaps because his fellow workers were not with him.

"To move from Athens to Corinth was to

exchange the atmosphere of a provincial
university city for that of a thriving commercial
metropolis …"5

1Longenecker, p. 480.
2See Dan P. Cole, "Corinth & Ephesus," Bible Review 4:6 (December 1988):20-25.
3Longenecker, p. 480.
4Ladd, "The Acts …," p. 1158.
5Neil, p. 194.
366 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

It was as though Paul had left Boston and had landed in Las
Vegas.

18:2-3 "Pontus" was the Roman province in Asia Minor that lay east
of Bithynia on the Black Sea coast (in modern northern
Turkey).

"Priscilla" had another name, Prisca (Rom. 16:3; 1 Cor. 16:19;

2 Tim. 4:19), the latter being more formal. Luke normally used
the colloquial, diminutive form of names (e.g., Silas, Sopatros,
Priscilla, Apollos), but Paul preferred their formal names in his
writings (e.g., Silvanus, Sosipatros, Prisca, Epaphroditus).1
Nevertheless he sometimes used the more popular form of a
name (e.g., Apollos, Epaphras). Priscilla's name frequently
appears before her husband's—"Aquila"—in the New
Testament (e.g., 18:18-19, 26; Rom. 16:3; 2 Tim. 4:19). This
may indicate that she came from a higher social class than
Aquila, or that others regarded her as superior to him in some
respect. Here, however, Luke mentioned Aquila first.

The Roman writer Suetonius referred to an edict by Emperor

"Claudius" ordering non-Roman citizen "Jews to leave Rome,"
and he dated this expulsion at A.D. 49-50.2 There were other
expulsions of Jews from Rome in 139 B.C. and 19 A.D.3

"Because the Jews at Rome caused continuous

disturbances at the instigation of Crestus, he
[Claudius] expelled them from the city."4

"It was commonly supposed that Suetonius was

referring to riots in the Jewish community over
the preaching of Christ, but that he has misspelled
the name and has perhaps erroneously thought
that Christ was actually a rebel leader in Rome

1Knowling, 2:383.
2F. F. Bruce, "Chronological Questions …," pp. 280-82. See Blaiklock, pp. 149-50, for an
interesting description of Claudius.
3Levinskaya, pp. 28-29.
4Suetonius, "Claudius," XXV, Twelve Caesars, cited by Kent, p. 141.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 367

(Suetonius was born in A.D. 69, and wrote

considerably after the event)."1

Often tradespeople set up shop on the ground floor of a

building and lived on the floor above. We do not know if Aquila
and Priscilla were Christians when Paul first met them, but it
seems likely that they were, since Luke did not mention their
conversion. Alford believed they were not Christians at this
time.2

Paul evidently had a financial need, so he went to work

practicing his trade of tentmaking (cf. 20:34; 1 Cor. 4:12; 9:1-
18; 2 Cor. 11:9; 1 Thess. 2:9; 2 Thess. 3:7-10).

"Apart from occasional gifts (Phil. 4:15ff), Paul's

practice was to be self-supporting by working at
his trade and not to be dependent on the charity
of church members …"3

"Tent-makers" made and repaired all kinds of leather goods,

not just tents.4 It would be more accurate to describe Paul as
a "leather-worker" (Gr. skenopoioi) than as a "tent-maker."
This was a common trade in his home province of Cilicia, which
produced a fabric made from goats' skins called cilicium. It was
common practice for Jewish rabbis to practice a trade as well
as study and teach the Hebrew Scriptures.5

"Paul was a Rabbi, but according to Jewish

practice, every Rabbi must have a trade. He must
take no money for preaching and teaching and
must make his living by his own work and his own
efforts. The Jew glorified work. 'Love work,' they
said. 'He who does not teach his son a trade
teaches him robbery.' 'Excellent,' they said, 'is the
study of the law along with a worldly trade; for the
practice of them both makes a man forget

1Ibid.,pp. 141-42.
2Alford, [Link].
3Neil, p. 195.
4Murphy-O'Connor, p. 41.
5Neil, p. 195.
368 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

iniquity; but all law without work must in the end

fail and causes iniquity.' So we find Rabbis
following every respectable trade."1

18:4 Paul continued his usual evangelistic strategy in Corinth. He

reasoned ("was reasoning") with (Gr. dielegeto, 17:2, 17;
18:19; 19:8-9; 20:7, 9; 24:12, 25) and tried "to persuade"
(epeithen, 13:43; 19:8, 26; 21:14; 26:28; 28:23) both "Jews
and Gentiles (Greeks)" in the local synagogue.

Paul's year and a half ministry in Corinth 18:5-11

18:5 Maybe Paul was able to stop practicing his trade, and give full
time to teaching and evangelizing, if Silas returned from
Philippi with a monetary gift, as seems likely (cf. Phil. 4:14-16;
2 Cor. 11:9). Timothy had returned from Thessalonica with
encouraging news about the Christians' progress there (cf. 1
Thess. 3:6-10), but they were also having problems (1 Thess.
2:3-6; 4:13—5:11).2 Paul evidently wrote 1 Thessalonians
soon after Timothy's return, and 2 Thessalonians shortly
thereafter—both from Corinth, probably in the early A.D. 50s
(cf. v. 11).

18:6 Paul's hearers "blasphemed" when they spoke things about

Jesus Christ that were not true (cf. 13:45; 26:11; Matt.
12:24-31). Shaking out one's "garments," so that no dust
from the place remained on them, symbolized the same thing
as shaking the dust from one's sandals (13:51), namely:
rejection. Paul felt he had fulfilled his responsibility to deliver
the gospel to these Jews (cf. Ezek. 33:1-9). Consequently he
turned his attention to evangelizing the Gentiles, as he had
done before (13:7-11, 46; 14:2-6; 17:5; cf. 19:8-9; 28:23-
28).

18:7 "Titius Justus"—the name is Roman—may have been a God-

fearer whom Paul met in the synagogue. He may be the person
Paul called "Gaius" elsewhere (cf. Rom. 16:23; 1 Cor. 1:14),

1Barclay,p. 147. See also Edersheim, Sketches of …, ch. xi: "Trades, Tradesmen, and
Trades' Guilds"; and R. F. Hock, The Social Context of Paul's Ministry, p. 67.
2See Howson, pp. 302-3, n. 1, for discussion of Silas and Timothy's unclear movements

between the time Paul left them in Macedonia and their rejoining him in Achaia.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 369

since Gaius is a first name, and "Titius" and "Justus" are given
and family names, respectively.1

18:8 "Crispus" was another one of the few believers in Corinth that
Paul "baptized" personally (1 Cor. 1:14). Yet "many of the
Corinthians … believed" the gospel "when they heard" it from
Paul.

18:9-10 Another "vision" now quieted Paul's fears (cf. 23:11; 27:23-
24). His ministry in Corinth was getting off to a rough start, as
many ministries do, but it would succeed. He needed
encouragement to be courageous, and to "keep (go on)
speaking," rather than fall "silent." The Lord could see His elect
in Corinth even before their conversions ("I have many people
in this city"), though Paul could not.

"Please note that divine sovereignty in election is

not a deterrent to human responsibility in
evangelism. Quite the opposite is true! Divine
election is one of the greatest encouragements to
the preaching of the Gospel. Because Paul knew
that God already had people set apart for
salvation, he stayed where he was and preached
the Gospel with faith and courage. Paul's
responsibility was to obey the commission; God's
responsibility was to save sinners."2

18:11 Paul's "year and six months" stay in Corinth probably dates
from the fall of 50 to the spring of A.D. 52. This was evidently
the entire time Paul remained in Corinth. The church Paul
planted in Corinth consisted of a rich mixture of people, some
of whom were greatly gifted, but most of whom came from
the lower elements of society (cf. Rom. 16:23; 1 Cor. 1:4-8,
26-29; 7:18; 12:13).

1WilliamM. Ramsay, Pictures of the Apostolic Church, p. 205, footnote 2; Edgar J.

Goodspeed, "Gaius Titius Justus," Journal of Biblical Literature 69:4 (December
1950):382-83.
2Wiersbe, 1:477.
370 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Paul's appearance before Gallio 18:12-17

18:12 An inscription found at Delphi, in central Greece, has enabled

us to date the beginning of Gallio's term, as "proconsul," to
July 1, 51.1 Gallio was a remarkable Roman citizen from Spain.
His brother, the Stoic philosopher Seneca, who was Nero's
tutor, referred to him as having an unusually pleasant
disposition.

"No mortal is so pleasant to any person as Gallio

is to everyone."2

"Even those who love my brother Gallio to the

utmost of their power do not love him enough."3

Another Greek writer referred to his wit.4 A "proconsul" was

the governor of a Roman province, and his legal decisions set
precedent for the other proconsuls throughout the empire.
Consequently Gallio's decision in Paul's case affected the
treatment that Christians would receive throughout the Roman
world. This was the first time that Paul (or any other apostle,
as far as we know) stood trial before a Roman provincial
governor.

The "judgment-seat" (Gr. bema, v. 12) was the place where

Gallio made his official decisions.

It was "… a large, raised platform that stood in

the agora (marketplace) in front of the residence
of the proconsul and served as a forum where he
tried cases."5

1See F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 374; idem, "Chronological Questions …," pp. 282-
83; Deissmann, p. 282.
2Seneca, Naturales Quaestiones 4a, Preface 11, cited by Longenecker, p. 485.
3Cited by Barclay, p. 148.
4Dio Cassius, History of Rome 61.35, cited by Longenecker, p. 485. See also Marshall, The

Acts …, p. 297. Alford, [Link], gave a brief history of Gallio.

5Longenecker, p. 486.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 371

Paul used the same Greek word to describe the judgment seat
of Christ when he wrote to the Corinthians later (2 Cor. 5:10;
cf. Matt. 27:19).

18:13 The Corinthian Jews' charge against Paul was the same as the
one the Philippian Jews and the Thessalonian Jews had raised
(16:21; 17:6-7, 13). They claimed he was proselytizing for a
new religion ("to worship God contrary to the law"). The
Romans permitted the Jews to do this, except they could not
proselytize among Roman citizens.

18:14-16 To Gallio, the accusations of these Jews seemed to involve

matters of religious controversy that entailed no violation of
Roman law. He was responsible to judge criminal cases, not
theological disputations. Consequently he refused to hear the
case, and ordered the Jews to settle it themselves. The AV
translation, "Gallio cared for none of these things," is
misleading. It implies that Gallio had no interest in spiritual
matters. That may have been true, but it is not what the text
means. In point of fact he was absolutely impartial, and refused
to involve himself in a dispute over which he had no jurisdiction.
He refused to mix church and state matters.1

Gallio's verdict effectively made Christianity legitimate in the

Roman Empire. However, it is going too far to say that Gallio's
decision made Christianity an officially recognized religion in
the Roman Empire.2 Officially hereafter, for many years, the
Romans regarded Christianity as a sect within Judaism, even
though the Jews were coming to see that it was a separate
faith. Being a proconsul, Gallio's decision in Paul's case was
much more impacting than the judgments that the local
magistrates in Philippi and elsewhere had rendered.

18:17 "They all" evidently refers to the Gentile audience at this trial.
Encouraged by Gallio's impatience with the Jews, they vented
their own anti-Semitic feelings. They beat up "Sosthenes," who
had either succeeded Crispus as leader of the synagogue (v.
8), or served together with him in this capacity (cf. 13:15).

1See McGee, 4:594.

2Witherington, p. 555.
372 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

This "Sosthenes" may have become a Christian later, and

served as Paul's amanuensis when the apostle wrote 1
Corinthians (1 Cor. 1:1), or he may have been a different
Sosthenes. The name was common.1 Gallio did not interfere,
probably concluding that this demonstration might discourage
the Jews from bothering him with their religious differences in
the future.

Gallio's decision resulted in the official toleration of Christianity, that

continued in the empire until A.D. 64, when Nero blamed the Christians for
burning Rome.2 It may also have encouraged Paul to appeal to Caesar,
about seven years later, when he felt that the Jews in Palestine were
influencing the Palestinian Roman officials against him too much (25:11).

4. The beginning of ministry in Asia 18:18-22

Paul had attempted to reach the province of Asia earlier (16:6). Now the
Lord permitted him to go there, but from the west rather than from the
east. Luke recorded Paul's initial contact with Ephesus, in this section,
which set the scene for his ministry there when he later returned from
Syrian Antioch (ch. 19).

18:18 Paul stayed in Corinth, and ministered quite a while ("many

days longer") after Gallio's decision. Eventually he decided to
return to Jerusalem for a brief visit. He departed by ship ("put
out to sea") from the Corinthian port town of "Cenchrea,"
seven miles southeast of Corinth, "for Syria." "Priscilla and
Aquila" accompanied him as far as "Ephesus," where they
remained (v. 19). Luke did not record what Silas and Timothy
did.

"… Paul set sail for Caesarea, giving as his reason

for haste, according to the Western text, 'I must
at all costs keep the coming feast at Jerusalem'.
If, as is likely, the feast was Passover, he was
planning to reach Jerusalem by April, A.D. 52. This
was a bad time of the year for a sea voyage, and
it has been suggested that one of the three

1Knowling, 2:391.
2See Appendix 6: "Roman Emperors in New Testament Times" at the end of these notes.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 373

shipwrecks which Paul refers to in 2 C. 11:25 may

have occurred between Ephesus and Caesarea."1

"The Western text (W) is represented by several

manuscripts … which are written in both Greek
and Latin, by the Old Latin versions, and by
quotations in Latin church writers such as
Cyprian."2

This questionable textual reading may explain part of Paul's

reason for going to Jerusalem, but Luke definitely recorded
that Paul had taken "a vow." This vow, which was optional for
Jews, involved, among other things, leaving one's hair uncut.
Jews took vows either to get something from God or because
God had done something for them (cf. Lev. 27). They were,
therefore, expressions of dedication or thanksgiving. Perhaps
Paul took this vow out of gratitude to God for the safety He
had granted him in Corinth.3

The Jews often made vows if they had been afflicted with
distemper or some other distress.4 At the end of the vow, the
person who made it would cut his hair and offer it as a burnt
offering, along with a sacrifice, on the altar in Jerusalem (cf.
Num. 6:1-21).5 Paul, according to one view, "had his hair cut"
in Cenchrea, and took it with him to Jerusalem, where he
ceremonially burned it in the fire in the Court of the Women.6
Another possibility is that the vow that Paul took was private,
in which case he may not have followed the Jewish custom.7

"There are a great many folk who find fault with

Paul because he made a vow. They say that this is
the man who preached that we are not under Law
but we are under grace, and so he should not have
made a vow. Anyone who says this about Paul is

1Neil, p. 199.
2Finegan, Light from …, p. 441.
3Lenski,p. 762, believed that Aquila made the vow.
4Josephus, The Wars …, [Link].
5See Mishnah Nazir 1:1—9:5; and Josephus, The Wars …, [Link]
6Edersheim, The Temple, p. 374.
7See Knowling, 2:392-93.
374 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

actually making a little law for Paul. Such folk are

saying that Paul is to do things their way. Under
grace, friend, if you want to make a vow, you can
make it. And if you do not want to make a vow,
you don't have to. Paul didn't force anyone else
to make a vow. In fact, he said emphatically that
no one has to do that. But if Paul wants to make
a vow, that is his business. That is the marvelous
freedom that we have in the grace of God today."1

Even under the Old Covenant, vows were optional. Evidently

Paul "had his hair cut," just before he made his vow, when he
was leaving Cenchrea for Syria. He would have cut it again
when he arrived in Jerusalem. It seems less likely that he would
have cut his hair at the end of his vow in Cenchrea, and then
carried it all the way to Jerusalem. Ironside believed Paul took
this vow before his conversion. 2 This seems unlikely. This
explanation may be an attempt to separate Paul as a Christian
from Jewish customs, but Paul clearly practiced other Jewish
customs after he became a Christian (cf. 21:17-36). This was
probably a private vow rather than a Nazirite vow.3

Cenchrea was the eastern seaport of Corinth on the Aegean

Sea. There was a church there later, or perhaps it was already
in existence at this time (Rom. 16:1).

18:19-21 Ephesus was the capital and chief commercial center of the
province of Asia.4 At this time it boasted a population of
between 200,000 and 250,000, and was the largest city of
Asia Minor.5 It stood near the coast of the Aegean Sea.

"No voyage across the Aegean was more

frequently made than that between Corinth and
Ephesus. They were the capitals of the two
flourishing and peaceful provinces of Achaia and

1McGee, 4:594. Cf. Marshall, The Acts …, p. 300.

2Ironside,Lectures on …, p. 421.
3Bock, Acts, p. 586.
4See Cole, pp. 25-30.
5Witherington, p. 563.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 375

Asia, and the two great mercantile towns on

opposite sides of the sea."1

Priscilla and Aquila remained in Ephesus, but Paul moved on to

Syria after he had done some evangelism in the synagogue.
The openness of the Jews there to Paul's preaching
encouraged him to "tell them: 'I will return.'" Paul's reference
to God's will (v. 21) reminds us again that he subordinated his
plans to the Lord's leading in his life. The phrase translated "if
God wills" was well known among Jews and Gentiles in Paul's
day. Both groups used it but with different gods in view.2

18:22 Paul's ship "landed at Caesarea," the chief port of Jerusalem

(cf. 10:1). He went from there "up" to Jerusalem and greeted
the church. To "go up to" and "go down from" are almost
technical terms for going to and from Jerusalem in Acts.3
Likewise "the church," without a modifier, is clearly a reference
here to the mother church in Jerusalem.4 When Paul had
finished his business in Jerusalem, he returned ("went down")
to Syrian Antioch, and so completed his second missionary
journey (15:40—18:22). Paul traveled about 2,800 miles on
this trip, compared to about 1,400 on his first journey.5

Luke highlighted one major speech in each of Paul's three missionary

journeys. During the first journey, Paul preached to Jews in Pisidian Antioch;
during the second journey, he preached to Gentiles in Athens; and during
the third journey, he preached to Christians at Miletus.6

5. The results of ministry in Asia 18:23—19:20

Luke gave considerable information, regarding Paul's significant ministry in

Asia Minor, to record the advance of the gospel and the church on the
eastern Aegean shores.

1Howson, p. 331.
2Witherington, p. 558.
3Longenecker, p. 489; Neil, p. 199.
4F. F. Bruce, "The Church …," p. 641.
5Beitzel, p. 177.
6Witherington, p. 560.
376 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

The beginning of Paul's third missionary journey 18:23

Luke this time did not record Paul's activities in Antioch, but we may safely
assume that he gave another report to the church—as he had done when
he returned from his first journey (14:27-28). Paul probably remained in
Antioch from the spring or summer of 52 through the spring of A.D. 53.1
Upon leaving Antioch, now on his third journey, Paul seems to have
followed the same route, through the province of Galatia and the district
of Phrygia, that he had taken when he began his second journey (15:41—
16:6). He stopped to minister to the churches of those areas again, too.

"The third journey is a journey of new mission only in a limited

sense. In the first two journeys the emphasis was on the
founding of new churches. In 18:23 Paul begins a journey to
strengthen established churches."2

The ministry of Apollos 18:24-28

The purpose of this pericope seems, primarily, to be: to bring us up to date

on what had transpired in Ephesus since Paul left that city.3 Luke also
introduced his readers to another important servant of the Lord to whom
Paul referred elsewhere (1 Cor. 1:12; 3:4-6, 22; 4:6; 16:12; Titus 3:13).

18:24-26a "Apollos," whose formal name would have been Apollonius,

may have arrived in Ephesus after Paul had departed for
Jerusalem on his previous journey. That is the impression Luke
gave. In any case, he was from Alexandria, the capital of Egypt.
Furthermore, he was a Christian Hellenistic Jew, "an eloquent
man," who had a thorough understanding of the Old
Testament, a gift for communicating and defending the faith,
and enthusiasm (cf. Rom. 12:11).

"The way of the Lord" is another description of the Christian

faith (i.e., the gospel; cf. 9:2; 16:17; 18:26; 19:9, 23; 22:4;
24:14, 22). Apollos was proclaiming what he knew of
("speaking and teaching accurately") the gospel ("the things
concerning Jesus") in the Ephesian synagogue, but he did not

1Longenecker, p. 489.
2Tannehill, 2:231. Cf. Kent, p. 147. See the map of Paul's third missionary journey in
Longenecker, p. 250; Toussaint, "Acts," p. 406; or The Nelson …, p. 1859.
3Marshall, The Acts …, p. 302.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 377

know about Christian baptism. He only knew about "John the

Baptist's … baptism," that expressed repentance for sins (cf.
19:3).

18:26b Luke named Priscilla here before her husband. He did not
explain the reason for this unusual order in the text.1 This
couple wisely "took" Apollos "aside," and privately instructed
him ("more accurately") in subsequent revelations about "the
way of God" (i.e., the gospel) that he did not know.

"Before the encounter with Aquila and Priscilla, it

is best to regard Apollos in the same class as OT
saints. They too hoped for salvation in Messiah
and had not rejected him. The entire Book of Acts
depicts the transition from Judaism to
Christianity. It is not surprising, therefore, to find
imperfect forms of faith during those epochal
days."2

Another possibility is that Apollos was a New Testament

Christian who had not yet learned as much as Priscilla and
Aquila had about their faith.

Priscilla and Aquila were an outstanding couple who give

evidence of having a strong marriage. They always appear
together on the pages of Scripture. They were selfless and
brave, and even risked their own lives for Paul (Rom. 16:4).
They were hospitable and hosted a church in their home (1
Cor. 16:19), and they were flexible, as seen in their moving
twice (vv. 2, 18). They worked together as leather-workers (v.
3). They were committed to Christ and to teaching others
about Him, which their instruction of Apollos illustrates.

"It is a needed and delicate task, this thing of

teaching gifted young ministers. They do not learn
it all in schools. More of it comes from contact

1See my comment on verse 2 above.

2Kent, p. 149.
378 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

with men and women rich in grace and in the

knowledge of God's ways."1

18:27-28 Armed with his new understanding, Apollos proceeded west,

where he ministered at Corinth and "Achaia" by watering the
gospel seed that Paul had planted (1 Cor. 3:6). The Christians
in Ephesus encouraged him by providing letters of
commendation that introduced him ("wrote to the disciples to
welcome him") to the Corinthian church (cf. 2 Cor. 3:1). This
is the first mention of a church in Ephesus. Perhaps Paul
planted it (vv. 19-21), but someone else may have done so,
since Paul appears to have been there only briefly—on his
second journey—on his way back to Jerusalem. Maybe Priscilla
and Aquila planted it.

Apollos was so effective at instructing the Corinthian believers,

and refuting Jewish objectors, that he developed a strong
personal following in Corinth (1 Cor. 1:12; 3:4). He does not
seem to have been responsible for encouraging the party spirit
that his presence there generated (1 Cor. 4:6; 16:12). He
proved from the Old Testament ("demonstrated from the
Scriptures") that "Jesus was the Messiah (Christ)" (cf. 8:35;
18:5; 1 John 5:9).

The word order in the Greek text favors the view that "through
grace" modifies "believed" rather than "helped." The
Corinthian Christians had believed the gospel through the
grace of God (v. 27; cf. Eph. 2:8-9).

Paul's ministry in Ephesus 19:1-20

Luke's account of Paul's third missionary journey is essentially a record of

Paul's ministry in Ephesus, the city he probably tried to reach at the
beginning of his second journey (cf. 16:6).2

1Robertson, 3:308.
2See Finegan, Light from …, pp. 345-50, for more information about Ephesus.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 379

The disciples of John the Baptist 19:1-7

This is the first of two incidents taken from Paul's ministry in Ephesus that
bracket Luke's description of his general ministry there. The second is
Paul's encounter with the seven sons of Sceva (19:13-20).

19:1-2 Two roads led into Ephesus from the east, and Paul traveled
the northern, more direct route (cf. 18:23).1 Ephesus, like
Athens, had reached its heyday by this time, and was in decline
when Paul visited it.

"… in the time of St. Paul it was the greatest city

of Asia Minor, as well as the metropolis of the
province of Asia."2

Its claim to fame was twofold. Its location on the west coast
of Asia Minor near the mouth of the Cayster River made it an
important commercial center. As commerce declined, due to
the silt buildup in the port at Ephesus, its religious influence
continued to draw worshippers to the Temple of Artemis
(Greek) or Diana (Roman). This magnificent temple was four
times the size of the Parthenon at Athens, and was renowned
as one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. Alexander
the Great had contributed much money for its construction in
the fourth century B.C., and it lasted until A.D. 262 when the
Goths destroyed it.3

"It was 425 feet long by 220 feet wide by 60 feet

high. There were 127 pillars, each of them the gift
of a king. They were all of glittering Parian marble
and 36 of them were marvelously gilt and inlaid.
The great altar had been carved by Praxiteles, the
greatest of all Greek sculptors. The image of
Artemis was not beautiful. It was a black, squat,
many-breasted figure, to signify fertility; it was so
old that no one knew where it had come from or
even of what material it was made. The story was

[Link], St. Paul …, p. 265.

2Howson, p. 369.
3S. D. F. Salmond, "The Epistle to the Ephesians," in The Expositor's Greek Testament,

3:205.
380 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

that it had fallen from heaven. The greatest glory

of Ephesus was that she was the guardian of the
most famous pagan temple in the world."1

Emperor Justinian of Byzantium later used some of the pilars

for the construction of the Hagia Sophia, where they still
stand, in modern Istanbul. Ephesus was a hotbed of religious
superstition and occult practices.

"Ephesus, for all her past splendour, was a dying

city, pre-occupied with parasite pursuits, living,
like Athens, on a reputation, and a curious
meeting-place of old and new religions, of
superstition and philosophy, of East and West."2

It is difficult to determine whether the "disciples" whom Paul

found in Ephesus were Christians or not. They seem quite
similar to Apollos (18:25-26), and some students of Acts
believe they were either Old Testament saints or untaught
Christians.3 Another possibility is that they were not believers
at all but only seekers after the truth.4 The second alternative
seems more probable to me. Elsewhere Luke used the word
"disciple" to describe John's followers (Luke 5:33; 7:18-19).
Clearly these men were disciples of John the Baptist, not
Jesus. Adolf Deissmann wrote that they constituted "a church
of twelve Baptists."5 This is the fifth reference in Acts to John
the Baptist's role as precursor of Jesus (cf. 1:5; 11:16; 13:25;
18:25). Clearly John's influence had been far reaching.

Paul asked these men if they had received the Holy Spirit,
probably because he saw some incongruity in their claim to be
admirers of John and their evident lack of the Spirit. The
correct translation is "when you believed" rather than "since
you believed" (AV, cf. 1:8). The Greek text implies no second
work of grace.6 Paul's question assumed two things: they were

1Barclay, p. 153.
2Blaiklock,pp. 154-55.
3E.g., Kent, p. 150; Bock, Acts, p. 599.
4E.g., Longenecker, pp. 492-93; McGee, 4:597; and Morgan, The Acts …, p. 346.
5Deissmann, p. 227.
6See The New Scofield …, p. 1192.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 381

genuine Christians, since they professed to believe John the

Baptist, and everyone who believes in Jesus possesses the
indwelling Holy Spirit (cf. Rom. 8:9; 1 Cor. 12:13).

John had predicted the baptism of the Holy Spirit (Matt. 3:11;
Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; cf. John 1:32-33). Their response to
Paul's question probably indicates that they did not know that
the Lord had given the Holy Spirit as John had predicted. It did
not indicate that they knew nothing of the existence of the
Holy Spirit, since John had predicted Holy Spirit baptism. Their
response enabled Paul to see that his first assumption about
these disciples was incorrect; they were probably not
Christians.

19:3 This discovery led Paul to raise another question to clarify his
second assumption: "What" (which) baptism had they
experienced, or with whom did they identify in baptism? They
replied that they had undergone "John's" water "baptism."
This response told Paul that they had not experienced Spirit
baptism, and therefore were evidently unsaved. Another view
is that they were saved, but they had not yet received the
Holy Spirit. I favor the former view, because I believe that by
this time in church history, everyone who believed in Jesus
received the Spirit at the moment of his or her conversion (cf.
Rom. 8:9; 1 Cor. 12:13).

"Like Apollos (18:25), they had been baptized as

a symbol of repentance only."1

Apollos seems to have become a Christian by the time he met

Priscilla and Aquila, whereas these men, I think, had not yet
become believers in Jesus.

19:4 Paul explained to these disciples, as Priscilla and Aquila had

undoubtedly explained to Apollos, that John's baptism was
good but insufficient. John, similarly, had instructed his
disciples "to believe in … Jesus," who would baptize them with
the Holy Spirit. The baptism of the Spirit normally accompanied
faith in Jesus.

1Neil, p. 203.
382 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

19:5 When these disciples of John "heard" that the Messiah had
come, they believed in Jesus and submitted to water baptism
in His name ("were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus").
This is the only explicit reference to re-baptism in the New
Testament.

19:6 As with the new converts in Samaria, these Ephesian disciples

received "the Holy Spirit" when an apostle, this time Paul, "laid
his hands upon them" (cf. 8:17). They did not receive the
Spirit by water baptism. In Samaria, this identification of the
coming of the Spirit with Peter and John first authenticated
God's giving of the Spirit in a non-Jewish context. Here,
similarly, the identification of the coming of the Spirit with Paul
authenticated God's giving of the Spirit in a town in which
demonic religious activity flourished (cf. vv. 13-19).

As subsequent events would show, the "Jesus" whom Paul

preached was the more powerful deity. These former disciples
of John received the Holy Spirit when Paul laid his hands on
them, thus obviously connecting their endowment with Paul's
message and apostolic authority. However, there was no delay
in the Spirit coming on Cornelius when he believed, and Peter
did not have to lay his hands on him to impart the Spirit
(10:44).

There are some interesting parallels between Spirit baptism, as

it took place in Ephesus in this chapter, and how it occurred in
Samaria in chapter 8.

"Chapter 8 Chapter 19

1 Word is preached to the 1 God's Word is proclaimed

Samaritans (by Philip); to the men at Ephesus
many become disciples (earlier by Apollos?); some
and are baptized (8:4- become disciples and are
13). baptized (John's baptism,
18:24-26).

2 Peter and John come to 2 Paul comes to Ephesus

Samaria and see that the and notes that the
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 383

presence of the Spirit is presence of the Spirit is

not evident in the not evident in the
disciples' lives (8:14-16). disciples' lives (19:1-5).

3 Peter and John lay hands 3 Paul lays his hands on the
on the disciples; the Holy disciples; the Holy Spirit
Spirit comes upon them comes upon them (19:6).
(8:17).

4 Peter and John's ministry 4 Paul's ministry stimulates

engages the interest of the interest of exorcists;
the magician Simon the seven sons of Sceva
(8:20-24). (19:13).

5 A conflict arises between 5 A conflict arises between

Peter and Simon. Simon is the exorcists and demons.
overwhelmed (8:20-24). The exorcists are
overwhelmed (19:14-16).

6 Peter and John preach in 6 All those in Asia hear the

many of the Samaritan Word of the Lord as a
villages before returning result of Paul's teaching
to Jerusalem (8:25). (19:10).

7 Many miracles are 7 Paul performs special

performed among the miracles by the power of
Samaritans by Philip (8:6- God (19:11, 12)."1
8).

The phenomenon of the separate conversion and Spirit

baptism experiences of some Christians that Luke recorded in
Acts may need further clarification. It seems that God wanted
to highlight the fulfillment of Jesus' promise that He would
send the Holy Spirit to be in and with believers (John 14:16-
18, 26; 15:26). To do so, God made the coming of the Spirit
obvious to everyone, until the church generally appreciated
the fact that it normally occurred at the time of regeneration.

1Harm, pp. 35-36.

384 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"This story has often been used as the basis for

doctrines about the reception of gifts of the Spirit
subsequent to conversion; but it has no real
connection with these. Rather Paul was dealing
with an unusual situation which required special
treatment. …

"… it is safe to say that the New Testament does

not recognize the possibility of being a Christian
apart from possession of the Spirit (Jn. 3:5; Acts
11:17; Rom. 8:9; 1 Cor. 12:3; Gal. 3:2; 1 Thes.
1:5f.; Tit. 3:5; Heb. 6:4; 1 Pet. 1:2; 1 Jn. 3:24;
4:13)."1

"It should be noted that the reception of the Holy

Spirit [by Christians] in Acts does not follow any
set pattern. He came into believers before
baptism (Acts 10:44), at the time of or after
baptism (8:12-16; 19:6), and by the laying on of
apostolic hands (8:17; 19:6). Yet Paul declared
(Rom. 8:9) that anyone without the Holy Spirit is
not a Christian. Quite obviously the transitional
Book of Acts is not to be used as a doctrinal
source on how to receive the Holy Spirit …"2

"Ephesus was a polyglot city of the Roman Empire.

There were many languages spoken there, just as
there had been in Jerusalem on the Day of
Pentecost. East and West met all along that coast.
… These men were now able to give the good
news about Christ to the entire city."3

This is the last reference to speaking in tongues in Acts (cf.

2:4; 10:46; 1 Cor. 12:10, 28, 30; 13:1, 8; 14).4 Is this gift still
in the church today? Some charismatic Christians believe that
it is. They argue mainly from experience, having heard

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 305. See also Wiersbe, 1:481.

2Toussaint,"Acts," p. 409. Cf. Harm, p. 38.
3McGee, 4:597.
4See the table "Speaking in Tongues in Acts" in my comments on Acts 2:4 above.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 385

someone, perhaps themselves, speak in what others refer to

as tongues. In most cases, what they call tongues is gibberish,
not known languages. This is different from what the New
Testament identified as tongues, namely, known languages
(cf. 1 Cor. 12; 14). In a few cases, people have apparently
spoken in known languages that they have not studied, the
type of tongues-speaking that the New Testament describes.

The real issue is what the New Testament says about tongues,
not what one may have experienced. It says that they would
pass away or cease of themselves, as in petering out (1 Cor.
13:8, middle voice of pauo). When would this happen? The
New Testament does not specify when, but it implies that they
would peter out before prophecy would end (lit. "be
terminated" [by God], passive voice of katargeo, 1 Cor. 13:8).

I do not believe that any one verse indicates that tongues

would cease or that they did cease in the apostolic period.
However, I think it is safe to conclude that they did for two
reasons. (Similarly we believe the doctrine of the Trinity, not
because there is a verse that clearly teaches it, but because
many verses lead us to conclude that God exists as a triune
being.) First, other New Testament passages imply that they
would and did cease then (Eph. 2:20; Heb. 2:3-4). Second, the
early church fathers wrote that tongues petered out in the
early history of the church, even though there were rare
instances of the phenomenon after that.1

"Concerning these [supernatural gifts], our whole

information must be derived from Scripture,
because they appear to have vanished with the

1Origen (ca. 185-ca. 254 A.D.), "Against Celsus," 7:8 in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 4:614;
Chrysostom (347-407 A.D.), "Homily 12 on Matthew," in The Nicene and Post-Nicene
Fathers, 10:77; idem, "Homily 14 on Romans," ibid., 11:447; idem, "Homily 29 on 1
Corinthians," ibid., 12:168; idem, "Homily 6 on 1 Corinthians," ibid., 12:31; Augustine
(354-430 A.D.), "On Baptism, Against the Donatists," [Link], ibid., 4:443; idem, "The
Epistle of St. John," 6:10, ibid., 7:497-98; idem, "The Epistle of 1 John. Homily," 6:10,
ibid., 7:497-98; idem, "The Answer to the Letters of Petition, to Donatist," [Link], ibid.,
4:548; and idem, "On the Gospel of St. John, Tractate," 32:7, ibid., 7:195. See also Calvin,
[Link], 19; McClain, p. 409; and Dillow, Speaking in …, pp. 147-64, for further information
about the historical cessation of the gift of tongues.
386 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

disappearance of the Apostles themselves, and

there is no authentic account of their existence in
the Church in any writings of a later date than the
books of the New Testament."1

How can we explain the instances of people speaking in

languages that they have not studied today? It may be that
God occasionally gives people this ability today, though the
evidence of this happening is rare. Practically no one, including
respected charismatic leaders, claims that the ability to speak
in a language that one has not studied exists today as it did in
New Testament times. Obviously the ability to grasp a foreign
language readily as one studies it is not the New Testament
gift of tongues.

God evidently gave the gift of prophesying to each of these

Ephesian disciples, in order to enable them to assume
leadership of the church and the church's mission. This gift
involves speaking forth the Word of God and leading the
worship of God.

19:7 Luke may have intended this group of "about 12" to remind
the reader of another core group, the 12 apostles, though
these were not on the same level of authority. The Ephesian
church became the center of Christian witness in western Asia
Minor and the Aegean region, as Antioch and Jerusalem had
become earlier.

Paul's general approach to ministry in Ephesus 19:8-12

"The further one proceeds in Acts 19, the clearer it becomes

that Luke intends the material in this chapter and the next to
depict the climax of Paul's ministry and missionary work as a
free man. It is here in Ephesus that he has the longest stable
period of ministry without trial or expulsion, here that he most
fully carries out his commission to be a witness to all persons,
both Jew and Gentile (see 22:15)."2

1W. J. Conybeare, in The Life and Epistles of St. Paul, p. 334.

2Witherington, p. 572.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 387

19:8 Paul followed his standard procedure of preaching to the Jews

in the synagogue, at Ephesus, as long as possible. Here the
Jews were more tolerant than they had been in some other
towns that Paul had evangelized, and he was able to continue
speaking there "for three months." As usual, Paul was
"reasoning and persuading" (Gr. dialegomenos kai peithon)
people there, meaning he reasoned persuasively. This is
probably a hendiadys, a figure of speech in which the writer
expresses a single complex idea by joining two substantives
with "and" rather than by using an adjective and a substantive.

Paul's general subject was "the kingdom of God" (cf. 1:3, 6;

8:12; 14:22; 20:25; 28:23, 31). This phrase is often a
shorthand expression in Acts for the whole message about
Jesus Christ, namely: the gospel. It is probably not a reference
to the messianic kingdom exclusively, but to the universal
kingdom of God, which includes the messianic kingdom and the
church.

"The argument advanced by some, that since the

apostles throughout the Acts period preached
'the things concerning the kingdom of God'
(19:8), therefore the Kingdom must have already
been established, is not very good logic. Most of
us preach and teach many things in the Christian
faith which are not yet realized in experience. No
sensible person would argue that because the
apostles continually preached the resurrection of
the dead, therefore, it must have already taken
place."1

"Three months in a synagogue without a riot was

something of a record for Paul. Perhaps the
cosmopolitan nature of Ephesus caused the Jews
there to be more tolerant."2

19:9 Eventually the Jews grew unresponsive and tried to discredit

Paul's preaching of "the Way" of salvation. Paul, therefore,

1McClain, pp. 425-26.

2Toussaint, "Acts," p. 410.
388 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"withdrew" from the synagogue to a neutral site. In Corinth,

this had been the home of Titius Justice (18:7). In Ephesus, it
proved to be a lecture hall owned, named, and or operated by
Tyrannus. Perhaps "Tyrannus" (lit. "Tyrant," probably a
nickname of this teacher and or landlord) made his auditorium
("school") available to Paul during the afternoons. The
Western text (i.e., Codex Beza), one of the ancient copies of
Acts, added that this was from 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Normally this was siesta time, when people rested, before
resuming work after the heat of the day had subsided.

"The old sequence of events unfolded,

monotonously true to form. It was not lack of sad
experience which led Paul in chapters ix—xi of the
Epistle to the Romans to speak of the national
rejection of Christ by the people privileged first to
hear of Him. It was an essential part of Luke's
theme to underline that fact. Hence the careful
record of Paul's method, his scrupulous regard for
the synagogue, his programme of patient
teaching and persuasion, the crystallizing of
opposition, and the altogether justifiable 'turning
to the Gentiles'."1

19:10 Evidently Paul taught in Tyrannus' public hall for "two" more
"years." Later Paul said that he had labored in Ephesus for a
total of three years (cf. 20:31). Paul evidently began his third
missionary journey, and his three-year ministry in Ephesus, in
A.D. 53—twenty years after the death and resurrection of
Jesus Christ and the day of Pentecost. As a result of this three
years of work, the local Christians preached the gospel and
established churches all over the province of Asia. Among
these were the churches of Colosse, Laodicea, and Hierapolis
in the Lycus Valley (Col. 4:13), though evidently Paul did not
personally plant them (cf. Col. 2:1; 4:13). Perhaps the other
churches in this area, that are mentioned in Revelation 2 and
3 (i.e., Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, and Philadelphia),
got their start at this time too.

1Blaiklock, p. 156.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 389

"We may think of the 'hall of Tyrannus' as the

centre of Paul's activity, attracting many Gentile
enquirers from the province generally, who in due
course became themselves, like Epaphras, faithful
ministers of Christ on Paul's behalf (Col. 1:7)."1

"The province was intensively evangelized, and

became one of the leading centres of Christianity
for centuries afterwards."2

Many students of Acts do not adequately appreciate the

significance of Ephesus as a center for the spread of the
gospel. One must carefully note the clues in Acts and the
epistles, as well as later church history, to understand what
took place during the years Paul lived there. God had opened
a wide door of opportunity for Paul, but there were many
adversaries (1 Cor. 16:8-9). Timothy, and later the Apostle
John, followed Paul in ministry there. The Christians at Ephesus
became the original recipients of at least three New Testament
books (Ephesians, 1 and 2 Timothy), and possibly as many as
seven (1, 2, and 3 John, and Revelation).

19:11-12 Jesus continued to work the same supernatural "miracles"

through Paul, that He had demonstrated during His own earthly
ministry (cf. Mark 5:27; 6:56), and that He had manifested
through Peter (Acts 5:15). Luke recorded Paul doing the same
types of miracles as Peter. Both healed a lame man early in
their ministries (14:8; cf. 3:2). Both exorcised demons (16:18;
cf. 5:16), defeated sorcerers (13:6; cf. 8:18), raised the dead
(20:9; cf. 9:36), and escaped from prison (16:25; cf. 12:7).
Evidently it was because of the multitudes of magicians and
religious charlatans, that "worked" Ephesus, that God
demonstrated His power in these supernatural ways. It was to
the church in Ephesus that Paul later wrote his famous
instructions about spiritual warfare (Eph. 6:10-20). Ephesus
was a hotbed of satanic activity.

1Neil, p. 204.
2F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 389.
390 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"The atmosphere of the city was electric with

sorcery and incantations, with exorcists, with all
kinds of magical impostors."1

"… the phrase 'Ephesian writings' (Ephesia

grammata) was common in antiquity for
documents containing spells and magical formulae
(cf. Athenaeus Deipnosophistae 12.548; Clement
of Alexandria Stromata 5.242)."2

God also healed indirectly, in Ephesus, through Paul's

garments. The fact that God used Paul's "handkerchiefs" (Gr.
soudarion, or "sweat-cloths") and "aprons" (simikinthion, lit.
"workman's aprons") is unusual, but not without precedent.
God had previously healed people who touched Jesus' cloak
(Luke 8:44). The fact that some modern charlatans have
abused this form of healing should not lead us to conclude that
God never used it.

"Paul is not said to have recommended the use of

cloths from his own body as instruments of
healing, but God was pleased to honor the faith of
these people by granting these miracles."3

"All miraculous working is an exertion of the direct

power of the All-powerful; a suspension by Him of
His ordinary laws; and whether He will use any
instrument in doing this, or what instrument, must
depend altogether on His own purpose in the
miracle—the effect to be produced on the
recipients, beholders, or hearers."4

"If God never honoured any faith save that entirely

free from superstition, how about Christian people
who are troubled over the number 13, over the
moon, the rabbit's foot? … God condescends to

1Morgan, The Acts …, p. 350.

2Longenecker, p. 496.
3Kent, p. 151.
4Alford, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 391

meet us in our ignorance and weakness where he

can reach us."1

"We are not to suppose that the Apostles were

always able to work miracles at will. An influx of
supernatural power was given to them, at the
time, and according to the circumstances, that
required it. And the character of the miracles was
not always the same. They were accommodated
to the peculiar forms of sin, superstition, and
ignorance they were required to oppose."2

The seven sons of Sceva 19:13-20

The following incident throws more light on the spiritual darkness that
enveloped Ephesus—as well as the power of Jesus Christ, and the gospel,
to dispel it. It also presents Paul as not only a powerful speaker (vv. 8-12)
but also a powerful miracle worker.

19:13 "But" introduces a contrast to the good miracles that "God

was performing … by … Paul" (v. 11). As had been Peter's
experience, some of Paul's observers tried to duplicate his
miracles (cf. 8:18-19). They wrongly concluded that the
simple vocalization of Jesus' name carried magical power.
Some peoples in the ancient world feared the Jews, because
they thought the "name" of God, which the Jews refused to
utter, was the key to their powers, including their success in
business. This was Paul's third contact with demonic powers
that Luke recorded (cf. 13:6-12; 16:16-18).

"The use of magical names in incantations to

exorcise evil spirits was common in the ancient
world, and it seems to have been especially
prominent at Ephesus."3

Many years earlier, Jesus' disciple John had asked Jesus to

rebuke someone who was casting out demons in His name, and

1Robertson, 3:316.
2Howson, p. 371.
3Longenecker, p. 497. See Bruce M. Metzger, "St. Paul and the Magicians," Princeton

Seminary Bulletin 38 (1944):27-30.

392 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Jesus refused to do so. He replied, "Do not hinder him; for he

who is not against you is for you" (Luke 9:49-50; cf. Mark
9:38-40). This incident exposed an attitude of rivalry among
the Twelve that existed toward other disciples of Jesus. This
was not a problem of orthodoxy; that exorcist believed in
Jesus. It was rather a problem of fellowship or association; he
was not one of the Twelve. He appears to have been on the
fringe of Jesus' followers.

The Twelve had wanted to exclude the exorcist, but Jesus had
wanted to include him. Jesus' reply was proverbial. He had
stated the reverse truth earlier (Matt. 12:30). Disciples should
regard people who do not oppose them as associates rather
than as enemies. These exorcists whom Paul encountered in
Ephesus, however, appear to have been unbelievers.

19:14-16 "Sceva" may have been a "chief priest" or the head of a

priestly family (cf. 5:24),1 or he may have only claimed to be
one.2 Compare Simon Magus, who claimed to be someone
great (cf. 8:9).

"… whoever he [Sceva] was, he was not a Jewish

high priest who had held office in Jerusalem, since
their names are all known; nor is it likely that he
even belonged to a high-priestly family. It is
possible that he may have been a self-styled 'high
priest' of one of the innumerable pagan cults, who
found that it paid him to pass himself off as a
Jew."3

Apparently two or more—the Greek word auton can mean "all"

(NIV) as well as "both" (NASB) in verse 16—of Sceva's "sons"
participated in the exorcism that backfired. They were
fortunate to have escaped from the house with their lives
(albeit "naked and wounded").

"The name of Jesus, like an unfamiliar weapon

misused, exploded in their hands; and they were

1Henry, p. 1713.
2F.F. Bruce, The Book …, p. 390.
3Neil, p. 205.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 393

taught a lesson about the danger of using the

name of Jesus in their dabbling in the
supernatural."1

19:17 News reports of this event greatly elevated the reputation

("name") of Jesus among "all" the Ephesians—"both Jews and
Gentiles ("Greeks")."

19:18-19 Some people in ancient times believed that the power of

sorcerers' rites and incantations lay in their secrecy, as noted
above. Magical secrets supposedly lost their power when they
were made public. The fact that the converted Ephesian
magicians disclosed these "practices" shows the genuineness
of their repentance. Likewise, the "burning" of "their books"
symbolizes the public and irreversible repudiation of their
contents. Luke did not describe the silver coin to which he
referred in enough detail to determine its value, though it was
probably a drachma. "Fifty thousand pieces of silver (coins),"
in any case, represents much money and many converts. If
these were drachmas, the value was 50,000 days worth of
wages. That would amount to several million dollars worth of
wages in present earning power.

"It is all too true that too many of us hate our sins
but cannot leave them. Even when we do seek to
leave them there is the lingering and the backward
look. There are times in life when treatment must
be surgical, when only the clean and final break will
suffice."2

19:20 As a consequence of the repentance described in the

preceding verses, the church became purer as well as larger
(cf. 5:1-11). Luke gave us this sixth progress report to mark
the end of another section of his book. The section we have
just completed (16:6—19:20) records the church's extension
in the Roman provinces around the Aegean Sea.

1Longenecker, p. 498.
2Barclay, p. 157.
394 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

While in Ephesus, Paul had considerable contact with the church in Corinth.
He wrote that church a letter that he called his "former letter" in 1
Corinthians 5:9. Then sometime later he wrote 1 Corinthians, probably near
the spring of A.D. 56. Timothy traveled from Corinth to Ephesus, then
evidently went back to Corinth, and returned later to Ephesus (Acts. 18:5;
1 Cor. 4:17; 16:10-11; Acts 19:22). Following Timothy's visit to Corinth,
Paul evidently made a so-called "painful visit" to Corinth (2 Cor. 2:1; 12:14;
13:1-2), and then returned to Ephesus.

After that painful visit, Paul wrote another "severe letter" to Corinth from
Ephesus (2 Cor. 2:3-4; 7:8-12; 12:18). These facts come to us through
Paul's two epistles to the Corinthians, the first of which he wrote during
the years he used Ephesus as his base of operations. He undoubtedly had
other contacts with many other churches about which we know nothing.
Some scholars believe that Paul wrote his Prison Epistles (Ephesians,
Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon) while he was in prison in Ephesus.
But there is no record of his being imprisoned there.1 Luke's purpose was
not to give us a complete record of Paul's ministry or the church's growth
as a whole. It was to document the church's advance to the heart of the
Roman Empire (1:8), and to show, by repetition, how Jesus Christ was
building His church (Matt. 16:18).

"Here is the climax of the account of Paul's ministry as a free

man; after this it is largely troubles, travels, and trials."2

D. THE EXTENSION OF THE CHURCH TO ROME 19:21—28:31

"The panel is introduced by the programmatic statement of

19:21-22 and concludes with the summary statement of
28:31. Three features immediately strike the reader in this
sixth panel: (1) the disproportionate length of the panel,
including one-third of the total material of Acts; (2) the
prominence given the speeches of Paul in his defense; and (3)
the dominance of the 'we' sections in the narrative portions
(cf. 20:5-15; 21:1-18; 27:1—28:16). It cannot be said that
the length is related to the theological significance of the
material presented. It seems rather to be related to the

1See Ben Witherington III, "The Case of the Imprisonment That Did Not Happen: Paul at
Ephesus," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 60:3 (September 2017):525-32.
2Idem, The Acts …, p. 583.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 395

apologetic purpose of Luke, particularly in the five defenses,

and to the eyewitness character of the narrative with its
inevitable elaboration of details (cf. the Philippian anecdotes
of 16:11-40). The events narrated here span the time from
approximately 56 through 62."1

"This ending of the Acts forms a striking parallel to the ending

of the [third] Gospel. There the passion of the Lord with all its
immediate preparation is related in great detail; so here the
'passion' of Paul is on a scale altogether disproportionate to
the rest of the book. The Acts however does not end in fact
with S. Paul's death, but with a condition of renewed life;
similarly at the end of Part I the 'passion' of S. Peter had ended
with a deliverance. Thus in each case there is a parallel to the
resurrection in the Gospel."2

1. Ministry on the way to Jerusalem 19:21—21:16

At this point in his ministry, Paul began to focus his attention on taking the
gospel to Rome. Luke recorded the events that led up to his arrival there,
so as to show how Jesus Christ extended His church to the center of the
Roman (Gentile) world.

Paul's plans 19:21-22

This pericope gives the reason for what follows in the remainder of Acts.

19:21 Paul evidently sensed that, having laid a firm foundation in Asia
Minor and the Aegean Sea region, he needed to press on to
Gentile areas yet unreached (cf. Rom. 15:23). Though he had
some short-range goals, he ultimately wanted to go to Rome
(Rom. 1:15; cf. Luke 4:43; 9:22, 51). In Romans 15:24, he
wrote that he intended to go on from Rome to Spain, the
westernmost frontier of the Roman Empire. Luke made no
reference to Spain. It was evidently his purpose to end his
record of the church's expansion when the gospel ultimately

1Longenecker, p. 499.
2Rackham, p. 358.
396 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

reached the heart of the empire, from where it then circulated

everywhere.

Some Bible students have concluded that Paul's decision to

visit Jerusalem was a mistake: that he turned aside from his
God-given mission to evangelize the Gentiles because he
desired to help his fellow Jews.1 Most expositors disagree.

"Although the phrase en to pneumati ('in the

spirit') could refer either to the human spirit or
the Holy Spirit, there is reason to believe that the
latter is at least included. It would be strange to
attribute the journey to Jerusalem to a human
decision while linking the trip to Rome to divine
necessity, especially when Paul says he 'must [Gr.
dei] also' see Rome, implying some comparability
between the two trips. Furthermore, in 20:22-23
Paul refers to the same decision and speaks of
himself going to Jerusalem 'bound in the Spirit'
and of the Holy Spirit testifying in every city of
coming suffering. More than a strong human
resolve is indicated."2

"By the combination of en to pneumati and dei,

Luke appears to be making the point in this
programmatic statement that the aftermath of
the Gentile mission and its extension into Rome
were likewise under the Spirit's direction, just as
the Gentile mission itself had been."3

The rest of Acts shows how Paul attained his purpose of

reaching Rome—in spite of many obstacles, all of which he
overcame.4

"The purpose of S. Paul, which coincided with the

will of God, was achieved; but, as in other cases,
the means by which he was brought to Rome were

1E.g., Gaebelein, The Annotated …, [Link]-300.

2Tannehill, 2:239.
3Longenecker, p. 500.
4F. F. Bruce, "Paul's Apologetic …," p. 380.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 397

far different from what he had wished or arranged.

Thus we have presented to us a typical instance
of divine overruling of human plans, but to the
achievement of one and the same end."1

"… in Paul's eyes Rome was designed to replace

Jerusalem as the centre of the Christian mission
(and to inherit his own apostolic responsibility).
Luke's perspective was different from Paul's but
from Luke's perspective too, as Jerusalem
Christianity was henceforth unable to fulfill God's
saving purpose in the world, it was for Roman
Christianity to take up the task and carry it
forward."2

Paul wanted to collect money for the poor Judean saints, from
the more prosperous Christians in the Aegean region, and then
deliver it to them in Jerusalem (cf. 24:17; 1 Cor. 16:1-4). He
realized that returning to Jerusalem would be dangerous for
him (cf. Rom. 15:30-32), but he determined to go
nonetheless. Paul never let the possibility of danger to his
person turn him away from doing God's will.

19:22 Paul apparently sent "Timothy" (cf. 18:5; 1 Cor. 4:17; 16:10-
11) and "Erastus" to minister to the Macedonian churches.
They also prepared for his coming by laying the groundwork
for the collection for the poor Jerusalem saints (cf. 1 Cor.
16:1-9). This "Erastus" was probably not the same man Paul
mentioned in Romans 16:23, though he may be the one he
wrote of in 2 Timothy 4:20.

Others who ministered to Paul included Silas and Titus, though

Luke did not mention them here. Silas' name appears in Acts
nine times between the events recorded in 15:40 and 18:5,
but Luke did not mention him again. Paul wrote that Titus was
a faithful and active associate of his (cf. 2 Cor. 2:13; 7:6, 13-

1Rackham, p. 359.
2F. F. Bruce, "The Church …," p. 661.
398 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

14; 8:6, 16, 23; 12:18; Gal. 2:1, 3; 2 Tim. 4:10; Titus 1:4),
but Luke did not mention him at all.

Paul evidently stayed in Ephesus several more months, and it

was probably during this time that the following incident
occurred.

The riot in Ephesus 19:23-41

This incident increases understanding about the effects of the gospel on

Ephesian society and religion (cf. vv. 13-20).

"Luke's purpose in presenting this vignette is clearly

apologetic, in line with his argument for the religio licita status
of Christianity (cf. Panel 5 [16:6—19:20]) and in anticipation
of the themes stressed in Paul's speeches of defense (Panel 6,
esp. chs. 22—26). Politically, Luke's report of the friendliness
of the Asiarchs ('officials of the province,' NIV) toward Paul
and of the city clerk's intervention on his behalf is the best
defense imaginable against the charge that Paul and
Christianity threatened the official life of the empire."1

19:23 Christianity, "the Way" (cf. v. 9; 9:2; 16:17; 18:25, 26; 22:4;
24:14, 22), had such an influence in Ephesian society that the
local pagan worship suffered.

"Cassidy has rightly pointed out that the use of

the phrase 'the Way' 'identifies the disciples as
constituting a socially cohesive movement, a
movement arising out of and grounded in their
shared faith in Jesus.'2 What is interesting about
Luke's use of this terminology is that we find it
chiefly in connection with the church in Jerusalem
and its environs (see 9:2; 22:4) and with the
church in Ephesus and its environs (see 19:9, 23).
This emphasizes that the movement is heading
west, is translocal, and can incarnate itself both
at the heart of Jewish culture and at the heart of

1Longenecker, p. 502.
2Footnote 106: R. Cassidy, Society and Politics in the Acts of the Apostles, p. 95.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 399

the somewhat Romanized Hellenistic culture found

in Ephesus."1

The antagonism that Luke proceeded to record was not

opposition to Paul personally; it was a reaction to the effect of
the gospel in Ephesus.

"… this is the major unit in Acts showing how the

transformation of a community affects the culture
at large, making it so nervous that it reacts to
stop the progress."2

19:24 There were two goddesses named Artemis (Greek), or Diana

(Latin), that Gentiles worshipped in the Roman Empire at this
time. One was the goddess of the hunt, usually pictured as a
young woman carrying a hunting bow. The other was a
goddess portrayed as a woman with many breasts. The latter
was the one especially venerated in Ephesus. Some scholars
have argued that "Artemis Ephesia" (Artemis [or Diana] of the
Ephesians) was not a fertility goddess, but a goddess who
aided women in childbirth.3

"The worship of Diana of the Ephesians was

entirely Asian and not Greek, although the Greek
colonists attempted to establish an identification
with their own Artemis on account of certain
analogies between them."4

There were at least 33 other places of Artemis worship in the

ancient world, but the temple in Ephesus was the chief worship
center.5 Pausanias, who wrote in the middle of the second
century A.D., claimed that the Artemis cult was the most
widely followed one in the ancient world.6

1Witherington, The Acts …, p. 584.

2Bock, Acts, p. 614.
3E.g.,Sandra L. Glahn, "The Identity of Artemis in First-Century Ephesus," Bibliotheca
Sacra 172:687 (July-September 2015):316-34.
4Knowling, 2:417.
5Ladd, "The Acts …," p. 1161. Strabo, Geography 4.1.5.
6Pausanias, Description of Hellas 4.31.8, cited by Witherington, The Acts …, p. 587.
400 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

The Temple of Diana, in Ephesus, was one of the seven

wonders of the ancient world, and many historians believe it
was one of the most beautiful buildings ever built.1 It stood on
the side of Mount Pion, about a mile northeast of the city, and
served as a bank as well as a place of worship and cultic
immorality. It could accommodate about 25,000 people, and
was probably the largest Greek temple ever built.

"It [the temple] was 425 feet in length and 220

in breadth, and the columns were 60 feet high.
The number of columns was 127, each of them
the gift of a king; and 36 of them were enriched
with ornament and colour. The folding doors were
of cypress-wood; the part which was not open to
the sky was roofed over with cedar; and the
staircase was formed of wood of one single vine
from the island of Cyprus. The value and fame of
the Temple were enhanced by its being the
treasury, where a large portion of the wealth of
Western Asia was stored up. It is probable that
there was no religious building in the world in
which was concentrated a greater amount of
admiration, enthusiasm, and superstition."2

This temple's centerpiece was an object that resembled a

woman with many breasts. Other objects that had purportedly
fallen from heaven, that became sacred cult objects, were at
Troy, Pessinus, Enna, and Emeas.3

"The figure which assumed this emblematic form

above, was terminated below in a shapeless block.
The material was wood. A bar of metal was in each
hand. The dress was covered with mystic devices,
and the small shrine, where it stood within the
temple, was concealed by a curtain in front. Yet,

1See my comments on verses 1 and 2 above.

2Howson, p. 423.
3See Longenecker, p. 502.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 401

rude as the image was, it was the object of the

utmost veneration."1

The "silversmith(s)" in Ephesus took Artemis as their patron

saint and, among their other wares, "made" miniature "silver
shrines" containing images of the goddess that they sold to
devotees. As Christianity spread, interest in Artemis and the
market for her statuettes declined. The leader of the guild that
made these trinkets was "Demetrius."

"When pilgrims came to Ephesus they liked to take

a souvenir home. These silversmiths were makers
of little silver model shrines which were bought
and sold as souvenirs."2

Alternatively, worshippers may have presented these model

shrines as votive offerings when they visited the temple, as
some people today purchase candles that they proceed to light
and leave in churches.3

19:25-27 Demetrius' words establish the extent to which the gospel had
penetrated "Asia," and the effect it had. There is no stronger
testimony than the words of a critic who acknowledges the
success of his adversary. Obviously his financial loss motivated
Demetrius to organize this protest as much as, or perhaps
even more than, veneration for the goddess Artemis. Artemis
was known as a major supporter of chastity, being a virgin
goddess.4

"… vested interests were disguised as local

patriotism—in this case also under the cloak of
religious zeal."5

"In an honor-shame culture such as this one,

public humiliation, or being seen as merely

1Howson, p. 424. See p. 374 for a picture of this image that appears on an ancient
Ephesian coin.
2Barclay, p. 160.
3Witherington, The Acts …, p. 590.
4Ibid., p. 587.
5Neil, p. 207.
402 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

mercenary individuals, could ruin reputations and

so one's livelihood."1

"The guilds, and the problem they presented to

the non-conforming Christian, haunt the
background of the New Testament. They were
societies not trade unions, primarily social, and
multitudinous in ancient society. Records exist of
guilds of bankers, doctors, architects, producers
of woollen and linen goods, dyers, workers in
metal, stone or clay, builders, carpenters, pastry
cooks, barbers, embalmers and transport
workers."2

The only other protest by Gentiles against the gospel, that

Luke recorded in Acts, also resulted from financial loss (cf.
16:16-24). The profit motive still opposes the spread of the
gospel.

"… you cannot step on a man's pocketbook

without hearing him say, 'Ouch!'"3

19:28-29 The Temple of Artemis was a source of civic pride to the

Ephesians. In view of Ephesus' commercial decline, it is easy to
see how the silversmiths' protest could have so quickly
aroused popular opposition to the Christian missionaries. This
was a case of mob violence; many of the protesters did not
understand what the issue was. A major boulevard, the
Arcadian Way, ran from the harbor to the Great Theater, and
it was probably this artery that the ringleaders used to collect
citizens on their march to the "theater."

Archaeologists have restored part of the Arcadian Way and the

Great Theater at Ephesus. This theater—the largest in Asia
Minor, and in the ancient Greek world—lay on the side of Mt.

1Witherington, The Acts …, p. 592.

2Blaiklock, p. 158.
3McGee, 4:600.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 403

Coressus, in the town, and reputedly seated 50,000 people.1

Its semi-circular design was typical of Roman outdoor theaters.

"Gaius" was a common Greek name. This "Gaius" seems to

have been different from the men with the same name,
mentioned in 20:4, Romans 16:23, and 1 Corinthians 1:14,
since this one was a Macedonian. Some Greek manuscripts,
however, indicate that it was only Aristarchus who was a
Macedonian, in which case this Gaius may have been the
resident of Derbe mentioned in 20:4. "Aristarchus" does
appear later in Acts (cf. 20:4; 27:2). He came from
Thessalonica.

19:30 Evidently the silversmiths did not lay hands on Paul as they did
on "Gaius and Aristarchus." He seems to have been elsewhere
in Ephesus when this demonstration broke out. Paul apparently
desired to use this occasion to preach the gospel to the
assembled throng in the theater. However, the other Christians
sensed his danger, and would not allow him to make himself a
target of their violence.

19:31 The "Asiarchs" were educated citizens who were the political
leaders of the cities of this Roman province.

They were "men of substance and influence in the

cities of the province of Asia who were or had
been presidents of the provincial council, which
dealt principally with organizing the games and
with ceremonial matters connected with Emperor-
worship. During his term of office, the Asiarch was
styled 'high-priest' of the imperial cult."2

Some of these men were "friends" of Paul. This shows again

that the attitude of many leaders was friendly to Christianity
at this time. Their attitude doubtless reflected what was
appropriate in the empire. The Asiarchs, too, wanted to
prevent Paul from being injured.

1Salmond, 3:205.
2Neil,
p. 208. See Longenecker, pp. 503-4; and Lily Ross Taylor, "The Asiarchs," in Foakes-
Jackson and Lake, 5:252-62, for fuller descriptions of them.
404 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"A sect whose leader had Asiarchs for friends

cannot be dangerous to the state."1

Notice that Paul had made friends with leading men of the city;
he did not keep a low profile as he evangelized.

19:32 We should probably understand Luke's reference to the

"confusion" of the crowd as pertaining to the particular
grievance of the silversmiths. Most of the people did not
understand "the reason" for the gathering; they just went
along for the excitement. The Greek word translated
"assembly" (cf. vv. 39, 41) is ekklesia, the normal translation
of which is "church." This use illustrates the basic meaning of
the word, which is an assembly of people called out of the mass
for a special purpose.

19:33-34 The crowd's reaction to "Alexander" showed distinct hostility

toward him. Apparently Alexander was a leading unbelieving
Jew, who wanted the crowd to understand that even though
Paul was a Jew, the local Jewish community did not approve of
him (cf. 18:12-17). However, like Gallio in Corinth, this crowd
did not distinguish between Christianity and Judaism. Both
faiths stood against idolatry. Perhaps the crowd assumed that
Alexander wanted to defend Paul as a fellow Jew. This
Alexander may be the one Paul warned Timothy about (1 Tim.
1:19-20; 2 Tim. 4:14), but he may have been someone
different, since "Alexander" was a common name among both
Jews and Gentiles.2

19:35-36 The "town-clerk" (Gr. ho grammateus) was the equivalent of a

modern mayor, the locally elected executive official most
responsible for what took place in the city. He was "the keeper
of the archives and public reader of decrees, &c., in the
assemblies."3 Consequently, he was eager to end this
demonstration. He made four points in his address to the
assembly. First, there was no danger whatsoever that people
would conclude Artemis was a goddess made with hands, since

1Haenchen, p. 578.
2See Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link].
3Alford, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 405

everyone assumed to know that the image of her in her famous

temple had fallen "from heaven" (possibly meaning was
"heaven-sent" in the metaphorical sense). "Do nothing rash"
is still good advice. The town-clerk was not a Christian, but he
was a wise and diplomatic man.

The title "temple keeper" (or "guardian of the temple") was

an honor that Rome bestowed on selected cities that
possessed temples of the imperial cult.1 Ephesus was one of
these.

19:37 Second, Gaius and Aristarchus had done nothing worthy of

punishment. They had neither physically damaged anything nor
had they spoken against Artemis. Robbing temples and
blaspheming other gods were common accusations that
Gentiles made against Jews, including Jewish Christians, in
antiquity (cf. Rom. 2:22).2

19:38-39 Third, "if Demetrius" and his fellow silversmiths ("craftsmen")

had "a complaint" against the Christians, they should handle it
in the legally authorized way, and take their adversaries to
court. The court that would have dealt with this kind of
complaint met three times a month in Ephesus.3 "Proconsuls"
were provincial governors.

19:40-41 Fourth, the mayor reminded the citizens that, if the provincial
authorities concluded that there was no good reason for their
rioting, they could impose penalties on the city. Furthermore
this riot was unjustified ("no real cause for it"). This line of
argument proved effective, so the crowd disbursed.

This may have been the occasion when Priscilla and Aquila risked their lives
for Paul (Rom. 16:4). This event may have been in Paul's mind when he
wrote of fighting "wild beasts" at Ephesus (1 Cor. 15:32), and of
despairing of life as he faced a deadly foe (2 Cor. 1:8-11).

1Neil, p. 208.
2Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link].
3F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 402.
406 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

One wonders if the cooling of the Ephesian Christians' love for Jesus Christ,
that took place in later years, connects to the zeal for Artemis that
characterized this community (cf. Rev. 2:1-7).

"The story [of the riot in Ephesus, vv. 23-41] is in effect a

statement that Christians do not constitute a danger to the
state and a plea that they be treated with toleration in a
pluralistic society; only when properly defined criminal charges
can he preferred against them should they be summoned
before the courts."1

Paul's visit to Macedonia and Achaia 20:1-6

"This report of Paul's return visit to Macedonia and Achaia is

the briefest account of an extended ministry in all of Acts—
even more so than the summary of the ministry at Ephesus
(cf. 19:8-12). Nevertheless, it can be filled out to some extent
by certain personal references and historical allusions in 2
Corinthians and Romans, which were written during this time."2

20:1 Evidently soon after the riot, Paul left Ephesus to pursue his
plan to return to Jerusalem through Macedonia and Achaia
(19:21). He traveled up to "Troas," where he could have
ministered for some time, because "a door was opened" for
him there (2 Cor. 2:12). Nevertheless he was uneasy about
the trouble in the Corinthian church. He had sent Titus to
Corinth, evidently from Ephesus, with a severe letter to the
church. He was eager to hear what the reaction to it had been
(2 Cor. 2:3-4; 7:8-12; 12:18). So rather than staying in Troas,
Paul moved west into Macedonia where he met Titus who was
returning from Corinth (2 Cor. 7:5-8). After receiving Titus'
favorable report of affairs in Corinth, Paul wrote 2 Corinthians
from somewhere in Macedonia, probably in the fall of A.D. 56
(cf. 2 Cor. 12:14; 13:1-2).

20:2 Paul's ministry to the province of Illyricum, which lay to the

northwest of Macedonia, may have taken place while he was in
this area, or possibly during his three-year ministry in Ephesus

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 314.

2Longenecker, p. 506.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 407

(cf. Rom. 15:19). "Greece" here refers to Achaia. Paul may

have sent his Epistle to Titus at this time, but he probably
wrote it after his acquittal in Rome, and after he had resumed
his missionary travels (Titus 3:12).

"The word translated encouraged [Gr.

parakalesas] has a full range of meanings, from
rebuking to comforting. Encourgement included
instruction, appeal, affirmation, warning, and
correction."1

20:3 The "three months" appear to have been the winter months
of A.D. 56-57. Paul probably spent most of this time in Corinth,
where Gaius (Titius Justus?) was his host (Rom. 16:23; cf.
Acts 18:7). There he wrote the Book of Romans as he
anticipated visiting Rome. From Rome he planned to move
farther west into Spain (Rom. 15:24). During his time in
Macedonia and Achaia, Paul was also busy collecting the gift
for the poor saints in Jerusalem (Rom. 15:26). He evidently
had planned to travel on a ship from Cenchrea to Caesarea,
and from there to Jerusalem, to celebrate one of the spring
Jewish feasts there (vv. 6, 16). However, when he learned of
the Jews' "plot" to kill him on the way, he changed his plans
and decided to go to Jerusalem by way of "Macedonia" (cf.
9:23, 29; 17:14; 23:12; 2 Cor. 11:32).

"Often from foreign ports Jewish pilgrim ships left

for Syria to take pilgrims to the Passover. Paul
must have intended to sail on such a ship. On such
a ship it would have been the easiest thing in the
world for the fanatical Jews to arrange that Paul
should disappear overboard and never be heard of
again."2

20:4 The men Luke identified here were the representatives of the
churches—in the provinces of Macedonia, Galatia, and Asia—
who accompanied Paul with the gift of money for the
Jerusalem church. "Sopater" may be the "Sosipater" of

1The Nelson …, p. 1858.

2Barclay, p. 161.
408 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Romans 16:21. Paul himself may have represented the

province of Achaia and the church in Corinth, while Luke may
have represented the Philippian Christians, but Luke did not
make this clear.

20:5-6 Apparently these men traveled from Corinth to Philippi with

Paul. In Philippi Paul met Luke, who may have ministered there
from the time Paul had founded the Philippian church (cf.
16:10-40). Paul's team celebrated the Feast of Unleavened
Bread, which followed immediately after Passover, in Philippi.
This eight-day festival began with Passover and continued with
the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The Jews commonly referred
to the whole holiday as the "Feast of Unleavened Bread," since
it was the longer celebration.

Some of Paul's companions then proceeded on to "Troas." Paul

and Luke, and perhaps Titus and two other representatives of
the church in Achaia (cf. 2 Cor. 8:6-24), remained in Philippi
briefly. Note the recurrence of "we" (vv. 5-15; cf. 16:10-17;
21:1-18; 27:1—28:16). They did so to celebrate the Passover
and Unleavened Bread feasts in the spring of A.D. 57. Then
they sailed from Neapolis, the port of Philippi (16:11), to Troas
and joined the other messengers. This crossing took "five
days," whereas previously Paul's ship from Troas to Neapolis
made the trip in only two days (16:11).1

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

"From 20:5 through the end of Acts (28:31), Luke's narrative

gives considerable attention to ports of call, stopovers, and
time spent on Paul's travels and includes various anecdotes. It
contains the kind of details found in a travel journal, and the
use of 'we' in 20:5-15; 21:1-18; and 28:16 shows its
eyewitness character."2

1See F. F. Bruce, "Chronological Questions …," pp. 288-89.

2Longenecker, p. 508.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 409

"This claim to be an eyewitness was considered vital in Greek

historiography, unlike Roman historiography where being an
armchair historian was much more acceptable."1

20:7 We do not know if Paul or someone else planted the church in

Troas (cf. 16:8-9; 2 Cor. 2:12-13). This is the first clear
reference in Scripture to the early Christians meeting to
worship on "the first day of the week," rather than on the
Sabbath, the seventh day (cf. John 20:19, 26; 1 Cor. 16:2;
Rev. 1:10). This day has continued to be the generally
preferred one for Christian worship. They selected "Sunday"
because it was the day on which the Lord Jesus Christ arose
from the dead. This group of believers met "to break bread"
(Gr. klasai arton).

"The breaking of the bread probably denotes a

fellowship meal in the course of which the
Eucharist was celebrated (cf. 2:42)."2

"In the early Church there were two closely related

things. There was what was called the Love Feast.
To it all contributed, and it was a real meal. Often
it must have been the only real meal that poor
slaves got all week. It was a meal when the
Christians sat down and ate in loving fellowship
and in sharing with each other. During it or at the
end of it the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was
observed. It may well be that we have lost
something of very great value when we lost the
happy fellowship and togetherness of the
common meal of the Christian fellowship. It
marked as nothing else could the real homeliness,
the real family spirit of the Church."3

"Breaking bread is not merely the occasion for the

Eutychus story, as v. 7 might suggest. Because
Paul is departing, the community's breaking of

1Witherington, The Acts …, p. 605.

2F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 408. Cf. v. 11; 1 Cor. 10:16-17; 11:17-34.
3Barclay, pp. 162-63.
410 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

bread becomes a farewell meal, resembling Jesus'

farewell meal with his apostles, when he 'took
bread' and 'broke' it (Luke 22:19). The echoes of
Jesus' Jerusalem journey and its consequences
that begin in Acts 19:21 and continue thereafter
may suggest that this resemblance has some
importance, even though it is not developed."1

Luke did not record when Paul began his address, but the
apostle kept speaking all night. Paul taught "until midnight,"
followed by more teaching and discussion ("talked with them
until daybreak"; cf. v. 11). Probably some of the Christians
present would have been slaves or employees who would have
been free to attend a meeting only at night. Luke's references
to time are Roman rather than Jewish. For him days ran from
sunrise to sunrise, not from sunset to sunset (cf. vv. 7, 11).

"I tell congregations very frankly that I'm a long-

winded preacher. I'm known as that. I love to
teach the Word of God. I have a system of
homiletics that I never learned in the seminary. I
picked it up myself—in fact, I got it from a
cigarette commercial. This is it: It's not how long
you make it but how you make it long. I believe in
making it long; my scriptural authority for it is that
Paul did it. He spoke until midnight [really until
daybreak, v. 11]."2

20:8-9 Luke's reference to the "many lamps" (Gr. lampades hikani, lit.
"many torches") suggests that it was probably the
combination of the long message and lack of oxygen that
caused Eutychus to fall asleep (sink "into a deep sleep") and
fall three floors. The Greek word translated "young man"
(meanias) elsewhere describes a boy of eight to 14 years old.
However, his name suggests that he may have been a slave, in

1Tannehill, 2:250-51.
2McGee, 4:602.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 411

which case he could have been in his thirties.1 Doctor Luke

pronounced Eutychus (lit. "Fortunate") "dead."2

"The length of Paul's preaching may incline us to

sympathize with sleepy Eutychus. The well-
developed synoptic theme of wakefulness puts a
different perspective on the matter. Falling asleep
is a serious failure with potentially grave
consequences. Paul's dedicated preaching makes
demands on his audience. They must be dedicated
listeners who hear the word and 'bear fruit with
perseverance (en upomone)' (Luke 8:15).
Eutychus failed and fell."3

"I confess that Paul's experience has always been

a comfort to me. When I look out at the
congregation and see some brother or sister out
there sound asleep, I say to myself, 'It's all right.
Just let them sleep. Paul put them to sleep, too.'"4

20:10 This seems to be a definite instance of Paul raising a dead

person back to life—similar to what Elijah, Elisha, and Jesus had
done (cf. 1 Kings 17:21-22; 2 Kings 4:34-35; Matt. 9:23-25;
Mark 5:39). If so, the incident shows the miraculous power of
Jesus Christ working through His apostle at this time (1:1-2).
(If you are a preacher and have the gift of gab, you may also
need the gift of healing!) However, many "competent"
exegetes have concluded that Eutychus simply swooned and
Paul revived him.

"One will believe here as the facts appeal to him."5

There are also several similarities between this incident and

Peter's raising of Tabitha (Dorcas) in 9:36-42.

1Witherington, The Acts …, p. 607.

2SeeAlford, [Link], for rebuttal of the view that Eutychus was not dead.
3Tannehill,
2:250.
4McGee, 4:602.
5Robertson, 3:342.
412 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"Whereas Peter raises Tabitha by a command,

following the pattern of resurrection stories in
Luke, Paul 'fell upon (epepesen)' Eutychus and
embraced him and then announced that he was
alive (20:10). If there is a healing act here, it is by
bodily contact, not by word, and follows the
pattern of the Elisha story (2 Kings 4:34 = 4
Kgdms. 4:34). Peter and Paul are similar in part
because they fit a common scriptural type.
Through both, the prophetic power of Elijah and
Elisha continues to be available to the church."1

20:11 The Christians returned to their third-story room and resumed

their meeting. The Greek phrase klasas ton arton kai
geusamenos, "broken the bread and eaten," can refer to an
ordinary meal rather than the Lord's Supper.2 Or the Lord's
Supper may be in view here.3 Paul then continued speaking
("talked with them") "until daybreak." He and the Troas
Christians realized that this might be their final opportunity to
meet together, so in spite of the unusual incident involving
Eutychus, they made the most of their opportunity.

20:12 Luke closed his account of this incident by assuring the reader
that Eutychus was indeed all right, and that the believers found
great comfort ("were greatly comforted") in Paul's ministry of
restoration as well as in his teaching.

"These early believers sat up all night listening to Paul. I know

someone is going to say, 'If I could listen to Paul, I'd listen all
night, too.' Probably Paul was nothing more than a humble
preacher of the gospel. We do know that Apollos was an
eloquent man, but that is not said of Paul. These believers
simply wanted to hear the Word of God. How wonderful that
is!"4

1Tannehill, 2:248.
2Longenecker, p. 509.
3Neil, p. 212; Kent, p. 156.
4McGee, 4:603.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 413

The journey from Troas to Miletus 20:13-16

"In a few business-like words Luke takes his readers over some
of the most storied coasts of ancient myth and history."1

20:13-14 Ships had to round Cape Lectum to reach "Assos" (modern

Bahram Koi) from Troas. This was a more time-consuming
route than the road between these two towns, which were 20
miles apart. By taking the "land" route, Paul was able to stay
in Troas a little longer. "Mitylene" was the chief city of the
island of Lesbos, the largest of the islands of western Asia
Minor.

20:15 "Chios" was the major town of a small island by the same
name, on which the poet Homer had been born.2 "Samos" was
another island off the coast of Asia, directly west of Ephesus,
another day's sail south. Samos' most famous son was
Pathagoras, the great mathematician. "Miletus" stood 30 miles
south of Ephesus on the mainland. Normally, small ships like
the ones on which Paul's company traveled, along the coast,
put into port each night when the winds died down.

20:16 Paul evidently concluded that it would be too time-consuming

or dangerous to return to Ephesus. He wanted to reach
Jerusalem by "the day of Pentecost," which was 50 days after
Passover (cf. v. 6; 2:1). Another reason why he did not land at
Ephesus may be that mariners avoided Ephesus, if they could,
because the harbor had become filled with silt from the
Cayster River.3 Therefore Paul's visit to Miletus must have
occurred in late April of A.D. 57.

Paul's address to the Ephesian elders 20:17-35

"Paul's farewell address to the Ephesian elders is the nearest

approximation to the Pauline letters in Acts. Its general
content recalls how in his letters Paul encouraged, warned, and
exhorted his converts. Moreover, its theological themes and
vocabulary are distinctively Pauline. In his three missionary

1Blaiklock,
p. 165.
2See Knowling, 2:427.
3Salmond, 3:204.
414 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

sermons (13:16-41; 14:15-17; 17:22-31) and five defenses

(chs. 22—26), Paul addressed non-Christian audiences. But he
was speaking to Christians here. It is significant that, in a
situation similar to those he faced in many of his letters, this
farewell to the Ephesian elders reads like a miniature letter of
his. This becomes all the more significant when we recall that
nowhere else in Acts is there any evidence for a close
knowledge of Paul's letters.

"The address is constructed in a way familiar to all readers of

Paul's letters. The body of it has three parts, which deal with
(1) Paul's past ministry at Ephesus (vv. 18-21), (2) Paul's
present plans in going to Jerusalem (vv. 22-24), and (3) the
future of Paul himself and of the church at Ephesus (vv. 25-
31). It concludes with a blessing (v. 32) and then adds further
words of exhortation that point the hearers to Paul's example
and the teachings of Jesus (vv. 33-35). Heading each section
is an introductory formula: 'you know' (hymeis epistasthe) at
v. 18; 'and now behold' (kai nyn idou) at v. 22; 'and now behold
I know' (kai nyn idou ego oida) at v. 25; and 'and now' (kai ta
nyn) at v. 32."1

This is probably one of the few speeches in Acts that Luke heard with his
own ears. The Greek physician Galen wrote that his students took down his
medical lectures in shorthand, so perhaps this is what Luke did on this
occasion.2

20:17 Evidently Paul's ship had a several-day layover in Miletus, or he

may have changed ships after spending a few days there (cf.
21:3-4, 8). It would have taken at least one day for Paul's
message to reach the Ephesian elders, and at least one more
day for them to make their way to Miletus to join him.

20:18-21 Paul first reviewed his past three-year ministry among these
elders (v. 31). He appealed to the way he had lived among
them in order to urge them to remain faithful in the future (cf.
1 Thess. 2:1-12). He emphasized particularly his humble

1Longenecker, pp. 511-12. See Witherington, The Acts …, p. 610, for a chart comparing
terms and concepts Paul used in this address with similar ones he used in his epistles.
2Robertson, 3:346-47.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 415

service of the Lord (cf. Eph. 4:2), his sorrows (cf. 2 Cor. 2:4),
and the opposition of enemies of the gospel (cf. 19:9; 20:1).
He also stressed his faithfulness in proclaiming what they
needed to hear (cf. Rom. 1:16), his ceaseless teaching ministry
(cf. 19:8-10), and his comprehensive evangelistic efforts (cf.
v. 26).

"Teaching … from house to house" (v. 20) probably included

home Bible classes and house churches. This defense of his
ministry suggests that critics may have been prejudicing his
converts against him in his absence, as they did elsewhere.
Notice that several of the words and phrases in this first part
of Paul's speech recur as it proceeds.

"Repentance toward God and faith in the (our) Lord Jesus

Christ" (v. 21) is a beautifully balanced way of expressing what
is essential for justification (cf. 26:20-23; Rom. 10:9-10; 2
Cor. 5:20—6:2). One must change his or her mind Godward
and place trust in the Lord Jesus Christ.

20:22-23 Next Paul described his present circumstances. Probably Paul

meant, by "bound by the Spirit," that he had committed
himself to visiting "Jerusalem," since he was sure this was what
God wanted him to do, even though he realized that trouble
("bonds and afflictions") lay ahead (cf. v. 3; 9:16; 19:21).
Perhaps prophets had by this time already revealed to him that
the Jews would arrest him there (cf. 21:4, 11; Rom. 15:30-
31). Paul wanted to be faithful to the Lord more than he
wanted to be physically safe or comfortable (cf. Phil. 1:20).

"It should be noted that the Spirit did not prohibit

his going, but told him what would happen when
he arrived."1

20:24 Paul's "gospel of the grace of God" was a continuation of the

good news Jesus had preached, but in a universal context.
Thus he equated it with "preaching the kingdom" (v. 25).

20:25 Paul continued by laying out his plans for the future. "The
kingdom" Paul preached is God's rule over His elect. It probably

1Kent, p. 157.
416 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

includes both His spiritual rule now, and His messianic, physical,
and earthly rule during the Millennium.

"Usually in the book of Acts the kingdom of God

refers to the eschatological realm of salvation
(14:22). But in this passage, the kingdom of God
is the summary of Paul's entire message in
Ephesus and refers to the present blessings of
redemption in Christ."1

"Paul clearly equated preaching the Gospel of the

grace of God with the preaching of the kingdom
of God. Once again [cf. 20:22-24] we see that the
two terms are used interchangeably [cf. 28:23,
30-31]. …

"Thus as we survey Paul's ministry as recorded in

the Book of Acts, we see that he was an
ambassador of the kingdom of God—but his
message was salvation through the death and the
resurrection of Jesus Christ. No reference is made
to support the notion that the earthly Davidic
kingdom had been established. Rather, the
message concerns entrance into a present form
of the kingdom of God by faith in Jesus Christ."2

Paul was confident ("I know") that not "all" the men he
addressed would "see" him again, though some of them might.
He did not plan to return to Ephesus for some time—if ever
(cf. Rom. 15:23-29).

20:26 Paul could say he was "innocent" (cf. Jer. 23:1-2), not because
he had presented the gospel to every individual personally. He
had carried out the mission God had given him of evangelizing
most or many of the pagan Gentile areas. The Christians
remaining in Asia could continue to evangelize more
thoroughly (cf. Ezek. 33:1-6).

1Ladd, "The Acts …," p. 1163. On the importance of being "in Christ" in Paul's thinking
and theology, see James S. Stewart, A Man in Christ.
2Pentecost, Thy Kingdom …, p. 280.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 417

20:27 Paul had passed on to these elders what was truly profitable
to them (cf. v. 20). "The whole purpose of God" refers to
God's basic plans and purposes, rather than a verse by verse
exposition of the Scriptures. Their responsibility was to
instruct the saints in more detail.

"As I write this, I am a retired preacher. I have

made many blunders and have failed in many
ways. But as I look back on my ministry, I can say
truthfully that when I stood in the pulpit, I
declared the Word of God as I saw it. I have the
deep satisfaction of knowing that if I went back to
any pulpit which I have held, I haven't a thing to
add to what I have already said. I don't mean I
couldn't say it in a better way, but the important
thing is that I declared the whole counsel of God.
I have always believed that the important issue is
to get out the entire Word of God."1

20:28 Paul concluded his address with a challenge because of the

Ephesian elders' future responsibilities (vv. 28-31). The elders
were to "guard" their own lives ("yourselves") from the
attacks of the adversary, and then the lives of those under
their care (cf. Ezek. 34:12-16; 1 Pet. 5:1-4). Paul used Jesus'
familiar figure of a "flock" of sheep to describe His followers
(John 10:27; 21:15; et al.).

The term "elder" (v. 17) came from Judaism, and emphasized
the dignity of the leader of God's people. "Overseer" is Greek
in origin, and describes the responsibility of this person.
"Shepherd" was both Jewish and Greek, and focuses on his
function. Putting them together, we conclude that these men
were older, more mature men in the faith, who were
responsible for the spiritual welfare of the church. They fulfilled
their responsibility by pastoring (i.e., leading, feeding, guiding,
and guarding) the church (cf. 1 Pet. 5:1-4).

"There was in apostolic times no distinction

between elders (presbyters) and bishops such as

1McGee, 4:604.
418 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

we find from the second century onwards: the

leaders of the Ephesian church are indiscriminately
described as elders, bishops (i.e.,
superintendents), and shepherds (or pastors)."1

The Holy Spirit appointed these men, in the sense that He led
the apostles or others to select them as elders.

A better translation of the last part of this verse would be, "He
[God the Father] purchased with the blood of His own [Son]"
(cf. Rom. 3:25; 5:9; Eph. 1:7; 2:13; Col. 1:20). It is important
for church leaders to remember that the church belongs to
God, not them. This helps balance the tendency to take too
little or too much responsibility on oneself. "The church [Gr.
ekklesia] of God" is a phrase we find elsewhere, in the New
Testament, only in Paul's epistles.

20:29-30 Paul may have been certain where future trouble would come
from: because of his contacts with that church, by special
revelation, or because of his general experience in ministry (cf.
Matt. 7:15; John 10:12). What he anticipated materialized (1
Tim. 1:6-7, 19-20; 4:1-7; 2 Tim. 1:15; 2:17-18; 3:1-9; Rev.
2:1-7). Most churches face opposition from people outside and
inside their fellowship.

20:31 Watchfulness ("Be on the alert") would be imperative for these

shepherds. Paul probably labored in Ephesus from the fall of
A.D. 53 to the summer of A.D. 55. Some scholars believe that
he spent some of this time in prison there (cf. 2 Cor. 11:23),
and that he wrote his Prison Epistles—at least Philippians—
from Ephesus. This is a minority opinion, however, that does
not have as strong support as the Roman origin of the Prison
Epistles theory does.

Reference to his "tears" shows that Paul's ministry was not

just intellectual but also emotional; he became emotionally
involved in it (cf. John 11:35). Specifically he delivered his
admonitions feeling the pain that they caused his hearers. The
Book of Acts does not generally picture Paul as weeping over

1F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 415.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 419

the people to whom he ministered or over ministry situations.

Rather, it portrays him as equal to any occasion. We only see
this human side of his ministry from Paul's own comments here
and in his epistles.

20:32 Paul concluded his address with a blessing. Since he was no

longer going to be able to build up these men, he committed
(or commended) them to God, who would do it, and to the
Scriptures ("the word of His grace"), God's tool in this process.
God's "grace" is the source of all spiritual growth, and of the
ultimate "inheritance" these elders would one day enjoy
because they were believing "saints" (cf. 1 Pet. 5:1-4; Phil.
1:6; Col. 3:24).

20:33-35 The apostle concluded with an exhortation, as he typically did

in his epistles. Was Paul boasting when he reviewed his habits
of life in Ephesus? I think not. He was reminding these elders
of his example ("in everything I showed you") that they were
to follow: as they led the church like he had led them. They
were to serve without concern for present material reward.
Paul's policy was not to ask others to support him, but to labor
at his trade: when he, or his fellow workers, or his converts,
needed financial support.

Paul did not hesitate to raise money for others, but there are
no references in Acts or in his epistles to his having asked for
money for himself. I do not believe he would have objected to
modern support-raising efforts by Christian workers, provided
the support raisers were willing to work—if their supporters
proved unfaithful. Paul emphasized motives (v. 33) and
example (v. 35). He wanted to give rather than receive, and
to model that attitude, so his converts could see how to
demonstrate it in everyday life.

"The Greco-Roman world was honeycombed by

social networks grounded in the priciple of
reciprocity, of 'giving and receiving.' Paul's
exhortation here is to break that cycle and serve
and help those who can give nothing in return.
This is the practical expression of what being
gracious means—freely they had received the
420 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

good news, and they should freely give with no

thought of return."1

The precise saying of Jesus to which Paul referred here (v. 35)
is not in Scripture. It may have come down to Paul by oral or
written tradition, or he may have been summarizing Jesus'
teaching (e.g., Luke 6:38). Paul often related his exhortations
to Jesus' teachings or example (cf. Rom. 12—14; Phil. 2:5-11;
1 Thess. 4:1-12).

Paul's departure from Miletus 20:36-38

20:36 Prayer for God's grace and protection undoubtedly bonded

these men together in Christian love. The kneeling posture
here, as elsewhere in Scripture, reflects an attitude of
submission to the sovereign Lord. The normal position for
praying in that culture was apparently standing (cf. Mark
11:25), so kneeling implies a particularly solemn occasion (cf.
21:5).2

20:37-38 This record of the Gentile converts' affection for Paul (cf. Gen.
33:4; 45:14; 46:29) contrasts with the hatred of the Jews
that he was soon to face in Jerusalem. Luke again obliquely
pointed out that the Gentiles received the gospel but the Jews
usually rejected it.

"… through all this scene there runs one dominant feeling and
that is the feeling of an affection and a love as deep as the
heart itself. That is the feeling that should be in any Church.
When love dies in any Church the work of Christ cannot do
other than wither or fade."3

Paul may have left Timothy in Ephesus at this time. However, it seems
more likely that that took place after Paul's release from Rome, his
departure from that city, and his return to Ephesus (1 Tim. 1:3; 3:14;
4:13).

1Witherington, The Acts …, p. 626.

2See Neil, p. 215; Lenski, p. 857.
3Barclay, p. 166.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 421

The trip from Miletus to Tyre 21:1-6

The third "we" section of Acts (21:1-18) is of theological importance

because it focuses on Paul's recapitulation of Jesus' passion. Note the
similarities between Luke's accounts of Jesus' trip to Jerusalem and Paul's.
Both stories involve a plot by the Jews and handing over to the Gentiles.
There were triple predictions along the way of suffering in Jerusalem in
both cases. Both Jesus and Paul steadfastly resolved to go there despite
opposition, and both resigned themselves to God's will.1 Luke probably told
his story as he did to help the reader appreciate the similarities between
Jesus and Paul to authenticate Paul's ministry.

21:1-3 "Cos" was an island 40 miles from Miletus. "Rhodes" refers to

the city on the island of Rhodes ("Rhodes" meaning "roses"),
another 90 miles farther. A gigantic statue of Apollo, "The
Colossus of Rhodes," one of the seven wonders of the ancient
world, stood astride the entrance to this harbor years earlier,
but it was now in ruins.2 From there, Paul's party continued
east to "Patara," a 60-mile journey. Paul could have made
these trips in three days. In Patara, the missionaries were able
to transfer to a ship bound directly for Tyre 400 miles away,
probably a grain or fruit ship.3 They sailed to the south of
Cyprus. "Tyre" was in ancient Phoenicia, then part of the
Roman province of Syria.

21:4 Refugees from the persecution that followed Stephen's

martyrdom had evangelized Phoenicia (11:19). Paul and his
companions "stayed" in Tyre for "seven days," fellowshipping
with the Christians.

"Sea journeys in the ancient world depended on

finding shipping available, and accepting delays
arising from loading and unloading. It is therefore
not inconsistent that Paul was in haste to reach
Jerusalem by Pentecost, yet had stopped for a

1Longenecker, p. 515.
2Knowling,2:441; Alford, [Link].
3Robertson, 3:359.
422 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

week at Troas, and now spends a week at Tyre;

he would have no choice."1

There is ample evidence in the text that Paul was not

disobedient to God in going on to Jerusalem (cf. 9:16; 19:21;
20:22-24; 21:14; 23:1, 11). Nevertheless, some students of
Scripture have criticized Paul for proceeding.2 It seems
probable that one or more prophets in the church at Tyre also
foretold His arrest in Jerusalem (20:23), and that they,
anxious about his safety, urged him not to proceed.

"Paul, however, regarded it not as a prohibition

but a divine forewarning so that he would be
spiritually prepared for what would happen."3

"Duty called louder than warning to Paul even if

both were the calls of God."4

21:5-6 As they had done just before leaving the Ephesian elders, Paul
and his fellow missionaries knelt down and prayed with these
believers before they parted (cf. 20:36). This reflects Paul's
ongoing commitment to and dependence on God. Then the
missionaries reboarded the ship, and the Christians of Tyre
"returned home."

Paul's advance to Caesarea 21:7-14

21:7 "Ptolemais" (Acco of the Old Testament and modern Acre,

located on the north side of the bay of Haifa) lay 25 miles
south of Tyre. It was the southernmost Phoenician port. There
also Paul met with the local Christians, while stevedores
unloaded and loaded his ship.

"The man who is within the family of the Church

is better equipped with friends that [sic] any other
man in all the world."5

1Neil,p. 216.
2E.g.,Darby, Synopsis of …, 4:89-97.
3Kent, p. 159.
4Robertson, 3:360.
5Barclay, p. 168.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 423

21:8-9 "Caesarea" (Meritima) was 40 miles farther south, and Paul's

party could have reached it by sea or by land. It was the capital
of the province of Judea and the major port of Jerusalem. Philip
may have settled in Caesarea after evangelizing the coastal
plain of Palestine 20 years earlier (8:40; cf. 6:5). This man was
not the Philip of the Gospels, who was a disciple of Jesus and
one of the Twelve. His "four daughters" had the prophetic gift.
This may mean that they served as worship leaders (cf. 1
Chron. 25:1).

According to early Church tradition, Philip and his daughters

later moved to Hierapolis in Asia Minor. There these women
imparted information about the early history of the Jerusalem
church to Papias, a church father.1 It seems unusual that Luke
would refer to these daughters as "prophetesses" without
mentioning anything that they had prophesied. Perhaps they
gave him information as they later did for Papias.2

21:10-11 "Agabus" previously had gone from Jerusalem to Antioch to

foretell the famine of A.D. 46 (11:26-27). Now he "came
down" to Caesarea and prophesied Paul's arrest in Jerusalem
(cf. Mark 9:31; 10:33; John 21:18). He illustrated his
prediction graphically, as several Old Testament prophets had
done (cf. 1 Kings 11:29-31; Isa. 20:2-4; Jer. 13:1-7; Ezek. 4).
"This is what the Holy Spirit says" is the Christian equivalent
of the Old Testament's "Thus saith the Lord." His revelation
came as no surprise to Paul, of course (v. 4; 9:16). Perhaps
another reason Luke emphasized these prophecies was to
prove to his readers that Paul's arrest and its consequences
were part of God's foreordained will for the church's expansion
(1:1-2; cf. Mark 10:33). Some interpreters of this passage see
Agabus' prophecy as further evidence that Paul should not
have gone to Jerusalem.3

21:12 It seemed clearer all the time to Paul's missionary companions,

as well as to the "local" Christians ("residents"), that Paul was

1Eusebius, p. 126 (bk. 3, ch. 39).

2Longenecker, p. 517; Neil, pp. 216-17.
3E.g., Gaebelein, The Annotated …, [Link].
424 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

going to be in great danger in Jerusalem. Consequently they

tried to discourage him from proceeding.

21:13 From Paul's response to their entreaty, he seems not to have

known whether his arrest would result in his death or not.

Why did Paul avoid the possibility of death in Corinth (20:3),

and other places, but not here? Paul's purpose to deliver the
collection, and thus to strengthen the unity of the Gentile and
Jewish believers, would have failed if he had died on board a
ship between Corinth and Jerusalem. However, arrest in
Jerusalem would not frustrate that purpose. For Paul, and
eventually for his friends (v. 14), the Lord's will was more
important than physical safety (cf. Luke 22:42). He believed
the Spirit wanted him to go to Jerusalem (19:21; 20:22) so
he "set his face" to go there (cf. Luke 9:51).

"Paul, aware of the suffering and danger ahead,

must make the same decision in Caesarea that
Jesus made in the prayer scene before his
crucifixion. In the prayer scene Jesus expressed
the two options himself in internal debate: 'Take
this cup from me; nevertheless, let not my will but
yours be done' (Luke 22:42). In Paul's case his
companions and friends express the option of
escape and appeal to Paul to choose it. Paul
chooses the other option. The conflict finally ends
when Paul's friends recognize that they cannot
persuade him and say, 'Let the will of the Lord be
done' (21:14)."1

21:14 Unable to dissuade him, Paul's friends stopped urging him ("fell
silent"), and committed the situation to the Lord.

"Perhaps he regarded Caesarea as his temptation

and Gethsemane. If so, the congregation, catching
the thought, echoed the garden prayer of Christ:
The will of the Lord be done …"2

1Tannehill, 2:264.
2Blaiklock, p. 168.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 425

"Paul is recognized and welcomed in Tyre and Caesarea as he

was at earlier stops on his trip, and the disciples in these places
show great concern for Paul's safety. Widespread respect for
Paul is also indicated by the attention that he receives from
figures associated with the mission in its early days: Philip the
evangelist (21:8), Agabus the prophet (21:10; cf. 11:28), and
Mnason, an 'early disciple' (21:16)."1

Christians have developed a respect for Paul—that is second only to

reverence for Jesus Christ—over approximately 20 centuries of church
history. However, when Luke wrote Acts, Paul was a very controversial
figure in the church. Luke seems to have gone out of his way to put Paul
in the best possible light, so that his original readers would accept and
appreciate his ministry.

The last stage of Paul's trip to Jerusalem 21:15-16

Jerusalem was about 65 miles southeast of Caesarea, a long two-day trip.

"Mnason" evidently became a Christian early in the history of the church,
perhaps on the day of Pentecost. He was a Hellenistic Jewish Christian from
Cyprus, like Barnabas was. As such, he would have been more open to
entertaining a mixed group of Jewish and Gentile Christians, than many
Hebrew Jewish Christians in Palestine would have been. Apparently he lived
about halfway between Caesarea and Jerusalem.

Paul finally achieved the first phase of his plan to visit Jerusalem and then
Rome (19:21). In doing so, he brought one chapter of his ministry to a
close and opened another. His return to Jerusalem was an essential part of
God's plan to send Paul to Rome. This plan unfolds in the rest of chapter
21. In all, Paul traveled about 2,700 miles on his third missionary journey
(cf. 14:28; 18:22).2

"Jesus too journeyed to Jerusalem, and during his journey

prophesied concerning his impending sufferings; he was
arrested and tried, appearing before the Jews and the Romans
…"3

1Tannehill, 2:262.
2Beitzel,p. 177.
3Marshall, The Acts …, p. 337. Cf. Rackham, pp. 403-4.
426 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

2. Ministry in Jerusalem 21:17—23:32

The events that transpired in Jerusalem, when Paul visited the city on this
occasion, proved crucial in spreading the gospel to Rome. The events that
Luke narrated in 21:17—23:35 took twelve days, whereas those that
follow in 24:1—26:32 took two years. Luke wrote these events partially
to reveal God's methods to his readers.

"The geographical extension of the church was not Luke's main

interest; it was rather the movement of redemptive history
from the Jews to the Gentiles. In keeping with this purpose,
Luke devotes considerable space to the record of Paul's last
visit to Jerusalem, not because the visit was important in itself,
but because it showed the final rejection of the Gospel by
Jerusalem."1

The advice of James and the elders 21:17-26

21:17-19 As he had done before, Paul related to a group of elders what

God had done on his missionary journeys among the Gentiles
(14:27; cf. 18:23). This undoubtedly helped the Jerusalem
church accept the gift that Paul had brought from their Gentile
brethren. I am assuming that the Jerusalem church leaders
received the gift, but they may not have done so. Perhaps Luke
did not comment on the giving and receiving of the gift,
because that was not something he wanted to draw attention
to, even though by not explaining this he left his readers with
an unanswered question.

"James," the Lord's half-brother, was still the recognized

leader of the Jerusalem church (cf. 12:17; 15:13), but this
church also had elder leadership (cf. 11:30). Herod Agrippa I
had killed James, the brother of John, earlier (12:2), not James
the half-brother of Jesus. Luke mentioned nothing about Paul's
delivery of the monetary gift, Paul's main reason for going to
Jerusalem (cf. Rom. 15:25-27; 1 Cor. 16:1-4). His purpose was
primarily to emphasize the spread of the gospel. The Gentiles
had remembered the poor as Paul had urged them to do (Gal.
2:10).

1Ladd, "The Acts …," p. 1164.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 427

Even though the third "we" section ends with verse 18, Luke
may have remained with Paul in Jerusalem. Possibly he stopped
including himself in the narrative in order to stress Paul's
leadership. Alternatively, he may have departed for some other
destination.

21:20-21 Having rejoiced ("glorified") over Paul's account of the

Gentiles' conversion, the elders also added that "thousands"
of "Jews" had become believers, many of them in Jerusalem.
Estimates of the population of Jerusalem at this time range
between 30,000 and 50,000.1 The elders explained that these
Jewish Christians had some misgivings about Paul's ministry,
about rumors they had heard. The word on the streets was
that Paul was going beyond his actual practice of not requiring
Gentile converts to undergo circumcision or to obey the Mosaic
Law. They had heard he was instructing Jewish converts not
to practice circumcision or to observe the customs of Judaism.
This was a false report. Paul did not teach that these customs
were wrong, but just that they were unnecessary for
justification and sanctification.

"The Jerusalem elders were in somewhat of a bind.

On the one hand, they had supported Paul's
witness to the Gentiles at the Jerusalem
Conference. Now they found Paul a persona non
grata and his mission discredited not only among
the Jewish populace, which they were seeking to
reach, but also among their more recent converts.
They did not want to reject Paul. Indeed, they
praised God for his successes. Still they had their
own mission to the Jews to consider, and for that
Paul was a distinct liability."2

From here to the end of Acts, Paul argued before various

audiences that he was a loyal Jew, and that his mission to the
Gentiles was not anti-Jewish. He insisted that he did not
oppose the Jews or their keeping of the Mosaic Law.

1Bock, Acts, p. 646.

2Polhill, p. 447.
428 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

21:22-24 The elders' plan aimed to prove to the Jewish Christians in

Jerusalem, and to all the Jews there, that Paul had not
abandoned the customs of the Jews. He had, of course, ceased
to believe and teach that salvation came by obeying the
Mosaic Law. He was no longer a Jew in religion, but he was still
a racial Jew, and as such observed Jewish cultural practices
(e.g., a ritual of purification for those who came from foreign,
unclean lands; cf. Num. 19:12). Many commentators believed
the "vow" in view here was a Nazarite vow, but that vow could
not be taken for less than 30 days.1

The "four men" in question had taken (and were "under," or

obligated to keep) a temporary "vow," as Paul had done
recently (18:18). At the end of the vow, each of them had to
bring an offering to the temple (cf. Num. 6:14-15). The elders
suggested that Paul go with them to the temple, purify himself
with them for temple worship, and show his support of the
Jewish custom by paying for their offerings. King Agrippa I had
recently, on his arrival from Rome to take possession of his
throne, similarly demonstrated his sympathy for the Jews.2

Paul could do what the elders suggested, and did so without

compromising his convictions, since the Jews did not regard
taking a vow as essential for acceptance by God. It was strictly
voluntary. They regarded circumcision, on the other hand, as
essential. However, Paul did not even object to circumcision as
a custom (earlier he had Timothy circumcised, 16:3), though
he did object to it as a rite essential for God's acceptance (Gal.
2).

21:25 James and the elders repeated their former conviction

regarding the instruction of Gentile converts. This was simply
a point of clarification designed to emphasize that the decision
of the Jerusalem Council still stood (cf. 15:20, 29). Their
counsel to Paul on this occasion did not contradict their strong
commitment to salvation by grace.

1Mishnah Oholot 2:3; 17:5; 18:6. See Haenchen, p. 612.

2Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 429

21:26 A Jew would normally announce the "completion" of his vow

to the priest, and then seven days later present his offerings
(cf. Num. 6:13-20). The Law did not prescribe a week's wait,
but it was customary. Paul accompanied the four men "into
the temple," and underwent the rites of "purification" with
them, because he was paying the expenses of their vow. A few
expositors believed Paul compromised his convictions here.1
But this is a minority opinion that I do not share. The Jews
considered paying the charges for votive offerings an act of
piety and a symbolic identification with the Jews.

The riot in the temple 21:27-36

21:27-28 The "Jews from Asia," possibly from Ephesus, were obviously
unbelievers. They charged Paul with the same kind of crimes
the unbelieving Jews had accused Stephen of committing
(6:11, 13-14). The Jews permitted Gentiles in the outer court
of the temple, the court of the Gentiles. They could not go in
beyond the sacred enclosure: into the women's court, or into
the court of Israel, much less into the court of the priests.

Jewish men like Paul, who were not priests or Levites, could go
no farther than the court of Israel. The priests had posted
notices prohibiting Gentiles from entering the sacred
enclosure, the area that included the courts of the women,
Israel, and the priests.2 These were in Latin and Greek, and
were on the barrier, the "Soreg," at the foot of the steps
leading to this area of the temple. Archaeologists have
discovered two of these notices.3 One reads as follows:

"No man of another nation to enter within the

fence and enclosure round the temple. And

1E.g.,Morgan, The Acts …, p. 485; idem, An Exposition …, p. 458..

2See Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]; idem, The Wars …, [Link]; Finegan, Light from
…, pp. 325-26.
3See Riesner, p. 194.
430 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

whoever is caught will have himself to blame that

his death ensues."1

Sacred Enclosure

Court of Priests

Women’s
Temple Court
(Treasury)
Altar

Court of Israel

Court of Gentiles

The Romans allowed the Jews to execute any Gentile, even a

Roman citizen, for proceeding beyond this low, stone barrier.2

21:29 "Trophimus the Ephesian" was Paul's Gentile traveling

companion from Asia (20:4). The Asian Jews had previously
seen them together in the city, and had assumed that Paul had
brought this Gentile into the sacred enclosure of the temple.

"The possibility that Trophimus might have

wandered of his own freewill into the forbidden
area is about as likely as that somebody should
wander into private rooms in the Kremlin for the
purpose of sightseeing."3

21:30 The rumor of Paul's alleged capital offense traveled quickly

throughout Jerusalem, and brought a mob of zealous Jews into

1C. K. Barrett, The New Testament Background: Selected Documents, p. 50. See Adolf
Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, facing p. 80, or Kent, p. 163, for a photograph
of this limestone block.
2Josephus, The Wars …, [Link]; [Link].
3Marshall, The Acts …, p. 348.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 431

the temple courtyard. "All the city was aroused" is probably

hyperbole.

"… the Temple was a fetish for all Jews, but for
none more so than fanatically devout pilgrims
from the Diaspora, who had travelled far to
celebrate the festival of Pentecost in the holy
city."1

"The perspective of the Jews toward the temple

was strikingly similar to that of Gentile worshipers
of gods and goddesses like Artemis."2

Evidently the priests (Levites, temple police) "dragged" Paul

"out of" one of the inner courts, and into the court of the
Gentiles. The "doors" that Luke referred to, separated the
court of the Gentiles from the inner courts that were
accessible only to Jews. The priests now closed these doors to
prevent the defiling of the inner courts by the tumult and
bloodshed.3

21:31-32 The Jews proceeded to beat Paul ("seeking to kill him") in the
court of the Gentiles. This was the "rebel's beating" that the
Jews commonly executed on people who supposedly openly
defied the Mosaic Law or the teachings of the elders (cf. Luke
4:29; John 8:59; 10:31).4 News of this commotion reached
the Roman "commander" of the Fortress of Antonia, which
connected with the temple area on the northwest. Herod the
Great had built this fortress to house the soldiers of the Tenth
Legion. The commander's name was Claudius Lysias (23:26).
He was responsible for the 1,000 soldiers stationed there.
When he saw the riot, he summoned "soldiers and centurions"
(commanders of 100 soldiers each) and "ran down" the steps
of the fortress and into the court of the Gentiles.

1Neil,
p. 220.
2Thomas A. Golding, "Pagan Worship in Jerusalem?" Bibliotheca Sacra 170:679 (July-
September 2013):316.
3Jeremias, Jerusalem in …, pp. 209-10.
4Edersheim, The Temple, pp. 66-67.
432 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"We know for certain of only a subterranean

passage which led from the fortress Antonia on
the 'north-western angle' of the Temple into the
Temple Court, and of the cloisters with stairs
descending into the porches, by one of which the
chief captain Lysias rushed to the rescue of Paul,
when nearly killed by the infuriated multitude."1

Levites constituted the temple police (cf. 4:1), but the Roman
troops were responsible to keep peace in the whole city.2 The
Jews "stopped beating Paul" when they "saw the commander
and the [other] soldiers."

"One thing Rome insisted on—civil order. A riot

was an unforgivable sin both for the populace who
staged it and the commander who allowed it."3

This is the sixth time in Acts that Paul's ministry had ignited a
public disturbance (cf. 14:19; 16:19-22; 17:5-8, 13; 19:25-
34).

21:33-34 The "commander" arrested ("took hold of") Paul, assuming

that he was a criminal. The "two chains" the Roman guards
placed on Paul probably bound him to two soldiers (cf. 12:6).
When the commander tried to learn "who" Paul "was," and
"what he had done," from some members of the crowd, he
received conflicting information. So he ordered Paul brought
into the "barracks," the Fortress of Antonia.

21:35-36 Stairs led up to the fortress from the city, both on its west
side, and from the temple courtyard on its south side.4
Probably the "stairs" in verse 35 were one of the two south
stairways leading from the temple courtyard into the fortress.

The fury of the Jews was evident in their desire to tear Paul
apart ("violence of the mob") immediately. Their cry ("Away
with him!") recalls their words about Jesus some 27 years

1Ibid., p. 37.
2Jeremias, Jerusalem in …, pp. 211-12.
3Barclay, p. 172.
4Foakes-Jackson and Lake, 4:136.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 433

earlier (Luke 23:18; John 19:15; cf. Acts 22:22). Probably the
Antonia Fortress was where the soldiers took Jesus for trial
before Pilate. It was also the prison from which the angel had
freed Peter (12:5).

Paul's defense before the Jewish mob 21:37—22:22

"In this first of Paul's five defenses, Luke's apologetic interests

come to the fore in highlighting the nonpolitical character of
Christianity (contrary to other messianic movements of the
day, cf. 21:38) and in presenting Paul's mandate to the
Gentiles as being the major reason for Jewish opposition to the
gospel (cf. 22:10-22)."1

Paul's request to address the people 21:37-40

21:37-38 The commander had assumed that Paul was a certain

"Egyptian" who had appeared in Jerusalem three years earlier.
This man claimed to be a prophet of God and announced that
the wall of Jerusalem would collapse at his command. He
further claimed that he would lead his followers from the Mount
of Olives into Jerusalem where they would defeat the Romans
and throw off their yoke.2 The Romans, however, attacked this
man's followers first, killing many of them, but he himself had
escaped.

The Egyptian's followers came from the ranks of "The

Assassins" (lit. "The Daggermen"). These were radicals who
would secretly mingle with crowds, holding daggers hidden
under their cloaks, and would stealthily stab to death Romans
and pro-Roman Jews in an attempt to gain Jewish
independence from Rome.3

Claudius Lysias evidently thought this Egyptian "freedom

fighter" had returned to the temple area to recruit more

1Longenecker, p. 523.
2See Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link]; and idem, The Wars …, [Link].
3Ibid., [Link], 5; and idem, Antiquities of …, [Link], 6, 10. See also Richard A. Horsley,

"High Priests and the Politics of Roman Palestine," Journal for the Study of Judaism 17:1
(June 1986):42-43; and Mark A. Brighton, "The Sicarii in Acts: A New Perspective," Journal
of the Evangelical Theological Society 54:3 (September 2011):547-58.
434 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

followers, and that the people who now recognized him as an

impostor had turned against him.

21:39 Paul explained that he was "a Jew," and thus had a right to be
in the temple court of Israel. He was not a resident of Egypt,
but "a Roman citizen" of the well-respected Roman city of
"Tarsus." Tarsus was one of the three chief centers of learning
in the ancient world (a "no insignificant city"), along with
Athens and Alexandria. Strabo, the ancient Greek geographer,
wrote that in all that related to philosophy, literature, and
general education, the fame of Tarsus was exceeded that of
Athens and Alexandria.1 Tarsus had several hundred thousand
inhabitants and was noted for its textile industry.2 It was also
the capital "of Cilicia," and a free city in the empire.

"It is important to recognize that to a great extent

in antiquity people were judged by the importance
of the place where they were born. Their own
personal honor and dignity was in part derived
from the honor rating of the place from which they
came."3

"We have good reason to believe that at the

period of the Apostle's birth the Jews were
unmolested at Tarsus, where his father lived and
enjoyed the rights of a Roman citizen. It is a
mistake to suppose that this citizenship was a
privilege which belonged to the members of the
family, as being natives of this city. … It is more
probable that it came to him as a reward of
services rendered, during the civil wars, to some
influential Roman. Great numbers of Jews were
made slaves in the Civil Wars, and then
manumitted. A slave manumitted with due
formalities became a Roman citizen."4

1Citedby Howson, pp. 18, 32.

2Bock,Acts, p. 658.
3Witherington, The Acts …, p. 663.
4Howson, p. 38.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 435

21:40 These credentials persuaded the Roman commander to let Paul

address the mob.

"Paul had shown respect for the tribune's

authority, spoken an educated man's Greek, and
made considerable honor and status claims. On
these grounds the tribune's action is quite
believable. He had no evidence that Paul was not
who he claimed to be, and it was always very
unwise to refuse or offend someone of equal or
higher social status than oneself."1

Paul "motioned … with his hand" to the crowd, a gesture

designed to quiet them and rivet their attention (cf. 12:17).
Paul spoke to the Jews in Aramaic ("the Hebrew dialect"), the
vernacular of Palestinian Jews, rather than in Greek.2 This
would have helped his hearers realize that he was one of them.

Paul's speech in his defense 22:1-21

The speeches in Acts so far have been mainly in the form of deliberative
rhetoric, the purpose of which is to make people change their minds and
lives in view of the future. In chapters 22—26, however, the speeches are
forensic rhetoric, designed mainly for defensive and apologetic purposes.3

Paul needed to defend himself against the charge that he had been disloyal
to his people, the Mosaic Law, and the temple (cf. 21:28). His devout
Jewish audience was especially skeptical of Paul since he was a Hellenistic
Jew who fraternized with Gentiles. This is an excellent example of the Holy
Spirit giving the Lord's servant the words to say on the spur of the
moment, as Jesus had promised He would do (Matt. 10:16-20; Mark 13:9-
11). All of Paul's speeches from here on in Acts concern his defense.

"It [the rest of Acts] is a mixture of travel narratives and

defense speeches and it covers a full quarter of Acts,
indicating its importance."4

1Witherington, The Acts …, p. 664.

[Link], Sketches of …, pp. 20-21.
3See Witherington, The Acts …, pp. 660-61, for further discussion.
4Bock, Acts, p. 654.
436 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"It [this speech] begins with Paul, the ardent Jew, the
persecutor of the Christians (v. 2-5). It proceeds with Paul
converted into the witness for the Just One (v. 6-16). It closes
with Paul sent away from the Jews to the Gentiles with his
testimony (v. 17-21)."1

22:1-2 Paul addressed his audience warmly and respectfully, in the

same terms ("Brethren and fathers") Stephen had used (7:2).

"So St. Stephen had addressed a similar assembly,

in which had been Saul of Tarsus, who was now
charged with a like offence as had been laid to the
charge of the first Martyr."2

Using the Aramaic language had the desired effect: The Jews
paid even closer attention.

"The real crime of S. Paul was preaching to the

Gentiles, and the real heresy his gospel of equality
of privilege. Hence he defends himself by
asserting (1) his loyalty to Israel, and (2) that his
preaching was simply obedience to a divine
command."3

22:3 Paul began by relating his manner of life before his conversion.
He emphasized his orthodox background and education
"under" the most respected Jewish teacher of his day,
"Gamaliel" (cf. 5:34). We have no record of how old Paul was
when he came to Jerusalem in his youth.

"From a passage in a sermon attributed to St.

Chrysostom, it has been inferred that he was born
in the year 2 B.C. of our era. This is on the
supposition that he died A.D. 66, at the age of 68.
The date is not improbable; but the genuineness
of the sermon is suspected …"4

1Lenski,
p. 900.
2Knowling,2:456.
3Rackham, p. 407.
4Howson, p. 37.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 437

It is possible that Paul spent his early childhood in Jerusalem.1

Others believe he spent this part of his life in Tarsus.2 One view
is that Paul moved to Jerusalem between the ages of 10 and
12.3 Another is that he was 13 or 14 years old when he came
to Jerusalem.4 The difference in interpretation springs partly
from two different ways of punctuating this verse. Paul's point
in citing his background was to show his hearers that he was
as "zealous" for his Jewish heritage ("for God") as any of them
(cf. Gal. 1:14).

22:4-5 His zeal for God was clear in that he "persecuted" Christians
("this Way") "to the death" (cf. 9:1-2). This is precisely what
his hearers wanted to do in Paul's case. Paul did so as an agent
of the Sanhedrin ("Council"), which gave him authority to
pursue Christian Jews as far away as "Damascus."

22:6-9 Paul next related the events of his conversion, and stressed
the supernatural revelation God had given him. That revelation
accounted for the radical change in his life. This account of
Paul's conversion harmonizes with the other two accounts of
it that Luke (9:3-19) and Paul (26:12-18) gave us in Acts. On
this occasion, as well as in chapter 26, Paul emphasized
features that would have been especially significant to his
audience. His listeners were Jewish in chapter 22, and Roman
in chapter 26.

As in 9:3-6, Paul stressed that his encounter with God was an

event that God had initiated. It was not something that Paul or
others had sought. Jesus of Nazareth had reached out to him.
Therefore Jesus was not only the Messiah, but He was and is
the risen Messiah. It was this Messiah who had changed Paul's
perspective and understanding. When Paul asked, "Who are
you, Lord?" (v. 8), he was probably addressing the Person
speaking to him as God and as personal master (cf. 9:5).
Evidently Paul's traveling companions heard a voice-like sound,

1W. C. van Unnik, Tarsus or Jerusalem: The City of Paul's Youth, pp. 9, 28.
2E.g.,Richard N. Longenecker, Paul, Apostle of Liberty, pp. 25-27.
3Howson, p. 43.
4Robertson, 3:386. Cf. Knowling, 2:457.
438 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

but only Paul understood Jesus' words (v. 9; cf. 9:7; 26:14;
John 12:29).

22:10-11 As a good Jew, Paul wanted to obey divine revelation, so he

asked, "What shall I do, Lord?" Submissively, he allowed others
to lead him to "Damascus," where the Lord had instructed him
to "go" to receive further directions.

22:12-13 Paul described "Ananias" as a "devout" Jew who carefully

observed the "Law," and one who had a good reputation
among his fellow Israelites. Paul related Ananias' words more
fully here than Luke did in chapter 9. This respected Jew had
also received a revelation from God that he communicated to
Paul in distinctly Jewish terms ("Brother Saul … the God of our
fathers …"). Paul sought to impress his hearers with the fact
that a pious Jew had communicated God's mission to him.
Ananias had even called Paul his "brother."

22:14-15 Ananias explained to Paul that it was "the God of their (our)
fathers" who had appeared to Paul (cf. 3:14). This title for God
is distinctly Jewish. God wanted Paul to "know His will," to "see
the Righteous One" (the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth, v. 8), and
to receive direct revelation from Him ("hear an utterance from
His mouth"). Ananias also said that God had told him that Paul
was to be a witness "to all men" of what Paul had seen and
heard. This revelation vindicated Paul's ministry to Gentiles.

"It is important to remember that Paul in Acts is

not the apostle to the Gentiles. He has been sent
'to all persons,' [v. 15] which means both Jews
and Gentiles. He is the one through whom the Lord
has chosen to realize the divine purpose of
including both groups in salvation, as announced
already in Luke 2:30-32 and 3:6."1

22:16 Verse 16 has been a problem to some readers of Acts because

people could understand it to be saying that water baptism
washes away sins. The writers of Scripture present water
baptism, elsewhere, not as the agent of spiritual cleansing, but

1Tannehill, 2:280.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 439

as the illustration (symbol) of spiritual cleansing that has

already taken place (1 Cor. 6:11; 1 Pet. 3:21). The agent of
spiritual cleansing is faith in Christ. Paul referred to faith in this
verse as "calling on His name" (cf. Joel 2:32).

Paul had evidently experienced regeneration on the Damascus

Road, since he was persuaded by Ananias to be baptized
shortly afterward; he believed that Jesus of Nazareth was the
divine Messiah predicted in the Old Testament (v. 10; cf. Gal.
1:11-12; Acts 9:17-18). He experienced baptism in water
several days after he had called on the Lord for salvation. The
Lord had already washed Paul's sins away when he had called
on the Lord. Then later Paul arose and received baptism. The
Greek word epikalesamenos, translated "calling on," is an aorist
participle meaning "having called on."

"Baptism symbolized the method of salvation

(identification with Christ) and washing
symbolized the result (cleansing from sin)."1

22:17 Paul next related his mission from God and included some new
things that Luke did not record in chapter 9. Evidently Ananias
conveyed to Paul God's commission to go to the Gentiles
(9:15-16). In "Jerusalem," God confirmed this mission to Paul
by special revelation, as he "was praying in the temple"
following his return from Damascus (9:26-29; Gal. 1:18-19).
That took place in the third year after his conversion. The fact
that Paul was praying in the temple when God gave him
direction would have positively impressed this Jewish crowd
even further.

22:18-20 In that vision, the risen and exalted Jesus of Nazareth had
instructed Paul to leave Jerusalem. Luke did not mention this
instruction earlier (9:29-30), but instead had emphasized the
activity of Paul's fellow believers in sending him to Tarsus.
Their insistence was in harmony with the Lord's command.
Jerusalem was God's originally intended place of witness, and
the temple had been His place of revelation. The reason Paul
needed to leave Jerusalem, was that the Jews there would

1Kent, p. 166. See also Robertson, 3:391-92.

440 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"not accept" his testimony about Jesus, even though Paul had
formerly persecuted Jesus' disciples.

22:21 Paul was to go to the Gentiles, the Messiah revealed to him,

because the Jews would not accept his witness. Specifically,
the Lord directed Paul to "go … to the Gentiles" who were "far
away," namely: Gentiles who had no relationship to Judaism
(cf. 2:39).

F. F. Bruce concluded that in narrating Paul's speeches, Luke followed the

precedent of the Greek historian Thucydides. Thucydides wrote that,
though he himself composed the speeches in his history, he nonetheless
tried to reproduce the general meaning of what the speakers said.1 Under
the Holy Spirit's inspiration, Luke received guidance to write exactly what
God wanted written. Almost all scholars agree that Luke summarized most,
if not all, of the speeches that he recorded in Acts.

The Jews' response 22:22

Jews had taken messages from God to Gentiles many times in Israel's past
(e.g., Jonah; the Pharisees, Matt. 23:15; et al.). That revelation could not
have been what infuriated Paul's audience. What upset them was that Paul
was approaching Gentiles directly about the Messiah—without first
introducing them to Judaism and its institutions. This was equivalent to
placing Gentiles on the same footing before God as Jews, and this was the
height of apostasy to the traditional Jewish mind. This is why Paul's hearers
reacted so violently and allowed him to say no more.

"The bulk of Jerusalem has reacted now against Jesus, Peter,

John, Stephen, and Paul. For Acts, this is a final, key rejection
of the gospel …"2

Paul's defense before Claudius Lysias 22:23-29

22:23-24 Claudius Lysias could not understand why the Jews reacted as
they did. If he did not understand Aramaic, his confusion would
have been even greater. He could not tolerate a riot, so he
decided to get the truth from Paul by threatening him and, if
necessary, torturing him. This type of beating ("scourging"), a

1F. F. Bruce, "Paul's Apologetics …," p. 379.

2Bock, Acts, p. 653.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 441

bloody, violent whipping applied with strips of leather

embedded with scraps of bone or metal fastened to a stout
wooden handle, usually resulted in death or permanent
crippling.1 This was the weapon (a "scourge") the Roman
soldiers used to punish Jesus, albeit after Pilate had declared
Him innocent (Matt. 27:26; John 18:38—19:1). This would
have been the worst beating Paul ever experienced (cf. 16:22-
23; 2 Cor. 11:24-25).

"In being called as witness to this Jesus, Paul was

also called to suffering (9:16), suffering that
increasingly looks like Jesus' suffering (cf. 21:11-
14; 22:22) and includes an extensive series of
trials and threats to Paul's life. The trials, even
though extended over much more time and
depicted in fuller scenes, resemble Jesus' trials.
Both Jesus and Paul must appear before the
Jewish council, the Roman governor, and a Jewish
king. Both are repeatedly declared innocent yet
not released."2

22:25 Roman law protected Roman citizens from the "scourge" (Lat.
flagellum) before they went on trial, and even if they were
found guilty.3 The fact that Paul raised a question in his
defense, rather than demanding his release, reflects his self-
control in this dangerous situation. He was under the Spirit's
control.

"… martyrdom is only of value when it cannot be

avoided."4

"Paul waits until he has been chained for the same

reason as in 16.37; he now has legal room to
maneuver against them."5

1SeeWitherington, The Acts …, p. 676, for drawings of four varieties of Roman scourges.
2Tannehill,2:282.
3Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 528. Cf. Josephus, The Wars …, [Link].
4Morgan, The Acts …, p. 383.
5Keener, Bible Background …, p. 390.
442 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

22:26-28 During the reign of Emperor Claudius (A.D. 41-54), it was

possible to obtain Roman citizenship for a high price. Claudius
Lysias' name probably had some connection with the Emperor
Claudius, since the commander had evidently purchased his
citizenship under the reign of that emperor. This had not
always been possible in the empire. Earlier the government
conferred citizenship for rendering valuable service to a Roman
general or high official.1 This is probably how Paul's father or
grandfather received his citizenship. As the son of a Roman
citizen, Paul inherited this status; it did not come to him
because he was a citizen of Tarsus. Tarsus was a free city, not
a colony of Rome like Philippi. Born citizens enjoyed greater
respect than Romans who had bought their citizenship.2

Roman citizens kept the documents proving their status in

secure places, and nothing external identified them as citizens.
People normally accepted a verbal claim to being a Roman
citizen at face value, since to claim citizenship falsely was a
capital offense.3 Claudius Lysias took the course of action that
was safest for him: he accepted Paul's claim.

"Perhaps he [Paul] carries his diploma, a wooden

diptych containing his registration as a citizen."4

22:29 The soldiers should not have bound Paul ("put him in chains")
until someone had formally charged him, as a Roman citizen,
with a crime.

"The narrative of an action-packed day ends after

this indication that Paul is fully a member of the
two worlds to which he has been sent. He is both
a devout Jew (22:3) and a Roman citizen."5

1F.F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 446.

2See Witherington, The Acts …, pp. 679-84, for further discussion of Roman citizenship.
3Suetonius, "The Deified Claudius," in The Lives of the Caesars, [Link].
4Bock, Acts, p. 664.
5Tannehill, 2:284.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 443

Paul's defense before the Sanhedrin 22:30—23:10

"The irregular structure of Luke's account of Paul's defense

before the Sanhedrin evidently reflects the tumultuous
character of the session itself. Three matters pertaining to
Luke's apologetic purpose come to the fore: (1) Christianity is
rooted in the Jewish doctrine of the resurrection of the dead
(cf. 23:6); (2) the debate Paul was engaged in regarding
Christianity's claims must be viewed as first of all a Jewish
intramural affair (cf. 23:7-10); and (3) the ongoing
proclamation of the gospel in the Gentile world stems from a
divine mandate (cf. 23:11)."1

22:30 The commander "released" Paul from his chains, but kept him
in custody. He decided the Sanhedrin ("Council") should
discover why the Jews were accusing Paul, since he himself
could not figure this out. He ordered this body to meet to
examine Paul, because Claudius himself was responsible for
keeping peace in Jerusalem. If Paul's offenses proved
inconsequential, Claudius Lysias would release him. If the Jews
charged him with some religious crime, the Sanhedrin could try
him. If they charged him with a civil crime, the Roman provincial
governor would try him.2

This was at least the sixth time that the Sanhedrin had to
evaluate the claims of Christ. The first occasion was when it
met to consider reports about Jesus (John 11:47-53), and the
second was Jesus' trial (Matt. 26:57-68; 27:1-2; Mark 14:53-
65; 15:1; Luke 22:66-71). The third meeting was the trial of
Peter and John (4:5-22), the fourth was the trial of the Twelve
(5:21-40), and the fifth was Stephen's trial (6:12—7:60).

23:1 Evidently Paul intended to give his testimony again, this time
to the Sanhedrin ("Council"). He addressed this body using the
formal address common among Jews (lit. "Men brothers," Gr.
Andres adelphoi). He identified himself as a Jew by his manner
of speech, since his loyalty to Judaism was in question.

1Longenecker, "The Acts …," pp 529-30.

2See my comments on 4:5 for information about the Sanhedrin.
444 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Paul frequently claimed to have lived with a clear ("perfectly

good") "conscience before God" (cf. 20:18-21, 26-27; 24:16;
Rom 15:19, 23; Phil. 3:6; 2 Tim. 4:7). Paul referred to the
"conscience" about 23 times in his epistles. Here this claim
meant he believed that nothing he had done, which he was
about to relate, was contrary to the will of God contained in
the Hebrew Scriptures. Specifically, his Christian beliefs and
conduct did not compromise his Jewish heritage.

"He was not, of course, claiming sinlessness, nor

was he referring to the inner spiritual conflicts of
Rom. 7. The reference was to the externals of his
life, and the blamelessness of his conduct as
measured by the demands of the Law (cf. Phil.
3:4-6)."1

23:2 Paul's claim to uprightness so incensed "Ananias the high

priest," that he ordered a soldier to "strike Paul (him) on the
mouth." Probably Ananias, who was a Sadducee, had already
made up his mind that Paul, who had been a Pharisee, was
guilty. An officer of another high priest had similarly struck
Jesus when He had testified before the Sanhedrin (cf. John
18:20-23).

Ananias became high priest in A.D. 47. He was not the Ananias
who is called the high priest in the Gospels and in 4:7. The
Jewish high priesthood was a political appointment during
Rome's occupation of Palestine. Josephus painted this Ananias
as a despicable person. He seized, for his own use, tithes that
should have gone to the ordinary priests, and he gave large
bribes to Romans and Jews. The emperor at one point
summoned him to Rome, on charges of being involved in a
bloody battle between Jews and Samaritans, but he escaped
punishment. He was very wealthy, and resorted to violence and
even assassination to accomplish his ends. He was also very
pro-Roman, and the Jews finally assassinated him in their

1Kent, p. 168, footnote 19.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 445

uprising against Rome in A.D. 66, nine years after Paul stood
before him.1

23:3 Jewish law considered a person innocent until proved guilty,

but Ananias had punished Paul before he had even been
charged, much less tried and found guilty. Paul reacted
indignantly and uttered a prophecy of Ananias' judgment that
God fulfilled later. A "whitewashed wall" was one that was
frequently inferior on the inside, but looked good outwardly
(cf. Ezek. 13:10-16; Matt. 23:27). Paul's reaction was
extreme, but as he proceeded to explain, it resulted from
misunderstanding. Some have felt that Paul's reaction shows
that he was not acting under the leading of the Holy Spirit.2

"Paul did not speak this in any sinful heat or

passion, but in a holy zeal against the high priest's
abuse of his power, not at all with a spirit of
revenge. … It is against all law, human and divine,
natural and positive, to hinder a man from making
his defence [sic], and to condemn him unheard. It
is inexcusable in a high priest that is appointed to
judge according to the law."3

23:4-5 Paul may not have known that the person who commanded the
soldier to strike him was the high priest for any number of
reasons: Paul had not been in Jerusalem for an extended visit
for over 20 years, and may not have recognized the current
high priest by sight. Perhaps Ananias was not wearing his high
priestly robes, this occasion not being a regular meeting of the
Sanhedrin.4 Or perhaps Paul was looking in another direction
when Ananias gave the order to strike him. Perhaps Paul had
poor eyesight.5 However, this seems less likely in view of verse
1.

1Josephus, The Wars …, [Link]; [Link], 9; Antiquities of …, [Link]; [Link]; [Link], 4.

Cf. Wiersbe, 1:494.
2E.g., Gaebelein, The Annotated …, [Link].
3Henry, p. 1729.
4Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 531; Ger, p. 282.
5Alford, [Link]; McGee, 4:614.
446 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

The passage, to which some commentators appeal to argue

that Paul had deficient eyesight (Gal. 4:13-15), does not really
say that. Another possibility is that Paul was speaking in irony:
"I did not think that a man who would give such an order could
be the high priest."1 Some interpreters believe that Paul simply
lost his temper.2 Others believe he was apologizing.3 Paul
voiced similar passionate utterances on other occasions (cf.
Gal. 2:11; 5:12; Phil. 3:2).

The high priest was "a ruler of the Jews (your people)" in a
higher sense than was true of the rest of the Sanhedrin
members. Paul's quotation from Exodus 22:28 showed that he
was in subjection to God's revealed will, concerning which he
was on trial for repudiating. Being subject to governmental
authorities is as much of a requirement under the New
Covenant as it was under the Old (cf. Rom. 13:1-7; et al.). Paul
quoted the Old Covenant here for the benefit of the Jews who
lived under it.

23:6 Paul recognized that he could not get a fair trial in a court that
did not even observe the law it purported to defend, so he
changed his tactics. He decided to divide the jury and began
his defense again ("Men brethren"). This time he took the
offensive.

The issue of "the (hope and) resurrection of the dead" was

fundamental in Paul's case (cf. 17:32). Israel's national hope
of deliverance by her Messiah rested on the resurrection of
that Messiah as predicted in the Hebrew Scriptures. By raising
the old controversy of whether resurrection is possible, Paul
divided his accusers.

"Paul keeps coming back to the theme of hope

and resurrection even when it no longer provokes
disruption (cf. 24:15, 21; 28:20), and it will be a
central theme in Paul's climactic defense speech
before King Agrippa (26:6-8, 23). Paul is doing

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 364; Neil, p. 228.

2Ironside, Lectures on …, p. 537.
3Kent, p. 168.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 447

more than injecting a controversial subject into

the Sanhedrin hearing. He is trying to change the
entire issue of his trial, and he will persist in this
effort in subsequent scenes. Therefore, the
significance of Paul's statement that he is on trial
'concerning hope and resurrection of the dead'
can be understood only by considering the
development of this theme in later scenes."1

23:7-8 Paul's belief in the resurrection divided the Sanhedrin. The

"Sadducees" denied the "resurrection," as well as the
existence of (good) "angels," and (evil) "spirit(s)," but the
"Pharisees" believed in ("acknowledge[d]") these things.2

23:9-10 The Pharisees sided with Paul, and the Sadducees opposed him.
Their emotional dispute excluded any possibility of a serious
examination of Paul's conduct, or even a clarification of the
charges against him. The Pharisees moreover defended Paul's
claim to having received a vision on the Damascus Road (22:6-
11) or in the temple (22:17-21), but the Sadducees
repudiated it. The Roman commander must have thrown up his
hands in dismay, and "was afraid Paul would be torn to pieces
by them." For a second time he could not discover what Paul
had done, or why so many Jews hated him. Pilate had a similar
problem with Jesus (John 18:28—19:15). Claudius Lysias
decided to take Paul into protective custody in the Fortress
("the barracks").

The Lord's encouragement of Paul 23:11

Paul was undoubtedly wondering how he would ever get out of the mess in
which he found himself. At this critical moment, during the "night of the
next day" ("following night"; Gr. te epiouse nykti), the Lord appeared to
him again (cf. 9:4-6; 16:9; 18:9-10; 22:17-21; 27:23-24; Gen. 15:1) and
"stood at his side." The Lord's appearances to Paul all occurred at great
crises in his life. He assured the apostle that he would bear "witness in (at)
Rome," as he had already done in Jerusalem (1:8). This revelation is

1Tannehill,2:287.
2See my comments on 4:1 and 5:34. See Bock, Acts, pp. 671-2, for six views of what the
Sadducees believed about angels, and Witherington, The Acts …, pp. 692-93, for
discussion of the view that both terms refer to deceased persons.
448 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

essential to Luke's purpose in writing Acts, and it certainly must have given
Paul confidence as the events that followed unfolded.

"When Jesus' witnesses were previously imprisoned, prison

doors were wondrously opened for them (5:17-21; 12:1-11;
16:23-26). That is no longer the case. The Lord's reassurance
must take the place of miraculously opening doors. The divine
power that rescues from prison has become a powerful
presence that enables the witness to endure an imprisonment
that lasts for years."1

"This assurance meant much to Paul during the delays and

anxieties of the next two years, and goes far to account for
the calm and dignified bearing which seemed to mark him out
as a master of events rather than their victim."2

The Jews' plot to kill Paul 23:12-24

This is the most detailed destription of a plot against Paul in Acts (cf. 9:23-
25, 29-30; 20:3).

23:12-15 Paul's adversaries (cf. 21:27-29) evidently agreed together

not to "taste" food or drink again until Paul was dead (cf. John
16:2). Their plan was to have the chief priests and elders of
Israel ask the Roman commander to return Paul to the
Sanhedrin for further questioning. Assassins planned to kill him
somewhere on the streets: between the Fortress of Antonia
and the Hall of the Sanhedrin. These two buildings were not far
apart. The plotters surely realized that Paul's Roman guards
might kill some of their number in the process.

"The oath was not so suicidal as it seems, since

provision was made by the rabbis for releasing
participants from the consequences of failure to
carry out their purpose if external circumstances
had made it impossible."3

1Tannehill, 2:292.
2F.F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 455.
3Neil, p. 230.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 449

23:16-17 We know nothing more about "Paul's sister" than what Luke
stated here. She may have lived in Jerusalem, Tarsus, or
elsewhere. Obviously her "son," Paul's nephew, sided with his
uncle rather than with the assassins. This is the only reference
to Paul's immediate family in the New Testament. Other
writers used the Greek word neanian, translated "young man"
(v. 17), of persons in their twenties and thirties, as well as for
younger men (cf. 7:58; 20:9). However, verse 19 suggests
that he may have been even younger than a teenager. Paul
could receive visitors in the barracks where he was a prisoner,
because he was a Roman citizen in protective custody. He
could also summon a centurion to do certain favors for him,
which he did here.

"I find today that there is a group of super-pious

folk, very sincere and very well-meaning, which
tells me I should not go to a doctor concerning my
cancer or other illnesses but that I should trust
the Lord to heal me. Well, I certainly do trust the
Lord; I have turned my case over to the Great
Physician, and I believe He provides doctors. It
would have been a simple thing for Paul to have
told his nephew, 'Thanks for telling me the news,
but I'm trusting the Lord—so you can go back
home.' But we find here that Paul used the
privileges of his Roman citizenship which were
available to him. Obviously the Lord provides
these means and He expects us to use them. This
in no way means that we are not trusting Him.
Rather, we are trusting God to use the methods
and the means to accomplish His purpose."1

23:18-22 The commander took the advice of Paul's nephew seriously. He

probably knew Ananias well enough to know that the high
priest would go along with this assassination plot.

23:23-24 The commander also realized that Paul's enemies in Jerusalem

would stop at nothing to see him dead. As long as Paul was in
Jerusalem there was a danger of rioting. Consequently Claudius

1McGee, 4:616.
450 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

prepared to send him to the Roman provincial capital with a

heavy guard under cover of night. The total number of soldiers
may have been 270 or 470, depending on the meaning of
dexiolaboi, "spearmen." This word may refer to either foot
soldiers or to led horses.1

The question is whether there were, in addition to the 200

infantrymen and 70 cavalrymen, 200 "spearmen" or 200
"extra horses." The third hour of the night was 9:00 p.m. This
is the third time Paul left a city secretly at night (cf. 9:25;
17:10). Obviously Claudius Lysias did not want the
assassination of a Roman citizen on his record, so he took
precautions to protect Paul. Paul's guards continued to treat
him with the respect due a Roman citizen. The commander
even provided horses for him to ride on.

"The size of the escort is not excessive, in view of

the troubled times and Jewish fanaticism."2

Lysias' letter to Felix 23:25-30

23:25 The commander had to send a copy of the background of

Paul's case along with Paul himself. Luke wrote that what
follows in the text was substantially what the "letter"
contained.

23:26 This is the first mention of the commander's name in Acts. His
Greek name was "Lysias," and when he purchased his Roman
citizenship (cf. 22:28), he must have also taken, as his first
name, the Roman name of the emperor. "Felix" was the
governor of the Roman province of Syria, which included
Judea.3 Claudius Lysias addressed Felix politely (cf. 1:1; 24:2;
26:25).

23:27-30 The commander put himself in the best light possible in view
of the facts. He mentioned his "rescue" of Paul in the temple
courtyard, but did not include that he almost flogged Paul. New
in this letter is the mention of Paul's arrest by the Jews,

1Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 535; Neil, p. 231.

2Ibid.
3Cf. Josephus, The Wars …, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 451

evidently the Jewish temple police. Lysias wrote that he had

rescued Paul because he knew ("having learned") that Paul was
a Roman citizen, but in fact the commander only learned of
Paul's Roman citizenship after he had arrested ("rescued") him
(21:34; 22:26-27).

Of particular importance is the notice that in Lysias' judgment,

Paul was not guilty of any crime (cf. John 18:38) "deserving
death or imprisonment," but his case only involved disputes
("questions") over Jewish theology or "their Law" (cf. Gallio in
18:14-15). This was another judgment, favoring not only Paul
but Christianity, by a Roman official, that Luke carefully
documented (cf. 19:40; 23:9; 25:25; 26:31-32). Every Roman
magistrate before whom Paul appeared (Gallio, Lysias, Felix,
and Festus) declared him innocent. Undoubtedly Claudius
Lysias told the Jewish leaders to go to Caesarea after Paul had
left Jerusalem.

Paul's trip back to Caesarea 23:31-32

The large contingent of Roman soldiers escorted Paul, through the Judean
hill country and the Shephelah (foothills), to the town of "Antipatris,"
about 37 miles northwest of Jerusalem. The remaining 28 miles to
Caesarea covered flatter terrain, in an area that had a sparser Jewish
population. Paul's party traveled across this distance in daylight. The foot
soldiers "returned" to Jerusalem ("the barracks") from Antipatris, and the
70 remaining cavalry soldiers ("horsemen") escorted Paul the rest of the
way to Caesarea.

Paul's departure from Jerusalem was the first leg of his journey to Rome.
God had used Paul as His witness in Jerusalem, once again, and had
preserved him to witness to the uttermost part of the earth.

3. Ministry in Caesarea 23:33—26:32

Paul's ministry in Caesarea was from prison. Luke devoted about three
chapters to Paul's ministry in Caesarea, primarily to reemphasize the
legality of Christianity while various Roman officials scrutinized it, and to
repeat major themes in Paul's addresses.
452 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Paul's introduction to Felix 23:33-35

23:33 The "governor" (procurator) of Judea at this time was

Antonius Felix (A.D. 52-59).1 Pontius Pilate occupied this
office from A.D. 26 to 36. Felix had a reputation for being a
harsh ruler who had risen from a lowly background. The Roman
historian Tacitus described him as follows.

"… Antonius Felix, practiced every kind of cruelty

and lust, wielding the power of [a] king with all the
instincts of a slave."2

He was apparently a freed man, someone who had been a

bondsman (indentured servant or bondslave) but had received
his freedom from an authoritative Roman, who in this case was
Emperor Claudius' mother, Antonia. He was the first slave ever
to become the governor of a Roman province.3 Felix rose to
power as a result of his influential brother, his self-serving
political maneuvering, and his three calculating marriages. He
normally dealt very severely with Jews, especially "The
Daggermen," the terrorists who sought to overthrow Roman
rule by assassinating key Romans and pro-Roman Jews (cf.
21:38).4

23:34-35 Felix inquired concerning Paul's home "province" for the

following reason: If Paul had come from an area in the empire
that had its own ruler, in addition to a Roman governor, then
that local authority had a right to witness the proceedings (cf.
Luke 23:6-12). "Cilicia" was not such a place, however, so Felix
could deal with Paul himself. He needed to hear the testimony
of Paul's "accusers," of course. Consequently Felix "kept" Paul
in the governor's palace, "Herod's Praetorium," which Herod
the Great had built, until those Jews arrived and he could
conduct a hearing. The governor's palace had cells for
prisoners. Paul would have been fairly comfortable there, since

1Cf. F. F. Bruce, "Chronological Questions …," pp. 284-87; David W. J. Gill, "Acts and
Roman Policy in Judaea," in The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book
of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 21-25.
2Tacitus, The Histories, 5:9.
3Barclay, p. 184.
4Josephus, The Wars …, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 453

he was a Roman citizen who had not even been formally

charged with a crime.

Paul's defense before Felix ch. 24

"The delivery of the prisoner Paul to Caesarea marked the

beginning of a two-year imprisonment in that city. During this
period he stated his case, and also the case for the Christian
gospel, to two provincial governors and a king, fulfilling one
aspect of the Lord's prediction about his ministry (9:15)."1

"In his account of Paul's defense before Felix, Luke gives

almost equal space to (1) the Jewish charges against Paul (vv.
1-9), (2) Paul's reply to these charges (vv. 10-21), and (3)
Felix's response (vv. 22-27). He does this, it seems, because
he wants to show that despite the devious skill of the Jewish
charges and the notorious cruelty and corruptibility of Felix, no
other conclusions can be drawn from Paul's appearance before
him than that (1) Christianity had nothing to do with political
sedition and (2) Jewish opposition to Christianity sprang from
the Christian claim to legitimate fulfillment of the hopes of
Judaism."2

The presentation of charges against Paul 24:1-9

24:1 The heat of the Jews' hatred of Paul is obvious from their
speedy trip to Caesarea. The "after five days" evidently refers
to the period from Paul's arrest in the temple courtyard to this
trial (cf. v. 11; 21:27). The Jews' antagonism is also clear in
that "Ananias" himself made the trip, and that Paul's accusers
had hired a special (prosecuting) "attorney" to present their
case. "Tertullus" (a diminutive form of "Tertius"; Rom. 16:22)
was probably a Hellenistic Jew, in view of his Roman name,
though he could have been a Roman Gentile, and hence a Latin
speaker. "Attorney" is the translation of a Greek word that
appears only here in the New Testament (rhetoros), which
means a lawyer who was especially skillful in oratory.

1Kent, p. 172.
2Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 538.
454 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

24:2-4 Flattery of officials in formal speeches was fashionable in Paul's

day, and Tertullus heaped praise on Felix. The title "most
excellent" usually applied to men who enjoyed a higher social
rank than Felix. Felix was a fierce ruler, and the "peace" that
existed was a result of terror rather than tranquillity. Tertullus
praised Felix for being a peacemaker—in preparation for his
charge that Paul was a disturber of the peace (vv. 5-6). Felix's
"reforms" were more like purges. Speakers of that day also
usually promised to be brief, which promises then—as now—
they did not always keep.

24:5 Tertullus leveled three specific charges against Paul: a personal

charge (heresy), a political charge (treason), and a religious
charge (sacrilege). First, he was a "pest" and a troublemaker
("fellow who stirs up dissension") throughout the Roman
Empire, having "stirred up" Jews wherever he went. This was
a serious charge because Rome sought to preserve peace in
the world, and Jewish uprisings were a perennial problem to
Roman officials.

Second, Tertullus pictured Paul as the leader of a cult outside

mainstream Judaism. The Roman Empire tolerated Judaism,
but the "sect of the Nazarenes" was not a part of Judaism to
the Jewish leaders. This title is a unique name for Christianity
found nowhere else in the New Testament. Tertullus evidently
used this name to make "the Way" sound as bad as possible.

"That [second charge] coupled Paul with

Messianic movements; and the Romans knew what
havoc false Messiahs could cause and how they
could whip the people into hysterical risings which
were only settled at the cost of blood."1

The first two charges gave the impression that Paul was guilty
of sedition against Rome. The Jews had similarly charged Jesus
with political sedition before Pilate (cf. Luke 23:2, 5).

24:6-8 Third, Tertullus claimed Paul had tried to "desecrate the

temple," allegedly by attempting to bring a Gentile into its

1Barclay, p. 185.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 455

inner precincts (21:28). This was a softening of the Asian

Jews' earlier charge that Paul had indeed brought Trophimus
into the inner precincts of the temple (21:28-29). Tertullus'
statement that the Jews had arrested Paul harmonized with
Lysias' report (23:27). The Jews had also tried to kill Paul on
the spot (21:31-33). Probably Tertullus left that part out
because it would have put the Jews in a very bad light. This
third charge implied that Felix should put Paul to death, since
Rome had given the Jews the right to execute temple
desecrators.

24:9 All of Paul's accusers ("the Jews") confirmed Tertullus'

charges. They undoubtedly expected Felix to dispatch Paul
quickly, since Felix had repeatedly crucified the leaders of
uprisings for disturbing the peace of Rome.1

Paul's defense before Felix 24:10-21

24:10 Paul's complimentary introduction was sincere and truthful

("for many years you have been a judge to this nation"). Felix
had had contact with the Jews in Palestine for over 10 years,
first in Samaria and then in Judea. Paul's introduction was also
briefer than Tertullus' opening statement.

"Although Tertullus is supposed to be a skilled

orator, Paul demonstrates his superior skill by
making use of Tertullus' words to build his own
case."2

24:11 In response to Tertullus' first charge (v. 5), Paul said that since
he had been in Jerusalem only "12 days," implying he had not
had time to be much of a pest.

24:12-13 In response to the third charge (v. 6), Paul replied that he had
gone to Jerusalem "to worship" (v. 11). He had gone to bring
money to the Jews there, and to present offerings to Yahweh
(v. 17), not to stir up political trouble (cf. Gal. 2:7-9). His
accusers could not "prove" that he had even carried on "a
discussion" in the "temple," or in the "synagogues," or even in

1Josephus, The Wars …, [Link]-5.

2Tannehill, 2:298.
456 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

the "city," much less fomented "a riot." There was, therefore,
no evidence to support these two charges against him.

24:14 Paul rebutted the second charge of leading a cult (v. 5), by
explaining that his beliefs harmonized with the teachings of the
Hebrew Scriptures ("the Law and … the Prophets"). This would
have helped Felix see that the real conflict between Paul and
his accusers was religious, and not political, as Tertullus had
made it appear.

"Two arguments are contained here: (1) Our

nation is divided into what they call sects—the
sect of the Pharisees, and that of the
Sadducees—all the difference between them and
me is, that I belong to neither of these, but to
another sect, or religious section of the nation,
which from its Head they call Nazarenes: for this
reason, and this alone, am I hated. (2) The Roman
law allows every nation to worship its own deities;
I claim protection under that law, worshipping the
God of my ancestors, even as they, only of a
different sect of the common religion."1

"The mention of the prophets as well as of the law

shows that a reference to the Messianic hopes is
intended."2

Paul was not claiming that the church is the continuation of

Israel (cf. Eph. 2:11-22). His point was that his beliefs did not
contradict anything predicted in the Old Testament.

24:15 Ananias was a Sadducee, and the Sadducees did not believe in
the resurrection (23:8). Therefore Felix must have seen that
Paul and Ananias disagreed strongly on this theological point.
The Jews who accompanied Ananias to Caesarea evidently
included Pharisees, who did believe in the resurrection. Belief
in "the resurrection" was the theologically conservative

1Jamieson, et al., p. 1128.

2Knowling, 2:483.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 457

position of the Jews as a whole, since the Old Testament

teaches it (e.g., Ps. 16:10-11; Dan. 12:2).

This verse contains the only New Testament reference that

Paul believed in both the resurrection of "the wicked" and the
resurrection of "the righteous." Nevertheless the Scriptures
speak elsewhere of God raising all people to face judgment
(e.g., Dan. 12:2; Matt. 25:31-33, 46; John 5:28-29; Acts
10:42; 17:31; Rev. 20:12-15).

24:16 Since Paul believed God would resurrect him, he sought to

maintain "a clear (blameless) conscience" while he lived.
Conscience is the capacity to feel guilt.

24:17-18a Rather than desecrating the temple (v. 6), Paul said he had
returned to Jerusalem to give money ("alms") to the Jews
there, and to "present" worship "offerings" in the temple. His
gift was for the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem. Yet at the same
time, since Paul's desire was that they (the Jewish Christians)
would evangelize the unsaved Jews there, he could honestly
say that he had brought alms "to his (my) nation."1 "Alms"
refers to the collection for the poor Jewish Christians, and
"offerings" to Paul's paying the expenses of the four men who
had taken a vow (21:23-26). He had just completed the
purification rites in an orderly manner, when some other Jews
("from Asia," v. 18b) stirred up dissension and started a riot.

24:18b-19 Paul pointed out that his original accusers were not "present"
at his hearing. They "should (ought to) have been." Probably
the Sanhedrin ruled that out because, in view of the facts, it
would have been clear that there was no basis for their
charges.

"Roman law imposed heavy penalties upon

accusers who abandoned their charges
(destitutio), and the disappearance of accusers
often meant the withdrawal of a charge. Their
absence, therefore, suggested that they had

1Adolph Harnack, The Date of the Acts and of the Synoptic Gospels, p. 74.
458 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

nothing against him that would stand up in a

Roman court of law."1

24:20-21 Paul's present accusers ("these men"; i.e., Ananias, the

Sadducees, plus several Pharisees) could not even testify that
the Sanhedrin ("Council") had found him guilty ("tell what
misdeed they found") when he appeared before that body.
Some of them had disagreed with his belief about
"resurrection." Therefore, Paul concluded, he was on trial over
the issue of the resurrection. This put Felix in the awkward
position of having to decide a theological issue over which his
Jewish subjects disagreed.

"One of the greatest things about Paul is that he speaks in his

own defence with force, with vigour and sometimes with a
flash of indignation—but there never emerge the accents of
self-pity or of bitterness, which would have been so natural in
a man whose finest actions had been so cruelly and
deliberately misinterpreted and mis-stated."2

The conclusion of Paul's hearing 24:22-23

24:22 Felix probably gained his "knowledge" of Christianity ("a more

exact knowledge of the Way") from several sources: his
current Jewish wife (who was a Herodian), Romans and Jews
from Judea, and many types of individuals from other parts of
the empire. He sought to preserve the peace by delaying the
trial, and by separating Paul from his accusers. "Lysias" had
already given his testimony in his letter to Felix (23:26-30),
so Felix was stalling for Paul's benefit.

24:23 While Paul waited for Lysias to appear in Caesarea, the apostle
continued to enjoy considerable personal "freedom"—as well
as Roman protection from his Jewish enemies. Paul's friends
probably included Aristarchus, Luke, and Philip the evangelist
who evidently lived in Caesarea (27:2; 21:8).

1Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 541.

2Barclay, p. 186.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 459

Paul's subsequent ministry to Felix 24:24-27

24:24 Sometime later Felix, along with his current wife, sent for Paul.
"Drusilla" was the youngest daughter of Herod Agrippa I, who
had been king over Palestine from A.D. 37-44. It was he who
had authorized the death of James, the son of Zebedee (12:1-
2), and had imprisoned Peter (12:3-11). Drusilla was Felix's
third wife, whom he had married when she was 16 years old.
She was now (A.D. 57) 19. She had previously been the wife
of Azizus, the king of Emesa, a state within Syria, but Felix
broke up that marriage to get her.1

Felix himself had been married twice before, to princesses, the

first of which was the granddaughter of Anthony and
Cleopatra. Felix used his marriages to advance his political
career. The Herods were, of course, Idumeans, part Israelite
and part Edomite. Drusilla eventually died when Mt. Vesuvius
erupted, along with her child by Felix.2

Something about Paul and or his gospel seems to have

fascinated Felix. Someone commented that when Paul talked
to Felix and Drusilla, enslaved royalty was addressing royal
slaves.3

24:25 Paul's emphases in his interview with Felix and Drusilla were
the same three things—that Jesus Christ had predicted the
Holy Spirit would convict people about—that would bring them
to faith. These things were: sin ("self-control"),
"righteousness," and "judgment" (John 16:8-11). Felix and
Drusilla were notoriously deficient in all three of these areas. It
is not surprising that Felix became uneasy. He apparently was
willing to discuss theology but not personal morality and
responsibility. These subjects terrified him (Gr. emphobos).

"Felix sat in transfixed silence while Paul stood up

before him and plunged the two-edged sword of
God's holy law into his guilt [sic] conscience, till
the hardened reprobate could not command

1Ibid.,
p. 187.
2Howson, p. 601.
3Cf. Morgan, The Acts …, p. 405.
460 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

himself. A greater seal was never set to the power

of Paul's preaching than when Felix shook and
could not sit still under the Apostle's words."1

Felix's decision to postpone making a decision about his

relationship to God is a common one. Often people put off this
most important decision until they cannot make it. This is
probably why most people who make decisions for Christ do
so when they are young. Older people normally become
hardened to the gospel.2 We do not know if Felix ever trusted
in Christ; there is no evidence that he did.

24:26 We do not know for sure where Paul got the "money" that Felix
hoped Paul would give him (bribe him with), or even if he had
it. Perhaps the Christians who heard of his imprisonment
contributed to his support (cf. v. 23; 27:3).3

"… although provincial governors were prohibited

by law from taking bribes from prisoners, the
practice was common and, in the case of Felix,
quite in character."4

Matthew Henry had an interesting view on giving Felix money

for Paul's release:

"Though Paul is to be commended that he would

not offer money to Felix, yet I know not whether
his friends are to be commended in not doing it
for him. I ought not to bribe a man to do an unjust
thing, but, if he will not do me justice without a
fee, it is but doing myself justice to give it to him;
and, if they might do it, it was a shame they did
not do it."5

24:27 The "two years" to which Luke referred were evidently the
years of Paul's detention in Caesarea. Felix's superiors relieved

1Whyte, 2:171.
2See McGee, 4:620-21.
3See Ramsay, St. Paul …, pp. 310-12.
4Neil, p. 236. Cf. Josephus, The Wars …, [Link].
5Henry, p. 1736.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 461

him of his position, because he had handled a conflict in

Caesarea too harshly, between the Jewish and Gentile
residents, which resulted in the suffering and death of innocent
people. Too many Jews had died or been mistreated.1 His
replacement, "Portius Festus," served as procurator of Judea
from A.D. 59 to 61.2 To appease the Jews, Felix "left Paul
imprisoned." The apostle had become a political pawn in the
will of God.

It is quite likely that, if Luke was with Paul at this time, he used these two
years to do some of the research he referred to at the beginning of his
two-part work (i.e., Luke-Acts; cf. Luke 1:3; Acts 1:1). He may have even
written his Gospel then, and some of Acts. A minority of scholars believes
that Paul wrote some or all of his Prison Epistles during his Caesarean
imprisonment. One expositor believed Luke wrote the Book of Hebrews
under Paul's tutelage during this time.3 This is quite unlikely.

Paul's defense before Festus 25:1-12

This is the shortest of Paul's five defenses that Luke documented. Paul
made his five defenses to: (1) the Jewish mob on the Antonia Fortress
stairway (22:1-21); (2) the Sanhedrin (23:1-6); (3) Felix (24:10-21); (4)
Festus (25:8, 10-11); and (5) Herod Agrippa II (26:1-26). This hearing is
quite similar to Paul's defense before Felix, except that here the apostle
appealed to the emperor.

"Luke's apologetic purpose is to show that only when Roman

administrators were largely ignorant of the facts of the case
were concessions made to Jewish opposition that could prove
disastrous for the Christian movement."4

Festus' visit to Jerusalem 25:1-5

25:1 Portius Festus was a more moderate and wise governor than
Felix.5 We can see his wisdom in his decision to meet with the
Jewish leaders in "Jerusalem" soon after he took office ("three

1Josephus, The Wars …, [Link]; Idem, Antiquities of …, [Link].

2Idem,The Wars …, [Link]; F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 474; cf. Gill, p. 25.
3Morgan, The Acts …, p. 394.
4Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 544.
5Josephus, The Wars …, [Link]; Antiquities of …, [Link]-11.
462 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

days later"). The "province" in view was Syria, which contained

Judea.

25:2-3 These Jews realized that they did not have much hope of doing
away with Paul through the Roman courts. The Jews' case
against Paul was too weak. Consequently they urged the new
governor to return Paul "to Jerusalem" so they could "kill him
on the way" there (cf. 23:12-15). Ishmael had succeeded
Ananias as high priest during the final days of Felix's
governorship.1

25:4-5 Festus did not agree to their request but promised to try Paul
in Caesarea if his accusers would go down there with him.

Paul's hearing before Festus and the Jewish leaders in Caesarea 25:6-
12

25:6-8 The "judgment seat," or "seat on the tribunal" (Gr. bema, v.

6, cf. vv. 10, 17; 12:21; 18:12; Matt. 27:19; John 19:13; 2
Cor. 5:10), on which Festus sat was customarily in a public
place. In regard to Paul's defense (v. 8), the serious charges
made by the Jews appear to have been the same ones as those
that Tertullus had presented (24:5-6). However, the Jews
could not prove them, and they produced no witnesses, so all
Paul had to do was deny them categorically. This trial seems
to have proceeded very much as the one before Felix had (ch.
24). Luke summarized the proceedings.

25:9 As the new governor, Festus did not want to do anything that
would turn the Jewish authorities against him, especially in
view of Felix's bad record. He did not know how to proceed (v.
20), but he wanted to stay in the Jews' good graces by doing
them "a favor." Therefore he somewhat naïvely asked Paul if
he was "willing" to move his trial to Jerusalem, the site of some
of his alleged crimes. The fact that he asked Paul's permission
indicates that Paul was not a common criminal, but an
unconvicted Roman citizen with rights that the governor had
to respect.

1See ibid., [Link], 11.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 463

25:10-11 Paul turned this offer down, perhaps because he feared that in
Jerusalem, popular opinion against him might sway his judge
even more strongly than it had in Caesarea. His "appeal" for a
trial in Rome, "to Caesar," was the right of every Roman citizen
who believed he was in danger of violent coercion or capital
punishment in a lower court.1 Only Roman citizens who were
murderers, pirates, or bandits caught in the act could not make
this appeal.2

At this time, Nero was emperor, but in the early years of his
rule (A.D. 54-62) he was a relatively admirable emperor, and
Paul had no reason to fear him (A.D. 59). Only after A.D. 62
did Nero begin to rule erratically and to turn against
Christianity.3

Nothing in the New Testament indicates that Paul's appeal to

Caesar was contrary to God's will. Paul probably considered
this appeal as the only way he could reach Rome, having been
detained in Caesarea for two years.

25:12 Paul's appeal got Festus off the hook with the Jews, so the
governor willingly granted it. He could have released Paul
because he was innocent (cf. 26:32), but the charges against
him were political sedition and profaning the temple, both of
which were capital offenses.

Michael Gray-Fow argued that Paul appealed to Caesar while he

was under Festus' authority, rather than when he was under
Felix's authority, because he believed that Festus would
respect his request for a hearing, whereas Felix would not.4

"The narrator shows unusual interest in Felix and Festus. They

are complex characters with conflicting tendencies. Felix is
attracted to Paul and his message, yet seeks a bribe and leaves
Paul in prison to appease Paul's enemies. Festus presents a
favorable image of himself to the public, but his handling of

1Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 545.

2Barclay,p. 189.
3Cf. Josephus, The Wars …, [Link].
4See Michael J. G. Gray-Fow, "Why Festus, Not Feliz? Paul's Caesarem Appello," Journal of

the Evangelical Theological Society 59:3 (September 2016):473-85.

464 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Paul's case is tainted with favoritism. Neither one is willing to

offend the high priests and elders by releasing Paul. The
narrator's characterization of the Roman governors
contributes to a portrait of Paul as one caught in a web of self-
interested maneuvers by people who vie for support within the
political jungle. However, Paul is not just a helpless victim. As
opportunity comes, he continues to bear witness to his Lord.
Although Paul continues to be denied justice and freedom, the
saving purpose of God still has use for this resourceful and
faithful prisoner."1

Jesus had also stood trial before two Roman officials: Pontius Pilate and
Herod Antipas I.

Herod Agrippa II's visit to Festus 25:13-22

The charges against Paul, and particularly his innocence, are the point of
this pericope.

25:13 This "King Agrippa" was Marcus Julius Agrippa II, the son of
Herod Agrippa I (12:1-11), the grandson of Aristobulus, and
the great grandson of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1).2 Herod the
Great had tried to destroy the infant Jesus. One of his sons,
Antipas, Agrippa II's great uncle, beheaded John the Baptist
and tried our Lord. Agrippa II's father, Agrippa I, had executed
James, the son of Zebedee and brother of John. He had also
imprisoned Peter and died in Caesarea (ch. 12). His son,
Agrippa II, is the man Paul now faced. Agrippa II had grown up
in Rome, and was a favorite of Emperor Claudius. He was the
last in the Herodian dynasty, and has been considered the best
of the Herods. He was also a friend to Flavius Josephus, who
served as governor of Galilee and a Roman general about this
time.3 Among his other powers, Agrippa II was superintendent
of the Jerusalem temple, and he had the power to appoint
Israel's high priests.4

1Tannehill,2:314.
2See the diagram "Herod's Family Tree" above at 12:1-2, and F. F. Bruce, "Chronological
Questions …," pp. 283-84.
3See Josephus, The Life …, par. 65, et al.
4Howson, pp. 601, 617.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 465

At the time he visited Festus, "Agrippa" II was the king whom

Rome had appointed over the territory northeast of the Judean
province. He lived in Caesarea Philippi (Dan of the Old
Testament), which he renamed "Neronias" in honor of Nero.
Agrippa was about 30 years old at this time, and his sister,
"Bernice" (Lat. Veronica), was one year younger. He ruled this
region from A.D. 50 to 70. Drusilla, Felix's wife, was Agrippa
and Bernice's younger sister. Bernice was first married to her
uncle Herod, King of Chalcis, and after he died, she lived with
her brother, Agrippa, in a suspicious relationship.1 She
concluded her profligate life by a criminal connection with
Titus, the conqueror of Jerusalem.2

Agrippa and Bernice evidently visited Festus on this occasion

to "pay their respects" to the new governor of their
neighboring province. Agrippa and Bernice were essentially
favorable to the Jews. They both tried to avert the Roman
massacre of the Jews in A.D. 66-70.3

25:14a Festus apparently wanted to discuss Paul's "case" with

Agrippa because he needed to clarify the charges against Paul
(v. 27). Agrippa had a reputation for being an expert in Jewish
matters, since he was part Jewish and had grown up in the
Herodian family. He was the person to whom Rome had given
the authority: to appoint the Jewish high priest, and to
preserve the temple treasury and vestments.4

25:14b-21 Festus reviewed Paul's situation, and confessed his own

surprise at the nature of the "charges" the Jews had brought
against him. They were matters concerning the Jewish
"religion" (cf. 18:15; 23:29), and the resurrection of Jesus.
Luke did not previously record that Paul had spoken to Festus
about Jesus' resurrection, but apparently he had. Festus did
not know "how" to deal with ("investigate") these charges (v.
20).

1Josephus, Antiquities of …, [Link].

2Howson, p. 600. See also Lenski, pp. 1002-3.
3Josephus, The Wars …, [Link]; [Link].
4Idem, Antiquities of …, [Link], 7.
466 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"It is interesting that by this stage the question

of Paul's alleged desecration of the temple has
quite disappeared from sight, and the topic of the
resurrection (23:4; 24:21) has replaced it. … The
real ground of dispute is that Paul preaches the
resurrection of Jesus, something which the
Sadducees refused to believe on principle and
which the Pharisees likewise refused to believe
although they admitted the fact of a final
resurrection of all men."1

25:22 The case interested Agrippa, and he asked "to hear" Paul.
Festus readily agreed, hoping that Agrippa would be able to
help him understand Paul's situation, and provide information
he could use in his report to the emperor.

Jesus had also appeared before a Jewish king, Herod Antipas I,

who similarly wanted to meet Him (Luke 23:8). However, Paul's
interview with Agrippa proved to be more satisfying to this
king than Jesus' appearance before Antipas had been to that
king (cf. Luke 23:6-12).

Paul's defense before Agrippa 25:23—26:32

This is the longest of Paul's five defenses. It centers on the gospel with an
evangelistic appeal, rather than on the charges against Paul. This emphasis
harmonizes with Luke's evangelistic purpose in Luke and Acts, and is a
fitting climax to that purpose. It also documents God's faithfulness in
allowing Paul to witness before kings (cf. 9:15).

"Inherent in Luke's account are at least three apologetic

themes: (1) Paul's relations with the Roman provincial
government in Judea did not end in dissonance but with an
acknowledgment of his innocence (cf. 25:25; 26:31); (2) even
though the Jewish high priests and Sanhedrin opposed Paul,
the Jewish king who in Rome's eyes outranked them agreed
with a verdict of innocence (cf. 26:32); and (3) Paul's
innocence was demonstrated not only before Roman and

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 388.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 467

Jewish rulers but also publicly before 'the high ranking officers
and the leading men of the city' (25:23)."1

The preliminaries of the hearing 25:23-27

25:23 Festus used this occasion to honor Agrippa and Bernice before
the local Caesarean leaders ("prominent men of the city").
There were five "commanders" based in Caesarea, each with
responsibility for 1,000 soldiers. They all had equal authority
to Claudius Lysias, the commander of the cohort based in
Jerusalem (cf. 21:31—23:30; 24:22). Besides these
commanders, many prominent men of the city were present in
the "auditorium" of the governor's palace.

"Everyone who was anyone would have been

there."2

Agrippa and Bernice conducted themselves like very important

individuals with "great pomp", but Paul was the truly significant
person in this gathering, as history has demonstrated (cf. Luke
21:12).

25:24-27 In reviewing the reasons for conducting this hearing, Festus

acknowledged that Paul had done "nothing worthy of death"
as the Jews had charged (v. 25). Pilate had made a similar
observation about Jesus' innocence (Luke 23:4, 14, 22).
Festus referred to the Emperor (Gr. sebastos, cf. v. 21) as his
"lord" (kyrios, meaning at least "majesty,"3 and perhaps even
"deity,"4 vv. 25, 26). But Paul would preach his "Lord," a
higher authority than Nero, to this crowd (cf. John 19:19).
Festus "decided to send" Paul to Nero, rather than sending him
back to Jerusalem (v. 9; cf. 26:32). After explaining his need
in face-saving language, Festus turned the hearing over to
Agrippa.

1Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 550.

2The NET Bible note on verse 23.
3Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, s.v. "kyrios, et al.," by Gottfried Quel and
Werner Foerster, 3(1965):1039-95.
4Ladd, "The Acts …," p. 1171.
468 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"This naïve confession of Festus reveals how

unjust has been his whole treatment of Paul."1

Luke undoubtedly included Festus' preamble in Acts because it was

another testimony by a Roman official that Paul and Christianity were not
threats to the empire.

Paul's speech to the dignitaries 26:1-23

Paul was not on trial here. When he had appealed to Caesar (25:11), he
had guaranteed that his next trial would be before the emperor. This was
just a hearing designed to acquaint Agrippa with Paul's case, so Agrippa
could give Festus help in understanding it and communicating it to the
emperor.

"This testimony of Paul is not a defense of himself. It is a

declaration of the gospel with the evident purpose of winning
Agrippa and the others present to Christ. This is a dramatic
scene, and this chapter is one of the greatest pieces of
literature, either secular or inspired…

"There is a consummate passion filling the soul of the apostle

as he speaks. I think this is his masterpiece. His message on
Mars' Hill is great, but it does not compare at all to this
message."2

The Lord had told Paul that he would bear His name before the Gentiles
and kings (9:15). Jesus had also told His disciples that before the
Tribulation, enemies would deliver them to prison and bring them before
kings and governors for His name's sake. This, He had said, would lead to
an opportunity for their testimony (Luke 21:12-13). This is exactly what
happened to Paul, and he used this opportunity to give his testimony, as
this chapter records.3

26:1 Paul apparently stretched out his hand, assuming the pose of
an orator. The phrase "stretched out his hand" in Greek differs
from the similar ones in 13:16 and 21:40. This "defense" is

1Robertson, 3:441.
2McGee, 4:624, 626.
3See Alister E. McGrath, "Apologetics to the Romans," Bibliotheca Sacra 155:620

(October-December 1998):391.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 469

Paul's fullest, most formal, and climactic of all the ones Luke
recorded in Acts (cf. 22:1-21; 23:1-6; 24:10-21; 25:8, 10-
11). It is quite similar to the one he delivered from the steps
of the Antonia Fortress (22:1-21), but he selected his words
here carefully to appeal to Agrippa and the other Romans
present.1

"Paul converted this great hall into a church and

acted as the preacher."2

26:2-3 Paul began with a customary introduction, in which he

complimented the king sincerely ("you are an expert"), and
urged him to listen "patiently." He did not promise a short
defense (cf. 24:2-4, 10).

"This was just the kind of situation Paul had

longed for during two bleak years in prison—viz.,
a knowledgeable judge and a not inherently
antagonistic audience before whom he could not
only make his defense but also proclaim his
message."3

26:4-7 The essence of the controversy surrounding Paul's ministry

and teaching, he explained, was the fulfillment of God's
"promise" to Israel, namely: salvation through a Messiah. This
promise included personal spiritual salvation, as well as national
deliverance and blessing—that the Hebrew prophets had
predicted. The agent of that salvation would be a Savior, whom
God would both anoint and resurrect from the dead. Paul's
conclusions concerning that Savior were the basis for the
Jews' antagonism against him.

Paul said that it was because of his Jewish heritage, not in spite
of it, that he believed and preached what he did. The Jewish
"hope" finds fulfillment in the Christian gospel. It was,
therefore, ironic that the Jews, of all people, should have
charged him with disloyalty.

1See Witherington, The Acts …, pp. 735-36.

2Lenski,p. 1020.
3Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 551.
470 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"Paul is arguing that he has been consistent in his

loyalty to the Jewish hope, whereas vv. 7-8 imply
that his opponents are strangely inconsistent;
what the people earnestly desire, the focus of
their hope, is rejected when it arrives."1

When Paul referred to his nation (v. 4), he may have had the
province of Cilicia or the Jewish community in Tarsus in mind.
Personal maintenance of ritual purity and strict tithing marked
the lives of Pharisees primarily (v. 5). Paul's mention of the 12
tribes of Israel (v. 7) shows that he did not believe that 10 of
the tribes became lost, as some cults today claim, for example:
Herbert W. Armstrong's teachings, and British Israelism (cf.
2:9; Matt. 19:28; Luke 2:36; 22:30; James 1:1; Rev. 7:4;
21:12).

26:8 Paul's reference to the resurrection was appropriate, because

Jesus' identification as the Messiah depended on His
resurrection. None of Paul's hearers could reasonably doubt
the resurrection of the dead since God had raised Jesus from
the dead. Furthermore, "why" could not an all-powerful God
"raise the dead"?

26:9-11 As a Pharisaic Jew, Paul had opposed the conclusion that

"Jesus of Nazareth" was the Messiah. He had disbelieved in the
resurrection of Jesus, who did not seem to him to fit the
scriptural image of that Savior. "Cast my vote" (v. 10) may be
metaphorical (cf. 8:1; 22:20) or, less likely, literal. There is no
evidence that Paul was ever a member of the Sanhedrin, but
he could have voted to punish Christians in the lower courts,
such as the ones that existed in local synagogues. Or he could
have been an accredited agent of the Sanhedrin empowered
to vote.2

Some scholars believe that Paul (Saul) may have been elected
into the Sanhedrin after Stephen's martyrdom, possibly as a
reward for his zeal against Christians.3 But there is no solid

1Tannehill, 2:318.
2Lenski, p. 1034.
3E.g., Howson, p. 64.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 471

evidence for this. Paul "tried to force" Christians "to

blaspheme," by getting them to say that Jesus was not the
Christ or by getting them to curse Him (cf. 1 Cor. 12:3). He
was so zealous for his errant belief that he even pursued
Christians to "foreign cities" to persecute them.

"As much as we should like to believe that no saint

of that time denied the faith, we fear that a good
many did."1

"The great Christians have never been afraid to

point to themselves as living and walking
examples of the power of Christ. The gospel to
them was not a form of words; it was not a form
of intellectual belief; it was a power unto salvation.
It is true that a man can never change himself; but
it is also gloriously true that what he cannot do,
Jesus Christ can do for him."2

26:12-14 Luke recorded two new bits of information that Paul included
here, that he had not mentioned in his previous testimonies (v.
14). On the Damascus Road, "all" of his companions had "fallen
to the ground" as a result of the bright light. This shows that
the event was real, and not a vision that Paul had seen. Also,
the Lord had spoken to him in Aramaic, probably to confirm to
Paul that the One addressing him was the God of the Jews.

"Goads" were sharp sticks used to drive cattle. The figure of

"kicking against goads" was, and is, a common rural metaphor
that describes opposing the inevitable (like "banging your head
against a wall"). Such action only hurts the one doing it, not
the object of his hostility. This was the case in Paul's
antagonism to God that his persecution of Christians
expressed.

"In the Greek world this was a well-known

expression for opposition to deity (cf. Euripides
Bacchanals 794-95; Aeschylus Prometheus Bound

1Lenski, p. 1034.
2Barclay, pp. 193-94.
472 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

324-25; Agamemnon 1624; Pindar Pythia 2.94-

95; Terence Phormio 1.2.27). Paul may have
picked it up in Tarsus or during his missionary
journeys. He used it here to show his Greek-
oriented audience the implications of the question
'Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?' Lest he be
misunderstood as proclaiming only a Galilean
prophet he had formerly opposed, he pointed out
to his hearers what was obvious to any Jew:
correction by a voice from heaven meant
opposition to God himself. So he used a current
expression familiar to Agrippa and the others …"1

"A young ox, when it was first yoked, usually

resented the burden and tried kicking its way out.
If the ox was yoked to a single-handed plow, the
plowman would hold a long staff with a sharpened
end close to the heels of the ox. Every time the
ox kicked, it struck the spike. If the ox was yoked
to a wagon, a studded bar with wooden spikes
served the same purpose. The point was that the
ox had to learn submission to the yoke the hard
way."2

"To kick back, therefore, is not merely impotent

and injurious folly, but it is rebellion against him
who guides. This is the precise lesson which our
Lord intended to teach, and which heathen poets
and moralists have drawn from the proverb, or
rather from the basis in agricultural life which
suggested it."3

Paul related his conversion experience very graphically on this

occasion, and he stressed the significance of these events.

26:15-17 Paul brought Jesus' words on the Damascus Road (cf. 9:5-6;
22:8, 10), His instructions through Ananias (cf. 22:14-15),

1Longenecker,"The Acts …," pp. 552-53. See also idem, Paul …, pp. 98-101.
2TheNelson …, p. 1870. See also Swindoll, Paul, p. 27.
3Thomson, 1:502.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 473

and His command in Paul's Jerusalem vision (cf. 22:18-21), all

together in this passage. He did so to summarize and to stress
the divine commission that Jesus Christ gave him concerning
his particular mission in life (cf. Jer. 1:7-8; Ezek. 2:1, 3). His
reference to being sent to "Gentiles" would have drawn a
favorable reaction from his Gentile audience.

"Paul's language here becomes noticeably more

biblical; he sees his call as a commission to
become one of God's prophets like Ezekiel or
Jeremiah and to share the role of the Servant of
Yahweh."1

26:18 This verse recalls the divine commission of Messiah (cf. Isa.
35:5; 42:6-7, 16). It is one of the best summary statements
of not only Paul's mission, but also the mission of every
believer (cf. Matt. 28:19-20; Col. 1:12-14). Paul was to do for
others what God had done for him, and so should we. The
sanctification in view is positional: God sets a person apart for
a special purpose—both before and when he or she trusts
Christ (cf. Eph. 1:4).

Paul had gone to Damascus as the apostle (i.e., sent one) of

the Sanhedrin. He returned as the apostle of Jesus Christ.2

26:19-20 We should probably understand verse 20 as a general

description of Paul's ministry, rather than as a strictly
chronological reference, in view of 9:20-30 and Galatians 1:18-
24.

"Repent" again means essentially to change the mind. Note

the distinction between "repenting" ("turning to God"), and
"performing deeds appropriate to repentance," that Paul made
in verse 20.

"What is repentance? It is a complete change of

attitude. It is a right-about-face. Here is a man
who is going on living in open, flagrant sin, and he
does not care anything about the things of God

1Neil, p. 244.
2Barclay, pp. 194-95.
474 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

and is totally indifferent to the claims of

righteousness. But laid hold of by the Spirit of
God, that man suddenly comes face to face with
his sins in the presence of God, and he turns right-
about-face and comes to the God he has been
spurning and to the Christ he has been rejecting
and he confesses his sins and puts his trust in the
Savior. All this is involved in repentance.

"Here is another man. He is not living in open sin,

but he has been living a very religious life. He has
been very self-righteous. He has been thoroughly
satisfied that because of his own goodness and
because of his punctilious attention to his
religious duties, God will accept him and eventually
take him to be with Himself. But suddenly he is
brought to realize that all his own righteousnesses
are as filthy rags, that nothing he can do will make
him fit for God's presence, and he faces this
honestly before God. For him too there is a change
of attitude. He turns away from all confidence in
self, the flesh, his religion, and cries: 'In my hand
no price I bring; simply to thy cross I cling.' This is
repentance. It is a right-about-face."1

"Faith in Jesus is where the process ends, but to

get there, a person changes his or her mind about
sin and God and turns to God to receive the offer
of salvation through Jesus. So each of these
terms ("repent," "turn," "believe") is adequate for
expressing the offer of the gospel, since Paul used
each of them."2

26:21 "For this reason" refers to Paul's preaching to Gentiles (v. 20).
Paul did not explain here exactly what he preached to the
Gentiles, namely: that they could obtain salvation simply by
faith in Christ. This message is what infuriated the Jews and
led to Paul's arrest. Nevertheless, Paul did give his audience

1Ironside, Lectures on …, pp. 613-14.

2Bock, Acts, p. 719.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 475

enough information about Jesus Christ so they could believe in

Him.

26:22-23 God had stood by Paul and had helped him, as He had promised
(v. 22; cf v. 17). Paul preached a message thoroughly in
harmony with Israel's faith (cf. 3:18; 17:3). Verse 23 may be
Luke's condensation of Paul's exposition of many Old
Testament messianic prophecies that Jesus fulfilled (e.g., Isa.
42:6; 49:6; 53:10; 60:3). Many of the Jews rejected the ideas
of a suffering Messiah, His resurrection from the dead, and His
direct ministry to Gentiles, but Paul found support for these in
the Old Testament.

"Here in substance is the Gospel that Paul

preached and that believers ought always to
proclaim, 'that Christ died for our sins according
to the scriptures; and that he was buried, and that
he rose again the third day according to the
scriptures' (1 Cor. 15:3-4)."1

Paul's appeal to Agrippa 26:24-29

26:24 Paul's knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures impressed Festus,

strongly implying that Paul probably said more than Luke chose
to record here. The Greek words ta polla … grammata,
translated "great learning" (lit. "the many writings"), indicate
that it was Paul's knowledge of the Scriptures that impressed
Festus, not his general knowledge. Perhaps Paul had with him
at this time, and was known to study diligently, "the books"
and "the parchments" that he later asked Timothy to bring
with him to Rome (2 Tim. 4:13).

However, the governor did not understand the significance of

Paul's beliefs. To him they seemed incomprehensible. He
concluded that Paul was a zealous obscurantist, and a bit
crazy, to risk his life defending such foolish ideas. The Romans
did not believe in the resurrection of the body, just the

1The New Scofield …, p. 1204.

476 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

immortality of the soul (cf. 17:32; 25:19).1 So belief in

resurrection would have seemed like insanity to Festus.

"The words were doubtless spoken ironically and

in contempt: but Paul took them as though they
had been spoken in earnest, and made that noble
answer, which expresses, as no other words ever
expressed them, that union of enthusiastic zeal
with genuine courtesy, which is the true
characteristic of 'a Christian.'"2

"Festus' comment sounds like an interruption

while Paul is still in full spate, but in fact the
speech has reached its conclusion."3

"Down through the ages Festus's response has

been echoed by men and women too trapped by
the natural to be open to the supernatural, too
confined by the 'practical' to care about life
everlasting."4

Some of Jesus' accusers also thought that He was mad. People

sometimes think that we are mad when we explain the gospel
to them and urge them to believe in the Lord.

26:25-27 Paul asserted that what Festus called madness was true and
reasonable. What had "not been done in a corner" (v. 26) was
the fulfillment of prophecy by the life, death, and resurrection
of Jesus, and the preaching of the gospel. Jesus' ministry was
well known in Palestine. "Done in a corner" was another Greek
idiom of the day.5 If Agrippa believed the prophets, Paul
believed he could not help concluding that Jesus fulfilled what
they predicted. Paul was backing the king into a corner with
what had not been done in a corner. All of this was beyond
Festus, but Agrippa knew the issues, and Paul was aiming his

1Bock, Acts, p. 722.

2Conybeare, p. 621.
3Marshall, The Acts …, p. 398.
4Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 554.
5Ibid.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 477

presentation of the gospel at him primarily. The accused had

now become the accuser.

26:28 Agrippa was now on the spot. If he agreed with Paul, or even
appeared to agree, he would have lost face with Festus and
the other Romans present. Festus had just said he thought
Paul was mad. On the other hand, if Agrippa said he did not
believe the prophets, his influence over his Jewish hearers and
subjects would have been damaged greatly. Consequently,
Agrippa replied noncommittally, "You are trying to make a
Christian out of me in such a short interview!" Or, as Alford
rendered his words: "Lightly (with small trouble) art thou
persuading thyself that thou canst make me a Christian."1 His
response does not mean that he was on the verge of becoming
a Christian, as the AV translation implies: "Almost thou
persuadest me to become a Christian."

"The reply is light-hearted, but not ironic."2

26:29 Paul responded to the king very politely but firmly. He wished
that "all" his hearers, not just Agrippa, "might become"
Christians. Paul's reference to his "chains" may have been
literal—he may have been wearing chains as he spoke, or
perhaps metaphorical—he may have been referring to his
condition as a prisoner. I am not aware of any evidence that
Agrippa ever became a Christian.

"The speech before King Agrippa is more than a defense

speech. It begins as a defense speech (cf. v. 1), and it develops
aspects of previous defense speeches, but its functions are
broader. It combines themes from the defense speeches with
themes from the earlier narrative, reaching back to the
missions of John the Baptist, Jesus, and the apostles, and
fashions these into a summary statement of Paul's place in the
unfolding purpose of God. Then Paul continues his mission
before our eyes as his review of his past message becomes

1Alford, [Link].
2Marshall, The Acts …, p. 407.
478 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

present proclamation, ending with a missionary appeal to King

Agrippa."1

The verdict of Agrippa 26:30-32

By rising to his feet, Agrippa signaled the end of the hearing. Everyone else
rose out of respect for him. Luke implied that everyone present concurred
that Paul was completely innocent. This had previously been the verdict of
the Pharisees (23:9), Claudius Lysias (23:29), and Festus (25:25). Now
Agrippa, a Roman ruler with Jewish blood in his veins who was sympathetic
to the Jews, voiced the same opinion (v. 32). In Agrippa's opinion, Paul did
not even need to be in prison, much less die for what he had done.

"The effect of the scene as a whole is to emphasize the

uprightness of Roman legal proceedings over against the
partiality and injustice of the Jews, and to show that, when
measured by Roman law, Paul's behavior appeared to be free
from any guilt; mad he might appear to be, but not a criminal.
There is tremendous emphasis on the climax: 'This man could
have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.'"2

"It may finally be asked whether Luke was justified in devoting

so much of his limited space to Paul's examinations before the
various tribunals of Rome. Paul's case, it should be
remembered, was a test case. If he was finally acquitted, and
the Pastoral Epistles are solid evidence that he was, Luke's
final purpose is clear."3

4. Ministry on the way to Rome 27:1—28:15

Luke apparently described this stage of the gospel's expansion for a

number of reasons. He evidently wanted to demonstrate God's protection
of Paul, to illustrate the increasingly Gentile nature of gospel expansion,
and to document the sovereign Lord's building of His church.

"Ever since the purpose of going to Rome had been planted in

Paul's mind by the Holy Spirit, his plans had been formulated

1Tannehill, 2:316.
2Marshall, The Acts …, p. 386.
3Blaiklock, p. 186.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 479

with that goal in view (19:21). No warnings of dangers to

come could make him deviate from that ultimate aim, nor from
the intermediate stages (Macedonia, Achaia, Jerusalem). The
intervening weeks had stretched into months and then into
years, and Paul had been confronted with one crisis after
another, but he had divine assurance that Rome would yet be
reached (23:11). The means were not what Paul could have
foreseen nor what he might have chosen, but God was in
control and the apostle was fully willing to leave the details in
His hands."1

God led Luke to record Paul's journey to Rome in a way that is very similar
to the biblical record of Jonah's journey. He may have done this so that
Luke's readers would note these similarities, and connect the purposes for
both journeys, namely: the salvation of lost Gentiles.

The great amount of detail in this section also raises the possibility that
Luke, as a good storyteller, was building to his climax by emphasizing the
improbability of Paul ever reaching Rome. He probably did this to produce
a feeling of great relief and satisfaction, in the reader, when Paul finally did
get there. Ancient Greek novelists often used this literary device for this
purpose. Storms and shipwrecks were favorite obstacles that heroes had
to overcome in order to win their prizes, as in Homer's Odyssey, for
example. Luke purposely built to his climax, in this section, as he did in his
Gospel. There he described in detail Jesus' final trip to Jerusalem and His
last days there, a feature peculiar to the third Gospel.2

"The story is told with such a wealth of detail that in all

classical literature there is no passage which gives us so much
information about the working of an ancient ship."3

This story also throws more light on the personality and character of Paul.
Though he was a prisoner, he became the leader and savior of all those
who traveled with him. Though he was weak, God made him strong (cf. 2
Cor. 12:9-10). He was God's man, the Holy Spirit working in and through
him, for the blessing of everyone he touched. Paul is the main subject.

1Kent, p. 184.
2See the map of Paul's journey to Rome in Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 251; Toussaint,
"Acts," p. 425; or The Nelson …, p. 1874.
3Rackham, p. 476.
480 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Some people on the trip even concluded that "he was a god" (28:6; cf.
Luke 8:25; 23:47).

Toward the end of the nineteenth century, a group of Scottish unbelievers

decided to expose errors in the Bible. They designated one of their number
to visit all the places Luke mentioned that Paul visited, with a view to
proving the record in Acts inaccurate. The man chosen was Sir William
Ramsay, who, after thorough study of the matter, concluded that Luke
was accurate in every detail.1 Ramsay became a Christian, and wrote
several books on Acts and Paul in defense of God's Word, some of which
appear in the bibliography of these notes.

The voyage from Caesarea to Crete 27:1-8

27:1 Luke appears to have remained with Paul from the time he left
Philippi on his third missionary journey (20:5). He may have
ministered to him during his entire two-year detention at
Caesarea. We know he traveled with Paul to Rome (28:16).
Here begins the longest of the four "we" sections of Acts:
27:1—28:16 (cf. 16:10-17; 20:5-15; 21:1-18).

"For the sake of the credibility of his work as a

piece of Greek history writing, at some point Luke
needed to be able not merely to claim but
demonstrate that he had participated in at least
some of the events he chronicled."2

Scholars have not been able to identify the "Augustan Cohort"

(a battalion of 1,000 soldiers, cf. 21:31) with certainty. Some
of them believe this was the cohort responsible for
communications and service between the emperor and his
provincial armies.3 However, this group may not have been in
existence this early in Roman history.4 Since "Augustan" was
a title of honor that the government gave to several cohorts,
this simply may have been one of the Augustan cohorts that

1Ironside,Lectures on …, pp. 618-19.

2Witherington, The Acts …, p. 755.
3E.g., Ramsay, St. Paul …, p. 315.
4Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 557.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 481

was based in the Syrian province.1 These Augustan cohorts

served various police and judicial functions.2

Since he was a Roman citizen who had appealed to Caesar, Paul

would have enjoyed greater privileges than the other, regular
prisoners. "Julius" was another centurion (cf. Cornelius, ch. 10;
22:26; 24:23) who demonstrated fairness, consideration, and
mercy, as this story will show. If the "Italian Cohort" of 10:1
was the same as the "Augustan Cohort" mentioned here, as
some believe, this "Julius" may have been Julius Priscus, who
later became prefect of the Praetorian Guards under the
Emperor Vitellius.3 Adramyttium was a seaport of Mysia,
opposite the island of Lesbos, 110 miles north of Ephesus.
Sidon stood on the Mediterranean seacoast about 70 miles
north of Caesarea.

27:2 Most likely Paul sailed from Caesarea. His ship originated from
the port of "Adramyttium," just south of Troas opposite the
island of Lesbos. It was a coastal vessel that docked at most
ports along the northeastern Mediterranean shoreline.

Aristarchus, like Luke, seems to have stayed with Paul during

his Caesarean imprisonment (cf. 19:29) and traveled with him
all the way to Rome (Col. 4:10; Phile. 24). The presence of
these companions with the apostle probably contributed to
the respect that Paul received as he traveled.4

27:3 "Sidon" stood about 70 miles north of Caesarea. Paul's

"friends" were probably members of the church there (cf.
11:19). A soldier would have accompanied Paul wherever he
went.

27:4-5 Prevailing winds in the Mediterranean, during spring and fall,

usually blow from west to east, and often from the northwest.
Consequently this ship sailed north, up the east side of the
island of Cyprus (cf. 21:3). Proceeding north, it came to the
coast of Cilicia and turned west, passing Pamphylia and landing

1F.F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 500.

2Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 558.
3Howson, p. 605.
4See Ramsay, St. Paul …, p. 316.
482 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

at "Myra" in "Lycia," the southernmost region in the province

of Asia. This was a 14-day journey by ship that spanned about
500 miles.1

27:6 At Myra, Julius transferred his party to another ship, this one
bound for Italy.2 This was a grain ship (v. 38) that had
accommodations for at least 276 passengers (v. 37). There
were no ships at this time devoted exclusively to passenger
travel.3 Its port of origin was Alexandria, the capital of Egypt.
Egypt was the major supplier of grain for Italy.4 A large fleet
of these ships sailed between Egypt and Italy, along the coasts
of Palestine, Syria, and Asia Minor, carrying food. According to
a contemporary description, these large ships were usually
180 feet long, 50 feet wide, and 44 feet deep from the deck
to the hold.5

27:7-8 "Cnidus" stood on the southwestern tip of the province of

Asia, where what we now call the Aegean Sea met the
Mediterranean, about 108 miles south of Ephesus. A
northwesterly wind forced Paul's ship southwest to the 180-
mile long island of "Crete." By sailing along Crete's eastern and
southern coasts, it finally reached the port of "Fair Havens"
(probably modern Limeonas Kalous) near a town called
"Lasea," having rounded Cape "Salmone" at the island's
southeastern tip.

The storm at sea 27:9-26

27:9-10 Evidently the captain waited for some ("considerable") "time"

for the weather to improve in Fair Havens. The "Fast" refers
to the Day of Atonement, that fell in the fall each year,
sometimes as late as early October. People considered it
dangerous to travel by sea between mid-September and mid-
November, and the harbors were closed for the winter from

1Eckhard J. Schnabel, Early Christian Mission, 2:1266.

2See Kenneth W. Yates, "Military Leaders and Jonah in the Writings of Luke, Part 2,"
Bibliotheca Sacra 173:692 (October-December 2016):448-59.
3Witherington, The Acts …, p. 759.
4Cf. Josephus, The Wars …, [Link]; and [Link].
5Lionel Casson, Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World, pp. 158-59.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 483

mid-November to early March.1 Paul had already experienced

shipwreck three times (2 Cor. 11:25). He recommended
staying through the winter at Fair Havens. A strong northerly
or northwesterly wind (cf. v. 14), that frequently came up
unexpectedly at that season of the year, could blow a ship far
from its destination. This is what happened next.

Haenchen noted that Luke recorded 11 or 12 sea journeys that

Paul took in Acts, beginning at 9:30 and ending with 28:10.
He calculated that the apostle traveled at least 3,000 miles by
sea.2 Thus Paul was a seasoned sea traveler whose word those
in authority should have heeded.

27:11-12 The "centurion" had the final word. Grain ships of this kind
were part of a fleet that was under the control of the Roman
government, even though private individuals owned the ships.3
The "pilot" (captain) and the owner (not the "captain") carried
more influence with the centurion than Paul did. Fair Havens
was suitable for wintering, but not as desirable as "Phoenix"
(modern Phineka, or possible Lutro4), which stood about 45
miles farther to the west along the southern Cretan coastline.

It is doubtful that Paul had the time or opportunity to plant a

church on Crete during this visit. He or others may have
planted the church there at another time. He probably visited
Crete with Titus after his release from Rome (Titus 1:5).

27:13-15 "Euroquilo" means northeastern. The wind changed from a mild

southerly breeze to a "violent" northeasterly gale. This
"violent wind" drove Paul's ship southwest, away from Crete
and the harbor at Phoenix.

"Ancient ships could not tack or face heavy seas

…"5

1Knowling, 2:520.
2Haenchen, pp. 702-3.
3F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 507.
4Robertson, 3:462-63.
5Marshall, The Acts …, p. 408.
484 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

27:16-17 The "small island" of "Clauda" (modern Gavdos or Gozzo) lay

south of Crete about 23 miles.1 There appears to have been
no adequate harbor there. However, this island did provide
enough temporary shelter for the sailors to haul on board the
trailing rowboat (dinghy). Another safety measure they
applied was to feed ropes over the bow, and to hold them up
tightly against the ship's hull from each side. Drawn up tight
under the ship, these ropes helped to reinforce the internal
braces of the hull.

The "shallows of Syrtis" probably refers to the dreaded

quicksand and shoals off the African coast, west of Cyrene
(modern Libya), toward which the ship headed.2 The Greek
word translated "sea anchors" here simply means equipment,
and can refer to any gear, perhaps some of the sails and rigging
(cf. v. 40). Compasses did not exist at this time. Sailors
plotted their courses by the stars, and by using points of
reference on land.

27:18-20 Evidently the ship was taking on so much water, "being

violently storm-tossed," that the captain decided to "jettison"
the wheat as well as the other "cargo," and all but the most
essential "tackle" (or "furniture," Gr. skeuen; cf. Jon. 1:5). He
kept some wheat on board, probably for ballast as well as for
food (v. 38).

27:21-26 Paul presumably did not mention his former advice at Fair
Havens just to gloat, but in order to encourage his fellow
travelers to believe what he was about to tell them. What he
had predicted had just come true, and what he was about to
predict would as well. An angelic visitor now confirmed God's
former assurance to Paul, repeating the promise that he would
reach Rome (23:11). Furthermore he told Paul that "all" on
board would reach land safely.

"This announcement that all will survive is

remarkable. … This announcement is a key to
understanding the rest of the episode, for it

1See Howson, facing p. 642, for a map of southern Crete and Clauda.
2See Pliny, Natural History, 5:26.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 485

determines what must happen, and the acts of

sailors, soldiers, and Paul are to be judged in light
of it. From this point on, no method of escape is
acceptable that doesn't include all."1

Paul encouraged his despairing (and perhaps seasick)

companions twice (vv. 22, 25). His reference to God's promise
would interest the other passengers in his Lord, at least when
God later fulfilled this prediction, if not before. Faith in God ("I
believe God") gave Paul great confidence and hope, as it
always should. This is a very clear definition of faith: simply
believing that things will be just as God says they will. Notice
also Paul's beautiful expression of his total commitment to the
Lord: "to whom I belong and whom I serve" (v. 23).

"The prisoner had become the captain, for he is

the only man with any courage left."2

The shipwreck 27:27-44

27:27-28 The ancient name of the central part of the Mediterranean Sea,
between Malta, Italy, Greece, and Crete,3 was "the Adria" or
"the Hadria." People referred to then, what we now call the
"Adriatic Sea," as the "Gulf of Adria (or Hadria)," or as the
"Ionian Sea."4 The winds and currents had carried Paul's ship
in a northwesterly direction from the south-central
Mediterranean. The sailors may have smelled the land, which
sailors can do, or they may have heard the waves breaking on
shore.

"Took soundings" is literally "hearing the land" in Greek. To

determine the depth of the water, the sailors tied a weight to
a line and threw it overboard. The depth to which it sank
indicated the depth of the water. A fathom is 6 feet, so these
depths ("20" and "15 fathoms") were 120 and 90 feet.

1Tannehill, 2:332-33.
2Barclay, pp. 202-3.
3Lenski, p. 1085.
4F. F. Bruce, Commentary on …, p. 515; Longenecker, p. 561.
486 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

27:29 "Four … stern … anchors" kept the ship pointing toward the
land, so that when the sun came up, the sailors could beach it
prow first. Another rendering of the Greek word for "wished"
(euchomai, v. 29) is "prayed" (cf. Jon. 1:14). Paul's company
had traveled by sea about 475 miles.1

27:30-32 The ship's crew ("the sailors") was about to abandon ship and
make for land in the lifeboat, leaving the passengers, Paul, the
captain, the soldiers, and the prisoners to fend for themselves.
Paul probably realized that anchors in front of the ship were
unnecessary—and sensed their plan. The sailors would only be
valuable on board, and were needed to help beach the ship
safely. They were the experts at maneuvering it. Probably "the
soldiers" let the dinghy drift free ("cut away the ropes of the
boat") so the sailors would not try another escape. This small
boat would have been useful later, however, when the
passengers had to swim to land.

"Verses 24 and 31 provide an interesting

illustration of the Biblical viewpoint regarding
divine sovereignty and human responsibility. God
knew that all on the vessel would be preserved
(and if God knows it, it is certain and cannot be
otherwise). At the same time God's sovereignty
which insured their safety was not intended to
discourage human effort, for this was the means
by which God would achieve the end in view."2

There is no adequate basis for concluding that simply because

God gave Paul insight and wisdom during this voyage, that all
Spirit-filled Christians, therefore, have more wisdom than
unbelievers. God gave Paul a measure of intelligence and
perception that He does not give all His servants. Some
Christians think that they can assess situations, and that
people should follow their advice simply because they are
"Christians" or "Spirit-filled Christians." Jesus taught that

1Bock, Acts, p. 739.

2Kent, p. 189.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 487

often unbelievers demonstrate more wisdom than believers,

unfortunately (cf. Luke 16:8).

27:33-37 "All" on board needed to eat ("take some food") to gain

strength, for the work of getting ashore that lay ahead. Paul
"gave thanks to God" publicly for the food (cf. 1 Tim. 4:4-5).
This would have helped all present to connect their deliverance
with God. This meal was evidently not a celebration of the
Lord's Supper, as some commentators suggested.1 The
circumstances of the occasion argue against this view, as does
the terminology Luke used (v. 35; cf. Luke 24:30). The rest of
the people ("All of them") followed Paul's example, and also
ate ("took food").

"It could never be said of Paul as it was said of

some people that 'they were so heavenly minded
that they were of no earthly use.' He knew that
hungry men are not efficient men; and so he
gathered the ship's company around him and
made them eat."2

27:38 It was necessary to "lighten the ship" so it would ride high into
shallow water when the sailors beached it.

27:39-40 A sandy "beach," traditionally St. Paul's Bay, was second best
to a harbor.3 This type of ship had rudder-like paddles on the
sides of the vessel that served to guide it. Evidently the sailors
had locked these "rudders" in place when the ship was drifting,
but now they put them into use again. The "foresail," on the
front of the ship, would have increased its maneuverability.

27:41 Evidently currents from two parts of the sea ("two seas")
converged near the entrance to this bay, resulting in an
accumulation of sand or mud. The sailors did not see this
sandbar, and inadvertently "ran the ship (vessel) aground,"
and "it (the prow) stuck firmly (fast)." "Reef" implies coral reef
in English, but the Greek word (topon), plus investigations at

1E.g.,
Neil, p. 252.
2Barclay,p. 204.
3See Howson, facing p. 658, for a map.
488 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

the site of St. Paul's Bay, suggest that Luke probably

described a sand or mud bar.

27:42-44 The soldiers would have had to pay with their lives if their
prisoners had escaped (cf. 12:19; 16:27). The "centurion" was
willing to take responsibility for the prisoners' safe-keeping in
order to spare Paul's life. This unusual concern for the apostle
raises the unanswerable question of whether this man may
have become a Christian on this trip. God kept His promise to
keep Paul and his fellow travelers safe (cf. v. 24). As the sign
on a church marquee put it: "God promises a safe landing, not
a calm passage."

A British yachtsman and scholar, who was familiar with the parts of the
Mediterranean Sea that Paul covered on this journey, retraced Paul's route
in the first part of the nineteenth century. His book relates his experiences
and findings. It is fascinating reading, and confirms the accuracy of Luke's
references in this chapter.1

This unusually dramatic and vivid chapter stresses God's sovereign control
over circumstances in bringing His will to pass, specifically that Paul should
minister in Rome. It reminds us of Jesus' ability to control the winds and
the waves of Galilee, to accomplish His will and to communicate His identity.
He had once sent His disciples into a storm (Luke 8:22-25), just as He now
had sent Paul. Jesus had predicted that He would build His church, and that
Hades' gates would not overwhelm it (Matt. 16:18). This chapter shows to
what great lengths God will go to remain faithful to His promises.

Paul's preservation on Malta 28:1-6

28:1-2 "Malta," also called "Melita" (meaning refuge, which it proved

to be for Paul and his companions), lies about 60 miles south
of the island of Sicily. It is about 18 miles long and 8 miles
wide. It is also about 500 miles west of Crete and 180 miles
northwest of Africa. People of Phoenician origin inhabited it in
Paul's day. Luke called them "barbarians" (Gr. barbaroi),
meaning people whose culture was not Greek (cf. Rom. 1:14).
These people were not savages or uncultured "natives,"

1James Smith, The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 489

however, as is clear from their hospitable treatment of the

shipwreck victims.

28:3 Paul made himself useful by gathering firewood; he did not sit
around expecting others to take care of him. Evidently he
unknowingly picked up a small snake with his wood. It would
have been sluggish because of the cold weather, but the heat
of the fire woke it up. This snake is a "viper" in Greek. A viper
is, of course, a specific variety of poisonous snake. The fact
that there are no vipers on Malta now, which has been a
stumbling block to some, simply shows that this variety of
snake became extinct there after Paul's visit.1 Vipers do not
normally fasten on what they bite; they strike and then retreat.
However in this case, the snake was evidently still somewhat
lethargic, and did not behave normally. Perhaps it got hung up
on Paul's hand by its fangs.

This was the third life-threatening situation that Paul faced on

his journey to Rome, the others being the storm at sea and
the shipwreck.

28:4-6 "These people thought that calamity was proof of

guilt, poor philosophy and worse theology."2

People had mistaken Paul for "a god" previously (14:8-18).

Perhaps his reaction here was the same as it had been at
Lystra. Probably he used the opportunity to preach the gospel.
Luke's purpose in recording this incident was probably not to
supply a background for what Paul said. It was to show that
God would even miraculously heal His servant, in order to
enable him to fulfill God's purpose that he bear witness in Rome
(cf 23:11; 27:24).

"Paul did not deliberately pick up this viper. Paul

was not tempting God. …

"The promise of God in Mark 16:18 [and Luke

10:19] was fulfilled in Paul's experience. He
suffered no ill effects from the venom. When folk

1See Ramsay, St. Paul …, p. 343.

2Robertson, 3:479.
490 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

today deliberately pick up snakes and claim that

promise as their protection, they are far afield
from what God had in mind."1

The healing of Publius' father 28:7-10

28:7-8 God not only healed Paul miraculously, He also enabled him to
heal the father of the island's leading citizen (cf. 3:1-10; Luke
4:38-44). "The leading man of the island" was a title indicating
that "Publius" was the Roman governor of Malta.2 From 1940
through 1942, British General William Dobbie was the governor
of Malta. He was an outspoken Christian whom I had the
privilege of meeting in England in 1949.

This is the only instance in Acts with the combination of

praying and laying on hands in a miracle story. Lenski believed
that Paul prayed for himself, not for the sick man, and that he
prayed to know if it was God's will to heal him.3 But this is
unprovable.

"This fever was possibly Malta fever, which was

common in Malta, Gibraltar, and other
Mediterranean islands. The microorganism has
since been traced to the milk of the Maltese
goats. The fever usually lasted four months, but
sometimes could last as long as two or three
years."4

28:9 Word of this healing spread across the island, and Paul was
able to heal many other sick people ("the rest of the people
… who had diseases"). Doctor Luke had an obvious medical
interest in physical recovery. However, the Holy Spirit seems
to have included these healings in the text to show that God's
power was still working through Paul. God was working as
strongly as ever, in spite of the physical exhaustion caused by

1McGee, 4:635, 636.

2Longenecker, "The Acts …," pp. 563, 564.
3Lenski, p. 1104.
4The Nelson …, p. 1873.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 491

the sea voyage and shipwreck. Paul could heal anyone that God
wanted healed, though not everyone (cf. 2 Tim. 4:20).

"Paul could exercise the gift of healing; and yet

Paul had forever to bear about with him the thorn
in the flesh. He healed others while he could not
heal himself. Like his Master, in another sense, he
saved others when he could not save himself."1

28:10 Paul was no "god," but he was a messenger of the true God.
His ministry to the people of Malta benefited them physically
and spiritually, and they expressed their gratitude by honoring
him in many ways ("with many marks of respect"). Even
though Paul was a prisoner, his service for God resulted in
blessing for others and for himself (cf. Matt. 6:33; Phil. 4:19).

"The account of Paul's healings on Malta is quite similar to the

account of Jesus' healings at Capernaum at the beginning of
his ministry (Luke 4:38-40). In both cases the healing of an
individual is followed by the healing of 'all' or 'the rest' in a
region. The individual, a relative of the healer's host, has been
'seized (sunexomene, sunexomenon)' by fever. There is also
reference to laying on of hands. The similarities show that
Jesus' healing ministry still continues through his witnesses,
with benefit both to the host who receives the healer and to
the whole community. A scene from the beginning of Jesus'
ministry is echoed in the last description of healing in Acts,
suggesting a chiastic relationship."2

The trip from Malta to Rome 28:11-15

28:11 Paul and his companions spent the winter on the island of
Malta. Ships began to sail again toward the middle of February.
The centurion was able to secure passage on another
"Alexandrian ship," perhaps another grain ship, that had
wintered in one of the Maltese ports. Valetta was the largest
of these ports. Paul still had about 210 miles to go before he
reached Rome.

1Barclay, pp. 207-8.

2Tannehill, 2:341-42.
492 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Luke's reference to the "figurehead" of this ship, from which

it took its name ("Twin Brothers"), is unusual. This is the only
ship's name that he recorded in Acts. The "twin brothers" were
Castor and Pollux, who were two Greek gods thought to guard
the safety of sailors. They were the sons of Zeus and Leda,
queen of Sparta, whom Zeus transformed into gods, according
to Greek mythology. The constellation Gemini represents
them, and anyone who saw it during a storm supposedly would
have good luck.1 Perhaps Luke mentioned them to contrast
God's real protection, as illustrated in the previous chapter and
this one, with the protection the pagans superstitiously
thought these gods provided. I can imagine Paul saying to
Luke, as they got ready to board this ship: "We have a better
Protector than the twin brothers!"

28:12 "Syracuse" stood on the east coast of the island of Sicily. It

was a busy port and the most important city on the island.

28:13 The site of "Rhegium" (modern Reggio di Calabria) was near

the tip of the "toe" of Italy's "boot" opposite Sicily, about 75
miles from Syracuse. It, too, was an important harbor. "Puteoli"
(Modern Pozzuoli) stood about 200 miles farther north on the
"shin" of the "boot." Its site occupied the most protected part
of the bay of Naples. It was a very large port, and the final
destination of many Egyptian wheat ships at that time. There
dock-hands unloaded the cargo.

28:14 It is not strange that a church existed there. Puteoli had a

Jewish colony.2 Perhaps Roman Christians had planted this
church, or perhaps Jewish converts had done so. The local
Christians were very generous with their hospitality to Paul and
his companions, having "invited" them "to stay … seven days."
"And thus we came to Rome" expresses Luke's eagerness to
reach Paul's goal city. They had not really arrived in Rome (cf.
vv. 15-16). However, Luke viewed Puteoli as close enough to
warrant this enthusiastic announcement of their arrival, even
though Paul still had 130 miles to travel.

1Toussaint, "Acts," p. 429.

2Josephus, The Wars …, [Link]; Idem, Antiquities of …, [Link].
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 493

28:15 News of Paul's arrival preceded him to Rome, which was about
125 miles from Puteoli.1 An entourage of believers from Rome
traveled down the Appian Way, "the oldest and most
frequented in Italy,"2 33 miles south to the "Three Taverns
(Inns)," a rest stop. There some of them waited, while the
more energetic among them proceeded another 10 miles to
"Appii Forum (or Market of Appius)," a market town. There
Paul met his first Roman Christians. He had sent them his
Epistle to the Romans three years earlier (in A.D. 57), from
Corinth, during his third missionary journey. This group of
greeters was a great encouragement to Paul, who had looked
forward so long to ministering in Rome (Rom. 15:22-29); he
"took courage" from this welcoming committee. Their
reception led Paul to "thank God." The entire trip from Malta
probably took three weeks.3

"It [Paul's growing party of friends proceeding to

Rome] becomes almost a triumphal procession
[cf. Jesus' triumphal entry]."4

Paul would have passed the tomb of the Roman poet Virgil
between Puteoli and Neapolis. In his poems, Virgil anticipated
a savior, and Paul came with the message that God had
provided one.5

These last verses bring Luke's account of the spread of the gospel to a
climax. It had gone from Jerusalem to Judea and Samaria, and now to the
uttermost part of the earth (1:8). Paul was now able to bear witness in the
capital of the empire.

Tannehill suggested that Luke's purpose in his account of Paul's voyage to

Rome was to illustrate the cooperative relationships that are possible
between Christianity and pagan society.6 This may have been part of his

1Lenski, p. 1109.
2Howson, p. 667.
3Bock, Acts, p. 746.
4Neil, p. 256.
5Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 569.
6Tannehill, 2:341.
494 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

purpose. The journey from Caesarea to Rome probably covered about

2,250 miles and took well over four months.1

5. Ministry in Rome 28:16-31

Luke's purpose in recording Paul's ministry in Rome included vindicating

God's promises to Paul that he would bear witness there (23:11; 27:24).
Even though a church already existed there, Paul's ministry in Rome was
significant in Luke's purpose, because he was the "apostle to the Gentiles."
The "apostle to the Gentiles" was now able to minister in the heart of the
Gentile world.2

"Gentiles saw Rome as the center of the earth."3

Paul's situation in Rome 28:16

Paul was a Roman citizen who had appealed to Caesar and had gained the
respect (to say the least) of his centurion escort. Therefore he was able
to reside in a private rented residence ("stay by himself") with a Roman
guard (v. 30).

This is the end of the last "we" section of Acts (16:10-17; 20:5-15; 21:1-
18; 27:1—28:16). We know that Luke and Aristarchus remained with Paul
for some time, and Paul had other visitors including Timothy, Tychicus, and
Epaphroditus. Luke and Aristarchus were with him when Paul wrote his
epistles to Philemon and to the Colossians (Phile. 24; Col. 4:14), which he
composed during his detention in Rome. This imprisonment probably lasted
from A.D. 60 into 62 (cf. v. 30). Thus Acts ends about A.D. 62—29 years
after the death and resurrection of the Savior and the day of Pentecost.

Paul's first conference with the Roman Jewish leaders 28:17-22

28:17-20 Paul began immediately to prepare to witness. He wanted to

see the leaders of the Jewish community soon for two reasons.
He wanted to preach the gospel to them as Jews first. He also
wanted to take the initiative in reaching out to them with an
explanation of why he was in Rome. He wanted to do so before
they arrived at false conclusions concerning his reasons for

1Beitzel,p. 177; Bock, Acts, p. 746.

2See Finegan, Light from …, pp. 363-77, for more information about Rome.
3Bock, Acts, p. 726.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 495

being there. Estimates of the Jewish population in Rome in the

first century vary between 10,000 and 60,000.1

Undoubtedly, before sending for these Jews, Paul satisfied

himself that they were not antagonistic to him already. He
would hardly have invited to his house men who might have
been just as hostile as the Jerusalem assassins. Paul may have
been unable to go to the synagogues because of his prisoner
status. On the other hand, he may have chosen to explain his
situation to a small group of Jewish leaders on his own turf. He
could have done this to preclude another riot, which would
have complicated his formal acquittal. So, only three days after
his arrival in Rome, Paul sent for these men.

"Paul's statement in 28:17-20 is a summary of

the preceding trial narrative and imprisonment
speeches in Acts 22—26. It presents what the
narrator most wants readers to retain from that
long narrative."2

Paul emphasized these points in his explanation: He had "done

nothing against" the Jews or their "customs" (v. 17). The
Roman authorities in Judea had already declared him innocent
(v. 18)—"no ground for putting (him) to death." He had
"appealed to Caesar" because the Jews in Judea challenged
("objected to") the Romans' verdict, not because Paul had any
grievance against the Jews (v. 19). His present condition grew
out of the promises God had given Israel ("the hope of Israel,"
i.e., concerning her Deliverer and deliverance, v. 20; cf. 23:6;
24:21; 26:6-8).

28:21-22 It may be that the Jewish leaders were being completely

honest and straightforward with Paul in what they said. If so,
God had miraculously kept these Jews from hearing about
Paul's case, since Jews in Jerusalem and Rome communicated
frequently with each other.

1Levinskaya, p. 182.
2Tannehill, 2:344.
496 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

"Very possibly the Jews in Rome preferred to

remain ignorant of the case; they would not have
forgotten that earlier disputes over the Messiah
had led to their temporary expulsion from the city
(18:2 note)."1

Perhaps the Jewish leaders realized that Paul's release was

inevitable, since the Jews had no real case against him in
Roman courts. They may have decided to start from scratch in
their campaign to do away with him. In any case, they were
eager "to hear" what Paul had to say.

Paul's second conference with the Jewish leaders 28:23-29

28:23 Luke's concern in this pericope was to emphasize what Paul

preached to these men ("God's kingdom" and the things
"concerning Jesus"), and their reaction to it. The term
"kingdom of God" probably means the same thing here as it
usually does in Acts, namely: Messiah's rule, both now and in
the messianic age to come (cf. 1:3; 8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25;
28:31).

"He [Paul] was seeking a communal decision, a

recognition by the Jewish community as a whole
that Jesus is the fulfillment of the Jewish hope.
The presence of significant opposition shows that
this is not going to happen."2

"Is there any example of undefeatable hope and

unconquerable love like this act of Paul when, in
Rome too, he preached first to the Jews?"3

28:24-27 Luke recorded, for the third and last time, what had become
the Jews' characteristic response to hearing the gospel (v. 24;
13:46; 18:6; cf. Rom. 11:7-10).

"We feel safe in saying that in all of Paul's career

he scored no greater success in a single day's

1Marshall, The Acts …, p. 423.

2Tannehill, 2:347.
3Barclay, p. 211.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 497

work than on the day which Luke describes in v.

23, etc. He converted half of the rabbis and
leaders of the eleven synagogues in the capital of
the world!"1

Paul's parting word was a quotation from Isaiah 6:9-10, in

which God told the prophet that his Jewish hearers "would not
believe" God's message through him (cf. Matt. 13:14-15; Mark
4:12; Luke 8:10; John 12:40-41). Paul saw that this word to
Isaiah was as applicable in his own day as it had been in Isaiah's.
He also regarded it as inspired by "the Holy Spirit."

"In every instance in Acts where a scriptural quote

is introduced by a reference to the Spirit, the
Spirit is described as having spoken (cf. 1.16;
4.25). In this manner the written Word is shown
to be a dynamic, 'living' Word."2

"Note how the failure to respond to the message

of the gospel is seen as a failure to turn."3

28:28-29 Verse 28 is probably the ultimate climax of Acts. It summarizes

the main theme of the book. Having presented the gospel to
the Jews in Rome, and having witnessed their rejection of it,
Paul now focused his ministry again on the Gentiles (cf. 13:46-
52; 18:6; Rom. 1:16). Until "the times of the Gentiles" run
their course, and Messiah's Second Advent terminates this era,
"Gentiles" will be the primary believers of the gospel (cf. Rom.
11:19-26).

"Luke-Acts is basically a story about a mission.

Acts 28:28 comments on the mission's future.
The narrative prepares for this comment by
reports of the Gentiles' friendly response to Paul
on the voyage and the Roman Jews' contrasting
response. When we recognize the careful
reflection on the possibilities of mission among
both Gentiles and Jews in Acts 27—28, the

1Lenski,p. 1132.
2Polhill,
p. 543.
3The NET Bible note on verse 27.
498 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

impression that the ending of Acts is abrupt and

unsuitable is considerably reduced."1

Gentile response to the gospel 28:30-31

Paul's officially established innocence of anything worthy of punishment is

clear from his living a relatively comfortable life in Rome for the next "two
years" (A.D. 60-62).2 Paul was able to preach (Gr. kerysso, to proclaim as
a herald) the kingdom (rule) of God, and to teach (didasko, to instruct
others) about the Lord Jesus Christ. Luke began Acts with one reference
to the kingdom of God (1:6), and ended it with another (28:31). Verse 23
clarifies verse 31. "Preaching the kingdom of God" involves solemnly
testifying about it, and "teaching concerning the Lord Jesus Christ"
includes persuading people about Him. Paul could do this openly and
without hindrance by the Roman authorities. This was Luke's final
testimony to the credibility and positive value of the Christian gospel.

"With this expression [i.e., unhindered], which is literally Luke's

last word in Acts, he is saying that largely through Paul's
activities, the Church is now on the march, and nothing can
stop it. Paul has built the vital bridge from Jerusalem to Rome.
The Cross is in the field."3

"In seeming to leave his book unfinished, he [Luke] was

implying that the apostolic proclamation of the gospel in the
first century began a story that will continue until the
consummation of the kingdom in Christ (Acts 1:11)."4

These verses contain the last of Luke's seven progress reports (2:47; 6:7;
9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; 28:30-31).

"What is the one outstanding impression made by the study

of the life and work of the Apostle of the Gentiles? Is it not
this:—The marvelous possibilities of a wholly-surrendered and
Divinely-filled life?"5

1Tannehill, 2:343. See also Ladd, "The Acts …," pp. 1177-78.
2F.F. Bruce, "Chronological Questions …," pp. 289-90.
3Neil, p. 30. Cf. Matt. 16:18.
4Longenecker, "The Acts …," p. 573.
5Thomas, p. 83.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 499

What happened to Paul following the events recorded in Acts? There is

disagreement among scholars, as one might expect. Some believe the
Roman authorities condemned Paul and put him to death. However, most
believe they released him and he left Rome. In support of the latter view
are references in other New Testament books to Paul's activities. These
activities are difficult to incorporate into the events of his life that Acts
records. We can only explain them if he continued his ministry. Also
Eusebius, the early church historian who died about A.D. 340, wrote the
following.

"After pleading his cause, he is said to have been sent again

upon the ministry of preaching, and after a second visit to the
city [Rome], that he finished his life with martyrdom."1

"The tradition from Clement to Eusebius favors two

imprisonments with a year [at least] of liberty between them.
It has been pointed out that the leaving of Trophemus sick at
Miletus (2 Tim. 4:20) could not have been an occurrence of
Paul's last journey to Jerusalem, for then Trophimus was not
left (Acts 20:4; 21:29); nor could it have been on his journey
to Rome to appear before Caesar, for then he did not touch at
Miletus. To make this incident possible, there must have been
a release from the first imprisonment and an interval of
ministry and travel."2

While Paul was in Rome during the two years Luke mentioned (28:30), he
evidently wrote the Prison Epistles (Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and
Philemon). After his release and departure from Rome, he wrote the
Pastoral Epistles. He probably wrote 1 Timothy between A.D. 63 and 66,
to Timothy, who was ministering in Ephesus, but we do not know for sure
from where he wrote it, though Macedonia may have been the place.3 He
spoke of meeting Timothy in Ephesus later (1 Tim. 3:14; 4:13). Paul also
wrote the Book of Titus, probably from Illyricum or Macedonia, during the
same period, to Titus who was on Crete (cf. Titus 3:12; 2 Tim. 4:10).

Perhaps Paul visited Spain, as he longed to do, between A.D. 62 and 67

(Rom. 15:23-24), though there is no Scriptural record that he did or did

1Eusebius,
p. 74 (bk. 2, ch. 22).
2The New Scofield …, p. 1208.
3Conybeare, p. 747.
500 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

not do so. There are, however, several statements in the early Church
Fathers that he did visit Spain.1 From Rome he wrote 2 Timothy to Timothy
in Ephesus, shortly before his martyrdom in A.D. 68, during Nero's reign (2
Tim. 1:16-18; 4:14, 19; 1 Tim. 1:20).2 Paul was probably tried and
executed under the authority of the City Prefect.3 He was evidently
depatitated outside the city, after being scourged with rods, and was
buried in the catacombs under Rome.4

Geographer Barry Beitzel estimated that Paul's travels, between his release
in Rome to his return and death there, would have involved a minimum of
2,350 travel miles. He also calculated that Paul probably traveled a total
of at least 13,400 airline (as the crow flies) miles during his years of
ministry.5

"… the end of Acts directs attention to the missionary

situation that Paul leaves behind and to Paul's courage and
faithfulness as example for the church. It points to the
opportunity among the Gentiles. It underscores the crisis in the
Jewish mission. It presents Paul continuing his mission by
welcoming all, both Jews and Gentiles, and speaking to them
'with all boldness' in spite of Jewish rejection and Roman
imprisonment. This is the concluding picture of Paul's legacy."6

"What almost seems like the unfinished character of the book

of Acts, from a merely literary standpoint, is doubtless
intended to teach us that until the fulfillment of the angels'
prophecy that 'this same Jesus' shall return even as He went
away, the work of evangelization for this age will not be
completed. We are to heed the Word—'Occupy till I come.'"7

1See ibid., pp. 738-39, 746.

2Ibid., p. 741.
3Ibid., p. 767.
4Ibid., pp. 781, 783.
5Beitzel, pp. 176-77.
6Tannehill, 2:356.
7Ironside, Lectures on …, p. 651.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 501

Sequence of Paul's Activities

Date Event Reference

Birth in Tarsus Acts 22:3

Early life and theological education in Acts 22:3

Jerusalem under Gamaliel

34 Participation in Stephen’s stoning outside Acts 7:57—8:1

Jerusalem

34 Leadership in the persecution of Acts 9:1

Christians in Jerusalem

34 Leadership in the persecution of Acts 9:2

Christians beyond Jerusalem to
Damascus

34 Conversion on the road to Damascus Acts 9:3-17

34 Baptism in Damascus Acts 9:18

34 Preaching in Damascus Acts 9:19-22

34 Trip to Arabia Gal. 1:17

34 Return to Damascus Gal. 1:17

37 Trip to Jerusalem Acts 9:26; Gal. 1:18

37 Meeting with Peter and James and Acts 9:27-29;Gal.

preaching in Jerusalem 1:18-19

37 Trip to Tarsus via Caesarea Acts 9:30; Gal. 1:21

37- Ministry in and around Tarsus Acts 11:25

43
502 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

37- Caught up to the third heaven 2 Cor. 12:2-4

43

43 Move to Antioch of Syria on Barnabas’ Acts 11:26

invitation

43 Ministry in Antioch of Syria Acts 11:26

47 Trip to Jerusalem with Barnabas and Acts 11:30; Gal. 2:1-

Titus to deliver a famine relief gift 10

47 Return to Antioch Acts 12:25

47- Continued ministry in Antioch Acts 13:1-3

48

48- First missionary journey with Barnabas Acts 13:4—14:27

49 and John Mark

48 Ministry in Cyprus Acts 13:4-12

48 Voyage to Asia Minor Acts 13:13

48 Separation from John Mark who Acts 13:13

departed at Perga

48 Ministry at Pisidian Antioch Acts 13:14-52

48- Ministry at Iconium Acts 14:1-5

49

49 Ministry at Lystra Acts 14:8-19

49 Ministry at Derbe Acts 14:20-23

49 Return to Attalia Acts 14:24-25

49 Return to Syrian Antioch Acts 14:26

49 Ministry in Syrian Antioch Acts 14:27-15:2

49 Rebuke of Peter Gal. 2:11-14

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 503

49 Writing of Galatians

49 Trip to Jerusalem with Barnabas via Acts 15:3

Phoenicia and Samaria

49 Jerusalem Council Acts 15:4-29

49 Return to Syrian Antioch with Barnabas, Acts 15:22, 30

Silas, and Judas

49 Separation from Silas and Judas who Acts 15:31-33

returned to Jerusalem

49- Ministry in Syrian Antioch Acts 15:35

50

50 Division of opinion with Barnabas over Acts 15:36-39

John Mark

50 Separation from Barnabas and John Acts 15:39

Mark who returned to Cyprus

50- Second missionary journey with Silas and Acts 15:40—18:22

52 others

50 Ministry in Syria and Cilicia Acts 15:41

50 Ministry in Derbe and Lystra Acts 16:1a

50 Partnership with Timothy who Acts 16:1b-3

joined Paul and Silas

50 Ministry in other Galatian churches Acts 16:4-6

50 Exclusion from Asia and Bithynia Acts 16:7-8

50 Macedonian vision at Troas Acts 16:9-10

50 Voyage from Troas to Samothrace to Acts 16:11

Neapolis with Luke

50 Ministry in Philippi Acts 16:12-40

504 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

50 Separation from Luke who Cf. "we" in Acts 16:12

remained at Philippi with "they" in Acts
17:1

50- Ministry in Thessalonica Acts 17:1-9

51

51 Ministry in Berea Acts 17:10-15

51 Separation from Silas and Timothy Acts 17:14

who remained in Berea

51 Ministry in Athens Acts 17:16-34

51 Ministry in Corinth Acts 18:1-17

51 Association with Aquilla and Acts 18:2-3

Priscilla

51 Reunion with Silas and Timothy Acts 18:5

51 Writing of 1 and 2 Thessalonians

52 Trip to Ephesus with Aquilla and Acts 18:18

Priscilla

52 Separation from Aquilla and Priscilla Acts 18:18-19

who proceeded to Syria

52 Ministry in Ephesus Acts 18:19-21

52 Return to Syrian Antioch via Caesarea Acts 18:21-22

and Jerusalem

52- Layover in Syrian Antioch Acts 18:23a

53

53- Third missionary journey Acts 18:23b—21:19

57

53 Ministry in Galatia Acts 18:23b; 19:1

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 505

53 Apollos’ ministry in Ephesus Acts 18:24

53 Aquilla and Priscilla’s ministry to Acts 18:26

Apollos

53 Apollos’ ministry in Achaia Acts 18:27-28

53- Ministry in Ephesus and Asia Acts 19:1—20:1

56

53- Writing of the “former letter” to 1 Cor. 5:9

56 Corinth

56 Writing of 1 Corinthians

56 The “painful visit’ to Corinth and 2 Cor., 2:1; 12:14;

return 13:1-2

56 Writing of the “severe letter” to 2 Cor. 2:3-4; 7:8-12;

Corinth 12:17-19

56 Sending of Timothy and Erastus to Acts 19:22

Macedonia

56 Trip to Troas from Ephesus

56 Wait for Titus

56 Trip to Macedonia from Troas Acts 20:1

56 Reunion with Titus in Macedonia

56 Writing of 2 Corinthians

56 Ministry in Macedonia Acts 20:2

56 Ministry in Greece (Achaia and Acts 20:2-3

Corinth)

56- Writing of Romans

57
506 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

57 Return to Macedonia and Philippi with Acts 20:3-4

Sopater, Aristarchus, Secundus, Gaius,
Timothy, Tychicus, Trophimus, and
Luke

57 Trip of his companions except Luke to Acts 20:5

Troas

57 Trip to Troas with Luke Acts 20:6

57 Ministry at Troas Acts 20:7-12

57 Trip to Assos by land while Luke and Acts 20:13

another brother travel by ship

57 Trip to Miletus by ship with Luke and Acts 20:14-16

the other brother

57 Ministry at Miletus Acts 20:17-38

57 Trip from Miletus to Caesarea with Acts 21:1-7

Luke and the other brother via Tyre

57 Ministry at Caesarea Acts 21:8-14

57 Trip to Jerusalem Acts 21:15-16

57 Ministry at Jerusalem Acts 21:17—23:30

57 Report to the church Acts 21:17-26

57 Arrest in the temple Acts 21:27-40

57 Speech in the temple courtyard Acts 22:1-21

57 Imprisonment in Jerusalem Acts 22:22—23:30

57 Trip to Caesarea Acts 23:31-35

57- Ministry in Caesarea Acts 24:1—26:32

59

57 Defense before Felix Acts 24:1-27

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 507

59 Defense before Festus Acts 25:1-12

59 Defense before Agrippa and Festus Acts 26:1-32

59- Journey to Rome with Luke and Acts 27:1—28:16

60 Aristarchus

59 Trip to Crete Acts 27:1-13

59 Shipwreck Acts 27:14-44

59- Ministry on Malta Acts 28:1-10

60

60 Trip from Malta to Rome Acts 28:11-16

60- Ministry in Rome Acts 28:16-31

62

60- Writing of the Prison Epistles

62

62 Release from Rome

62 Return to the Aegean area

62- Writing of 1 Timothy and Titus

66

67 Arrest

67- Imprisonment in Rome

68

67 Writing of 2 Timothy

68 Martyrdom in Rome
 508

THE KINGDOMS OF GOD

TRADITIONAL DISPENSATIONALISM

The Sovereign Rule of God

First Advent

586 B.C.
Second Advent

1011 B.C.
Ascension
Church

Davidic Kingdom Mystery Form Messianic Kingdom

of the Kingdom

PROGRESSIVE DISPENSATIONALISM AND

COVENANT PREMILLENNIALISM

The Sovereign Rule of God

Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts

586 B.C.
First Advent

1011 B.C.
Second Advent

Ascension

Church

Davidic Kingdom Messianic Kingdom

2020 Edition

Dr. Constable's Course on Matthew

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 509

Views of the Messianic Kingdom

Has it How many Jesus'
View Jesus' location
begun? stages? agent

Heaven or the
Non-millennial Yes One Church
New Earth

Heaven Church
Covenant
Yes Two (already) and and
Premillennial
Earth (not yet) Church

Heaven
Progressive Church
Yes Two (already) and
Dispensational and Israel
Earth (not yet)

Traditional
No One Earth Israel
Dispensational
510 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Sermons and Speeches in Acts1

Speakers Occasions and or Cities References
Hearers

Peter (1) Selection of successor Jerusalem 1:16-22

to Judas

Peter (2) Signs on the day of Jerusalem 2:14-36

Pentecost*

Peter (3) Healing of lame man in Jerusalem 3:12-26

the temple*

Peter (4) Before the Sanhedrin Jerusalem 4:8-12

for preaching the
resurrection of Christ*

Gamaliel Before the Sanhedrin Jerusalem 5:35-39

regarding Peter and
others

Stephen Before the Sanhedrin Jerusalem 7:2-53

after his arrest*

Peter (5) At Cornelius' house to Caesarea 10:34-43

present the gospel to
Gentiles*

Peter (6) Defense to the church Jerusalem 11:4-17

about what happened
in Caesarea

Paul (1) Sabbath sermon to Pisidian Antioch 13:16-41

Jews in the
synagogue*

1Adapted from The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, p. 355. Gospel
presentations are marked with an asterisk.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 511

Paul (2) and Crowd who wanted to Lystra 14:15-17

Barnabas worship them*

Peter (7) Church council Jerusalem 15:7-11

James Church council Jerusalem 15:13-21

Paul (3) Athenians on Mars Athens 17:22-31

Hill*

Demetrius Workmen who were Ephesus 19:25-27

disturbed at Paul's
preaching

Town clerk Riot at Ephesus Ephesus 19:35-40

Paul (4) Gathering of Ephesian Miletus 20:18-35

elders

Paul (5) Mob of people who Jerusalem 22:1-21

tried to kill Paul*

Paul (6) Defense before the Jerusalem 23:1-6

Sanhedrin

Paul (7) Defense before Felix Caesarea 24:10-21

Paul (8) Defense before Festus Caesarea 25:8, 10-11

Paul (9) Defense before Herod Caesarea 26:1-23

Agrippa II*

Paul (10) Shipmates in a violent Mediterranean Sea 27:21-26

storm between Crete and
Malta

Paul (11) Testimony to Jewish Rome 28:17-20,

leaders 25-28
512 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Paul's Epistles
Period Epistle Origin Date

After the 1st missionary Galatians Antioch of A.D. 49

journey Syria

During the 2nd 1 Thessalonians Corinth A.D. 51

missionary journey
2 Thessalonians Corinth A.D. 51

During the 3rd missionary 1 Corinthians Ephesus A.D. 56

journey
2 Corinthians Macedonia A.D. 56

Romans Corinth A.D. 57

During the 1st Roman Ephesians Rome A.D. 60-62

imprisonment
Philippians Rome A.D. 60-62

Colossians Rome A.D. 60-62

Philemon Rome A.D. 60-62

Between the 1st and 2nd 1 Timothy Macedonia? A.D. 62-66

Roman imprisonments
Titus Macedonia? A.D. 62-66

During the 2nd Roman 2 Timothy Rome A.D. 67

imprisonment
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 513

Roman Emperors in New Testament Times

Emperor Important Events Bible Books
Written

Augustus Ordered the census that took Joseph and

(31 B.C.- Mary to Bethlehem (Luke 2:1)
A.D. 15)

Tiberius Jesus' earthly ministry conducted during

(A.D. 15- his reign (Luke 3:1; 20:22, 25; 23:2;
35) John 19:12, 15)

Gaius Appointed Herod Agrippa I king over Matthew (A.D.

(A.D. 35- Palestine (Acts 12:1) 40-70)
41)

Claudius Extensive famines (Acts 11:28) James (A.D.

(A.D. 41- 45-48)
54) Expelled the Jews, including Priscilla and
Aquilla, from Rome (Acts 18:2) Galatians
(A.D. 49)

1 & 2 Thess.
(A.D. 51)

Nero Paul appealed for trial before him (Acts 1 & 2 Cor.
(A.D. 54- 25:11) (A.D. 56)
68)
Favored Christianity early in his reign, but Romans (A.D.
when Rome burned in 64 A.D., he blamed 57)
the Christians, and from then on
persecuted them Luke (A.D.
57-59)
Had Paul and Peter executed (according
to early Christian tradition) Prison Epistles
(A.D. 60-62)

Acts (A.D. 60-

62)
514 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

1 Tim. (A.D.
62-66)

Titus (A.D.
62-66)

Mark (A.D.
63-70)

1 Pet. (A.D.
64)

2 Tim. (A.D.
67)

2 Pet. (A.D.
67-68)

Jude (A.D. 67-

80)

Galba Hebrews (A.D.

(A.D. 68- 68-69)
69)

Otho
(A.D. 69)

Vitellius
(A.D. 69)

Vespasian Crushed the Jewish revolt against Rome

(A.D. 69- (A.D. 66-70)1
79)

Titus Vespasian's son, who assisted his father

(A.D. 75- in the wars against the Jews, and
81) destroyed Jerusalem (A.D. 70).2

1See Josephus, The Wars . . ., books 3 and 4.

2Ibid., books 3-7.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 515

Domitian John (A.D. 85-

(A.D. 81- 95)
96)
1, 2 & 3 John
(A.D. 90-95)

Revelation
(A.D. 95-96)

Nerva
(A.D. 96-
98)
516 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Albright, William Foxwell. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed.

Pelican Archaeology series. Harmondswroth, Middlesex, England:
Penguin Books, 1956.

Alexander, Joseph Addison. Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles.

Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, n.d.

Alexander, L. C. A. "Luke's Preface in the Context of Greek Preface-

Writing." Novum Testamentum 18 (1986):48-74.

Alford, Henry. The Greek Testament. 4 vols. New ed. Cambridge: Deighton,
Bell, and Co., 1883, 1881, 1880, 1884.

Allen, Roland. Missionary Methods: St. Paul's or Ours? 2nd American ed.,
Chicago, Moody Press, 1959.

Allis, Oswald T. Prophecy and the Church. Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and
Reformed Publishing Co., 1945.

The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James

Donaldson. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1974.

Archer, Gleason L. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids:

Zondervan Publishing House, Regency Reference Library, 1982.

Arndt, William F., and F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1979.

Bailey, Mark L., and Thomas L. Constable. The New Testament Explorer.
Nashville: Word Publishing Co., 1999. Reprinted as Nelson's New
Testament Survey. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1999.

Baker, Bruce A. "The New Covenant and Egalitarianism." Journal of

Dispensational Theology 12:37 (December 2008):27-51.

Ballance, M. The Site of Derbe: A New Inscription. Anatolian Studies series.

London: British Institute of Archaeology at Ankora, 1957.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 517

Bammel, Ernst. "Jewish Activity against Christians in Palestine according to

Acts." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The
Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 357-64. Edited by Richard
Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and
Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Barclay, William. The Acts of the Apostles. The Daily Study Bible series. 2nd
ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1962.

Barker, Kenneth L. "The Scope and Center of Old and New Testament
Theology and Hope." In Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The
Search for Definition, pp. 293-328. Edited by Craig A. Blaising and
Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Barnhouse, Donald G. God's River. Vol. IV in Exposition of Bible Doctrines.

Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1958.

Barrett, C. K. "The Apostolic Decree of Acts 15.29." Australian Biblical

Review 35 (1987):50-59.

_____. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles.

Vol. 1. The International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. &
T. Clark, 1994.

_____. The New Testament Background: Selected Documents. New York:

Harper & Row, 1961.

Bartchy, S. S. "Community of Goods in Acts: Idealization or Social Reality?"

In The Future of Christianity: Essays in Honor of Helmut Koester, pp.
309-18. Edited by B. A. Pearson. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991.

Bauckham, Richard. "James and the Jerusalem Church." In The Book of Acts
in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian
Setting, pp. 415-80. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm.
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press,
1995.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 1960. One vol. ed. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1980.

Beitzel, Barry J. The Moody Atlas of Bible Lands. Chicago: Moody Press,
1985.
518 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Bellshaw, William G. "The Confusion of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra

120:478 (April-June 1963):145-53.

Berghuis, Kent D. "A Biblical Perspective on Fasting." Bibliotheca Sacra

158:629 (January-March 2001):86-103.

Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. 4th revised ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1959.

Blaiklock, E. M. The Acts of the Apostles. Tyndale New Testament

Commentaries series. London: Tyndale Press, 1959; reprint ed.,
Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1979.

Blaising, Craig. A. "The Extent and Varieties of Dispensationalism." In

Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 9-56. By Craig A. Blaising and
Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

_____. "The Fulfillment of the Biblical Covenants Through Jesus Christ." In

Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 174-211. By Craig A. Blaising and
Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

_____. "The Kingdom of God in the New Testament." In Progressive

Dispensationalism, pp. 232-83. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L.
Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

Bock, Darrell L. Acts. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament

series. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.

_____. "Evidence from Acts." In A Case for Premillennialism: A New

Consensus, pp. 181-98. Edited by Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L.
Townsend. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992.

_____. "Jesus as Lord in Acts and in the Gospel Message." Bibliotheca

Sacra 143:570 (April-June 1986):146-54.

_____. Proclamation from Prophecy and Pattern: Lucan Old Testament

Christology. Journal for the Study of the New Testament:
Supplement Series 12. Sheffield, Eng.: JSOT Press, 1987.

_____. "The Reign of the Lord Christ." In Dispensationalism, Israel and the
Church: The Search for Definition, pp. 37-67. Edited by Craig A.
Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1992.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 519

_____. "A Theology of Luke-Acts." In A Biblical Theology of the New

Testament, pp. 87-166. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody
Press, 1994.

Boice, James Montgomery. Foundations of the Christian Faith. Downers

Grove. Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1986.

Brighton, Mark A. "The Sicarii in Acts: A New Perspective." Journal of the

Evangelical Theological Society 54:3 (September 2011):547-58.

Bruce, Alexander Balmain. The Training of the Twelve. 8th ed. N. c.: A. C.
Armstrong and Son, 1894; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel
Publications, 1971.

Bruce, F. F. "Chronological Questions in the Acts of the Apostles." Bulletin

of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 68:2 (Spring
1986):273-95.

_____. "The Church of Jerusalem in the Acts of the Apostles." Bulletin of

the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67:2 (Spring
1985):641-61.

_____. Commentary on The Book of Acts. New International Commentary

on the New Testament series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

_____. The Epistle to the Galatians. New International Greek Testament

Commentary series. Exeter, England: Paternoster Press, 1982;
reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

_____. "Paul's Apologetic and the Purpose of Acts." Bulletin of the John
Rylands University Library 39:2 (Spring 1987):379-93.

Brunner, Emil. The Misunderstanding of the Church. Philadelphia:

Westminster Press, 1953.

Burns, J. Lanier. "A Reemphasis on the Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca

Sacra 132:527 (July-September 1975):242-49.

Burton, Ernest DeWitt. "The Politarchs." American Journal of Theology 2

(1898):598-632.
520 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Butcher, J. Kevin. "A Critique of The Gospel According to Jesus." Journal

of the Grace Evangelical Society 2:1 (Spring 1989):27-43.

Cadbury, Henry J. The Book of Acts in History. London: Black, 1955.

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. The Library of Christian

Classics series, volumes 20 and 21. Edited by John T. McNeill.
Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Philadelphia: Westminster Press,
1960.

Campbell, Donald K. "Paul's Ministry at Ephesus—A Devotional Study."

Bibliotheca Sacra 118:472 (October-December 1961):304-10.

Capper, Brian. "The Palestinian Cultural Context of Earliest Christian

Community of Goods." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century
Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 323-
56. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

Carroll, J. Response to the End of History: Eschatology and Situation in

Luke-Acts. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989.

Carson, Donald A. Exegetical Fallacies. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,

1984.

Carson, Donald A., and Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction to the New

Testament. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.

Cassidy, R. Society and Politics in the Acts of the Apostles. Maryknoll: Orbis,
1987.

Casson, Lionel. Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World. Princeton:

University Press, 1971.

Catalog of Oral Roberts University. Tulsa, Okla.: Oral Roberts University,

1973.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Grace. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House,

1922.

_____. He That Is Spiritual. Findlay, Ohio: Dunham Publishing Co., 1819.

_____. Salvation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1917.

2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 521

_____. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1947-

48.

Chambers, Andy. Exemplary Life: A Theology of Church Life in Acts.

Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2012.

Chase, F. H. The Credibility of the Acts of the Apostles. London: Macmillan

Co., 1902.

Chisholm, Robert B, Jr. "Joel." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old

Testament, pp. 1409-24. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B.
Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

Cocoris, G. Michael. Evangelism: A Biblical Approach. Chicago: Moody Press,

1984.

_____. "John MacArthur, Jr's, System of Salvation: An Evaluation of the

Book, The Gospel According to Jesus." Glendora, Calif.: By the
Author, 1989.

_____. Lordship Salvation—Is It Biblical? Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1983.

Cohen, Shaye J. D. "Was Timothy Jewish (Acts 16:1-3)? Patristic Exegesis,

Rabbinic Law, and Matrilineal Descent." Journal of Biblical Literature
105:2 (June 1986):251-68.

Cole, Dan P. "Corinth & Ephesus." Bible Review 4:6 (December 1988):20-
30.

Compton, R. Bruce. "The Ordo Salutis and Monergism: The Case for Faith
Preceding Regeneration, Part 1." Bibliotheca Sacra 175:697
(January-March 2018):34-49.

_____. "The Ordo Salutis and Monergism: The Case for Faith Preceding
Regeneration, Part 2." Bibliotheca Sacra 175:698 (April-June
2018):159-73.

Constable, Thomas L. "Acts." In Surveying the Gospels and Acts, pp. 219-
71. Edited by Paul D. Weaver. Schroon Lake, N.Y.: Word of Life,
2017.

_____. "The Gospel Message." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 201-17. Edited

by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.
522 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

_____. "What Prayer Will and Will Not Change." In Essays in Honor of J.
Dwight Pentecost, pp. 99-113. Edited by Stanley D. Toussaint and
Charles H. Dyer. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Conybeare, William John, and John Saul Howson. The Life and Epistles of
St. Paul. London: n.p., 1851; New ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1964.

Conzelmann, H. Acts of the Apostles. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987.

Cooper, Kenneth R. "The Tabernacle of David in Biblical Prophecy."

Bibliotheca Sacra 167:672 (October-December 2011):402-12.

Criswell, W. A. Acts. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

Crocker, Piers T. "The City of Meroe and the Ethiopian Eunuch." Buried
History 22:3 (September 1986):53-72.

Croy, N. Clayton. "Hellenistic Philosophies and the Preaching of the

Resurrection (Acts 17:18, 32)." Novum Testamentum 39:1
(1997):21-39.

Culver, Robert Duncan. "Apostles and the Apostolate in the New

Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 134:534 (April-June 1977):131-43.

Dalman, Gustaf H. The Words of Jesus. Translated by D. M. Kay. Edinburgh:

T. & T. Clark, 1909.

Dana, H. E., and Julius R. Mantey. A Manual Grammar of the Greek New
Testament. New York: Macmillan, 1955.

Darby, John Nelson. Meditations on the Acts of the Apostles. London: G.

Moorish, n.d.

_____. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York:
Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Dean, David A. "A Study of the Enthronement of Christ in Acts 2 and 3."
Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1992.

Deere, Jack. Surprised by the Power of the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1993.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 523

Deissmann, Adolf. Light from the Ancient East. 4th ed. Translated by Lionel
R. M. Strachen. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965.

_____. Paul: A Study in Social and Religious History. Translated by William

E. Wilson. Harper Torchbook ed. New York: Harper and Row, Harper
Torchbooks, 1957.

Derrett, J. D. M. "Ananias, Sapphira, and the Right of Property." In Studies

in the New Testament Volume One. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1977.

deSilva, David A. "Paul and the Stoa: A Comparison." Journal of the

Evangelical Theological Society 38:4 (December 1995):549-64.

_____. "Paul's Sermon in Antioch of Pisidia." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601

(January-March 1994):32-49.

Detwiler, David F. "Paul's Approach to the Great Commission in Acts 14:21-

23." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:605 (January-March 1995):33-41.

de Waard, J. A. A Comparative Study of the Old Testament Text in the

Dead Sea Scrolls and in the New Testament. Leiden, Netherlands:
Brill, 1965.

A Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1898 ed. 4 vols. S.v.
"The Chronology of the New Testament," by C. H. Turner, 1:403-25.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fla.:
Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

_____. Speaking in Tongues: Seven Crucial Questions. Grand Rapids:

Zondervan Publishing House, 1980.

"Doctrinal Statement of Dallas Theological Seminary." Dallas Theological

Seminary 1988-89 Catalog.

Documents of the Christian Church. Edited by Henry Bettenson. Second ed.

London, Oxford, and New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

Dodd, C. H. According to the Scriptures. London: Nisbet, 1952.

Dunn, James D. G. Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Philadelphia: Westminster

Press, 1970.
524 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Edersheim, Alfred. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. 2 vols. New
American ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1965.

_____. Sketches of Jewish Social Life in the Days of Christ. Reprint ed.
Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1974.

_____. The Temple: Its Ministry and Services As They Were at the Time of
Jesus Christ. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Co., 1972.

Edgar, Thomas R. "The Cessation of the Sign Gifts." Bibliotheca Sacra

145:580 (October-December 1988):371-86.

_____. Miraculous Gifts. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1983.

English, E. Schuyler. "Was St. Peter Ever in Rome?" Bibliotheca Sacra

124:496 (October-December 1967):314-20.

Esler, P. F. Community and Gospel in Luke-Acts: The Social and Political

Motivations of Lucan Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1987.

Eusebius. The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus. Twin Brooks

series. Popular ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Falk, Daniel K. "Jewish Prayer Literature and the Jerusalem Church." In The
Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in
Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 267-301. Edited by Richard Bauckham.
Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England:
Paternoster Press, 1995.

Feldman, Louis H. "The Omnipresence of the God-Fearers." Biblical

Archaeology Review 12:5 (September-October 1986):58-63.

Fiensy, David A. "The Composition of the Jerusalem Church." In The Book

of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its
Palestinian Setting, pp. 213-36. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand
Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England:
Paternoster Press, 1995.

Finegan, Jack. The Archaeology of the New Testament. Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 1969.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 525

_____. Light from the Ancient Past: The Archeological Background of

Judaism and Christianity. 2nd edition. Princeton University Press.
London: Oxford University Press, 1959.

Foakes-Jackson, F. J. The Acts of the Apostles. Moffat New Testament

Commentary series. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1931; reprint
ed. 1960.

Foakes-Jackson, F. J. and Kirsopp Lake. The Acts of the Apostles. Part I of

The Beginnings of Christianity, vols. 4 and 5. Reprint ed. Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965

Fox, R. L. Pagans and Christians. New York: Knopf, 1989.

Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. "Israel and the Church." In Issues in

Dispensationalism, pp. 113-30. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John
R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology. Tustin, Calif.:

Ariel Ministries Press, 1989.

Fung, Ronald Y. K. The Epistle to the Galatians. New International

Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1988.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Acts of the Apostles: An Exposition. New York: Our
Hope, 1912.

_____. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and
New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

Gangel, Kenneth O. "Paul's Areopagus Speech." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:508

(October-December 1970):308-12.

Gentry, K. L. "The Great Option: A Study of the Lordship Controversy."

Baptist Reformation Review 5 (1976):49-79.

Ger, Steven. The Book of Acts: Witnesses to the World. Twenty-First

Century Biblical Commentary series. Chattanooga, Tenn.: AMG
Publishers, 2004.

Gerlach, Joel C. "Glossolalia." Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 70:4 (October

1973):233-61.
526 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Gill, David W. J. "Acts and Roman Policy in Judaea." In The Book of Acts in
Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian
Setting, pp. 15-26. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm.
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press,
1995.

Glahn, Sandra L. "The Identity of Artemis in First-Century Ephesus."

Bibliotheca Sacra 172:687 (July-September 2015):316-34.

Golding, Thomas A. "Pagan Worship in Jerusalem?" Bibliotheca Sacra

170:679 (July-September 2013):304-16.

Goodspeed, Edgar J. "Gaius Titius Justus." Journal of Biblical Literature

69:4 (December 1950):382-83.

Grant, F. W. The Numerical Bible. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

Gray-Fow, Michael J. G. "Why Festus, Not Feliz? Paul's Caesarem Appello."

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 59:3 (September
2016):473-85.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by

C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph
Henry Thayer, 1889.

Gromacki, Robert G. The Modern Tongues Movement. Philadelphia:

Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1967; reprint ed., Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, n.d.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London:

Tyndale Press, 1966.

Haenchen, Ernst. The Acts of the Apostles. Translated by R. McL. Wilson.

Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971.

Hanna, Kenneth G. From Gospels to Glory: Exploring the New Testament.

Bloomington, Ind.: CrossBooks, 2014.

Harm, Frederick R. "Structural Elements Related to the Gift of the Holy Spirit
in Acts." Concordia Journal 14:1 (January 1988):28-41.

Harnack, Adolph. The Date of the Acts and of the Synoptic Gospels.
Translated by J. R. Wilkinson. London: Williams & Norgate, 1911.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 527

_____. The Mission and Expansion of Christianity. 2 vols. Translated by J.

Moffatt. London: Williams & Norgate, 1908.

Hays, J. Daniel. "The Cushites: A Black Nation in the Bible." Bibliotheca

Sacra 153:612 (October-December 1996):396-409.

Heater, Homer, Jr. "Evidence from Joel and Amos." In A Case for
Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 147-64. Edited by Donald K.
Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992.

Helyer, Larry R. "Luke and the Restoration of Israel." Journal of the

Evangelical Theological Society 36:3 (September 1993):317-29.

Hendriksen, William. New Testament Commentary: Exposition of Philippians

and Exposition of Colossians and Philemon. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1979.

Hengel, Martin. "The Geography of Palestine in Acts." In The Book of Acts

in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian
Setting, pp. 27-78. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm.
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press,
1995.

Henry, Matthew. Commentary on the Whole Bible. One volume ed. Edited
by Leslie F. Church. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Co., 1961.

Herodotus. The Histories. The Landmark Herodotus edition. Edited by

Robert B. Strassler. Translated by Andrea L. Purvis. Pantheon Books,
Random House: New York and Toronto, 2007.

Hesner, Colin. "The Name of Felix Again." Journal for the Study of the New
Testament 31 (October 1987):45-49.

Hess, Richard S. Song of Songs. Baker Commentary on the Old Testament:

Wisdom and Psalms series. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. Working With God: Scriptural Studies in Intercession.

New York: Carlton Press, 1987.

Hock, R. F. The Social Context of Paul's Ministry. Philadelphia: Fortress

Press, 1980.
528 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Hodges, Zane C. Absolutely Free! A Biblical Reply to Lordship Salvation.

Dallas: Redencion Viva, and Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
House, Academie Books, 1989.

_____. "A Dispensational Understanding of Acts 2." In Issues in

Dispensationalism, pp. 167-80. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John
R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. The Gospel Under Seige. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

_____. "The Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:479 (July-

September 1963):226-33.

_____. Review of "A Review of The Gospel According to Jesus, by Darrell

L. Bock in Bibliotheca Sacra, January-March 1989, pp. 21-40."
Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 2:1(Spring 1989):79-83.

Hoehner, Harold W. Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ. Grand Rapid:

Zondervan Publishing House, 1977.

_____. "Chronology of the Apostolic Age." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas

Theological Seminary, 1965.

_____. "The Duration of the Egyptian Bondage." Bibliotheca Sacra

126:504 (October-December 1969):306-16.

Homer. The Odyssey. 2 vols. With an English translation by A. T. Murray.

The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, and
London: William Heinemann, 1946.

Hook, H. Phillip. "A Biblical Definition of Faith." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:482

(April-June 1964):133-40.

Horsley, Richard A. "High Priests and the Politics of Roman Palestine."

Journal for the Study of Judaism 17:1 (June 1986):23-55.

Ice, Thomas D. "Dispensational Hermeneutics." In Issues in

Dispensationalism, pp. 29-49. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R.
Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Instone-Brewer, David. "Infanticide and the Apostolic decree of Acts 15."

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 52:2 (June
2009):301-21
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 529

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed.

5 vols. S.v. "Acts of the Apostles," by A. T. Robertson.

Ironside, Harry A. Except Ye Repent. New York: American Tract Society,

1937.

_____. Lectures on the Book of Acts. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1943.

Jamieson, Robert; A. R. Fausset; and David Brown. Commentary Practical

and Explanatory on the Whole Bible. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Jeremias, Joachim. Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus. Translated by F. H. and

C. H. Cave. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969.

_____. "Untersuchungen zum Quellenproblem der Apostelgeschichte."

Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschrift 36 (1937):208-
13.

Jewett, Robert A. A Chronology of Paul's Life. Philadelphia: Fortress Press,

1979.

The Jewish Encyclopedia. Edited by Isadore Singer. 1906 ed. 12 vols. S. v.

"Alexandrians in Jerusalem," by Emil Schürer, 1:371-72.

Johnson, Elliott E. "Hermeneutical Principles and the Interpretation of Psalm

110." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:596 (October-December 1992):428-
37.

Johnson, John E. "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral

Identity." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.

Johnson, S. Lewis, Jr. Discovering Romans: Spiritual Revival for the Soul.
Adapted by Mike Abendroth. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2014.

_____. "The Gift of Tongues and the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra
120:480 (October-December 1963):309-11.

_____. "How Faith Works." Christianity Today 33:13 (September 22,

1989):21-25.

Jones, A. H. M. Studies in Roman Government and Law. New York: Praeger,

1960.
530 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Jones, Bruce. "Real Repentance." Moody Monthly 88:2 (October 1987):21-

23.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William

Whiston. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866; reprint ed. Peabody,
Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 1988.

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. Back Toward the Future: Hints for Interpreting Biblical
Prophecy. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1989.

Keener, Craig S. Bible Background Commentary. Downers Grove, Ill.:

InterVarsity, 1993.

_____. "The Spirit and the Mission of the Church in Acts 1—2." Journal of
the Evangelical Theological Society 62:1 (March 2019):25-45.

Kennedy, George A. New Testament Interpretation through Rhetorical

Criticism. Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press, 1984.

Kent, Homer A., Jr. Jerusalem to Rome. New Testament Studies series.
Brethren Missionary Herald, 1972; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker
Book House and BMH Books, 1985.

Knowling, R. J. "The Acts of the Apostles." In The Expositor's Greek

Testament. 2 (1912):1-554. 4th ed. Edited by W. Robertson Nicoll.
London: 5 vols. Hodder and Stoughton, 1900-12.

Ladd, George E. "The Acts of the Apostles." In The Wycliffe Bible

Commentary, pp. 1123-78. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett
F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

_____. A Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans

Publishing Co., 1974.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint
ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol 9: John-
Acts, by J. P. Lange and Gotthard Victor Lechler. Translated by Philip
Schaff and Charles F. Schaeffer.

Larkin, William J., Jr. "The Recovery of Luke-Acts as 'Grand Narrative' for
the Church's Evangelistic and Edification Tasks in a Postmodern
Age." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:3
(September 2000):405-15.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 531

Law, Robert. The Tests of Life. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1909.

Lawrence, William D. "The New Testament Doctrine of the Lordship of

Christ." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1968.

Lawson, Steven J. "The Priority of Biblical Preaching: An Expository Study

of Acts 2:42-47." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:630 (April-June
2001):198-217.

Légasse, Simon. "Paul's Pre-Christian Career according to Acts." In The

Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in
Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 365-90. Edited by Richard Bauckham.
Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England:
Paternoster Press, 1995.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles. Reprint

ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1964.

Levinskaya, Irena. The Book of Acts in Its Diaspora Setting. Vol. 5 of The
Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting, edited by Bruce W. Winter.
Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England:
Paternoster Press, 1996.

Lewellen, Thomas G. "Has Lordship Salvation Been Taught throughout

Church History?" Bibliotheca Sacra 147:585 (January-March
1990):54-68.

Liddell, Henry George, and Robert Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon. 7th ed.
Revised by Prof. Drisler. New York: Harper, 1883.

Lightner, Robert P. Speaking in Tongues and Divine Healing. 2nd ed.

Schaumburg, Ill.: Regular Baptist Press, 1978.

Longenecker, Richard N.. "The Acts of the Apostles." In John-Acts. Vol. 9

of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E.
Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1981.

_____. Paul, Apostle of Liberty. New York: Harper & Row, 1964.

López, René A. "Is Faith a Gift from God or a Human Exercise?" Bibliotheca
Sacra 164:655 (July-September 2007):259-76.
532 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Lumby, J. Rawson. The Acts of the Apostles. Cambridge Greek Testament

for Schools and Colleges series. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1885.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective. Grand

Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979.

_____. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word
Publishing, 1993.

_____. The Gospel According to Jesus. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing

House, Academie Books, 1988.

_____. Justification by Faith. Chicago: Moody Press, 1984.

Macartney, Clarence E. N. Paul the Man. Westwood, N.J.: Fleming H. Revell,

1961.

MacLennan, Robert S. and A. Thomas Kraabel. "The God-Fearers—A

Literary and Theological Invention." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:5
(September-October 1986):46-53.

Maile, John F. "The Ascension in Luke-Acts." Tyndale Bulletin 37

(1986):29-59.

Malina, Bruce J. "'Religion' in the World of Paul." Biblical Theology Bulletin

16:3 (July 1986):92-101.

Malphurs, Aubrey M. "A Theological Critique of the Churches of Christ

Doctrine of Soteriology." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological
Seminary, 1981.

Man, Ronald E. "The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation."

Bibliotheca Sacra 141:562 (April-June 1984):146-57.

Manek, Jindrich. "The New Exodus in the Books of Luke." Novum

Testamentum 2 (1957):8-23.

Manson, T. W. Studies in the Gospels and Epistles. Edited by Matthew Black.

Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962.

Marshall, I. Howard. "Acts and the 'Former Treatis.'" In The Book of Acts in
Its First Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 533

Literary Setting, pp. 163-182. Edited by Bruce W. Winter and Andrew

D. Clarke. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle,
England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

_____. The Acts of the Apostles. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries

series. Reprint ed. Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, and Grand
Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

Mason, Steve. "Chief Priests, Sadducees, Pharisees and Sanhedrin in Acts."

In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of
Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 115-77. Edited by Richard
Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and
Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

McClain, Alva J. The Greatness of the Kingdom. Reprint ed. Winona Lake,
Ind.: BMH Books, 1974.

McGee, J. Vernon. Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee. 5 vols. Pasadena,
Calif.: Thru The Bible Radio; and Nashville: Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1983.

McGrath, Alister E. "Apologetics to the Romans." Bibliotheca Sacra

155:620 (October-December 1998):387-93.

McIntyre, Luther B., Jr. "Baptism and Forgiveness in Acts 2:38." Bibliotheca
Sacra 153:609 (January-March 1996):53-62.

McLean, John A. "Did Jesus Correct the Disciples' View of the Kingdom?"
Bibliotheca Sacra 151:602 (April-June 1994):215-27.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed.

Revised by C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Meisner, Donald R. "Chiasm and the Composition and Message of Paul's

Missionary Sermons." S.T.D. thesis, Lutheran School of Theology at
Chicago, 1974.

_____. "The Missionary Journeys Narrative: Patterns and Implications." In

Perspectives on Luke-Acts, pp. 199-214. Edited by Charles H.
Talbert. Danville, Va.: Association of Baptist Professors of Religion,
1978.

Merrill, Eugene H. "Paul's Use of 'About 450 Years' in Acts 13:20."

Bibliotheca Sacra 138:551 (July-September 1981):246-57.
534 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Metzger, Bruce M. "St. Paul and the Magicians." Princeton Seminary Bulletin
38 (1944):27-30.

Meyer, F. B. Paul: A Servant of Jesus Christ. London: Morgan and Scott, n.d.

The Mishnah. Translated by Herbert Danby. London: Oxford University

Press, 1933.

Moore, Thomas S. "'To the End of the Earth': The Geographical and Ethnic
Univarsalism of Acts 1:8 in Light of Isaianic Influence on Luke."
Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:3 (September
1997):389-99.

Morgan, G. Campbell. The Acts of the Apostles. New York: Fleming H. Revell
Co., 1924; reprint ed., London: Pickering and Inglis, 1965.

_____. An Exposition of the Whole Bible. Westwood, N.J.: Fleming H.

Revell, 1959.

_____. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York:
Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

_____. The Unfolding Message of the Bible. Westwood, N.J.: Fleming H.

Revell Co., 1961.

Moule, C. F. D. "Once More, Who Were the Hellenists?" Expository Times

70 (October 1958-September 1959):100-2.

Murphy, S. Jonathan. "The Role of Barnabas in the Book of Acts." Biblitheca

Sacra 167:667 (July-September 2010):319-41.

Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome. "The Cenacle—Topographical Setting for Acts

2:44-45." In The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4:
The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 303-22. Edited by
Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1995.

_____. "On the Road and on the Sea with St. Paul." Bible Review 1:2
(Summer 1985):38-47.

Murray, George W. "Paul's Corporate Evangelism in the Book of Acts."

Bibliotheca Sacra 155:618 (April-June 1998):189-200.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 535

Murray, John. Redemption—Accomplished and Applied. Grand Rapids: Wm.

B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1955.

"Must Christ be Lord to be Savior?" Eternity, September 1959, pp. 14-18,

36-37, 48.

Neil, William, The Acts of the Apostles. New Century Bible Commentary
series. London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, 1973; reprint ed., Grand
Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and London: Marshall,
Morgan, and Scott, 1981.

The Nelson Study Bible. Edited by Earl D. Radmacher. Nashville: Thomas

Nelson Publishers, 1997.

The NET (New English Translation) Bible. First beta printing. Spokane,
Wash.: Biblical Studies Press, 2001.

The New Bible Dictionary. Edited by J. D. Douglas. 1962 ed. S.v. "Cilicia,"
by E. M. B. Green, p. 233.

_____. S.v. "Judas Iscariot," by R. P. Martin, pp. 673-75.

The New Scofield Reference Bible. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, William

Culbertson, et al. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

The New Testament in Modern English. Translated by J. B. Phillips. New

York: Macmillan Co., 1958.

The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. First series. Edited by Philip Schaff.
14 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978.

O'Connor, E. D. The Pentecostal Movement in the Catholic Church. Notre

Dame: Ave Maria Press, 1971.

Olmstead, A. T. History of the Persian Empire. Chicago: University of

Chicago, 1948.

Orr, J. Edwin. The Fervent Prayer: The Worldwide Impact of the Great
Awakening of 1858. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

O'Toole, Robert F. "Acts 2:30 and the Davidic Covenant of Pentecost."

Journal of Biblical Literature 102:2 (1983):245-58.
536 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Packer, James I. Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God. Downers Grove,

Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1961.

Palmer, D. W. "The Literary Background of Acts 1.1-14." New Testament

Studies 33:3 (July 1987):427-38.

Patterson, Richard D. "The Imagery of Clouds in the Scriptures." Bibliotheca

Sacra 165:657 (January-March 2008):13-27.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. "The Apostles' Use of Jesus' Predictions of Judgment

on Jerusalem in A.D. 70." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands,
pp. 134-43. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1994.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor

Books, 1990.

Peterson, Brian. "Stephen's Speech as a Modified Prophetic Rib Formula."

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 57:2 (June
2014):351-69.

Peterson, David. "The Motif of Fulfilment and Purpose of Luke-Acts." In The

Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in
Its Ancient Literary Setting, pp. 83-104. Edited by Bruce W. Winter
and Andrew D. Clarke. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

Philostratus. The Life of Appollonius. 2 vols. With an English translation by

F. C. Conybeare. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: London:
William Heinemann, and New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1921.

Pink, Arthur W. Studies on Saving Faith. Swengel, Pa.: Reiner Publications,

n.d.

Pocock, Michael. "The Role of Encouragement in Leadership." In Integrity of

Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 301-7. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and
Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Polhill, J. P. The Acts of the Apostles. Nashville: Broadman, 1992.

Pollock, A. J. The Apostle Paul and His Missionary Labors. New York:
Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 537

Praeder, Susan Marie. "The Problem of First Person Narration in Acts."

Novum Testamentum 29:3 (July 1987):193-218.

Price, J. Randall. "Prophetic Postponement in Daniel 9 and Other Texts." In

Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 133-65. Edited by Wesley R. Willis
and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Rackham, Richard Belward. The Acts of the Apostles. Westminster

Commentaries series. 9th ed. London: Methuen and Co., 1922.

Ramm, Bernard. Rapping about the Spirit. Waco: Word Books, 1974.

Ramsay, William M. The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness

of the New Testament. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1953.

_____. The Church in the Roman Empire. 3rd ed. London: Hoddar and
Stoughton, 1894.

_____. Pictures of the Apostolic Church. London: Hodder & Stoughton,

1910.

_____. St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen. London: Hoddar and
Stoughton, 1897; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1960.

Reinhardt, Wolfgang. "The Population Size of Jerusalem and the Numerical

Growth of the Jerusalem Church" In The Book of Acts in Its First
Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting,
pp. 237-65. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press,
1995.

Richard, Ramesh. "Soteriological Inclusivism and Dispensationalism."

Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):85-108.

Riesner, Rainer. "Synagogues in Jerusalem." In The Book of Acts in Its First

Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting,
pp. 179-211. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press,
1995.
538 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Roberts, C., T. C. Skeat, and A. D. Nock. "The Guild of Zeus Hypsistos."

Harvard Theological Review 29 (1936):39-88.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols.

Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Robertson, Archibald, and Alfred Plummer. A Critical and Exegetical

Commentary on the First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians.
International Critical Commentary series. Second ed. Edinburgh: T. &
T. Clark, 1963.

Rogers, Cleon L., Jr. "The Davidic Covenant in Acts-Revelation." Bibliotheca

Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):71-84.

_____. "The Davidic Covenant in the Gospels." Bibliotheca Sacra 150:600

(October-December 1993):458-78.

Rosner, Brian S. "Acts and Biblical History." In The Book of Acts in Its First
Century Setting; Vol. 1: The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary
Setting, pp. 65-82. Edited by Bruce W. Winter and Andrew D. Clarke.
Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England:
Paternoster Press, 1993.

Ross, Bob L. Acts 2:38 and Baptismal Regeneration. Pasadena, Tex.: Pilgrim
Publications, 1976.

Ruble, Richard L. "The Doctrine of Dreams." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:500

(October-December 1968):360-64.

Russell, Walt. "The Anointing with the Holy Spirit in Luke-Acts." Trinity
Journal 7NS (Spring 1986):47-63.

Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. The Acts of the Apostles. Everyman's Bible

Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1961.

_____. Balancing the Christian Life. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969.

_____. The Basis of the Premillennial Faith. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux

Brothers, 1953.

_____. "The Christian and Civil Disobedience." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:506

(April-June 1970):153:62.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 539

_____. Dispensationalism. Chicago: Moody Press, 1995.

_____. Dispensationalism Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

_____. "The End of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September

1967):243.

_____. So Great Salvation. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor

Books, 1989.

_____. You Mean the Bible Teaches That … Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Sachar, Abram Leon. A History of the Jews. 5th ed. New York: Alfred A.
Knopf, 1965.

Salmond, S. D. F. "The Epistle to the Ephesians." in The Expositor's Greek

Testament, 3 (1910):203-395. Edited by W. Robertson Nicoll. 5
vols. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1900-10.

Sanders, John. "Inclusivism." In What about Those Who Have Never Heard?
Three Views on the Destiny of the Unevangelized, pp. 21-55. Edited
by John Sanders. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1995.

Sarles, Ken L. "All Power & Signs." Kindred Spirit 13:2 (Summer 1989):8-
11.

_____. "An Appraisal of the Signs and Wonders Movement." Bibliotheca

Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1988):57-82.

_____. "A Theological Evaluation of the Prosperity Gospel." Bibliotheca

Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):329-52.

Saucy, Robert L. The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids:

Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

_____. "The Presence of the Kingdom and the Life of the Church."
Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1987):30-46.

Savelle, Charles H. "A Reexamination of the Prohibitions in Acts 15."

Bibliotheca Sacra 161:644 (October-December 2004):449-68.

Schnabel, Eckhard J. Early Christian Mission. 2 vols. Downers Grove, Ill.:

InterVarsity Press, and Leicester, Eng.: Apollos, 2004.
540 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

_______. "The Persecution of Christians in the First Century." Journal of

the Evangelical Theological Society 61:3 (September 2018):525-47.

Schwartz, Joshua. "Peter and Ben Stada in Lydda." In The Book of Acts in
Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian
Setting, pp. 391-414. Edited by Richard Bauckham. Grand Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England: Paternoster
Press, 1995.

Scofield, C. I. Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth. 1896; reprint ed. Neptune,
N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

Schürer, Emil. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ.
Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1979.

Sell, Phillip W. "The Seven in Acts 6 as a Ministry Team." Bibliotheca Sacra

167:665 (January-March 2010):58-67.

Sherrill, John. They Shall Speak with Other Tongues. Old Tappan, N.J.:
Fleming H. Revell Co., 1964.

Showers, Renald E. Maranatha Our Lord, Come: A Definitive Study of the

Rapture of the Church. Bellmawr, Pa.: Friends of Israel Gospel
Ministry, 1995.

Smith, James. The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul. London: Longman,
Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1848.

Soards, M. The Speeches in Acts: Their Content, Context, and Concerns.

Louisville, Ky.: Westminster/John Knox, 1994.

Stagg, Frank. The Book of Acts. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1955.

Stewart, James S. A Man in Christ: The Vital Elements of St. Paul's Religion.
1935. Reprint ed. London: Hodder & Stoughton Ltd., 1964.

Stonehouse, Ned. "The Gift of the Holy Spirit." Westminster Theological

Journal 13 (1949-51):1-15.

Stott, John R. W. Basic Christianity. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans

Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. The Message of Acts. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1990.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 541

Strabo. Geography. 8 vols. With an English translation by Horace Leonard

Jones. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, and London: William Heinemann, 1960.

Strauch, Alexander. Biblical Eldership. Littleton, Colo.: Lewis & Roth

Publishers, 1986.

Strauss, Stephen J. "The Purpose of Acts and the Mission of God."

Bibliotheca Sacra 169:676 (October-December 2012):443-64.

_____. "The Significance of Acts 11:26 for the Church at Antioch and
Today." Bibliotheca Sacra 168:671 (July-September 2011):283-
300.

Strom, Mark R. "An Old Testament Background to Acts 12. 20-23." New
Testament Studies 32:2 (April 1986):289-92.

Suetonius. "The Deified Claudius." In The Lives of the Caesars. Translated

by J. C. Rolfe. The Loeb Classical Lubrary. Cambridge, Mass.: and
London: Harvard University Press, 1939.

Swindoll, Charles R. "Dallas's New Dispensation." Christianity Today,

October 25, 1993, pp. 14-15.

_____. Paul: A Man of Grace and Grit. Nashville: The W Publishing Group,
2002.

_____. The Swindoll Study Bible. Carol Stream, Ill.: Tyndale House
Publishers, 2017.

Sylva, Dennis D. "The Meaning and Function of Acts 7:46-50." Journal of

Biblical Literature 106:2 (1987):261-75.

Tabb, Brian. "Salvation, Spreading, and Suffering: God's Unfolding Plan in

Luke-Acts." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 58:1
(March 2015):43-61.

Tacitus. The Histories. The Loeb Classical Library series. Translated by

Clifford H. Moore. London: William Heinemann Ltd., New York: G. P.
Putnam's Sons, 1931.

Talbert, Charles H. Literary Patterns, Theological Themes, and the Genre of

Luke-Acts. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1974.
542 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

_____. Luke and the Gnostics. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1966.

Tannehill, Robert C. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary

Interpretation. Vol. 2: The Acts of the Apostles. Minneapolis: Fortress
Press, 1990.

Tannenbaum, Robert F. "Jews and God-Fearers in the Holy City of

Aphradite." Biblical Archaeology Review 12:5 (September-October
1986):54-57.

Tanton, Lanny T. "The Gospel and Water Baptism: A Study of Acts 2:38."
Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 3:1 (Spring 1990):27-52.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by Gerhard Kittel and

Gerhard Friedrich. Translated and edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley.
1964-76 ed. 10 vols. S.v. "kyrios, at al.," by Gottfried Quell and
Werner Foerster, 3(1965):1039-95.

_____. S.v. "pneuma, et al.," by Hermann Kleinknect, et al., 6(1968):411.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand

Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, W. H. Griffith. The Acts of the Apostles: Outline Studies in

Primitive Christianity. Chicago: Bible Institute Colportage Association,
n.d.

Thompson, Alan J. "Unity in Acts: Idealization or Reality?" Journal of the

Evangelical Theological Society 51:3 (September 2008):523-42.

Thompson, Robin G. "Diaspora Jewish Freedmen: Stephen's Deadly

Opponents." Bibliotheca Sacra 173:690 (April-June 2016):166-81.

Thomson, W. M. The Land and the Book. 2 vols. New York: Harper &
Brothers Publishers, 1873.

Toussaint, Stanley D. "Acts." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New

Testament, pp. 349-432. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B.
Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

_____. "The Contingency of the Coming of the Kingdom." In Integrity of

Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 222-37. Edited by Charles H. Dyer
and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 543

_____. "Rethinking Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 172:686 (April-June

2015):177-189.

_____. "Suffering in Acts and the Pauline Epistles." In Why, O God?

Suffering and Disability in the Bible and the Church, pp. 183-93.
Edited by Larry J. Waters and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Crossway,
2011.

Toussaint, Stanley D., and Jay A. Quine. "No, Not Yet: The Contingency of
God's Promised Kingdom." Bibliotheca Sacra 164:654 (April-June
2007):131-47.

Treier, Daniel J. "The Fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32: A Multiple-Lens

Approach." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:1
(March 1997):13-26.

Trites, Allison A. "Church Growth in the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra

145:578 (April-June 1988):162-73.

Trompf, G. W. The Idea of Historical Recurrence in Western Thought.

Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979.

Trull, Gregory V. "Peter's Interpretation of Psalm 16:8-11 in Acts 2:25-

32." Bibliotheca Sacra 161:644 (October-December 2004):432-48.

_____. "Views on Peter's Use of Psalm 16:8 in Acts 2:25-32." Bibliotheca

Sacra 161:642 (April-June 2004):194-214.

Unger, Merrill F. "Archaeology and Paul's Visit to Iconium, Lystra, and

Derbe." Bibliotheca Sacra 118:470 (April-June 1961):107-12.

_____. The Baptizing Work of the Holy Spirit. Chicago: Scripture Press,
1953.

_____. "Historical Research and the Church at Thessalonica." Bibliotheca

Sacra 119:473 (January-March 1962):38-44.

_____. "Pisidian Antioch and Gospel Penetration of the Greek World."

Bibliotheca Sacra 118:469 (January-March 1961):46-53.

_____. "The Significance of Pentecost." Bibliotheca Sacra 122:486 (April-

June 1965):169-77.
544 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

_____. Zechariah. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1963.

Unger's Bible Dictionary. 1957 ed. S.v. "Herod," by S. L. Bowman.

Valdés, Alberto S. "The Acts of the Apostles." In The Grace New Testament
Commentary, 1:481-615. Edited by Robert N. Wilkin. 2 vols. Denton,
Tex.: Grace Evangelical Society, 2010.

van Ommeren, Nicholas M. "Was Luke an Accurate Historian? Bibliotheca

Sacra 148:589 (January-March 1991):57-71.

van Unnik, W. C. Tarsus or Jerusalem: The City of Paul's Youth. Translated

by G. Ogg. London: Epworth, 1962.

Walton, Steve. "What Does 'Mission' in Acts Mean in Relation to the 'Powers
That Be'?" Journal of the Evangleical Theological Society 55:3
(September 2012):537-56.

Walvoord, John F. "The Ascension of Christ." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:481

(January-March 1964):3-12.

_____. "Biblical Kingdoms Compared and Contrasted." In Issues in

Dispensationalism, pp. 75-91. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R.
Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. The Holy Spirit at Work Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1973.

_____. Jesus Christ Our Lord. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969.

Warfield, Benjamin B. Counterfeit Miracles. New York: Charles Scribner's

Sons, 1918; reprint ed., London: Banner of Truth Trust, 1972.

Weinert, Francis D. "Luke, Stephen, and the Temple in Luke-Acts." Biblical

Theology Bulletin 17:3 (July 1987):88-90.

Wenham, John. "The Identification of Luke." Evangelical Quarterly 63:1

(1991):3-44.

Whyte, Alexander. Bible Characters. One-volume ed. Grand Rapids:

Zondervan Publishing House, 1973.

Wiersbe, Warren W. The Bible Exposition Commentary. 2 vols. Wheaton:

Scripture Press, Victor Books, 1989.
2020 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 545

_____ "Joel." In The Bible Exposition Commentary/Prophets, pp. 333-42.

Colorado Springs, Colo.: Cook Communications Ministries; and
Eastbourne, England: Kingsway Communications Ltd., 2002.

Wilkin, Robert N. "Did H. A. Ironside Teach Commitment Salvation?" Grace

Evangelical Society News 4:6 (June 1989):1, 3.

_____. "An Exegetical Evaluation of the Perseverance of the Saints." Th.D.

dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1982.

_____. "Repentance and Salvation." Journal of the Grace Evangelical

Society 1:1 (Autumn 1988):11-20; 2:1 (Spring 1989):13-26.

_____. "Repentance and Salvation: A Key Gospel Issue." Grace Evangelical

Society News 3:6 (June-July 1988):3.

Williams, D. J. Acts. San Francisco: Harper, 1985.

Williams, Ernest Swing. Systematic Theology. 3 vols. Springfield, Mo.:

Gospel Publishing House, 1953.

Williams, Margaret H. "Palestinian Jewish Personal Names in Acts." In The

Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting; Vol. 4: The Book of Acts in
Its Palestinian Setting, pp. 79-113. Edited by Richard Bauckham.
Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Carlisle, England:
Paternoster Press, 1995.

Wilson, Benjamin R. "The Depiction of Church Growth in Acts." Journal of

the Evangelical Theological Society 60:2 (June 2017):317-32.

Wimber, John. Power Evangelism. San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers,
1986.

Winter, B. W. "Providentia for the Widows of 1 Timothy 5:3-16." Tyndale

Bulletin 39 (1988):93-99.

Witherington, Ben, III. The Acts of the Apostles: A Socio-Rhetorical

Commentary. Grand Rapids and Carlisle, U.K.: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co. and Paternoster Press, 1998.

_____. "The Case of the Imprisonment That Did Not Happen: Paul at
Ephesus." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 60:3
(September 2017):525-32.
546 Dr. Constable's Notes on Acts 2020 Edition

Woodbridge, Charles J. A Study of the Book of Acts. Grand Rapids: Baker

Book House, 1955.

Yates, Kenneth W. "Military Leaders and Jonah in the Writings of Luke, Part
2." Bibliotheca Sacra 173:692 (October-December 2016):448-59.

Zimmerman, Charles. "To This Agree the Words of the Prophets." Grace
Journal 4:3 (Fall 1963):28-40.

Zuck, Roy B. "Cheap Grace?" Kindred Spirit 13:2 (Summer 1989):4-7.

_____. "The Doctrine of Conscience." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504

(October-December 1969):329-40.

Zweck, Dean W. "The Areopagus Speech of Acts 17." Lutheran Theological

Journal 21:3 (December 1987):111-22.