ACTS 2 COMMETARYEDITED BY GLE PEASE

Acts 2

The Holy Spirit Comes at Pentecost

1When the day of Pentecost came, they were all

together in one place.

BARNES, "And when the day of Pentecost - The word “Pentecost” is a Greek word signifying the 50th part of a thing, or the 50th in order. Among the Jews it was a applied to one of their three great feasts which began on the 50th day after the Passover. This feast was reckoned from the 16th day of the month Abib, or April, or the second day of the Passover. The paschal lamb was slain on the 14th of the month at evening, Lev_23:5; on the 15th day of the month was a holy convocation - the proper beginning of the feast; on the 16th day was the offering of the firstfruits of harvest, and from that day they were to reckon seven weeks, that is, 49 days, to the feast called the Feast of Pentecost, so that it occurred 50 days after the first day of the Feast of the Passover. This feast was also called the Feast of Weeks, from the circumstance that it followed a succession of weeks, Exo_34:22; Num_28:26; Deu_16:10. It was also a harvest festival, and was accordingly called the Feast of Harvest; and it was for this reason that two loaves made of new meal were offered on this occasion as first-fruits, Lev_23:17, Lev_23:20; Num_28:27-31.

Was fully come - When the day had arrived. The word used here means literally “to be completed,” and as employed here refers, not to the day itself, but to the completion of the interval which was to pass before its arrival (Olshausen). See Luk_9:51. Compare Mar_1:15; Luk_1:57. This fact is mentioned, that the time of the Pentecost had come, or fully arrived, to account for what is related afterward, that there were so many strangers and foreigners present. The promised influences of the Spirit were withheld until the greatest possible number of Jews should be present at Jerusalem at the same time, and thus an opportunity be afforded of preaching the gospel to vast multitudes in the very place where the Lord Jesus was crucified, and also an opportunity be afforded of sending the gospel by them into distant parts of the earth.

They were all - Probably not only the apostles, but also the 120 people mentioned in Act_1:15.

With one accord - See Act_1:14. It is probable that they had continued together until this time, and given themselves entirely to the business of devotion.

In one place - Where this was cannot be known. Commentators have been much divided in their conjectures about it. Some have supposed that it was in the upper room mentioned in Act_1:13; others that it was a room in the temple; others that it was in a synagogue; others that it was among the promiscuous multitude that assembled for

devotion in the courts of the temple. See Act_2:2. It has been supposed by many that this took place on the first day of the week; that is, on the Christian Sabbath. But there is a difficulty in establishing this. There was probably a difference among the Jews themselves as to the time of observing this festival: The Law said that they should reckon seven sabbaths; that is seven weeks, “from the morrow after the sabbath,” Lev_23:15. By this Sabbath the Pharisees understood the second day of the Passover, on whatever day of the week it occurred, which was kept as a day of holy convocation, and which might be called a Sabbath. But the Karaite Jews, or those who insisted on a literal interpretation of the Scriptures, maintained that by the Sabbath here was meant the usual Sabbath, the seventh day of the week. Consequently, with them, the day of Pentecost always occurred on the first day of the week; and if the apostles fell in with their views, the day was fully come on what is now the Christian Sunday. But if the views of the Pharisees were followed, and the Lord Jesus had with them kept the Passover on Thursday, as many have supposed, then the day of Pentecost would have occurred on the Jewish Sabbath, that is, on Saturday (Kuinoel; Lightfoot). It is impossible to determine the truth on this subject. Nor is it of much importance. According to the later Jews, the day of Pentecost was kept also as a festival to commemorate the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai; but no trace of this custom is to be found in the Old Testament.

CLARKE, "When the day of pentecost was fully come - The feast of pentecost

was celebrated fifty days after the passover, and has its name πεντηκοστη from

πεντηκοντα, fifty, which is compounded of πεντε, five, and ηκοντα, the decimal

termination. It commenced on the fiftieth day reckoned from the first day of unleavened bread, i.e. on the morrow after the paschal lamb was offered. The law relative to this feast is found in Lev_23:15, Lev_23:16, in these words: And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the Sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave-offering; seven Sabbaths shall be complete: even unto the morrow after the seventh Sabbath shall ye number fifty days. This feast was instituted in commemoration of the

giving the law on Mount Sinai; and is therefore sometimes called by the Jews, שמחת�תורה

shimchath�torah, the joy of the law, and frequently the feast of weeks. There is a

correspondence between the giving of the law, which is celebrated by this feast of pentecost, together with the crucifixion of our Lord, which took place at the passover, and this descent of the Holy Spirit, which happened at this pentecost.

1. At the passover, the Israelites were delivered from Egyptian bondage: this was a type of the thraldom in which the human race were to Satan and sin.

2. At the passover Jesus Christ, who was typified by the paschal lamb, was sacrificed for the sin of the world, and by this sacrifice redemption from sin and Satan is now procured and proclaimed.

3. On the pentecost, God gave his law on Mount Sinai, accompanied with thunderings and lightnings. On the pentecost, God sent down his Holy Spirit, like a rushing mighty wind; and tongues of fire sat upon each disciple, in order that, by his influence, that new law of light and life might be promulgated and established. Thus, the analogy between the Egyptian bondage and the thraldom occasioned by sin - the deliverance from Egypt, and the redemption from sin - the giving of the law, with all its emblematic accompaniments, and the sending down the Holy Spirit, with its symbols of light, life, and power, has been exactly preserved.

4. At the Jewish passover, Christ was degraded, humbled, and ignominiously put to

death: at the following festival, the pentecost, he was highly glorified; and the all conquering and ever during might of his kingdom then commenced. The Holy Spirit seems to have designed all these analogies, to show that, through all preceding ages, God had the dispensation of the Gospel continually in view; and that the old law and its ordinances were only designed as preparatives for the new.

They were all with one accord in one place - It is probable that the All here mentioned means the one hundred and twenty spoken of Act_1:15, who were all together

at the election of Matthias. With one accord, �µοθυµαδον; this word is very expressive: it

signifies that all their minds, affections, desires, and wishes, were concentred in one object, every man having the same end in view; and, having but one desire, they had but one prayer to God, and every heart uttered it. There was no person uninterested - none unconcerned - none lukewarm; all were in earnest; and the Spirit of God came down to meet their united faith and prayer. When any assembly of God’s people meet in the same spirit they may expect every blessing they need.

In one place. - Where this place was we cannot tell: it was probably in the temple, as

seems to be intimated in Act_2:46, where it is said they were daily �µοθυµαδον�εν�τ �

!ερ , with one accord in the temple; and as this was the third hour of the day, Act_2:15,

which was the Jewish hour of morning prayer, as the ninth hour was the hour of evening prayer, Act_3:1, it is most probable that the temple was the place in which they were assembled.

GILL Verse 1. R. Sol Jarchi {p} calls this day, Myvymx Mwy, "the fiftieth day": on this

day, the Jews say {q}, the law was given; and observe {r}, that "from the day that Israel

went out of Egypt, unto the day that the law was given, were fifty days." And on this day,

and which was the first day of the week, the Spirit was poured forth upon the disciples;

the Gospel began to be preached to all nations, and a harvest of souls was gathered in:

they were all with one accord in one place; in two ancient copies of Beza's, and in some

others it is read, "all the apostles"; Matthias, and the eleven, with whom he was

numbered, who are last spoken of, in Acts 1:26. Though this need not be restrained to the

twelve apostles, but may be understood of the hundred and twenty, on whom, as well as

on the apostles, the Holy Ghost might be poured forth, that so they might speak with

tongues; since among these were many ministers of the Gospel, as the seventy disciples,

and it may be more; and that his extraordinary gifts should be bestowed on others, is but

what was afterwards done; see Acts 8:17 and though there were so many of them

together, they were very unanimous and peaceable; there were no jars nor contentions

among them; they were of the same mind and judgment in faith and practice, and of one

heart and soul, and had a cordial affection for one another; and were all in one place,

which seems to be the temple; see Acts 2:46. And indeed, no other place or house could

hold so many as came to hear them, of which number three thousand were converted.

Unknown, "V. 1 - Pentecost - Normally occurred 50 days after Passover. See Exodus

23:16; 34:22; Leviticus 23:15-21; Numbers 28:26-31; Deuteronomy 16:9-12.

they - The nearest grammatical antecedent is "apostles" in 1:26. This does not prove

"they" to have been the apostles. The remainder of the chapter treats the apostles,

however, and not any others who were with them. The ministry of Jesus to the apostles,

the events in chapter one, the subsequent events in Acts which show the unique place the

apostles held in the church: all combine to argue for the apostles and against any others.

Those who hold that the "120" are the group which received the Holy Spirit in Acts 2 do

so without any basis in fact, rather upon poor exegesis and wishful thinking. Such a

position makes it possible for everyone to be "baptized" in the Holy Spirit as the apostles

were, a strictly non-scriptural point of view.

HENRY, "We have here an account of the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the disciples of Christ. Observe,

I. When, and where, this was done, which are particularly noted, for the greater certainty of the thing.

1. It was when the day of pentecost was fully come, in which there seems to be a reference to the manner of the expression in the institution of this feast, where it is said (Lev_23:15), You shall count unto you seven sabbaths complete, from the day of the offering of the first-fruits, which was the next day but one after the passover, the sixteenth day of the month Abib, which was the day that Christ arose. This day was fully come, that is, the night preceding, with a part of the day, was fully past. (1.) The Holy Ghost came down at the time of a solemn feast, because there was then a great concourse of people to Jerusalem from all parts of the country, and the proselytes from other countries, which would make it the more public, and the fame of it to be spread the sooner and further, which would contribute much to the propagating of the gospel into all nations. Thus now, as before at the passover, the Jewish feasts served to toll the bell for gospel services and entertainments. (2.) This feast of pentecost was kept in remembrance of the giving of the law upon mount Sinai, whence the incorporating of the Jewish church was to be dated, which Dr. Lightfoot reckons to be just one thousand four hundred and forty-seven years before this. Fitly, therefore, is the Holy Ghost given at that feast, in fire and in tongues, for the promulgation of the evangelical law, not as that to one nation, but to every creature. (3.) This feast of pentecost happened on the first day of the week, which was an additional honour put on that day, and a confirmation of it to be the Christian sabbath, the day which the Lord hath made, to be a standing memorial in his church of those two great blessings - the resurrection of Christ, and the pouring out of the Spirit, both on that day of the week. This serves not only to justify us in observing that day under the style and title of the Lord's day, but to direct us in the sanctifying of it to give God praise particularly for those two great blessings; every Lord's day in the year, I think, there should be a full and particular notice taken in our prayers and praises of these two, as there is by some churches of the one once a year, upon Easter-day, and of the other once a year, upon Whit-sunday. Oh! that we may do it with suitable affections!

2. It was when they were all with one accord in one place. What place it was we are not told particularly, whether in the temple, where they attended at public times (Luk_24:53), or whether in their own upper room, where they met at other times. But it was at Jerusalem, because this had been the place which God chose, to put his name there, and the prophecy was that thence the word of the Lord should go forth to all nations, Isa_2:3. It was now the place of the general rendezvous of all devout people: here God had promised to meet them and bless them; here therefore he meets them with this blessing of blessings. Though Jerusalem had done the utmost dishonour imaginable to Christ, yet

he did this honour to Jerusalem, to teach his remnant in all places; he had this in Jerusalem. Here the disciples were in one place, and they were not as yet so many but that one place, and no large one, would hold them all. And here they were with one accord. We cannot forget how often, while their Master was with them, there were strifes among them, who should be the greatest; but now all these strifes were at an end, we hear no more of them. What they had received already of the Holy Ghost, when Christ breathed on them, had in a good measure rectified the mistakes upon which those contests were grounded, and had disposed them to holy love. They had prayed more together of late than usual (Act_1:14), and this made them love one another better. By his grace he thus prepared them for the gift of the Holy Ghost; for that blessed dove comes not where there is noise and clamour, but moves upon the face of the still waters, not the rugged ones. Would we have the Spirit poured out upon us from on high? Let us be all of one accord, and, notwithstanding variety of sentiments and interests, as no doubt there was among those disciples, let us agree to love one another; for, where brethren dwell together in unity, there it is that the Lord commands his blessing.

II. How, and in what manner, the Holy Ghost came upon them. We often read in the old Testament of God's coming down in a cloud; as when he took possession first of the tabernacle, and afterwards of the temple, which intimates the darkness of that dispensation. And Christ went up to heaven in a cloud, to intimate how much we are kept in the dark concerning the upper world. But the Holy Ghost did not descend in a cloud; for he was to dispel and scatter the clouds that overspread men's minds, and to bring light into the world.

CALVI 1 TO 4

I will not refute that high and subtle interpretation of Augustine, that like as

the law was given to the old people fifty days after Easter, being written in

tables of stone by the hand of God, so the Spirit, whose office it is to write the

same in our hearts, did fulfill that which was figured in the giving of the law

as many days after the resurrection of Christ, who is the true Passover.

Notwithstanding, whereas he urgeth this his subtle interpretation as necessary,

in his book of Questions upon Exodus, and in his Second Epistle unto

Januarius, I would wish him to be more sober and modest therein.

Notwithstanding, let him keep his own interpretation to himself. In the mean

season, I will embrace that which is more sound.

. It is a common thing for the Spirit to be signified by wind, (or a blast,) (John

20:22.) For both Christ himself, when he was about to give the Spirit to his

apostles, did breathe upon them; and in Ezekiel's vision there was a whirlwind

and wind, (Ezekiel 1:4.) Yea, the word Spirit itself is a translated word; for,

because that hypostasis, or person of the Divine essence, which is called the

Spirit, is of itself incomprehensible, the Scripture doth borrow the word of the

wind or blast, because it is the power of God which God doth pour into all

creatures as it were by breathing. The shape of tongues is restrained unto the

present circumstance. For as the figure and shape of a dove which came down

upon Christ, (John 1:32,) had a signification agreeable to the office and nature

of Christ, so God did now make choice of a sign which might be agreeable to

the thing signified, namely, that it might show such effect and working of the

Holy Ghost in the apostles as followed afterward.

WITNESS LEE

Acts 2:1 says, “And when the day of Pentecost was being fulfilled, they were

all together in the same place.” The word “Pentecost” means fiftieth. It was

the fiftieth day from the Lord’s resurrection, seven weeks in between,

counting from the second day (the first day of the week—Luke 23:54—24:1)

after the Passover on which the Lord was crucified (John 19:14). It was the

fulfillment of the feast of Weeks (Deut. 16:10), which was also called the feast

of Harvest (Exo. 23:16), counting from the day of offering a sheaf of the

firstfruits of the harvest unto the morrow after the seventh Sabbath (Lev.

23:10-11, 15-16). The offering of a sheaf of the firstfruits was a type of the

resurrected Christ offered to God on the day of His resurrection (John 20:17),

which was the day after the Sabbath (John 20:1). From that day to the day of

Pentecost was exactly fifty days.

The feast of Harvest typifies the enjoyment of the rich produce brought in by

the resurrected Christ. This rich produce is the all-inclusive Spirit of the

processed Triune God given by Him to His chosen people as the blessing of

the gospel (Gal. 3:14) so that they may enjoy the all-inclusive Christ (the very

embodiment of the Triune God) as their good land. This signifies that the

believers, through receiving the bountiful Spirit on the day of Pentecost, not

only have entered into the good land, but also have participated in the

bountiful riches of the all-inclusive Christ (Eph. 3:8) in His resurrection and

ascension as God’s full allotment in His New Testament economy.

We have seen that Pentecost was the fiftieth day from the Lord’s resurrection.

The Lord’s resurrection was three days after His death. However, these were

not three full days as we count days. Regarding these three days, a small part

of a day was counted as a whole day. This means that the first of the three

days, a Friday, was the day on which the Lord Jesus was crucified. The Lord

was on the cross from nine o’clock in the morning until three o’clock in the

afternoon. Then, in the evening, He was taken down from the cross and

buried. According to the Jewish way of reckoning days, the remaining part of

that day was counted as a whole day. Hence, the three days were counted from

the last part of the first day. Furthermore, according to the Jewish way of

counting days, a day began not in the morning but in the evening. For

example, Genesis 1:5 says, “And the evening and the morning were the first

day.”

If we count part of a day as a whole day, then from the Friday evening when

the Lord Jesus was buried to the morning of His resurrection would be three

days. The last part of Friday is one day; the whole of Saturday is the second

day; and part of what is today called Sunday is the third day. However, the

actual time the Lord was in the tomb may be less than forty hours. In the early

part of the third day, perhaps less than forty hours after He died, the Lord

Jesus was resurrected.

The day of the Lord’s resurrection, the Lord’s Day, was the first day after the

Sabbath. The Jewish Sabbath, of course, was on Saturday. The Lord was

resurrected on the first day of the week, which was the day after the Sabbath.

If we count from the second day after the Passover on which the Lord was

crucified, Pentecost was the fiftieth day from His resurrection. Therefore,

there were seven weeks in between the Lord’s resurrection and Pentecost,

which also was on the Lord’s Day, the first day of the week.

COKE, "Acts 2:1. And when the day of Pentecost was fully come,— It has

often been observed, that as our Lord was crucified at one of the great Jewish

feasts, it was fit that he should be glorified at another; and this of Pentecost

was chosen, with peculiar propriety, as next succeeding that of the passover at

which Christ suffered; and also as it was celebrated in commemoration of the

giving the law from mount Sinai on that day, (Exodus 19:1-11.) and as the

first-fruits were then offered and anointed, (Exodus 23:16. Leviticus 23:17.)

To these answered the fuller discovery of the gospel on this occasion, and the

anointing the first-fruits of the Christian church by the effusion of the Spirit.

The solemnity of the feast, the general expectation of the Messiah, and the

length of the days, as it was about the middle of summer, would no doubt

bring great numbers to Jerusalem at that time; who, when they returned home,

and reported this great event, would naturally make way for the better

reception of the apostles, when they came among them. The Jews used to

begin their days, as we have often observed, about six o'clock in the evening,

and reckoned till that time the next evening, according to Genesis 1:5. By

saying therefore that the day of Pentecost was fully come, St. Luke meant that

the night was past, and the light of the next morning begun. This was the first

day of the week, or the Lord's day, as it is called Revelation 1:10. On the first

day of the week our Lord arose from the dead. On that day of the week he

appeared to his apostles when they were assembled, for two weeks

successively; and, on the first day of the week, the Holy Spirit was first poured

out upon the apostles and their company. On that day of the week the apostles

and primitive Christians used toassemble for religious worship; and, from the

custom and example of those who must needs have known the mind and will

of Christ, the Christian church still continues to assemble on that day for

religious worship. St. Luke says, they were all with one accord in one place. It

is said, ch. Acts 1:14-15 of all the hundred and twenty, all these met with one

accord, to choose an apostle, &c. The history is continued, as would appear

more plainly if we had not divided it into chapters and verses;—and of the

same company it is here said again, they were all met together with one accord

in the same place, (for so it should be rendered,) when the Holy Spirit was

poured down upon them. It is probable all these hundred and twenty were

along with the apostles, when the Holy Spirit was poured down a second time,

ch. Acts 4:23-31 and it is evident from ch. Acts 6:3 that several beside the

apostles were full of the Holy Spirit, (which is the very phrase in the text, Acts

2:4.) when the Spirit was now poured out;—a phrase, which, in other places,

signifies that the Spirit was conferred in the most honourable manner, as well

as ina greater degree; that is, that it was given immediately from heaven, and

not by the laying on of the hands of the apostles. Again, Why might not the

Holy Spirit fall down upon all the hundred and twenty, as well as upon

Cornelius and his company? ch. Acts 10:44-46. What seems much to confirm

this account of the presence of the hundred and twenty, is St. Peter's speech,

Acts 2:16 where he asserts, that, by that effusion of the Holy Spirit, the

prophesy of Joel was accomplished in which it was foretold, that the Spirit

should be poured out upon women as well as upon men, &c. For one cannot

conceive how that prophesy could be already fulfilled, unless the Spirit was

shed upon all the hundred and twenty; among whom it is expressly said, ch.

Acts 1:14 there was Mary the mother of Jesus, and some other women, who

were Christ's disciples. It may perhaps be objected to this interpretation, that

the apostles had the highest and the most of the spiritual gifts, and are taken

notice of as the only persons who preached to the multitude which then came

together. Now it is allowed, that the apostles had the most, and the best of the

gifts of the Spirit; but, notwithstanding, the other disciples might have some

inferior gifts, and those granted at the same time, in what measure and

proportion God saw fit; for there were diversities of gifts and operations,

though they all proceeded from one and the same Spirit; and the Spirit could

easily distinguish between the apostles and others, though they were all in the

same room and company.

CONSTABLE, "The day of Pentecost was an annual spring feast at which the

Jews presented the first-fruits of their wheat harvest to God (Exodus 34:22 a).

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. Exodus

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 (Galatians 3:3; Galatians 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 (Exodus

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. Travelling conditions then 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.

". . . 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." [Note: Longenecker,

p. 269.]

The antecedent of "they" is apparently the believers Luke mentioned in Acts

1:15. It is not possible to identify the place (lit. the house, Gr. ton oikon)

where they assembled certainly. Perhaps it was the upper room already

mentioned (Acts 1:13) or another house. Clearly the disciples were indoors

(Acts 2:2).

Verses 1-4

The descent of the Spirit 2:1-4

Luke introduced the beginning of Jesus' earthly ministry with His baptism

with the Spirit (Luke 3:21-22). He paralleled this 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 (Matthew 3:11; Luke 3:16) as

had Jesus (Acts 1:8). Jesus did the baptizing, and the Spirit came upon the

disciples.

Verses 1-41

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. [Note: For more

information about the dispensations, see Charles C. Ryrie, Dispensationalism

Today, or idem, Dispensationalism.] 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. [Note: E.g., James D. G. Dunn,

Baptism in the Holy Spirit, p. 49; Eduard Schweizer, Theological Dictionary

of the New Testament, s.v., "pneuma ...," 6:411; Emil Brunner, The

Misunderstanding of the Church, p. 161; Neil, p. 71; Longenecker, p. 271; and

Morgan, p. 22). For a summary of the views of ultradispensationalists, see

Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today, ch. 10; or idem, Dispensationalism, ch. 11.]

"This event is a fulcrum account in Luke-Acts." [Note: Bock, Acts, p. 92.]

"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 to Acts 8:3 traces the

development of this conflict in Jerusalem." [Note: Tannehill, 2:34.]

BARCLAY, "THE DAY OF PENTECOST (Acts 2:1-13)

We may never know precisely what happened on the Day of Pentecost but we

do know that it was one of the supremely great days of the Christian Church.

for on that day the Holy Spirit came to the Christian Church in a very special

way.

Acts has been called the Gospel of the Holy Spirit; so before we turn to

detailed consideration of its second chapter let us take a general view of what

Acts has to say about the Holy Spirit.

The Coming Of The Spirit

It is perhaps unfortunate that we so often speak of the events at Pentecost as

the coming of the Holy Spirit. The danger is that we may think that the Holy

Spirit came into existence at that time. That is not so; God is eternally Father,

Son and Holy Spirit. In fact Acts makes that quite clear. The Holy Spirit was

speaking in David (Acts 1:16); the Spirit spoke through Isaiah (Acts 28:25);

Stephen accuses the Jews of having, all through their history, opposed the

Spirit (Acts 7:51). In that sense the Spirit is God in every age revealing his

truth to men. At the same time something special happened at Pentecost.

The Work Of The Spirit In Acts

From that moment the Holy Spirit became the dominant reality in the life of

the early Church.

For one thing, the Holy Spirit was the source of all guidance. The Spirit moves

Philip to make contact with the Ethiopian Eunuch (Acts 8:29); prepares Peter

for the coming of the emissaries of Cornelius (Acts 10:19); orders Peter to go

without hesitation with these emissaries (Acts 11:12); enables Agabus to

foretell the coming famine (Acts 11:28); orders the setting apart of Paul and

Barnabas for the momentous step of taking the gospel to the Gentiles (Acts

13:2; Acts 13:4); guides the decisions of the Council of Jerusalem (Acts

15:28); guides Paul past Asia, Mysia and Bithynia, down into Troas and

thence to Europe (Acts 16:6); tells Paul what awaits him in Jerusalem (Acts

20:23). The early Church was a Spirit-guided community.

For another thing, all the leaders of the Church were men of the Spirit. The

Seven are men of the Spirit (Acts 6:3); Stephen and Barnabas are full of the

Spirit (Acts 7:55; Acts 11:24). Paul tells the elders at Ephesus that it was the

Spirit who made them overseers over the Church of God (Acts 20:28).

For still another thing. the Spirit was the source of day-to-day courage and

power. The disciples are to receive power when the Spirit comes (Acts 1:8);

Peter's courage and eloquence before the Sanhedrin are the result of the

activity of the Spirit (Acts 4:31); Paul's conquest of Elymas is the work of the

Spirit (Acts 13:9). The Christian courage to meet the dangerous situation, the

Christian power to cope with life more than adequately, the Christian

eloquence when eloquence is needed, the Christian joy which is independent

of circumstances are all ascribed to the work of the Spirit.

For a last thing, Acts 5:32 speaks of the Spirit "whom God has given to those

who obey him." This has in it the great truth that the measure of the Spirit

which a man can possess is conditioned by the kind of man he is. It means that

the man who is honestly trying to do the will of God will experience more and

more of the wonder of the Spirit.

In Acts 1:1-26; Acts 2:1-47; Acts 3:1-26; Acts 4:1-37; Acts 5:1-42; Acts 6:1-

15; Acts 7:1-60; Acts 8:1-40; Acts 9:1-43; Acts 10:1-48; Acts 11:1-30; Acts

12:1-25; Acts 13:1-52 there are more than forty references to the Holy Spirit;

the early Church was a Spirit-filled Church and that was the source of its

power

THE BREATH OF GOD (Acts 2:1-13 continued)

2:1-13 So when the day of Pentecost came round, they were all together in one

place; and all of a sudden there came from heaven a sound like that of a

violent, rushing wind and it filled the whole house where they were sitting.

And tongues, like tongues of fire, appeared to them, which distributed

themselves among them and settled on each one of them. And they were all

filled with the Holy Spirit and they began to speak in other tongues as the

Spirit gave them the power of utterance.

There were staying in Jerusalem, Jews, devout men from all the races under

heaven. When the news of this got abroad the crowd assembled and came

pouring together; for each one of them heard them speaking in his own

language. They were all astonished and kept saying in amazement, "Look

now! Are all these men who are speaking not Galilaeans? And how is it that

each one of us hears them speaking in our own language in which we were

born? Parthians and Medes. Elamites, those who stay in Mesopotamia, in

Judaea and Cappadocia, in Pontus. in Asia, in Phrygia and Pamphylia. in

Egypt and the parts of Libya round about Cyrene, Romans, who are staving

here, Jews and proselytes. people from Crete and Arabia--we hear these men

telling the wonders of God in our own tongues." They were all astonished and

did not know what to make of it, and they kept on saying to each other, "What

can this mean?" But others kept on saying in mockery, "They are filled with

new wine."

There were three great Jewish festivals to which every male Jew living within

twenty miles of Jerusalem was legally bound to come--the Passover, Pentecost

and the Feast of Tabernacles. Pentecost means "The Fiftieth," and another

name for Pentecost was "The Feast of Weeks." It was so called because it fell

on the fiftieth day, a week of weeks, after the Passover. The Passover fell in

the middle of April; therefore Pentecost fell at the beginning of June. By that

time travelling conditions were at their best. At least as many came to the

Feast of Pentecost as came to the Passover. That explains the roll of countries

mentioned in this chapter; never was there a more international crowd in

Jerusalem than at the time of Pentecost.

The Feast itself had two main significances. (i) It had an historical

significance. It commemorated the giving of the Law to Moses on Mount

Sinai. (ii) It had an agricultural significance. At the Passover the crop's first

omer of barley was offered to God; and at Pentecost two loaves were offered

in gratitude for the ingathered harvest. It had one other unique characteristic.

The law laid it down that on that day no servile work should be done

(Leviticus 23:21; Numbers 28:26). So it was a holiday for all and the crowds

on the streets would be greater than ever.

What happened at Pentecost we really do not know except that the disciples

had an experience of the power of the Spirit flooding their beings such as they

never had before. We must remember that for this part of Acts Luke was not

an eye-witness. He tells the story as if the disciples suddenly acquired the gift

of speaking in foreign languages. For two reasons that is not likely.

(i) There was in the early Church a phenomenon which has never completely

passed away. It was called speaking with tongues (compare Acts 10:46; Acts

19:6). The main passage which describes it is 1 Corinthians 14:1-40 . What

happened was that someone, in an ecstasy, began to pour out a flood of

unintelligible sounds in no known language. That was supposed to be directly

inspired by the Spirit of God and was a gift greatly coveted. Paul did not

greatly approve of it because he greatly preferred that a message should be

given in a language that could be understood. He in fact said that if a stranger

came in he might well think he had arrived in a congregation of madmen (1

Corinthians 14:23). That precisely fits Acts 2:13. Men speaking in tongues

might well appear to be drunk to someone who did not know the phenomenon.

(ii) To speak in foreign languages was unnecessary. The crowd was made up

of Jews (Acts 2:5) and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Proselytes were Gentiles who

had accepted the Jewish religion and the Jewish way of life. For a crowd like

that at most two languages were necessary. Almost all Jews spoke Aramaic;

and, even if they were Jews of the Dispersion from a foreign land, they would

speak that language which almost everyone in the world spoke at that time--

Greek.

It seems most likely that Luke, a Gentile, had confused speaking with tongues

with speaking with foreign tongues. What happened was that for the first time

in their lives this motley mob was hearing the word of God in a way that

struck straight home to their hearts and that they could understand. The power

of the Spirit was such that it had given these simple disciples a message that

could reach every heart.

COFFMAN, "This fantastic chapter records the establishment of the church of

Jesus Christ upon this earth, the same being the long promised kingdom of

God, and the fulfillment of a vast body of Old Testament prophecy. Every line

here recorded by Luke reveals truth of the most extensive dimensions. This is

not merely the best account of the beginning of this current dispensation of the

grace of God, it is the only account, the keystone that ties together the Old

Testament and the New Testament; and, regarding such question as how the

church began, and of how one becomes a member of it, and of the first

emergence of God's new creation in Christ, this chapter provides a record of

what is KNOWN, as contrasted with what is merely GUESSED about these

vital considerations.

Significantly, this account is brief, so condensed that almost every line of it

touches but does not elaborate things which tantalize human curiosity, and

concerning which things men will always DESIRE to know more than is

revealed. However, concerning things which are within the perimeter of what

men NEED to know, this chapter blazes with eternal light.

And when the day of Pentecost was now come, they were all together in one

place. (Acts 2:1)

PENTECOST

Pentecost ... This was one of the three principal feasts of the Jews (2

Chronicles 8:12,13), the others being Passover and Tabernacles. This feast

was known by several names: "Firstfruits," "Harvest Festival," "Feast of

Weeks" (Leviticus 23:15f), and "Pentecost," as here. The last two of these

names derived from the time it was held, which was fifty days after the first

ordinary sabbath after the beginning of Passover, "Pentecost" meaning

"fiftieth." Also, since fifty days were exactly seven weeks, counting the first

and last Sundays inclusively, this led to the name "Feast of Weeks." The

historical church devised another name which came about thus: "The habit of

dressing in white and seeking baptism on Pentecost gave it the name

`Whitsunday,' by which it is popularly known all over the world."[1]

The Passover week, from which Pentecost was reckoned, usually had two

sabbaths: (1) the first full day of the feast, called a "high" sabbath (John

19:31), and (2) the ordinary sabbath, the seventh day of the ordinary week.

The first of these came on various days of the week, like any day occurring on

a fixed day of the month; the second was always a Saturday. The year our

Lord suffered (A.D. 30), the high sabbath fell on Friday, both our Lord and the

robbers being crucified on Thursday the preceding day; and, to prevent the

bodies remaining upon the cross on that high sabbath, the Pharisees requested

Pilate to break their legs. Thus there were back-to-back sabbaths during the

Passover at which Jesus died, as attested by the Greek text of Matthew 28:1.

It will be seen at once that reckoning Pentecost from Friday would give a

Saturday for Pentecost (as sabbatarians have insisted); whereas, reckoning

from the ordinary sabbath would give a Sunday. The Sadducees and Karaite

Jews counted from the sabbath ordinary; the Pharisees counted from the high

sabbath. Thus, depending upon which method of calculating was used,

Pentecost fell upon either a Saturday or a Sunday; but there is no way that the

Christians could have been persuaded to accept the Pharisees' method of

counting it, neither the judgment of the Pharisees or Sadducees having any

weight at all with the followers of Christ. The Karaite Jews, however,

accepted the Scriptures literally, insisting that Pentecost be reckoned from the

sabbath ordinary of Passover week; and it is certain that Jesus' followers

would have done the same thing. As Barnes declared:

The Caraite (the alternate spelling of Karaite) Jews, or those who insisted on a

literal interpretation of the Scriptures, maintaining that by "the sabbath" here

was meant the usual sabbath, the seventh day of the week.[2]

Thus it is immaterial whether the Pharisees' or the Sadducees' position on this

question prevailed in that year 30 A.D.; and all arguments based upon the date

of the Jews' observance of Pentecost that year are irrelevant. The Christians

would have allowed the literal, scriptural method, as did the Karaites, counting

from the ordinary sabbath, and thus assuring that Pentecost would have been

marked by them as falling upon the fiftieth day following the ordinary sabbath.

That, of course, was a Sunday.

The verse before us carries a strong inference that the Pentecost observed by

the followers of Jesus that year did not coincide with the Jewish observance.

Was fully come ... This is the rendition in the KJV, and there are no valid

reasons for changing this in the English Revised Version. The words "fully

come" are translated from a word of uncertain meaning; and the incomparable

Lightfoot believed that Luke used that word here "to signify that the Christian

Pentecost did not coincide with the Jewish, just as Christ's last meal with the

disciples was considered not to have coincided with the Jewish Passover."[3]

In many areas, Christian tradition may not be considered as conclusive; but in

this matter of what day of the week was Pentecost, the unbroken,

unchallenged tradition of more than nineteen centuries, plus the fact that the

first day of the week is stressed throughout the New Testament as the fixed

day of Christian assemblies, makes it certain that Pentecost fell on a Sunday.

Why would the church have clung to their assemblies upon the first day of the

week, if indeed the very beginning of the church had been upon a Saturday?

We agree with Bruce who said: "Christian tradition is therefore right in fixing

the anniversary of the descent of the Spirit upon a Sunday."[4]

It should also be noted that the complicated nature of the question in view here

is a key factor in the popular and erroneous opinion that Christ was crucified

on Friday. Note this:

According to Matthew, and Mark and Luke, the passover that year fell on

Thursday the 14th of Nisan, hence, Pentecost fell on Saturday.[5]

In view of the above, many calculators made the crucifixion to be on Friday

with a view to fixing Pentecost on Sunday; but the exegesis here demonstrates

that it is not necessary at all to do this. It is true, of course, that the Passover

fell on Thursday (after sundown), after Jesus was crucified; and the next day

(Friday) was a high sabbath from which the Pharisees would have calculated

Pentecost, making it fall on a Saturday. But in their departures from the word

of the Lord, the Pharisees were wrong in this, as they were wrong in so many

other things. It is very significant, however, that it was the Sadducees, not the

Pharisees, who were in charge of the Jewish religious affairs during that

crucial time; and they reckoned Pentecost from Sunday after the sabbath

ordinary. As Bruce explained:

This was the reckoning of the Sadducean party in the first century A.D. In the

phrase "the morrow after the sabbath" (Leviticus 23:15), they interpreted the

sabbath as the weekly sabbath. While the temple stood, their interpretation

would be normative for the public celebration of the festival.[6]

Some scholars deny this, insisting that the Pharisees' calculations were

followed; but take it either way: (1) If the count was from the high sabbath (as

by the Pharisees), then the Christian Pentecost came a day later (as might be

indicated by the words "fully come"); and (2) if the count was from the

sabbath ordinary, as alleged by Bruce to have been the method then in vogue,

then the Christian Pentecost coincided with it, having been most certainly

celebrated on Sunday the first day of the week, no matter what the Jews did.

To this student, it seems strongly indicated that Bruce is correct and that the

Jewish and Christian Pentecosts coincided, the immense throngs of people

mentioned in this chapter apparently proving this.

They were all together ... Who were the "they"? Scholars disagree radically

about this; but the conviction here is that the reference is to the Twelve. They

were the only ones to whom Jesus had promised such an outpouring of the

Spirit. Furthermore, Peter's words (Acts 2:32) that "we are all witnesses" of

Christ's resurrection can refer only to the Twelve, because only two disciples

were found among the whole one hundred and twenty who were eligible to

join them as "witnesses." What the word "all" surely means in Acts 2:32 must

therefore be the meaning here. "We ... all," as used by Peter, identifies the

"they ... all," as used here by Luke.

Also, "numbered with the eleven apostles," as it stands at the end of Acts 1,

requires "eleven apostles" to be understood as the antecedent of "they" in Acts

2:1. DeWelt said:

The fact that the antecedent of any pronoun is found by referring back to the

nearest noun (or pronoun) with which it agrees in number etc., clinches the

argument of the baptism of only the apostle's in the Holy Spirit.[7]

Russell also restricted the meaning of "they ... they ... all" in this verse to "the

apostles."[8] McGarvey wrote:

The persons thus assembled together and filled with the Holy Spirit were not,

as many have supposed, the one hundred and twenty disciples mentioned in a

parenthesis in the preceding chapter, but the twelve apostles. This is made

certain by the grammatical connection between the first verse of this chapter

and the last of the preceding.[9]

Another consideration is that the apostles had undergone a long preparation

for the events of Pentecost, and there is no indication that the entire one

hundred and twenty were thus prepared. The implications against

understanding "they" in this verse as inclusive of the one hundred and twenty

are too formidable to be set aside.

In one place ... Where was this? Some have supposed it was the upper room,

and others have been sure that some area of the Jewish temple, such as

Solomon's Porch, was the place of these events; and still others have

understood the action to have taken place in both, beginning in the upper room

and moving to the larger area in the temple with the progression of events. It

appears most likely that some large area of the temple compound was the

place, due to the large numbers of people involved. All that is certain is that it

was in Jerusalem.

In later Jerusalem, Pentecost was celebrated as the anniversary of the giving of

the Law at Sinai (based upon a deduction from Exodus 19:1); and the

occasions do have the great factors in common, of the Law having been

promulgated at Sinai, and the proclamation of the gospel having begun at

Pentecost in Jerusalem. The typical nature of the first event is further seen in

the death of three thousand souls through disobedience the day the Law came,

and in the contrast of three thousand souls having been saved through

obedience at Pentecost. John Wesley has the following comment:

At the Pentecost of Sinai in the Old Testament, and the Pentecost of Jerusalem

in the New Testament, were the two grand manifestations of God, the legal

and the evangelical; the one from the mountain and the other from heaven; the

terrible one and the merciful one.[10]

The very weightiest reasons appear for God's choice of this day for the

beginning of the church: (1) As Jesus was crucified at a great Jewish festival,

it was appropriate that he should have been glorified at another; (2) Pentecost

was the next after the Passover; (3) it was the anniversary of the giving of the

Law; (4) the firstfruits were offered on Pentecost, and it was proper that the

firstfruits of the gospel should come unto God on that occasion; (5) millions of

people were in Jerusalem for that occasion; and (6) most importantly of all,

perhaps, by its falling upon the first day of the week, it coincided in that

particular with the resurrection of Christ, and was thus of major importance in

certifying Sunday as the day of the Christian assemblies.

[1]; ISBE, p. 2319.

[2] Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan:

Baker Book House, 1953), Acts,. p. 26.

[3]; ISBE, p. 2318.

[4] F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B.

Eerdmans, Publishers, 1954), p. 53.

[5]; ISBE, p. 2318.

[6] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 53.

[7] Don DeWelt, Acts Made Actual (Joplin, Missouri: College Press, 1958), p.

35.

[8] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament

(Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 286.

[9] J. W. McGarvey, Acts of Apostles (Cincinnati: Standard Publishing

Company, 1892), p. 21.

[10] John Wesley, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan:

Baker Book House, n.d.), in loco.

BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR 1-4, "And when the day of Pentecost was fully come.

The day of Pentecost

I. In the occurrences of the day of Pentecost we discover evidence of a special Divine influence. This idea is too prevalent, that the agency of the Supreme is only of a general character—that the repentance and salvation of sinners are brought about, independently of any direct agency on the part of God. They spake with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Most convincing evidence of a special Divine influence is found also in the effects produced upon the day of Pentecost.

II. The occurrences of the day of Pentecost confirmed the Divine mission of Jesus and the truth of Christianity. Whilst on earth the Lord Jesus gave abundant evidence that He was from God. Jesus encouraged His disciples to expect that they would be endued with special power from on high.

III. The occurrences of the day of Pentecost exhibit the folly of opposition to the Kingdom of Christ. The day of Pentecost assures us that Jehovah regards the kingdom of His Son with supreme affection, and that all His perfections are engaged for its defence and enlargement.

IV. The occurrences of the day of Pentecost exhibit the grand means of advancing the cause of Christ and saving sinners.

V. The occurrences of the day of Pentecost exhibit the Christian minister’s grand source of encouragement.

VI. The occurrences of that day exhibit the reality and importance of revivals of religion. By a revival of religion we understand an uncommon and general interest in the subject of salvation, produced by the Holy Spirit, through the instrumentality of Divine truth. Such, substantially, was the revival on the day of Pentecost. Do you say that the excitement, denominated a revival of religion, occurs in connection with the special efforts of Christians? We answer, that the excitement on the day of Pentecost occurred in a similar connection. Do you say that the Divine influence to which we allude, as to the mode of its operation, is enveloped in the darkness of mystery? So it was on the day of Pentecost. Do you say there is enthusiasm connected with the excitement denominated a revival of religion? Fanaticism there may have been. But does such a fact prove the entire absence of genuine religion? Does it prove that no revival is a sober, rational work? Do you say that in a time of general excitement there will be instances of gross imposition on the Church? So it was in the Pentecost revival, when, in awful warning to hypocrites, Ananias and Sapphira fell down dead. Do you say that the excitement denominated a revival of religion, is often succeeded by instances of apostacy? We answer, that apostacies have likewise occurred under other circumstances. The occurrences of the day of Pentecost exhibit, likewise, the importance of revivals of religion. In a single day it gave to the Christian Church a weight of influence more than a hundredfold greater than it had previously possessed. It is important to individual happiness and to the

community at large. (Baxter Dickinson.)

Pentecost—the first-fruits

But why was the gift of the Spirit delayed until the day of Pentecost was fully come? No man must irreverently pry into the purposes of Deity.

I. Pentecost was the feast of first-fruits; therefore symbolical of the first-fruits of the Christian Church (Lev_23:15; Lev_23:17; Deu_16:9). The first sheaf of the Christian harvest, the first fruit of the Christian reaping was there ingathered.

II. Pentecost was associated in the Jewish worship with the giving of the law from Sinai. Fifty days after the exodus from Egypt, the Israelites received the law from Sinai. To this day the gift of the law is kept in view in the Jewish observance of Pentecost.

1. Conviction of sin is the prominent idea of the apostolic Pentecost. Peter’s sermon resulted in the cry, “Brethren, what shall we do?” Conviction of sin is the prelude to a reformed life. In our Christian families and amongst our young people, trained from infancy in Christian virtue, we need not always look for the intense conviction of sin which is apparent on this first day of the Christian Pentecost. No! God’s ways are often gentle.

2. The first gift of the Paraclete on the day of Pentecost—the day which, in Jewish thought, was specially consecrated to the giving of the law from Sinai—was specially fitted to the mission of Him “who will convict the world in respect of sin.”

III. The first-fruits on the day of Pentecost are typical of the ingathering of all nations to Christ. More foreign Jews attended the Pentecost than any other Jewish feast. And in the light of Pentecost we look forward hopefully to the time when the “great multitude, whom no man could number, out of every nation, and of all tribes, and peoples, and tongues” shall stand before the throne and before the Lamb, and shall cry with a great voice, saying, “Salvation unto our God which sitteth on the throne, and unto the Lamb” (Rev_7:9-10).

IV. Pentecost teaches the union of vast spiritual power with feeble human agency. (George Deane, D. Sc.)

Whir-Sunday

I. What the day of Pentecost gave indisputable proof of.

1. The truth of Old and New Testament prophecies (Isa_44:3; Eze_36:27; Joe_2:28; Zec_4:6; Joh_14:16; Joh_15:26; Joh_16:7; Act_1:5, etc.).

2. The reality of the Messiahship and mission of Christ. The Holy Ghost would bring to the remembrance of the disciples the words they had heard their Master utter, and reveal the meaning of the things of Christ unto them. The Spirit bears witness with our spirits to-day that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.

3. The person, presence, and power of the Holy Ghost.

II. What the day of Pentecost gave infallible pledge of. The success of the preaching of Peter on that day was the earnest of the successive victories the gospel would achieve over error in the world down to the end of time. Those victories would be won—

1. In spite of the paucity of numbers on the side of the gospel.

2. In spite of the poverty of the preachers of the gospel.

3. In spite of the antagonism of the enemies of the gospel.

4. In spite of the unfaithfulness of professors of the gospel.

III. What the day of Pentecost gave irrevocable pattern of. The primitive Church had to—

1. Wait for the day.

2. Work for the day. Human agony linked with Divine power. (F. W. Brown.)

Pentecost

I. The season when the Spirit was given.

1. In God’s appointed time. There is a set time to favour Zion, both to try our faith and to prove God’s sovereignty. If every drop of rain has its appointed birthday, every gleam of light its predestinated pathway, and every spark of fire its settled hour for flying upward, certainly the will of God must have arranged and settled the period and place of every gracious visitation.

2. After the ascension. The Spirit was not given till after Jesus had been glorified. Various blessings are ascribable to different parts of Christ’s work. His life is our imputed righteousness; His death brings us pardon; His resurrection confers upon us justification; His ascension yields to us the Holy Spirit. “When He ascended up on high,” etc. It was the wont of the Roman conqueror as he rode along to scatter large quantities of money among the admiring crowd. So our glorified Lord scattered gifts among men.

3. At Pentecost. Some say that at Pentecost the law was proclaimed on Sinai. If so, it was very significant that on the day when the law was issued amid thunders and lightnings, the gospel—God’s new and better law—should be proclaimed with mighty wind and tongues of fire. We are clear, however, that Pentecost was a harvest-festival. On that day the sheaf was waved before the Lord and the harvest consecrated. The passover was to our Saviour the time of His sowing, but Pentecost was the day of His reaping, and the fields which were ripe to the harvest when He sat on the well, are reaped now that He sits upon the throne.

4. When there was most need. Vast crowds were gathered. What would have been the use of the many tongues when no strangers were ready to hear? Whenever we see unusual gatherings, whenever the spirit of hearing is poured out upon the people, we ought to pray for and expect an unusual visitation of the Spirit.

5. Where they were all with one accord in one place. Christians cannot all now be in one place, but they can all be of one accord. When there are no cold hearts, no prejudices and bigotries to separate, no schism to rend the one sacred garment of Christ, then may we expect to see the Spirit of God resting upon us.

6. When they were earnest about one grand object.

II. The manner. Each word here is suggestive.

1. Suddenly. It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, and so, though the Spirit may

have been secretly preparing men’s hearts, yet the real work of revival is done suddenly to the surprise of all observers.

2. There was a sound. Although the Spirit of God is silent, yet His operations are not silent in their results.

3. As of wind. In Greek and Hebrew the word used for wind and for Spirit is the same. The wind is doubtless, chosen as an emblem because of its mysteriousness: “Thou canst not tell whence it cometh nor whither it goeth”; because of its freeness: “It bloweth where it listeth”; because of diversity of its operations, for the wind blows a gentle zephyr at one moment, and anon it mounts to a howling blast. The Holy Spirit at one time comes to comfort, and at other times to alarm, etc.

4. It was rushing. This pour-trayed the rapidity with which the Spirit’s influences spread—rushing like a torrent. Within fifty years from Pentecost the gospel had been preached in every country of the known world.

5. It was mighty, irresistible, and so is the Spirit of God; where He comes nothing can stand against Him.

6. It filled all the place where they were sitting. The sound was not merely heard by the disciples. When the Spirit of God comes, He never confines Himself to the Church. A revival in a village penetrates even the pot-house. The Spirit of God at work in the Church is soon felt in the farm-yard, work-room, and factory.

7. But this was not all. I must now mention what was the appearance seen—a bright luminous cloud probably, not unlike that which once rested in the wilderness over the tribes by night—which suddenly divided, or was cleft, and separate tongues of fire rested upon the head of each of the disciples. They would understand that thus a Divine power was given to them. Heathens represent beams of light or flames of fire proceeding from their false deities, and the nimbus with which Roman Catholic painters always adorn the heads of saints, is a relic of the same idea. It was said by the ancients of Hesiod, the first of all the poets, that whereas he was once nothing but a simple neat-herd, yet suddenly a Divine flame fell upon him, and he became henceforth one of the noblest of men. We feel assured that so natural a metaphor would be at once understood by the apostles.

(1) It was a tongue, for God has been pleased to make the tongue do mightier deeds than either sword or pen; by the foolishness of preaching to save them that deliver.

(2) It was a tongue of fire, to show that God’s ministers speak, not coldly as though they had tongues of ice, nor learnedly as with tongues of gold, nor arrogantly as with tongues of brass, nor pliantly as with tongues of willow, nor sternly as with tongues of iron, but earnestly as with the tongue of flame; their words consume sin, scorch falsehood, enlighten the darkness, and comfort the poor.

(3) It sat upon them. So the Spirit of God is an abiding influence, and the saints shall persevere.

(4) It sat upon each of them, so that while there was but one fire, yet each believer received his portion of the one Spirit. There are diversities of operations, but it is the same Lord.

III. The result. After all this, what are you expecting? Shall the wind blow down dynasties—the fire consume dominions? No; Spiritual and not carnal is the kingdom of

God. The result lies in three things.

1. A sermon. The Spirit of God was given to help Peter preach. You turn with interest to know what sort of a sermon a man would preach who was full to the brim of the Holy Ghost. You expect him to be more eloquent than Robert Hall, or Chalmers; more learned than the Puritans. You expect all the orations of Cicero and Demosthenes to be put in the shade. No such thing! Never was there a sermon more commonplace. It is one of the blessed effects of the Holy Spirit to make ministers preach simply.

2. The people were pricked in the heart, and cried, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” What a disorderly thing! Blessed disorder which the Spirit of God gives. Men then feel that they have heard something which has gone right into their inmost nature and receive a wound which only God can heal.

3. Faith and the outward confession of it in baptism. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

The descent of the Spirit

The circumstances connected with the event.

I. The Time. “When the day of Pentecost was fully come.” It was the fiftieth day after the Passover, and beginning of the harvest festival. Harvest home! Surely it was no blind chance that made this appointment for the inauguration of the dispensation of spiritual ingathering (Rev_14:15).

II. The place. It was “a house,” the noteworthy fact being that it was not the temple. Up to this time the temple had monopolised the formal worship of Jehovah; but to-day a new order begins. The privileges of worship are to be everywhere and for all sorts and conditions of men.

III. The dramatis personae. Here were a hundred and twenty feeble folk, none mighty or noble among them, distinguished from the multitudinous rank and file of common people only by the fact that God had chosen them to be the nucleus of the Christian Church. Thus, kneeling together, they held the coign of vantage. They were sure of the blessing. May it not be that, under similar conditions, the Church of our times would be similarly blest?

IV. The onlookers. There came together to witness this strange occurrence a motley and polyglot assemblage of “Parthians, Modes, and Elamites, dwellers in Mesopotamia and in Judaea and Cappadocia, in Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, in Egypt and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians.” Was ever a more representative body of people? And this was as it should have been, for the thing about to happen was of universal importance, and the power about to descend was, like the sceptre in Balaam’s vision, to smite even to the remotest corners of the earth. The time had come for the propagation of a catholic gospel; and this heterogeneous company of people was the first representative Christian congregation that ever assembled on earth. Those who, on this occasion, were “sojourning at Jerusalem out of every nation under heaven,” carried back to their countrymen the announcement of the new religion; and thus the seed was sown whose full and glorious fruition will be seen at the close of history, when “a great multitude which no man can number,” etc. (Rev_7:9).

V. What they saw and heard. At this point everything is significant.

1. The “sound as of a mighty, rushing wind.” This must instantly have recalled to the minds of the disciples their Master’s word, “The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth; so is every one that is born of the Spirit.” In Ezekiel’s vision in the valley of dry bones we have a similar association of the wind or breath (Hebrew ruach) with spiritual influence: “Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live!” The symbol is appropriate, suggesting an influence so elevating and inspiring as to mark the beginning of a new life.

2. The fire. This would instantly recall the words of John the Baptist, “He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.” Fire burns, subdues, purifies, penetrates, illumines, energises. Fire is power. The heart that has received the baptism from on high is “set on fire” with a passion for all things true and right.

3. Cloven tongues. It is to be observed that the symbol used to designate the power of the gospel dispensation was not an iron rod, nor a sword, nor a pontifical mitre, but a cloven tongue—the symbol of speech, of argument, of “the foolishness of preaching.” The victory by which the world is to be subjugated to the gospel is to be a moral victory; and the power which is to accomplish it is the simple story of the Cross. Jehovah is not in the storm nor in the earthquake, but in the still, small voice.

VI. The significance of this event.

1. It marked the reformation and reorganisation of Judaism into the Christian Church. In this company of a hundred and twenty persons—like-minded as to the ruling principle of life and engaged with one accord in prayer for a specific blessing—we behold, in seed and promise, a mighty organism which is destined to survive all shocks and oppositions, gathering meat out of the eater and sweetness out of the strong, until at length it shall bring the world and lay it before its Master’s feet. This is the living mechanism that Ezekiel saw by the river Chebar, “a whirlwind out of the north and a fire infolding itself and winged creatures going straight forward: whither the spirit yeas to go they went, and they turned not when they went” (Eze_1:4-10). This working Church of Jesus, inspired by a purpose above all carnal ambitions and endued with power to accomplish it, is at this moment incomparably the greatest force on earth.

2. The miracle of the day of Pentecost marked the beginning of a new epoch. The old economy of types and shadows was over; the dispensation of the Spirit was at hand. Thenceforth the Holy Ghost was to rule in human affairs. It was a transitional point in history. Let us thank God that we live on the hither side of it. Nay, rather, let us thank God over and over that we are permitted to take part in the splendid achievements of these days.

3. This Pentecostal effusion of the Spirit marked the beginning of the end. At that moment God Himself made bare His arm and said, The kingdoms of this world shall be Mine! Those who looked on” were amazed and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?” In answer they were referred by Peter to the prophesy of Joel: “It shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, that I will pour out of My Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophecy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams.’” It is scarcely to be believed that God will wait upon the slow processes which His people are using for the conversion of the world. He has mighty forces in reserve which we in our poor philosophies have never dreamed of; and who can tell at what moment He may bring them into requisition? (D. J. Burrell, D. D.)

Pentecost

1. “Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.” The exact day was not specified, and still less the precise nature of the gift. Expectation has always been the posture of the Church. For ages the expectation was that of the Messiah’s coming; and no sooner did the Messiah appear than a new season of expectation set in; the expectation of His second coming. Nowhere is there, nor ought there to be, mere retrospection or satisfaction. Many chief graces can only be exercised by looking forward and upward.

2. The condition of the disciples between Ascension and Pentecost was one of expectation in a double sense. They were taught by the angels to look for their Lord’s return. But there was a near return as well as one more remote. When our Lord said “I will see you again,” etc., He said so in three senses—in His own resurrection; in their resurrection; but between these two there lay a spiritual but not therefore an unreal advent.

3. The feast of Pentecost was one of the three great festivals of Israel. It was so called from one particular point in the celebration of the Passover; the waving of the sheaf of the first-fruits of the harvest on the morrow after the Passover-Sabbath. From that day they were to number seven complete sabbaths, and then arrived the feast of weeks or of Pentecost; on which occasion, as at the earlier Passover, and the later Tabernacles, all the men were required to appear before the Lord at His sanctuary in Jerusalem. The Passover had already found its antitype in that season at which Christ the Paschal Lamb was sacrificed for us. The feast of Tabernacles, the celebration of the completion of harvest and vintage, and of the rest which followed the entrance into Canaan, is to find its antitype in that rest which remains for the people of God in heaven. The intermediate festival of Pentecost was to have its antitype in that gift which this chapter describes. Jewish tradition marked out the feast as the commemoration of the giving of the law. And peculiar significance is therefore given to the choice of the day for the giving of that new law, of the Spirit of life, by which the commandments of God were to be written, not on tables of stone, but on the tablets of a renewed and willing heart. At all events the festival of the first-fruits was now to be fulfilled in the Holy Spirit as the firstfruits of the heavenly inheritance. Two things in the narrative need to be distinguished.

I. The origin of the gift.

1. Men are slow in understanding and stubborn in disputing spiritual or supernatural influences; resolving everything into workings of nature, chance, or imagination. There is no spiritual influence which the philosophers and theologians of this age would not explain away, or laugh down. It is well, perhaps, that the gospel was established in men’s convictions in an age of greater simplicity and of less presumption.

2. But if God would make it evident that He is at work, I know not how it can be done without miracle. If our Lord would convince common men that He had all the power of God, was there any mode so really decisive as that which the Gospels describe to us? Those who had actually seen Him still a tempest, raise a corpse, etc., must have felt that God had given them evidence of the Messiahship of Christ. Even thus was it with the coming of the Holy Ghost. Hearts might have been influenced, lives might have been changed, and men might have ascribed it to natural causes;

but if it was to be made plain, beyond gainsaying, that the Holy Spirit had descended to make His abode in the Church and in the hearts of men, there must be some sign of which the senses could take cognisance, and from which but one inference could be drawn.

3. Such a sign was that marvellous power of which we have here the first example. If unlettered men were heard to utter sounds recognised by men of diverse nations as their native speech, what other explanation could be given save that which Peter gave?

4. And is there anything irrational in the supposition that God should come in direct personal communication with man, or should make it plain whence that communication was derived? It can be no reproach to a revelation that its utterance is decisive and its proofs intelligible to unlettered men.

5. In the signs which accompanied the descent of the Holy Ghost we can recognise all the emblems by which He had been foretold.

(1) The rushing mighty wind, “blowing where it listeth,” audible in its sound, inscrutable in its source and destination.

(2) The fiery flame which had been taken from the first as the description of the Saviour’s baptism.

(3) The voice which bore witness to the informing, instructing, and counselling presence within.

II. The gift signified.

1. We read of it in its prediction and in its experience. Look for the one to Joh_14:-16., and for the other to Rom_8:1-39., Gal_5:1-26. Study those and you will see how little they can enter into the fulness of the promise, who either imagine it to have been designed for apostles only, or as consisting principally of miraculous gifts. The Holy Spirit was promised as the Comforter, the Remembrancer, the Teacher, the Guide, the inward Advocate, the Representative of Christ, the Presence of God and of Christ in the soul, whose coming was to make it a gain even that the Saviour should depart. And what then was the experience of this great gift? How did they describe it who had found it for their own? Hear what Paul, who was not present at Pentecost, but only received the gift afterwards as any one of you might receive it in answer to prayer, tells how the Holy Ghost within had set him free from the bondage of sin and death; how He had turned his affections from things below to things above; how he had found the Holy Spirit to be indeed a Spirit not of fear but the Spirit of adoption, etc.

2. The gift of the Spirit is one half of the whole need of man. We need forgiveness first. But there is a need behind, without which forgiveness would be a mockery—the gift of the Holy Ghost pledged in baptism—promised in the Word of life. We are ignorant, poor, weak, sad, and lonely in heart, until the Sun of Righteousness rises upon us with that healing in His wings, which is first the joy of a free forgiveness, and secondly the joy of an indwelling Spirit! And be we well assured that, if we are filled with the Holy Ghost, the other words of the text will be realised in us; we shall also speak with another tongue, the Spirit giving us the utterance. How transforming is the influence of the Holy Spirit upon human lips! Can we live with a man in whom God dwells and not perceive it in his words? Let us pray for the gift of that new Divine speech, in the power of which he who once opened his lips only to trifle, to defame, or to deceive, has begun to breathe the sounds of love and joy and peace, of

gentleness and goodness and faith and meekness. Thus shall men take knowledge of us that we have been with Jesus. Thus shall we bear that testimony, not of word only but of sign, by which minds are convinced and hearts opened, by which God’s name is made known on earth, His saving health among all nations. (Dean Vaughan.)

Pentecost a spiritual spring feast

I. The spring breezes which blow: stormy blasts and soft zephyrs.

II. The spring voices which are heard: the inspired tongues of the apostles praising the mighty acts of God, and the timid voices of awakened consciences inquiring after salvation.

III. The spring blossoms which appear: childlike faith and brotherly love. (Gerok.)

The Pentecostal outpouring

I. The preparation for the gift of the spirit.

1. The ascension. Christ had taught that His going away was essential to the Spirit’s coming.

2. The attitude of the disciples.

(1) Patient waiting.

(2) Union.

(3) Prayer.

(4) Fellowship with the risen Christ.

II. Its sensible accompaniments. The elements of nature were now, as so often, symbolical of spiritual realities.

1. The sound like wind indicating the immediacy, secrecy and swiftness of the Divine action.

2. The appearance like fire symbolising warming, quickening, cleansing.

III. The gift itself. The Spirit’s influence was—

1. In its nature adapted to affect men’s minds and hearts.

2. In its measure as vast as human capacities could receive.

3. In its extent universal, being designed for Christ’s whole Church.

IV. The immediate consequences.

1. The apostles were empowered to speak with other tongues, which was a sign of Divine energy.

2. Preaching was made powerful to the conversion of many; enemies of Christ became friends.

3. The Church was established upon a sure and lasting foundation. (Family Churchman.)

The gift of Pentecost the best gift of God

In virtue of—

I. Its root—the merits of Christ, His humiliation and exaltation.

II. Its nature—the union of the Spirit of God with man.

III. Its operations—the new creation of the heart and of the world. (Gerok.)

Pentecost; or, the first Christian day

Next to the day of Christ’s death, Pentecost was the greatest day that ever dawned. It was “the birth-day” of the Church, the first day of the new creation, in which chaos began to be fashioned and arranged by the plastic power of the Spirit, the day of the grand and solemn opening of the kingdom of heaven, after the completion of the Christ’s preparatory work, the day on which the fountain was unsealed, whose waters should flow forth for the healing and purifying of the nations. And as it was the first of Christian days, so was it a type of Christian days. Note—

I. The history.

1. The season was the Pentecost, a Jewish festival.

2. The hour, “the hour of prayer.”

3. The place was one of the apartments of the temple. If we put these things together, we shall have two results.

(1) They secured a large and fitting audience. Great numbers of Jews and proselytes visited Jerusalem; and the temple was just the place where they could most easily become parties to the introduction of the new dispensation.

(2) It was strikingly taught that the old state of things was giving place to another, which should change its form but perfect its spirit. The shell was being broken to yield a new life; the beautiful fly was being developed from the worm. Judaism was to be displaced by that which should spiritualise and ennoble its truths and principles. The temple was to become a church, and Pentecost to witness a new celebration of harvest, the ingathering of souls.

4. The antecedents. The apostles “continued with one accord,” etc.

II. The occurrences as strikingly suggestive of important truths in relation to the dispensation thus introduced. There was—

1. A new Spirit. Whatever spiritual influences had been shed forth in former periods, the Holy Ghost, in the New Testament sense, was to be the gift of the glorified Saviour, the characteristic blessing of His kingdom. We must beware of restricting this fact to miraculous endowments. The gift of tongues, etc., were but signs and seals of the spiritual power intended to draw attention to the inward gift, only as the thunder and lightning of the new spiritual world, occasional and impressive incidents of powers and processes whose constant, silent operation is the very life of men.

(1) The world needed the Spirit. It was not a case merely for new religious opinions, habits, or institutions; the need was of life from above; the nature

required to be restored and quickened. Sin had cut off the supplies of Divine grace, had converted the temple into a tomb. It was the grand design of the gospel to engraft humanity upon Deity, to breathe into our dead souls the breath of life.

(2) The apostles needed the Spirit. Much as they had been with Jesus, they were still strangers to His inner being, the deeper meaning of His acts and words, the glory of His Cross; they were like the skeletons in the valley of vision, very dry, till at the prophet’s bidding they became living men.

2. A new truth. “We do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God,” the same as composed the subject of Peter’s discourse; the history of Christ. True, they knew that He had died, and risen again, and ascended: but all this, though familiar as history, was new as truth. And just as a man who has travelled in the dark, looks back at break of day and admires the objects that he passed, aware only of their existence, or deeming them objects of fear, so the disciples recalled the events of their Master’s life, and rejoiced in much which had perplexed and grieved them. The death and departure of Christ were to His followers like the fabled statue of Memnon, which sent forth sounds, mournful in the night, but melodious at the rising of the sun: when God’s morning light arose, how sweet the notes those facts, once only sad, emitted! Christianity is essentially historical. It does not set men on arduous inquiries, nor answer them by logical expositions; but it points us to the incarnate Son of God; tells us how He lived and suffered and arose to glory; tells us that He was, that He is: He is the object of its faith, its love, its obedience and its joy. Such was evidently Peter’s thought when he used “the keys of the kingdom of heaven” to open it to the Jewish world on the day of Pentecost. Such was also Paul’s (1Co_15:3-4). This was the truth which they propounded to men of every class and in every condition—to Greek (1Co_2:2); to Jew (Gal_6:14); to Roman (Rom_8:3-4); and it proved, in the case of all, the power of God unto every one that believeth. The declaration of this truth on the day of Pentecost was therefore not an exceptional thing; it was a specimen of the kind of moral instrumentality which should be characteristic of Christianity.

3. A new vehicle. “They began to speak with other tongues.”

(1) Had a Jew been told that God was about to introduce a new and transcendent dispensation in a style worthy of its superior excellence, he would probably have expected a grand ceremonial. But he was here taught that Christianity would be a system, not of ceremonialism, but of moral agency, and that its chief means would be uttered thought and feeling, man coming into contact with man, reason with reason, heart with heart. No system of religion has made such use of the voice as Christianity, and its purest forms have always been connected with the largest use of the voice.

(2) The manner as well as the fact of the use of the tongue was instructive. In the publicity and indiscriminateness of Pentecostal preaching there was something different from all that had appeared in the best types of heathen wisdom. The philosophers universally disregarded the poor; their discoveries were confined to those who sought and could purchase them. But the gift of tongues declared not only that speech would be the most appropriate organ of the gospel, but that it would “speak to the people” without exception, “all the words of this life.”

4. A new world. No power on earth could have brought together, at that time, so typical a congregation. And herein was there an expression of the catholicity of the

gospel. It not only declared that the world might enjoy the privileges of the true religion, but it spoke to the world in its own language; it destroyed every “middle wall of partition” between Jew and Gentile, and made the common possession of every race the rich inheritance of “the gospel of the grace of God.” The confusion of tongues (Gen_11:7) was reversed, and it was proclaimed that the effect of the gospel would be the destruction of all that divided and alienated men; that its purpose was to form a new “body,” into which all should be “baptized by one Spirit, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free,” so creating a “new man,” in which there should be “neither Greek nor Jew,” etc.

5. A new impression (verses 37, 41-42).

(1) There had been mighty religious movements among Jews and Gentiles, but there had been no seasons similar to Pentecost. Not that we are to dissociate that time from times preceding. “Other men had laboured, and the disciples entered into their labours.” Christ had no Pentecost; but He was always doing that without which no Pentecost could have been. He was breaking up the fallow-ground, and sowing seed; the ingathering was to come. It is a far greater thing to make a gospel than to preach a gospel. And when Peter with quickening energy spake to the people, and thousands confessed the sovereignty of truth, he was only the instrument of bringing to bear the virtue and power of Christ’s redemption. “The corn of wheat had fallen into the ground and died,” but, having died, it now “brought forth much fruit.”

(2) But however men had been moved or changed before, they had never been moved or changed thus. The sense of guilt was not strange, but penitence had never possessed the depth and the tenderness which belonged to theirs who “looked on Him whom they had pierced, and mourned for Him,” Moral and religious reformation had often rewarded the labours of the wise and good, but never had it taken so Divine a type as in those who now “gladly received the Word.” Men had often associated themselves together at the bidding of outward law or inward love, but organisation and fellowship had never known their truest life and strongest bonds till the thousands of Pentecost joined the Church at Jerusalem.

III. Application:

1. Let us recognise the fact that this is the dispensation of the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost is now given because Jesus is glorified. It is the time of spiritual life, “the day of Christ’s power.”

2. The means whereby “the power from on high” may be obtained for ourselves and others. These are prayer and truth. It was the supplicating Church that was filled with the Spirit; it was the speaking Church that received the addition of three thousand souls. This is a union that evermore prevails, and without which there can be no realisation of Pentecostal times.

3. The pouring forth of the Spirit of Christ is the present, the universal, the urgent necessity of men. The main misery of the world is its carnal life, its separation from God: it will never be whole and happy till it be possessed and regenerated by the Spirit of the living God. (A. J. Morris.)

The day of Pentecost

The occurrences of the day exhibit—

1. Evidence of a special Divine influence.

2. The Divine mission of Jesus and the truth of Christianity.

3. The folly of opposition to Christ’s kingdom.

4. The grand means of advancing Christ’s cause and saving sinners.

5. The Christian minister’s great source of encouragement.

6. The reality and importance of revivals of religion. (B. Dickinson, M. A.)

The day of Pentecost

The disciples—

I. Began to speak. Hitherto they had kept silence. They were learners and asked questions. True, they were sent by Christ to try their “‘prentice hands”; but their discourses could not have been much to boast of, or they would have been recorded. But no sooner were they filled with the Spirit than they began to speak out. A man may have a little of the Spirit and be able to observe silence; but if he is filled he cannot hold his peace. “Necessity is laid upon me.” From their irrepressible desire to speak, many concluded they were “full of new wine.” And herein there is a superficial likeness between “being filled with wine” and “being filled with the Spirit”; in either case there is a powerful desire to speak. A few chapters further on in reply to the magistrates, they said, “We cannot but speak.” The Holy Spirit was fermenting within them and bursting through all restraints (see Job_32:17-20, and Marg.).

II. With other tongues.

1. This is a power inherent in all men. Men speak with new tongues every year. Some can converse in many languages. Here the Spirit quickened this power. The first miracle of Christ was the turning of water into wine. There is nothing unnatural in that. Do we not see it every year in the vintages of Europe? The supernatural consisted in its instantaneousness. And so the first miracle of the Holy Ghost consisted in the rapidity with which the knowledge of other tongues was acquired.

2. Some acquire knowledge with much greater rapidity than others. Who can tell how quickly the human intellect may acquire it when inspired by the Holy Ghost? Sir William Hamilton tells us of a servant girl who, under the excitement of fever, repeated long and intricate passages from Latin, Greek, and Hebrew authors, which she had occasionally overheard her old master read as he was walking up and down in his house. If that be the ease under the excitement of fever, is it incredible that the disciples spoke with foreign tongues under the influences of the Holy Spirit? Man is only a degenerate specimen of what he once was. Adam could learn more in five minutes than we can in five years. He could instinctively make language, a much more formidable task than to learn it. Let the wound which sin has inflicted on the mind be healed up, and man will learn a new language with as much facility as Adam made one.

3. The Holy Spirit, it is admitted, ennobles other faculties; then why not this? He made Bezaleel and Aholiab skilful workmen, and still endows men with the knowledge necessary to the successful prosecution of art. When Christianity appeared, the arts and sciences were at a very low ebb. But before long the new

religion poured a new spirit into society, and began to ennoble the intellect of the race. Just as you have seen a tree, after being well manured, budding out in early spring with fresh vitality, so Christianity enriched the human mind. Poetry revived under it—the best poetry of the world is Christian. Painting grew under the shadow of its wing—the grand pictures are nearly all representations of scenes in the life of the Saviour. Music and architecture also have chiefly flourished on Christian soil and in immediate connection with Christian worship. And so with the sciences. The revival of learning was coincident with the revival of Christianity. Science did not make the discovery that the sun is the centre of our system until Luther discovered that Christ, the Sun of Righteousness, is the centre of religion. Stephenson was once asked, What was the power that pulled the train along the rails? He answered, The sun. The sun was not the immediate power—that was the fire under the boiler; but he knew that science could trace back the fire of the coal to the fire of the sun. And the power that is now working in the heart of civilization, that is pushing upward and forward all that is good and true is the power of the Spirit of Christ.

4. As sin, which lies like an incubus on the heart of humanity, hindering free movement, will be expunged, we may expect corresponding celerity in our acquisition of knowledge. Possibly the lofty mental state of the apostles is the normal state of man. Daniel was thrown to the lions’ den, and the lions hurt him not. That we call supernatural: yet it is perhaps the true natural—the state in which man was placed in Paradise, and in which he will find himself again by and by. The three young men in Babylon were cast into the fiery furnace, and the flame did not singe a hair of their heads. That we call supernatural, yet it may be the true natural. Man was not subject to death either natural or accidental before the entrance of sin into the world; and man redeemed will go through the fire and not be burnt. Christ walked the sea, that we call supernatural: yet I am not sure but it is the true natural—the state in which man found himself in the Paradise of old, and in Paradise regained he will walk through rivers and they will not overflow him. Paul took hold of serpents, and they did not bite him, nor did they bite man in Eden, and they will not bite him in the future. And the disciples on the day of Pentecost spoke with other tongues. The family of man once spoke the same language; and who knows but the partition walls between nations as the result of the confusion of languages will be totally removed by a vast display of intellectual power on the part of the race baptized with the Holy Ghost? The miracle of Pentecost will gradually neutralise the miracle of Babel. Men travel now with greater speed than of old; they correspond with greater rapidity; and who can tell but that learning will move with greater ease, relieved to a certain extent from the present drudgery? “There is a royal road to learning.” Let sin be purged out, and man will learn by intuition.

III. The wonderful works of God.

1. His ordinary works are the Creation in its various ramifications. He makes the sun to rise and to set; His wonderful works are as Peter’s sermon shows, the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The only subjects worthy of the pulpit are not the arts and sciences, but the gospel—a thing specially lacking in the sermons of some leading preachers.

2. It is truly remarkable that the wonderful works of God are easily translatable. Science is not suitable for every language; it cannot speak Welsh, e.g.; but the gospel can. A minister insisted on the importance of knowing Greek to understand the New Testament. “I do not,” remarked an old lady, “perceive the necessity, for my Saviour knows Welsh as well as I do. It is in Welsh that I always speak to Him, and that He

always speaks to me. He knew Welsh when I was a little girl, and we have talked Welsh together ever since.”

3. But the words intimate that the disciples spoke in foreign languages with a thorough command of their peculiar idiom and accent. Not only in their languages but in their “tongues” they had the very twang of natives. Native tongue has very great influence over man. The same truths uttered in another language, though well understood, exercise not the same charm. “Can an Ethiopian change his skin?” Yes, as soon as he can change his tongue. When St. Paul addressed the enraged multitude in Jerusalem in Hebrew, they grew calm and attentive. Latin and Greek would only excite them.

4. Seeing that language is the only weapon in the propagation of the gospel, it is of great importance that its ministers should know how to use it deftly and well. The sword of Cromwell was mighty; all Europe feared the flash of it. But the tongue and pen of Milton did more to ensure liberty of conscience. The pen is stronger than the sword—the tongue can drown the roar of cannon.

5. And the Church leads the van in the study of languages. Commerce and love of learning have done a little in that direction; but they generally follow in the wake of the gospel. Who are the first to learn the languages of distant nations, to write their grammars, to compile their dictionaries? Missionaries of the gospel. What book is the first to speak in the barbarous tongues of the earth? The Bible; but the moment the Bible speaks in those tongues they forthwith cease to be barbarous. Sin has left its deep, black marks upon language. Open your English dictionary and you will find in the first page that three-fourths of the words owe their existence and significance to sin. But these words must gradually grow obsolete, and language be refashioned—the gospel will leave its mark upon the dictionary. The Church of the present day is richly endued with the gift of tongues, every fresh effusion of the Spirit being followed by the certain acquisition of a new language. Go to the Bible Society House, where the Church speaks in no fewer than two hundred and fifty languages. The disciples only began; the Church continues and will continue till all nations shall have heard in their own tongues the wonderful works of God.

6. But we are not taught languages miraculously now. True; and for valid reasons—

(1) One is the printing press. What the gift of tongues did for the Church of Pentecost, the printing press has done for the Church of the Reformation.

(2) Another is the abundance of the labourers. In the primitive Church there were only a few, whereas there was a whole world to evangelise. So Goal gave them their tools ready made—sickles sharpened for work. But the need for this no longer exists. There are Christians enough in England alone to learn all the languages of the earth, and to preach the gospel to every creature in less than ten years, without in the least disturbing the ordinary course of business at home. God, therefore, has withdrawn the miracle. To continue it would be to patronise indolence, and do for believers what they can easily do for themselves.

7. The miracle has ceased, but the blessing enveloped in the miracle remains.

(1) The necessity for miracles arises out of the want and not of the wealth of the age. Hence Jesus turned water into wine, multiplied loaves and fishes and healed the sick, because there were no other means of supply and effectual medicine. It is different now.

(2) The miraculous ages are always the most spiritually impoverished. The

deliverance of Israel from Egypt is marked by miracles. But the necessity for them arose out of the moral dearth of the times. As the consciousness of God grew, the miraculous continued to wax smaller, till in the reigns of David and Solomon—the richest period materially, intellectually, and spiritually—it ceased altogether. But in subsequent reigns spiritual religion rapidly declined; therefore the gift of miracles was again revived in the persons of Elijah and Elisha. When the Saviour appeared the epoch was the most degraded in the annals of the race. The gift of miracles was therefore granted once more. Miraculous is always in inverse proportion to spiritual power; where the latter grows the former declines. Will miracles be again revived in the Christian Church? Not unless spiritual religion be threatened with speedy extinction.

IV. To men of other nations.

1. Increased life always demands increased scope for its exercise. There was no power to spread itself in religion under the Old Testament. The Spirit was given in very scanty measures, just enough to preserve, but not to multiply life and replenish the earth. That Judaism should cover only a small portion of the globe was an absolute necessity, for it could maintain its life only by concentration. If the fire be small, it can only be kept burning by being heaped close together. Let the coals be scattered, and the fire will die out. And under the Old Testament only a few sparks came down from heaven to earth; hence it was necessary to gather them together within the narrow confines of Palestine. And in the days of the Saviour the fire was nearly extinguished. Fire was the great need of the age. “I indeed baptize you with water,” exclaims the Baptist; but water can only cleanse the surface, but He will baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire. And on the day of Pentecost the prediction is fulfilled. The fire first burns into the hearts of the disciples, then it begins to extend its area, and now it threatens to burn up all the stubble of the world.

2. This increased life reveals itself instinctively in a desire to enlarge its circumference. Whenever the presence of the Spirit is powerfully felt in the Church, it is invariably followed by a renewed effort to evangelise the world. Let the spring impart new life to the roots of the trees, and the life will at once be transmitted to the branches, covering them with abundant foliage. Let the warm, genial months come round, reviving the drooping nature of the bird after the long dreary winter cold, and the bird shows it immediately in his song. He does not sing because he thinks he ought; he sings because he must. And it is a poor way of promoting the evangelistic zeal of the Church to demonstrate constantly what she ought to do. It is useless to lay down rules for the guidance of the Churches unless we supply them with motive power.

(1) I do not cry down organisations; they are very valuable in their proper place. But they are only cisterns, and cisterns, though of the most approved pattern, are not of much use to quench thirst. The Pentecostal Church had few organisations; but she had the water of life to give freely to all who were in need. The modern Church can boast of multitudinous organisations; and so far she can claim superiority to the early Church, for cisterns after all are serviceable. What glorious cisterns are missionary societies! They have silver pipes connecting them with every country under heaven; the waterworks are laid to convey the water of life to every thirsty soul. But the results are seldom proportionate to the expenditure. The cisterns too often run dry. How few the triumphs of Christianity at home and abroad! How tardy its onward march! Why? Lack of funds, answer our secretaries. Nay, lack of life, piety, the Holy Spirit of God. Had

the apostles funds to back their efforts?

(2) Reflection on the part of the Church is not to be discouraged. But stock-taking will not clothe the naked. We spend too much time in surveying our property, and meanwhile our enthusiasm considerably abates. The Greek Church took stock of all the Christian doctrines and reduced them into carefully worded articles. But in reflection she lost her ardour, in speculation evaporated all her life. The most orthodox church became practically a dead church. I have not heard of her sending out missionaries to evangelise the heathen. What then is required to awaken within her the old life and incite her to new adventures? What is wanting to make Roman and Protestant Churches more powerful for good in the world? Another outpouring of the Holy Ghost. We have cisterns enough, pray for the living water; machinery enough, pray the Spirit of the living creature to enter the wheels, and then it will do more work and make less noise.

V. That they also might be filled with the Holy Ghost. “Repent and be baptized,” etc.

1. Truth, though it be Christian truth, cannot fill and satisfy our nature. God alone can do that. This, of course, implies that human nature is capacious enough to take in the Spirit. God is too great for our powers, but not for our wants; too vast for our reason, but not for our hearts. Our abilities are limited enough, but our necessities are verily boundless. “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness”; and He made him in the similitude even of His infinitude. I have infinite wants within me, and through the Infinite within I can know the Infinite without, and receive Him in the ample plenitude of His power and grace into my soul. How does the infant know his mother? By his wants. He knows not whether she is rich or poor, accomplished or unlearned, beautiful or plain; but he thoroughly knows her when he is hungry, for she feeds him; when he is cold, for she warms him; when he is in pain, for she soothes him. We know God just in the same way.

2. We may be filled with Him so as to convince unbelievers, not only that we have been with God, but that He dwells in us of a truth. There is a curious invention to fill the human body with electricity. If you only approach the body so filled, it will shoot forth sparks of wild lightning. But all connection between the body and the earth must be severed; the man must stand on a non-conducting material, else the electric fluid will flow out as fast as it flows in. In like manner we me y be recipients of the Divine fire. And sometimes we feel as if we were getting full, we emit Divine sparks at the approach of others they are convinced that God is in us of a truth. But ere many days pass, the hallowed influences have all flowed out. Worldliness is the great sin of the Church; it robs us of the Divine in Christian experience. Oh for another Pentecostal baptism! We need the Spirit now as much as ever to convert unbelievers, and to stir up the dormant energies of the Church. Why is it that Christian workers see so little fruit to their labours? That the success is not commensurate with the organisations? Some answer, The poverty of your sermons. But that cannot be the reason for every preaching qualification met in Christ, and yet He made but comparatively few converts. “He could not do many mighty works there, because of their unbelief.” A cold church, an unbelieving church robs itself of the choicest blessings of heaven. Let it not blame its ministers for its non-success—roses will not grow in Greenland, trees will not blossom at the North Pole. (J. Cynddylan Jones, D. D.)

The day of Pentecost

I. The religious history of the world has been marked by great steps or periods, separated by striking events or epochs, and constituting dispensations or eras.

1. Thus the creation of man inaugurated an era which continued until the Flood; the covenant with Noah inaugurated another, which continued until the Exodus; the delivery of the law another, which continued until Christ’s ascension; and the day of Pentecost another, in the course of which our own generation finds its place. This, too, will be superseded by the Second Advent. And it is well for us to connect the little day of our life with this magnificent progression. As an independent thing our life is utterly insignificant; as a contributing item, it becomes almost sublime.

2. Up to the day of Pentecost every dispensation was preparatory. Christianity is final; and therefore surpasses in importance every other that preceded it. All the constituent elements of Christianity were now provided; the life of Christ had demonstrated the practicability and holiness of God’s law; His death had constituted an atonement for transgressors; His resurrection had attested it; His ascension had consummated His incarnate life; and then, after seven or eight days, as if to mark by a solemn pause the broad boundary line of Judaism and Christianity, the Holy Spirit was palpably bestowed; and the spiritual religion of Christ inaugurated.

3. Amongst the anniversaries of the Church, therefore, the day of Pentecost must ever occupy an august position. Christianity was a completed system stereotyped for all men to the end of the world in a historical form.

II. The dispensational change which the day of Pentecost marked and consummated. The dispensation of the Spirit stands in natural and logical order amongst the Divine dispensations looked at.

1. As manifestations of God. Of these there have been three successively presented, and corresponding with the triune distinction of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. First, the revelation of the Father—the manifestation of those ideas of the Divine nature which we associate with the Father—such as power, wisdom, holiness, and law. Secondly, the revelation of the Son—the manifestation of those ideas of the Divine nature which we associate with the Son—such as teaching, mediation, sacrifice, love. Lastly, the revelation of the Spirit—as the Source of life, the Enlightener, the Sanctifier, the Comforter. And these correspond in their order to the spiritual education of men. In their ignorance and guilt they need first to be taught the idea of God. Convinced of sin, they then need to be taught a way of reconciliation; and under the dispensation of the Son, they have the great saving plan revealed. Under the dispensation of the Spirit, a provision is made for the efficiency of the plan; spiritual life is quickened; they are not only forgiven, but sanctified. So with their education in worship. Under the dispensation of the Father, they learn the first rudiments of worship, through material symbols and pictures; under the dispensation of the Son they worship the spiritual God, but m connection with the living body of the Incarnate One; under the dispensation of the Spirit, they worship without any material medium in “spirit and in truth.” The dispensation of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost assumed two distinct forms, and produced two distinct effects.

(1) As miraculous endowment it was peculiar to the apostles. This was indicated by material symbols. But such endowment was incidental and subordinate. Just as the miracles of Christ are not to be confounded with His moral mission, so the miraculous endowments of the Spirit are not to be confounded with His moral or sanctifying influences. The miraculous element in both cases is simply the

credential or attestation of the moral. It soon, therefore, ceased. As moral evidence for Christianity accumulated, and the written records of the New Testament were completed, miraculous testimony was withdrawn.

(2) But the deeper and abiding manifestation was that moral and regenerating influence of it of which Christ discoursed to Nicodemus, and is known, therefore, only by its effects. The former was an endowment of the preacher; this is an endowment of the hearer, qualifying and disposing him to receive it in the saving love and power of it.

2. As a saving provision for man.

(1) This dispensation of the Spirit abides with the Church for ever, and is bestowed upon all believers. And this is the grand and transcendent characteristic of Christianity, whereby it provides for the efficacy of its own religious teaching. Other religions give laws, and leave men unaided with the stern requirement; but Christianity gives dispositions as well as laws. It puts a new spirit into those whom it calls to its discipleship.

(2) We cannot, therefore, exaggerate the importance of this provision. Without it, all that Christ has taught or done would have been in vain; we should for lack of spiritual discernment have failed to discern spiritual things, and for lack of spiritual affection failed to have embraced them.

(3) Of course spiritual influence of this kind must have been in operation before. No holy man ever became such save through the influences of the Holy Spirit, allusions to which are very numerous in the Old Testament. But just as the work of Christ was in efficacious operation before Christ Himself was historically manifested, so was the work of the Spirit. Just as the first pardoned man was justified by faith in Christ, so the first holy man was renewed by the operation of the Holy Ghost, and just as the Nativity was the manifestation of the atoning Christ, so the day of Pentecost was the manifestation of the renewing spirit. As much of the character and work of the Son were revealed as the world could receive; and as much of the influence of the Spirit was exerted as the moral condition of the world would admit of. Hence we may understand how there should be a greater amount of spiritual influence operating in the Christian Church than in the Jewish Church. (H. Allon, D. D.)

The fitness of the day of Pentecost

It is natural to assume a purpose in the Divine choice of the day on which the disciples were thus to receive the promise of the Father. That choice may have been determined, if one may so speak, either in view of the circumstances of the feast, or of its history and symbolic fitness.

1. Of all the feasts of the Jewish year it was that which attracted the largest number of pilgrims from distant lands. The dangers of travel by sea or land in the early spring or late autumn (cf. Act_27:9)prevented their coming in any large numbers to the Passover. At no other feast would there have been representatives of so many nations. It was Pentecost that St. Paul went up to keep once and again, during his mission-work in Greece and Asia (Act_18:21; Act_20:16). So there was no time on which the gift of the Spirit was likely to produce such direct and immediate results.

2. Each aspect of the old Feast of Weeks, now known as Pentecost, or the “Fiftieth-day” Feast, presented a symbolic meaning which made it typical of the work now about to be accomplished.

(1) It was the “feast of harvest, the feast of the first-fruits”; and so it was meet that it should witness the first great gathering of the fields that were white to harvest (Exo_23:16).

(2) It was one on which, more than on any other, the Israelite was to remember that her had been a bondman in the land of Egypt, and had been led forth to freedom (Deu_16:12), and on it, accordingly, they were to do no servile work (Lev_23:31); and it was, therefore, a fit time for the gift of the Spirit, of whom it was emphatically true that “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty” (2Co_3:17), and who was to guide the Church into the truth which should make men free indeed (Joh_8:32).

(3) It was a day on which sacrifices of every kind were offered—burnt-offerings, and sin-offerings, and meat-offerings, and peace-offerings—and so represented the consecration of body, soul, and spirit as a spiritual sacrifice (Lev_23:17-20).

(4) As on the Passover the first ripe sheaf of corn was waved before Jehovah as the type of the sacrifice of Christ, of the corn of wheat which is not quickened except it die (Lev_23:10; Joh_12:24), so on Pentecost two wave-loaves of fine flour were to be offered, the type, it may be, under the light now thrown on them, of the Jewish and the Gentile Churches (Lev_23:17). And these loaves were to be leavened, as a witness that the process of the contact of mind with mind, which—as the prohibition of leaven in the Passover ritual bore witness—is naturally so fruitful in evil, might yet, under a higher influence, become one of unspeakable good: the new life working through the three measures of meal until the whole was leavened (Mat_13:33).

3. The Feast of Pentecost had—traditionally, at least—also a commemorative character. On that day—so it was computed by the later Rabbis, though the Book of Exodus (Exo_19:1) seems to leave the matter in some uncertainty—the Israelites had encamped round Sinai, and there had been thunders, and darkness, and voices, and the great Laws had been proclaimed. It was, that is, an epoch-making day in the religious history of Israel. It was fit that it should be chosen for another great epoch-making day, which, seeming at first to be meant for Israel only, was intended ultimately for mankind. (Dean Plumptre.)

The feast of harvest

I. The consecrated harvest of the field. It may seem somewhat singular that we should be talking of harvest on the first of June, but in Palestine the harvest is much earlier than where the climate is more severe. At the beginning of the barley harvest the first ripe ears were presented to the Lord in due order, but at the fuller festival they brought into God’s house, not the ears of wheat, but two large loaves—the fruit of the earth actually prepared for human food. What did that mean?

1. That all came from God. We regard our bread as the fruit of our own labour; but who gives us strength to labour,, and gives the earth the power to bring forth her harvest? I fear in many houses bread is eaten and the Giver is forgotten. Let us by grateful offerings to the Lord express our thankfulness for all the comforts we enjoy.

2. That all our possessions need God’s blessing upon them. Without a blessing from God His gifts become temptations, and bring with them care rather than refreshment. It was a joyous sight to see the loaves and the fishes multiplied; but the best part of it was that the Master looked up to heaven and blessed them. If thou hast little, yet if God has blessed thy little there is a flavour in it which the ungodly cannot know when they fill themselves with stalled oxen. If thou hast ample, yet if thou hast more blessing, thy riches shall not be a snare to thee.

3. That all we have we hold under God as His stewards. These two loaves were a kind of peppercorn rent acknowledging the superior landlord who was the true owner of the Holy Land. We farm our portions and gather the fruit as stewards for the Most High, and bring a part thereof to His altar in token that we would use the rest to His glory. Have we all done this with our substance? Where is that one talent of thine, O slothful servant? Where are those five talents, O thou man of influence and of wealth?

4. That they were afraid they might commit sin in the using of what God had given. The first thank-offering was of barley, fresh plucked from the field; but this second offering of the first-fruits was not wheat as God made it. Why was it ordained that they should present leaven to God? To show us that common life, with all its imperfections, may yet be used for God’s glory. We may, through our Lord Jesus, be accepted in shop-life as well as in sanctuary-life, in market-dealing as well as in sacramental meditation. Yet do not fail to notice that they brought also a burnt-offering: so the precious blood of Christ’s sacrifice must fall upon our leavened loaves, or they will be sour before the Lord. “He hath made us accepted in the Beloved.” Nay, that was not all. In consideration of the loaf being leavened, they brought with it a sin-offering as well (Lev_23:19). Confessing, as each one of us must do, that however hearty our dedication to God, there is still a faultiness in our lives, we are glad to be cleansed by the blood of Jesus.

5. All this was done as an act of joy. A new meat-offering was offered unto the Lord with peace-offerings, which two always signify, among other things, a quiet, happy communion with God. In addition to all this they presented a drink-offering of wine, which expresses the joy of the offerer. Pentecost was not a fast, but a festival. When thou givest anything to God, give it not as though it were a tax, but freely; or it cannot be accepted. God loveth a cheerful giver. His service is perfect freedom; to give to Him is rapture; to live to Him is heaven.

II. The consecrated harvest of our Lord Jesus Christ, as taught by the events of the great Christian Pentecost. Our Lord is the greatest of all sowers, for He sowed Himself. “Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground,” etc. Had He not said, “The fields are white already to harvest”? and now, when the day of Pentecost was fully come, the fruit was seen of them, and joyfully gathered. Learn—

1. That the first harvest of our Lord Jesus Christ was through the Holy Ghost. There were no three thousand converts till first of all was heard the rushing of mighty wind. Till the cloven tongues had rested on the disciples there were no broken hearts among the crowd. Until the believers were all filled with the Holy Ghost the minds of their hearers were not filled with conviction. If you desire to save your class you must yourselves be endowed with the power of the Holy Ghost. You cannot burn a way for the truth into the heart of another unless the tongue of fire is given to you from on high.

2. That day may be considered to be the ordering of the Christian dispensation. It

was exactly fifty days after the original Passover that the law was given on Mount Sinai. At the commencement of the New Testament dispensation the Lord gives the Spirit. Under the old covenant the command was given; but under the new the will and the power to obey are bestowed by the Holy Ghost. Moses on the mount can only tell us what to do, but Jesus ascended on high pours out the power to do it. Now we are not under the law, but under grace, and the Spirit is our guiding force.

3. This Pentecost was also the beginning of a great harvest of Jews and Gentiles. Were there not two loaves? Not only shall Israel be saved, but the multitude of the Gentiles shall be turned unto the Lord. If the first-fruits were so great, what will the ultimate harvest be?

(1) The filling of the apostles with the Holy Ghost was a part of the first-fruits. A man full of the Holy Ghost rejoices the heart of Christ.

(2) Still, the major part of the Pentecostal first-fruits will be found in the great number that were that day converted.

4. The Christian Pentecost is to us full of instruction.

(1) The disciples had to wait for it. “The husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth.” Sow on: Pentecost will yet yield its loaves unto the Lord.

(2) They obtained nothing until they began preaching the gospel, and then in one day the Church was multiplied by twenty-five.

(3) Of all those people saved it was acknowledged that they belonged unto the Lord alone.

(4) Even if we should see three thousand converted in a day we must not reckon that such first-fruits would be absolutely perfect. In all our successes and additions there will sure to be a leaven. Do not wonder if some converts go back. It will always be so; tares grow with the wheat, and bad fish are taken in the same net with the good.

III. The consecrated harvest from each particular person. In Deu_26:1-19. you will find there a form of service which I pray may serve your turn to-day. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

A Whitsunday meditation

There is a Christian as well as a Jewish year; we ought not to be unmindful of the changes which illustrate God’s holy counsel and tender conduct. The Author of natural and spiritual life is one, and He gives many a hint of His gracious purpose in the changes of the year. Christ has taught us to see in seed-sowing a symbol of the Cross, and a call to Christian sacrifice. The “harvest,” the solemn fruitful autumn-time, reminds us of “the end of the world,” and has its strangely blended influences of mournfulness and hope. Spring is a type of the resurrection; life bursting out of the grave. Of all symbols of the Christian life, this early summer-time is the most blessed. Calm as these warm and not yet sultry days; peaceful as early June mornings; fresh as the dews and showers; rich as the verdure of our landscape, it is given us to know that our Christian life is under the silent energy of the Spirit.

I. The Passover and Pentecost were intimately connected.

1. The injunction to keep the feast of first-fruits concludes, “and thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in Egypt”; the rejoicing followed the

commemoration of the deliverance. The Jews call the day of Pentecost the “concluding festival” i.e., the festival that concludes the Paschal celebration. The association is not difficult to trace. The national life of Israel was the sequel to their deliverance from Egypt. It was not enough for them to be set free and to be led into the desert. God had prepared a land for them needing greater labour and more careful cultivation than Egypt, but yielding better fruits. The feast of Pentecost was their memorial that God had fulfilled His promise. They brought the fruits of the land which He had given them, and remembered year by year that He blessed their toil, and was nourishing the men He had redeemed,

2. Spiritual life is the sequel of Christian redemption; the gift of the Holy Ghost was God’s purposed supplement of Calvary. Spiritual history begins with the Cross, but it does not end there. It sometimes happens that the first gladness and gratitude of a forgiven soul are followed by a strange restlessness and dissatisfaction, as was the deliverance of Israel. But the Paschal time, of haste and scarce-quelled anxiety, of girded loins and unleavened bread and bitter herbs, are followed by the Pentecost of life, love, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. It is not till this Divine life is formed within us by God’s Spirit, strong as the forces that clothe the earth with summer beauty, that we can fully commemorate the death of Christ which is our redemption. The Holy Ghost was needed by the men who were to be preachers of the Cross. He not only unfolded to them its meaning; He dwelt in them an energy tender, earnest, and strong, like that of Christ the Redeemer. They had life in them; and nothing could suppress their faith, their gladness, or their labours; and by all the genial force of life, men were constrained by their influence, and drawn into their communion. And so now, if Christian teaching is ineffective, it is because it lacks the force of Christian life. Our teaching may be scrupulously orthodox, yet very repellent and cold. Our efforts may be unnumbered, and our plans most wisely organised; yet, without the love, the earnestness that only life can give, they will be all in vain. There is something for us besides praying for the Divine life; it is to live it. Christians sometimes ask that “the Spirit may be poured out.” He has been poured out.

II. Pentecost was a memorial of God’s constant presence and power. The feast was ordained to remind the Jews who it was who gave them their corn and wine and oil. They were not permitted to eat of the year’s harvest till the first sheaves had been waved before the Lord, and the two loaves offered to Him; lest they should think that the earth brought forth fruit of itself, lest they should be undevout, and gluttonous, and drunken in their feasts. This was the consecration of the “first-fruits” which would hallow the “whole lump” of which they were daily partaking. The Jews, like Englishmen, were prone to practical atheism; they, like Englishmen, only recognised God in signal events of their history, unmindful of the care that was daily mindful of them, and the bounty which daily made them glad. All piety decays when we forget that the “Father” is “ever working.” Body and soul, as well as spirit, have been redeemed by the blood of Christ. Food and raiment, house-room and friends, have been given us by the same Father who gave us His Son. The power that quickened the world from the Cross is ruling over it still; the love that shines in the Cross gives summer flowers and autumn fruits. Men who see nothing more than forces of nature in the power that yearly clothes the hill-sides, and makes the valleys fruitful, see too in the Christian life nothing more than human nature under new developments. The day of Pentecost is the witness of a Divine person abiding near us, and working in us all the energies and influences of a Christian life. It prevents our falling into that despondency which must be our lot if we have none to trust in but ourselves. Where we are powerless, He imparts life; and then truth becomes plain, and motives are felt that we could not awaken. Earnest Christian people need the

teaching of the day of Pentecost. There are many who connect the Holy Ghost only with their conversion, and with periods of high-wrought emotion; but in the whole range of Christian life, however varied to our feeling, the Spirit, the source of life, is working. Yes, and in hearts that have not yet yielded themselves to Jesus; in children born into godly households, and abandoned ones listening wonderingly to new words of hope and love; in providential circumstances; by words of kindness and deeds that flow from a heart of love; in everything that has a Christian tendency, in every influence that comes from Christ and moves towards Him, “worketh that one and the self-same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will.” A few weeks ago, and though ,we knew, we did not feel that summer was nigh. The trees were bare, and the earth was hard, and we shivered beneath the chilling blast. But God was working; the spirit of life was moving in the sluggish sap, the sun was gathering force, and the western winds were on their way to us with refreshing showers. And lo! the summer is hero. Let us work according to God’s will, and we shall one day see the glad and genial life that the Divine Spirit is accomplishing; for He is near us and is in us still. “I have planted, Apollos watered, and God gave the increase.” (A. Mackennal, D. D.)

The White Sunday (children’s sermon)

1. Two reasons for the name.

(1) On Whitsunday people used to come to be baptized, dressed all in white. Why? Because they wanted to feel that they were going to be made clean. And so it came to be called “White Sunday,” or, shortened, “Whit Sunday.”

(2) If you count Easter Sunday one, and then count on to this Sunday, you will find that this is the eighth. Now the French word for “eight” is “halt.” You know a great many French words came into English, but people did not know how to spell some of them, so they spelt this word “bait” as if it were “white.”

2. What happened on Whitsunday? The Holy Ghost came down. I cannot explain to you all about the Holy Ghost. It is very deep and mysterious. Perhaps you have heard about the monk who was trying to explain all about God. He went down to the seaside, and found a man with a little shell in his hand scooping up the sea. He said to the man, “What are you doing?” He replied, “I am going to put the sea into this shell.” “You cannot do it,” said the monk. Then the man replied, “My task is easier than yours. You are trying to put the great God into your little mind.”

3. What does “Holy Ghost” mean? Holy Spirit. Sometimes, when we cannot look at the sun, we look at a sunbeam; or we look at the reflection of the sun in a looking-glass. We cannot see the sun in his full lustre. Now I want to speak about the Holy Ghost by emblems.

I. What is that you can feel, but cannot see? The Wind. You can feel the Holy Ghost, but you cannot see Him. “The wind bloweth where it listeth,” etc. The Saviour likened Him to that, and said, “Except a man be born,” etc. Now—

1. Nobody can go to heaven unless they are “born again.” A man was once asked, “Where were you born?” He said, “In London, and in Salisbury.” “What! born in two places?” he was asked. He explained, “My body was born in London, and my soul was born in Salisbury.” Now what does it mean? Did you ever see a new-born baby? What a new, strange world it has come into. When you become a real Christian, you enter a new world, and all will be so new to you. Poor little baby! Somebody must feed it,

clothe it, carry it. So when you become a Christian you must feel, “Jesus must carry me, clothe me, feed me.” When you are “born again” you will have new thoughts, new feelings.

2. Does everybody know when they are “born again”? Some do; but very few. There is a great palm-tree called the Palm Azaleum, and when the blossom comes out of the shield, the flower breaks the shield with a noise as loud as a cannon. Everybody can know when that flower comes out. Some conversions are like that, but most are as quiet as when the little grain comes out of the grass, or when the flower comes out in the bud; you can hardly tell when it happens. One day there was a wicked man driving his cart along a road, and suddenly the wind blew a tract to his feet. Where that tract came from he never knew. He took it up and read it, and a word there changed the man, made him a Christian. The Holy Ghost, like the wind, turned his heart.

3. Did you ever see an AEolian harp? It is a very wonderful thing, a little harp with a few strings. No human fingers play upon it. If you keep it in your room it won’t play; but if you put it just outside the window, on a windy day, it will play such sweet music. A great writer has said, “The human heart is a harp of a thousand strings.” All the thoughts and feelings in your heart are all strings. If the Holy Spirit comes they will play very sweet music. But your heart won’t play without the Holy Spirit.

II. The Holy Ghost is like water When you were baptized some water was poured over your head to tell you that the Holy Ghost can make the heart clean. There was a good man who, when he wanted to think about holy things, put before himself three words, “black,” “red,” and “white.” He looked at the word “black,” and he thought, “That is my heart, which is very black.” Then he looked at the word “red,” and thought, “The blood of Jesus can make the black thing white.” And then he looked at the word “white,” and thought, “I hope my heart has been washed, and made white through the Holy Ghost.”

III. When the Holy Ghost came down upon the Lord Jesus He appeared as a dove. And a dove is considered an emblem of something very gentle. The Holy Ghost comes very gently, and He makes us gentle. I knew two little girls who were going out of a church, and one little girl pushed by the other, and she made way for her to pass, saying, “Blessed are the peacemakers.” That was gentle, like a dove. As a boy was once going to throw a stone at a little bird, the bird sang so sweetly that the boy could not throw. Another, passing, said, “Why don’t you throw? You will hit it.” “I cannot,” he said; “the little bird is singing so sweetly.” If you know anybody who is unkind to you, you sing like the little bird, and then see if anybody will hurt you.

IV. The Holy Spirit is like dew. “Dew” is to be seen in the morning and evening. It is very pretty and makes everything so fresh where it comes. Now, if you wish to be good and please God, take care that every morning and evening yon get a little of the dew of the Holy Spirit upon you; it will make everything fresh and nice. You are in the morning of life. Now is the time to have dew, and may it always abide in and upon you, not like the natural dew, that soon passes away.

V. The Holy Spirit is like fire. Supposing I were to give you a piece of iron, and ask you to make an image out of it, what would you do? If you got a hammer and chisel, and worked ever so hard, it would not make it into an image. What, then, would you do? Put it into the fire, then it would get soft; then you could make it into almost any shape you like four hearts are like iron. You have tried to make them good, but you cannot do so; but put them into “the fire,” the Holy Spirit will make them soft and make them into right shapes. Supposing I saw two girls quarrelling, and I wanted to make them at one,

how can I do it? Supposing I gave you two bits of iron, and asked you to make them one, how would you do it? You must weld them together. You could not do it till you put them into the fire. So if I find two persons quarrelling, and I want to make them one, I should try to do it by the Holy Spirit.

VI. The Holy Spirit is a seal now, supposing a person had got some very precious jewels, and was going abroad, and he wanted to be quite sure that they would be safe when he came back again. He would lock them up, and put a seal upon the lock, that nobody might be able to break the lock. You are Christ’s jewels, and He has gone abroad. By and by He will come back again. He has “sealed” you with the Holy Spirit. If you take care not to break that “seal,” then you are quite safe; but if you trifle with it, i.e., if you grieve the Holy Spirit, the “seal” will be broken; then what will become of the jewels? But keep the Holy Spirit in your heart, then you will be safe when Christ comes back. In the time of the Emperor Tiberius, there was a law in Rome that anybody who carried a particular ring on his finger must never go into any dirty or wrong place. You have got the seal; keep it holy! (J. Vaughan, M. A.)

Holy Spirit: The method of His bestowment unrevealed

It is the doctrine of the interworking of the Spirit of God upon the souls of men. I have no philosophy about it. All I say is this: that God knows what is the secret way in which mind reaches mind. I do not—you do not. I do not know why words on my tongue wake up thoughts corresponding to those words in you. I do not know why the soul of man, like a complex instrument of wondrous scope, is played upon by my words, so that there are waked up in it notes along the whole scale of being. I do not understand why things are so, but unquestionably they are so. I do not know how the mother pours her affection on the child’s heart, but she does. Two stars never shone into each other as two loving souls shine into each other. I know it is so, but I do not know why it is so. I do not know how soul touches soul, how thought touches thought, or how feeling touches feeling, but I know it does. Now that which we see in the lower departments of life—that which exists between you and your friends, and me and my friends—that I take, and by my imagination I lift it up into the Divine nature, and give it depth and scope and universality; and then I have some conception of the doctrine of God’s Spirit poured upon the human soul. (H. W. Beecher.)

The Holy Spirit needed

It is as if you saw a locomotive engine upon a railway, and it would not go; and they put up a driver, and they said, “Now, that driver will just do.” They try another and another. One proposes that such and such a wheel should be altered; but still it will not go. Some one then bursts in amongst those who are conversing, and says, “No, friends; but the reason why it will not go is because there is no steam. You have no fire; you have no water in the boiler: that’s why it will not go. There may be some faults about it: it may want a bit of paint here and there: but it will go well enough with all those faults if you do but get the steam up.” But now people are saying, “This must be altered, and that must be altered.” But it would go he better unless God the Spirit should come to bless us. That is the Church’s great want; and, until that want be supplied, we may reform and reform, and stiff be lust the same. We want the Holy Spirit; and then, whatever faults there may be in our organisation, they can never materially impede the progress of Christianity when once the Spirit of the Lord God is in our midst. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

The Holy Spirit indispensable

Here is a noble ship … The forests have masted her; in many a broad yard of canvas a hundred looms have given her wings. Her anchor has been weighed to the rude sea-chant; the needle trembles on her deck: with his eye on that friend, unlike worldly friends, true in storm as in calm, the helmsman stands impatient by the wheel. And when, as men bound to a distant shore, the crew have said farewell to wives and children, why, then, lies she there over the self-same ground, rising with the flowing and falling with the ebbing tide? The cause is plain. They want a wind to raise that drooping pennon and fill these empty sails. They look to heaven; and so they may; out of the skies their help must come. At length their prayer is heard.… And now, like a steed touched by the rider’s spur, she starts, bounds forward, plunges through the waves, and, heaven’s wind her moving power, is off and away, amid blessings and prayers, to the land she is chartered for. Even so, though heaven-born, heaven-called, heaven-bound, though endowed with a new heart and new mind, we stand in the same need of celestial influences. (T. Guthrie, D. D.)

Revivals—occasional things

Revivals are not constant, but occasional things; they are like the showers that water the earth. (T. H. Skinner.)

The sending of the Holy Ghost

We are this day to celebrate the yearly memory of the sending down of a benefit, so great and so wonderful, as there were not tongues enough upon earth to celebrate it, but there were fain to be more sent from heaven to help to sound it out thoroughly.

I. The time. The day of Pentecost. Why that day? Pentecost was a great feast under the law; and meet it was this coming should be at some great feast. The first dedication of Christ’s Catholic Church on earth, the first publishing the gospel, the first proclaiming the apostles’ commission, were so great matters, as it was not meet they should be done in a corner.

II. Manner.

1. On their parts on whom the Holy Ghost came. It is truly said by the philosopher, that if the patient be prepared aright, the agent will have his work both the sooner and the better. And so, consequently, the Spirit in His coming, if the parties to whom He cometh be made ready. And this is threefold:

(1) Unity. Can any spirit animate or give life to members dismembered? A fair example we have in Ezekiel (Eze_37:7-9). Now the Holy Ghost is the very essential unity, love, and love-knot, of the two Persons, the Father and the Son, even of God with God. And He is sent to be the union, love, and loveknot of the two Natures united in Christ, even of God with man. And can we imagine that He will enter (essential unity) but where there is unity? There is no greater bar to His entry than discord and disunited minds.

(2) Not only of one mind, that is, unanimity, but also in one place too, that is,

uniformity; both in the unity of the Spirit, that is inward, and in the bond of peace too, that is, outward. God’s will is, we should be as upon one foundation, so under one roof (Psa_68:6). Therefore it is expressly noted of this company where they prayed, they prayed all together (Act_4:24). When they heard, they heard all together (Act_8:6). When they brake bread, they did it all together (verse 46). Division of places will not long be without division of minds.

(3) A disposition in them, whereby they held out, and stirred not, even till the fifty days were fulfilled. That ,former, unanimity; this latter, longanimity. There is in us a hot, hasty spirit, impatient of any delay.

2. On His part. He came sensibly, a rare coming, since the Holy Ghost, an invisible Spirit, cometh, for the most part, invisibly. Yet here it was meet—first, that no less honour done to this law of Zion than to that of Sinai, which was public and full of majesty; and secondly, it pleased Him to vouchsafe to grace the Church, His queen, with like solemn inauguration to that of His own, when the Holy Ghost descended on Him in likeness of a Dove. This coming, then, of His thus in state, is such as it was both to be heard and seen. To the ear, which is the sense of faith; to the eye, which is the sense of love. The ear, that is the ground of the word, which is audible; the eye, which is the ground of the sacraments, which are visible. To the ear in a noise; to the eye in a show. The noise, serving as a trumpet, to awake the world, and give them warning He was come. The fiery tongues, as so many lights, to show them and let them see the day of that their visitation.

(1) There comes a sound. Which is to show that the spirit is no dumb spirit but vocal. The sound thereof is gone into all lands, and hath been heard in all ages.

(2) It was the sound of a wind. For first, of all bodily things it is the least bodily, and cometh nearest to the nature of a spirit, invisible as it is; and secondly, quick and active, as the spirit is. Now, this wind that came and made this sound is here described with four properties:

(a) It fell suddenly, so doth the wind. It riseth often in the midst of a calm, giveth no warning; and even so doth the Spirit, for that cometh not by observation, neither can you make set rules of it: you must wait for it as well when it cometh not as when it comes. Many times it is found of them that seek it not. It creeps not like motions that come from the serpent. And therefore sudden, saith Gregory, because things, if they be not sudden, awake us not, affect us not. And therefore sudden, saith he again, that men may learn not to despise present motions of grace, though suddenly rising in them, and though they can give no certain reason of them, but take the wind while it bloweth as not knowing when it will or whether ever it will blow again.

(b) It was a mighty, or vehement, wind. Although the wind is nothing else but a puff of air, the thinnest, the poorest, and to our seeming, of the least force of all creatures, yet groweth it to that violence which pulls up trees, blows down huge piles of building, hath most strange and wonderful effects, and all this but a little thin air. And surely no less observable or admirable, nay, much more, have been and are the operations of the Spirit. Even presently after this, this Spirit, in a few poor weak and simple instruments, waxed so full and forcible as it cast down strongholds, brought into captivity many an exalting thought, made a conquest of the whole world, even then, when it was bent fully in main opposition against it.

(c) It came from heaven. Winds naturally come not from thence, but move laterally from one coast or climate to another. To come directly down from heaven, that is supernatural, and points us plainly to Him that is ascended up into heaven, and now sendeth it down from thence that it may fill us with the breath of heaven. To distinguish this wind from others is no hard matter. If our motions come from above it is this wind, which came thence to make us heavenly-minded.

(d) It filled that place where they sat. That place, not the places about. The common wind fills all places within his circuit alike. And this is a property very well fitting the Spirit. To blow in certain places where itself will; and upon certain persons and they shall plainly feel it, and others about them not a whir.

(2) This wind brought down with it tongues to be seen. Here is not only sent a wind which serveth for their own inspiration, but tongues which serve for elocution, that is, to impart the benefit to more than themselves. It showeth that the Holy Ghost cometh and is given rather to do others good than to benefit themselves. Charity poured into their hearts would serve them; grace poured into their lips was needful to make others partakers of the benefit. This also standeth of four parts, as did the former.

(a) There were tongues, and God can send from heaven no better thing, nor the devil from hell no worse. The best member we have (Psa_108:1). The worst member we have (Jas_3:6). Both, as it is employed.

(b) Cloven tongues—and that very cleaving of right necessary use to the business intended, viz., that the knowledge of the gospel might be dispersed to every nation under heaven. If there must be a calling of the Gentiles, they must have the tongues of the Gentiles wherewith to call them. But with their many tongues they spake one thing.

(c) They were tongues as of fire to show that they were not of our elementary fire. As the wind, so the fire from heaven, of the nature of that which made the bush burn and yet consumed it not. The tongues were as of fire to teach that the force of fire should show forth itself in their words, both in the splendour, which is the light of knowledge to clear the mist of their darkened understanding, and in the fervour, which is the force of spiritual efficacy, to quicken the dulness of their cold and dead affections. With such a tongue spake Christ Himself, when they said of Him, “Did not our hearts burn within us while He spake unto us by the way?” With such a tongue St. Peter, here in this chapter; for sure there fell from Him something like fire on their hearts, when they were pricked with it and cried, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” But this is not always, nor in all with us; no more was it with them, but in those of their hearers which had some of the anointing, and that will easily take the fire, in them good will be done; or at least, where there was some smoking flax, some remainder of the Spirit, which without any great ado will be kindled anew.

(d) These sat upon each of them. In which sitting is set down unto us their last quality—of continuance and constancy. They did not light and touch and away, after the manner of butterflies. (Bp. Andrewes.)

The advent of the Spirit

I. That the promise of the Holy Spirit to the Church will certainly be fulfilled.

1. The Holy Spirit is promised to the Church (Joh_15:26; Joh_16:7; Joe_2:28-29).

2. The promise is not always understood in its full meaning as it ought to be. The disciples did not understand it, nor does the Church of our own age. It would not rest a day without its fulfilment (Joh_4:10).

3. The promise will certainly be fulfilled. This is seen in the history of the Church at Pentecost. There was delay, but not denial. Then as now the Holy Spirit is given to the Church at the best and most appropriate time. We must wait, for it is determined by infinite wisdom.

II. That the Church must put itself into a proper moral attitude in order to receive the Holy Spirit. The Church must be—

1. Frequent in its meetings.

2. United in its spirit.

3. Prayerful in disposition (Act_1:14).

4. Patient in temper.

5. Catholic in sentiment.

Not merely the disciples were present, but many strangers. They had come to the feast, and got a better feast than they expected. Some Churches are so narrow and sectarian in their spirit, that the Holy Spirit is shut out from them.

III. That the advent of the Holy Spirit to the Church is accompanied by wondrous phenomena and sublime moral results. The advent of the Holy Spirit—

1. Is set forth under appropriate emblems.

2. Affects the speaking of the Word. When men receive the Holy Spirit it is always evident in their conversation, which is aglow with heavenly fire and feeling. True eloquence is a spiritual gift.

3. Is designed to fill the human soul with Divine and ennobling influences. As the wind filled the house, so the Spirit filled the men, every crevice of their being. The heart of man must be filled with something; if God does not fill it the world will. The Divine filling is the most ennobling and blessed. (The Study and the Pulpit.)

The coming of the Holy Spirit

I am sitting, on a summer’s day, in the shadow of a great New England elm. Its long branches hang motionless; there is not breeze enough to move them. All at once there comes a faint murmur; around my head the leaves are moved by a gentle current of air; then the branches begin to sway to and fro, the leaves are all in motion, and a soft, rushing sound fills my ear. So with every one that is born of the Spirit. I am in a state of spiritual lethargy, and scarcely know how to think any good thought. I am heart-empty, and there comes, I know not where or whence, a sound of the Divine presence. I am inwardly moved with new comfort and hope, the day seems to dawn in my heart, sunshine comes around my path, and I am able to go to my duties with patience. I am walking in the Spirit, I am helped by the help of God, and comforted with the comfort of

God. And yet this is all in accordance with law. There is no violation of law when the breezes come, stirring the tops of the trees; and there is no violation of law when God moves in the depths of our souls, and rouses us to the love and desire of holiness. (James Freeman Clarke.)

The descending Spirit

Notice—

I. Some features of the event here related.

1. It is interesting that the Holy Spirit should have been conferred at Jerusalem, the capital of the old faith. It is not God’s way to inaugurate the new by any harsh abandonments of the old. The Christian is only the Jewish Church led forth into a new stage of development. As the two lay in Christ’s mind there was no break between them. “I came not to destroy, but to fulfil.” It was suitable, then, that where the old Church had matured, the new Church should germinate.

2. It is impossible to say with exactness where in Jerusalem the disciples were gathered. It is barely possible that it was in some portion of the temple edifice. If that were the case it would only be in the line of what has just been said.

3. This first giving of the Spirit was at Pentecost. Still another proof of this is that God would like to have us consider Christianity as a graft upon an old stock.

4. As to the nature of the miracle. Was it a gift of “tongues,” or a gift of “ears”? The most casual perusal is sufficient to convince that it was the disciples that were inspired to speak. The hearers were not in a mood to be inspired. The Holy Ghost works inspiringly upon those who are in sympathy with Him; and this these foreign residents at Jerusalem were not.

II. The lessons connected with the event.

1. The Christian Church was born at Pentecost. The materials were already present, but standing out of organic relation with each ether. It was the brooding of the Spirit that produced the formless elements of things into a shapely and prolific world. It was the inbreathing of God into the being of our first parent that developed him into a living soul. It was the influx similarly of the Divine Spirit that composed the disciples of Christ into an organised and living Church.

2. This was the first Christian revival of religion. The Church was born in a revival, and the survival of the Church has been along a continuous line of revival. There is nothing in the whole New Testament narrative more startling than the transformation which the Twelve suddenly underwent on the fiftieth day after Calvary. A cultivated ministry and well-appointed churches are well enough in their way; they are suitable for the conveyance of power, but are not themselves power. They are to positive spiritual efficacy only what riverbeds are to the floods that are set to roll in them. The early Church, as compared with the modern, was poor in appliances; but one sermon then converted three thousand men, and now it takes three thousand sermons to convert one man. The difference between the times is largely difference of power.

3. The Spirit descended upon the disciples when they were together. The full meaning of Christianity is not exhausted in any relation in which it sets us individually to Christ. There are blessings that accrue to Christians only by their

standing in fellowship with each ether. The first Christian revival was inaugurated in a prayer-meeting. It is easy, and rather common, to treat prayer-meetings with disparagement. But it is generally found that when a revival comes it begins in God’s revelation of Himself to saints that draw near to one another in prayer.

4. This first revival of religion began with the spiritual replenishment of those already Christian. It is time wasted, and runs counter to the Divine order of things, for a Church that is not itself revived to attempt revivalistic operations among the unconverted. Christianity, to the degree in which it extends itself, does so as a kind of contagion. The result of “gotten-up” revivals is only man-made Christians; and man-made Christians stand in the way of their own conversion and add to the inertia of the Church.

6. After the Ascension the disciples simply waited for Pentecost. There was no further work that needed to be wrought in them before its bestowment. And we shall always receive the Divine baptism just as soon as there is nothing on our part that hinders it. “Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, and prove Me now herewith,” etc.

6. The Holy Spirit descended upon all the disciples. So far as we are Holy Ghost Christians, all substantial distinctions in this respect between the laity and the clergy are erased.

7. The Holy Spirit revealed Himself outwardly in the shape of tongues. This was prophetic of the way in which revealed truth was to be disseminated. It does not suffice that men should simply live lives of Christian constancy. Christ not only lived, He preached. The first revival, then, opened men’s mouths and set men talking. There is no place for silent Christians under the administration of the Holy Ghost. The pressure of God upon the heart inevitably finds escape at the lip. (G. H. Parkhurst, D. D.)

“It’s no’ bilin’”

The late Dr. William Arnot, of Edinburgh, used to tell of his being at a railway station, where he grew weary of waiting for the train to move. He inquired if the trouble was want of water. “Plenty of water,” was the quick reply, “but it’s no’ bilin’.” We have no lack of religious machinery in Church and Sabbath-schools and benevolent societies. The engines are on the track, and the trainmen are in their places. If there is little or no progress, may it not be that the water is “no’ bilin’”?

Sudden revivals explained

I looked recently at a very remarkabIe sight, the burning of a huge floorcloth manufactury. I was just about returning home from my Master’s work when I saw a little blaze, and in an incredibly short space a volume of fire rolled up in great masses to the skies. Why blazed it so suddenly? Why, because for months before many men had been busily employed in hanging up the floorcloth and in saturating the building with combustible materials; I do not mean with the intention of making a blaze, but in the ordinary course of their manufacture; so that when at last the spark came it grew into a great sheet of flame all at once. So sometimes when the gospel is faithfully preached a sinner gets present peace and pardon, and he is so full of joy his friends cannot make him out, his progress is so rapid. But be it remembered that God has been mysteriously at work months before in that man’s heart, preparing his soul to catch the heavenly

flame, so that there was only a spark needed, and then up rolled the flame to heaven. Oh that I could be that spark to some heart in whom God has been working this morning, but He alone can make me so! (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Spiritual influence from another world

The Gulf Stream in its beneficent and hidden influence may be taken as a sort of parable of spiritual influence. This England of ours should be naturally and properly a land of almost eternal winter. For some eight months of the year our very seas ought to be frozen over, so that no ship could approach our shores. Our islands should be a rough rude tract of country, where only the hardiest forms of life could survive—a land of forests where wild beasts should roam, whose furs should give to the place almost its only value, and where the deep snows should make agriculture almost impossible. This should be Great Britain—a proud name for so desolate a tract. What mystery is this which delivers us? Away in the distant southern world, in the fierce heat of the tropics, starts the Gulf Stream. It gathers the warmth of the sun, and sends it for thousands of miles across the seas to lave our shores. And thus the arctic winter is driven from us; and our ports are open all the year round; over us stretch the kindlier skies; about us blow the gentler winds; our fields are covered with grass, the valleys are thick with corn; the pastures are covered with flocks and herds, and this favoured land is shut off from extremes, and has the summer of the North with the winter of the South. Now think of some shivering native of Labrador, who has heard of this Gulf Stream, and scornfully shakes his head—“I do not believe it,” says he; “it is impossible and absurd.” Well, I would not argue the subject. I would only invite him to come and see. “But where is this Gulf Stream which does such wonders? Can you see it?” No, we cannot see it, but it is there—hidden, noiseless, mingling with our waters and transforming our climate. The parable is a many-sided illustration of the truth. Of nature, of ourselves, we do dwell in a land of winter—frozen and well-nigh dead, without the energy to put forth any life of God. But, lo, about us do flow gracious influences from another world. We know not how, but by the Holy Spirit of God, there is breathed about us and within us the love of God, softening, transforming, bringing to us a new heaven and a new earth. And now do grow and flourish blessed things which before we knew not. (M. G. Pearse.)

The outpouring of the Spirit

(first sermon):—

I. Mark the very critical care of the Divine Head of the Church, in fixing special times for the communication of special blessings. Here we have the largest possible opportunity which God Himself could have secured for the communication of His supreme gift. Pentecost was a harvest festival; about that time people could come with the least degree of danger from various outlying countries and districts. There are opportunities even in Divine providence. The days are not all alike to God. We bind Him down to one day, whereas is there in reality a single day in our life that He has not a lien upon? Does He not come in upon birthdays, days of deliverance, of surprise, of unusual sorrow and joy? God is not the God of one day only; He takes up the one day and specially holds it before us, but only symbolically. What He does with that He wants to do with all the others.

II. On this occasion we have the largest possible union—

1. Of nationalities.

2. Of desire. Note the word “accord.” The instruments were all in tune together, without mental distraction or moral discord. God has promised nothing to disunion; the man that creates disunion in the Church must instantly be put away—he is worse than an infidel.

3. They were also gathered in one place: that is the transient word. The place is nothing, the accord is everything. Neither in this mountain nor yet at Jerusalem will men worship the Father, but the accord, the rhythmic fellowship—this is the eternal quantity, and he who meddles with it is a violator within the very shadow of the altar. Yet who thinks of this? If a poor moral cripple should be caught suddenly in some moral fault, then is the imperfect and blind Church enraged with him, but the man who is speaking ungracious words, making unlovely statements, breathing a spirit of dissension in the Church—who takes note of him?

III. Then we have the largest possible bestowment of the Divine gift. The word “all” includes the followers of Christ of every name and degree. We are not to suppose that popes, prelates, preachers, ministers, leaders, alone have this gift of the Holy Spirit. We must not imagine that a minister merely as such has greater spiritual privileges than a mechanic. We are all equally priests before God, our priesthood has no standing but in our holiness. As to the Church all meeting in one place, do not believe in a place-church. God’s Church is everywhere. Many of you belong to God’s Church and may not know it. What is your heart, what is your heart’s desire, what is the sovereign purpose of your life? If you can say it is to know God’s will and do it, then you are in the Church, whatever particular place you may occupy. Jesus Christ made a great promise to His disciples when they asked Him whether at that time He would restore the kingdom unto Israel. The very great-nero of the promise necessitates that the fulfilment of it shall be upon a scale proportioned to itself. Now how will He fulfil the promise of enduement with power from on high? That would be no commonplace realisation of that promise, nor was there one (verses 1-4). Imagination says, “It is enough.” God always takes care to satisfy the moral nature, and to call upon conscience to say, “It is right.”

IV. We see from this revelation how helpless we are in the matter of spiritual revivals. What did the apostles do towards this demonstration of Divine power? They did nothing but wait, pray, hope, expect—what the world, so fond of action, would call nothing. That is all we can do. Have nothing to do with those persons who organise revivals, with any mechanised resurrection of spiritual life. We need to know the power of waiting. There are those who tell us we ought to be doing something practical, and they degrade that word into a kind of mechanical exercise. Is he doing nothing who continues steadfast in prayer? or he who speaks great words of wisdom, and who calms the heart in the midst of its searching trouble? To be practical is not to be demonstrative, to be building wood, hay, stone, and metal, it may be to give thought, to offer suggestion, to stimulate the mind, to check the ambition, to elevate the purpose of life. The disciples and apostles, previous to Pentecost, did everything by doing nothing.

V. We see how unmistakable fire is. The difference between one man and another is a difference of heat. The difference between one reader and another is a difference of fire; the difference between one musician and another is that one man is all fire, and the other man all ice. The difference between one preacher and another is a difference of fire. (J. Parker, D. D.)

The outpouring of the Spirit

(second sermon):—

I. It is in the presence of the Holy Ghost that we find the true union of the Church. There are diversities of operation, and must always be, but such diversity does not impair the unity of the Spirit. There is one faith, though there be many creeds, one baptism, though there be many forms of it, one Lord, though He shine in a thousand different lights. We have been vainly looking for union in uniformity. Consider how irrational this is. Is the human race one or many? is there any difficulty in identifying a man whatever his colour, form, stature, language?—yet are there any two men exactly alike? Man has, say, some seven features, forehead, eyes, nose, mouth, chin, form or contour, colour or complexion, yet out of those seven notes what music of facial expression has God wrought? It is so in the Christian Church. That is split up into a score of sects, but the Church itself is one. To those who look upon things from the outside merely, it would seem impossible that the Arminian and the Calvinist can both be readers of the same Bible, and worshippers of the same God. But their unity is not found in formality, in creedal expression, in propositional theology, in ecclesiastical arrangement; down in the centre of the heart lies the common organic nerve that unites Christendom in its worship and in its hope; and when the Cross is touched, the defence never comes from any one section, the whole Church with unanimous love and loyalty rushes to the vindication. This has been illustrated by the diversities which occur in the expressions of sorrow, worship, and loyalty. The Eastern sufferer lies prostrate, crying piteously and vehemently. The Western is silent and self-controlled. The difference is not in the sorrow, but in the manifestation of the sorrow. So the Oriental before his king falls fiat on the ground, and the Briton before his God only kneels. Is there, then, a difference in the spirit of worship?

II. Have we received the Holy Ghost? The question does not admit of hesitation as to its answer.

1. No man can mistake the summer sun when he sees it; he will not come home with a half tale of having seen some kind of light, but is not quite sure whether it was a gas jet, or the shining of an electric light, or a new star. The sun needs no introduction, has no signature but its own glory, and needs take no oath in proof of its identity. The shadows know it, and flee away; the flowers, and open their little hearts to its blessing; all the hills and valleys know it and quiver with a new joy.

2. We may have the form, and not the spirit. People say the great thing after all for a man to do is to do good. That is correct. But what would you think of me if I said the great thing after all is for a train to go, when the train has not been attached to the engine? You are perfectly right in saying that the train is useless if it does not go, and if the train is going it is all right. But you must bring within your argument the fact that the engine could not go without the fire, that the tram cannot go unless attached to the engine, that the engine and the train move, vibrate, fly, under the power of light—the light that was sealed up in the bins of the earth ten thousand ages ago is driving your great locomotives to-day I When, therefore, you tell me that a man must do good, and that is enough, you omit from your statement the vital consideration that we can only do these things as we are inspired by the indwelling Spirit of God. I see before me at this moment certain pieces of cord. What is wanted is but to connect these cords with a motive power, but until the connection is established they are but dead useless things. Connect them, set the engine going, let it cause the necessary rotations to fly, and presently an arrangement may be made by which from these cords we shall receive a dazzling glory. They are nothing in themselves, and yet

without them the engine might go for a thousand ages and we should get no light. It is even so with us. We are here, men educated, intelligent, well-appointed, and what is it that we need but connection with the heavens, direct communication with the source of light and fire.

III. When the Holy Spirit is communicated to the Church, we must not imagine that we shall be other than ourselves, enlarged, ennobled, and developed. The Spirit will not merge our individuality in a common monotony. Whatever your power is now, the incoming of the Holy Ghost will magnify and illuminate, so that your identity Will be carried up to its highest expression and significance. And more than that, there will be a development of latent faculties, slumbering powers, the existence of which has never been suspected by our dearest friends. Look for surprises in the Church when the Holy Ghost falls upon it: dumb men will speak, ineloquent men will attract and fascinate by the sublimity of their new discourse, timid men will put on the lion, and those who had hidden themselves away in the obscurity of conscious feebleness will come out and offer themselves at the Lord’s altar to help in the Lord’s service. The resources of the Church will be multiplied in proportion as the Church enjoys the presence and power of the Holy Ghost. How the old earth has continued to keep pace with all our civilisation and science. The electric light was, as to its possibilities, in Eden, as certainly as it is in the metropolis of England to-day. The locomotive has not created anything but a new combination and a new application and use. It is even so in the Bible. The Church knows nothing yet about the possibilities of revelation. No new Bible will be written, but new readers will come. We have learning and ability and industry enough; what we want is the baptism of the Holy Ghost. (J. Parker, D. D.)

The baptism of the Spirit experienced

As I turned, and was about to take a seat by the fire, I received a mighty baptism of the Holy Ghost. Without any expectation of it, without ever having the thought in my mind that there was any such thing for me, without any recollection that I had ever heard the thing mentioned by any person in the world, the Holy Spirit descended upon me in a manner that seemed to go through me, body and soul. I could feel the impression like a wave of electricity, going through and through me. Indeed, it seemed to come in waves and waves of liquid love, for I could not express it in any other way. It seemed like the very breath of God. I can recollect distinctly that it seemed to fan me like immense wings. No words can express the wonderful love that was shed abroad in my heart. I wept aloud with joy and love These waves came over me and over me and over me, one after the other, until I recollect I cried out: “I shall die if these waves continue to pass over me.” I said, “Lord, I cannot bear any more”; yet I had no fear of death. (C. G. Finney, D. D.)

The baptism of the Spirit: its effects

It was that baptism which made the might of weakness irresistible; it was that which sent a few poor fishermen and publicans to conquer and regenerate the resisting world. In the might of that Spirit Peter broke down the old wall of partition, and admitted the Gentiles into the Church of God. By the earthquake of that Spirit the veil of the temple was rent, and free access was given to all in the holiest place. Convicted by the might of that Spirit the Rabbi of Tarsus sent the gospel flashing like a beacon fire from Jerusalem to Antioch, from Antioch to Ephesus, from Ephesus to Rome. The might of that Spirit,

working among the Roman legionaries subdued their fierce and stubborn hearts; the might of that Spirit dilated the humble intellects of the apologists of Christianity, made ridiculous the wit of Lucian, the taunts of Celsus, the logic of Porphyry, the satire of Julian. That Spirit leapt with Telemachus into the Coliseum, and put an end for ever to the hideous butchery of the gladiators in the arena; it emancipated the wretched millions of ancient slaves; it made childhood sacred with the seal of baptism, and gave to trembling womanhood the rose of chastity and honour. The might of the Spirit again dissipated the radiant glamour of Pagan fancy, broke the wand of the enchantress, hushed the song of the Syren, branded with shame the flushed face of Bacchus, and the harlot brow of Aphrodite. The might of that Spirit, abasing the Roman eagles, wove its cross, the symbol which heathenism loathed as the gibbet of the malefactor, in gold on the banners of armies, and in gems on the diadems of kings. Touched with that Spirit, the rude northern barbarians bowed their heads before the meek white Christ. Clothed in that Spirit, the missionaries went forth from St. Thomas to Ulphilas, from Ulphilas to Boniface, from Boniface to Henry Martin and Coleridge Pattison, until the great Angel stood with one foot upon the land and one upon the sea, with an everlasting gospel in His hands. In the might of that Spirit the Crusaders gave up their lives for their fair Captain, Christ. It was the love which that Spirit kindled, like a pure flame on the altar of their hearts, which made the philanthropists, from Fabula to St. Francis, from St. Francis to St. Vincent de Paul and John Howard and David Livingstone and Lord Shaftesbury, strong to confront the menacing monopolies, and to smite the hoary head of inveterate abuse. So the descending flame, the rushing mighty wind of the Holy Ghost, is the secret of all that Christianity has done for the love of Christ its Lord. Look forward for three poor centuries from the first Pentecost, and on Whitsunday A.D. 337 died, in the white robe of baptism which he had just received, Constantine the Great, the first Christian emperor of Rome. Look forward for six centuries, and it was on Whitsunday of A.D. 597 that the conversion of Saxon England began with the baptism of King Ethelbert. Look forward for seven centuries and a half, and it was on Whitsunday A.D. 755 that St. Boniface was martyred, the great apostle of the Germans. Look forward nearly nineteen centuries, and to-day, in tens of thousands of Christian Churches, from the snows of Greenland to the rocky Falkland Isles, from dawn to sunset, and again from sunset to dawn, in every single spot where there are gathered the representatives of any portion of civilised peoples, there is being preached that very same gospel in every essential particular which was preached nearly two millenniums ago in Nazareth and Bethlehem. (Archdeacon Farrar.)

A new manifestation of the Divine Spirit

1. Though we cannot regard Pentecost as the birthday of the Church, since the Church was born centuries before, we are bound to regard it as the grand crowning period in the development of the plan of redemption. Periods in the working out of this plan mark the history of four thousand years, one leading to another. From Adam to Abraham, from Abraham to Moses, and from Moses to Christ, and now from Christ’s Advent to Pentecost. To this all the others pointed, and in it they were all crowned with glory.

2. But we are not to suppose that this was the first time the Divine Spirit visited this world. He strove with the antediluvians, inspired old prophets, and dwelt in old saints. But He never came in such a demonstration and plenitude of power before. Before He had distilled as the dew, now He comes down as a shower; before He had gleamed as the first rays of morning, now He appears as the brightness of noon. Note

His action—

I. Upon the disciples.

1. Upon their ear. “Wind,” an emblem of the Spirit.

(1) Invisible.

(2) Mysterious.

(3) Powerful.

(4) Refreshing.

Great ,epochs are usually marked by extraordinary phenomena—e.g., the giving of the Law; the Advent; the Crucifixion, and now Pentecost.

2. Upon their eye. “Fire” is

(1) Purifying.

(2) Consuming.

(3) Transmuting.

(4) Diffusive.

Perhaps these supernatural appeals to the senses were intended to express the relation of the Divine Spirit.

(a) To life—“wind” or air is vital, the breath of life.

(b) To speech—“tongues” would intimate that the Spirit had given men new utterances.

(c) To purity—“fire” would indicate that the Spirit had to consume all the corruptions of the soul.

II. In the disciples. “They were filled with the Holy Ghost.” He took possession of their—

1. Minds, and made them the organs of Divine thought.

2. Hearts, and filled them with Divine emotions.

3. Bodies, and made them His living temples.

4. Wills, and made them the organs of Divine resolutions. Nothing but the Divine will fill the soul Without God there will be a boundless vacuum within.

III. through the disciples. Your things are observable concerning their speech.

1. It followed their Divine inspiration. It was not until the Spirit had given them the right thoughts and feelings that utterance came. Better be dumb than express the sentiments of the unrenewed soul. It is when the Spirit comes that we want speech, and shall have it. A Divinely filled soul must break forth in Divine language.

2. It was miraculous. The coming at once into the possession of a new language is as great a miracle as the possession of a new limb.

3. It was unspeakably useful. It served to impress the multitude with the Divinity of Christianity, and enabled the disciples to proclaim without preparation the gospel to every man. Without it the first age of the Church would have had a different history.

4. It was profoundly religious. This wonderful gift was employed to speak of God’s wonderful works. May the day soon come when God-given language, instead of being

the vehicle of erroneous thought, impure feeling, depraved purpose, shall convey to men nothing but holiness, goodness, and truth. (D. Thomas, D. D.)

The time of the Spirit’s outpouring proves the unity of the two dispensations

The time when the Spirit was poured out on the body of Christians, and the Church’s foundations laid deep and strong, revealed profound reverence for the old dispensation, raising by anticipation a protest against the heretical teaching which become current among the Gentiles in the second century, and has often since reappeared, as amongst the Anabaptists of Germany and the Antinomians at the Reformation. This view taught that there was an essential opposition between the Old and the New Testament, some holding that the Old Testament was the production of a spiritual being inferior and hostile to the eternal God. The Divine Spirit guided St. Luke, however, to teach the opposite view, and is careful to honour the eider dispensation and the old covenant, showing that Christianity was simply the perfection and completion of Judaism, and was developed therefrom as naturally as the bud of spring bursts forth into the splendid blossom and flower of summer. We trace these evidences of the Divine foreknowledge, as well as the Divine wisdom, in these Pentecostal revelations, providing for and forecasting future dangers with which, even in its earlier days, the bark of Christ’s Church had desperately to struggle. (G. T. Stokes, D. D.)

Effect of the Holy Spirit

“Tell me,” said a father to his son, “what difference you can detect between two needles—one of which has received an electric shock, whilst the other has not. And yet the one has hidden virtues, which occasion will show, of which the other has none. The electric shock has rendered the one needle a magnet, which, duly balanced, will enable man to find his way across the trackless ocean. As this needle, so may that soul be which has received the electric shock of the Holy Ghost: on the ocean of a sinful world, it shall point wanderers to the heaven of everlasting rest.”

Revivals of religion

I. Their nature. Religion in the soul is sometimes in a lower, sometimes in a higher state. The passage from the one to the other is more or less rapid. So in a community or church. There were periods of decline and refreshing under the Old Testament, in the time of Christ, in the time of the Reformation, in the time of Edwards and since. The phrase has now acquired the meaning of a sudden change from inattention to attention in regard to religions—to those seasons when Christian zeal is manifestly increased, and converts multiplied.

II. Their reality,

1. This has been denied—

(1) By rationalists, and all who deny the supernatural operations of the Holy Spirit.

(2) By those who deny that the converting influences of the Spirit are ever exerted except in connection with the sacraments.

(3) By those whose theory of religion does not admit of instantaneous or rapid conversions; who hold that the germ of piety implanted in baptism is, by an

educational process, to be nurtured unto conversion.

(4) By those who, while admitting the facts of She Bible on the subject, seem disposed to regard them as belonging rather to the miraculous than to the normal state of the Church.

2. But granting the fact of supernatural influence, there is no objection to the theory of revivals. There is nothing in them inconsistent with the nature of religion, or with the modes of Divine operation. It is a question of fact, and both Scripture and history are decisive on the point.

3. In regard to the question whether any religious excitement is a revival or not, note—

(1) It is, of course, not to be taken for granted that every such excitement is a work of God. It may be nothing but the product of human acts and eloquence, and consist in the excitement of mere natural feelings. Much, no doubt, which passes for revival is more or less of that character.

(2) The criteria for the decision between true and false revivals, and true and false religion is the same.

(a) Their origin. Are they due to the preaching of the truth?

(b) Their character. Is the excitement humble, reverential, peaceful, benevolent: holy; or is it proud, censorious, schismatical, irreverent?

(c) Their permanent fruits. This is the only certain test.

(3) Perfection is not to be expected in revivals any more than in the religion of individuals, and they are not to be condemned because of some evils.

III. Their importance.

1. This may be estimated, proximately, in two ways—

(1) By the importance of the end which they are assumed to answer—the salvation of many souls and the elevation of the piety of the Church.

(2) Historically, i.e., by a reference to the effects they have produced. Pentecost, the Reformation, the Mission of Wesley, etc. Estimated by these standards their importance is incalculable.

2. But there are false views of their importance, viz.,

(1) That they are the only ways in which religion can be promoted. Many expect nothing except during a revival, and consequently do nothing.

(2) That they are the best way. They are great mercies, but there are greater. When there have been years of famine a superabundant harvest is a great blessing. But it had been better had each harvest been good. General permanent health is better than exuberant joyousness alternating with depression.

IV. Their dangers. These may be learned—

1. From their nature. Excitement in proportion to its intensity in an individual or a community calls into vigorous exercise both the good and bad elements which may be extant. It makes the self-righteous, the censorious, the vain, more so. It sets men on new, unauthorised or improper means of promoting religion; and the evil elements often mingle with the good, so as to be far more apparent than the good.

The desolations of storm or flood are often more apparent than their benefits.

2. From experience we find the following evils are apt to attend revivals.

(1) False teachers, doctrines, measures, as in the apostolic age.

(2) False views of religion, fanaticism.

(3) Contempt of the ordinary means of grace, and neglect of them.

(4) Disparagement of religion in the eyes of serious, reflecting men.

(5) Denunciation and schisms.

(6) False views of the proper kind of preaching, and neglect of the instruction of the young. (C. Hodge, D. D.)

Revival preceded by prayer

In the winter of 1875, we were worshipping in the Brooklyn Academy of Music in the interregnum of churches. We had the usual great audiences, but I was oppressed beyond measure by the fact that conversions were not more numerous. One Tuesday I invited to my house five old, consecrated Christian men—all of them gone now, except Father Pearson, and he, in blindness and old age, is waiting for the Master’s call to come up higher. These old men came, not knowing why I had invited them. I took them to the top room of my house. I said to them: “I have called you here for special prayer. I am in an agony for a great turning to God of the people. We have vast multitudes in attendance and they are attentive and respectful, but I cannot see that they are saved. Let us kneel down and each one pray, and not leave this room until we are all assured that the blessing will come and has come.” It was a most intense crying unto God. I said, “Brethren, let this meeting be a secret,” and they said it would be. That Tuesday night special service ended. On the following Friday night occurred the usual prayer-meeting. No one knew of what had occurred on Tuesday night, but the meeting was unusually thronged. Men accustomed to pray in public in great composure broke down under emotion. The people were in tears. There were sobs and silences and solemnities of such unusual power that the worshippers looked into each other’s faces as much as to say, “What does all this mean?” And, when the following Sabbath came, although we were in a secular place, over four hundred arose for prayers, and a religious awakening took place that made that winter memorable for time and for eternity. There may be in this building many who were brought to God during that great ingathering, but few of them know that the upper room in my house in Quincy Street, where those five old Christian men poured out their souls before God, was the secret place of thunder. (T. De Witt Talmage.)

Belief in the Holy Ghost

“I believe in the Holy Ghost,” is not with us a mere formal expression; but the utterance of our heartfelt conviction. I have heard of a Church school in which the children were taught the Apostles’ Creed, and each child had to say a sentence. One day the clergyman came in, and asked them to repeat it to him. They managed all right for a time, but all of a sudden there was an awkward silence. The clergyman said, “Why don’t you go on?” One trembling little voice replied, “Please, sir, the boy that believes in the Holy Ghost isn’t here to-day.” I fear that is true of many churches, and many pulpits; those who

believe in the Holy Ghost are not there! His very name is scarcely heard in some places of worship; and all ascription of glory and honour to Him is lost in the mention of an “influence.” (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Waiting where the Spirit is likely to come

“That ship does not seem to stir; there’s not a breath of wind to move her sails”; said one of our little company. “No,” replied another, “but she is where she will get the wind as soon as it begins to blow.” And so it proved; for presently her canvas began to fill, and ere long she was speeding towards her desired haven. It is a good thing to be in the way of any blessing that may be coming. Perhaps you are not yet a Christian; but you say that you long to be one. Then seek to get where the sacred wind is likely to blow. The Spirit, like the wind, “bloweth where it listeth”; but there are special times and places in which His gracious influences are usually manifested. See that you are where you may expect the heavenly breeze. Prayer-meetings, Bible-classes, special services, and places of worship where the gospel of the grace of God is preached in all its fulness, are the spots where the Spirit delights to work; go there, and may the Divine afflatus fill thee, and speed thee on thy heavenward voyage! (J. W. Harrald.)

Are we ready for spiritual power

This power is what we want; but the question is, are we ready for it? Are we fit to be used, willing to be used, to be used anywhere, to be apparently unused, to be nothing, that Christ may be all? The possession of power is a great responsibility; perhaps the self-will and self-esteem of some of us would make the possession of such power a very deadly thing. Andrew Murray says, “We want to get possession of the power, and use it; God wants the power to get possession of us, and use us. If we give ourselves to the power to rule in us, the power will give itself to us to rule through us.” We are waiting here this morning to be filled with power. Perhaps we had better wait first to be emptied. (T. J. Longhurst.)

Awaking to truth

The Holy Spirit comes like a rushing wind upon the disciples, and in an hour they are new men. The jailer hears and believes in a night. Luther, while toiling up the holy stairs of the Lateran, holding to salvation by works, drops that scheme on the way, and lays hold of the higher one of salvation by faith. Ignatius Loyola, in a dream, has sight of the Mother of Christ, and awakes a soldier of Jesus. It is often so. We do not so much grow into the possession of new spiritual truths as we awake to them. Their coming is not like ,the sunrise, that slowly discloses the shapes and relations of things, but is like the lightning, that illuminates earth and sky in one quick flash, and so imprints them for ever on the vision. (Theodore T. Munger.)

The gift of the Spirit dependent upon conditions

How to realise the immanence, or possess ourselves of the indwelling of this Holy Spirit, is purely a question of conditions. Let me illustrate my meaning. To a man in perfect

health an atmosphere impregnated with disease-germs is comparatively harmless; but should he approach a typhus-stricken patient with a body exhausted by exercise, or faint from want of food, the probabilities are that he will fall a prey to the disease. Again, as a man brings himself into harmony with all the laws of his being, life assumes a bright and joyous aspect. Forms, tints, sounds, the shouldering hill, the roseate hues of dawn, the sweet-voiced song of birds, rouse in him the spirit of devotion, and appeal to him as revelations of a hand and mind Divine. But if his eye be jaundiced, his liver torpid, his pulse irregular, his brain congested, then creation becomes a blank, the world a wilderness, and life a weariness and a woe. Or, once more, take mental conditions. Have you never, in reading a book, marked with pencil some passage that suddenly flashed its meaning in upon your mind; and then, some six months later, in re-reading the same passage, wondered how it was you failed to re-experience the inspiration of the former time? There was no change in the book; the change was in your mental condition. Have you never, in hearing some strain of music, felt that it led you into a world of fancy, a realm of strange unutterable delight, and yet, forsooth, when on a later day the same chords have been touched by the same hands, to your astonishment they languidly and meaninglessly floated past your ear without rousing the imagery of your soul? There was no change in the music, the change was in the mental conditions of your life; at one time you were responsive; at the other, dull and inert. In all spheres of our existence, joy, truth, love, are proportioned to conditions. And so in the realm of the Spirit. Fulfil the Divine conditions and you are en rapport with the Divine life. Permit those conditions to go unfulfilled, and the Divine life will be to you as though it were not. And oh! how simple these conditions are! They do not consist in lashing yourself into a frenzy, nor in shouting yourself into hoarseness, nor in mutilating yourself. No. The conditions are prayer and supplication from hearts one in accord. It is prayer, and prayer only, that fits us for Divine indwelling; it is prayer, and prayer only, that puts us in touch with God. A prayerless life can no more draw to itself the Holy Spirit than glass can draw the electric fire; nor can a prayerless Church bring forth the fruits of holiness any more than the frigid zone can call forth and perfect a tropical growth. “Ye have not because ye ask not; and ye have not because ye ask amiss.” Live in the atmosphere of prayer; for therein, and therein only, will you fit yourself for the Divine indwelling; therein, and therein only, will you be vigorous with the life of God. (J. Marshall Mather.)

All with one accord in one place.—

The outward unity of the Pentecostal Church

There was unity of spirit and unity in open manifestation to the world at large. Christ’s disciples, when they received the gifts of heaven’s choicest blessings, were not split up into dozens of different organisations, each of them hostile to the others, and each striving to aggrandise itself at the expense of kindred brotherhoods. They had keenly in remembrance the teaching of our Lord’s great Eucharistic supplication (Joh_17:21). There was visible unity among the followers of Christ; there was interior love and charity, finding expression in external union which qualified the disciples for the fuller reception of the spirit of love, and rendered them powerful in doing God’s work amongst men. What a contrast the Christian Church presents to this now! There are some persons who rejoice in the vast divisions in the Church; but they are shortsighted and inexperienced in the dangers and scandals which have flowed, and are flowing, from them. It is indeed in the mission field that the schisms among Christians are most evidently injurious. When the heathen see the soldiers of the Cross split up among themselves into hostile organisations, they very naturally say that it will be time enough

when their own divergencies and difficulties have been reconciled to come and convert persons who at least possess internal union and concord. Then, again, these divisions lead to a wondrous waste of power both at home and abroad. If men believe that the preaching of the Cross of Christ is the power of God unto salvation, and that millions are perishing from want of that blessed story, can they feel contentment when the great work of competing sects consists, not in spreading that salvation, but in building up their own cause by proselytising from the neighbours, and gathering unto their own organisation persons who have already been made partakers of Christ Jesus? And if this competition of sects be injurious and wasteful within the bounds of Christendom, surely it is infinitely more so when various contending bodies concentrate all their forces, as they so often do, on the same locality in some unconverted land, and seem as eagerly desirous of gaining proselytes from one another as from the mass of paganism. Then, too, to take it from another point of view, what a loss in generalship, in Christian strategy, in power of concentration, results from our unhappy divisions! The united efforts made by Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Greeks, are indeed all too small for the vast work of converting the heathen world if they were made with the greatest skill and wisdom. How much more insufficient they must be when a vast proportion of the power employed is wasted, so far as the work of conversion is concerned, because it is used simply in counteracting and withstanding the efforts of other Christian bodies. How different it was in the primitive Church! Within one hundred and fifty years, or little more, of the ascension of Christ, and the outpouring of the Divine Spirit, a Christian writer could boast that the Christian Church had permeated the whole Roman empire to such an extent that if the Christians abandoned the cities they would be turned into howling deserts. This triumphant march was simply in accordance with the Saviour’s promise. The world saw that Christians loved one another, and the world was consequently converted. (G. T. Stokes, D. D.)

EBC 1-13, "THE PENTECOSTAL BLESSING

IN these words we find the record of the event which completed the Church, and endowed it with that mysterious power which then was, and ever since has been, the source of its true life and of its highest success.

The time when the gift of the Spirit was vouchsafed is marked for us as "when the day of Pentecost was now come." Here again, as in the fact of the ascension and the waiting of the Church, we trace the outline of Christianity in Judaism, and see in the typical ceremonial of the old dispensation the outline and shadow of heavenly realities.

What was the history of the Pentecostal feast? That feast fulfilled in the Jewish system a twofold place. It was one of the great natural festivals whereby God taught His ancient people to sanctify the different portions of the year. The Passover was the feast of the first ripe corn, celebrating the beginning of the barley harvest, as again the Pentecostal loaves set forth, solemnised, and sanctified the close of the wheat harvest. No one was permitted, according to the twenty-third of Leviticus, to partake of the fruits of the earth till the harvest had been sanctified by the presentation to God of the first ripe sheaf, just as at the greatest paschal festival ever celebrated, Christ, the first ripe sheaf of that vast harvest of humanity which is maturing for its Lord, was taken out of the grave Where the rest of the harvest still lies, and presented in the inner temple of the universe as the first-fruits of humanity unto God. At Pentecost, on the other hand, it was not a sheaf but a loaf that was offered to signify the completion of the work begun at the Passover. At Pentecost the law is thus laid down: "Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave

loaves of two tenth parts of an ephah: they shall be of fine flour, they shall be baken with leaven, for first-fruits unto the Lord". (Lev_23:17) Pentecost, therefore, was the harvest festival, the feast of ingathering for the Jews; and when the type found its completion in Christ, Pentecost became the feast of ingathering for the nations, when the Church, the mystical body of Christ, was presented unto God to be an instrument of His glory and a blessing to the world at large. This feast, as we have already intimated, was a fitting season for the gift of the Holy Ghost, and that for another reason. Pentecost was considered by the Jews as a festival commemorative of the giving of the law at Mount Sinai in the third month after they had been delivered from the bondage of Egypt. It was a fitting season, therefore, for the bestowal of the Spirit, whereby the words of ancient prophecy were fulfilled, "I will put My law in their inward parts, and in their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people." (Jer_31:33)

The time when the Spirit was poured out on the assembled body of Christians, and the Church’s foundations laid deep and strong, revealed profound reverence for the old dispensation, raising by anticipation a protest against the heretical teaching which became current among the Gnostics in the second century, and has often since found place in Christian circles, as amongst the Anabaptists of Germany and the Antinomians at the time of the Reformation. This view taught that there was an essential opposition between the Old and the New Testament, some maintainers of it, like the ancient Gnostics, holding that the Old Testament was the production of a spiritual being inferior and hostile to the Eternal God. The Divine Spirit guided St. Luke, however, to teach the opposite view, and is careful to honour the elder dispensation and the old covenant, showing that

Christianity was simply the perfection and completion of Judaism, and was developed therefrom as naturally as the bud of spring bursts forth into the splendid blossom and flower of summer. We trace these evidences of the Divine foreknowledge, as well as of the Divine wisdom, in these Pentecostal revelations, providing for and forecasting future dangers with which, even in its earlier days, the bark of Christ’s Church had desperately to struggle.

I. Now let us take the circumstances of the Pentecostal blessing as they are stated, for every separate detail bears with it an important message. The place and the other circumstances of the outpouring of the Spirit are full of instruction. The first disciples were all with one accord in one place. There was unity of spirit and unity in open manifestation to the world at large. Christ’s disciples, when they received the gifts of heaven’s choicest blessings, were not split up into dozens of different organisations, each of them hostile to the others, and each striving to aggrandise itself at the expense of kindred brotherhoods. They had keenly in remembrance the teaching of our Lord’s great Eucharistic supplication when He prayed to His Father for His people that "they may all be one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee that the world may believe that Thou didst send Me." There was visible unity among the followers of Christ; there was interior love and charity, finding expression in external union which qualified the disciples for the fuller reception of the spirit of love, and rendered them powerful in doing God’s work amongst men. The state of the Apostles and the blessing then received have an important message for the Christianity of our own and of every age. What a contrast the Christian Church-taking the word in its broadest sense as comprising all those who profess and call themselves Christians-presents at the close of the nineteenth when compared with the opening years of the first century! May not many of the problems and difficulties which the Church of to-day experiences be traced up to this woeful contrast? Behold England nowadays, with its two hundred sects, all calling themselves by the name of Christ; take the Christian world, with its Churches mutually

hostile, spending far more time and trouble on winning proselytes one from the other than upon winning souls from the darkness of heathenism; - surely this one fact alone, the natural result of our departure from the Pentecostal condition of unity and peace, is a sufficient evidence of our evil plight. We do not purpose now to go into any discussion of the causes whence have sprung the divisions of Christendom. "An enemy hath done this" is a quite sufficient explanation, for assuredly the great enemy of souls and of Christ has counter-worked and traversed the work of the Church and the conversion of the world most effectually thereby. There are some persons who rejoice in the vast variety of divisions in the Church; but they are shortsighted and inexperienced in the danger and scandals which have flowed, and are flowing, from them. It is indeed in the mission field that the schisms among Christians are most evidently injurious. When the heathen see the soldiers of the Cross split up among themselves into hostile organisations, they very naturally say that it will be time enough when their own divergences and difficulties have been reconciled to come and convert persons who at least possess internal union and concord. The visible unity of the Church was from the earliest days a strong argument, breaking down pagan prejudice. Then, again, not only do the divisions of Christians place a stumbling-block in the way of the conversion of the heathen, but they lead to a wondrous waste of power both at home and abroad. Surely one cannot look at the religious state of a town or village in England without realising at a glance the evil results of our divisions from this point of view. If men believe that the preaching of the Cross of Christ is the power of God unto salvation, and that millions are perishing from want of that blessed story, can they feel contentment when the great work of competing sects consists, not in spreading that salvation, but in building up their own cause by proselytising from their neighbours, and gathering into their own organisation persons who already have been made partakers of Christ Jesus? And if this competition of sects be injurious and wasteful within the bounds of Christendom, surely it is infinitely more so when various contending bodies concentrate all their forces, as they so often do, on the same locality in some unconverted land, and seem as eagerly desirous of gaining proselytes from one another as from the mass of paganism.

Then, too, to take it from another point of view, what a loss in generalship, in Christian strategy, in power of concentration, results from our unhappy divisions? The united efforts made by Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Greeks, are indeed all too small for the vast work of converting the heathen world if they were made with the greatest skill and wisdom. How much more insufficient they must be-when a vast proportion of the power employed is wasted, as far as the work of conversion is concerned, because it is used simply in counteracting and withstanding the efforts of other Christian bodies. I say nothing as to the causes of dissensions. In many cases they may have been absolutely necessary, though in too many cases I fear they have resulted merely from views far too narrow and restrained; I merely point out the evil of division in itself as being, not a help, as some would consider it, but a terrible hindrance in the way of the Church of Christ. How different it was m the primitive Church! Within one hundred and fifty years, or little more, of the ascension of Jesus Christ and the outpouring of the Divine Spirit, a Christian writer could boast that the Christian Church had permeated the whole Roman empire to such an extent that if the Christians abandoned the cities they would be turned into howling deserts. This triumphant march of Christianity was simply in accordance with the Saviour’s promise. The world saw that Christians loved one another, and the world was consequently converted. But when primitive love cooled down, and divisions and sects in abundance sprang up after the conversion of Constantine the Great, then the progress of God’s work gradually ceased, till at last Mahometanism arose to roll back the tide of triumphant success which had followed the preaching of the Cross, and to

reduce beneath Satan’s sway many a fair region, like North Africa; Egypt, and Asia Minor, which once had been strongholds of Christianity. Surely when one thinks of the manifold evils at home and abroad which the lack of the Pentecostal visible union and concord has caused, as well as of the myriads who still remain in darkness while nominal Christians bite and devour one another, we may well join in the glowing language of Jeremy Taylor’s splendid prayer for the whole Catholic Church, as he cries, "O Holy Jesus, King of the saints and Prince of the Catholic Church, preserve Thy spouse whom Thou hast purchased with Thy right hand, and redeemed and cleansed with Thy blood. O preserve her safe from schism, heresy, and sacrilege. Unite all her members with the bands of faith, hope, and charity, and an external communion when it shall seem good in Thine eyes. Let the daily sacrifice of prayer and sacramental thanksgiving never cease, but be for ever presented to Thee, and for ever united to the intercession of her dearest Lord, and for ever prevail for the obtaining for each of its members grace and blessing, pardon and salvation."

II. Furthermore, we have brought before us the external manifestations or evidences of the interior gift of the Spirit really bestowed upon the Apostles at Pentecost. There was a sound as of a rushing mighty wind; there were tongues like as of fire, a separate and distinct tongue resting upon each disciple; and lastly there was the miraculous manifestation of speech in divers languages. Let us take these spiritual phenomena in order. First, then, "there came from heaven a sound as of the rushing of a mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting"; a sign which was repeated in the scene narrated in the fourth chapter and the thirty-first verse, where we are told that "when they had prayed, the place was shaken wherein they were gathered together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost." The appearances of things that were seen responded to the movements and powers that were unseen. It was a supernatural moment. The powers of a new life, the forces of a new kingdom were coming into operation, and, as the result, manifestations that never since have been experienced found place among men. We can find a parallel to what then happened in scientific investigations. Geologists and astronomers push back the beginning of the world and of the universe, at large to a vast distance, but they all acknowledge that there must have been a period when phenomena were manifested, powers and forces called into operation, of which men have now no experience. The beginning, or the repeated beginnings, of the various epochs must have been times of marvels, which men can now only dream about. Pentecost was for the Christian with a sense of the awful importance of life and of time and of the individual soul a far greater beginning and a grander epoch than any mere material one. It was the beginning of the spiritual life, the inauguration of the spiritual kingdom of the Messiah, the Lord and Ruler of the material universe; and therefore we ought to expect, or at least not to be surprised, that marvellous phenomena, signs and wonders even of a physical type, should accompany and celebrate the scene. The marvels of the story told in the first of Genesis find a parallel in the marvels told in the second of Acts. The one passage sets forth the foundation of the material universe, the other proclaims the nobler foundations of the spiritual universe. Let us take it again from another point of view. Pentecost was, in fact, Moses on Sinai or Elijah on Horeb over again, but in less terrific form. Moses and Elijah may be styled the founder and the re-founder of the old dispensation, just as St. Peter and the Apostles may be called the founders of the new dispensation. But what a difference in the inaugural scene! No longer with thunder and earthquake, and mountains rent, but in keeping with a new and more peaceful economy, there came from heaven the sound as of the rushing of a mighty wind. It is not, too, the only occasion where the idea of wind is connected with that of the Divine Spirit and its mysterious operations. How very similar, as the devout mind will

trace, are the words and description of St. Luke when narrating this first outpouring of the Spirit, to the words of the Divine Master repeated by St. John, "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the voice thereof, but knowest not whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit."

There appeared, too, tongues, separate and distinct, sitting upon each of them. The outward and visible sign manifested on this occasion was plainly typical of the new dispensation and of the chief means of its propagation. The personality of the Holy Ghost is essentially a doctrine of the new dispensation. The power and influence of God’s Spirit are indeed often recognised in the Old Testament. Aholiab and Bezaleel are said to have been guided by the Spirit of God as they cunningly devised the fabric of the first tabernacle. The Spirit of Jehovah began to move Samson at times in the camp of Dan; and, on a later occasion, the same Spirit is described as descending upon him with such amazing force that he went down and slew thirty men of Ashkelon. These and many other similar passages present to us the Jewish conception of the Spirit of God and His work. He was a force, a power, quickening the human mind, illuminating with genius and equipping with physical strength those whom God chose to be champions of His people against the surrounding heathen. Aholiab’s skill in mechanical operations, and Samson’s strength, and Saul’s prophesying, and David’s musical art, were all of them the gifts of God. What a noble, what a grand, inspiring view of life and life’s gifts and work, is there set before us. It is the old lesson taught by St. James, though so often forgotten by men when they draw a distinction between things sacred and things secular, "Every good gift and every perfect boon is from above, coming down from the Father of light." A deeper view, indeed, of the Divine Spirit and His work on the soul can be traced in the prophets, but then they were watchers upon the mountains, who discerned from afar the approach of a nobler and a brighter day. "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor." That was Isaiah’s statement of his work as adopted by our Lord; and now, at the very foundation of the Church, this deeper and nobler tone of thought concerning the Spirit is proclaimed, when there appeared tongues like as of fire sitting upon each of them.

The sign of the Holy Spirit’s presence was a tongue of fire. It was a most suitable emblem, pregnant with meaning, and indicative of the large place which the human voice was to play in the work of the new dispensation, while the supernatural fire declared that the mere unaided human voice would avail nothing. The voice needs to be quickened and supported by that Divine fire, that superhuman energy and power, which the Holy Ghost alone can confer. The tongue of fire pointed on the Pentecostal morn to the important part in the Church’s life, and in the propagation of the gospel, which prayer, and praise, and preaching would hereafter occupy. It would have been well, indeed, had the Church ever remembered what the Holy Ghost thus taught, specially concerning the propagation of the gospel, for it would have been thereby saved many a disgraceful page of history. The human tongue, illuminated and sanctified by fire from the inner sanctuary, was about to be the instrument of the gospel’s advancement, -not penal laws, not the sword and fire of persecution; and so long as the divinely-appointed means were adhered to, so long the course of our holy religion was one long-continued triumph. But when the world and the devil were able to place in the hands of Christ’s spouse their own weapons of violence and force, when the Church forgot the words of her Master, "My kingdom is not of this world," and the teachings embodied in the symbol of the tongue of fire, then spiritual paralysis fell upon religious effort; and even where human law and power have compelled an external conformity to the Christian system, as they undoubtedly have done in some cases, yet all vital energy, all true godliness, have been there utterly lacking in the religion established by means so

contrary to the mind of Christ. Very good men have made sad mistakes in this matter. Archbishop Ussher was a man whose deep piety equalled his prodigious learning, yet he maintained that the civil sword ought to be used to repress false doctrine; the divines of the Westminster Assembly have left their opinion on record, that it is the duty of the magistrate to use the sword on behalf of Christ’s kingdom; Richard Baxter taught that the toleration of doctrines which he considered false was sinful; and all of them forgot the lesson of the day of Pentecost, that the tongue of fire was to be the only weapon permissible in the warfare of the kingdom whose rule is over spirits, not over bodies. The history of religion in England amply proves this. The Church of England enjoyed, about the middle of the last century, the greatest temporal prosperity. Her prelates held high estate, and her security was fenced round by a perfect bulwark of stringent laws. Yet her life-blood was fast ebbing away, and her true hold upon the nation was speedily relaxing. The very highest ranks of society, whom worldly policy attached nominally to her communion, had lost all faith in her supernatural work and commission. A modern historian has shown this right well in his description of the death-scene of Queen Caroline, a woman of eminent intellectual qualities, who had played no small part in the religious life of this nation during the reign of her husband George II Queen Caroline came to die, and was passing away surrounded by a crowd of attendants and courtiers. The whole Court, permeated by the spirit of earthliness which then prevailed, was disturbed by the death of the Queen’s body, but no one seems to have thought of the Queen’s soul, till some one mildly suggested that, for decency’s sake, the Archbishop of Canterbury should be sent for that he might offer up prayer with the dying woman. Writing here in Ireland, I cannot forget that it was just the same with us at that very period. Religion was here upheld by Worldly power; the Church, which should have been viewed as simply a spiritual power, was regarded and treated as a mere branch of the civil service, and true religion sank to its lowest depths. And we reaped in ourselves the due reward of our deeds. The very men whose voices were loudest in public for the repression of Romanism were privately living in grossest neglect of the offices and laws of religion and morality, because they in their hearts despised an institution which had forgotten the Pentecostal gift, and sought victory with the weapons of the flesh, and not with those of the spirit. May God for evermore protect His Church from such miserable mistakes, and lead her to depend more and more upon the power of the blessed and ever-present Pentecostal gift!

A separate and distinct tongue, too, sat upon each individual assembled in the upper room, -significant of the individual character of our holy religion. Christianity has a twofold aspect, neither of which can with impunity be neglected. Christianity has a corporate aspect. Our Lord Jesus Christ came not so much to teach a new doctrine as to establish a new society, based on newer and higher principles, and working towards a higher and nobler end than any society ever previously founded. This side of Christianity was exaggerated in the Middle Ages. The Church, its unity, its interests, its welfare as a corporation, then dominated every other consideration. Since the Reformation, however, men have run to the other extreme. They have forgotten the social and corporate view of Christianity, and only thought of it as it deals with individuals. Men have looked at Christianity as it deals with the individual alone and have forgotten and ignored the corporate side of its existence. Truth is many-sided indeed, and no side of truth can with impunity be neglected. Some have erred in dwelling too much on the corporate aspect of Christianity; others have erred in dwelling too much on its individual aspect. The New Testament alone combines both in due proportion, and teaches the importance and necessity of a Church, as against the extreme Protestant, on the one hand, who will reduce religion to a mere individual matter; and of a personal religion, an

individual interest in the Spirit’s presence, as here indicated by the tongues which sat upon each of them, as against the extreme Romanist, on the other hand, who looks upon the Church as everything, to the neglect of the life and progress of the individual. This passage does not at the same time lend any assistance to those who would thence conclude that there was no distinction between clergy and laity, and that no ministerial office was intended to exist under the dispensation of the kingdom of heaven. The Spirit, doubtless, was poured out upon all the disciples, and not upon the Twelve alone, upon the day of Pentecost, as also upon the occasion of the conversion of Cornelius and his household. Yet this fact did not lead the Apostles and early Christians to conclude that an appointed and ordained ministry might be dispensed with. The Lord miraculously bestowed His graces and gifts at Pentecost and in the centurion’s house at Caesarea, because the gospel dispensation was opened on these occasions first of all to the Jews and then to the Gentiles. But when, subsequently to the formal opening, we read of the gifts of the Spirit, we find that their bestowal is connected with the ministry of the Apostles, of St. Peter and St. John at Samaria, or of St. Paul at Ephesus. The Holy Ghost was poured out upon all the company assembled in the upper room, or in the centurion’s house; yet the Apostles saw nothing in this fact inconsistent with a ministerial organisation, else they would not have set apart the seven men full of faith and of the Holy Ghost to minister to the widows at Jerusalem, nor would they have laid hands upon elders in every church which they founded, nor would St. Paul have written, "He that seeketh the office of a bishop desireth a good work," nor would St. Peter have exhorted the elders to a diligent oversight of the flock of God after the model of the Good Shepherd Himself. St. Peter clearly thought that the Pentecostal gifts did not obliterate the distinction which existed between the shepherds and the sheep, between a fixed and appointed ministry and the flock to whom they should minister, though in the very initial stages of the miraculous movement the Spirit was bestowed without any human agency upon men and women alike.

III. Lastly, in this passage we find another external proof of the Spirit’s presence in the miraculous gift of tongues. That gift indicated to the Apostles and to all ages the tongue as the instrument by which the gospel was to be propagated, as the symbol fire indicated the cleansing and purifying effects of the Spirit. The gift of tongues is one that has ever excited much speculation, and specially so during the present century, when, as some will remember, an extraordinary attempt to revive them was made, some sixty years ago, by the followers of the celebrated Edward Irving. Devout students of Scripture have loved to trace in this incident at Pentecost, at the very foundation of the new dispensation, a reversal of that confusion of tongues which happened at Babel, and have seen in it the removal of "the covering cast over all peoples, and the veil that is spread over all nations." The precise character of the gift of tongues has of late years exercised many minds, and different explanations have been offered of the phenomena. Some have viewed it as a miracle of hearing, not of speaking, and maintained that the Apostles did not speak different languages at all, but that they all spake the one Hebrew tongue, while the Jews of the various nationalities then assembled miraculously heard the gospel in their own language.

The miracle is in that case intensified one hundredfold; while not one single difficulty which men feel is thereby alleviated. Meyer and a large number of German critics explain the speaking with tongues as mere ecstatic or rapturous utterances in the ordinary language of the disciples. Meyer thinks too that some foreign Jews had found their way into the band of the earliest disciples. They naturally delivered their ecstatic utterances, not in Aramaic, but in the foreign tongues to which they were accustomed, and legend then exaggerated this natural fact into the form which the Acts of the Apostles and the

tradition of the Christian Church have ever since maintained. It is, indeed, rather difficult to understand the estimate formed by such critics of the gift of tongues, whether bestowed on the day of Pentecost or during the subsequent ministrations of St. Paul at Corinth and Ephesus. Meyer is obliged to confess that there were some marvellous phenomena in Corinth and other places to which St. Paul bears witness. He describes himself as surpassing the whole Corinthian Church in this particular gift, (1Co_14:18) so that if St. Paul’s testimony is to be relied upon, -and Meyer lays a great deal of weight upon it, -we must accept it as conclusively proving that there existed a power of speaking in various languages among the first Christians. But the explanation offered by many critics of the gift of tongues as undoubtedly exercised at Corinth reduces it to something very like those fanatical exhibitions, witnessed among the earliest followers of the Irvingite movement, or, to put it plainly, to a mere uttering of gibberish, unworthy of apostolic notice save in the language of sternest censure, as being a disorderly and foolish proceeding disgraceful to the Christian community.

Meyer’s theory and that of many modern expositors seems, then, to me very unsatisfactory, raising up more difficulties than it solves. But it may be asked, what explanation do you offer of the Pentecostal miracle? and I can find no one more satisfactory than the old-fashioned one, that there was a real bestowal of tongues, a real gift of speaking in foreign languages, granted to the Apostles, to be used as occasion required when preaching the gospel in heathen lands. Dean Stanley, in his commentary on Corinthians, gives, as was his wont, a clear and attractive statement of the newer theory, putting in a vigorous shape the objections to the view here maintained. I know there are difficulties connected with this view, but many of these difficulties arise from our ignorance of the state and condition of the early Church, while others may spring from our very imperfect knowledge of the relations between mind and body. But whatever difficulties attend the explanation I offer, they are as nothing compared with the difficulties which attend the modern explanations to which I have referred. What, then, is our theory, which we call the old-fashioned one? It is simply this, that on the day of Pentecost Christ bestowed upon His Apostles the power of speaking in foreign languages, according to His promise reported by St. Mark, (Mar_16:17) "They shall speak with new tongues." This was the theory of the ancient Church. Irenaeus speaks of the tongues as given "that all nations might be enabled to enter into life"; while Origen explains that "St. Paul was made a debtor to different nations, because, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, he had received the gift of speaking in the languages of all nations." This has been the continuous theory of the Church as expressed in one of the most ancient portions of the Liturgy, the proper prefaces in the Communion orifice. The preface for Whir Sunday sets forth the facts commemorated on that day, as the other proper prefaces state the facts of the Incarnation, the Resurrection, and Ascension. The fact which Whit Sunday celebrates, and for which special thanks are then offered, is this, that then "the Holy Ghost came down from heaven in the likeness of fiery tongues, lighting upon the Apostles, to teach them, and to lead them to all truth; giving them both the gift of divers languages, and also boldness with fervent zeal constantly to preach the gospel unto all nations."

Now this traditional interpretation has not only the authority of the past on its side; we can also see many advantages which must have accrued from a gift of this character. The preface we have just cited states that the tongues were bestowed for the preaching of the gospel among all nations. And surely not merely as a striking sign to unbelievers, but also as a great practical help in missionary labours, such a gift of tongues would have been invaluable to the Church at its very birth. There was then neither time, nor money, nor organisation to prepare men as missionaries of the Cross. A universal commission

and work were given to twelve men, chiefly Galilean peasants, to go forth and found the Church. How could they have been fitted for this work unless God had bestowed upon them some such gift of speech? The vast diversity of tongues throughout the world is now one of the chief hindrances with which missionary effort has to contend. Years have often to elapse before any effective steps can be taken in the work of evangelisation, simply because the question of the language bars the way. It would have been only in accordance with God’s action in nature, where great epochs have been ever signalised by extraordinary phenomena, if such a great era-making epoch as the birth of the Church of Christ had been marked with extraordinary spiritual powers and developments, which supplied the want of that learning and those organisations which the Lord now leaves to the spiritual energies of the Church itself. But it is sometimes said, we never hear of this power as used by the Apostles for missionary purposes. Nothing, however, is a surer rule in historical investigations than this, "Never trust to mere silence," specially when the records are but few, scanty, fragmentary. We know but very little of the ways, worship, actions of the Apostles. Silence is no evidence either as to what they did or did not do. Some of them went into barbarous and distant lands, as history states. Eusebius (3:1) tells us that St. Thomas received Parthia as his allotted region, while St. Andrew taught in Scythia. Eusebius is an author on whom great reliance is justly placed. He is one, too, whose accuracy and research have been again and again confirmed in our own day by discoveries of every kind. I see, then, no reason why we should not depend upon him upon this point as well as upon others. Now if the Apostles taught in Scythia and Parthia, what an enormous advantage it must have given them in their work among a strange and barbarous people if, by means of the Pentecostal blessing, they could at once proclaim a crucified Saviour. It is sometimes said, how ever, the gift of speaking with foreign languages was not required by the Apostles for missionary purposes, as Greek alone would carry a man all through the world, and Greek the Apostles evidently knew. But people in saying so forget that there is a great difference between possessing enough of a language to travel over the world, and speaking with such facility as enables one to preach. English will now carry a man over the world, but English will not enable him to preach to the people of India or of China. Greek might carry Apostles all over the Roman Empire, and might enable St. Thomas to be understood by the courtiers of the great kings of Parthia, where traces of the ancient Greek language and civilisation, derived from Alexander’s time, long prevailed. But Greek would not enable a primitive Christian teacher to preach fluently among the Celts of Galatia, or of Britain, or among the natives of Spain or of Phrygia, or the barbarians of Scythia. We see from St. Paul’s case how powerful was the hold which the Aramaic language had over the people of Jerusalem. When the excited mob heard St. Paul speak in the Hebrew tongue they listened patiently, because their national feelings, the sentiments which sprang up in childhood and were allied with their noblest hopes, were touched. So must it have been all the world over. The Pentecostal gift of tongues was a powerful help in preaching the gospel, because, like the Master’s promise to assist their minds and their tongues in the hour of need, it freed the Apostles from care, anxiety, and difficulties, which would have sorely hindered their great work. But while I offer this explanation, I acknowledge that it has its own difficulties; but then every theory has its difficulties, and we can only balance difficulties against difficulties, selecting that theory which seems to have the fewest. The conduct, for instance, of the Corinthians, who seem to have used the gift of tongues simply to minister to the spirit of display, not to edification or to missionary work, seems to some a great difficulty. But after all is not their conduct simply an instance of human sin, perverting and misusing a divine gift, such as we often see still? God still bestows His gifts, the real outcome and work of the Spirit. Man takes them, treats them as his own, and misuses them for his own purposes of sin and selfishness. What else did the

Corinthians do, save that the gift which they abused was an exceptional one; but then their circumstances, times, opportunities, punishments, all were exceptional and peculiar. The one thing that was not peculiar was this, the abiding tendency of human nature to degrade Divine gifts and blessings. There must, we again repeat, be difficulties and mystery connected with this subject, no matter what view we take. Perhaps, too, we are no fitting judges of the gifts be stowed on the primitive Church, or the phenomena manifested under such extraordinary circumstances, when everything, every power, every force, every organisation, was arrayed against the company of the twelve Apostles. Surely miracles and miraculous powers seem absolutely necessary and natural in such a case. We are not now sufficient or capable judges of events as they then existed. Perhaps, too, we are not sufficient judges because we do not possess that spirit which would make us to sympathise with and understand the state of the Church at that time. "They were all together in one place." The Church was then visibly united, and internally united too. A nineteenth-century Christian, with the endless divisions of Christendom, is scarcely the most fitting judge of the Church and the Church’s blessings when the Spirit of the Master pervaded it and the prayer of the Master for visible unity was fulfilled in it. Christendom is weak now from its manifold divisions. Even in a mere natural way, and from a mere human point of view, we can see how its divisions destroy its power and efficacy as Christ’s witness in the world. But when we take the matter from a spiritual point of view, we cannot even guess what marvellous gifts and endowments, needful for the edification of His people and the conversion of the world, we now lack from want of the Divine charity and peace which ruled the hearts of the twelve as they assembled in the upper room that Pentecostal morn. We shall better understand primitive gifts when we get back primitive union.

HAWKER, "God the Holy Ghost visits the Apostles in a wonderful and miraculous Manner. The Apostles, being filled with the Spirit, speak divers Languages, The Astonishment of the Multitude. Peter’s Sermon; and the Conversion of three thousand Souls.

Act_2:1

And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

The day of Pentecost was fifty days from the Passover. It was the second of those three great festivals in the Jewish Church, when all the males of Israel were enjoined to appear before the Lord, Deu_16:16. This was the feast, which was to be observed before the people began their harvest; it being unlawful to enter upon their harvest, until this feast to the Lord had been observed. See Lev_23:10-11. This was the sacred day, which God the Holy Ghost was pleased to appoint, for the more open manifestation of himself to the Church. And, as God the Son, in our nature, made the voluntary offer of himself in sacrifice, at the Jewish Passover; the first great feast among his people, being our Passover, and the Lamb, slain from the foundation of the world: 1Co_5:7; Rev_13:8. So God the Holy Ghost, consecrated this second feast to the gracious purpose, of assuming, in a more open manner, his Almighty ministry in his Church, by coming down in state, in a visible manifestation, on his Apostles: and from that hour to the present, and through all ages of the Church, to the consummation of all things, the Lord the Spirit, carries on all the efficiency of grace, in the hearts of the people, until grace is finished in glory. In this ever memorable and blessed day, the Apostles, (and it is probable the seventy, spoken of, Luk_10:1, or perhaps the whole hundred and twenty, spoken of in

Act_1:15, formed the complete assembly,) were all with one accord met together, waiting in expectation, the sure promise of Jesus, Chapter one and verse five (Act_1:5) Reader! pause, and contemplate, the sacred hour; and the holy solemnity of such a congregation! Oh! that the Lord would cause the review of such a season, and such an assembly, to operate upon the minds of the Lord’s people now, that wherever two or three are met together, in the Lord’s name, they might wait, in the humble frame, of sure expectation, of the Lord’s presence, Mat_28:20; Isa_41:1.

ELLICOTT, "(1) Of all the feasts of the Jewish year, it was that which attracted the largest number of pilgrims from distant lands. The dangers of travel by sea or land in the early spring or late autumn (comp. Acts 27:9) prevented their coming in any large numbers to the Passover or the Feast of Tabernacles. At no other feast would there have been representatives of so many nations. So, it may be noted, it was the Feast of Pentecost that St. Paul went up to keep once and again, during his mission-work in Greece and Asia. (See Notes on Acts 18:21; Acts 20:16.) So far, then, there was no time on which the gift of the Spirit was likely to produce such direct and immediate results.

SBC, "Pentecost

I. The congregation in that upper room was the representative, or, as it were, the seed-germ, of the whole Catholic Church of all the centuries and of every land. For a symbol of this, its world-wide significance, the little Church rehearsed the praises of redemption in all the tongues of all the lands over which God had scattered the tribes of Israel. This polyglot praise was the consecration of heathen speech to the service of Israel’s Jehovah. It foreshadowed the catholic grace of God which has turned common and unclean tongues to holy use. It meant, though they knew it not, the gathering in of the Gentile races to the God of Jacob. Let us, then, not be fond of uniformity that is false Catholicism. Let us seek the higher unity which rests on freedom and variety. In the true Catholic Church which stands in our creed, and is dear to our heart, there are many tongues and forms of utterance—tongues so diverse that, alas! we often fail to recognise one another; yet is there only one Spirit, who inspires, and having inspired, interprets; who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

II. We are the heirs of Pentecost. Then first the waiting Church below was linked tight in uttermost unity of life to its reigning Lord above. One Spirit embraces the throne in heaven, and the upper room on earth. To each Christian man in every Christian age, there has stood, and still stands open, the unrevoked grant of the fulness of the Spirit; such fulness as will fill him, if he be willing to take it in, up to his capacity. To each of us it is, and has been, according to our faith. If we are carnal, cold, timid, desponding, servile-hearted, fearful, it is not because we live under the law, not because God has set bounds to His grace, nor because the Holy Ghost is not yet, as if Christ were not yet glorified. It is because we have either no heart to desire, or no faith to expect. We have not now, because we ask not. "Ask and ye shall receive."

J. Oswald Dykes, From Jerusalem to Antioch, p. 43.

I. It is said in the text that the disciples began to speak. The first effect of the outpouring of the Spirit on the disciples was to prompt them to speak. A man may have a little of the

Holy Spirit and observe silence, but if he is filled with the Spirit he cannot hold his peace.

II. The disciples began to speak with other tongues. The Lord descended to Babel and confused the tongues—He there and then set a train of circumstances in motion which necessarily resulted in diversity of languages. The Lord descended to Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost—unified the tongues again—He there and then set a train of circumstances in motion which inevitably led to a better understanding between the nations, and a more thorough knowledge of each other’s languages. The miracle of the Pentecost will gradually neutralise the miracle of Babel.

III. The disciples began to speak with other tongues the wonderful works of God. The wonderful works of God are, the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. These formed the grand topics which the disciples construed into other tongues; not nature, but the gospel; not creation, but redemption.

IV. They spoke to men of other nations. Increased life always demands increased scope for its exercise. The fire first burns into the heart of the disciples, then it begins to extend its area, and now it threatens to burn up all the stubble of the world.

V. The disciples spoke to other nations, that they also might be filled with the Holy Ghost. "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

J. Cynddylan Jones, Studies in the Acts, p. 20.

References: Act_2:1-13.—J. Oswald Dykes, Preacher’s Lantern, vol. iv., p. 124. Act_2:1-21.—Parker, Contemporary Pulpit, vol. iii., p. 316. Act_2:2, Act_2:3.—Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iv., p. 255.

Acts 2:1-47

Acts 2

We have here the history of the first Christian revival. Let us trace it through, and mark at once its origin and its characteristics.

I. It was ushered in by prayer. Like true children of God, these first disciples waited and prayed, asking evermore, that they might receive the Holy Ghost according to His word. And herein they rebuke us dreadfully, for in our petitions we far too largely neglect the Holy Ghost.

II. The revival began in the Church in the quickening and enlightening of those who were already disciples. To have the world converted, we must have the Church purified and ennobled, through the enjoyment of a rich effusion of the Holy Ghost.

III. The revival was characterised by the preaching of the truth. Peter’s discourse was (1) Biblical, (2) experimental, (3) pointed and courageous.

IV. This revival was characterised by many conversions.

W. M. Taylor, Peter the Apostle, p. 170.

MEYER, " SPEAKING IN STRANGE TONGUES

Act_2:1-13

The priests in the Temple were offering the first loaves of the new harvest, in celebration of the feast of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit came as the first fruits of our inheritance. Suddenly there was a sound that was heard throughout the city. There was no wind, but the sound of a rushing, mighty wind. Suddenly, as each looked on the rest, he saw their heads crowned with tongues of flame. Each, too, became suddenly aware of a drawing toward the Lord, of a longing to see Him glorified, and of a vast enlargement and enhancement of spiritual joy and power.

When presently the vast crowd collected to know the meaning of the sound, each inspired soul gathered a little knot of hearers, to whom he discoursed of Jesus and the Resurrection; and the hearers heard in their own tongue, the wonderful works of God.The Holy Spirit used the telepathy of mind and heart, so that involuntarily the speaker clothed his thoughts in language borrowed from his hearer’s vocabulary. This was the sign of Babel’s undoing.

MACLAREN 1-13, "THE ABIDING GIFT AND ITS TRANSITORY ACCOMPANIMENTS

Only ten days elapsed between the Ascension and Pentecost. The attitude of the Church during that time should be carefully noted. They obeyed implicitly Christ’s command to wait for the ‘power from on high.’ The only act recorded is the election of Matthias to fill Judas’s place, and it is at least questionable whether that was not a mistake, and shown to be such by Christ’s subsequent choice of Paul as an Apostle. But, with the exception of that one flash of doubtful activity, prayer, supplication, patient waiting, and clinging together in harmonious expectancy, characterised the hundred and twenty brethren.

They must have been wrought to an intense pitch of anticipation, for they knew that their waiting was to be short, and they knew, at least partially, what they were to receive, namely, ‘power from on high,’ or ‘the promise of the Father.’ Probably, too, the great Feast, so near at hand, would appear to them a likely time for the fulfilment of the promise.

So, very early on that day of Pentecost, they betook themselves to their usual place of assembling, probably the ‘large upper room,’ already hallowed to their memories; and in each heart the eager question would spring, ‘Will it be to-day?’ It is as true now as it was then, that the spirits into whom the Holy Spirit breathes His power must keep themselves still, expectant, prayerful. Perpetual occupation may be more loss of time than devout waiting, with hands folded, because the heart is wide open to receive the power which will fit the hands for better work.

It was but ‘the third hour of the day’ when Peter stood up to speak; it must have been little after dawn when the brethren came together. How long they had been assembled we do not know, but we cannot doubt how they had been occupied. Many a prayer had gone up through the morning air, and, no doubt, some voice was breathing the united desires, when a deep, strange sound was heard at a distance, and rapidly gained volume, and was heard to draw near. Like the roaring of a tempest hurrying towards them, it hushed human voices, and each man would feel, ‘Surely now the Gift comes!’ Nearer and

nearer it approached, and at last burst into the chamber where they sat silent and unmoving.

But if we look carefully at Luke’s words, we see that what filled the house was not agitated air, or wind, but ‘a sound as of wind.’ The language implies that there was no rush of atmosphere that lifted a hair on any cheek, or blew on any face, but only such a sound as is made by tempest. It suggested wind, but it was not wind. By that first symbolic preparation for the communication of the promised gift, the old symbolism which lies in the very word ‘Spirit,’ and had been brought anew to the disciples’ remembrance by Christ’s words to Nicodemus, and by His breathing on them when He gave them an anticipatory and partial bestowment of the Spirit, is brought to view, with its associations of life-giving power and liberty. ‘Thou hearest the sound thereof,’ could scarcely fail to be remembered by some in that chamber.

But it is not to be supposed that the audible symbol continued when the second preparatory one, addressed to the eye, appeared. As the former had been not wind, but like it, the latter was not fire, but ‘as of fire.’ The language does not answer the question whether what was seen was a mass from which the tongues detached themselves, or whether only the separate tongues were visible as they moved overhead. But the final result was that ‘it sat on each.’ The verb has no expressed subject, and ‘fire’ cannot be the subject, for it is only introduced as a comparison. Probably, therefore, we are to understand ‘a tongue’ as the unexpressed subject of the verb.

Clearly, the point of the symbol is the same as that presented in the Baptist’s promise of a baptism ‘with the Holy Ghost and fire.’ The Spirit was to be in them as a Spirit of burning, thawing natural coldness and melting hearts with a genial warmth, which should beget flaming enthusiasm, fervent love, burning zeal, and should work transformation into its own fiery substance. The rejoicing power, the quick energy, the consuming force, the assimilating action of fire, are all included in the symbol, and should all be possessed by Christ’s disciples.

But were the tongue-like shapes of the flames significant too? It is doubtful, for, natural as is the supposition that they were, it is to be remembered that ‘tongues of fire’ is a usual expression, and may mean nothing more than the flickering shoots of flame into which a fire necessarily parts.

But these two symbols are only symbols. The true fulfilment of the great promise follows. Mark the brief simplicity of the quiet words in which the greatest bestowment ever made on humanity, the beginning of an altogether new era, the equipment of the Church for her age-long conflict, is told. There was an actual impartation to men of a divine life, to dwell in them and actuate them; to bring all good to victory in them; to illuminate, sustain, direct, and elevate; to cleanse and quicken. The gift was complete. They were ‘filled.’ No doubt they had much more to receive, and they received it, as their natures became, by faithful obedience to the indwelling Spirit, capable of more. But up to the measure of their then capacities they were filled; and, since their spirits were expansible, and the gift was infinite, they were in a position to grow steadily in possession of it, till they were ‘filled with all the fulness of God.’

Further, ‘they were all filled,’-not the Apostles only, but the whole hundred and twenty. Peter’s quotation from Joel distinctly implies the universality of the gift, which the ‘servants and handmaidens,’ the brethren and the women, now received. Herein is the true democracy of Christianity. There are still diversities of operations and degrees of possession, but all Christians have the Spirit. All ‘they that believe on Him,’ and only they, have received it. Of old the light shone only on the highest peaks,-prophets, and

kings, and psalmists; now the lowest depths of the valleys are flooded with it. Would that Christians generally believed more fully in, and set more store by, that great gift!

As symbols preceded, tokens followed. The essential fact of Pentecost is neither the sound and fire, nor the speaking with other tongues, but the communication of the Holy Spirit. The sign and result of that was the gift of utterance in various languages, not their own, nor learned by ordinary ways. No twisting of the narrative can weaken the plain meaning of it, that these unlearned Galileans spake in tongues which their users recognised to be their own. The significance of the fact will appear presently, but first note the attestation of it by the multitude.

Of course, the foreign-born Jews, who, from motives of piety, however mistaken, had come to dwell in Jerusalem, are said to have been ‘from every nation under heaven,’ by an obvious and ordinary license. It is enough that, as the subsequent catalogue shows, they came from all corners of the then known world, though the extremes of territory mentioned cover but a small space on a terrestrial globe.

The ‘sound’ of the rushing wind had been heard hurtling through the city in the early morning hours, and had served as guide to the spot. A curious crowd came hurrying to ascertain what this noise of tempest in a calm meant, and they were met by something more extraordinary still. Try to imagine the spectacle. As would appear from Act_2:33, the tongues of fire remained lambently glowing on each head (‘which ye see’), and the whole hundred and twenty, thus strangely crowned, were pouring out rapturous praises, each in some strange tongue. When the astonished ears had become accustomed to the apparent tumult, every man in the crowd heard some one or more speaking in his own tongue, language, or dialect, and all were declaring the mighty works of God; that is, probably, the story of the crucified, ascended Jesus.

We need not dwell on subordinate questions, as to the number of languages represented there, or as to the catalogue in Act_2:9-10. But we would emphasise two thoughts. First, the natural result of being filled with God’s Spirit is utterance of the great truths of Christ’s Gospel. As surely as light radiates, as surely as any deep emotion demands expression, so certainly will a soul filled with the Spirit be forced to break into speech. If professing Christians have never known the impulse to tell of the Christ whom they have found, their religion must be very shallow and imperfect. If their spirits are full, they will overflow in speech.

Second, Pentecost is a prophecy of the universal proclamation of the Gospel, and of the universal praise which shall one day rise to Him that was slain. ‘This company of brethren praising God in the tongues of the whole world represented the whole world which shall one day praise God in its various tongues’ (Bengel). Pentecost reversed Babel, not by bringing about a featureless monopoly, but by consecrating diversity, and showing that each language could be hallowed, and that each lent some new strain of music to the chorus.

It prophesied of the time when ‘men of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation’ should lift up their voices to Him who has purchased them unto God with His blood. It began a communication of the Spirit to all believers which is never to cease while the world stands. The mighty rushing sound has died into silence, the fiery tongues rest on no heads now, the miraculous results of the gifts of the Spirit have passed away also, but the gift remains, and the Spirit of God abides for ever with the Church of Christ.

COKE, "Introduction

CHAP. II.

The apostles, filled with the Holy Ghost, and speaking divers languages, are admired by some; but are derided by others, whom Peter confutes, shewing that the apostles spake by the power of the Holy Ghost, that Jesus was risen from the dead, ascended into heaven, had poured down the same Holy Ghost, and was the Messias, known to them to be approved of God by his miracles, wonders, and signs: a great number that were converted, are baptized, who afterwards devoutly and charitably converse together, the apostles working many miracles, and God daily increasing his church.

Anno Domini 33.

Verse 1

Acts 2:1. And when the day of Pentecost was fully come,— It has often been observed, that as our Lord was crucified at one of the great Jewish feasts, it was fit that he should be glorified at another; and this of Pentecost was chosen, with peculiar propriety, as next succeeding that of the passover at which Christ suffered; and also as it was celebrated in commemoration of the giving the law from mount Sinai on that day, (Exodus 19:1-11.) and as the first-fruits were then offered and anointed, (Exodus 23:16. Leviticus 23:17.) To these answered the fuller discovery of the gospel on this occasion, and the anointing the first-fruits of the Christian church by the effusion of the Spirit. The solemnity of the feast, the general expectation of the Messiah, and the length of the days, as it was about the middle of summer, would no doubt bring great numbers to Jerusalem at that time; who, when they returned home, and reported this great event, would naturally make way for the better reception of the apostles, when they came among them. The Jews used to begin their days, as we have often observed, about six o'clock in the evening, and reckoned till that time the next evening, according to Genesis 1:5. By saying therefore that the day of Pentecost was fully come, St. Luke meant that the night was past, and the light of the next morning begun. This was the first day of the week, or the Lord's day, as it is called Revelation 1:10. On the first day of the week our Lord arose from the dead. On that day of the week he appeared to his apostles when they were assembled, for two weeks successively; and, on the first day of the week, the Holy Spirit was first poured out upon the apostles and their company. On that day of the week the apostles and primitive Christians used toassemble for religious worship; and, from the custom and example of those who must needs have known the mind and will of Christ, the Christian church still continues to assemble on that day for religious worship. St. Luke says, they were all with one accord in one place. It is said, ch. Acts 1:14-15 of all the hundred and twenty, all these met with one accord, to choose an apostle, &c. The history is continued, as would appear more plainly if we had not divided it into chapters and verses;—and of the same company it is here said again, they were all met together with one accord in the same place, (for so it should be rendered,) when the Holy Spirit was poured down upon them. It is probable all these hundred and twenty were along with the apostles, when the Holy Spirit was poured down a second time, ch. Acts 4:23-31 and it is evident from ch. Acts 6:3 that several beside the apostles were full of the Holy Spirit, (which is the very phrase in the text, Acts 2:4.) when the Spirit was now poured out;—a phrase, which, in other places, signifies that the Spirit was conferred in the most honourable manner, as well as ina greater degree; that is, that it was given immediately from heaven, and not by the laying on of the hands of the apostles. Again, Why might not the Holy Spirit fall down

upon all the hundred and twenty, as well as upon Cornelius and his company? ch. Acts 10:44-46. What seems much to confirm this account of the presence of the hundred and twenty, is St. Peter's speech, Acts 2:16 where he asserts, that, by that effusion of the Holy Spirit, the prophesy of Joel was accomplished in which it was foretold, that the Spirit should be poured out upon women as well as upon men, &c. For one cannot conceive how that prophesy could be already fulfilled, unless the Spirit was shed upon all the hundred and twenty; among whom it is expressly said, ch. Acts 1:14 there was Mary the mother of Jesus, and some other women, who were Christ's disciples. It may perhaps be objected to this interpretation, that the apostles had the highest and the most of the spiritual gifts, and are taken notice of as the only persons who preached to the multitude which then came together. Now it is allowed, that the apostles had the most, and the best of the gifts of the Spirit; but, notwithstanding, the other disciples might have some inferior gifts, and those granted at the same time, in what measure and proportion God saw fit; for there were diversities of gifts and operations, though they all proceeded from one and the same Spirit; and the Spirit could easily distinguish between the apostles and others, though they were all in the same room and company.

2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent

wind came from heaven and filled the whole house

where they were sitting.

BARNES, "And suddenly - It burst upon them at once. Though they were waiting for the descent of the Spirit, yet it is not probable that they expected it in this manner. As this was an important event, and one on which the welfare of the church depended, it was proper that the gift of the Holy Spirit should take place in some striking and sensible manner, so as to convince their own minds that the promise was fulfilled, and so as deeply to impress others with the greatness and importance of the event.

There came a sound - #χος ēchos. This word is applied to any noise or report. Heb_

12:19, “the sound of a trumpet”; Luk_4:37, “The fame of him,” etc. Compare Mar_1:28.

From heaven - Appearing to rush down from the sky. It was suited, therefore, to attract their attention no less from the direction from which it came, than on account of its suddenness and violence. Tempests blow commonly horizontally. This appeared to come from above; and this is all that is meant by the expression. “from heaven.”

As of a rushing mighty wind - Literally, “as of a violent blast borne along” -

φεροµένης pheromenēs - rushing along like a tempest. Such a wind sometimes borne

along so violently, and with such a noise, as to make it difficult even to hear the thunder in the gale. Such appears to have been the sound of this remarkable phenomenon. It does not appear that there was any wind, but the sudden sound was like such a sweeping tempest. It may be remarked, however, that the wind in the sacred Scriptures is often put as an emblem of a divine influence. See Joh_3:8. It is invisible, yet mighty, and thus

represents the agency of the Holy Spirit. The same word in Hebrew רּוח ruwach and in

Greek πνε/µα pneuma is used to denote both. The mighty power of God may be denoted

also by the violence of a tempest, 1Ki_19:11; Psa_29:1-11; Psa_104:3; Psa_18:10. In this place the sound as of a gale was emblematic of the mighty power of the Spirit, and of the effects which his coming would accomplish among people.

And it filled - Not the wind filled, But the sound. This is evident:

(1) Because there is no affirmation that there was any wind.

(2) The grammatical structure of the sentence will admit no other construction. The word “filled” has no nominative case but the word “sound”: “and suddenly there was a sound as of a wind, and (the sound) filled the house.” In the Greek, the word “wind” is in the genitive or possessive case. It may be remarked here that this miracle was really far more striking than the common supposition makes it to have been. A tempest would have been terrific. A mighty wind might have alarmed them. But there would have been nothing unusual or remarkable in this. Such things often happened; and the thoughts would have been directed of course to the storm as an ordinary, though perhaps alarming occurrence. But when all was still; when there was no storm, no wind, no rain, no thunder, such a rushing sound must have arrested their attention, and directed all minds to a phenomenon so unusual and unaccountable.

All the house - Some have supposed that this was a room in or near the temple. But as the temple is not expressly mentioned, this is improbable. It was probably the private dwelling mentioned in Act_1:13. If it be said that such a dwelling could not contain so large a multitude as soon assembled, it may be replied that their houses had large central courts (See the notes on Mat_9:2), and that it is not affirmed that the transactions recorded in this chapter occurred in the room which they occupied. It is probable that it took place in the court and around the house.

CLARKE, "A sound from heaven - Probably thunder is meant, which is the harbinger of the Divine presence.

Rushing mighty wind - The passage of a large portion of electrical fluid over that place would not only occasion the sound, or thunder, but also the rushing mighty wind; as the air would rush suddenly and strongly into the vacuum occasioned by the rarefaction of the atmosphere in that place, through the sudden passage of the electrical fluid; and the wind would follow the direction of the fire. There is a good deal of similarity between this account and that of the appearance of God to Elijah, 1Ki_19:11, 1Ki_19:12, where the strong wind, the earthquake, and the fire, were harbingers of the Almighty’s presence, and prepared the heart of Elijah to hear the small still voice; so, this sound, and the mighty rushing wind, prepared the apostles to receive the influences and gifts of the Holy Spirit. In both cases, the sound, strong wind, and fire, although natural agents, were supernaturally employed. See the note on Act_9:7.

GILL, "And suddenly there came a sound from heaven,.... Which is expressive of the original of the gifts and graces of the Spirit of God, which come from above, from heaven, from the Father of lights; and of the freeness of them, being unmerited; and so come suddenly, at an unawares, being unthought of, undesired, and unexpected, and so certainly undeserved; and may be a symbol of the sound of the Gospel, which from hence was to go forth into all the earth; and may likewise express the rise of that, and the freeness of the grace of God in it, and its sudden spread throughout the world:

as of a rushing mighty wind; it was not a wind, but like one; and the noise it made, was like the rushing noise of a strong and boisterous wind, that carries all before it: the Spirit of God is sometimes compared to the wind, because of the freeness of his operations; as that blows where it listeth, so he works when and where, and on whom he pleases; and also because of the power and efficacy of his grace, which is mighty and irresistible, and works with great energy upon the minds of men; and as the wind is secret and invisible, so the operations of the Spirit are in a manner secret and imperceptible unto men: this may likewise be applied to the Gospel, when it comes with the Holy Ghost, and with power; it makes its way into the heart, and throws down the strong holds of sin and Satan; there it works effectually, though secretly, and is the power of God to salvation:

and it filled all the house where they were sitting; which was the temple, or the upper room or chamber in it, where they were assembled; so in the Ethiopic confession of faith (s) it is said,

"the Holy Ghost descended upon the apostles, in the upper room of Zion;

this may be a symbol of the Gospel filling the whole world,

HENRY, "1. Here is an audible summons given them to awaken their expectations of something great, Act_2:2. It is here said, (1.) That it came suddenly, did not rise gradually, as common winds do, but was at the height immediately. It came sooner than they expected, and startled even those that were now together waiting, and probably employed in some religious exercises. (2.) It was a sound from heaven, like a thunder-clap, Rev_6:1. God is said to bring the winds out of his treasuries (Psa_135:7), and to gather them in his hands, Pro_30:4. From him this sound came, like the voice of one crying, Prepare ye the way of the Lord. (3.) It was the sound of a wind, for the way of the Spirit is like that of the wind (Joh_3:3), thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it comes nor whither it goes. When the Spirit of life is to enter into the dry bones, the prophet is told to prophecy unto the wind: Come from the four winds, O breath, Eze_37:9. And though it was not in the wind that the Lord came to Elijah, yet this prepared him to receive his discovery of himself in the still small voice, 1Ki_19:11, 1Ki_19:12. God's way is in the whirlwind and the storm (Nah_1:3), and out of the whirlwind he spoke to Job. (4.) It was a rushing mighty wind; it was strong and violent, and came not only with a great noise, but with great force, as if it would bear down all before it. This was to signify the powerful influences and operations of the Spirit of God upon the minds of men, and thereby upon the world, that they should be mighty through God, to the casting down of imaginations. (5.) It filled not only the room, but all the house where they were sitting. Probably it alarmed the whole city, but, to show that it was supernatural, presently fixed upon that particular house: as some think the wind that was sent to arrest Jonah affected only the ship that he was in (Jon_1:4), and as the wise men's star stood over the house where the child was. This would direct the people who observed it whither to go to enquire the meaning of it. This wind filling the house would strike an awe upon the disciples, and help to put them into a very serious, reverent, and composed frame, for the receiving of the Holy Ghost. Thus the convictions of the Spirit make way for his comforts; and the rough blasts of that blessed wind prepare the soul for its soft and gentle gales.

JAMISON, "And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, etc. — “The whole description is so picturesque and striking that it could only come from an eye-witness” [Olshausen]. The suddenness, strength, and diffusiveness of the sound strike with deepest awe the whole company, and thus complete their preparation for the heavenly gift. Wind was a familiar emblem of the Spirit (Eze_37:9; Joh_3:8; Joh_20:22). But this was not a rush of actual wind. It was only a sound “as of” it.

HAWKER 2-3, "And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. (3) And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.

As this open display of God the Holy Ghost in the Church, after the ascension of Jesus, is among the most momentous doctrines of our holy faith, and the proper apprehension of it, is, of all others, the most interesting, I persuade myself that the Reader will grant me a more than usual indulgence, to dwell upon it particularly. And I am free to confess, that, according to my view of things, it is to our ignorance and inattention on this blessed part of the Gospel, is to be ascribed the lamentable state of Churches, (and even some Churches professing all the truths of our holy faith,) so confessedly destitute, as for the most part they are, of vital godliness. For surely, if God the Holy Ghost, in his Almighty ministry, be not known nor enjoyed, if his Person and Godhead, if his covenant-office work and character, his influences and graces, be kept in the back ground of the ordinances, be those ordinances ever so sweet in themselves, or ever so frequently observed by the people, there must be great leanness of soul amidst the whole of them. It matters not what the minister saith, if we hear not what the Spirit saith to the Churches, Rev_2:11; Rev_2:17; Rev_2:29, etc.

The first thing I beg the Reader to observe with me in what is said in those verses, is, the manner which God the Holy Ghost was pleased to make use of, to manifest his Almighty presence. It was with sovereign strength, and by effects making known both his person, and eternal power, and Godhead. And, surely, if anything could be supposed to identify both person and power, this display of Himself, by a sound from heaven, a rushing mighty wind, and filling the whole space occupied by the disciples, these were full demonstrations of both.

And here I stop the Reader, to remark the glory by which God the Holy Ghost was pleased to manifest himself to the Church, for the first time after Christ’s ascension. He had presided over the Church from the first moment he formed the Church, and numberless instances are on record of his Almighty agency, both on the Person of Christ, the great Head of his Church, and the Church, Christ’s members, all along the way the Church was brought through the whole of the Old Testament dispensation. Hence Christ was called by that name before his incarnation, and the Lord Jesus, by the spirit of prophecy, so described himself ages before he was born, Isa_61:1, etc. And as the Lord the Spirit anointed the head, so did he shed abroad his influences in the hearts of his members. See Num_11:16-17; Neh_9:20; Eze_2:2, etc. But now the Lord the Spirit will make an open manifestation of himself, and enter with state and dignity upon his blessed office, as Lord of Christ’s Church, now Jesus, having finished redemption-work, is returned to glory. So that the whole efficiency of salvation, in the heart of every individual member of Christ’s mystical body, becomes his province, according to covenant-engagements. Reader! I pray you to ponder well the subject, for it is well worthy the most animated consideration, of the Lord’s people. Let you and I both look up for the testimonies in our own hearts of His divine teaching, for every view of His

Almighty agency in the Church of whom I am now speaking is blessed.

When the Reader hath duly considered these things, I would beg of him next to observe what a beautiful order and harmony there is shewn in the joint acts of the Holy Three in One, as relating to the Church, now fulfilled by this manifestation of God the Spirit at the day of Pentecost. God the Father, in his covenant-office and character, through the Old Testament dispensation, had all along been manifesting his everlasting love to the Church, in proclaiming the Person, Work, and Glory of his dear Son; and under the New Testament dispensation, when Christ appeared, he confirmed the same by a voice from heaven, in a public and audible manner, in the presence of the people, declaring the identity of Jesus, by saying, this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, Mat_3:17; Luk_9:35; Joh_12:28. God the Son, before his openly tabernacling in substance of our flesh, is expressly said to have been in the Church in the wilderness, when he spake to Moses in the Mount Sinai with our fathers, for so Stephen, when filled with the Holy Ghost, and speaking therefore under the influence of his divine teaching, declared, Act_7:37-38, and which, by the way, it may be observed, throws a light on many other parts of the Old Testament Scripture, in proof that it was Christ who all along manifested himself as the Shechinah to the Church. So that when the fulness of time was come, and the Son of God was to make his open appearance in our nature, he came as God manifest in the flesh, entered upon, and finished his office-work of redemption, and returned to glory. See Gen_12:7; Gen_32:24, &c; Exo_24:9 to the end. And God the Holy Ghost, thought he had all along presided over the Church, (which he himself founded,) during the whole of the Old Testament dispensation, yet now comes at the day of Pentecost in an open manifestation of himself, in his Person, Godhead, and Ministry, and makes himself known as the Almighty Teacher in the Church, to render the whole effectual of salvation-work in the hearts of his people. See 1Pe_1:10-11; 2Pe_1:21; Heb_9:1-8. And wherefore all these glorious manifestations of each divine person, and all but to testify to the Church that the whole Godhead is alike concerned, and alike entitled to the adoration, love, obedience, and praise of the whole Church of Jesus, for their joint favor to the Church before all worlds, in her present time-state on earth, and her everlasting happiness to all eternity.

I do not think it necessary in a work of this kind to enter into a critical enquiry concerning the appearances here made by the Holy Ghost. It will be sufficient to remark that the whole plainly proved the Lord the Spirit’s personal presence, his Almighty power and ministry in his government over the Church. The suddenness of it implied how unexpected the manifestations of his grace are in all instances. The direction coming from heaven, proved that the blessed Spirit is from above, agreeably to Scripture, Jas_1:17. The sound, as of crushing mighty wind, was in exact conformity to what the Lord Jesus had before said, when speaking of the work of God the Holy Ghost, whose operations are like the unknown and unexplored source of the air, which bloweth where it listeth, Joh_3:8, See Commentary there. The appearances of cloven tongues, like as of fire, were suitable to denote his presence, who is a Spirit of judgment, and q Spirit of burning. Isa_4:4. And their sitting upon the head of each of them, graciously taught, that where the Lord the Spirit came, he would abide forever. So the Lord Jesus taught his disciples to expect, and, blessed be God, so his people know, Joh_14:16-17. But what I would yet more particularly beg the Reader to notice, from all these different manifestations, is, that they all proved the Person, Godhead, and Ministry of the Holy Ghost. And I beg of him to observe, that this manifestation at Pentecost was as folly and decidedly in proof of God the Holy Ghost’s office-work in the covenant, (as far as an open appearance became necessary,) as the personal appearance of the Son of God manifest in the flesh, was for his part in this mysterious work. The one is as

demonstrative as the other. Reader! do not hastily pass away from meditating on these things. Carry them about with you wherever you go, as so many credentials of your faith, in the present awful day of infidelity with which the Church of God is surrounded.

CONSTABLE, "The sound like wind came from heaven, the place where Jesus had gone (Acts 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 (Ezekiel 37:9-14; John 3:8).

"Luke particularly stresses the importance of the Spirit in the life of the church [in Acts]." [Note: Marshall, The Acts . . ., p. 32. ]

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 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 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." [Note: McGee, 4:516.]

COKE, "Acts 2:2. And suddenly there came a sound— It was about 1500 years before this, and, as many think, on this very day of the year, that the law was given of God from Mount Sinai, in the sight andhearing of all Israel; and attended not only with a visible glory, but with pomp also and terror; and now the new law of grace is given to the apostles upon mount Sion; (see on ch. Acts 1:13.) attended likewise with a glory, but communicated, agreeably to the nature of it, in a much more mild, gentle, and familiar manner. For, while they were big with expectations of their ascended Lord's fulfilling his promise, in sending down the so-often mentioned gift of the Holy Spirit, there came all on a sudden a sound from heaven, as of a mighty rushing wind, which filled the whole house where they were assembled, as their doctrine was afterwards to fill the whole earth. When Moses had finished all things according to the pattern shewn him on the mount, it is said, Exodus 40:34-35 that a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle; and when Solomon had finished the building of the temple, it is said that the cloud, &c. filled the house of the Lord. 1 Kings 8:10-11. In like manner, when Isaiah saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, it is said, that his train filled the temple, ch. Acts 6:1. But now the divine Presence had left the temple, and the glory of the Lord rested upon mount Sion, and filled the house where the apostles were assembled.

UNKNOWN V. 2 - sound - The Greek word means noise, or echo. "Sound" is a good

word. The idea to be conveyed is this: the sound heard is not simply a wind, but like a

rushing mighty wind, as of a tornado. The significance for the apostles may have been

varied, depending upon their state of mind.

The promise of Jesus of a mighty power to come upon the apostles was described by the

term "Holy Spirit". We do not, as a rule, connect the Holy Spirit with wind, or wind with

God. However, for the men sitting in the house, the situation was different. The Greek

term (if they spoke it); the Aramaic term (which probably they spoke): the Hebrew term

(the language in which most of their Bible was), all had the varied meanings of wind,

breath, etc.; then spirit, mind, attitude/disposition, and God. The O.T. used the Hebrew

term in all these ways. Here are some examples: as wind, Genesis 8:1, "and God made a

wind blow"; as breath, Job 27:3, "as long as my breath is in me"; as one’s

disposition/attitude ("spirit"), Numbers 5:14, "and if the spirit of jealousy"; as that part of

man from God which returns to God at separation of spirit and body, Isaiah 57:16 "from

me (God) proceeds the spirit, and I have made the breath of life"; (Note the idea in

Eccles. 3:21; 8:8; James 2:26) and of God, Genesis 1:2; Job 33:4, "the spirit of God has

made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life" (It is thus often a phrase which

equals God, as in Psalms 33:6; Isaiah 30:33). These ideas could be multiplied but this will

suffice to help us see that the sound like that of a rushing mighty wind would have

created in the minds of the "twelve" the concept of God in their presence, a God of

power, might, ability.

house - Can refer to the temple, as in 7:47.

WITESS LEE, "Acts 2:1 and 2 say, “And when the day of Pentecost was being

fulfilled, they were all together in the same place. And suddenly there came a noise

out of heaven like a rushing violent wind, and it filled the whole house where they

were sitting.” In the Lord’s resurrection, the Spirit of resurrection life is likened to

breath, breathed into the disciples (John 20:22) for their spiritual being and living

essentially. In the Lord’s ascension, the Spirit of ascension power, poured upon the

disciples, is symbolized here by the wind for the disciples’ ministry and move

economically. The essential Spirit of resurrection life is for the believers to live

Christ; the economical Spirit of ascension power is for them to carry out His

commission.

We need to see clearly the difference between the breathing in John 20 and the

blowing in Acts 2. The breathing in John 20 is for the imparting of the life-giving

Spirit into the disciples essentially for their spiritual being and for their spiritual

living. But the blowing in Acts 2 is for the pouring out of the economical Spirit of

power upon the believers, who have already received the essential Spirit into them.

The pouring out of the Spirit of power is not for the believers’ spiritual being or

living; rather, the outpouring of the Spirit of power is for the believers’ ministry

and move. Therefore, the essential aspect of the Spirit is for living, and the

economical aspect is for ministry. It is important for us to differentiate these two

aspects of the Spirit, for then we shall understand the Gospels and Acts in the right

way. Otherwise, we shall be confused.

Many years ago, a certain highly respected minister said that the breathing in John

20 was not a fact but was merely a performance that indicated that the fact was yet

to come in Acts 2. According to his understanding, after the performance in John

20, it was necessary for the disciples to wait fifty days to receive the fact. In the view

of this minister, both John 20 and Acts 2 refer to the same thing, the difference

being that one describes a performance and the other describes a fact. This concept

is altogether wrong. As we have pointed out, there is a difference between the

breathing in John 20 and the blowing in Acts 2. Breathing is for life, but blowing is

for power.

In the Gospel of John the Spirit of life in resurrection is likened to water for us to

drink. John 4:14 says, “Whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him shall by

no means thirst forever; but the water that I shall give him shall become in him a

spring of water welling up into eternal life.” John 7:37-39 says, “ow on the last

day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, If anyone thirst, let

him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, out of his

innermost being shall flow rivers of living water. But this He said concerning the

Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were about to receive.” In Luke 24:49 the

economical Spirit is likened to clothing that we put on: “And behold, I am sending

forth the promise of My Father upon you; but you, stay in the city until you are

clothed with power from on high.” Water is for life inwardly, and clothing is for

work outwardly.

Let us use a policeman as an illustration of the difference between the essential

Spirit for life inwardly and the economical Spirit for power outwardly. A policeman

does not put on his uniform in order to quench his thirst. Thirst cannot be quenched

by putting on a uniform. A policeman clothes himself with a uniform when he is

about to go on duty, that is, when he is ready to work as a policeman. Suppose a

policeman drank something to quench his thirst and then went to work without his

uniform. If he did this, no one would pay attention to him as he tried to give orders

on the street. o matter how much he may drink to quench his thirst, a policeman

still must put on his uniform when he is about to work as a policeman. If he is

clothed in his uniform, others will respect him. Through this illustration we can see

the difference between drinking and being clothed. Drinking is inward, but being

clothed is an outward matter.

It is a serious mistake to say, as did that minister years ago, that the breathing in

John 20 is a performance and the blowing in Acts 2 is a fact. This kind of

interpretation comes from the shortage of proper knowledge and leads to confusion.

The proper knowledge we need requires not only the study of the Scriptures but

also heavenly enlightenment along with adequate experience. It is not accurate to

say that in John 20 Peter did not receive the Spirit of life into him. The Lord’s

breathing in that chapter was certainly not a performance. According to John 20:22,

the Lord Jesus “breathed into them and said to them, Receive the Holy Spirit.” This

is not a performance—it is an accomplished fact. Here we have the fact of the

breathing of the life-giving Spirit into the disciples on the day of Christ’s

resurrection.

ELLICOTT,"(2) And suddenly there came a sound from heaven. . . .—The description

reminds us of the “sound of a trumpet” (Exodus 19:19; Hebrews 12:19) on Sinai, of the

“great and strong wind” that rent the mountains on Horeb (1 Kings 19:11). Such a wind

was now felt and heard, even as the wind, the breath, the Spirit of God, had moved upon

the face of the waters, quickening them into life (Genesis 1:2).

A rushing mighty wind.—Better, a mighty breath borne onwards, so as to connect the

English, as the Greek is connected, with St. Peter’s words that, “holy men of old spake as

they were moved (literally, borne on) by the Holy Ghost” (2 Peter 1:21). The Greek word

for “wind” is not that commonly so translated (anemos), but one from the same root as

the Greek for “Spirit” (Pnoè and Pneuma—both from Pneô, “I breathe”), and rendered

“breath” in Acts 17:25. It is obviously chosen here as being better fitted than the more

common word for the supernatural inbreathing of which they were conscious, and which

to many must have recalled the moment when their Lord had “breathed on them, and said,

Receive ye the Holy Ghost” (John 20:22). Now, once more, they felt that light yet awful

breathing which wrought every nerve to ecstasy; and it filled “the whole house,” as if in

token of the wide range over which the new spiritual power was to extend its working,

even unto the whole Church, which is the House of God (1 Timothy 3:15), and to the

uttermost parts of the earth.

COFFMAN, "The spectacular events here are suggestive of the wonders that attended the

giving of the Law (Exodus 19:16f), such as the loud trumpet, the smoking mountain, the

terrible earthquake, the thick cloud, and Jehovah descending upon Sinai in fire.

Wind ... fire ... There was no wind, but the sound of a mighty wind; and no fire, but

tongues resembling fire, at Pentecost. Despite this, wind and fire are both typical and

suggestive of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is typified by the wind in that: (1) it is gentle; (2)

it is powerful; (3) it is invisible (John 3:8); (4) it is the "breath" of life itself. Fire typifies

the Holy Spirit in that: (1) it gives light; (2) it provides warmth; (3) it purifies; and (4) it

is an emblem of God himself (Hebrews 12:29), and in this latter quality standing for the

judgment of God against wickedness.

That such elemental forces of nature were manifested both at Sinai and at Pentecost is

evidence, according to Lange, that the "kingdom of power and of grace is governed by

one God."[11] It is also proof that the God of nature and the God of religious faith are one

and the same. Although the tongues so strongly resembled fire, this may not be called a

baptism of fire; "for the context in the Gospel (Matthew 3:11f) suggests that the baptism

of fire is the judgment of those who reject the Messiah, the burning of the chaff with

unquenchable fire."[12]

All filled with the Holy Spirit ... This has reference to the Twelve apostles only. See

under Acts 2:1. Beasley-Murray gave expression to a common misconception regarding

this outpouring of God's Spirit on the Twelve. He said:

At Pentecost the Spirit came upon the disciples with no other condition than that of

prayer; they are not baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, either prior to or after the

event.[13]

None of those persons who had been baptized of John's baptism had any need to be

baptized again; and it is a dogmatic certainty that the Twelve had been baptized by John's

baptism (John 4:1,2), because there is no way to believe that the apostles would have

been baptizing others with a baptism to which they themselves had not submitted.

Moreover, if they had rejected John's baptism for themselves, it would have been

"rejecting the counsel of God" (Luke 7:30); and, had they done that, Jesus would never

have named them apostles of the new covenant. For further discussion of this, see under

Acts 1:5.

On this Pentecost, there were two measures of the Holy Spirit given: (1) the miraculous

outpouring previously promised the Twelve, and (2) the gift ordinary which is received by

every Christian. The three thousand who were baptized received the second of these

following their baptism; and it may be assumed that the one hundred and twenty (who, it

may be assumed, were also baptized by John's baptism) likewise received that same gift.

There is utterly no basis for supposing that they too were given that apostolic measure of

the Spirit which would have enabled them to raise the dead, speak with inspiration, and

be guided "into all truth," in the manner of the apostles. If they did receive that measure

of the Holy Spirit, where is the record of any of them ever doing such things as the

apostles did?

The new birth has two elements in it, requiring that all who experience it be born "of the

water" and "of the Spirit." All who received God's Spirit that day, in whatever measure,

were "born of water," in that they were baptized (either with John's baptism or that

commanded on Pentecost), and also "born of the Spirit," that is, they received the gift of

the Holy Spirit, whether in apostolic measure or in the measure called "the earnest of our

inheritance," (Ephesians 1:13).

Began to speak with other tongues ... Despite the insistence of some that this has

reference to ecstatic utterances like those of so-called "tongues" today, such a view is

refuted, absolutely, by the fact that men of many nations understood every word in their

native languages. Nothing like this was ever seen, either before or after the astounding

event before us. As Lange said:

The confusion of tongues occasioned the dispersion of men (Genesis 11); the gift of

tongues re-united them as one people.[14]

The event at Babel, referred to by Lange, was a direct intervention of God in human

history; and the same thing, with opposite purpose, is apparent here. The action at Babel

was not repeated, nor was this.

This baptism of the Spirit was never repeated. It was later extended to believers in

Samaria (Acts 8), to the Gentiles (Acts 10-11) ... The filling of the Spirit was often

repeated, but not the baptism with the Spirit.[15]

Wesley noted that:

(They) spoke languages of which they had been before entirely ignorant. They did not

speak now and then a word of another tongue, or stammer out some broken sentences, but

spoke each language as readily, properly, and elegantly as if it had been their mother

tongue.[16]

If Wesley's view is correct, and the conviction here is that it is, then it would be logical to

understand each one of the Twelve speaking in a different area of the great temple

concourse, in each instance speaking in the language of his hearers. There is no way to

understand this as a group of twelve men standing closely together and all speaking at

once. Later on, Peter did stand up with the eleven; but then there were not many speakers,

but only one.

Boles' comment on the "tongues" is:

They were not uttering unintelligible sounds, nor using a mere jargon of syllables with no

meaning; their sentences were clear and their words distinct, so that every man heard

them speaking in his own language.[17]

This phenomenon was doubtless the "baptism of the Holy Spirit." De Welt stated that:

We can know as a dogmatic certainty that Acts 2:4 is the literal fulfillment of Acts 1:5.

Jesus had promised (the apostles) the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and here is the

fulfillment of his promise.[18]

[11] John Peter Lange, Commentary on Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan

Publishing House, n.d.), p. 31.

[12] Everett F. Harrison, Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1962), p.

387.

[13] G. R. Beasley Murray, Baptism in the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan:

Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publishers, 1962), p. 105.

[14] John Peter Lange, op. cit., p. 31.

[15] Everett F. Harrison, op. cit., p. 388.

[16] John Wesley, op. cit., in loco.

[17] H. Leo Boles, Acts of Apostles (Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1941), p. 33.

[18] Don DeWelt, op. cit., p. 36.

3They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that

separated and came to rest on each of them.

BARNES, "And there appeared unto them - There were seen by them, or they saw. The fire was first seen by them in the room before it rested in the form of tongues on the heads of the disciples. Perhaps the fire appeared at first as scintillations or coruscations, until it became fixed on their heads.

Tongues - γλ2σσαι glōssai. The word “tongue” occurs often in the Scriptures to

denote the member which is the instrument of taste and speech, and also to denote “language” or “speech” itself. It is also used, as with us, to denote what in shape resembles the tongue. Thus, Jos_7:21, Jos_7:24 (in Hebrew), “a tongue of gold,” that is, a wedge of gold; Jos_15:5; Jos_18:19; Isa_11:15, “The tongue of the sea,” that is, a bay or gulf. Thus also we say “a tongue of land.” The phrase “tongue of fire” occurs once, and once only, in the Old Testament Isa_5:24, “Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble (Hebrew: tongue of fire), and the flame consumeth,” etc. In this place the name tongue is given from the resemblance of a pointed flame to the human tongue. Anything long, narrow, and tending to a point is thus in the Hebrew called “a tongue.” The word here means, therefore, “slender and pointed appearances” of flame, perhaps at first moving irregularly around the room.

cloven - Divided, separated - διαµεριζόµεναι diamerizomenai - from the verb διαµερίζω

diamerizō, “to divide, or distribute into parts.” Mat_27:35, “they parted his garments”;

Luk_22:17, “Take this (the cup) and divide it among yourselves.” Probably the common opinion is, that these tongues or flames were, each one of them split, or forked, or cloven. But this is not the meaning of the expression. The idea is that they were separated or divided one from another; it was not one great flame, but was broken up, or cloven into many parts, and probably these parts were moving without order in the room. In the Syriac it is, “And there appeared unto them tongues which divided themselves like fire, and sat upon each of them.” The old Ethiopic version reads it, “And fire, as it were, appeared to them and sat on them.”

And it sat upon each of them - Or “rested,” in the form of a lambent or gentle flame, upon the head of each one. This showed that the prodigy was directed to them, and was a very significant emblem of the promised descent of the Holy Spirit. After the rushing sound and the appearance of the flames, they could not doubt that here was some remarkable interposition of God. The appearance of fire, or flame, has always been regarded as a most striking emblem of the Divinity. Thus, Exo_3:2-3, God is said to have manifested himself to Moses in a bush which was burning, yet not consumed. Thus, Exo_19:16-20, God descended on Mount Sinai in the midst of thunders, and lightnings, and smoke, and fire, striking emblems of his presence and power. See also Gen_15:17. Thus, Deu_4:24, God is said to be “a consuming fire.” Compare Heb_12:29. See Eze_1:4; Psa_18:12-14. The Classic reader will also instantly recall the beautiful description in Virgil (Aeneid, b. 2:680-691). Other instances of a similar prodigy are also recorded in profane writers (Pliny, H. N., 2:37; Livy, 1:39). These appearances to the apostles were emblematic, doubtless:

(1) Of the promised Holy Spirit, as a Spirit of purity and of power. The prediction of John the Immerser, “He shall baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire” Mat_3:11would probably be recalled at once to their memory.

(2) The unique appearance, that of tongues, was an emblem of the diversity of languages which they were about to be able to utter. Any form of fire would have denoted the presence and power of God; but a form was adopted expressive of “what was to occur.” Thus, “any divine appearance” or “manifestation” at the baptism of Jesus might have denoted the presence and approbation of God; but the form chosen was that of a dove descending - expressive of the mild and gentle virtues with which he was to be imbued. So in Eze_1:4, any form of flame might have denoted the presence of God; but the appearance actually chosen was one that was strikingly emblematical of his providence. In the same way, the appearance here symbolized their special endowments for entering on their great work - the ability to speak with new tongues.

CLARKE, "Cloven tongues like as of fire - The tongues were the emblem of the languages they were to speak. The cloven tongues pointed out the diversity of those languages; and the fire seemed to intimate that the whole would be a spiritual gift, and be the means of bringing light and life to the souls who should hear them preach the everlasting Gospel in those languages.

Sat upon each of them - Scintillations, coruscations, or flashes of fire, were probably at first frequent through every part of the room where they were sitting; at last these flashes became defined, and a lambent flame, in the form of a cloven tongue, became stationary on the head of each disciple; a proof that the Spirit of God had made each his temple or residence. That unusual appearances of fire were considered emblems of the presence and influence of God, both the Scriptures and the Jewish writings amply prove. Thus God manifested himself to Moses, when he appointed him to deliver Israel, Exo_3:2, Exo_3:3; and thus he manifested himself when he delivered the law on Mount Sinai, Exo_19:16-20. The Jews, in order to support the pretensions of their rabbins, as delivering their instructions by Divine authority and influence, represent them as being surrounded with fire while they were delivering their lectures; and that their words, in consequence, penetrated and exhilarated the souls of their disciples. Some of the Mohammedans represent Divine inspiration in the same way. In a fine copy of a Persian work, entitled Ajaceb al Makhlookat, or Wonders of Creation, now before me, where a marred account of Abraham’s sacrifice, mentioned Gen_15:9-17, is given, instead of the burning lamp passing between the divided pieces of the victim, Gen_15:17, Abraham is represented standing between four fowls, the cock, the peacock, the duck, and the crow, with his head almost wrapped in a flame of lambent fire, as the emblem of the Divine communication made to him of the future prosperity of his descendants. The painting in which this is represented is most exquisitely finished. This notion of the manner in which Divine intimations were given was not peculiar to the Jews and Arabians; it exists in all countries; and the glories which appear round the heads of Chinese, Hindoo, and Christian saints, real or supposed, were simply intended to signify that they had especial intercourse with God, and that his Spirit, under the emblem of fire, sat upon them and became resident in them. There are numerous proofs of this in several Chinese and Hindoo paintings in my possession; and how frequently this is to be met with in legends, missals, and in the ancient ecclesiastical books of the different Christian nations of Europe, every reader acquainted with ecclesiastical antiquity knows well. See the dedication of Solomon’s temple, 2Ch_7:1-3.

The Greek and Roman heathens had similar notions of the manner in which Divine communications were given: strong wind, loud and repeated peals of thunder, coruscations of lightning, and lambent flames resting on those who were objects of the Deities regard, are all employed by them to point out the mode in which their gods were

reported to make their will known to their votaries. Every thing of this kind was probably borrowed from the account given by Moses of the appearance on Mount Sinai; for traditions of this event were carried through almost every part of the habitable world, partly by the expelled Canaanites, partly by the Greek sages travelling through Asiatic countries in quest of philosophic truth: and partly by means of the Greek version of the Septuagint, made nearly three hundred years before the Christian era.

“A flame of fire seen upon the head of any person was, among the heathens, considered as an omen from their gods that the person was under the peculiar care of a supernatural power, and destined to some extraordinary employment. Many proofs of this occur in the Roman poets and historians. Wetstein, in his note on this place, has made an extensive collection of them. I shall quote but one, which almost every reader of the Aeneid of Virgil will recollect: -

Talia vociferans gemitu tectum omne replebat:Cum subitum, dictuque oritur mirabile monstrum.Namque manus inter, maestorumque ora parentum.Ecce levis summo de vertice visusIuli Fundere lumen apex, tactuque innoxia molliLambere flamma comas, et circum tempora pasci.Nos pavidi trepidare metu, crinemque flagrantemExcutere, et sanctos restinguere fontibus ignes.At pater Anchises oculos ad sidera laetusExtulit, et coelo palamas cum voce tetendit:Jupiter omnipotens -Da auxilium, pater, atque haec omina firma.Virg. Aen. ii. v. 679.

While thus she fills the house with clamorous cries,Our hearing is diverted by our eyes;For while I held my son, in the short spaceBetwixt our kisses and our last embrace,Strange to relate! from young Iulus’ head,A lambent flame arose, which gently spreadAround his brows, and on his temples fed.Amazed, with running water, we prepareTo quench the sacred fire, and slake his hair;But old Anchises, versed in omens, rear’dHis hands to heaven, and this request preferr’d:If any vows almighty Jove can bend,Confirm the glad presage which thou art pleased to send.Dryden.

There is nothing in this poetic fiction which could be borrowed from our sacred volume; as Virgil died about twenty years before the birth of Christ.

It may be just necessary to observe, that tongue of fire may be a Hebraism: for in Isa_

leshon�esh, which we render simply fire, is literally a tongue of fire, as the לשון�אש ,5:24

margin very properly has it. The Hebrews give the name of tongue to most things which

terminate in a blunt point: so a bay is termed in Jos_15:2, לשן lashon, a tongue. And in

Jos_15:5, what appears to have been a promontory is called לשון�הים leshon�hayam, a

tongue of the sea.

It sat upon each - That is, one of those tongues, like flames, sat upon the head of each disciple; and the continuance of the appearance, which is indicated by the word sat, shows that there could be no illusion in the case. I still think that in all this case the agent was natural, but supernaturally employed.

GILL Verse 3.

Through this baptism of the Holy Ghost and fire, the apostles became more knowing, and

had a greater understanding of the mysteries of the Gospel, and were more qualified to

preach it to people of all nations and languages. The Holy Spirit, in his gifts and graces, is

compared to fire, because of its purity, light, and heat, as well as consuming nature; the

Spirit sanctifies, and makes men pure and holy, purges from the dross of sin, error and

superstition; and enlightens the minds of men, and gives them knowledge of divine and

spiritual things; and fills them with zeal and fervour for the glory of God and Christ, and

the good of his church and interest, and for the doctrines and ordinances of the Gospel; as

well as fortifies them against their enemies, whom he consumes, according to Zechariah

2:5 a passage of Scripture the Jews make use of in an uncommon sense; for they say {u},

that as "Jerusalem was destroyed by fire, "by fire it shall be built again"; as it is said,

Zechariah 2:5 'For I, saith the Lord, will be unto her a wall of fire round about.'" The

pouring forth of the Spirit upon the apostles, in this form of cloven tongues, as of fire,

was indeed the means of rebuilding Jerusalem, in a spiritual sense; or of founding the

Gospel church state in the world:

HENRY, "Here is a visible sign of the gift they were to receive. They saw cloven

tongues, like as of fire (Act_2:3), and it sat - ekathise, not they sat, those cloven tongues,

but he, that is the Spirit (signified thereby), rested upon each of them, as he is said to rest upon the prophets of old. Or, as Dr. Hammond describes it, “There was an appearance of something like flaming fire lighting on every one of them, which divided asunder, and so formed the resemblance of tongues, with that part of them that was next their heads divided or cloven.” The flame of a candle is somewhat like a tongue; and there is a meteor which naturalists call ignis lambens - a gentle flame, not a devouring fire; such was this. Observe,

(1.) There was an outward sensible sign, for the confirming of the faith of the disciples themselves, and for the convincing of others. Thus the prophets of old had frequently their first mission confirmed by signs, that all Israel might know them to be established prophets.

(2.) The sign given was fire, that John Baptist's saying concerning Christ might be fulfilled, He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire; with the Holy Ghost as with fire. They were now, in the feast of pentecost, celebrating the memorial of the giving of the law upon mount Sinai; and as that was given in fire, and therefore is called a fiery law, so is the gospel. Ezekiel's mission was confirmed by a vision of burning coals of fire(Eze_1:13), and Isaiah's by a coal of fire touching his lips, Isa_6:7. The Spirit, like fire, melts the heart, separates and burns up the dross, and kindles pious and devout

affections in the soul, in which, as in the fire upon the altar, the spiritual sacrifices are offered up. This is that fire which Christ came to send upon the earth. Luk_12:49.

(3.) This fire appeared in cloven tongues. The operations of the Spirit were many; that of speaking with divers tongues was one, and was singled out to be the first indication of the gift of the Holy Ghost, and to that this sign had a reference. [1.] They were tongues; for from the Spirit we have the word of God, and by him Christ would speak to the world, and he gave the Spirit to the disciples, not only to endue them with knowledge, but to endue them with a power to publish and proclaim to the world what they knew; for the dispensation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. [2.] These tongues were cloven, to signify that God would hereby divide unto all nations the knowledge of his grace, as he is said to have divided to them by his providence the light of the heavenly bodies, Deu_4:19. The tongues were divided, and yet they still continued all of one accord; for there may be a sincere unity of affections where yet there is a diversity of expression. Dr. Lightfoot observes that the dividing of tongues at Babel was the casting off of the heathen; for when they had lost the language in which alone God was spoken of and preached, they utterly lost the knowledge of God and religion, and fell into idolatry. But now, after above two thousand years, God, by another dividing of tongues, restores the knowledge of himself to the nations.

(4.) This fire sat upon them for some time, to denote the constant residence of the Holy Ghost with them. The prophetic gifts of old were conferred sparingly and but at some times, but the disciples of Christ had the gifts of the Spirit always with them, though the sign, we may suppose, soon disappeared. Whether these flames of fire passed from one to another, or whether there were as many flames as there were persons, is not certain. But they must be strong and bright flames that would be visible in the day-light, as it now was, for the day was fully come.

JAMISON, "cloven tongues, like as of fire, etc. — “disparted tongues,” that is, tongue-shaped, flame-like appearances, rising from a common center or root, and resting upon each of that large company: - beautiful visible symbol of the burning energy of the Spirit now descending in all His plenitude upon the Church, and about to pour itself through every tongue, and over every tribe of men under heaven!

CONSTABLE, "Fire, as well as wind, symbolized the presence of God (cf. Genesis 15:17; Exodus 3:2-6; Exodus 13:21-22; Exodus 19:18; Exodus 24:17; Exodus 40:38; Matthew 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 the apparent fire came at first 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. One of these "flames" abode on each believer present. God could hardly have visualized the distribution of His Spirit to every individual believer more clearly. The Spirit had in the past abode on the whole nation 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. Exodus 3:2-6).

Probably the Jews present connected the tongues with 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 (Matthew 3:11; Luke 3:16; cf. Joel 2:28-29; Malachi 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 or partial 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 the prophecy about baptism with fire was not fulfilled and will be fulfilled in the Tribulation. Others who hold this second view, including myself, believe that both baptisms occurred on Pentecost and both will occur again in the future and will involve Israel. I view what happened on Pentecost as a foreview of what will happen for Israel in the future. 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. This explanation is unappealing to me because what happened on Pentecost has clear connections with these predictions. 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. [Note: See also my comments on 2:16-21 below.]

COKE,"Acts 2:3. There appeared unto them cloven tongues— Besides the great and

indispensable use of the gift of tongues to the first preachers of the gospel, the elegance

and propriety in the choice of this miracle to attest the real descent of the Spirit who was

to teach us all things, can never be enough admired; for words being the human vehicle of

knowledge, this appearance was the fittest precursor of the Spirit of truth. When the

cloven tongues appeared upon each of the disciples, they were assembled together in a

private room sequestered and apart; and it was not till the thing was noised abroad, and

the multitude came together, to inquire into the truth of it, that the apostles spoke with

tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. Now between this visible descent of the Holy

Spirit, and their speaking to the multitude, a considerable time intervened; sufficient to

convince the apostles, from the steady durationof the appearance, that it was not natural,

but miraculous; and this the original will express, properly rendered by the phrase of

SITTING upon each of them; words so inconsistent with a momentary appearance, that it

would be trifling with common sense to deduce such an interpretation from oblique

circumstances, and collateral reasoning. It may not therefore be improper to consider the

evangelical account of this visible descent with a little more exactness. In this place we

see the fiery tongues are said to sit upon each of them; and other places of scripture,

which mention the like descent of the Holy Spirit in a visible form, describe it in such

terms as denote a very different appearance from a sudden flash of lightning. St. Matthew

tells us, that the Spirit of God descended like a dove; as birds, when about to settle upon

any thing, first hoverupon it with quivering wings: it then lighted upon Jesus. So the same

Spirit is said to descend under the appearance of cloven tongues, like as of fire. In this

descent, the motion, figure, and colour, are described; and the term of cloven tongues,

which the sacred historian employs to describe the motion, proves it to be of some

continuance. Let us observe, that the thing seen, like as of fire, on the heads of the

apostles, was no more an elementary fire, than the thing seen like a dove on the head of

Jesus, was a real dove; for, as only a dove-like motion is intimated in the latter

expression, so only a flame-like motion is intimated in the former. And what this was, the

historian tells us in effect;—the appearance of cloven tongues. The sudden flash of

lightning exhibits to the eye of the beholder only a line of light, angularly broken into

several directions, very different from the form of tongues, whether whole or divided.

Whenever a flame assumes this appearance, it is become stationary, as this was, which

the historian says sat upon each of them; and then, its natural motion being upwards, it

represents, when divided length-wise, a pyramidical tongue-like figure cloven; a

demonstration that the appearance in question was not momentary, but of some

continuance. What in our English Bible is rendered fire, Isaiah 5:24 is, in the original, a

tongue of fire. Our old English version has preserved the allusion, and rendered the words

like as the fire lighteth up the straw. Tongues of fire properly signify the points of flames,

which move nimbly, and lick like tongues. The ancient Romans alluded to this when they

spoke of lambent flames. Virgil's fiction, concerning the omen which happened to Iulus,

is very pertinent to the present purpose:

Ecce levis summo de vertice visus Iuli Fundere lumen apex, tactuque innoxia molli

Lambere flamma comas, et circum tempora pasci. AEn. 2: line 682, &c.

Strange to relate, from young Iulus' head A lambent flame arose, which gently spread

Around his brows, and on his temples fed. DRYDEN.

This fire, or divine glory, resting upon the head of each of the persons there assembled,

was a lively emblem of one of the most remarkable gifts then conferred. That the tongues

were separated, might denote the multiplicity and variety of languages which they should

be able to speak; though as all these proceeded from one and the same Spirit, they should

all agree in their doctrines: and possibly to denote this unity of the Spirit, the singular it,

namely, this fiery appearance, is used after the plural tongues. As the glory rested for

some time upon them, it might shadow out the permanency of the gifts then bestowed; in

which, as well as in many other particulars, they excelled the Old Testament prophets.

Thus was John the Baptist's prediction fulfilled, that Christ should baptize with the Holy

Ghost andwith fire, Matthew 3:11. And as the division of tongues at Babel once

introduced confusion, so now there was a remedy provided by the gift of tongues at Sion,

to bring the Gentiles out of darkness unto light, and to destroy the veil which had been

spread over all nations, Isaiah 25:7.

ELLICOTT, "(3) There appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire.—Better, and

tongues as of fire were seen by them, parted among them. The word translated “cloven”

cannot possibly have that meaning. It is not uncommon (e.g., Acts 2:45; Matthew 27:35;

Luke 22:17; and John 19:24), and is always used in the sense of dividing or distributing.

What the disciples saw would, perhaps, be best described in modern phrase as a shower

of fiery tongues, coming they knew not whence, lighting for a moment on each head, and

then vanishing. The verb “it (sc., a tongue of fire) sat upon” is in the tense which

expresses momentary, not continuous, action.

UNKNOWN, "V. 3 - tongues - Symbolized like a flame of fire (though not actually fire).

Both the wind and the fire were O.T. symbols of God, as in II Sam. 5:24; I Kings

19:11,12; Psalms 104:3; Ezekiel 37:9; Exodus 3:2; Deuteronomy 5:4; Hebrews 12:29.

Recall John 1:32, when the Spirit descended as a dove upon Jesus, "abiding upon him."

The Spirit of God lives in Christians, II Cor. 1:22. Hence, the Spirit may take different

forms in relationship to man.

As we consider the Holy Spirit coming upon these men, it will be instructive to compare

Luke’s Gospel with Luke’s history. Consider Luke 1:15, 35, 41, 67; 2:25; 3:22; 4:1; etc.

Then Acts ch. 2, 7:55; 8:17, 29; 10:19; etc. Luke shows the coming of the Spirit in both

sound and sight to direct the lives of these twelve men, upon whose shoulders the

proclamation of an everlasting Gospel rested.

It has been pointed out that though this day of Pentecost seems of great importance, it is

not found to be so in early church writings (including the N.T.); the day of Christ痴resurrection is the day of prominence.

4All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and

began to speak in other tongues[a] as the Spirit

enabled them.

BARNES, "Were all filled with the Holy Ghost - Were entirely under his sacred influence and power. See the notes on Luk_1:41, Luk_1:67. To be filled with anything is a phrase denoting that all the faculties are pervaded by it, engaged in it, or under its influence, Act_3:10, “Were filled with wonder and amazement”; Act_5:17, “Filled with indignation”; Act_13:45, “Filled with envy”; Act_2:4, “Filled with joy and the Holy Spirit.”

Began to speak with other tongues - In other languages than their native tongue. The languages which they spoke are specified in Act_2:9-11.

As the Spirit gave them utterance - As the Holy Spirit gave them power to speak. This language implies plainly that they were now endued with a faculty of speaking languages which they had not before learned. Their native tongue was that of Galilee, a somewhat barbarous dialect of the common language used in Judea - the Syro-Chaldaic. It is possible that some of them might have been partially acquainted with the Greek and Latin, as each of those languages was spoken among the Jews to some extent; but there is not the slightest evidence that they were acquainted with the languages of the different nations afterward specified. Various attempts have been made to account for this remarkable phenomenon without supposing it to be a miracle. But the natural and obvious meaning of the passage is, that they were endowed by the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit with ability to speak foreign languages, and languages to them before unknown. It does not appear that each one had the power of speaking all the languages which are specified Act_2:9-11, but that this ability was among them, and that together they could speak these languages, probably some one and some another. The following remarks may perhaps throw some light on this remarkable occurrence:

(1) It was predicted in the Old Testament that what is here stated would occur in the times of the Messiah. Thus, in Isa_28:11, “With ...another tongue will he speak unto this

people.” Compare 1Co_14:21 where this passage is expressly applied to the power of speaking foreign languages under the gospel.

(2) It was promised by the Lord Jesus that they should have this power, Mar_16:17, “These signs shall follow them that believe ...they shall speak with new tongues.”

(3) The ability to do it existed extensively and long in the church, 1Co_12:10-11, “To another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: all these worketh that one and the self-same Spirit”; Act_2:28, “God hath set in the church ...diversities of tongues.” Compare also Act_2:30, and Act_14:2, Act_14:4-6, Act_14:9,Act_14:13-14; Act_14:18-19, Act_14:22-23, Act_14:27, Act_14:39. From this it appears that the power was well known in the church, and was not confined to the apostles. This also may show that in the case in the Acts , the ability to do this was conferred on other members of the church as well as the apostles.

(4) It was very important that they should be endowed with this power in their great work. They were going forth to preach to all nation; and though the Greek and Roman tongues were extensively spoken, yet their use was not universal, nor is it known that the apostles were skilled in those languages. To preach to all nations, it was indispensable that they should be able to understand their language. And in order that the gospel might be rapidly propagated through the earth, it was necessary that they should be endowed with ability to do this without the slow process of being compelled to learn them. It will contribute to illustrate this to remark that one of the principal hindrances in the spread of the gospel now arises from the inability to speak the languages of the nations of the earth, and that among missionaries of modern times a long time is necessarily spent in acquiring the language of a people before they are prepared to preach to them.

(5) One design was to establish the gospel by means of miracles. Yet no miracle could be more impressive than the power of conveying their sentiments at once in all the languages of the earth. When it is remembered what a slow and toilsome process it is to learn a foreign tongue, this would I be regarded by the pagan as one of the most striking miracles which could be performed, 1Co_14:22, 1Co_14:24-25.

(6) The reality and certainty of this miracle is strongly attested by the early triumphs of the gospel. That the gospel was early spread over all the world, and that, too, by the apostles of Jesus Christ, is the clear testimony of all history. They preached it in Arabia, Greece, Syria, Asia, Persia, Africa, and Rome. Yet how could this have been effected without a miraculous power of speaking the languages used in all those places? Now, it requires the toil of many years to speak in foreign languages; and the recorded success of the gospel is one of the most striking attestations to the fact of the miracle that could be conceived.

(7) The corruption of language was one of the most decided effects of sin, and the source of endless embarrassments and difficulties, Gen. 11: It is not to be regarded as wonderful that one of the effects of the plan of recovering people should be to show the power of God over all evil, and thus to furnish striking evidence that the gospel could meet all the crimes and calamities of people. And we may add,

(8) That from this we see the necessity now of training people who are to be missionaries to other lands. The gift of miracles is withdrawn. The apostles, by that miracle, simply were empowered to speak other languages. That power must still be had if the gospel is to be preached. But it is now to be obtained, not by miracle, but by stow and careful study and toil. If possessed, people must be taught it. And as the church is bound Mat_28:19 to send the gospel to all nations, so it is bound to provide that the teachers who shall be sent forth shall be qualified for their work. Hence, one of the

reasons of the importance of training men for the holy ministry.

CLARKE, "To speak with other tongues - At the building of Babel the language of the people was confounded; and, in consequence of this, they became scattered over the face of the earth: at this foundation of the Christian Church, the gift of various languages was given to the apostles, that the scattered nations might be gathered; and united under

one shepherd and superintendent (επισκοπος) of all souls.

As the Spirit gave them utterance - The word αποφθεγγεσθαι seems to imply such

utterance as proceeded from immediate inspiration, and included oracular communications.

GILL Verse 4. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost,.... With the gifts of the

Holy Spirit; they had received the Spirit before, as a Spirit of grace, and were endowed

with great gifts; but now they had great plenty of them, a large abundance; they were like

vessels filled to the brim; they were as it were covered with them; there was an overflow

of them upon them; and now it was, that they were baptized with him; See Gill on "Ac

1:5." Not only the twelve apostles, but the seventy disciples; and it may be all the hundred

and twenty, that were together, even women as well as men: Acts 2:17.

And began to speak with other tongues; besides, and different from that in which they

were born and brought up, and usually spake; they spake divers languages, one spoke one

language, and another, another; and the same person spoke with various tongues,

sometimes one language, and sometimes another. These are the new tongues, Christ told

them they should speak with, Mr 16:17 such as they had never heard, learned, nor known

before:

as the Spirit gave them utterance; they did not utter anything of themselves, and what

came into their minds, things of little or no importance; nor in a confused and disorderly

manner; but they were wise and weighty sentences they delivered, as the word signifies;

even the wonderful works of God, Acts 2:11 the great doctrines of the Gospel; and

though in different languages, yet in a very orderly and distinct manner, so as to be heard

and understood by the people. The Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions read, "as the Holy

Spirit," &c.

HENRY, "What was the immediate effect of this? 1. They were all filled with the Holy Ghost, more plentifully and powerfully than they were before. They were filled with the graces of the Spirit, and were more than ever under his sanctifying influences - were now holy, and heavenly, and spiritual, more weaned from this world and better acquainted with the other. They were more filled with the comforts of the Spirit, rejoiced more than ever in the love of Christ and the hope of heaven, and in it all their griefs and fears were swallowed up. They were also, for the proof of this, filled with the gifts of the Holy Ghost, which are especially meant here; they were endued with miraculous powers for the furtherance of the gospel. It seems evident to me that not only the twelve apostles, but all the hundred and twenty disciples were filled with the Holy Ghost alike at this time - all the seventy disciples, who were apostolic men, and employed in the same work, and all the rest too that were to preach the gospel; for it is said expressly (Eph_4:8,

Eph_4:11), When Christ ascended on high (which refers to this, Act_2:33), he gave gifts unto men, not only some apostles (such were the twelve), but some prophets and some evangelists (such were many of the seventy disciples, itinerant preachers), and some pastors and teachers settled in particular churches, as we may suppose some of these afterwards were. The all here must refer to the all that were together, Act_2:1; Act_1:14, Act_1:15. 2. They began to speak with other tongues, besides their native language, though they had never learned any other. They spoke not matters of common conversation, but the word of God, and the praises of his name, as the Spirit gave them

utterance, or gave them to speak apophthengesthai - apophthegms, substantial and

weighty sayings, worthy to be had in remembrance. It is probable that it was not only one that was enabled to speak one language, and another another (as it was with the several families that were dispersed from Babel), but that every one was enabled to speak divers languages, as he should have occasion to use them. And we may suppose that they understood not only themselves but one another too, which the builders of Babel did not, Gen_11:7. They did not speak here and there a word of another tongue, or stammer out some broken sentences, but spoke it as readily, properly, and elegantly, as if it had been their mother-tongue; for whatever was produced by miracle was the best of the kind. They spoke not from any previous thought or meditation, but as the Spirit gave them utterance; he furnished them with the matter as well as the language. Now this was, (1.) A very great miracle; it was a miracle upon the mind (and so had most of the nature of a gospel miracle), for in the mind words are framed. They had not only never learned these languages, but had never learned any foreign tongue, which might have facilitated these; nay, for aught that appears, they had never so much as heard these languages spoken, nor had any idea of them. They were neither scholars nor travellers, nor had had any opportunity of learning languages either by books or conversation. Peter indeed was forward enough to speak in his own tongue, but the rest of them were no spokesmen, nor were they quick of apprehension; yet now not only the heart of the rash understands knowledge, but the tongue of the stammerers is ready to speak eloquently, Isa_32:4. When Moses complained, I am slow of speech, God said, I will be with thy mouth, and Aaron shall be thy spokesman. But he did more for these messengers of his: he that made man's mouth new-made theirs. (2.) A very proper, needful, and serviceable miracle. The language the disciples spoke was Syriac, a dialect of the Hebrew; so that it was necessary that they should be endued with the gift, for the understanding both of the original Hebrew of the Old Testament, in which it was written, and of the original Greek of the New Testament, in which it was to be written. But this was not all; they were commissioned to preach the gospel to every creature, to disciple all nations. But here is an insuperable difficulty at the threshold. How shall they master the several languages so as to speak intelligibly to all nations? It will be the work of a man's life to learn their languages. And therefore, to prove that Christ could give authority to preach to the nations, he gives ability to preach to them in their own language. And it should seem that this was the accomplishment of that promise which Christ made to his disciples (Joh_14:12), Greater works than these shall you do. For this may well be reckoned, all things considered, a greater work than the miraculous cures Christ wrought. Christ himself did not speak with other tongues, nor did he enable his disciples to do so while he was with them: but it was the first effect of the pouring out of the Spirit upon them. And archbishop Tillotson thinks it probable that if the conversion of infidels to Christianity were now sincerely and vigorously attempted, by men of honest minds, God would extraordinarily countenance such an attempt with all fitting assistance, as he did the first publication of the gospel.

JAMISON, "they ... began to speak with ... tongues, etc. — real, living languages, as is plain from what follows. The thing uttered, probably the same by all, was “the wonderful works of God,” perhaps in the inspired words of the Old Testament evangelical hymns; though it is next to certain that the speakers themselves understood nothing of what they uttered (see on 1Co_14:1-25).

HAWKER, "And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

I beg the Reader, while attending to what is here said of the disciples being filled with the Holy Ghost, to observe, that it doth not mean to imply they had not been in a state of regeneration before. Very evident it is, that the Apostles to whom Jesus addressed himself in his farewell Sermon, were at that time acquainted with the gracious influences of the Spirit, and consequently regenerated. It the Reader will consult what the Lord then said respecting the Holy Ghost, in their knowledge of Him, and of his dwelling with them, and being in them, he will perceive that these things implied a state of grace different from the world, Joh_14:16-17. But the being filled with the Holy Ghost, as is here spoken of, meant (what the Lord Jesus had taught them to expect, and to wait for at Jerusalem,) their ordination to the ministry. This was the blessed work wrought at Pentecost. And now, ordained by God the Holy Ghost, their mouths were opened to declare among the people the unsearchable riches of Christ. If the Reader would wish to see similar instances of this holy ordination, he may behold them in the case of several of the Lord’s servants, Isa_6:7-10; Jer 1 throughout; Eze 2; Act_13:2-4. See the Commentary on this last scripture.

I take occasion from hence to observe the difference between regeneration, which is essential to every child of God for his personal enjoyment of an union and interest with Christ, and the unction of the Holy Ghost, when calling his sent servants to the ministry. For, though the Lord calls none to the ministry but whom he hath first called by grace, as is evident in the instance of the Apostles, yet multitudes are savingly called by regeneration for their own personal happiness in Christ, whom God the Holy Ghost never sends forth as his ministers. A man being regenerated is no authority for ministering in the word and doctrine. And to run unsent, is a solemn thing, Jer_23:20; Heb_5:4.

NOTES COLLECTED

The church was baptized by the Holy Spirit and became the habitation of the Holy

Spirit, and endowed with the gifts of the Spirit. It had to be fully purchased before it

could be fully possessed, and that is why it had to wait until after the cross and

resurrection.

Alvah Hovey, "A study of all the passages in which this expression is found leads to

the conlusion that being filled with the H.S, or being baptized in the H. S. implies a

reception from the Spirit of extrordinary power, in addition to sanctifying grace."

Bruce says it was once for all on the community of the church. Jesus gives the Spirit

he had on earth to his body that it might continue to be the Messiah to the world

and not just to Israel.

Morgan says "The filling was the baptism, the filing was an anointing, and the

filling was a sealing." All were born again in the T sense, for none in the OT were

born of the Spirit. We do not need more of the Spirit, but the Spirit needs more of

us.

B. H. Carroll, THE HOLY SPIRIT says that Jesus never baptized an individual in

water or in the Spirit. It is the church that was baptized once and for all. The

church had been sailing only in Jewish waters but now at Pentecost it is thrust out

into the deep of the Gentile world.

ELLICOTT, "(4) And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost.—The outward portent

was but the sign of a greater spiritual wonder. As yet, though they had been taught to pray

for the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 11:13), and, we must believe, had found the answer to

their prayer in secret and sacred influences and gradual growth in wisdom, they had never

been conscious of its power as “filling” them—pervading the inner depths of personality,

stimulating every faculty and feeling to a new intensity of life. Now they felt, in St.

Peter’s words, as “borne onward” (2 Peter 1:21), thinking thoughts and speaking words

which were not their own, and which they could hardly even control. They had passed

into a state which was one of rapturous ecstasy and joy. We must not think of the gift as

confined to the Apostles. The context shows that the writer speaks of all who were

assembled, not excepting the women, as sharers in it. (Comp. Acts 2:17-18.)

And began to speak with other tongues.—Two facts have to be remembered as we enter

upon the discussion of a question which is, beyond all doubt, difficult and mysterious. (1)

If we receive Mark 16:9-20 as a true record of our Lord’s words, the disciples had, a few

days or weeks before the Day of Pentecost, heard the promise that they that believed

should “speak with new tongues” (see Note on Mark 16:17), i.e., with new powers of

utterance. (2) When St. Luke wrote his account of the Day of Pentecost, he must have

had—partly through his companionship with St. Paul, partly from personal observation—

a wide knowledge of the phenomena described as connected with the “tongues” in 1

Corinthians 14. He uses the term in the sense in which St. Paul had used it. We have to

read the narrative of the Acts in the light thrown upon it by the treatment in that chapter

of the phenomena described by the self-same words as the Pentecost wonder. What, then,

are those phenomena? Does the narrative of this chapter bring before us any in addition?

(1) The utterance of the “tongue” is presented to us as entirely unconnected with the work

of teaching. It is not a means of instruction. It does not edify any beyond the man who

speaks (1 Corinthians 14:4). It is, in this respect, the very antithesis of “prophecy.” Men

do not, as a rule, understand it, though God does (1 Corinthians 14:2). Here and there,

some mind with a special gift of insight may be able to interpret with clear articulate

speech what had been mysterious and dark (1 Corinthians 14:13). St. Paul desires to

subject the exercise of the gift to the condition of the presence of such an interpreter (1

Corinthians 14:5; 1 Corinthians 14:27). (2) The free use of the gift makes him who uses it

almost as a barbarian or foreigner to those who listen to him. He may utter prayers, or

praises, or benedictions, but what he speaks is as the sound of a trumpet blown

uncertainly, of flute or lyre played with unskilled hand, almost, we might say, in the

words of our own poet, “like sweet bells jangled, out of tune and harsh” (1 Corinthians

14:7-9). (3) Those who speak with tongues do well, for the most part, to confine their

utterance to the solitude of their own chamber, or to the presence of friends who can share

their rapture When they make a more public display of it, it produces results that stand in

singular contrast with each other. It is a “sign to them that believe not,” i.e., it startles

them, attracts their notice, impresses them with the thought that they stand face to face

with a superhuman power. On the other hand, the outside world of listeners, common

men, or unbelievers, are likely to look on it as indicating madness (1 Corinthians 14:23).

If it was not right or expedient to check the utterance of the tongues altogether, St. Paul at

least thought it necessary to prescribe rules for its exercise which naturally tended to

throw it into the background as compared with prophecy (1 Corinthians 14:27-28). The

conclusion from the whole chapter is, accordingly, that the “tongues” were not the power

of speaking in a language which had not been learnt by the common ways of learning, but

the ecstatic utterance of rapturous devotion. As regards the terms which are used to

describe the gift, the English reader must be reminded that the word “unknown” is an

interpolation which appears for the first time in the version of 1611. Wiclif, Tyndale,

Cranmer, and the Rhemish give no adjective, and the Geneva inserts “strange.” It may be

noted further that the Greek word for “tongue” had come to be used by Greek writers on

Rhetoric for bold, poetic, unusual terms, such as belonged to epic poetry (Aristot. Rhet.

iii. 3), not for those which belonged to a foreign language. If they were, as Aristotle calls

them, “unknown,” it was because they were used in a startlingly figurative sense, so that

men were sometimes puzzled by them (Aristot. Rhet. iii. 10). We have this sense of the

old word (glossa) surviving in our glossary, a collection of such terms. It is clear (1) that

such an use of the word would be natural in writers trained as St. Paul and St. Luke had

been in the language of Greek schools; and (2) that it exactly falls in with the conclusion

to which the phenomena of the case leads us, apart from the word.

We turn to the history that follows in this chapter, and we find almost identical

phenomena. (1) The work of teaching is not done by the gift of tongues, but by the speech

of Peter, and that was delivered either in the Aramaic of Palestine, or, more probably, in

the Greek, which was the common medium of intercourse for all the Eastern subjects of

the Roman empire. In that speech we find the exercise of the higher gift of prophecy, with

precisely the same results as those described by St. Paul as following on the use of that

gift. (Comp. Acts 2:37 with 1 Corinthians 14:24-25.) (2) The utterances of the disciples

are described in words which convey the idea of rapturous praise. They speak the “mighty

works,” or better, as in Luke 1:49, the great things of God. Doxologies, benedictions,

adoration, in forms that transcended the common level of speech, and rose, like the

Magnificat, into the region of poetry: this is what the word suggests to us. In the wild,

half dithyrambic hymn of Clement of Alexandria—the earliest extant Christian hymn

outside the New Testament—in part, perhaps, in that of Acts 4:24-30, and the

Apocalyptic hymns (Revelation 4:8; Revelation 4:11; Revelation 5:13; Revelation 7:10),

we have the nearest approach to what then came, in the fiery glow of its first utterance, as

with the tongues “of men and of angels,” from the lips of the disciples. (3) We cannot fail

to be struck with the parallelism between the cry of the scoffers here, “These men are full

of new wine” (Acts 2:13), and the words, “Will they not say that ye are mad?” which St.

Paul puts into the mouth of those who heard the “tongues” (1 Corinthians 14:23). In both

cases there is an intensity of stimulated life, which finds relief in the forms of poetry and

in the tones of song, and which to those who listened was as the poet’s frenzy. It is not

without significance that St. Paul elsewhere contrasts the “being drunk with wine” with

“being filled with the Spirit,” and immediately passes on, as though that were the natural

result, to add “speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs”

(Ephesians 5:18-19). If we find the old Jewish psalms in the first of these three words,

and hymns known and remembered in the second, the natural explanation of the adjective

specially alluded to in the third is that the “songs” or “odes” are such as were not merely

“spiritual” in the later sense of the word, but were the immediate outflow of the Spirit’s

working. Every analogy, it will be noticed, by which St. Paul illustrates his meaning in 1

Corinthians 13:1; 1 Corinthians 14:7-8, implies musical intonation. We have the

sounding brass and the tinkling (or clanging) cymbal, the pipe, the harp, the trumpet

giving an uncertain sound. It falls in with this view that our Lord Himself compares the

new energy of spiritual life which He was about to impart to new wine (Matthew 9:17),

and that the same comparison meets us in the Old Testament in the words in which Elihu

describes his inspiration (Job 32:19). The accounts of prophecy in its wider sense, as

including song and praise, as well as a direct message to the minds and hearts of men, in

the life of Saul, present Phenomena that are obviously analogous (1 Samuel 10:10-11; 1

Samuel 19:20; 1 Samuel 19:24). The brief accounts in Acts 10:46, “speaking with

tongues and magnifying God,” and Acts 19:6, where tongues are distinguished from

prophecy, present nothing that is not in harmony with this explanation.

In the present case, however, there are exceptional phenomena. We cannot honestly

interpret St. Luke’s record without assuming either that the disciples spoke in the

languages which are named in Acts 2:9-11, or that, speaking in their own Galilean

tongue, their words came to the ears of those who listened as spoken in the language with

which each was familiar. The first is at once the more natural interpretation of the

language used by the historian, and, if we may use such a word of what is in itself

supernatural and mysterious, the more conceivable of the two. And it is clear that there

was an end to be attained by such an extension of the in this case which could not be

attained otherwise. The disciples had been present in Jerusalem at many feasts before, at

which they had found themselves, as now, surrounded by pilgrims from many distant

lands. Then they had worshipped apart by themselves, with no outward means of

fellowship with these strangers, and had poured out their praises and blessings in their

own Galilean speech, as each group of those pilgrims had done in theirs. Now they found

themselves able to burst through the bounds that had thus divided them, and to claim a

fellowship with all true worshippers from whatever lands they came. But there is no

evidence that that power was permanent. It came and went with the special outpouring of

the Spirit, and lasted only while that lasted in its full intensity. (Comp. Notes on Acts

10:46; Acts 19:6.) There are no traces of its exercise in any narrative of the work of

apostles and evangelists. They did their work in countries where Greek was spoken, even

where it was not the native speech of the inhabitants, and so would not need that special

knowledge. In the history of Acts 14:11, it is at least implied that Paul and Barnabas did

not understand the speech of Lycaonia.

COKE, "Acts 2:4. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost,— That is, "all the

hundred and twenty." See on Acts 2:1. This effusion of the Spirit,

particularlydemonstrated in the gift of tongues, was intended not only as a sign of the

apostles' inspiration at this period, but likewise designed for the use of the apostolic

mission. Jesus himself expressly tells us so; for, on his leaving the world, he comforts his

disciples with this promise: But ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come

upon you; and ye shall be witnesses unto me,—unto the uttermost parts of the earth. This

is recorded, ch. Acts 1:8 by the evangelic writer, as an introduction to his narrative of the

miraculous gift of tongues, which heconsiders as the completion of this promise; and that

the power to be received was the power then given; the use of which, as we see, was to

enable the disciples to become witnesses unto him, unto the uttermost parts of the earth.

We find St. Paul had this power, not only in the fullest measure, but in a proportionable

duration; for, endeavouring to moderate the excessive value which the Corinthians set

upon spiritual gifts, he observes, that, with regard to the most splendid of them, the gift of

tongues, he himself had the advantage of them all.—I thank my God, says he, that I speak

with tongues more than you all. The occasion shews, that he considered this his

acquirement as a spiritual gift; and his using the present time shews, that he spoke of it as

then in his possession. But why did he speak with more tongues than all of them? For a

good reason: he was to be the peculiar apostle of the Gentiles, and was to preach the

gospel among remote and

barbarousnations;whichverycircumstancerenderedthisendowmentmorenecessary to him

than the rest of the apostles, whose ministry was circumscribed within more narrow

bounds.

UNKNOWN, "V. 4 - tongues - Identified as a language, spoken and understood. Note the

expressions which show the identification of tongue with language in verses 6, 8, 11. I

Cor. 14:21 makes a positive equation of "tongue" with language. There is nothing in the

N.T. to cause any other interpretation than this: tongue = language. Those who make

"tongue" equal to something else, do it in opposition to the evident usage, and not

because of any usage.

GREAT TEXTS OF THE BIBLE, "1. THE Day of Pentecost, or Whitsun Day, is the

birthday of the

Christian Church. On that day the Divine society was con

stituted. Not till Pentecost were Christians a distinct corporate

body. On that day the Divine life, the life of the Holy Spirit of

God, was infused into its members, and the first cry of the new

born Divine society was praise "They spake in other tongues

the wonderful works of God."

The day chosen was striking and suggestive. Proselytes from

various countries were all gathered together with the Jews of

Jerusalem to keep the Feast of Weeks. It was Pentecost, the

fiftieth day a week of weeks since Passover. At Passover a

sheaf of ripe barley had been waved in the Temple; at Pente

cost the two loaves of fine flour made from the newly gathered

wheat were now being waved in the Holy Place. And it was

harvest. What better occasion for the outpouring of the Spirit,

the " Giver of life," than this feast of Pentecost, when the first-

fruits of the great Spiritual harvest of both Jews and Gentiles

were offered unto the Lord who had redeemed them ?

Moreover, Pentecost was celebrated as the anniversary of the

giving of the law from Sinai, after the wanderings of the children

of Israel for seven weeks from the first Passover in Egypt. How

fitting a festival for the first outpouring of the Spirit, whereby

that law might be observed in its fullest meaning, not as uttered

amid the terrors of Sinai, but as revealed in Him who fulfilled the

law and the prophets to the uttermost.

2. On this great festival the apostles and disciples were

assembled together in Jerusalem. They were praying. They

were waiting for the promise of the Spirit. Suddenly the whole

28 WHITSUN DAY

place was shaken as with a tempest, and bright flamee, like

tongues of fire, flickered for a moment over every head. These

were, indeed, wonderful outward signs ; but we must not think

of this rush of tempest, and this shower of flaming tongues, ae

the most wonderful thing that happened. They were but the

outward signs of something more wonderful still. The Holy

Ghost filled the hearts of all that were present not only the

apostles, but also the men and women who were with them;

arid they burst out into loud shouts of praise and thanksgiving

to God.

3. " They were all with one accord in one place." There is

no absolute certainty what that place was or who were the

recipients of the gift there bestowed. Some have thought that

it was within the precincts of the Temple, and the early testimony

of Josephus (Antiq. viii. 3. 2) is appealed to in support of this.

He says the term here used (oTxoc) was applied to describe the

thirty chambers which ran round the Temple of Solomon ; but

though open and easily accessible, none of them could have held

so large a multitude ; and it is extremely difficult to believe that

the Priests and Pharisees would have allowed such a gathering

of the despised followers of One whom they had crucified but

a few weeks before. Although, then, it would have been intensely

significant had the New Covenant been inaugurated within the

very shrine of the Old, we are compelled to look for some other

scene. Tradition has placed it in that Upper Chamber, in which

we know that the first Christians were wont to hold their religious

meetings.

4. On whom was the gift bestowed ? It is impossible to say

whom St. Luke intended when he spoke of " all." Perhaps the

more general belief has limited it to the Apostles, as the

Whitsuntide preface in the Book of Common Prayer unhesitat

ingly teaches ; there is ancient testimony, however, to the

inclusion of " the one hundred and twenty/ and some extension

beyond the Twelve is almost necessitated by the language of

Joel s prophecy, which, St. Peter says, was fulfilled on this

occasion. The expression was perhaps intended to embrace all

the believers in Christ then congregated in Jerusalem.

jj Can it surprise us that the world, which has no eyes and

ACTS n. 4 29

no heart for spiritual things, usually appreciates this feast least

of all, and rather seeks its satisfaction in the enjoyment of nature

than in gratitude for the copious outpouring of the Spirit ? Men

must in some degree be filled with the Holy Ghost in order to

value aright the blessing of this day ; they must with the eye of

the Spirit have seen something of the glory of the New Dispensa

tion, in order to know fully the value of the declaration : " The

promise is to you and to your children, and to as many as the

Lord our God shall call." Just this is the glory of the feast of

Pentecost, that it not merely renews the remembrance of a most

interesting event in the past, but, moreover, points us to the

source of richest blessing for the present, and opens to us the

brightest prospect for the so frequently beclouded future. 1

THE COMING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

The words of Jesus concerning the Holy Spirit seem to have

made but little immediate impression upon His sorrowing

disciples. Probably they were too full of trouble to comprehend

their meaning, and too indifferent to consolation to care to

understand. Love in tears is apt to be petulant. The suggestion

of any possibility of compensation for impending loss is resented

as an insult and a reproach. The promise that Another should

fill His place brought no comfort. They did not want Another.

To speak of a successor was a reflection upon their devotion, and

to say the exchange would be to their advantage could be nothing

but the exaggeration of compassion. Grief for impending loss

refuses to be comforted. So the promise of the Paraclete brought

little light to their understanding, and apparently less comfort to

their hearts. It was not until the Ascension that their eyes were

opened. The Eesurrection filled them with a great joy, but not

until they witnessed His return to the Father did they realize

the true greatness of their Lord and the meaning of His Mission

in the world. As they beheld Him rise, the mists lifted from

their understanding, and they returned to Jerusalem, not like

bereaved and broken men, but rejoicing and praising God. The

vision of the opened heavens had given them a new conception

of all things in heaven and on earth. Infinity had received a

1 J. J. van Oosterzee, The Year of Salvation, i. 476.

30 WHITSUN DAY

new centre, for the eternal glory was embodied in a Person they

knew; prayer had a new meaning, for it was through a Name

they uttered with familiar affection; faith had received a new

basis, for it was in the Christ they had loved and proved. For

ten days they waited with their eyes set upon the heavens where

they had seen Him disappear from their sight. With Pentecost

came the fulfilment of His word, and the gift in which they

found the complete realization of all that He had said

1. Let us first see how the disciples were prepared to receive

the Gift.

The coming of the Holy Spirit involved the preparation of a

people to receive Him. There was an extended and an immediate

preparation. The extended preparation of the disciples covered

the whole course of Christ s ministry and fellowship. Uncon

sciously, they had come to know the Spirit in Christ. Everything

in the life, teaching, and work of Jesus was a manifestation of

the power and method of the Spirit. As the end approached, He

prepared their minds for His coming by definite instruction and

promise. He talked with a glow and enthusiasm of the Spirit

calculated to kindle their desire and expectation. They were told

of His wisdom and power, and the wonders He would do for

them, exceeding all they had seen in their Lord. Faith cometh

by hearing; after the Eesurrection they seem to have heard of

little else but the wonders of the Coming One; and the last

words of the ascending Lord were words of promise concerning

Him. "Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost, not many

days hence." " Ye shall receive power when the Holy Ghost is

come upon you." If they had not heard they would not have

expected, and could not have received.

The final stage of their preparation was in united and believ

ing prayer. The baptism came to the prepared. For ten

consecutive days they remained in prayer. They were of one

accord and in one place. A common object drew them together,

a common expectation focused their faith, and focused faith

always prevails. The fact that they continued for ten days

proves both their earnestness and their faith. They waited

earnestly for God, pleaded the promise of Christ, and had faitb

in His word.

ACTS n. 4 31

2. The coming of the Holy Spirit is symbolized in the elements

of wind and fire. Let us then consider the meaning which under

lies these symbols.

Wind.

What a gentle thing wind is ! What a powerful thing wind

is! You hear of an evening the gentle breeze whispering so

sweetly through the trees ; you turn your face to it, and the wind

falls so softly on your opened eye, that even that eye, which the

smallest speck of dust can injure, is unhurt by it. The bubble

which a touch of your finger will destroy floats unharmed in it ;

the thistledown is borne unbroken for miles by it ; and, even in

winter, the snowflakes, so fragile that your touch is destruction

to them, are whirled round and round uninjured in their purity

and beauty. How gentle the wind is, but how strong! Those

great trees of the forest that have stood for ages, and clutched

the earth far and wide with their spreading roots, fall before the

storm; and the mighty ships, that seem so majestic in their

power, are driven to destruction before the tempest, and cast in

splintered wreckage on our shores. Even so is the Spirit of God :

speaking so tenderly to the heart of some little child ; filling

young souls with every true, and beautiful, and loving thought

that they have, and moving the strongest men to penitence and

faith. The Spirit of God is gentle as the breeze, strong as the

storm.

Tf The wind is a favourite Biblical image for the movements

and goings of God s Spirit. Prophet and psalmist alike speak of

the wind as symbolizing God s power. " Come from the four

winds, breath," cried Ezekiel, in the vision of the dry bones.

" The Lord hath his way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and

the clouds are the dust of his feet," says the prophet Nahum.

In the Book of Job the poet represents God as speaking in the

wind. And so, too, Jesus, who came to fulfil the sayings of the

prophets, said: "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou

hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh,

and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the

Spirit." 1

(1) One of the psalmists speaks about God bringing the wind

out of His treasuries. That must be the wind that blows healthily

1 D. L. Ritchie.

32 WHITSUN DAY

to heal our sicknesses ; whose every kiss is tonic, whose rude

and wild embrace is strength. Whether it comes rushing over

the mountains, or tearing down the gullies, or skipping over the

Bummer sea as a gentle breeze to cool the fevered brow, it comes

as a cleanser, as life-giver, as health-bringer. Its very buffetings

are health. Now that is what God s Spirit is to the spirit of a

man. It is life and health and peace. When Jesus spoke to

Nicodemus about birth by the Spirit and compared it to the wind,

the reference was to the evening breeze just whispering among

the olive groves. A ripple and a rustle and it is gone, and thou

canst not tell whither it goeth : so is every one that is born of the

Spirit.

T[ It is an old Jewish saying that Moses died from the kiss of

God. How true it is to say that many people, especially young

people, live because of the kiss of the Spirit. One imprint on

their young hearts and they give themselves in love to the great

God and His Christ. Yes, God s Spirit still comes like the

zephyr, wooing and winning, like the breeze which you can scarcely

feel upon your hand, though you know it on your more delicate

brow. So He comes to many hearts in pensive hours, in times

and seasons of holy quiet and blessed meditation ; so He comes,

too, in life s morning to young souls. 1

The Lord of brightness and of warmth,

Of fragrance and of dew,

Who having joy in life and growth,

Finds pleasures ever new ;

To herbs the earth, and trees the heaven caressing,

Alike He gives His soft and sunny blessing. 2

(2) But the Holy Spirit also comes as a mighty rushing wind,

as He came of old, and then He comes with great and stirring

power ; and the Church has so known the Holy Spirit s coming

in the times of great revival. He comes to spirits, invigorating

and renewing them until they have a new life, as if it were life

from the dead.

And every virtue we possess,

And every conflict won,

And every thought of holiness

Are His alone.

D. L. Ritchie. 3 T. T. Lynch, The Rivulet,, 149.

ACTS ii. 4 33

Oh ! that God s Spirit would come in both ways to the Church

to-day, kissing spirits until they live, moving and thrilling the

heart of the Church until there is a great revival of spiritual

religion, and a quickening and bracing of all the powers of

righteousness in our beloved land.

Hail, mightiest and bounteous wind,

Distributor of wealth,

Who giving, comest to confirm

Or to restore our health ;

A blessing thou, bright energy diffusing,

For every other blessing s happiest using. 1

(3) And there is another function of the wind. It is some

times a winnowing wind, separating chaff from grain, the false

from the true ; or it sometimes comes as a blight. There is, for

example, the sirocco that starts in the heart of Africa, and, with

its blighting breath, passes over whole tracts of country, leaving

nothing but destruction in its train. Yes ! the wind blights as

well as gives health and strength; and so does God s Spirit.

God s Spirit gives health and vigour to every virtue we possess,

and it seeks to blight for ever every sin that besets our nature

or reigns in our life.

A rushing, mighty wind across the sky,

A swirling, swinging, roaring, ringing breath

Which seen) s to fill the world, as. flying by,

It sweeps the pathway both of life and death.

Into our hearts it blows, and bears away

All evil thoughts, all hate, and strife, and sin,

All dust of hopes and fears and sorrows grey,

To let the light of love and truth within.

So Charity shall come, a living flame,

A fire divine, a firm and steady glow,

The pulsing light of life, for aye the same,

To make us tender kindly words to know.

Thus, year by year, the nodding, bending trees,

Whose sentient branches swiftly bear along

The cleansing, rushing, purifying breeze,

Shall sing Earth s mighty Pentecostal song. 2

1 T. T. Lynch, The. Rivulet, 149.

3 M. A. B. Evans, The Moonlight Sonata,, 118.

ACTS & ROM. 3

34 WHITSUN DAY

Fir*

Fire has three uses it gives light, it gives heat, and it

purifies.

(1) The Spirit of G-od comes to us as light. It comes to

enlighten us, to show us the meaning or God s blessed Word, to

explain to us what God is, and what our blessed Saviour s life and

death meant for us ; and so to teach us many things which we

cannot know without Him. So we say in the Collect for this

day that God did teach the hearts of His faithful people, by

sending to them the Light of His Holy Spirit. And so, according

to one interpretation, the Day of Pentecost is called Whitsun Day

because God gave to His disciples " wit," i.e. " wisdom," as the

word " wit " used to mean. 1

K " It is with man s Soul," says Carlyle, " as it was with

Nature : the beginning of Creation is Light." And of Conversion

he says : " Blame not the word, rejoice rather that such a word,

signifying such a thing, has come to light in our modern Era,

though hidden from the wisest Ancients. The Old World knew

nothing of Conversion ; instead of an Ecce Homo, they had only

some Choice of Hercules. It was a new-attained progress in the

Moral Development of man : hereby has the Highest come home

to the bosoms of the most Limited; what to Plato was but a

hallucination, and to Socrates a chimera, is now clear and certain

to your Zinzendorfs, your Wesleys, and the poorest of their

Pietists and Methodists." 2

Spirit, guiding us aright,

Spirit, making darkness light,

Spirit of resistless might,

Hear us, Holy Spirit.

(2) Fire gives heat as well as light. The Holy Spirit not only

teaches us about God and about Christ, but He makes our hearts

flame up in love to Him.

With feet of burning brass,

When times are dark as night,

Thou through the world dost pass,

Consuming in our sight

Dry trees and withering grass,

With dreadful, happy light.

1 T. Teignmouth Shore. s Sartor Resartus. Bk. ii

ACTS ii. 4 35

O thou consuming fire,

Why should I fear thy flame,

Who purpose and desire

To burn what Thou shalt blame,

111 weeds, and every brier

Of folly and of shame ?

With shining beams that smite

The chains of darkness through,

Thou smilest in the height,

And all things smile anew;

Thy heat, in subtle might,

Works with the gentle dew.

Thou creating fire,

I feel thy warmth benign;

My hopes a flowering spire

Arise, unfold, and shine;

And fruits that I desire

Shall soon be mine and Thine. 1

(3) And fire is used to purify. Have you ever seen a piece of

ore ? It looks like a bit of common, hard, dirty rock, with just

here and there a little, tiny, bright spot. You might hammer

away at it for a long time trying to get those little pieces of

metal out of it, and you would splinter it all about, and not

succeed in getting the metal after all. But take it to a fur

nace, and there the fierce red and white heat will burn up all the

dross, and the pure metal streams forth. A great deal of what is

earthy is mixed up in our natures with a little that is pure ; then

the Spirit of God descends like illuminating and purifying fire.

By all our trials and discipline, that Spirit purges out of us all

that is base, and false, and earthy. "Our God is a consuming

fire," but He will consume only the dross, and will set free the

true gold of our nature, so that it may be one day pure enough to

be formed into part of the Crown of the King, and to flash in its

loveliness and beauty in the eternal glory of the Father s presence.

Those delicate wanderers,

The wind, the star, the cloud,

Ever before mine eyes

As to an altar bowed,

Sighs and dew-laden aire

Offer in sacrifice.

1 T. T. Lynch, The RwuUi, 121.

36 WHITSUN DAY

The offerings arise:

Hazes of rainbow light,

Pure crystal, blue, and gold,

Through dreamland take their flight;

And mid the sacrifice

God moveth as of old.

In miracles of fire

He symbols forth His days;

In gleams of crystal light

Reveals what pure pathwaye

Lead to the soul s desire,

The silence of the height 1

II.

FILLED WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Let us now inquire what is meant by the words " filled with

the Holy Spirit." Very many people have had their minds more

or less exercised touching the blessing of the " baptism of the

Holy Spirit," as it is often termed. Not a few have been hindered,

if not actually thrown back, in their spiritual course, simply for

lack of a little instruction in the very first principles of the

doctrine concerning the Person, offices, and work of the Holy

Spirit.

1. The first point to be recognized, as clearly set forth in the

Scriptures, is the fact, that all Christians have the Holy Spirit.

They have not only been brought under His influence, but they

have received the Holy Spirit Himself. " If any man have not the

Spirit of Christ, he is none of his " (Eom. viii. 9).

2. At the same time we must recognize the fact that to have

the Spirit is one thing, but to be filled with the Spirit is quite

another thing. We know from what is recorded in St. John s

Gospel that even before the Ascension the Holy Ghost had

actually been given to the disciples, that Christ breathed upon

them the Holy Ghost. But on the Day of Pentecost they were

filled with the Holy Ghost.

^[ There are upon the whole two main aspects or phases of the

*"A. K."

ACTS ii. 4 37

fulness of the Spirit. There is a special, critical phase, in which

at a great crisis it comes out in marked, and perhaps wholly

abnormal, manifestation, as when it enables the man or woman

to utter supernatural prediction or proclamation. And there is

also what we may call the habitual phase, where it is used to

describe the condition of this or that believer s life day by day

and in its normal course. Thus the Seven were not so much

specially " filled " as known to be " full " ; and so was Barnabas.

Into this holy habitual fulness Paul entered, it appears, at his

baptism. On the other hand, the same Paul experienced from

time to time the other and abnormal sort of filling ; and it thus

results that the same man might in one respect be full while in

another he needed to be filled. 1

3. What, then, have we to do in order to be " filled with the

Spirit " ? The answer to this question is not far to seek, for

Christ has said, "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye

shall find ; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." For " if ye

being evil know how to give good gifts unto your children, how

much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to

them that ask Him ? " (Luke xi. 9-13). If, therefore, we want to

be filled with the Holy Spirit, then indeed we are not far from

receiving the rich blessings of the gift, but we must want the

blessing and want it earnestly, for the Holy Spirit will not fill

unwilling hearts. But we have great encouragement to ask. He

has promised, and He has repeatedly fulfilled His promise. We

cannot ask more than He has already given in many lives.

Did we dare

In our agony of prayer,

Ask for more than He has done?

When was ever His right hand

Over any time or land

Stretched as now beneath the sun ?

Ill

TRANSFORMED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT.

" They began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave

them utterance."

The words of the text are significant, and not the less so

1 H. 0. G. Moule, Veni Creator, 21 1 .

38 WHITSUN DAY

because, in some measure, symbolic. We must find the meaning

which the symbolism contains. We have already been thinking

of the symbols under which the Holy Spirit came wind and fire,

and how these symbols characterise the work of the Holy Spirit

in us ; we shall now see how the same symbols are connected

with the gift of speaking with tongues. Wind is symbolic of

power ; fiery tongues are symbolic of inspired speech " fchey

spake as the Spirit gave them utterance."

i. The Immediate Results.

1. Speaking with tongues. The Authorized Version by

speaking of " cloven " tongues, and Christian painters by their

pictorial representations, have imported into the scene an

unauthorized feature. It has been supposed that a bishop s

mitre, with its divided crest, was first suggested by this erroneous

idea of the shape of the tongues which rested upon the heads of

the Apostles. The word translated " cloven " should be rendered

K dividing " or " distributing themselves." The flame-like forms

descended into the Upper Chamber in a body or compact mass,

and then at once scattered themselves over the assembled

company, one lighting upon the head of each. The original

language seems to imply that it rested there for a moment only,

and then suddenly vanished, symbolizing perhaps its transitory

nature as a gift of tongues.

Now in histories of this kind we are always under a tempta

tion to seize upon the most extraordinary feature of the story,

and to take that as the essence of the whole. Thus one of the

popular ideas of Whitsun Day has been that it commemorates the

gift of languages to the Apostles, by which, though uneducated

men, they were qualified in a moment of time to preach the

Gospel to every nation under heaven. But, indeed, this gift of

tongues (even if it were what is here supposed) is but a small

part of the matter. The gift of tongues concerned only one

generation, at any rate, and a very few individuals.

2. The greatest miracle of that day was the transformation

wrought in the waiting disciples. Their fire-baptism transfigured

them. Every part of their nature was vitalized, invigorated, and

transformed in fire. Its effect upon their knowledge was all that

ACTS ii. 4 39

Christ had promised it should be. Their eyes were opened, their

memories quickened, and their minds inspired. How clear all

things appeared now that the Spirit shone upon them ! The

Cross, the Kesurrection, and the Kingdom were all seen in their

true meaning. Peter s address reveals an illumined intelligence,

an apt and accurate interpreter, an Apostle on fire. The coming

of the Spirit had turned the fisherman into a teacher, orator, and

evangelist. The tongue of fire gave forth the word of wisdom

and of power. As men listened they found their minds informed,

their reasons convinced, their souls convicted, and their wills

persuaded. The Apostles themselves became new men. They

now no longer coveted wealth or power, or the honour of this

world; they no longer desired to have again the kingdom

restored to Israel, so that the Jewish dream of earthly dominion

should be theirs, one of them sitting on the right hand of the

King, and one on the left, each and all anxious to be first and

highest. No, the unseen and everlasting world had been opened

to their gaze, and they now saw all earthly things in their true

light. The only real wealth was wealth within, purified and

loving hearts. The only real honour was the honour that comes

from God, the honour of God s likeness ; above all, the honour of

bringing many sons to God, multitudes of men and women

delivered from evil and saved eternally. So they now preached

with power ; even the power of the Holy Ghost Himself ;

and this very day of Pentecost three thousand were added

to their number, three thousand who the other day might

have been among those that cried, " Crucify him, crucify

him."

^ The moral change wrought in the disciples, by the new

baptism of the Spirit, is strikingly displayed in the case of one

man. A difficult service was to be performed in Jerusalem that

day. Had it been desired to find a man in London who would

have gone down to Whitehall a few weeks after Charles was

beheaded, and, addressing Cromwell s soldiers, have endeavoured

to persuade them that he whom they had executed was not only

a King and a good one, but a Prophet of God, and that, therefore,

they had been guilty of more than regicide, of sacrilege ; although

England had brave men then, it may be questioned whether any

one could have been found to bear such a message to that audience.

The service which had then to be performed in Jerusalem was

40 WHITSUN DAY

similar to this. It was needful that some one should stand up under

the shadow of the temple, and, braving chief priests and inob

alike, assert that He whom they had shamefully executed seven

weeks ago was Israel s long-looked-for Messiah; that they had

been guilty of a sin which had no name ; had raised their hands

against " God manifest in the flesh " ; had, in words strange to

human ears, " killed the Prince of Life." Who was thus to

confront the rage of the mob, and the malice of the Priests ?

We see a man rising, filled with a holy fire, so that he totally

forgets his danger, and seems not even conscious that he is doing

an heroic act. He casts back upon the mockers their charge, and

proceeds to open and to press home his tremendous accusation, as

if he were a king upon a throne, and each man before him a

lonely and defenceless culprit.

Who is this man ? Have we not seen him before ? Is it

possible that it can be Peter ? We know him of old : he has a

good deal of zeal, but little steadiness; he means well, and,

when matters are smooth, can serve well; but when difficulties

and adversaries rise before him, his moral courage fails. How

short a time is it ago since we saw him tried ! He had been

resolving that, come what might, he would stand by his Master to

the last. Others might flinch, he would stand. Soon the Master

was in the hands of enemies. Yet His case was by no means lost.

The Governor was on His side ; many of the people were secretly

for Him ; nothing could be proved against Him ; and, above all,

He who had saved others could save Himself. Yet, as Peter

saw scowling faces, his courage failed. A servant-maid looked

into his eye, and his eye fell. She said she thought he belonged

to Jesus of Nazareth : his heart sank, and he said, " No." Then

another looked in his face, and repeated the same suspicion. Now,

of course, he was more cowardly, and repeated his " No." A third

looked upon him, and insisted that he belonged to the accused

Prophet. Now his poor heart was all fluttering ; and, to make it

plain that he had nothing to do with Jesus of Nazareth, he began

to curse and swear.

Is it within the same breast where this pale and tremulous

heart quaked that we see glowing a brave heart which dreads

neither the power of the authorities nor the violence of the

populace; which faces every prejudice and every vice of

Jerusalem, every bitter Pharisee and every street brawler, as if

they were no more than straying and troublesome sheep ? Is the

Peter of Pilate s hall the Peter of Pentecost, with the same

natural powers, the same natural force of character, the same

training, and the same resolutions ? If so, what a difference is

ACTS n. 4 41

made in a man by the one circumstance of being filled with the

Holy Ghost I 1

ii, The Permanent Results.

1. The descent of the Holy Ghost was preceded by " a rushing

mighty wind " which " filled all the house where they were

sitting." It bespeaks the irresistible force of the Spirit, and the

fact that it filled the whole chamber would seem to be

emblematical of the universality of its influence. Apart, then,

from its immediate effect upon the assemblage there gathered

together, it was the first-fruits of the indwelling of the Holy

Ghost in the whole mystical Body of Christ s Church in all places

and through all time. It is this that marks off the Dispensa

tion of the Spirit from those Dispensations which had preceded

it. God had deigned to be present with special people, and

at special times; He had even caused an embodiment of His

presence to be manifested in a special place, resting like a cloud

of glory above the mercy-seat. And again, God had been present

in the Person of His Incarnate Son among the inhabitants of

Palestine, but in both cases the Divine Presence had been circum

scribed and local only; but from that first Whitsuntide and

onwards God has enabled men, through the doctrine of the Blessed

Trinity, to realise His Presence everywhere, and what before seemed

to men to be local only has become universal.

2. To the Jews in the wilderness and to the people in

Palestine, the Presence of God was wholly external, outside of them

selves, but now it is within ; " Know ye not," says St. Paul, " that

ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth ID

you ? " He meant to remind us of the inspiring thought that as

the indwelling Spirit is felt to be ever prompting us to do what

is right, so it should act as a deterrent from doing what is wrong.

He meant us to realize that every time we yield to temptation,

we sin not only against a God above and about us, but also

against a God within us.

3. The life so filled is transformed. There may be some who

will ask, Does the Holy Sfjirit still fill the hearts of men and

transform, their lives, as we read that He did in the days qf the

i W. Arthur, Tlie Tonyue of Fire, 63.

42 WHITSUN DAY

Apostles* The answer to the question is one which rests on

experience ; it is not a matter of correct interpretation of symbols.

We may easily go astray in interpreting symbols, and we need

the valuable reminder which Dr. Swete gives us that when we

have translated the words of the Bible into the terms of modern

philosophy we have only substituted one set of symbols for

another. The modern symbols may be more intelligible and less

likely to be misunderstood than the old ones ; but the ultimate

truths will not be reached until we have passed, in the words

which Cardinal Newman chose for his own epitaph, ex umbris et

imaginibus in veritatem. 1 Let us quote the words of Dr. Swete in

answer to this question : " Communion with God through Christ

in the Holy Spirit is not a theory or a dogma, but a fact of

personal knowledge to which tens of thousands of living Christians

can testify as the most certain of actualities." *

U Let us go back a century and a half ago, and compare the

condition of things then with the condition of things to-day. In

the year 1724 " gin-drinking infected the mass of the population

with the violence of an epidemic." It is said that every sixth

house in London was a gin-palace. Hogarth s cartoon retains the

sign which stood outside the doors of these drinking dens " Here

you may get drunk for a penny ; dead drunk for twopence straw

provided." The public-houses were open all night. Public opinion

did not hold the character of any man to suffer through drunken

ness. Dr. Johnson says to Boswell : " I remember, sir, when every

decent person in Lichfield got drunk every night and nobody thought

the worse of them." It was the mark of a gentleman to get

drunk, and the standard of comparison was as " drunk as a lord."

Again, in the social habits of the upper classes profane swearing

was held to be a mark of good breeding, and to take the name of

God in vain in almost every sentence was the mark of a gentle

man and even of a lady. Look again at the sports of the people,

perhaps the truest index to their character. On the Sunday the

people gathered for cock-fighting, bull-baiting, and other cruel

sports. If we could have stepped into the midst of the eager and

excited crowd we might have cried indignantly " This ought to

be put down by law." But how impossible it would have seemed,

How indignantly it would have been scouted. The members of

Parliament were the ringleaders of the sport. The clergy thought

themselves fortunate to own a winning bird. Now where is all

that gone ? What has made drunkenness a low and beastly

* The Ghiardicm, 3rd February 1911. Swete, The Ascended Christ.

ACTS n. 4 43

habit ? What has made swearing an utterly vulgar thing ? Why

has the law stepped in and put down cruel sports ? Do you say

that education has become more general, and that culture has

brought in other and more refined tastes? No; it was the

educated and cultured classes who led the fashion in these things.

There is but one explanation. Wesley and Whitefield were filled

with the Holy Ghost, and as they preached here and there a

little company of men and women were converted not many in

comparison with the masses of the nation. And these converted

men and women went forth amongst the neighbours and began

to live a Christlike life. Each became a new moral standard

amongst them. Each was a skylight through which the heavens

shone down into the midst of the little community. Each of

them witnessed that there was another life than that to which

they had been accustomed, and that in every way a better and

happier life. Each became a living conscience in which things

were so much more definitely black or white than they used to

be blessedly good or uncomfortably bad. Each was a window

through which men and women saw beyond the little present out

into the eternities and the infinities. That wrought the reforma

tion witnesses unto Me. 1

Oh, turn me, mould me, mellow me for use.

Pervade my being with thy vital force,

That this else inexpressive life of mine

May become eloquent and full of power,

Impregnated with life and strength divine.

Put the bright torch of heaven into my hand,

That I may carry it aloft

And win the eye of weary wanderers here below

To guide their feet into the paths of peace.

I cannot raise the dead,

Nor from this soil pluck precious dust,

Nor bid the sleeper wake,

Nor still the storm, nor bend the lightning back,

Nor muffle up the thunder,

Nor bid the chains fall from off creation s long enfettered limbs.

But I can live a life that tells on other lives,

And makes this world less full of anguish and of pain ;

A life that like the pebble dropped upon the sea

Sends its wide circles to a hundred snores.

May such a life be mine.

Creator of true life, Thyself the life Thou givest,

Give Thyself, that Thou mayest dwell in me, and I in Thee. s

1 M. G. Pewe, Horatiua Bonar,

CONSTABLE,"Spirit filling and Spirit baptism are two distinct ministries of the Holy

Spirit. Both occurred on this occasion, though Luke 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 (Acts 1:5). Moreover, Peter spoke of it

as having taken place on Pentecost a short time later (Acts 11:15-16). [Note: See

Fruchtenbaum, pp. 116-17.]

Filling with the Spirit was a phenomenon believers experienced at various times in the

Old Testament economy (Exodus 35:30-34; Numbers 11:26-29; 1 Samuel 10:6; 1 Samuel

10:10) 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; Acts

4:31; Acts 6:3; Acts 6:5; Acts 7:55; Acts 9:17; Acts 13:9; Acts 13:52). Furthermore God

has commanded all believers to be filled with the Spirit (Ephesians 5:18). Luke used

"filling" to express the Holy Spirit's presence and enablement. [Note: Bock, "A Theology

. . .," pp. 98-99.] Filling by the Spirit results in the Spirit's control of the believer

(Ephesians 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 we 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. Acts 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 (Acts 2:4; Acts 4:8; Acts 4:31; Acts 9:17; Acts 13:9). [Note: Frederick R. Harm,

"Structural Elements Related to the Gift of the Holy Spirit in Acts," Concordia Journal

14:1 (January 1988):30.]

"... Luke always connects the 'filling of the Holy Spirit' with the proclamation of the

gospel in Acts (Acts 2:4; Acts 4:8; Acts 4:31; Acts 9:17; Acts 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; Acts 6:5; Acts 7:55; Acts 11:24; Acts 13:52)." [Note: Walt

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

1986):63.]

"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."

[Note: Barclay, pp. 12, 13.]

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 (Romans 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 (Acts 8:17; Acts 10:45; Acts 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. [Note: See my comments on these verses in these notes

for further explanations.] Spirit baptism always unites a believer to the body of Christ (1

Corinthians 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. Matthew 16:18).

Speaking with other tongues 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 (Acts

10:46; Acts 19:6). In each case it was primarily for the benefit of Jews present, who as a

people sought a sign from God to mark His activity, that God gave this sign (Luke 11:16;

John 4:48; 1 Corinthians 1:22). [Note: See William G. Bellshaw, "The Confusion of

Tongues," Bibliotheca Sacra 120:478 (April-June 1963):145-53.]

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 Corinthians 12:7). [Note: E.g., Jack Deere, Surprised

by the Power of the Spirit, pp. 134-36.]

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." [Note: E. 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.]

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 miracle-working had passed by also, as a mere matter of course." [Note:

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

". . . 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." [Note: Joel 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.]

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; Acts 7:51; Hebrews 2:2-4; 1 Corinthians 14:20-22). [Note: See S. Lewis

Johnson Jr., "The Gift of Tongues and the Book of Acts," Bibliotheca Sacra 120:480

(October-December 1963):309-11.] 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 speak to them in a foreign language

because they refused to pay attention to Isaiah's words to them in their own language

(Isaiah 28:11; cf. 1 Corinthians 14:21). Jews who knew this prophecy and were listening

to Peter should have recognized 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. [Note: Barclay, p. 16.] 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." [Note: Harm, p. 30.]

"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]." [Note: Witherington, p. 133.]

". . . the startling effect of the phenomenon on those who in difficult circumstances

desperately wished otherwise (as in Acts 4:13-16; Acts 10:28-29; Acts 11:1-3; Acts

11:15-18; and Acts 15:1-12) supports the purpose of authentication (and not edification)

for the sign gifts." [Note: J. Lanier Burns, "A Reemphasis on the Purpose of the Sign

Gifts," Bibliotheca Sacra 132:527 (July-September 1975):245.]

God gave the gift of tongues also to rouse the nation of Israel to repentance (1 Corinthians

14:22-25). [Note: Zane 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.]

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 (Acts 2:6; Acts 2:8).

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 Corinthians 14), but at other times, as at Pentecost, one was not.

Instances of Speaking in Tongues in Acts

Reference

Tongues-speakers

Audience

Relation to conversion

Purpose

Acts 2:1-4

Jewish believers

Unsaved Jews and Christians

Sometime after conversion

To validate (for Jews) God's working as Joel prophesied

Acts 10:44-47

Gentile believers

Jewish believers who doubted God's plan

Immediately after conversion

To validate (for Jews) God's working among Gentiles as He had among Jews

Acts 19:1-7

Believers

Jews who needed confirmation of Paul's message

Immediately after conversion

To validate (for Jews) Paul's gospel message

Were the tongues here the same as in Corinth (1 Corinthians 12; 1 Corinthians 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? [Note: See Kent, pp. 30-32, for a clear presentation of these views.]

"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. 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." [Note: Johnson, pp. 310-11. See also

Rackham, p. 21. Longenecker, p. 271, pointed out the differences between tongues in

Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 12, 14.]

Probably, then, the gift of tongues was a term that covered speaking in a language or

languages that the speaker had never studied. 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 (Acts 2:3; Acts 2:7-11). It

has been suggested that the tongues speaking on the day of Pentecost was not a normal

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

(miracle) instead. [Note: See my note on 19:6 for further comments on the cessation of

the gift of tongues.]

God gave three signs of the Spirit's coming to the Jews who were celebrating the Feast of

Passover 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] [Note: L. S.

Chafer, He That Is Spiritual, pp. 19-21.]

5ow there were staying in Jerusalem God-

fearing Jews from every nation under heaven.

These were already God fearing Jews who were a part of the family of God, but they

had not yet receive the Messiah as their Savior. It says every nation under heaven,

but that means according to their knowledge at the time. Today we know of many

places they did not know existed, and so it is an absolute statement that is really

quite relative to the full picture of the whole world. This became the greatest

missionary effort ever, for these people went back to share all over the known

world.

BARNES, "There were dwelling at Jerusalem - The word rendered “dwelling” -

κατοικο/ντες katoikountes - properly means to have a fixed and permanent habitation, in

distinction from another word - παροικο/ντες paroikeountes - which means to have a

temporary and transient residence in a place. But it is not always confined to this signification; and it is not improbable that many wealthy foreign Jews had a permanent residence in Jerusalem for the convenience of being near the temple. This was the more

probable, as about that time the Messiah was expected to appear, Matt. 2.

Jews - Jews by birth; of Jewish descent and religion.

Devout men - Dνδρες�EυλαβεGς andres�eulabēis. Literally, men of cautious and

circumspect lives, or who lived in a prudent manner. The term is then applied to men who were cautious about offending God; who were careful to observe his commandments. It is hence a general expression to denote pious or religious men, Act_8:2, “And devout men carried Stephen to his burial”; Luk_2:25,” And the same man (Simeon) was just, and devout.” The word “devout” means “yielding a solemn and reverential attention to God in religious exercises, particularly in prayer, pious, sincere, solemn” (Webster), and very well expresses the force of the original.

Out of every nation under heaven - A general expression meaning from all parts of the earth. The countries from which they came are more particularly specified in Act_2:9-11. The Jews at that time were scattered into almost all nations, and in all places had synagogues. See the Joh_7:35 note; Jam_1:1 note; 1Pe_1:1 note. Still they would naturally desire to be present as often as possible at the great feasts of the nation in Jerusalem. Many would seek a residence there for the convenience of being present at the religious solemnities. Many who came up to the Feast of the Passover would remain to the Feast of the Pentecost. The consequence of this would be, that on such occasions the city would be full of strangers. We are told that when Titus besieged Jerusalem, an event which occurred at about the time of the Feast of the Passover, there were no less than three million people in the city.

Josephus also mentions an instance in which great multitudes of Jews from other nations were present at the feast of Pentecost (Jewish Wars, book 2, chapter 3, section 1). What is here stated as occurring at that time is true of the inhabitants of Jerusalem -four or five thousand in number who reside there now. A large portion of them are from abroad. Prof. Hackett (Illustrations of Scripture, p. 228, 229) says of them, “Few of them, comparatively, are natives of the country. The majority of them are aged persons, who repair to the holy city to spend the remainder of their days and secure the privilege of being buried in the Valley of the Kedron, which, as their traditions assert, is to be the scene of the last judgment. At the Jews’ Wailing Place one day I met a venerable man, bowed with age, apparently beyond 80, who told me that, in obedience to his sense of duty, he had forsaken his children and home in England, and had come, unattended by any friend, to die and make his grave at Jerusalem. Others of them are those who come here to fulfill a vow, or acquire the merit of a pilgrimage, and then return to the countries where they reside. Among them may be found representatives from almost every land, though the Spanish, Polish, and German Jews compose the greater number.

Like their brethren in other parts of Palestine, except a few in some commercial places, they are wretchedly poor, and live chiefly on alms contributed by their countrymen in Europe and America. They devote most of their time to holy employments, as they are called; they frequent the synagogues, roam over the country to visit places memorable in their ancient history, and read assiduously the Old Testament and the writings of their rabbis. Those of them who make any pretensions to learning understand the Hebrew and rabbinic, and speak as their vernacular tongue the language of the country where they formerly lived, or whence their fathers emigrated.”

CLARKE,"Devout men, out of every nation - Either by these we are simply to understand Jews who were born in different countries, and had now come up to Jerusalem to be present at the passover, and for purposes of traffic, or proselytes to Judaism, who had come up for the same purpose: for I cannot suppose that the term

ανδρες�ευλαβεις, devout men, can be applied to any other. At this time there was scarcely

a commercial nation under heaven where the Jews had not been scattered for the purpose of trade, merchandize, etc., and from all these nations, it is said, there were persons now present at Jerusalem.

GILL, "And there were dwelling at Jerusalem, Jews,.... The Ethiopic version adds, "proselytes"; but they were not all such, as appears from the following account of them; many, and it seems the most of them were of Jewish extract and descent, and others were proselytes to the Jewish religion: these were not natives of Jerusalem, but such as were born in other countries, Act_2:8 but were come to Jerusalem, either to learn the Hebrew language, which was necessary to their reading and understanding the books of Moses, and the prophets written in it; or for an increase of spiritual knowledge and piety; or, as is generally thought, to keep the feast of Pentecost; or rather, as Dr. Lightfoot thinks, they were come hither in great numbers from all parts, in expectation of the Messiah and his kingdom; the time being up, according to Daniel's weeks, and other prophecies, that he should appear: and these were

devout men; men of religion and piety, of faith and holiness; and as the Syriac version renders it, "who feared God"; for in these worst of times, among this wicked generation of men, there were some who had the fear of God before their eyes, and on their hearts; and these were collected from different quarters, to be witnesses of this amazing dispensation: for they came

out of every nation under heaven; that is, wherever the Jews were dispersed; being the descendants of those that were carried captive at different times, and into different places; as by Salmanezer, Nebuchadnezzar, Ptolomy Lagus, Antiochus, and in other lesser dispersions.

HENRY, "We have here an account of the public notice that was taken of this extraordinary gift with which the disciples were all on a sudden endued. Observe,

I. The great concourse of people that there was now at Jerusalem, it should seem more than was usual at the feast of pentecost. There were dwelling or abiding at JerusalemJews that were devout men, disposed to religion, and that had the fear of God before their eyes (so the word properly signifies), some of them proselytes of righteousness,that were circumcised, and admitted members of the Jewish church, others only proselytes of the gate, that forsook idolatry, and gave up themselves to the worship of the true God, but not to the ceremonial law; some of those that were at Jerusalem now, out of every nation under heaven, whither the Jews were dispersed, or whence proselytes were come. The expression is hyperbolical, denoting that there were some from most of the then known parts of the world; as much as ever Tyre was, or London is, the rendezvous of trading people from all parts, Jerusalem at that time was of religious people from all parts. Now, 1. We may here see what were some of those countries whence those strangers came (Act_2:9-11), some from the eastern countries, as the Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and dwellers in Mesopotamia, the posterity of Shem; thence we come in order to Judea, which ought to be mentioned, because, though the language of those in Judea was the same with that which the disciples spoke, yet, before, they spoke it with the north-country tone and dialect (Thou art a Galilean, and thy speech betrays thee), but now they spoke it as correctly as the inhabitants of Judea themselves did. Next come the inhabitants of Cappadocia, Pontus, and that country

about Propontis which was particularly called Asia, and these were the countries in which those strangers were scattered to whom St. Peter writes. 1Pe_1:1. Next come the dwellers in Phrygia and Pamphylia, which lay westward, the posterity of Japhet, as were also the strangers of Rome; there were some also that dwelt in the southern parts of Egypt, in the parts of Libya about Cyrene; there were also some from the island of Crete, and some from the deserts of Arabia; but they were all either Jews originally, dispersed into those countries; or proselytes to the Jewish religion, but natives of those countries. Dr. Whitby observes that the Jewish writers about this time, as Philo and Josephus, speak of the Jews as dwelling every where through the whole earth; and that there is not a people upon earth among whom some Jews do not inhabit. 2. We may enquire what brought all those Jews and proselytes together to Jerusalem at this time: not to make a transient visit thither to the feast of pentecost, for they are said to dwell there. They took lodgings there, because there was at this time a general expectation of the appearing of the Messiah; for Daniel's weeks had just now expired, the sceptre had departed from Judah, and it was then generally thought that the kingdom of God would immediately appear, Luk_19:11. This brought those who were most zealous and devout to Jerusalem, to sojourn there, that they might have an early share in the kingdom of the Messiah and the blessings of that kingdom.

JAMISON, "there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men out of every nation — not, it would seem, permanently settled there (see Act_2:9), though the language seems to imply more than a temporary visit to keep this one feast.

HAWKER 5-11, "And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. (6) Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. (7) And they were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? (8) And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? (9) Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, (10) Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, (11) Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

It is well worthy the observation of the Reader, how the Lord, by the ordinary method of his providence, overruled this event, that it should take place at this particular season, to render it more public to the world. As the death and resurrection of Christ took place at the first great Jewish feast, the Passover, so the first coming of the Holy Ghost, in this signal and open display of divine power, should take place at the second great feast of Pentecost, Hence both were so admirably timed, that multitudes from all parts, which came up for the sake of trade, at those Jewish feasts at Jerusalem, should be eye and ear witnesses to the Lord’s glory. Reader! think of these things, and learn to reverence and adore the Lord, both in the appointments of his providences, as well as in the manifestations of his grace.

The consternation occasioned in Jerusalem by these prodigies, may be better conceived than described. Let the Reader figure to himself those poor humble fishermen of Galilee, the natives of a little despised city, whose inhabitants were dull and unlearned, even to a proverb, (Joh_1:46.) let him fancy that he beholds one Apostle speaking to a Parthian, another to a Mede, another to an Elamite, without the help of an interpreter, as had always been done before; and let him call to mind that the Apostles addresses were not

of earthly things, but of the wonderful works of God, and then let him pause and ponder over the Almighty ministry of God the Spirit! Here were no less than fifteen different nations of the earth brought together on this occasion, and all of them distinguished by a different language. And to these different nations those poor, humble, untaught fishermen of Galilee, were at once qualified to talk on the great things of God in their own mother tongue in which they were born with the greatest fluency of language! What will the Reader say to these things? What less could it be than the power of God, and the wisdom of God, speaking in them and by them to the blessed purposes of salvation? Jesus had said that his disciples should speak with new tongues. And here we see the Lord’s promise fulfilled, Mar_16:17. And, Reader! shall not you and I depend upon the promises of Jesus?

I beg to call the Reader’s attention to one beauty as discoverable in this miracle, which perhaps in the first view may not so immediately strike him; I mean the wonderful circumstance with which God the Holy Ghost here begun his ministry, in restoring to his servants, the Apostles, the use of tongues, which was made confusion in the first instance at the building of Babel. In the early world, when the Sin of men taught rebellion against God, the Lord confounded their language. Before this, the whole earth was of one language, and one speech, Gen_11:1-9. And it was God’s own language. It was sacred. It was divine. And no doubt it was a blessing to mankind. For it not only promoted a general intercourse and good will between man and man, but being the sacred language, it tended to preserve the knowledge of the Lord throughout the earth. But, when for sin man lost this privilege, what difficulties for apprehension must have occurred? But, who should have thought, that in the designs and stores of omnipotency, the Lord would have made this sin of man the very foundation of bringing forth greater mercy, and have made that which sprung out of evil to become the very means of greater good? And yet so it was. This miracle of enabling the Apostles to speak various languages in a moment of time, would never have had an opportunity for display, had not the tower of Babel, and the confusion of tongues taken place. So that here, as in a thousand instances beside, the Lord overrules the unworthiness of his creatures to his glory, and renders their weakness the means of manifesting his strength. Oh! the depths of the riches both of the wisdom, and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out, Rom_11:33.

CONSTABLE, "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; Acts 7:2; Acts 7:4; Acts 7:48; Acts 9:22; Acts 11:29; Acts 13:27; Acts 17:24; Acts 17:26; and Acts 22:12, and these suggest permanence compared with epidemeo ("sojourning") in Acts 2:10.

"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." [Note: Neil, p. 73. Cf. Kent, p. 30, n. 9.]

A list of nations from which they had come follows in Acts 2:9-10. The sound that attracted attention may have been the wind (Acts 2:2) or the sound of the tongues speakers (Acts 2:4). The Greek word translated "noise" in Acts 2:2 is echos, but the word rendered "sound" in Acts 2:6 is phones. The context seems to favor the sound of the tongues speakers. Acts 2:2 says the noise filled the house where the disciples were, but

there is no indication that it was heard outside the house. Also Acts 2:6 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 this day (Acts 2:41) the multitude (Acts 2:6) must have numbered many thousands. About 200,000 people could assemble in the temple area. [Note: J. P. Polhill, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 118, footnote 135; Joachim Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus, p. 83.] This fact has led some interpreters to assume that that may have been where this multitude congregated.

UNKNOWN, "V. 5 - Luke identified various groups (v. 9-11) who were hearing and

seeing the heavenly event, as the apostles spoke "the mighty works of God." The people

were characterized as devout (cf. Luke 2:25), and dwellers in Jerusalem. It may be that

they dwelt there permanently, or were temporary dwellers from Passover to Pentecost.

The point is made that all were Jews, in sympathy if not by birth. One can think of the

tower of Babel where God brought confusion by mixing languages. Now He unites

through the same medium. It is important to note that no Scripture can be cited that shows

such a gift was used to "evangelize" or used other than in a meeting of brethren.

CALVI 5 TO 12 5. And there were at Jerusalem. When he calleth them godly or

religious men, he seemeth to give us to understand that they came to Jerusalem that they

might worship God; like as God, in all ages, after the scattering abroad, did gather

together into that city some seed which remained, having, as it were, set up his banner,

because as yet the temple did serve to some use. Yet, nevertheless, he showeth, by the

way, who those be which profit by those miracles, whereby God doth declare his power.

For wicked and profane men do either laugh at them, or else pass [care] not for them, as

we shall see by and by. Furthermore, he meant to cite those as witnesses, which may the

better be believed for their religion and godliness. When he said, out of every nation, he

meaneth out of divers countries, whereof one is far from another. For he doth also

afterwards reckon up those lands whereof one was far distant from another, of which sort

are Libya and Pontus, Rome and Parthia, and Arabia, and such like. This serveth to

increase the greatness of the thing. For the Cretians and men of Asia, dwelling so near

together, might have some likelihood and agreement in speech; 2 but the same could not

be betwixt the Italians and the men of Cappadocia, betwixt the Arabians and those of

Pontus. Yea, this was also a work of God worthy to be remembered and wondered at, that

in so huge and horrible a scattering abroad of the people, he did always reserve some

relics, yea, he caused certain strangers to adjoin themselves unto a people which was in

such misery, and, as it were, quite destroyed. For although they lived here and there in

exile in far countries, and being one far from another, did, as it were, inhabit divers

worlds, yet did they hold among themselves the unity of faith. Neither doth he call them

unadvisedly, and without good consideration, godly men, and men gearing God.

COFFMAN, "Heard them speaking in his own language ... Some have understood the

miracle to have been in the hearers, as in Harrison's comment:

This is not the language of religious ecstasy. By a miracle, the language of the apostles

was translated by the Holy Spirit into many diverse languages without a human translator.

This phenomenon is not the same as the glossolalia, or gift of tongues, in 1 Corinthians

14, which were unintelligible until interpreted.[19]

It is certain, however, that the miracle was not in the hearers, but in the speakers. If the

miracle is understood as being in the hearers, there would have been no need for a

plurality of speakers; yet it is clear that all the apostles were speakers; the people "heard

THEM speaking." Thus the wonder was not in the hearers, but in the speakers. After all,

it was THEY who had received the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

ENDNOTE:

[19] Everett F. Harrison, op. cit., p. 388.

COKE, "Acts 2:5. There were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, &c.— There were sojourning,

&c. κατοικουντες . Devout or pious men, is a title applied not only to those religious

persons who observed the Jewish law, but likewise to those Heathens who had renounced

idolatry, and lived a life of piety and holiness. From every nation under heavencan signify

no more than "from all the several nations among whom the Jews were dispersed." The

Jews were then so numerous, as to have spread through every country; so that, as

Agrippa, in Josephus, says, "there was not a people upon earth who had not Jews

inhabiting among them." These men were come up to Jerusalem, not only upon account

of the festival then celebrating, but in expectation of the Messiah, who was to be

manifested about that time accordingto the concurring testimony of the prophets.

ELLICOTT, "(5) There were dwelling at Jerusalem.—The phrase is one of frequent

occurrence in St. Luke’s writings (Luke 13:4; Acts 1:19; Acts 4:16). As a word, it implied

a more settled residence than the “sojourning” of Luke 24:18 (see Note), Hebrews 11:9,

but was probably sufficiently wide in its range to include the worshippers who had come

up to keep the feast.

Devout men.—For the meaning of the word see Note on Luke 2:25. The primary meaning

was one of cautious reverence, the temper that handles sacred things devoutly. As such, it

was probably used to include proselytes as well as Jews by birth. The words that are

added, “from every nation under heaven,” reduce the probability to a certainty. It appears

again in Acts 8:2.

BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR 5-11, "And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation.

The first congregation appealed to by the apostles

I. It consisted of men of many lands. The fifteen countries remind us of the dispersion of the Jews. They had been scattered on account of their sins; but the mercy of God was shown in making this punishment a way for the gospel. Jews and proselytes would return and tell their kindred of the wonders of this day. Some without design would convey to the heathen saving truth; just as fugitive traitors may build a bridge over which the saviours of their country afterwards pass; others doubtless saw here the fulfilment of their prayers that they might benefit the perishing Gentiles among whom they dwelt.

II. It represented the whole world. When the glorious news which God designed for all had to be declared for the first time, it was fitting that all should thus be represented. But on the ground of the unity of the race every congregation represents the whole world, and he who leads one soul to the Saviour makes a contribution to the aggregate of human good. What value does this put on the work of Christian agents of every class.

III. It exemplified various moral characteristics.

1. The God-fearing and worthy. They looked on the wonders with careful and devout inquiry. In seeking the salvation of sinners it is necessary to elicit the question, “What may this be?”

2. The frivolous. They preferred the vain charge of drunkenness. No doubt the excitement in part accounted for it, but it is probable that jesting was resorted to that the impressions of the moment might be resisted. This obvious way of grieving the Spirit is sometimes exhibited in criticisms on preachers.

3. The haughty who could not bear the idea of being taught by Galileans. So David had doubt cast on his ability to show any good, and our Lord was received with suspicion because He belonged to Nazareth. But a servant has sometimes been able to teach his master the truth of God, and an illiterate preacher has often convinced men of learning whom their equals had failed to reach. (W. Hudson.)

How the seed of the Word is spread

1. In the cotton factories of Lancashire there is a huge piece of machinery fifty feet in length, and containing hundreds of spindles, which moves steadily backward and forward from one side of the room to the other. It is a great triumph of skill to insert within the machine a power by which it shall move a certain distance and then stop and go back again. There was a similar contrivance in Judaism which retained the Word of God at Jerusalem till a certain time and then sent it forth from Jerusalem. This contrivance was the regulation that all the people should repair to the capital to celebrate their appointed feasts; and this regulation was observed even after the Jews had been scattered all over the world. Hence the gathering at Pentecost. Up to that period the arrangement seemed devised to keep the worship of God in one place and to forbid the spread of true religion. But now it seemed expressly invented for the universal diffusion of the gospel of Christ.

2. In a still, sultry autumn day, as you walk through the fields, your attention is arrested by a tiny sound at intervals, like an explosion in miniature, and a few seconds after a shower of tiny bails falls upon the ground. It is the bursting of seed pods in the sun. The casket that contains the seed of some plants is composed of four or five long narrow staves, joined together like Cooper work, but without the staves.

The staves are glued together at the edges, and the vessel so constructed is strong enough to contain the seed till it is ripe. But if the seeds were retained beyond that the purposes of nature would be thwarted. Accordingly at this stage there is a turning point, and the action of the machinery is reversed. The same qualities in the vessels that hold fast the seed while it is green jerk it to a distance after it is ripe. The staves of the little barrel are bent, the bursting force overcomes the adhesion and opens them with a spring that flings the seed as if from a sewer’s hand. By this contrivance, though no human hand were near, a whole field would soon be sown by seed from a single plant. Thus the law in Israel that confined the sacrifices to a single spot, and so brought Jews from all parts at Pentecost, threw the seed of the Word as by a spring out from Jerusalem into all the neighbouring nations. These Parthians, etc., were the vessels charged with precious seed at Jerusalem, and then thrown back on the several countries whence they had come. In this way the gospel was in a single season brought to regions which otherwise it might not have reached in a century. (W. Arnot.)

The visitors at Jerusalem

The list is characteristic of the trained historian and geographer—trained, it may be, in the school of Strabo—who had carefully inquired what nations were represented at that great Pentecost, who had himself been present, at least, at one later Pentecost (Act_21:15), and knew the kind of crowd that gathered to it. There is a kind of order, as of one taking a bird’s-eye view of the Roman Empire, beginning with the great Parthian kingdom, which was still, as it had been in the days of Crassus, the most formidable of its foes; then the old territory of the Medes, which had once been so closely connected with the history of their fathers; then, the name of the Persians having been thrown into the background, the kindred people of Elam (commonly rendered Persia in the LXX.), whom Strabo speaks of as driven to the mountains (11:13, § 6); then the great cities of the Tigris and Euphrates, where the “princes of the captivity” still ruled over a large Jewish population; then passing southward and westward to Judaea; then to Cappadocia, in the interior of Asia Minor; then to Pontus, on the northern shore washed by the Euxine; then westward to the Proconsular Province of Asia, of which Ephesus was the capital. From Ephesus the eye travels eastward to the neighbouring province of Phrygia; thence southward to Pamphylia; thence across the Mediterranean to Egypt; westward to Cyrene; northward, re-crossing the Mediterranean, to the great capital of the empire; then, as by an after-thought, to the two regions of Crete and Arabia that had been previously omitted. The absence of some countries that we should have expected to find in the list—Syria, Cilicia, Cyprus, Bithynia, Macedonia, Achaia, Spain—is not easy to explain, but it is, at any rate, an indication that what we have is not an artificial list made up at a later date, but an actual record of those whose presence at the feast had been ascertained by the historian. Possibly they may have been omitted, because Jews and converts coming from them would naturally speak Greek, and there would be no marvel to them in hearing Galileans speaking in that language. The presence of Judaea in the list is almost as unexpected as the absence of the others. That, we think, might have been taken for granted. Some critics have accordingly conjectured that “India” must be the true reading, but without any MS. authority. Possibly the men of Judaea are named as sharing in the wonder that the Galileans were no longer distinguished by their provincial patois (cf. Mat_26:73). (Dean Plumptre.)

We do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.—

The thousand-tongued hallelujah of the world in honour of God

I. Begun on the morning of creation in the kingdom of nature.

II. Renewed at Pentecost in the kingdom of grace.

III. Perfected, but never finished, on the day of manifestation in the kingdom of glory. (Gerok.)

The wonderful works of God

I. The subject itself. And where shall we begin? All that God does is wonderful. Let us enter—

1. The field of creation. Here, how wonderful are the works of God! Think of—

(1) Their number. Look at the heavens. Though infidelity has mocked at the idea of comparing them to the sands of the sea-shore, the discoveries of astronomy have proved it to be a fact. Look on the face of the world, how many inhabitants are there, visible and invisible!

(2) Their diversity! How large are some, and how minute are others! Take up the microscope and the telescope. What vastness in the sun! what smallness in the mite! And yet there are creatures less than these, and all of them have their peculiar qualities, tribes, families, birth, breeding, education, government. Only observe the commonwealth of the ants and the queendom of the bees!

(3) Their support. They are all provided for. There is sufficient for all and for all seasons.

(4) Their structure. Take only one of the vegetable tribes; how miraculous its growth, how simple its form, and yet how beautiful! “Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.” What man contrives man may comprehend; whereas in the works of God we find that we are in the region of infinity.

2. The field of providence. Here all is wonderful! Nothing comes by chance.

(1) What an astonishing series of events are displayed in the history of one single country! What mighty movements proceed from causes almost imperceptible!

(2) The history of every individual is equally wonderful.

3. The field of grace. How wonderful is the work of redemption and its application to the soul! How wonderful the history of the believer from conversion to glorification! Angels desire to understand these things, and the more they discern the more they are surprised, and at each discovery they sing new songs, “Great and marvellous are all Thy works, Lord God Almighty.”

II. The way in which the subject was announced. “We do hear them speak,” said the audience, diversified as it was, “in our tongues.” It is the duty of ministers to tell the people in their own tongue the wonderful works of God. “The poor have the gospel preached unto them,” said Christ. “The common people heard Christ gladly,” says the evangelist. What are philosophical expressions and learned disquisitions to these? I fear we may apply what the apostle says of speaking in an unknown tongue to many of them.

Ministers should use “great plainness of speech.” But this speaking to men of various languages is—

1. Nothing less than a real miracle. Two things are essential to a miracle.

(1) There must be something addressed to the sense as well as to the reason. These are called “signs,” and it would be wonderful if signs could not be seen.

(2) It must be above all known second causes. God only could have stored the minds of these men with such a multitude of merely arbitrary signs, and have given them power and ability to utter such a variety of distinct sounds.

2. The truth of it is evident also. It was undeniable.

(1) These men were well known.

(2) Their judges were competent to detect imposture.

(3) They did not go to a distance to tell their tale; they began amongst their enemies.

(4) The time was when large multitudes were present.

(5) Mark their boldness; they charged the Jews around them with the murder of an innocent young man.

(6) Note the result.

3. This miracle was expressly predicted. Christ said, “They shall speak with new tongues.”

4. This miracle was necessary for the accomplishment of their world-wide mission.

5. This gift of tongues was continued for years.

6. The want of this gift in the work of evangelising the world must now be supplied by human learning. And we ought to be very thankful to God that His Word is translated into so many tongues.

III. How this subject was heard.

1. Some heard with wonder. So it is now. And this is not surprising; for the natural man discerns not the things of God. Christians are “men wondered at”; the men of the world wonder that you run not to the same excess of riot with themselves, not knowing that you have meat to eat which they know not of. And this is often attended with a good effect, for it induces them to examine, and truth always gains by investigation. But then, on the other hand, the wonder often dies away, and he who wondered comes within the number of those of whom it is said, “Behold, ye despisers, and wonder and perish!”

2. Some heard in mockery. And so it is now. That which devils believe, and the belief of which makes them tremble, furnishes such men with matter for mirth.

(1) Some of these mockers were Once professors; the apostate is seldom found neuter.

(2) Some mock from the affectation of greatness. These things may be well enough for the common people, but will not do for men of taste.

(3) Some mock from the affectation of wisdom. “What will this babbler say?” “We preach Christ crucified, to the Greeks foolishness.”

(4) Some mock from ignorance. They mock at what they do not understand, at what they never read. Many are afraid to hear or to read the truth lest it should destroy their peace.

(5) Some cannot deny certain facts which are before them; but then they show their malignity by accounting for them. They ascribe the zeal of the Christian to disappointed love—to ambition—to a sanguine complexion—to a heated imagination—to enthusiasm, etc. So here, the multitude ascribed the phenomena to drunkenness.

3. Some heard and believed. (W. Jay.)

6When they heard this sound, a crowd came

together in bewilderment, because each one heard

them speaking in his own language.

BARNES, "When this was noised abroad - When the rumor of this remarkable transaction was spread, as it naturally would be.

Were confounded - συνεχύθη sunechutheJJ. The word used here means literally “to

pour together,” hence, “to confound, confuse.” It is used:

(a) Of an assembly or multitude thrown into confusion, Act_21:27;

(b) Of the mind as perplexed or confounded, as in disputation, Act_9:22; and,

(c) Of persons in amazement or consternation, as in this place. They did not understand this; they could not account for it.

Every man heard them speak ... - Though the multitude spoke different tongues, yet they now heard Galileans use the language which they had learned in foreign nations.

“His own language.” His own dialect - διαλέκτ dialektō. His own idiom, whether it was a

foreign language, or whether it was a modification of the Hebrew. The word may mean either; but it is probable that the foreign Jews would greatly modify the Hebrew, or conform almost entirely to the language spoken in the country where they lived. We may remark here that this effect of the descent of the Holy Spirit was not special to that time. A work of grace on the hearts of people in a revival of religion will always “be noised abroad.” A multitude will come together, and God often, as he did here, makes use of this motive to bring them under the influence of religion. Curiosity was the motive here, and it was the occasion of their being brought under the power of truth, and of their conversion. In thousands of cases this has occurred since. The effect of what they saw was to confound them, to astonish them, and to throw them into deep perplexity. They

made no complaint at first of the irregularity of what was done, but were all amazed and overwhelmed. So the effect of a revival of religion is often to convince the multitude that it is indeed a work of the Holy One; to amaze them by the display of his power; and to silence opposition and cavil by the manifest presence and the power of God. A few afterward began to cavil Act_2:13, as some will always do in a revival; but the mass were convinced, as will be the case always, that this was a mighty display of the power of God.

CLARKE, "When this was noised abroad - If we suppose that there was a considerable peal of thunder, which followed the escape of a vast quantity of electric fluid, and produced the mighty rushing wind already noticed on Act_2:2, then the whole city must have been alarmed; and, as various circumstances might direct their attention to the temple, having flocked thither they were farther astonished and confounded to hear the disciples of Christ addressing the mixed multitude in the languages of the different countries from which these people had come.

Every man heard them speak in his own language - Use may naturally suppose that, as soon as any person presented himself to one of these disciples, he, the disciple, was immediately enabled to address him in his own language, however various this had been from the Jewish or Galilean dialects. If a Roman presented himself, the disciple was immediately enabled to address him in Latin - if a Grecian, in Greek - an Arab, in Arabic, and so of the rest.

GILL Verse 6. Now when this was noised abroad,.... Or "when this voice was made";

referring either to the sound, as of a mighty rushing wind, which came from heaven; and

might not only be heard by those in the house, into which it came, but by the inhabitants

of the city, as it came down from heaven; so the Arabic version renders it, "when the

aforesaid sound was made": or else to the apostles' voice, and their speaking with divers

tongues; which being heard by some, was told to others, and a rumour of it being made

through the city,

the multitude came together; to the house, or temple, where the disciples were; and this

multitude did not consist only of the devout Jews, before mentioned; but of others who

scoffed and mocked at the apostles, and who had been concerned in the crucifying of

Christ:

and were confounded; or "confused"; they ran and came together in a disorderly and

tumultuous manner; the whole city was in an uproar, the assembly on this occasion was a

perfect mob; their numbers were so large, that they were ready to thrust each other down,

and trample one another under foot: the Vulgate Latin adds, "in mind"; they did not know

what to think of things, they were so astonished at what they heard, that they were

scarcely themselves; they were as persons stupid and senseless; being filled partly with

shame and confusion, and partly with wonder and amazement, that these illiterate men,

the followers of Jesus of Nazareth, whom they had crucified, and whose disciples they

had in so much contempt, should have such extraordinary gifts bestowed on them:

because that every man heard them speak in his own language; which shows, what has

been before observed, that one spake in one language, and another in another language; or

the same person sometimes spoke one language, and sometimes another; so that in

course, all languages were spoken by them; whence it appears, that it was not one

language only which was spoken by the apostles, which men of different languages heard

and understood, as if it was their own; for then the miracle must have been in the hearers,

and not in the speakers; and the cloven tongues, as of fire, should rather have sat on them,

than on the disciples; and these men be said to be filled with the gifts of the Holy Ghost,

rather than they.

HENRY, " The amazement with which these strangers were seized when they heard the disciples speak in their own tongues. It should seem, the disciples spoke in various languages before the people of those languages came to them; for it is intimated (Act_2:6) that the spreading of the report of this abroad was that which brought the multitude together, especially those of different countries, who seem to have been more affected with this work of wonder than the inhabitants of Jerusalem themselves.

ELLICOTT, "6) When this was noised abroad. . . .—Better When there had been this voice, or utterance. The word for “voice” is never used for rumour or report in the New Testament; always of some utterance—human (Matthew 3:3; Galatians 4:20), angelic (1 Thessalonians 4:16; Revelation 5:11), or divine (Matthew 3:17; Matthew 17:5). In John 3:7 (see Note there) we find it used, in the same connection as in this verse, for the “voice” or “utterance” of the Spirit.

Were confounded.—The word is peculiar to the Acts (Acts 9:22; Acts 19:32). If we were to draw a distinction between two words of cognate meaning with each other and with the Greek, confused would, perhaps, be a better rendering than confounded.

Every man heard them speak.—The verb is in the imperfect. They went on listening in their amazement as one after another heard the accents of his own language.

In his own language.—Another word peculiar to the Acts. (See Note on Acts 1:19.) It stands as an equivalent for the “tongue” in Acts 2:11, but was used for a dialect, in the modern sense of the term, as well as for a distinct language.

UNKNOWN,"V. 6 - they were bewildered - Though all "dwelt" in Jerusalem (and

perhaps all understood a common language like Aramaic) various language groups were

represented among them. The sound drew them together, but the bewilderment came

when the realization came that all were hearing in their own particular language despite

the fact that the twelve apostles (the ones who were speaking) were Galileans (and not,

therefore, capable of speaking so many different languages). As a matter of interest,

notice how widely Jews were dispersed in the world. Peter痴 epistles were addressed to

the "dispersed," I Peter 1:1ff.

CALVI, "6. When this was noised abroad. Luke saith thus in Greek, This

voice being made; but his meaning is, that the fame was spread abroad,

whereby it came to pass that a great multitude came together. For if one after

another in divers places, and at divers times, had heard the apostles speaking

in divers tongues, the miracle had not been so famous; therefore they come

altogether into one place, that the diversity of tongues may the better appear by

the present comparison. There is a further circumstance also here to be noted,

that the country (and native soil) of the apostles was commonly known, and

this was also commonly known, that they never went out of their country to

learn 3 strange tongues. Therefore, forasmuch as one speaketh Latin, another

Greek, another the Arabian tongue, as occasion was offered, and that

indifferently, and every one doth also change his tongue, the work of God

appeareth more plainly hereby.

COKE, "Acts 2:6. Every man heard them speak, &c.— Some commentators

of note, both antient and modern, have maintained that they spoke only one

language, that is, Hebrew, or Syro-Chaldaic; but that the people heard them

every one in their own language. This is really making the miracle consist in

the hearing, and not in the speaking, and seems so groundless, that it does not

need any laboured confutation. Our Saviour promised, Mark 16:17 that they

should speak with new tongues, &c. And St. Luke here plainly asserts, Acts

2:4 that they did speak with other tongues, or in other languages. The same

thing is either supposed or plainly asserted by St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 12:10; 1

Corinthians 12:28; 1 Corinthians 12:30 and 1 Corinthians 14:2-39. The

mistake seems to have arisen from this and the 8th verse. But St. Luke did not

intend to say, that any one of the apostles spoke more languages than one at a

time, nor that they spoke one language, and the people heard one or many

others; but his plain meaning is, that one of them spoke one language, and

another another, and so on; and that different apostles addressed themselves to

men of different nations at the same time; or that one apostle addressed

himself to men of different nations one after another; by which means all the

foreigners heard their own native language spoken distinctly and intelligibly;

and not only the languages spoken, but the Christian doctrine also plainly

delivered to them in their own language.

7Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these

men who are speaking Galileans?

It was a startling suprise and the word is the root of our word ecstasy. Extreme

degree of wonder. It was fantastic. They are all local people and yet they speak as

people who have traveled the world and know the languages of people everywhere.

BARNES, "Galileans - Inhabitants of Galilee. It was remarkable that they should speak in this manner, because:

(1) They were ignorant, rude, and uncivilized, Joh_1:46. Hence, the term Galilean was used as an expression of the deepest reproach and contempt, Mar_14:70; Joh_7:52.

(2) Their dialect was proverbially barbarous and corrupt, Mar_14:70; Mat_26:73. They were regarded as an outlandish people, unacquainted with other nations and languages, and hence, the amazement that they could address them in the refined language of other people. Their native ignorance was the occasion of making the miracle more striking. The native weakness of Christian ministers makes the grace and glory of God more remarkable in the success of the gospel. “We have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us,” 2Co_4:7. The success which God often grants to those who are of slender endowments and of little learning, though blessed with an humble and pious heart, is often amazing to the people of the world. God has “chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise,” 1Co_1:27. This should teach us that no talent or attainment is too humble to be employed for mighty purposes, in its proper sphere, in the kingdom of Christ; and that pious effort may accomplish much, and then burn in heaven with increasing luster for ever, while pride, and learning, and talent may blaze uselessly among people, and then be extinguished in eternal night.

CLARKE, "Are not all these - Galileans? - Persons who know no other dialect, save that of their own country. Persons wholly uneducated, and, consequently, naturally ignorant of those languages which they now speak so fluently.

HENRY, "They observe that the speakers are all Galileans, that know no other than their mother tongue (Act_2:7); they are despicable men, from whom nothing learned nor polite is to be expected. God chose the weak and foolish things of the world to confound the wise and mighty. Christ was thought to be a Galilean, and his disciples really were so, unlearned and ignorant men.

GILL Verse 7. And they were all amazed, and marvelled,.... They were struck with

surprise, they were as it were out of themselves, like persons in an ecstasy, not knowing

what could be the cause or meaning of this:

saying one to another; the phrase "one to another," is left out in the Vulgate Latin and

Ethiopic versions, and so it is in the Alexandrian copy:

behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? rude, unpolished, and unlearned men;

who had never been brought up in any school of learning, and had never learned any

language but their mother tongue; and that they pronounced with an ill grace, and in a

very odd manner; and which made the thing the more astonishing to them. The apostles

were inhabitants of Galilee, and so very likely were the greatest part of those that were

with them: hence the Christians afterwards, by way of contempt, were called Galilaeans;

as they are by Julian {x} the apostate, and others {y}.

COKE, "Acts 2:7-8. Are not all these—Galileans? &c.— See on Matthew 26:73 and on

John 1:46. The word διαλεκτος, Acts 2:8 signifies not only what we call a dialect, or

different way of speaking the same language, but alsoan entirely distinct language; and

perhaps it may be used here to express the propriety and accuracy wherewith these low

and uneducated Galileans spoke these different languages. The original in Acts 2:7 is very

beautiful, and expressive of the astonishment of the hearers,— Οικ ιδου παντες, &c.

CONSTABLE, "Verses 7-11

Most of the disciples were Galileans at this time. They were identifiable by their rural

appearance and their accent (cf. Matthew 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." [Note: Longenecker, p. 272.]

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. [Note: Ibid., p. 273.] Josephus wrote that visitors to Jersalem for a great

feast could swell the population to nearly 3,000,000. [Note: Flavius Josephus, The Wars

of the Jews, 6:9:3.]

"The Roman Empire had an estimated population of fifty to eighty million, with about

seven million free Roman citizens (Schnabel 2004: 558-59). 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." [Note: Bock, Acts, p. 43.]

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. [Note: F. F. Bruce, Commentary

on the Book of Acts, p. 64.] 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

these heard the mighty deeds of God (i.e., the gospel) in their own languages. This was a

reversal of what took place at Babel (Genesis 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." [Note: Tannehill, 2:27.]

"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. [Note: See D. J. Williams, Acts, pp. 28-29.] 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)." [Note: Witherington, p. 136.]

ELLICOTT, "(10) Strangers of Rome . . .—Better, the Romans who were sojourning

there—i.e., at Jerusalem. The verb is peculiar to St. Luke in the New Testament, and is

used by him, as in Acts 17:18, of the strangers and visitors of a city.

Jews and proselytes.—The words may possibly be applicable to the whole preceding list;

but they read more like a note specially emphasising the prominence of the Roman

proselytes in that mixed multitude of worshippers. It lies in the nature of the case, that

they were proselytes in the full sense of the term, circumcised and keeping the Law.

Looking to St. Luke’s use of another word (“they that worship God,” as in Acts 16:14;

Acts 17:4; Acts 17:17) for those whom the Rabbis classed as “proselytes of the gate,” it is

probable that he used the term in its strictest sense for those who had been received into

the covenant of Israel, and who were known in the Rabbinic classification as the

“proselytes of righteousness.

8Then how is it that each of us hears them in his

own native language?

BARNES, "Wherein we were born - That is, as we say, in our native language; what is spoken where we were born.

CLARKE, "How hear we every man in our own tongue - Some have supposed from this that the miracle was not so much wrought on the disciples as on their hearers: imagining that, although the disciples spoke their own tongue, yet every man so understood what was spoken as if it had been spoken in the language in which he was born. Though this is by no means so likely as the opinion which states that the disciples themselves spoke all these different languages, yet the miracle is the same, howsoever it be taken; for it must require as much of the miraculous power of God to enable an Arab to understand a Galilean, as to enable a Galilean to speak Arabic. But that the gift of tongues was actually given to the apostles, we have the fullest proof; as we find

particular ordinances laid down by those very apostles for the regulation of the exercise of this gift; see 1Co_14:1, etc.

GILL Verse 8. And how hear we every man in our own tongue,.... Them speaking, as the

Ethiopic version reads; that is, we everyone of us hear one or another, speak in the same

language,

wherein we were born; our native language; for though these men were Jews by descent,

yet were born and brought up in other countries, which language they spake; and not the

Hebrew, or Syriac, or Chaldee.

HENRY, " They acknowledge that they spoke intelligibly and readily their own language (which they were the most competent judges of), so correctly and fluently that none of their own countrymen could speak it better: We hear every man in our own tongue wherein we were born (Act_2:8), that is, we hear one or other of them speak our native language. The Parthians hear one of them speak their language, the Medes hear another of them speak theirs; and so of the rest; Act_2:11, We do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. Their respective languages were not only unknown at Jerusalem, but probably despised and undervalued, and therefore it was not only a surprise, but a pleasing surprise, to them to hear the language of their own country spoken, as it naturally is to those that are strangers in a strange land. (1.) The things they

heard the apostles discourse of were the wonderful works of God, megaleia�tou�Theou -

Magnalia Dei, the great things of God. It is probable that the apostles spoke of Christ, and redemption by him, and the grace of the gospel; and these are indeed the great things of God, which will be for ever marvellous in our eyes. (2.) They heard them both praise God for these great things and instruct the people concerning these things, in their own tongue, according as they perceived the language of their hearers, or those that enquired of them, to be. Now though, perhaps, by dwelling some time at Jerusalem, they were got to be so much masters of the Jewish language that they could have understood the meaning of the disciples if they had spoken that language, yet, [1.] This was more strange, and helped to convince their judgment, that this doctrine was of God; for tongues were for a sign to those that believed not, 1Co_14:22. [2.] It was more kind, and helped to engage their affections, as it was a plain indication of the favour intended to the Gentiles, and that the knowledge and worship of God should no longer be confined to the Jews, but the partition-wall should be broken down; and this is to us a plain intimation of the mind and will of God, that the sacred records of God's wonderful works should be preserved by all nations in their own tongue; that the scriptures should be read, and public worship performed, in the vulgar languages of the nations.

COFFMAN,"This list of geographical names shows the diversity of the people to whom

the apostles spoke, the provinces and locations mentioned lying in all directions from

Jerusalem and representing a cross-section of the languages spoken in the entire Roman

empire. As stated above, it is a mistake to suppose all of these languages were spoken "at

once" and by a single speaker. Such a supposition would embellish this wonder far

beyond the text. As Walker said:

It is probable that each of the eleven addressed the multitude in a different language.

People would naturally gather around the man using their native language. We may thus

imagine eleven congregations assembled within the same large area, all listening to the

same sermon, in substance at least, but each in his own language.[20]

Root also concurred in this view, saying:

It is not necessary to assume that each visitor heard the sermon of Peter in his own

tongue; but, in the beginning of the morning's meeting, the various languages were

spoken by the apostles.[21]

The wonder of some and the mockery of others sprang from the sensational event of the

Twelve apostles (this student believes Matthias participated in this) preaching all at one

time to twelve assemblies at various places in the large temple enclosure. The power and

eloquence of men who but a short while previously had been fishermen in Galilee was an

astounding thing; and the scoffers could think of no better explanation than to charge

them with drunkenness, a charge as unreasonable as it was malicious. Peter would

dispose of that slander in a brief word a little later.

[20] W. R. Walker, Studies in Acts (Joplin, Missouri: College Press, n.d.), p. 17.

[21] Orin Root, Commentary on Acts (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company,

1966), p. 10.

9Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of

Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and

Asia,

Representative people from all 12 tribes were able to enter the church on this special

day. The church became the new Israel with the people of God now a mixture of

both Jews and Gentiles.

BARNES, "Parthians ... - To show the surprising extent and power of this miracle, Luke enumerates the different nations that were represented then at Jerusalem. In this way the number of languages which the apostles spoke, and the extent of the miracle, can be ascertained. The enumeration of these nations begins at the east and proceeds to the west. Parthians mean those Jews or proselytes who dwelt in Parthia. This country was a part of Persia, and was situated between the Persian Gulf and the Tigris on the west, and the Indus River on the east. The term “Parthia” originally referred to a small mountainous district lying to the northeast of Media. Afterward it came to be applied to the great Parthian kingdom into which this province expanded. Parthia proper, or Ancient Parthia, lying between Asia and Hyrcania, the residence of a rude and poor

tribe, and traversed by bare mountains, woods, and sandy steppes, formed a part of the great Persian monarchy. Its inhabitants were of Scythian origin. About 256 years before Christ, Arsaces rose against the Syro-Macedonian power, and commenced a new dynasty in her own person, designated by the title of Arsacidae. This was the beginning of the great Parthian empire, which extended itself in the early days of Christianity over all the provinces of what had been the Persian kingdom, having the Euphrates for its western boundary, by which it was separated from the dominions of Rome (Kitto’s Encyclop.). Their empire lasted about 400 years. The Parthians were much distinguished for their manner of fighting. They usually fought on horseback, and when appearing to retreat, discharged their arrows with great execution behind them. They disputed the empire of the East with the Romans for a long time. The language spoken there was that of Persia, and in ancient writers Parthia and Persia often mean the same country.

Medes - Inhabitants of Media. This country was situated westward and southward of the Caspian Sea, between 35 degrees and 40 degrees of north latitude. It had Persia on the south and Armenia on the west. It was about the size of Spain, and was one of the richest parts of Asia. In the Scriptures it is called Madai, Gen_10:2. The Medes are often mentioned, frequently in connection with the Persians, with whom they were often connected under the same government, 2Ki_17:6; 2Ki_18:11; Est_1:3, Est_1:14, Est_1:18-19; Jer_25:25; Dan_5:28; Dan_6:8; Dan_8:20; Dan_9:1. The language spoken here was also that of Persia.

Elamites - Elam is often mentioned in the Old Testament. The nation was descended from Elam, the son of Shem, Gen_10:22. It is mentioned as being in alliance with Amraphel, the king of Shinar, and Arioch, king of Ellasar, and Tidal, king of nations, Gen_14:1. Of these nations in alliance, Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, was the chief, Gen_14:4. See also Ezr_2:7; Ezr_8:7; Neh_7:12, Neh_7:34; Isa_11:11; Isa_21:2; Isa_22:6, etc. They are mentioned as a part of the Persian empire, and Daniel is said to have resided at Shushan, which is in the province of Elam, Dan_8:2. The Greeks and Romans gave to this country the name of Elymais. It is now called Kusistan. It was bounded by Persia on the east, by Media on the north, by Babylonia on the west, and by the Persian Gulf on the south. The Elamites were a warlike people, and celebrated for the use of the bow, Isa_22:6; Jer_49:35. The language of this people was of course the Persian. Its capital, Shusan, called by the Greeks Susa, was much celebrated. It is said to have been fifteen miles in circumference, and was adorned with the celebrated palace of Ahasuerus. The inhabitants still pretend to show there the tomb of the prophet Daniel.

Mesopotamia - This name, which is Greek, signifies between the rivers; that is, the

region lying between the rivers Euphrates and Tigris. In Hebrew it was called Aram-

Naharaim; that is, Aram, or Syria, of the two rivers. It was also called Padan Aram, the

plain of Syria. In this region were situated some important places mentioned in the Bible: “Ur of the Chaldees, the birthplace of Abraham Gen_11:27-28; Haran, where Terah stopped on his journey and died Gen_11:31-32; Charchemish 2Ch_35:20; Hena 2Ki_19:13; Sepharvaim 2Ki_17:24. This region, known as Mesopotamia, extended between the two rivers from their sources to Babylon on the south. It had on the north Armenia, on the west Syria, on the east Persia, and on the south Babylonia. It was an extensive, level, and fertile country. The language spoken here was probably the Syriac, with perhaps a mixture of the Chaldee.

In Judea - This expression has greatly perplexed commentators. It has been thought difficult to see why Judea should be mentioned, as if it were a matter of surprise that they could speak in this language. Some have supposed that there is an error in the manuscripts, and have proposed to read Armenia, or India, or Lydia, or Idumea, etc. But

all this has been without any authority. Others have supposed that the language of Galilee was so different from that of the other parts of Judea as to render it remarkable that they could speak that dialect. But this is an idle supposition. This is one of the many instances in which commentators have perplexed themselves to very little purpose. Luke recorded this as any other historian would have done. In running over the languages which they spoke, he enumerated this as a matter of course; not that it was remarkable simply that they should speak the language of Judea, but that they should steak so many, meaning about the same by it as if he had said they spoke every language in the world. It is as if a similar miracle were to occur at this time among an assembly of native Englishmen and foreigners. In describing it, nothing would be more natural than to say they spoke French, and German, and Spanish, and English, and Italian, etc. In this there would be nothing remarkable except that they spoke so many languages.

Cappadocia - This was a region of Asia Minor, and was bounded on the east by the Euphrates and Armenia, on the north by Pontus, west by Phrygia and Galatia, and south by Mount Taurus, beyond which are Cilicia and Syria. The language which was spoken here is not certainly known. It was probably, however, a mixed dialect, made up of Greek and Syriac, perhaps the same as that of their neighbors, the Lycaonians, Act_14:11. This place was formerly celebrated for iniquity, and is mentioned in Greek writers as one of the three eminently wicked places whose name began with C. The others were Crete (compare Tit_1:12) and Cilicia. After its conversion to the Christian religion, however, it produced many eminent men, among whom were Gregory Nyssen and Basil the Great. It was one of the places to which Peter directed an epistle, 1Pe_1:1.

In Pontus - This was another province of Asia Minor, and was situated north of Cappadocia, and was bounded west by Paphlagonia. Pontus and Cappadocia under the Romans constituted one province. This was one of the places to which the apostle Peter directed his epistle, 1Pe_1:1. This was the birthplace of Aquila, one of the companions of Paul, Act_18:2, Act_18:18, Act_18:26; Rom_16:3; 1Co_16:19; 2Ti_4:19.

And Asia - Pontus and Cappadocia, etc., were parts of Asia. But the word Asia is doubtless used here to denote the regions or provinces west of these, which are not particularly enumerated. Thus, it is used Act_6:9; Act_16:6; Act_20:16. It probably embraced Mysia, Aeolis, Ionia, Caria, and Lydia. “The term probably denoted not so much a definite region as a jurisdiction, the limits of which varied from time to time, according to the plan of government which the Romans adopted for their Asiatic provinces” (Prof. Hackett, in loco). The capital of this region was Ephesus. See also 1Pe_1:1. This region was frequently called Ionia, and was afterward the seat of the seven churches in Asia, Rev_1:4.

CLARKE, "Parthians - Parthia anciently included the northern part of modern Persia: it was situated between the Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf, rather to the eastward of both.

Medes - Media was a country lying in the vicinity of the Caspian Sea; having Parthia on the east, Assyria on the south, and Mesopotamia on the west.

Elamites - Probably inhabitants of that country now called Persia: both the Medes and Elamites were a neighboring people, dwelling beyond the Tigris.

Mesopotamia - Now Diarbec in Asiatic Turkey; situated between the rivers Tigris and Euphrates; having Assyria on the east, Arabia Deserta with Babylonia on the south, Syria on the west, and Armenia on the north. It was called Padan-aram by the ancient Hebrews, and by the Asiatics is now called Maverannhar, i.e. the country beyond the river.

Judea - This word has exceedingly puzzled commentators and critics; and most

suspect that it is not the true reading. Bishop Pearce supposes that Ιουδαιαν is an

adjective, agreeing with Μεσοποταµιαν, and translates the passage thus: the dwellers in

Jewish Mesopotamia. He vindicates this translation by showing that great numbers of the Jews were settled in this country: Josephus says that the ten tribes remained in this country till his time; that “there were countless myriads of them there, and that it was

impossible to know their numbers.” - Μυριαδες�απειροι,�και�αριθµ �γνωσθηναι�µη�

δυναµεναι. See Ant. lib. xv. c. 2, s. 2, and c. 3, s. 1; Bell. Jud. lib. i. c. 1, 2. This

interpretation, however ingenious, does not comport with the present Greek text. Some

imagine that Ιουδαιαν is not the original reading; and therefore they have corrected it

into Syriam, Syria; Armeniam, Armenia; Ινδιαν, India; Λυδιαν, Lydia; Ιδουµαιαν,

Idumea; Βιθυνιαν, Bithynia; and Κιλικιαν, Cilicia: all these stand on very slender

authority, as may be seen in Griesbach; and the last is a mere conjecture of Dr. Mangey. If Judea be still considered the genuine reading, we may account for it thus: the men who were speaking were known to be Galileans; now the Galilean dialect was certainly different from that spoken in Judea - the surprise was occasioned by a Jew being able to comprehend the speech of a Galilean, without any interpreter and without difficulty; and yet it is not easy to suppose that there was such a difference between the two dialects as to render these people wholly unintelligible to each other.

Cappadocia - Was an ancient kingdom of Asia comprehending all that country that lies between Mount Taurus and the Euxine Sea.

Pontus - Was anciently a very powerful kingdom of Asia, originally a part of Cappadocia; bounded on the east by Colchis; on the west by the river Halys; on the north by the Black Sea; and on the south by Armenia Minor. The famous Mithridates was king of this country; and it was one of the last which the Romans were able to subjugate.

Asia - Meaning probably Asia Minor; it was that part of Turkey in Asia now called Natolia.

GILL Verse 9. Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites,.... These are the words of the men

continued, and not of the historian, as appears from Acts 2:10 and so the Arabic version

reads, "of us Persians, Parthians, and Medes"; that is, we hear them speak in the language

of everyone of us: the order in this version is inverted, otherwise the same persons are

intended; for the Elamites and Persians are the same: by the Parthians are meant, Jews

that were born in Parthia, and had dwelt there, and who spoke the language of that

country; and that there were Jews, in those parts, is clear from Josephus {z}, who speaks

of them together with the Jews of other nations. Many of the Parthian Jews were

afterwards converted to the Christian faith; to whom the Apostle John is thought, by

some, to have written his first epistle; and which, by some of the ancients, is called the

epistle to the Parthians. The kingdom of Parthia, according to Pliny {a}, Ptolomy {b},

and Solinus {c}, had Media on the west, Hyrcania on the north, Aria, or Ariana, on the

east, and the desert of Carmania on the south; the metropolis of it was Hecatompylos, so

called from the hundred gates that belonged to it; and which, it is thought, stood on the

same spot of ground that Ispahan does now, the seat of the Sophies of Persia. And by the

Medes are intended the Jews that were natives of Media: so called from "Madai," one of

the sons of Japhet, Genesis 10:2 and this, according to Ptolomy {d}, has on the north the

Hyrcanian, or Gasptan sea, on the west Armenia Major and Assyria, and on the east

Hyrcania and Parthia, and on the south Parthia. The Elamites are so called, from Elam the

son of Shem, Genesis 10:22 and these, according to Josephus {e}, were the founders of

the Persians, or from whom they sprung; and so we find Elam and Media, and the kings

of Elam, and the kings of the Medes, mentioned together in Scripture, Isaiah 21:2.

And certain it is, that Elam was at least a part of the empire of Persia, in Daniel's time; for

Shushan, where the kings of Persia then kept their palace, was in the province of Elam,

Daniel 8:2 and it is evident, that hither the Jews were carried captive, Isaiah 11:11. So

that there might be some remaining in those parts, that were their descendants; and from

hence also were people brought by Asnapper, into the cities of Samaria, to supply the

room of those who were carried captive, and are called Elamites, Ezra 4:9 And that there

were Elamite Jews, may be concluded from the writings of the Jews; for so they say {f},

that "the Hagiographa, or holy writings, which were written in the Coptic, Median,

Hebrew, tymlye, "Elamite," and Greek tongues; though they did not read in them (on the

sabbath day in time of service) they delivered them from the fire," when in danger of

being burned: so the Megilla, or book of Esther, might not be read in the Coptic, Hebrew,

Elamite, Median, and Greek languages; but it might be read in Coptic to Coptites, in

Hebrew to Hebrews, Mymlyel tymlye, in "Elamite" to the "Elamites," and in Greek to the

Greeks {g}; and such sort of Jews as the Elamite ones, were these in the text: the Syriac

version reads Elanites; and so R. Benjamin in his Itinerary {h}, makes mention of a

country called, hynla, "Alania," and of a people called, Nala, "Alan"; and whom he speaks

of in company with Babylon, Persia, Choresan, Sheba, and Mesopotamia; and may intend

the same people as here: now these Parthian, Median, and Elamite Jews were such who

descended from the captives of the ten tribes, carried away by Shalmaneser king of

Assyria, whom he placed in Halah and Habor, and in the cities of the Medes, 2 Kings

17:6. But besides these, there were also at Jerusalem, at this time, those who are next

mentioned:

and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus and Asia; who

came not quite so far off as the former: Mesopotamia is the same with what is called in

the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, Aram Naharaim, or Syria between the two rivers;

that is, Tigris and Euphrates; the former was on the east of it, and the latter on the west,

and Babylon was on the south, and Caucasus on the north; and so the Greek word

Mesopotamia signifies a place between two rivers; see Genesis 24:10. And the Jews have

adopted it into their own language, calling it, aymjwpom, "Mesopotamia" {i}; and the

same name obtains with other writers {k}, and it has since been called Azania and

Halopin; it belonged to that part of Assyria, called Chaldea; and these Mesopotamian

Jews were the remains of those who were carried captive by Nebuchadnezzar, king of

Babylon; and though the Chaldean, or Syriac language was now spoken by the Jews, yet

in a different manner than it was in Chaldea and Syria: and there were also the dwellers in

Judea; by which is meant, that part of the land of Israel, which was distinct from Galilee,

and where they used a different dialect from the Galilean Jews; and there were others,

who were born, and had lived in Cappadocia. This was a country in Asia, in which were

many famous cities; as Archalais, where Claudius Caesar put a Roman colony; and Neo

Caesarea (the birth place of Gregory Thaumaturgus); and Melita, built by Semiramis; and

Mazaca {l}, which was the chief city; and so called from Meshech, the son of Japhet,

since called Caesarea. The inhabitants of this country, Herodotus says {m}, "were by the

Greeks called Syrians, and they were Syrians; and before the Persians had the

government, they were subject to the Medea, and then to Cyrus."

And by Pliny {n} they are called, Leucosyrians. This country, according to Ptolomy {o},

had Galatia, and part of Pamphylia on the west, and on the south Cilicia, and part of

Syria, and on the east Armenia the great, and on the north, part of the Euxine Pontus; it is

now called Amasia, or Almasin: here were many Jews scattered abroad, some of which

were afterwards believers in Christ, to whom Peter sent his epistles, 1 Peter 1:1. It had its

former name from the river Cappadox, which, as Pliny {p} says, divided the Galatians

and Leucosyrians, and this indeed is the reason of its name; in the Syriac language it is

called, Kdpq, "Capdac," which comes from dpq; which signifies to "cut off," or "divide,"

as this river did the above people from one another; and hence the country was called

Cappadocia, and the inhabitants Cappadocians: in the Jewish writings it is called,

ayqjwpq, Capotakia; and which Maimonides {q} says, is the same with Caphtor; and in

the Arabic language, is called Tamiati; and so Caphtor is rendered Cappadocia, and the

Caphtorim Cappadocians, in the Targums of Onkelos, Jonathan, and Jerusalem, in

Genesis 10:14 and so in the Septuagint version of Deuteronomy 2:23. This country was

near the land of Israel, and in it dwelt many Jews; they had schools of learning here, and

had traditions peculiarly relating to it: as for instance, "if a man married a wife in the land

of Israel, and divorced her in Cappadocia, he must give her (her dowry) of the money of

the land of Israel; and if he marries a wife in Cappadocia, and divorces her in the land of

Israel, he may give her of the money of the land of Israel; Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel

says, he must give her of the money of Cappadocia {r};" for it seems the Cappadocian

money was larger, and weighed more than that in the land of Israel: however, "if a man

marries a wife in Cappadocia, and divorces her in Cappadocia, he must give her of the

money of Cappadocia."

And so R. Akiba speaks {s} of one, that he saw shipwrecked at sea; and when, says he, I

came to the province of Cappadocia, he came and sat, and judged before me in the

constitutions and traditions of the elders: from whence it is manifest, that here were

people of the Jewish nation that dwelt in this country, and so at this time. As also in

Pontus; hence the first epistle of Peter is sometimes called the epistle to the Pontians; that

is, to the Jews of Pontus, then become Christians; Pontus was a country in lesser Asia,

and according to Ptolomy {t}, it had on the west the mouth of Pontus, and the Thracian

Bosphorus, and part of Propontis, on the north, part of the Euxine sea, and on the south

the country which is properly called Asia, and on the east Galatia by Paphlagonia; it was

the birth place of Marcion the heretic, of which Tertullian gives a most dismal account

{u}: Asia here intends, neither Asia the greater, nor the less, but Asia properly so called;

which had Lycia and Phrygia on the east, the Aegean shores on the west, the Egyptian sea

on the south, and Paphlagonia on the north {w}; in which were Ephesus the chief city,

and Smyrna and Pergamus, and where were many Jews; these might be the remains of

those that were carried captive, and dispersed by Ptolomy Lagus; those who dwelt in the

three last places spoke the Greek language.

ELLICOTT, "(9-11) Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites. . . .—The list that follows is

characteristic of the trained historian—trained, it may be, as in the school of Strabo (see

Introduction to St. Luke)—who had carefully inquired what nations were represented at

that great Pentecost, who had himself been present, at least, at one later Pentecost (Acts

21:15), and knew the kind of crowd that gathered to it. There is a kind of order, as of one

taking a mental bird’s-eye view of the Roman empire, beginning with the great Parthian

kingdom, which was still, as it had been in the days of Crassus, the most formidable of its

foes; then the old territory of the Medes which had once been so closely connected with

the history of their fathers; then, the name of the Persians having been thrown into the

background, the kindred people of Elam (commonly rendered Persia in the LXX.) whom

Strabo speaks of as driven to the mountains (xi. 13, § 6); then the great cities of the Tigris

and Euphrates, where the “princes of the captivity” still ruled over a large Jewish

population; then passing southward and westward to Judæa; then to Cappadocia, in the

interior of Asia Minor; then to Pontus, on the northern shore washed by the Euxine; then

westward to the Proconsular Province of Asia, of which Ephesus was the capital. From

Ephesus the eye travels eastward to the neighbouring province of Phrygia; thence

southward to Pamphylia; thence across the Mediterranean to Egypt; westward to Cyrene;

northward, re-crossing the Mediterranean, to the great capital of the empire; then, as by an

after-thought, to the two regions of Crete and Arabia that had been previously omitted.

The absence of some countries that we should have expected to find in the list—Syria,

Cilicia, Cyprus, Bithynia, Macedonia, Achaia, Spain—is not easy to explain, but it is, at

any rate, an indication that what we have is not an artificial list made up at a later date,

but an actual record of those whose presence at the Feast had been ascertained by the

historian. Possibly they may have been omitted because Jews and converts coming from

them would naturally speak Greek, and there would be no marvel to them in hearing

Galileans speaking in that language. The presence of Judæa in the list is almost as

unexpected as the absence of the others. That, we think, might have been taken for

granted. Some critics have accordingly conjectured that “India” must be the true reading,

but without any MS. authority. Possibly, the men of Judæa are named as sharing in the

wonder that the Galileans were no longer distinguished by their provincial patois. (Comp.

Note on Matthew 26:73.)

10Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of

Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome

BARNES, "Phrygia, and Pamphylia - These were also two provinces of Asia Minor. Phrygia was surrounded by Galatia, Cappadocia, and Pisidia. Pamphylia was on the Mediterranean, and was bounded north by Pisidia. The language of all these places was doubtless the Greek, more or less pure.

In Egypt - This was that extensive country, well known, on the south of the Mediterranean, watered by the Nile. It extends 600 miles from north to south, and from 100 to 120 miles east and west. The language used there was the Coptic tongue. At present the Arabic is spoken. Vast numbers of Jews dwelt in Egypt, and many from that country would be present at the great feasts at Jerusalem. In this country the first translation of the Old Testament was made, which is now called the Septuagint.

In the parts of Libya - Libya is a general name for Africa. It properly denoted the region which was near to Egypt; but the Greeks gave the name to all Africa.

About Cyrene - This was a region about 500 miles west of Alexandria in Egypt. It was also called Pentapolis, because there were in it five celebrated cities. This country now belongs to Tripoli. Great numbers of Jews resided here. A Jew of this place, Simon by name, was compelled to bear our Saviour’s cross after him to the place of crucifixion, Mat_27:32; Luk_23:26. Some of the Cyrenians are mentioned among the earliest Christians, Act_11:20; Act_13:1. The language which they spoke is not certainly known.

Strangers of Rome - This literally means “Romans dwelling or tarrying,” that is, at Jerusalem. It may mean either that they were permanently fixed, or only tarrying at

Jerusalem - ��ι�Eπιδηµο/ντες�TωµαGοι hoi�epidēmōuntes�Rōmaioi. They were doubtless

Jews who had taken up their residence in Italy, and had come to Jerusalem to attend the great feasts. The language which they spoke was the Latin. Great numbers of Jews were at that time dwelling at Rome. Josephus says that there were eight synagogues there. The Jews are often mentioned by the Roman writers. There was a Jewish colony across the Tiber from Rome. When Judea was conquered, about 60 years before Christ, vast numbers of Jews were taken captive and carried to Rome. But they had much difficulty in managing them as slaves. They pertinaciously adhered to their religion, observed the Sabbath, and refused to join in the idolatrous rites of the Romans. Hence, they were freed, and lived by themselves across the Tiber.

Jews - Native-born Jews, or descendants of Jewish families.

Proselytes - Those who had been converted to the Jewish religion from among the Gentiles. The great zeal of the Jews to make proselytes is mentioned by our Saviour as one of the special characteristics of the Pharisees, Mat_23:15. Some have supposed that the expression “Jews and proselytes” refers to the Romans only. But it is more probable that reference is made to all those that are mentioned. It has the appearance of a hurried enumeration; and the writer evidently mentioned them as they occurred to his mind, just as we would in giving a rapid account of so many different nations.

CLARKE, "Phrygia - A country in Asia Minor, southward of Pontus.

Pamphylia - The ancient name of the country of Natolia, now called Caramania, between Lycia and Cilicia, near the Mediterranean Sea.

Egypt - A very extensive country of African bounded by the Mediterranean on the north; by the Red Sea and the Isthmus of Suez, which divide it from Arabia, on the east; by Abyssinia or Ethiopia on the south; and by the deserts of Barca and Nubia on the west. It was called Mizraim by the ancient Hebrews, and now Mesr by the Arabians. It extends 600 miles from north to south; and from 100 to 250 in breadth, from east to

west.

Libya - In a general way, among the Greeks, signified Africa; but the northern part, in the vicinity of Cyrene, is here meant.

Cyrene - A country in Africa on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea, southward of the most western point of the Island of Crete.

Strangers of Rome - Persons dwelling at Rome, and speaking the Latin language, partly consisting of regularly descended Jews and proselytes to the Jewish religion.

GILL Verse 10. Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt,.... Phrygia was a country in Asia, and

had part of Galatia on the north, Lycaonia, Pisidia, and Mygdonia on the south, and on the

east Cappadocia {x}; here the Apostle Paul afterwards travelled, and strengthened the

Christians; see Acts 16:6. Pamphylia, now called Setilia, is another country in Asia,

formerly called Mopsopia {y}; which had on the west Lycia, and part of Asia, on the

north Galatia, on the east Cilicia, and part of Cappadocia, and on the south the sea of

Pamphylia {z}, of which mention is made in Acts 27:5. The chief city in it was Perga,

where was a temple of Diana {a}, and here the Apostle Paul also was; see Acts 13:13.

Others of these sojourning Jews lived in Egypt, which was a large country in Africa;

which had on the east the deserts of Arabia, on the west Libya, on the south Ethiopia, and

on the north the Mediterranean sea; hither many Jews were carried captive by Ptolomy

Lagus, and these spoke the Egyptian language:

and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene; there were others at Jerusalem, which came from

hence, The Arabic version reads this clause, "and in the parts of Africa, which is our

country"; and Pliny says {b}, the Greeks call Africa, Libya. The Jews say {c}, Libya in

Egypt; and for proselytes from Libya, they wait three generations; that is, before they

receive them: Cyrene, or Cyreniaca, which is no other than upper Libya, is called by Pliny

{d}, the Pentapolitan country, from the five cities in it; Berenice, Arsinoe, Ptolemais,

Apollonia, and Cyrene: to these are added,

and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes; that is, as the Syriac version renders it,

"those that came from Rome"; to which the Arabic agrees: they were natives and

inhabitants of the city of Rome, though now they were at Jerusalem; and some of these

were Jews by birth, and lineal descent, though born at Rome; and others were such as

were proselytes of righteousness, who were originally Gentiles, but were now

circumcised, and had embraced the Jewish religion; concerning such, See Gill on "Mt

23:15." These doubtless spoke in the Roman, or Latin tongue.

COKE, "Acts 2:10. Strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,— That is, Jews and

proselytes who were by birth or habitation Romans, but now sojourned at Jerusalem. That

there were great multitudes of Jews who dwelt at Rome,is evident not only from

Josephus, but from Dio, Suetonius, Tacitus, and, I think we may say, all the Roman

authors of that time, not excepting even the poets; and that there were not a few in that

great city proselyted to the Jewish religion, sufficiently appears from the Satires of

Horace, Juvenal, and Persius. The wonderful works of God, in the next verse, mean the

several dispensations of God to mankind in the successive ages of the world, and

particularly concerning the resurrection of Christ, and the Messiah's kingdom. The

original is expressive, — τα µεγαλεια του Θεου : as if the dispensation of God in Jesus,

was the only great and magnificent work of God.

11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans

and Arabs-we hear them declaring the wonders of

God in our own tongues!"

The curse of babel reversed says Bruce.

BARNES, "Cretes - Crete, now called Candia, is an island in the Mediterranean, about 200 miles in length and 50 in breadth, about 500 miles southwest of Constantinople, and about the same distance west of Syria or Palestine. The climate is mild and delightful, the sky unclouded and serene. By some this island is supposed to be the Caphtor of the Hebrews, Gen_10:14. It is mentioned in the Acts as the place touched at by Paul, Act_27:7-8, Act_27:13. This was the residence of Titus, who was left there by Paul” to set in order the things that were missing,” etc., Tit_1:5. The Cretans among the Greeks were famous for deceit and falsehood. See the notes on Tit_1:12-13. The language spoken there was probably the Greek.

Arabians - Arabia is the great peninsula which is bounded north by part of Syria, east by the Euphrates and the Persian Gulf, south by the Indian Ocean, and west by the Red Sea. It is often mentioned in the Scriptures; and there were doubtless there many Jews. The language spoken there was the Arabic.

In our tongues - The languages spoken by the apostles could not have been less than seven or eight, besides different dialects of the same languages. It is not certain that the Jews present from foreign nations spoke those languages perfectly, but they had doubtless so used them as to make them the common tongue in which they conversed. No miracle could be more decided than this. There was no way in which the apostles could impose on them, and make them suppose they spoke foreign languages, if they really did not; for these foreigners were abundantly able to determine that. It may be remarked that this miracle had most important effects besides that witnessed on the day of Pentecost. The gospel would be carried by those who were converted to all these places, and the way would be prepared for the labors of the apostles there. Accordingly, most of these places became afterward celebrated by the establishment of Christian churches and the conversion of great multitudes to the Christian faith.

The wonderful works of God - τV�µεγαλεία�το/�Θεο/ ta�megaleia�tou�Theou. The

great things of God; that is, the great things that God had done in the gift of his Son; in raising him from the dead; in his miracles, ascension, etc. Compare Luk_1:49; Psa_

71:19; Psa_26:7; Psa_66:3; Psa_92:5; Psa_104:24; etc.

CLARKE, "Cretes - Natives of Crete, a large and noted island in the Levant, or eastern part of the Mediterranean Sea, now called Candia.

Arabians - Natives of Arabia, a well known country of Asia, having the Red Sea on the west; the Persian Gulf on the east; Judea on the north; and the Indian Ocean on the south.

The wonderful works of God - Such as the incarnation of Christ; his various miracles, preaching, death, resurrection, and ascension; and the design of God to save the world through him. From this one circumstance we may learn that all the people enumerated above were either Jews or proselytes; and that there was probably none that could be, strictly speaking, called heathens among them. It may at first appear strange that there could be found Jews in so many different countries, some of which were very remote from the others; but there is a passage in Philo’s Embassy to Caius which throws considerable light on the subject. In a letter sent to Caius by King Agrippa, he speaks of to the holy city of Jerusalem, not merely as the metropolis of Judea, but of many other regions, because of the colonies at different times led out of Judea, not only into neighboring countries, such as Egypt, Phoenicia, Syria, and Coelosyria, but also into those that are remote, such as Pamphylia, Cilicia, and the chief parts of Asia as far as Bithynia, and the innermost parts of Pontus; also in the regions of Europe, Thessaly, Boeotia, Macedonia, Aetolia, Attica, Argos, Corinth, and the principal parts of Peloponnesus. Not only the continents and provinces (says he) are full of Jewish colonies, but the most celebrated isles also, Euboea, Cyprus, and Crete, not to mention the countries beyond the Euphrates. All these (a small part of Babylon and some other praefectures excepted, which possess fertile territories) are inhabited by Jews. Not only my native city entreats thy clemency, but other cities also, situated in different parts of the world, Asia, Europe, Africa; both islands, sea coasts, and inland countries.” Philonis Opera, edit. Mangey, vol. ii. p. 587.

It is worthy of remark that almost all the places and provinces mentioned by St. Luke are mentioned also in this letter of King Agrippa. These, being all Jews or proselytes, could understand in some measure the wonderful works of God, of which mere heathens could have formed no conception. It was wisely ordered that the miraculous descent of the Holy Ghost should take place at this time, when so many from various nations were present to bear witness to what was done, and to be themselves subjects of his mighty working. These, on their return to their respective countries, would naturally proclaim what things they saw and heard; and by this the way of the apostles was made plain; and thus Christianity made a rapid progress over all those parts in a very short time after the resurrection of our Lord.

GILL Verse 11. Cretes and Arabians,.... The former are either the same with the Cretians,

Titus 1:12 the inhabitants of the island of Crete, Acts 27:7 now called Candia or Candy,

which has on the north the Aegean sea, on the south the Libyan or African sea, on the

west the Adriatic sea, and on the east the Carpathian sea. In it were an hundred cities; the

most famous of which were, Gnosos, Cortyna, Lyctos, Lycastos, Holopixos, Phaestos,

Cydon, Manethusa, Dyctynna {e}, and others; these spoke the Greek language; yet not the

Attic, for the Cretian and Attic speech are distinguished {f}: or else, as Dr. Lightfoot

thinks, these were the same with the Cherethim or Cherethites, in Ezekiel 25:16 whom

the Septuagint interpreters call Cretes, as here; since these are mentioned with the

Philistines, to whose land Arabia joined; the inhabitants of which are next mentioned

here. There were three Arabias; Arabia Petraea, which had on the west part of Egypt, and

on the north Judea, and part of Syria, on the south the Red sea, and on the east Arabia

Felix. The second was called Arabia Deserta, and had on the north part of Mesopotamia,

and on the east Babylonia, on the south Arabia Felix, and on the west, part of Syria and

Arabia Petraea. The third was called Arabia Felix, and had on the north the south sides of

Petraea and Arabia Deserta, and the more southern part of the Persian gulf, on the west

the gulf of Arabia, and on the south the Red sea, and on the east, part of the Persian gulf

{g}; and here dwelt Jews who spoke the Arabic language. Now these Jews, of different

nations, declared concerning the apostles, saying,

we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God; not the works of

creation and providence, though these are great and wonderful; but of redemption,

pardon, atonement, justification, and salvation, by the Messiah, by his obedience,

sufferings, and death, and also of his resurrection from the dead; things which struck

them with amazement, and the more, that such illiterate persons should have such

knowledge of them, and should be able to speak of them in such a clear, distinct, and

powerful manner; and still the more, that they should speak of them in their several

tongues in which they were born, and to which they were used, and which the apostles

had never learned: and this they heard with their own ears, and were fully satisfied that

they did speak divers languages.

CALVI, "11. The wonderful works of God. Luke noteth two things which

caused the hearers to wonder; first, because the apostles being before ignorant

and private persons, 4 born in a base corner, 5 did, notwithstanding, intreat

profoundly of divine matters, and of heavenly wisdom. The other is, because

they have new tongues given them suddenly. Both things are worth the noting,

because to huddle out [utter] words unadvisedly and foolishly, should not so

much have served to move their minds; and the majesty of the things ought the

more to have moved them to consider the miracle. Although they give due

honor to God, in that they are astonished and amazed, yet the principal and of

the miracle is expressed in this, that they inquire, and thereby declare that they

are prepared to learn; for otherwise their amazedness and wondering should

not have done them any great good. And certainly we must so wonder at the

works of God, that there must be also a consideration, and a desire to

understand.

12Amazed and perplexed, they asked one

another, "What does this mean?"

God does wonders to amaze and perplex so that people will ask what does it mean

and search for answers. This leads them to discover the truth he wants to give to

them. You have succeeded when somone asks what does this mean? That is a key

question that all must ask to receive the truth of God.

BARNES, "Were in doubt - This expression, διηπόρουν diēporoun, denotes “a state

of hesitancy or anxiety about an event.” It is applied to those who are traveling, and are ignorant of the way, or who hesitate about the road. They were all astonished at this; they did not know how to understand it or explain it, until some of them supposed that it was merely the effect of new wine.

GILL Verse 12. And they were all amazed,.... That is, all these devout men, Jews and

proselytes, which came from other nations before mentioned:

and were in doubt; not whether the apostles spoke in various languages, nor about the

sense of their words; for they not only heard them with their ears, and were assured of the

facts, but they seem also to understand what was said, since they call the things delivered,

the great or wonderful things of God; but they were at a loss in their minds what should

be the cause of this, or the reason of such a dispensation,

saying, one to another, what meaneth this? from whence is it? what is the design of it? or

what the end to be answered by it? or what will follow upon it? surely something

considerable.

HENRY, " They wonder at it, and look upon it as an astonishing thing (Act_2:12): They were all amazed, they were in an ecstacy, so the word is; and they were in doubt what the meaning of it was, and whether it was to introduce the kingdom of the Messiah,

which they were big with the expectation of; they asked themselves and one another ti�an�

theloi�touto�einai; - Quid hoc sibi vult? - What is the tendency of this? Surely it is to

dignify, and so to distinguish, these men as messengers from heaven; and therefore, like Moses at the bush, they will turn aside, and see this great sight.

HAWKER, "And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this? (13) Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.

I detain the Reader over these two verses, just to call his attention to the very different effects here described, which were wrought upon the minds of the different characters beholding this miracle. Pause, Reader, at the view. What but divine teaching could have made this difference? Here is one set of men struck with awe at the wonderful works of God. And here is another attempting to turn the solemn work of God the Spirit into ridicule. One praising God; and another blaspheming. And yet the work is the same. And is it not so now? Do not some mock, while others pray? Some laugh, while others mourn? Both not the same Gospel, the same preacher, produce these different effects? Reader! do you not know it? Have you never seen it? 2Co_2:15-16. And, Reader! depend

upon it, such is, and must be the case forever. If the devils in hell were liberated from their chains, devils they would still be. Nothing short of Almighty grace could make a change. If the Reader would see an awful representation of this, let him read what is said under the fourth and fifth vials poured out upon the seat of the beast. Rev_16:8-11

UNKNOWN, "V. 12 - all were amazedall were amazedall were amazedall were amazed - The exact results intended by the "wind" and languages. The signs were not the message, but to get attention for the message. The phenomena were, however, a partial fulfillment of God痴 prophetic statements through his prophet Joel, as Peter will say. God had been preparing for this event since before the foundation of the world. It is now the fullness of time and the mystery, long hidden, is to be revealed, a mystery that concerned Jesus and the unique role he filled in man痴 history, being the actual basis for man痴 redemption, and forming the foundation of the church (=the kingdom of God, which also was/is Christ痴 body), within hours of being a historical reality.

CALVIN, "12. Others mocking. Hereby it appeareth how monstrous as well

the sluggishness, as also the ungodliness of men is, when Satan hath taken

away their mind. If God should openly (and visibly) descend from heaven, his

majesty could scarce more manifestly appear than in this miracle. Whosoever

hath any drop of sound understanding in him must needs be stricken with the

only hearing of it. How beastly, then, are those men who see it with their eyes,

and yet scoff, and go about with their jests to mock the power of God? But the

matter is so. There is nothing so wonderful which those men do not turn to a

jest who are touched with no care of God; because they do, even upon set

purposes, harden themselves in their ignorance in things most plain. And it is

a just punishment of God, which he bringeth upon such pride, to deliver them

to Satan, to be driven headlong into blind fury. Wherefore, there is no cause

why we should marvel that there be so many at this day so blind in so great

light, if they be so deaf when such manifest doctrine is delivered, yea, if they

wantonly refuse salvation when it is offered unto them. For if the wonderful

and strange works of God, wherein he doth wonderfully set forth his power, be

subject to the mockery of men, what shall become of doctrine, which they

think tasteth of nothing but of that which is common? Although Luke doth

signify unto us that they were not of the worst sort, or altogether past hope,

which did laugh (and mock;) but he meant rather to declare how the common

sort was affected when they saw this miracle. And truly it hath been always so

in the world, for very few have been touched with the true feeling of God as

often as he hath revealed himself. Neither is it any marvel; for religion is a rare

virtue, and a virtue which few men have; which is, indeed, the beginning of

understanding. Nevertheless, howsoever the more part of men, through a

certain hard stiff-neckedness, doth reject the consideration of the works of

God, yet are they never without fruit, as we may see in this history.

BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR, "And they were all amazed.

Whit Sunday, or what our Churches need

Notice—

I. Three things immediately preceding the outpouring of the Spirit—things which if not the direct cause of a revival, always herald it—the shadows cast by the coming blessing.

1. A complete congregation. “They were all in one place.” No absentees. This betokened earnestness, for it was in fact an early Sunday morning prayer-meeting with every one present. Always before a great blessing there will be a revived interest in sanctuary services. The half truth, “I can worship God as well at home” (which is a lie when the man is able to come to the sanctuary and does not) will not be heard. Indifference to public worship is a fatal sign. Things that would never be permitted to interfere with business or pleasure are reckoned sufficient to warrant “staying at home to-day.” You found eleven o’clock this morning too early to come to worship, but I will guarantee you catch the eight o’clock excursion train to-morrow morning.

2. A congregation one in desire and motive; “With one accord.” No two motives had drawn them. They came to receive the promised blessing. Is not the want of this spirit of accord the weakness of the Churches of the present day? Unbelief is not the only thing that keeps Christ from doing many mighty works. It might with equal truth be said of many a Church: “He did not many mighty works there because of their squabbling, petty, selfish spirit.” There are men who will be nothing unless they are everything, and will without compunction sacrifice a whole Church’s prosperity upon the wretched little altar of their own unsanctified ambition. Instead of all being baptized into one spirit, it looks more as if every one had been baptized into a different spirit and every spirit an evil one. But when all differences become drowned in one overwhelming passion of saving souls, then let the Church lift up her head, for the day of her revival draweth nigh.

3. A congregation steeped in the spirit of prayer. They had a ten days’ prayer-meeting. Do you wonder they had a Whit Sunday? I should have wondered if they had not. The general prayerlessness of the Church is simply deplorable. Here and there the hundreds come to prayer. But take the general run of prayer-meetings. It is not an uncommon thing for Churches to have to give them up because so few come. Whilst all this is so it is of no use talking about having a revival.

II. The blessing itself.

1. It came at an appointed time. “When the day of Pentecost was fully come.” God has a time for everything. The disciples doubtless expected the blessing sooner. They had to learn that there is a sovereignty in revivals. Man has no power to command one. He can but cry and wait. Over one Church a cloud of blessing hangs, continually letting fall showers of refreshment. Beneath its influence all is verdant, fresh and lovely. But yonder is another Church the very contrast to this. The heavens above it seem as brass. The piety of its members seems to lack freshness and their leaf

withers. Converts are almost unknown. Let not those Churches that have the blessing despise those that lack it. The only difference is that the time to favour them “has come and the time to favour the others shall come.”

2. It came suddenly and in a moment. Revivals’ very often do. With man’s work the process as well as the result is visible. Is a temple to be built, the plans are exhibited, the foundations dug out, the scaffolding reared, and for months the chipping of the chisel and the clicking of the trowel are heard. God can build His temple in a night, and like Solomon’s, no sound of tool be heard. At any moment, without any previous warning, the revival may come.

3. It spread far and wide. From the upper room it soon flew along the streets of Jerusalem like an electric current. There is no telling where the influence of a revival in a Church may spread. It creeps into homes shut against the tract distributor. It glides into darkest places of vice. A revived Church will be certain to draw the multitude together. This is the secret of getting at the masses.

III. The question of our text. “What meaneth this?” Why, it means—

1. That Christ is ascended, and has received gifts for men. An ascended, glorified Christ warrants the Church in expecting any measure of blessing, any number of conversions. “What meaneth this”?

2. That all instrumentality is nothing without the Holy Ghost, but that the meanest instrumentality with the Spirit is mighty enough to accomplish anything. Alas, what an amount of powerless machinery we have in the so-called “religious world,” because it has no unction, because it is the work of man, not the working of God through the man, because it is dry and official. Instrumentality is almost worshipped, whilst the Holy Ghost is well-nigh ignored.

3. That God is pleased to work on the world through the Church. Far be it from us to call in question the good that has been accomplished by many of our “societies,” but we believe that half of them could be spared with ease did a greater unction but rest upon the Church.

4. That these are the seasons God’s Church is to seek at His hands. I will close with an illustration. Once upon the sea-shore, watching the “getting off” of a fishing smack, I saw in it a union of work and dependence that charmed me. The fishermen brought the craft clown the beach as far as they could and then left her awhile until the tide, which was flowing, neared her. Meantime two anchors had been cast out to sea, from which were ropes to a windlass in the centre of the vessel. Soon the surf (for the sea was fresh) began to run round her as she lay a dead weight upon the shore. Then the waves began to curl over and break upon her side. The men at the windlass took a turn and made the rope fast. And now every moment the tide had more power over her. She was never still. Twenty times did I say “now she is off”; and twenty times did she settle down again upon the shore, and twenty times did the men at the windlass put on the strain. At last one wave swept higher than any before; she shook—rose—glided down towards the deep—the men turning the handle of the windlass quickly as possible. A wave she met threatened to sweep her back upon the shore, but the anchors held her, and right through the surf the men wound her, and half an hour after she was flying away before the breeze, a very contrast to the dead weight she looked upon the beach. That vessel is the Church. The Holy Ghost is the tide. The ropes and the windlass are human agencies only to be used in dependence on the tide. The tide is coming in. The Church feels its power. She moves—she rises. Oh God send the billow that shall float her now, and send her careering on her

course, with the breeze of the Spirit. (A. G. Brown.)

The multitude in amazement

I. A multitude gathered from all parts of the world.

II. A multitude gathered for religious purposes. They had come to the feast of Pentecost.

III. A multitude astonished by a miracle. The subject was one, the languages many. So—

1. In the gospel we have proof that by the foolishness of preaching God confounds the wisdom of the world.

2. Note the wonderful adaptation of the gospel to the entire world. It appeals to all natures and dispositions, and equally meets the wants of all.

IV. A multitude variously affected. All were amazed. Some inquired, some mocked. Some said (probably the devout men mentioned in Act_2:5), “What meaneth this?” This language betokened a desire to learn. Others (Act_2:13) said, “They are full of new wine”; regarding the religion of Jesus Christ as fanaticism. How does the gospel affect us? (F. Wagstaff.)

A miracle the object of derision

Of all the expressions of our distaste, a scoff is the worst. Admonition may be physic, a reproof balm, a blow ointment; but derision is as poison and a sword. It was the height of Job’s complaint that persons made jests on him; and it was the depth of Samson’s calamity (Jdg_16:25). That which raises our anger presents some magnitude to our eyes; but that which we scorn is less than nothing. But now everything is not always as it appears, especially to the eye of the scoffer; for here we see things of excellency may be submitted to jests. Note

I.

the object of their derision. A. miracle. In every miracle there is “the thing done,” which must transcend the course of nature, and “the end,” which is also supernatural. In respect of the power of God there is no miracle; but in His goodness He was pleased to work wonders, not for show, but for our instruction. And as He had borne witness to His Son by miracles, so doth He here to the Holy Ghost. This was the end of this miraculous operation.

II. The persons.

1. What entertainment finds the miracle? What welcome hath the Holy Ghost? No other than what befals all extraordinary events. Every man lays hold of it and shapes it in such a form as he may please. To some it is a matter of wonder; to others, of mirth.

2. We should account it a strange stupidity in any one not to be more affected at the sight of the sun than of a taper, and to esteem the great palace of heaven but as a furnace. But when God stretcheth forth His hands to produce effects which follow not the force of secondary causes, then, not to put-on wonder, not to conclude that it is for some great end, is not folly, but infidelity, the daughter of malice and envy and affected ignorance.

3. Miracles are signs; and if they signify nothing it is evident that a stubborn heart and froward mind will not understand the meaning of them. And then what are miracles but trifles, matter of scoff and derision? “Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God by miracles” (verse 22), a juggler; a voice from heaven, but “thunder”; to make the blind to see, etc., witchcraft; to be full of the Spirit, “to be full of drink.” When Julian had read a Defence of Christianity, he remarked, “I have read, understood, and condemned it.” To which St. Basil replied, “Had you understood it, you would never have condemned it.” The same befalls men prepossessed and too far engaged in the world, and the father’s reply will reach home to them.

4. To this day our behaviour is little better than mocking. Our lust, which waits for the twilight, mocks at God’s Omniscience (Psa_73:11); our distrust argues against His power (Psa_78:20; 2Ki_8:2); our impatience questions His truth; and those who acknowledge Him to be the Giver of life, have confined His goodness to a few. His mercy “triumpheth over” His justice; yet Novatian made every fall as low as hell: and what is despair but a mocking of God’s mercy?

5. The ground of all is infidelity, the proper issue of obstinate and wilful ignorance. Plato well observeth, that none can taste and judge of that sweetness which truth affords but the philosopher, because they want that instrument of judgment which he useth; and that cannot be applied by covetousness, ambition, and lust; “the philosopher’s instrument is reason.” So in Divine mysteries and miracles, we cannot reach the meaning of them without a humble, pure, and free spirit, the best instrument of a Christian.

6. Indeed, reason might have taught these men that this was a miracle. For rude and illiterate men to speak on a sudden all languages, was more than all the linguists in the world could teach. And from no other principle arose the question of verse 12. But, to “read the riddle, we must plough with another heifer” than reason (Jdg_14:18). To dive into the sense of the miracle can proceed from no other Spirit than that whose miracle it was, even Him wire enlightens them that sit in darkness, and who makes the humble and docile soul both His school and His scholar. Reason is a light, but obnoxious to fogs and mists, till this great light dispel and scatter them. Julian was a man as well furnished as any; yet he wounded religion more with his scoffs than with his sword. When he had received his death’s wound, he confessed it came from the power of Christ, in a phrase of scorn, “The day is Thine, O Galilean!” Indeed the greatest scoffers have been for the most part eminent in natural abilities, whose reason, notwithstanding, could not show them their own fluctuations, the storms and tempest of their souls, she being eclipsed with her own beams.

III. The scoff itself.

1. It was not only a scoff, but an accusation, and there be divers reasons which make men accusers, ambition, hatred, hope of reward. Ecumenius tells us it was here that perverseness which indifferently passeth censure upon any cause, or “no cause at all.” And this is bred by opinion, and not by truth. If they understood not what the apostles spake, how could they say they were drunk? and if they did understand, why did they scoff? They were men settled in the very dregs of error and malice; and, having taken up an opinion, they would not let it go, no not at the sight of a miracle.

2. But yet though there were no reason nor probability to justify their scoff, some show there was to countenance it. The apostles, after this gift of tongues, talked much: they were full indeed with the wine of the New Testament; and, as drunken men, they were merry and cheerful; they publish secrets, they fear no face, regard no

power, regard not themselves.

3. This hath always been, and to this day is, the great error of the world—to make shadows substances, similitudes indentities, the faintest representations truth (1Sa_1:13-14; 2Sa_6:20; Mar_3:21). Upon this ground faith is called “presumption” because it is like it; Christianity is called “madness”; for when we mortify the flesh, and estrange ourselves from the world, most that behold us think us not well in our wits. At this day true devotion goes for fancy, reverence for superstition, bowing for idolatry. Our Saviour’s counsel is, “Judge not according to the appearance” (Joh_7:24). For how easy is it to paint and present things as we please! Many times an evil eye makes an evil face, puts horror upon religion itself, and, where devotion shines out in the full beauty of holiness, draws a Pope or a devil. As “‘charity covers a multitude of sins” (Jas_5:20), so doth malice cover a multitude of virtues with the black mantle of vice. (A. Farindon, D. D.)

What meaneth this? (text and verse 37).—

Two great questions

These questions are the outcome of two widely different but intimately associated states of experience—the one intellectual, the other moral. The first is an inquiry of the mind in the face of a problem which unassisted it cannot solve; the second is an inquisition of the soul in the presence of a danger from which unaided it cannot flee. An extraordinary event had taken place at which the perplexed beholders exclaimed “What meaneth this?” When the reply came it was found to involve such tremendous issues that they cried in despair “What shall we do?”

I. What meaneth this? The inquiry was—

1. Natural. The mind instinctively rebels against the unexplained. It was made for and is fed by knowledge. Just as the animal instincts are urged by thirst and hunger to search for food and drink, so the intellect is stimulated by a sense of void to inquire for the knowledge that will fill and satisfy it. These men were confronted by a mysterious fact, and were “troubled in mind” until it was accounted for.

2. Right. The liberty to inquire is one of the inalienable, inborn, and crown rights of humanity. That it may exercise this function, God has endowed it with the requisite faculties. The hunger of the mind for knowledge is a stamp of its Divine original, and a prophecy of its immortality. Inquiry makes all the difference between savagedom and civilisation, between weakness and strength. The feeble and superstitious shun it, and perish in darkness; the strong and wise welcome it and are rewarded by the light. We must carefully distinguish, however—

(1) between aimless inquiry, i.e., curiosity, and the search for true wisdom, and

(2) between legitimate and illegitimate inquiry. “The secret things belong unto God.” The present inquiry was in many respects legitimate and commendable.

3. Was addressed to the wrong persons with unsatisfactory results. Twice, we are told, they questioned one to another. They were prevented by a too hasty generalisation and by prejudice from asking those on whom these wonders were wrought what they meant.

(1) It was enough for “strangers” to know that they were “Galileans,” a name

which embodied all that was ignorant and vile.

(2) The “dwellers at Jerusalem” would recognise them as the fanatical followers of one who was set down as “a man gluttonous and winebibber.” These manifestations, therefore, were treated as the ravings of men excited with enthusiasm or with drink. But Galileans as they were, drunk or mad as they considered, there was the phenomenon. They could not account for it, but they felt it must be accounted for. And instead of asking those from whom only a reply could be obtained, they engaged in a fruitless inquiry among themselves. How like modern scepticism!

4. Suggests an important line of argument in favour of Christianity. There are certain facts equally inexplicable to the human mind to-day. We do not see cloven tongues, etc., but we are witnesses of events even more wonderful.

(1) The conversion of infidels. Lord Lyttleton, Gilbert West, and some within personal knowledge.

(2) The conversion of men immoral and profane. Bunyan and John Newton, etc.

(3) The conversion of men of merely moral habits. John Wesley and William Wilberforce. Each case forces the question upon us. They are not isolated but common occurrences. How are they to be accounted for? On the score of weakness, wrought upon by terror or excitement, or on the score of ignorance? The known character of these men forbid these explanations. These wonders should set us inquiring, and the inquiry is as natural and proper in the one case as in the other, and furthermore by inquiring matters will be disclosed that seriously concern us all.

II. What shall we do? Although not invited Peter undertook to reply to the first question. The general explanation was verses 14-21; the particular application verses 22-36. So with the modern facts adduced. Does this explanation satisfy? Is this explanation taken home? Then both will now as of old lead to the second question. This inquiry—

1. Expressed a sense of utter helplessness. “What shall we do?” These men were convinced of the crime and mistake of a whole life, and of the human impossibility of rectification.

2. Was to the point, “What shall we do?” Not like the other question theoretical, but practical. They felt that they were in an unsatisfactory state, and that something must be done. What?

3. Was, like the first inquiry, answered.

(1) Repent. Change your mind, forsake your sins.

(2) Be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus; implying faith, union with the Church and public profession. Conclusion: Both inquiries were at length crowned with blessed results. Three thousand received forgiveness for the past, comfort for the present, hope for the future (verses 38-47). (J. W. Burn.)

13Some, however, made fun of them and said,

"They have had too much wine.[b]"

Some people solve mystery so easily and these do by saying they are just a bunch of

drunkards babbling out of their minds. That is all there is to it. So lets go home and

forget the whole thing. Mockery is their way of escape from asking questions and

getting answers.

BARNES,"Others, mocking, said - The word rendered “mocking” means “to cavil, to deride.” It occurs in the New Testament in only one other place: Act_17:32, “And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked.” This was an effect that was not confined to the day of Pentecost. There has seldom been a revival of religion, a remarkable manifestation of the power of the Holy Spirit, that has not given occasion for profane mockery and merriment. One characteristic of wicked people is to deride those things which are done to promote their own welfare. Hence, the Saviour himself was mocked; and the efforts of Christians to save others have been the subject of derision. Derision, and mockery, and a jeer, have been far more effectual in deterring people from becoming Christians than any attempts at sober argument. God will treat people as they treat him, Psa_18:26. And hence, he says to the wicked, “Because I have called and ye refused ...but ye have set at naught my counsel; I also will laugh at your calamity, I will mock when your fear cometh,” Pro_1:24-26.

These men are full of new wine - These men are drunk. In times of a revival of religion men will have some way of accounting for the effects of the gospel, and the way is commonly about as wise and rational as the one adopted on this occasion. “To escape the absurdity of acknowledging their own ignorance, they adopted the theory that strong drink can teach languages” (Dr. McLelland). In modern times it has been usual to denominate such scenes fanaticism, or wildfire, or enthusiasm. When people fail in argument, it is common to attempt to confute a doctrine or bring reproach upon a transaction by “giving it an ill name.” Hence, the names Puritan, Quaker, Methodist, etc., were at first given in derision, to account for some remarkable effect of religion on the world. Compare Mat_11:19; Joh_7:20; Joh_8:48. And thus people endeavor to trace revivals to ungoverned and heated passions, and they are regarded as the mere offspring of fanaticism. The friends of revivals should not be discouraged by this; but they should remember that the very first revival of religion was by many supposed to be the effect of a drunken frolic.

New wine - γλεύκους gleukous. This word properly means the juice of the grape

which distils before a pressure is applied, and called must. It was sweet wine, and hence, the word in Greek meaning “sweet” was given to it. The ancients, it is said, had the art of preserving their new wine with the special flavor before fermentation for a considerable time, and were in the habit of drinking it in the morning. See Horace, Sat., b. 2:iv. One of the methods in use among the Greeks and Romans of doing this was the following: An amphora or jar was taken and coated with pitch within and without, and was then filled with the juice which flowed from the grapes before they had been fully trodden, and was

then corked so as to be air-tight. It was then immersed in a tank of cold water or buried in the sand, and allowed to remain six weeks or two months. The contents after this

process were found to remain unchanged for a year, and hence, the name Dεί�γλεύκος aei�

gleukos - always sweet. The process was not much unlike what is so common now of

preserving fruits and vegetables. Sweet wine, which was probably the same as that mentioned here, is also mentioned in the Old Testament, Isa_49:26; Amo_9:13.

CLARKE, "These men are full of new wine - Rather sweet wine, for γλευκους, cannot mean the mustum, or new wine, as there could be none in Judea so early as

pentecost. The Γλευκος, gleucus, seems to have been a peculiar kind of wine, and is thus

described by Hesychius and Suidas: Γλευκος,�το�αποσταγµα�της�σταφυλης,�πριν�πατηθY.

Gleucus is that which distils from the grape before it is pressed. This must be at once

both the strongest and sweetest wine. Calmet observes that the ancients had the secret of preserving wine sweet through the whole year, and were fond of taking morning draughts of it: to this Horace appears to refer, Sat. l. ii. s. iv. ver. 24.

Aufidius forti miscebat mella Falerno.Mendose: quoniam vacuis committere venisNil nisi lene decet: leni praecordia mulsoProlueris melius.

Aufidius first, most injudicious, quaffedStrong wine and honey for his morning draught.With lenient bev’rage fill your empty veins,For lenient must will better cleanse the reins.Francis.

GILL, "Others mocking, said,.... These were the native inhabitants of Jerusalem, the common people; and it may be also the Scribes and Pharisees, who did not understand the languages in which the apostles spake, and therefore derided them both by words and gestures:

these men are full of new wine; the Syriac, version adds, "and are drunk"; a very foolish and impertinent cavil this; there was, at this time of the year, no new wine, just pressed, or in the fat; and if there had been any, and they were full of it, it could never have furnished them with a faculty of speaking with many tongues; men generally lose their tongues by intemperance. They were indeed filled with wine, but not with wine, the juice of the grape, either new or old; but with spiritual wine, with the gifts of the Spirit of God, by which they spake with divers tongues. They might hope this insinuation, that they were drunk with wine, would take and be received, since it was a feasting time, the feast of Pentecost; though, as Peter afterwards observes; it was too early in the day to imagine this to be their case.

HENRY Not that they were so absurd as to think that wine in the head would enable

men to speak languages which they never learned; but these, being native Jews, knew not, as the others did, that what was spoken was really the languages of other nations, and therefore took it to be gibberish and nonsense, such as drunkards, those fools in Israel, sometimes talk. As when they resolved not to believe the finger of the Spirit in Christ's miracles, they turned it off with this, “He casteth out devils by compact with the prince of the devils;” so, when they resolved not to believe the voice of the Spirit in the apostles' preaching, they turned it off with this, These men are full of new wine. And, if they called the Master of the house a wine-bibber, no marvel if they so call those of his household.

UNKNOWN, "V. 13 - new wine - The Greek word means a wine that is sweet. Since the

time was spring, no "new" grape juice had been made from "sweet" grapes and preserved

by one of several methods. If the skeptics・remarks are taken at face value, "new wine"

could produce inebriation.

mocking - Some were predisposed to explain the phenomena in terms contrary to the

truth. Such had always been so, and would continue to be. Consider the parable of Jesus

in Luke 8, the comment and quote of an O.T. text from Isaiah in Matthew 13:14-15; and

Paul痴 use of a like text from Habakkuk 1:5 in Acts 13:41; and use of the Isaiah text in

Acts 28:26-28. (The basic Greek term was used in ch. 17:32 to describe what some did

when Paul preached about the bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead.) They jeered at

the signs and perhaps also those who were minded to accept said signs as from God. Peter

had a ready response to the amazement of some, the skepticism of others.

COKE, "Acts 2:13. These men are full of new wine.— Though there was no must or new

wine at Pentecost, yet if they preserved the wine cool, it kept sweet a long time, and

tasted like must. So Plutarch; "Must, if a vessel be kept in a cool place, will continue

sweet, γλευκυ, for a long time." Such wines were remarkably intoxicating. See Isaiah

49:26. Sweet wine, such as the prophet there speaks of, was used in royal palaces for its

gratefulness; was capable of being kept to a great age, and consequently was very

inebriating. A few generations ago, sweet wines were those most esteemed in England.

Peter Addresses the Crowd

14Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised

his voice and addressed the crowd: "Fellow Jews

and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me

explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say.

WITESS LEE

Peter’s first message to the Jews was his first use of the keys to open the door of the

kingdom for the Jews. After Peter saw the vision concerning the Lord Jesus being

the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matt. 16:16), the Lord said to him, “I will give

to you the keys of the kingdom of the heavens, and whatever you bind on the earth

shall be what has been bound in the heavens, and whatever you loose on the earth

shall be what has been loosed in the heavens” (v. 19). According to history, the keys

have been two. Peter used one key to open the door for the Jewish believers to enter

the kingdom on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:38-42). Later, he used the other key to

open the door for the Gentile believers to enter the kingdom in the house of

Cornelius (10:34-48). Therefore, on the day of Pentecost, Peter used the first of these

two keys.

GILL Act 2:14 - But Peter standing up with the eleven,.... Apostles; their number being now complete, Matthias being chosen in the room of Judas. These all at once rose up, as abhorring the fact they were charged with, and to show the falsehood of it, and to vindicate themselves; when Peter, as their mouth, stood "in the midst" of them, as the Ethiopic version reads, with great courage, boldness, and intrepidity of mind: and "lift up his voice"; that he might be heard by the whole multitude, that was gathered together, as well as to show his zeal and fervour of spirit, and fortitude of mind; for being endued with the Spirit from on high, he was fearless of men, who but a little while ago was frightened by a servant maid,

And said unto them, ye men of Judea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem; which shows that they were the natives and citizens of Jerusalem that mocked and scoffed; for to these the apostle addresses himself,

Be this known unto you, and hearken to my words; as follows.

CLARKEAct 2:14 -Peter, standing up with the eleven - They probably spoke by turns, not

altogether; but Peter began the discourse.

All ye that dwell at Jerusalem - Ο!�κατοικουντες would be better translated by the

word sojourn, because these were not inhabitants of Judea, but the strangers mentioned in Act_2:9-11, who had come up to the feast.

BARNESAct 2:14 -But Peter - This was in accordance with the natural temperament of Peter. He was

bold, forward, ardent; and he rose now to defend the apostles of Jesus Christ, and Christ himself, from an injurious charge. Not daunted by ridicule or opposition, he felt that now was the time for preaching the gospel to the crowd that had been assembled by curiosity. No ridicule should deter Christians from an honest avowal of their opinions, and a defense of the operations of the Holy Spirit.

With the eleven - Matthias was now one of the apostles, and now appeared as one of

the witnesses for the truth. They probably all arose, and took part in the discourse. Possibly Peter began to discourse, and either all spoke together in different languages, or one succeeded another.

Ye men of Judea - People who are Jews; that is, Jews by birth. The original does not mean that they were permanent dwellers in Judea, but that they were Jews, of Jewish families. Literally, “men, Jews.”

And all ye that dwell ... - All others besides native-born Jews, whether proselytes or strangers, who were abiding at Jerusalem. This comprised, of course, the whole assembly, and was a respectful and conciliatory introduction to his discourse. Though they had mocked them, yet he treated them with respect, and did not render railing for railing 1Pe_3:9, but sought to convince them of their error.

Be this known ... - Peter did not intimate that this was a doubtful matter, or one that could not be explained. His address was respectful, yet firm. He proceeded calmly to show them their error. When the enemies of religion deride us or the gospel, we should answer them kindly and respectfully, yet firmly. We should reason with them coolly, and convince them of their error, Pro_15:1. In this case Peter acted on the principle which he afterward enjoined on all, 1Pe_3:15, “Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear.” The design of Peter was to vindicate the conduct of the apostles from the reproach of intoxication; to show that this could be no other than the work of God; and to make an application of the truth to his hearers. This he did:

(1) By showing that this could not be reasonably supposed to be the effect of new wine, Act_2:15.

(2) By showing that what had occurred had been expressly predicted in the writings of the Jewish prophets, Act_2:16-21.

(3) By a calm argument, proving the resurrection and ascension of Christ, and showing that this also was in accordance with the Jewish Scriptures, Act_2:22-35. We are not to suppose that this was the whole of Peter’s discourse, but that these were the topics on which he insisted, and the main points of his argument.

HENRY, "We have here the first-fruits of the Spirit in the sermon which Peter preached immediately, directed, not to those of other nations in a strange language (we are not told what answer he gave to those that were amazed, and said, What meaneth this?) but to the Jews in the vulgar language, even to those that mocked; for he begins with the notice of that (Act_2:15), and addresses his discourse (Act_2:14) to the men of Judea and the inhabitants of Jerusalem; but we have reason enough to think that the other disciples continued to speak to those who understood them (and therefore flocked about them), in the languages of their respective countries, the wonderful works of God. And it was not by Peter's preaching only, but that of all, or most, of the rest of the hundred and twenty, that three thousand souls were that day converted, and added to the church; but Peter's sermon only is recorded, to be an evidence for him that he was thoroughly recovered from his fall, and thoroughly restored to the divine favour. He that had sneakingly denied Christ now as courageously confesses him. Observe,

I. His introduction or preface, wherein he craves the attention of the auditory, or demands it rather: Peter stood up (Act_2:14), to show that he was not drunk, with the eleven, who concurred with him in what he said, and probably in their turns spoke likewise to the same purport; those that were of greatest authority stood up to speak to the scoffing Jews, and to confront those who contradicted and blasphemed, but left the seventy disciples to speak to the willing proselytes from other nations, who were not so

prejudiced, in their own language. Thus among Christ's ministers, some of greater gifts are called out to instruct those that oppose themselves, to take hold of sword and spear; others of meaner abilities are employed in instructing those that resign themselves, and to be vine-dressers and husband-men. Peter lifted up his voice, as one that was both well assured of and much affected with what he said, and was neither afraid nor ashamed to

own it. He applied himself to the men of Judea, andres�Ioudaioi - the men that were

Jews; so it should be read; “and you especially that dwell at Jerusalem, who were accessory to the death of Jesus, be this known unto you, which you did not know before, and which you are concerned to know now, and hearken to my words, who would draw you to Christ, and not to the words of the scribes and Pharisees, that would draw you from him. My Master is gone, whose words you have often heard in vain, and shall hear no more as you have done, but he speaks to you by us; hearken now to our words.”

UNKNOWN, "V. 14 - Peter - He will now begin a sermon, not only intended to allay the

charge of some (v. 13) but to show that the Jews should have been prepared for what had

happened to Jesus, and what was now beginning to happen in the "church age."

The first major task of the apostles was to show the Jews the cross as it related to God’s

plan for the Messiah. Their problem was manifold, but basically involved seeing Jesus as

both God and man, and both a Messiah and a suffering servant.

the eleven - As with another term, "the twelve," those who accompanied Jesus were

meant, and excludes the "120" as remarked above.

men of Judea - He addressed the crowd, though we know not if all understood, or if

some did, because we know not if the crowd could all understand a common language, or

if only some did (hence the need to have other languages spoken by the apostles). As

obvious, but not able to be settled, we don稚 know if, in addition to the miracle of sound,

sight, speech, there was also a miracle of hearing.

This was the local crowd that Peter addresses. He does not get angry at the mockers

but seeks to explain and give them reason to listen.

He raised his voice for had no loud speaker system.

ELLICOTT, "(13) These men are full of new wine.—Literally, of sweet

drink—the word “wine” not being used—stronger and more intoxicating than

the lighter and thinner wines that were ordinarily drunk. The Greek word was

sometimes used, like the Latin mustum, for the unfermented grape-juice. Here,

however, the context shows that wine, in the strict sense of the word, was

intended, and the use of the same word in the LXX. of Job 32:19 confirms this

meaning. The word for “new wine” in Matthew 9:17, Mark 2:22, is different,

but there also (see Notes) fermentation is implied. The words, as has been said

above (Note on Acts 2:4), point to a certain appearance of excitement in tone,

manner, and words.

BARCLAY, "THE FIRST CHRISTIAN PREACHING (Acts 2:14-41)

(i) There was kerugma (Greek #2782). Kerugma (Greek #2782) literally

means a herald's announcement and is the plain statement of the facts of the

Christian message, about which, as the early preachers saw it, there can be no

argument or doubt.

(ii) There was didache (Greek #1322). Didache (Greek #1322) literally means

teaching and elucidated the meaning of the facts which had been proclaimed.

(iii) There was paraklesis (Greek #3874) which literally means exhortation.

This kind of preaching urged upon men the duty of fitting their lives to match

the kerugma (Greek #2782) and the didache (Greek #1322) which had been

given.

(iv) There was homilia (Greek #3657) which means the treatment of any

subject or department of life in light of the Christian message.

Fully rounded preaching has something of all four elements. There is the plain

proclamation of the facts of the Christian gospel; the explanation of the

meaning and the relevance of these facts; the exhortation to fit life to them;

and the treatment of all the activities of life in the light of the Christian

message.

In Acts we shall meet mainly with kerugma (Greek #2782) because Acts tells

of the proclamation of the facts of the gospel to those who had never heard

them before. This kerugma (Greek #2782) follows a pattern which repeats

itself over and over again all over the New Testament.

(i) There is the proof that Jesus and all that happened to him is the fulfillment

of Old Testament prophecy. In modern times less and less stress has been laid

on the fulfillment of prophecy. We have come to see that the prophets were

not nearly so much fore-tellers of events to come as forth-tellers of God's truth

to men. But this stress of early preaching on prophecy conserved the great

truth that history is not haphazard and that there is meaning to it. To believe in

the possibility of prophecy is to believe that God is in control and that he is

working out his purposes.

(ii) In Jesus the Messiah has come, the Messianic prophecies are fulfilled and

the and the New Age has dawned. The early Church had a tremendous sense

that Jesus was the hinge of all history; that with his coming, eternity had

invaded time; and that, therefore, life and the world could never be the same

again.

(iii) The kerugma (Greek #2782) went on to state that Jesus had been born of

the line of David, that he had taught, that he had worked miracles, that he had

been crucified, that he had been raised from the dead and that he was now at

the right hand of God. The early Church was sure that the Christian religion

was based on the earthly life of Christ. But it was also certain that that earthly

life and death were not the end and that after them came the resurrection.

Jesus was not merely someone about whom they read or heard; he was

someone whom they met and knew, a living presence.

(iv) The early preachers went on to insist that Jesus would return in glory to

establish his kingdom upon earth. In other words, the early Church believed

intensely in the Second Coming. This doctrine has to some extent passed out

of modern preaching but it does conserve the truth that history is going

somewhere and that some day there will be a consummation; and that a man is

therefore in the way or on the way.

(v) The preaching finished with the statement that in Jesus alone was

salvation, that he who believed on him would receive the Holy Spirit and that

he who would not believe was destined for terrible things. That is to say, it

finished with both a promise and a threat. It is exactly like that voice which

Bunyan heard as if at his very shoulder demanding, "Wilt thou leave thy sins

and go to heaven, or wilt thou have thy sins and go to hell?"

If we read through Peter's sermon as a whole we will see how these five

strands are woven into it.

God's Day Has Come (Acts 2:14-21)

2:14-21 But Peter stood up with the eleven and raised his voice and said to

them, "You who are Jews and you who are staying in Jerusalem, let this be

known to you and listen to my words. These men are not, as you suppose,

drunk; for it is only nine o'clock in the morning. But this is what was spoken

by the prophet Joel, 'It will be in the last days, says God, that I will pour out

from my Spirit upon all men, and your sons and your daughters will prophesy

and your young men will see visions and your old men will dream dreams,

And I will pour out from my Spirit upon my men servants and my maid

servants in these days and they will prophesy. I will send wonders in the

heaven above and signs upon the earth below, blood and fire and vapour of

smoke. The sun will be changed into darkness and the moon into blood before

there comes the great and famous day of the Lord. And it shall be that all

whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."'

This passage brings us face to face with one of the basic conceptions of both

the Old and the New Testaments--that of The Day of the Lord. Much in both

the Old and in the New Testaments is not fully intelligible unless we know the

basic principles underlying that conception.

The Jews never lost the conviction that they were God's chosen people. They

interpreted that status to mean that they were chosen for special privilege

among the nations. They were always a small nation. History had been for

them one long disaster. It was clear to them that by human means they would

never reach the status they deserved as the chosen people. So, bit by bit, they

reached the conclusion that what man could not do God must do; and began to

look forward to a day when God would intervene directly in history and exalt

them to the honour they dreamed of The day of that intervention was The Day

of the Lord.

They divided all time into two ages. There was The Present Age which was

utterly evil and doomed to destruction; there was The Age to Come which

would be the golden age of God. Between the two there was to be The Day of

the Lord which was to be the terrible birth pangs of the new age. It would

come suddenly like a thief in the night; it would be a day when the world

would be shaken to its very foundations; it would be a day of judgment and of

terror. All over the prophetic books of the Old Testament and in much of the

New Testament, are descriptions of that Day. Typical passages are Isaiah 2:12;

Isaiah 13:6 ff.; Amos 5:18; Zephaniah 1:7; Joel 2:1-32 ; 1 Thessalonians 5:2

ff.; 2 Peter 3:10.

Here Peter is saying to the Jews--"For generations you have dreamed of the

Day of God, the Day when God would break into history. Now, in Jesus, that

Day has come." Behind all the outworn imagery stands the great truth that in

Jesus, God arrived in person on the scene of human history.

ELLICOTT, "(14) But Peter, standing up with the eleven, . . .—We are struck

at once with the marvellous change that has come over the character of the

Apostle. Timidity has become boldness; for the few hasty words recorded in

the Gospels we have elaborate discourses. There is a method and insight in the

way he deals with the prophecies of the Christ altogether unlike anything that

we have seen in him before. If we were reading a fictitious history, we should

rightly criticise the author for the want of consistency in his portraiture of the

same character in the first and second volumes of his work. As it is, the

inconsistency becomes almost an evidence of the truth of the narratives that

contain it. The writer of a made-up-history, bent only upon reconciling the

followers of Peter and of Paul, would have made the former more prominent

in the Gospels or less prominent in the Acts. And the facts which St. Luke

narrates are an adequate explanation of the phenomena. In the interval that had

passed, Peter’s mind had been opened by his Lord’s teaching to understand the

Scriptures (Luke 24:45), and then he had been endued, by the gift of the Holy

Spirit, with power from on high. That which he now speaks is the first

utterance of the new gift of prophecy, and followed rightly on I the portent of

the “tongues” to bring about the work of conversion which they had no power

to accomplish. The speech which follows was spoken either in the Aramaic of

Palestine, or, more probably, in the Greek, which was common in Galilee, and

which would be intelligible to all, or nearly all, of the pilgrims from distant

countries.

And said unto them.—The verb is not the word commonly so rendered, but

that which is translated “utterance,” or “to utter,” in Acts 2:4. The unusual

word was probably repeated here to indicate that what follows was just as

much an “utterance” of the Holy Spirit, working on and through the spiritual

powers of man, as the marvel of the “tongues” had been.

Hearken to my words.—Literally, give ear to. The verb is an unusual one, and

is found here only in the New Testament. It is used not unfrequently in the

LXX., as, e.g., in Genesis 4:22; Job 23:18.

COFFMAN, "Peter standing up with the eleven ... In Acts 1:26, Luke said that

Matthias was "numbered with the eleven," meaning that Matthias was the

twelfth man. In the same way, Peter's standing up "with the eleven," as here,

means that Peter was the twelfth man. Thus the Twelve participated in the

events of this day.

The sensational speeches made by all of the Twelve earlier were at this point

concluded, and the Twelve came together, and Peter, speaking upon behalf of

all of them, delivered the inspired sermon which is the feature of this chapter.

All were the object of Peter's sermon, but he addressed, particularly and

primarily, "men of Judaea." It is neither affirmed nor denied that they heard

Peter in their native languages.

Peter's taking the lead here was within full harmony with the Lord's promise

that he should have "the keys of the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 16:19);

and, accordingly, Peter flung wide the gates of the kingdom, preaching the

first sermon of the gospel age.

PETER'S SERMON ON PENTECOST

The classical judgment of any public address must take account of: (1) the

occasion, (2) the speaker, (3) the subject matter, and (4) the results; and by any

or all of these criteria, Peter's address recorded here must be hailed as the most

wonderful ever given. It was the birthday of the New Institution, the official

emergence of the kingdom of God among men. That occasion was the precise

moment toward which all the prophecies for thousands of years had pointed.

The "new creation" was wrought that day.

Regarding the speaker, the rugged fisherman of Galilee, the bold outdoorsman

with the ready tongue and fiery disposition, the man who shortly before had

denied the Christ whom he was then to proclaim, the natural leader of the

Twelve, and the type of man who could command the respect of all, - that man

was the speaker, and no more effective a person for such a task could be

imagined.

The subject matter was human salvation and the procurement of it in Jesus

Christ the risen Lord. Where was ever a nobler theme?

And the results: three thousand souls believed in the Lord, repented of their

sins, and were baptized into Christ in a single day! Let men study this speech,

and like those who first heard it, they will be amazed and marvel. Concerning

this sermon, McGarvey said:

Never did mortal lips announce in so brief a space so many facts of import to

the hearers. We might challenge the world to find a parallel to it in the

speeches of her orators, or the songs of her poets. There is not such a

thunderbolt in all the burdens of the prophets of Israel, or among the voices

which thunder in the Apocalypse.[22]

The postulations of critics who would if they could, erode the authority of this

sermon through allegations that Luke, rather than Peter, composed it, are

completely frustrated by the evident marks of its genuineness that distinguish

every line of it. Dummelow said:

The genuineness of this speech is vouched for by the simplicity of its

theology, and by its resemblances to 1Peter (e.g. "foreknowledge," 1 Peter 1:2;

"to call upon (God)," 1 Peter 1:17; "rejoicing," 1 Peter 1:6,8; 4:13; "the right

hand of God," 1 Peter 3:22; "exalt," 1 Peter 5:6; "the house" (Israel), 1 Peter

2:5; 4:17 etc.[23]

These are not drunken ... This malicious comment by the mockers deserved

little attention, and little it received from Peter. He merely pointed out that the

time of day alone was grounds for rejecting such a slander. On a festival like

Pentecost, no Jew ever ate or drank anything until after 9:00 A.M.

This is that which hath been spoken through the prophet Joel ... Not Joel, but

God was the speaker in that prophet's writings.

This is that ... identifies the events initiated at Pentecost as fulfilling the

prophecy about to be quoted from Joel.

[22] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 30.

[23] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The

Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 821.

SBC, "The first Gospel Sermon

There are four links in St. Peter’s chain of evidence. The first two, lying within the knowledge of his hearers, are briefly handled; the last two, being facts lying outside their observation, are confirmed at length by Scripture and living testimony.

I. God’s hand first appeared in the public ministry of Jesus by the miracles which He had wrought. On these proofs the preacher had no need to dwell. They were known to all.

II. But now came the stumbling block with the audience. This Man of Nazareth, the fame of whose words had filled Palestine, had been by the national rulers solemnly adjudged a cheat and a blasphemer; and the people in a fickle hour had turned upon their former

favourite, and demanded His blood. Nakedly Peter recalls the harsh and horrid deeds of seven weeks before, and bluntly charges them on the crowd before him, so that each man’s share in that Friday’s work might rise up out of memory before his soul and tear his conscience with remorse and shame. Only his proof of the Messiahship of the Crucified is still far too incomplete to justify his dwelling on so irritating a theme, and therefore, without giving time for pause, or even breaking off his sentence, he goes on to announce—

III. That novel and astounding fact of resurrection, by which God had set His seal for ever beyond all cavil to the innocence and the claims and sonship of the Lord Jesus, "whom God raised up." What any devout and thoughtful Jew ought to have been looking for, as the chief mark of Messiah when He came, as God’s crowning attestation to David’s Son, could not be a thing incredible when at last affirmed of a Man who declared to the death that He was Messiah. If Jesus should be after all what He said He was, God must have raised Him up; but God had raised Him up, "whereof," adds the preacher, "we all are witnesses."

IV. One more proof, and only one, remained. David had not ascended into heaven to sit there in the seat of supreme, celestial monarchy and thence subdue all earthly foes; but Peter was prepared to say that Jesus had. In the change which the anointing Holy Ghost had wrought, the disciples were living proofs that their Master, though refused, baffled, slain on earth, had been exalted and enthroned in heaven, and had received of the Father—what He had now sent down to them—the promise of the Holy Ghost. Pentecost itself is the supreme demonstration of Peter’s thesis that Jesus is the Christ; for on Jesus’ friends, and. on none else, has come what prophets promised and the just have waited for.

J. Oswald Dykes, From Jerusalem to Antioch, p. 63.

EBC, "ST. PETER’S FIRST SERMON.

THIS verse contains the opening words of St. Peter’s address to the multitude who were roused to wonder arid inquiry by the miraculous manifestations of Pentecost: That address is full of interest when viewed aright, freed from all the haze which the long familiarity of ages has brought with it. In this second chapter we have the report of a sermon preached within a few days of Christ’s ascension, addressed to men many of whom knew Jesus Christ, all of whom had heard of His work, His life, and His death, and setting forth the apostolic estimate of Christ, His miracles, His teaching, His ascended condition and glory. We cannot realise, unless by an intellectual effort, the special worth of these apostolic reports contained in the Acts. Men are sometimes sceptical about them, asking, how did we get them at all? how were they handed down? This is, however, an easier question to answer than some think. If we take, for instance, this Pentecostal address alone, we know that St. Luke had many opportunities of personal communication with St. Peter. He may have learned from St. Peter’s own mouth what he said on this occasion, and he could compare this verbal report with the impressions and remembrances of hundreds who then were present. But there is another solution of the difficulty less known to the ordinary student of Holy Scripture. The ancients made a great use of shorthand, and were quite well accustomed to take down spoken discourses, transmitting them thus to future ages. Shorthand was, in fact, much more commonly used among the ancients than among ourselves. The younger

Pliny, for instance, who was a contemporary of the Apostles, never travelled without a shorthand writer, whose business it was to transcribe passages which struck his master in the books he was perpetually studying. The sermons of Chrysostom were all extemporaneous effusions. In fact, the golden-mouthed patriarch of Constantinople was such an indefatigable pulpit-orator, preaching almost daily, that it would have been impossible to have made any copious preparation. The extensive reports of his sermons which have come down to us, the volumes of his expositions on the books of Scripture which we possess, prove that shorthand must have been constantly used by his hearers. Now what would we give for a few shorthand reports of sermons by Clement of Rome, by St. Luke, by Timothy, by Apollos, preached in Rome, Alexandria, or Antioch? Suppose they were discovered, like the numerous Egyptian manuscripts which have of late years come to light, deposited in the desert sands, and were found to set forth the miracles, the ministry, and the person of Christ exactly as now we preach them, what a marvellous confirmation of the faith we should esteem them! And yet what should we then possess more than we already have in the sermons and discourses of St. Peter and St. Paul, reported by an eye- and ear-witness who wrote the Acts of the Apostles?

I. The congregation assembled to listen to this first Gospel discourse preached by a human agent was a notable and representative one. There were Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia and in Judaea, - or, as an ancient expositor (Tertullian) puts it, in Armenia and Cappadocia, - in Pontus and Asia, in Phrygia and Pamphylia, in Egypt and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians. The enumeration of the various nationalities listening to St. Peter begins from the extremest east; it proceeds then to the north, from thence to the south, terminating with Rome, which represents the west. They were all Jews or Jewish proselytes, showing how extremely wide, at the epoch of the Incarnation, was the dispersion of God’s ancient people. St. Paul, in one profound passage of the Epistle to the Galatians, notes that "God sent forth His Son in the fulness of time," that is, at the exact moment when the world was prepared for the advent of the truth. This "fulness of time" may be noted in many directions. Roman roads, Roman law, commerce, and civilisation opened channels of communication which bore the tidings of the gospel into every land. A sweet ginger of our own time, the late Sir Samuel Ferguson, has depicted in his "Lays of the Western Gael" this diffusion of the gospel through the military organisation of Rome. He represents a Celt from Ireland as present at the crucifixion. This may seem at first somewhat improbable, as Ireland was never included within the bounds of the Roman Empire; and yet the poet’s song can be justified from history. Though never included formally within the Empire, Irishmen and Scotch Highlanders must often have served in the ranks of the Roman army, just as at the present day, and especially in India, men of foreign nationalities are often found serving in the ranks of the British army. In later times Irishmen most certainly formed a Roman legion all to themselves. St. Jerome tells us that he had seen them acting in that capacity at Treves, in Germany. They were noted for their bravery, which, as Jerome believes, they sustained by consuming human flesh Three hundred years earlier Irishmen may often have enlisted in the service of those British legions which the Romans withdrew from Britain and located in the East; and thus Sir Samuel Ferguson does not pass the bounds of historic credibility when he represents a certain centurion, who had been present at the crucifixion, as returning to his native land, and there proclaiming the tidings of our Lord’s atoning sacrifice:-

"And they say, Centurion Altus, when he to Emania came And to Rome s subjection called us, urging Caesar’s tribute claim, Told that half the world barbarian thrills already with the faith, Taught them by the God-like Syrian Caesar lately put to death."

The dispersion of the Jews throughout not only the Roman Empire, but far beyond its limits, served the same end, and hastened the fulness of time needed for the Messiah’s appearance. We must remember, however, that the long list of varied nationalities present at this Pentecostal feast were not Gentiles, they were Jews of the dispersion scattered broadcast among the nations as far as Central Asia towards the east, as far as southern Arabia and Aden on the south, and Spain and Britain on the west. The course of modern investigation and discovery amply confirms the statement of this passage, as well as the similar statement of the eighth chapter, which represents a Jewish statesman of Abyssinia or Ethiopia as coming up to Jerusalem for the purposes of devotion. Jewish inscriptions have been found in Aden dating back long before the Christian era. A Jewish colony existed ages before Christ in the region of Southern Arabia, and continued to flourish there down to the Middle Ages. At Rome, Alexandria, and Greece the Jews at this period constituted an important factor in the total population. The dispersion of the Jews had now done its work, and brought with it the fulness of time required by the Divine purposes. The way of the Messiah had been effectually prepared by it. The Divine seed fell upon no un-ploughed and unbroken soil. Pure and noble ideas of worship and morality had been scattered broadcast throughout the world. Some years ago the Judgment of Solomon was found depicted on the ceiling of a Pompeian house, witnessing to the spread of scriptural knowledge through Jewish artists in the time of Tiberius and of Nero. A race of missionaries, too, equipped for their work, was developed through the discipline of exile. The thousands who hung upon Peter’s lips needed nothing but instruction in the faith of Jesus Christ, together with the baptism of the Spirit, and the finest, the most enthusiastic, and the most cosmopolitan of agencies lay ready to the Church’s hand. While, again, the organisation of synagogues, which the exigencies of the dispersion had called into existence, was just the one suited to the various purposes of charity, worship, and teaching, which the Christian Church required. Whether, indeed, we consider the persons whom St. Peter addressed, or the machinery they had elaborated, or the diffusion of pure religious ideas they had occasioned, we see in this passage a splendid illustration of the care and working of Divine Providence bringing good out of evil and real victory out of apparent defeat. Prophet and psalmist had lamented over Zion’s ruin and Israel’s exile into foreign lands, but they saw not how that God was thereby working out His own purposes of wider blessing to mankind at large, fitting Jews and Gentiles alike for that fulness of time when the Eternal Son should be manifested.

II. The brave, outspoken tone of this sermon evidences the power and influence of the Holy Spirit upon St. Peter’s mind. St. Chrysostom, in his famous lectures on the Acts of the Apostles, notes the courageous tone of this address as a clear evidence of the truth of the resurrection. This argument has been ever since a commonplace with apologists and expositors, and yet it is only by an effort that we can realise how very strong it is. Here were St. Peter and his fellow Apostles standing up proclaiming a glorified and ascended Messiah. Just seven weeks before, they had fled from the messengers of the High Priest sent to arrest their Master, leaving Him to His fate. They had seen Him crucified, knew of His burial, and then, feeling utterly defeated, had as much as possible withdrawn themselves from public notice. Seven weeks after, the same band, led by St. Peter, himself a short time before afraid to confess Christ to a maidservant, boldly stand up, charge upon the multitude, who knew all the circumstances of Christ’s execution, the crime of having thus killed the Prince of Life, and appeal to the supernatural evidence of the gift of tongues, to which they had just listened, as the best proof of the truth of their message, St. Peter’s courage on this occasion is one of the clearest proofs of the truth of his testimony. St. Peter was not naturally a courageous man. He was very impulsive and

very sympathetic. He was the creature of his surroundings. If he found himself in the midst of Christ’s friends, he was the most forward to uphold Christ’s cause, but he had not much moral stamina. He was sadly deficient in staying power. His mind was very Celtic in its tone, to draw an illustration from national characteristics. The Celtic mind is very sympathetic, ardent, enthusiastic. It is swept along in moments of excitement, either of victory or of defeat, by the dominating power of numbers. How often has this quality been manifested by the French people, for instance? They are resistless when victorious; they collapse utterly and at once when defeated. St. Peter was just the same. He was sympathetic, ardent, enthusiastic, and fell, in later as well as in earlier age, into the perils which attend such temperaments. He denied his Master when surrounded by the menials of the high priest. He was ready to die for that Master a few hours before, when sitting surrounded by Christ’s disciples in the secrecy of the upper room. Divine grace and the baptism of the Spirit did not at all change his natural character in this respect. Divine grace, whether granted in ancient or in modern times, does not destroy natural character, which is God’s gift to man. It merely refines, purifies, elevates it. We find, indeed, a striking illustration of this law of the Divine life in St. Peter’s case.

One of the most convincing proofs of the truth of the New Testament is the identity of character we behold in the representations given of St. Peter by writers who produced their books quite independently of each other. St. Paul wrote his Epistle to the Galatians long prior to any of the Gospel narratives. Yet St. Paul’s picture of St. Peter in the Epistle to the Galatians is exactly the same as that drawn by the four Evangelists alike. St. Paul depicts him as the same intensely sympathetic, and therefore the same unstable person whom the Evangelists describe. The brave scene in the upper chamber, and the scene of cowardice and disgrace in the high priest’s palace, were in principle re-enacted twenty years after, about the year A.D. 53, at Antioch. St. Peter was very bold in maintaining the right of Gentile freedom, and hesitated not to live like the Gentile Christians at Antioch, so long as none of the strict Jewish Christians of Jerusalem knew about it. St. Peter wished, in fact, to stand well with both parties, and therefore strove to conciliate both. He was, for the time, a type of that famous character Mr. Facing-two-ways. He lived, therefore, as a Gentile, until some of the Jerusalem brethren arrived at Antioch, when he at once quailed before them and retreated, betraying the cause of Christian freedom, and sacrificing, just as men do still, Christian principle and honesty upon the altar of self-seeking popularity. St. Peter, we therefore maintain, always remained at heart the same character. He was bold and forward for Christ so long as all went well, because he was intensely sympathetic; but he had very little of that power of standing alone which marked St. Paul, and nerved him, even though a solitary witness, when the cause of truth was involved. This somewhat lengthened argument is absolutely necessary to show the strength of our conclusion: that it must have been an overpowering sense of the awful reality of Christ’s resurrection and ascension which alone could have overcome this natural weakness of St. Peter, and made him on the day of Pentecost as brave in proclaiming Jesus Christ to his red-handed murderers as he was bold to propose a new Apostle in place of the hapless traitor to the assembled disciples in the upper chamber. St. Peter evidently believed, and believed with an intense, overwhelming, resistless conviction, in the truth of Christ’s resurrection and ascension, which thus became to him the source of personal courage and of individual power.

III. Again, the tone of St. Peter’s sermon was remarkable because of its enlarged and enlightened spirituality. It proved the Spirit’s power in illuminating the human consciousness. St. Peter was rapidly gaining a true conception of the nature of the kingdom of God. He enunciates that conception in this sermon. He proclaims Christianity, in its catholic and universal aspect, when he quotes the prophet Joel as

predicting the time when the Lord would pour out His Spirit upon all flesh. St. Peter does not indeed seem to have realised all at once the full significance of his own teaching. He did not see that his words applied to the Gentiles equally with the Jews, sounding the death-knell of all national exclusiveness in religion. Had he seen the full meaning of his own words, he would not have hesitated so much about the baptism of Cornelius and the admission of the Gentiles. It has been found true, not only of St. Peter, but of teachers, reformers, politicians, statesmen, that they have not at once recognised all the vast issues and undeveloped principles which lay wrapped up m their original message. The stress and trial of life alone draw them out, at times compelling their authors to regret their earlier actions, at other times leading them to follow out with intensified vigour the principles and movements which they had themselves set in operation. Luther, when he protested against indulgences; Erasmus, when he ridiculed the ignorance of the monks and advocated the study of the Greek New Testament; John Hampden, when he refused to pay ship money; or Bishop Ken, when he declined obedience to the orders of King James II; -none of them saw whereunto their principles would necessarily grow till time had thoroughly threshed their teaching and their actions, separating the husk of external circumstances, which are so variable, from the kernel of principle, which is eternally the same, stern, severe, inexorable, in its operations. So it was with St. Peter, and still earlier with the prophets. They sang of and preached a universal religion, as in this passage, but yet none of them realised the full scope and meaning of the words they had used, till a special revelation upon the housetop at Joppa compelled St. Peter to grasp and understand and apply the principles he had been already proclaiming.

In this respect, indeed, we recognise the greatness, the divinity of the Master Himself towering above the noblest of His followers; above even Peter himself, upon whom He pronounced such an eulogium, and bestowed such privileges. Our Lord Jesus Christ taught this universality of Christianity, and expressly recognised it. St. Peter indeed taught it in this sermon, but he did not recognise the force of his own words. Jesus Christ not only taught it, but realised the meaning of His teaching. It was indeed no part of Christ’s earthly ministry to preach to the Gentiles. He came to the house of Israel alone. Yet how clearly He witnesses, how distinctly He prophesies of the future universality of His kingdom. He heals a centurion’s servant, proclaiming at the same time that many shall come from the east and west, and sit down in the kingdom, while the children of the kingdom shall be cast out. He risks His life among the inhabitants of the city where He had been brought up, in order that He may deliver this truth. He repeats it to the woman of Samaria, in order that He may chase away her national superstition. He embodies it in His great eucharistic prayer for His Apostles and for His Church at large. The more carefully and the more devoutly we study Christ’s words, the more lofty will be our conception of His personality and character, who from the very beginning recognised the full force of His message, the true extent of that Divine society He was about to establish. The avowed catholicity of Christ’s teaching is one of the surest proofs of Christ’s divinity. He had not to wait as Peter waited, till events explained the meaning of His words; from the beginning He knew all things which should happen.

Still the tone of St. Peter’s sermon proved that the Spirit had supernaturally enlightened him. He had already risen to spiritual heights undreamt-of hitherto, even by himself. A comparison of a few passages proves this. In the sixteenth chapter of St. Matthew we have narrated for us the scene where our Lord extracts from St. Peter his celebrated confession, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God," and then soon after bestows upon him the equally celebrated rebuke, "Get thee behind Me, Satan! thou art a stumbling-block unto Me: for thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of

men." St. Peter, with his horror-struck opposition to the very idea of Christ’s death and suffering, evidently cherished the same notions of the kingdom of God, which Christ had come to establish, as James and John did when they petitioned for the highest place in the Master’s kingdom. This carnal conception of a temporal kingdom and earthly forces and human weapons St. Peter retained when he armed himself with a sword and prepared to defend his Master in the Garden of Gethsemane; and even later still when, after the resurrection, the Apostles, acting doubtless through Peter as their spokesman, demanded, "Dost Thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" But the Spirit was vouchsafed, and new power, of which the Master had spoken, was granted, and that power raised Peter above all such low Jewish ideas, and the kingdom announced to the Jews is no longer a kingdom of earth, with its carnal weapons and its dignities. He now understood what the Master had taught when He witnessed before Pontius Pilate His good confession, "My kingdom is not of this world: if My kingdom were of this world, then would My servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now is My kingdom not from hence." The carnal conception passes away under the influence of the heavenly solvent, and St. Peter proclaimed a kingdom which was a purely spiritual dominion, dealing with remission of sins and a purified interior life, through the operation and indwelling of the Holy Ghost. The power of the Holy Ghost was shown in St. Peter’s case by the vast and complete change which passed at once over his spiritual ideas and outlook. The thoughts and expectations of the pious Jews of Galilee-the very class from whom St. Peter sprang-were just then shaped and formed by the popular apocalyptic literature of the period, as we have already pointed out in the second chapter. The Second Epistle of St. Peter and the Epistle of Jude prove that the Galileans of that time were careful students of works like the Assumption of Moses, the Book of Enoch, and the Ascension of Isaiah, which agree in representing the kingdom of God and the reign of the Messiah as equivalent to the triumph of the Jewish nation over all foreign dominion and bondage. St. Peter and the other eleven Apostles shared these natural ideas and expectations till the Spirit was poured out, when they learned in a profounder spiritual comprehension to estimate aright the scope and meaning of our blessed Lord’s teaching. St. Peter dwells, therefore, in his sermon on Christ’s person, His sufferings, His resurrection, His ascension, no longer indeed for the purpose of exalting the Jewish nation, or predicting its triumph, but to point a purely spiritual lesson. "Repent ye, and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive"-not honour, riches, temporal freedom, but "ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." The subject-matter of St. Peter’s sermon, the change in his tone of teaching, is another great proof of a supernatural force and power imparted on the Day of Pentecost.

IV. Let us look somewhat farther into the matter of this earliest Christian sermon, that we may learn the apostolic view of the Christian scheme. Some persons have asserted that the earliest Christians were Ebionites, and taught a system of doctrine akin to modern Unitarianism. This theory can best be tested by an appeal to the Acts of the Apostles. What, for instance, was the conception of Christ’s life, work, and ascended state, which St. Peter presented to the astonished multitude? We must not expect, indeed, to find in this sermon a formulated and scientific system of Christian doctrine. St. Peter was as yet far too near the great events he declared, far too close to the superhuman personality of Christ, to co-ordinate his ideas and arrange his views. It is a matter of every-day experience that when a new discovery is suddenly made, when a new revelation takes place in the region of nature, men do not grasp at once all the new relations thereby involved, all the novel applications whereof it is capable. The human mind is so limited in its power that it is not till we get some distance away from a great

object that we are enabled to survey it in the fulness of its outline. Inspiration assisted St. Peter, elevated his mind, raised his tone of thought to a higher level, but it did not reverse this fundamental law under which the human mind works. Yet St. Peter’s discourse contains all the great principles of Catholic Christianity as opposed to that low view which would represent the earliest Christians as preaching the purely humanitarian scheme of modern Unitarianism. St. Peter taught boldly the miraculous element of Christ’s life, describing Him as "a man approved of God by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did by Him." Yet he did not dwell as much as we might have expected upon the miraculous side of Christ’s ministry. In fact, the earliest heralds of the Cross did not make as much use of the argument from miracles as we might have expected them to have done. And that for a very simple reason. The inhabitants of the East were so accustomed to the practices of magic that they simply classed the Christian missionaries with magicians. The Jewish explanation of the miracles of our Lord is of this description. The Talmudists do not deny that He worked miracles, but assert that He achieved them by a special use of the Tetragammaton, or the sacred name of Jehovah, which was known only to Himself. The sacred writers and preachers refer, therefore, again and again to the miracles of our Saviour, as St. Peter does in the second chapter, as well-known and admitted facts, whatever explanation may be offered of them, and then turn to other aspects of the question. The Apostles had, however, a more powerful argument in reserve. They preached a spiritual religion, a present peace with God, a present forgiveness of sins; they point forward to a future life of which even here below believers possess the earnest and the pledge. We, with our minds steeped in ages of Christian thought and teaching, can have no idea of the convincing self-evidencing force of teaching like that, to a Jew reared up in a system of barren formalism, and still more to a Gentile, with spiritual instincts longing for satisfaction, and which he was expected to satisfy with the bloodstained shows of the amphitheatre or with the immoralities and impure banquetings of the pagan temples. To persons in that condition, an argument derived from a mere wonderful work brought little conviction, for they were well accustomed to behold very marvellous and apparently miraculous actions, such as to this day the wandering jugglers of India exhibit. But when they beheld lives transfused by the love of God, and heard pure spiritual teaching such as responded to the profoundest depths of their own hearts, then deep answered unto deep. The preaching of the Cross became indeed the power of God unto salvation, because the human soul instinctively felt that the Cross was the medicine fittest for its spiritual maladies.

V. Again, this sermon shows the method of interpreting the Psalms and Prophets popular among the pious Jews of St. Peter’s time. St. Peter’s method of interpretation is identical with that of our Lord, of St. Paul, and of the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. He beholds in the Psalms hints and types of the profoundest doctrines of the Creed. We can see this in both the quotations which he makes. St. Peter finds in the sixteenth Psalm a prophecy of the intermediate state of souls and of the resurrection of our Lord. "Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades" is a text which has furnished the basis of the article in the Apostles’ Creed which teaches that Christ descended into hell. It is a pity indeed that the translation which the last revisers have adopted, "Hades" instead of "Hell," was not used in the English translation of the Apostles’ Creed; for the ordinary reading has misled many a thoughtful and serious soul, as if the Creed taught that the pure and sinless spirit of the Saviour had been made partaker of the horrors of eternal misery. Whereas, in truth, the doctrine of Scripture and of the Creed alike merely asserts that our Lord’s spirit, when separated from the body, entered and thereby sanctified and prepared the place or state where Christian souls, while separated from their bodies,

await the general resurrection of the just and the completion of their happiness. The doctrine of the intermediate state, as taught by Bishop Pearson and other great divines, is primarily based on two texts, the passage before us and the words of our Saviour to the penitent thief, "To-day shalt thou be with Me in Paradise". (Luk_23:43) This doctrine accurately corresponds with the catholic doctrine of our Lord’s Person. The Arian heresy denied the true deity of our Lord. The second great heresy was the Apollinarian, which denied His true and perfect humanity. The orthodox doctrine taught the tripartite nature of man, that is, that there was in man, first, a body, secondly, the animal soul which man possesses in common with the beasts, and which perishes at death, and, lastly, the human spirit which is immortal and by which he maintains communion with God. Now the Apollinarian heresy asserted that Jesus Christ possessed a body and a soul, but denied His possession of a spirit. Its theory was that the Divine nature took the place of a true human spirit in Christ, so that Christ was unlike His brethren in this respect, that when the body died, and the animal soul perished, He had no human spirit by which He might enter into Hades, or dwell in Paradise. The Divine nature was the only portion of the Incarnate Lord which then survived. Against this view the words of St. Peter testified beforehand, teaching, by his adaptation of David’s prophecy, that our Lord possessed the fulness of humanity in its threefold division, whereby He was enabled to share the experience and lot of His brethren, not only in this life, but also in the intermediate state of Hades, wherein the spirits of the blessed dead await re-union with their bodies, and expect in hope the second advent of their Lord.

St. Peter’s interpretation again of the Psalms recognised in David’s words a prophecy of the resurrection: "Neither wilt Thou give Thy Holy One to see corruption,"-a rendering of the New Testament revisers which, however literal, is not nearly as vigorous or suggestive as the old translation, "Neither wilt Thou suffer Thy Holy One to see corruption." St. Peter then proceeds to point out how impossible it was that this prediction could have been fulfilled in David. David’s flesh undoubtedly did see corruption, because every one knew where his tomb was. St. Peter’s speech here touches upon a point where we can confirm his accuracy out of ancient historians. David was buried, according to ancient writers, in the city of David. (2Ki_2:10) The Rabbis went even further, they determined the time of his death. According to a writer quoted by that great seventeenth-century teacher, Dr. John Lightfoot, "David died at Pentecost, and all Israel bewailed him, and offered their sacrifices the day following." After the return from Babylon the site of the sepulchre was known, as Neh_3:16 reports, telling us that Nehemiah the son Of Azbuk repaired the wall over against the sepulchre of David; while still later Josephus tells us that Hyrcanus, the high priest, and Herod the Great opened David’s tomb, and removed vast treasures from it. St. Peter’s words on this occasion possess an important evidential aspect, and suggest one of the gravest difficulties which the assailants of the resurrection have to face. St. Peter appealed to the evidence of David’s tomb as demonstrating the fact that he was dead, and that death still held him in its power. Why did not his opponents appeal to the testimony of Christ’s tomb? It is evident from St. Peter’s argument that Christ’s tomb was empty, and was known to be empty. The first witnesses to the resurrection insisted, within a few weeks of our Lord’s crucifixion, upon this fact, proclaimed it everywhere, and the Jews made no attempt to dispute their assertions. Our opponents may indeed say, we acknowledge the fact of the emptiness of the tomb, but the body of Christ was removed by St. Peter and his associates. How then, we reply, do you account for St. Peter’s action? Did conscious guilt and hypocrisy make him brave and enthusiastic? If they say, indeed, Peter did not remove the body, but that his associates did, then how are we to account for the conversations St. Peter thought he had held with his risen Master, the appearances

vouchsafed to him, the close converse, "eating and drinking with him after He was risen from the dead"? St. Peter, by his appeal to David’s tomb, and its bearing on the sixteenth Psalm, proves that he believed in no ideal resurrection, no phantasm, -no ghost story, to put it plainly; but that he taught the doctrine of the resurrection as the Church now accepts it.

HAWKER 13-36, "But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words: (15) For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. (16) But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; (17) And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: (18) And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: (19) And I will show wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke: (20) The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: (21) And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. (22) Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: (23) Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: (24) Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it. (25) For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: (26) Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: (27) Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. (28) Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. (29) Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us unto this day. (30) Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; (31) He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. (32) This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. (33) Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. (34) For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, (35) Until I make thy foes thy footstool. (36) Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

There must have been somewhat very striking, when Peter and the eleven all arose at once, as if (and which indeed was the case,) all animated by a supernatural power, to refute the foul calumny of drunkenness. And I beg the Reader to remark with me, how mildly the Apostle expostulated with their accusers, appealing to their own principles of religion, in proof of the falseness of what they had said, seeing it was now but the third hour of the day, namely, nine of the clock in the morning, the well-known hour of the morning sacrifice; before which, and especially on the Sabbath, which this was, it

became unlawful for any of the seed of Abraham to indulge in bodily refreshment. Compare Num_28:1-10 with Exo_12:16. Reader! so will every preacher, yea, every child of God, mildly reason with opposers, when under the blessed influences of God the Holy Ghost, 2Ti_2:24-25.

I am constrained by the limits I must observe, from entering very largely into a Commentary upon this sweet Sermon of the Apostles. For the text which Peter took from the prophecy of Joel, I refer to some few observations I have already offered in my Poor Man’s Commentary on the place. And in addition to what is there proposed, I would here remark, that by the all flesh the Prophet speaks of, and the Apostle comments upon, cannot be supposed to mean all mankind; but as other Scriptures explain the phrase, all God’s people in all places; and not confined, as the early Prophets had supposed to be the case, to the people of Judaea. Thus Haggai, when speaking of Christ, calls him the desire of all nations, Hag_2:7, meaning the desire of his people in all nations. So Christ, when speaking of the world, God so loved the world, that all that believe in him, etc. meaning believers throughout the world, Joh_3:16. That the phrase must be understood in this sense, is evident, from what is said in other parts of scripture concerning the world, which cannot receive the Spirit of truth, and for whom Christ doth not pray. See Joh_14:17 and Joh_17:9-10.

Let me particularly request the Reader to observe how Peter speaks of his divine Lord. A man he calleth him approved of God, among them by miracles and wonders as they knew. But while a man, truly and properly so, (for otherwise he could not have been the seed of the woman promised, Gen_3:15.) yet, as truly and properly God, whom the pains of death could not hold, because (saith Peter,) it was not possible that he should be holden of it. Reader! what higher demonstrations can be wished in proof of Godhead. Surely common sense must say, that had he not been God, the pains of death and the power of the grave must have held him, as they would hold any man, and make every man a prisoner. But, in the person of the God-man Christ Jesus, it was not possible, that he who was both God and man should be holden of either. And, as another Apostle saith, and under the same authority, Jesus was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead, Rom_1:4. How very blessed and precious are both testimonies to the union of the nature of God and man, in the person of our Lord !

I request the Reader’s attention to another beautiful part in Peter’s sermon. He saith, that Christ was delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, when crucified and slain by wicked hands. Oh! what a very blessed relation is here, to the truth as it is in Jesus? For what can be more blessed to every child of God, while rejoicing in hope of the glory of God, through the blood and righteousness of Christ as a Savior; than to see the hand of Jehovah in the appointment? In this united point of view, God our Redeemer’s full equivalent sacrifice for sin, (yea, more than equivalent, as a ransom for the sins of all his people,) we find a blessed plea before the mercy-seat in all our approaches there; in that we find all the strength necessary to make it blessed, because it is also from the appointment and ordination of Jehovah. Hence, we not only plead on the footing of Christ’s blood and righteousness; but we plead, when we plead rightly, the Lord’s appointment of it, and his approbation and pleasure in the Almighty work. Is it not sweet then, yea, very sweet, to bear back to the throne, what comes first from the throne, and to tell our God and Father, what our God and Father hath first told us; that it was Jehovah which bruised our glorious Head, and put him to grief, when he made his soul an offering for sin; that it was Jehovah which laid on Him the iniquities of us all, when by the determinate counsel of God, by wicked hands he was taken, and crucified, and slain? And, that the hand of the Lord was first in the great work, when Jesus was

delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification? Reader! what correspondence is there from the teachings of God the Holy Ghost, in your heart with these things? Oh! the blessedness of being able to join the voice of Old Testament saints, now we have seen the accomplishment of the whole to New Testament believers, and say as they did, Behold, 0 God! our shield, and look upon the face of thine anointed? Happy the man, who amidst all the remains of indwelling corruption within, and the ungodly world without, the demands of law and justice, and all the accusations of Satan, can, and doth, go daily to the pardon office of Jesus Christ, pleading his blood and righteousness, and Jehovah’s covenant promises, the joint security of everlasting salvation. See Isa_53:5-6; Rom_4:25; Psa_84:9.

Let me beg the Reader not to overlook the mercy and love of God the Holy Ghost, in another sweet part of Peter’s sermon, namely, the explanation of the sixteenth Psalm, in direct reference to the Lord Jesus Christ. There can be no doubt from the manner in which Peter spake upon it, in begging permission to speak freely of the Patriarch David, but that the Jews of those days, considered that Psalm as written by David, in allusion to himself. What a blessed scripture, therefore, it is, to have it thus explained with an eye to Christ, and from such authority. And may we not observe that from the illustration of this Psalm, we derive information upon many other occasions of a similar nature, to make application to Christ? Reader! do not forget to notice Peter’s appeal from the whole, to the hearts and minds of his hearers. How affectionate, yet how faithful the Apostle is. Let them know, (saith he,) even the whole house of Israel, what the result of this wonderful event is. To Jesus shall every knee bow. He whom ye crucified, is now the Almighty and everlasting Lord of heaven and of earth! Reader! behold the bold, the undaunted Apostle! Oh! what did grace accomplish in him! And why not in you, or me? Lord! the Spirit! do thou in thy rich mercy make thy servants faithful! Speak, Lord, in them and by them, and let all whom thou hast sent, do the work of Evangelists, and make full proof of their ministry!

BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR 14-40, "But Peter standing up with the eleven.

The scene

Never was such an audience assembled as that before which this poor fisherman appeared: men of different nations, rapidly and earnestly speaking in their different tongues; one in Hebrew, mocking and saying, “These men are full of new wine”; another inquiring in Latin; another disputing in Greek; another wondering in Arabic; and an endless Babel beside expressing every variety of surprise, doubt, and curiosity. Amid such a scene the fisherman stands up; his voice strikes across the hum which prevails all down the street. He has no tongue of silver; for they say, “He is an unlearned and ignorant man.” The rudeness of his Galilean speech still remains with him; yet, though “unlearned and ignorant” in their sense—as to polite learning—in a higher sense he was a scribe well instructed. On whatever other points the learned of Jerusalem might have found Peter at fault, in the sacred writings he was more thoroughly furnished than they; for though Christ took His apostles from among the poor, He left us no example for those who have not well learned the Bible, to attempt to teach it. Yet Peter had no tongue of silver, or of honey, no soothing, flattering speech, to allay the prejudices and to captivate the passions of the multitude. Nor had he a tongue of thunder; no outbursts of native eloquence distinguished his discourse. Indeed, some, if they had heard that discourse from ordinary lips, would not have hesitated to pronounce it dry—some of a class, too numerous, who do not like preachers who put them to the trouble of thinking, but enjoy only those who regale their fancy, or move their feelings, without requiring any

labour of thought. Peter’s sermon is no more than quoting passages from the Word of God, and reasoning upon them; yet, as in this strain he proceeds, the tongue of fire by degrees burns its way to the feelings of the multitude. The murmur gradually subsides; the mob becomes a congregation; the voice of the fisherman sweeps from end to end of that multitude, unbroken by a single sound; and, as the words rush on, they act like a stream of fire. Now, one coating of prejudice which covered the feelings is burned, and rends away: now, another and another: now the fire touches the inmost covering of prejudice, which lay close upon the heart, and it too gives way. Now, it touches the quick, and burns the very soul of the man! Presently, you might think that in that throng there was but one mind, that of the preacher, which had multiplied itself, had possessed itself of thousands of hearts, and thousands of frames, and was pouring its own thoughts through them all. At length, shame, and tears, and sobs overspread that whole assembly. Here, a head bows; there, starts a groan; yonder, rises a deep sigh; here, tears are falling; and some stern old Jew, who will neither bow nor weep, trembles with the effort to keep himself still. At length, from the depth of the crowd, the voice of the preacher is crossed by a cry, as if one was “mourning for his only son”; and it is answered by a cry, as if one was in “bitterness for his first-born.” At this cry the whole multitude is carried away, and, forgetful of everything but the overwhelming feeling of the moment, they exclaim, “Men and brethren, what must we do?” (W. Arthur, M. A.)

St. Peter’s first sermon

Here we have the report of a sermon preached within a few days of Christ’s ascension, addressed to men many of whom knew Jesus Christ, all of whom had heard of His work, His life, and His death, and setting forth the apostolic estimate of Christ, His miracles, His teaching, His ascended condition and glory. We cannot realise, unless by an intellectual effort, the special worth of these apostolic reports contained in the Acts. Men are sometimes sceptical about them asking, How did we get them at all? how were they handed down? This is, however, an easier question to answer than some think. If we take, for instance, this Pentecostal address alone, we know that St. Luke had many opportunities of personal communication with St. Peter. But there is another solution. The ancients made a great use of shorthand, and were quite well accustomed to take down spoken discourses, transmitting them thus to future ages.

I. The congregation assembled to listen to this first gospel discourse preached by a human agent was a notable and representative one. They were all Jews or Jewish proselytes, showing how extremely wide, at the epoch of the Incarnation, was the dispersion of God’s ancient people. The Divine seed fell upon no unploughed and unroken soil. Pure and noble ideas of worship and morality had been scattered broadcast throughout the world. Some years ago the judgment of Solomon was found depicted on the ceiling of a Pompeian house, witnessing to the spread of Scriptural knowledge through Jewish artists in the time of Tiberius and of Nero A race of missionaries, too, equipped for their work, was developed through the discipline of exile. The thousands who hung upon Peter’s lips needed nothing but instruction in the faith of Jesus Christ, together with the baptism of the Spirit, and the finest, the most enthusiastic, and the most cosmopolitan of agencies lay ready to the Church’s hand. While, again, the organisation of synagogues, which the exigencies of the dispersion had called into existence, was just the one suited to the various purposes of charity, worship, and teaching, which the Christian Church required.

II. The brave, outspoken tone of this sermon evidences the power and influence of the

Holy Spirit upon St. Peter’s mind. Chrysostom notes the courageous tone of this address as a clear evidence of the truth of the resurrection.

III. Again, the tone of St. Peter’s sermon was remarkable because of its enlarged and enlightened spirituality. It proved the Spirit’s power in illuminating the human consciousness. St. Peter was rapidly gaining a true conception of the nature of the kingdom of God. He enunciates that conception in this sermon. He proclaims Christianity, in its catholic and universal aspect, when he quotes Joel as predicting the time when the Lord would pour out His Spirit upon all flesh.

IV. Let us look somewhat farther into the matter of this earliest Christian sermon, that we may learn the apostolic view of the Christian scheme. What was the conception of Christ’s life, work, and ascended state, which St. Peter presented to the astonished multitude? We must not expect, indeed, to find in this sermon a formulated and scientific system of Christian doctrine. St. Peter was as yet far too near the great events he declared, far too close to the superhuman personality of Christ, to coordinate his ideas and arrange his views. Yet his discourse contains all the great principles of catholic Christianity as opposed to that low view which would represent the earliest Christians as preaching the purely humanitarian scheme of modern unitarianism. St. Peter taught boldly the miraculous element of Christ’s life, describing Him as “a man approved of God by mighty works,” etc. Yet he did not dwell as much as we might have expected upon the miraculous side of Christ’s ministry. And that for a very simple reason. The inhabitants of the East were so accustomed to the practices of magic that they simply classed the Christian missionaries with magicians. The apostles had, however, a more powerful argument in reserve. They preached a spiritual religion, a present peace with God, a present forgiveness of sins; they pointed forward to a future life of which even here below believers possess the earnest and pledge.

V. Again, the sermon shows the method of interpreting the psalms and prophets popular among the pious Jews of St. Peter’s time. St. Peter’s method of interpretation is identical with that of our Lord, of St. Paul, and of the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. He beholds in the Psalms hints and types of the profoundest doctrines of the Creed. He finds in the sixteenth Psalm a prophecy of the intermediate state of souls and of the resurrection of our Lord. (G. T. Stokes, D. D.)

St. Peter to the multitude

1. We are struck first with the calmness and concentrated force of this address. How difficult the task which St. Peter undertook! He had to speak on the spur of the moment, and to a crowd excited as only an Eastern crowd can be. It is not easy for the most practised orator to catch the ear, and hold the attention of a confused and hostile crowd. Shakespeare means us to recognise consummate skill in Mark Antony’s handling of the Roman citizens at Caesar’s funeral; but he used flattering words, and he spoke in order to rouse the people against the assassins of Caesar, not against themselves. St. Peter had to address the crowd on a theme which could not be welcome, and to stir them to self-condemnation. Yet we see no trace of hesitation or embarrassment. The speech was as well conceived and compacted as if it had been premeditated for weeks. It soothed the tumult of unfriendly excitement, and stirred a tumult of convicted conscience.

2. An opening for the address was made by the rude jeering of some as to the source of that ardour which glowed in the faces and uttered itself in the words of the

brethren. This charge was easily disposed of. It was a fair specimen of the capacity of carnal men to judge spiritual.

(1) But St. Peter brushed it away with a sentence. It was enough that it was but the third hour of the day. What Jew would have drunk wine at all on such a morning, and before the morning sacrifice i And even if one or two could be so lost to shame, how absurd to accuse one hundred and twenty! Even the heathen reckoned it disreputable to drink strong wines in the morning. Cicero tells us indeed that the revelry at Antony’s villa began at nine o’clock; but this was regarded as the foolish excess of debauchees.

(2) But the complete refutation of it was the whole tone and tenor of the address, which was calm and well considered to a marvel. It showed that he and his companions were certainly “not filled with wine, wherein is excess.” They were “filled with the Spirit.” The apostle gave this as the true explanation, and proceeded at once to illustrate and support it by a felicitous quotation from one of the ancient prophets. He knew that in order to convince it was necessary to proceed on the common ground of Scripture. No one in that multitude, however prejudiced or impatient, could object to the citation from Joel. What St. Peter taught was the beginning of a fulfilment of Joel’s prophecy. It was the sign of a new era; the inauguration of a time, the length of which no man could define, but ending with a “great and terrible day of the Lord.” Such was the exordium of St. Peter’s speech. We can see the mockers silenced, some of them, let us hope, ashamed. The crowd ceased to sway and shout, listening to the calm, clear, strong statement which carried with it such a ring of certainty.

3. Then the speaker, pursuing his advantage, addressed himself to the main theme. The Spirit had come upon them, that they might preach Christ with power. The apostles never dragged in their great theme abruptly or awkwardly. Here St. Peter found a starting-point for preaching Jesus in the concluding words of the passage he had cited from Joel, “Whosoever should call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” Who was the Lord, whose “great and notable day” should terminate the dispensation of the Spirit? St. Peter and his colleagues were prepared to say and prove that it was Jesus. And then for the first time the sin of the crucifixion was charged on the conscience of the Jews, the fulness of the gospel made known. Not a few of those present had joined in the cry, “Crucify Him!” That had not been, however, spontaneous; but had been stirred up by the rulers. And now that hot blood had cooled there must have been sore misgivings, which the apostle soon deepened. He reminded his hearers of “the mighty works and wonders and signs” by which God had accredited His prophet. He appealed to their own knowledge of those things; and their silence intimated that they could not dispute the fact.

4. Having gained the point, St. Peter proceeded to show who the prophet Jesus was—

(1) By reference to His crucifixion. Was this fatal to a claim of Messiahship? Peter would once have said so; but now he stood there prepared to show that it formed an essential part of the proof that He was indeed the Christ. It was God’s purpose, and was predicted in the ancient oracles. Jewish teachers had turned away from a suffering to an exclusively glorious Messiah. But none the less was He so predicted, and none the less was the fulfilment secured by God’s “determinate counsel.” Therefore was Jesus delivered into the hands of those who hated Him, who crucified Him by the hand of “men without the law”—the Roman soldiers. But it was really on the Jews and their children that the blood of

the Just One lay—“Ye did crucify and slay.”

(2) Then, in a breath, the speaker announced a fact which gave a new turn to the whole history in the resurrection of the Crucified One. “Whom God raised up,” etc. This, indeed, had been announced immediately after; but a counter story had been set afloat that the body had been stolen. These conflicting rumours had left the whole matter in a haze of doubt. But, before adducing witnesses, St. Peter referred again to the Old Testament. With a fine skill which the Holy Ghost had taught him, he prepared the Jews for receiving evidence, by showing that it was far from incredible, since it had been clearly foretold in one of the prophetic Psalms. Of course this did not prove that Jesus was that Christ. But, if it could be proved that Jesus had risen, His fulfilment of this oracle would go far to place it beyond doubt that He was the Messiah. And then the proof was adduced. Pointing to the Christian company, St. Peter said boldly, “This Jesus did God raise up, whereof we all are witnesses.” How could any fact of the kind have better attestation?

(3) The argument had to be carried one step further; and the speaker, not knowing how long the crowd might continue to listen, proceeded at once to say that the risen Jesus was exalted by the right hand of God. On this point, too, St. Peter found support in the Old Testament—“Jehovah said to Adonai” (Psa_110:1-7.). Every one knew who was meant by Jehovah: but who was Adonai? David could not have meant himself, for he was not his own Lord; far less could he have given such a title to any of the kings of the earth. The Spirit had inspired him to sing thus of the Lord Christ, and the proof of His ascension was before the eyes of the multitude. On the followers of Jesus, and on them only, had descended the new energy from heaven.

5. Thus the proof was completed at every point. There was no declamation but compact statement and close reasoning, leading up to the conclusion that God had made the crucified Jesus both Lord and Christ. And now the Christians beheld the crowd no longer mocking, but subdued, ashamed, conscience-stricken. Pricked in their hearts, many cried out, “What shall we do?” A welcome interruption! It showed St. Peter that he had struck the right chord, and that the Holy Spirit was speaking through him to the people. It enabled him to follow up his address with a very pointed application, and a very earnest appeal. They could not undo their own act, but God had done that already. This, however, they might and should do without delay:

(1) “Repent.”—It was not enough to be pricked in heart. Repentance is more than vexation with one’s self, or even poignant sorrow. The apostle bade them reconsider the whole matter, and so change their minds regarding the Nazarene, and consequently their attitude.

(2) “And be baptised every one of you unto the remission of sins.”—This implied that they should believe, and confess their faith-for faith is always allied with repentance unto life, and is the instrument of forgiveness. Those who sincerely repented of their rejection of Jesus, must now believe in Him as the Christ; and in token thereof were called to join the company of His followers by openly receiving that baptism, which Christ had authorised them to administer. The consequence of this would be, that they would obtain not only pardon, but the Holy Ghost; for the promise was to their nation first, though also, God be praised, to the Gentiles—“as many as the Lord our God shall call.”

6. Such was the speech of St. Peter; and the result was glorious. The fisher of men let down a good net into the deep, and caught a great draught—drew to the shore of faith and peace three thousand souls. He wrought no miracle to astonish and impress them. It was better that no sign or prodigy performed by the apostles should interfere with the direct and solemn application of truth to the conscience. He performed no ceremony. The notion of a Christianity that trusts to ceremonial and celebration was quite foreign to the apostolic conception. The speaker prevailed by the word of his testimony. The three thousand felt the power of the truth and yielded to it—the Spirit of the Lord disposing and enabling them so to do. Thus they repented, believed, were baptized, were pardoned, were quickened to newness of life.

7. In one day! It was the typical and significant day of our dispensation, a day which should be expected to repeat itself. True, there cannot be a second descent of the Holy Spirit, any more than there can be a second incarnation of the Son. But the Church should ask and look for a continuance of the mighty working of the Holy Ghost, and so for conversions by thousands. The Church wants no other means of increase than those by which it was founded—

(1) the fire of the Holy Ghost, and

(2) the testimony of anointed witnesses in sound speech that cannot be gainsaid, testifying to Jesus, the Saviour, that He is the Christ of Israel, and the Lord of all. (D. Fraser, D. D.)

The first apostolic appeal to the multitude

The wondering, the questioning, and the mockery compelled the apostles to explain. So have young Christians often been constrained by what they saw or knew to attempt work for which they had little inclination. In making this appeal the apostles—

I. Had a leader. All had been speaking with tongues, and when that sign had answered its first purpose it was necessary for one to appeal to the intelligence of all. Peter now “stood up.”

1. A man of confidence and quick decision. What a change since his denial.

2. A man who could command attention. For this end he “lifted up his voice.” Having to plead for Christ and truth, he gladly used his best powers.

3. A man of knowledge; “be it known unto you.” Some were guessing and misinterpreting, and honesty demanded a hearing for one who said he had certain knowledge.

4. A man of words. “Hearken to my words.” He proceeded to prove what he had boldly affirmed. In this he is an example. He gave the sense of Scripture, and did his work with sobriety and earnestness, and without reflections on the spirit of the crowd.

II. Had to rebut error. There were misconceptions which had to be removed, and in doing this Peter did not mock the mockers, or show irritation. He calmly and kindly rooted out error that truth might take its place. Note that—

1. Peter denied the false charge of drunkenness, but not as a malicious calumny, but as the actual opinion of intelligent men. “As ye suppose.” In this way we may introduce an argument against the false doctrines of the day. But denial was not

enough, so—

2. He gave a clear reason—the hour was too early and too sacred for intoxication. Religious controversy ought to be based on undeniable facts. Yet this was not enough, so Peter—

3. Interpreted the facts which the mockers had misinterpreted. It was the fulfilment of Joel’s prophecy. Would that all preachers would meet the demand for facts by the positive truth of the Word of God.

III. Realised that there is given to believers what men’s natural suppositions misrepresent. It was natural for men to think that they could explain the strange signs; but the error was brought home in due time. How many to-day are like this multitude. They observe the profession and zeal of Christians, and hear about their experiences, but put it all down to superstition, weakness, or delusion. (W. Hudson.)

Preaching on the day of Pentecost

The restoration of Peter was fully recognised by his brethren. They felt bound to imitate Christ’s conduct. He knew what underlay the weakness of His servant, and having received him to favour, sent him forth with fresh power to feed the lambs, etc. Whom God receives, let no man refuse. A tempted Christian may fall, but if he repent, his fellow Christians should receive him back. Let us contemplate—

I. The circumstances in which Peter preached.

1. He preached upon the day of Pentecost. All the memories of God’s goodness in seedtime, summer, and autumn, were then occupying the minds of the Hebrews. And Peter rose to appropriately publish God’s glorious gospel of mercy.

2. His audience was peculiarly stimulating. Like Simeon they waited for the consolation of Israel. They had come from distant parts, and presented, in their diversified wants, a type of the world’s necessities. Following the law they found the gospel. The law was a schoolmaster that brought them to Christ. An appreciative assembly has a stimulating effect upon any orator; and this audience, composed of devout inquirers, anxious to learn the whole truth about Christ, was sufficient to give the eloquence of true earnestness of Peter’s preaching.

3. His position was that of spokesman for and defender of his brethren.

4. He preached under the immediate inspiration of the Holy Ghost and with a tongue of fire.

II. The sermon that Peter delivered. We cannot say it was a great sermon, in the modern sense. There is no profound and far-reaching grasp of Divine truth; no display of mental and spiritual genius; no soaring flight of imagination; none of those marvellous revelations which are given in Isaiah and Ezekiel; none of those mighty sentences, lightning-like in their flash, thunder-like in their sound, that rolled from the mouth of Cicero or Demosthenes; and certainly none of that loud-coloured grandiloquence, which is so much admired by a sensation-loving world. The preaching of Peter, or Paul, or Christ, is usually destitute of these artistic qualities, and yet conspicuously fitted to serve its heavenly purpose. The characteristics of Peter’s sermon are very distinct.

1. It was Scriptural. His subject was the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. He brings a text from Joel (Act_2:28-32), to show that the Spirit was promised, and should have

been expected in some such way as that in which He had actually come. The use which Peter makes of his proof-text is simple, yet skilful; displays good powers of reasoning, and above all, reveals a clear knowledge of the Scriptures; and the finishing stroke brings out, most happily, the grand design of God in His wonderful promise, and its more wonderful fulfilment—“That whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

2. Most faithful. The trumpet at his mouth gave no uncertain sound. He spake no smooth things, and minced no truth to suit fastidious tastes. Speaking, though he was, against the great men of his nation, and among an excited populace, who had a few weeks ago destroyed his Master, the earnest preacher was unconscious of timidity, and he did not hesitate to tell them plainly, that they had taken with wicked hands and crucified and slain the Lord’s anointed. Harsh words, no doubt; but words like the hammer that breaks the rocky heart. And the man who would preach the Word of God with true faithfulness to his fellow-sinners must be prepared at any risk to expose and condemn every sort of wickedness.

3. Evangelical. It contained very prominently the three R’s which Rowland Hill has made proverbial in our country

(1) Ruin by the fall. The apostle gave prominence to the ruinous effects of sin. Jerusalem sinners had committed an awful crime in killing the Son of God.

(2) Redemption through the death of Jesus.

(3) Regeneration through the power of the Holy Spirit. “Repent, and be baptized,” etc.

III. The success of Peter’s sermon. We find it very difficult to realise the impression produced. There is nothing like it in modern times. People assemble in great crowds to hear the best of preachers, and go away in a state of stolid indifference. From week to week the whole preaching of the Christian sabbath, in every village and town, passes over without the smallest degree of spiritual excitement. We surely need more of that earnest, heaven-reaching prayer, that will bring the Spirit of God, like a rushing mighty wind, to fill our house and every heart with spiritual animation. This was the prime result of Pentecostal preaching. Thousands of sleeping souls were awakened. We have heard of men sailing towards the rapids of Niagara, all unconscious of danger, until they felt their boat quiver in the struggling water, and stars away with alarming speed. In a moment they were filled with anxiety, and began to pull and cry with all their might for safety. So with Jerusalem sinners under the sermon of Pentecost. The whole crowd was shaking like fields of corn in the autumn wind, or tossing like troubled waves upon the stormy ocean. And with one loud cry that went ringing through the holy city, and up to the Holy God, they said, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” Blessed question from a sinner’s heart! And the question must have gone with a grateful thrill to the preacher’s heart, as it surely went like a shout of triumph to the heart of Jesus on the throne. We have read somewhere of a Russian prince, coming in the course of hunting to a river’s side, where a few peasants had brought to the bank a person apparently drowned. The prince had previously been reading some directions which had been issued by a humane society, about the mode of restoring animation to people who have been rescued from under water. He leaped from his horse, stripped off his flowing robes, gave instructions to the peasants how to assist, and commenced the work of rubbing the cold limbs of the unfortunate man with all his might. The work was continued by the prince for a whole hour, without any appearance of success. At length the lifeless-looking bosom began to heave and give signs of animation. On seeing which, the prince looked up, with beaming

countenance, and exclaimed: “This is the happiest moment of my life.” He had saved a man from death. Not less would it be a happy moment for the heart of Elisha, when he felt the flesh of the Shunamite’s child waxing warm, and saw him open his eyes in life and happiness. But we can believe it was even a happier moment for the apostle of Christ on the day of Pentecost, when the people cried, “What shall we do?” and so gave signs of being raised from spiritual death to Christian vitality. No time was lost in telling the inquirers their path of duty. “Look to Jesus and be saved.” (J. Thompson, A. M.)

A varied ministry blessed by the Holy Spirit

Mark the course of a river like the Thames; how it winds and twists according to its own sweet will. Yet there is a reason for every bend and curve: the geologist, studying the soil and marking the conformation of the rock, sees a reason why the river’s bed diverges to the right or to the left; and so, though the Spirit of God blesses one preacher more than another, and the reason cannot be such that any man could congratulate himself upon his own goodness, yet there are certain things about Christian ministers which God blesses, and certain other things which hinder success. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

The first sermon

1. The gospel is not a system of doctrines, a code of laws, still less a fabric of fancies or theories: it is a record of facts. It is this characteristic which makes it—

(1) So satisfactory; we can plant the foot firmly upon it, for it is founded upon a rock.

(2) So universal: not the religion of a few philosophers, capable of arguing out deep truths or of rising to lofty mysteries, but the religion of a world, as suitable to the simple as to the learned.

2. And as the gospel rests upon fact, so also it prompts to action. No sooner is the persecutor of the Church struck to the earth by the bright light of the Divine presence than we hear him asking, “Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do?” And no sooner does the jailer at Philippi recognise in his prisoners the servants of the Most High God, than he asks the practical question, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And no sooner does the astonished multitude hear from Peter’s lips the explanation of the marvellous sign which has gathered them to listen, than they exclaim, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” What they heard was a narrative of facts: what they understood by it was a summons to action. God grant to us also a spirit of faith in gospel fact, a spirit of readiness for gospel action!

3. St. Peter sets us the example of repeating a text for his sermon. The Bible then was the Old Testament. Out of it Christian teachers were able to plead for God and to prove the gospel. In our thankfulness for the New Testament we must never learn to despise the Old. St. Peter’s text was taken from Joel. That Book was probably composed 850 years before Christ. The prophets of the Old Testament were not instructed to reveal the long interval which should elapse between the two advents. The delay of the second coming was not even a revelation of the gospel. Each age was to expect it. The taunt, “Where is the promise of His coming?” was to have scope to operate, because no generation was to be made aware that the advent might not take place within its duration. And thus it is that Joel here speaks of the outpouring of the

Spirit as a sign of the last days. The gospel age, however long it has continued or may continue, is the dispensation of the last times: after it comes none other, and itself is to be viewed as one whole, from the redemption which contained in itself not the promise only but the germ of all, until the coming of the very kingdom of heaven in power and great glory. “In the last days, saith God,” etc.

4. After this quotation the discourse addresses itself pointedly to the audience. “Ye men of Israel, hear these words. A Man, as you deemed Him, and as He was, has within these few weeks been put to death by you; the blood of that Man is at this moment upon your hands!” But was, then, that murder effectual? No; “God raised Him up because it was not possible that He should be holden of death.” Not possible, by reason of His Divine nature. Not possible, because the voice of inspired prophecy had declared the contrary (Psa_16:1-11.). Could words like these have found their full accomplishment in their human author? The words which David thus spake, he spake as God’s prophet. For himself the words could only express that assurance of a life beyond death, the hope of the saints. But in relation to Christ the words have a fuller meaning. His soul was recalled from its brief sojourn in Hades, before it bad taken up its abode there as a recognised inmate. Of this revival from death we His apostles are the witnesses. Now, therefore, the events of this day become intelligible and natural. The risen Saviour hath fulfilled His promise. He promised to send—He hath sent—His Holy Spirit upon His disciples. And hereunto agree those other words of the Psalmist, “The Lord said unto my Lord,” etc. That prophecy, like the former, points, not to David, but to David’s Son; even to Him who is as truly the Lord of David in right of His Godhead, as He is the Son of David by reason of His manhood. “Therefore let every family of Israel know,” etc.

5. Such was the discourse, to which blessing was vouchsafed such as has been granted to no other. God works where and as and by whom He will; choosing oftentimes the weak things of the world to confound the mighty. We may read St. Peter’s words unmoved. But not so did they to whom he addressed himself. Compunction was the first fruit of his preaching. Conscience now awoke. The sign before them was a sign of power: how could this be, save by the hand of God? But beyond this, it was a sign foretold by Jesus. All things had come to pass, even as He had said to them. Yes, all is now clear and consistent, though the inference is one of shame and condemnation for themselves. “When they heard, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter,” etc. We will not answer the question now, rather let it press upon us as a question of deep moment for ourselves. Hearing of Christ caused—

I. Compunction. What they heard was extremely simple. It was nothing more than what we have all heard ten thousand times. The words of Zechariah were fulfilled, “They shall look upon Me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn.” They had pierced Him, and now the arrow of conviction pierced them.

1. I know not that any words of man could bring to our minds the same conviction of sin without the grace of God by His Holy Spirit. And yet we do read of such a crime as that of “crucifying the Son of God afresh, and putting Him to an open shame.” The Epistle to the Hebrews even says of such persons that “it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance.” God grant, therefore, that, in its worst form, that of actual apostasy, none of us may yet have committed it! But there are approaches to that crime. There are those who make very light of the purposes for which Christ died, who contradict and go against the very object of that death; that He might put away sin; that He might redeem us from all iniquity. Is there no one here who ever helped

to undo Christ’s dying work in another person’s soul? who ever tempted another person to commit sin; either by ridiculing his scruples, or by making the way to sin known to him, or by suggesting to his mind sinful images, or raising in his mind sinful desires? That man, whoever he is, has done worse things than even the Jews who gave Jesus to be crucified. Nothing, however cruel, done to the body, can be so heinous as the least injury done to the soul. Alas! there are those now amongst us who have more cause to be “pricked in their heart” than ever had those men on the day of Pentecost.

2. And if not in this gravest sense, yet which of you has not cause to be sorrowful when he thinks of his Lord and his God? What is a day to you but one succession of slights done to your Saviour? How did it begin? Was not your morning prayer a poor, cold, reluctant service? And so the day went full of anything and everything rather than the thought and the love of Christ; full of the world, of vanity, of self. Then have not you, have not we all, cause to feel compunction, and to cry, “God be merciful to me a sinner”?

II. This compunction may well work in us anxiety; the conviction of sin the desire for direction. “What shall we do?” It is the want of this desire which make our meetings for worship too often cold and lifeless. What would preaching be, if it were in deed and in truth addressed to a number of human hearts, every one of which was inwardly asking, “What must I do? Preaching is a finger-post marking the traveller’s way, and saying to wayfaring men, “This is the way; walk ye in it!” Let us come together, Sunday by Sunday, in this spirit; crying, “What shall I do?” and doubt not but your cry will be heard: if man should fail you, God Himself will be your preacher; your inward ear shall hear the voice of His Spirit, warning, counselling, comforting, according to your need. (Dean Vaughan.)

A new style of religious ministry

Peter’s sermon is something strikingly fresh in the history of preaching. Moses, Joshua, the prophets, the Baptist, Christ had preached, but this preaching was in many respects a new thing in the earth.

1. The occasion was new—the spiritual excitement of the disciples, produced by Divine influence and leading to strange thoughts.

2. The substance was new. It was not a prophetic or a present, but an historic Christ who had risen from the grave to the throne of the universe. No one had ever preached Christ in this form before.

3. The impression of the sermon was new. In analysing the discourse we find—

I. A statement for refuting the charge of the scoffer.

1. The negative part includes three distinguishable points.

(1) A categorical denial: “These men are not drunken.” It is a libel.

(2) An intimation of the groundless-ness of the charge: “As ye suppose.” It was a mere empty assumption.

(3) A suggestion of high improbability: “Seeing it is but the third hour.”

2. The positive part asserts that the phenomenon was the effect of Divine inspiration: “It shall come to pass,” etc. The days of the Messiah are “the last days”;

no other dispensation of mercy will succeed them. The passage teaches that these last days—

(1) Would be connected with an extraordinary effusion of the Spirit, not limited—

(a) To any class.

(b) To any sex.

(c) To any age.

(2) Would be connected with prodigious revolutions. The words “I will show wonders,” etc., may probably be regarded as a highly poetic representation of what would follow, in government and churches, the working out of Divine ideas and spiritual influences (Isa_13:10; Isa_34:4).

(3) Would be succeeded by a notable day—probably the destruction of Jerusalem as a type of the Judgment.

(4) Would be connected with a possibility of salvation to all who seek it.

II. An argument for convicting the hearts of the hardened—an argument resolving itself into four facts.

1. That Jesus had wrought miracles among them while living.

2. That His crucifixion was only the working out of the Divine plan. So great is God that He can make His greatest enemies serve Him.

3. That His resurrection, which they could not deny, was a fact which accorded with their Scriptures. In this quotation from the Psalms Peter—

(1) Assumes that the document which he quotes will be admitted by them as of Divine authority.

(2) Takes for granted that the document refers to the resurrection of some one of distinguished excellence.

(3) Reasons that the resurrection of the distinguished one predicted could not be David.

(4) Concludes that the resurrection predicted must have referred to Christ.

III. An exhortation to the awakened. Peter directs them—

1. To the only blessings that could meet their case: Divine pardon and Divine influence.

2. To the course of conduct essential to the attainment of those blessings.

3. To the precious promise of heaven to encourage them in the course of conduct required. (D. Thomas, D. D.)

Elements of power in Peter’s sermon

I. Adaptation to circumstances. There was a startling event; the sermon applied its lessons. It was spontaneous: Peter had no time to prepare a history or even notes.

II. A scriptural basis. The main points were proved by the Bible. Nature and experience

are important, but do not carry conviction like the living Word.

III. Unsparing rebuke of sin. Their guilt was so pressed home that they were “pricked in their hearts.”

IV. Christ at the beginning, in the middle, and at the end.

V. The presence of the Holy Ghost. (Homiletic Monthly.)

Peter’s impulsiveness useful because wisely directed

Turn water into a proper receptacle, and its power is well-nigh overwhelming. Turn fire into its proper channel, and it proves an unparalleled power. And these elements thus controlled and brought into their legitimate course, will prove a blessing to man, but left uncurbed, though still a power, it is destructive in its character. Even so it is with impulsiveness, if sanctified by God’s grace, and thus turned within the divinely appointed channel of redemption, it will prove a great blessing to an individual and those with whom he associates; but left uncurbed, it becomes a destructive power to happiness, peace, usefulness, and real success. (W. H. Blake.)

The power of the human voice

The true preacher has nothing to fear from any rival, for the human voice has no adequate substitute. Even a gospel written is not equal to a gospel spoken. The heart will not disdain any instrument of expression, but the instrument which it loves with all its love is the human voice—all instruments in one, and all inspired. (J. Parker.)

A sermon to prick the conscience

If a man is able to produce beautiful roses and delight his congregation with them Sunday after Sunday, by all means let him produce them: only let him take care to make his roses as God makes His—never a rose without a thorn, to prick the conscience of the hearer, and to spur him onward in his Divine life. Let the sermon please if possible; but, like Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost, it ought to prick the consciences of men. (J. C. Jones.)

Plain preaching

In some churches the creed and commandments are painted so grand, in such fantastic characters, and with such perplexing convolutions, that a plain man cannot possibly make them out; and the truth is sometimes treated in the pulpit by the preacher as the painter has painted it—the language is so grand, and the rhetoric so gorgeous, that the people fail to realise the truth it may be supposed to embody.

Different styles of preaching

We are often told with great earnestness what is the best style for preaching; but the fact is, that what would be the very best style for one man would perhaps be the worst possible for another. In the most fervid declamation, the deepest principles may be stated and pressed home; in the calmest and most logical reasoning, powerful motives

may be forced close upon the feelings; in discussing some general principle, precious portions of the text of Scripture may be elucidated; and in simple exposition, general principles may be effectively set forth. Let but the powers given to any man play with their full force, aided by all the stores of Divine knowledge which continuous acquisition from its fountain and its purest channels can obtain for him, and, the fire being present—the fire of the Spirit’s power and influence—spiritual effects will result. The discussion about style amounts very much to a discussion whether the rifle, the carbine, the pistol, or the cannon, is the best weapon. Each is best in its place. The great point is, that every one shall use the weapon best suited to him, that he charge it well, and see that it is in a condition to strike fire. The criticisms which we often hear amount to this: We admit that such-an-one is a good exhortational preacher, or a good doctrinal preacher, or a good practical preacher, or a good expository preacher; but because he has not the qualities of another—qualities, perhaps, the very opposite of his own—we think lightly of him. That is, we admit that the carbine is a good carbine; but because it is not a rifle, we condemn it; and because the rifle is not a cannon, we condemn it. (W. Arthur, M. A.)

CONSTABLE, "Peter, again representing the apostles (cf. Acts 1:15), addressed the assembled crowd. He probably gave this speech in the Temple outer courtyard (the court of the Gentiles). He 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 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 was more telling in antiquity than today." [Note: Longenecker, p. 275.]

"Scrupulous Jews drank wine only with flesh, and, on the authority of Exodus 16:8, 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." [Note: Blaiklock, p. 58]

15These men are not drunk, as you suppose. It's

only nine in the morning!

BARNESAct 2:15 -For these are not drunken ... - The word these here includes Peter himself, as well

as the others. The charge doubtless extended to all.

The third hour of the day - The Jews divided their day into twelve equal parts, reckoning from sunrise to sunset. Of course the hours were longer in summer than in winter. The third hour would correspond to our nine o’clock in the morning. The reasons why it was so improbable that they would be drunk at that time were the following:

(1) It was the hour of morning worship, or sacrifice. It was highly improbable that, at an hour usually devoted to public worship, they would be intoxicated.

(2) It was not usual for even drunkards to become drunk in the daytime, 1Th_5:7, “They that be drunken are drunken in the night.”

(3) The charge was, that they had become drunk with wine. Ardent spirits, or alcohol, that curse of our times, was unknown. It was very improbable that so much of the weak wine commonly used in Judea should have been taken at that early hour as to produce intoxication.

(4) It was a regular practice with the Jews not to eat or drink anything until after the third hour of the day, especially on the Sabbath, and on all festival occasions. Sometimes this abstinence was maintained until noon. So universal was this custom, that the apostle could appeal to it with confidence, as a full refutation of the charge of drunkenness at that hour. Even the intemperate were not accustomed to drink before that hour. The following testimonies on this subject from Jewish writers are from Lightfoot: “This was the custom of pious people in ancient times, that each one should offer his morning prayers with additions in the synagogue, and then return home and take refreshment” (Maimonides, Shabb., chapter 30). “They remained in the synagogue until the sixth hour and a half, and then each one offered the prayer of the Minchah before he returned home, and then he ate.” “The fourth is the hour of repast, when all eat.” One of the Jewish writers says that the difference between thieves and honest men might be known by the fact that the former might be seen in the morning at the fourth hour eating and sleeping, and holding a cup in his hand. But for those who made pretensions to religion, as the apostles did, such a thing was altogether improbable.

CLARKE, "But the third hour of the day - That is, about nine o’clock in the morning, previously to which the Jews scarcely ever ate or drank, for that hour was the hour of prayer. This custom appears to have been so common that even the most intemperate among the Jews were not known to transgress it; Peter therefore spoke with confidence when he said, these are not drunken - seeing it is but the third hour of the day, previously to which even the intemperate did not use wine.

GILL Verse 15. For these are not drunken,.... Meaning not only the eleven apostles, but

the rest of the hundred and twenty, on whom also the Spirit was poured forth, and who

were endowed with his extraordinary gifts:

as ye suppose; and had given out that they were: and this shows the sense of being filled

with new wine; that they meant that they were really drunk, and which they believed, or at

least would have had others believe it; the unreasonableness of which supposition and

suggestion the apostle argues from the time of day:

seeing it is but the third hour of the day; or nine of the clock in the morning: for till this

time it was not usual with the Jews, if men of any sobriety or religion, so much as to taste

anything: the rules are these {h}, "it is forbidden a man to taste anything, or do any work

after break of day, until he has prayed the morning prayer."

Now "the morning prayer, the precept concerning it is, that a man should begin to pray as

soon as the sun shines out; and its time is until the end of the fourth hour, which is the

third part of the day {i}." So that a man might not taste anything, either of eatables or

drinkables, until the fourth hour, or ten o'clock in the morning: hence it is said {k}, that

"after they offered the daily sacrifice they ate bread, Nyev ebra Nmzb, "at the time of four

hours":" or on the fourth hour, and sooner than this it was not lawful to eat, even ever so

little; and whoever did, was not reckoned fit to be conversed with.

"Says R. Isaac {l}, whoever eats a green or herb before the fourth hour, it is forbidden to

converse with him; and the same says, it is unlawful to eat a raw herb before the fourth

hour. Amemar, and Mar Zutra, and Rab Ashe were sitting, and they brought before them

a raw herb before the fourth hour. Amemar and Rab Ashe ate, and Mar Zutra did not eat:

they said to him, what is thy meaning? (he replied) that R. Isaac said, whoever eats a herb

before the fourth hour, it is forbidden to converse with him."

The time for taking food by persons of different characters, is thus expressed by them:

"the first hour is the time of eating for the Lydians, the second for thieves, the third for

heirs, the fourth for labourers, the fifth for every man; is it not so? Saith R. Papa, the

fourth is the time of repast for every man; but (the truth is) the fourth is the time of eating

for every man, the fifth for labourers, and the sixth for the disciples of the wise men

{m}." Hence that advice {n}, "'at the fourth hour,' go into a cook's shop, (or tavern,) if

thou seest a man drinking wine, and holding the cup in his hands, and slumbering, inquire

about him, if he is one of the wise doctors, &c." The "gloss" upon it is, "at the fourth

hour, for that is the time of eating, when all go into the shops (or taverns) to eat."

Now whereas they that are drunken are drunken in the night, and not in the day, and much

less so soon in the day, when it was not usual, at least with religious men, to have tasted

anything by this time; and whereas the apostles, and their company, were sober and

religious men, and had never done thing to forfeit their character, it was unreasonable to

suppose anything of this kind in them.

HENRY, "His answer to their blasphemous calumny (Act_2:15): “These men are not drunken, as you suppose. These disciples of Christ, that now speak with other tongues,speak good sense, and know what they say, and so do those they speak to, who are led by their discourses into the knowledge of the wonderful works of God. You cannot think they are drunk, for it is but the third hour of the day,” nine of the clock in the morning; and before this time, on the sabbaths and solemn feasts, the Jews did not eat nor drink: nay, ordinarily, those that are drunk are drunk in the night, and not in the morning; those are besotted drunkards indeed who, when they awake, immediately seek it yet again, Pro_23:35.

III. His account of the miraculous effusion of the Spirit, which is designed to awaken them all to embrace the faith of Christ, and to join themselves to his church. Two things he resolves it into: - that it was the fulfilling of the scripture, and the fruit of Christ's resurrection and ascension, and consequently the proof of both.

1. That it was the accomplishment of the prophecies of the Old Testament which related to the kingdom of the Messiah, and therefore an evidence that this kingdom is come, and the other predictions of it are fulfilled. He specifies one, that of the prophet Joel, Joe_

2:28. It is observable that though Peter was filled with the Holy Ghost, and spoke with tongues as the Spirit gave him utterance, yet he did not set aside the scriptures, nor think himself above them; nay, much of his discourse is quotation out of the Old Testament, to which he appeals, and with which he proves what he says. Christ's scholars never learn above their Bible; and the Spirit is given not to supersede the scriptures, but to enable us to understand and improve the scriptures.

COKE, "Acts 2:15. Seeing it is but the third hour of the day.— Such of the Jews as

shamefullyimitatedtheirHeathenneighbours,anddranktoolargelyatthefestival,did not use to

take such criminal liberties till after the sacrifices were offered, and the oblations made;

but the morning sacrifices had not been now offered, to which, as some think, St. Peter

might allude. Josephus tells us, that, on the feast days, the Jews seldom ate or drank till

noon; which, if true, would render the calumny here referred to the more incredible

Jews were to abstain from drink before the first hour of prayer and so inconceivable

that faithful Jews would be drunk this early in the moring.

ELLICOTT, "(15) Seeing it is but the third hour of the day.—The appeal is made to the

common standard of right feeling. Drunkenness belonged to the night (1 Thessalonians

5:7). It was a mark of extremest baseness for men to “rise up early in the morning that

they may follow strong drink” (Isaiah 5:11; comp. also Ecclesiastes 10:16). “Were the

disciples likely to be drunk at 9 a. m., and that on the morning of the Day of Pentecost,

after a night spent in devotion, and when all decent Jews were fasting?

UNKNOWN, "V. 15 - These are not drunkThese are not drunkThese are not drunkThese are not drunk - Whether or not the scoffers really meant what they said is anybody痴 guess. They may have suggested it to avoid praise (cf. v.11) or because they did not understand the phenomenon, or because they understood, but did not wish to believe, etc. As Peter stated, drunkenness was unlikely, and offered a more reasonable interpretation of the manifestation.

16o, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:

BARNES, "This is that - This is the fulfillment of that, or this was predicted. This was the second part of Peter’s argument, to show that this was in accordance with the

predictions in their own Scriptures.

By the prophet Joel - Joe_2:28-32. This is not quoted literally, either from the Hebrew or the Septuagint. The substance, however, is preserved.

CLARKE,"Spoken by the prophet Joel - The prophecy which he delivered so long ago is just now fulfilled; and this is another proof that Jesus whom ye have crucified is the Messiah.

GILL Verse 16. But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel. This affair, which

is a matter of wonder and amazement with some, and of speculation with others, and of

ridicule and contempt with the most, not the effect of wine, but the fulfilment of a

prophecy in Joel 2:28 and is that effusion of the Spirit there foretold; and this prophecy is

by the Jews themselves allowed to belong to the world to come, or to the times of the

Messiah. Some of their commentators {o} say, that it refers dytel, "to time to come"; by

which they frequently mean the times of the Messiah; and another says {p} expressly, that

they belong xyvmh tymyl, "to the days of the Messiah"; and in one of their Midrashes {q}

it is observed, that "the holy blessed God says in this world they prophesy single,

(particular persons,) but "in the world to come" all "Israel" shall become prophets, as it is

said, Joel 2:28 "and it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all

flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your old men," &c. So

expounds R. Tanchums with R. Aba."

COKE, "Acts 2:16. This is that which was spoken, &c.— Respecting this remarkable

prophesy, we refer to the notes on Joel 2:28; Joel 2:32 just observing, that if this

miraculous effusion of the Holy Spirit had not been foretold, the argument for the truth of

Christianity from it, would have been fully conclusive; but as it was referred to in the Old

Testament, it might dispose the minds of the Jews still more to regard it, as it was indeed

the more remarkable. The reader will not omit to compare the passages in the margin.

UNKNOWN,"V. 16 - this is what - Peter asserts that God had planned just such an event

to usher in a new era, the last days, in which the pouring out of the Spirit would be one

event. Turn it around, and Peter said: what was spoken by the prophet Joel is fulfilled in

what you are hearing, seeing, etc. Peter said, in effect, that everything he quoted from Joel

was then being fulfilled. Many try to take the prophecy apart, and asserts each piece must

be more or less literally fulfilled. Peter seems to assert the opposite. The gist of Joel was

the coming of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles. The subsequent events were results of

this cause. It is then unnecessary to look for or expect any fulfillment of Joel beyond the

apostles.

As a general conclusion in consideration of N.T. quotes from O.T. texts, one should not

assert what the N.T. does not assert. Contrariwise, if the N.T. asserts a fulfillment, then

the safest and best course is to accept it. As illustrations, see Matthew 1:23; 2:15, 17;

4:15-16; Acts 13:33-41; 15:15-17; etc. Peter certainly interprets Joel by that which he

said, and the interpretation was inspired. That is hard to argue with.

CONSTABLE 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 (Isaiah 32:15; Isaiah 44:3; Ezekiel 36:27;

Ezekiel 37:14; Ezekiel 39:29; Zechariah 12:10). Moreover John the Baptist also predicted

the pouring out of God's Spirit on believers (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John

1:33).

Some commentators believe that Peter was claiming that all of what Joel prophesied

happened that day.

"The fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel which the people had just witnessed was a sign

of the beginning of the Messianic age ..." [Note: F. J. Foakes-Jackson, The Acts of the

Apostles, p. 15.]

"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." [Note:

Marshall, 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.]

"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." [Note: Kent, 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.]

Other scholars believe God fulfilled Joel's prophecy only partially. Some of these, for

example, believed that He fulfilled Acts 2:17-18 on the day of Pentecost, but He will yet

fulfill Acts 2:19-21 in the future. [Note: Ironside, pp. 46-48; Zane C. Hodges, "A

Dispensational Understanding of Acts 2," in Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 168-71. 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.] 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 2:19-20 were not fulfilled. The

implication is that the remainder would be fulfilled if Israel would repent." [Note:

Toussaint, p. 358. Cf. Pentecost, p. 271.]

"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." [Note: 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.]

Still others believe Peter was not claiming the fulfillment of any of Joel's prophecy. They

believe he was only comparing what had happened 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 Acts 2:21." [Note: Charles 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.]

"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

the slightest hint at a continual fulfillment during the church age or a coming fulfillment

toward the end of the church age." [Note: Merrill F. Unger, "The Significance of

Pentecost," Bibliotheca Sacra 122:486 (April-June 1965):176-77. See also John Nelson

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.]

"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." [Note: Arnold 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.]

"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 fulfillment

is stated here ('aferward,' cp. Hosea 3:5), i.e. in the latter days when Israel turns to the

LORD." [Note: The New Scofield Reference Bible, p. 930. Underlining added for

clarification.]

I prefer this second 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.'" [Note: Longenecker, p. 275.]

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 days 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 Timothy 3:1; Hebrews 1:2; James

5:3; 1 Peter 1:5; 1 Peter 1:20; 2 Peter 3:3; 1 John 2:18; Judges 1:18), 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 before the age to come, namely, 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" (Acts 2:17), as He

will in the future. He had only poured out His Spirit on some 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. Acts 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. 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 ..." [Note: Saucy, The Case . . ., p.

134.] I disagree with this.

Not all normative dispensationalists agree on the interpretation. By "normative

dispensationalists" I mean traditional dispensationalists, not progressives, including

classical and revised varieties. [Note: See Craig A. Blaising, Progressive

Dispensationalism, pp. 9-56, for these labels.] Some of them, 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 to see it as a partial fulfillment

and as a similar outpouring, specifically the one Jesus predicted in the Upper Room (John

14:16-17; John 14:26; John 15:26; John 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. [Note: E.g., Merrill F. Unger, The Baptizing

Work of the Holy Spirit.] There does not seem to me to be adequate exegetical basis for

this distinction. [Note: See Saucy, The Case . . ., p. 181.]

"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 portrayals of natural phenomena and apocalyptic imagery in the

OT." [Note: Longenecker, p. 276.]

By repeating, "And they will prophesy" (Acts 2:18), 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.

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" (Matthew 21:43).

Daniel predicted that seven years of terrible trouble were coming on the Jews (Daniel

9:24-27; cf. Matthew 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 reoffer of the kingdom view will follow later.

17" 'In the last days, God says,

I will pour out my Spirit on all people.

Your sons and daughters will prophesy,

your young men will see visions,

your old men will dream dreams.

The last days began with the first coming and they will end with his second coming.

The last days mentioned in verse 17 denote the closing period of the present age (2

Pet. 3:3; Jude 18), which began from Christ’s first coming (1 Pet. 1:20) and will last

until Christ’s second coming (see note 12 in 2 Tim. 3).

BARNES, "It shall come to pass - It shall happen, or shall occur.

In the last days - Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic, after these things, or afterward. The expression the last days, however, occurs frequently in the Old Testament: Gen_49:1, Jacob called his sons, that he might tell them what should happen to them in the last days, that is, in future times - Heb. in after times; Mic_4:1, “In the last days (Hebrew: in later times) the mountain of the Lord’s house,” etc.; Isa_2:2, “in the last days the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established in the tops of the mountains,” etc. The expression then properly denoted “the future times” in general. But, as the coming of the Messiah was to the eye of a Jew the most important event in the coming ages - the great, glorious, and crowning scene in all the vast futurity, the phrase came to be regarded as properly expressive of that. It stood in opposition to the usual denomination of earlier times.

It was a phrase in contrast with the days of the patriarchs, the kings, the prophets, etc. The last days, or the closing period of the world, were the days of the Messiah. It does not appear from this, and it certainly is not implied in the expression, that they supposed the world would then come to an end. Their views were just the contrary. They anticipated a long and glorious time under the dominion of the Messiah, and to this expectation they were led by the promise that his kingdom should be forever; that of the increase of his government there should be no end, etc. This expression was understood by the writers of the New Testament as referring undoubtedly to the times of the gospel. And hence they often used it as denoting that the time of the expected Messiah had come, but not to imply that the world was drawing near to an end: Heb_1:2, “God hath spoken in these last days by his Son”; 1Pe_1:20, “Was manifested in these last times for you”; 2Pe_3:3; 1Pe_1:5; 1Jo_2:18, “Little children, it is the last time,” etc.; Jud_1:18. The expression the last day is applied by our Saviour to the resurrection and the day of judgment, Joh_6:39-40, Joh_6:44-45; Joh_11:24; Joh_12:48. Here the expression means simply “in those future times, when the Messiah shall have come.”

I will pour out of my Spirit - The expression in Hebrew is, “I will pour out my Spirit.” The word “pour” is commonly applied to water or to blood, “to pour it out,” or “to shed it,” Isa_57:6; to tears, “to pour them out,” that is,” to weep, etc., Psa_42:4; 1Sa_1:15. It is applied to water, to wine, or to blood, in the New Testament, Mat_9:17; Rev_16:1; Act_22:20, “The blood of thy martyr Stephen was shed.” It conveys also the idea of “communicating largely or freely,” as water is poured freely from a fountain, Tit_3:5-6, “The renewing of the Holy Spirit, which he shed on us abundantly.” Thus, Job_36:27, “They (the clouds) pour down rain according to the vapor thereof”; Isa_44:3, “I will pour water on him that is thirsty”; Isa_45:8, “Let the skies pour down righteousness”; Mal_3:10, “I will pour you out a blessing.” It is also applied to fury and anger, when God intends to say that he will not spare, but will signally punish, Psa_69:24; Jer_10:25. It is not infrequently applied to the Spirit, Pro_1:23; Isa_44:3; Zec_12:10. As thus used it means that he will bestow large measures of spiritual influences. As the Spirit renews and sanctifies people, so to pour out the Spirit is to grant freely his influences to renew and sanctify the soul.

My Spirit - The Spirit here denotes the Third Person of the Trinity, promised by the Saviour, and sent to finish his work, and apply it to people. The Holy Spirit is regarded as the source or conveyer of all the blessings which Christians experience. Hence, he renews the heart, Joh_3:5-6. He is the source of all proper feelings and principles in Christians, or he produces the Christian graces, Gal_5:22-25; Tit_3:5-7. The spread and success of the gospel is attributed to him, Isa_32:15-16. Miraculous gifts are traced to him, especially the various gifts with which the early Christians were endowed, 1Co_12:4-10. The promise that he would pour out his Spirit means that he would, in the time of the Messiah, impart a large measure of those influences which it was his special province to communicate to people. A part of them were communicated on the day of Pentecost, in the miraculous endowment of the power of speaking foreign languages, in the wisdom of the apostles, and in the conversion of the three thousand,

Upon all flesh - The word “flesh” here means “persons,” or “people.” See the notes on Rom_1:3. The word “all” here does not mean every individual, but every class or rank of individuals. It is to be limited to the cases specified immediately. The influences were not to be confined to any one class, but were to be communicated to all kinds of persons - old men, youth, servants, etc. Compare 1Ti_2:1-4.

And your sons and your daughters - Your children. It would seem that females shared in the remarkable influences of the Holy Spirit. Philip the Evangelist had four daughters which did prophesy, Act_21:9. It is probable also that the females of the church of Corinth partook of this gift, though they were forbidden to exercise it in public, 1Co_14:34. The office of prophesying, whatever was meant by that, was not confined to the people among the Jews: Exo_15:20, “Miriam, the prophetess, took a timbrel,” etc.; Jdg_4:4, “Deborah, a prophetess, judged Israel”; 2Ki_22:14. See also Luk_2:36, “There was one Anna, a prophetess,” etc.

Shall prophesy - The word “prophesy” is used in a great variety of senses:

(1) It means to predict or foretell future events, Mat_11:13; Mat_15:7.

(2) To divine, to conjecture, to declare as a prophet might, Mat_26:68, “Prophesy who smote thee.”

(3) To celebrate the praises of God, being under a divine influence, Luk_1:67. This seems to have been a considerable part of the employment in the ancient schools of the prophet, 1Sa_10:5; 1Sa_19:20; 1Sa_30:15.

(4) To teach - as no small part of the office of the prophets was to teach the doctrines of religion, Mat_7:22, “Have we not prophesied in thy name?”

(5) It denotes, then, in general, “to speak under a divine influence,” whether in foretelling future events, in celebrating the praises of God, in instructing others in the duties of religion, or “in speaking foreign languages under that influence.” In this last sense the word is used in the New Testament, to denote those who were miraculously endowed with the power of speaking foreign languages, Act_19:6. The word is also used to denote “teaching, or speaking in intelligible language, in opposition to speaking a foreign tongue,” 1Co_14:1-5. In this place it means that they would speak under a divine influence, and is specially applied to the power of speaking in a foreign tongue.

Your young men shall see visions - The will of God in former times was communicated to the prophets in various ways. One was by visions, and hence one of the most usual names of the prophets was seers. The name seer was first given to that class of men, and was superseded by the name prophet, 1Sa_9:9, “He that is now called a prophet was beforetime called a seer”; 1Sa_9:11, 1Sa_9:18-19; 2Sa_24:11; 1Ch_29:29, etc. This name was given from the manner in which the divine will was communicated, which seems to have been by throwing the prophet into an ecstasy, and then by causing the vision, or the appearance of the objects or events to pass before the mind. The prophet looked upon the passing scene, the often splendid diorama as it actually occurred, and recorded it as it appeared to his mind. Hence, he recorded rather the succession of images than the times in which they would occur. These visions occurred sometimes when they were asleep, and sometimes during a prophetic ecstasy, Dan_2:28; Dan_7:1-2, Dan_7:15; Dan_8:2; Eze_11:24; Gen_15:1; Num_12:6; Job_4:13; Job_7:14; Eze_1:1; Eze_8:3.

Often the prophet seemed to be transferred or transported to another place from where he was, and the scene in a distant land or age passed before the mind, Eze_8:3; Eze_40:2; Eze_11:24; Dan_8:2. In this case the distant scene or time passed before the prophet, and he recorded it as it appeared to him. That this did not cease before the times of the gospel is evident: Act_9:10, “To Ananias said the Lord in a vision,” etc.; Act_9:12, “and hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias,” etc.; that is, Paul hath seen Ananias represented to him, though absent; he has had an image of him coming in to him; Act_10:3, Cornelius “saw in a vision evidently an angel of God coming to him,” etc. This was one of the modes by which in former times God made known his will; and the language of the Jews came to express a revelation in this manner. Though there were strictly no visions on the day of Pentecost, yet that was one scene under the great economy of the Messiah under which God would make known his will in a manner as clear as he did to the ancient Jews.

Your old men shall dream dreams - The will of God in former times was made known often in this manner; and there are several instances recorded in which it was done under the gospel. God informed Abimelech in a dream that Sarah was the wife of Abraham, Gen_20:3. He spoke to Jacob in a dream, Gen_31:11; to Laban, Gen_31:24; to Joseph, Gen_37:5; to the butler and baker, Gen_40:5; to Pharaoh, Gen_41:1-7; to Solomon, 1Ki_3:5; to Daniel, Dan_2:3; Dan_7:1. It was prophesied by Moses that in this way God would make known his will, Num_12:6. It occurred even in the times of the gospel. Joseph was warned in a dream, Mat_1:20; Mat_2:12-13, Mat_2:19, Mat_2:22. Pilate’s wife was also troubled in this manner about the conduct of the Jews to Christ, Mat_27:19. As this was one way in which the will of God was made known formerly to people, so the expression here denotes simply that His will would be made known; that it would be one characteristic of the times of the gospel that God would reveal Himself to mankind. The ancients probably had some mode of determining whether their dreams were divine communications, or whether they were, as they are now, the mere erratic wanderings of the mind when unrestrained and unchecked by the will. At present no

confidence is to be put in dreams. Compare the introduction to Isaiah, section 7, 12.

CLARKE, "In the last days - The time of the Messiah; and so the phrase was understood among the Jews.

I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh - Rabbi Tanchum says, “When Moses laid his hands upon Joshua, the holy blessed God said, In the time of the old text, each individual prophet prophesied; but, in the times of the Messiah, all the Israelites shall be prophets.” And this they build on the prophecy quoted in this place by Peter.

Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy - The word prophesy is not to be understood here as implying the knowledge and discovery of future events; but signifies to teach and proclaim the great truths of God, especially those which concerned redemption by Jesus Christ.

Your young men shall see visions, etc. - These were two of the various ways in which God revealed himself under the Old Testament. Sometimes he revealed himself by a symbol, which was a sufficient proof of the Divine presence: fire was the most ordinary, as it was the most expressive, symbol. Thus he appeared to Moses on Mount Horeb, and afterwards at Sinai; to Abraham, Genesis 15:1-21; to Elijah, 1Ki_19:11, 1Ki_19:12. At other times he revealed himself by angelic ministry: this was frequent, especially in the days of the patriarchs, of which we find many instances in the book of Genesis.

By dreams he discovered his will in numerous instances: see the remarkable case of Joseph, Gen_37:5, Gen_37:9; of Jacob, Gen_28:1, etc.; Gen_46:2, etc.; of Pharaoh, Gen_41:1-7; of Nebuchadnezzar, Dan_4:10-17. For the different ways in which God communicated the knowledge of his will to mankind, see the note on Gen_15:1.

GILL Verse 17. And it shall come to pass in the last days,.... In Joel it is, "afterwards";

instead of which Peter puts, "in the last days"; the sense is the same: and so R. David

Kimchi, a celebrated commentator with the Jews, observes, that "afterwards" is the same

"as in the last days," and which design the times of the Messiah; for according to a rule

given by the same writer on Isaiah 2:2 wherever the last days are mentioned, the days of

the Messiah are intended.

Saith God, or "the Lord," as the Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions read. This clause is

added by Peter, and is not in Joel; and very rightly, since what follow are the words of

God speaking in his own person:

I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh; not "upon every animal," as the Ethiopic version

renders it: this is extending the sense too far, as the interpretation the above named

Jewish writer gives, limits it too much, restraining it to the people of Israel. It being a

maxim with them, that the Shekinah does not dwell but in the land of Israel; and also that

prophecy, or a spirit of prophecy, does not dwell on any but in the holy land {r}. For

though as it regards the first times of the Gospel, it may chiefly respect some persons

among the Jews, yet not to the exclusion of the Gentiles; and it designs all sorts of

persons of every age, sex, state, and condition, as the distribution afterwards shows.

Jarchi's note upon it is, "upon everyone whose heart is made as tender as flesh; as for

example, "and I will give an heart of flesh," Ezekiel 36:26." By the Spirit is meant the

gifts of the Spirit, the spirit of wisdom and knowledge, of understanding the mysteries of

the Gospel, of explaining the Scriptures, and of speaking with tongues; and by the

pouring of it out, is intended the abundance and great plenty of the gifts and graces of the

Spirit bestowed; but yet not all of him, or all his gifts and grace in the large extent of

them: therefore it is said, not "my Spirit," but "of my Spirit," or "out of it"; as out of an

unfathomable, immeasurable, and inexhaustible fountain and fulness:

and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy: or foretell things to come, as Agabus,

and the four daughters of Philip the Evangelist, Acts 21:9

and your young men shall see visions; as Ananias, Acts 9:10, and Peter, Acts 10:17 and

Paul when a young man, Acts 22:17 and John, the youngest of the apostles, Revelation

1:10 though he was in years, when he saw the visions in the Revelations:

and your old men shall dream dreams; or shall have night visions, as Paul at Troas, Acts

16:9 and in his voyage when at sea, Acts 27:23. The order of the words is inverted, this

last clause stands first in Joel; perhaps the change is made, because the apostles were

young men, on whom the Spirit was poured; and the thing was the more wonderful that so

it should be, than if they had been old men.

HENRY, 17-21, "The text itself that Peter quotes, Act_2:17-21. It refers to the last days, the times of the gospel, which are called the last days because the dispensation of God's kingdom among men, which the gospel sets up, is the last dispensation of divine grace, and we are to look for no other than the continuation of this to the end of time. Or, in the last days, that is, a great while after the ceasing of prophecy in the Old Testament church. Or, in the days immediately preceding the destruction of the Jewish nation, in the last days of that people, just before that great and notable day of the Lordspoken of, Act_2:20. “It was prophesied of and promised, and therefore you ought to expect it, and not to be surprised at it; to desire it, and bid it welcome, and not to dispute it, as not worth taking notice of.” The apostle quotes the whole paragraph, for it is good to take scripture entire; now it was foretold,

[1.] That there should be a more plentiful and extensive effusion of the Spirit of grace from on high than had ever yet been. The prophets of the Old Testament had been filled with the Holy Ghost, and it was said of the people of Israel that God gave them his good Spirit to instruct them, Neh_9:20. But now the Spirit shall be poured out, not only upon the Jews, but upon all flesh, Gentiles as well as Jews, though yet Peter himself did not understand it so, as appears, Act_11:17. Or, upon all flesh, that is, upon some of all ranks and conditions of men. The Jewish doctors taught that the Spirit came only upon wise and rich men, and such as were of the seed of Israel; but God will not tie himself to their rules.

[2.] That the Spirit should be in them a Spirit of prophecy; by the Spirit they should be enabled to foretel things to come, and to preach the gospel to every creature. This power shall be given without distinction of sex - not only your sons, but your daughters shall prophesy; without distinction of age - both your young men and your old men shall see visions, and dream dreams, and in them receive divine revelations, to be communicated to the church; and without distinction of outward condition - even the servants and handmaids shall receive of the Spirit, and shall prophesy (Act_2:18); or, in general, men and women, whom God calls his servants and his handmaids. In the beginning of the age of prophecy in the Old Testament there were schools of the prophets, and, before that,

the Spirit of prophecy came upon the elders of Israel that were appointed to the government; but now the Spirit shall be poured out upon persons of inferior rank, and such as were not brought up in the schools of the prophets, for the kingdom of the Messiah is to be purely spiritual. The mention of the daughters (Act_2:17) and the handmaidens (Act_2:18) would make one think that the women who were taken notice of (Act_1:14) received the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, as well as the men. Philip, the evangelist, had four daughters who did prophesy (Act_21:9), and St. Paul, finding abundance of the gifts both of tongues and prophecy in the church of Corinth, saw it needful to prohibit women's use of those gifts in public, 1Co_14:26, 1Co_14:34.

[3.] That one great thing which they should prophesy of should be the judgment that was coming upon the Jewish nation, for this was the chief thing that Christ himself had foretold (Mt. 24) at his entrance into Jerusalem (Luk_19:41); and when he was going to die (Luk_23:29); and these judgments were to be brought upon them to punish for their contempt of the gospel, and their opposition to it, though it came to them thus proved. Those that would not submit to the power of God's grace, in this wonderful effusion of his Spirit, should fall and lie under the pourings out of the vials of his wrath. Those shall break that will not bend. First, The destruction of Jerusalem, which was about forty years after Christ's death, is here called that great and notable day of the Lord, because it put a final period to the Mosaic economy; the Levitical priesthood and the ceremonial law were thereby for ever abolished and done away. The desolation itself was such as was never brought upon any place or nation, either before or since. It was the day of the Lord, for it was the day of his vengeance upon that people for crucifying Christ, and persecuting his ministers; it was the year of recompences for that controversy; yea, and for all the blood of the saints and martyrs, from the blood of righteous Abel, Mat_23:35. It was a little day of judgment; it was a notable day: in Joel it is called a terrible day, for

so it was to men on earth; but here epiphanē (after the Septuagint), a glorious, illustrious

day, for so it was to Christ in heaven; it was the epiphany, his appearing, so he himself spoke of it, Mat_24:30. The destruction of the Jews was the deliverance of the Christians, who were hated and persecuted by them; and therefore that day was often spoken of by the prophets of that time, for the encouragement of suffering Christians, that the Lord was at hand, the coming of the Lord drew nigh, the Judge stood before the door, Jam_5:8, Jam_5:9. Secondly, The terrible presages of that destruction are here foretold: There shall be wonders in heaven above, the sun turned into darkness and the moon into blood; and signs too in the earth beneath, blood and fire. Josephus, in his preface to his history of the wars of the Jews, speaks of the signs and prodigies that preceded them, terrible thunders, lightnings, and earthquakes; there was a fiery comet that hung over the city for a year, and a flaming sword was seen pointing down upon it; a light shone upon the temple and the altar at midnight, as if it had been noon-day. Dr. Lightfoot gives another sense of these presages: The blood of the Son of God, the fire of the Holy Ghost now appearing, the vapour of the smoke in which Christ ascended, the sun darkened, and the moon made blood, at the time of Christ's passion, were all loud warnings given to that unbelieving people to prepare for the judgments coming upon them. Or, it may be applied, and very fitly, to the previous judgments themselves by which that desolation was brought on. The blood points at the wars of the Jews with the neighbouring nations, with the Samaritans, Syrians, and Greeks, in which abundance of blood was shed, as there was also in their civil wars, and the struggles of the seditious (as they called them), which were very bloody; there was no peace to him that went out nor to him that came in. The fire and vapour of smoke, here foretold, literally came to pass in the burning of their cities, and towns, and synagogues, and temple at last. And this turning of the sun into darkness, and the moon into blood,

bespeaks the dissolution of their government, civil and sacred, and the extinguishing of all their lights. Thirdly, The signal preservation of the Lord's people is here promised (Act_2:21): Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord Jesus (which is the description of a true Christian, 1Co_1:2) shall be saved, shall escape that judgment which shall be a type and earnest of everlasting salvation. In the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans, there was a remnant sealed to be hid in the day of the Lord's anger; and in the destruction by the Romans not one Christian perished. Those that distinguish themselves by singular piety shall be distinguished by special preservation. And observe, the saved remnant are described by this, that they are a praying people: they call on the name of the Lord, which intimates that they are not saved by any merit or righteousness of their own, but purely by the favour of God, which must be sued out by prayer. It is the name of the Lord which they call upon that is their strong tower.

(2.) The application of this prophecy to the present event (Act_2:16): This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; it is the accomplishment of that, it is the full accomplishment of it. This is that effusion of the Spirit upon all flesh which should come, and we are to look for no other, no more than we are to look for another Messiah; for as our Messiah ever lives in heaven, reigning and interceding for his church on earth, so this Spirit of grace, the Advocate, or Comforter, that was given now, according to the promise, will, according to the same promise, continue with the church on earth to the end, and will work all its works in it and for it, and every member of it, ordinary and extraordinary, by means of the scriptures and the ministry.

JAMISON,"in the last days — meaning, the days of the Messiah (Isa_2:2); as closing all preparatory arrangements, and constituting the final dispensation of God’s kingdom on earth.

pour out of my Spirit — in contrast with the mere drops of all preceding time.

upon all flesh — hitherto confined to the seed of Abraham.

sons ... daughters ... young men ... old men ... servants ... handmaidens —without distinction of sex, age, or rank.

see visions ... dream dreams — This is a mere accommodation to the ways in which the Spirit operated under the ancient economy, when the prediction was delivered; for in the New Testament, visions and dreams are rather the exception than the rule.

UNKNOWN, "V. 17 - pour out my spiritpour out my spiritpour out my spiritpour out my spirit - As with 2:38, the question is: was the Spirit Himself given (poured out) or gifts from the Spirit? The O.T. Hebrew text says "poured out" but that doesn稚 settle the matter. It seems from various texts that either position could be true insofar as the apostles were concerned. Certainly if the person of the Holy Spirit is meant, it can only be in a manner of speaking, as best we know, since we can稚 conceive of one distinct person being in twelve different bodies at the same time. However, since God is not limited as we are, such is quite possible. See John 14:23; Rom. 5:59; Eph. 1:13;

I Cor. 6:19; II Cor. 1:21,22; I Thess. 4:8. The end result was what was important, and we can see that for ourselves.

CALVIN, "17. It shall be in the last days. By this effect he proveth that the

Messiah is already revealed. Joel, indeed, doth not express the last days, (Joel

2:29;) but for as much as he intreateth of the perfect restoring of the Church, it

is not to be doubted but that that prophecy belongeth unto the last age alone.

Wherefore, that which Peter bringeth doth no whit dissent from Joel's

meaning; but he doth only add this word for exposition sake, that the Jews

might know that the Church could by no other means be restored, which was

then decayed, but by being renewed by the Spirit of God. Again, because the

repairing of the Church should be like unto a new world, therefore Peter saith

that it shall be in the last days. And surely this was a common and familiar

thing among the Jews, that all those great promises concerning the blessed and

well-ordered state of the Church should not be fulfilled until Christ, by his

coming, should restore all things. Wherefore, it was out of all doubt amongst

them, that that which is cited out of Joel doth appertain unto the last time.

Now, by the last days, or fullness of time, is meant the stable and firm

condition of the Church, in the manifestation or revealing of Christ.

I will pour out my Spirit. He intendeth to prove, (as we have already said,) that

the Church can be repaired by no other means, saving only by the giving of the

Holy Spirit. Therefore, forasmuch as they did all hope that the restoring drew

near, he accuseth them of sluggishness, because they do not once think upon

the way and means thereof. And when the prophet saith, "I will pour out," it is,

without all question, that he meant by this word to note the great abundance of

the Spirit. And we must take I will pour out of my Spirit in the same sense, as

if he had said simply, I will pour out my Spirit. For these latter words are the

words of the prophet. But Peter followed the Grecians, who translate the

Hebrew word x, (cheth,) apo. Therefore, some men do in vain more subtlely

play the philosophers; because, howsoever the words be changed, yet must we

still retain and keep the prophet's meaning. Nevertheless, when God is said to

pour out his Spirit, I confess it must be thus understood, that he maketh

manifold variety and change of gifts to flow unto men from his Spirit, as it

were out of the only fountain, the fountain which can never be drawn dry. For,

as Paul doth testify, there be divers gifts, and yet but one Spirit, (1 Corinthians

12:4.) And hence do we gather a profitable doctrine, that we can have no more

excellent thing given us of God than the grace of the Spirit; yea, that all other

things are nothing worth if this be wanting. For, when God will briefly

promise salvation to his people, he affirmeth that he will give them his Spirit.

Hereupon it followeth that we can obtain no good things until we have the

Spirit given us. And truly it is, as it were, the key which openeth unto us the

door, that we may enter into all the treasures of spiritual good things; and that

we may also have entrance into the kingdom of God.

Upon all flesh. It appeareth, by that which followeth, of what force this

generality is; for, first, it is set down generally, all flesh; after that the partition

is added, whereby the prophet doth signify that there shall be no difference of

age or kind, but that God admitteth all, one with another, unto the partaking of

his grace. It is said, therefore, all flesh, because both young and old, men and

women, are thereby signified; yet here may a question be moved, why Clod

doth promise that unto his people, as some new and unwonted good thing,

which he was wont to do for them from the beginning throughout all ages; for

there was no age void of the grace of the Spirit. The answer of this question is

set down in these two sentences: "I will pour out," and, "Upon all flesh;" for

we must here note a double contrariety, 6 between the time of the Old and

New Testament; for the pouring out (as I have said) doth signify great plenty,

when as there was under the law a more scarce distribution; for which cause

John also doth say that the Holy Ghost was not given until Christ ascended

into heaven. All flesh cloth signify an infinite multitude, whereas God in times

past did vouchsafe to bestow such plenty of his Spirit only upon a few.

Furthermore, in both comparisons we do not deny but that the fathers under

the law were partakers of the self, same grace whereof we are partakers; but

the Lord doth show that we are above them, as we are indeed. I say, that all

godly men since the beginning of the world were endued with the same spirit

of understanding, of righteousness, and sanctification, wherewith the Lord

doth at this day illuminate and regenerate us; but there were but a few which

had the light of knowledge given them then, if they be compared with the

great multitude of the faithful, which Christ did suddenly gather together by

his coming. Again, their knowledge was but obscure and slender, and, as it

were, covered with a veil, if it be compared with that which we have at this

day out of the gospel, where Christ, the Sun of righteousness, doth shine with

perfect brightness, as it were at noon day. Neither doth that any whit hurt or

hinder that a few had such an excellent faith, that peradventure they have no

equal at this day. For their understanding did nevertheless smell or savor of

the instruction and schoolmastership7 of the law. For that is always true, that

godly kings and prophets have not seen nor heard those things which Christ

hath revealed by his coming. Therefore, to the end the prophet Joel may

commend the excellency of the New Testament, he affirmeth and foretelleth

that the grace of the Spirit shall be more plentiful in time thereof; and, again,

that it shall come unto more men, (Matthew 13:17; Luke 10:24.)

And your sons shall prophesy. By the word prophesy he meant to note the rare

and singular gift of understanding. And to the same purpose tendeth that

partition which followeth afterwards, "your young men shall see visions, and

your old men shall dream dreams;" for we gather out of the twelfth chapter of

Numbers, that these were the two ordinary ways whereby God did reveal

himself to the prophets. For in that place, when the Lord exempteth Moses

from the common sort of prophets, he saith,

"I appear unto my servants by a vision, or by a dream; but I speak unto

Moses face to face," (Numbers 12:6.)

Therefore, we see that two kinds are put after the general word for a

confirmation; yet this is the sum, that they shall all be prophets so soon as the

Holy Ghost shall be poured out from heaven. But here it is objected, that there

was no such thing, even in the apostles themselves, neither yet in the whole

multitude of the faithful. I answer, that the prophets did commonly use to

shadow under tropes most fit for their time, 8 the kingdom of Christ. When

they speak of the worship of God, they name the altar, the sacrifices, the

offering of gold, silver, and frankincense. Notwithstanding, we know that the

altars do cease, the sacrifices are abolished, whereof there was some use in

time of the law; and that the Lord requireth some higher thing at our hands

than earthly riches. That is true, indeed; but the prophets, whilst they apply

their style unto the capacity of their time, comprehend under figures

(wherewith the people were then well acquainted) those things which we see

otherwise revealed and showed now, like as when he promiseth elsewhere that

he will make priests of Levites, and Levites of the common sort of men,

(Isaiah 66:21,) this is his meaning, that under the kingdom of Christ every

base person shall be extolled unto an honorable estate; therefore, if we desire

to ]lave the true and natural meaning of this place, we must not urge the words

which are taken out of the old order9 of the law; but we must only seek the

truth without figures, and this is it, that the apostles, through the sudden

inspiration of the Spirit, did intreat of the heavenly mysteries prophetically,

that is to say, divinely, and above the common order.

Therefore, this word prophesy doth signify nothing else save only the rare and

excellent gift of understanding, as if Joel should say, Under the kingdom of

Christ there shall not be a few prophets only, unto whom God may reveal his

secrets; but all men shall be endued with spiritual wisdom, even to the

prophetical excellency. As it is also in Jeremiah,

"Every man shall no longer teach his neighbor; because they shall all know

me, from the least unto the greatest,"

(Jeremiah 31:34.)

And in these words Peter inviteth the Jews, unto whom he speaketh, to be

partakers of the same grace. As if he should say, the Lord is ready to pour out

that Spirit far and wide which he hath poured upon us. Therefore, unless you

yourselves be the cause of let, ye shall receive with us of this fullness. And as

for us, let us know that the same is spoken to us at this day which was then

spoken to the Jews. For although those visible graces of the Spirit be ceased,

yet God hath not withdrawn his Spirit from his Church. Wherefore he offereth

him daily unto us all, by this same promise, without putting any difference.

Wherefore we are poor and needy only through our own sluggishness; and

also it appeareth manifestly, that those are wicked and sacrilegious enemies of

the Spirit which keep back the Christian common people from the knowledge

of God; and forasmuch as he himself doth not only admit, but also call by

name unto himself, women and men, young and old.

ELLICOTT,"(17) It shall come to pass in the last days.—The prophecy of Joel

takes its place, with the exception, perhaps, of Hosea, as the oldest of the

prophetic books of the Old Testament. The people were suffering from one of

the locust-plagues of the East and its consequent famine. The prophet calls

them to repentance, and promises this gift of the Spirit as the great blessing of

a far-off future. He had been taught that no true knowledge of God comes but

through that Spirit. So Elisha prayed that a double portion (i.e., the eldest

son’s inheritance) of the Spirit which God had given to Elijah might rest upon

him (2 Kings 2:9).

Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy.—The Old Testament use of the

word, in its wider generic sense, as, e.g., in the case of Saul, 1 Samuel 10:10;

1 Samuel 19:20-24, covered phenomena analogous to the gift of tongues as

well as that of prophecy in the New Testament sense. The words imply that

women as well as men had been filled with the Spirit, and had spoken with the

“tongues.”

Your young men shall see visions.—The “visions,” implying the full activity

of spiritual power, are thought of as belonging to the younger prophets. In the

calmer state of more advanced age, wisdom came, as in the speech of Elihu,

“in a dream, in visions of the night, when deep sleep falleth upon men” (Job

33:15).

COFFMAN, "In the last days ... This refers to the Christian dispensation then

beginning. The same thought occurs often in the New Testament. Note such

passages as Hebrews 1:2,1 Peter 1:20, and 1 John 2:18. The day of Pentecost,

therefore, ushered in the "last days"; but the meaning is compound. (1) Those

were the last days in the sense of this being the final dispensation of God's

grace to men, the same thought appearing in Mark 12:6. (2) Those were the

last days in the sense that Israel's day of grace was running short. Their long

and repeated rebellions against God were soon to culminate and become final

in their rejection of Christ. (3) Those were last days in the sense that

Jerusalem, the temple, and the Jewish state would be utterly destroyed before

that generation died (in 70 A.D.). (4) Those were the last days in the sense that

the prophecies of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:31-35) and others of a new covenant

were fulfilled in the preaching of the gospel.

It is a gross error to suppose that the apostles all thought that the end of the

world was at hand. Jesus had plainly told them that some of them were to be

killed before Jerusalem fell, and that even the fall of the Holy City was but a

type of "the end" that would come long, long afterward. See in my

Commentary on Mark, under Mark 14:9.

The passage Peter here quoted from Joel Isaiah 2:28ff.

My Spirit upon all flesh ... The baptism of the Twelve in the Holy Spirit was

the enabling act that would propagate the gospel throughout all times and

nations, and it was for the benefit of "all flesh" that this endowment of the

apostles was given. As De Welt expressed it, "The pouring forth of the Spirit

upon all flesh was POTENTIALLY accomplished upon the day of

Pentecost."[24]

The other things mentioned here, such as sons and daughters prophesying,

young men seeing visions, and old men dreaming dreams, etc., refer to the

gifts of miracles which, through the imposition of the apostles' hands, would

bless and encourage the church during the apostolic period. Again from De

Welt, these things can be "understood as the spiritual gifts imparted by the

apostles."[25]

[24] Don DeWelt, op. cit., p. 42.

[25] Ibid.

MACLAREN,"THE FOURFOLD SYMBOLS OF THE SPIRIT

Act_2:2-3, Act_2:17; 1Jn_2:20

Wind, fire, water, oil,-these four are constant Scriptural symbols for the Spirit of God. We have them all in these fragments of verses which I have taken for my text now, and which I have isolated from their context for the purpose of bringing out simply these symbolical references. I think that perhaps we may get some force and freshness to the thoughts proper to this day [Footnote: Whit Sunday.] by looking at these rather than by treating the subject in some more abstract form. We have then the Breath of the Spirit, the Fire of the Spirit, the Water of the Spirit, and the Anointing Oil of the Spirit. And the consideration of these four will bring out a great many of the principal Scriptural ideas about the gift of the Spirit of God which belongs to all Christian souls.

I. First, ‘a rushing mighty wind.’

Of course, the symbol is but the putting into picturesque form of the idea that lies in the name. ‘Spirit’ is ‘breath.’ Wind is but air in motion. Breath is the synonym for life. ‘Spirit’ and ‘life’ are two words for one thing. So then, in the symbol, the ‘rushing mighty wind,’ we have set forth the highest work of the Spirit-the communication of a new and supernatural life.

We are carried hack to that grand vision of the prophet who saw the bones lying, very many and very dry, sapless and disintegrated, a heap dead and ready to rot. The question comes to him: ‘Son of man! Can these bones live?’ The only possible answer, if he consult experience, is, ‘O Lord God! Thou knowest.’ Then follows the great invocation: ‘Come from the four winds, O Breath! and breathe upon these slain that they may live.’ And the Breath comes and ‘they stand up, an exceeding great army.’ ‘It is the Spirit that quickeneth.’ The Scripture treats us all as dead, being separated from God, unless we are united to Him by faith in Jesus Christ. According to the saying of the Evangelist, ‘They

which believe on Him receive’ the Spirit, and thereby receive the life which He gives, or, as our Lord Himself speaks, are ‘born of the Spirit.’ The highest and most characteristic office of the Spirit of God is to enkindle this new life, and hence His noblest name, among the many by which He is called, is the Spirit of life.

Again, remember, ‘that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.’ If there be life given it must be kindred with the life which is its source. Reflect upon those profound words of our Lord: ‘The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh nor whither it goeth. So is every one that is born of the Spirit.’ They describe first the operation of the life-giving Spirit, but they describe also the characteristics of the resulting life.

‘The wind bloweth where it listeth.’ That spiritual life, both in the divine source and in the human recipient, is its own law. Of course the wind has its laws, as every physical agent has; but these are so complicated and undiscovered that it has always been the very symbol of freedom, and poets have spoken of these ‘chartered libertines,’ the winds, and ‘free as the air’ has become a proverb. So that Divine Spirit is limited by no human conditions or laws, but dispenses His gifts in superb disregard of conventionalities and externalisms. Just as the lower gift of what we call ‘genius’ is above all limits of culture or education or position, and falls on a wool-stapler in Stratford-on-Avon, or on a ploughman in Ayrshire, so, in a similar manner, the altogether different gift of the divine, life-giving Spirit follows no lines that Churches or institutions draw. It falls upon an Augustinian monk in a convent, and he shakes Europe. It falls upon a tinker in Bedford gaol, and he writes Pilgrim’s Progress. It falls upon a cobbler in Kettering, and he founds modern Christian missions. It blows ‘where it listeth,’ sovereignly indifferent to the expectations and limitations and the externalisms, even of organised Christianity, and touching this man and that man, not arbitrarily but according to ‘the good pleasure’ that is a law to itself, because it is perfect in wisdom and in goodness.

And as thus the life-giving Spirit imparts Himself according to higher laws than we can grasp, so in like manner the life that is derived from it is a life which is its own law. The Christian conscience, touched by the Spirit of God, owes allegiance to no regulations or external commandments laid down by man. The Christian conscience, enlightened by the Spirit of God, at its peril will take its beliefs from any other than from that Divine Spirit. All authority over conduct, all authority over belief is burnt up and disappears in the presence of the grand democracy of the true Christian principle: ‘Ye are all the children of God by faith in Jesus Christ’; and every one of you possesses the Spirit which teaches, the Spirit which inspires, the Spirit which enlightens, the Spirit which is the guide to all truth. So ‘the wind bloweth where it listeth,’ and the voice of that Divine Quickener is,

‘Myself shall to My darling be

Both law and impulse.’

Under the impulse derived from the Divine Spirit, the human spirit ‘listeth’ what is right, and is bound to follow the promptings of its highest desires. Those men only are free as the air we breathe, who are vitalised by the Spirit of the Lord, for ‘where the Spirit of the Lord is, there,’ and there alone, ‘is liberty.’

In this symbol there lies not only the thought of a life derived, kindred with the life bestowed, and free like the life which is given, but there lies also the idea of power. The wind which filled the house was not only mighty but ‘borne onward’-fitting type of the strong impulse by which in olden times ‘holy men spake as they were “borne onward”‘ (the word is the same) ‘by the Holy Ghost.’ There are diversities of operations, but it is

the same breath of God, which sometimes blows in the softest pianissimo that scarcely rustles the summer woods in the leafy month of June, and sometimes storms in wild tempest that dashes the seas against the rocks. So this mighty lif-giving Agent moves in gentleness and yet in power, and sometimes swells and rises almost to tempest, but is ever the impelling force of all that is strong and true and fair in Christian hearts and lives.

The history of the world, since that day of Pentecost, has been a commentary upon the words of my text. With viewless, impalpable energy, the mighty breath of God swept across the ancient world and ‘laid the lofty city’ of paganism ‘low; even to the ground, and brought it even to the dust.’ A breath passed over the whole civilised world, like the breath of the west wind upon the glaciers in the spring, melting the thick-ribbed ice, and wooing forth the flowers, and the world was made over again. In our own hearts and lives this is the one Power that will make us strong and good. The question is all-important for each of us, ‘Have I this life, and does it move me, as the ships are borne along by the wind?’ ‘As many as are impelled by the Spirit of God, they’-they-’are the sons of God.’ Is that the breath that swells all the sails of your lives, and drives you upon your course? If it be, you are Christians; if it be not, you are not.

II. And now a word as to the second of these symbols-’Cloven tongues as of fire’-the fire of the Spirit.

I need not do more than remind you how frequently that emblem is employed both in the Old and in the New Testament. John the Baptist contrasted the cold negative efficiency of his baptism, which at its best, was but a baptism of repentance, with the quickening power of the baptism of Him who was to follow him; when he said, ‘I indeed baptise you with water, but He that cometh after me is mightier than I. He shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.’ The two words mean but one thing, the fire being the emblem of the Spirit.

You will remember, too, how our Lord Himself employs the same metaphor when He speaks about His coming to bring fire on the earth, and His longing to see it kindled into a beneficent blaze. In this connection the fire is a symbol of a quick, triumphant energy, which will transform us into its own likeness. There are two sides to that emblem: one destructive, one creative; one wrathful, one loving. There are the fire of love, and the fire of anger. There is the fire of the sunshine which is the condition of life, as well as the fire of the lightning which burns and consumes. The emblem of fire is selected to express the work of the Spirit of God, by reason of its leaping, triumphant, transforming energy. See, for instance, how, when you kindle a pile of dead green-wood, the tongues of fire spring from point to point until they have conquered the whole mass, and turned it all into a ruddy likeness of the parent flame. And so here, this fire of God, if it fall upon you, will burn up all your coldness, and will make you glow with enthusiasm, working your intellectual convictions in fire not in frost, making your creed a living power in your lives, and kindling you into a flame of earnest consecration.

The same idea is expressed by the common phrases of every language. We speak of the fervour of love, the warmth of affection, the blaze of enthusiasm, the fire of emotion, the coldness of indifference. Christians are to be set on fire of God. If the Spirit dwell in us, He will make us fiery like Himself, even as fire turns the wettest green-wood into fire. We have more than enough of cold Christians who are afraid of nothing so much as of being betrayed into warm emotion.

I believe, dear brethren, and I am bound to express the belief, that one of the chief wants of the Christian Church of this generation, the Christian Church of this city, the

Christian Church of this chapel, is more of the fire of God! We are all icebergs compared with what we ought to be. Look at yourselves; never mind about your brethren. Let each of us look at his own heart, and say whether there is any trace in his Christianity of the power of that Spirit who is fire. Is our religion flame or ice? Where among us are to be found lives blazing with enthusiastic devotion and earnest love? Do not such words sound like mockery when applied to us? Have we not to listen to that solemn old warning that never loses its power, and, alas! seems never to lose its appropriateness: ‘Because thou art neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of My mouth.’ We ought to be like the burning beings before God’s throne, the seraphim, the spirits that blaze and serve. We ought to be like God Himself, all aflame with love. Let us seek penitently for that Spirit of fire who will dwell in us all if we will.

The metaphor of fire suggests also-purifying. ‘The Spirit of burning’ will burn the filth out of us. That is the only way by which a man can ever be made clean. You may wash and wash and wash with the cold water of moral reformation, you will never get the dirt out with it. No washing and no rubbing will ever cleanse sin. The way to purge a soul is to do with it as they do with foul clay-thrust it into the fire and that will burn all the blackness out of it. Get the love of God into your hearts, and the fire of His Divine Spirit into your spirits to melt you down, as it were, and then the scum and the dross will come to the top, and you can skim them off. Two powers conquer my sin: the one is the blood of Jesus Christ, which washes me from all the guilt of the past; the other is the fiery influence of that Divine Spirit which makes me pure and clean for all the time to come. Pray to be kindled with the fire of God.

III. Then once more, take that other metaphor, ‘I will pour out of My Spirit.’

That implies an emblem which is very frequently used, both in the Old and in the New Testament, viz., the Spirit as water. As our Lord said to Nicodemus: ‘Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.’ The ‘water’ stands in the same relation to the ‘Spirit’ as the ‘fire’ does in the saying of John the Baptist already referred to-that is to say, it is simply a symbol or material emblem of the Spirit. I suppose nobody would say that there were two baptisms spoken of by John, one of the Holy Ghost and one of fire,-and I suppose that just in the same way, there are not two agents of regeneration pointed at in our Lord’s words, nor even two conditions, but that the Spirit is the sole agent, and ‘water’ is but a figure to express some aspect of His operations. So that there is no reference to the water of baptism in the words, and to see such a reference is to be led astray by sound, and out of a metaphor to manufacture a miracle.

There are other passages where, in like manner, the Spirit is compared to a flowing stream, such as, for instance, when our Lord said, ‘He that believeth on Me, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water,’ and when John saw a ‘river of water of life proceeding from the throne.’ The expressions, too, of ‘pouring out’ and ‘shedding forth’ the Spirit, point in the same direction, and are drawn from more than one passage of Old Testament prophecy. What, then, is the significance of comparing that Divine Spirit with a river of water? First, cleansing, of which I need not say any more, because I have dealt with It in the previous part of my sermon. Then, further, refreshing, and satisfying. Ah! dear brethren, there is only one thing that will slake the immortal thirst in your souls. The world will never do it; love or ambition gratified and wealth possessed, will never do it. You will be as thirsty after you have drunk of these streams as ever you were before. There is one spring ‘of which if a man drink, he shall never thirst’ with unsatisfied, painful longings, but shall never cease to thirst with the longing which is blessedness, because it is fruition. Our thirst can be slaked by the deep draught of ‘the river of the

Water of Life, which proceeds from the Throne of God and the Lamb.’ The Spirit of God, drunk in by my spirit, will still and satisfy my whole nature, and with it I shall be glad. Drink of this. ‘Ho! every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters!’

The Spirit is not only refreshing and satisfying, but also productive and fertilising. In Eastern lands a rill of water is all that is needed to make the wilderness rejoice. Turn that stream on to the barrenness of your hearts, and fair flowers will grow that would never grow without it. The one means of lofty and fruitful Christian living is a deep, inward possession of the Spirit of God. The one way to fertilise barren souls is to let that stream flood them all over, and then the flush of green will soon come, and that which is else a desert will ‘rejoice and blossom as the rose.’

So this water will cleanse, it will satisfy and refresh, it will be productive and will fertilise, and ‘everything shall live whithersoever that river cometh.’

IV. Then, lastly, we have the oil of the Spirit.

‘Ye have an unction,’ says St. John in our last text, ‘from the Holy One.’ I need not remind you, I suppose, of how in the old system, prophets, priests, and kings were anointed with consecrating oil, as a symbol of their calling, and of their fitness for their special offices. The reason for the use of such a symbol, I presume, would lie in the invigorating and in the supposed, and possibly real, health-giving effect of the use of oil in those climates. Whatever may have been the reason for the use of oil in official anointings, the meaning of the act was plain. It was a preparation for a specific and distinct service. And so, when we read of the oil of the Spirit, we are to think that it is that which fits us for being prophets, priests, and kings, and which calls us to, because it fits us for, these functions.

You are anointed to be prophets that you may make known Him who has loved and saved you, and may go about the world evidently inspired to show forth His praise, and make His name glorious. That anointing calls and fits you to be priests, mediators between God and man, bringing God to men, and by pleading and persuasion, and the presentation of the truth, drawing men to God. That unction calls and fits you to be kings, exercising authority over the little monarchy of your own natures, and over the men round you, who will bow in submission whenever they come in contact with a man all evidently aflame with the love of Jesus Christ, and filled with His Spirit. The world is hard and rude; the world is blind and stupid; the world often fails to know its best friends and its truest benefactors; but there is no crust of stupidity so crass and dense but that through it there will pass the penetrating shafts of light that ray from the face of a man who walks in fellowship with Jesus. The whole nation of old was honoured with these sacred names. They were a kingdom of priests; and the divine Voice said of the nation, ‘Touch not Mine anointed, and do My prophets no harm!’ How much more are all Christian men, by the anointing of the Holy Spirit, made prophets, priests, and kings to God! Alas for the difference between what they ought to be and what they are!

And then, do not forget also that when the Scriptures speak of Christian men as being anointed, it really speaks of them as being Messiahs. ‘Christ’ means anointed, does it not? ‘Messiah’ means anointed. And when we read in such a passage as that of my text, ‘Ye have an unction from the Holy One,’ we cannot but feel that the words point in the same direction as the great words of our Master Himself, ‘As My Father hath sent Me, even so send I you.’ By authority derived, no doubt, and in a subordinate and secondary sense, of course, we are Messiahs, anointed with that Spirit which was given to Him, not by measure, and which has passed from Him to us. ‘If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His.’

So, dear brethren, all these things being certainly so, what are we to say about the present state of Christendom? What are we to say about the present state of English Christianity, Church and Dissent alike? Is Pentecost a vanished glory, then? Has that ‘rushing mighty wind’ blown itself out, and a dead calm followed? Has that leaping fire died down into grey ashes? Has the great river that burst out then, like the stream from the foot of the glaciers of Mont Blanc, full-grown in its birth, been all swallowed up in the sand, like some of those rivers in the East? Has the oil dried in the cruse? People tell us that Christianity is on its death-bed; and the aspect of a great many professing Christians seems to confirm the statement. But let us thankfully recognise that ‘we are not straitened in God, but in ourselves.’ To how many of us the question might be put: ‘Did you receive the Holy Ghost when you believed?’ And how many of us by our lives answer: ‘We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.’ Let us go where we can receive Him; and remember the blessed words: ‘If ye, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him’!

18Even on my servants, both men and women,

I will pour out my Spirit in those days,

and they will prophesy.

BARNES, "And on my servants - The Hebrew text in Joel is “upon the servants.” The Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate, however, render it “on my servants.” In Joel, the prophet would seem to be enumerating the different conditions and ranks of society. The influences of the Spirit would be confined to no class; they would descend on old and young, and even on servants and handmaids. So the Chaldee Paraphrase understood it. But the Septuagint and Peter evidently understood it in the sense of servants of God, as the worshippers of God are often called servants in the Scriptures. See Rom_1:1. It is possible, however, that Joel intended to refer to the servants of God. It is not “upon your servants,” etc., as in the former expression, “your sons,” etc.; but the form is changed, “upon servants and handmaids.” The language, therefore, will admit the construction of the Septuagint and of Peter; and it was this variation in the original Hebrew which suggested, doubtless, the mention of “my servants,” etc., instead of your servants.

And on my handmaids - Female servants. The name is several times given to pious women, Psa_86:16; Psa_116:16; Luk_1:38, Luk_1:48. The meaning of this verse does not materially differ from the former. In the times of the gospel, those who were brought under its influence would be remarkably endowed with ability to declare the will of God.

CLARKE, "On my servants and on my handmaidens - This properly means persons of the lowest condition, such as male and female slaves. As the Jews asserted that the spirit of prophecy never rested upon a poor man, these words are quoted to

show that, under the Gospel dispensation, neither bond nor free, male nor female, is excluded from sharing in the gifts and graces of the Divine Spirit.

GILL Verse 18. And on my servants, and on my handmaidens,.... In Joel it is only the

servants and the handmaids; and which Kimchi interprets of strangers that should stand in

the land of Israel, and serve the Israelites. But these phrases do not seem so much to

describe the civil state and condition of those persons, as their religious character, being

such as were brought, by the power of divine grace, to yield a cheerful obedience to the

will of God; though it may also regard the former, and show, that with God there is no

distinction and difference of bond or free, of rich or poor; contrary to a maxim of the

Jews {s}, that the Shekinah does not dwell but upon a wise man, a mighty man, and a rich

man.

I will pour out, in those days, of my Spirit, and they shall prophesy; see the note on the

preceding verse, from whence this clause, "and they shall prophesy," is repeated; for it is

not in the text in Joel; which is done to point at the end and effect of the Spirit being

poured down upon them.

CALVIN, "18. Upon my servants. In these words the promise is restrained

unto the worshippers of God. For God doth not profane his Spirit; which he

should do, if he should make the stone common to the unbelieving and

despisers. It is certain that we are made the servants of God by the Spirit; and

that, therefore, we are not, until such time as we have received the same; but,

first, whom God hath adopted to be of his family, and whom he hath framed

by his Spirit to obey him, those doth he furnish with new gifts afterward.

Again, the prophet did not respect that order of thee, but his meaning was to

make this grace proper to the Church alone. And forasmuch as the Church was

only among the Jews, he calleth them honorably the servants and handmaids

of God. But after that God did gather unto himself on every side a Church, the

wall of separation being pulled down, so many as are received into the society

of the covenant are called by the same name. Only let us remember, that the

Spirit is appointed for the Church properly.

COFFMAN, "This is a continuation of the thought in the previous verse. The

mention of daughters, handmaidens, and servants shows that in Christ Jesus

"there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female"

(Galatians 3:28).

They shall prophesy ... The tremendous weight of prophecy is not fully

appreciated in these times, because men simply do not know how amazingly

the apostles of Christ foretold future events. Barclay relates how the ancient

writer Tatian was led to accept the Scriptures, quoting him as follows:

I was led to put faith in these by the unpretending cast of their language, the

inartificial character of the writers, the foreknowledge displayed of future

events, the excellent quality of the precepts, and the declaration of the

government of the universe in one Being.[26]

ENDNOTE:

[26] William Barclay, Turning to God (Philadelphia: Westminster Press,

1964), p. 43.

ELLICOTT, "(18) And on my servants and on my handmaidens . . .—This

was the culminating point of the joyous prediction. Not on priests only, or

those who had been trained in the schools of the prophets, but on slaves, male

and female, should that gift be poured by Him who was no respecter of

persons. The life of Amos, the herdsman of Tekoa, the “gatherer of sycomore

fruit” (Amos 1:1; Amos 7:14), was, perhaps, the earliest example of the gift so

bestowed. The apostolic age must have witnessed many. The fisherman of

Galilee, who was now speaking, was the forerunner of thousands in whom the

teaching of the Spirit has superseded the training of the schools.

19I will show wonders in the heaven above

and signs on the earth below,

blood and fire and billows of smoke.

BARNES, "I will show wonders - Literally, “I will give signs” - �δώσω�τέρατα dōsō�

terata. The word in the Hebrew, מופתים mowpatiym, means properly “prodigies; wonderful

occurrences; miracles performed by God or his messengers,” Exo_4:21; Exo_7:3, Exo_7:9; Exo_11:9; Deu_4:34, etc. It is the common word to denote a miracle in the Old Testament. Here it means, however, a portentous appearance, a prodigy, a remarkable occurrence. It is commonly joined in the New Testament with the word “signs” - “signs and wonders,” Mat_24:24; Mar_13:22; Joh_4:48. In these places it does not of necessity mean miracles, but unusual and remarkable appearances. Here it is used to mean great and striking changes in the sky, the sun, moon, etc. The Hebrew is, “I will give signs in the heaven and upon the earth.” Peter has quoted it according to the sense, and not according to the letter. The Septuagint is here a literal translation of the Hebrew; and this is one of the instances where the New Testament writers did not quote from either.

Much of the difficulty of interpreting these verses consists in affixing the proper meaning to the expression “that great and notable day of the Lord.” If it be limited to the day of Pentecost, it is certain that no such events occurred at that time. But there is, it is believed, no propriety in confining it to that time. The description here pertains to “the last days” Act_2:17; that is, to the whole of that period of duration, however long, which

was known by the prophets as “the last times.” That period might be extended through many centuries; and during that period all these events would take place. The day of the Lord is the day when God will manifest himself in a special manner; a day when he will so strikingly be seen in his wonders and his judgments that it may be called his day. Thus, it is applied to the day of judgment as the day of the Son of man; the day in which he will be the great attractive object, and will be signally glorified, Luk_17:24; 1Th_5:2; Phi_1:6; 2Pe_3:12. If, as I suppose, “that notable day of the Lord” here refers to that future time when God will manifest himself in judgment, then we are not to suppose that Peter meant to say that these “wonders” would take place on the day of Pentecost, or had their fulfillment then, “but would occur under that indefinite period called “the last days,” the days of the Messiah, and before that period Was closed by the great day of the Lord.” The gift of tongues was a partial fulfillment of the general prophecy pertaining to those times. And as the prophecy was thus partially fulfilled, it was a pledge that it would be entirely; and thus there was laid a foundation for the necessity of repentance, and for calling on the Lord in order to be saved.

Blood - Blood is commonly used as an emblem of slaughter or of battle.

Fire - Fire is also an image of war, or the conflagration of towns and dwellings in time of war.

Vapour of smoke - The word “vapor,” Dτµίς atmis, means commonly an exhalation

from the earth, etc., easily moved from one place to another. Here it means (Hebrew: Joel) rising columbus or pillars of smoke, and is another image of the calamities of war the smoke rising from burning towns. It has always been customary in war to burn the towns of an enemy, and to render him as helpless as possible. Hence, the calamities denoted here are those represented by such scenes. To what particular scenes there is reference here it is impossible now to say. It may be remarked, however, that scenes of this kind occurred before the destruction of Jerusalem, and there is a striking resemblance between the description in Joel and that by which our Saviour foretells the destruction of Jerusalem. See the notes on Mat_24:21-24. Dr. Thomson (Land and the Book, vol. 2, p. 311) supposes that the reference in Joel may have been to the usual appearances of the sirocco, or that they may have suggested the image used here. He says: “We have two kinds of sirocco, one accompanied with vehement wind, which fills the air with dust and fine sand. I have often seen the whole heavens veiled in gloom with this sort of sandcloud, through which the sun, shorn of his beams, looked like a globe of dull smouldering fire. It may have been this phenomenon which suggested that strong prophetic figure of Joel, quoted by Peter on the day of Pentecost. Wonders in the heaven and in the earth; blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke; the sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood. The pillars of smoke are probably those columns of sand and dust raised high in the air by local whirlwinds, which often accompany the sirocco. On the great desert of the Hauran I have seen a score of them marching with great rapidity over the plain, and they closely resemble ‘pillars of smoke.’”

CLARKE, "I will show wonders - It is likely that both the prophet and the apostle refer to the calamities that fell upon the Jews at the destruction of Jerusalem, and the fearful signs and portents that preceded those calamities. See the notes on Mat_24:5-7(note), where these are distinctly related.

Blood, fire, and vapour of smoke - Skirmishes and assassinations over the land, and wasting the country with fire and sword.

GILL Verse 19. And I will show wonders in heaven above,.... The word above is not in

Joel, nor in the Syriac version here, as neither the word "beneath," in the next clause. This

may refer either to the appearance of angels, and of an extraordinary star at the birth of

Christ; or rather to comets and blazing stars, and particularly to that comet which, in the

form of a flaming sword, hung over Jerusalem, and the forms of armies in the heavens

engaged together, which were seen before, and portended the destruction of that city {t}:

and signs in the earth beneath; meaning either the miracles done by Christ, and his

apostles, on earth; or those surprising events in Judea and in Jerusalem, a flame was seen

in the temple, the doors of it opened of themselves, and a voice was heard in it, saying, let

us go hence; and an idiot went about several years together, saying, woe to the people,

woe to the city, &c.

blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: by blood is meant not the blood of Christ, either his

bloody sweat in the garden, or what he shed on the cross, but the blood of the Jews, shed

in war, and in internal seditions and murders: and by "fire" is designed not the Holy

Ghost, who now appeared in cloven tongues, as of fire, but the conflagration of the city

and temple of Jerusalem, and of many other towns and villages. And by "vapours of

smoke"; or, as in the Hebrew text, "pillars of smoke," ascending in upright columns, like

palm trees, are intended literally, the vast quantities of smoke that would arise from such

burnings; so that the very heavens would be clouded and darkened with them, and sun

and moon appear in the following form.

JAMISON, "I will show wonders, etc. — referring to the signs which were to precede the destruction of Jerusalem (see on Luk_21:25-28).

CALVIN, "19. And I will show wonders. We must first see what is meant by

this great day of the Lord. Some do expound it of the former coming of Christ

in the flesh; and others refer it unto the last day of the resurrection, I do allow

neither opinion. For, in my judgment, the prophet comprehendeth the whole

kingdom of Christ. And so he calleth it the great day, after that the Son of

God began to be revealed in the flesh, that he may lead us into the fulfilling of

his kingdom. Therefore, he appointeth no certain day, but he beginneth this

day at the first preaching of the gospel, and he extendeth the same unto the last

resurrection. Those which restrain it unto the time of the apostles are moved

with this reason, because the prophet joineth this member and that which

goeth next before together. But in that there is no absurdity at all, because the

prophet doth assign the time when these things began to come to pass,

howsoever they have a continual going forward even until the end of the

world. Furthermore, whereas he saith that the sun shall be turned to darkness,

and the moon into blood, they are figurative speeches, whereby he doth give

us to understand thus much, that the Lord will show tokens of his wrath

through the whole frame of the world, which shall bring men even to their

wit's end, as if there should be some horrible and fearful change of nature

wrought. For as the sun and moon are unto us witnesses of God's fatherly

favor towards us, whilst that by course they give light to the earth; so, on the

other side, the prophet saith, that they shall be messengers to foreshow God's

wrath and displeasure. And this is the second member of the prophecy. For

after that he had intreated of the spiritual grace which should be abundantly

poured out upon all flesh, lest any man should imagine that all things should

be quiet and prosperous together, therewithal he addeth that the estate of the

world shall be troublesome, and full of great fear under Christ; as Christ

himself doth more fully declare, Matthew 24 and Luke 21.

But this serveth greatly to the setting forth of grace, that whereas all things do

threaten destruction, yet whosoever doth call upon the name of the Lord is

sure to be saved. By the darkness of the sun, by the bloody streaming of the

moon, by the black vapor of smoke, the prophet meant to declare, that

whithersoever men turn their eyes, there shall many things appear, both

upward and downward, which may make them amazed and afraid, as he hath

already said. Therefore, this is as much as if he should have said, that the

world was never in a more miserable case, that there were never so many and

such cruel tokens of God's wrath. Hence may we gather how inestimable the

goodness of God is, who offereth a present remedy for so great evils; and

again, how unthankful they are towards God, and how froward, which do not

flee unto the sanctuary of salvation, which is nigh unto them, and doth meet

them. Again, it is out of all doubt, that God meaneth by this so doleful a

description, to stir up all godly men, that they may with a more fervent desire

seek for salvation. And Peter citeth it to the same end, that the Jews may know

that they shall be more miserable unless they receive that grace of the Spirit

which is offered unto them. Yet here may a question be asked, how this can

hang together, that when Christ is revealed, there should such a sea of miseries

overflow and break out therewithal? For it may seem to be a thing very

inconvenient,10 that he should be the only pledge of God's love toward

mankind, in whom the heavenly Father doth lay open all the treasure of his

goodness, yea, he poureth out the bowels of his mercy upon us, and that yet,

by the coming of the same, his Son, his wrath should be more hot than it was

wont, so that it should, as it were, quite consume both heaven and earth at

once.

But we must first mark, that because men are too slow to receive Christ, they

must be constrained by divers afflictions, as it were with whips. Secondly,

forasmuch as Christ doth call unto himself all those which are heavy laden and

labor, (Matthew 11:28,)we must first be tamed by many miseries, that we may

learn humility. For through great prosperity men do set up the horns of pride.

And he cannot but despise Christ fiercely, whosoever he be, that seemeth to

himself to be happy. Thirdly, because we are, more than we ought, set upon

the seeking of the peace of the flesh, whereby it cometh to pass that many tie

the grace of Christ unto the present life, it is expedient for us to be accustomed

to think otherwise, that we may know that the kingdom of Christ is spiritual.

Therefore, to the end God may teach us that the good things of Christ are

heavenly, he doth exercise us, according to the flesh, with many miseries;

whereby it cometh to pass that we do seek our felicity without the world.

Moreover, men do bring miseries upon themselves through their

unthankfulness; for the servant which knoweth his master's will, and doth not

obey, is worthy of greater and more stripes, (Luke 12:47.) The more familiarly

that God doth communicate with us in Christ, the more doth our ungodliness

grow and break out into open contumacy, so that it is no marvel if, when

Christ is revealed, there appear many tokens of God's vengeance on the other

side, forasmuch as men do hereby more grievously provoke God against them,

and kindle his wrath through wicked contempt. Surely, in that the day of

Christ is fearful, it is an accidental thing; whether God will correct our

slothfulness, to bring us under, which [who] are yet inapt to be taught, or

whether he will punish our unthankfulness. For it bringeth with it of itself

nothing but that which is pleasant; but the contempt of God's grace doth

provoke him to horrible anger not without cause.

COFFMAN, "Wonders in the heaven above, and signs on the earth beneath ...

Several of the most spectacular wonders ever seen on earth had occurred right

there in Jerusalem the day Jesus was crucified only fifty-three days before

Peter thus spoke. The very sun's light failed; and, as it was the full moon, the

satellite appeared as blood. Pontius Pilate wrote to the Emperor Tiberius that

"The moon, being like blood, did not shine the whole night, and yet she

happened to be at the full."[27] Thus the sun and the moon were "wonders in

heaven"; and the earthquake, the rending of the veil of the temple, and the

resurrection of many of the dead, were signs on the earth beneath. See in my

Commentary on Matthew, pp. 483-495.

Certain commentators, such as Harrison, refer these verses to "the day of

Christ's coming in glory,"[28] apparently overlooking the most spectacular

fulfillment of them a little over seven weeks prior to Peter's message. Despite

this, it is not wrong to see in these words a prophecy of the final day also. As

Bruce pointed out,

"The last days" began with Christ's first advent and will end with the second

advent. They are the days during which the age to come overlaps the present

age; hence the assurance with which Peter could quote the words of Joel and

declare, "This is that."[29]

The blood and fire and vapor of smoke ... were spectacularly associated with

every great Jewish feast, such as Passover or Pentecost. It is difficult for any

modern to envision the sacrifice of a quarter of a million lambs and all of the

blood and "vapor of smoke" that inevitably accompanied such an event. These

words most certainly fix the occasion of the signs mentioned as occurring

upon one of the great Jewish festivals, which of course they did.

The awful events prophesied by Joel and here announced by Peter as fulfilled

(that is, beginning to be fulfilled) were omens of fearful judgments about to

fall upon the chosen people; but in concert with this, Peter also extended the

hope of grace and forgiveness, basing his whole sermon on the climactic final

sentence concluding the passage from Joel.

[27] Tertullian, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Pilate to Tiberius (Grand Rapids:

Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publishers, 1957), Vol. 3p. 463.

[28] Everett F. Harrison, op. cit., p. 389.

[29] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 68.

COKE, "Acts 2:19. Vapour of smoke:— A cloud of smoke. Doddridge; who

paraphrases the passage thus: "Such destructive wars shall arise, as a

punishment for the wickedness of those who reject the mercy I offer, that there

shall be blood shed in abundance, and fire scattered abroad to consume your

cities and villages; so that a cloud of smoke shall ascend from the ruins of

them."

ELLICOTT,"(19) And I will shew wonders in heaven above.—St. Peter

quotes the words of terror that follow, apparently, for the sake of the promise

with which they end in Acts 2:21. But as it was not given to him as yet to

know the times and the seasons (Acts 1:7), it may well have been that he

looked for the “great and notable day” as about to come in his own time. The

imagery is drawn as from one of the great thunder-storms of Palestine. There

is the lurid blood-red hue of clouds and sky; there are the fiery flashes, the

columns or pillars of smoke-like clouds boiling from the abyss. These, in their

turn, were probably thought of as symbols of bloodshed, and fire and smoke,

such as are involved in the capture and destruction of a city like Jerusalem.

20The sun will be turned to darkness

and the moon to blood

before the coming of the great and glorious

day of the Lord.

Sun darkened when Jesus on the cross.

BARNES, "The sun shall be turned into darkness - See the notes on Mat_24:29.

The same images used here with reference to the sun and moon are used also there: They occur not infrequently, Mar_13:24; 2Pe_3:7-10. The shining of the sun is an emblem of prosperity; the withdrawing, the eclipse, or the setting of the sun is an emblem of calamity, and is often thus need in the Scriptures, Isa_60:20; Jer_15:9; Eze_32:7; Amo_8:9; Rev_6:12; Rev_8:12; Rev_9:2; Rev_16:8. To say that the sun is darkened, or turned into darkness, is an image of calamity, and especially of the calamities of war, when the smoke of burning cities rises to heaven and obscures his light. This is not, therefore, to be taken literally, nor does it afford any indication of what will be at the end of the world in regard to the sun.

The moon into blood - The word “blood” here means that obscure, sanguinary color which the moon has when the atmosphere is filled with smoke and vapor, and especially the lurid and alarming appearance which it assumes when smoke and flames are thrown up by earthquakes and fiery eruptions, Rev_6:12, “And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and lo, there was a great earthquake, and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood,” Rev_8:8. In this place it denotes great calamities. The figures used are indicative of wars, and conflagrations, and earthquakes. As these things are Matt. 24 applied to the destruction of Jerusalem; as they actually occurred previous to that event (see the notes on Matt. 24), it may be supposed that the prophecy in Joel had an immediate reference to that. The meaning of the quotation by Peter in this place therefore is, that what occurred on the day of Pentecost was the beginning of the serges of wonders that was to take place during the times of the Messiah. It is not intimated that those scenes were to close or to be exhausted in that age. They may precede that great day of the Lord which is yet to come in view of the whole earth.

That great and notable day of the Lord - This is called the great day of the Lord, because on that day he will be signally manifested, more impressively and strikingly than

on other times. The word “notable,” Eπιφαν_ epiphanē, means “signal, illustrious,

distinguished.” In Joel the word is “terrible or fearful”; a word applicable to days of calamity, and trial, and judgment. The Greek word here rendered notable is also in the Septuagint frequently used to denote “calamity” or “times of judgment,” Deu_10:21; 2Sa_7:23. This will apply to any day in which God signally manifests himself, but particularly to a day when he shall come forth to punish people, as at the destruction of Jerusalem, or at the day of judgment. The meaning is, that those wonders would take place before that distinguished day should arrive when God would come forth in judgment.

CLARKE, "The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood - These are figurative representations of eclipses, intended most probably to point out the fall of the civil and ecclesiastical state in Judea: see the notes on Mat_24:29. That the Sun is darkened when a total eclipse takes place, and that the Moon appears of a bloody hue in such circumstances, every person knows.

GILL Verse 20. The sun shall be turned into darkness,.... As at the death of Christ, by a

total eclipse of it:and the moon into blood; as at the opening of the sixth seal, Revelation

6:12

before that great and notable day of the Lord come; when he shall come in power and

great glory, as he did in a few years after this, to take vengeance on the Jews, and destroy

their nation, city, and temple; in which there was a display of his greatness, and power,

and which was awful and "terrible" to them, as in Joel it is called; See Gill on "Mt 24:29."

SBC, "The first Christian Apology

I. The audience which St. Peter addressed were familiar with the main outlines of Jesus’ life as recent and notorious events. We assume them also. For the truth of the theory that Christ was God the Church offers one test-proof—the resurrection. Virtually, St. Peter does so in these early sermons of his. If God Almighty did raise the Lord Jesus from the dead into glorified and unchangeable life, as no other man ever was raised, then Jesus was the Son of God as He claimed to be, His life as Divine as it professed to be, His miracles genuine, His teaching true, His pretensions valid, His death innocent, His passion propitiatory and atoning. But if, which is the only other alternative, the alternative of unbelief, if God did not raise this Man, the Christian advocate throws up his case, our faith is false, our fancied Saviour an impostor, and we are in our sins like other men.

II. Even a Christ who became alive again is not enough, if He has so withdrawn Himself that in His absence He cannot help us. A Christ removed out of reach of men were as good as no Christ at all. Our Christ is not out of reach; withdrawn as He is from sensible contact with matter, into that spiritual world which on every side encompasses and perhaps touches this earthly life of ours, Christian faith feels herself more really near to Him now than when He was present to sight. It is because the Spirit of power, and purity, and peace flows into her, from her no longer accessible Head, that the Church exists, and possesses the unity of a spiritual organism, and does effective work as the bearer of a regenerating Gospel. Her word, her work, her very being, hinge on the fact that the Holy Ghost inhabits her. We have here an advantage over an apologist so early as St. Peter. In proof that his newly-departed Master had sent down the Holy Ghost, Peter had nothing to appeal to but one unique and startling phenomenon just happening in his hearers’ presence. He had the rushing noise, the flames of fire, the foreign tongues. We have the gathered spiritual experience of eighteen centuries. Christianity is not so small or so new a thing that it should be hard for any man who tries to track its working in detail on innumerable men, and gather up even its secret fruits. The Gospel is not a dead history, but a living power. It is not far off, but nigh us. God’s breath is in it, and moral miracles attest the perennial contact with our sunken race of a strong Divine hand—a hand more strong than sin’s—always at work to uplift and to heal.

J. Oswald Dykes, Sermons, p. 1.

ELLICOTT, "(20) The sun shall be turned into darkness.—Both clauses bring before us the phenomena of an eclipse: the total darkness of the sun, the dusky copper hue of the moon. Signs, of which these were but faint images, had been predicted by our Lord, echoing, as it were, the words of Joel, as among the preludes of His Advent (Matthew 24:29).

That great and notable day.—St. Luke follows the LXX. version. The Hebrew gives, as in our version, “the great and terrible day.” As seen by the prophet, the day was terrible to the enemies of God; a day of blessing to “the remnant whom the Lord should call” (Joel 2:32). The Greek word for “notable” (epiphanès) lent itself readily to the thought of the great Epiphany or manifestation of Christ as the Judge of all.

UNKNOWN, "V. 20 - day of the Lord - Normally used in the N.T. epistles to mean the

Second Coming, as in I Cor. 1:8; II Cor. 1:14, Phil. 1:10; I Thess. 5:2; II Thess. 2:8; I

Tim. 6:14. Of course, there may have been more than one "day of the Lord," with one yet

to come when the epistles were written. It may also be true that Joel痴 expression

included all the time in the "last days," so that his prophecy included the Second Coming.

Again, as remarked about, the gist of Joel痴 prophecy was what was occurring that day to

the twelve.

21And everyone who calls on the name of the

Lord will be saved.'[c]

BARNES, "Whosoever shall call - In the midst of these wonders and dangers, whosoever should call on the Lord should be delivered (Joel). The name of the Lord is the same as the Lord himself. It is a Hebraism, signifying to call on the Lord, Psa_79:6; Zec_13:9.

Shall be saved - In Hebrew, shall be delivered, that is, from impending calamities. When they threaten, and God is coming forth to judge them, it shall be that those who are characterized as those who call on the Lord shall be delivered. This is equally true at all times. It is remarkable that no Christians perished in the siege of Jerusalem. Though more than a million of Jews perished, yet the followers of Christ who were there, having been warned by him, when they saw the signs of the Romans approaching, withdrew to Aelia, and were preserved. So it shall be in the day of judgment. All whose character it has been that “they called on God” will then be saved. While the wicked will then call on the rocks and the mountains to shelter them from the Lord, those who have invoked his favor and mercy will find deliverance. The use which Peter makes of this passage is this: Calamities were about to come; the day of judgment was approaching; they were passing through the last days of the earth’s history, and therefore it became them to call on the name of the Lord, and to obtain deliverance from the dangers which impended over the guilty. There can be little doubt that Peter intended to apply this to the Messiah, and that by the name of the Lord he meant the Lord Jesus. See 1Co_1:2. Paul makes the same use of the passage, expressly applying it to the Lord Jesus Christ, Rom_10:13-14. In Joel, the

word translated “Lord” is יהוה Yahweh, the incommunicable and unique name of God;

and the use of the passage before us in the New Testament shows how the apostles regarded the Lord Jesus Christ, and proves that they had no hesitation in applying to him names and attributes which could belong to no one but God.

This verse teaches us:

1. That in prospect of the judgments of God which are to come, we should make preparation. We shall be called to pass through the closing scenes of this earth; the time

when the sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, and when the great day of the Lord shall come.

2. It is easy to be saved. All that God requires of us is to call upon him, to pray to him, and he will answer and save. If people will not do so easy a thing as to call on God, and ask him for salvation, it is obviously proper that they should be cast off. The terms of salvation could not be made plainer or easier. The offer is wide, free, universal, and there is no obstacle but what exists in the heart of the sinner.

And from this part of Peter’s vindication of the scene on the day of Pentecost we may learn also:

1. That revivals of religion are to be expected as a part of the history of the Christian church. He speaks of God’s pouring out his Spirit, etc., as what was to take place in the last days, that is, in the indefinite and large tract of time which was to come, under the administration of the Messiah. His remarks are by no means limited to the day of Pentecost. They are as applicable to future periods as to that time; and we are to expect it as a part of Christian history, that the Holy Spirit will be sent down to awaken and convert people.

2. This will also vindicate revivals from all the changes which have ever been brought against them. All the objections of irregularity, extravagance, wildfire, enthusiasm, disorder, etc., which have been alleged against revivals in modern times, might have been brought with equal propriety against the scene on the day of Pentecost. Yet an apostle showed that that was in accordance with the predictions of the Old Testament, and was an undoubted work of the Holy Spirit. If that work could be vindicated, then modern revivals may be. If that was really liable to no objections on these accounts, then modern works of grace should not be objected to for the same things. And if that excited deep interest in the apostles; if they felt deep concern to vindicate it from the charge brought against it, then Christians and Christian ministers now should feel similar solicitude to defend revivals, and not be found among their revilers, their calumniators, or their foes. There will be enemies enough of the work of the Holy Spirit without the aid of professed Christians, and that man possesses no enviable feelings or character who is found with the enemies of God and his Christ in opposing the mighty work of the Holy Spirit on the human heart.

CLARKE, "Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved -The predicted ruin is now impending; and only such as receive the Gospel of the Son of God shall be saved. And that none but the Christians did escape, when God poured out these judgments, is well known; and that All the Christians did escape, not one of them perishing in these devastations, stands attested by the most respectable authority. See the note on Mat_24:13.

GILL Verse 21. And it shall come to pass,.... Even at that time, when these signs shall

appear, and the destruction is hastening on, that

whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord; shall believe in the Lord Jesus Christ with

the heart, and shall confess him with the mouth, and shall worship him in Spirit and in

truth, and submit to all his ordinances and commands; for invocation of the Lord includes

the whole of worship, internal and external:

shall be saved; or delivered from that temporal destruction which came upon the Jews, as

the Christians were by removing from Jerusalem to Pella, as they were directed {u}; and

shall be saved with a spiritual and everlasting salvation by Jesus Christ; See Gill on "Ro

10:13."

JAMISON, "whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved —This points to the permanent establishment of the economy of salvation, which followed on the breaking up of the Jewish state.

UNKNOWN, "V. 21 - whoever calls - Paul has the same statement in Romans 10:13. It

apparently means that any person, regardless of who it is, may receive salvation if said

person turns to the Lord for salvation. Of course, this idea of universal salvation was

foreign to Jewish concepts, in the main, and definitely not understood by Peter, the

speaker, the other apostles, or those listening. The whole Acts account gives various

struggles of the early Christians to overcome their provincial thinking, and see the truth of

the statement in Romans 3, that God is "the God of the Gentiles also."

name of the Lord - This expression equals the person of the Lord. Many times "name"

means the person, as in Acts 3:16; etc. We might notice that this is one of several times

when the texts referring to God in the Old Testament are applied to Jesus in the N.T.

Consider Isaiah 45:23 and Rom. 14:11; Phil. 2:10-11; Psalms 34:8 and I Peter 2:3; Isaiah

8:13 and I Peter 3:15.

CALVIN, "21. Whosoever shall call upon. An excellent place. For as God

doth prick us forward like sluggish asses, with threatenings and terrors to seek

salvation, se, after that he hath brought darkness upon the face of heaven and

earth, yet doth he show a means whereby salvation may shine before our eyes,

to wit, if we shall call upon him. For we must diligently note this

circumstance. If God should promise salvation simply, it were a great matter;

but it is a far greater when as he promiseth the same amidst manifold

dungeons of death. Whilst that (saith he) all things shall be out of order, and

the fear of destruction shall possess all things, only call upon me, and ye shall

be saved. Therefore, howsoever man be swallowed up ill the gulf of miseries,

yet is there set before him a way to escape. We must also note the universal

word, whosoever. For God admitteth all men unto himself without exception,

and by this means doth he invite them to salvation, as Paul gathereth in the

tenth chapter to the Romans, and as the prophet had set it down before,

"Thou, Lord, which hearest the prayer,

unto thee shall all flesh come,"

(Psalm 65:2.)

Therefore, forasmuch as no man is excluded from calling upon God, the gate

of salvation is set open unto all men; neither is there any other thing which

keepeth us back from entering in, save only our own unbelief. I speak of all

unto whom God doth make himself manifest by the gospel. But like as those

which call upon the name of the Lord are sure of salvation, so we must think

that, without the same, we are thrice miserable and undone. And when as our

salvation is placed in calling upon God, there is nothing in the mean season

taken from faith, forasmuch as this invocation is grounded on faith alone.

There is also another circumstance no less worthy the noting; in that the

prophet doth signify, that the calling upon God doth properly appertain and

agree unto the last days. For although he would be called upon in all ages,

notwithstanding, since that he showed himself to be a Father in Christ, we

have the more easy access unto him. Which thing ought both the more to

embolden us, and to take from us all sluggishness. As he himself doth also

reason, that by this privilege our forwardness to pray is doubled to us:

"Hitherto have ye asked nothing in nay name; ask, and ye shall receive;" as if

he should say, theretofore, although I did not yet appear to be a mediator and

advocate in the faith, yet did ye pray; but now, when you shall have me to be

your patron, with how much more courage ought ye to do that?

COFFMAN, "This verse was the text of Peter's address, making it clear that

his sermon was primarily concerned with human salvation and the means of

its procurement by men. As Boles expressed it:

In the midst of these alarming events and wonders and terrible phenomena that

foretold awful judgments, opportunity would be given to all who would "call

upon the name of the Lord" to be saved.[30]

The impending judgment against Israel would bring the total destruction of the

Holy City; but all of the Jews who became Christians were spared in that

disaster; and as it was a type of the final judgment and overthrow of the world

itself, Peter's message applied not merely to Israel who first heard it but to all

men, as stated in Acts 2:39.

Call upon ... The word thus translated denotes far more than merely

pronouncing the Lord's name (Matthew 7:21,22; Luke 6:46).

It is used of being declared to be a dedicated person, as to the Lord, Acts

15:17...to invoke, to call upon for oneself (that is, on one's behalf)...and to call

upon by way of adoration, making use of the Name of the Lord, Acts 2:21.[31]

[30] H. Leo Boles, op. cit., p. 40.

[31] W. E. Vine, Dictionary of New Testament Words (Old Tappan, New

Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1940), p. 163.

COKE, "Acts 2:21. Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord.— See

Ezekiel 9:4-6. This context being quoted thus, was a strong intimation that

nothing but their acceptance of the gospel could secure them from impending

ruin. Brennius has proved, by an ample collection of texts, that calling on the

name of the Lord, is often put for the whole of religion; and if it do not here

directly signify invoking Christ, which is sometimes used to express the whole

of the Christian character, (Comp. Ch. Acts 9:14; Acts 9:21, Acts 22:16.

Romans 10:12-13 and 1 Corinthians 1:2.) it must imply, that it is impossible

for any who reject him, to pray in an acceptable manner. How awful a

reflection! See the note on Joel 2:32.

ELLLICOTT, "(21) Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord . . .—

Singularly enough, the precise phrase, to “call upon” God, common as it is in

the Old Testament, does not occur in the Gospels. With St. Luke and St. Paul

it is, as it were, a favourite word (Acts 7:59; Acts 9:14; Romans 10:12; 1

Corinthians 1:2). Its Greek associations gave to the “invoking” which it

expressed almost the force of an appeal from a lower to a higher tribunal.

(Comp. Acts 25:11; Acts 25:21; Acts 25:25.) Here the thought is that that

Name of the Eternal, invoked by the prayer of faith, was the one sufficient

condition of deliverance in the midst of all the terrors of the coming day of the

Lord.

22"Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of azareth

was a man accredited by God to you by miracles,

wonders and signs, which God did among you

through him, as you yourselves know.

Morgan, "Let me put it startlingly. Jesus, in his human form, perfomed no miracles.

God wrought the miracles through Jesus. They were miracles which God did by

Him in the midst of you. Consequently the miracles prove, not the deity of our Lord,

but His humanity-his perfect humanity."

WITESS LEE

The Greek word translated “demonstrated” in verse 22 literally means to point out,

to exhibit, to show forth, in the sense of proving by demonstration, thus bringing

about an approval. This indicates that the Lord’s work was God’s demonstration of

Him, His exhibition of Him. While Christ was living and ministering, whatever He

did was an exhibition of the fact that His work was done by God. In the four

Gospels we have the exhibition of a wonderful Person, the God-man. The Gospels

exhibit this God-man as the One who was fully tested, proved, and approved.

Peter’s thought in verse 22 is that Jesus was fully tested, proved, and approved by

God.

The record in 2:14-47 emphasizes Peter’s speaking concerning Christ. Peter spoke

of Christ, and he even spoke forth Christ. This is the first case of the speaking of

Christ by the believers. In his speaking, Peter presents to us the Man Jesus and

witnesses to us concerning Him. In particular, Peter speaks of the Lord Jesus in His

work, death, resurrection, and ascension.

In his speaking concerning Christ in chapters two through five of Acts, Peter does

not refer to Him as the Son of God. Peter’s emphasis here is not on the fact that

Jesus is the Son of God. Rather, in these chapters Peter stresses that the Lord Jesus

is a man. The reason for this emphasis is that the Jews crucified Christ as a man,

regarding Him merely as a despised man, a azarene, a person of low estate.

Therefore, Peter said that the One regarded by the Jews as a lowly azarene was

approved by God in all that He did.

UNKNOWN, "V. 22 - Jesus of azareth - This phrase identifies who is the subject of

Peter's remarks. Many were called "Jesus." We need to remember that the real issue is

this: do you and I believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ of God? Peter affirmed this

proposition in Matthew 16:16, as did the other apostles.

Peter proclaimed that the events were part of God’s plan; the above fact (including

explicit details about Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection) that was prophesied by Joel to

happen in the "last days" - all was taking place just as God had intended.

mighty works, wonders and signs - Three aspects of any miracle, viewed from what it

took to do it (mighty work), the response it caused in the viewer (wonder), and that it

(sign) pointed to something beyond itself.

you yourselves know - The Gospels are replete with miracles no one could deny. The

case is much like that in Acts 4:16. Many of those in the audience had knowledge of

Jesus・works, or were themselves among the blessed. It was as Nicodemus said in John

3, "We know that you are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that

you do, except God be with him."

BARNES, "Ye men of Israel - Descendants of Israel or Jacob, that is, Jews. Peter proceeds now to the third part of his argument, to show that Jesus Christ had been raised up; that the scene which had occurred was in accordance with his promise, was proof of his resurrection, and of his exaltation to be the Messiah; and that, therefore, they should repent for their great sin in having put their own Messiah to death.

A man approved of God - A man who was shown or demonstrated to have the approbation of God, or to have been sent by him.

By miracles, and wonders, and signs - The first of these words properly means the displays of power which Jesus made; the second, the unusual or remarkable events which attended him, as suited to excite wonder or amazement; the third, the sights or proofs that he was from God. Together, they denote the array or series of remarkable works - raising the dead, healing the sick, etc., which showed that Jesus was sent from God. The proof which they furnished that he was from God was this, that He would not confer such power on an impostor, and that therefore Jesus was what he pretended to be.

Which God did, by him - The Lord Jesus himself often traced his power to do these things to his commission from the Father, but he did it in such a way as to show that he was closely united to him, Joh_5:19, Joh_5:30. Peter here says that God did these works by Jesus Christ, to show that Jesus was truly sent by him, and that therefore he had the

seal and attestation of God. The same thing Jesus himself said, Joh_5:36, “The work which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.” The great works which God has made in creation, as well as in redemption, he is represented as having done by his Son, Heb_1:2, “By whom also he made the worlds,” Joh_1:3; Col_1:15-19.

In the midst of you - In your own land. It is also probable that many of the persons present had been witnesses of his miracles.

As ye yourselves also know - They knew it either by having witnessed them, or by the evidence which everywhere abounded of the truth that he had performed them. The Jews, even in the time of Christ, did not dare to call his miracles in question, Joh_15:24. While they admitted the miracle, they attempted to trace it to the influence of Beelzebub, Mat_9:34; Mar_3:22. So decided and numerous were the miracles of Jesus, that Peter here appeals to them as having been known by the Jews themselves to have been performed, and with a confidence that even riley could not deny it. On this he proceeds to rear his argument for the truth of his Messiahship.

CLARKE, "A man approved of God - Αποδεδειγµενον, celebrated, famous. The

sense of the verse seems to be this: Jesus of Nazareth, a man sent of God, and celebrated among you by miracles, wonders, and signs; and all these done in such profusion as had never been done by the best of your most accredited prophets. And these signs, etc., were such as demonstrated his Divine mission.

GILL Verse 22. Ye men of Israel hear these words,.... The Arabic version prefaces this

passage with these words, "in those days Peter stood and said unto the people"; as if it

was not on the same day, and the following oration was a new one, and not a continued

discourse with the former; whereas it was delivered at the same time, and is in connection

with what goes before. Only the apostle having finished the vindication of his brethren,

and the whole society, and set that matter in a clear light; and being willing to take this

opportunity of preaching Christ to the Jews, addresses them under another character in a

new form of words, though to the same sense as in Acts 2:14 in order to soften their

minds, and raise their attention, and proceeds to describe the person, the subject of his

following discourse:

Jesus of Nazareth; first by his name Jesus, which the angel gave him before his birth; and

that for this reason, because he is the Saviour of his people from their sins, and which his

name signifies; and next by the place, not where he was born, for that was Bethlehem, but

where he was educated and brought up, and where he lived the greatest part of his life,

Nazareth, a city in Galilee; whence he was so called, generally by way of contempt, and

not so much to distinguish him from any of the same name:

a man approved of God; he was truly and really a man, who in his incarnation assumed a

true body, and a reasonable soul; but he was not a mere man, and much less a common

and ordinary man: he was the famous son of man the Scriptures speak of; the man of

God's right hand, the man his fellow, a great, mighty, and wonderful man: "approved by

God"; or shown, declared, and demonstrated by him, to be sent by him in human nature,

to be the true Messiah and Saviour of the world, who was the chosen of God, loved and

honoured by him, whom he sealed, and bore a testimony to; and that not privately, but

openly and publicly:

among you; in the face of all the people in Jerusalem, and in the temple, and at the time of

public feasts:

by miracles, and wonders, and signs; by dispossessing devils, cleansing lepers, restoring

sight to the blind, causing the deaf to hear, the dumb to speak, and the lame to walk, and

by raising the dead:

which God did by him in the midst of you; not but that he did the miracles himself, as and

the Son of God; but as he was man, God did them, by his human nature, as the

instrument: the meaning is, that his miracles were wrought by a divine power, and not by

a diabolical influence, by Beelzebub the prince of devils, as the Pharisees blasphemously

said of him; and these were done, not in a corner, but in the midst of them:

as ye yourselves also know; for they must be sensible and convicted in their own

consciences, not only that these things were done by him, but that they could not be done

by him, unless God was with him, or he was from God; and so were testimonies both of

the divine approbation of him, and of his deity and Messiahship.

HENRY,"That it was the gift of Christ, and the product and proof of his resurrection and ascension. From this gift of the Holy Ghost, he takes occasion to preach unto them Jesus; and this part of his sermon he introduces with another solemn preface (Act_2:22): “You men of Israel, hear these words. It is a mercy that you are within hearing of them, and it is your duty to give heed to them.” Words concerning Christ should be acceptable words to the men of Israel. Here is,

(1.) An abstract of the history of the life of Christ, Act_2:22. He calls him Jesus of Nazareth, because by that name he was generally known, but (which was sufficient to roll away that reproach) he was a man approved of God among you, censured and condemned by men, but approved of God: God testified his approbation of his doctrine by the power he gave him to work miracles: a man marked out by God, so Dr. Hammond reads it; “signalized and made remarkable among you that now hear me. He was sent to you, set up, a glorious light in your land; you yourselves are witnesses how he became famous by miracles, wonders, and signs, works above the power of nature, out of its ordinary course, and contrary to it, which God did by him; that is, which he did by that divine power with which he was clothed, and in which God plainly went along with him; for no man could do such works unless God were with him.” See what a stress Peter lays upon Christ's miracles. [1.] The matter of fact was not to be denied: “They were done in the midst of you, in the midst of your country, your city, your solemn assemblies, as you yourselves also know. You have been eyewitnesses of his miracles; I appeal to yourselves whether you have any thing to object against them or can offer any thing to disprove them.” [2.] The inference from them cannot be disputed; the reasoning is as strong as the evidence; if he did those miracles, certainly God approved him, declared him to be, what he declared himself to be, the Son of God and the Saviour of the world; for the God of truth would never set his seal to a lie.

JAMISON 22-28, "a man approved of God — rather, “authenticated,” “proved,” or

“demonstrated to be from God.”

by miracles ... which God did by him — This is not a low view of our Lord’s miracles, as has been alleged, nor inconsistent with Joh_2:11, but is in strict accordance with His progress from humiliation to glory, and with His own words in Joh_5:19. This view of Christ is here dwelt on to exhibit to the Jews the whole course of Jesus of Nazareth as the ordinance and doing of the God of Israel [Alford].

CALVI, "22. Jesus of 'azareth. Now doth Peter apply unto his purpose the prophecy

of Joel; namely, that the Jews may thereby know that the time of restoring was present;

and that Christ was given them for this purpose. For this promise was no otherwise to be

fulfilled, save only by the coming of the Mediator. And this is the right use of all those

gifts which we have by Christ, whilst that they bring us unto Christ, as unto a fountain.

But he cometh hither by little and little. For he doth not by and by in the beginning affirm

that Jesus was Christ; but he saith only that he was a man sent of God; and that doth he

prove by his miracles. Afterward he addeth, that he rose from death when he was slain.

Whereby it appeareth more certainly and more fully that he was not one of the prophets,

but the very Son of God, who was promised to be the repairer of all things. Let this,

therefore, be the first member, that Jesus of Nazareth was a man approved of God by

manifest testimonies, so that he could not be despised as some base and obscure person.

The old interpreter did not evil 1 translate uJpodedeigmenon approved. And Erasmus is

deceived, who thinketh that he did read it otherwise; and he himself did not express

Luke's mind, when as he translated it given. 2 For, seeing that word doth signify among

the Grecians to show, whereupon the mathematicians also call those arguments whereby

they set a thing, as it were, before a man's eyes, apodeixeiv, or demonstrations, Luke

meant to say, that Jesus came not unknown, and without any testimony or approbation,

but that those miracles which God showed by him served to this end, that he might be

famous and excellent. Therefore he saith that he was showed toward the Jews; because

God would have his Son to be accounted excellent and great among them; as if he should

say, that miracles were not appointed for other nations, but for the Jews, that they might

know that Jesus was sent unto them of God.

By great works. He calleth miracles by these three names. And because God

doth show forth his power in them after a new and unwonted sort, or doth, at

least, procure greater admiration, they are, for good causes, called great works.

3 For we are commonly more moved when any extraordinary thing doth

happen. In which respect they are also called wonders, 4 because they make us

astonished. And for this cause are they called signs, because the Lord will not

have men's minds to stay there, but to be lifted up higher; as they are referred

unto another end. He put in three words, to the end he might the more extol

Christ's miracles, and enforce the people, by his heaping and laying of words

together, to consider the same. Furthermore, he maketh not Christ the chief

author, but only the minister; because, as we have already said, he determined

to go forward by degrees. Notwithstanding, here may a question be asked,

whether miracles do suffice to be a sufficient and just approbation [proof] or

no? Because by this means inchanters might cause their legerdemain 5 to be

believed. I answer, that the juggling casts of Satan do much differ from the

power of God. Christ saith elsewhere, that the kingdom of Antichrist shall be

in wonders, but he addeth by and by, in lying wonders, (2 Thessalonians 2:9.)

if any man object, that we cannot easily discern, because he saith that they

shall have so great color that they shall deceive (if it could be) the very elect; I

answer again, that this error proceedeth only from our own want of wit,

because we are so dull; for God doth show his power manifestly enough.

Therefore, there is sufficient approbation of the doctrine and of the ministry in

the miracles which God doth work, so that we be not blind. And whereas it is

not of sufficient force among the wicked, because they may now and then be

deceived with the false miracles of Satan, this must be imputed unto their own

blindness; but whosoever hath a pure heart, he doth also know God with the

pure eyes of his mind, so often as he doth show himself. Neither can Satan

otherwise delude us, save only when, through the wickedness of our heart, our

judgment is corrupt and our eyes blinded, or at least bleared through our own

slothfulness.

BARCLAY, "Lord And Christ (Acts 2:22-36)

Here is a passage full of the essence of the thought of the early preachers.

(i) It insists that the Cross was no accident. It belonged to the eternal plan of

God (Acts 2:23). Over and over again Acts states this same thing (compare

Acts 3:18; Acts 4:28; Acts 13:29). The thought of Acts safeguards us from

two serious errors in our thinking about the death of Jesus. (a) The Cross is

not a kind of emergency measure flung out by God when everything else had

failed. It is part of God's very life. (b) We must never think that anything Jesus

did changed the attitude of God to men. It was by God Jesus was sent. We

may put it this way--the Cross was a window in time allowing us to see the

suffering love which is eternally in the heart of God.

(ii) Acts insists that this in no way lessens the crime of those who crucified

Jesus. Every mention of the crucifixion in Acts is instinct with a feeling of

shuddering horror at the crime it was (compare Acts 2:23; Acts 3:13; Acts

4:10; Acts 5:30). Apart from anything else, the crucifixion shows supremely

how horrifyingly sin can behave.

(iii) Acts is out to prove that the sufferings and death of Christ were the

fulfillment of prophecy. The earliest preachers had to do that. To the Jew the

idea of a crucified Messiah was incredible. Their law said, "A hanged man is

accursed by God" (Deuteronomy 21:23). To the orthodox Jew the Cross made

it completely impossible that Jesus could be the Messiah. The early preachers

answered, "If you would only read your scriptures rightly you would see that

all was foretold."

(iv) Acts stresses the resurrection as the final proof that Jesus was indeed

God's Chosen One. Acts has been called The Gospel of the Resurrection. To

the early Church the resurrection was all-important. We must remember this--

without the resurrection there would have been no Christian Church at all.

When the disciples preached the centrality of the resurrection they were

arguing from experience. After the Cross they were bewildered, broken men,

with their dream gone and their lives shattered. It was the resurrection which

changed all that and turned them from cowards into heroes. It is one of the

tragedies of the Church that so often the preaching of the resurrection is

confined to Easter time. Every Sunday is the Lord's Day and every Lord's Day

should be kept as resurrection day. In the Eastern Church on Easter day, when

two people meet, one says, "The Lord is risen"; and the other answers, "He is

risen indeed!" A Christian should never forget that he lives and walks with a

Risen Lord.

COFFMAN, "It is significant, as McGarvey taught, that: "By the three terms,

works ... wonders ... signs, Peter does not mean three classes of actions; but he

uses the three terms to describe the same phenomena."[32] All of Christ's

deeds were "mighty works," for only the power of God in himself could have

done them; they were "wonders," because all who beheld them marveled; and

they were "signs" in that, properly viewed, they attested the oneness of Jesus

with the Father in heaven. Thus, in a single sentence Peter summarized the

countless miracles of the four-year ministry of our Lord.

ENDNOTE:

[32] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 29.

ELLICOTT, "(22) Jesus of Nazareth.—We hardly estimate, as we read them,

the boldness implied in the utterance of that Name. Barely seven weeks had

passed since He who bore it had died the death of a slave and of a robber. The

speaker himself had denied all knowledge of Him of whom he now spoke.

A man approved of God.—The verb is used in its older English sense, as

proved, or pointed out, not as we now use the word, as meeting with the

approval of God.

Miracles and wonders and signs.—Better, mighty works . . . The words are

three synonyms, expressing different aspects of the same facts, rather than a

classification of phenomena. The leading thought, in the first word, is the

power displayed in the act; in the second, the marvel of it as a portent: in the

third, its character as a token or note of something beyond itself.

23This man was handed over to you by God's set

purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the

help of wicked men,[d] put him to death by

nailing him to the cross.

WITESS LEE

n 2:23 we see that the Lord’s death was according to God’s determined counsel and

foreknowledge: “This man, delivered up by the determined counsel and

foreknowledge of God, you, through the hand of lawless men, nailed to the cross and

killed.” This determined counsel must be a counsel held by the Trinity before the

foundation of the world (1 Pet. 1:20; Rev. 13:8). This indicates that the Lord’s

crucifixion was not an accident in human history, but a purposeful fulfillment of the

divine counsel determined by the Triune God.

Christ’s death was also according to the foreknowledge of God. Christ was

foreordained, prepared, by God to be His redeeming Lamb (John 1:29) for His elect

according to His foreknowledge before the foundation of the world (1 Pet. 1:20).

This was done according to God’s eternal purpose and plan, not accidentally.

Hence, in the eternal view of God, from the foundation of the world, that is, the fall

of man as a part of the world, Christ was slain (Rev. 13:8).

We have seen that the divine Trinity held a counsel concerning the death of Christ.

In that counsel it was determined that the second of the Trinity would become a

man and die on the cross. Therefore, the Lord’s crucifixion, which was according to

the foreknowledge of the Triune God, was the result of a determination made by the

Trinity in an eternal counsel. Therefore, instead of being an accident, the Lord’s

crucifixion took place according to the eternal determination of the Triune God.

Acts 2:23 says that through the hand of lawless men the Lord Jesus was nailed to

the cross and killed. These lawless men included Judas Iscariot (Luke 22:3-6), chief

priests, officers of the temple, elders (Luke 22:52-53), the high priest and the Jewish

Sanhedrin (Luke 22:54, 66-71), Pilate, Herod, and the Roman soldiers (Luke 23:1-

25)—mainly the Jewish religionists with their deputies and the Gentile politicians

with their subordinates. This indicates that Jesus was killed by all mankind.

Acts 2:23 says that the Lord Jesus was nailed to the cross. The Jewish death penalty

was by stoning (Lev. 20:2, 27; 24:23; Deut. 13:10; 17:5). Crucifixion was a heathen

practice (Ezra 6:11), adopted by the Romans for the execution of slaves and heinous

criminals only. The crucifixion of the Lord Jesus was not only a fulfillment of the

Old Testament (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13; um. 21:8-9), but also of the Lord’s own

word concerning the mode of His death (John 3:14; 8:28; 12:32), which could not

have been fulfilled by stoning. It was of God’s sovereignty that not long before the

Lord Jesus was put to death the Roman Empire made the law that criminals

sentenced to death were to be crucified. It was by this kind of death that the Lord

was executed.

UNKNOWN,"V. 23 - this Jesus...delivered up - Further evidence that God had planned

to redeem man, and counted the cost to do so. Consider what light this sheds on the

"scandal of the cross": it was God痴 plan! For God, the events of the cross were the

means of the reconciliation of the world. It was only to the minds of men out of tune with

God that the cross was a scandal.

lawless men - Probably the Romans, but could well mean men with no restraints, such as

the Jewish leaders or Pilate; whose only restraint was what worked for them personally.

Jesus・death was not a matter of helplessness: God foreknew it; but men were still guilty

of it, because they, with power of personal judgment willed it to be so. The crowds

shouted to Pilate, "Crucify him (Jesus)." They accepted blame for his blood, Matthew

27:25.

BARNES, "Him, being delivered - bκδοτον ekdoton. This word, delivered, is used

commonly of those who are surrendered or delivered into the hands of enemies or adversaries. It means that Jesus was surrendered, or given up to his enemies by those who should have been his protectors. Thus, he was delivered to the chief priests, Mar_10:33. Pilate released Barabbas, and delivered Jesus to their will, Mar_15:15; Luk_23:25. He was delivered unto the Gentiles, Luk_18:32; the chief priests delivered him to Pilate, Mat_27:2; and Pilate delivered him to be crucified, Mat_27:26; Joh_19:16. In this manner was the death of Jesus accomplished, by being surrendered from one tribunal to another, and one demand of his countrymen to another, until they succeeded in procuring his death. It may also be implied here that he was given or surrendered by God Himself to the hands of people. Thus, he is represented to have been given by God, Joh_3:16; 1Jo_4:9-10. The Syriac translates this, “Him, who was destined to this by the foreknowledge and will of God, you delivered into the hands of wicked men,” etc. The Arabic, “Him, delivered to you by the hands of the wicked, you received, and after you had mocked him you slew him.”

By the determinate counsel - The word translated “determinate” - τc��dρίσµένY tē�

hōrismenē - mean, properly, “what is defined, marked out, or bounded; as, to mark out or

define the boundary of a field,” etc. See Rom_1:1, Rom_1:4. In Act_10:42, it is translated “ordained of God”; denoting His purpose that it should be so, that is, that Jesus should be the Judge of quick and dead; Luk_22:22, “The Son of man goeth as it is determined of him,” that is, as God has purposed or determined beforehand that he should go; Act_11:29, “The disciples ...determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judea,” that is, they resolved or purposed beforehand to do it; Act_17:26, “God ...‘hath determined’ the times before appointed and fixed,” etc. In all these places there is the idea of a purpose, intention, or plan implying intention, and marking out or fixing the boundaries to some future action or evens. The word implies that the death of Jesus was resolved by God before it took place. And this truth is established by all the predictions made in the Old Testament, and by the Saviour himself. God was not compelled to give up his Son. There was no claim on him for it. He had a right, therefore, to determine when and how it should be done. The fact, moreover, that this was predicted, shows that

it was fixed or resolved on. No event can be foretold, evidently, unless it be certain that it will take place. The event, therefore, must in some way be fixed or resolved on beforehand,

Counsel - βουλή boulē. This word properly denotes “purpose, decree, will.” It

expresses the act of the mind in willing, or the purpose or design which is formed. Here it means the purpose or will of God; it was his plan or decree that Jesus should be

delivered: Act_4:28, “For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel f�βουλή�σου hē�

boulē�sou determined before to be done”; Eph_1:11, “Who worketh all things after the

counsel of his own will”; Heb_6:17, “God willing ...to show ...the immutability of his counsel.” See Act_20:27; 1Co_4:5; Luk_23:51. The word here, therefore, proves that Jesus was delivered by the deliberate purpose of God; that it was according to his previous intention and design. The reason why this was insisted on by Peter was that he might convince the Jews that Jesus was not delivered by weakness, or because he was unable to rescue himself. Such an opinion would have been inconsistent with the belief that he was the Messiah. It was important, then, to assert the dignity of Jesus, and to show that his death was in accordance with the fixed design of God, and therefore that it did not interfere in the least with his claims to be the Messiah. The same thing our Saviour has himself expressly affirmed, Joh_19:10-11; Joh_10:18; Mat_26:53.

Foreknowledge - This word denotes “the seeing beforehand of an event yet to take place.” It implies:

1. Omniscience; and,

2. That the event is fixed and certain.

To foresee a contingent event, that is, to foresee that an event will take place when it may or may not take place, is an absurdity. Foreknowledge, therefore, implies that for some reason the event will certainly take place. What that reason As, however, God is represented in the Scriptures as purposing or determining future events; as they could not be foreseen by him unless he had so determined, so the word sometimes is used in the sense of determining beforehand, or as synonymous with decreeing, Rom_8:29; Rom_11:2. In this place the word is used to denote that the delivering up of Jesus was something more than a bare or naked decree. It implies that God did it according to his foresight of what would be the best time, place, and manner of its being done. It was not the result merely of will; it was will directed by a wise foreknowledge of what would be best. And this is the case with all the decrees of God. It follows from this that the conduct of the Jews was foreknown. God was not disappointed in anything respecting their treatment of his Son, nor will he be disappointed in any of the actions of people. Notwithstanding the wickedness of the world, his counsel shall stand, and he will do all his pleasure, Isa_46:10.

Ye have taken - See Mat_26:57. Ye Jews have taken. It is possible that some were present on this occasion who had been personally concerned in taking Jesus, and many who had joined in the cry, “Crucify him, Luk_23:18-21. It was, at any rate, the act of the Jewish people by which this had been done. This was a striking instance of the fidelity of that preaching which says, as Nathan did to David, “Thou art the man!” Peter, once so timid that he denied his Lord, now charged this atrocious crime to his countrymen, regardless of their anger and his own danger. He did not deal in general accusations, but brought the charges home, and declared that they were the people who had been concerned in this amazing crime. No preaching can be successful that does not charge to people their personal guilt, and that does not fearlessly proclaim their ruin and danger.

By wicked hands - Greek: “through or by the hands of the lawless or wicked.” This

refers, doubtless, to Pilate and the Roman soldiers, through whose instrumentality this had been done. The reasons for supposing that this is the true interpretation of the passage are these:

(1) The Jews had not the power of inflicting death themselves.

(2) The term used here, “wicked,” Dνόµων anomōn, is not applicable to the Jews, but to

the Romans. It properly means lawless, or those who had not the Law, and is often applied to the pagan, Rom_2:12, Rom_2:14; 1Co_9:21.

(3) The punishment which was inflicted was a Roman punishment.

(4) It was a matter of fact that the Jews, though they had condemned him, yet had not put him to death themselves, but had demanded it of the Romans. But, though they had employed the Romans to do it, still they were the prime movers in the deed; they had plotted, and compassed, and demanded his death, and they were, therefore, not the less guilty. The maxim of the common law and of common sense is, “He who does a deed by the instrumentality of another is responsible for it.” It was from no merit of the Jews that they had not put him to death themselves. It was simply because the power was taken away from them.

Have crucified - Greek: “Having affixed him to the cross, ye have put him to death.” Peter here charges the crime fully on them. Their guilt was not diminished because they had employed others to do it. From this we may remark:

1. That this was one of the most amazing and awful crimes that could be charged to any people. It was malice, and treason, and hatred, and murder combined. Nor was it any common murder. It was their own Messiah whom they had put to death; the hope of their fathers; he who had been long promised by God, and the prospect of whose coming had so long cheered and animated the nation. They had now imbrued their hands in his blood, and stood charged with the awful crime of having murdered the Prince of Peace.

2. It is no mitigation of guilt that we do it by the instrumentality of others. It is often, if not always, a deepening and extending of the crime.

3. We have here a striking and clear instance of the doctrine that the decrees of God do not interfere with the free agency of people. This event was certainly determined beforehand. Nothing is clearer than this. It is here expressly asserted; and it had been foretold with undeviating certainty by the prophets. God had, for wise and gracious purposes, purposed or decreed in his own mind that his Son should die at the time and in the manner in which he did; for all the circumstances of his death, as well as of his birth and his life, were foretold; and yet in this the Jews and the Romans never supposed or alleged that they were compelled or cramped in what they did. They did what they chose. If in this case the decrees of God were not inconsistent with human freedom, neither can they be in any case. Between those decrees and the freedom of man there is no inconsistency, unless it could be shown - what never can be that God compels people to act contrary to their own will. In such a case there could be no freedom. But that is not the case with regard to the decrees of God. An act is what it is in itself; it can be contemplated and measured by itself. That it was foreseen, foreknown, or purposed does not alter its nature, anymore than it does that it be remembered after it is performed. The memory of what we have done does not destroy our freedom. “Our own purposes” in relation to our conduct do not destroy our freedom; nor can the purposes or designs of any other being violate one free moral action, unless he compels us to do a thing against our will.

4. We have here a proof that the decrees of God do not take away the moral character of an action. It does not prove that an action is innocent if it is shown that it is a part of

the wise plan of God to permit it, Never was there a more atrocious crime than the crucifixion of the Son of God; and yet it was determined on in the divine counsels. So with all the deeds of human guilt. The purpose of God to permit them does not destroy their nature or make them innocent. They are what they are in themselves. The purpose of God does not change their character; and if it is right to push them in fact, they will be punished. If it is right for God to punish them, it was right to resolve to do it. The sinner must answer for his sins, not for the plans of his Maker; nor can he take shelter in the day of wrath against what he deserves in the plea that God has determined future events. If any people could have done it, it would have been those whom Peter addressed; yet neither he nor they felt that their guilt was in the least diminished by the fact that Jesus was “delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.”

5. If this event was predetermined; if that act of amazing wickedness, when the Son of God was put to death, was fixed by the determinate counsel of God, then all the events leading to it, and the circumstances attending it, were also a part of the decree. The one could not be determined without the other.

6. If that event was determined, then others may also be consistently with human freedom and responsibility. There can be no deed of wickedness that will surpass that of crucifying the Son of God, and if the acts of his murderers were a part of the wise counsel of God, then on the same principle are we to suppose that all events are under his direction, and ordered by a purpose infinitely wise and good.

7. If the Jews could not take shelter from the charge of wickedness under the plea that it was foreordained, then no stoners can do it. This was as clear a case as can ever occur; and yet the apostle did not intimate that an excuse or mitigation for their sin could be pled from this cause. This case, therefore, meets all the excuses of sinners from this plea, and proves that those excuses will not avail them or save them in the day of judgment.

CLARKE, "Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel - Bp. Pearce paraphrases the words thus: Him having been given forth; i.e. sent into the world, and manifested by being made flesh, and dwelling among you, as it is said in Joh_1:14; see also Act_4:28.

Kypke contends that εκδοτον, delivered, does not refer to God, but to Judas the traitor

“the Jews received Jesus, delivered up to them by Judas; the immutable counsel of God so permitting.”

By the determinate counsel, dρισµενY�βουλY; that counsel of God which defined the

time, place, and circumstance, according (προγνωσει) to his foreknowledge, which

always saw what was the most proper time and place for the manifestation and crucifixion of his Son; so that there was nothing casual in these things, God having determined that the salvation of a lost world should be brought about in this way; and neither the Jews nor Romans had any power here, but what was given to them from above. It was necessary to show the Jews that it was not through Christ’s weakness or inability to defend himself that he was taken; nor was it through their malice merely that he was slain; for God had determined long before, from the foundation of the world, Rev_13:8, to give his Son a sacrifice for sin; and the treachery of Judas, and the malice of the Jews were only the incidental means by which the great counsel of God was fulfilled: the counsel of God intending the sacrifice, but never ordering that it should be brought about by such wretched means. This was permitted; the other was decreed. See the observations at the end of this chapter.

By wicked hands have crucified and slain - I think this refers to the Romans, and not to the Jews; the former being the agents, to execute the evil purposes of the latter. It is well known that the Jews acknowledged that they had no power to put our Lord to death, Joh_18:31, and it is as well known that the punishment of the cross was

not a Jewish, but a Roman, punishment: hence we may infer that by δια�χειρων�ανοµων,

by the hands of the wicked, the Romans are meant, being called ανοµοι, without law,

because they had no revelation from God; whereas the others had what was emphatically

termed ��νοµος�του�Θεου, the law of God, by which they professed to regulate their

worship and their conduct. It was the Jews, therefore, who caused our Lord to be crucified by the hands of the heathen Romans.

GILL Verse 23. Him being delivered,.... By himself, according to his own will, for he

gave, or delivered himself for his people; and by his Father, who spared him not, but

delivered him up for us all; and by Judas, one of his disciples, who, for a sum of money,

delivered him into the hands of the Jews; and by them he was delivered up to Pilate, the

Roman governor; and by him back again to the Jews, and to the soldiers, to crucify him:

and all this

by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God; God not only foreknew that it

would be, but determined that it should be, who does all things after the counsel of his

own will; and this for the salvation of his people, and for the glorifying of his divine

perfections: though this fixed resolution, settled purpose, and wise determination of God,

did not in the least excuse the sin of Judas in betraying him, or of Pilate in condemning

him, or of the Jews in crucifying him; nor did it at all infringe the liberty of their wills in

acting, who did what they did, not by force, but voluntarily:

ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain; they took him in the garden,

and bound him, and had him first before the high priest, then before Pilate, the Roman

governor, and cried out with one voice, in a most vehement manner, for the crucifying of

him, which, at their importunity, was granted, though no fault was found in him; and

therefore are justly charged with slaying, or murdering him.

HENRY," An account of his death and sufferings which they were witness of also but a few weeks ago; and this was the greatest miracle of all, that a man approved of God should thus seem to be abandoned of him; and a man thus approved among the people, and in the midst of them, should be thus abandoned by them too. But both these mysteries are here explained (Act_2:23), and his death considered, [1.] As God's act; and in him it was an act of wonderful grace and wisdom. He delivered him to death; not only permitted him to be put to death, but gave him up, devoted him: this is explained Rom_8:32, He delivered him up for us all. And yet he was approved of God, and there was nothing in this that signified the disapproving of him; for it was done by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, in infinite wisdom, and for holy ends, which Christ himself concurred in, and in the means leading to them. Thus divine justice must be satisfied, sinners saved, God and man brought together again, and Christ himself glorified. It was not only according to the will of God, but according to the counsel of his will, that he suffered and died; according to an eternal counsel, which could not be altered. This reconciled him to the cross: Father, thy will be done; and Father, glorify

thy name; let thy purpose take effect, and let the great end of it be attained. [2.] As the people's act; and in them it was an act of prodigious sin and folly; it was fighting against God to persecute one whom he approved as the darling of heaven; and fighting against their own mercies to persecute one that was the greatest blessing of this earth. Neither God's designing it from eternity, nor his bringing good out of it to eternity, would in the least excuse their sin; for it was their voluntary act and deed, from a principle morally evil, and therefore “they were wicked hands with which you have crucified and slainhim.” It is probable that some of those were here present who had cried, Crucify him, crucify him, or had been otherwise aiding and abetting in the murder; and Peter knew it. However, it was justly looked upon as a national act, because done both by the vote of the great council and by the voice of the great crowd. It is a rule, Refertur ad universos quod publice fit per majorem paretm - That which is done publicly by the greater part we attribute to all. He charges it particularly on them as parts of the nation on which it would be visited, the more effectually to bring them to faith and repentance, because that was the only way to distinguish themselves from the guilty and discharge themselves from the guilt.

JAMISON, "determinate counsel and foreknowledge — God’s fixed plan and perfect foresight of all the steps involved in it.

ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain — How strikingly is the criminality of Christ’s murderers here presented in harmony with the eternal purpose to surrender Him into their hands!

CALVIN, "23. Him have ye slain. He maketh mention of the death of Christ

for this cause chiefly, that the resurrection might the more assuredly be

believed. It was a thing full well known among the Jews that Christ was

crucified. Therefore, in that he rose again, it is a great and wonderful token of

his Divine power. In the mean season, to the end he may prick their

consciences with the feeling of sin, he saith that they slew him; not that they

crucified him with their own hands, but because the people, with one voice,

desired to have him put to death. And although many of the hearers unto

whom he speaketh did not consent unto that wicked and ungodly cruelty, yet

doth he justly impute the same to the nation; because all of them had defiled

themselves either with their silence, or else through their carelessness. Neither

hath the cloak and color 6 of ignorance any place, forasmuch as he was

showed before of God. This guiltiness, therefore, under which he bringeth

them, is a preparation unto repentance.

By the determinate counsel. He removeth a stumbling-block; because it

seemeth, at the first blush, to be a thing very inconvenient, [unaccountable,]

that that man whom God had so greatly adorned, being afterward laid open to

all manner of mocking, doth suffer so reproachful a death. Therefore, because

the cross of Christ doth commonly use to trouble us at the first sight, for this

cause Peter declareth that he suffered nothing by chance, or because he wanted

power to deliver himself, but because it was so determined (and appointed) by

God. For this knowledge alone, that the death of Christ was ordained by the

eternal counsel of God, did cut off all occasion of foolish and wicked

cogitation's, and did prevent all offenses which might otherwise be conceived.

For we must know this, that God doth decree nothing in vain or rashly;

whereupon it followeth that there was just cause for which he would have

Christ to suffer. The same knowledge of God's providence is a step to consider

the end and fruit of Christ's death. For this meeteth us by and by in the counsel

of God, that the just was delivered 7 for our sins, and that his blood was the

price of our death.

And here is a notable place touching the providence of God, that we may

know that as well our life as our death is governed by it. Luke intreateth,

indeed, of Christ; but in his person we have a mirror, which doth represent

unto us the universal providence of God, which doth stretch itself throughout

the whole world; yet doth it specially shine unto us who are the members of

Christ. Luke setteth down two things in this place, the foreknowledge and the

decree of God. And although the foreknowledge of God is former in order,

(because God doth first see what he will determine, before he doth indeed

determine the same,) yet doth he put the same after the counsel and decree of

God, to the end we may know that God would nothing, neither appointed

anything, save that which he had long before directed to his [its] end. For men

do oftentimes rashly decree many things, because they decree them suddenly.

Therefore, to the end Peter may teach that the counsel of God is not without

reason, he coupleth also therewithal his foreknowledge. Now, we must

distinguish these two, and so much the more diligently, because many are

deceived in this point. For passing over the counsel of God, wherewith he doth

(guide and) govern the whole world, they catch at his bare foreknowledge.

Thence cometh that common distinction, that although God doth foresee all

things, yet doth he lay no necessity upon his creatures. And, indeed, it is true

that God doth know this thing or that thing before, for this cause, because it

shall come to pass; but as we see that Peter doth teach that God did not only

foresee that which befell Christ, but it was decreed by him. And hence must be

gathered a general doctrine; because God doth no less show his providence in

governing the whole world, than in ordaining and appointing the death of

Christ. Therefore, it belongeth to God not only to know before things to come,

but of his own will to determine what he will have done. This second thing did

Peter declare when he said, that he was delivered by the certain and

determinate counsel of God. Therefore, the foreknowledge of God is another

thing than the will of God, whereby he governeth and ordereth all things.

Some, which are of quicker sight, confess that God doth not only foreknow,

but also govern with his beck what things soever are done in this world.

Nevertheless, they imagine a confused government, as if God did give liberty

to his creatures to follow their own nature. They say that the sun is ruled by

the will of God, because, in giving light to us, he doth his duty, which was

once enjoined him by God. They think that man hath free-will after this sort

left him, because his nature is disposed or inclined unto the free choice of

good and evil. But they which think so do feign that God sitteth idle in

heaven. The Scripture teacheth us far otherwise, which ascribeth unto God a

special government in all things, and in man's actions. Notwithstanding, it is

our duty to ponder and consider to what end it teacheth this; for we must

beware of doting speculations, wherewith we see many carried away. The

Scripture will exercise our faith, that we may know that we are defended by

the hand of God, lest we be subject to the injuries of Satan and the wicked. It

is good for us to embrace this one thing; neither did Peter mean anything else

in this place. Yea, we have an example set before us in Christ, whereby we

may learn to be wise with sobriety. For it is out of question, that his flesh was

subject to corruption, according to nature. But the providence of God did set

the same free. If any man ask, whether the bones of Christ could be broken or

no? it is not to be denied, that they were subject to breaking naturally, yet

could there no bone be broken, because God had so appointed and determined,

(John 19:36.) By this example (I say) we are taught so to give the chiefest

room to God's providence, that we keep ourselves within our bounds, and that

we thrust not ourselves rashly and indiscreetly into the secrets of God, whither

our eyesight doth not pierce.

By the hands of the wicked. Because Peter seemeth to grant that the wicked

did obey God, hereupon followeth two absurdities; 8 the one, either that God

is the author of evil, or that men do not sin, what wickedness soever they

commit. I answer, concerning the second, that the wicked do nothing less than

obey God, howsoever they do execute that which God hath determined with

himself. For obedience springeth from a voluntary affection; and we know that

the wicked have a far other purpose. Again, no man obeyeth God save he

which knoweth his will. Therefore, obedience dependeth upon the knowledge

of God's will. Furthermore, God hath revealed unto us his will in the law;

wherefore, those men 9 do obey God, who do that alone which is agreeable to

the law of God; and, again, which submit themselves willingly to his

government. We see no such thing in all the wicked, whom God doth drive

hither and thither, they themselves being ignorant. No man, therefore, will say

that they are excusable under this color, because they obey God; forasmuch as

both the will of God must be sought in his law, and they, so much as in them

lieth, do 10 to resist God. As touching the other point, I deny that God is the

author of evil; because there is a certain noting of a wicked affection in this

word. For the wicked deed is esteemed according to the end whereat a man

aimeth. When men commit theft or murder, they offend 11 for this cause,

because they are thieves or murderers; and in theft and murder there is a

wicked purpose. God, who useth their wickedness, is to be placed in the

higher degree. For he hath respect unto a far other thing, because he will

chastise the one, and exercise the patience of the other; and so he doth never

decline from his nature, that is, from perfect righteousness. So that, whereas

Christ was delivered by the hands of wicked men, whereas he was crucified, it

came to pass by the appointment and ordinance of God. But treason, which is

of itself wicked, and murder, which hath in it so great wickedness, must not be

thought to be the works of God.

COFFMAN, "n these verses and the one preceding them, there are four

statements, two of which required no proof, the latter being: (1) that God had

approved Jesus Christ among them by mighty deeds, and (2) that they had by

the hands of lawless men crucified him.

Lawless ... McGarvey thought this refers to the Romans, that is, men without

the law; and, although true that the Romans were so used by the leaders of

Israel in crucifying Christ, we believe that much more is intended. Vine

pointed out the word here is the same as that describing the man of sin (2

Thessalonians 2:4), where "The thought is not simply that of doing what is

unlawful, but of flagrant defiance of the known will of God."[33] The "lawless

men," therefore, were not merely the Romans, but the religious leaders of

Israel who violated every conceivable kind of law in their ruthless

determination to accomplish the death of Jesus. How great was the courage of

Peter to charge such men publicly, as he did here, and at a time so soon

following their dastardly crime.

The other two of the four statements required proof, these being: (3) that it

was included in the purpose and foreknowledge of God that Jesus should so

suffer, and (4) that God had raised him from the dead. Peter at once presented

formal, dogmatic and conclusive proof of both of these. That it was God's

purpose and with his permission that Jesus suffered, he proved from the Old

Testament (Acts 2:25-28); and that God had indeed raised Jesus from the

dead, he would prove by appealing to the witnesses of it, as well as by

pointing out the clear prophecy of it.

It was not possible that he should be holden of it ... The master thesis of the

Bible is that God runs a just universe; and if Jesus had remained in the grave,

that would have been the end of any such proposition. That is why it was

impossible for death to have triumphed over Jesus by retaining his body in the

grave.

ENDNOTE:

[33] W. E. Vine, op. cit., p. 317.

COKE, "Acts 2:23. Him, being delivered, &c.— The word εκδοτον, rendered

being delivered, signifies one given or surrendered up into the hands of an

enemy; and St. Luke intimates by it the free and gracious donation of God the

Father, whereby he delivered up his only begotten Son for the redemption of

mankind. By wicked hands the Romans are meant, who were the immediate

agents in the crucifixion of Christ, yet were only the instruments of the Jewish

rage and cruelty in what they did. Heylin renders the verse rather more clearly

thus: Him (who was given up by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge

of God) you have taken and put to death upon the cross, by the hands of

wicked men. Pyle would read, Him, who by the determinate counsel—of God,

was given [to you as a Saviour], ye have taken, and crucified. See ch. Acts

4:27-28.

ELLICOTT, "(23) By the determinate counsel and fore knowledge of God.—

The adjective meets us again in St. Peter’s speech in Acts 10:42; the word for

“foreknowledge in his Epistle (1 Peter 1:2), and there only in the New

Testament. The coincidence is not without its force as bearing on the

genuineness both of the speech and of the letter. It has now become the habit

of the Apostle’s mind to trace the working of a divine purpose, which men,

even when they are most bent on thwarting it, are unconsciously fulfilling. In

Acts 1:16, he had seen that purpose in the treachery of Judas; he sees it now in

the malignant injustice of priests and people.

Ye have taken. . . .—Better, ye took, and by lawless hands crucified and slew.

Stress is laid on the priests having used the hands of one who was “without

law” (1 Corinthians 9:21), a heathen ruler, to inflict the doom which they

dared not inflict themselves.

24But God raised him from the dead, freeing him

from the agony of death, because it was

impossible for death to keep its hold on him.

morgan says agony is birth pangs and out of the death of Christ came new birth.

What a parodox that death became the mother of life, for out of the tomb which

became the womb came the new life in Christ. He rose from death and had the

power then to conquor death. Death became the place of the birth of its own demise.

Out of death came the life that is everlasting, and so this makes death a necessity in

the total plan of God. It is the last enemy but it plays a major role in giving birth to

life in God's plan.

BARNES, "Whom God hath raised up - This was the main point, in this part of his argument, which Peter wished to establish. He could not but admit that the Messiah had been in an ignominious manner put to death. But he now shows them that God had also raised him up; had thus given his attestation to his doctrine; and had sent down his Spirit according to the promise which the Lord Jesus made before his death.

Having loosed the pains of death - The word “loosed,” λύσας lusas, is opposed to

bind, and is properly applied to a cord, or to anything which is bound. See Mat_21:2; Mar_1:7. Hence, it means to free or to liberate, Luk_13:16; 1Co_7:27. It is used in this sense here; though the idea of untying or loosing a band is retained, because the word translated “pains” often means “a cord or band.”

The pains of death - gδGνας�το/�θάνατου ōdinas�tou�thanatou. The word translated

“pains” denotes properly “the extreme sufferings of parturition, and then any severe or excruciating pangs.” Hence, it is applied also to death, as being a state of extreme suffering. A very frequent meaning of the Hebrew word of which this is the translation is cord or band. This, perhaps, was the original idea of the word; and the Hebrews expressed any extreme agony under the idea of bands or cords closely drawn, binding and constricting the limbs, and producing severe pain. Thus, death was represented under this image of a band that confined people, that pressed closely on them, that

prevented escape, and produced severe suffering. For this use of the word חבל chebel, see

Psa_119:61; Isa_66:7; Jer_22:23; Hos_13:13. It is applied to death, Psa_18:5, “The snares of death prevented me”; corresponding to the word “sorrows” in the previous part of the verse; Psa_116:3, “The sorrows of death compassed me, and the pains of hell (Hades or Sheol, the cords or pains that were binding me down to the grave) gat held on me.”

We are not to infer from this that our Lord suffered anything after death. It means simply that he could not be held by the grave, but that God loosed the bonds which had held him there; that he now set him free who had been encompassed by these pains or bonds until they had brought him down to the grave. Pain, mighty pain, will encompass us all like the constrictions and bindings of a cord which we cannot loose, and will fasten our limbs and bodies in the grave. Those bands begin to be thrown around us in early life, and they are drawn closer and closer, until we lie panting under the stricture on a bed of pain, and then are still and immovable in the grave - subdued in a manner not a little resembling the mortal agonies of the tiger in the convolutions of the boa constrictor, or like Laocoon and his sons in the folds of the serpents from the Island of Tenedos.

It was not possible - This does not refer to any natural impossibility, or to any inherent efficacy or power in the body of Jesus itself, but simply means that “in the circumstances of the case such an event could not be.” Why it could not be he proceeds at once to show. It could not be consistently with the promises of the Scriptures. Jesus was the “Prince of life” Act_3:15; he had life in himself Joh_1:4; Joh_5:26; he had power to lay down his life and to take it again Jdg_10:18; and it was indispensable that he should rise. He came, also, that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death that is, the devil Heb_2:14; and as it was his purpose to gain this victory, he could not be defeated in it by being confined to the grave.

CLARKE, "Whom God hath raised up - For, as God alone gave him up to death, so God alone raised him up from death.

Having loosed the pains of death - It is generally supposed that this expression means, the dissolving of those bonds or obligations by which those who enter into the region of the dead are detained there till the day of the resurrection; and this is supposed

to be the meaning of חבלי�מות chebley�maveth, in Psa_116:3, or חבלי�שאול chebley�sheol, in

Psa_18:5, and in 2Sa_22:6, to which, as a parallel, this place has been referred. But

Kypke has sufficiently proved that λυειν�τας�ωδινας�θανατου, signifies rather to Remove

the pains or sufferings of death. So Lucian, De Conscr. Hist., says, “a copious sweat to

some, ελυσε�τον�πυρετον, Removes or carries off the fever.” So Strabo, speaking of the

balm of Jericho, says, λυει�δε�κεφαλαλγιας�θαυµαστως - it wonderfully Removes the

headache, etc. That Christ did suffer the pains and sorrows of death in his passion is sufficiently evident; but that these were all removed, previously to his crucifixion, is fully

seen in that calm manner in which he met it, with all its attendant terrors. If we take the words as commonly understood, they mean that it was impossible for the Prince of Life to be left in the empire of death: his resurrection, therefore, was a necessary consequence of his own Divine power.

Instead of θανατου, of death, the Codex Bezae, Syriac, Coptic, and Vulgate, have kιδου,

of hell, or the place of separate spirits; and perhaps it was on no better authority than this various reading, supported but by slender evidence, that, He descended into hell, became an article in what is called the apostles’ creed. And on this article many a popish legend has been builded, to the discredit of sober sense and true religion.

GILL Verse 24. Whom God raised up,.... From the dead; for though his life was taken

away by men, he was raised to life again by God the Father, to whom the resurrection of

Christ is generally ascribed, though not to the exclusion of Christ himself, and the blessed

Spirit; and this being what the apostles were witnesses of, and the Jews endeavoured to

stifle as much as they could, it being the sign Christ gave them of the truth of his

Messiahship; and this being also a fundamental article of the Christian religion, the

apostle enlarges upon it:

having loosed the pains of death; this may be understood either of what Christ had done

for his people by dying for them; he had abolished death; he had took away its sting, and

delivered them from the curse of it, having fulfilled the law, satisfied justice, and made

full atonement for their sin; so that though they die, death is not a penal evil to them, nor

shall they always continue under the power of it: or of what God did in raising Christ

from the dead; he delivered him from the power of death, by which he was held in the

grave, and which is expressed by a word which signifies pains and sorrows, even those of

a woman in travail; which though he felt not now, he had gone through them; his low

state in the grave was the effect of them; and these are said to be loosed when he was

raised up, he being so entirely delivered from them, as that they should never come upon

him more: and it is to be observed, that the same word in the Hebrew language, and so in

the Chaldee and Syriac, in which Peter might speak, signifies both cords and sorrows; and

we often read in Talmudic and Rabbinic {w} writings, of xyvm lv wlbx, "the sorrows," or

"pains" of the Messiah. The death which Christ died, being the death of the cross, was a

very painful one: he endured great pains in his body, smote with rods, and buffeted with

the hands of men; by being scourged and whipped, and having a crown of thorns platted

on his head; but the pains of the cross were still greater, his body being stretched out upon

it, and fastened to it by nails drove through his hands and feet, and then reared up, and

jogged in the earth, where he hung upon it in extreme agony, till he expired: and these

pains he endured, not through want of love to him in his Father, who, as he does not

willingly grieve and afflict the children of men, so neither would he his own Son; nor was

it on account of any sin of his, for he knew none, nor did he commit any; but he was

wounded, and bruised, and endured these sorrows and pains for the sins of his people: as

he was their surety, it was necessary he should die, because the wages of sin is death, and

the justice and veracity of God required it; and it was proper he should die the painful

death of the cross, because of the types and prophecies of it, and chiefly that he might

appear to be made a curse for his people: though more must be meant here than the pains

he endured in the moment and article of death, since they ceased at death, and he was

then freed from them; whereas the text speaks of a loosing him from them at his

resurrection, which supposes that they continued on him until that time; wherefore these

pains of death also signify the power and dominion death had over him, and continued to

have over him in the grave; with the cords of which he was bound and held, till he was

loosed by raising him from the dead.

Dr. Goodwin is of opinion, that these words are to be understood, not of the resurrection

of Christ's body from the pains and power of death, but at least chiefly of the recovery

and revival of his soul from those spiritual agonies which attended him, and from which

he was loosed and delivered before his death; and the rather, because as before observed,

at death the pains of it are gone, the bitterness of it is over, and nothing is felt in the

grave; besides, the word here used signifies the pains of a woman in travail, 1

Thessalonians 5:3 and seems best to agree with those inward sufferings of Christ, which

are called "the travail of his soul," Isaiah 53:11 and which, like the pangs of a woman in

labour, came upon him gradually: four or five days before his death he said, "now is my

soul troubled," John 12:27. The night in which he was betrayed, when he came into the

garden, he began to be sorrowful, and heavy, and sore amazed; and at length he breaks

out, and says, "my soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death," Matthew 26:37 and

after some time his pains increase, and being in agony, he prayed more earnestly, and his

sweat was, as it were, great drops of blood, Luke 22:44 but the sharpest pains were yet to

come, and which he endured when on the cross, being forsaken by his God and Father,

Matthew 27:46 and which arose partly from the sins of his people, the filth and guilt of

them laid upon him, which must be very distressing to his pure and holy mind; and from

the wrath of God, and curse of the law, which he sustained as the punishment for them;

and it was necessary he should bear the whole punishment due to sin, the punishment of

sense, or feel the wrath of God, and the strokes of divine justice, and the punishment of

loss, or be deprived of the divine presence; and these sorrows of soul may be well called

the pains or sorrows of death, because they were unto death, and issued in it; a corporeal

death followed upon them; and when he was in the garden, and on the cross, it might be

truly said, "the sorrows of death compassed him about," Psalm 18:4 but from these he

was loosed just before his death, when he said, "it is finished"; the darkness was over; the

light of God's countenance broke out upon him; he heard his cry, and helped him in the

acceptable time, in the day of salvation; his anger, as a judge, was turned away from him,

justice being entirely satisfied; and therefore it was not possible he should be held any

longer with these cords and sorrows of death; for he being an infinite person, was able to

bear all the wrath of God at once, which was due to sin, and therefore did not bring on

him an eternal death as on the wicked, he sustaining and satisfying for all at once; and,

like another Samson, broke asunder these cords like threads, and was loosed from them.

But after all, though these are very great truths; yet, according to the order in which these

words lie, being placed after the account of the crucifixion and death of Christ, they seem

rather to respect the resurrection of his body, and the loosing it from the power and

dominion of death; and in such sense as never to return to it, or any more feel the pains of

it. One of Stephen's copies reads, "the pains of Hades," or the invisible state; and the

Vulgate Latin version, "the pains of hell"; as in Psalm 18:5 where the grave is meant; and

the Syriac version, lwavd hylbx, "the pains," or "cords of the grave": the word "cords," or

"bands," best agrees with the word "loosing"; and the Ethiopic version renders it, "the

bands of death."

Because it was not possible he should be holden of it: of death, and under the power of it;

partly, because of the power and dignity of his person, as the Son of God, he being still

the Prince of life, and who by dying abolished death, and him that had the power of it;

and partly, because as the surety of his people, he had made full satisfaction for sin, and

had brought in an everlasting righteousness, and therefore ought in justice to be

discharged, and detained a prisoner no longer; as also because of the prophecies of the

Old Testament concerning his resurrection, which must be fulfilled, as follows.

HENRY, "An attestation of his resurrection, which effectually wiped away the reproach of his death (Act_2:24): Whom God raised up; the same that delivered him to death delivers him from death, and thereby gave a higher approbation of him than he had done by any other of the signs and wonders wrought by him, or by all put together. This therefore he insists most largely upon.

[1.] He describes his resurrection: God loosed the pains of death, because it was

impossible that he should be holden of it; ōdinas - the sorrows of death; the word is used

for travailing pains, and some think it signifies the trouble and agony of his soul, in which it was exceedingly sorrowful, even to the death; from these pains and sorrows of soul, this travail of soul, the Father loosed him when at his death he said, It is finished.Thus Dr. Godwin understands it: “Those terrors which made Heman's soul lie like the slain (Psa_88:5, Psa_88:15) had hold of Christ; but he was too strong for them, and broke through them; this was the resurrection of his soul (and it is a great thing to bring a soul out of the depths of spiritual agonies); this was not leaving his soul in hell; as that which follows, that he should not see corruption, speaks of the resurrection of his body; and both together make up the great resurrection.” Dr. Lightfoot gives another sense of this: “Having dissolved the pains of death, in reference to all that believe in him, God raised up Christ, and by his resurrection broke all the power of death, and destroyed its pangs upon his own people. He has abolished death, has altered the property of it, and, because it was not possible that he should be long holden of it, it is not possible that they should be for ever holden.” But most refer this to the resurrection of Christ's body. And death (says Mr. Baxter) is by privation a penal state, though not dolorous by positive evil. But Dr. Hammond shows that the Septuagint, and from them the apostle here, uses the word for cords and bands (as Psa_18:4), to which the metaphor of loosing and being

held best agrees. Christ was imprisoned for our debt, was thrown into the bands of death; but, divine justice being satisfied, it was not possible he should be detained there, either by right or by force; for he had life in himself, and in his own power, and had conquered the prince of death.

JAMISON,"was not possible he should be holden of it — Glorious saying! It was indeed impossible that “the Living One” should remain “among the dead” (Luk_24:5); but here, the impossibility seems to refer to the prophetic assurance that He should not see corruption.

UNKNOWN, "V. 24 - God raised him up - Note how clear and bold Peter is, within a

city where the facts he preached could be easily checked. Only an abundance of evidence

could have changed the apostles into such forthright witnesses. Consider also how much

Peter痴 ideas about Jesus・death and resurrection had changed since he first heard about

it.

pangs of death - Probably best understood as referring to that which held Jesus (i.e.,

death), which is likened to the trap or snare that held whatever it caught. In Jesus・case,

God planned that death would not triumph over Him who is Life. As Peter said, "It was

not possible" for death to hold Jesus. Obviously the resurrection provided the best

perspective from which to view the crucifixion, then or now.

CALVIN, "24. Having loosed the sorrows of death. By the sorrows of death I

understand some farther thing than the bodily sense or feeling. For those

which duly consider the nature of death, because they hear that it is the curse

of God, must needs conceive that God is angry in death. Hence cometh

marvelous horror, wherein there is greater misery than in death itself.

Furthermore, Christ died upon this occasion that he might take upon him our

guiltiness. That inward fear of conscience, which made him so afraid that he

sweat blood when he presented himself before the throne and tribunal seat of

God, did more vex him, and brought upon him greater horror, than all the

torments of the flesh. And whereas Peter saith, that Christ did wrestle with

such sorrows, and doth also declare that he had the victory, by this it cometh

to pass that the faithful ought not now to be afraid of death; for death hath not

the like quality now which was in Adam; because by the victory of Christ the

curse is swallowed up, (1 Corinthians 15:54.) We feel, indeed, yet the pricking

of sorrows, but such as do not wholly wound us, whilst that we hold up the

buckler of faith against them. He added a reason, because it was impossible

that Christ should be oppressed by death, who is the author of life.

COKE, "Acts 2:24. Whom God hath raised up, &c.— "But be it known unto

you, that God hath abundantly vindicated the honour of this his dear Son,

whom you have thus infamously abused, and hath borne a most glorious

testimony to his innocence, truth, and dignity; for it is he whom "God hath

raised up from the dead, by a miraculous effort of his divine power, having

loosedthe bonds in which he lay, when the pains of death had done their work

upon him; as indeed it was impossible that he should finally be held under the

power of it."

ELLICOTT, "(24) Whom God hath raised up.—It is probable enough that

some rumours of the Resurrection had found their way among the people, and

had been met by the counter-statement of which we read in Matthew 28:11-

15; but this was the first public witness, borne by one who was ready to seal

his testimony with his blood, to the stupendous fact.

Having loosed the pains of death.—The word for “pains” is the same as that

for “sorrows” in Matthew 24:8 : literally, travail-pangs. The phrase was not

uncommon in the LXX. version, but was apparently a mistranslation of the

Hebrew for “cords,” or “bands,” of death. If we take the Greek word in its full

meaning, the Resurrection is thought of as a new birth as from the womb of

the grave.

Because it was not possible. . . .—The moral impossibility was, we may say,

two-fold. The work of the Son of Man could not have ended in a failure and

death which would have given the lie to all that He had asserted of Himself.

Its issue could not run counter to the prophecies which had implied with more

or less clearness a victory over death. The latter, as the sequel shows, was the

thought prominent in St. Peter’s mind.

25David said about him:

" 'I saw the Lord always before me.

Because he is at my right hand,

I will not be shaken.

BARNES, "For Daniel speaketh ... - This doctrine that the Messiah must rise from the dead Peter proceeds to prove by a quotation from the Old Testament. This passage is taken from Psa_16:8-11. It is made from the Greek version of the Septuagint, with only one slight and unimportant change. Nor is there any material change, as will be seen, from the Hebrew. In what sense this Psalm can be applied to Christ will be seen after we have examined the expressions which Peter alleges.

I foresaw the Lord - This is an unhappy translation. To foresee the Lord always before us conveys no idea, though it may be a literal translation of the passage. The word means “to foresee,” and then “to see before us,” that is, “as present with us, to regard as being near.” It thus implies “to put confidence in one; to rely on him, or expect assistance from him.” This is its meaning here. The Hebrew is, “I expected, or waited

for.” It thus expresses the petition of one who is helpless and dependent, who waits for help from God. It is often thus used in the Old Testament.

Always before my face - As being always present to help me, and to deliver me out of all my troubles.

He is on my right hand - To be at hand is to be near to afford help. The right hand is mentioned because that was the place of dignity and honor. David did not design simply to say that he was near to help him, but that he had the place of honor, the highest place in his affections, Psa_109:31. In our dependence on God we should exalt him. We should not merely regard him as our help, but should at the same time give him the highest place in our affections.

That I should not be moved - That is, that no great evil or calamity should happen to me; that I may stand firm. The phrase denotes “to sink into calamities, or to fall into the power of enemies,” Psa_62:2, Psa_62:6; Psa_46:6. This expresses the confidence of one who is in danger of great calamities, and who puts his trust in the help of God alone.

CLARKE, "For David speaketh concerning him - The quotation here is made from Psa_16:8-11 (note), which contains a most remarkable prophecy concerning Christ, every word of which applies to him, and to him exclusively. See the notes there.

GILL Verse 25. For David speaketh concerning him,.... The Messiah, the Lord Jesus

Christ, in Psalm 16:8. The whole psalm belongs to the Messiah, and everything

concerning the person in it agrees with him; such as his trust in God, Psalm 16:1 as he

was man and Mediator; his very great regard to the saints, and delight in them, Psalm

16:2 his disregard to others who were hastening after another God, or another Saviour,

whose sacrifices, as an high priest, he would not offer up, nor make intercession for them,

Psalm 16:4 his exceeding great satisfaction in having the God of Israel for his portion,

and in having his lot cast among his peculiar people, who were a delightful inheritance to

him, Psalm 16:5 his thankfulness for advice and direction in the time of his sorrows and

sufferings; and his dependence on the almighty power of God to support and protect him,

Psalm 16:7 and the joy and comfort he was filled with in the view of his resurrection

from the dead, and his enjoyment of the heavenly glory, Psalm 16:9,

I foresaw the Lord always before my face; Christ always had Jehovah in view throughout

the whole of his life; and in his last moments he had respect unto the glory of his

perfections, as the ultimate end of his obedience and sufferings; and to his purposes,

council, and covenant, which were to be accomplished by him; and to his will and

command in preaching the Gospel, working miracles, going about to do good, in obeying

the precept, and bearing the penalty of the law; as well as to his promises, and his power

to assist, support, and preserve him, as man and Mediator:

for he is on my right hand; which expresses his nearness to him, his presence with him,

his readiness to assist him, and his protection of him; as if he was his second that stood by

him, to take his part, and, if need be, to take up his cause, and defend him from his

enemies; see Psalm 109:31

that I should not be moved; from his station, place, and duty; from the cause he was

engaged in, so as to relinquish it; or with the fear of men, or fury of devils, or wrath of

God, whilst he was doing and suffering, according to the will of God.

HENRY 25-28, "He showed it to be the fulfilling of the scripture, and, because the scripture had said that he must rise again before he saw corruption, therefore it was impossible that he should be holden by death and the grave; for David speaks of his being raised, so it comes in, Act_2:25. The scripture he refers to is that of David (Psa_16:8-11), which, though in part applicable to David as a saint, yet refers chiefly to Jesus Christ, of whom David was a type. Here is,

First, The text quoted at large (Act_2:25-28), for it was all fulfilled in him, and shows us, 1. The constant regard that our Lord Jesus had to his Father in his whole undertaking: I foresaw the Lord before me continually. He set before him his Father's glory as his end in all-for he saw that his sufferings would redound abundantly to the honour of God, and would issue in his own joy; these were set before him, and these he had an eye to, in all he did and suffered; and with the prospect of these he was borne up and carried on, Joh_13:31, Joh_13:32; Joh_17:4, Joh_17:5. 2. The assurance he had of his Father's presence and power going along with him: “He is on my right hand, the hand of action, strengthening, guiding, and upholding that, that I should not be moved,nor driven off from my undertaking, notwithstanding the hardships I must undergo.” This was an article of the covenant of redemption (Psa_89:21), With him my hand shall be established, my arm also shall strengthen him; and therefore he is confident the work shall not miscarry in his hand. If God be at our right hand we shall not be moved. 3. The cheerfulness with which our Lord Jesus went on in his work, notwithstanding the sorrows he was to pass through: “Being satisfied that I shall not be moved, but the good pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in my hand, therefore doth my heart rejoice, and my tongue is glad, and the thought of my sorrow is as nothing to me.” Note, It was a constant pleasure to our Lord Jesus to look to the end of his work, and to be sure that the issue would be glorious; so well pleased is he with his undertaking that it does his heart good to think how the issue would answer the design. He rejoiced in spirit, Luk_10:21. My tongue was glad. In the psalm it is, My glory rejoiceth; which intimates that our tongue is our glory, the faculty of speaking is an honour to us, and never more so than when it is employed in praising God. Christ's tongue was glad, for when he was just entering upon his sufferings, in the close of his last supper, he sang a hymn. 4. The pleasing prospect he had of the happy issue of his death and sufferings; it was this that carried him, not only with courage, but with cheerfulness, through them; he was putting off the body, but my flesh shall rest; the grave shall be to the body, while it lies there, a

bed of repose, and hope shall give it a sweet repose; it shall rest in hope, hoti, that thou wilt no leave my soul in hell; what follows is the matter of his hope, or assurance rather, (1.) That the soul shall not continue in a state of separation from the body; for, besides that this is some uneasiness to a human soul made for its body, it would be the continuance of death's triumph over him who was in truth a conqueror over death: “Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell” (in hades, in the invisible state, so hades properly signifies); “but, though thou suffer it for a time to remove thither, and to remain there, yet thou wilt remand it; thou wilt not leave it there, as thou dost the souls of other men.” (2.) That the body shall lie but a little while in the grave: Thou wilt not suffer thy Holy One to see corruption; the body shall not continue dead so long as to begin to putrefy or become noisome; and therefore it must return to life on or before the third day after its death. Christ was God's Holy One, sanctified and set apart to his service in the work of redemption; he must die, for he must be consecrated by his own blood; but he must not see corruption, for his death was to be unto God of a sweet smelling savour. This was typified by the law concerning the sacrifice, that no part of the flesh of the sacrifice

which was to be eaten should be kept till the third day, for fear it should see corruption and begin to putrefy, Lev_7:15-18. (3.) That his death and sufferings should be, not to him only, but to all his, an inlet to a blessed immortality: “Thou has made known to me the ways of life, and by me made them known to the world, and laid them open.” When the Father gave to the Son to have life in himself, a power to lay down his life and to take it again, then he showed him the way of life, both to and fro; the gates of death were open to him and the doors of the shadow of death (Job_38:17), to pass and repass through them, as his occasion led him, for man's redemption. (4.) That all his sorrows and sufferings should end in perfect and perpetual felicity: Thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. The reward set before him was joy, a fulness of joy, and that in God's countenance, in the countenance he gave to his undertaking, and to all those, for his sake, that should believe in him. The smiles with which the Father received him, when, at his ascension, he was brought to the Ancient of days, filled him with joy unspeakable, and that is the joy of our Lord, into which all his shall enter, and in which they shall be for ever happy.

CALVIN, "25. The resurrection, 1 which was both declared and witnessed by certain and

evident testimonies, and which might also have been gathered out of the continual

doctrine of the prophets, was to be proved to the Jews as some new and strange thing.

And no marvel. For we see that although Christ had oftentimes beat 2 the same into his

disciples' heads, yet did they profit but a little. And yet did they retain certain principles

of true doctrine, which might have made a way for them unto the knowledge of Christ, as

we shall see by and by. Therefore, because the gift of the Spirit was a fruit of the

resurrection of Christ, he proveth by the testimony of David that Christ must needs have

risen again, that the Jews may thereby know that he was the author of the gift. For he

taketh it as a thing which all men grant, that he was raised up from death, that he may live

not for himself, but for his. Now we see Peter's drift; that that ought to seem no strange

thing which was foretold so long before; and that Jesus is also Christ, because David did

prophecy of him, as of the tied of the Church.

First of all, we must see whether this place ought altogether to be understood

of Christ, as Peter affirmeth; that done, if there be any thing in the words

worth noting, we will in order discuss it. Peter denieth that that agreeth with

David which is said in this place:

"Thou shalt not suffer thine Holy One to see corruption," (Psalm 16:10,)

because David's carcass was corrupt in the grave. It seemeth at the first blush

to be but a light argument. For a man might easily object, that the word is not

to be urged, forasmuch as David meant nothing else, save only to exempt

himself from destruction. Therefore, howsoever corruption did touch him, yet

doth that no whit hinder but that he may easily say that he was safe from the

danger thereof, because he knew that the Lord would deliver him. Yea, it

seemeth to be a repetition of the former sentence, according to the common

custom of the Hebrew tongue. Which if it be so, the sense shall be plain, that

God will not suffer him to be oppressed with death, or that death should

consume him. And this interpretation is confirmed by that where we read hell,

it is in Hebrew lo, (seol;) where we read corruption, there it is txs, (shachat;)

both these words do signify the grave. By this means David should say twice,

that he shall be delivered from death by the grace of God. Finally, he saith the

same thing in this place, which he saith, (Psalm 49:15,) "God shall redeem my

soul from the hand of hell." Like as, on the other side, when he speaketh of the

reprobates, he is wont to take "going down into the grave" for destruction. I

answer briefly, that there is some greater thing expressed in this place than the

common redemption or deliverance of the godly. David, indeed, doth promise

that God will be his eternal deliverer, as well in life as in death. Neither had he

been much better for this, to have been once delivered from one danger, unless

he had hoped that he should be safe even unto the end through God's

protection; but he speaketh of such safety as is not common. 3 And surely the

words do sound that he speaketh of some new and singular privilege. Admit I

grant that it is a repetition, and that there is all one thing uttered in these two

members, "Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell;" and, "Thou shalt not suffer

me to see corruption;" yet do I deny that it is simply to be understood that God

will deliver his Holy One from eternal destruction; for freedom from

corruption is promised by name. Neither do I pass for this, that txs (shachat)

doth signify the grave, as lo, (seol,) which is put in the former member. For

although I do not stand nor contend about the words, yet must we respect the

etymology. Therefore, forasmuch as the grave is called txs, (shachat) because

it doth corrupt man's body with rottenness, it is not to be doubted but that

David meant to note that quality. Therefore, the place is not so much

expressed by this word, as the condition of rotting. So that the sense is, that

God will not suffer him of whom the Psalm speaketh "to rot or corrupt in the

grave." And forasmuch as David was not free from this necessity, it followeth

that the prophecy was neither truly nor perfectly fulfilled in him.

And that the Psalm ought altogether to be expounded of Christ, the thing itself

doth prove. For seeing that David was one of the sons of Adam, he could not

escape that universal condition and estate of mankind,

"Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return,"

(Genesis 3:19;)

the grave standeth open (I say) for all the children of Adam, that it may

swallow them up, and consume them; so that no man can exempt himself from

corruption. So that, beholding ourselves apart from Christ, we see the grave

prepared for us, which threateneth to us corruption. Wherefore, if David be

separated from Christ, that shall not belong to him which is here said, that he

shall be preserved from the grave. Therefore, when he boasteth that he shall be

free from the grave, as touching corruption, without all doubt he placeth

himself in the body of Christ, wherein death was overcome, and the kingdom

thereof abolished. But and if David do promise himself exempting from the

grave in another respect, save only so far forth as he is a member of Christ,

hereby it appeareth that this freedom must begin at Christ as at the head. What

man soever shall be of sound judgment shall easily know that this is a good

argument. God did put all mankind under corruption; therefore, David,

inasmuch as he was of the number of men, could not be free from the same.

Neither is it to be doubted, but that the Jews, before whom this sermon was

made, forasmuch as without question that maxim was of force amongst them,

that they were to hope for the restoring of things at the hands of Christ alone,

did the more readily stay themselves upon 4 the words of Peter; because they

saw that that could no otherwise be which the words do import, unless they

should apply it to the Messias. For they were not come to that point of

impudence, at least those of whom mention is made here, that they durst cavil

in matters which were evident; for God had then offered unto his disciples

those which were godly hearers, and apt to be taught. They sought the Messias

in the Old Testament. They knew that David was a figure of him. There was

amongst them some religion and reverence of the Scriptures then; but now the

impudency of all the whole nation almost is desperate. Howsoever they be

urged, they wrench themselves out one way or other. 5 Where there is no way

to escape, yet they break through; although they be overcome, yet will they not

yield; neither is it to be doubted but that this their shameless forwardness is a

punishment for their ungodliness. But let us return unto Peter's sermon.

Seeing that David doth not only affirm that God also shall be his deliverer, but

doth express a singular way and means; namely, that he shall not be subject to

the corruption of the grave, Peter doth for good causes gather, that that doth

not properly appertain unto him, for that his body was corrupt in the grave.

And now, because this had been somewhat hard to be spoken among the Jews,

he mollifieth the hardness with a circumlocution. For he doth not flatly deny

in one word that that was fulfilled indeed in David, but doth only by the way 6

signify so much unto them, because he lieth consumed in the grave after the

common custom of other men. And David did so prophesy of Christ, that he

did both apply this consolation unto himself privately, and' also extend the

same unto the whole body of the Church. For that which is sound and perfect

in the head is spread abroad, being afterward poured out into all the members.

Neither is it to be denied but that David spoke of himself in this place; yet

only so far forth as he beheld himself in Christ, as in the mirror of life. First,

he hath respect unto Christ; after that he turneth his eyes toward himself, and

others the faithful. So that we have a general doctrine prescribed unto us in

this plate, concerning the nature of faith, the spiritual joy of conscience: and

the hope of eternal deliverance.

I saw. We must hold this principle. If we will have God present with us, we

must set him before our eyes; and that before he do appear; for the prospect of

faith pierceth far further than unto the present experience. Therefore faith hath

this property, to set God always before it as a guide in all dangers and

confused matters. For there is nothing that doth so much hold us up, as when

we know that God is present with us; as the opinion of his absence doth often

cast us down, and at length quite discourage us. David addeth, That he took

not heed in vain unto the direction of God. "He is (saith he) at my right hand;"

whereby he doth signify that we need not to fear lest we be deceived, 7 when

as we set him before us at present; for we shall always feel his help most

ready. Faith, in hoping for the help of God, ought to prevent and overgo 8 all

experience, and whatsoever is perceived by the sense; but so soon as it shall

give this glory to God, that it doth behold him in his Word, although he be

absent, and so, consequently, invisible, it shall be overcome with the effect of

the thing. For the measure of faith is not able to comprehend the infinite

greatness of the power and goodness of God. He draweth a similitude from

those which, when they will underprop the weak, or strengthen the fearful, do

join themselves unto their side. Not to be moved, is not to be thrown down

from their degree, but to remain firm in their estate; like as also Psalm 46:5,

God is in the midst of it, therefore shall it not be moved. For although it come

to pass sometimes that the godly be sore shaken, yet because they come to

themselves again, they are said to continue firm. Therefore, there is no cause

why they should be afraid of falling, who are upholden by the help of God.

Like as, on the other side, those which place their strength anywhere else save

only in God, they shall be like to fall at every blast of wind, but at any mean

wind of temptation they shall fall to the ground.

COFFMAN, "These words are from Psalms 16:8ff. In this Psalm, David spoke

in the first person, as if the glorious promises concerned himself; but actually

they regarded great David's greater Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, there having

been no fulfillment whatever of these words in the instance of King David

himself. It is absolutely certain that this passage from the Old Testament

prophesies a resurrection of someone, for it is only by a resurrection that one

could descend into the grave (Hades) and not see corruption. The inspired

Peter correctly applied it to the resurrection of Christ, an event the Lord had

repeatedly, at least four different times, prophesied and elaborated for the

Twelve. The proof absolute that this Psalm cannot refer to David was present

for all to see right there in Jerusalem in the tomb of David which still

enshrined his dust.

COKE, "Acts 2:25. For David speaketh concerning him, &c.— It is plain that

the phrase εις αυτον here signifies of or concerning him: the particle has the

same import, Ephesians 5:32. Elsner upon this place, and Gataker upon the

title of Marcus Antoninus's book, which is εις εαυτον, concerning himself,

have produced many places from some of the Greek authors, where the

preposition εις is understood in the same sense. Mr. Jeffery, in his True

Grounds, p. 121 observes from this text, and lays great stress upon it every

where, "That the apostle does not make Davidto speak these things first of

himself, and then of the Messiah only in a secondary sense, but quotes them as

referring to Christ alone." The passages here quoted in the words of the LXX.

are something different from the Hebrew, but the sense is much the same; for

which we refer to the notes on Psalms 16.

UNKNOWN, "V. 25 - This is one of the interesting usages of prophecy Peter makes,

through the leading of the Holy Spirit. The text (from Psalms 16), as Peter explained in

verses 29-31, could not refer to David, and to no one else but the Messiah. In it, the

Messiah had expressed the confidence that a resurrection (in his case) would occur, since

he, being raised, would enjoy the presence of God after the resurrection from the state of

the dead.

In this connection, consider how often Jesus spoke of his resurrection. The

epistles show what the resurrection means to us as they elaborate upon the

meaning and application of Jesus’ death in our behalf.

ELLICOTT, "(25) For David speaketh concerning him.—More accurately, in

reference to Him—i.e., in words which extended to Him. Reading Psalms 16

without this interpretation, it seems as if it spoke only of the confidence of the

writer that he would be himself delivered from the grave and death. Some

interpreters confine that confidence to a temporal deliverance; some extend it

to the thought of immortality, or even of a resurrection. But Peter had been

taught, both by his Lord and by the Spirit, that all such hopes extend beyond

themselves—that the ideal of victory after suffering, no less than that of the

righteous sufferer, was realised in Christ. The fact of the Resurrection had

given a new meaning to prophecies which would not, of themselves, have

suggested it, but which were incomplete without it.

He is on my right hand.—The Psalmist thought of the Eternal as the warrior

thinks of him who, in the conflict of battle, extends his shield over the

comrade who is on the left hand, and so guards him from attack. When the

Son of Man is said to sit on the right hand of God (Psalms 110:1; Matthew

26:64) the imagery is different, and brings before us the picture of a king

seated on his throne with his heir sitting in the place of honour by his side.

26Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue

rejoices;

my body also will live in hope,

BARNES, "Therefore - Peter ascribes these expressions to the Messiah. The reason why he would exult or rejoice was, that he would be preserved amidst the sorrows that were coming on him, and could look forward to the triumph that awaited him. Thus, Paul says Heb_12:2 that “Jesus ...“for the joy that was set before him,” endured the

cross, despising the shame,” etc. Throughout the New Testament, the shame and sorrow of his sufferings were regarded as connected with his glory and his triumph, Luk_24:26; Phi_2:6-9; Eph_1:20-21. In this our Saviour has left us an example that we should walk in his steps. The prospect of future glory and triumph should sustain us amidst all afflictions, and make us ready, like him, to lie down in even the corruptions of the grave.

Did my heart rejoice - In the Hebrew this is in the prescott tense, “my heart rejoices.” The word “heart” here expresses “the person,” and is the same as saying “I rejoice.” The Hebrews used the different members to express the person. And thus we say, “every soul perished; the vessel had 40 hands; wise heads do not think so; hearts of steel will not flinch,” etc. (Prof. Stuart on Psa_16:1-11). The meaning is, because God is near me in time of calamity, and will support and deliver me, I will not be agitated or fear, but will exult in the prospect of the future, in view of the “joy that is set before me.”

My tongue was glad - Hebrew, My glory or my honor exults. The word is used to denote “majesty, splendor, dignity, honor.” It is also used to express the heart or soul, either because that is the chief source of man’s dignity, or because the word is also expressive of the liver, regarded by the Hebrews as the seat of the affections, Gen_49:6, “Unto their assembly, mine honor,” that is, my soul, or myself, “be not thou united”; Psa_57:8, “Awake up, my glory,” etc.; Psa_108:1, “I will sing ...even with my glory.” This word the Septuagint translated “tongue.” The Arabic and Latin Vulgate have also done the same. Why they thus use the word is not clear. It may be because the tongue, or the gift of speech, was what chiefly contributes to the honor of man, or distinguishes him from the brutal creation. The word “glory” is used expressly for “tongue” in Psa_30:12; “To the end that my glory may sing praise to thee, and not be silent.”

Moreover also - Truly; in addition to this.

My flesh - My body. See Act_2:31; 1Co_5:5. It means here properly the body separate from the soul; the dead body.

Shall rest - Shall rest or repose in the grave, free from corruption.

In hope - In confident expectation of a resurrection. The Hebrew word rather expresses confidence than hope. The passage means, “My body will I commit to the grave, with a confident expectation of the future, that is, with a firm belief that it will not see corruption, but will be raised up.” It thus expresses the feelings of the dying Messiah; the assured confidence which he had that his repose in the grave would not be long, and would certainly come to an end. The death of Christians is also in the New Testament represented as a sleep, and as repose Act_7:60; 1Co_15:6, 1Co_15:18; 1Th_4:13, 1Th_4:15; 2Pe_3:4; and they may also, after the example of their Lord, commit their bodies to the dust, in hope. They will lie in the grave under the assurance of a happy resurrection; and though their bodies, unlike his, will moulder to their native dust, yet this corruptible will put on incorruption, and this mortal will put on immorality, 1Co_15:53.

CLARKE, "And my tongue was glad - In the Hebrew it is ויגל�כבודי vaiyagel�kebodi,

“And my glory was glad:” but the evangelist follows the Septuagint, in reading και�

ηγαλλιασατο�f�γλωσσα�µου, what all the other Greek interpreters in the Hexapla translate

δοξα�µου, my glory. And what is to be understood by glory here! Why the soul, certainly,

and not the tongue; and so some of the best critics interpret the place.

GILL Verse 26. Therefore did my heart rejoice,.... Because that he had always the truth,

faithfulness, and power of God in his view, and the presence and protection of God with

him; and which are sufficient to make the hearts of his people, as well as of him, to

rejoice:

and my tongue was glad: in the Hebrew text it is, "my glory"; and so the Syriac version

renders it here; which Kimchi explains of the soul, because that is the glory of the body;

but our apostle rightly interprets it of the tongue, which is so called, Psalm 30:12 and

Psalm 57:8 and Psalm 108:1 because it is both the glory of man, for that being endowed

with the faculty of speaking, gives him a glory above the brute creatures; and because it is

that by which he glorifies God, by ascribing greatness to him, speaking of his marvellous

works, and singing his praises, as Christ did, in the great congregation, among his

apostles, a little before his death.

Moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope, or "safely"; meaning, that his body should lie

quietly in the grave, as in its resting place from all toil and labour, pains and sorrows, and

be secure from worms, or any corruption. Or this may be understood of his person being

in a quiet, firm, and full hope of the resurrection of the dead, and of eternal life and glory.

CALVIN, "26. For this my heart rejoiced. Joy of the soul, gladness of the

tongue, and quietness of all the whole body, do ensue upon sure hope and

confidence; for unless men be quite past feeling, 9 they must needs be careful

and sorrowful, and so, consequently, miserably tormented, so long as they feel

themselves destitute of the help of God. But that sure trust which we repose in

God doth not only deliver us from carefulness, 10 but doth also replenish our

hearts with wonderful joy (and gladness.) That is the joy which Christ

promised to his disciples should be full in them, and which he testified could

not be taken from them, (John 16:22; 17:13.) He expresseth the greatness of

the joy when he saith, That it cannot be kept in, but that it will break forth into

the gladness of the tongue. 11 dwbk, doth signify, indeed, glory, but it is taken

in that place, as in many others, for the tongue. And so the Grecians have truly

translated the same. The rest of the flesh doth signify the quietness of the

whole man, which we have through the protection of God. Neither is this any

let, because the faithful are continually out of quiet and tremble; for as in the

midst of sorrows they do nevertheless rejoice; so there are no troubles so great

that can break them of their rest. If any man object, that the peace of the

faithful doth consist in the spirit, and that it is not in the flesh: I answer, that

the faithful do rest in body; not that they are free from troubles, but because

they believe that God careth for them wholly, and that not only their soul shall

be safe through his protection, but their body also.

27because you will not abandon me to the grave,

nor will you let your Holy One see decay.

BARNES, "Thou wilt not leave my soul - The word “soul,” with us, means “the thinking, the immortal part of man,” and is applied to it whether existing in connection

with the body or separate from it. The Hebrew word translated “soul” here, נפׁש nephesh,

however, may mean “spirit, mind, life,” and may denote here nothing more than “me” or “myself.” It means, properly, “breath”; then “life,” or “the vital principle, a living being”; then “the soul, the spirit, the thinking part.” Instances where it is put for the individual himself, meaning “me” or “myself” may be seen in Psa_11:1; Psa_35:3, Psa_35:7; Job_9:21. There is no clear instance in which it is applied to the soul in its separate state, or disjoined from the body. In this place it must be explained in part by the meaning of the word hell. If that means grave, then this word probably means “me”; thou wilt not leave me in the grave. The meaning probably is, “Thou wilt not leave me in Sheol, neither,” etc. The word “leave” here means, “Thou wilt not resign me to, or wilt not give me over to it, to be held under its power.”

In hell - - εrς�sδου eis�Hadou. The word “hell,” in English, now commonly denotes

“the place of the future eternal punishment of the wicked.” This sense it has acquired by long usage. It is a Saxon word, derived from helan, “to cover,” and denotes literally “a covered or deep place” (Webster); then “the dark and dismal abode of departed spirits”; and then “the place of torment.” As the word is used now by us, it by no means expresses the force of the original; and if with this idea we read a passage like the one before us, it would convey an erroneous meaning altogether, although formerly the English word perhaps expressed no more than the original. The Greek word “Hades” means literally “a place devoid of light; a dark, obscure abode”; and in Greek writers was applied to the dark and obscure regions where disembodied spirits were supposed to dwell. It occurs only eleven times in the New Testament. In this place it is the translation of the Hebrew

.Sheowl ׁשאול

In Rev_20:13-14, it is connected with death: “And death and hell (Hades) delivered up the dead which were in them”; “And death and hell (Hades) were cast into the lake of fire.” See also Rev_6:8; Rev_1:18, “I have the keys of hell and death.” In 1Co_15:55 it means the grave: “O grave (Hades), where is thy victory?” In Mat_11:23 it means a deep, profound place, opposed to an exalted one; a condition of calamity and degradation, opposed to former great prosperity: “Thou, Capernaum, which art exalted to heaven, shalt be thrust down to hell” (Hades). In Luk_16:23 it is applied to the place where the rich man was after death, in a state of punishment: “In hell (Hades) he lifted up his eyes, being in torments.” In this place it is connected with the idea of suffering, and undoubtedly denotes a place of punishment. The Septuagint has used this word

commonly to translate the word ׁשאול She ̀owl.

Once it is used as a translation of the phrase “the stones of the pit” Isa_14:19; twice to express silence, particularly the silence of the grave Psa_94:17; Psa_115:17; once to express the Hebrew for “the shadow of death” Job_38:17; and sixty times to translate the word Sheol. It is remarkable that it is never used in the Old Testament to denote the

word קבר qeber, which properly denotes “a grave or sepulchre.” The idea which was

conveyed by the word Sheol, or Hades, was not properly a grave or sepulchre, but that dark, unknown state, including the grave, which constituted the dominions of the dead. What idea the Hebrews had of the future world it is now difficult to explain, and is not necessary in the case before us. The word originally denoting simply “the state of the dead, the insatiable demands of the grave,” came at last to be extended in its meaning, in proportion as they received new revelations or formed new opinions about the future world. Perhaps the following may be the process of thought by which the word came to have the special meanings which it is found to have in the Old Testament:

(1) The word “death” and the grave קבר qeber would express the abode of a deceased

body in the earth.

(2) Man has a soul, a thinking principle, and the inquiry must arise, What will be its state? Will it die also? The Hebrews never appear to have believed that. Will it ascend to heaven at once? On that subject they had at first no knowledge. Will it go at once to a place of happiness or of torment? Of that, also, they had no information at first Yet they

supposed it would live; and the word ׁשאול Sheowl expressed just this state - the dark,

unknown regions of the dead; the abode of spirits, whether good or bad; the residence of departed people, whether fixed in a permanent habitation, or whether wandering about. As they were ignorant of the size and spherical structure of the earth, they seem to have supposed this region to be situated in the earth, far below us, and hence, it is put in opposition to heaven, Psa_139:8, “If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there; if I make my bed in hell (Sheol), behold, thou art there”; Amo_9:2. The most common use of the word is, therefore, to express those dark regions, the lower world, the region of ghosts, etc. Instances of this, almost without number, might be given. See a most striking and sublime instance of this in Isa_14:9; “Hell from beneath is moved to meet thee,” etc.; where the assembled dead are represented as being agitated in all their vast regions at the death of the King of Babylon.

(3) The inquiry could not but arise whether all these beings were happy. This point revelation decided; and it was decided in the O d Testament. Yet this word would better express the state of the wicked dead than the righteous. It conveyed the idea of darkness, gloom, wandering; the idea of a sad and unfixed abode, unlike heaven. Hence, the word sometimes expresses the idea of a place of punishment: Psa_9:17, “The wicked shall be turned into hell,” etc.; Pro_15:11; Pro_23:14; Pro_27:20; Job_26:6. While, therefore, the word does not mean properly a grave or a sepulchre, it does mean often “the state of the dead,” without designating whether in happiness or woe, but implying the continued existence of the soul. In this sense it is often used in the Old Testament, where the Hebrew word is Sheol, and the Greek Hades: Gen_37:35, “I will go down into the grave, unto my son, mourning” I will go down to the dead, to death, to my son, still there existing; Gen_42:38; Gen_44:29, “He shall bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave; Num_16:30, Num_16:33; 1Ki_2:6, 1Ki_2:9; etc. etc. in the place before us, therefore, the meaning is simply, thou wilt not leave me among the dead. This conveys all the idea. It does not mean literally the grave or the sepulchre; that relates only to the body. This expression refers to the deceased Messiah. Thou wilt not leave him among the dead; thou wilt raise him up. It is from this passage, perhaps, aided by two others (Rom_10:7, and 1Pe_3:19), that the doctrine originated that Christ “descended,” as it is expressed in the Creed, “into hell”; and many have invented strange opinions about his going among lost spirits. The doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church has been that he went to purgatory, to deliver the spirits confined there. But if the interpretation now given be correct, then it will follow:

(1) That nothing is affirmed here about the destination of the human soul of Christ

after his death. That he went to the region of the dead is implied, but nothing further.

(2) It may be remarked that the Scriptures affirm nothing about the state of his soul in that time which intervened between his death and resurrection. The only intimation which occurs on the subject is such as to leave us to suppose that he was in a state of happiness. To the dying thief he said, “This day shalt thou be with me in paradise.” When Jesus died, he said, “It is finished”; and he doubtless meant by that that his sufferings and toils for man’s redemption were at an end. All suppositions of any toils or pains after his death are fables, and without the slightest warrant in the New Testament.

Thine Holy One - The word in the Hebrew which is translated here “Holy One” properly denotes “One who is tenderly and piously devoted to another,” and corresponds to the expression used in the New Testament, “my beloved Son.” It is also used, as it is here by the Septuagint and by Peter, to denote “One that is holy, that is set apart to God.” In this sense it is applied to Christ, either as being set apart to this office, or as so pure as to make it proper to designate him by way of eminence the Holy One, or the Holy One of God. It is several times used as the wellknown designation of the Messiah: Mar_1:24, “I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God”; Luk_4:34; Act_3:14, “But ye denied the Holy One, and the just,” etc. See also Luk_1:35, “That holy thing that is born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”

To see corruption - To see corruption is to experience it, to be made partakers of it. The Hebrews often expressed the idea of experiencing anything by the use of words pertaining to the senses, as, to taste of death, to see death, etc. Corruption here means

putrefaction in the grave. The word which is used in the Psalm, ׁשחת shachath, is thus

used in Job_17:14, “I have said to corruption, thou art my father,” etc. The Greek word used here properly denotes this. Thus, it is used in Act_13:34-37. This meaning would be properly suggested by the Hebrew word, and thus the ancient versions understood it. The meaning implied in the expression is, that he of whom the Psalm was written should be restored to life again; and this meaning Peter proceeds to show that the words must have.

CLARKE, "Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell - Εις�kιδου, in hades, that is, the

state of separate spirits, or the state of the dead. Hades was a general term among the Greek writers, by which they expressed this state; and this Hades was Tartarus to the wicked, and Elysium to the good. See the explanation of the word in the note on Mat_11:23 (note).

To see corruption - Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return, was a sentence pronounced on man after the fall: therefore this sentence could be executed on none but those who were fallen; but Jesus, being conceived without sin, neither partook of human corruption, nor was involved in the condemnation of fallen human nature; consequently, it was impossible for his body to see corruption; and it could not have undergone the temporary death, to which it was not naturally liable, had it not been for the purpose of making an atonement. It was therefore impossible that the human nature of our Lord could be subject to corruption: for though it was possible that the soul and it might be separated for a time, yet, as it had not sinned, it was not liable to dissolution; and its immortality was the necessary consequence of its being pure from transgression.

GILL Verse 27. Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell,.... This is an apostrophe, or

an address to his Father, who he believed would not leave his soul, as separate from his

body, in Hades, in the invisible world of souls, in the place where the souls of departed

saints are, but would quickly return it to its body, and reunite them; or else, that he would

not leave his dead body, for so vpn sometimes signifies; see Leviticus 19:28 in the grave;

which is no unusual sense of lwav; see Genesis 42:38 that is, so long as to be corrupted

and putrefy, as the next clause shows:

neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. The character of an "Holy One"

well agrees with Christ, both as God, or with respect to his divine nature, holiness being a

perfection in it, and in which he is glorious; and as man, he being holy in his nature,

harmless in his life and conversation: all his doctrines were pure and holy, and so were all

his works; and all his administrations in the discharge of every of his office; and he is the

efficient cause and lain of all the holiness of his people; they are sanctified in him, and by

him, and have all their sanctification from him. The word may be rendered, "thy

merciful," or "bountiful one"; and such Christ is, a merciful, as well as faithful high

priest; and who has shown great compassion both to the bodies and souls of men, and has

been very beneficent and liberal in the distributions of his grace and goodness. Now,

though he died, and was laid in the grave, and buried, yet God would not suffer him to lie

there so long as to be corrupted and putrefied, which is the sense of seeing corruption:

and so the Jews themselves explain the last clause of the preceding verse, in connection

with this, "my flesh shall rest in hope," that no worm or maggot should have power over

it, or corrupt it.

"Seven fathers (they say {x}) dwell in eternal glory, and there is no helwtw hmr, "worm

or maggot," rules over them; and these are they, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and Moses,

and Aaron, and Amram their father; and there are that say also David, as it is said, Psalm

16:1, 'therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth, my flesh also shall rest in hope.'"

And which sense also is mentioned by one of their commentators of note {y}, who thus

paraphrases the words: "whilst I am alive it shall rest safely, for thou wilt deliver me from

all hurt; and in the mystical sense, or according to the Midrash, after death; intimating,

that no maggot or worm should have power over him;" which was not true of David, but

is of the Messiah.

UNKNOWN, "V. 27 - Hades (Hebrew "sheol") - The term really describes, not so

much the actual grave, or the decay of the flesh, but rather the dead in total, all those who

have died, regardless of their actual state. The meaning, then, is that the one David is

quoting expected to be restored to life again, not remain among the dead. Of course, the

apostles were witnesses of this fact, additionally substantiated by Peter痴 argument in

verses 29-31, that David could not have been speaking of himself, the facts being contrary

to it. The Psalmist was then shown to have been speaking of the Messiah who was to

come, and now identified to be Jesus. For us as Christians, knowing that Jesus existed

before the time of the Psalmist (since Jesus is eternal in nature), we can understand that

Jesus through the Psalmist foretold his own death, resurrection, etc.

The Greek word for Hades occurs ten times in the N.T: Matthew 11:23; 16:18; Luke

10:15; 16:23; Acts 2:31; Revelation 1:18; 6:8; 20:13,14 and our text. It is equal to the

O.T. "Sheol". The Greek word for hell occurs in the following places: Matt. 5:22, 29, 30;

10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mark 9:43, 45, 47; Luke 12:5; James 3:6. It is important to note

that we should not read hell in our text, since that gives a misunderstanding of the actual

events. Jesus did not go to hell as we think of it, but rather to Hades which is simply the

place of the dead, inclusive of all the dead.

corruption - To be understood in parallel with Hades, and meant the state/place of the

dead, rather than referring to the physical body, per se.

CALVIN, "27. Because thou shalt not leave. To leave the soul in hell is to

suffer the same to be oppressed with destruction. There be two words used in

this place, both which do signify the grave amongst the Hebricians. Because

lwas, doth signify to require, I suppose it is called lwo, because death is

insatiable; whence also cometh that translation, Hell hath enlarged her soul.

Again, they set open their mouth like hell. And because the latter txs, is

derived and set for corruption, or consumption, that quality is to be

considered, as David meant to note the same. Those things which are disputed

in this place by divers, concerning the descending of Christ into hell, are in my

judgment superfluous; because they are far from the intent and purpose of the

prophet. For the word anima, or soul, doth not so much signify the spirit being

of an immortal essence as the life itself. For when a man is dead, and lieth in

the grave, the grave is said to rule over his life. Whereas the Grecians translate

it holy, it is in Hebrew tox, which doth properly signify meek, or gentle, but

Luke did not much regard this, because it doth not much appertain unto the

present purpose. Furthermore, gentleness and meekness is so often

commended in the faithful, because it behoveth them to imitate and resemble

the nature of their Father.

ELLICOTT, "(27) Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell.—Literally, in Hades.

(See Note on Matthew 11:23.) As interpreted by St. Peter’s words in his

Epistle (1 Peter 3:19), the words conveyed to his mind the thought which has

been embodied in the article of the “Descent into Hell,” or Hades, in the

Apostle’s Creed. The death of Christ was an actual death, and while the body

was laid in the grave, the soul passed into the world of the dead, the Sheol of

the Hebrews, the Hades of the Greeks, to carry on there the redemptive work

which had been begun on earth. (Comp. Acts 13:34-37, and Ephesians 4:9.)

Here again we have an interesting coincidence with St. Peter’s language (1

Peter 3:19), as to the work of Christ in preaching to the “spirits in prison.”

Neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.—The word for

“holy” is different from that commonly so rendered, and conveys the idea of

personal piety and godliness rather than consecration. As the Psalmist used the

words, we may think of them as expressing the confidence that he himself, as

loving, and beloved of, God, would be delivered from destruction, both now

and hereafter. St. Peter had learnt to interpret the words as having received a

higher fulfilment. Christ was, in this sense, as well as in that expressed by the

other word, “the Holy One” of God (Mark 1:24; Luke 4:34). In Hebrews 7:26;

Revelation 15:4; Revelation 16:5, this very word is applied to Christ. The

Hebrew text of Psalms 16:10 presents the various reading of “the holy ones,”

as if referring to the “saints that are upon the earth,” of Acts 2:3. The LXX.,

which St. Peter follows, gives the singular, which is indeed essential to his

argument, and this is also the reading of the Masoretic text. The Greek word

for “corruption” ranges in its meaning from “decay” to “destruction.” The

Hebrew to which it answers is primarily the “pit” of the grave, and not

“corruption,” or “wasting away.”

28You have made known to me the paths of life;

you will fill me with joy in your

presence.'[e]

BARNES, "Thou hast made known ... - The Hebrew is, “Thou wilt make known to me,” etc. In relation to the Messiah, it means, Thou wilt restore me to life.

The ways of life - This properly means the path to life; as we say, the road to preferment or honor; the path to happiness; the highway to ruin, etc. See Pro_7:26-27. It means, thou wilt make known to me life itself, that is, thou wilt restore me to life. The expressions in the Psalm are capable of this interpretation without doing any violence to the text; and if the preceding verses refer to the death and burial of the Messiah, then the natural and proper meaning of this is, that he would be restored to life again.

Thou shalt make me full of joy - This expresses the feelings of the Messiah in view of the favor that would thus be showed him; the resurrection from the dead, and the elevation to the right hand of God. It was this which is represented as sustaining him the prospect of the joy that was before him, in heaven, Heb_12:2; Eph_1:20-22.

With thy countenance - Literally, “with thy face,” that is, in thy presence. The words “countenance” and “presence” mean the same thing, and denote “favor,” or the “honor and happiness” provided by being admitted to the presence of God. The prospect of the honor that would be bestowed on the Messiah was what sustained him. And this proves that the person contemplated in the Psalm expected to be raised from the dead, and exalted to the presence of God. That expectation is now fulfilled, and the Messiah is now filled with joy in his exaltation to the throne of the universe. He has “ascended to his Father and our Father”; he is “seated at the right hand of God”; he has entered on that “joy which was set before him”; he is “crowned with glory and honor”; and “all things are put under his feet.” In view of this, we may remark:

(1) That the Messiah had full and confident expectation that he would rise from the dead. This the Lord Jesus always evinced, and often declared it to his disciples.

(2) If the Saviour rejoiced in view of the glories before him, we should also. We should anticipate with joy an everlasting dwelling in the presence of God, and the high honor of sitting “with him on his throne, as he overcame, and is set down with the Father on his throne.”

(3) The prospect of this should sustain us, as it did him, in the midst of persecution, calamity, and trials. Thy will soon be ended; and if we are his friends, we shall “overcome,” as he did, and be admitted to “the fulness of joy” above, and to the “right hand” of God, “where are pleasures forevermore.”

CLARKE, "Thou hast made known to me the ways of life - That is, the way from the region of death, or state of the dead and separate spirits; so that I shall resume the same body, and live the same kind of life, as I had before I gave up my life for the sin of the world.

GILL,"Thou hast made known to me the ways of life,.... That is, thou hast raised me from the dead. When God raised Christ from the dead, he showed him, or made him to know experimentally the way of life, or the way of the resurrection from death to life; and this path of life, or of the resurrection to an immortal and eternal life, was first shown to Christ, who is the first fruits of them that slept, and the first begotten from the dead,

Thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance; or glorious presence, in which is fulness of joy; which Christ, as man, is in, and fully possessed of, being exalted at the right hand of God, and crowned with glory and honour, and has all the joy that was set before him in his sufferings and death.

CALVIN, "28. Thou hast made known. He meaneth, that he was restored from

death to life by the grace of God. For in that he was, as it were, a man raised

from death to life, he acknowledgeth that it was a great good gift of God. This

was in such sort fulfilled in Christ, that there wanted nothing unto perfection.

As for the members they have their measure. Therefore Christ was far from

corruption, that he may be the first-fruits of those which rise from death, (1

Corinthians 15:23.) We shall follow him in our order at length, but being first

turned into dust, (1 Corinthians 15:42.) That which followeth, that he was

filled with gladness, with the countenance of God, agreeth with that: Show us

thy face, and we shall be safe. And, again, The light of thy countenance is

showed upon us: thou hast put gladness in my heart. For it is only the

pleasantness of God's countenance, which doth not only make us glad, but also

quickens us; again, when the same is turned away, or troubled, we must needs

faint.

JOH PIPER The Gladness of the Risen God

Acts 2:28

Thou hast made known to me the ways of life;

thou wilt make me full of gladness with thy presence.

I begin this morning with three questions for you to answer silently in your own

mind.

g. First, do you want to be happy?

h. Second, do you want your happiness to be partial or full?

i. Third, do you want your happiness to stop or to last as long as you last?

The reason I count these questions worthy of Easter Sunday morning is not just because I

think every person in this room cares about them, but also because these questions are the

rock bottom concerns of the Bible.

Wherever the Bible has had its profoundest effect in people's lives it hasn't been because

of the demands of a new duty but because of the power of a new pleasure. Let me

illustrate what I mean.

John G. Paton was born on May 24, 1824 in Dumfries County, Scotland. His father was a

weaver and had his stocking frames in a room of the house. And his father was godly.

Paton's biographer says that the churchgoing and Bible stories and Shorter Catechism

were "not tasks but pleasures" in the Paton home.

The boy had to quit school when he was 12 to help his father support the

family of eleven children, and when he was 17 he had a deep experience of conversion

that brought all his parents love for Christ home to his own heart.

The call to Christian service became irresistible and Paton worked for ten years works as

a city missionary in Glasgow among the poor children of the slums.

At 32 he accepted the call to missionary service in the New Hebrides in the South Pacific.

In March of 1858 he married Mary Ann Robson, and on April 16 they sailed together for

the cannibal island of Tanna.

In less than a year they had built a little home and Mary had given birth to a son. But on

March 3 of 1859, one year after their marriage, Mary died of the fever, and in three weeks

the infant son died. John Paton buried them alone, and wrote, "But for Jesus. . . I must

have gone mad and died beside that lonely grave."

One of the gifts that Jesus had given him to sustain him in those days were the words his

wife spoke shortly before here death. And right here is where we see the profoundest

effect of Biblical Christianity. She did not murmur against God, or resent her husband

bringing her there. Rather she spoke these incredible words—and you find them again

and again where the Bible has sunk into the heart—"I do not regret leaving home and

friends. If I had it to do over, I would do it with more pleasure, yes, with all my heart."

(FIFTY MISSIONARY HEROES, by Julia Johnston, 1913, p. 153).

Among those who know the Bible best and who have experienced it most deeply, it has

never perted people from the quest for happiness and pleasure. Instead, it has caused

people to get really serious about the quest. It has caused them to ask, "Do I really want to

be happy? Do I want the fullest happiness possible? Do I want my happiness to last for

ever?" In other words, the Bible makes us stop playing games with our happiness. It

makes us serious, even desperate, in our pursuit.

It makes a harried and overworked businessman go away for a few days and sit by the

lake, and look at the sunset and the stars, and ask: "Have I found it? Is this what I am

really after? Does it satisfy? Will it last?"

Jesus Christ never once condemned the quest for happiness. But often he has rebuked us

for taking it so lightly.

Now what does all this have to do with Easter Sunday? Back in January when I first

conceived of this message I saw the connection in a new way, and I want to try to show it

to you.

In Acts 1:3 Luke tells us that "Jesus presented himself alive after his passion by many

proofs, appearing to his apostles during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God."

For forty days he sought to prove to his followers that he really was alive,

j. that his body was new and indestructible,

k. that his death for sinners was validated,

l. that his teaching was true,

m. that his fellowship would be permanent,

n. and that his cause would triumph in the world.

Then Jesus ascended into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God the Father. And

there he will reign until his ransomed people are gathered in from every people and

tongue and tribe and nation. Then the Lord will come a second time in power and great

glory and the dead in Christ will be raised to reign with him for ever and ever.

Then the Book of Acts goes on to show us that for ten days after Jesus had ascended to

heaven the apostles and Jesus' mother and his brothers devoted themselves to prayer in

Jerusalem. During these ten days Peter and the others must have combed the Old

Testament for predictions and explanations of what was happening in these incredible

days, because when the Holy Spirit finally comes upon them with power at the end of

those ten days the apostles are full of Scripture. They explain everything in terms of the

fulfillment of Scripture.

One of the Psalms that Peter evidently pondered deeply goes like this:

Preserve me, O God, for in thee I take refuge.

I say to the LORD, "Thou art my Lord;

I have no good apart from thee."

As for the saints in the land,

they are the noble, in whom is all my delight.

Those who choose another god multiply their sorrows;

their libations of blood I will not pour out,

or take their names upon my lips.

The LORD is my chosen portion and my cup;

thou holdest my lot.

The lines have fallen for me in pleasant places;

yea, I have a goodly heritage.

I bless the LORD who gives me counsel;

in the night also my heart instructs me.

I keep the LORD always before me;

because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved.

Therefore my heart is glad, and my soul rejoices;

my body also dwells secure.

For thou dost not give me up to Sheol,

or let thy godly one see the Pit.

Thou dost show me the path of life;

in thy presence there is fullness of joy,

in thy right hand are pleasures for evermore.

Psalm l6

The reason we know that Peter had given thought to this Psalm is that he quotes from it in

Acts 2:25-28. It was a Psalm of David and Peter's mind seemed to go something like this

when he pondered this Psalm.

We know that God gave David a promise (in 2 Samuel 7:12-16) that one of his own

posterity would be the everlasting king of Israel—the Son of David, the Messiah (Isaiah

9:6-7). David must have often thought of this wonderful thing—that in his own body, as

it were, there was a King whose reign would never end.

And Peter noticed in reading the psalms of David that sometimes, as David expressed his

own hope in God, he would be caught up by the Holy Spirit to say things about himself

that went far beyond what his own experience would be. It was as though David were

sometimes transported into the future of his son the Messiah and would say things that

only the Son of David would experience sometime in the future.

This is what Peter saw as he meditated on Psalm 16. He read, "The LORD is at my right

hand that I might not be shaken." (You can see this Acts 2:25.) And he asked perhaps, "In

what sense will David not be shaken?"

So he reads on for the answer. Acts 2:26—"Therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue

rejoiced; moreover my flesh will dwell in hope." And Peter ponders and answers his

question: "The sense in which David will not be shaken is that his heart and his flesh are

secure in God. He will be protected—soul and body."

Then Peter asks, "How will they be protected? How safe is David really? Will he not die?

Did he not die?" Peter reads on (Acts 2:27), "For thou wilt not abandon my soul to Hades,

nor let thy Holy One see corruption." Peter looks at this for a long time. He ponders,

"Will David's flesh really never see corruption? Will David really never see the decaying

effects of the Pit? Does he really expect this much protection for himself?"

And suddenly (or gradually?) it dawns on Peter that these words go beyond anything that

David experienced. David did die! David was buried! David's flesh did see corruption. So

Peter recognizes that David is no longer speaking merely for himself. The Spirit has lifted

him up to see the destiny of the second David. And the voice of the Messiah is heard

prophetically in the voice of his father David.

And then the connection with Jesus hits home. This is what happened to Jesus! Peter

makes the connection for us in Acts 2:31—"David foresaw and spoke of the resurrection

of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption. This

Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses."

Now right here we begin to make the connection with that longing for happiness that I

referred to back at the beginning. In Acts 2:28 Peter goes on to quote from the last verse

of Psalm 16. But now we know that it is really Jesus, the Son of David, speaking through

the voice of the prophet David:

Thou hast made known to me the ways of life;

thou wilt make me full of gladness with thy presence.

And the Psalm ends (though Peter doesn't finish it), "In thy right hand are pleasures for

evermore."

In other words, what we see from this text is that God's goal for Jesus Christ beyond the

grave was that he might fill him with gladness. So he didn't abandon his soul to Hades or

let his flesh see corruption. He raised him from the dead to make him full of happiness for

ever and ever.

And what is the essence of this happiness?

Verse 28 says, "Thou wilt make me full of gladness with thy presence." Which means that

we end this l3-week series on the pleasures of God where we began—with God the Son

and God the Father delighting in each other's presence. "Thou wilt make me full of

gladness with thy presence."

But what does Jesus experience in the presence of God? What are the pleasures in God's

right hand?

The first thing that comes to mind is glory. Jesus had prayed in John 17:5, "Father, glorify

me in your own presence with the glory which I had with you before the world was

made." Jesus had laid down his glory in order to suffer for us. Now he is eager to take it

up again.

And the Father was eager to give it. That's what Paul means when he says (in Philippians

2:8-ll), "God has highly exalted him and given him a name which is above every name

that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the

earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

ow what does the gladness of the risen God have to do with us?

Jesus didn't just happen upon this gladness beyond the grave; he pursued it with all his

might. Hebrews 12:2 says, "For the joy that was set before him he endured the cross,

despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of God."

In other words, Jesus was able to endure the cross because he knew it was leading to the

Father's presence where there is "fullness of joy" and to the Father's right hand where

there are "pleasures for evermore".

This means that, if you are here this morning with a deep longing for happiness, you will

not be told by Jesus Christ that this longing is bad, or that it must be denied or that you

should have nobler goals on Easter than happiness. Jesus lived for the joy that was set

before him. He is the pioneer and perfecter of our faith. And therefore he sanctioned the

thirst of our souls by the thirst of his own.

But there's more that has to do with us. If all Jesus wanted was the glory and gladness that

he had with his Father before the world was, why did he come into the world in the first

place? The Bible says, Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners like you and me

(1 Tim. 1:15).

But someone might say, I thought you said he was pursuing his own joy. You said he

wanted to be glorified by the Father. Which is it? Does he want his own glory and his

own gladness or does he want ours? This has been the key question of this whole series

on the pleasures of God. Is he for us or for himself?

Listen to his own answer one last time from John 17:24, "Father, I desire that they also,

whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to behold my glory which you

have given me. . . before the foundation of the world."

Yes he is for himself because he longs for the glory and the gladness of his Father's

presence. And yes he is for us, because he wants us with him there.

The message of Easter is doubly wonderful.

It is wonderful to see the suffering Son coming home to the Father. What a reunion that

must have been when Creator embraced Creator and said, "Well done Son. Welcome

home." What a wonderful thing to see the bloody Passover Lamb of Good Friday

crowned with glory and honor, and handed the scepter of the universe!

But it is also wonderful to hear Jesus say, "I want others to be with me, Father. I want

others to share my glory. I want my gladness in your glory to overflow like a mountain

spring and become the gladness of others. I want my joy in you to be in them and their joy

to be full for ever and ever."

On Easter Sunday morning Jesus blew the lock off the prison of death and gloom and

returned to the gladness of God. With that he put his sanction on the pursuit of happiness.

And he opened the way for sinners to find never-ending satisfaction at the fountain of the

glory of his grace.

From the right hand of God he speaks to everyone of us today and invites us to the never-

ending banquet: "I am the bread of life; he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who

believes in me shall never thirst (John 6:35). . . I am the resurrection and the life; he who

believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and whoever lives and believes in me

shall never die. Do you believe this?" (John 11:25-26).

UNKNOWN, "V. 28 - thy presence - The Greek says "with your face" meaning God痴actual presence. The Greek term "face" often meant the person or the person痴 presence.

V. 29 - David’s tomb was within the city walls, as seems evident from Nehemiah 3:16.

Solomon was apparently also buried there. (The "tombs of the kings" now extant are

apparently not the ones Peter had in mind, since they date only from the Roman period.)

This the Jews listening all knew. Hence, the Psalm could only refer to the Messiah, who

was being preached to them as Jesus of Nazareth.

V. 30 - God had sworn - The text Peter has in mind is II Sam. 7:12-16; and Psalms

132:11-12. Note Luke痴 record of Gabriel痴 remarks to Mary, Luke 1:32-33. Since the

Messiah痴 resurrection was a matter of prophecy, thus truth, the Jews could not argue the

point. All Peter needed to do was show that Jesus was the subject of that prophecy.

V. 32 - we are witnesses - The proof positive of the resurrection of Jesus was in the

twelve apostles who were eyewitnesses of the matter.

29"Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the

patriarch David died and was buried, and his

tomb is here to this day.

BARNES, "Men and brethren - This passage of the Psalms Peter now proves could not relate to David, but must have reference to the Messiah. He begins his argument in a respectful manner, addressing them as his brethren, though they had just charged him and the others with intoxication. Christians should use the usual respectful forms of salutation, whatever contempt and reproaches they may meet with from opposers.

Let me freely speak - That is, “It is lawful or proper to speak with boldness, or openly, respecting David.” Though he was eminently a pious man, though venerated by us all as a king, yet it is proper to say of him that he is dead, and has returned to corruption. This was a delicate way of expressing high respect for the monarch whom they all honored, and yet evinced boldness in examining a passage of Scripture which probably many supposed to have reference solely to him.

Of the patriarch David - The word “patriarch” properly means “the head or ruler of a family”; and then “the founder of a family, or an illustrious ancestor.” It was commonly applied to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by way of eminence, the illustrious founders of the Jewish nation, Heb_7:4; Act_7:8-9. It was also applied to the heads of the families, or the chief men of the tribes of Israel, 1Ch_24:31; 2Ch_19:8, etc. It was thus a title of honor, denoting “high respect.” Applied to David, it means that he was the illustrious head or founder of the royal family, and the word is expressive of Peter’s intention not to say anything disrespectful of such a king, at the same time that he freely canvassed a passage of Scripture which had been supposed to refer to him.

Dead and buried - The record of that fact they had in the O d Testament. There had been no pretence that he had risen, and therefore the Psalm could not apply to him.

His sepulchre is with us - Is in the city of Jerusalem., Sepulchres wore commonly

situated without the walls of cities and the limits of villages. The custom of burying in towns was not commonly practiced. This was true of other ancient nations as well as the Hebrews, and is still in Eastern countries, except in the case of kings and very distinguished men, whose ashes are permitted to rest within the walls of a city: 1Sa_28:3, “Samuel was dead ...and Israel ...buried him in Ramah, in his own city”; 2Ki_21:18, “Manasseh ...was buried in the garden of his own house”; 2Ch_16:14, Asa was buried in the city of David; 2Ki_14:20. David was buried in the city of David 1Ki_2:10, with his fathers; that is, on Mount Zion, where he built a city called after his name, 2Sa_5:7. Of what form the tombs of the kings were is not certainly known. It is almost certain, however, that they would be constructed in a magnificent manner.

The tombs were commonly excavations from rocks, or natural caves; and sepulchres cut out of the solid rock, of vast extent, are Known to have existed. The following account of the tomb called “the sepulchre of the kings” is abridged from Maundrell: “The approach is through an entrance cut out of a solid rock, which admits you into an open court about 40 paces square, cut down into the rock. On the south side is a portico nine paces long and four broad, hewn likewise out of the solid rock. At the end of the portico is the descent to the sepulchres. The descent is into a room about 7 or 8 yards square, cut out of the natural rock. From this room there are passages into six more, all of the same fabric with the first. In every one of these rooms, except the first, were coffins placed in niches in the sides of the chamber,” etc. (Maundrell’s Travels). If the tombs of the kings were of this form, it is clear that they were works of great labor and expense.

Probably, also, there were, as there are now, costly and splendid monuments erected to the memory of the mighty dead. The following extract from “The Land and the Book,” and cut on the next page (from Williams’ Holy City), will illustrate the usual construction of tombs: “The entire system of rooms, niches, and passages may be comprehended at once by an inspection of the plan of the Tombs of the Judges near Jerusalem. The entrance faces the west, and has a vestibule (a) 13 feet by 9. Chamber (B), nearly 20 feet square, and 8 high. The north side is seen in elevation in Fig. 2, and shows two tiers of niches, one over the other, not often met with in tombs. There are seven in the lower tier, each 7 feet long, 20 inches wide, and nearly 3 feet high. The upper tier has three arched recesses, and each recess has two niches. From this room (B) doors lead out into chambers (C and D), which have their own special system of niches, or Ioculi, for the reception of the bodies, as appears on the plan. I have explored scores of sepulchres at Ladakiyeh closely resembling this at Jerusalem, and there are many in the plain and on the hillsides above us here at Sidon of the same general form chambers within chambers, and each with niches for the dead, variously arranged according to taste or necessity.”

These tombs are about a mile northwest of Jerusalem. “The tombs which are commonly called the ‘Tombs of the Kings’ are in an olivegrove about half a mile north of the Damascus Gate, and a few rods east of the great road to Nablus. A court is sunk in the solid rock about 90 feet square and 20 deep. On the west side of this court is a sort of portico, 39 feet long, 17 deep, and 15 high. It was originally ornamented with grapes, garlands, and festoons, beautifully done on the cornice; and the columns in the center, and the pilasters at the corners, appear to have resembled the Corinthian order. A very low door in the south end of the portico opens into the ante-chamber - 19 feet square, and 7 or 8 high. From this three passages conduct into other rooms, two of them, to the south, having five or six crypts. A passage also leads from the west room down several steps into a large vault running north, where are crypts parallel to the sides. These rooms are all cut in rock intensely hard, and the entrances were originally closed with stone doors, made with panels and hung on stone hinges, which are now all broken. The whole series of tombs indicates the hand of royalty and the leisure of years, but by whom

and for whom they were made is a mere matter of conjecture. I know no good reason for ascribing them to Helena of Adiabene. Most travelers and writers are inclined to make them the sepulchres of the Asmonean kings” (The Land and the Book, vol. 2, pp. 487, 488). The site of the tomb of David is no longer known.

Unto this day - That the sepulchre of David was well known and honored is clear from Josephus (Antiq., book 7, chapter 15, section 3): “He (David) was buried by his son Solomon in Jerusalem with great magnificence, and with all the other funeral pomps with which kings used to be buried. Moreover, he had immense wealth buried with him: for one thousand and three hundred years afterward Hyrcanus the high priest, when he was besieged by Antiochus, and was desirous of giving him money to raise the siege, opened one room of David’s sepulchre and took out three thousand talents. Herod, many years afterward, opened another room, and took away a great deal of money,” etc. See also Antiq., book 13, chapter 8, section 4. The tomb of a monarch like David would be well known and had in reverence. Peter might, then, confidently appeal to their own belief and knowledge that David had not been raised from the dead. No Jew believed or supposed it. All, by their care of his sepulchre, and by the honor with which they regarded his grave, believed that he had returned to corruption. The Psalm, therefore, could not apply to him.

CLARKE, "Let me speak freely - of the patriarch David - In Midris Tillin, it is said, in a paraphrase on the words, my flesh shall rest in hope, “Neither worm nor insect had power over David.” It is possible that this opinion prevailed in the time of St. Peter, and, if so, his words are the more pointed and forcible; and therefore thus applied by Dr. Lightfoot: “That this passage, Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell, etc., is not to be applied to David himself appears in that I may confidently aver concerning him, that he

was dead and buried, and never rose again; but his soul was left εις�zδου, in the state of

the dead, and He saw corruption; for his sepulchre is with us to this day, under that very notion, that it is the sepulchre of David, who died and was there buried; nor is there one

syllable mentioned any where of the resurrection of his body, or the return of his soul εξ�

zδου from the state of the dead.” To this the same author adds the following remarkable

note: I cannot slip over that passage, Hieros. Chagig. fol. 78: Rab. Jose saith, David died at pentecost, and all Israel bewailed him, and offered their sacrifices the day following. This is a remarkable coincidence; and may be easily applied to him of whom David was a type.

GILL Verse 29. Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you,.... The apostle calls the

Jews, brethren, whom he before only styled men of Judea, and men of Israel, because they

were his brethren according to the flesh, as many of them afterwards were in a spiritual

relation; and the rather he adds this affectionate appellation to soften their minds, and

prepare them to receive the account he was about to give of David, and of his prophecy of

the Messiah, and his resurrection; in which he used much freedom of speech, consistent

with truth, good sense, and strong reasoning; which he thought might be allowed to take,

and they would not be displeased at, in discoursing to them

of the patriarch David; who was a "head of the fathers," as the Syriac and Arabic versions

render it; a prince of the tribes of Israel; one of the greatest kings the tribes of Israel ever

had; and therefore this name well becomes him; though it is more commonly given to

Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the heads of the twelve tribes:

that he is both dead, and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day; it is a plain

case, and a certain matter of fact, which nobody disputes or denies, that David really died,

and was laid in the grave, and that his monument, or tomb, was still extant, so that he was

not risen from the dead; and therefore the above citation could not respect him, but

another, even the Messiah, and had been literally fulfilled in Jesus. The Jews say {z}, that

David died on the day of Pentecost; which was the very day on which Peter was now

preaching; he was buried in Jerusalem, and his sepulchral monument was in being when

Peter said these words. And Josephus relates {a}, that the sepulchre of David was opened

by Hyrcanus, who took out of it three thousand talents; and that it was afterwards opened

by Herod {b}: which, if true, may serve to render credible what Peter says concerning its

continuance to that day. Though it may be questioned whether any such treasure was ever

in it, or taken out of it; and still less credible is the account which R. Benjamin {c} gives

of two men in his time, who, under the wall of Zion, found a cave, which led them to a

large palace built on pillars of marble, and covered with gold and silver; and within it was

a table, and a golden sceptre, and a crown of gold; and this, says the author, was the

sepulchre of David, king of Israel.

HENRY 29 F, "Secondly, The comment upon this text, especially so much of it as relates to the resurrection of Christ. He addresses himself to them with a title of respect, Men and brethren, Act_2:29. “You are men, and therefore should be ruled by reason; you are brethren, and therefore should take kindly what is said to you by one who, being nearly related to you, is heartily concerned for you, and wishes you well. Now, give me leave freely to speak to you concerning the patriarch David, and let it be no offence to you if I tell you that David cannot be understood here as speaking of himself, but of the Christ to come.” David is here called a patriarch, because he was the father of the royal family, and a man of great note and eminency in his generation, and whose name and memory were justly very precious. Now when we read that psalm of his, we must consider, 1. That he could not say that of himself, for he died, and was buried, and his sepulchre remained in Jerusalem till now, when Peter spoke this, and his bones and ashes in it. Nobody ever pretended that he had risen, and therefore he could never say of himself that he should not see corruption; for it was plain he did see corruption. St. Paul urges this, Act_13:35-37. Though he was a man after God's own heart, yet he went the way of all the earth, as he saith himself (1Ki_2:2), both in death and burial. 2. Therefore certainly he spoke it as a prophet, with an eye to the Messiah, whose sufferings the prophets testified beforehand, and with them the glory that should follow; so did David in that psalm, as Peter here plainly shows. (1.) David knew that the Messiah should descend from his loins (Act_2:30), that God had sworn to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne. He promised him a Son, the throne of whose kingdom should be established for ever, 2Sa_7:12. And it is said (Psa_132:11), God swore it in truth unto David. When our Lord Jesus was born, it was promised that the Lord God would give him the throne of his father David,Luk_1:32. And all Israel knew that the Messiah was to be the Son of David, that is, that, according to the flesh, he should be so by his human nature; for otherwise, according to the spirit, and by his divine nature, he was to be David's Lord, not his son. God having sworn to David that the Messiah, promised to his fathers, should be his son and successor, the fruit of his loins, and heir to his throne, he kept this in view, in penning

his psalms. (2.) Christ being the fruit of his loins, and consequently in his loins when he penned that psalm (as Levi is said to be in Abraham's loins when he paid tithes to Melchizedek), if what he says, as in his own person, be not applicable to himself (as it is plain that it is not), we must conclude it points to that son of his that was then in his loins, in whom his family and kingdom were to have their perfection and perpetuity; and therefore, when he says that his soul should not be left in its separate state, nor his flesh see corruption, without doubt he must be understood to speak of the resurrection of Christ, Act_2:31. And as Christ died, so he rose again, according to the scriptures; and that he did so we are witnesses. (3.) Here is a glance at his ascension too. As David did not rise from the dead, so neither did he ascend into the heavens, bodily, as Christ did, Act_2:34. And further, to prove that when he spoke of the resurrection he meant it of Christ, he observes that when in another psalm he speaks of the next step of his exaltation he plainly shows that he spoke of another person, and such another as was his Lord (Psa_110:1): “The Lord said unto my Lord, when he had raised him from the dead, Sit thou at my right hand, in the highest dignity and dominion there; be thou entrusted with the administration of the kingdom both of providence and grace; sit there as king, until I make thy foes either thy friends or thy footstool,” Act_2:35. Christ rose from the grave to rise higher, and therefore it must be of his resurrection that David spoke, and not his own, in the Psa_16:1; for there was no occasion for him to rise out of his grave who was not to ascend to heaven.

(4.) The application of this discourse concerning the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ.

[1.] This explains the meaning of the present wonderful effusion of the Spirit in those extraordinary gifts. Some of the people had asked (Act_2:12), What meaneth this? I will tell you the meaning of it, says Peter. This Jesus being exalted to the right hand of God,so some read it, to sit there; exalted by the right hand of God, so we read it, by his power and authority - it comes all to one; and having received of the Father, to whom he has ascended, the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath given what he received (Psa_68:18), and hath shed forth this which you now see and hear; for the Holy Ghost was to be given when Jesus was glorified, and not before, Joh_7:39. You see and hear us speak with tongues that we never learned; probably there was an observable change in the air of their countenances, which they saw, as well as heard the change of their voice and language; now this is from the Holy Ghost, whose coming is an evidence that Jesus is exalted, and he has received this gift from the Father, to confer it upon the church, which plainly bespeaks him to be the Mediator, or middle person between God and the church. The gift of the Holy Ghost was, First, A performance of divine promises already made; here it is called the promise of the Holy Ghost; many exceedingly great and precious promises the divine power has given us, but this is the promise, by way of eminency, as that of the Messiah had been, and this is the promise that includes all the rest; hence God's giving the Holy Spirit to those that ask him (Luk_11:13) is his giving them all good things, Mat_7:11. Christ received the promise of the Holy Ghost, that is, the promised gift of the Holy Ghost, and has given it to us; for all the promises are yea and amen in him. Secondly, It was a pledge of all divine favours further intended; what you now see and hear is but an earnest of greater things.

JAMISON, "David ... is ... dead and buried, etc. — Peter, full of the Holy Ghost, sees in this sixteenth Psalm, one Holy Man, whose life of high devotedness and lofty spirituality is crowned with the assurance, that though He taste of death, He shall rise again without seeing corruption, and be admitted to the bliss of God’s immediate

presence. Now as this was palpably untrue of David, it could be meant only of One other, even of Him whom David was taught to expect as the final Occupant of the throne of Israel. (Those, therefore, and they are many, who take David himself to be the subject of this Psalm, and the words quoted to refer to Christ only in a more eminent sense, nullify the whole argument of the apostle). The Psalm is then affirmed to have had its only proper fulfillment in JESUS, of whose resurrection and ascension they were witnesses, while the glorious effusion of the Spirit by the hand of the ascended One, setting an infallible seal upon all, was even then witnessed by the thousands who stood listening to Him. A further illustration of Messiah’s ascension and session at God’s right hand is drawn from Psa_110:1, in which David cannot be thought to speak of himself, seeing he is still in his grave.

ELLICOTT, "(29) Let me freely speak.—Better, it is lawful for me to speak with freedom. Those to whom the Apostle spoke could not for a moment dream of asserting that the words quoted had been literally and completely fulfilled in him, and it was therefore natural to look for their fulfilment elsewhere.

Of the patriarch David.—The word is used in its primary sense, as meaning the founder of a family or dynasty. In the New Testament it is applied also to Abraham (Hebrews 7:4) and the twelve sons of Jacob (Acts 7:8). In the Greek version of the Old Testament it is used only of the comparatively subordinate “chief of the fathers” in 1 Chronicles 9:9; 1 Chronicles 24:31, et al.

His sepulchre is with us unto this day.—The king was buried in the city which bore his name (1 Kings 2:10). Josephus relates that vast treasures were buried with him (Ant. vii. 15, § 4), and that John Hyrcanus opened one of the chambers of the tomb, and took out three thousand talents to pay the tribute demanded by Antiochus the Pious (Ant. xiii. 8, § 4). Herod the Great also opened it and found no money, but gold and silver vessels in abundance. The tradition was that he sought to penetrate into the inner vault, in which the bodies of David and Solomon were resting, and was deterred by a flame that issued from the recess (Ant. xvi. 7, § 1). It is difficult to understand how such a treasure could have escaped the plunderer in all the sieges and sacks to which Jerusalem had been exposed; but it is possible that its fame as a holy place may have made it, like the temples at Delphi and Ephesus, a kind of bank of deposit, in which large treasures in coin or plate were left for safety, and many of these, in the common course of things, were never claimed, and gradually accumulated. The monuments now known as the “tombs of the kings” on the north side of the city, though identified by De Sauley with the sepulchres of the house of David, are of the Roman period, and are outside the walls. David and his successors were probably buried in a vault on the eastern hill, in the city of David (1 Kings 2:10), within the range of the enclosure now known as the Haram Area.

COFFMAN, "Peter here affirmed that not only was David fully aware that the promise in

his Psalm was not to be fulfilled in himself, but that he also foresaw the resurrection of

the Holy One. The certainty of this lies in the words HOLY ONE, there having been

utterly no way that David would ever have referred to himself in those words. The

memory of Uriah and Bathsheba would never have allowed it.

Implicit in Peter's works is also the fact of David's realization that his throne was to be

occupied by that same Holy One, even Christ, who true enough would be the "fruit of"

David's body, but in only one dimension, that of the flesh. We need not speculate upon

the extent of David's understanding of Christ and his kingdom; but the fact of his being a

prophet of God indicates that it was broader and deeper than many suppose.

Resurrection of the Christ ... The significance of "the Christ" should not be overlooked.

Jesus was not A Christ, or A Messiah. Jesus of Nazareth is THE Messiah, THE Christ of

God! As Alexander Campbell observed:

To maintain this was the main drift of all apostolic preaching and teaching. So important

is it, then, that it should stand before all men in the proper attitude. In reading the five

historical books of the Christian religion, every intelligent reader must have observed that

the issue concerning Jesus of Nazareth is: "Is he, or is he not, the Christ of whom Moses

in the law, and all the prophets wrote?"[34]

ENDNOTE:

[34] Alexander Campbell, Acts of the Apostles (Austin, Texas: Firm Foundation, 1858),

p. 15.

CONSTABLE 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 Psalms 132:11 (cf. 2 Samuel 7:16). [Note: See Robert F.

O'Toole, "Acts 2:30 and the Davidic Covenant of Pentecost," Journal of Biblical

Literature 102:2 (1983):245-58.]

Peter did not say that Jesus now sits on David's throne (Acts 2:30), which is what many

progressive dispensationalists affirm. [Note: E.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,

3" (Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1992); McLean, pp. 223-24; Ryrie,

Dispensationalism, pp. 168-69; Hodges, "A Dispensational ...," pp. 174-78; and Stanley

D. Toussaint, "The Contingency of the Coming of the Kingdom," in Integrity of Heart,

Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 231-32. 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.] 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.

30But he was a prophet and knew that God had

promised him on oath that he would place one of

his descendants on his throne.

BARNES, "Therefore - As David was dead and buried, it was clear that he could not have referred to himself in this remarkable declaration. It followed that he must have had reference to some other one.

Being a prophet - One who foretold future events. That David was inspired is clear, 2Sa_23:2. Many of the prophecies relating to the Messiah are found in the Psalms of David: Psa_22:1, compare Mat_27:46; Luk_24:44 - Psa_22:18, compare Mat_27:35 -Psa_69:21, compare Mat_27:34, Mat_27:48 - Psa_69:25, compare Act_1:20.

And knowing - Knowing by what God had said to him respecting his posterity.

Had sworn with an oath - The places which speak of God as having sworn to David are found in Psa_89:3-4, “I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant, Thy seed will I establish,” etc.; and Psa_132:11, “The Lord hath sworn in truth unto David, he will not turn from it, Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon my throne”; Psa_89:35-36. The promise to which reference is made in all these places is in 2Sa_7:11-16.

Of the fruit of his loins - Of his descendants. See 2Sa_7:12; Gen_35:11; Gen_46:26; 1Ki_8:19, etc.

According to the flesh - That is, so far as the human nature of the Messiah was concerned, he would be descended from David. Expressions like these are very remarkable. If the Messiah was only a man, they would be unmeaning. They are never used in relation to a mere man; and they imply that the speaker or writer supposed that there pertained to the Messiah a nature which was not according to the flesh. See Rom_1:3-4.

He would raise up Christ - That is, the Messiah. To raise up seed, or descendants, is to give them to him. The promises made to David in all these places had immediate reference to Solomon and to his descendants. But it is clear that the New Testament writers understood them as referring also to the Messiah. And it is no less clear that the Jews understood that the Messiah was to be descended from David, Mat_12:23; Mat_21:9; Mat_22:42, Mat_22:45; Mar_11:10; Joh_7:42, etc. In what way these promises that were made to David were understood as applying to the Messiah, it may not be easy to determine. The fact, however, is clear. The following remarks may throw some light on the subject:

(a) The kingdom which was promised to David was to have no end; it was to be established forever. Yet his descendants died, and all other kingdoms changed.

(b) The promise likewise stood by itself; it was not made to any other of the Jewish kings; nor were similar declarations made of surrounding kingdoms and nations. It came, therefore, gradually to be applied to that future king and kingdom which was the hope of the nation; and their eyes were anxiously fixed on the long-expected Messiah.

(c) At the time that he came it had become the settled doctrine of the Jews that he was to descend from David, and that his kingdom was to be perpetual.

On this belief of the prophecy the apostles argued; and the opinions of the Jews furnished a strong point by which they could convince them that Jesus was the Messiah. Peter affirms that David was aware of this, and that he so understood the promise as referring not only to Solomon, but in a far more important sense to the Messiah. Happily we have a commentary of David himself as expressing his own views of that promise. That commentary is found particularly in Psa_2:1-12; Ps. 22; Ps. 69; and Psa_16:1-11; In these Psalms there can be no doubt that David looked forward to the coming of the Messiah; and there can be as little that he regarded the promise made to him as extending to his coming and his reign.

It may be remarked that there are some important variations in the manuscripts in regard to this verse. The expression “according to the flesh” is omitted in many mss., and is now left out by Griesbach in his New Testament. It is omitted also by the ancient Syriac and Ethiopic versions, and by the Latin Vulgate.

To sit on his throne - To be his successor in his kingdom. Saul was the first of the kings of Israel. The kingdom was taken away from him and his posterity, and conferred on David and his descendants. It was determined that it should be continued in the family of David, and no more go out of his family, as it had from the family of Saul. The unique characteristic of David as king, or what distinguished him from the other kings of the earth, was that he reigned over the people of God. Israel was his chosen people, and the kingdom was over that nation. Hence, he that should reign over the people of God, though in a manner somewhat different from David, would be regarded as occupying his throne, and as being his successor. The form of the administration might be varied, but it would still retain its prime characteristic as being a reign over the people of God. In this sense the Messiah sits on the throne of David. He is his descendant and successor. He has an empire over all the friends of the Most High. And as that kingdom is destined to fill the earth, and to be eternal in the heavens, so it may be said that it is a kingdom which shall have no end. It is spiritual, but not the less real; defended not with carnal weapons, but not the less really defended; advanced not by the sword and the din of arms, but not the less really advanced against principalities, and powers, and spiritual wickedness in high places; not under a visible head and earthly monarch, but not less really under the Captain of salvation and the King of kings.

CLARKE, "According to the flesh, he would raise up Christ - This whole clause is wanting in ACD, one of the Syriac, the Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, and Vulgate; and is variously entered in others. Griesbach rejects it from the text, and Professor White says of the words, “certissime delenda,” they should doubtless be expunged. This is a gloss, says Schoettgen, that has crept into the text, which I prove thus:

1. The Syriac and Vulgate, the most ancient of the versions, have not these words.

2. The passage is consistent enough and intelligible without them.

3. They are superfluous, as the mind of the apostle concerning the resurrection of Christ follows immediately in the succeeding verse.

The passage therefore, according to Bp. Pearce, should be read thus: Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath, of the fruit of his loins, to set on his throne; and foreseeing that he (God) would raise up Christ, he spake of the resurrection of Christ, etc. “In this transition, the words which Peter quotes for David’s

are exactly the same with what we read in the psalm above mentioned; and the circumstance of David’s foreseeing that Christ was to be raised up, and was the person meant, is not represented as a part of the oath; but is only made to be Peter’s assertion, that David, as a prophet, did foresee it, and meant it.”

GILL Verse 30. Therefore being a prophet,.... Who could foretell things to come, as he

did many things concerning the sufferings and death of Christ, and the circumstances

attending it, concerning his resurrection, ascension, and session at the right hand of God.

So the title of his "Psalms," in the Syriac version, runs thus; the "Book of the Psalms of

David, King and Prophet": and in the Arabic version, "the First Book of the Psalms of

David the Prophet, King of the Children of Israel." Though the Jews {d} will not allow

him, nor Solomon, nor Daniel, to be strictly and properly prophets, they make a

difference between prophecy, and the Holy Spirit. They own, that the book of Psalms was

written under the influence of the Holy Spirit, but not by prophecy; and therefore they

place it among the Hagiographa, or holy writings, but not among the Prophets: though

after all, Kimchi allows David to be a prophet, since he is called a man of God; for he

says this name is not said of any but aybn le, "of a prophet" {e}; and Peter is right in

calling him so:

and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him; as he did in Psalm 132:11.

that of the fruit of his loins; of one that should be of his seed, that should spring from

him, even the Virgin Mary, who was of the house and lineage of David:

according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ; would send him forth, according to the

human nature; for this phrase respects not his resurrection from the dead, but his

incarnation or exhibition in the flesh, as in Acts 3:26. This clause is wanting in the

Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions, and in the Alexandrian copy, and should be

read in a parenthesis; since it is not in the text in Psalm 132:11.

to sit on his throne; on the throne of David his father; See Gill on "Lu 1:32."

CALVIN, "30. Therefore, seeing he was a prophet. He showeth, by two

reasons, that it is no marvel if David do speak of things that should come to

pass long after his time; the former is, because he was a prophet. And we

know that things to come, and such as are removed far from the knowledge of

men, are revealed unto the prophets. Therefore, it were wickedness to measure

their speeches according to the common manner and order which we use in

measuring the speeches of other men, forasmuch as they go beyond the long

courses of years, having the Spirit for their director. Whereupon they are also

called seers; because being placed, as it were, upon an high tower, 12 they see

those things which, by reason of great distance, are hidden from other men.

Another reason is, because Christ was promised to him peculiarly. This

maxim was so common amongst the Jews, that they had ever now and then the

son of David in their mouth, so often as there was any mention made of

Christ. They be no such arguments, I confess, as do necessarily prove that this

prophecy is to be expounded of Christ; neither was that Peter's intent and

purpose; but first he meant to prevent the contrary objection, whence David

had such skill to foretell a thing which was unknown. Therefore he saith, That

he knew Christ, both by prophetical revelation, and also by singular promise.

Furthermore, this principle was of great (Romans 10:4) force amongst the

better-minded sort which Paul setteth down, that Christ is the end of the law.

13 No man, therefore, did doubt of this, but that this was the mark whereat all

the prophets did aim, to lead the godly unto Christ as it were by the hand.

Therefore, what notable or extraordinary thing soever they did utter, the Jews

were commonly persuaded that it did agree with Christ. Furthermore, we must

note, that Peter doth reason soundly, when he gathered that David was not

ignorant of that which was the chiefest point of all revelations.

He had sworn with an oath. God swore not only to the end he might make David believe

his promise, but also that the thing promised might be had in greater estimation. And to

this end, in my judgment, it is here repeated, that the Jews may think with themselves of

what great weight the promise was, which God did make so notable (and so famous.) The

same admonition is profitable for us also. For we need not to doubt of this, but that the

Lord meant to set forth the excellency of the covenant by putting in a solemn oath. In the

mean season, this is also a fit remedy for the infirmity of our faith, that the sacred name of

God is set forth unto us, 14 that his words may carry the greater credit. These words,

"according to the flesh," do declare that there was some more noble thing in Christ than

the flesh. Therefore Christ did so come of the seed of David as he was man, that he doth

nevertheless, retain his divinity; and so the distinction between the two natures is plainly

expressed; when as Christ is called the Son of God, according to his eternal essence, in

like sort as he is called the seed of David according to the flesh.

ELLICOTT, "(30) Therefore being a prophet.—The words “according to the flesh, He

would raise up Christ,” are wanting in many of the best MSS. Without them the sentence,

though somewhat incomplete, would run thus: “That God had sworn with an oath that

from his loins one should sit upon his throne.” The words claim for the Psalmist a

prophetic foresight of some kind, without defining its measure or clearness. His thoughts

went beyond himself to the realisation of his hopes in a near or far-off future. As with

most other prophets, the precise time, even the “manner of time,” was hidden from him (1

Peter 1:11).

He would raise up Christ.—The Greek, by using the verb from which comes the word

“resurrection,” gives to the verb the definite sense of “raising from the dead.”

31Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the

resurrection of the Christ,[f] that he was not

abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see

decay.

BARNES, "He, seeing this before ... - By the spirit of prophecy. From this it appears that David had distinct views of the great doctrines pertaining to the Messiah.

Spake ... - See Psa_16:1-11.

That his soul ... - See the notes on Act_2:27.

CLARKE, "That his soul was not left in hell - The words f�ψυχη�αυτου, his soul,

are omitted by ABCD, Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic, and Vulgate. Griesbach has left them out of the text, and Professor White says again, certissime delenda. The passage may be thus read: “He spake of the resurrection of Christ, that he was not left in hades, neither did his flesh see corruption.” For the various readings in this and the preceding verse, see Griesbach.

GILL, "He seeing this before,.... Or by a spirit of prophecy foreseeing it, that according to God's promise and oath, the Messiah would be raised up, and spring from his seed; and also by the same Spirit foresaw that he would suffer and die, and be laid in the grave, the pit of corruption:

spake of the resurrection of Christ; from the dead, to the sense of the following words, in Psa_16:10.

that his soul was not left in hell: neither his separate soul in Hades, nor his body in the grave,

neither his flesh did see corruption; or his body, or his "carcass", as the Syriac version renders it, did not lie so long in the grave as to rot and putrefy.

32God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all

witnesses of the fact.

BARNES, "This Jesus - Peter, having shown that it was predicted that the Messiah would rise, now affirms that such a resurrection occurred in the case of Jesus. If it was a matter of prophecy, all objection to the truth of the doctrine was taken away, and the only question was whether there was evidence that this had been done. The proof of this Peter now alleges, and offers his own testimony, and that of his brethren, to the truth of

this great and glorious fact.

We are all witnesses - It seems probable that Peter refers here to the whole 120 who were present, and who were ready to attest it in any manner. The matter which was to be proved was that Jesus was seen alive after he had been put to death. The apostles were appointed to bear witness of this. We are told by Paul 1Co_15:6 that he was seen by more than five hundred brethren, that is, Christians, at one time. The 120 assembled on this occasion were doubtless part of the number, and were ready to attest this. This was the proof that Peter alleged; and the strength of this proof was, and should have been, perfectly irresistible:

(1) They had seen him themselves. They did not conjecture it or reason about it; but they had the evidence on which people act every day, and which must be regarded as satisfactory the evidence of their own senses.

(2) The number was such they could not be imposed on. If 120 persons could not prove a plain matter of fact, nothing could be established by testimony; there could be no way of arriving at any facts.

(3) The thing to be established was a plain matter. It was not that they “saw him rise.” That they never pretended: Impostors would have done this. But it was that they saw him, talked, walked, ate, drank with him, being alive, after, he had been crucified. The fact of his death was matter of Jewish record, and no one called it in question. The only fact for Christianity to make out was that he was seen alive afterward, and this was attested by many witnesses.

(4) They had no interest in deceiving the world in this thing. There was no prospect of pleasure, wealth, or honor in doing it.

(5) They offered themselves now as ready to endure any sufferings, or to die, in attestation of the truth of this event.

CLARKE, "Whereof we all are witnesses - That is, the whole 120 saw him after he rose from the dead, and were all ready, in the face of persecution and death, to attest this great truth.

GILL Verse 32. This Jesus hath God raised up,.... That is, from the dead,

whereof we are all witnesses; namely, of his resurrection, they having seen him, and

heard him, and ate, and drank, and conversed with him since his resurrection; and which

was true, not of the twelve apostles only, but of the whole company: or "we are all his

witnesses"; either of God, who raised Christ from the dead; or of Christ who was raised

by him; and indeed, they bore testimony to the whole of this, to Christ, and to his

resurrection, and to its being done by God the Father.

HENRY, "He attests the truth of his resurrection (Act_2:32): God hath raised him up, whereof we all are witnesses - we apostles, and others our companions, that were intimately acquainted with him before his death, were intimately conversant with him after his resurrection, did eat and drink with him. They received power, by the descent of the Holy Ghost upon them, on purpose that they might be skilful, faithful, and courageous witnesses of this thing, notwithstanding their being charged by his enemies as having stolen him away.

CALVI "32. This Jesus. After that he had proved by the testimony of David, that it

was most requisite that Christ should rise again, he saith, that he and the rest of his

fellows were such witnesses as saw him with their eyes after his resurrection. For this text

1 will not suffer this word raised up to be drawn into any other sense. Whereupon it

followeth that that was fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth which David did foreshow

concerning Christ. After that he intreateth of the fruit or effect. For it was requisite for

him to declare that first, that Christ is alive. Otherwise it had been an absurd and

incredible thing that he should be the author of so great a miracle. Notwithstanding he

doth therewithal teach us, that he did not rise for his own sake alone, but that he might

make the whole Church partaker of his life, having poured out the Spirit.

MACLAREN, "PETER'S FIRST SERMON

This passage may best be dealt with as divided into three parts: the sharp spear-thrust of Peter’s closing words (Act_2:32-36), the wounded and healed hearers (Act_2:37-41), and the fair morning dawn of the Church (Act_2:42-47).

I. Peter’s address begins with pointing out the fulfilment of prophecy in the gift of the Spirit (Act_2:14 - Act_2:21).

It then declares the Resurrection of Jesus as foretold by prophecy, and witnessed to by the whole body of believers (Act_2:22-32), and it ends by bringing together these two facts, the gift of the Spirit and the Resurrection and Ascension, as effect and cause, and as establishing beyond all doubt that Jesus is the Christ of prophecy, and the Lord on whom Joel had declared that whoever called should be saved. We now begin with the last verse of the second part of the address.

Observe the significant alternation of the names of ‘Christ’ and ‘Jesus’ in Act_2:31-32. The former verse establishes that prophecy had foretold the Resurrection of the Messiah, whoever he might be; the latter asserts that ‘this Jesus’ has fulfilled the prophetic conditions. That is not a thing to be argued about, but to be attested by competent witnesses. It was presented to the multitude on Pentecost, as it is to us, as a plain matter of fact, on which the whole fabric of Christianity is built, and which itself securely rests on the concordant testimony of those who knew Him alive, saw Him dead, and were familiar with Him risen.

There is a noble ring of certitude in Peter’s affirmation, and of confidence that the testimony producible was overwhelming. Unless Jesus had risen, there would neither have been a Pentecost nor a Church to receive the gift. The simple fact which Peter alleged in that first sermon, ‘whereof we all are witnesses,’ is still too strong for the deniers of the Resurrection, as their many devices to get over it prove.

But, a listener might ask, what has this witness of yours to do with Joel’s prophecy, or with this speaking with tongues? The answer follows in the last part of the sermon. The risen Jesus has ascended up; that is inseparable from the fact of resurrection, and is part of our testimony. He is ‘exalted by,’ or, perhaps, at, ‘the right hand of God.’ And that exaltation is to us the token that there He has received from the Father the Spirit, whom He promised to send when He left us. Therefore it is He-’this Jesus’-who has ‘poured forth this,’-this new strange gift, the tokens of which you see flaming on each head, and hear bursting in praise from every tongue.

What triumphant emphasis is in that ‘He’! Peter quotes Joel’s word ‘pour forth.’ The prophet had said, as the mouthpiece of God, ‘I will pour forth’; Peter unhesitatingly transfers the word to Jesus. We must not assume in him at this stage a fully-developed consciousness of our Lord’s divine nature, but neither must we blink the tremendous assumption which he feels warranted in making, that the exaltation of Jesus to the right hand of God meant His exercising the power which belonged to God Himself.

In Act_2:34, he stays for a moment to establish by prophecy that the Ascension, of which he had for the first time spoken in Act_2:33, is part of the prophetic characteristics of the Messiah. His demonstration runs parallel with his preceding one as to the Resurrection. He quotes Psa_110:1-7, which he had learned to do from his Master, and just as he had argued about the prediction of Resurrection, that the dead Psalmist’s words could not apply to himself, and must therefore apply to the Messiah; so he concludes that it was not ‘David’ who was called by Jehovah to sit as ‘Lord’ on His right hand. If not David, it could only be the Messiah who was thus invested with Lordship, and exalted as participator of the throne of the Most High.

Then comes the final thrust of the spear, for which all the discourse has been preparing. The Apostle rises to the full height of his great commission, and sets the trumpet to his mouth, summoning ‘all the house of Israel,’ priests, rulers, and all the people, to acknowledge his Master. He proclaims his supreme dignity and Messiahship. He is the ‘Lord’ of whom the Psalmist sang, and the prophet declared that whoever called on His name should be saved; and He is the Christ for whom Israel looked.

Last of all, he sets in sharp contrast what God had done with Jesus, and what Israel had done, and the barb of his arrow lies in the last words, ‘whom ye crucified.’ And this bold champion of Jesus, this undaunted arraigner of a nation’s crimes, was the man who, a few weeks before, had quailed before a maid-servant’s saucy tongue! What made the change? Will anything but the Resurrection and Pentecost account for the psychological transformation effected in him and the other Apostles?

II. No wonder that ‘they were pricked in their heart’!

Such a thrust must have gone deep, even where the armour of prejudice was thick. The scene they had witnessed, and the fiery words of explanation, taken together, produced incipient conviction, and the conviction produced alarm. How surely does the first glimpse of Jesus as Christ and Lord set conscience to work! The question, ‘What shall we do?’ is the beginning of conversion. The acknowledgment of Jesus which does not lead to it is shallow and worthless. The most orthodox accepter, so far as intellect goes, of the gospel, who has not been driven by it to ask his own duty in regard to it, and what he is to do to receive its benefits, and to escape from his sins, has not accepted it at all.

Peter’s answer lays down two conditions: repentance and baptism. The former is often taken in too narrow a sense as meaning sorrow for sin, whereas it means a change of disposition or mind, which will be accompanied, no doubt, with ‘godly sorrow,’ but is in itself deeper than sorrow, and is the turning away of heart and will from past love and practice of evil. The second, baptism, is ‘in the name of Jesus Christ,’ or more accurately, ‘upon the name,’-that is, on the ground of the revealed character of Jesus. That necessarily implies faith in that Name; for, without such faith, the baptism would not be on the ground of the Name. The two things are regarded as inseparable, being the inside and the outside of the Christian discipleship. Repentance, faith, baptism, these three, are called for by Peter.

But ‘remission of sins’ is not attached to the immediately preceding clause, so as that baptism is said to secure remission, but to the whole of what goes before in the sentence.

Obedience to the requirements would bring the same gift to the obedient as the disciples had received; for it would make them disciples also. But, while repentance and baptism which presupposed faith were the normal, precedent conditions of the Spirit’s bestowal, the case of Cornelius, where the Spirit was given before baptism, forbids the attempt to link the rite and the divine gift more closely together.

The Apostle was eager to share the gift. The more we have of the Spirit, the more shall we desire that others may have Him, and the more sure shall we be that He is meant for all. So Peter went on to base his assurance, that his hearers might all possess the Spirit, on the universal destination of the promise. Joel had said, ‘on all flesh’; Peter declares that word to point downwards through all generations, and outwards to all nations. How swiftly had he grown in grasp of the sweep of Christ’s work! How far beneath that moment of illumination some of his subsequent actions fell!

We have only a summary of his exhortations, the gist of which was earnest warning to separate from the fate of the nation by separating in will and mind from its sins. Swift conviction followed the Spiri-given words, as it ever will do when the speaker is filled with the Holy Spirit, and has therefore a tongue of fire. Three thousand new disciples were made that day, and though there must have been many superficial adherents, and none with much knowledge, it is perhaps not fanciful to see in Luke’s speaking of them as ‘souls’ a hint that, in general, the acceptance of Jesus as Messiah was deep and real. Not only were three thousand ‘names’ added to the hundred and twenty, but three thousand souls.

III. The fair picture of the morning brightness, so soon overclouded, so long lost, follows.

First, the narrative tells how the raw converts were incorporated in the community, and assimilated to its character. They, too, ‘continued steadfastly’ (Act_1:14). Note the four points enumerated: ‘teaching,’ which would be principally instruction in the life of Jesus and His Messianic dignity, as proved by prophecy; ‘fellowship,’ which implies community of disposition and oneness of heart manifested in outward association; ‘breaking of bread,’-that is, the observance of the Lord’s Supper; and ‘the prayers,’ which were the very life-breath of the infant Church (Act_1:14). Thus oneness in faith and in love, participation in the memorial feast and in devotional acts bound the new converts to the original believers, and trained them towards maturity. These are still the methods by which a sudden influx of converts is best dealt with, and babes in Christ nurtured to full growth. Alas! that so often churches do not know what to do with novices when they come in numbers.

A wider view of the state of the community as a whole closes the chapter. It is the first of several landing-places, as it were, on which Luke pauses to sum up an epoch. A reverent awe laid hold of the popular mind, which was increased by the miraculous powers of the Apostles. The Church will produce that impression on the world in proportion as it is manifestly filled with the Spirit. Do we? The s-called community of goods was not imposed by commandment, as is plain from Peter’s recognition of Ananias’ right to do as he chose with his property. The facts that Mark’s mother, Mary, had a house of her own, and that Barnabas, her relative, is specially signalised as having sold his property, prove that it was not universal. It was an irrepressible outcrop of the brotherly feeling that filled all hearts. Christ has not come to lay down laws, but to give impulses. Compelled communism is not the repetition of that oneness of sympathy which effloresced in the bright flower of this common possession of individual goods. But neither is the closed purse, closed because the heart is shut, which puts to shame so much profession of brotherhood, justified because the liberality of the primitive disciples was not by

constraint nor of obligation, but willing and spontaneous.

Act_2:46-47 add an outline of the beautiful daily life of the community, which was, like their liberality, the outcome of the feeling of brotherhood, intensified by the sense of the gulf between them and the crooked generation from which they had separated themselves. Luke shows it on two sides. Though they had separated from the nation, they clung to the Temple services, as they continued to do till the end. They had not come to clear consciousness of all that was involved in their discipleship, It was not God’s will that the new spirit should violently break with the old letter. Convulsions are not His way, except as second-best. The disciples had to stay within the fold of Israel, if they were to influence Israel. The time of outward parting between the Temple and the Church was far ahead yet.

But the truest life of the infant Church was not nourished in the Temple, but in the privacy of their homes. They were one family, and lived as such. Their ‘breaking bread at home’ includes both their ordinary meals and the Lord’s Supper; for in these first days every meal, at least the evening meal of every day, was hallowed by having the Supper as a part of it. Each meal was thus a religious act, a token of brotherhood, and accompanied with praise. Surely then ‘men did eat angels’ food,’ and on platter and cup was written ‘Holiness to the Lord.’ The ideal of human fellowship was realised, though but for a moment, and on a small scale. It was inevitable that divergences should arise, but it was not inevitable that the Church should depart so far from the brief brightness of its dawn. Still the sweet concordant brotherhood of these morning hours witnesses what Christian love can do, and prophesies what shall yet be and shall not pass.

No wonder that such a Church won favour with all the people! We hear nothing of its evangelising activity, but its life was such that, without recorded speech, multitudes were drawn into so sweet a fellowship. If we were like the Pentecostal Christians, we should attract wearied souls out of the world’s Babel into the calm home where love and brotherhood reigned, and God would ‘add’ to us ‘day by day those that were being saved.’

OLGIVIE, "As Peter will go on to prove, with respect to Pentecost, Jesus' resurrection is

the answer to the question "Why?" from both angles. It is Pentecost's immediate cause

(vv. 32-33), and it is the ground for the saving significance of the Pentecost event.

Peter now argues, based on Scripture, that Jesus' resurrection is part of God's saving plan.

In verses 25-28 he introduces a quote from Psalm 16:8-11 to explain Jesus' resurrection as

the fulfillment of prophecy about the Messiah (NIV does not translate the Greek gar,

causal connector between vv. 24 and 25). The psalmist declares that because of his

ongoing relationship with the Lord God, he will not be shaken. This accords well with

Luke's portrayal of Jesus in his last hours (Lk 23:46/Ps 31:5; the cry of dereliction is

absent--Mk 15:34/Ps 22:1). The psalmist expresses joyful confidence that his flesh (sarx,

NIV body; v. 26) will live in hope. He openly declares that there is no abandonment to

Sheol or experience of decay, but rather the path of life and the joy of God's presence

forever.

How is it possible to understand a first-person psalm attributed to

David, in which he appears to speak of his protection from death,

as a prophecy of the Messiah's hope in a resurrection out of death?

Peter comes to such an understanding by using two hermeneutical

principles: literal interpretation and a messianic reading of first-

person Davidic psalms. Thus David, "not . . . as a mere person but

David as the recipient and conveyor of God's ancient but ever-

renewed promise," can predict the Messiah's experience (Kaiser

1980:225). Pointing to the well-known (and still extant) tomb of

David, Peter contends that David could not be talking about

himself. By a process of elimination, then, someone else must

qualify to experience the literal fulfillment of this promise. That

someone is the Messiah. For David was a prophet. He had received

the divinely sworn promise of an eternal reign for one of his

descendants, who would be the Messiah (2 Sam 7:12-13; Ps

132:12).

But how can a Messiah who suffers and dies also reign forever (Ps 22:15-16)? It is

possible only if that Messiah rises from the dead. David was permitted to see ahead of

time this vital stage in God's process of redemption. So he could speak confidently of

Messiah's resurrection when he said that Messiah was not abandoned to the grave, nor

did his body see decay (Acts 2:31). What a wise God to plan a path the Messiah would

follow to effect salvation! What a merciful God to reveal a portion of that path to

prophets, so that now, as we look back after the fulfillment, it all makes sense (see 1 Pet

1:10-12).

Now Peter moves from argumentation to proclamation (Acts 2:32). The great good news

is that God has now raised to life the same Jesus who was crucified (v. 23). Peter adds his

voice and those of the other apostles to the witness of the Scriptures. So confident is he of

the apostolic witnesses' compelling testimony that he can divide his presentation into two

steps: (1) the Old Testament bears witness to a risen Messiah and (2) we bear witness to

Jesus as the risen Messiah.

Peter unveils an even greater truth about Jesus which turns his audience into witnesses of

God's saving grace. Jesus is the exalted Lord raised to the Father's right hand in heaven

(see also v. 30). From that position of authority Jesus mediates the gift of the Spirit (Jn

14:16, 26; 16:7).

Peter now completes the second half of a chiastic (or reverse parallelism) construction

that extends all the way back to verse 25. He has (a) preached Scripture proof of Jesus as

the Messiah risen from the dead (vv. 25-28), (b) given an interpretation (vv. 29-31) and

(c) made a kerygmatic proclamation (v. 32). Now he (c') proclaims Jesus as the exalted

Lord and giver of the Spirit (v. 33), (b') gives an interpretation (v. 34) and (a') presents

Scripture proof (vv. 34-35/Ps 110:1). This construction binds together Jesus' resurrection,

his exaltation and his giving of the Spirit.

Again by a process of elimination and literal interpretation, Peter applies the Old

Testament text to the Messiah. David is dead; we cannot claim that he has ascended to

heaven. Then, following the lead of Jesus, Peter claims that David is addressing the

Messiah when he says, "The Lord [God] said to my Lord [the Messiah]" (Lk 20:41-44/Ps

110:1). When Jesus asked how David could call his descendant "Lord," he was not simply

making Messiah and Lord synonymous titles. When the One who is literally exalted to

the right hand of the Father is called "Lord," he is addressed as more than an honored

human descendant of David. The way Jesus formulated the question implied as much.

Peter, unveiling what Jesus' question hinted at, declares him to be Lord in the sense of

Yahweh. Jesus is God! (See also Acts 2:21, 36, 38.)

Peter calls his listeners to know for certain that God has openly avowed Jesus to be Lord

and Messiah (compare Lk 1:4). Jesus may now rightfully be declared Messiah, since he

has done Messiah's saving work and has been vindicated by God, who raised him from

the dead. He may properly be proclaimed Lord in the highest sense of the word, as the

respectful designation of the unpronounceable name of God (YHWH). For by his

resurrection-exaltation he has demonstrated that he is the ever-living and life-giving God,

whom death cannot hold and who pours out the Spirit (Acts 2:24, 33).

Peter immediately reminds his listeners that it is this risen and exalted Messiah and Lord

whom they have crucified. "They were not trifling with a Galilean carpenter, but God!"

(Ogilvie 1983:71).Application of Pentecost: A Call to Repentance and Promise (2:37-41)

By the Spirit (Jn 16:8-11) the crowd feels the sharp pain of guilt (the NIV renders the

verb literally, were cut to the heart). For Luke, this is as it should be: the heart, the inner

life, is the source of all the thoughts, motivations, intentions and plans of sinful human

beings (Lk 6:45; 12:34: 21:34; Acts 5:3-4; 7:39; 8:21-22; 28:27). Realizing they have

killed the Messiah, their only hope of salvation, they desperately want to know, "Is there

anything we can do about this? Or are we doomed to suffer God's certain wrath on the

day of the Lord?" (see 2:20). They address Peter and the rest of the apostles, for it is the

apostolic gospel, not a gospel of Peter, that they must receive and cling to (2:32, 42).

What will it take today to bring people to their knees--beyond admitting their anxiety (the

awareness that something is wrong) to facing their guilt (the recognition that someone is

wrong)? The sin of people today put Jesus to death just as surely as the sinful hatred of

first-century people. This fact leaves no room for anti-Semitism. With Peter's first

audience, we must return to the scene of the crime, the cross. We must face up to our

guilt before almighty God, the Judge. We must throw ourselves on his mercy, asking,

What shall we do? (v. 37).

Peter's invitation is to repent, "do an about face in your life's orientation and attach

yourself to Jesus" (Talbert 1984:16). This turning from sin and turning to Christ is the

necessary condition for receiving salvation blessings (Lk 13:3, 5; 15:7; 16:30; 24:47; Acts

3:19; 17:30; 20:21; 26:20). What about faith? It is mentioned in verse 44. John Stott

observes, "Repentance and faith involve each other, the turn from sin being impossible

without the turn to God, and vice versa" (1990:78).

Peter calls for each one of them individually (hekastos, but NIV every one) to be baptized

. . . in (on the basis of) the name of Jesus Christ--that is, as Joseph Addison Alexander

puts it, "by his authority, acknowledging his claims, subscribing to his doctrine, engaging

in his service, and relying on his merits" (quoted in Stott 1990:78). By repentance and

baptism we show that we have met the conditions for receiving forgiveness of sins and

the gift of the Spirit. By making repentance and baptism conditions for the reception of

salvation blessings, Luke does not imply that salvation comes by merit or ritual. He is not

promoting some necessary second experience. He consistently presents both forgiveness

and the Spirit as gifts of grace (3:19; 5:31; 13:38; 11:17; 15:8). The gift of the Spirit is the

Spirit himself, who regenerates, indwells, unites, and transforms lives. All the fruit and

gifts of the Spirit flow from this one great gift.

Peter now declares the universal extent of the salvation offer. He reaches out across time

and space, generations and cultures (your children and . . . all who are afar off--that is,

Jews of the diaspora and Gentiles; see Is 57:19; Eph 2:13). And he does not let his

audience forget, even as he tells them their responsibility, that salvation is God's work

from beginning to end. For the promise is for all whom the Lord our God will call. Those

who respond are answering the Lord our God's effective call on their lives (compare Acts

13:48; 16:14). "He set me free to want what He wanted to give!" (Ogilvie 1983:72).

Now we have come full circle. The salvation promised by Joel (and everyone who calls

on the name of the Lord will be saved--Acts 2:21/Joel 2:32) is accomplished by Jesus

(God has made this Jesus . . . Lord--Acts 2:36). And it is humanly appropriated when one

is baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (v. 38) with the assurance that the gift of salvation

is for all whom the Lord our God will call (v. 39).

There were many other things Peter said to the crowd as he warned them. He kept on

exhorting them to allow themselves to be saved, rescued from a corrupt (literally,

"crooked") generation. The Old Testament labeled the Israelites who wandered in the

wilderness a "crooked generation" (Deut 32:5; Ps 78:8). Peter's use of this phrase

intensifies the call to repentance. The "wilderness generation" experienced the judgment

of God when it did not repent. So will those of the present generation if they do not

answer God's call and turn to him in repentance.

The gospel call comes clearly and urgently today. "The question is not, shall I repent? For

that is beyond a doubt. But the question is, shall I repent now, when it may save me; or

shall I put it off to the eternal world when my repentance will be my punishment?"

(Samuel Davies in Wirt and Beckstrom 1974:203).

Three thousand souls welcomed the word (compare 28:30), met its conditions and were

baptized. They joined the ranks of the apostles and disciples in the nucleus of the New

Testament church. "The kerygma, indeed, has the power to evoke that which it celebrates"

(Willimon 1988:36).

We must not be negligent either in giving or heeding invitations. Lloyd Ogilvie strongly

encourages pastors to make invitation a standard part of regular worship services. In

whatever form--whether printing an invitation in the bulletin, designating a room for

inquirers or calling people forward during a closing hymn--the Lord's call for those to be

saved should be consistently present. "People are more ready than we dare to assume.

And why not? The Holy Spirit is at work!" (Ogilvie 1983:73).

New Testament Church Life

J. A. Bengel, the great Pietist commentator on the Bible, concluded his comments on Acts this way: "Thou hast, O church, thy form [pattern]. It is thine to preserve it, and guard thy trust" (Bengel 1860:1:925). We must do this by examining Luke's portrait of a Spirit-filled community.Four Commitments (2:42) The outpouring of the Spirit produced not just momentary enthusiasm but four continuing commitments: to learn, to care, to fellowship and to worship. The apostles' teaching probably included an account of Jesus' life and ministry, his ethical and practical teachings, warnings about persecution and false teaching, and the christocentric Old Testament hermeneutic. But at its center was the gospel message. And so today, to devote oneself to the apostles' teaching means

evangelism as well as edification (4:2; 5:42; 15:35). The apostles' fellowship and breaking of bread was a sharing of possessions to meet needs and of lives in common meals (2:44-46). What an inviting way of life for our day, when "loneliness drives people into one place, but that does not mean that they are together, really" (Ogilvie 1983:74). Finally, Luke portrays prayer as integral to the church's life (compare 4:24; 6:4; 12:5; 13:3; 20:36). It is the essential link between Jesus and his people as they carry out his kingdom work under his guidance and by his strength (4:29-30; 6:6; 8:15; 14:23; 28:8). The reputation of the vital, growing Korean church as a praying church shows that the maxim is indeed true: "the vitality of the church was a measure of the reality of their prayers" (Williams 1985:39).Impact: Fear (2:43) The conviction of sin that followed Peter's Spirit-filled preaching (2:37) was not momentary panic but a continuing uneasiness among those who had not yet received the word. The many wonders and miraculous signs done by God through the apostles served only to intensify this conviction. Whether the "signs and wonders" element be taken as normative for today (Wimber 1986:21) or as simply the authentication of a fresh stage of revelation (Stott 1974:13), clearly Luke is certain that the church's presence will have an impact on society.A Caring, Joyful, Transparent Fellowship (2:44-47) In expression of their Spirit-inspired togetherness, the believers pooled their resources. Individuals voluntarily sold property and goods, contributed the proceeds to a fund from which any Christian (and possibly non-Christians as well) could receive help, as he or she might have need. What a standard for today's church! Indeed, "what we do or do not do with our material possessions is an indicator of the Spirit's presence or absence" (Krodel 1986:95). The community lived out its commitment to the apostles' teaching by gathering each day in the temple courts to hear instruction. They probably met in Solomon's colonnade, at the eastern end of the court of the Gentiles (5:12; compare 5:20-21, 42, and Jesus' practice--Lk 20:1; 21:37). In the temple they also fulfilled their commitment to prayer as they engaged in corporate worship. Daily the community broke bread together in homes--sharing a meal, beginning it with the bread and ending it with the cup of the Lord's Supper (Lk 22:19-20; 24:35; Acts 20:7, 11). With constant intimacy, exultant joy and transparency of relationship they enjoyed the graces of Messiah's salvation in a true anticipation of his banquet in the kingdom (Lk 22:30; compare Acts 16:34). It was a gracious witness to the people (laos), "Israel as the elect nation to whom the message of salvation is initially directed" (Longenecker 1981:291). Today growing churches manifest the same "metachurch" pattern:

celebration, joining in large gatherings for worship and instruction, and cell group, meeting in home groups for fellowship and nurture.Impact: Church Growth (2:47) Every day the Lord Jesus by his Spirit saved some, incorporating them into their number. God's plan is for churches to grow. The challenge for us is, "Will we meet the Scriptural conditions for growth: a dedication to be a learning, caring, fellowshipping, worshipping church?" Will we meet the one essential condition? "As empowering follows petition, so evangelism and Christian unity or community follow Pentecost. The empowering, moreover, is repeatable. So pray!" (Talbert 1984:17).

COFFMAN, "The resurrection: This is the bedrock and cornerstone of the Christian faith,

dogmatically affirmed in the five historical books of our holy religion, and the quibbles of

sinful men with regard to variations in the records themselves are powerless to cast any

shadow over the fact itself. What is needed is honesty in the reading of them. If Liby,

Polybius, Dionysius and Tacitus describe the same event with variations, no one denies

that the event occurred; and the Gospels should be received the same way, especially in

view of the truth that the "variations" in them are so minor as to be negligible.

Hunter noted that the New Testament accounts of the resurrection all agree (1) that the

tomb was empty and (2) that the resurrection occurred the third day. Regarding the empty

tomb, he said:

Paul's tradition implies it. So does the apostolic preaching in Acts. The four evangelists

declare it. The silence of the Jews confirms it ... In trying to fathom the mystery of the

first Easter Day, we should think of something essentially other-worldly, a piece of

heavenly reality, invading this world of time and sense and manifesting itself. We are

concerned with an unmistakably divine event which yet occurred in this world of ours, on

an April day in A.D. 30 while Pontius Pilate was Roman governor of Judea.[35]

We are all witnesses ... Peter could not have meant "all" of the one hundred and twenty

disciples, but all of the Twelve apostles. The blessed Mary herself, who was one of the

one hundred and twenty, was not a witness of the resurrection; nor is there any record that

Jesus ever appeared to her.

In the certification of so important an event as the resurrection to all times and conditions

of men, Jesus trained and qualified a group of men fully equal to the task. They were

outdoorsmen, unspoiled by any human sophistication, but still prepared in the most

complete and perfect manner to witness and proclaim the resurrection. It is simply

incredible that such men as the Twelve could have been led, either intentionally or

otherwise, into believing the resurrection of Christ UNLESS IT HAD INDEED occurred.

This conscious limitation of the witnesses of Christ's resurrection was noted by Peter

himself who said:

Him God raised up the third day, and gave him to be made manifest, not to all the people,

but unto witnesses that were chosen before of God, even to us, who ate and drank with

him after he rose from the dead (Acts 10:40,41).

The resurrection of Christ as the fulfillment of God's oath to set a descendant of David

upon his throne should be noted. God promised David:

And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed

after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He

shall build an house for my name, and I will establish his kingdom for ever .... Thine

house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be

established for ever (2 Samuel 7:12-16).

I have sworn unto David my servant: Thy seed will I establish for ever, And build up thy

throne to all generations (Psalms 89:3,4).

Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure for

ever, and his throne as the sun before me. It shall be established for ever as the moon, and

as a faithful witness in heaven (KJV Psalms 89:35-37).SIZE>

It is regrettable that many have envisioned the Davidic throne as something that would be

upon earth, despite the fact of the throne in view here being compared to the sun or the

moon, neither of which was ever on earth, and especially in view of the plain promise that

it would be "in heaven," that is, the authority (or throne) would be in heaven. The

rendition of "heaven" as "sky," as in the English Revised Version, does not change this

meaning. The apostle Peter forever settled this question when he declared here in Acts

2:31 that the resurrection of Christ was the fulfillment of the above promises to David.

The Davidic throne was a type of the eternal throne and authority of Jesus Christ.

ENDNOTE:

[35] Archibald M. Hunter, Introducing New Testament Theology (Philadelphia: The

Westminster Press, 1957), p. 57.

33Exalted to the right hand of God, he has

received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit

and has poured out what you now see and hear.

Jesus received the Holy Spirit from the Father and then poured it out on his body

the church. He had to ascend to heaven as the perfect man to have the right to do

this.

BARNES, "Therefore, being by the right hand - The right hand among the Hebrews was often used to denote “power”; and the expression here means, not that he was exalted to the right hand of God. but by his power. He was raised from the dead by his power, and borne to heaven, triumphant over all his enemies. The use of the word “right hand” to denote “power” is common in the Scriptures: Job_40:14, “Thine own right hand can save thee”; Psa_17:7, “Thou savest by thy right hand them that trust in thee”; Psa_18:35; Psa_20:6; Psa_21:8; Psa_44:3; Psa_60:5, etc.

Exalted - Constituted King and Messiah in heaven. Raised up from his condition of humiliation to the glory which he had with the Father before the world was, Joh_17:5.

And having received ... - The Holy Spirit was promised to the disciples before his death, Joh_14:26; Joh_15:26; Joh_16:13-15. It was expressly declared:

(1) That the Holy Spirit would not be given except the Lord Jesus should return to heaven Joh_16:7; and,

(2) That this gift was in the power of the Father, and that he would send him, Joh_14:26; Joh_15:26. This promise was now fulfilled, and those who witnessed the extraordinary scene before them could not doubt that it was the effect of divine power.

Hath shed forth this ... - This power of speaking different languages and declaring the truth of the gospel. In this way Peter accounts for the remarkable events before them. What had occurred could not be produced by new wine, Act_2:15. It was expressly foretold, Act_2:16-21. It was predicted that Jesus would rise, Act_2:22-31. The apostles were witnesses that he had risen, and that he had promised that the Holy Spirit would descend; and the fulfillment of this promise was a rational way of accounting for the scene before them. It was unanswerable; and the effect on those who witnessed it was such as might be expected.

CLARKE, "By the right hand of God exalted - Raised by omnipotence to the highest dignity in the realms of glory, to sit at the right hand of God, and administer the laws of both worlds.

The promise of the Holy Ghost - This was the promise that he had made to them a little before he suffered, as may be seen in Joh_14:16, etc., Joh_16:7, etc., and after he had risen from the dead. Luk_24:49, and which as the apostle says was now shed forth.

GILL Verse 33. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted,.... After his

resurrection he ascended to heaven, and was exalted in human nature; "to the right hand

of God," as the Ethiopic version; and the Arabic version used by De Dieu read; an honour

that never was conferred on any creature, angels or men, besides: or he was exalted and

raised to the high honour and dignity of a Prince and Saviour, of Lord, Head, and King,

so as to have a name, dominion, and authority over all, by the mighty power of God,

which is sometimes called his right hand; see Psalm 118:15.

and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost; which the Father had

promised to pour forth in the last days, Isaiah 44:3 and which Christ had promised to send

from the Father, John 14:16 and which, upon his ascension and exaltation, he received as

Mediator from him; see Psalm 68:18 compared with Ephesians 4:8

he hath shed forth this; this Holy Spirit, or promised Spirit, these gifts of his; and so the

Syriac version renders it, "he hath shed forth this gift"; which expresses both the plenty

and abundance of the gifts bestowed, and the liberality of Christ in the donation of them:

it is added,

which ye now see and hear; meaning the cloven tongues, as of fire, which they saw sitting

on the disciples, and the various languages which they heard them speak. The

Alexandrian copy, the Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions, leave out the word "now":

and the Syriac, in the room of it, reads, "behold."

UNKNOWN, "V. 33 - Being exalted - The promise to David had been fulfilled at last,

since Jesus was the fulfillment. The greatest era in the Jews・history, known as the "last

days," had come. Paul remarked as much in I Cor. 10:11. The thing that was different,

however, was that Jesus was exalted in heaven at God痴 right hand, while the Jewish

people, as a nation, had supposed that the Messiah would sit upon a throne in the (earthly)

city of Jerusalem, and establish an earthly kingdom. Of course, they were sadly and badly

mistaken. The kingdom to be brought into existence by the Messiah was to be spiritual in

nature, not material, and its king was to reign from heaven not upon earth. This point

about "Jerusalem" was enlarged and clarified by Paul in Galatians 4:21-31. The kingdom

of which the Messiah was to be king was/is the Church, the body of Christ. In this way,

Jesus sat upon the throne of his father David, ruling over a kingdom that, by its very

nature, could have and would have no end (since the kingdom was not material in nature,

but spiritual. Material things, all of them, have an end, I John 2:15-17).

the promise (of the Father) - See Luke 24:49. It is noteworthy that God is said to do this

in Joel, and Acts 2:17; while here Jesus is said to "pour out" the Holy Spirit, or at least

gifts of the Holy Spirit, accounting for what they saw and heard. Hence, Jesus and God

are said to have done the same things; another item which shows Jesus・deity.

CALVIN, "33. He being therefore exalted by the right hand of God. The right

hand is taken in this place for the hand or power, in like sort as it is taken

everywhere in the Scripture. For this is his drift, to declare that it was a

wonderful work of God, in that he had exalted his Christ (whom men thought

to be quite destroyed by death) unto so great glory.

The promise of the Spirit for the Spirit which was promised. For he had

oftentimes before promised the Spirit to his apostles. Therefore Peter doth

signify, that Christ. had obtained power of God the Father to fulfill the same.

And he maketh mention of the promise in plain words, to the end the Jews

may know that this came not to pass suddenly, but that the words of the

prophet were now verified, which went long time before the thing itself.

Furthermore, whereas it is said that he obtained it of the Father, it is to be

applied to the person of the Mediator. For both these are truly said, that Christ

sent the Spirit from himself and from the Father. He sent him from himself,

because he is eternal God; from the Father, because in as much as he is man,

he receiveth that of the Father which he giveth us. And Peter speaketh wisely

according to the capacity of the ignorant, lest any man should move a question

out of season concerning the power of Christ. And surely forasmuch as it is

the office of Christ to direct us unto his Father, this is a most apt form of

speaking for the use of godliness, that Christ being placed, as it were, in the

midst between God and us, doth deliver unto us with his own hand those gifts

which he hath received at the hands of his Father. Furthermore, we must note

this order that he saith, that the Spirit was sent by Christ after that he was

exalted. This agreeth with those sentences:

"The Spirit was not yet given,

because Christ was not yet glorified," (John 7:39.)

And again,

"Unless I go hence, the Spirit will not come," (John 16:7.)

Not because the Spirit began then first to be given, wherewith the holy fathers

were endued since the beginning of the world; but because God did defer this

more plentiful abundance of grace, until such time as he had placed Christ in

his princely seat; which is signified by this word poured out, as we saw a little

before. For by this means the force and fruit of Christ his death and

resurrection is sealed; and we do also thereby know, that we have lost nothing

by Christ his departing out of the world; because, though he be absent in body,

yet is he present with us after a better sort, to wit, by the grace of his Holy

Spirit.

COFFMAN,"By the right hand of God ... Christ had indeed appeared alive

after his death and burial, and the apostles had seen him ascend into heaven.

As so often affirmed in Scripture, Jesus was exalted at the right hand of the

Majesty on High, and that exaltation was the fulfillment of God's oath that a

descendant of David would sit upon his throne in perpetuity.

He hath poured forth this ... Despite the fact of his being in heaven, Jesus was

still concerned with earth and the men dwelling upon it. He had promised the

apostles that "another Comforter" would be given unto them; and here Peter

affirmed that the baptism of the apostles in the Holy Spirit, as audibly and

visually evidenced by the miraculous demonstration somewhat earlier, had

indeed come to pass as Jesus promised. "Christ's present impartation of the

Spirit to the apostles, attended as it was by sensible signs, was a further open

vindication of the claim that he was the exalted Messiah."[36] However,

before leaving the subject, Peter would offer another proof.

ENDNOTE:

[36] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 72.

COKE, "Acts 2:33. He hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.— It is

said, John 7:39 that the Holy Ghost was not yet given, because Jesus was not

yet glorified. See the note on that verse. The Spirit, in his extraordinary and

superabundant influences, was reserved as the great donative after Christ's

triumph over principalities and powers. When he was ascended up on high, he

sent down the greatest gift that ever was bestowed upon mankind, except

himself. By this Christ discovered the greatness of his purchase, the height of

his glory, the exercise of his power, the certainty of his resurrection and

ascension, and the care he took of his church: for in what could he illustrate

his character more, thanby letting them see that he made good his last promise,

of sending them another Comforter, who should be with them in all their

undertakings, to direct them in their doubts, and to plead their cause against all

opposition? What still enhanced this gift was, that it was not to continue with

them only for a short time, but to abide with them and all his faithful saints for

ever. It was to remain with them as a pledge of his love, as a testimony of his

truth, as an earnest of his favour now, and of the future inheritance of all the

faithful in heaven. See Ephesians 4:8; Ephesians 4:32.

ELLICOTT, "(33) Therefore being by the right hand of God.—The Greek has

the dative case without a preposition. The English version takes it, and

probably is right in taking it, as the dative of the instrument, the image that

underlies the phrase being that the Eternal King stretches forth His hand to

raise Him who was in form His Servant to a place beside Him on His right

hand; and, on the whole, this seems the best rendering. Not a few scholars,

however, render the words “exalted to the right hand of God.”

Having received of the Father.—The words of St. Peter, obviously

independent as they are of the Gospel of St. John, present a striking agreement

with our Lord’s language as recorded by him (John 14:26; John 15:26). The

promise throws us back upon these chapters, and also upon Acts 1:4.

Hath shed forth this.—Better, hath poured out. The verb had not been used in

the Gospels of the promise of the Spirit, but is identical with that which was

found in the Greek version of Joel’s prophecy, as cited in Acts 2:17, “I will

pour out of My Spirit.”

34For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he

said,

" 'The Lord said to my Lord:

"Sit at my right hand

BARNES 34-35, "For David is not ascended into the heavens - That is, David has not risen from the dead and ascended to heaven. This further shows that Psa_16:1-11could not refer to David, but must refer to the Messiah. Great as they esteemed David, and much as they were accustomed to apply these expressions of the Scripture to him, yet they could not be applicable to him. They must refer to some other being; and especially that passage which Peter now proceeds to quote. It was of great importance to show that these expressions could not apply to David, and also that David bore testimony to the exalted character and dignity of the Messiah. Hence, Peter here adduces David himself as affirming that the Messiah was to be exalted to a dignity far above his own. This does not affirm that David was not saved, or that his spirit had not ascended to heaven, but that he had not been exalted in the heavens in the sense in which Peter was speaking of the Messiah.

But he saith himself - Psa_110:1.

The Lord - The small capitals used in translating the word “Lord” in the Bible denote

that the original word is יהוה Yahweh. The Hebrews regarded this as the unique name of

God, a name incommunicable to any other being. It is not applied to any being but God in the Scriptures. The Jews had such a reverence for it that they never pronounced it;

but when it occurred in the Scriptures they pronounced another name, אדני ̀ Adonaay. Here it means, “Yahweh said,” etc.

My Lord - This is a different word in the Hebrew - it is אדני ̀ Adonaay. It properly is

applied by a servant to his master, or a subject to his sovereign, or is used as a title of respect by an inferior to a superior. It means here, “Yahweh said to him whom I, David, acknowledge to be my superior and sovereign.” Thus, though he regarded him as his descendant according to the flesh, yet he regarded him also as his superior and Lord. By reference to this passage our Saviour confounded the Pharisees, Mat_22:42-46. That the passage in this Psalm refers to the Messiah is clear. Our Saviour, in Mat_22:42, expressly applied it thus, and in such a manner as to show that this was the well-understood doctrine of the Jews. See the notes on Mat_22:42, etc.

CLARKE,"David is not ascended - Consequently, he has not sent forth this extraordinary gift, but it comes from his Lord, of whom he said, The Lord said unto my Lord, etc. See the note on these words, Mat_22:44 (note).

GILL Verse 34. For David is not ascended into the heavens,.... In his body, that being

still in the grave, in his sepulchre, which remained to that day, though in his soul he was

ascended to heaven; his Spirit had returned to God that gave it, and was among the spirits

of just men made perfect: but he saith himself, in Psalm 110:1 "the Lord said unto my

Lord, sit thou on my right hand"; See Gill on "Mt 22:44."

HENRY, "Here is a glance at his ascension too. As David did not rise from the dead, so neither did he ascend into the heavens, bodily, as Christ did, Act_2:34. And further, to prove that when he spoke of the resurrection he meant it of Christ, he observes that when in another psalm he speaks of the next step of his exaltation he plainly shows that he spoke of another person, and such another as was his Lord (Psa_110:1): “The Lord said unto my Lord, when he had raised him from the dead, Sit thou at my right hand, in the highest dignity and dominion there; be thou entrusted with the administration of the kingdom both of providence and grace; sit there as king, until I make thy foes either thy

friends or thy footstool,” Act_2:35. Christ rose from the grave to rise higher, and therefore it must be of his resurrection that David spoke, and not his own, in the Psa_16:1; for there was no occasion for him to rise out of his grave who was not to ascend to heaven.

UNKNOWN, "V. 34 - David did not ascend - Peter again appeals to Scripture to

establish his case, using the same Scripture Jesus had used earlier to show the

misunderstanding of the Jews (see Matt. 22:41-45). It was Jesus who ascended into the

heavens to begin to reign, not David. We do not think that Peter affirmed anything about

what David did at death, bur rather stated what happened to Jesus as the subject of

prophecy.

CALVIN, "34. For doubtless David. Although they might easily gather by the

very effect which they saw with their eyes, that the principality was granted

and given to Christ, yet to the end his glory may carry the greater credit, he

proveth, by David his testimony, that it was so appointed in times past by God,

that Christ should be lifted up unto the highest degree of honor. For these

words, to "sit at the right hand of God," import as much as to bear the chief

rule, as we shall afterward more at large declare. Yet before he reciteth the

prophecy, he saith that it agreeth only to Christ. Therefore, to the end the sense

may be more manifest, the sentence must thus run. David pronounceth that it

was decreed by God that a king should sit at his right hand. But this doth not

appertain unto David, who was never extolled unto so great dignity. Therefore

lie speaketh this of Christ. Furthermore, that ought to have seemed no strange

thing unto the Jews which was foretold by the oracle of the Holy Ghost.

Hereby it appeareth in what sense Peter denieth that David ascended into

heaven. He intreateth not in this place of the soul of David, whether it were

received into blessed rest, and the heavenly dwelling or no; but the ascending

into heaven comprehendeth under it those things which Paul teacheth in the

Epistle to the Ephesians, (Ephesians 4:9), where he placeth Christ above all

heavens, that he may fulfill all things. Wherefore the disputation concerning

the estate of the dead is altogether superfluous in this place. For Peter goeth

about to prove no other thing but this, that the prophecy concerning the sitting

at the right hand of God was not fulfilled in David, and that, therefore, the

truth thereof must be sought elsewhere. And forasmuch as it can be found

nowhere else save only in Jesus Christ, it resteth that the Jews 2 do know that

that is showed to them in Christ which was foretold them so long before. That

is true, indeed, that David reigned, God being the author hereof, and, in some

respect, he was God's vicegerent; yet not so that he might be above all

creatures. Wherefore, this sitting agreeth to none, unless he excel and be above

all the whole world.

The Lord said unto my Lord. This is the most lawful manner of ruling, when

as the king (or by what other title soever he be called) doth know that he is

ordained of God, therefore David pronounceth that the commandment to reign

was given unto Christ by name, (Psalm 110:1.) As if he should say, He took

not the honor to himself rashly, but did only obey God when he commanded

him, (Hebrews 5:5.) ]Now must we see whether Peter's reason be sound

enough or no. He gathereth that the words concern Christ, because the sitting

at the right hand of God doth not agree to David. It seemeth that this may be

refuted, because David did reign by the peculiar commandment, name, and

help of God; which is to sit at the right hand of God. But Peter taketh that for a

thing which all men grant, which is true, and which I have already touched,

that a greater and more royal government is here spoken of than that which

David did enjoy. For howsoever he was God's vicegerent and did, as it. were,

represent his person in reigning, yet is this power far inferior to that, to sit

even at the right side of God. For this is attributed to Christ, because he is

placed above all principality, and above every name that is named, both in this

world, and in the world to come, (Ephesians 1:21.) Seeing that David is far

inferior to the angels, he doth possess no such place that he should be counted

next to God. For he must ascend far above all heavens, that he may come to

the right hand of God. Wherefore no man is said to sit at it, rightly and

properly, save only he which doth surpass all creatures in the degree of honor.

As for him which is resident amongst the creatures, although he be reckoned

in the order of angels, yet is he far from that highness. Again, we must not

seek the right hand of God amongst the creatures; but it doth also surpass all

heavenly principalities.

Furthermore, there is great weight even in the sentence itself. The king is

commanded to bear the chiefest rule, until God have put all his enemies under

his feet. Surely, although I grant that; he name of such an honorable sitting

may be applied unto earthly lordship: yet do I deny that David did reign until

such time as all his enemies were subdued. For we do hereby gather that the

kingdom of Christ is eternal. But the kingdom of David was not only

temporal, but also frail, and of a small continuance.

Moreover, when David died, he left many enemies alive here and there. he got

many notable victories, but he was far from subduing all his enemies. He

made many of those people which were round about him tributaries to him;

some did he put to flight and destroyed; but what is all this unto all? Finally,

we may prove by the whole text of the Psalm, that there can nothing else be

understood save only the kingdom of Christ. That I may pass over other

things: that which is here spoken touching the eternal priesthood is too far

disagreeing from David's person. I know that the Jews do prattle, that kings'

sons are called elsewhere cohenim. But he intreateth here of the priesthood as

it is ascribed by Moses to the king Melchizedek. And there is established by a

solemn oath a certain new kind of priesthood. And, therefore, we must not

here imagine any common or ordinary thing. But it had been wickedness for

David to thrust himself into any part of the priest's office. How should he then

be called cohen, greater than Aaron, and consecrated of God for ever? But

because I do not intend at this present to expound the whole Psalm, let this

reason suffice which Peter bringeth: That he is made Lord of heaven and earth,

which sitteth at the right hand of God. As touching the second member of the

verse, read those things which I have noted upon the fifteenth chapter (1

Corinthians 15:25) of the former Epistle to the Corinthians, concerning the

putting of his enemies under his feet.

COFFMAN, "This quotation from Psalms 110:1 indicated: (1) that the Son of

David would also be the Lord of David (Matthew 22:43ff), and (2) that the

Son of David would sit on the right hand of God, an idiomatic promise of the

ascension into heaven. Peter did not have to prove that David himself had not

ascended to heaven, for his grave was still in Jerusalem. In post-apostolic

times, Jewish commentators have attempted to deny the Davidic authorship of

this Psalm, with a view to softening the argument here; but the Lord Jesus

himself left no doubt whatever of it, naming David as the author (Matthew

22:43).

Having thus established a number of the most important truths regarding

Christianity, especially the power and godhead of Jesus Christ, his

resurrection from the dead, ascension into heaven, and sitting down upon the

throne of David in heaven, and the fact of Christ's having poured forth the

Holy Spirit in such a divine demonstration as the multitude had witnessed,

Peter then announced his conclusion.

CONSTABLE 34-35, Verse 34-35

Peter then added a second evidence that Jesus was the Christ. He had proved

that David had prophesied Messiah's resurrection (Acts 2:27). Now he said

that David also prophesied Messiah's ascension (Psalms 110:1). This was a

passage from the Old Testament that Jesus had earlier applied to Himself

(Matthew 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 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 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. 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 Psalms 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 (Acts 2:30). [Note: E.g., Alva J. McClain, The Greatness of

the Kingdom, p. 401.]

"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.'" [Note: Saucy, 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.]

"This does not mean that Jesus is at the present time ruling from the throne of

David, but that He is now at 'the right hand of the Father' until His enemies are

vanquished (Acts 2:33-35)." [Note: Cleon L. Rogers Jr., "The Davidic

Covenant in Acts-Revelation," Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March

1994):74.]

". . . 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, 132. Psalms

110 refers to the Lord's throne (Acts 2:1) and a Melchizedekian priesthood

(Acts 2:4) but Psalms 132 refers to David's throne (Acts 2:11) and (Aaronic)

priests (Acts 2:9; Acts 2:16)....

"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 (Psalms 110:2), He is seated at

the right hand of God (Acts 2:1). 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 (Psalms 110:2; Psalms 110:5-7). Until then, He is now

seated at God's right hand (Acts 2:1), exercising the decreed role of the

Melchizedekian King-Priest (Acts 2:4), the believer's great High Priest

(Hebrews 2:17; Hebrews 4:14-15; Hebrews 5:10; Hebrews 6:20; Hebrews

7:26; Hebrews 8:1; Hebrews 9:11; Hebrews 10:21)." [Note: Elliott E.

Johnson, "Hermeneutical Principles and the Interpretation of Psalms 110,"

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

"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 right hand (Hebrews

1:3; Acts 7:56), which position He had given up at the time of the Incarnation

(Philippians 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." [Note: Pentecost, pp. 272. Cf. Hodges, "A

Dispensational . . .," pp. 172-78.]

Normative dispensationalists:

Christ's messianic reign will be on earth.

Progressive dispensationalists:

Christ's messianic reign is now from heaven and will be on earth.

Non-dispensational premillenarians:

Christ's messianic reign is now from heaven and will be on earth.

Non-millennarians:

Christ's messianic reign is now and will be from heaven.

35until I make your enemies

a footstool for your feet." '[g]

BARNES, "For David is not ascended into the heavens - That is, David has not risen from the dead and ascended to heaven. This further shows that Psa_16:1-11 could not refer to David, but must refer to the Messiah. Great as they esteemed David, and much as they were accustomed to apply these expressions of the Scripture to him, yet they could not be applicable to him. They must refer to some other being; and especially that passage which Peter now proceeds to quote. It was of great importance to show that these expressions could not apply to David, and also that David bore testimony to the exalted character and dignity of the Messiah. Hence, Peter here adduces David himself as affirming that the Messiah was to be exalted to a dignity far above his own. This does not affirm that David was not saved, or that his spirit had not ascended to heaven, but that he had not been exalted in the heavens in the sense in which Peter was speaking of the Messiah.

But he saith himself - Psa_110:1.

The Lord - The small capitals used in translating the word “Lord” in the Bible denote

that the original word is יהוה Yahweh. The Hebrews regarded this as the unique name of

God, a name incommunicable to any other being. It is not applied to any being but God in the Scriptures. The Jews had such a reverence for it that they never pronounced it;

but when it occurred in the Scriptures they pronounced another name, אדני ̀ Adonaay. Here it means, “Yahweh said,” etc.

My Lord - This is a different word in the Hebrew - it is אדני ̀ Adonaay. It properly is

applied by a servant to his master, or a subject to his sovereign, or is used as a title of respect by an inferior to a superior. It means here, “Yahweh said to him whom I, David, acknowledge to be my superior and sovereign.” Thus, though he regarded him as his descendant according to the flesh, yet he regarded him also as his superior and Lord. By reference to this passage our Saviour confounded the Pharisees, Mat_22:42-46. That the passage in this Psalm refers to the Messiah is clear. Our Saviour, in Mat_22:42, expressly applied it thus, and in such a manner as to show that this was the well-understood doctrine of the Jews. See the notes on Mat_22:42, etc.

CLARKE, "Until I make thy foes thy footstool - It was usual with conquerors to put their feet on the necks of vanquished leaders, as emblematical of the state of subjection to which they were reduced, and the total extinction of their power. By quoting these words, Peter shows the Jews, who continued enemies to Christ, that their discomfiture and ruin must necessarily take place, their own king and prophet having predicted this in connection with the other things which had already been so literally and circumstantially fulfilled. This conclusion had the desired effect, when pressed home with the strong application in the following verse.

GILL, "Until I make thy foes thy footstool. See Gill on Mat_22:44.

36"Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God

has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both

Lord and Christ."

BARNES, "Therefore let all ... - “Convinced by the prophecies, by our testimony, and by the remarkable scenes exhibited on the day of Pentecost, let all be convinced that the true Messiah has come and has been exalted to heaven.”

House of Israel - The word “house” often means “family”: “let all the family of Israel, that is, all the nation of the Jews, know this.”

Know assuredly - Be assured, or know without any hesitation or possibility of mistake. This is the sum of his argument or his discourse. He had established the points

which he purposed to prove, and he now applies it to his hearers.

God hath made - God hath appointed or constituted. See Act_5:31.

That same Jesus - The very person who had suffered. He was raised with the same body, and had the same soul; he was the same being, as distinguished from all others. So Christians, in the resurrection, will be the same beings that they were before they died.

Whom ye have crucified - See Act_2:23. There was nothing better suited to show them the guilt of having done this than the argument which Peter used. He showed them that God had sent him as the Messiah, and that he had showed his love for him in raising him from the dead. The Son of God, and the hope of their nation, they had put to death. He was not an impostor, nor a man sowing sedition, nor a blasphemer, but the Messiah of God; and they had imbrued their hands in his blood. There is nothing better suited to make sinners fear and tremble than to show them that, in rejecting Christ, they have rejected God; in refusing to serve him they have refused to serve God. The crime of sinners has a double malignity, as committed against a kind and lovely Saviour, and against the God who loved him, and appointed him to save people. Compare Act_3:14-15.

Both Lord - The word “lord” properly denotes “proprietor, master, or sovereign.” Here it means clearly that God had exalted him to be the king so long expected; and that he had given him dominion in the heavens, or, as we should say, made him ruler of all things. The extent of this dominion may be seen in Joh_17:2; Eph_1:21, etc. In the exercise of this orifice, he now rules in heaven and on earth, and will yet come to judge the world. This truth was particularly suited to excite their fear. They had murdered their sovereign, now shown to be raised from the dead, and entrusted with infinite power. They had reason, therefore, to fear that he would come forth in vengeance, and punish them for their crimes. Sinners, in opposing the Saviour, are at war with their living and mighty sovereign and Lord. He has all power, and it is not safe to contend against the judge of the living and the dead.

And Christ - Messiah. They had thus crucified the hope of their nation; imbrued their hands in the blood of him to whom the prophets had looked; and put to death that Holy One, the prospect of whose coming had sustained the most holy men of the world in affliction, and cheered them when they looked on to future years. He who was the hope of their fathers had come, and they had put him to death; and it is no wonder that the consciousness of this - that a sense of guilt, and shame, and confusion should overwhelm their minds, and lead them to ask, in deep distress, what they should do.

CLARKE, "Both Lord and Christ - Not only the Messiah, but the supreme Governor of all things and all persons, Jews and Gentiles, angels and men. In the preceding discourse, Peter assumes a fact which none would attempt to deny, viz. that Jesus had been lately crucified by them.

He then,

1. Proves his resurrection.

2. His ascension.

3. His exaltation to the right hand of God.

4. The effusion of the Holy Spirit, which was the fruit of his glorification, and which had not only been promised by himself, but foretold by their own prophets: in consequence of which,

5. It was indisputably proved that this same Jesus, whom they had crucified, was the

promised Messiah; and if so,

6. The Governor of the universe, from whose power and justice they had every thing to dread, as they refused to receive his proffered mercy and kindness.

GILL, "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly,.... "With certain knowledge", as the Arabic version renders it; with full assurance of it: this is a case that is plain and clear, a matter of fact that may be depended on; which all the people of Israel, called "the house of Israel", a phrase frequently used of that people in the Old Testament, which every individual of that body of men might be assured of:

that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ; that is, that God the Father had not only constituted and appointed Jesus of Nazareth to be the Messiah, the Lord of lords, and King of kings, and had invested him with that office, power, and authority, but he had made him manifest to be so by the Holy Spirit which he had received, and now poured forth the same, and not another; even him whom they had rejected with so much contempt; whom they had treated in such a scornful and brutish manner; had spit upon, buffeted, and scourged, and at last crucified; and yet, now, even he had all power in heaven, and in earth, given him, and was exalted above every name; that in his name every knee should bow. The phrase of "making a Messiah", or "Christ", is used in the Talmudic writings (f),

"The holy blessed God sought to make Hezekiah the Messiah, or Christ, and Sennacherib Gog and Magog; the property or attribute of justice said before the holy blessed God, Lord of the world, and what was David, the king of Israel, who said so many songs and hymns before thee, and thou didst not make him Christ? Hezekiah, for whom thou hast done all these wonders, and he hath not said a song before thee, wilt thou make him the Messiah, or Christ? wherefore his mouth was shut up; and the earth opened, and said a song before him; Lord of the world, I have said a song before thee, for this righteous one,

.and he made him Messiah, or Christ ,ועשהו�משיח

HENRY, " The application of this discourse concerning the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ.

[1.] This explains the meaning of the present wonderful effusion of the Spirit in those extraordinary gifts. Some of the people had asked (Act_2:12), What meaneth this? I will tell you the meaning of it, says Peter. This Jesus being exalted to the right hand of God,so some read it, to sit there; exalted by the right hand of God, so we read it, by his power and authority - it comes all to one; and having received of the Father, to whom he has ascended, the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath given what he received (Psa_68:18), and hath shed forth this which you now see and hear; for the Holy Ghost was to be given when Jesus was glorified, and not before, Joh_7:39. You see and hear us speak with tongues that we never learned; probably there was an observable change in the air of their countenances, which they saw, as well as heard the change of their voice and language; now this is from the Holy Ghost, whose coming is an evidence that Jesus is exalted, and he has received this gift from the Father, to confer it upon the church, which plainly bespeaks him to be the Mediator, or middle person between God and the church. The gift of the Holy Ghost was, First, A performance of divine promises already made; here it is called the promise of the Holy Ghost; many exceedingly great and precious promises the divine power has given us, but this is the promise, by way of

eminency, as that of the Messiah had been, and this is the promise that includes all the rest; hence God's giving the Holy Spirit to those that ask him (Luk_11:13) is his giving them all good things, Mat_7:11. Christ received the promise of the Holy Ghost, that is, the promised gift of the Holy Ghost, and has given it to us; for all the promises are yea and amen in him. Secondly, It was a pledge of all divine favours further intended; what you now see and hear is but an earnest of greater things.

[2.] This proves what you are all bound to believe, that Christ Jesus is the true Messiah and Saviour of the world; this he closes his sermon with, as the conclusion of the whole matter, the quod erat demonstrandum - the truth to be demonstrated (Act_2:36): Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that this truth has now received its full confirmation, and we our full commission to publish it, That God has made that same Jesus whom you have crucified both Lord and Christ. They were charged to tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ till after his resurrection (Mat_16:20; Mat_17:9); but now it must be proclaimed on the housetops, to all the house of Israel; he that hath ears to hear, let him hear it. It is not proposed as probable, but deposed as certain: Let them know it assuredly, and know that it is their duty to receive it as a faithful saying, First, That God has glorified him whom they have crucified. This aggravates their wickedness, that they crucified one whom God designed to glorify, and put him to death as a deceiver who had given such pregnant proofs of his divine mission; and it magnifies the wisdom and power of God that though they crucified him, and thought thereby to have put him under an indelible mark of infamy, yet God had glorified him, and the indignities they had done him served as a foil to his lustre. Secondly, That he has glorified him to such a degree as to make him both Lord and Christ: these signify the same; he is Lord of all, and he is not a usurper, but is Christ, anointed to be so. He is one Lord to the Gentiles, who had had lords many; and to the Jews he is Messiah, which includes all his offices. He is the king Messiah, as the Chaldee paraphrast calls him; or, as the angel to Daniel, Messiah the prince, Dan_9:25. This is the great truth of the gospel which we are to believe, that that same Jesus, the very same that was crucified at Jerusalem, is he to whom we owe allegiance, and from whom we are to expect protection, as Lord and Christ.

JAMISON, "Therefore — that is, to sum up all.

let all the house of Israel — for in this first discourse the appeal is formally made to the whole house of Israel, as the then existing Kingdom of God.

know assuredly — by indisputable facts, fulfilled predictions, and the seal of the Holy Ghost set upon all.

that God hath made — for Peter’s object was to show them that, instead of interfering with the arrangements of the God of Israel, these events were His own high movements.

this same Jesus, whom ye have crucified — “The sting is at the close” [Bengel]. To prove to them merely that Jesus was the Messiah might have left them all unchanged in heart. But to convince them that He whom they had crucified had been by the right hand of God exalted, and constituted the “Lord” whom David in spirit adored, to whom every knee shall bow, and the Christ of God, was to bring them to “look on Him whom they had pierced and mourn for Him.”

ELLICOTT, "(36) That same Jesus. . . .—Better, this Jesus.

Both Lord and Christ.—Some MSS. omit “both.” The word “Lord” is used with special reference to the prophetic utterance of the Psalm thus cited. There is a rhetorical force in the very order of the words which the English can scarcely give: “that both Lord and Christ hath God made this Jesus whom ye crucified.” The pronoun of the last verb is emphatic, as pointing the contrast between the way in which the Jews of Jerusalem had dealt with Jesus and the recognition which he had received from the Father. The utterance of the word “crucified” at the close, pressing home the guilt of the people on their consciences, may be thought of as, in a special manner, working the result described in the next verse.

UNKNOWN,"V. 36 - Let...Israel know - By virtue of the prophecies, the testimonies

and the empirical evidence, the fact was clear: Jesus of Nazareth was Lord and Messiah,

the person the Jews had crucified. (Note John 17:5, 24-26; I Cor. 15:27; Eph. 1:20-23;

etc.). Observe also how David痴 "Lord" and Peter痴 "Lord" are declared to be one and

the same, and that "Lord" and "Messiah" were equated, all in reference to Jesus.

Now, as we begin study of 2:38, we must recognize the following: The basics are to be

considered in this text, and 2:42. It must be recognized that good and honest men have

labored long over this whole section and yet have differed over what is therein said. It

will not do, therefore, to argue that the Bible "says" it (whatever), and suppose that

statement will end the discussion. The question to be resolved is: what does the Bible

"say," here or elsewhere? May we then approach the text within that sphere of thought,

and do our best to understand exactly what God did say to us. It may further be added that

even if we, or anyone else, is able to discern the exact import of these verses, that gives

no reason for pride, nor does it mean that practice will be equal to understanding. God

may well save because of faith and despite some/much misunderstanding (with the

resultant disobedience or lack of obedience). Stated differently, grace may be greatened to

some/many as God so desires. Be that as it may, no one is hereby relieved from knowing

and doing as well as possible. Neither are we privileged to offer salvation other than as

God directed.

CALVIN, "36. Therefore, let all the house of Israel know. The house of Israel

did confess that that Christ should come which was promised; yet did they not

know Who it was. Therefore, Peter concludeth, that Jesus: whom they had so

spitefully handled, yea, whose name they did so greatly detest: is he whom

they ought to acknowledge to be their Lord, and whom they ought to

reverence. For, (saith he,) God hath made him Lord and Christ; that is, you

must look for none other than him whom God hath made and given.

Furthermore, he saith, That he was made, because God the Father gave him

this honor. He joineth the title Lord with the word Christ, because it was a

common thing among the Jews, that the Redeemer should be anointed upon

this condition, that he might be the Head of the Church, and that the chiefest

power over all things might be given him. He speaketh unto the whole house

of Israel; as if he should say, Whosoever will be reckoned among the sons of

Jacob, and do also look for the promise, let them know for a surety, that this is

he and none other. He useth the word house, because God had separated that

name and family from all other people. And he saith asfalwv, or for a surety,

not only that they may repose their sure confidence and trust in Christ, but that

he may take away all occasion of doubting from those which do oftentimes

willingly doubt even of matters which are certain and sure. In the end of his

oration he upbraideth unto them again, that they did crucify him, that being

touched with greater grief of conscience, they may desire remedy.

And now, forasmuch as they know that Jesus is the Anointed of the Lord, the

governor of the Church, and the giver of the Holy Ghost, the accusation hath

so much the more force. For the putting of him to death was not only full of

cruelty and wickedness, but also a testimony of outrageous disloyalty against

God, of sacrilege and unthankfulness, and, finally, of apostasy. But it was

requisite that they should be so wounded, lest they should have been slow to

seek for medicine. And yet, notwithstanding, they did not crucify him with

their own hands; but this is more than sufficient to make them guilty, in that

they desired to have him put to death. And we also are accused by this same

voice, if we crucify him in ourselves, being already glorified in heaven,

making a mock of him, as saith the Apostle, (Hebrews 6:6.)

COFFMAN, "All the house of Israel ... There seems to be good reason to

understand these words as being addressed not to the dwellers in all those

countries mentioned by Luke (Acts 2:8-12), but to the Jews of the Holy City

itself, there being no evidence that the Diaspora had taken any hand in the

rejection of Christ. This justifies the conclusion that the "speaking" of all the

Twelve in languages they had never learned, earlier that morning, was not in

any sense a preview of this sermon. This sermon was the first of the gospel

age, quite properly delivered "to the Jew first" as God had ordained; and,

therefore, it may be concluded, that those earlier "speakings" were concerned

with gathering an audience for Peter's message, the same purpose being

evident in the rushing sound and other divine manifestations of that hour.

CONSTABLE, "Peter wanted every Israelite to consider the evidence he had

just presented because it proved "for certain" that Jesus of Nazareth (cf. Acts

2:22) 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 Acts

2:21.

"This title of 'Lord' was a more important title than Messiah, for it pictured

Jesus' total authority and His ability and right to serve as an equal with God

the Father." [Note: Bock, "A Theology . . .," p. 104. See Witherington's

excursus on Luke's Christology, pp. 147-53.]

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 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. [Note: Blaising,

Progressive Dispensationalism, p. 248.] They see the church as the present

stage in the progressive unfolding of the messianic kingdom (hence the name

"progressive dispensationalism"). [Note: Ibid., p. 49.] 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, not on David's throne fulfilling Old

Testament prophecies concerning the Davidic king's future reign (cf.

Revelation 3:21).

Peter again mentioned his hearers' responsibility for crucifying Jesus to

convict them of their sin and to make them feel guilty (cf. Acts 2:23). [Note:

See Darrell L. Bock, "Jesus as Lord in Acts and in the Gospel Message,"

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

"Peter did not present the cross as the place where the Sinless Substitute died

for the world, but where Israel killed her own Messiah!" [Note: Wiersbe,

1:410.]

"Peter's preaching, then, in Acts 2:14 ff. must be seen as essentially a message

to the Jews of the world, not to the whole world." [Note: Witherington, pp.

140-41.]

"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 (Acts 2:14; Acts 2:36). 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 Acts 2:36 : '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." [Note: Tannehill, 2:35.]

"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." [Note: Ibid., 2:37.]

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. Acts 1:8). Luke recorded both outpourings (Luke 3:21-22; Acts 2:2-

4; cf. Acts 4:27; Acts 10:28). This fact is further evidence that Luke wanted

his readers to view their own ministries as the extension of Jesus' ministry

(Acts 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." [Note: Russell, p. 63.]

Peter mentioned that Jesus was now at the right hand of God in heaven four

times in this part of his speech (Acts 2:25; Acts 2:30; Acts 2:33-34). This had

particular relevance for "all the house of Israel" (cf. Acts 2:14; Acts 2:22; Acts

2:29).

"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.'" [Note: Longenecker, p. 281.]

37When the people heard this, they were cut to

the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles,

"Brothers, what shall we do?"

BARNES, "Now when they heard this - When they heard this declaration of Peter, and this proof that Jesus was the Messiah. There was no fanaticism in his discourse; it was cool, close, pungent reasoning. He proved to them the truth of what he was saying, and thus prepared the way for this effect.

They were pricked in their heart - The word translated were “pricked,”

κατενύγησαν katenugēsan, is not used elsewhere in the New Testament. It properly

denotes “to pierce or penetrate with a needle, lancet, or sharp instrument”; and then “to pierce with grief, or acute pain of any kind.” It corresponds precisely to our word “compunction.” It implies also the idea of sudden as well as acute grief. In this case it means that they were suddenly and deeply affected with anguish and alarm at what Peter had said. The causes of their grief may have been these:

(1) Their sorrow that the Messiah had been put to death by his own countrymen.

(2) Their deep sense of guilt in having done this. There would be mingled here a remembrance of ingratitude, and a consciousness that they had been guilty of murder of the most aggravated and horrid kind, that of having killed their own Messiah.

(3) The fear of his wrath. He was still alive; exalted to be theft Lord; and entrusted with all power. They were afraid of his vengeance; they were conscious that they deserved it; and they supposed that they were exposed to it.

(4) What they had done could not be undone. The guilt remained; they could not wash it out. They had imbrued theft hands in the blood of innocence, and the guilt of that oppressed their souls. This expresses the usual feelings which sinners have when they are convicted of sin.

Men and brethren - This was an expression denoting affectionate earnestness. Just before this they mocked the disciples, and charged them with being filled with new wine, Act_2:13. They now treated them with respect and confidence. The views which sinners have of Christians and Christian ministers are greatly changed when they are under conviction for sin. Before that they may deride and oppose them; then, they are glad to be taught by the obscurest Christian, and even cling to a minister of the gospel as if he could save them by his own power.

What shall we do? - What shall we do to avoid the wrath of this crucified and exalted Messiah? They were apprehensive of his vengeance, and they wished to know how to avoid it. Never was a more important question asked than this. It is the question which all convicted sinners ask. It implies an apprehension of danger, a sense of guilt, and a readiness to “yield the will” to the claims of God. This was the same question asked by Paul Act_9:6, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” and by the jailor Act_16:30 “He ...came, trembling, ...and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” The state of mind in this case - the case of a convicted sinner - consists in:

(1) A deep sense of the evil of the past life; remembrance of a thousand crimes perhaps before forgotten; a pervading and deepening conviction that the heart,

and conversation, and life have been evil, and deserve condemnation.

(2) Apprehension about the justice of God; alarm when the mind looks upward to him, or onward to the day of death and judgment.

(3) An earnest wish, amounting sometimes to agony, to be delivered from this sense of condemnation and this apprehension of the future.

(4) A readiness to sacrifice all to the will of God; to surrender the governing purpose of the mind, and to do what he requires. In this state the soul is prepared to receive the offers of eternal life; and when the sinner comes to this, the offers of mercy meet his case, and he yields himself to the Lord Jesus, and finds peace.

In regard to this discourse of Peter, and this remarkable result, we may observe:

(1) That this is the first discourse which was preached after the ascension of Christ, and is a model which the ministers of religion should imitate.

(2) It is a clear and close argument. There is no ranting, no declamation, nothing but truth presented in a clear and striking manner. It abounds with proof of his main point, and supposes that his hearers were rational beings, and capable of being influenced by truth. Ministers have no right to address people as incapable of reason and thought, nor to imagine, because they are speaking on religious subjects, that therefore they are at liberty to speak nonsense.

(3) Though these were eminent sinners, and had added to the crime of murdering the Messiah that of deriding the Holy Spirit and the ministers of the gospel, yet Peter reasoned with them coolly, and endeavored to convince them of their guilt. People should be treated as endowed with reason, and as capable of seeing the force and beauty of the great truths of religion.

(4) The arguments of Peter were adapted to produce this effect on their minds, and to impress them deeply with the sense of their guilt. He proved to them that they had been guilty of putting the Messiah to death; that God had raised him up, and that they were now in the midst of the scenes which established one strong proof of the truth of what he was saying. No class of truths could have been so well adapted to make an impression of their guilt as these.

(5) Conviction for sin is a rational process on a sinner’s mind. It is the proper state produced by a view of past sins. It is suffering truth to make an appropriate impression; suffering the mind to feel as it ought to feel. The man who is guilty ought to be willing to see and confess it. It is no disgrace to confess an error, or to feel deeply when we know we are guilty. Disgrace consists in a hypocritical desire to conceal crime; in the pride that is unwilling to avow it; in the falsehood which denies it. To feel it and to acknowledge it is the mark of an open and ingenuous mind.

(6) These same truths are adapted still to produce conviction for sin. The sinner’s treatment of the Messiah should produce grief and alarm. He did not murder him, but he has rejected him; he did not crown him with thorns, but he has despised him; he did not insult him when hanging on the cross, but he has a thousand times insulted him since; he did not pierce his side with the spear, but he has pierced his heart by rejecting him and contemning his mercy. “For these things he should weep.” In the Saviour’s resurrection he has also a deep interest. He rose as the pledge that we may rise; and when the sinner looks forward, he should remember that he must meet the ascended Son of God. The Saviour reigns; he lives, Lord of all. The sinner’s deeds now are aimed at his throne, and his heart, and his crown. All his crimes are seen by his sovereign, and it is not safe to mock the Son of God on his throne, or to despise him who will soon come to judgment. When the sinner feels these truths he should tremble and cry out, What

shall I do?

(7) We see here how the Spirit operates in producing conviction of sin. It is not in an arbitrary manner; it is in accordance with truth, and by the truth. Nor have we a right to expect that he will convict and convert people except as the truth is presented to their minds. They who desire success in the gospel should present clear, striking, and impressive truth, for such only God is accustomed to bless.

(8) We have in the conduct of Peter and the other apostles a striking instance of the power of the gospel. Just before, Peter, trembling and afraid, had denied his Master with an oath; now, in the presence of the murderers of the Son of God, he boldly charged them with their crime, and dared their fury. Just before, all the disciples forsook the Lord Jesus and fled; now, in the presence of his murderers, they lifted their voice and proclaimed their guilt and danger, even in the city where he had been just arraigned and put to death. What could have produced this change but the power of God? And is there not proof here that a religion which produces such changes came from heaven?

CLARKE, "When they heard this, they were pricked in their heart - This powerful, intelligent, consecutive, and interesting discourse, supported every where by prophecies and corresponding facts, left them without reply and without excuse; and they plainly saw there was no hope for them, but in the mercy of him whom they had rejected and crucified.

What shall we do? - How shall we escape those judgments which we now see hanging over our heads?

GILL Verse 37. Now when they heard this,.... Or "him," as the Arabic version; that is,

Peter speaking these things, describing the character of Jesus of Nazareth; opening the

prophecies concerning him; asserting his resurrection from the dead, and exaltation at the

right hand of God; ascribing this wonderful affair, of speaking with divers tongues, to his

effusion of the Spirit; and charging them home with the iniquity of crucifying him:

they were pricked in their hearts; the word of God entered into them, and was as a sharp

sword in them, which cut and laid open their hearts, and the sin and wickedness of them;

they saw themselves guilty of the crime laid to their charge, and were filled with remorse

of conscience for it; they felt pain at their hearts, and much uneasiness, and were seized

with horror and trembling; they were wounded in their spirits, being hewn and cut down

by the prophets and apostles of the Lord, and slain by the words of his mouth; they were

as dead men in their own apprehension; and indeed, a prick, a cut, or wound in the heart

is mortal:

and said unto Peter, and to the rest of the apostles, men and brethren, what shall we do?

the persons they before mocked at, they are glad to advise with, what should be done in

this their sad and wretched case; what they should do to obtain the favour of God, the

forgiveness of their sins, and everlasting salvation. Convinced, awakened sinners, are

generally at first upon a covenant of works; are for doing something to atone for their past

crimes, to set themselves right in the sight of God, to ingratiate themselves into his

favour, and procure the pardon of their sins, and the inheritance of eternal life. And they

seem also to be at a loss about the way of salvation, what is to be done to attain it, or how,

and by what means it is to be come at; and are almost ready to despair of it, their sin

appearing in so dreadful a light, and attended with such aggravating circumstances. Beza's

ancient copy reads, "some of them said to Peter," &c. not all that heard, but those that

were pricked to the heart.

HENRY, "We have seen the wonderful effect of the pouring out of the Spirit, in its influence upon the preachers of the gospel. Peter, in all his life, never spoke at the rate that he had done now, with such fulness, perspicuity, and power. We are now to see another blessed fruit of the pouring out of the Spirit in its influence upon the hearers of the gospel. From the first delivery of that divine message, it appeared that there was a divine power going along with it, and it was mighty, through God, to do wonders: thousands were immediately brought by it to the obedience of faith; it was the rod of God's strength sent out of Zion, Psa_110:2, Psa_110:3. We have here the first-fruits of that vast harvest of souls which by it were gathered in to Jesus Christ. Come and see, in these verses, the exalted Redeemer riding forth, in these chariots of salvation, conquering and to conquer, Rev_6:2.

In these verses we find the word of God the means of beginning and carrying on a good work of grace in the hearts of many, the Spirit of the Lord working by it. Let us see the method of it.

I. They were startled, and convinced, and put upon a serious enquiry, Act_2:37. When they heard, or having heard, having patiently heard Peter out, and not given him the interruption they had been used to give to Christ in his discourses (this was one good point gained, that they were become attentive to the word), they were pricked to the heart, or in the heart, and, under a deep concern and perplexity, applied themselves to the preachers with this question, What shall we do? It was very strange that such impressions should be made upon such hard hearts all of a sudden. They were Jews, bred up in the opinion of the sufficiency of their religion to save them, had lately seen this Jesus crucified in weakness and disgrace, and were told by their rulers that he was a deceiver. Peter had charged them with having a hand, a wicked hand, in his death, which was likely to have exasperated them against him; yet, when they heard this plain scriptural sermon, they were much affected with it.

1. It put them in pain: They were pricked in their hearts. We read of those that were cut to the heart with indignation at the preacher (Act_7:54), but these were pricked to the heart with indignation at themselves for having been accessory to the death of Christ. Peter, charging it upon them, awakened their consciences, touched them to the quick, and the reflection they now made upon it was as a sword in their bones, it pierced them as they had pierced Christ. Note, Sinners, when their eyes are opened, cannot but be pricked to the heart for sin, cannot but experience an inward uneasiness; this is having the heart rent (Joe_2:13), a broken and contrite heart, Psa_51:17. Those that are truly sorry for their sins, and ashamed of them, and afraid of the consequences of them, are pricked to the heart. A prick in the heart is mortal, and under those commotions (says Paul) I died, Rom_7:9. “All my good opinion of myself and confidence in myself failed me.”

2. It put them upon enquiry. Our of the abundance of the heart, thus pricked, the mouth spoke. Observe,

(1.) To whom they thus addressed themselves: To Peter and to the rest of the apostles,some to one and some to another; to them they opened their case; by them they had been convinced, and therefore by them they expect to be counselled and comforted. They do not appeal from them to the scribes and Pharisees, to justify them against the

apostles' charge, but apply to them, as owning the charge, and referring the case to them. They call them men and brethren, as Peter had called them (Act_2:29): it is a style of friendship and love, rather than a title of honour: “You are men, look upon us with humanity; you are brethren, look upon us with brotherly love.” Note, Ministers are spiritual physicians; they should be advised with by those whose consciences are wounded; and it is good for people to be free and familiar with those ministers, as men and their brethren, who deal for their souls as for their own.

(2.) What the address is: What shall we do? [1.] They speak as men at a stand, that did not know what to do; in a perfect surprise: “Is that Jesus whom we have crucified both Lord and Christ? Then what will become of us who crucified him? We are all undone!” Note, No way of being happy but by seeing ourselves miserable. When we find ourselves in danger of being lost for ever, there is hope of our being made for ever, and not till then. [2.] They speak as men at a point, that were resolved to do any thing they should be directed to immediately; they are not for taking time to consider, nor for adjourning the prosecution of their convictions to a more convenient season, but desire now to be told what they must do to escape the misery they were liable to. Note, Those that are convinced of sin would gladly know the way to peace and pardon, Act_9:6; Act_16:30.

CALVIN, "37. They were pricked in heart. Luke doth now declare the fruit of the

sermon, to the end we may know that the power of the Holy Ghost was not only showed

forth in the diversity of tongues, but also in their hearts which heard. And he noteth a

double fruit; first, that they were touched with the feeling of sorrow; and, secondly, that

they were obedient to Peter's counsel. This is the beginning of repentance, this is the

entrance unto godliness, to be sorry for our sins, and to be wounded with the feeling of

our miseries. For so long as men are careless, they cannot take such heed unto doctrine as

they ought. And for this cause the word of God is compared to a sword, (Hebrews 4:12,)

because it doth mortify our flesh, that we may be offered to God for a sacrifice. But there

must be added unto this pricking in heart readiness to obey. Cain and Judas were pricked

in heart, but despair did keep them back from submitting themselves unto God, (Genesis

4:13; Matthew 27:3.) For the mind being oppressed with horror, can do nothing else but

flee from God. And surely when David affirmeth that a contrite spirit and an humble

heart is a sacrifice acceptable to God, he speaketh of voluntary pricking; forasmuch as

there is fretting and fuming mixed with the prickings of the wicked. Therefore, we must

take a good heart to us, and lift up our mind with this hope of salvation, that we may be

ready to addict and give over ourselves unto God, and to follow whatsoever he shall

command. We see many oftentimes pricked, who, notwithstanding, do fret and murmur,

or else forwardly strive and struggle, and so, consequently, go furiously mad. Yea, this is

the cause why they go mad, because they feel such prickings against their will. Those

men, therefore, are profitably pricked alone who are willingly sorrowful, and do also seek

some remedy at God's hands.

BARCLAY, "Save Yourselves (Acts 2:37-41)

(i) This passage shows with crystal clarity the effect of the Cross. When men realised just

what they had done in crucifying Jesus their hearts were broken. "I," said Jesus, "when I

am lifted up from the earth will draw all men to myself" (John 12:32). Every man has had

a hand in that crime. Once a missionary told the story of Jesus in an Indian village.

Afterwards he showed the life of Christ in lantern slides thrown against the white-washed

wall of a house. When the Cross appeared on the wall, one man rose from the audience

and ran forward. "Come down from that Cross, Son of God," he cried. "I, not you, should

be hanging there." The Cross, when we understand what happened there, must pierce the

heart.

(ii) That experience demands a reaction from men. "Repent," said Peter, "first and

foremost." What does repentance mean? The word originally meant an afterthought.

Often a second thought shows that the first thought was wrong; and so the word came to

mean a Change of mind. But, if a man is honest, a change of mind demands a change of

action. Repentance must involve both change of mind and change of action. A man may

change his mind and come to see that his actions were wrong but be so much in love with

his old ways that he will not change them. A man may change his ways but his mind

remains the same, changing only because of fear or prudence. True repentance involves a

change of mind and a change of action.

(iii) When repentance comes something happens to the past. There is God's forgiveness

for what lies behind. Let us be quite clear that the consequences of sins are not wiped out.

Not even God can do that. When we sin we may well do something to ourselves and to

others which cannot be undone. Let us look at it this way. When we were young and had

done something bad there was an invisible barrier between us and our mother. But when

we went and said we were sorry, the old relationship was restored and we were right with

her again. Forgiveness does not abolish the consequences of what we have done but it

puts us right with God.

(iv) When repentance comes something happens for the future. We receive the gift of the

Holy Spirit and in that power we can win battles we never thought to win and resist things

which by ourselves we would have been powerless to resist.

ELLICOTT, "(37) They were pricked in their heart.—The verb occurs here only in the

New Testament, and expresses the sharp, painful emotion which is indicated in

“compunction,” a word of kindred meaning. A noun derived from it, or possibly from

another root, is used in Romans 11:8 in the sense of “slumber,” apparently as indicating

either the unconsciousness that follows upon extreme pain, or simple drowsiness. In

“attrition” and “contrition” we have analogous instances of words primarily physical used

for spiritual emotions.

COFFMAN, "They were pricked in their heart ... is equivalent to saying that these people

then and there believed on the Lord Jesus Christ. There is no way that they would have

followed on to obey the word if they had not believed. Thus, right here in the gateway of

the historical church stands the sure and certain truth that "faith alone" did not save the

first Christians; nor can the conclusion be denied that "faith alone" never saved any

Christians since then.

The terms of the salvation of those believers in Christ were immediately announced by

that apostle to whom Jesus had promised that whatever he bound on earth would be

bound in heaven (Matthew 16:13ff). There was no ambiguity in the announcement.

What shall we do ...? In the light of Peter's text, "Whosoever shall call upon the name of

the Lord shall be saved" (Acts 2:21), the meaning of this question is "What shall we do to

be saved?" It has no other possible interpretation.

UNKNOWN,"V. 37 - cut to the heart - The verb means to sting or to cut or to pierce. It

conveys the idea that Peter痴 words stunned them, not only because what he said was

recognized as being true, but also because of the enormity of the truths presented.

to Peter and the rest - Though Peter had preached, and answers their question, the other

eleven may also have been speaking. The twelve were recognized as those who would

know the answers, on the basis of what had been seen and heard, and so they were asked.

This is but another indication that only the twelve were recipients of Joel痴 prophecy, and

properly the subjects being described in 2:1ff.

what shall we do - Not a rhetorical question, but one for information. They had accepted

as true what Peter had said. They now believed that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah,

and that they were guilty of sin in respect to His crucifixion.

V. 38 - repent - The Greek word means: change your mind (and thus your life). It is a

prominent N.T. theme, involved in the initial response to the gospel facts, and in

subsequent Christian life. One never gets through repenting, since (like Paul in Phil. 3:13-

14) one must always "press forward" in better living, higher goals, following in Jesus・footsteps.

It is a basic premise behind the N.T. epistles that those to whom they were written will

conform to the stipulations therein. Hence, repentance is presumed on the part of the

recipients. Stated differently, to have the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ is

going to demand constant mind-changing, seen in life-changing. Nothing else will suffice.

The doctrine of repentance is much more forward looking than being concerned with the

past. The Christian must live in the future, not the past. We do people a disservice with

our "faith", repentance, etc.," if we leave an impression that repentance is only necessary

to becoming a Christian, rather than essential to remaining a Christian.

be baptized - The second of the two commands, the results being stated next. This is the

first outward action commanded, and actually the effect of faith and repentance. We are

active in believing and changing our mind, and express our acceptance of Jesus as our

Savior, in a way that all can see, by our obedience to the command to be immersed. By

these three: faith, repentance, immersion, we are in Christ, Galatians 3:27. (See

comments on 8:36 please).

forgiveness of sins - A promise to be received by faith. We cannot prove that such has

been done. We accept the fact that our sins have been forgiven because of our faith in

God痴 character. We do what Jesus commands, and believe that God will keep His

promise(s). John痴 immersion was for the forgiveness of sins, but like the sacrifices of

the Old covenant, depended upon the blood of Jesus (Cf. Mark 1:4), Hebrews 9:15-17.

gift of the Holy Spirit - There is so much controversy over this point (as well as the

preceding ones!). The argument over the nature of the Holy Spirit, the relationship of the

Holy Spirit to one痴 conversion, then the subsequent effects upon that (converted)

person, whether the gift is the Holy Spirit Himself, or a gift from Him - all these are at

issue here. We think it is best to take the text as meaning the person of the Holy Spirit, as

presented in Romans 8:9-11. So then, the person of Jesus gave his life for all our sins, the

person of the Holy Spirit is given as a guarantee of our eternal inheritance, II Cor. 5:5.

HAWKER 37-40. "Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? (38) Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (39) For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. (40) And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.

Behold the wonderful grace of God, as here manifested! How sudden, how powerful, how gracious! Surely, the Lord the Spirit here wrought by his Almighty sovereignty, on the hearts of those Jerusalem sinners. And, was not this in proof of what Jesus had said and promised? Joh_1:50; Joh_14:12. But, let not the Reader forget, that the same Lord still carrieth on the same works of grace, and is as much the Almighty Lord in his Church, as ever!

And I pray the Reader to remark with me, the characters of those, to whom such grace was shewn. No doubt from what Peter said, (verse 23; Act_2:23) that many of those who were now pricked in their heart, were among those who joined the rabble, to crucify the Lord of life and glory. Oh! who that knew these wonderful events, but must have exclaimed, what hath God wrought! The Reader will probably recollect, upon this occasion, some of these scriptures, Hos_6:5; Heb_4:12; Jer_23:29.

It is well worthy observation, how very natural it is with sinners of all descriptions and characters, under the first alarms of sin, to cry out, what must I do to be saved! Every carnal mind is for doing, although all his life past he hath done nothing but sin. But, such is the pride of human nature in an unhumbled, unregenerate state, Joh_6:28; Act_9:6; Act_16:30.

The Apostle’s answer to their anxious question, deserves to be well attended to, when saying to them, repent and be baptized. Did Peter mean to say, that repentance was in every man’s power to perform? Surely the Apostle could not, for in a subsequent discourse before the Jewish council, he expressly ascribes the work to Christ. Him, (saith Peter,) hath God exalted to be a Prince and a Savior, for to give repentance to Israel, and remission of sins, Act_5:30-31. What, therefore, is Christ’s gift, cannot be man’s work. And, moreover, Peter commanded them to repent, and then to be baptized, that they might receive the gifts of the Holy Ghost. So that the repentance Peter enjoined, was to go before the gifts of the Holy Ghost, and not to follow, And so the Prophet in the Lord’s name promised, in the latter day dispensation, to pour out a spirit of grace, and of supplication; and then godly mourning and true sorrow should follow, in prompting them to look to Him whom they had pierced, Zec_12:10. Hence it should seem, that the repentance Peter called upon them to perform, differed from that which is the gift of God.

And it is worthy remark, that Christ, and his harbinger, John the Baptist, preached the same, Mat_3:1 and Mat_4:17. And no doubt there is a repentance, which is simply the sorrow of nature, arising from natural causes, and produced by natural means; and

which differs as widely from the spiritual sorrow of the heart, inwrought by the Holy Ghost, by reason of sin; as the rain of pools which dry up for want of supply, from the water of the fountain, which forms a living spring in the heart, springing up to everlasting life. Every carnal mind upon earth, more or less, knows this repentance; for when sin brings sickness, and sickness threatens death, the sinner will naturally repent his folly. Peter calls upon those Jerusalem sinners, to repent of their wickedness, in their false views of Christ and his Messiahship; and in testimony of that sorrow, to be baptized in his name for the remission of sins, and to receive gifts of the Holy Ghost.

I beg to observe on the form of baptism enjoined by Peter, that it differed from what the Lord Jesus himself appointed, when giving his final commission to the Apostles. This of Peter was to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. That of Christ himself was in the joint name of the whole three Persons of the Godhead, Mat_28:19. But here lay the difference. The Jews to whom Peter addressed himself, had hitherto denied the Person and Godhead of Christ as the Messiah. They acknowledged God the Father; and believed in the Spirit, as speaking in, and by the Prophets. So that by following what Peter commanded of being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, implied also the whole Persons of the Godhead as included. But Christ’s commission to his Apostles, had respect to the Gentiles, who were alike ignorant of all the Persons of the Godhead: and therefore the Lord mentioned all.

One observation more I beg to offer on this most precious sermon of the Apostles, namely, the sure consequences Peter promised, in the gifts of the Holy Ghost; that is, I apprehend, all the saving gifts of the Spirit necessary to salvation. Not the more special operations of the Holy Ghost needful to the Apostolic office, but only such, as suited their own personal sanctification. For had all these, received miraculous qualifications for the ministry the Apostles needed not, as they soon afterwards did, to recommend the Church to look out seven men of honest report, to exercise the office of deacons, Act_6:3. And in relation to the promise of the Holy Ghost, how sweetly the Apostle finished the subject, in shewing the extensiveness of it, while bounded by the Lord’s call. So ran the charter of grace, in the original Covenant with Abraham, Gen_17:7. So the Lord confirmed it in the days of the Prophets: Isa_44:3 and Isa_49:21. And so all the after ages of the Church found it, both Jew and Gentile, subject to the divine call, Psa_103:3. Oh! the preciousness of a Covenant, ordered in all things and sure, 2Sa_23:5; Gal_3:28.

BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR 37-42, "Now when they heard this they were pricked in their heart.

The effects of gospel preaching

1. Peter having explained the events of Pentecost, an immediate effect was produced. “They were pricked in their hearts.” So the Holy Ghost was poured out upon them as He had been poured out upon the assembly of the Church. We see here, therefore, the double action of the Holy Spirit. He is poured out upon the Church to sanctify and to confirm in the faith; and upon those who are outside that He may alarm and quicken and direct to right conclusions.

2. This was the first Christian sermon that had been preached. Jesus Christ was no longer present in the body. Now we are curious to know how the truth will make its way upon its own merits, apart from that magnetic influence which attached to the audible voice of the Divine Master. Will the truth make its way by sheer force of its celestial beauty and grace, and comfort, or will it perish under other voices than Christ’s own? So we wait, we hear the discourse, and when it is concluded we read—

that when the people heard this they were pricked in their hearts.

3. Observe the peculiarity of that effect. Not, they were awed by the eloquence, excited in their imagination; gratified in their taste; the result was infinitely deeper and grander. An arrow had fastened itself in the very centre of their life. In their conscience was inserted the sting of intolerable self-accusation. This was the grand miracle. Truly we may say this was the beginning of miracles of the higher, because the spiritual kind. Great effects are produced by great causes.

4. A reflection of this kind would, however, have a very remote interest for us were it confined to an ancient incident. As a matter of fact, the apostle Peter preached the only sermon that any Christian minister is ever at liberty to preach. This is the model sermon. No change must be made here or a corresponding change will be made in the effect. Men may be more eloquent, literary, technical, and philosophical; they may use longer words and more abstruse arguments, but the effect will be like other talk, pointless, and there will be no answer in the great human heart—no conscience will accuse, no eyes will be blinded with tears, none will cry, “What shall we do?” Let us look at—

I. The sermon and see how it is made up.

1. It is full of Scriptural allusions, as is every sermon that is worth listening to. The reason why our preaching is so powerless is that we do not impregnate it with the inspired word. Peter did not make the sermon. He quoted David and Joel, the Psalms and the prophets, and set these quotations in their right relations to what had just happened, and whilst he was talking history he made history. Faithful to God’s word, God’s Spirit was faithful to him, and herein was realised “My word shall not return unto Me void.” Peter’s word would have returned void, but God’s word is as a sower in the eventide bringing back his sheaves with joy.

2. It is full of Christ. But for Christ it never could have been delivered. From end to end it palpitates with the Deity and glory of the Son of God.

3. It is full of holy unction. It was not delivered as a schoolboy might deliver a message. The great strong rough frame of the fisherman-preacher quivered under the feeling of the sacred message which the tongue was delivering.

4. It is full of patriotic and spiritual tenderness, and all the while without art or trick or mechanical skill, it led up to a vehement and solemn demand. When that demand was thundered upon the people they did not applaud the man, they were concerned about themselves; they were not pleased, they were pierced; and they were not gratified, they were convicted.

II. But even this great sermon of Peter’s does not explain the full result. The preacher must have had something to do with the effect. He had just received the Holy Ghost. An inspired doctrine demands an inspired ministry. The Book is inspired, but when uninspired readers read it they kill the very fire of heaven when it touches their reluctant tongues. It is there that the holy influence is lost. When the Holy Ghost is both in the doctrine and in the people who profess it, the mountains of difficulty will fly away like dust upon the mocking wind.

III. Nor have we read the full account yet of the production of this mighty effect. The people were prepared for vital statement; anything that was beautiful in nature, or in music would not have satisfied them. They would have resented any discourse that bristled with merely clever allusions or curious conceits of expression. The fire fell upon prepared material, therefore the Word of the Lord had free course and was glorified.

How can we preach to a people unprepared to hear? The work is too great for any man. A prepared pulpit should be balanced by a prepared pew, “Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters.” To the unthirsty man the Bible spring is without attraction, but to the thirsty traveller, sun-smitten and weary, how like the music of running streams! A very solemn reflection occurs here. Where the heart is unaffected, Christian service is more mischievous than beneficial. What if our notions be increased, if our motives be left unbaptized? And what if we have been flattered and cajoled and “daubed with untempered mortar,” if the Word has not reached the very seat of the disease? Pray for a ministry that shall affect the heart. He who seeks after a comforting ministry only, and a restful one that shall give him no disturbance, wounds his own life.

IV. The effect was grand in every aspect.

1. Three thousand souls were saved. And this will be the effect of Christian teaching everywhere under the right conditions. Again and again we read that the people who heard the apostolic preaching, “cried out.” We have lost that cry: we have succumbed to the cold and benumbing spirit of decorum. And whilst it is perfectly true that there may be an irrational excitement which ought to be subdued and controlled, it is also true that there is a spiritual enthusiasm, without which the Church may be but a painted sepulchre.

2. The people continued steadfastly in the apostle’s doctrine, and in fellowship, in breaking of bread and in prayers.

(1) The flock kept well together for fear of the wolf. Were we ourselves in heathen lands we should realise the joy of keeping closely together. But Hying in a Christian land where Christianity has become a luxury, or in some instances even an annoyance, what wonder that we do not realise the primitive enthusiasm, and enter with delight into the original fellowship and union of the Church?

(2) The people continued in the right teaching. Until our teaching be right our life must be wrong. We must ask for the pure bread, the pure water, the undefiled Bible, and live on that; out of such nutritious food there will come proper results such as fellowship, sacramental communion, and common prayer. A man says, “I can pray by myself,” that is perfectly true, but you should realise that you are something more than yourself; you are part of a sum total. A man is not at liberty in the Christian sense of manhood to detach himself from the common stock to which he belongs. Herein is the advantage of common prayer and common praise. “Forsake not the assembling of yourselves together.” There is inspiration in sympathy, there is encouragement in fellowship. It does the soul good to see the hosts gathered together under the royal banner stained with blood; to see the great army marching shoulder to shoulder under the blast of the great trumpet. “No man liveth unto himself” who lives aright.

(3) They had all things common. This is the sternly logical outcome of true inspiration. But having regard to all the social conditions under which we live this mechanical form of union is impracticable. But having lost this form, which broke down under the eyes of apostles themselves, we still reserve the spiritual outcome and meaning. My strength is not my own, it belongs to the weakest child that I may see groaning under oppression. If I interfere, and the oppressor say to me, What have you to do with him—he is not yours? Christianity obliges me to say he is mine. If you see an animal ill-used and ill-treated, though it be not yours in any technical or legal sense of the term, you are called upon to interfere by an earlier right, and by a diviner law. Whoever has strength owns it for the benefit of

those who have none. (J. Parker, D. D.)

Evangelical preaching

Preaching has ever been the principal means used for diffusing a knowledge of Christianity. It was the method adopted and enjoined by the great Author of our religion (Mat_4:17; Mat_10:7; Mar_16:15). A striking instance of its early success is recorded in the chapter before us; and we are led by our text to inquire into the nature of that preaching which was so successful; and into the effects which followed such preaching.

I. The nature of the preaching may be understood from the context.

1. The subject was Christ. The preacher’s name evidently was to prove that Jesus of Nazareth was the true Messiah.

2. The subject was of the highest importance; it was perfectly suitable to the audience;

3. And the manner of treating it was excellent. The discussion was plain—concise—clear. The mode of address was courageous.

4. The preacher who thus conducted himself, demands our consideration. It was Peter, a late fisherman of Galilee, he was Divinely called to preach the gospel; and thus qualified, he preached; power from above attended the word.

II. And the effects which followed well deserve our attention. “They were pricked in their heart.” Hearers treat the Word preached with indifference; or feeling its force they resist it; or happily, like those whose case is before us, they yield to its convincing influence. The address was made to their understanding—their judgment—their conscience; and being accompanied by the power of Divine grace, they were rationally, Scripturally, and feelingly convinced of the error of their ways and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” We may consider this as—

1. The language of religious concern.

2. The language of religious distress.

3. The language of humble inquiry. Think on their former prejudices. Such was the preaching, and such were the effects.

Our minds are farther led to the following improvement.

1. Christ crucified is, and ever should be, the grand subject of the Christian ministry.

2. There is salvation in no other—there is no other name whereby we can be saved (Act_4:12).

3. In religion, it is of the utmost importance that the heart be affected (“ they were pricked in their hearts”); See Gen_6:5; Jer_17:7; Joe_2:13; Mar_7:21; Pro_4:23; Psa_51:10; Psa_51:17. Sin hath its seat in the heart—there the change should begin.

4. Persons may be so affected on account of their sin and danger, that they cannot, in some cases, avoid strongly expressing what they feel.

5. The essential importance of Divine influence to render the word preached successful is another idea suggested by the circumstances connected with the text. (Theological Sketch-book.)

Conversion

I. Refers to what they heard. They heard—

1. An explicit statement of the truth.

2. Enforced by solid reasoning.

3. Brought home to their own Consciences with fidelity.

II. It describes what they felt—“They were pricked in their heart.” The expression denotes a sudden, deep, strong, anguished feeling.

1. Agonised astonishment—at this ignorance amid so much light—at the error committed against such evidence. They see that Jesus was no impostor.

2. Inexpressible conviction. They felt the guilt of rejecting a Divine Teacher.

3. Terrified apprehension. Could they forget their treatment of Jesus? Think of the alarm that now seizes them when the tumult of rage gives way to the conviction of guilt.

III. It records what they said.

1. What shall we do? This explanation is the utterance of concern—concern which it is not in the power of language to express.

2. It is the utterance of ingenuous confession.

3. It is the language of surrender. They abandon unbelief.

4. The language of anxiety for salvation. (Homilist.)

The effusion of the Holy Spirit

“Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation They will not hearken unto thee; for they will not hearken unto Me;… yet thou shalt speak unto them, and tell them, thus saith the Lord God; whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear;… and they shall know that there hath been a prophet among them.” Thus God formerly forearmed Ezekiel against the greatest discouragement that he was to meet with in his mission, I mean the unsuccessfulness of his ministry. For they are not only your ministers, who are disappointed in the exercise of the ministry: Isaiah, Jeremiahs, Ezekiels, are often as unsuccessful as we. In such melancholy eases we must endeavour to surmount the obstacles, which the obduracy of sinners opposeth against the dispensations of grace. If “the angels -of God rejoice over one sinner that repenteth,” what pleasure must he feel who hath reason to hope, that in this valley of tears he hath had the honour of opening the gate of heaven to a multitude of sinners, that he hath “saved himself and them that heard him.” This pure joy God gave on the day of Pentecost to St. Peter. In order to comprehend what passed in the auditory, we must understand the sermon of the preacher. There are five remarkable things in the sermon, and there are five correspondent dispositions in the hearers.

I. We have remarked in the sermon of St. Peter that noble freedom of speech, which so well becomes a Christian preacher, and is so well adapted to strike his hearers. How much soever we now admire this beautiful part of pulpit-eloquence, it is very difficult to imitate it. Sometimes a weakness of faith, which attends your best established preachers;

sometimes worldly prudence; sometimes a timidity, that proceedeth from a modest consciousness of the insufficiency of their talents; sometimes a fear, too well grounded, alas I of the retorting of those censures, which people, always ready to murmur against them who reprove their vices, are eager to make; sometimes a fear of those persecutions, which the world always raiseth against all whom heaven qualifies to destroy the empire of sin; all these considerations damp the courage of the preacher, and deprive him of freedom of speech. But none of these considerations had any weight with our apostle. And, indeed, why should any of them affect him? Should the weakness of his faith? He had conversed with Jesus Christ Himself; he had accompanied Him on the holy mount, he had “heard a voice from the excellent glory,” saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Could he distrust his talents? The Prince of the kingdom, the Author, and Finisher of faith, had told him, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church.” Should he dread reproaches and recriminations? The purity of his intentions, and the sanctity of his life confound them. Should he pretend to keep fair with the world? But what finesse is to be used, when eternal misery is to be denounced, and eternal happiness proposed? Philosophers talk of certain invisible bands that unite mankind to one another. A man, animated with any passion, hath in the features of his face, and in the tone of his voice, a something that partly communicates his sentiments to his hearers. Error proposed in a lively manner by a man, who is affected with it himself, may seduce unguarded people. Fictions, which we know are fictions, exhibited in this manner, move and affect us for a moment. But what a dominion over the heart doth that speaker obtain, who delivers truths, and who is affected himself with the truths which he delivereth! To this part of the eloquence of St. Peter, we must attribute the emotions of his hearers; “they were pricked in their heart.”

II. A second thing which gave weight and dignity to the sermon of St. Peter, was the miracle that preceded his preaching, I mean the gift of tongues, which had been communicated to all the apostles. The prodigy that accompanied the sermon of St. Peter had three characteristic marks of a real miracle.

1. It was above human power. Every pretended miracle, that hath not this first character, ought to be suspected by us. But the prodigy in question was evidently superior to human power. Of all sciences in the world, that of languages is the least capable of an instant acquisition. Certain natural talents, a certain superiority of genius, sometimes produce in some men the same effects, which long and painful industry can scarcely ever produce in others. We have sometimes seen people whom nature seems to have designedly formed in an instant courageous captains, profound geometers, admirable orators. But tongues are acquired by study and time. The acquisition of languages is like the knowledge of history. It is not a superior genius, it is not a great capacity, that can discover to any man what passed in the world ten or twelve ages ago. The monuments of antiquity must be consulted, huge folios must be read, and an immense number of volumes must be understood, arranged, and digested. In like manner, the knowledge of languages is a knowledge of experience, and no man can ever derive it from his own innate fund of ability. Yet the apostles, and apostolical men, men who were known to be men of no education, all on a sudden knew the arbitrary signs by which different nations had agreed to express their thoughts. Terms, which had no natural connection with their ideas, were all on a sudden arranged in their minds.

2. But perhaps these miracles may not be the more respectable on account of their superiority to human power. Perhaps, if they be not human, they may be devilish? No, a little attention to their second character will convince you that they are Divine. Their end was to incline men, not to renounce natural and revealed religion, but to

respect and to follow both; not to render an attentive examination unnecessary, but to allure men to it.

3. The prodigy that accompanied the preaching of St. Peter had the third character of a true miracle. It was wrought in the presence of those who had the greatest interest in knowing the truth of it. The miracle being granted, I affirm that the compunction of heart, of which my text speaks, was an effect of that attention which could not be refused to such an extraordinary event, and of that deference which could not be withheld from a man, to whose ministry God had set His seal. They instantly, and entirely, surrendered themselves to men, who addressed them in a manner so extraordinary, “they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter, and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?”

III. We remark, in the discourse of the apostle, an invincible power of reasoning, and, in the souls of his hearers, that conviction which carries along with it the consent of the will. Of all methods of reasoning with an adversary, none is more conclusive than that which is taken from his own principles. But when the principles of an adversary are well grounded, and when we are able to prove that his principles produce our conclusions, our reasoning becomes demonstrative to a rational opponent, and he ought not to deny it. Christianity, it is remarkable, is defensible both ways. The first may be successfully employed against pagans; the second more successfully against the Jews. It is easy to convince a heathen that he can have no right to exclaim against the mysteries of the gospel, because if he have any reason to exclaim against the mysteries of Christianity, he hath infinitely more to exclaim against those of paganism. The second way was employed more successfully by the apostles against the Jews. They demonstrated that all the reasons, which obliged them to be Jews, ought to have induced them to become Christians; that every argument, which obliged them to acknowledge the Divine legation of Moses, ought to have engaged them to believe in Jesus Christ. St. Peter made use of this method. What argument can ye allege for your religion, said they to the Jews, which doth not establish that which we preach? Do ye allege the privileges of your legislator? Your argument is demonstrative; Moses had access to God on the holy mountain. Do ye allege the purity of the morality of your religion? Your argument is demonstrative. The manifest design of your religion is to reclaim men to God, to prevent idolatry, and to inspire them with piety, benevolence, and zeal. But this argument concludes for us. Do ye allege the miracles that were wrought to prove the truth of your religion? Your argument is demonstrative. But this argument establisheth the truth of our religion. What, then, are the prejudices that still engage you to continue in the profession of Judaism? Are they derived from the prophecies? Your principles are demonstrative; but, in the person of our Jesus, we show you to-day all the grand characters which, your own prophets said, would be found in the Messiah. Close reasoning ought to be the soul of all discourses. I compare it in regard to eloquence with benevolence in regard to religion. Without benevolence we may maintain a show of religion; but we cannot possess the substance of it (1Co_13:1, etc.). In like manner in regard to eloquence; speak with authority, display treasures of erudition, let the liveliest and most sublime imagination wing it away, turn all your periods till they make music in the most delicate ear, what will all your discourses be if void of argumentation? a noise, sounding brass, a tinkling cymbal. Ye may surprise, but ye cannot convince; ye may dazzle, but ye cannot instruct; ye may, indeed, please, but ye can neither change, sanctify, nor transform.

IV. There are, in the sermon of St. Peter, stinging reproofs; and, in the souls of the hearers, a pungent remorse (verse 22). And who can express the agitations which were produced in the souls of the audience? What pencil can describe the state of their consciences? They had committed this crime through ignorance. St. Peter tore these

fatal veils asunder. He showed these madmen their own conduct in its true point of light; and discovered their parricide in all its horror. “Ye have taken, and crucified Jesus, who was approved of God.” The apostle reminded them of the holy rules of righteousness, which Jesus Christ had preached and exemplified; and the holiness of Him, whom they had crucified, filled them with a sense of their own depravity. He reminded them of the benefits which Jesus Christ had bountifully bestowed on their nation. He reminded them of the grandeur of Jesus Christ. He reminded them of their unworthy treatment of Jesus Christ; of their eager outcries for His death; of their repeated shoutings. The whole was an ocean of terror, and each reflection a wave that overwhelmed, distorted, and distressed their souls.

V. In fine, we may remark in the sermon of St. Peter denunciations of Divine vengeance. The most effectual means for the conversion of sinners, that which St. Paul so successfully employed, is terror. St. Peter was too well acquainted with the obduracy of his auditors not to avail himself of this motive. People, who had imbrued their hands in the blood of a personage so august, wanted this mean. St. Peter quoted a prophecy of Joel, which foretold that fatal day, and the prophecy was the more terrible because one part of it was accomplished; because the remarkable events that were to precede it were actually come to pass; for the Spirit of God had begun to pour out His miraculous influences upon all flesh, young men had seen visions, and old men had dreamed dreams; and the formidable preparations of approaching judgments were then before their eyes. Such was the power of the sermon of St. Peter over the souls of his hearers! Human eloquence hath sometimes done wonders worthy of immortal memory. Some of the ancient orators have governed the souls of the most invincible heroes, and the life of Cicero affords us an example. Ligarius had the audacity to make war on Caesar. Caesar was determined to make the rash adventurer a victim to his revenge. The friends of Legarius durst not interpose, and Ligarius was on the point, either of being justly punished for his offence, or of being sacrificed to the unjust ambition of his enemy. What force could control the power of Caesar? But Caesar had an adversary, whose power was superior to his own. This adversary pleads for Ligarius against Caesar, and Caesar, all invincible as he is, yields to the eloquence of Cicero. Cicero pleads, Caesar feels; in spite of himself, his wrath subsides, his vengeance disappears. The fatal list of the crimes of Ligarius, which he is about to produce to the judges, falls from his hands, and he actually absolves him at the close of the oration, whom, when he entered the court, he meant to condemn. But yield, ye orators of Athens and Rome! Yield to our fishermen and tent-makers. Oh, how powerful is the sword of the Spirit in the hands of our apostles! But will ye permit us to ask you one question? Would ye choose to hear the apostles, and ministers like the apostles? Would ye attend their sermons? or, to say all in one word, Do ye wish St. Peter was now in this pulpit? Think a little, before ye answer this question. Compare the taste of this auditory with the genius of the preacher; your delicacy with that liberty of speech with which he reproved the vices of his own times. One wants to find something new in every sermon; and, under pretence of satisfying his laudable desire of improvement in knowledge, would divert our attention from well-known vices that deserve to be censured. Another desires to be pleased, and would have us adorn our discourses, not that we may obtain an easier access to his heart, but that we may flatter a kind of concupiscence, which is content to sport with a religious exercise, till, when Divine service ends, it can plunge into more sensual joy. Almost all require to be lulled asleep in sin. Ah! how disagreeable to you would the sermons of the apostles have been! Realise them. Ah! methinks I hear the holy man; methinks I hear the preacher, animated with the same spirit that made him boldly tell the murderers of Jesus Christ, “Jesus of Nazareth, a Man approved of God among you, by miracles and

wonders, and signs, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.” Methinks I see St. Peter, the man who was so extremely affected with the sinful state of his auditors; methinks I hear him enumerating the various excesses of this nation, and saying, Ye! ye are void of all sensibility when we tell you of the miseries of the Church, when we describe those bloody scenes, that are made up of dungeons and galleys, apostates and martyrs. (J. Saurin.)

The results of revivals not all known

A revival is as when a sportsman goes out with his gun, and sends its charge into a flock of pigeons. Some fall dead at once, and he sees and secures them; but others, sorely hurt, limp off and hide, to die among the bushes. The best part of this revival is, that while you can only see those who are shot dead, and fall down before you, there are, thank God, thousands in all parts of the land, being hit and wounded, to go off unnoticed to their own homes, and God heals them there.

Revival preachers

Revival preachers make their sermons like a lens, to concentrate the rays of truth, and exhibit them with unflinching hand, in near connection with the sinner, till they burn and inflame his heart. (J. Jenkyn.)

A sermon without an application

A sermon without an application does no more good than the singing of a skylark: it may teach, but it does not impel; and though the preacher may be under concern for his audience, he does not show it till he turns the subject to their immediate advantage. (Bishop Home.)

The operations of truth

Divine truth exerts on the mind of man at once a restorative and a self-manifesting power. It creates in the mind the capacity by which it is discerned. As light opens the close-shut flower-bud to receive light, or as the sunbeam, playing on a sleeper’s eyes, by its gentle irritation opens them to see its own brightness; so the truth of God, shining on the soul, quickens and stirs into activity the faculty by which that very truth is perceived. It matters little which of the two operations be first; practically they may be regarded as simultaneous. The perception rouses the faculty, and yet the faculty is implied in the perception. The truth awakens the mind, and yet the mind must be in activity ere the truth can reach it. And the same two-fold process is carried on in the whole subsequent progress of the soul. (Professor Caird.)

Awakened sinners

Peter’s hearers—

I. Were in a state of distress. “Pricked to the heart.” The Holy Spirit did this by means of—

1. What they saw; the wrong and folly of their action towards Jesus.

2. What they felt; that their folly and wrong-doing were sinful in the sight of God.

3. What they feared; that they might have to endure dreadful consequences.

II. Uttered a cry of distress, which meant—

1. That something must be done. The misery of self-condemnation must be ended by some means. It is a joy to an evangelist when hearers have this feeling.

2. That the apostles were able to tell them what to do. Peter had led them into that state, and it was natural to expect that he could deal with them in that state.

3. That they were ready to do what was required. The mark of true penitence is submissiveness. So long as a seeker lays down his own terms he is not fit to be saved.

III. Received an apostolic answer.

1. Turn from your sins. They were already convinced of sin and sorry for it, and were therefore ready for the direction.

2. Openly declare that you have turned from your sins. At this time baptism meant a great deal, viz., that the service of Christ was chosen at the risk of certain suffering.

3. Fulfil the appointed conditions of pardon. “Repent etc. with reference to the remission of sins.” So long as these are unfulfilled the sinner is morally unfit to receive pardon.

4. The Spirit who has given you this distress will give you joy. “Ye shall receive the gift,” etc. The fulness of the Spirit’s work always brings fulness of joy.

IV. Learned the ground of the answer. “The promise is unto you,” etc. How wonderful that their awful sin did not invalidate this promise. Who is not the subject of the Divine call? The call to repentance, faith and virtue comes by many means: by providence, the Word, the Spirit. Have you not heard it?

V. Receive a final direction (verse 40).

1. The generation was wicked. This had been abundantly proved. Is it not so with the present generation? What else mean the frauds, vices, and blasphemies of every class of society.

2. It was necessary for the followers of Jesus to be separate from the world. Reason, interest, and Christian philanthropy required it then and require it now. Jesus was separate from sinners; His kingdom is not of this world; and true Christianity and worldliness cannot coalesce. He, then, who wishes to be saved must renounce the world.

3. This direction, therefore, is properly the last to penitent inquirers. To leave the world is to give decisive proof of the genuineness of repentance and faith. (W. Hudson.)

The great question and the inspired answer

I. The questing.

1. To this question they were led—

(1) by the Spirit;

(2) by the Truth;

(3) by their conscience—a view of sin leading to a consciousness of many.

2. This question indicates their—

(1) feeling;

(2) condition;

(3) desire.

3. This question was—

(1) honest,

(2) searching,

(3) inspired.

II. A suitable and significant answer.

1. Consider who gives the answer—

(1) apostles,

(2) inspired,

(3) speaking with authority.

2. The answer urges to—

(1) repentance,

(2) profession of Christ.

(3) yielding to the Spirit’s control.

3. The answer rests—

(1) not on human wisdom,

(2) not on human goodness,

(3) not on human efforts,

(4) but on the promise of God (verse 39), which is as wide as the world.

III. To a right reception comes a blessed consummation.

1. In personal experience—

(1) peace,

(2) goodness,

(3) singleness of heart (verse 46).

2. Relatively—

(1) favours with God,

(2) and man (verse 47). (J. M. Allis.)

Rightly dividing the word of truth

1. The word had wounded, now the word heals. A little religion is a painful thing, but more takes the pain away. The word is a hammer to break and a balm to heal. Its first effect is to convince a sinner that he is lost; its next to make the lost rejoice in his Saviour.

2. It is important to keep these two functions distinct. To preach a healing gospel when there is no wound on the conscience is like pressing cold water on those who are not thirsty. There is nothing sweeter to the thirsty; nothing more insipid to the satisfied.

3. The apostle rightly divided the word of truth. Peter’s aim all through is to produce conviction of sin, and for this appeals to Scripture to bring home the guilt of the crucifixion. It was not with gladness that they received that word but with grief, shame, remorse. When the preacher saw that his first word had taken effect he delivered the second. He had succeeded in wounding; and at the cry of the suffering patient, he comes forward to heal. The old stem had been cut off and the tree was bleeding; he turns the knife, and with its other side inserts the new graft, that there may be a tree of righteousness the planting of the Lord. You pour some burning drops upon a sore; their first effect is to increase the pain; but knowing the sovereign power of the remedy you continue to pour, sparing not for the patient’s crying. At length continued application of that which caused the pain takes all pain away. When the word wounds, still ply the word until the sword becomes a balm. Then, in this second stage, the hearer will receive the word with joy. He who really receives the word receives it gladly, for those who do not, will not long continue to receive it at all.

3. The believers were immediately baptized. It is clear that regeneration was not the result of baptism, but vice versa. It was when they received the word with gladness they were baptized. The order of events is that which the master enjoined (Mat_28:19-20). Peter and his companions first laid themselves out to make disciples. Then, when by the successive pain and gladness produced by preaching, they perceived that disciples were made, they baptized them. Lastly, the newly accepted members of the Church were taught to observe all the commandments, for they abounded in faith and love.

4. But a dash of sadness is thrown upon the happy scene. “Fear came upon every soul.” But this points to the outer circle. The conversions startled the onlookers, and they were smitten with a sudden fear lest they should be left outside and perish. From the apostles view point, however, this was a hopeful symptom. The example of believers had begun to tell. It is a good sign when those living without God begirt to be uneasy; especially when it is at the sight of multitudes pressing into the kingdom. When men are delivered from the horrible pit many shall see it and fear (Psa_40:1-17.). The Christian community in the freshness of its first faith was suddenly thrown into society, and disturbed it by its unwonted presence. If a new planet should be projected into our system, it would make the old worlds stagger. Bodies in contact reciprocally affect each other, especially in respect of temperature. Pour hot water into a cold vessel; the water contributes to heat the vessel, but the vessel also contributes to cool the water. But if a constant stream of hot water is supplied, it will bring up the vessel to its own temperature. A process like this goes on continually between the Church and the world. Fervent disciples, particularly those in their first love, affect with their own warmth the society into which they are poured; but society, on the other hand, affects them with its own coldness, and being the larger

body will soon cool the disciples’ hearts, unless they maintain constant contact with Christ.

5. A word to those who are without Christ, I confess that the Church in contact with you is more or less cold. The disciples are not so manifestly like heaven as to send a thrill of terror through you lest you should fall to join their company. But if you stumble over their coldness, to blame them for their lukewarmness will not save you when you are lost. A man on inspecting a new house he was having built found one of the men lighting his pipe in the midst of dry shavings. So he said to him, “If my house is burnt the blame will rest on you.” Thinking over what he had said, he added, “The blame will be yours, but the loss will be mine.” He saw the risk, and went away and insured his house. Go thou and do likewise. The Church deserves blame; but the loss is yours. Hide your imperilled soul “with Christ in God.” (W. Arnot, D. D.)

On being pricked to the heart

I. When we hear God reprove sin we should be pricked at the heart.

1. So as to be sensible of sin.

(1) The guilt of it (Psa_51:3-4).

(2) Of our defilement with it (Psa_57:5).

2. So as to be troubled for our sins.

(1) Their sinfulness.

(2) Their multitude. (Ezr_9:6).

(3) Their greatness; as being—

(a) Against knowledge (Joh_3:19).

(b) Against mercies.

(c) After judgments (Isa_1:5; Amo_4:9).

(d) Contrary to our promises.

(e) Against the checks of conscience (Rom_2:15), the motives of the Spirit, the reproofs of the word.

3. Uses: Be pricked at your hearts when sin is reproved considering—

(1) Who is it that reproves (Amo_3:8; Jer_5:21-22).

(2) Reproofs without this effect do more harm than good (Pro_29:1).

(3) God may reprove no more (Eze_3:26; Hos_4:17).

(4) You must answer for all the reproofs you hear.

II. Such as are pricked to the heart should be very inquisitive what to do.

1. We are all capable of holiness and happiness (Gen_1:26).

2. But full of sin and misery (Eph_2:3).

3. It is one part of our sin and misery that we are not sensible of

(1) sin. This appears—

(a) In that we have not grieved for it (Eze_7:16).

(b) Nor fear to commit it (Psa_18:23).

(c) Nor strive to get it subdued (Psa_57:2).

(2) Misery. This appears—

(a) In that we rejoice in it.

(b) We do not strive to get out of it.

4. The first step to holiness and felicity is sensibleness of sin and misery.

5. There is none so sensible of this, but he will be very inquisitive what to do (Act_16:30). This is essential because—

(1) Our everlasting happiness depends upon it.

(2) Unless we inquire we shall never know what to do.

6. Whom must we inquire of?

(1) God.

(2) The Scriptures (Luk_17:29).

(3) Ministers. (Bp. Beveridge.)

Being pricked to the heart

Whitefield was preaching at Exeter. A man was present who had filled his pockets with stones to throw at the preacher. He heard, however, the prayer with patience, but no sooner was the text named than he pulled out a stone, and waited for an opportunity to throw it. But God sent the Word into his heart, and the stone fell from his hand. After the sermon he went to Whitefield, and said, “Sir, I came to hear you with a view to break your head, but the Spirit of God through your ministry has given me a broken heart.” The man proved to be a sound convert, and lived an ornament to the gospel.

Heart-work God’s work

Heart-work must be God’s work. Only the great heart-maker can be the great heart-breaker. (R. Baxter.)

The gospel to be preached to the heart

“I have an ear for other preachers,” Sir John Cheke used to say, “but I have a heart for Latimer.” Here is a very clear and main distinction. Too often men hear the Word sounding its drums and trumpets outside their walls, and they are filled with admiration of the martial music; bat their city gates are fast closed and vigilantly guarded, so that the truth has no admittance, but only the sound of it. Would to God we knew how to reach men’s affections, for the heart is the target we aim at, and unless we hit it we miss altogether.

The truth the sword of the Spirit

It is not the drapery in which Divine truth may be clothed, nor the force and beauty of the illustrations with which it may be presented, but it is the truth itself—the bare,

naked, unvarnished truth-that is the instrument of the Spirit’s power. That is the sword of the Spirit; and it is the sword that does the work, not the scabbard in which it is sheathed. The scabbard may be finely fitted, and beautifully embellished, bound with the finest gold, and glittering with jewels of polished diamonds; but it is not the garnished scabbard, it is the drawn sword which the Spirit wields, and which, when wielded by Him, is quick and powerful, piercing even to the dividing asunder of the soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intents of the heart. (J. A. Wallace.)

A famous conversion

1. It is remarkable in the very first order of it. It is the first conversion that was wrought by the apostles in the Christian Church; the first-fruits of the gospel; the first handful of ripe ears of corn offered up to God to sanctify the whole harvest; the goodly bunch of Eskol gathered by these first spies, the apostles, betokening the Church’s fruitfulness.

2. It is remarkable for the time and season when these converts embrace the faith and profess religion. We all know it was a sad time of persecution.

3. It is remarkable in the condition and quality of the persons: a mixed, confused company of men, strangely disposed and affected before their conversion. They run together, and flock about the apostles, with no very religious purpose, but merely to gaze and wonder at them. Nay, worse than so, they fall a-scoffing and deriding the apostles. Oh, the greatness of God’s mercy that He would, and, oh, the power of Christ’s grace that it could, convert such converts as these!

4. It is remarkable in the great number and multitude of converts. Not a cluster, or two, but a plentiful vintage. Such was the power of religion in those primitive times; so mightily grew the Word, and prevailed.

5. It is remarkable for the complete, entire fulness of their conversion. They are troubled for their sins, “pricked at their heart.” They repent, believe, and are baptized. They are diligent in all the duties of God’s service, and worship (verse 24). Their religion is not confined to the Church only, but they are fruitful in all works of charity (verse 45). They live together in all Christian love (verse 46). Here is an exact pattern of a through-conversion, a complete and perfect frame of a holy Church.

I. The means that wrought this anguish and compunction. It is St. Peter’s sermon: “When they heard this.” The text tells us of a wound that was given them, that pierced their heart. Here we see both the weapon that made it, and the place where it entered. In bodily strokes, he that means to hit the heart must take another aim, not run his weapon in at the ear; but he that means to wound the heart spiritually, his directest passage is through the ear. In this case there is an immediate conveyance from the ear to the heart. Men may as well expect good corn on their land without ploughing and sowing, as true sorrow and repentance without hearing and attending. The passage and entrance, then, is the ear; but what is the weapon St. Peter uses to pierce and wound them?

1. God’s Word in the general, that is the means that works this compunction, that is the choice, sanctified instrument appointed by God for this sacred work. The speaking to exhortation and doctrine is the way to convince and convert souls.

2. It is verbum convictivum. St. Peter makes choice of that Word of God that was most fit to detect and convict them; and he doth manage it so that they could not

avoid the edge of it. And this he does by a close application of it to their sinful condition.

3. It was verbum convictivum de his peccatis. He charges them in a special manner with these and these sins as those that are likeliest to perplex their soul and bring them to compunction. As, in course of law, general accusations will ground no action; if we come to accuse a man, it is not sufficient to lay to his charge that he is a malefactor, but we must charge him with particulars. So, would a sinner arraign his conscience before God’s tribunal, he must frame an indictment against himself of his more notorious and personal impieties. If we trouble and disquiet and perplex your souls, we have our warrant from St. Peter’s example. St. Peter was even now filled with the Holy Ghost, and so the first vent that it found is in this sharp reprehension. This kind of dealing is warranted by the great success that God gave unto it. Peter hath saved thousands with it, and Paul his ten thousands. This is to cast the net on the right side of the ship, as Christ directs Peter; he shall not miss of a plentiful draught. He that means to fish for souls, let him bait his hook with this worm of conscience, and he will take them presently.

II. The paroxysm itself, the anguish and compunction they were brought into.

1. It is exceeding sharp; their soul is embittered in them. The Scripture sets out this compunction of spirit in terms of extremity (2Sa_24:10; Pro_18:14; Rom_2:9; Psa_51:17). And it is the sense of God’s displeasure causes this breaking by three apprehensions, as by so many strokes.

(1) As most deserved and due to us. We eat the bitter fruit of our works.

(2) As most heavy and unsupportable by us. Who knows the power of His anger? Who can dwell with everlasting burnings?

(3) As, of ourselves, unavoidable by us. How shall we flee from the wrath to come? A poor sinner, beset with these anxieties, tortures himself with these pensive thoughts: “What have I done?” “What danger have I run into?” “How bitter are mine anguishes?” “Whither shall I turn myself for ease and comfort?”

2. Consider the goodness of these men’s compunction; and it will appear observable for our imitation in these four respects:—

(1) Their compunction is the more observable, because it is wrought in them without the help and concurrence of any outward affliction, only by the dint of St. Peter’s sermon.

(2) Their compunction is the more observable because wrought into them by the hearing of one sermon of St. Peter; no sooner charged with sin but they are convinced presently, and cry cut for sorrow.

(3) Their compunction is the more observable as being wrought in them only by convincing them of sin, not by threatening or denouncing of judgments.

(4) This compunction is the more observable because, ye see, it is a full yielding to the accusation. St. Peter charges them with horrid sin, and, without more ado, they plead guilty to all, confess the whole indictment. They are not enraged against the apostle for this sharp reproof. They take no exception against the accuser. They make no defence of the fact. They excuse it not. They demur not. None of all these shifts, but they accept of the accusation; they confess themselves guilty, and, with sorrow of heart, acknowledge they are murderers of

the Lord of glory.

(a) Such power and such strength was in the Word of God preached by Peter. His words are like sharp arrows in the hand of a giant: they return not empty.

(b) Such prevalency hath the Grace of God in the hearts of this people. Like a sovereign antidote that served to drive the poison of sin from the heart into the outward parts by an open confession. That is the second particular of the text—their anguish and perplexity; and it briefly affords us a threefold meditation.

(i.) It lets us see the outfall of sin; the issue and end of it is sorrow and vexation. It may be sweet in the mouth, but it will be bitter in thy bowels.

(ii.) It shows the inlet and first entrance of grace; it begins with sorrow and sharp compunction. The first physic to recover our souls are not cordials, but corrosives; not an immediate stepping into heaven by a present assurance, but mourning, and a bitter bewailing of our former transgressions.

(iii.) It shows us the downfall of despair. Are these converts, whom God means mercy to, thus sharply tortured? How bitter are their torments whom He plunges into perdition I

III. The course they take for ease and remedy. They repair to Peter and the apostles, crave their help and direction: “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” And this course of theirs is qualified with three conditions.

1. They take a speedy course. As soon as the wound is given and felt, they presently seek for help and direction. They put it not off till some other time, as Felix did when he felt the first shiverings and grudgings of contrition. Nor think they that they shall outgrow it in time, that their hearts are like good flesh that will heal of itself. No; delays in this kind breed a double danger.

(1) Good motions, if not cherished, will vanish away, and then the heart grows harder.

(2) Hath God pricked thine heart? Take the wound timely, lest it grow worse.

2. It was an advised and proper course they make choice of St. Peter and the rest of the apostles. And the wisdom, shall I say, or the happiness of this choice will appear in four particulars.

(1) They are spiritual men, physicians for the soul. A. wounded spirit cannot be cured but by spiritual means.

(2) They repair to the apostles. Why, Peter was he that wounded them! Best of all, none like him to cure them. What Hosea speaks of God is true of His ministers in a due subordination. “They have wounded, and they heal us; they have smitten, and they will bind us up.”

(3) They repair to Peter and the rest; they come to men of practice and experience. These apostles knew what it was to have a wounded spirit; these had crucified Christ; Peter had denied Him, the rest had forsaken Him, and it cost them dear ere they could be recovered. None like these to direct their conscience. They do it—

(a) more skilfully,

(b) more humbly,

(c) more tenderly.

(4) They are unanimous, all here in a joint consent and concurrence of judgment.

3. It proves successful, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” It discovers a threefold effect that this compunction hath already wrought in them to help forward their conversion.

(1) It represses their censoriousness. A man truly sensible of his own sins will have little lift or leisure to censure and judge, much less to reproach or slander others. It will make him judge himself, and condemn himself, and think worst of himself of all other men.

(2) This compunction and perplexity makes them reverent and respectful to St. Peter and the other apostles. God’s ministers are never in season with the world till men come to distress and perplexity. In the time of ease and jollity a minister is but a contemptible man; he and his pains may be well spared. But when sorrows surprise you, and your hearts are wounded, then one leaf from the Tree of Life to stanch the bleeding wilt be precious to you. This is the honour of our ministry to be able to help in such helpless times.

(3) It makes them inquisitive. “What shall we do?” Surely it is the voice of anguish and perplexity. They speak as men at a loss; they know not how to shift. But they were men acquainted with the law; nay, devout zealots of the Jewish traditions (verse 5); and yet we see they are now to seek how to ease themselves in that great perplexity. Whence arises this sudden amazement? Was it from the surcharge of sorrow that had overwhelmed their spirits and darkened that light which was formerly in them? It often proves so. It shadows out the insufficiency of the law to breed peace and comfort to us. It may perplex us, but it cannot quiet us; discover our sins, but not remove them. Or was it not they placed all their religion in some outward observations, without the life and piety of inward devotion. Rituals with substantials are the beauty of religion, but severed and divided will breed but cold comfort to us.

2. It makes them docile and tractable, willing and desirous to receive instruction. Compunction bores and opens the ear, and makes it capable of direction.

3. It begets a readiness to undertake any course that shall be prescribed for relief and comfort. In our ease heaven must fall into our laps, or we will none of it. If it put us to pains or cost it is toe dear a bargain for us to deal withal. But when our souls are in perplexity we will be glad to accept of mercy upon any terms; we will take heaven at God’s price then. “I will do anything, Lord, I will suffer anything to get hell out of my soul now, and to keep my soul out of hell hereafter.” (Bp. Brownrigg.)

Life-wounds

1. Peter’s sermon was not a fine display of eloquence.

2. Neither was it a very pathetic plea.

3. Nor a loud but empty cry of “Believe, believe!”

4. It was simple, a plain statement and a soberly earnest argument.

5. Its power lay in the truthfulness of the speaker, his appeal to Scripture, the concurrence of his witnessing brethren, and his own evident faith.

6. Above all, in the Holy Spirit who accompanied the Word.

I. Saving impression is a prick in the heart. To be cut to the heart is deadly (Act_5:33): to be pricked in the heart is saving.

1. All true religion must be of the heart. Without this—

(1) Ceremonies are useless (Isa_1:13).

(2) Orthodoxy of head is in vain (Jer_7:4).

(3) Profession and a constrained morality fail (2Ti_3:5).

(4) Loud zeal, excited and sustained by mere passions, is useless.

2. Impressions which do not prick the heart may even be evil. They may

(1) Excite to wrath and opposition.

(2) Lead to sheer hypocrisy.

(3) Create and foster a spurious hope.

3. Even when such superficial impressions are good, they are transient: and when they have passed away, they have often hardened those who have felt them for a season.

4. They will certainly be inoperative. As they have not touched the heart, they will not affect the life. They will not lead to

(1) Confession and inquiry, nor

(2) Repentance and change of life.

(3) Glad reception of the Word, nor

(4) Obedience and steadfastness. Heart-work is the only real work.

II. What truths produce such a prick?

1. The truth of the gospel has often, by the power of the Holy Ghost, produced an indelible wound in minds sceptical and opposed.

2. A sense of some one specially startling sin has frequently aroused the conscience (2Sa_12:7).

3. Instruction in the nature of the law, and the consequent heinousness of sin, has been blessed to that end (Rom_7:13).

4. The infinite wickedness of sin, as against the very being of God, is also a wounding thought (Psa_51:4).

5. The exactness, severity, and terror of the judgment, and the consequent punishment of sin, are stirring thoughts (Act_16:25-30).

6. The great goodness of God has led many to see the cruel wantonness of sin against Him (Rom_2:4).

7. The death of Christ as a Substitute has often been the means of revealing the greatness of the sin which needed such an atonement, and of showing the true tendency of sin in having slain One so good and kind (Zec_12:10).

8. The abundant grace and love revealed in the gospel and received by us are sharp arrows to wound the heart.

III. What hand makes these painful pricks?

1. The same hand which wrote the piercing truths also applies them.

2. He is well acquainted with our hearts, and so can reach them.

3. He is the Quickener, the Comforter, the Spirit helping our infirmities, showing to us the things of Jesus: His fruit is love, joy, peace, etc. We need not utterly despair when wounded by such a tender Friend.

4. He is a Spirit to be sought unto, who acts in answer to His people’s prayers. We turn for healing to Him who pricks.

IV. How can these pricks be healed?

1. Only One who is Divine can heal a wounded heart.

2. The only medicine is the blood of His heart.

3. The only hand to apply it is that which was pierced.

4. The only fee required is gladly to receive Him. Conclusion: Let us ask the question, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” Let us then obey the gospel, and believe in the Lord Jesus. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Honest preaching

No doubt it is a high and difficult task to preach with success; far be it from us to teach that no pains should be used to gain men’s ears; but the preacher who gains their ears should use his conquest to reach their consciences—and it is his business to give them pain. They are sinners, and they know it, even better than the preacher. He will not become their enemy by telling them the truth, and so telling it that their ears will tingle with shame and their consciences cry out with remorse. At all events, enemies made in that way may become the preacher’s best friend; and if they do not, they will carry his credentials as stigmata burnt into their memories. A man riding with his friend past a country church fell to musing with himself, and presently said: “In that house, thirty years ago, I passed the most uncomfortable hour of my life. It seems but yesterday, and my pain seems as keen as it was then.” The other laughed and said: “I suppose it was some coquettish maiden.” “No. It was an honest preacher who got hold of my very soul.” Such memories in the hearts of sinners are the best credentials they can give to preachers of the gospel.

Reaching the heart

Jerome used to say, “It is not the clamour of praise but the groans of conviction that should be heard whilst the minister preaches.” And again, “The tears of the congregation form the highest praises of the pulpit orator.” The anecdote of Dean Milner and Rowland Hill here is apposite. Dean Milner had a great objection against extemporaneous preaching, thinking that it warred against the precise and orthodox mode. However, being attracted by the great fame of Rowland Hill, he was led to indulge his curiosity by once going to hear him. After the sermon the Dean was seen forcing his way, in much haste, to the vestry-room, when, seizing the hand of the preacher, in his enthusiasm, he cried out, “Well, dear brother Rowland, I perceive now that your slapdash preachers are,

after all, the best preachers; it went to the heart, sir; it went to the heart, sir!” (Scottish Christian Herald.)

Powerful preaching

John Elias was called to preach a great association sermon at Pwllheli. In the whole neighbourhood the state of religion was very low, and distressingly discouraging to pious minds, and it had been so for many years. Elias felt that his visit must be an occasion with him. It may almost be said of that day that “he prayed, and the heavens gave rain.” He went. He took as his text, “Let God arise, let His enemies be scattered.” It was an astonishing time. While the preacher drove along with his tremendous power, multitudes of the people fell to the ground. Calm stood the man, his words rushing from him like flames of fire. There were added to the churches of that immediate neighbourhood, in consequence of the impetus of that sermon, two thousand five hundred members. (E. Paxton Hood.)

Only God can heal the wounds He makes

When a man is wounded with a barbed arrow, the agonies he suffers will cause him to toss about in pain; but the harder he strives to release the weapon from his flesh, the more does it become entangled in his sinews, the wound becomes enlarged, and the torture increased. When, by the power of the Holy Ghost, a man is wounded on account of sin, and the arrows of the Most High tear his soul, he frequently tries to pluck them out with his own hand, but finds that the misery becomes worse, and the inflaming wounds at last cause faintness and despair. Only the Good Physician knows how to relieve the pain without tearing and festering the spirit. (Handbook of Illustration.)

A true saving conviction of sin

I. The instrument by which it was produced, namely, the preaching of St. Peter. The Holy Spirit was the Author, but He employed the preaching of the apostle. It is by the Word of God, and usually by the preaching of that Word, that the heart is awakened, enlightened, and impressed. See why Satan is such an enemy to the preaching of the gospel. He knows that it is the appointed instrument for overturning his kingdom. He would, therefore, gladly prevent preaching, but when he cannot do this he tries to keep men from hearing.

II. The description here given of a saving conviction of sin. They “were pricked in their hearts.” The Word of God, in order to be of any real use, must reach the heart. It is not enough that it enlighten the understanding, or please the fancy, or warm the affections. Nor is merely reaching the heart sufficient. It must touch it. And what is the way in which it touches the heart? We read of some ‘who were “cut to the heart.” Their hearts were deeply affected; but instead of any saving conviction being wrought in them, they were only the more exasperatd and hardened against the truth. A prick in the heart, though a small wound, would be fatal.

III. The way in which such a conviction will show itself; namely, in an application for relief. Take notice to whom they made this application: to those very persons through whose preaching the wound had been inflicted. Not that the preacher, by his own power,

can heal the wound, any more than he could at first inflict it. The same Holy Spirit, which alone produces conviction, can alone administer consolation. But in both eases He works by means. Attend, then, to the preaching of the Word, and you will find it a life-giving Word, mighty to heal as well as to wound, the power of God unto salvation.

IV. The humility produced by a saving conviction of sin. Such a conviction disposes men to use the remedy prescribed. “What shall we do?” indicates that they were not only in deep trouble as not knowing what course to take, but also that they were willing to follow any directions which the apostles might point out. To this question there is but one answer, that of Peter. (E. Cooper.)

We must preach to the consciences of men

Inspector Byrnes of New York says, “The great lieutenant of every police officer is that mysterious thing called conscience. You let a man try to deceive himself and lie to himself about himself, and that something comes knocking up against the shell of his body, and thumping on his ribs with every heart-beat, and pounding on his skull until his head aches and he wishes he were dead, and groans in agony for relief. It is the same conscience that makes a criminal ‘give himself away,’ if one only knows how to awaken it, or stir it into activity. I never let a man know for what he is arrested. He may have committed a dozen more crimes of which I know nothing. If I lock him up alone and leave him to the black walls and his guilty conscience for three or four hours, while he pictures the possible punishment due to him for all his crimes, he comes presently into my hands like soft clay in the hands of the potter. Then he is likely to tell me much more than I ever suspected.” So the conscience is the great lieutenant of every preacher of the gospel, and this is not a lesson for the pulpit alone, for one of the most suggestive features of the Pentecost revival is that the Church members were all preachers that day. This picture ought to lead us to have courage to expect immediate results from the faithful preaching of the gospel. One of the most dangerous errors that ever was propagated by the enemy of souls, an error that paralyses the tongue of the preacher and the prayer of the Church, is that Christianity is only a system of culture, and that souls are to be ransomed by gradual stages. (L. A. Banks.)

Acts 2:41-42

Then they that gladly received his word were baptized.

Marks of having received the Word

1. A public profession of faith.

2. A desire to fulfil all the ordinances laid upon them by our Lord.

3. A desire to unite in fellowship with other believers.

4. Continuance in the Word.

5. Prayer and study of the “Word in order to growth in grace.

6. Conclusion: In proportion as those who receive the Word are faithful, will godly fear fall upon others. (S. S. Times.)

Anxious for baptism

Mr. A. Wills, whose work for Christ was much blessed at Hang-Chan. He says: “I examined a poor sick man this morning, who is anxious to be baptized. He was first brought to hear the gospel through coming for medicine, about a year ago, and since then I have baptized his wife. He was examined some months ago, but the Church thought it best for him to wait a little for further instruction. His sickness has become worse, and now all hope of recovery is past, and he again asks for baptism. He said, ‘I expect to die in a few days,’ and upon my asking where he thought his soul would go, he promptly replied, ‘To heaven.’ ‘Why?’ ‘Because Jesus on the Cross died to save sinners; I am a sinner, and I trust Him to save me.’ ‘But,’ said I, ‘if you die before you are baptized, do you then expect to go to heaven?’ ‘Oh, yes,’ he said, ‘because it is the blood of Jesus that saves the soul.’ ‘Then why do you in your weak and dangerous state wish to be baptized?’ ‘Because,’ he said, ‘it is the duty of every Christian to obey the commands of Jesus, and not be ashamed of Him. I worshipped idols for forty-two years, and was not ashamed of the devil’s works; and now, before I die, I want to let my sons and neighbours know that I am not ashamed of Jesus Christ.’ I asked him many other questions, one of which was, ‘Are you not afraid of the cold water doing you harm?’ He replied, ‘Oh, no, I don’t fear that, because I have prayed to Jesus to help me.’ We baptized him, and a week later he was called up into the presence of his Saviour.”

Safeguards of religious life

We have here a beautiful portraiture of primitive Church-life in its simplicity, its purity, and its fidelity. Now we have brought before us four safeguards of spiritual life. They are not in themselves religion, but they are protective of religion. We may see the husbandman build a circle of fencing around the tender sapling to protect it in its early growth. The fence is not part of the sapling, but it preserves it. Thus are these four things placed about religious life. Not as a barrier to confine: their mission is protective. You will notice these are, Christian teaching, Christian fellowship, Christian sacrament, communion with Jesus Christ and God.

1. One great safeguard of religious life is Christian instruction. “They continued steadfastly in the apostles’ teaching.” It is the glory of Christianity that it is a teaching religion. It offers men an open Bible, an open Church, an open way of redemption and an open means of access to God. We have read of men in ancient times who had two sets of doctrines, their esoteric and their exoteric truth, truth that was for the few and truth that was for the many, truth to be sought in secret to the privileged circle, and truth that was taught to the multitude of the people. Christianity has no privileged secrets. As far as mysteries are revealed they are revealed alike to all. Its invitations are invitations to all. The attitude of the apostles was that of men who had seen great light and found great blessing, and they yearned that other men might also see and share that which had become so precious unto themselves. You will observe, moreover, these first converts to Jesus Christ not only continued in Christian teaching, but in the teaching of Christ’s apostles. They did not think each was qualified to teach the other. They turned instinctively to the instruction of those who were ordained for all time, the accredited teachers of the gospel of Jesus Christ. The apostles were qualified to teach because they themselves were taught. They were the first; learners. Their Christian education was not confined to one portion of their life, it continued on. Truth was added to truth. Light increased to greater light. Thus they were enabled to speak as the Spirit gave them utterance. The quiet teaching of the great truths of God is one of the greatest blessings of religion. If we are to attain

to right views of the Deity, right views of ourselves, right views of the world, we must be taught by a higher Power. Not fancy, but food is the first requirement of spiritual life. God has sent us many teachers to guide our feet in the way of His commandments. Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and the man that getteth understanding, the merchandise of it is better than the merchandise of silver, the gain thereof than fine gold.

2. A second safeguard of Christian life is Christian intercourse. They continued in the apostles’ fellowship. There were doubtless special reasons which drew these early disciples into close spiritual communion. They lived in an age of hostility. In fellowship they found a powerful means of sustaining their common spiritual life. There are two forms of help which minister to Christian life in men, one which comes from within, another which comes from without. By that which comes from within I mean meditation, prayer, devotion, the power of the Spirit of God within us. By that which comes from without I mean the contact of mind with mind, and heart with heart the power of the Spirit of God ministering through agencies which are without us. Christian men need both. There is inspiration in true Christian fellowship. Faith strengthens faith. Love is quickened by love. Through Christian fellowship also they were able to make greater efforts for Christ’s cause. Achievements are possible to organised life which are beyond the power of individual effort. Unity is strength. Co-operation is multiplied power. I know no habit more worth pleading for than this habit of meeting together in Christian fellowship. It has been the custom of religious men in all ages and in all climes. The patriarchs in their wandering life gathered their followers about them in religious fellowship: The people of God had their united gatherings, their feast days, and their solemn assemblies, when they joined together in offering their devotions to their God. The ancient Druids had their sacred enclosures—rough stones were the walls, the heavens the canopy above their heads, nature the silent witness of their devotions. And it has been the custom of the Christian Church in every stage of its eventful history for the saints of God to continue in Christian fellowship. How often has the first downward step of a wasted life commenced in the wandering away from the communion of God’s people? If we cannot meet with God’s people to get good, we can, at least, meet with them to do good. It is more blessed to give than to receive.

3. A third safeguard of Christian life is faithful observance of Christian ordinances. “They continued in the breaking of bread.” The breaking of bread may symbolise three things which should not be forgotten. I see in it a link with the past. You may trace this rite step by step backward through the centuries, till you reach the little upper room where Christ was in the presence of His disciples. But by it all confess their devotion to Him and His relationship to them as Saviour and Redeemer, and Friend. I see in the breaking of bread also the sign and pledge of present grace. The broken body and the shed blood is for all men who will receive His atoning work. “Take, eat, this is My body which is broken for you,” is the language of the Saviour to every man, woman, or child, that lingers about His table. It is a personal bond of a personal Saviour. In it He seals us as His own. I see further in the breaking of bread a promise and a prophecy. This rite shall be observed on and on by generations yet unborn.

4. A fourth safeguard of Christian life is found in communion with Jesus Christ and God. They continued in prayer. They did not theorise about prayer; they prayed. Men have drawn near to God in sorrow that have left His presence with joy. Men have entered the secret closet with weakness that have left it with courage and strength. The sorrowful have felt the comfort in sorrow. The perplexed have found light in

their darkness. The tempted and tried have found deliverance in prayer. Charles Kingsley has said, “What an awful weapon prayer is! It saved me from madness in the hour of my great sorrow. Pray day and night very quietly, like a weary child, to the loving and great God for everything you want in body as well as soul, the least as well as the greatest. Nothing is too much to ask God for. Nothing is too great for Him to give. Thus we have traced the four great safeguards of religious life. We need them as much to-day as these first converts needed them for their Christian life. I do not know one that can wisely be neglected in the spiritual discipline of Christian souls. We trifle with them at our peril.” (B. Bramham.)

The first revival

In the outpouring of the Spirit, we have the cause in our text—the characteristics of the first revival of the Christian Church. Note—

I. Profession of faith—baptism. Inquire what are those modes of baptism which Scripture warrants; but do not pelt others who differ, seeing the principle of Christianity is not baptism, but communion with Christ. If you have received Christ, you are not to delay open profession. Young Christians may hear a whisper, “There is a lion in the way.” What lion? A laugh, or an angry word anticipated, or like that in “Pilgrim’s Progress,” which, after all, was chained. Let every waverer look to God, and get strength to come out, as these Christians of an heroic age did!

II. Continuance in apostolic teaching. These young converts were but in the infant school, and, like children, would often say to the apostles, “Tell us again about the angels’ song, the Infant in the manger, the storm on the lake, the crucifixion on Calvary”; and that telling was the apostles’ teaching. I have read an account of the conversion of a scoundrel at a gospel meeting which took place at six o’clock, and at half-past six he was preaching; but these children in the apostles’ infant school knew they had to learn before they could teach. Meanwhile, with some entreaty, they might say, Come father, come shipmate, come shopmate, and hear what these men have to say.

III. Generosity. “And all that believed were together, and had all things in common,” etc. The Socialist says, “Ah, there you see Communism is Christianity, and comes in along with the Lord’s Supper and baptism.” But no. The Communist says, “All your property is mine.” “All my property is yours,” says the Christian. The Communist says, “Stand and deliver!” The Christian says, “Brother, your trouble is mine, receive.” There is nothing that fell from the lips of Christ to make this act a law. The circumstances were peculiar, and a special arrangement had to be made to meet them. The workman had left his work, and had nothing provided for a lengthened stay, and then had come the sudden conversion and consequent waiting for more teaching. The spirit was of Christ, but the action was an economic mistake. For see, presently, how the poor brethren had given away their independence, and looked on this generosity, not as an act of love, but as a right. They were pauperised. Notice how the Church at Jerusalem was so miserably poor as to be dependent on the churches abroad for support. Of a certain man you say, “No use helping him; it is like throwing money into a well.” As to its motive, it was Divinely splendid; it was Jesus Christ in action through three thousand incarnations. We are to have the same glorious capacity for making such a mistake. The generous God will have a generous people. God will withdraw Himself from a synagogue of misers, as from a synagogue of the dead.

IV. Joy. If we have like precious faith in the precious Saviour, like joy will follow. Jesus

Christ is mine; and mine is the inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, Rocks of diamonds, mines of gold, are all as nothing compared to what the believer has in Christ. Can you say that, brother? If so, then you may eat at the same fir table, out of the same coarse delf, your poor fare; but it will be “with gladness,” etc. What a change! These converts had been the wolves howling round the Cross. Now Christ might say to them, “Who is Master?” The Spirit in the Word transfixed them, and they shuddered and twisted like shot things; but now the balm has been applied to their wounds, the oil of joy and gladness has been poured into their hearts.

V. Divine increase (Act_2:47). God adds to the Church the saved. Does God alone add to the Church? If you mean certificated members, then verily others add to the” Church in plenty. Who added Judas, Ananias, and Sapphira? Who is that stealing on to God’s farm in the darkness, sowing his tares? The devil. Yea, the devil adds to the Church diligently, to neutralise it, and make it like the world. How many were added to the Church last year? The proper question is not How many, but Who? Man adds the dry branch, which cannot grow or blossom into fruit. God adds the living branch, giving beauty and strength to the Church. Mr. Beckford built Fonthill, and thought one hill needed growth of wood to beautify the prospect. He found the soil so thin and the climate so bleak, that no trees would grow. Instead of sending again to the nursery, he sent to the foundry for cast-iron trees, had them painted green, and stuck them by long iron stakes into the ground. He could add to these trees daily, but they could not grow. May we never have such trees on this hill—iron hope, iron charity, iron love. Conclusion: In certain transatlantic climes, spring immediately succeeds winter. By gentleness it makes winter go, by kisses the sun unlocks the ice, and the river is sent forth to beautify the plain. May God give such a spring to all the world, when its ice and snow shall melt with the magic celerity of enchantment, and spiritual woodlands burst into song and rejoice in the newborn beauties of an imperishable spring. (C. Stanford, D. D.)

The newly converted

The actions of the converts proved that they had passed into a new spiritual state, and we may regard them as models for every age. They—

I. Openly confessed Christ. Opinions vary, and will vary, as to the mode of baptism; but all are agreed as to its symbolic meaning. The words appointed to be used in baptism declare the relation of the candidate to each person in the Godhead; the water symbolises the need of Divine purification, and the gracious provision which has made that purification possible; while the application of the water represents the process and conditions of personal salvation. In this baptism Christ was openly confessed. And He must be openly confessed in some way by all who are His.

II. Diligently attended to apostolic teaching. They were careful to hear what the apostles had to say, that their knowledge of the truth might increase. Instruction, then, followed baptism. We have not the apostles, but we have their writings, by which they still teach. Diligent attention to the New Testament is calculated to save men from infidelity and much mischief of other kinds.

III. Associated with other Christians. How would people who were drawn together by a common attachment to Christ act when together? All their conduct would be affected by their Christianity. When professing Christians, of choice, associate with the god-less, their conduct belies their profession. And when they meet Without any reference to the Master, they neglect a means of grace, and give ground for suspicion as to their sincerity

or zeal.

IV. Diligently used the means of grace.

1. “Breaking of bread” reminds us of the institution of the Eucharist.

2. “Prayers” show us that they were devout people, in which respect their example is important. When professors are too busy to pray, or indulge in conduct which makes prayer irksome, they are in great danger. If the first Christians had so lived, they would never have been charged with turning the world upside down. And since their day great wonders have been wrought by men and women of much prayer.

V. Made a deep and salutary impression on their observers. “Fear came on every soul.” Those who had not become Christians were filled with solemn dread. They felt that God had sent among them a wonderful thing, which no creature could have produced. They seem also to have been afraid lest they should be smitten for standing in an improper relation to what was transpiring. Recollection of the past history of their nation would tend to deepen the fear. And ought not all Christians to make on those who watch them impressions of the presence of God? A holy man often makes the self-condemning observer miserable by his very silence. When will all professors thus give counsel and rebuke by the spirit which they manifest? Were they to do so, how soon would Christianity diffuse itself through all the world!

VI. God directed public attention to the religious system which these converts had embraced. “Many wonders and signs,” etc. Attention was called by miracles to the doctrine and personal conduct of the first propagators of Christianity. Repeatedly we find in the Acts first a miracle, then a sermon. If the time for miracles has passed away, attention has already been called to Christianity. What is now wanted is the fearless preaching of the gospel, with that best of all commentaries, Christlike living. In using such means, Christianity is its own witness. (W. Hudson.)

A new development of social life

As the result of Peter’s sermon, a form of society rises which had never appeared before. New forces act upon the social natures of men, and bring them together with new feelings for new engagements.

I. The incorporating principle of this new society. The magnet that drew together and centralised into a loving unity these souls which a few hours ago were so discordant, were—

1. The apostle’s word—i.e., Peter’s sermon.

2. The apostle’s word received. They were convinced of its truth, and accepted it as a Divine reality.

3. The apostle’s word received gladly; for while it convinced them of enormous wickedness, it assured them of salvation. Christ, then, as He said, was the rock on which He built His Church.

II. The introductive ceremony to this new society. Baptism is a symbolical ordinance, which expresses the twofold truth of the moral pollution of humanity, and the necessity of an extraneous influence to cleanse its stains. These truths these sinners felt under Peter’s sermon; and, as the most proper thing, they were admitted into communion with the disciples by an impressive declaration of them. As to the mode, this is a trifle

interesting only to those religionists who live on rites. When it is remembered that Jerusalem had only the fountain of Siloam as its water supply, that the three thousand were baptized in one day which had commenced its noon, and that they included both sexes, it is impossible that they could all have been immersed in water. However, the mode of the act is nothing, the spirit is everything.

III. The unremitting services of this new society. They were “persevering” in—

1. The teaching. After their conversion they had much to learn; so this new society became a society of students—they “inquired” in the house of the Lord. They regularly attended the teaching as distinguished from all other.

2. The fellowship. They appreciated the communion of saints. They regarded themselves as members of a brotherhood, whose rules they were bound to obey, and whose interests they were bound to promote. In this fellowship, like saints of old, they “spake often one to another,” considered one another “to provoke unto love and good works,” exhorted “one another daily,” endeavoured to “edify one another,” and perhaps confessed their “faults one to another.”

3. The breaking of bread, in accordance with their Master’s dying command.

4. The prayers, probably prayer meetings.

IV. The distinguishing spirit of this new society.

1. Reverence. “Fear came upon every soul.” Whilst they were happy, there was no frivolity. They felt God was near, because of the “wonders and signs.”

2. Generosity. Selfishness had no place here. Their benevolence—

(1) Inspired them to make sacrifices. The love of property gave way to love of man. The law of social Christianity enjoins the strong to help the weak, and all to bear each other’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

(2) Adjusted itself to the occasion. The circumstances justified this particular effort. Many came from a distance, and were unprepared to settle down; and many of them, too, were poor. The benevolence of those who had property, therefore, was called out to meet the case. This, consequently, cannot be regarded as a precedent binding on future times, nor is there a word in the narrative to imply this.

3. Gladness. The rich were happy, for their benevolence was gratified in giving. The poor were happy, for their hearts glowed with gratitude in receiving. All were happy in themselves and with each other, because happy in God.

4. Simplicity. There was no pride, ostentation, self-seeking, hypocrisy among them; but all were childlike in spirit.

5. Religiousness. “Praising God”—a summary of the whole.

V. The blessed condition of this new society.

1. Their influence was great. They had favour, not with a class—not with priests, Pharisees, Sadducees—but with all the people.

2. Their growth was constant. They were neither declining nor stationary; they were daily increasing. This was “the Lord’s” doing. He only can add true men to the Church.

3. Their salvation was promising. “Such as were in the way of salvation.” (D.

Thomas, D. D.)

And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine.—

Church life

The text tells us how the newly-baptized lived, in that first bloom and freshness of the gospel. They waited constantly upon—

I. The teaching of the apostles. There was much for them to learn. They knew nothing as yet in detail of the doctrine of their new Master. The particulars of His life, words, character, work; how must the apostles have busied themselves in recounting these things to a congregation all but wholly ignorant of them, amidst breathless silence or murmured satisfaction!—the gospel story. We are too ready to imagine that we have nothing to learn now from public teaching. We sit in judgment upon our teachers, as though we had all truth and knowledge already in possession. And most unwilling would your ministers be to speak as though they had anything which you know not, or might not know, for yourselves from the pages of the Holy Book. Nevertheless, preaching is one of God’s ordinances, and to it belongs the emphasis of that solemn caution, “Despise not prophesyings.” It is still one mark of the true Christian that he waits stedfastly upon the teaching of appointed men, whose responsible office it is rightly to divide the word of truth.

II. In fellowship—i.e., in the formation and fostering of that brotherly spirit of Christian love which the Apostles’ Creed calls “the communion of saints.” The converts did not separate after their baptism, each to his home, to live a life of pious meditation. They set themselves resolutely to a life of fellowship. The Christian is one of a community; alone, he is but a limb cut off from the trunk; separately, he must draw his vital vigour from the Head, but that vigour must be used and manifested in a self-forgetting fellowship. He must never fancy himself the whole body, either in being independent of the Head or of the organised system. “Ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.”

III. The breaking of the bread. How instantly the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper took its place among the marks and tokens of the true Church! From the very first it was understood that a Christian is one who observes all that Christ has commanded, and not least His dying charge, “This do,” etc. Doubtless the Lord’s Supper was a daily celebration. And do you suppose that any of the three thousand dared or wished to turn their back upon it? And yet how many of us are knowingly, wilfully, and throughout life, acting as if the charge, “This do,” had never been uttered, or as if the apostles only had ever been addressed by it! And no doubt there are those who could not, without presumption or profaneness, attend on that breaking of bread. But does not that inability, of itself, startle them? Does it not sound in their ears the condemning sentence, “Thou art none of Christ’s; thou art yet in thy sins”?

IV. In prayers. No doubt they prayed in secret. No doubt it was a life of prayer. The charge which we treat as hyperbolical—“Pray without ceasing”—was to them, in its spirit, a literal precept. Their life was now above, hidden with Christ in God, and well might they exercise that life in offices of perpetual communion. Christ was to them not a name nor a doctrine, but a real and living Person, their Friend and their Saviour, their Lord and their God. They could not have too much of Him! Therefore a life of prayer was to them a life of happiness. But the particular place occupied by the word “prayers” in the text, leads us rather to think of the worship of the congregation than of the worship of the secret chamber. It was not then, as it is now, that any little fluctuation of feeling,

or any passing accident of weather or of company, can thin a congregation almost to nothing. It was not then the case, as it is now, that everything is more attractive than worship; an additional half-hour’s rest, a walk into the country, a newspaper or a novel; nothing felt to be so little worth exertion as the opportunity of joining in the Church’s prayers or listening to the Church’s teaching. (Dean Vaughan.)

Attachment to the Church

All of us here assembled profess ourselves members of this Christian community; we profess ourselves churchmen, as members of the Church of Christ; for every sincere and honest member of the Church of England values his Church for this reason, that it is a portion of the Church of Christ. The churchmanship which I am now inculcating is the churchmanship of our text, and the duties therein described are the duties which I earnestly press upon you, and which I now proceed to illustrate. “And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.”

1. This description of the first Christians implies that the good churchman is stedfastly attached to the communion of his Church, cultivates a warm and constant affection for her, and uses all proper means for extending its influence, and carrying its beneficial influence to all who are ignorant of, or careless about, those invaluable blessings she contains within her sacred repository. This profession, entered into at baptism, and ratified at confirmation, leads the true member of Christ’s Church courageously to assert and to maintain the doctrines of the Cross of Christ in all their genuine simplicity, and that not only when it can be done without incurring opposition, but also when their maintenance may be scorned by the world and assailed by the sceptic; the good Churchman knows from Scripture that these truths are the doctrines of the apostles. From these doctrines he has derived peace and consolation; and from them, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, he feels implanted within him a principle, a life-giving principle, of holiness, which suggests the motives and dictates the acts of his daily conduct. These doctrines, when heartily embraced, are doctrines for the healing of the world of its sins and evils. The good Churchman remains immovable; he loves his Church for the truth’s sake; if any of her sons act unworthily of her, if any abuse, any deformity for a time creep round her sacred battlements, the abuse, the deformity is lamented, and, if possible, removed; but the Church herself is his delight; he loves her for the blessings she conveys.

2. From our text, it is to be observed that the Christian who desires to act his part well in his duty and obligations to his Church, will stedfastly attend on its services and observe its institutions. The first three thousand Churchmen, than whom so good a sample has never since been met with, “continued stedfastly, as in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, so also in breaking of bread and in prayers.” Indeed, the services of the Church form the main bond of fellowship with her. Most inconsistent is it for men, like the Jews of old, to exclaim, “The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord are we,” when the temple is scarcely ever frequented, and they themselves never seen within its sacred enclosure! Calling themselves members of Christ’s Church, but altogether neglecting its services, except as necessity calls upon them to join in them, and consequently as ignorant of their intent and meaning, as unmoved by any spiritual affection towards them or sacred pleasure from them, as though they were repeated in a language they understood not; boasting of their external fellowship by baptism, as though baptism were the sum-total of Church

membership. The remark of Bishop Beveridge upon the character and behaviour of these first Christians is well worthy of universal attention: “They did not think it sufficient to be baptized into Christ, but they still continued in Him, doing all such things as He hath appointed, whereby to receive grace and power from Him to walk as becometh His disciples; and so must we also, if we desire to be saved by Him. It is our great happiness to have been by baptism admitted into the Church and school of Christ, and so made His disciples and scholars; but unless we continue to do what we promised at our baptism, our condemnation will be the greater, in that we do not only break the laws of God, but likewise the promise we made to Him when we were baptized.” Of this state of things the consistent Churchman is fully aware, and by the grace of God he acts accordingly; hence his regular attendance on Divine ordinances is marked by internal devotion and external propriety. He is enabled to say of the temple and worship of the Lord, “This is none other but the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.” (J. C. Abdy, M. A.)

Steadfastness

Recently, at Chicago, Bishop Whipple related the following incident as an illustration of the moral courage of Christian Indians: “One day an Indian came to our missionary and said, ‘I know this religion is true. The men who have walked in this new trail are better and happier. But I have always been a warrior, and my hands are full of blood. Could I be a Christian?’ The missionary repeated the story of God’s love. To test the man, he said, ‘May I cut your hair?’ The Indian wears his scalp-lock for his enemy. When it is cut it is a sign that he will never go on the war-path again. The man said, ‘Yes, you may cut it. I shall throw my old life away.’ It was cut. He started for home, and met some wild Indians, who shouted with laughter, and with taunts said, ‘Yesterday you were a warrior; to-day you are a squaw.’ It stung the man to madness, and he rushed to his home and threw himself on the floor and burst into tears. His wife was a Christian, and came and put her arms about his neck and said, ‘Yesterday there was not a man in this world who dared call you a coward. Can’t you be as brave for Him who died for you as you were to kill the Sioux?’ He sprung to his feet and said, ‘I can, and will.’ I have known many brave, fearless servants of Christ, but I never knew one braver than this chief.”

Revivals favourable to doctrine

A languid church breeds unbelief as surely as a decaying oak fungus. In a condition of depressed vitality, the seeds of disease, which a full vigour would shake off, are fatal. Raise the temperature, and you kill the insect germs

Revivals unfavourable to unbelief

A warmer tone of spiritual life would change the atmosphere which unbelief needs for its growth. It belongs to the fauna of the glacial epoch, and when the rigours of that wintry time begin to melt, and warmer days to set in, the creatures of the ice have to retreat to arctic wildernesses, and leave a land no longer suited for their life. (A. Maclaren.)

Model Church

I. It was made up of converts—that is, of such as had repented and put an unquestionable faith in Jesus Christ. It is possible, of course, that some slipped in who were either wilful deceivers or self-deceived, but that was not likely to be the case under

such circumstances. None joined from social considerations or because others were doing so.

II. The members of this model church “continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine.” They received the truth as it came to them from inspired lips and were cordially faithful to it. They had a creed and were not ashamed of it. There were no heretics among them, walking about with feathers in their hats and vaunting their disloyalty to truth. We are -told that Christianity is not dogma, but life. It is both, and to say that it is either at the expense of the other is to antagonise the clear teaching of Scripture. Christianity is neither dogma nor life; it is life founded on dogma; it is ethics growing out of truth; it is creed flowering into conduct.

III. “they continued stedfastly in fellowship and in breaking of bread and in prayers.” The rationale of the Church finds its briefest expression in that word “fellowship.” There is a notion abroad that the Church is an organisation of good people, such as think themselves a little better than their neighbours. This is a mistake; the very opposite is true. The Church is a mutual help association, made up not of good people, but of such us want to be good, who feel their weakness and their need of co-operative sympathy and prayer. The over-righteous, who are strong enough to get along by themselves, are outside of the Church.

IV. They surrendered all their earthly possessions to a common treasury to be expended for the common good. These people lived in the early morning, with the dewy memory of Christ upon them and hearts warmed by the baptism of fire; they had recently seen their Master caught up in the clouds of heaven and received an assurance that He would come again in “like manner.” Thus memory and hope conspired to make their hearts unworldly, and in their fellowship we may reasonably expect to find the nearest approach to the Church of the millennium. In these days, when property rights so far eclipse the great verities, we may be excused for wondering how these people could be so foolish as to sell their possessions in this way and “hold all things common”; but by-and-by there will come a time when truth and goodness will outshine silver and gold, and then, perhaps, it will appear that these early Christians were not wrong after all, but only a little premature. The term “communism” is applied to so much of crack-brained fanaticism that we are in danger of overlooking the real truth at the centre of it.

V. The members of this primitive Church gave themselves wholly up to the work and worship of God; “They continued daily with one accord in the temple and breaking bread from house to house.” They were not content with mere Sabbath worship and the other perfunctory duties of a religious life. To these enthusiastic Christians every day was a holy day and every place was a sanctuary. (D. J. Burrell, D. D.)

The faith and stedfastness of the early Christians

I. We have here, then, in the first place, a very full account of the primitive Church. It is, in fact, a kind of full-length portrait, drawn by the pencil of inspiration, which we must analyse and examine for our own benefit. And here, first of all, we find it stated that “they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine.” If you ask what this doctrine was, we refer you back to the clear outline of it which is presented to our minds in the sermon of the Apostle Peter. It was the doctrine of a free and full remission of our sins, through the atoning sacrifice of our blessed Saviour, who was put to death for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

II. The blessed effects. It is also asserted that these primitive Christians maintained a

constant attendance on the means of grace. A man cannot walk alone and by himself on the path which leads to glory. As soon as his conscience has been awakened, his judgment convinced, and his heart subdued to the obedience of faith, he must become a member of that Church to which her Divine Master has entrusted the dispensation of those means of grace which He has provided for the advancement of the spiritual interests of His people. But we must also notice another characteristic feature in this infant Church, They manifested a noble and commendable attention to the wants of their poorer brethren; they “continued stedfastly in the fellowship,” or, rather, as the original word implies, in the contribution, or in the generous and considerate extension of their temporal resources for the supply of the necessities of their poorer brethren: “They had all things common, and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.” And we cannot fail to notice the spirit of union and of Christian love that pervaded all the services and intercourse of these first disciples of our blessed Redeemer. There was an unity of faith, and, what was of more consequence, there was an unity of feeling amongst them, binding together into one happy family the constituent members of this infant Church. It might, indeed, be said of them, “Behold how these Christians love one another,” so zealously did they endeavour to “keep the unity of the Spirit in the bonds of peace.” They “were together”; they did not frustrate the great purpose for which Christ has incorporated His people into a church by becoming hermits, but, feeling their mutual dependence on each other, they endeavoured by mutual encouragement to strengthen and to build each other up in the faith and hope of the everlasting gospel. (D. Bagot, D. D.)

The first Christians a holy family

I. The kind father of the family: recognised in filial love and proved in daily blessings.

II. The loving members of the family: the old ones of Pentecost and the new ones added to it.

III. The beautiful order of the family: doctrine and prayer, breaking of bread and care for the poor.

IV. The holy peace of the family.

1. Within among themselves.

2. Without in relation to the world. (Gerok.)

The first Christian Church

1. The faith which it testified.

2. The deeds which it performed.

3. The love which it evidenced.

4. The means of grace which it employed.

5. The blessedness which it enjoyed. (G. Florey.)

The blooming garden of God in the primitive Church

1. The delightful sunshine of Divine grace which it enjoys after the Pentecostal rain.

2. The lovely spiritual blossoms and fruits of grace which increase under such a Divine blessing—faith, love, hope, humility, meekness, purity, alms, prayer, etc.

3. The strong wall by which God’s garden is protected from the wasting of the enemy. (C. Gerok.)

Christian doctrine

The New Testament was not yet written, yet there was a coherent system of Christian faith and truth, and by an instinct these people knew it. The truth had not yet been formulated into a creed, but the essentials of a creed existed in the minds of both preachers and hearers of the gospel; and say what we may about creeds and the use which has sometimes been made of them, Christian doctrine is and ever has been essential to the integrity and the triumphs of the Christian Church. Note—

I. That the Christian life depends partly upon the soul’s convictions as to the character of God.

1. This life is derived from God, and is developed in the soul. There are inscrutable influences of the Holy Spirit in bringing about the inward change. There are also undefinable influences of godly friends or preachers, but none of these can be effectual unless there be a truth or fact through which the Holy Spirit works. How does a parent move his child towards a godly life? By force of character? Yes; but character is the product of Christian truth; and the parent was holy because, among other things, he read his Bible and believed his Saviour.

2. You might as well try to account for the life of a flower apart from the seed as to account for spiritual life apart from spiritual doctrine. You can predict the character of the flower from the nature of the seed; so from your knowledge of religious systems you can foretell the forms of character that will be developed from them—Mohammedan, Buddhist, Socinian, etc.; and our spiritual life will depend on the tenacity with which we cling to true convictions of the character of God. St. Paul was one of the most spiritual and self-denying of men, and again and again he traces his inner life to the power which Christian truth had over him—over his heart, of course, but over his intellect as well.

3. It is a shallow and often a hypocritical cry that asks us for a Christianity without doctrine. You cannot have it. God is—that is a doe-trine. God loves you-that is a doctrine, and so on. Feed your mind on these and kindred facts, and yours shall be no puny life.

II. That a Christian community must be drawn together by affinities in Christian doctrine.

1. If the unit of spiritual life depends for its existence and sustenance on truth, so does the community; if one child needs food, so do all the children; and though differences may be made to suit various appetites, yet chemical analysis shows that the foods are the same in their primal elements. And all spiritual communions must find a common spiritual basis. Feeling is too shifting for this basis, conduct too indefinite, negation too cold and unsubstantial, ceremony too formal and outward, and those combinations which are formed by the sinking of convictions are immoral and hollow. No; the first requisite for Christian union is that there shall be a due

regard to Christian conviction.

2. We sometimes talk of truth as though it were in the air, in documents, in the mystic utterance of the whole body of believing people. Yet ultimately it must be found in the individual soul. This is where error is, and not merely in magazines and lectures. A number of individuals, then, tenaciously holding the same beliefs, constitutes a spiritual community, and no Church is so destitute of the first principles of common sense as to seek fellowship apart from understood and common beliefs. The Unitarian may say, “We do not lay down any doctrinal basis for our fellowship,” yet a preacher who proclaimed the atonement or Divinity of Christ would have but a sorry welcome.

3. Churches exist for the very purpose of proclaiming Christian truth. If truth has gone, their mission has gone, and thirsty souls will go to them and find no living water.

III. That for Christian doctrine we are dependent on revelation. God did not leave men to find out the truth concerning Himself; He revealed it. When He revealed it He did not leave it to take care of itself. Both the revelation and the record are monuments of God’s special love to man. The idea of the supernatural is particularly obnoxious to “advanced thinkers”; they are consequently ever on the look-out for evidence that Christianity was only a product of the human mind, and so on a level with all other religions. But Christianity professes to be a new and supernatural departure in the history of religion, and the apostles are the Divinely appointed media of the Divine revelation. Their “doctrine” concerns the life, death, and resurrection of our Lord, and who so competent as they to deliver it, and who shall contest it as it comes from their lips or pens? Matthew was a chosen companion of Christ’s; Mark was a convert of Peter’s, and a comrade of Paul’s; Luke had “a perfect understanding of all things from the first”; John was “the disciple whom Jesus loved,” and “we know that his testimony is true.” Peter was an eye-witness of His majesty, and did “not follow cunningly devised fables.” To Paul the risen Christ appeared as to one born out of due time and “he received of the Lord that which he also delivered” to his converts. If we want trustworthy guides, these are the men to help us.

IV. That the power of Christian churches lies, amongst other things, in their adherence to Christian doctrines. If men want to be strong and aggressive, they must not be easily moved by the threatening sounds of modern unbelief; they must know their own minds and the mind of Christ. In moral conflicts convictions are the only forces that will do lasting service. (S. Pearson, M. A.)

The disciplined life of the Church

“They continued steadfastly.” The word seems to imply a double action; first, that of stretching out the hand to grasp firmly; and having done this, to adhere strongly to the object in our possession. They were perseveringly devoted to—

1. The apostles’ doctrine; the great, deep, broad fundamental truths and principles upon which the whole catholic faith is founded, and according to which the lives of the members of the Church must be regulated and conformed. Before we proceed to teach a truth, before we even profess to embody a truth in life and conduct, we should have a clear conception of the same. And before we ask others to frame their life and conduct according to these principles, we must see that upon them and according to them we frame and fashion our own. A profession without practice will

never tend to the conversion of others, it can only bring ridicule and contempt upon ourselves.

2. The apostles’ fellowship. Besides the community of principle, there was a community of life. Nothing tends to give principles so much force as seeing and feeling them embodied, not merely in the lives of isolated individuals, but in the life of a society. The power of a small united body of men is many times greater than that of each separate unit multiplied by the whole number. Let us remember that the wisdom and teaching of the Church is more perfect than that of any individual within it. Let us cultivate a spirit of watchful obedience; and let us be careful to check in ourselves or in others a spirit of self-wisdom, which, could we only regard it in its true light, would be seen to be little more than the spirit of selfishness.

3. The breaking of the bread. They were careful to be regular communicants. The most familiar name of that sacred service reminds us that it is meant to be a bond of union; those who neglect to partake thereof are, by absenting themselves from it, guilty of encouraging divisions in the Church. In the Holy Communion God calls us to rejoice with Him over the celebration of the closest union between the Divine and the human. It is the spirit of selfishness which causes us to disobey that call. But the Holy Communion is more than the chief bond of unity in the Church. It is in worthily partaking of the blessings offered there that the Christian soldier receives his chief support; there he gains the strength he needs in the day of battle; there he re-equips himself for active service.

4. The prayers. As they had a common creed and a common life, as they joined together in the participation of the Holy Communion, so they took part in a form of common prayer. The principal feature of the prayer-book upon which! Would now dwell is this—it teaches regular, systematic, common and public prayer. Nothing ministers more surely to the unity of faith and the unity of life than the unity of worship. That we think the same thing, that we aspire towards the same ideal, that we ask the same blessing, the prayer-book is ever reminding us. (W. E. Chadwick, M. A.)

Steadfastness in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship

Proofs of the reality of alleged conversions are always desirable. No man ought to feel offended if both the Church and the world demand such proof. If the change is real, the evidence will be forthcoming. Profession will not do, for without corresponding life it is mere assertion. For a man to say he is a Christian does not make him one. The only satisfactory evidence is that given by these Pentecostal converts by stedfastness in—

I. The apostles’ doctrine.

1. Sudden conversions are not always lasting. Many causes may bring about a change of view. It is difficult even for a man of calm self-possession to retain the mastery of his emotions and keep himself free from the influence of that strong sympathetic feeling which, like an electric current, runs through a crowd. Thus by the able orator or the artful demagogue marvellous effects are often produced, and many” a so-called conversion has been so effected. For the moment it is undeniably sincere, but the impression is due to passing sympathy with an earnest soul rather than with the truth declared; and the sequel often is unstedfastness in the doctrine of Christ. The cause ceases, and the effect disappears. The sympathy dies out for want of fresh stimulus. Like a house without a foundation, the assumed Christian profession may

be swept into ruin by the first tempest. It is like a human body whose spinal column has been materially damaged; artificial props are necessary to shore it up and prevent its collapse.

2. One test, then, of sincere adhesion to Christ is stedfast adherence to His teaching—a life in accordance with His precepts. This proof of conversion these converts had. With us it is not a difficult thing to make a profession. In certain circles this is a badge of respectability. But then it was to incur serious peril. These converts were true converts, and therefore became assiduous scholars in Christ’s school, and when the day of cool reflection or hot persecution came, they were not moved from their stedfastness. The more they knew of the doctrine, the more they deemed it worth the sacrifice.

II. In fellowship. The disciples were no longer a mere family, but a community. They had now ceased to be the private followers of a man; they stood before the world as a church, a living body, all whose members were in fellowship. And so we come thus early to the root idea of the Church. It is a brotherhood conferring privileges upon, yet demanding duties from, every one of its members. Each is a partner in a firm, and as such is bound to promote the interests of the concern. But it is a concern that can neither conduct its operations with borrowed capital, nor permit the presence of any sleeping partners. It is a living body, whose graceful movement is as much impeded by an inactive member as is the action of the body by a diseased limb. The rich are to help the poor, and the strong the weak; the wise are to be the advisers of the ignorant, etc. The converts at Pentecost recognised all this, and thus proved the reality of their conversion. “Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.” (W. M. Arthur, M. A.)

The use of fellowship

The community of spirit suggested in the word here rendered “fellowship” must have grown out of the instant recognition of the rule, “A place for every man, and every man in his place.” One of the most successful preachers in modern times, being asked how he was able to accomplish so much good in the course of a year, replied, “It is not I that do it, but the Church I serve; I preach as hard as I can on Sunday, and then I have seven hundred members who go out and preach every day of the week afterwards.” (C. S. Robinson, D. D.)

The primitive fellowship at Jerusalem was

I. Founded on a new doctrine.

1. This doctrine was in harmony with and fulfilment of the old, but yet it was new. Its subject was the life, death, etc., of Christ, and the salvation which His work had brought to man.

2. This doctrine, received by faith and applied by the Holy Ghost, became spirit and life to the hearers. There were, of course, no church buildings; the meetings, therefore, could only be held in the Temple courts or in private houses. Wonderful evenings must those have been which were spent in the spacious apartments of such as, being wealthier, kept open house—evenings not only of hearing the doctrine, but of worship, mutual converse, frugal feasting, and winding up with the Lord’s Supper. But it was to learn about Jesus that mainly brought them together.

II. Inspired by a new life.

1. This life began in repentance and faith, and broke out of cloud into sunshine, and from embryo into active and joyous expression through the power of the Holy Spirit. It was the soul of the new fellowship, the spring of its development, the source of its tendencies and laws.

2. This new life, like the new doctrine, was one with the old, but so much fuller, and more intense and glorious, that it may justly be called new. Moreover, it was poured forth with so free and wide a bounty that it may well be called the donation of a new life to the Church, and through it to the world.

3. This new life belongs to every penitent believer, and there is no “higher life” than this, although it has its stages from the “babe” to the “father” in Christ. It is in fact that “life eternal,” which is to “know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent.”

4. This new life made all things new.

5. Its secret and its relations to Divine truth and holy duty are summed up in 1Pe_1:22-23. Faith is obedience to the truth; the new life develops itself in holy love.

III. Expressed and sustained by new means and developments.

1. Fellowship meetings from house to house, where speech and prayer were free to each, were the ordinary means of common edification, and appear for some time to have been the only specific and characteristic means maintained in the Church at Jerusalem. There was neither ritual nor organisation, but the primary germ cell was there in the fellowship meetings, and we are thus shown what is the true substratum of Church organisation and life. Without this a so-called church is not a living Christian community. However complete its organisation may become, it is bound to retain its character as a spiritual commonwealth, instinct with free life.

2. This new life grafted on its new means new developments of mutual care. The converts did not say that anything was their own; they acknowledged themselves to be not proprietors, but stewards. There was a vast number of pauper Jews, and we may be sure that the fountain of Pharisaic beneficence would be sealed against them when they became Christians. It was therefore incumbent upon their believing brethren to make provision for their necessities. And in that hour of loving enthusiasm their generosity knew no bounds. This was no new principle. It lay at the root of all Bible ethics, but it had never been fully acted on by a whole community before.

IV. Sealed by new sacraments—baptism and “the breaking of bread.” The latter was a natural and beautiful finish to their social meals and sacred exercises. As multitudes were continually joining the Church, we may believe that at each gathering, house by house, there were fresh converts. To these the seal of the Holy Communion would rightfully be given as consummating their union and fellowship with the company of believers.

V. Maintained in harmony with the earlier ordinances of public worship as established in the temple services. “The prayers” were the daily prayers of the Temple. Thus in the providence of God it was ordered that the Christian Church should take root, and partially unfold its form and glory within the ground of Judaism. The unity and continuity of the Divine dispensations was thus to be set forth. (J. H. Rigg, D. D.)

Christian fellowship

I. Its hindrances.

1. Exaggerated individualism.

(1) It is a grand truth that religion lies between the solitary soul and God, and that no priest has any right to intermeddle with it. Alone we were born into the new world; alone we have to wrestle in it; alone we shall die.

(2) But we have exaggerated this principle, and thrown the idea of the Church into the shade. The lonely pilgrim travels to the Cross, but to find there “the general assembly and Church of the first-born.” Yet there are those in our churches who do not share, or only feebly, this common life. To them public worship differs only from private in being offered publicly. They eat their portion alone, and come and go, knowing only the man who preaches, and the man who collects pew rents. It may be they are constitutionally shy, or self-absorbed, or unhappy. But they are spots in our feasts of charity, and icebergs which chill the gulf stream of the Church’s life.

(3) We need to be reminded that the Church is not a club, hotel, or a mere voluntary association, but a home, and that they can no more denude themselves of their spiritual than they can of their natural relationships.

2. Social distinctions.

(1) It is a dark day for any Church when it declares its special mission to be to any one class, or when a Church consists of any one class. This is a danger which menaces modern Church life. The rich gravitate to the suburbs, the poor crowd into the towns, her great gulf yawns between.

(2) The ideal relation is when rich and poor meet together on the same common level—before the Lord, the Master and Redeemer of them all. We need to be reminded that squire and labourer, master and clerk, mistress and maid, have committed the same sins, felt the same penitence, been redeemed by the same sacrifice. If the life of the Church is not strong enough to perfect this union, and enable men So rise above such things, seen and temporal, as distinctions of rank, to things unseen and eternal, it is time we consider how to recover the diviner spirit of earlier days.

3. The caste of culture. Superior persons who are acquainted with all the scientific objections to Christianity look down upon the uninitiated as Philistines. Then there are those half-time Christians who contend that their spiritual culture can be promoted quite as well by private reading as public worship, and attend once a day merely for example. Such forget that the Saviour was the Friend of publicans and sinners, and thanked God for hiding things from the wise and prudent, and for revealing them unto babes.

4. The spirit of faction. “Mark them which cause divisions among you.” How many are they! On what slight grounds and paltry pretexts they disturb the peace of the Church! With what arrogance do they judge and condemn brethren whose lives are as pure as theirs!

II. Practical remedies.

1. We must train our young members, and inculcate upon them the duties as well as

the privileges of Church fellowship.

2. Our churches must be organised for work. There must be no drones in the hive. No member ought to secure exemption by money payment from personal service. It was when the people had a mind to work that the walls of Jerusalem rose. Pastor Oncken, of Hamburg, gathered a church of three thousand, the distinctive feature of which was that each was pledged to personal service. In our churches the most beautiful and spiritually operative brotherly love is found among those who, in Sunday-schools, tract societies, etc., are associated in effort to advance the cause of Christ.

3. Meetings of the Church might be held distinct from those for business, for mutual conference, after the pattern of Methodist class meetings, where “whosoever hath a psalm, a doctrine, a revelation, an interpretation,” might feel at liberty to impart it. The patient sufferings of the sick and poor, their quiet trust in God’s love might rebuke our discontent, and teach us the meaning of Divine support and consolation. The rough honest speech of a working man telling the story of his difficulties might give the well-to-do an insight into hardships which they are in danger of forgetting, while a business man frankly telling his difficulties might remind the poor man that the prosperous have temptations from which he is spared. Such conferences would create a mutual trust and affection fruitful in a thousand acts of brotherliness. (A. Wilson, B. A.)

In prayers.—

Prayer meetings as affecting the prosperity of the Church

If we regard prayer meetings merely as expedients appointed by men and having no sanction from the Word of God, we may, perhaps, be disposed to treat them lightly. And it is very much to be feared that this is the view taken by many of prayer meetings, because—

1. They are generally so thinly attended.

2. They are so disparaged—“It is only a prayer meeting.” Let us show, then—

I. That prayer meetings are scriptural. We find here that when those who gladly received the Word had been baptized, they “continued stedfastly,” not once or twice or occasionally, “in prayers,” in fact as stedfast as in “doctrine,” etc. Social prayer is placed on a level in point of importance with apostolic doctrine and the Lord’s Supper. Why, then, should the one be comparatively lost sight of by the churches, whilst the others are regarded as essential to the profession of Christianity? Those who neglected “the assembling of themselves together” were denounced by the apostle, and the continuance of fellowship is here associated with continuance in prayer. Now if we look at any other part of the Word of God, we shall find the same thing uniformly brought before us as the practice of the Church. In Act_1:14-15 we find that such was the practice before the outpouring of the Spirit. We come next to chap. 4., and after Peter and John had been dismissed we find, in verse 33, they reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them. Then there was a prayer meeting, and the prayers offered were honoured with a remarkable reply from heaven (verse 31). In chap. 12. Peter was apprehended and kept in prison. The Church, however, had prayer meetings on his behalf. And the prayer was granted before the prayer meeting was broken up. I have not quoted passages in the Epistles where supplication and prayer are enjoined on the churches, but, glancing

generally at these exhortations, are you to suppose that they ask for the prayers merely of individuals as such? When they call upon the Church to do anything, do they not call upon the Church to do it as a public body, and in a public way? Taking this view of the matter, you will find all the apostolic exhortations to supplication bearing upon the apostolic practice, and then the evidence that prayer meetings, properly so called, were a part of the practice of the apostolic churches will be found to be complete.

II. What benefit will accrue from such meetings.

1. Union of feeling must arise in the Church. When the same minds are before the same throne of grace; when the same acknowledgment is made of common transgressions, and the same faith is exercised in a common Saviour; and when the whole mind of a combined people is consecrated by the solemnity of their common supplications, surely there must be the elements of a union far surpassing any other that can exist. It is this very circumstance that frequently leads people to think highly of unions by no means scriptural in their character.

2. As that united feeling becomes sanctified prayer meetings will also tend to strengthen spiritual devotion in the Church. Devotion may be regarded as an ardent feeling in connection with religious matters; with or without scriptural light and authority the latter may be created in a variety of ways. The solemnities of high mass create that feeling in the Church of Rome. The splendour of its statuary and its paintings; the richness of its structures; the grandeur of its rites; the elevating influence of its music, all will be found having a tendency to create an ardent feeling in connection with religious matters. But this is not religious feeling accompanied with scriptural light and scriptural sobriety. In the midst of the thrilling influences to which they are subject, remind them that these structures were raised by a system that destroyed the souls of men, and took away liberty as regarded their bodies. Tell them to observe that such places were never intended for instruction. Let them afterwards look at the plainer structures which were evidently intended for instruction. It is very clear that the feeling I have described is not to be found there; but at the same time the light of scriptural truth will be found operating, and the calm and practical influence of genuine Christianity will be found to have superseded the feeling of excitement and religious awe. Now, if we look at devotional feeling in both these points of view, where are we to find that which is really scriptural so clearly exhibited as in prayer meetings? Go to the humble prayer meeting; let there be no influence there but the influence of heaven: let there be no power but the power of the Spirit of God; let the mind be directed by scriptural light and by scriptural desires, expressed in scriptural petitions, and you have there the exhibition of a plain and practical Christianity, which, while it has fellowship with the Father and with His Son, exercises a sufficient command over the physical economy to prevent that extravagance which deludes in the manner that I have described.

3. Prayer meetings are calculated to promote the spread of God’s glory in the Church. We know that they bring the glory of God before the supplicants with a degree of spirituality and power unknown in any other circumstances, and that therefore they are best fitted, best armed, for the field in which God calls upon them to act when they have received common refreshment at the footstool of the Majesty on high.

4. Prayer meetings are calculated to raise the Church above the secular influence and spirit by which churches are often divided. If individuals belonging to a Christian Church are habitually separated from one another; if they know little or nothing

about one another; when any question arises in that Church, how ill provided are they to treat it in the spirit of Christian devotion. In such a state of things every man feels that he has to seek his own will in reference to the question, and there is likely to be a conflagration of feeling in the Church. But let them come from the throne where they have often asked for that help by which they may work together in the spirit of Christian charity; let them come from the place where God has often been felt to be present; and let something them be suggested that may for a moment lead to debate, and you will see the whole Christian brotherhood acting as those who know what it is to feel together the sanctifying influence of devotion. The peace of the Church, therefore, is involved in prayer meetings.

5. When prayer meetings are conducted spiritually, the Church itself will be found to exhibit to the world more of the spirit by which the Church must be actuated before the gospel can triumph. If the Saviour prayed that His people might be one, as He was one with the Father, in order “that the world might believe that He had sent Him”; i.e., made their union evidence of the truth of Christianity; and if the Saviour, at the same time, held up His people as a praying people, and promised that whatever they should ask in His name He would bestow; the world finding all this laid down in our statute book, will look to see how far it is carried out in our practice. Let them see, then, that prayer meetings are duly attended; and they will be ready to acknowledge that God is “among you of a truth” (1Co_14:24).

III. What are the real objections? The only objection that I know is that people cannot give two evenings in the week. You have, then, to take the prayer meeting and the meeting for public assembly, and to ask which is the more important of the two; or you have to compare the two meetings with your other employments, and to determine to which you shall give the preference. Is the business to which you have to attend on the two evenings, or on one of them, more important than the assembly or the prayer meeting; then attend to that business. The very same remark will apply to the Sabbath day. (J. Burnet.)

And fear came upon every soul.—

Church life

Note—

I. The effect produced upon beholders without. “And fear came upon every soul.” One explanation of this may be found in the clause which follows. Proofs daily witnessed of the Divine presence could not fail to strike fear into the hearts of those who looked on without obeying. But there is more than that. The effect upon the wicked Herod of the character of the Baptist was fear, little as was the ground for it in an earthly sense. So it was here. Christians do not always know their own power. What fears do young Christians often experience in the prospect of opposition or ridicule! Let them go forward in the path of duty, and they will find that “Greater is He that is in them than he that is in the world.” So far from having anything to fear, you have all of you the power of striking a wholesome and perhaps a saving fear into the enemies of Christ by a bright and consistent example. That is a testimony which men cannot gainsay. All else they may laugh at your persuasions, warnings, arguments; but your example will make its way into their consciences. That is the one weapon which a woman, which a child may wield, and which no coat of mail is close enough to evade or strong enough to parry.

II. Their union and beneficence (verses 44-45). In the first ardour of their new

conviction they obeyed literally the direction to “lay up for themselves no treasures on earth”; to “sell that they had, and give alms”; to “forsake all and follow Christ.” They could not bear to have while another wanted. Nothing but a real community of goods could satisfy their Christian instincts. It was an example for all times.

1. Not, however, in form. There is no inspired rule, applicable to all cases, for this. We find St. Paul, e.g., recommending a liberal contribution, according to the circumstances of each man, to the relief of the poor saints at Jerusalem; and in another, advising that on the first day of each week every one should “lay by him in store” for this purpose “as God had prospered him.” This could not have been done if in the Church of Corinth there had been a community of possessions. How different was this example from anything which the world has since witnessed! It has been the dream of theorists to see all distinction of ranks levelled, and a whole congregation, or nation, living in brotherly concord upon the common property of all. But every such scheme has been based upon assumptions hasty in themselves and mischievous in their consequences. In Christian bodies the attempt to establish a system of communion has led more often to the exclusion than to the consideration of the poor. Among political speculators the principle of communism has been too often absolutely anti-Christian; and a hatred of subordination has been the secret spring of much professed zeal for the rights of man, and of much declamation upon the interests of society. The example before us was of a widely different kind from either of these. It was the spontaneous, natural, and temporary effect of a fresh faith, a lively hope, and a genuine charity. In its form it was not and it could not be permanent. While it continued it was a wonderful testimony to the strength of the new religion in the hearts of those who believed. “See how these Christians love,” might well be the comment of those who looked on upon a scene so unlike the world of common life. Judge ye what there is, in heaven or in earth, which would have made any one of us go and do likewise.

2. And though the form of that entire self-sacrifice may vary—and we believe that our Master designed that it should vary with the varying circumstances of the world and of His Church—let us not forget that the spirit of this life must be ours. If it be the best on the whole for the true welfare of society that each man be the possessor of the fruits of his own toil, and the uncontrolled steward of his own resources; if many high and Christian purposes are answered by that gradation of ranks and that variety of fortunes which is the form of society under which God has placed us; yet let us not forget that one end, perhaps the chief end, to be answered by this arrangement, is, that each man, “working with his hands the thing that is good,” may thereby “have to give to him that needeth”; that every one may be able to exercise his individual judgment upon various objects of piety and charity proposed to him; but certainly not that any one may be at liberty to say, I prefer keeping to myself, and to my own, all that I possess.

III. Their private and domestic life (verses 46-47).

1. The life of a true Christian ought to be and will be a happy life. His very food has a blessing. He praises God over it. He partakes of it in gladness. It is to him the token of a Father’s love. He receives it, as out of God’s hand, in his own. And the heart which is glad is described as a “single” or a “simple” heart. The word denotes properly smooth or level; it is the epithet of a field or a road out of which the stones have been carefully gathered, so that it presents no impediment to the plough of the husbandman or the feet of the traveller. A stoneless heart is one which has no impediments or obstacles in it; one out of which the roughnesses of temper and the

stumbling blocks of sin have been removed by grace, so that it is now level and even, smooth in its course, and gentle in its contact.

2. And this may explain how it should be that a life which inspired fear was also one of “favour with all the people.” A Christian life is a witness against sinfulness and carelessness. It awakens slumbering consciences, testifying of realities above not to be forgotten without danger. In this aspect it inspires awe. But in another it is altogether lovely. It is written of Jesus that, as He “increased in wisdom and stature,” He increased also “in favour with God and man.” So is it with His people. Men often show their religion in unattractive or repulsive forms, and then regard their own unpopularity as a proof of the world’s hatred against religion. Let them exhibit their religion in its aspect of a world-wide charity, and they will find it otherwise. They will find that, while it inspires awe as God’s witness, their religion wins love also as.the friend of man.

IV. Their increase (verse 47). There is nothing here of a Divine selection fixing by an arbitrary sentence who should and who should not be heirs of salvation. The words themselves say, “those who were in the course (in the process) of salvation.” Salvation, if in one sense a single act, is in another a course of acts. A man may forfeit salvation; he may grieve and quench the Holy Spirit; he may fall away and never be renewed And while these things are possible, it is as much as we can say of any man that he is in course of salvation. And a great thing it is to be able to say this. We cannot say this of a man who is trifling, or is a despiser of the means of grace, or is cherishing any known sin.

1. It is “the Lord” who adds. Without Him, without His Holy Spirit, what would be Paul or Apollos or Cephas, much more we poor, erring, uninspired men? It was He who “opened the heart” of Lydia “that she attended to the things that were spoken by Paul.” And it is He who opens hearts now to attend to the things spoken by His ministers. We want new converts, and who can add these to our number, save the Lord only?

2. It is “to the Church” that the Lord adds. It is not only secret desires, resolutions, prayers, that we need awakening in us; there must be an adding to the Church. We ought ¢o be not only a pious people, fulfilling life’s duties and satisfying life’s relations in the fear of God; but also a people honouring God, and walking to heaven together, together serving Christ, and working righteousness.

3. These additions were “day by day.” The course of this world is a transitory, rapid thing; we are here to-day, and to-morrow there. In the meantime can we say that there is a daily Church progress? “The Lord’s arm is not shortened,” etc. Then why this pause and intermission in the work of grace? Why is it that a minister counts himself happy if but one or two souls are gathered into the Church below? What has become of the word “daily”? Can we afford, any better than the primitive Christians, to lose time in this work of adding? The world stops not for our loitering; life and death stop not while we linger; God of His infinite mercy make us feel the value of time, and count each day lost that has not added to His Church one that shall be saved! (Dean Vaughan.)

EBC 37-47, "THE FIRSTFRUITS OF PENTECOST

THE sermon of St. Peter on the day of Pentecost and the sermons of our Lord present a striking contrast. Our Lord’s sermons were of various kinds; they were at times

consoling, yet full of instruction and direction. Such, for instance, was the Sermon on the Mount. At other times His discourses were stern and full of sharp reproof. Such was His teaching in His parting addresses to the Jews delivered in the Temple, recorded in the synoptic Gospels. Yet they apparently failed, for the time at least, in producing any great practical results. In fact, His Temple discourses served only to irritate His foes, and arouse their hostility.

St. Peter delivered a sermon on the day of Pentecost which was quite as stern and quite as calculated to irritate, and yet that discourse was crowned with results exceeding those ever achieved by our Lord, though His discourses far surpassed St. Peter’s in literary skill, in spiritual meaning, in eternal significance and value. Whence came this fact? It simply happened in fulfilment of Christ’s own prophecy recorded by St. John, where He predicts that His Apostles shall achieve greater works than He had achieved, "because I go unto the Father." (Joh_14:12) The departure of Christ into the true Holy of Holies opened the channel of communication between the eternal Father and the waiting Church; the Spirit was poured out through Christ as the channel, and the result was conviction and conversion; leading the people to cry out, in response to St. Peter’s simple statement of facts, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?"

I. One of the first qualifications absolutely necessary, if a man is to write history tellingly and sympathetically, is a historical imagination. Unless a man can, from a multitude of separate and often independent details, reconstruct the past, realise it vividly for himself, and then depict it with life and force to his readers, he will utterly fail as a historian. The same historical imagination is needed, too, if we wish to realise the full force of the circumstances we are considering. It is hard even for those who do possess such an imagination to throw themselves back into all the circumstances and surroundings of the Apostles at Pentecost; but when we succeed in doing so, then all these circumstances can only be explained on the supposition-the orthodox and catholic supposition-that there must have happened a supernatural occurrence, and that there must have been granted a supernatural power and blessing on the day of Pentecost.

The courage of St. Peter when preaching his sermon is, as we have already noticed, a proof of the descent of the Spirit. The resurrection of his Master had doubtless inspired him with all the power of a new idea. But St. Peter’s history, both before the day of Pentecost and after it, amply proved that mere intellectual conviction could be united with grievous moral cowardice. We cannot doubt, for instance, that St. Peter was intellectually convinced of the justice of the Gentile claims, and their right to a full equality with the Jews, when St. Paul felt compelled to withstand him at Antioch. Yet he was possessed with no such spiritual enthusiasm on the question as that which moved St. Paul or else he never would have fallen into such lamentable hypocrisy as he displayed on that occasion. The gift of the Spirit was needed by St. Peter before an intellectual conviction could be transformed into an overwhelming spiritual movement which swept every obstacle from its path. Again, the conduct of the people is a proof of the descent of the Spirit. St. Peter assails their actions, charges upon them the murder of the Messiah, and proclaims the triumph of Christ over all their machinations. Yet they listen quietly, respectfully, without opposition, as mobs do not usually listen to speeches running counter to their prejudices. Some wondrous phenomena such as the gift of tongues, combined with divinely persuasive eloquence, flinging the aegis of their protection over the preacher’s defenceless person, must have so struck the minds of these fanatical Jews as to keep them quiet while St. Peter spoke. But the result of St. Peter’s speech was the chiefest evidence that something extraordinary must have happened at Jerusalem in the earliest days of the Church’s history. Secular history tells us, as well as the sacred narrative, that Christianity rose again from what seemed its

grave at the very spot where, and at the very moment when, the crucifixion had apparently extinguished it for ever.

The evidence of the historian Tacitus is conclusive upon this point. He lived and flourished all through the time when St. Paul’s ministry was most active. He was born about the year 50, and had every opportunity of becoming acquainted with the facts concerning the execution of Christ and the rise of Christianity, as they were doubtless laid up in the imperial archives at Rome. His testimony, written at a period when, as some maintain, neither the Acts of the Apostles nor the Gospels of the New Testament were in existence, exactly tallies with the account given by our sacred books. In his "Annals," book 15. chap. 44, he writes concerning Christianity: "Christus, from whom the name of Christian has its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out in Judaea." So that the pagan historian who knew nothing about Christianity save what official pagan documents or popular report told him, agrees with the Scriptures that Christianity was checked for a moment by the death of its founder, and then gained its earliest and most glorious triumph on the very scene of its apparent defeat where-and this is a very important part of the argument-previously the most marvellous wisdom and the most striking signs and wonders had utterly failed to gain any large measure of success. Whence, then, can we explain this fact, or how account for this conscience-stricken cry, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" unless we assume what the narrative of our text declares, that the Holy Ghost, in all His convincing and converting power, had been poured out from on high?

And surely our own personal experience daily corroborates this view. There may be intellectual, conviction and controversial triumph without any spiritual enthusiasm. Sermons may be clever, powerful, convincing, and yet, unless the Spirit’s power be sought, and an unction from on high be vouchsafed, no spiritual harvest can be expected. St. Peter’s sermon, if viewed from a human standpoint, could no more have been expected to succeed than the Master’s. The one new element, however, which now entered into the combination, explains the difference. The Spirit was now given, and men therefore hearkened to the servant where they had turned a deaf ear to the Master. It is a lesson much needed for our generation, especially in the case of the young, and in our Sunday-school system. The religious instruction of youth is much more carefully looked after than it used to be. Primers, handbooks, elementary commentaries, catechists’ manuals, are published in profusion, and many think that provided a Sunday or day school distinguishes itself in the examination list, which is now the one great educational test, religious knowledge has been secured. The contrast between St. Peter’s success and our Lord’s failure warns us that there is a vast difference between religious life and religious knowledge. The most irreligious people, the most bitter opponents of Christianity, have been produced by schools and systems where religious knowledge was literally crammed down the throats of the children in a hard, mechanical, unloving style. But let there be no mistake. I do not object to organised religious instruction. I think, in fact, that a vast amount of Sunday-school teaching is utterly worthless for want of such organisation. Our Sunday-school system will, in fact, be thoroughly inefficient, if not useless, as a system, till every Sunday-school has its teachers’ meeting presided over by a competent instructor, who will carefully teach the teachers themselves in a well-ordered, systematic course. But after all this has been done, we must still remember that Christianity is something more than a system of doctrine, or a Divine scheme of philosophy, which can be worked up like Aristotle’s "Ethics" or Mill’s "Logic." Christianity is a Divine power, a power which must be sought in faith, in humiliation,

and in prayer; and till the Holy Ghost be duly honoured, and His presence be humbly sought, the finest system and the most elaborate organisations will be found devoid of any fruitful life and vigour.

II. There are many other points of interest in this passage; let us take them one by one as they offer themselves. The people, seized by conviction and in acute pain of conscience, cried out, "What shall we do?" St. Peter replied, "Repent, and be baptised." Repent is the Apostle’s first rule, -contrasting very strongly with some modern systems which have been devised on a plan very different from that of our Lord and of His Apostles. The preaching of the New Testament is ever the same. John the Baptist came, and his teaching was briefly summed up thus, "Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." John was removed, and Christ came. The light ceased to shine, and then the true light stood revealed; but the teaching was the same, and the Messiah still proclaims, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." The system of teaching to which I refer parries the force of our Lord’s example, as well as of the Baptist’s words, by saying, that was the old dispensation. Till Christ died, the new covenant did not come into force, and therefore Christ taught in His public ministry merely as a Jew, speaking on Jewish grounds to Jews. But let us see whether such an explanation, which makes void our Lord’s personal teachings and commands, is tenable. A reference, to this passage sufficiently settles this point. The Master departs and the Spirit is outpoured, and still the apostolic and inspired teaching is just the same. The cry of the multitude, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" produces, from the illuminated Apostle, the same response, "Repent," coupled with a new requirement, "Be baptised, every one of you, for the remission of sins." And the same message has ever since continued to be the basis of all real spiritual work. Simon Magus is found by St. Peter with his mind intellectually convinced, but with his affections untouched and his heart spiritually dead. To Simon Magus Peter delivers the same message, "Repent of this thy wickedness, and pray God if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee." John Wesley was one of the greatest evangelists that ever lived and worked for God. During the whole sixty years of his continuous labours, from the time when he taught his pupils in Oxford College and the prisoners in Oxford jail down to the last sermon that he preached, his ministry and teaching were modelled upon that of the New Testament, -it was ever a preaching of repentance. He counted it utterly useless and hopeless to preach the comforts of the gospel before he had made men feel and wince beneath the terrors of the law and the sense of offended justice. Modern times have seen, however, a strange perversion of the gospel method, and some have taught that repentance was not to be urged or even mentioned to Christian congregations.

This is one of the leading points which the Plymouth Brethren specially press in the course of their destructive and guerilla-like assaults upon the communions of reformed-Christendom. The apostolic doctrine of repentance finds no place in their scheme; while again their teaching on this subject, or something very like it, is often reproduced, all unconsciously, it may be, by the conductors of those mission services so common throughout the country. It is as hard now to preserve a just balance in teaching, as it was in the days of St. Paul and St. James. It is no easy matter so to preach repentance as not to discourage the truly humble soul; so to proclaim God’s forgiving love as not to encourage presumption and carelessness.

I have said, indeed, that the doctrine of the Plymouth body on this point is a modern one. It is modern, indeed, when compared with the genuine teaching of the New Testament; but still it is, in fact, ancient, for it dates back to the Antinomians, who, two hundred and fifty years ago, created a great sensation among the Puritan divines. A brief historical narrative will prove this. The sermons of Dr. Tobias Crisp and Fisher’s

"Marrow-of Modern Divinity" are books whose very titles are now forgotten, and yet the diligent student will there find all those ideas about repentance, justification, and assurance which are now produced as marvellous new truths, though reprobated two centuries ago as earnestly by Churchmen like Bull, Beveridge, and Stillingfleet, as by Howe, and Baxter, and Williams among the Nonconformists and Puritans. The denial of the necessity for Christian repentance was based, by the logical Antinomians of the olden time, upon the theory that Christ bore in His own person the literal sins of the elect; so that an elect person has nothing whatsoever to do with his sins save assure himself by an act of faith, that his sins were forgiven and rendered completely non-existent eighteen hundred years ago.

The formula which they delight in and I have heard used, even by Churchmen, is this: "Believe that you are saved, and then you are saved." The result of this teaching in every age, wherever it has appeared, is not far to seek. The main stress of all Christian effort is devoted not to the attainment of likeness to Christ, or that pursuit of holiness without which the beatific vision of God is impossible. The great point urged by this party in every age is the supreme importance of assurance which they identify with saving faith. Therefore it is that they discourage, aye, and go farther, utterly reject, all teaching of repentance. The words of one of those old writers put the matter in its simplest form. In the reign of James II and William III there arose a great controversy in London touching this very point. Dr. Williams, the founder of the well-known library in Grafton Street, London, was the leader on one side, while the sermons of Tobias Crisp were the rallying-point on the other. Williams and Baxter maintained the importance of repentance and the absolute necessity of good works for salvation. On the opposite side, the views and doctrines which we have seen pressed in modern times were explicitly stated, but with far more fearlessness and logical power than are ever now used. Here are a few of the propositions which Dr. Williams felt himself bound to refute. I shall give them at some length, that my readers may see how ancient is this heresy. "The elect are discharged from all their sins by the act of God laying their sins upon Christ on the cross, and consequently that the elect upon the death of Christ ceased to be sinners, and ever since sins committed by them are none of their sins, they are the sins of Christ." Again, the Antinomians taught, in language often still reproduced, "Men have nothing to do in order to salvation, nor is sanctification a jot the way of any person to heaven. Nor can the duties and graces of the elect, nor even faith itself, do them the least good or prevent the least evil; while, on the other hand, the grossest sins which the elect commit cannot do them the least harm, nor ought they to fear the least hurt from their own sins." While again, coming still closer to the point on which we have been insisting, they declared, according to Dr. Williams, that "the covenant of grace hath no condition to be performed on man’s part, even though in the strength of Christ. Neither is faith itself the condition of this covenant, but all the saving benefits of this covenant actually and really belong to the elect before they are born, yea, and even against their will"; while as to the nature of faith, they taught "that saving faith is nothing else but our persuasion or absolute concluding within ourselves that our sins are pardoned, and that Christ is ours." Hence they derived a dogma of their own, directly and plainly contradictory of the teaching of the New Testament on the subject of repentance, "that Christ is offered to blasphemers, murderers, and the worst of sinners, that they, remaining ignorant, unconvinced, and resolved in their purpose to continue such, may be assured they have a full interest in Christ; and this by only concluding in their own minds that Christ is theirs." It is plain to any one fully acquainted with modern religious thought, that all the special doctrines of Plymouthism concerning justification, repentance, and faith, are involved in the statements which Dr. Williams set himself to refute, and which he does refute most ably,

in works long since consigned to the oblivion of our great libraries, though well worthy of careful study amid the troubles of the present age. Assurance, a present knowledge of a present salvation, present peace, these are the only topics pressed upon the unconverted. If the multitude at Jerusalem had asked the same question from our modern teachers which they asked from the Apostles, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" the reply would have been, "Do you know you are saved? If not, believe that you are saved, believe that Jesus died for you." But not one of them would have given the apostolic reply, "Repent, and be baptised, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost," because the doctrine of repentance and the value and use of the sacrament of baptism find no place in this new-fangled scheme.

III. "Repent, and be baptised, every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins." These words form the basis of a well-known clause in the Nicene Creed, which says, "I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins." They suggest in addition some very important discussions. The position which baptism occupies in apostolic teaching is worthy of careful notice. It is pressed upon the multitude as a present duty, and as a result there were three thousand persons baptised in that one day. It was just the same with Cornelius the centurion, and with the Philippian jailer whom St. Paul converted. Baptism did not then succeed a long course of preparatory training and instruction, as now is the case in the mission field. When men in apostolic times received the rudiments of the faith, the sacrament of baptism was administered, as being the channel or door of admission into Christ’s Church; and then, being once admitted into God’s house, it was firmly believed that the soul’s life would grow and develop at a vastly accelerated rate. A grave question here suggests itself, whether baptism of converts from paganism is not often too long delayed? The apostles evidently regarded the Church as a hospital where the wounds of the soul were to be healed, as a Divine school where the ignorance of the soul was to be dissipated, and therefore at once admitted the converts to the sacrament upon the profession of their rudimentary faith. The church soon reversed this process, and demanded an amount of spiritual knowledge and a development of spiritual life as the conditions of baptism, which should have been looked for as the result of admission within her sacred ranks, forgetful of that great missionary law laid down by the Master Himself, which places baptism first and teaching afterwards, "Go ye, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." We freely admit that there may have been a quickened spiritual vitality, a stronger spiritual life, in the case of the earliest converts, enabling them in the course of a few hours to attain a spiritual level which demanded a more prolonged effort on the part of the later disciples. When we come to the times of the later apostolic age, and inquire from such a book as the lately-discovered "Teaching of the Twelve Apostles," what the practice of the Church was then, we see that experience had taught a more regular, a less hasty course of action. The law of Baptism in the "Didache," as the "Teaching of the Twelve Apostles" is usually called, runs thus: "Now concerning baptism, thus baptise ye; having first uttered all these things, baptise into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, in running water. But if thou hast not running water, baptise in other water; and if thou canst not in cold, then in warm. But if thou hast neither, pour water upon the head thrice, into the name of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptiser and the baptised fast, and whatever others can; but the baptised thou shalt command to fast for one or two days before."

From these words it is plain that the immediate baptism of converts had ceased probably with the first organisation of the Church. A pause was instituted between the first

conviction of the truth and the complete initiation which baptism involved, but not such a period of delay as the months and even years over which the preparation for baptism was subsequently spread. This delay of baptism sprang out of a mistaken view of this Divine sacrament. Men came to look on it as a charm, whereby not merely admission was obtained to the Divine society which our Lord had founded, but also as bringing with it a complete purgation from the sins of a careless life. Men postponed it, therefore, to the very last, so that all sins might be swept away at once. The Emperor Constantine was a good example of this mischievous extreme. He was a man who took a kind of interest in theological matters. Like our own King James I, he considered it his duty to settle the religious affairs of his empire, even as his predecessors had done in the days of paganism. He presided over Church councils, dictated Church formularies, and exercised the same control in the Church as in the State, being all the time unbaptised. He was scarce aught but a pagan too in disposition and temper. He retained pagan symbols, titles, and observances, and imbrued his hands, Herod-like, in the blood of his own family. Yet he delayed his baptism to the very last, under the notion that then there could be thus effected at one stroke the complete removal of the accumulated sins of a lifetime.

IV. The comparison of the passage just quoted from the "Teaching of the Apostles" with the words of my text suggest other topics. The Plymouth Brethren, at least in some of their numerous ramifications, and other sects, have grounded upon the words, "be baptised, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ," a tenet that baptism should not be conferred in the name of the Trinity, but in that of Jesus alone. It is indeed admitted that while our Lord commanded the use of the historic baptismal formula in the concluding words of St. Matthew’s Gospel, the formula itself is never expressly mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles. Not merely on the day of Pentecost, but on several other occasions, Christian baptism is described as if the Trinitarian formula was unknown. In the tenth chapter Cornelius and his household are described as "baptised in the name of Jesus Christ." In the nineteenth chapter St. Paul converts a number of the Baptist’s disciples to a fuller and richer faith in Christ. They were at once "baptised into the name of the Lord Jesus." But a reference to the newly-discovered "Teaching of the Twelve Apostles" explains the difficulty, offering an interesting example of the manner in which modern discoveries have helped to illustrate and confirm the Acts of the Apostles. In the "Didache," as in the Acts, the expression "baptism in the name of the Lord" is used. The "Didache" lays down with respect to the communion, "Let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist except those baptised into the name of the Lord." Yet this does not exclude the time-honoured formula of Christendom. The same apostolic manual lays down the rule, a little before this prohibition which we have just quoted, "Baptise into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," and then in the tenth chapter describes baptism thus administered in the threefold name, as baptism in the name of the Lord; and thus it was doubtless in the case of the Acts. For the sake of brevity St. Luke speaks of Christian baptism as baptism in the name of Christ, never dreaming at the same time that this was exclusive of the divinely appointed formula, as certain moderns have taught. The Acts of the Apostles, and the "Didache" prove their primitive character, and show that they deduce their origin from the same early epoch, because they both describe Christian baptism as performed in the name of Christ; and yet this fact does not exclude, according to either, the use of the threefold Name. It is evident that, whether in the Acts or in the "Didache," baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost was regarded as baptism especially in the name of Jesus Christ, because while the Father and the Spirit were known to the Jews, the one new element introduced was that of the name of Jesus, whom God had made both Lord and Christ.

Baptism in the Triune name was emphatically baptism in the name of the Lord. This passage, when compared with the "Didache," sheds light on another point. The mode wherein baptism should be administered has been a point often discussed. Some have maintained the absolutely binding and universal character of immersion; others have stood at the opposite extreme, and upheld the method of sprinkling. The Church of England, in union with the ancient Church, has laid down no hard-and-fast rule on the subject. She recognises immersion as the normal idea in a warm Eastern climate, but she allows pouring (not sprinkling) of water to be substituted for immersion, which has, as a matter of fact, taken the place in the Western Church of the more regular and ancient immersion. The construction of the ancient Churches, with their baptisteries surrounded with curtains, and the female assistants for the service of their own sex, amply proves that in the ancient Church, as to this day in the Eastern Church, baptism was ordinarily administered by immersion. The Church proved its Eastern origin by the mode wherein its initial sacrament was at first applied. But it also showed its power of adaptation to Western nations by allowing the alternative of pouring water when she dealt with the needs of a colder climate. Yet from the beginning the Church cannot have made the validity of her sacrament depend upon the quantity of water that was used. Take the cases reported in the Acts of the Apostles, or the rules prescribed in the apostolic manual, the "Didache." In the latter it is expressly said that pouring with water shall suffice if a larger quantity is not at hand. On the day of Pentecost it was clearly impossible to immerse three thousand persons in the city of Jerusalem. The Ethiopian eunuch baptised by St. Philip in the wilderness could not have been immersed. He came to a stream trickling along, scarce sufficient to lave his feet, or perhaps rather to a well in the desert; the water was deep down, and reached only, as in the case of Jacob’s well, by a rope or chain. Even if the water could have been reached, common sense, not to speak of any higher motive, would have forbidden the pollution of an’ element so needful for human life. The baptism of the eunuch must have been by pouring or affusion, as must also have been the case with the Philippian jailer. The difficulties of the case are forgotten when people insist that immersion must necessarily have been the universal rule in ancient times. Men and women were baptised separately, deaconesses officiating in the case of the women. When immersion was used the men descended naked, or almost so, into the baptistery, which was often a building quite separate and distinct from the church, with elaborate arrangements for changing garments. The Church, in the days of earliest freedom and purity, left her children free in those points of minor detail, refusing to hamper herself or limit her usefulness by a restriction which would have equally barred entrance to her fold in the burning deserts or in the ice-bound regions of the frozen north, where baptism by immersion would have been equally impossible.

Again, the extent of the baptismal commission is indicated in this passage. "Make disciples of all the nations by baptism" are the words of our Lord. "Be baptised, every one of you, for the promise is to you and to your children, and to all that are afar off," is St. Peter’s application of this passage. St. Peter’s language admits of various interpretations. Like much of Scripture, the speaker, when uttering these words, meant probably one thing, while the words themselves mean something much wider, more catholic and universal. When Peter spake thus he proclaimed the worldwide character of Christianity, just as when he quoted the prophet Joel’s language he declared the mission of the Comforter in its most catholic aspect, embracing Gentiles as well as Jews. "I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh." But St. Peter never thought of the full scope of his words. He meant, doubtless, that the promise of pardon, and acceptance, and citizenship in the heavenly kingdom was to those Jews that-were present in Jerusalem, and to their

children, and to all of the Jews of the dispersion scattered afar off amid the Gentiles. Had Peter thought otherwise, had he perceived the wider meaning of his words, he would have had no hesitation about the reception of the Gentiles, and the baptism of Cornelius would not have demanded a fresh revelation.

We often, indeed, invest the Apostles and the writers of Holy Scripture with an intellectual grasp of a supernatural kind, which prevents us recognising that growth in Divine knowledge which found place in them, as it found place in the Divine Master Himself. We silently vote them infallible on every topic, because the Spirit’s presence was abundantly vouchsafed. The inspiration they enjoyed guided their language, and led them to use words which, while expressing their own sentiments, admitted a deeper meaning and embraced a wider scope than the speaker intended. It was just the same with the Apostles’ words as with their conduct in other respects. The presence and inspiration of the Spirit did not make them sinless, did not destroy human infirmities. It did not destroy St. Peter’s moral cowardice, or St. Paul’s hot temper, or St. Barnabas’ family partiality and nepotism; and neither did that presence illumine at once St. Peter’s natural prejudices and intellectual backwardness, which led him long to restrain the mercies and lovingkindness of the Lord to His ancient people, though here on the day of Pentecost we find him using language which plainly included the Gentiles as well as the Jews within the covenant of grace. A farther question concerning the language of St. Peter here arises. Do not his words indicate that children were fit subjects for baptism? Do they not justify the practice of infant baptism? I honestly confess that, apart from the known practice of the Jews, St. Peter’s language would not necessarily mean so much. But then when we take the known practice of the Jews into consideration; when we remember that St. Peter was speaking to a congregation composed of Jews of the dispersion, accustomed, in their own missionary work among the heathen, to baptise children as well as adults, we must admit that, in the absence of any prohibition to the contrary, the effect of the words of St. Peter upon his hearers must have been this; they would have acted when Christians as they had already done as Jews, and baptised proselytes of every age and condition on their admission to the Christian fold. (See Lightfoot, "Hor. Heb.," St. Matthew.) (Mat_3:6)

V. Such was St. Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost. The results of it in the unity of doctrine and discipline and the community of goods will come before us in subsequent chapters. One thought stands out prominent as we survey this second chapter. Here in very deed we find an ample fulfilment of our Lord’s promise to St. Peter which has been so completely misused and misunderstood, "I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven"; a passage which has been made one of the scriptural foundations of the monstrous claims of the See of Rome to an absolute supremacy alike over the Christian Church and over the individual conscience. In this respect, however, Scripture is its own best interpreter. Just reflect how it is in this matter. Christ first of all defines, in the celebrated series of parables related in the thirteenth of St. Matthew, what the kingdom of heaven is. It is the kingdom He had come to reveal, the society He was establishing, the Church and dispensation of which He is the Head and Chief. To St. Peter He gave the keys, or power of opening the doors, of this kingdom; and this office St. Peter duly executed. He opened the door of the kingdom of heaven to the Jews on the day of Pentecost, and to the Gentiles by the conversion and baptism of Cornelius. St. Peter himself recognised on one occasion the special Providence which watched over him in this matter. He points out, in his speech to the brethren gathered at the first council held at Jerusalem, that "a good while ago God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel"; a passage which seems a reminiscence of the earlier promise of Christ, which Peter must have so. well remembered, and a humble

recognition of the glorious fulfilment which that promise had received at the Divine hand. The promise was a purely personal one peculiar to St. Peter, as purely personal as the revelation made to him on the housetop at Joppa, and as such received a complete fulfilment in the Church’s infant days. But Rome’s vaulting ambition would not be content with the fulfilment which satisfied St. Peter himself, and on this text has been built up a series of claims which, culminating in the celebrated traffic in indulgences, precipitated the great revolution involved in the German Reformation.

38Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every

one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the

forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the

gift of the Holy Spirit.

John's Gospel never mentions repentance but believe, and the implication is that if

you believe you will repent automatically and seek forgiveness of sins.

BARNES, "Then Peter said unto them - Peter had been the chief speaker, though others had also addressed them. He now, in the name of all, directed the multitude what to do.

Repent - See the notes on Mat_3:2. Repentance implies sorrow for sin as committed against God, along with a purpose to forsake it. It is not merely a fear of the consequences of sin or of the wrath of God in hell. It is such a view of sin, as evil in itself, as to lead the mind to hate it and forsake it. Laying aside all view of the punishment of sin, the true penitent hates it. Even if sin were the means of procuring him happiness; if it would promote his gratification and be unattended with any future punishment, he would hate it and turn from it. The mere fact that it is evil, and that God hates it, is a sufficient reason why those who are truly penitent hate it and forsake it. False repentance dreads the consequences of sin; true repentance dreads sin itself. These persons whom Peter addressed had been merely alarmed; they were afraid of wrath, and especially of the wrath of the Messiah. They had no true sense of sin as an evil, but were simply afraid of punishment. This alarm Peter did not regard as by any means genuine repentance. Such conviction for sin would soon wear off, unless their repentance became thorough and complete. Hence, he told them to repent, to turn from sin, to exercise sorrow for it as an evil and bitter thing, and to express their sorrow in the proper manner. We may learn here:

(1) That there is no safety in mere conviction for sin: it may soon pass off, and leave the soul as thoughtless as before.

(2) There is no goodness or holiness in mere alarm or conviction. The devils ...tremble.

A man may fear who yet has a firm purpose to do evil, if he can do it with impunity.

(3) Many are greatly troubled and alarmed who never repent. There is no situation where souls are so easily deceived as here. Alarm is taken for repentance; trembling for godly sorrow; and the fear of wrath is taken to be the true fear of God.

(4) True repentance is the only thing in such a state of mind that can give any relief. An ingenuous confession of sin, a solemn purpose to forsake it, and a true hatred of it, is the only thing that can give the mind composure. Such is the constitution of the mind that nothing else will furnish relief. But the moment we are willing to make an open confession of guilt, the mind is delivered of its burden, and the convicted soul finds peace. Until this is done, and the hold on sin is broken, there can be no peace.

(5) We see here what direction is to be given to a convicted sinner. We are not to direct him to wait; nor to lead him to suppose that he is in a good way; nor to tell him to continue to seek; nor to call him a mourner; nor to take sides with him, as if God were wrong and harsh; nor to advise him to read, and search, and postpone the subject to a future time. We are to direct him to repent; to mourn over his sins, and to forsake them. Religion demands that he should at once surrender himself to God by genuine repentance; by confession that God is right and that he is wrong; and by a firm purpose to live a life of holiness.

Be baptized - See the notes on Mat_3:6, Mat_3:16. The direction which Christ gave to his apostles was that they should baptize all who believed, Mat_28:19; Mar_16:16. The Jews had not been baptized; and a baptism now would be a profession of the religion of Christ, or a declaration made before the world that they embraced Jesus as their Messiah. It was equivalent to saying that they should publicly and professedly embrace Jesus Christ as their Saviour. The gospel requires such a profession, and no one is at liberty to withhold it. A similar declaration is to be made to all who are inquiring the way to life. They are to exercise repentance; and then, without any unnecessary delay, to evince it by partaking of the ordinances of the gospel. If people are unwilling to profess religion, they have none. If they will not, in the proper way, show that they are truly attached to Christ, it is proof that they have no such attachment. Baptism is the application of water, as expressive of the need of purification, and as emblematic of the influences from God that can alone cleanse the soul. It is also a form of dedication to the service of God.

In the name of Jesus Christ - Not εrς eis, into, but Eπί epi, upon. The usual form of

baptism is into the name of the Father, etc. - εrς eis. Here it does not mean to be

baptized by the authority of Jesus Christ, but it means to be baptized for him and his service; to be consecrated in this way, and by this public profession, to him and to his cause. The expression is literally upon the name of Jesus Christ: that is, as the foundation of the baptism, or as that on which its propriety rested or was based. In other words, it is with an acknowledgment of him in that act as being what his name imports the Sinner’s only Hope, his Redeemer, Lord, Justifier, King (Prof. Hackett, in loco). The name of Jesus Christ means the same as Jesus Christ himself. To be baptized to his name is to be devoted to him. The word “name” is often thus used. The profession which they were to make amounted to this: a confession of sins; a hearty purpose to turn from them; a reception of Jesus as the Messiah and as a Saviour; and a determination to become his followers and to be devoted to his service. Thus, 1Co_10:2, to be baptized unto Moses means to take him as a leader and guide. It does not follow that, in administering the ordinance of baptism, they used only the name of Jesus Christ. It is much more probable that they used the form prescribed by the Saviour himself Mat_28:19; though, as the special mark of a Christian is that he receives and honors Jesus

Christ, this name is used here as implying the whole. The same thing occurs in Act_19:5.

For the remission of sins - Not merely the sin of crucifying the Messiah, but of all sins. There is nothing in baptism itself that can wash away sin. That can be done only by the pardoning mercy of God through the atonement of Christ. But baptism is expressive of a willingness to be pardoned in that way, and is a solemn declaration of our conviction that there is no other way of remission. He who comes to be baptized, comes with a professed conviction that he is a sinner; that there is no other way of mercy but in the gospel, and with a professed willingness to comply with the terms of salvation, and to receive it as it is offered through Jesus Christ.

And ye shall receive ... - The gift of the Holy Spirit here does not mean his extraordinary gifts, or the power of working miracles, but it simply means, you shall partake of the influences of the Holy Spirit “as far as they may be adapted to your case” -as far as may be needful for your comfort, peace, and sanctification. There is no evidence that they were all endowed with the power of working miracles, nor does the connection of the passage require us thus to understand it. Nor does it mean that they had not been awakened “by his influences.” All true conviction is from him, Joh_16:8-10. But it is also the office of the Spirit to comfort, to enlighten, to give peace, and thus to give evidence that the soul is born again. To this, probably, Peter refers; and this all who are born again and profess faith in Christ possess. There is peace, calmness, joy; there is evidence of piety, and that evidence is the product of the influences of the Spirit. “The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace,” etc., Gal_5:22, Gal_5:24.

CLARKE,"Peter said unto them, Repent -Μετανοησατε; Humble yourselves

before God, and deeply deplore the sins you have committed; pray earnestly for mercy, and deprecate the displeasure of incensed justice. For a definition of repentance, see on Mat_3:2 (note).

And be baptized every one of you - Take on you the public profession of the religion of Christ, by being baptized in his name; and thus acknowledge yourselves to be his disciples and servants.

For the remission of sins - Εις�αφεσιν�}µαρτιων, In reference to the remission or

removal of sins: baptism pointing out the purifying influences of the Holy Spirit; and it is in reference to that purification that it is administered, and should in consideration never be separated from it. For baptism itself purifies not the conscience; it only points out the grace by which this is to be done.

Ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost - If ye faithfully use the sign, ye shall get the substance. Receive the baptism, in reference to the removal of sins, and ye shall receive the Holy Ghost, by whose agency alone the efficacy of the blood of the covenant is applied, and by whose refining power the heart is purified. It was by being baptized in the name of Christ that men took upon themselves the profession of Christianity; and it was in consequence of this that the disciples of Christ were called Christians.

GILL Verse 38. Then Peter said unto them,.... Being the mouth of the apostles, and being

ready to give advice, and speak a word of comfort to their distressed minds:

repent: change your minds, entertain other thoughts, and a different opinion of Jesus of

Nazareth, than you have done; consider him, and believe in him, as the true Messiah and

Saviour of the world; look upon him, not any more as an impostor, and a blasphemer, but

as sent of God, and the only Redeemer of Israel; change your voice and way of speaking

of him, and your conduct towards his disciples and followers; a change of mind will

produce a change of actions in life and conversation: bring forth fruits meet for

repentance; and make an open and hearty profession of repentance for this your sin. And

this the apostle said, to distinguish between a legal and an evangelical repentance; the

former is expressed in their being pricked to the heart, on which they were not to depend;

the latter he was desirous they might have, and show forth; which springs from the love

of God, is attended with views, or at least hopes of pardoning grace and mercy, and with

faith in Christ Jesus: it lies in a true sight and sense of sin, under the illuminations and

convictions of the Spirit of God; in a sorrow for it, after a godly sort, and because it is

committed against a God of love, grace, and mercy, and it shows itself in loathing sin,

and in shame for it, in an ingenuous acknowledgement of it, and in forsaking it: and this

is moreover urged, to show the necessity of it, as to salvation, for such that God would

not have perish, he will have come to repentance; so to their admission to the ordinance

of baptism, to which repentance is a pre-requisite; and to which the apostle next advises:

and be baptized everyone of you; that repents and believes; that is, in water, in which

John administered the ordinance of baptism; in which Christ himself was baptized, and in

which the apostles of Christ administered it; in this Philip baptized the eunuch; and in this

were the persons baptized that were converted in Cornelius's house; and it is

distinguished from the baptism of the Spirit, or with fire, the extraordinary gifts of the

Spirit mentioned in the last clause of this verse; and which ordinance of water baptism

was administered by immersion, as the places, Jordan and Aenon, where John performed

it, and the instances of it particularly in Christ, and in the eunuch, and the end of it, which

is to represent the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, as well as the primary

signification of the word, show. And this is to be done,

in the name of Jesus Christ; not to the exclusion of the Father, and of the Spirit, in whose

name also this ordinance is to be administered, Matthew 28:19 but the name of Jesus

Christ is particularly mentioned, because of these Jews, who had before rejected and

denied him as the Messiah; but now, upon their repentance and faith, they are to be

baptized in his name, by his authority, according to his command; professing their faith in

him, devoting themselves to him, and calling on his name. The end for which this was to

be submitted to, is,

for the remission of sins; not that forgiveness of sin could be procured either by

repentance, or by baptism; for this is only obtained by the blood of Christ; but the apostle

advises these awakened, sensible, repenting, and believing souls, to submit to baptism,

that by it their faith might be led to Christ, who suffered and died for their sins, who left

them buried in his grave, and who rose again for their justification from them; all which

is, in a most lively manner, represented in the ordinance of baptism by immersion: the

encouragement to it follows,

and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost: not the grace of the Spirit, as a regenerator

and sanctifier; for that they had already; and is necessary, as previous to baptism; unless it

should mean confirmation of that grace, and stability in it, as it appears from Acts 2:42

they afterwards had; but rather the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, particularly the gift of

speaking with tongues, which Christ had received from the Father, and had now shed on

his apostles; see Acts 19:5.

HENRY, "Peter and the other apostles direct them in short what they must do, and what in so doing they might expect, Act_2:38, Act_2:39. Sinners convinced must be encouraged; and that which is broken must be bound up (Eze_34:16); they must be told that though their case is sad it is not desperate, there is hope for them.

1. He here shows them the course they must take. (1.) Repent; this is a plank after shipwreck. “Let the sense of this horrid guilt which you have brought upon yourselves by putting Christ to death awaken you to a penitent reflection upon all your other sins (as the demand of some one great debt brings to light all the debts of a poor bankrupt) and to bitter remorse and sorrow for them” This was the same duty that John the Baptist and Christ had preached, and now that the Spirit is poured out is it still insisted on: “Repent, repent; change your mind, change your way; admit an after-thought.” (2.) Be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ; that is, “firmly believe the doctrine of Christ, and submit to his grace and government; and make an open solemn profession of this, and come under an engagement to abide by it, by submitting to the ordinance of baptism; be proselyted to Christ and to his holy religion, and renounce your infidelity.” They must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. They did believe in the Father and the Holy Ghost speaking by the prophets; but they must also believe in the name of Jesus, that he is the Christ, the Messias promised to the fathers. “Take Jesus for your king, and by baptism swear allegiance to him; take him for your prophet, and hear him; take him for your priest, to make atonement for you,” which seems peculiarly intended here; for they must be baptized in his name for the remission of sins upon the score of his righteousness. (3.) This is pressed upon each particular person: Every one of you.“Even those of you that have been the greatest sinners, if they repent and believe, are welcome to be baptized; and those who think they have been the greatest saints have yet need to repent, and believe, and be baptized. There is grace enough in Christ for every one of you, be you ever so many, and grace suited to the case of every one. Israel of old were baptized unto Moses in the camp, the whole body of the Israelites together, when they passed through the cloud and the sea (1Co_10:1, 1Co_10:2), for the covenant of peculiarity was national; but now every one of you distinctly must be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, and transact for himself in this great affair.” See Col_1:28.

2. He gives them encouragement to take this course: - (1.) “It shall be for the remission of sins. Repent of your sin, and it shall not be your ruin; be baptized into the faith of Christ, and in truth you shall be justified, which you could never be by the law of Moses. Aim at this, and depend upon Christ for it, and this you shall have. As the cup in the Lord's supper is the New Testament in the blood of Christ for the remission of sins, so baptism is in the name of Christ for the remission of sins. Be washed, and you shall be washed.” (2.) “You shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost as well as we; for it is designed for a general blessing: some of you shall receive these external gifts, and each of you, if you be sincere in your faith and repentance, shall receive his internal graces and comforts, shall be sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise.” Note, All that receive the remission of sins receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. All that are justified are sanctified. (3.) “Your children shall still have, as they have had, an interest in the covenant, and a title to the external seal of it. Come over to Christ, to receive those inestimable benefits; for the promise of the remission of sins, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, is to you and to your children,” Act_2:39. It was very express (Isa_44:3): I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed. And (Isa_59:21), My Spirit and my word shall not depart from thy seed, and thy

seed's seed. When God took Abraham into covenant, he said, I will be a God to thee, and to thy seed (Gen_17:7); and, accordingly, every Israelite had his son circumcised at eight days old. Now it is proper for an Israelite, when he is by baptism to come into a new dispensation of this covenant, to ask, “What must be done with my children? Must they be thrown out, or taken in with me?” “Taken in” (says Peter) “by all means; for the promise, that great promise of God's being to you a God, is as much to you and to your children now as ever it was.” (4.) “Though the promise is still extended to your children as it has been, yet it is not, as it has been, confined to you and them, but the benefit of it is designed for all that are afar off;” we may add, and their children, for the blessing of Abraham comes upon the Gentiles, through Jesus Christ, Gal_3:14. The promise had long pertained to the Israelites (Rom_9:4); but now it is sent to those that are afar off,the remotest nations of the Gentiles, and every one of them too, all that are afar off. To this general the following limitation must refer, even as many of them, as many particular persons in each nation, as the Lord our God shall call effectually into the fellowship of Jesus Christ. Note, God can make his call to reach those that are ever so far off, and none come but those whom he calls.

COKE, "Acts 2:38. Repent, and be baptized— They are not only called on here to repent, but a submission also to the ordinance of baptism is required of them; for though on their repenting and believing, they were, according to the tenor of the gospel covenant, entitled to the remission of their sins; yet as Christ had, for wise reasons, appointed this solemn rite, as a token of their taking up the Christian profession in a public manner, there could have been no sufficient evidence of the truth of their repentance and faith, if this precept of Christ had not been obeyed. Vitringa has taken a great deal of pains to shew, that the phrase here translated in the name of Jesus Christ, signifies not only "being numbered among those who are called by his name," but "professing to devote themselves to the glory of it." The miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost were various, as appears from the first epistle to the Corinthians; and were variouslydispensed. If all the persons whom the apostle addresses, received this gift of the Holy Ghost, to one might be imparted the gift of prophesy, to another wisdom, to another the power of working miracles; those who were intended for the propagation of the gospel being endued with the extraordinary gifts; and those who were not separated tothat office receiving only the ordinary ones; but all of them possessing such as were sufficient to manifest their faith, to enable them, if faithful, to persevere in it, to illustrate the gospel dispensation, and to set it in a conspicuous light

RESOLVING ACTS 2:38

By Neal Griffin

"Repent and be baptized "FOR" the remission of sins!" Acts 2:38. The works oriented

scholars argue that the word "for" in this passage means "in order to" while the grace

oriented scholars argue that it means "because of". And while there is much controversy

over the construction that should be placed on the word I think that most scholars agree

that there are different shades of meaning represented by it, the "for" in Mark 1:44 being

one example. Both camps use the Bible to prove their points. Where then does the burden

of proof rest? How can one be persuaded in his own mind when there is such

disagreement among the scholars? Is being on the right side in this dispute essential to

salvation? Many there are who demand that conformity to their conclusion in this issue is

essential to salvation. I am not that sure of myself. My conclusion in this matter does,

however, allow me to happily resolve in my own mind the passages which seem to

oppose one another.

Abrahams faith, for example, was imputed to him for righteousness several years before

he sacrificed Isaac and Paul, by the Holy Spirit, wrote that this was written for our benefit

and we are to be accepted too on the same condition of faith. Romans 4:23-25. How can

this be resolved with the "in order to" interpretation of the word, "for"? If it does in fact

mean "in order to" then there is an irresolvable conflict between the two passages. If this

were the only passage that needed to be resolved with that understanding of Acts 2:38

then perhaps the confusion could be partly justified, but there are others.

Romans 4:4-6 reveals that, "Pay does not come to a worker as a favor-he earns it! But

suppose a person doesn't work for it? Instead, he believes in God who makes an ungodly

man righteous. Then, his faith is regarded as righteousness. David talks about the

happiness of a man whom God regards as righteous (without human effort)" SEV.

Salvation is of God. It is impossible on the part of man. Matthew 19:26. "Salvation does

not come from any good deeds that man can do. No, it comes by God's mercy." Titus 3:5.

Paul, by the Holy Spirit, said, "I want to be in Him, not having my' righteousness (the

kind that comes from the law), but having the righteousness which comes from God

based on faith." Philippians 3:9. If "for" in Acts 2:38 means "in order to" then there is

certainly an irreconcilable conflict between it and these passages.

It is through the benevolent will and grace of God, manifested by the blood of Jesus, that

our sins are remitted and it is by trusting in this good news that we are saved. 1'st

Corinthians 15:2. Righteousness is a gift from God-a free gift. We are made right by His

decree based on the perfect sacrifice of Jesus and it is in this respect that His

righteousness is imputed to us. Romans 5:15-18. "Blessed is the man to whom God does

not impute sin". Psalms 32:1-2

Salvation is not a demonstration of the righteousness of man, but rather it is a glorious

display of God's goodness. "God wanted to show the superior riches of His gracious love

for all time. He did this by using Jesus to be kind to us. You have been saved by God's

gracious love through faith. Salvation does not come from you; it is God's gift. It does not

come from human effort. If that were true, someone could brag about earning it".

Ephesians 2:7-10.

How do I resolve the "for" in Acts 2:38 with all of these passages? From my viewpoint as

I am persuaded in my own mind, it must necessarily mean "because of". Certainly we

must be baptized. Certainly we must repent and certainly we must be faithful but not "in

order to" gain (or in anywise) merit salvation. Obedience and good works should be

forthcoming from all born-again believers because anything less would not be becoming

of those who are joint heirs with the Prince of peace in His Divine Kingdom. Baptism,

repentance, and faithfulness are required of all Christians because they are children of the

King and not because they are commanded to do so "in order to" gain salvation. When we

are obedient to our biological fathers we are not obedient in order to become their

children. We are obedient because we are their children and the same is true in the

Spiritual family. Our heavenly Father conceived and birthed us. Our obedience is not to

become His children but rather it is because we are His children. Spiritual conception and

birthing, like their physical counterparts, are not accomplished by the one being born. It is

God who accomplishes this life giving process. Eternal life is "impossible" on the part of

man. Matthew 19:26 is very clear on this point.

What then is the significance of our obedience? Relating to salvation our good works are

no more significant than "filthy rags". They just might be demonstrations of saving faith,

but on the other hand they could be the outpourings of hypocritical hearts. At their very

best they are but evidences and not the essence of saving faith and only God is capable of

making the distinction. Many there are, however, who presume to help God out in making

this distinction. By this I mean there are many who impose certain evidences as

"essential" evidences. One prominent denominated religious organization adamently

argues that tongue speaking is an essential evidence. Another one maintains that snake

handling is essential. One sect goes so far as to argue that using instruments in worship is

a denial of saving faith while a schism within it argues that supporting orphanages with

"church" funds is a denial of saving faith. The question at hand is: In God's plan of

salvation, where fits the "repent and be baptized" of Acts 2:38?

"By the works of (the) law shall no flesh be justified". Galatians 2:16. If we are going to

put our trust for salvation in law keeping we obligate ourselves to flawlessly keep every

precept of God. The absolute folly of this is clearly seen in Romans 3:23: "All have

sinned and come short". The idea is doomed from the start. Our election stands not on

works but on faith. Romans 9:11.

Brethren, these are the reasons why I am persuaded in my own mind that "because of" is

the construction that must necessarily be placed on the word, "for", in Acts 2:38. Please

consider these thoughts in light of the Word

CALVIN, "38. Peter said. Hereby we see that those do never go away empty

which ask at the mouth of the Lord, and do offer themselves unto him to be

ruled and taught; for that promise must needs be true, Knock, and it shall be

opened unto you, (Matthew 7:7.) Therefore, whosoever shall be rightly

prepared to learn, the Lord will not suffer his godly desire to be in vain; for he

is a most faithful master, so that he hath scholars which are apt to be taught

and studious. Wherefore, there is no cause why he should fear, lest he suffer

us to be destitute of sound counsel, if we be attentive and ready to hear him,

and do not refuse to embrace whatsoever he shall teach us. And let us suffer

ourselves to be governed by the counsel and authority of those men whom he

offereth unto us to teach us. for this ready obedience cometh thence so

suddenly in those which addict themselves unto the apostles, because they are

persuaded that they are sent of God, to show them the way of salvation.

Repent. There is greater force in the Greek word, for it doth signify the

conversion of the mind, that the whole man may be renewed and made another

man, which thing must be diligently noted, because this doctrine was

miserably corrupted in the time of Popery; for they translated the name of

repentance almost unto certain external rites. They babble somewhat, indeed,

about the reigned contrition of the heart; but they touch that part very slightly,

and they stand principally upon the external exercises of the body, which were

little worth; yea, though there were in them no corruption; but they urge

nothing else in a manner but reigned trifles, wherewith men are wearied in

vain. Wherefore, let us know that this is the true repentance, when a man is

renewed in the spirit of his mind, as Paul teacheth, (Romans 12:2.) Neither

need we to doubt of this; but that Peter did preach plainly of the force and

nature of repentance; but Luke doth only touch the chief points, and doth not

reckon up the words of the oration which he made. We must, therefore, know

thus much, that Peter did at the first exhort the Jews unto repentance; and that

done, he lifted them up with hope of pardon; for he promised them forgiveness

of sins, which two things are the two parts of the gospel, as we know full well;

and, therefore, when Christ will briefly teach what the doctrine of the gospel

doth contain, he saith, that repentance and remission of sins (Luke 24:47) must

be preached in his name. Furthermore, because we are reconciled unto God

only by the intercession of Christ's death, neither are our sins otherwise

purged, 1 and done away, save only by his blood, therefore, Peter calleth us

back unto him by name. He putteth baptism in the fourth place, as the seal

whereby the promise of grace is confirmed.

Wherefore, we have in these few words almost the whole sum of Christianity,

namely, how a man renouncing himself and taking his farewell of the world,

may addict himself wholly to God; secondly, How he may be delivered by free

forgiveness of sins, and so adopted into the number of the children of God.

And forasmuch as we can obtain none of all these things without Christ, the

name of Christ is therewithal set forth unto us, as the only foundation of faith

and repentance. And we must also note this, that we do so begin repentance

when we are turned unto God, that we must prosecute the same during our

life; therefore, this sermon must continually sound in the Church, repent,

(Mark 1:15;) not that those men may begin the same, who will be counted

faithful, and have a place already in the Church; but that they may go forward

in the same; although many do usurp the name of faithful men, which had

never any beginning of repentance. Wherefore, we must observe this order in

teaching, that those which do yet live unto the world and the flesh may begin

to crucify the old man, that they may rise unto newness of life, and that those

who are already entered the course of repentance may continually go forward

towards the mark. Furthermore, because the inward conversion of the heart

ought to bring forth fruits in the life, repentance cannot be rightly taught

unless works be required, not those frivolous works which are only in

estimation amongst the Papists, but such as are sound testimonies of

innocence and holiness.

Be baptized every one of you. Although in the text and order of the words,

baptism doth here go before remission of sins, yet doth it follow it in order,

because it is nothing else but a sealing of those good things which we have by

Christ that they may be established in our consciences; therefore, after that

Peter had intreated of repentance, he calleth the Jews unto the hope of grace

and salvation; and, therefore, Luke well afterwards, in Paul's sermon, joineth

faith and repentance together in the same sense, wherein he putteth

forgiveness of sins in this place, and that for good considerations; for the hope

of salvation consisteth in the free imputation of righteousness; and we are

counted just, freely before God, when he forgiveth us our sins. And as I said

before, that the doctrine of repentance hath a daily use in the Church so must

we think of the forgiveness of sins, that the same is continually offered unto

us; and surely it is no less necessary for us during the whole course of our life,

than at our first entrance into the Church, so that it should profit us nothing to

be once received into favor by God, unless this embassage should have a

continual course; be-reconciled unto God, because

"he which knew no sin was made sin for us, that we might

be the righteousness of God in him," (2 Corinthians 5:20.)

Moreover, the Papists do so corrupt this other part of the gospel, that they

quite exclude the remission of sins, which was to be obtained by Christ. They

confess their sins are freely forgiven in baptism, but they will have them

redeemed with satisfactions after baptism; and although they mix the grace of

Christ together therewithal, yet because they inwrap the same in men's merits,

they do by this means overthrow the whole doctrine of the gospel; for, first,

they take from men's consciences the certainty of faith; that done, forasmuch

as they part the forgiveness of sins between the death of Christ and our

satisfactions, they do altogether deprive us of Christ's benefit. For Christ doth

not reconcile us unto God in part, but wholly, neither can we obtain remission

of sins by him, unless it be whole and perfect. But the Papists are much

deceived therein, who restrain baptism unto the nativity and former life, as if

the signification and force thereof did not reach even unto death.

Let us know, therefore, that forgiveness of sins is grounded in Christ alone,

and that we must not think upon any other satisfaction 2 save only that which

he hath performed by the sacrifice of his death. And for this cause, as we have

already said, doth Peter express his name, whereby he doth signify unto us,

that none of all these things can be rightly taught, unless Christ be set in the

midst, to the end the effect of this doctrine may be sought in him. That

needeth no long exposition where he commandeth them to be baptized for the

remission of sins; for although God hath once reconciled men unto himself in

Christ" by not imputing unto them their sins," (2 Corinthians 5:19,) and doth

now imprint in our hearts the faith thereof by his Spirit; yet, notwithstanding,

because baptism is the seal whereby he doth confirm unto us this benefit, and

so, consequently, the earnest and pledge of our adoption, it is worthily said to

be given us for the remission of sins. For because we receive Christ's gifts by

faith, and baptism is a help to confirm and increase our faith, remission of

sins, which is an effect of faith, is annexed unto it as unto the inferior mean.

Furthermore, we must not fetch the definition of baptism from this place,

because Peter doth only touch a part thereof. Our old man is crucified by

baptism, as Paul teacheth, that we may rise unto newness of life, (Romans 6:4,

6.) And, again, we put on Christ himself, (1 Corinthians 12.) and the Scripture

teacheth every where, that it is also a sign and token of repentance, (Galatians

3:27.) But because Peter doth not intreat in thin place openly of the whole

nature of baptism, but speaking of the forgiveness of sins, doth, by the way,

declare that the confirmation thereof is in baptism, there doth no

inconvenience follow, if ye do omit the other part. 3

In the name of Christ. Although baptism be no vain figure, but a true and

effectual testimony; notwithstanding, lest any man attribute that unto the

element of water which is there offered, the name of Christ is plainly

expressed, to the end we may know that it shall be a profitable sign for us

then, if we seek the force and effect thereof in Christ, and know that we are,

therefore, washed in baptism, because the blood of Christ is our washing; and

we do also hereby gather, that Christ is, the mark and end whereunto baptism

directeth us; wherefore, every one profiteth so much in baptism as he learneth

to look unto Christ. But here ariseth a question, Whether it were lawful for

Peter to change the form prescribed by Christ? The Papists do think, at least

feign so, and thence do they take a color of liberty to change or abrogate the

institutions of Christ. They confess that nothing ought to be changed, as

touching the substance, but they will have the Church to have liberty to change

whatsoever it will in the form. But this argument may easily be answered. For

we must first know that Christ did not indite and rehearse unto his apostles

magical words for enchanting, as the Papists do dream, but he did, in few

words, comprehend the sum of the mystery. Again, I deny that Peter doth

speak in this place of the form of baptism; but he doth simply declare that the

whole strength 4 of baptism is contained in Christ; although Christ cannot be

laid hold on by faith without the Father by whom he was given us, and the

Spirit by the which he reneweth and sanctifieth us. The answer consisteth

wholly in this, that he intreateth not in this place of the certain form of

baptizing, but the faithful are called back unto Christ, in whom alone we have

whatsoever baptism doth prefigure unto us; for we are both made clean by his

blood, and also we enter into a new life by the benefit of his death and

resurrection.

Ye shall receive the gift of the Spirit. Because they were touched with

wondering when they saw the apostles suddenly begin to speak with strange

tongues, Peter saith that they shall be partakers of the same gift if they will

pass over unto Christ. Remission of sins and newness of life were the

principal things, and this was, as it were, an addition, that Christ should show

forth unto them his power by some visible gift. Neither ought this place to be

understood of the grace of sanctification, which is given generally to all the

godly. Therefore he promiseth them the gift of the Spirit, whereof they saw a

pattern in the diversity of tongues. Therefore this doth not properly appertain

unto us. For because Christ meant to set forth the beginning of his kingdom

with those miracles, they lasted but for a time; yet because the visible graces

which the Lord did distribute to his did shoe, as it were in a glass, that Christ

was the giver of the Spirit, therefore, that which Peter saith doth in some

respect appertain unto all the whole Church: ye shall receive the gift of the

Spirit. For although we do not receive it, that we may speak with tongues, that

we may be prophets, that we may cure the sick, that we may work miracles;

yet is it given us for a better use, that we may believe with the heart unto

righteousness, that our tongues may be framed unto true confession, (Romans

10:10,) that we may pass from death to life, (John 5:24) that we, which are

poor and empty, may be made rich, that we may withstand Satan and the

world stoutly. Therefore, the grace of the Spirit shall always be annexed unto

baptism, unless the let be in ourselves.

ELLICOTT, "(38) Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of

Jesus Christ.—The work of the Apostles is, in one sense, a continuation, in

another a development, of that of the Baptist. There is the same indispensable

condition of “repentance”—i.e. a change of heart and will—the same outward

rite as the symbol of purification, the same promise of forgiveness which that

change involves. But the baptism is now, as it had not been before, in the

name of Jesus Christ, and it is connected more directly with the gift of the

Holy Spirit. The question presents itself, Why is the baptism here, and

elsewhere in the Acts (Acts 10:48; Acts 19:5), “in the name of Jesus Christ,”

while in Matthew 28:19, the Apostles are commanded to baptize in the name

of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit? Various explanations have been

given. It has been said that baptism in the Name of any one of the Persons of

the Trinity, involves the Name of the other Two. It has even been assumed

that St. Luke meant the fuller formula when he used the shorter one. But a

more satisfactory solution is, perhaps, found in seeing in the words of

Matthew 28:19 (see Note there) the formula for the baptism of those who, as

Gentiles. had been “without God in the world, not knowing the Father;” while

for converts from Judaism, or those who had before been proselytes to

Judaism, it was enough that there should be the distinctive profession of their

faith in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, added on to their previous belief

in the Father and the Holy Spirit. In proportion as the main work of the

Church of Christ lay among the Gentiles, it was natural that the fuller form

should become dominant, and finally be used exclusively. It is interesting

here, also, to compare the speech of St. Peter with the stress laid on baptism in

his Epistle (1 Peter 3:21).

Ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.—The word for “gift” (dôrea) is

generic, and differs from the more specific “gift” (charisma) of 1 Corinthians

12:4; 1 Corinthians 12:9; 1 Corinthians 12:28. The Apostle does not

necessarily promise startling and marvellous powers, but in some way they

should all feel that a new Spirit was working in them, and that that Spirit was

from God.

COFFMAN, "As long as this verse remains in the sacred New Testament, the

terms of admission into Christ's kingdom shall continue to be understood as

faith (those were already believers), repentance and baptism unto the

remission of sins. The cavils and controversies of the post-Reformation period

have not altered in the slightest particular what is so evident here. Space does

not permit any exhaustive reply to the denials which are alleged against what

Peter declared; indeed, no complete answer is possible, because the cleverness

and ingenuity of man have been exhausted in the vain efforts to shout baptism

out of this verse as a God-imposed precondition of salvation. We shall note

only a few.

Note the following from Hervey:

We have in this short verse the summary of Christian doctrine as regards man

and God. Repentance and faith on the part of man; forgiveness of sins, or

justification, and the gift of the Holy Spirit, or sanctification, on the part of

God![37]

Thus, baptism is left out of the things regarding man's part in the

accomplishment of his salvation; and, while it is true that Hervey went on to

affirm that all of this is "expressed in the sacrament of baptism," it cannot be

denied that such an exegesis denies what is so categorically affirmed here by

inspiration, namely, that a man must repent and be baptized in order to receive

the forgiveness of his sins and the gift of the Spirit.

This writer is glad to note a change among modern commentators toward a

more scriptural view of the ordinance of baptism, as evidenced by the

following:

The idea of an unbaptized Christian is simply not entertained in the New

Testament.[38]

In the early church it was the universal practice of the church that the new

convert was baptized immediately.[39]

The rite was first practiced in obedience to a command of the Risen Lord ...

dates back to the day of Pentecost ... was administered "into Christ," or "in the

name of Christ," signifying that the baptized person passed into his

possession. The mode was immersion, and baptism normally coincided with

the reception of the Holy Spirit.[40]

Baptism is the occasion when the Spirit brings to new life him that believes in

the Son of Man ... We must ungrudgingly recognize that the New Testament

does not permit us to divide between the new life of Christ and the new life of

the Spirit in baptism. (We) should bear steadily in view that the difficulties

and the misunderstandings that have surrounded this doctrine, through the

change of the context in which the churches have set baptism, DO NOT

ARISE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT (italics mine, JBC). They should not be

permitted to affect our interpretation of its evidence.[41]SIZE>

Glimpses of the truth appearing in such comments are a vast improvement

over many of the wild allegations of the nineteenth century; and it is devoutly

hoped that men will come to accept what is so patently stated in the text

before us, namely, that forgiveness of sins and the gift of God's Spirit are

promised AFTER both repentance and baptism (also after faith), obedience of

the believer to BOTH requirements being made an absolute precondition of

salvation.

This text is the grave of the Lutheran heresy of justification by "faith only";

and, since many passages of the New Testament have been laid under tribute

by holders of that error in their efforts to refute this text, many passages of the

New Testament should be studied in connection with this. In this series of

commentaries, extensive teaching on this doctrine will be found as follows:

my Commentary on Mark, Mark 16:16; my Commentary on John, John

3:5,8:30, and John 12:43; my Commentary on Hebrews, Hebrews 1:2,9:14;

and my Commentary on Romans, Romans 3:22,24, and Romans 10:11, etc.

One other common misunderstanding and it concerns this:

Ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit ... Here, as Beasley-Murray pointed

out, "The gift of the Spirit will be given in or immediately upon baptism,"

whereas "The Samaritans are evangelized by Philip and baptized by him

without receiving the Holy Spirit."[42] This, of course, is viewed as a

discrepancy by many; but the problem is resolved in the knowledge that at

Pentecost those baptized received the gift ordinary of the Spirit, which is the

earnest of our inheritance; whereas, a special dispensation of the Spirit

"through the laying on of the apostles' hands" is indicated in the case of the

Samaritans.

It is a mistake to view the gift of the Spirit as promised to all who were

baptized on Pentecost as anything other than the gift ordinary. "There is no

indication that the apostles laid hands on these new converts that they might

receive the Holy Spirit."[43] As Thomas Scott stated it:

There is nothing to lead us to imagine that they received any miraculous gifts

of any kind. There can be no doubt that the gift of the Holy Spirit in view here

is that which all without exception received ... which is bestowed upon all the

members of the family of our heavenly Father.[44]

[37] A. C. Hervey, Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B.

Eerdmans, Publishers, 1950), Vol. 18, p. 54.

[38] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 77.

[39] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 50.

[40] A. M. Hunter, op. cit., p. 79.

[41] G. R. Beasley-Murray, op. cit., pp. 278,279.

[42] Ibid., p. 105.

[43] Everett J. Harrison, op. cit., p. 392.

[44] Thomas Scott, Commentary on the Holy Bible (Grand Rapids, Michigan:

Baker Book House, 1960), p. 439.

CONSTABLE, "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

formerly 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 (Matthew 3:2; Matthew

4:17; et al.), and the apostles continued this emphasis, as Luke reported in

Acts (Acts 3:19; Acts 5:31; Acts 8:22; Acts 10:43; Acts 11:18; Acts 13:24;

Acts 17:30; Acts 19:4; Acts 20:21; Acts 26:18; Acts 26:20).

"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

(promised Messiah). To do this would bring salvation." [Note: Charles C.

Ryrie, Balancing the Christian Life, p. 176.]

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]

Acts 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." [Note: Bock, "A Theology . . .," pp.

129-30, 132.]

If a person just thinks of repentance as turning from sinful practices,

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., Ephesians 2:8-9). God does not save us because of

what we do for Him but because of what He has done for us in Christ. [Note:

See 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.]

Repentance by definition is not an act separate from trusting Christ. It is part

of the process of believing. A few scholars believe repentence plays no part in

salvation but that repentence is a condition for harmonious fellowship with

God. [Note: E.g., Zane C. Hodges, Absolutely Free, pp. 145-6.] 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. [Note: See

Thomas L. Constable, "The Gospel Message," in Walvoord: A Tribute, p.

207.]

". . . 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." [Note: Harry A.

Ironside, Except Ye Repent, pp. 9-10.]

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 Acts 2:38 "baptism" is probably 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."

[Note: Bruce, Commentary on . . ., pp. 76-77.]

This verse is a major proof text for those who believe that water baptism is

essential for salvation. [Note: See Aubrey M. Malphurs, "A Theological

Critique of the Churches of Christ Doctrine of Soteriology" (Th.D.

dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1981).] 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; Acts 10:43; Acts 13:38-39; Acts 26:18; Luke 24:47; John 3:16; John

3:36; Romans 4:1-17; Romans 11:6; Galatians 3:8-9; Ephesians 2:8-9). [Note:

See 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.]

Peter later promised forgiveness of sins on the basis of faith alone (Acts 5:31;

Acts 10:43; Acts 13:38; Acts 26:18).

"... Christian [water] baptism was an expression of faith and commitment to

Jesus as Lord." [Note: Marshall, The Acts . . ., p.81.]

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. [Note: Lanny 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.]

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., Matthew 3:11; Matthew

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." [Note: Advocates 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.]

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)

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. [Note: See

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.] 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]." [Note: Blaiklock, p. 60.]

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; Acts 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; Acts 8:12-17;

Acts 19:1-7; and Acts 22:16. He took these occurrences as non-normative

Christian experience unique in the early years of Christianity. Acts 10:43-48

reflects normative 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 (Romans

8:9; cf. 1 Corinthians 12:13). [Note: Rackham, p. 30; and Zane C. Hodges,

The Gospel Under Seige, pp. 101-4.]

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."

[Note: Bruce, Commentary on . . ., p. 77. See also Longenecker, p. 284.]

"Since baptism signifies association with the message, group, or person

involved in authorizing it [cf. 1 Corinthians 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."

[Note: Ryrie, The Acts . . ., pp. 23-24. See also Longenecker, p. 286.]

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" (Matthew 28:19). I do not think so. When Jesus gave the

Great Commission, He had in view the discipling of the nations: 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 (Acts 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 Acts 2:36,

but as I have explained, the context argues for "Lord" meaning God rather

than master there. Further discussion of the "lordship salvation" view will

follow in these notes.

39The promise is for you and your children and

for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our

God will call."

BARNES, "For the promise - That is, the promise respecting the particular thing of which he was speaking - the influences of the Holy Spirit. This promise he had adduced in the beginning of his discourse Act_2:17, and he now applies it to them. As the Spirit was promised to descend on Jews and their sons and daughters, it was applicable to them in the circumstances in which they then were. The only hope of lost sinners is in the promises of God, and the only thing that can give comfort to a soul that is convicted of sin is the hope that God will pardon and save.

Unto you - To you Jews, even though you have crucified the Messiah. The promise had special reference to the Jewish people.

To your children - In Joel, to their sons and daughters, who would, nevertheless, be old enough to prophesy. Similar promises occur in Isa_44:3, “I will pour my Spirit on thy seed, and my blessing on thine offspring”; and in Isa_59:21, “My Spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and forever.” In these and similar places their descendants or posterity are denoted. It does not refer merely to children as children, and should not be adduced as applicable exclusively to infants. It is a promise I to parents that the blessings of salvation shall not be confined to parents, but shall be extended also to their posterity.

Under this promise parents may be encouraged to train up their children for God; they are authorized to devote them to him in the ordinance of Christian baptism, and they may trust in his gracious purpose thus to perpetuate the blessings of salvation from age to age.

To all - To the whole race; not limited to Jews.

Afar off - To those in other lands. It is probable that Peter here referred to the Jews who were scattered in other nations; for he does not seem yet to have understood that the gospel was to be preached to the Gentiles. See Acts 10: Yet the promise was equally applicable to the Gentiles as the Jews, and the apostles were afterward brought so to understand it, Acts 10; Rom_10:12, Rom_10:14-20; 11. The Gentiles are sometimes clearly indicated by the expression “afar off Eph_2:13, Eph_2:17; and they are represented as having been brought nigh by the blood of Christ. The phrase is equally applicable to those who have been far off from God by their sins and their evil affections. To them also the promise is extended if they will return.

Even as many ... - The promise is not to those who do not hear the gospel, nor to those who do not obey it; but it is to those to whom God in his gracious providence shall send it. He has the power and right to pardon. The meaning of Peter is, that the promise is ample, full, free; that it is suited to all, and may be applied to all; that there is no defect or lack in the provisions or promises, but that God may extend it to whomsoever he pleases. We see here how ample and full are the offers of mercy. God is hot limited in the provisions of his grace; but the plan is applicable to all mankind. It is also the purpose of God to send it to all people, and he has given a solemn charge to his church to do it. We cannot reflect but with deep pain on the fact that, although these provisions have been made - fully made; that they are adapted to all people; but that yet they have been extended by his people to so small a portion of the human family. If the promise of life is to all, it is the duty of the church to send to all the message of mercy.

CLARKE, "For the promise is unto you - Jews of the land of Judea: not only the fulfillment of the promise which he had lately recited from the prophecy of Joel was made to them, but in this promise was also included the purification from sin, with every gift and grace of the Holy Spirit.

To all that are afar off - To the Jews wherever dispersed, and to all the Gentile nations; for, though St. Peter had not as yet a formal knowledge of the calling of the Gentiles, yet, the Spirit of God, by which he spoke, had undoubtedly this in view; and therefore the words are added, even as many as the Lord our God shall call, i.e. all to whom, in the course of his providence and grace, he shall send the preaching of Christ crucified.

GILL Verse 39. For the promise is unto you,.... Either of the Messiah, and salvation by

him, which was particularly given forth to the people of the Jews; or of the remission of

sins, which was a branch of the covenant made with the house of Israel, in a spiritual

sense, even the whole household of God; or of the pouring forth of the Spirit: and this

promise was not only to them, but to theirs, even to as many of them as belonged to the

election of grace; and whom the Lord their God would effectually call by his grace, as the

last and limiting clause of the text, and which is to be connected with every part of it,

shows:

and to your children: this is the rather mentioned, because these awakened, and converted

souls, were not only in great concern about themselves, for their sin of crucifying Christ,

but were in great distress about their children, on whom they had imprecated the guilt of

Christ's blood, as upon themselves; the thought of which cut them to the heart, and made

their hearts bleed, within them: wherefore to relieve them, and administer comfort to

them in this their distress, the apostle informs them, that the promise of Christ, and of his

grace, was not only to them, who were now called, but it was also to their children; to as

many of them as the Lord God should call; and who are the children of the promise,

which all the children of the flesh were not, Romans 9:6 and to these the promise should

be applied, notwithstanding this dreadful imprecation of theirs:

and to all that are afar off; either in place, as those that were dispersed, among the several

nations of the world; and so carried in it a comfortable aspect on the multitude of Jews,

that were of every nation under heaven; or in time, who should live in ages to come; or

else the Gentiles are intended, who were afar off from God and Christ, and the way of life

and salvation by him; see Ephesians 2:12 even as many as the Lord our God shall call:

not externally only, by the ministry of the word, but internally, by his grace and Spirit;

with that calling, which is according to the purpose and grace of God, and is inseparably

connected with eternal glory; the promise is to all such, and is made good to all such,

whether they be Jews or Gentiles, fathers, or children, greater or lesser sinners. The

Syriac version reads, "whom God himself shall call."

JAMISON,"For the promise — of the Holy Ghost, through the risen Savior, as the grand blessing of the new covenant.

all afar off — the Gentiles, as in Eph_2:17), but “to the Jew first.”

ELLICOTT, "(39) The promise is unto you, and to your children.—The tendency of sects

has always been to claim spiritual gifts and powers as an exclusive privilege limited to a

few. It is the essence of St. Peter’s appeal that all to whom he speaks can claim the

promise as fully as himself. The phrase “those that are afar off,” was probably wide

enough to cover both the Jews of the Dispersion, to whom the Apostle afterwards wrote

(1 Peter 1:1-2), and the heathen nations among whom they lived. The use of the phrase in

Ephesians 2:13; Ephesians 2:17, inclines rather to the latter meaning.

Even as many as the Lord our God shall call.—There seems, at first sight, a limitation on

the universality of the previous words. And in some sense there is; but it is not more than

is involved in the fact that spiritual knowledge and culture are not bestowed on all nations

and ages alike. Wherever there is a difference, some possessing a higher knowledge and

greater power than others, the Apostle could only see, not chance, or evolution, but the

working of a divine purpose, calling some to special privileges, and yet dealing equitably

with all.

CALVIN, "39. For the promise appertaineth unto you. It was requisite that

this should be expressly added, that the Jews might certainly think and

persuade themselves that the grace of Christ did belong as well to them as to

the apostles. And Peter proveth it thus, because the promise of God was made

unto them. For we must always look unto this, because [that] we cannot

otherwise know the will of God save only by his word. But it is not sufficient

to have the general word, unless we know that the same is appointed for us.

Therefore Peter saith, that those benefits which they see in him and his fellows

in office were in times past promised to the Jews; because this is required

necessarily for the certainty of faith, that every one be fully persuaded of this,

that he is comprehended in the number of those unto whom God speaketh.

Finally, this is the rule of a true faith, when I am thus persuaded that salvation

is mine, because that promise appertaineth unto me which offereth the same.

And hereby we have also a greater confirmation, when as the promise is

extended unto those who were before afar off. For God had made the covenant

with the Jews, (Exodus 4:22.) If the force and fruit thereof come also unto the

Gentiles, there is no cause why the Jews should doubt of themselves, but that

they shall find the promise of God firm and stable.

And we must note these three degrees, that the promise was first made to the

Jews, and then to their children, and last of all, that it is also to be imparted to

the Gentiles. We know the reason why the Jews are preferred before other

people; for they are, as it were, the first begotten in God's family, yea, they

were then separated from other people by a singular privilege. Therefore Peter

observeth a good order, when he giveth the Jews the pre-eminence. Whereas

he adjoineth their children unto them, it dependeth upon the words of the

promise: I will be thy God, and the God of thy seed after thee, (Genesis 17:7,)

where God doth reckon the children with the fathers in the grace of adoption.

This place, therefore, doth abundantly refute the manifest error of the

Anabaptists, which will not have infants, which are the children of the faithful,

to be baptized, as if they were not members of the Church. They espy a

starting hole in the allegorical sense,5 and they expound it thus, that by

children are meant those which are spiritually begotten. But this gross

impudency doth nothing help them. It is plain and evident that Peter spoke

thus because God did adopt one nation peculiarly. And circumcision did

declare that the right of adoption was common even unto infants. Therefore,

even as God made his covenant with Isaac, being as yet unborn, because he

was the seed of Abraham, so Peter teacheth, that all the children of the Jews

are contained in the same covenant, because this promise is always in force, I

will be the God of your seed.

And to those which are afar off. The Gentiles are named in the last place,

which were before strangers. For those which refer it unto those Jews which

were exiled afar off, (and driven) into far countries, they are greatly deceived.

For he speaketh not in this place of the distance of place; but he noteth a

difference between the Jews and the Gentiles, that they were first joined to

God by reason of the covenant, and so, consequently, became of his family or

household; but the Gentiles were banished from his kingdom. Paul useth the

same speech in the second chapter to Ephesians, (Ephesians 2:11,) that the

Gentiles, which were strangers from the promises, are now drawn near,

through Jesus Christ, unto God. Because that Christ (the wall of separation

being taken away)hath reconciled both (the Jews and Gentiles) unto the

Father, and coming, he hath preached peace unto those which were nigh at

hand, and which were afar off. Now we understand Peter's meaning. For to the

end he may amplify the grace of Christ, he doth so offer the same unto the

Jews, that he saith the Gentiles are also partakers thereof. And therefore he

useth this word call, as if he should say: Like as God hath gathered you

together into one peculiar people heretofore by his voice, so the same voice

shall sound everywhere, that those which are afar off may come and join

themselves unto you, when as they shall be called by a new proclamation.

COFFMAN,"All that are afar off ... certainly includes the Gentiles; but Peter,

like many of the prophets of the Old Testament, was here uttering words,

under the power of his inspiration, that he himself did not fully understand; for

it took a miracle, later on, to convince Peter that the Gentiles should be

included as proper recipients of the gospel message. See under Acts 10:14,15,

and also 1 Peter 1:12.

As a matter of simple fact, the command to believe, repent and be baptized for

the forgiveness of sins (the Nestle Greek text translates this "with a view to"

the remission of sins) and with the promise of receiving the Holy Spirit

afterward, - this is a timeless and universal commandment of the Christian

gospel, as clear from this verse. None are exempted, or denied, or promised

redemption without compliance.

COKE, "Acts 2:39. For the promise is unto you, &c.— Considering that the

gift of the Holy Ghost had been mentioned just before, it seems most natural

to interpret this as a reference to the passage in Joel above recited, where God

promises the effusion of the Spirit on their sons and their daughters: but if the

promise be interpreted as referring to a remoter clause, the forgiveness of their

sins, this whole verse must be taken in a greater latitude, as having respect to

the encouragement which all future converts and their children had, to expect

the benefits of the gospel. This passage makes much in favour of infant

baptism, as many writers on the subject have largely shewn. Since St. Peter as

yet knew nothing of the intended calling of the Gentiles, he could only mean

by the words, to all afar off, that the gospel should be preached to all the

dispersed of Israel, in distant nations; but the Spirit of God mighthave a

further view. "The words (says Dr. Heylin) refer to time as well as place; the

promises also to us and to our children: words which imply a benefit, include

the accepting of it: in this sense the word call is used in this verse, and in 1

Corinthians 1:24 that is, they who obey the call."

CONSTABLE, "The "promise" is the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5; Acts

1:8; Acts 2:33). 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 (Acts 2:21; cf. Joel 2:32), a fact taught repeatedly

in both the Old and the New Testament. 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. Acts 2:23). God takes the

initiative in calling the elect to salvation, and then they repent (Acts 2:38; cf.

John 6:37; Romans 8:28-30).

40With many other words he warned them; and

he pleaded with them, "Save yourselves from this

corrupt generation."

BARNES, "Many other words - This discourse, though one of the longest in the New Testament, is but an outline. It contains, however, the substance of the plan of salvation, and is admirably arranged to attain its object.

Testify - Bear witness to. He bore witness to the promises of Christianity; to the truths pertaining to the danger of sinners; and to the truth respecting the character of that generation.

Exhort - He entreated them by arguments and promises.

Save yourselves - This expression here denotes, preserve yourselves from the influence, opinions, and fate of this generation. It implies that they were to use diligence and effort to deliver themselves. God deals with people as free agents. He calls upon them to put forth their own power and effort to be saved. Unless they put forth their own strength, they will never be saved. When they are saved, they will ascribe to God the praise for having inclined them to seek him, and for the grace whereby they are saved.

This generation - This age or race of people; the Jews then living. They were not to apprehend danger from them from which they were to deliver themselves; but they were to apprehend danger from being with them, united in their plans; designs, and feelings. From the influence of their opinions, etc., they were to escape. That generation was signally corrupt and wicked. See Matt. 23; Mat_12:39; Mat_16:4; Mar_8:38. They had crucified the Messiah; and they were, for their sins, soon to be destroyed.

Order? this untoward generation? - Untoward: “Perverse, refractory, not easily guided or taught” (Webster). The same character our Saviour had given of that generation in Mat_11:16-19. This character they had shown uniformly. They were smooth, cunning, plausible; but they were corrupt in principle, and wicked in conduct. The Pharisees had a vast hold on the people. To break away from them was to set at defiance all their power and doctrines; to alienate themselves from their teachers and friends; to brave the authority of those in office, and those who had long claimed the right of teaching and guiding the nation. The chief danger of those who were now awakened was from that generation; that they would deride, or denounce, or persecute them, and induce them to abandon their seriousness, and turn back to their sins. And hence, Peter exhorted them at once to break off from them, and give themselves to

Christ. We may hence learn:

(1) That if sinners will be saved they must make an effort. There is no promise to any unless they will exert themselves.

(2) The principal danger which besets those who are awakened arises from their former companions. They are often wicked, cunning, rich, mighty. They may be their kindred, and will seek to drive off their serious impressions by derision, or argument, or persecution. They have a powerful hold on the affections, and they will seek to use it to prevent those who are awakened from becoming Christians.

(3) Those who are awakened should resolve at once to break off from their evil companions, and unite themselves to Christ and his people. There may be no other way in which this can be done than by resolving to forsake altogether the society of those who are infidels, and scoffers, and profane. They should forsake the world, and give themselves up to God, and resolve to have only so much contact with the world, in any respect, as may be required by duty, and as may be consistent with a supreme purpose to live to the honor of God.

CLARKE, "Save yourselves from this untoward generation - Separate

yourselves from them: be ye saved, σωθητε: the power is present with you; make a proper

use of it, and ye shall be delivered from their obstinate unbelief, and the punishment that awaits it in the destruction of them and their city by the Romans.

GILLVerse 40. And with many other words did he testify and exhort,.... For Luke does

not give the sermons of the apostles at length, but a compendium, or specimen of them,

and some of the more remarkable things in them; and which, it seems, lay partly in

testifying concerning Christ, his person, office, grace, righteousness, and salvation; and

against sins and errors, and false doctrine; and in "exhorting" to the exercise of grace, and

the discharge of duty; or in comforting distressed minds: for the word used signifies to

comfort as well as to exhort; though it seems to have the latter sense here, since it

follows:

saying, save yourselves from this untoward generation: meaning, the chief priests,

Scribes, and Pharisees, and elders of the people, chiefly, who were a perverse generation

of men; and upon whom, for their impenitence and unbelief, for their rejection of the

Messiah, and their evil treatment of him, wrath and ruin would come upon them, to the

uttermost, very quickly; wherefore the apostle exhorts to separate from them, and not

partake of their sins, lest they should also of their plagues; but come out from among

them, and so, in a temporal sense, save themselves from the destruction that would

quickly come on their nation, city, and temple; and so the Arabic version renders it,

"escape from this rough generation."

JAMISON, "with many other words did he testify and exhort — Thus we have here but a summary of Peter’s discourse; though from the next words it would seem that only the more practical parts, the home appeals, are omitted.

Save yourselves from this untoward generation — as if Peter already foresaw the hopeless impenitence of the nation at large, and would have his hearers hasten in for themselves and secure their own salvation.

SBC, "It can scarcely be denied that our age is distinguished by peculiar advantages. If I am asked to name the most prominent feature of our days, I at once single out the enjoyment by every one of so much personal freedom.

I. The outcome of this freedom is the unprecedented activity which characterises the religious and philanthropic enterprises of our day. There is, however, no exception to the law which prevails in God’s world, and which links together opportunity with danger. Multitudes in our day stand aloof, and take no share either in the labour or in the munificence by which great movements are sustained and made to succeed. Beware of the condemnation of the son who said, "I go sir, and went not."

II. What is the effect of personal freedom upon obedience to authority. It may be observed that we are made to feel in many ways, and often in unexpected quarters, that authority must now rest its claims to obedience upon reason, and not primarily on prescription. Is this a gain to us or a loss? Is it an advantage or a peril? Amidst much which good men deplore, there is more that they may welcome with hope. It is no inconsiderable advantage that in our times free discussion can precede change. For although discussion does not always prevent mischief, it is always useful, because it informs and educates men’s minds and prepares them for changes which are inevitable. When the dust of strife has settled down, and the noise of disputation has ceased, it is always found that the Almighty is still sitting upon His throne, and that He is the Ruler over all. In His own way He has been accomplishing His own designs, all the time that we, in our weakness and our fear, were trembling lest wrong judgment should prevail, and lest the firmament itself should fall down.

III. We must, however, work out our own salvation with fear and trembling. We must not hope to be taken out of the world. We may not suppose that the whole tenor of modern thought will be changed, so as to become accommodated to our weakness or to our fears. On the contrary, we must gird up the loins of our mind and be sober. Whilst we recognise and guard ourselves from the manifold dangers which lurk even in the very forms of our liberty, we shall endeavour to prize and to hold fast the unspeakable advantages which, by means of this very freedom, God has placed within our reach. We have our own duty to do, our own talents to improve, our own devil to resist, our own crown to win. We must do this in the strength of the Lord, and in the power of His grace.

W. B. Hopkins, Oxford and Cambridge Journal, April 27th, 1882.

ELLICOTT, "(40) With many other words.—The report breaks off, as if St. Luke’s

informant had followed closely up to this point and then lost count of the sequence of

thought and words.

Did he testify—i.e., continued to testify.

Save yourselves.—Literally, in the passive, Be ye saved. They were invited to submit to

God’s way of salvation, to accept Jesus as their Saviour.

From this untoward generation.—Literally, from this crooked generation, as the word is

rendered in Luke 3:5; Philippians 2:15.

CALVI 40. And with many. Although in these things which we have had hitherto, Luke

did not recite the words of St Peter, but did only briefly touch the chief points;

notwithstanding he telleth us again in this place, that Peter did not use doctrine only, but

did add the pricks of exhortations. And he expresseth plainly that tie stood much 1

hereupon. Whereas he saith, that he did exhort and beseech, he noteth therein his

earnestness. For it was not so easy a matter for them by and by 2 to take their leave of

those errors wherewith they were of late infected, and to shake off the government of the

priests whereunto they were accustomed. Therefore it stood him upon to pull them

violently out of this mire. The sum was this, that they should beware of that froward

generation. For they could not be Christ's unless they would depart from his professed

enemies. The priests and scribes were then in great authority, and forasmuch as they did

cover themselves under the visor [mask] of the Church, they did deceive the simple, This

did hinder and keep back a great many from coming to Christ. Also some might waver,

and other some might fall away from the right faith. Therefore Peter plainly declareth that

they are a froward generation, howsoever they may boast of the title of the Church. For

which cause he commandeth his hearers to separate themselves from them, lest they

entangle themselves in their wicked and pestiferous fellowship. Whereas he saith, Be ye

saved, he signifieth unto them that they shall surely perish if they couple themselves with

such a plague. And surely experience doth teach us, how miserably those men are tossed

to and fro who cannot discern the voice of their pastor from the voice of other men; 3 and

again, what an hindrance softness and sluggishness is to a great many, whilst they desire

to stand in a doubt. 4 Therefore he commandeth them to depart from the wicked if they

will be saved. And this point of doctrine is not to be neglected. For it were not sufficient

to have Christ set before us, unless we were also taught to flee those things which do lead

us away from him. And it is the duty of a good shepherd to defend his sheep from the

wolves. So at this day, to the end we may keep the people in the sincere doctrine of the

gospel, we are ever now and then enforced to show and testify how much Papistry

differeth from Christianity, and what a hurtful plague it is to be yoked with the unfaithful

enemies of Christ. Neither ought Peter to be accused of railing, because he calleth the

reverend 6tthers, who had the government of the Church 5 in their hands at that day, a

froward generation. For those dangers which may draw the soul unto destruction are to

be showed by their names. For men will not beware of poison, unless they know that it is

poison.

COFFMAN, "Many other words ... Thus Luke was giving a resume of this great sermon,

and not a verbatim account of every word of it; and from this, we may be sure that where

Peter is quoted, he is quoted accurately.

With these words Luke summarized the great message of Pentecost and, significantly, the

initiative rested with men, not God. The promised Spirit had come; henceforth forever,

until the final judgment, that Spirit would be in the world; the terms of accepting the

gospel had been announced, and they would never be changed. Therefore the final word

to humanity was:

Save yourselves from this crooked generation ... As Morgan said:

You say that you are waiting for the Spirit? Nothing of the kind ... The Spirit is waiting

for you. No, we are not waiting for him; how often he is waiting for us![45]

Of all the wicked falsehoods ever devised by Satan and received by sinful men, the

greatest is this: "There is nothing you can do to be saved!" The existence of this Satanic

lie has been continuous throughout the Christian dispensation; but this verse is the total

refutation of it. How does one "save himself"? Just as Peter said: "Repent and be

baptized." Even in compliance with the God-given conditions, lacking which no man can

be saved, the saved person does not merit, or earn, redemption; but he saves himself in

the sense of fulfilling the conditions without which he can never be saved.

Note the following:

Take heed to thyself, and to thy teaching. Continue in these things; for in doing this thou

shalt both save thyself and them that hear thee (1 Timothy 4:16).

So then, my beloved, even as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now

much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling

(Philippians 2:12).SIZE>

The great teaching of these verses, taken in conjunction with what Peter said, is that man

is himself responsible for whether or not he is saved. If he obeys the Lord, he will be

saved, not as a matter of merit, but by the grace of God; but if he does not obey, not even

the grace of God can reach him and redeem him. Nor is there any implication in those

teachings that an absolutely perfect obedience is prerequisite to redemption, because

absolutely perfect obedience does not lie within the province of man's ability. However,

the initial obedience, such as Peter commanded on Pentecost, does lie within the area of

what man is fully able to do, provided only that he desires to do it; and that is the basis of

the conclusion that there can be no waiver of what Peter commanded on Pentecost. It will

be bound in heaven. It is simply incredible that most commentators pass over this

sentence with no comment: "Save yourselves from this crooked generation"!

ENDNOTE:

[45] G. Campbell Morgan, The Unfolding Message of the Bible (Old Tappan, New

Jersey.: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1961), p. 339 .

CONSTABLE,"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., Matthew 17:17; Mark 9:19; Mark 13:30;

Luke 9:41; Luke 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." [Note: A Greek-

English Lexicon of the New Testament, s.v. "genea," p. 112.] 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 (Matthew 21:41-44; Matthew

22:7; Matthew 23:34 to Matthew 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 (Matthew 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 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." [Note: J. 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.]

41Those who accepted his message were baptized,

and about three thousand were added to their

number that day.

BARNES, "They that gladly received - The word rendered “gladly” means “freely, cheerfully, joyfully.” It implies that they did it without compulsion, and with joy. Religion is not compulsion. They who become Christians do it cheerfully; they do it rejoicing in the privilege of becoming reconciled to God through Jesus Christ. Though so many received his word and were baptized, yet it is implied that there were others who did not. It is probable that there were multitudes assembled who were alarmed, but who did not receive the word with joy. In all revivals there are many who become alarmed, and who are anxious about their souls, but who refuse to embrace the gospel, and again become thoughtless, and are ruined.

His word - The message which Peter had spoken respecting the pardon of sin through Jesus Christ.

Were baptized - That is, those who professed a readiness to embrace the offers of salvation. The narrative plainly implies that this was done the same day. Their conversion was instantaneous. The demand on them was to yield themselves at once to God. And their profession was made, and the ordinance which sealed their profession

administered without delay.

And the same day - The discourse of Peter commenced at nine o’clock in the morning, Act_2:15. How long it continued it is not said; but the ceremony of admitting them to the church and of baptizing them was evidently performed on the same day. The mode in which this is done is not mentioned; but it is highly improbable that in the midst of the city of Jerusalem three thousand persons were wholly immersed in one day. The whole narrative supposes that it was all done in the city; and yet there is no probability that there were conveniences there for immersing so many persons in a single day. Besides, in the ordinary way of administering baptism by immersion, it is difficult to conceive that so many persons could have been immersed in so short a time. There is, indeed, here no positive proof that they were not immersed; but the narrative is one of those incidental circumstances often much more satisfactory than philological discussion, that show the extreme improbability that all this was done by wholly immersing them in water. It may be further remarked that here is an example of very quick admission to the church. It was the first great work of grace under the gospel. It was the model of all revivals of religion. And it was doubtless intended that this should be a specimen of the manner in which the ministers of religion should act in regard to admissions to the Christian church. Prudence is indeed required; but this example furnishes no warrant for advising those who profess their willingness to obey Jesus Christ, to delay uniting with the church. If persons give evidence of piety, of true hatred of sin, and of attachment to the Lord Jesus; they should unite themselves to his people without delay.

There were added - To the company of disciples, or to the followers of Christ.

Souls - Persons. Compare 1Pe_3:20; Gen_12:5. It is not affirmed that all this took place in one part of Jerusalem, or that it was all done at once; but it is probable that this was what was afterward ascertained to be the fruit of this day’s labor, the result of this revival of religion. This was the first effusion of the Holy Spirit under the preaching of the gospel; and it shows that such scenes are to be expected in the church, and that the gospel is suited to work a rapid and mighty change in the hearts of people.

CLARKE, "They that gladly received his word - The word ασµενως, which

signifies joyfully, readily, willingly, implies that they approved of the doctrine delivered; that they were glad to hear of this way of salvation; and that they began immediately to act according to its dictates. This last sense is well expressed in a similar phrase by Josephus: when speaking of the young Israelites enticing the Midianitish women to sin,

by fair speeches, he says, α!�δε�ασµενως�δεξαµεναι�τους�λογους�συνYεσαν�αυτοις, Ant. l. iv. c.

4. Then they who approved of their words consorted with them. The word is however omitted by ABCD, Coptic, Sahidic, Ethiopic, Vulgate, the Itala of the Codex Bezae, Clemens, and Chrysostom.

Were baptized - That is, in the name of Jesus, Act_2:38, for this was the criterion of a Jew’s conversion; and when a Jew had received baptism in this name he was excluded from all communication with his countrymen; and no man would have forfeited such privileges but on the fullest and clearest conviction. This baptism was a very powerful means to prevent their apostasy; they had, by receiving baptism in the name of Jesus, renounced Judaism, and all the political advantages connected with it; and they found it indispensably necessary to make the best use of that holy religion which they had received in its stead. Dr. Lightfoot has well remarked, that the Gentiles who received the Christian doctrine were baptized in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost; whereas the Jewish converts, for the reasons already given, were baptized in the

name of the Lord Jesus.

Were added - three thousand souls - Προσετεθησαν, They went over from one

party to another. The Greek writers make use of this verb to signify that act by which cities, towns, or provinces changed their masters, and put themselves under another government. So these 3000 persons left the scribes and Pharisees, and put themselves under the teaching of the apostles, professing the Christian doctrine, and acknowledging that Christ was come, and that he who was lately crucified by the Jews was the promised and only Messiah; and in this faith they were baptized.

These 3000 were not converted under one discourse, nor in one place, nor by one person. All the apostles preached, some in one language, and some in another; and not in one house - for where was there one at that time that could hold such a multitude of people? For, out of the multitudes that heard, 3000 were converted; and if one in five was converted it must have been a very large proportion. The truth seems to by this: All the apostles preached in different, parts of the city, during the course of that day; and in

that day, τY�fµερ��εκεινY, 3000 converts were the fruits of the conjoint exertions of these

holy men. Dr. Lightfoot thinks that the account in this place is the fulfillment of the prophecy in Psa_110:1, etc.: The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand; this refers to the resurrection and ascension of Christ. Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, Psa_110:3. This was the day of his power; and while the apostles proclaimed his death, resurrection, and ascension, the people came willingly in, and embraced the doctrines of Christianity.

GILL Verse 41. Then they that gladly received his word,.... The Syriac version adds, "and

believed"; what Peter said concerning repentance and baptism, and especially concerning

remission of sins, and the gift of the Holy Ghost; and concerning the promise of Christ,

and salvation by him, of the pardon of sin, and of the Holy Spirit; which doctrine they

received with great joy and gladness, it being suitable to their case; and very "readily,"

and "willingly," as the Syriac and Arabic versions render it; for they were now made a

willing people in the day of God's power, and now that promise, or prophecy, in Psalm

110:3 had a remarkable accomplishment; these converts were the dew of Christ's youth,

as well as instances of his powerful and efficacious grace: not all that heard this sermon

of Peter's received his doctrine in this manner, only some; and so the Syriac and Arabic

versions render the words, "and some of them readily received," &c. which shows the

distinguishing grace of God in this instance. The Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions

leave out the word "gladly," which should not be omitted: and as soon as they had

received the word, and were comforted by it, they

were baptized; in water, by immersion, for which there was great conveniency in

Jerusalem, and in the temple, where the apostles now were: in the city of Jerusalem, in

private houses, they had their baths for purifications, by immersion, as in the case of

menstruous, gonorrhoeas, and other defilements, by touching unclean persons, and things,

which were very frequent; so that a digger of cisterns, for such uses, and others, was a

business in Jerusalem. "Says Simeon Sicana {g}, who was a digger of cisterns, ditches,

and caves, in Jerusalem, to R. Jochanan ben Zaccai, I am as great a man as thou art; he

made answer to him, why? (or your reason for it;) he replied to him, because I am

employed in the necessary affairs of many, (or of the public,) as you are; for says he, if a

man comes to you for judgment, or to ask a question, you say to him, drink out of this

cistern, whose waters are pure, and cold; or, if a woman asks thee concerning her

monstrous, you say to her, ylbj, dip in this cistern, whose waters purify."

And in the temple there was an apartment, called hlybj tyb, "the dipping place," or

"room," where the high priest dipped himself on the day of atonement {h}: and besides,

there were ten lavers of brass, made by Solomon; and every laver held forty baths of

water, and each was four cubits broad and long, sufficient for immersion of the whole

body of a man; and to these Herbanus {i} the Jew seems to have respect, when he says,

that in the outer part of Solomon's temple, there were

louthrhv, "lavers," in every side, (or all around,) which were free, or open, for the use of

all; to which, he thinks, the prophet Isaiah has respect, in Isaiah 1:16. Those were for the

priests, both to wash their hands and feet at, and also to wash the burnt offerings; see

Exodus 30:18 {k}: and who were likewise obliged, very often, to bathe, or dip their

whole bodies in water; for if a priest went out of the temple for a little while to speak with

a friend, hlybj Nwej, "he was obliged to dipping": and if he nodded, he was obliged to

wash his hands and his feet; but if he slept, he was obliged to dip himself; yea, a man

might not go into the court, or to service, even though he was clean, lbwj awhv de, "until

he dip himself" {l}. Add to this, that there was the molten sea also for the priests to wash

in, 2 Chronicles 4:6 which was done by immersion; on which one of the Jewish

commentators {m} has these words: "the sea was tlybjl, "for the dipping" of the priests;

for in the midst of it, they dipped themselves from their uncleanness; but in the Jerusalem

Talmud {n} there is an objection, is it not a vessel? as if it was said, how can they "dip"

in it, for is it not a vessel? and there is no "dipping" in vessels: R. Joshua ben Levi

replied, a pipe of water was laid to it from the fountain of Etam, and the feet of the oxen,

(which were under the molten sea,) were open at the pomegranates; so that it was as if it

was from under the earth, and the waters came to it, and entered, and ascended, by the

way of the feet of the oxen, which were open beneath them, and bored."

The reason of the objection is, because bathing, or dipping for purification, was not made

in vessels, but in gatherings, or pools of water upon the ground; and which objection is

removed, by observing, that a pipe was laid from the fountain of Etam, which supplied it

with spring, or running water; so that the molten sea, and the lavers, were looked upon all

one as pools of water, or springs of water, and as fit for immersion. This sea was ten

cubits from brim to brim, and five cubits high, and held two thousand baths, 1 Kings

7:23. Yea, three thousand, as in 2 Chronicles 6:5 and every laver held forty baths, 1 Kings

7:38 and every bath held four gallons and a half, and between seven and eight gallons of

wine measure. And it may be observed, that there were also in Jerusalem the pool of

Bethesda, into which persons went down at certain times, John 5:1 and the pool of

Siloam, where persons bathed, and dipped themselves, on certain occasions; See Gill "Joh

9:7." So that there were conveniences enough for baptism by immersion in this place: and

the same day there were added; unto them, or to the church, as in Acts 2:47 the whole

company of the hundred and twenty disciples; the Arabic version supplies, "among the

believers": the number of those, that were added to them, were about three thousand

souls; or persons, men, and women; and their number is no objection to their being

baptized by immersion.

HENRY, " Here is the happy success and issue of this, Act_2:41. The Spirit wrought with the word, and wrought wonders by it. These same persons that had many of them been eye-witnesses of the death of Christ, and the prodigies that attended it, and were not wrought upon by them, were yet wrought upon by the preaching of the word, for it is this that is the power of God unto salvation. 1. They received the word; and then only the word does us good, when we do receive it, embrace it, and bid it welcome. They admitted the conviction of it, and accepted the offers of it. 2. They gladly received it. Herod heard the word gladly, but these gladly received it, were not only glad that they had it to receive, but glad that by the grace of God they were enabled to receive it, though it would be a humbling changing word to them, and would expose them to the enmity of their countrymen. 3. They were baptized; believing with the heart, they made confession with the mouth, and enrolled themselves among the disciples of Christ by that sacred rite and ceremony which he had instituted. And though Peter had said, “Be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus” (because the doctrine of Christ was the present truth), yet we have reason to think that, in baptizing them, the whole form Christ prescribed was used, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Note, Those that receive the Christian covenant ought to receive the Christian baptism. 4. Hereby there were added to the disciples to the number of about three thousand souls that same day. All those that had received the Holy Ghost had their tongues at work to preach, and their hands at work to baptize; for it was time to be busy, when such a harvest was to be gathered in. The conversion of these three thousand with these words was a greater work than the feeding of four or five thousand with a few loaves. Now Israel began to multiply after the death of our Joseph. They are said to be three thousand souls (which word is generally used for persons when women and children are included with men, as

Gen_14:21, margin, Give me the souls; Gen_46:27, seventy souls), which intimates that those that were here baptized were not so many men, but so many heads of families as, with their children and servants baptized, might make up three thousand souls. These were added to them. Note, Those who are joined to Christ are added to the disciples of Christ, and join with them. When we take God for our God, we must take his people to be our people.

ELLICOTT, "(41) They that gladly received his word were baptized.—This was, we must remember, no new emotion. Not four years had passed since there had been a like eagerness to rush to the baptism of John. (See Notes on Matthew 3:5; Matthew 11:12.)

Three thousand souls.—The largeness of the number has been urged as rendering it probable that the baptism was by affusion, not immersion. On the other hand, (1) immersion had clearly been practised by John, and was involved in the original meaning of the word, and it is not likely that the rite should have been curtailed of its full proportions at the very outset. (2) The symbolic meaning of the act required immersion in order that it might be clearly manifested, and Romans 6:4, and 1 Peter 3:21, seem almost of necessity to imply the more complete mode. The swimming-baths of Bethesda and Siloam (see Notes on John 5:7; John 9:7), or the so-called Fountain of the Virgin, near the Temple enclosure, or the bathing-places within the Tower of Antony (Jos. Wars, v. 5, § 8), may well have helped to make the process easy. The sequel shows (1) that many converts were made from the Hellenistic Jews who were present at the Feast (Acts 6:1); and (2) that few, if any, of the converts were of the ruling class (Acts 4:1). It is obvious that some of these converts may have gone back to the cities whence they came, and may have been the unknown founders of the Church at Damascus, or Alexandria, or Rome itself.

NOTE, "As for convenient places to baptize in, there were enough, as we have seen

already; and there were administrators sufficient for this work: had there been no more

than the twelve apostles, it was but two hundred and fifty men apiece; and there were

twelve separate places in the temple, where they might be baptizing at the same time;

there were the ten lavers, the molten sea, and the dipping room, so that the work was not

so very heavy nor difficult; but besides, there were seventy disciples, who, as they were

preachers of the word, were administrators of this ordinance; and supposing them all

employed, as they might be, at the same time, either in the temple, or at the pools in

Jerusalem, or at the baths, and cisterns, in private houses; they would not have more than

six or seven and thirty persons apiece to baptize; and there was time enough in the day for

it; it was but the third hour, or nine o'clock in the morning, when Peter began his sermon;

and allowing an hour for that, there were eight hours more in the day, according to the

Jewish reckoning of twelve hours in a day; so that the business might be done without

any hurry, or great fatigue; and indeed, the objection, as to time, would equally lie against

sprinkling, or pouring, as dipping; at least the difference is very inconsiderable; for the

same form of words must be pronounced in administering the ordinance by the one, as by

the other; and a person being ready, is very near as soon dipped into water, as water can

be taken, and sprinkled, or poured on the face. Besides, after all, though these persons

were added to the church the same day, it does not necessarily follow from the text, that

they were all baptized in one day; the words do not oblige us to such a sense: I own, I am

of opinion, that they were all baptized in one day; and that on the same day they were

baptized, they were joined to the church; and that day was the day of Pentecost, the day

on which the law was given on Mount Sinai, and on which now the Gospel was published

to men of all nations under the heavens; the day on which the firstfruits were offered to

the Lord, and on which now the firstfruits of the death, resurrection, and ascension of

Christ were brought in to him. Let the order be observed, they were first baptized, and

then added to the church."

HAWKER 41-47, "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. (42) And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. (43) And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. (44) And all that believed were together, and had all things common; (45) And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. (46) And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, (47) Praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

Here we have the gracious, arid blissful consequences resulting from the whole, in the powerful operations of God the Holy Ghost, by the instrumentality of Peter’s Sermon. Three thousand Souls, savingly converted on the spot, to the knowledge and love of Jesus! What a specimen, in the first fruits of the Holy Ghost’s descending, of what in the after harvest the Lord the Spirit would gather in, to the Church of God! And behold, what continued evidences followed, to the compleatness of the work. A stedfast continuing in doctrine; and a continued observance of ordinances. And while those who received the Holy Ghost, in his gifts and graces received all that was needful to their private sanctification; the Apostles received the power of working miracles, in proof of their public ministry. An holy fear came upon all beholders. The most unbounded charity brake out among all the faithful. The temple, or private house; the public assembly, or the private meeting; all resounded with the adorable name of Jesus. And so much of God appeared in all the deportment of those holy men, at this most blessed season, that it was one continued festival. And Jehovah in his threefold character of Person, gave such testimony to the word of his grace, that daily the Lord called his own from darkness to light, and from the power of sin and Satan to the living God. Oh! blessed Pentecost of a blessed God! Lord! grant in this latter day of thy Church a renewed Pentecost to manifest thy glory!

CALVIN, "41. They, therefore, which willingly. Luke showeth more plainly

how fruitful this one sermon which Peter made was: to wit, that it gained unto

Christ about three thousand men. And therewithal he declareth the nature and

force of faith when he saith, that with a prompt and ready 6 mind they

embraced his word. Therefore, faith must begin with this readiness and willing

desire to obey. And because many do show themselves at the first very

willing, who afterward have in themselves no constancy or continuance, lest

we should think that it was some sudden pang 7 which by and by fell away,

Luke doth also afterward commend their constancy, who (as he said) did

willingly embrace this word of the apostles, showing that they were joined

unto the disciples, or that they were engrafted into the same body, and that

they continued in their doctrine. Therefore we must neither be slow to obey,

nor yet swift to leap back; but we must stick fast, and stand stoutly to that

doctrine which we did forthwith (without any tarriance [delay]) embrace.

Furthermore, this example ought to make us not a little ashamed. For whereas

there was a great multitude converted unto Christ with one sermon, an

hundred sermons can scarce move a few of us; and whereas Luke saith that

they continued, there is scarce one amongst ten that doth show even a mean

desire to profit and go forward, yea, rather, the more part doth soon loathe our

doctrine. Woe be, therefore, to the sluggishness and lightness of the world!

COFFMAN,"At the giving of the Law, three thousand souls broke the Law

and died; on this occasion three thousand souls obeyed the gospel and were

saved.

Unto them ... is usually written in italics to indicate that the words were

supplied by the translators. From this some have concluded that these, along

with the apostles and the one hundred twenty, were "added," or aggregated to

become the first body of Christians.

COKE, "Acts 2:41. There were added unto them about three thousand

souls.— The phrase Προσετεθησαν, rendered there were added, emphatically

signifies, "to pass over to a body of men;" and implies that these persons

renounced their former religious profession, and embraced that of the apostles.

Some render it, There came over, or acceded. Elsner, in his note on this place,

has shewn, that souls often signifies persons in the Greek and Latin classics. It

is commonly said, that the three thousand mentioned in the text, were

converted by one sermon. But, it is probable, that, while St. Peter was

preaching in the Syriac language, the other apostles were preaching at some

small distance, much to the same purpose, in other languages; and it is not to

be imagined that none of them but St. Peter should be blessed on that day, as

the means of converting souls; not to insist upon it, that he himself might

deliver several discourses this day to different audiences, when the concourse

of people was so great, and their languages so various. The late sufferings of

our Lord, the present miracle of languages, and the authority of the speakers,

greatly contributed to this

numerousconversion:butallwouldhavebeenutterlyunavailablewithouttheefficac

y of the Holy Spirit. This numerous conversion not only confirmed the truth of

the apostles, in laying claim to the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, but likewise

served as a proof to them of the reality of it, and as an encouragement to

undertake that office, for which it qualified them. With these credentials from

Heaven, even a poor fisherman of Galilee might appear with dignity before the

high-priest and sanhedrim of the Jews; asserting boldly, that God had made

that Jesus, whom they had crucified, both Lord and Christ, and making good

this assertion by proving that he was risen from the dead,—strange and

supernatural as it might seem,—not only by his own testimony, and that of his

brethren, the apostles and disciples of Jesus, by whom he was seen forty days

after his passion; but by innumerable instances of a power in like manner

superior to nature, derived upon them from him, and exercised bythem in his

name. From the scriptures also might the same ignorant Galilean show,

against the traditions of the elders, and learning of the scribes, and the

prejudices of the whole Jewish nation, that the humble suffering Jesus, was

the mighty, triumphant Messiah, spoken of by the prophets; since if, with a

reference to the interpretation of those prophesies, any doubt could have arisen

among the people, to whose expositions they should submit,—to those of the

scribes and elders, or those of the apostles,—the latter had to produce, in

support of their authority, the attestation of the Spirit, by whom those prophets

were inspired, now speaking through their mouths in all the languages of the

earth. And, with regard to that other point, of infinitely harder digestion to the

Jews, namely, the calling of the uncircumcised Gentiles to an equal

participation of the kingdom of God, and consequently the abolishing of

circumcision, and the whole ceremonial law;—the apostles were furnished

with an argument to which all the rabbies were not able to reply, by the Holy

Ghost bestowing upon the Gentile converts to Christianity, the same heavenly

gifts as he had conferred at the beginning upon the believing Jews.

DEFFIBAUGH The Baptism of Jesus and the Baptism at Pentecost

21 ow when all the people were baptized, Jesus also was baptized. And while he

was praying, the heavens opened, 22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily

form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven, “You are my one dear Son; in you

I take great delight” (Luke 3:21-22).

Consider the similarities between our Lord’s baptism by John and the baptism of

the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. In Luke 3, the Spirit comes upon Jesus after He has

been baptized by John and while He is praying. In Acts, the apostles and others

have also been praying, and the Spirit comes upon them. In Luke, a voice (the voice

of God the Father) comes from heaven; in Acts 2, a great noise comes from heaven.

In Luke, the Spirit comes in the form of a dove and rests upon Jesus. In Acts 2, the

Spirit’s coming is seen in the likeness of tongues of fire, which come upon all those

gathered together. The coming of the Spirit upon Jesus in Luke 3 is the event that

preceded the commencement of our Lord’s ministry, a ministry which was marked

by manifestations of power. In Acts 2, Pentecost is the event that preceded the going

forth of the apostles in power, as they proclaimed the gospel.

I would like to suggest that the baptism of our Lord in Luke 3 is essential and

foundational to our understanding Pentecost. In our Lord’s baptism, Jesus certainly

identified Himself with John, his ministry, and his message. Further, in our Lord’s

baptism, He identified Himself with lost sinners – He identified Himself with us. But

this is not where I see the emphasis falling. At the baptism of Jesus, we see God

identifying Himself (Father and Spirit) with the Son, and with His ministry. We see

that it is from this point on that Jesus is endowed with power from on high to

conduct His earthly ministry.

When we come to Pentecost in Acts 2, we see a similar event taking place with our

Lord’s earthly body, the church. At Pentecost, God identifies Himself with the

church, the body of Christ. It is one thing to identify ourselves with Christ (which

we do in believer’s baptism). It is another thing for us to claim that God is with us.

(Many are those corrupt governments and rulers who have claimed God was with

them in their evil causes.) But it is a most unusual thing when God personally

identifies Himself with us. That is what He has done at Pentecost. God identified

Himself with the church, and specifically with the apostles. The things our Lord

Jesus began to do and to teach (Acts 1:1-2), He continued to do and to teach through

His apostles. Just as Jesus did not begin His public ministry until the Father

identified Himself with Him by bestowing His Spirit on Him, so the apostles were

told to wait until He identified Himself with them at Pentecost.

I do not think that we fully appreciate what it meant for God to identify Himself

with the church. This is a distinctly ew Covenant event. I am reminded of the

events of Exodus in chapters 32-34. While Moses was on the mountain, receiving the

Ten Commandments in stone, the Israelites are down below (in full view of the

manifestations of God’s presence on the mountain) worshipping the idol they had

instructed Aaron to fashion for them. The initial issue was whether or not God

would wipe out this entire nation and raise up a new nation through Moses (Exodus

32:7-14). Moses successfully (humanly speaking) interceded for the nation, and God

spared them. ow, the issue was whether God would be present with His people as

they went forward to possess the land of Canaan:

1 And the Lord said to Moses, “Go up from here, you and the people whom you

brought up out of the land of Egypt, to the land I promised on oath to Abraham, to

Isaac, and to Jacob, saying, ‘I will give it to your descendants.’ 2 And I will send an

angel before you, and I will drive out the Canaanite, the Amorite, the Hittite, the

Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite. 3 Go up to a land flowing with milk and

honey. But I will not go up among you, for you are a stiff-necked people, and I

might destroy you on the way” (Exodus 33:1-3, emphasis mine).

Once again it was through the intercession of Moses that God promised to go with

His people:

12 Then Moses said to the Lord, “See, you have been saying to me, ‘Bring this

people up,’ but you have not let me know whom you will send with me. But you said,

‘I know you by name, and also you have found favor in my sight.’ 13 And now, if I

have found favor in your sight, show me your way, that I may know you, that I may

continue to find favor in your sight. And see that this nation is your people. 14 And

he said, “My presence will go with you,11 and I will give you rest.” 15 And he said

to him, “If your presence does not go with us, do not take us up from here. 16 For in

what way will it be known that I have found favor in your sight, I and your people?

Is it not in your going with us, so that we will be distinguished, I and your people,

from all the people who are on the face of the earth?” 17 And the Lord said to

Moses, “I will do this thing also that you have spoken, for you have found favor in

my sight, and I know you by name” (Exodus 33:12-17, emphasis mine).

God did go with His people. According to Paul, even our Lord Jesus was present,

although not recognized as such (1 Corinthians 10:4). But God was not intimately

indwelling His people. There were always barricades, always barriers which

separated men from God. While He was with His disciples, our Lord spoke of a time

in the near future when He would dwell within His disciples in an entirely new and

much more intimate way:

15 “If you love me, you will obey my commandments. 16 Then I will ask the Father,

and he will give you another Advocate to be with you forever— 17 the Spirit of

truth, whom the world cannot accept, because it does not see him or know him. But

you know him, because he resides with you and will be in you. 18 “I will not

abandon you as orphans, I will come to you. 19 In a little while the world will not see

me any longer, but you will see me; because I live, you will live too. 20 You will

know at that time that I am in my Father and you are in me and I am in you. 21 The

person who has my commandments and obeys them is the one who loves me. The

one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and will reveal

myself to him” (John 14:15-21, emphasis mine).

From Pentecost on, God has come to dwell in His people, manifesting His person

and presence in a way that is more intimate than we ever find in the Old Testament.

God now identifies Himself with His people in a most intimate way. This is only

possible because our sins have been dealt with on the cross of Calvary. Pentecost can

come because our Passover has been sacrificed:

Clean out the old yeast so that you may be a new batch of dough—you are, in fact,

without yeast. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed (1 Corinthians

5:7).

Pentecost and the Great Commission

18 Then Jesus came up and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has

been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them

in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to obey

everything I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end

of the age” (Matthew 28:18-20, emphasis mine).

44 Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still

with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets

and the psalms must be fulfilled.” 45 Then he opened their minds so they could

understand the scriptures, 46 and said to them, “Thus it stands written that the

Messiah would suffer and would rise from the dead on the third day, 47 and

repentance for the forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in his name to all

nations, beginning from Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things. 49 And

look, I am sending you what my Father promised. But stay in the city until you have

been clothed with power from on high” (Luke 24:44-49, emphasis mine).

8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will

be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the farthest

parts of the earth” (Acts 1:8, emphasis mine).

In the Great Commission of Matthew 28:18-20, Jesus claims all authority. He

commands His disciples to make disciples of all nations, and He promises to be with

them always, to the end of the age. At Pentecost, the power and authority of God are

bestowed upon the disciples in the coming of the Holy Spirit. His presence, through

the Spirit, is assured until this age is past.

In both Luke and Acts, we see that our Lord promised power through the coming of

the Holy Spirit, with the result that the gospel would be proclaimed to all the earth,

beginning at Jerusalem. Is it not striking that our Lord has orchestrated Pentecost

in such a way that (so to speak) all the nations of the earth are present and

represented by those who were dwelling in Jerusalem when the Spirit was bestowed

on the church? God has seen to it that the first fruits of His sovereign purposes are

harvested on the very day that the Spirit is given to the church.

Pentecost and the Feast of Pentecost

It is my understanding that God purposed to send His Spirit to the church during

the Feast of Pentecost because this Old Testament feast foreshadowed Pentecost.

Paul calls attention to this relationship between Old Testament institutions and ew

Testament realities in Colossians 2:

16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you with respect to food or drink, or in the

matter of a feast, new moon, or Sabbath days— 17 these are only the shadow of the

things to come, but the reality is Christ! (Colossians 2:16-17, emphasis mine)

The writer to the Hebrews says the same thing:

For the law possesses a shadow of the good things to come but not the reality itself,

and is therefore completely unable, by the same sacrifices offered continually, year

after year, to perfect those who come to worship (Hebrews 10:1, emphasis mine).

Let us take note of these Old Testament texts which speak of the Feast of Pentecost:

You are also to observe the Feast of Harvest, the firstfruits of your labors that you

have sown in the field, and the Feast of Ingathering at the end of the year when you

have gathered in your labors out of the field (Exodus 23:16, emphasis mine).

22 And you must observe the Feast of Weeks—the firstfruits of the harvest of

wheat—and the Feast of Ingathering at the end of the year. 23 At three times in the

year all your men must appear before the Lord God, the God of Israel (Exodus

34:22-23, emphasis mine).

11 And he must wave the sheaf before the Lord to be accepted for your benefit—on

the day after the Sabbath the priest is to wave it. . . . 15 “‘You must count for

yourselves seven weeks from the day after the Sabbath, from the day you bring the

wave offering sheaf; they must be complete weeks. 16 You must count fifty days—

until the day after the seventh Sabbath—and then you must present a new grain

offering to the Lord. 17 From the places where you live you must bring two loaves of

bread for a wave offering; they must be made from two tenths of an ephah of fine

wheat flour, baked with leaven, as first fruits to the Lord. 18 Along with the loaves

of bread, you must also present seven flawless yearling lambs, one young bull, and

two rams. They are to be a burnt offering to the Lord along with their grain offering

and drink offerings, a gift of a soothing aroma to the Lord. 19 You must also offer

one male goat for a sin offering and two yearling lambs for a peace offering

sacrifice, 20 and the priest is to wave them—the two lambs—along with the bread of

the first fruits, as a wave offering before the Lord; they will be holy to the Lord for

the priest’” (Leviticus 23:11, 15-20, emphasis mine).

26 “‘Also, on the day of the first fruits, when you bring a new grain offering to the

Lord during your Feast of Weeks, you are to have a holy convocation. You must do

no ordinary work’” (umbers 28:26, emphasis mine).

9 You must count seven weeks; you must begin to count them from the time you

begin to harvest the standing grain. 10 Then you are to celebrate the Festival of

Weeks before the Lord your God with the voluntary offering that you will bring, in

proportion to how he has blessed you. 11 You shall rejoice before him—you, your

son, your daughter, your male and female slaves, the Levites in your villages, the

resident foreigners, the orphans, and the widows among you—in the place where

the Lord chooses to locate his name (Deuteronomy 16:9-11, emphasis mine).

We can see that the Feast of Pentecost was known by several names: the “Feast of

Harvest” (Exodus 23:16), the “Festival (or Feast) of Weeks” (Exodus 34:22;

Deuteronomy 16:10), and the “day of the first fruits” (umbers 28:26).

The Jewish feasts are observed according to the Jewish calendar. As many know,

the Jewish calendar is very different from our own.12 The first spring holiday is

that of Passover (see Exodus 12:1-14; Leviticus 23:5). Passover commemorates

God’s deliverance of Israel from Egyptian bondage at the exodus. Passover recalls

the ten plagues, the observance of the first Passover meal (by means of which the

first born males were spared), and the crossing of the Red Sea. Passover commences

on the 14th day of the first month of Abib, which falls in our months of March or

April. The day after Passover, the 15th day of the month, was the beginning of a one

week celebration of the “Feast of Unleavened Bread” (Exodus 12:15-20; 13:8-9;

Leviticus 23:6-8). All leaven was to be removed for a period of one week. One of the

seven days of the “Feast of Unleavened Bread” would naturally be a Sabbath. The

day following this Sabbath there was to be the celebration of the wave offering of

Israel’s “First Fruits” (Leviticus 23:9-14). The first sheaf of the new spring barley

crop was brought to the priest who waved this offering before the Lord.

The Feast of Pentecost (or, more commonly in Old Testament terms, the “Feast of

Weeks”) was to be celebrated 50 days after the offering of the first fruits. In this

way, we can see that Pentecost followed Passover, but was actually 50 days after the

offering of first fruits. It occurs in the third month of the Jewish calendar, which

would be during the months of May or June on our calendar.

There are several things I believe to be significant about this holiday which serve to

foreshadow the Pentecost of Acts 2. First of all, Pentecost marks the transition from

Israel’s barley harvest to her wheat harvest. If I understand correctly, the wheat

crop would ripen just as the barley harvest has ended. Thus, it marked the

transition from harvesting barley to harvesting wheat. Wheat appears to be

regarded as the more highly prized crop. Is this somehow a fulfillment of our Lord’s

promise to His disciples?

12 I tell you the solemn truth, the person who believes in me will perform the

miraculous deeds that I am doing, and will perform greater deeds than these,

because I am going to the Father. 13 And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so

that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask me anything in my name, I

will do it. 15 “If you love me, you will obey my commandments. 16 Then I will ask

the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you forever— 17 the

Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot accept, because it does not see him or know

him. But you know him, because he resides with you and will be in you. 18 “I will

not abandon you as orphans, I will come to you (John 14:12-18, emphasis mine).

Whatever the “harvest” had been during the life and ministry of our Lord, it would

suddenly increase, beginning with Pentecost.

Second, Pentecost was unique in that the grain offering was in the form of two

loaves,13 both of which were made with leaven (Leviticus 23:17). What a contrast to

Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread, where no leaven was tolerated! What

has happened so that the Feast of Pentecost actually requires bread made with

leaven? How can that which is leavened be presented to God as a sacrifice?

I’m inclined to see the interpretation in terms of the sequence of spring holidays we

have seen thus far. Passover clearly anticipated the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ

and His saving work on the cross of Calvary. He is our Passover Lamb (1

Corinthians 5:7). The Feast of Unleavened Bread follows Passover, and all leaven

must be removed. The death of our Lord Jesus at Calvary removes the guilt of our

sins, and thus we must come to hate sin and desire that it be put far from us:

6 Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast affects the whole

batch of dough? 7 Clean out the old yeast so that you may be a new batch of

dough—you are, in fact, without yeast. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been

sacrificed. 8 So then, let us celebrate the festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of

vice and evil, but with the bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth (1

Corinthians 5:6-8).

Like the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the offering of Israel’s first fruits followed

shortly after the observance of the Passover meal. The presentation of the first fruits

always occurred on the day after Sabbath, or Sunday. Sunday after Passover was

also the day our Lord Jesus rose from the dead, the first fruits from the dead (1

Corinthians 15:20). Fifty days later, Israel celebrated the Feast of Pentecost. This

was the end of the barley season (the Old Covenant?) and the beginning of the

wheat harvest (the ew Covenant?). It was the time when God identified Himself

with the church, the time when He endowed the saints with power so that they could

carry out the Great Commission. It was the time when God came to indwell His

saints in a way that was more intimate than any saint had ever experienced it. It was

the time, thanks to the atoning sacrifice of Jesus on the cross, when God could now

indwell those who were not yet free from sin and its corrupting influences. God

dwells among and in His people, sinful though they will be, because of the atoning

sacrifice of the Lord Jesus.

Matthew’s Gospel began by telling us that in Jesus, God is with us:

20 When he had contemplated this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a

dream and said, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife,

because the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a

son and you will name him Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.” 22

This all happened so that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet would

be fulfilled: 23 “Look! The virgin will conceive and bear a son, and they will call

him Emmanuel,” which means “God with us” (Matthew 1:20-25, emphasis mine).

When the Gospel of Matthew ends with the Great Commission, we find these words

of our Lord, reassuring His disciples that He will be with them always, to the end of

the age:

18 Then Jesus came up and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has

been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them

in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to obey

everything I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end

of the age” (Matthew 28:18-20, emphasis mine).

What does Pentecost mean to us? The story of Pentecost in Acts 2 tells us how our

Lord is now present with His church – through the Holy Spirit, whom He has sent.

Pentecost assures us that God is present with His people, even though we are not yet

sinless. We are forgiven sinners, who will one day be freed from the suffering and

groaning that is the result of sin (Romans 8:18-25). But through the atoning work of

Christ and the abiding of the Spirit, God is with us in a way that no Old Testament

saint ever knew. He is with us, not only to teach, comfort, and guide us, but also to

empower us to carry out the Great Commission. What news could be better than

this? To God be the glory.

CONSTABLE, "Peter had called on his audience to repent and to be baptized (Acts 2:38).

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 Acts 1:15 since he was describing the visible

relationships of the believers. [Note: Kent, p. 34, footnote 14.]

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. [Note: Rackham, pp. 31-32; Neil, p. 80.]

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 (Matthew 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 experiential transition in the development of the

theocratic kingdom program." [Note: Pentecost, Thy Kingdom . . ., pp. 266-67.]

". . . 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)." [Note: Thomas, pp. 86-87.]

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." [Note: Barclay, p. xiii.]

The Fellowship of the Believers

42They devoted themselves to the apostles'

teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of

bread and to prayer.

BARNES, "And they continued stedfastly - They persevered in, or they adhered to. This is the inspired record of the result. That any of these apostatized is nowhere recorded, and is not to be presumed. Though they had been suddenly converted; though they were suddenly admitted to the church; though they were exposed to much persecution and contempt, and to many trials, yet the record is that they adhered to the doctrines and duties of the Christian religion. The word rendered “continued stedfastly”

- προσκαρτερο/ντες proskarterountes - means “attending one, remaining by his side, not

leaving or forsaking him.”

The apostles’ doctrine - This does not mean that they held or believed the doctrines of the apostles, though that was true; but it means that they adhered to, or attended on, their teaching or instruction. The word doctrine has now a technical sense, and means a collection and arrangement of abstract views supposed to be contained in the Bible. In the Scriptures the word means simply “teaching”; and the expression here denotes that they continued to attend on their instructions. One evidence of conversion is a desire to be instructed in the doctrines and duties of religion, and a willingness to attend on the preaching of the gospel.

And fellowship - The word rendered “fellowship,” κοινωνία koinōnia, is often

rendered “communion.” It properly denotes “having things in common, or participation, society, friendship.” It may apply to anything which may be possessed in common, or in which all may partake. Thus, all Christians have the same hope of heaven; the same joys; the same hatred of sin; the same enemies to contend with. Thus, they have the same subjects of conversation, of feeling, and of prayer; or they have communion in these things. And thus the early Christians had their property in common. The word here may apply to either or to all of these things to their conversation, their prayers, their dangers, or their property; and means that they were united to the apostles, and participated with them in whatever befell them. It may be added that the effect of a revival of religion is to unite Christians more and more, and to bring those who were before separated to union and love. Christians feel that they are a band of brethren, and that, however much they were separated before they became Christians, now they have great and important

interests in common; they are united in feelings, in interests, in dangers, in conflicts, in opinions, and in the hopes of a blessed immortality.

Breaking of bread - The Syriac renders this “the eucharist” or the Lord’s Supper. It cannot, however, be determined whether this refers to their partaking of their ordinary food together, or to feasts of charity, or to the Lord’s Supper. The bread of the Hebrews was made commonly into cakes, thin, hard, and brittle, so that it was broken instead of being cut. Hence, to denote “intimacy or friendship,” the phrase “to break bread together” would be very expressive in the same way as the Greeks denoted it by drinking

together, συµπόσιον sumposion. From the expression used in Act_2:44, compare with

Act_2:46, that they had all things common, it would rather seem to be implied that this referred to the participation of their ordinary meals. The action of breaking bread was commonly performed by the master or head of a family immediately after asking a blessing (Lightfoot).

In prayers - This was one effect of the influence of the Spirit, and an evidence of their change. A genuine revival will be always followed by a love of prayer.

CLARKE, "They continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine - They received it, retained it, and acted on its principles.

And fellowship - Κοινωνι�, community; meaning association for religious and

spiritual purposes, The community of goods cannot be meant; for this is mentioned Act_2:44, Act_2:45, where it is said, they had all things common.

And in breaking of bread - Whether this means the holy eucharist, or their common meals, it is difficult to say. The Syriac understands it of the former. Breaking of bread was that act which preceded a feast or meal, and which was performed by the master of the house, when he pronounced the blessing - what we would call grace before meat. See the form on Mat_26:26 (note).

And in prayers - In supplications to God for an increase of grace and life in their own souls; for establishment in the truth which they had received, and for the extension of the kingdom of Christ in the salvation of men. Behold the employment of the primitive and apostolic Church.

1. They were builded up on the foundation of the prophets and apostles, Jesus Christ himself being the corner stone.

2. They continued steadfastly in that doctrine which they had so evidently received from God.

3. They were separated from the world, and lived in a holy Christian fellowship, strengthening and building up each other in their most holy faith.

4. They were frequent in breaking bread; in remembrance that Jesus Christ died for them.

5. They continued in prayers; knowing that they could be no longer faithful than while they were upheld by their God; and knowing also that they could not expect his grace to support them, unless they humbly and earnestly prayed for its continuance.

GILL Verse 42. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine,.... And which is

the same with the doctrine of Christ, of which he is the author, preacher, and subject; the

substance of which is peace, pardon, righteousness, and salvation by him: this the

apostles received from Christ, and constantly taught in their ministry; for which reason, it

is called theirs; and this these young converts had embraced gladly; and were not only

believers of it, but persevering believers; they were constant hearers of it; they continually

attended on the ministry of the apostles, and held fast the form of sound words they had

received from them; and stood fast in the faith of the Gospel, notwithstanding all the

reproach cast upon it, and the afflictions they endured for it:

and fellowship; with the apostles and other saints, in spiritual conversation with them, in

private, and in communion with them at the Lord's table in public: and so the Vulgate

Latin reads this clause, in connection with the next, thus, "in the communication of

breaking of bread"; to which agrees the Syriac version, and "they communicated in

prayer, and in breaking of the eucharist"; though it seems better to understand this of a

distinct branch of fellowship, or communication, and may rather intend liberality and

beneficence, in which sense it is used, Romans 15:26 and so expresses their constant

contributions towards the support of the apostles, as ministers of the word and of the poor

members of the church; a duty which, in both its branches, is incumbent on those who

have it in their power to perform, and which these first Christians were remarkable for:

and in breaking of bread; or "of the eucharist": as the Syriac version renders it, which was

an usual name with the ancients for the Lord's supper; and which seems to be intended

here, and not eating common bread, or a common meal; seeing it is here mentioned with

religious exercises: and though the Jews used to begin their meals with breaking of bread,

yet the whole repast, or meal, is never by them called by that name; and for what reason

these saints should be commended for keeping their common meals, cannot be said,

unless to show their sociableness, agreement, and brotherly love in eating together; and

which is not hinted at here, but in Acts 2:46 where it is mentioned as something distinct

from this: it seems rather therefore to design, that they were constant at the Lord's table,

kept their places there, and duly attended whenever the ordinance was administered:

and in prayers: not only in their closets, and in their families, but in the church; in the

public prayers of the church, they observed all opportunities of this kind, and gladly

embraced them.

ELLICOTT, "(42) And they continued steadfastly.—The one Greek word is expressed by

the English verb and adverb. As applied to persons, the New Testament use of the word is

characteristic of St. Luke (Acts 2:46; Acts 6:4; Acts 8:13; Acts 10:7), and peculiar to him

and St. Paul (Romans 12:12; Romans 13:6; Colossians 4:2).

The apostles’ doctrine.—Four elements of the life of the new society are dwelt on. (1)

They grew in knowledge of the truth by attending to the teaching of the Apostles. This,

and not the thought of a formulated doctrine to which they gave their consent, is clearly

the meaning of the word. (See Note on Matthew 7:28.) (2) They joined in outward acts of

fellowship with each other, acts of common worship, acts of mutual kindness and

benevolence. The one Greek word diverges afterwards into the sense of what we

technically call “communion,” as in 1 Corinthians 10:16, and that of a “collection” or

contribution for the poor (Romans 15:26; 2 Corinthians 9:13).

And in breaking of bread, and in prayers.—(3) St. Luke uses the phrase, we must

remember, in the sense which, when he wrote, it had acquired in St. Paul’s hands. It can

have no meaning less solemn than the commemorative “breaking of bread,” of 1

Corinthians 10:16. From the very first what was afterwards known as the Lord’s Supper

(see Note on 1 Corinthians 11:20) took its place with baptism as a permanent universal

element in the Church’s life. At first, it would seem, the evening meal of every day was

such a supper. Afterwards the two elements that had then been united were developed

separately, the social into the Agapœ, or Feasts of Love (Jude 1:12, and—though here

there is a various-reading—2 Peter 2:13), the other into the Communion, or Eucharistic

Sacrifice. (4) Prayer, in like manner, included private as well as public devotions. These

may have been the outpouring of the heart’s desires; but they may also have been what

the disciples had been taught to pray, as in Matthew 6:9, Luke 11:1, as the disciples of

John had been taught. The use of the plural seems to indicate recurring times of prayer at

fixed hours.

HENRY, "We often speak of the primitive church, and appeal to it, and to the history of it; in these verses we have the history of the truly primitive church, of the first days of it, its state of infancy indeed, but, like that, the state of its greatest innocence.

I. They kept close to holy ordinances, and abounded in all instances of piety and devotion, for Christianity, admitted in the power of it, will dispose the soul to communion with God in all those ways wherein he has appointed us to meet him and promised to meet us.

1. They were diligent and constant inn their attendance upon the preaching of the word. They continued in the apostles' doctrine, and never disowned nor deserted it; or, as it may be read, they continued constant to the apostles' teaching or instruction; by baptism they were discipled to be taught, and they were willing to be taught. Note, Those who have given up their names to Christ must make conscience of hearing his word; for thereby we give honour to him, and build up ourselves in our most holy faith.

2. They kept up the communion of saints. They continued in fellowship (Act_2:42), and continued daily with one accord in the temple, Act_2:46. They not only had a mutual affection to each other, but a great deal of mutual conversation with each other; they were much together. When they withdrew from the untoward generation, they did not turn hermits, but were very intimate with one another, and took all occasions to meet; wherever you saw one disciple, you would see more, like birds of a feather. See how these Christians love one another. They were concerned for one another, sympathized with one another, and heartily espoused one another's interests. They had fellowship with one another in religious worship. They met in the temple: there was their rendezvous; for joint-fellowship with God is the best fellowship we can have with one another, 1Jo_1:3. Observe, (1.) They were daily in the temple, not only on the days of the sabbaths and solemn feasts, but on other days, every day. Worshipping God is to be our daily work, and, where there is opportunity, the oftener it is done publicly the better. God loves the gates of Zion, and so must we. (2.) They were with one accord; not only no discord nor strife, but a great deal of holy love among them; and they heartily joined in their public services. Though they met with the Jews in the courts of the temple, yet the Christians kept together by themselves, and were unanimous in their separate devotions.

3. They frequently joined in the ordinance of the Lord's supper. They continued in the breaking of bread, in celebrating that memorial of their Master's death, as those that were not ashamed to own their relation to, and their dependence upon, Christ and him crucified. They could not forget the death of Christ, yet they kept up this memorial of it,

and made it their constant practice, because it was an institution of Christ, to be transmitted to the succeeding ages of the church. They broke bread from house to house;

kat'�oikon - house by house; they did not think fit to celebrate the eucharist in the temple,

for that was peculiar to the Christian institutes, and therefore they administered that ordinance in private houses, choosing such houses of the converted Christians as were convenient, to which the neighbours resorted; and they went from one to another of these little synagogues or domestic chapels, houses that had churches in them, and there celebrated the eucharist with those that usually met there to worship God.

4. They continued in prayers. After the Spirit was poured out, as well as before, while they were waiting for him, they continued instant in prayer; for prayer will never be superseded till it comes to be swallowed up in everlasting praise. Breaking of breadcomes in between the work and prayer, for it has reference to both, and is a help to both. The Lord's supper is a sermon to the eye, and a confirmation of God's word to us; and it is an encouragement to our prayers, and a solemn expression of the ascent of our souls to God.

JAMISON, "lcontinued steadfastly in — “attended constantly upon.”

the apostles’ doctrine — “teaching”; giving themselves up to the instructions which, in their raw state, would be indispensable to the consolidation of the immense multitude suddenly admitted to visible discipleship.

fellowship — in its largest sense.

breaking of bread — not certainly in the Lord’s Supper alone, but rather in frugal repasts taken together, with which the Lord’s Supper was probably conjoined until abuses and persecution led to the discontinuance of the common meal.

prayers — probably, stated seasons of it.

WITNESS LEE

Acts 2:42 says, “And they were continuing steadfastly in the teaching and the fellowship

of the apostles, in the breaking of bread and the prayers.” Here we see that the first group

of believers produced through the apostles’ preaching and ministering of Christ on the

day of Pentecost continued steadfastly in four things: teaching, fellowship, breaking of

bread, and prayers. Teaching is the unveiling of God’s New Testament economy

concerning Christ and the church. Fellowship is the communion and communication

between the believers in their communion and communication with God the Father and

Christ the Son. Breaking of bread is the remembrance of the Lord in His accomplishment

of God’s full redemption. Prayer is cooperation with the Lord in heaven for the carrying

out of God’s New Testament economy on earth.

The first two matters, teaching and fellowship, conjoined by “and” to be one group, are of

the apostles, but breaking of bread and prayers are not of the apostles. This indicates that

besides the teaching and fellowship of the apostles, the believers in Christ should not

have any other teaching and fellowship. In God’s New Testament economy there is only

one kind of teaching revealed and recognized by God—the teaching of the apostles.

Likewise, there is only one kind of fellowship which is of God and acceptable to Him—

the fellowship of the apostles, which is with the Father and the Son Jesus Christ (1 John

1:3) and which is the unique fellowship of the unique church, the Body of Christ.

The last two matters, the breaking of bread and prayer, conjoined also by “and” to be

another group, are practices of the believers’ Christian life. These practices are not related

directly to God’s economy for the keeping of the oneness of the church, the Body of

Christ. Hence, they are not of the apostles, who brought in God’s New Testament

revelation and His fellowship among all the believers in Christ.

The Teaching of the Apostles

We have seen that the new believers continued steadfastly in the teaching of the apostles.

The only proper teaching in the New Testament is the apostles’ teaching. Any teaching

other than the apostles’ teaching is not scriptural or orthodox. The orthodox teaching is

that of the apostles recorded in the twenty-seven books of the New Testament from

Matthew through Revelation. Therefore, Paul said to Timothy, “Even as I urged you,

when I was going into Macedonia, to remain in Ephesus in order that you might charge

certain ones not to teach differently” (1 Tim. 1:3). To teach differently is to teach

differently from the teaching of the apostles. If we have different teachings, we shall be

divided into different groups. But if we have only the teaching of the apostles, we shall be

one.

CALVIN, "42. In their doctrine. Luke doth not only commend in them the

constancy of faith or of godliness, but he saith, also, that they did constantly

give themselves to those exercises which serve to the confirmation of faith; to

wit, that they studied continually to profit by hearing the apostles; that they

gave themselves much to prayer; that they did use fellowship and breaking of

bread very much.

As touching prayer and doctrine the sense is plain. Communication or

fellowship, and breaking of bread, may be taken diversely. Some think that

breaking of bread doth signify the Lord's Supper; other some do think that it

signifieth alms; other some that the faithful did banquet together 8 among

themselves. Some do think that koinwnia, doth signify the celebrating of the

Holy Supper; but I do rather agree to those others who think that the same is

meant by the breaking of bread. For koinwnia, unless it have somewhat added

unto it, is never found in this sense; therefore, I do rather refer it unto mutual

society and fellowship, unto alms, and unto other duties of brotherly

fellowship. And my reason why I would rather have breaking of bread to be

understood of the Lord's Supper in this place is this, because Luke doth reckon

up those things wherein the public estate of the Church is contained. Yea, he

expresseth in this place four marks whereby the true and natural face of the

Church may be judged. Do we then seek the true Church of Christ? The image

thereof is lively depainted and set forth 9 unto us in this place. And he

beginneth with doctrine which is, as it were, the soul of the Church. Neither

doth he name all manner of doctrine, but the doctrine of the apostles, that is,

that which the Son of God had delivered by their hands. Therefore,

wheresoever the pure voice of the gospel doth sound, where men continue in

the profession thereof, where they exercise themselves in hearing the same

ordinarily that they may profit, without all doubt there is the Church.

Hereby we may easily gather how frivolous the boasting of the Papists is,

whilst that they carelessly10 thunder out with fall mouth the name of the

Church; whereas, notwithstanding, they have most filthily corrupted the

doctrine of the apostles. For if it be duly examined, we shall find no sound

part at all; and in most points they do as much dissent from the same, and have

as little agreement therewith as light with darkness. The rule of worshipping

God, which ought to be fetched out of the pure Word of God alone, is only

made and patched together 11 amongst the Papists, of the superstitious

inventions of men. They have translated unto the merits of works the hope of

salvation, which ought to have rested in Christ alone. The invocation of God is

altogether polluted with innumerable profane dotings of men. Finally,

whatsoever is heard amongst them, it is either a deforming of the apostles'

doctrine, or else a clear overthrowing (and destroying) of the same. Therefore,

we may as easily refute the foolish arrogancy of the Papists, as they can cloak

their dealings with the title of the Church. For this shall be the state, 12

whether they have retained the purity of doctrine, from which they are as far as

hell is from heaven. But they are wise enough in that point, because they will

have no controversy moved about doctrine. But we, as I have said, may freely

contemn that vain visor, [mask,] forasmuch as the Spirit of God doth

pronounce that the Church is principally to be (esteemed and) discerned by

this mark, if the simplicity or purity of the doctrine delivered by the apostles

do flourish (and be of force) in the same.

In fellowship. This member and the last do flow from the first, as fruits or

effects. For doctrine is the bond of brotherly fellowship amongst us, and doth

also set open unto us the gate unto God, that we may call upon him. And the

Supper is added unto doctrine instead of a confirmation. Wherefore, Luke

doth not in vain reckon up these four things, when as he will describe unto us

the well-ordered state of the Church. And we must endeavor to keep and

observe this order, if we will be truly judged to be the Church before God and

the angels, and not only to make boast of the name 13 thereof amongst men. It

is certain that he speaketh of public prayer. And for this cause it is not

sufficient for men to make their prayers at home by themselves, unless they

meet altogether to pray; wherein consisteth also the profession of faith.

COKE, "Acts 2:42. And they continued steadfastly, &c.— This may intimate,

on the one hand, that many efforts were made to shake their resolution; and,

on the other, that, upon fuller inquiry, they found all things as the apostles had

represented. Breaking of bread, is a phrase which in the New Testament

signifies, both eating common meals and celebrating the Lord's supper. It

seems that the Lord's supper was here intended; because it is joined with

prayer. They constantly attended upon the teaching of the apostles, in strict

communion, and the exercise of the most affectionate friendship towards each

other; uniting in the duties of piety, in receiving the Lord's supper, as well as

offering up their united prayers and supplications unto God. Dr. Heylin reads

after the Vulgate, In the communion of breaking bread.

BARCLAY, "THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE CHURCH (Acts 2:42-47)

2:42-47 They persevered in listening to the apostles' teaching, in the

fellowship. in the breaking of bread and in prayers. Awe was in every soul;

and many signs and wonders were done by the apostles. All the believers were

together and they were in the habit of selling their goods and possessions and

of distributing them amongst all as each had need. Daily they continued with

one accord in the Temple, and breaking bread from house to house they

received their food with joy and in sincerity of heart; and they kept praising

God and everyone liked them. Daily the Lord added to them those who were

being saved.

In this passage we have a kind of lightning summary of the characteristics of

the early Church.

(i) It was a learning Church; it persisted in listening to the apostles as they

taught. One of the great perils of the Church is to look back instead of

forward. Because the riches of Christ are inexhaustible we should ever be

going forward. We should count It a wasted day when we do not learn

something new and when we have not penetrated more deeply into the

wisdom and the grace of God.

(ii) It was a Church of fellowship; it had what someone has called the great

quality of togetherness. Nelson explained one of his victories by saying, "I had

the happiness to command a band of brothers." The Church is a real Church

only when it is a band of brothers.

(iii) It was a praying Church--these early Christians knew that they could not

meet life in their own strength and that they did not need to. They always went

in to God before they went out to the world; they were able to meet the

problems of life because they had first met him.

(iv) It was a reverent Church--in Acts 2:43 the word which the King James

Version correctly translates fear has the idea of awe in it. It was said of a great

Greek that he moved through this world as if it were a temple. The Christian

lives in reverence because he knows that the whole earth is the temple of the

living God.

(v) It was a Church where things happened--signs and wonders were there

(Acts 2:43). If we expect great things from God and attempt great things for

God things happen. More things would happen if we believed that God and we

together could make them happen.

(vi) It was a sharing Church (Acts 2:44-45); these early Christians had an

intense feeling of responsibility for each other. It was said of William Morris

that he never saw a drunken man but he had a feeling of personal

responsibility for him. A real Christian cannot bear to have too much when

others have too little.

(vii) It was a worshipping Church (Acts 2:46); they never forgot to visit God's

house. We must remember that "God knows nothing of solitary religion."

Things can happen when we come together. God's Spirit moves upon his

worshipping people.

(viii) It was a happy Church (Acts 2:46); gladness was there. A gloomy

Christian is a contradiction in terms.

(ix) It was a Church whose people others could not help liking. There are two

Greek words for good. Agathos (Greek #18) simply describes a thing as good.

Kalos (Greek #2570) means that a thing is not only good but looks good; it

has a winsome attractiveness about it. Real Christianity is a lovely thing.

There are so many people who are good but with their goodness possess a

streak of unlovely hardness. Struthers of Greenock used to say that it would

help the Church more than anything else if Christians ever and again would do

a bonnie thing. In the early Church there was a winsomeness in God's people.

COFFMAN, "The apostles' teaching ... As this church did, so should every

church do, the apostles' teaching being the only doctrinal authority in the

Christian religion. This is limited, of course, to the teachings of the New

Testament.

And fellowship ... Campbell rendered this "contribution," stating that:

The contribution of money for the wants of the brotherhood, appears to be its

import in this passage as in Romans 15:16.[46]

In the breaking of bread ... Barnes thought that it was impossible to tell

whether this has reference to "taking ordinary food, feasts of charity, or the

Lord's Supper";[47] but Milligan, Boles and Campbell were certain that the

reference is to the Lord's Supper.

Campbell supported his conclusion thus:

The expression itself may designate an ordinary meal, as in Luke 24:35; but

that here would be an unmeaning notice. There can be no doubt that the

Eucharist at this period was preceded uniformly by a common repast, as when

the ordinance was instituted. Most scholars hold that this was the prevailing

usage in the first centuries after Christ; and we have traces of this practice in 1

Corinthians 11:20ff, and in all probability in Acts 2:46.[48]

The bread only being mentioned in this passage is held by the Roman Catholic

Church to support their custom of distributing only the bread to their

congregations, calling it "communion under one kind." However, as the

scholarly Hackett said: (this mention of the bread alone) "is obviously a case

in which the leading act of a transaction gives name to the transaction

itself."[49] The figure of speech thus used is synecdoche, and the Protestant

world have little complaint against Catholics for missing the synecdoche here

in view of the fact that they themselves have missed it so spectacularly in

reading salvation by faith as salvation by "faith alone." The errors are one and

the same.

And the prayers ... Whereas in Judaism, prayers were offered at stated times of

the day, the Christians offered prayers at any and all times, and in any and all

places.

[46] Alexander Campbell, op. cit., p. 18.

[47] Albert Barnes, op. cit., p. 64.

[48] Alexander Campbell, op. cit., p. 18.

[49] As quoted by Campbell, ibid.

GREAT TEXTS OF THE BIBLE, "And they continued steadfastly in the

apostles teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the prayers.

Acts ii. 42.

1. IN these words are set forth the characteristic marks of the

new Christian life to which the converts of Pentecost were

pledged by their Baptism. The Apostles stand out as the core of

the Church. About them the new disciples are gathered; from

them the doctrine and discipline of the infant society proceed ;

they constitute a visible centre of unity.

2. The Church was not only holy, catholic, and apostolic, but

it was also one. The world recognized that unity, and felt its

power. A bishop of the Church in Ephesus was a bishop of the

Church in Lyons, and a member of the Church in Alexandria was

a member of the Church in Aries. The Church newly planted in

Armenia was immediately brought into relation with the Church

wherever it was already existing. There was a principle as real

in the Church which was producing this unity, as the principle of

gravity in the solar system which is binding it into unity and

harmony. It is not difficult to discover that principle. If we

turn to the inspired history of the Church, we shall find that

principle of unity clearly stated. " They continued steadfastly in

the Apostles teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread

and the prayers." Here are four things the teaching, the fellow

ship, the sacrament, and the worship.

^[ We greet one another cordially as brethren, and we meet in

committees and on platforms and in various other ways. Some

of us have become members of the Evangelical Alliance, and we

have various ways of expressing the unity that remains to us

across the divided lines of our Churches. Ah, but there was a

time, gone by long, long ago, when all those who in any place

confessed a common Lord exercised their unity around the same

communion table, and in the courts which Christ had set up, and

not in such committees and alliances as we have been compelled

to plan because we had fallen from the others. There was a time

when it entered into no Christian mind that, in any place, those

who confessed our common Lord were to sit down contented with

a unity that was not expressed and could not be in Christ s

ordinances and Christ s institutions. There was a time when, if

anything fell out to break it, men were grieved and humbled

and Apostles wrote moving letters to the Churches concerned;

and after the Apostles were gone, the Church of Rome sent her

letter to the Church of Corinth to entreat them to be visibly one

in the institutions and ordinances which Christ gave them to

express and to exercise their unity, There was such a time, and

if since post-apostolic times the Church has gained something

and I think it has gained much yet surely it has lost something

too. There was something they had in the early Church, when

they met around the same communion table and in the same

institutions just as naturally as they went to one martyr-death

together there was something then which we have not now.

Therefore we are bound to aim at it we are bound to seek it as

we can. 1

Tf There are two notions of unity in men s minds. One of them

is really the notion of uniformity. It has no place for diversity.

It wants almost complete identity between the things which it

compares. The other rejoices in diversity, and finds its unifying

principle in the common motive or purpose out of which an

infinite diversity of many actions may proceed. How vain the

search for any unity but this ! It is the unity of nature. The

budding, bursting spring is full of it; a thousand trees all

different from one another are all one in the oneness of the great

life-power which throbs and pulsates in them all. And souls the

most unlike, most widely separated from each other, are one in

Christ. Christ is their principle of unity. The thinker ponder

ing deep problems, the workman struggling with the obstinacy of

material, the worshipper lost in his adoration, the men of all

centuries, the men of all lands, they are all one, if all their

lives are utterances of the same Christ. It is beautiful, the way

in which each new Christian strikes into this unity and becomes

a part of it immediately. A man has been living by himself,

seeming to find all his sources of activity in his own life. By and

by the change comes and he is Christ s. The pulse of universal

Christian life begins to beat through him. Now he is one with

all men who, anywhere, are doing anything ly Christ for Christ

How he lays hold of and comprehends the ages ! 2

1 R. Rainy, in The Life of Principal liainy, i. 168.

8 Phillips Brooks.

ACTS ii. 42 49

The text names four elements as expressive of the variety in

unity of primitive Christian life. They continued steadfastly

I. In the Apostles Teaching.

II. In the Fellowship.

III. In the Breaking of Bread.

IV. In the Prayers.

U The great Christian thinker and preacher of Protestant

Lausanne, as he compared the splendour and enthusiasm of the

Roman Benediction with the shorn and meagre rite of Genevan

Calvinism, exclaimed in melancholy tones, " Rome has worship

without the word, we have the word without worship." But the

earliest Church, as delineated by its great historian, combines all

these elements, and appeals to man through all his faculties. It

appeals to his intellect by its doctrine. It awakens his social

feelings whether towards contemporary Christians, or spirits

waiting in the world unseen, or great predecessors in the faith;

nay, something higher still " And truly our fellowship is with

the Father, and with his son Jesus Christ." It deals with the

soul in its most mysterious depths by the consciousness of a

Presence at once awful arid blessed. It has treasures, and it

opens for every one of its children a language of sobs and rapture,

of penitence and joy a wealth of words that set themselves to

some far-off music, which linger along fretted roofs, yet nestle in

our hearts, and in our last hours sing us into the sleep of death

as if with the lullaby of God. Thus, as in the description of

her first structure, the Church is doctrinal, social, sacramental,

liturgical. She is a school of teaching, a centre of social unity, a

shrine of sacraments, a home of worship. The child of heaven,

destined to an inheritance so splendid, was strong and radiant in

her cradle. All the possibilities of her history and her being lay

folded in her heart from the very first. 1

THE TEACHING OF THE APOSTLES.

1. " The teaching of the Apostles " was the necessary instru

mentality for bringing the new converts to full discipleship.

Their rudimentary faith needed a careful and continuous instruc

tion, an instruction which replaced that which the scribes were in

1 W. Alexander.

ACTS & ROM. 4

the habit of giving, so that in the most literal sense the Apostles

might now be called scribes become disciples to the kingdom,

bringing out of their treasure things new and old, the new tale of

the ministry and glory of Jesus, the old promises and signs by

which Law and Prophets had pointed onward to Him and His

kingdom.

2. But, further, the teaching of the Apostles had a far wider

range when their disciples were not converted Jews, but converted

heathen. Then they had to create a new morality, to lay firmly

that foundation which the Jews had received from their long

tradition of legal righteousness, to adapt the principles to the

novel conditions of Gentile life.

3. Can we tell what the teaching of the Apostles chiefly

consisted of ?

(1) Even a superficial study of St. Paul s Epistles enables us

to understand the magnitude of the task which rested on the

Apostles as religious teachers, Take, for sufficient example, the

First Epistle to the Corinthians. We find clearly indicated there

a teaching extraordinary in depth, range, and variety. St. Paul

brings to the Corinthians the knowledge of Christ s life and death,

and the substance of His revelation. He interprets the Old

Testament in the light of Christian belief ; he develops a detailed

doctrine of the person and work of our Saviour. Consider how

large a background of theological knowledge, built up in the

Corinthians by systematic teaching, is implied in such a verse as

this : " But of him (i.e. God) are ye in Christ Jesus, who was made

unto us wisdom from God, and righteousness, and sanctification,

and redemption." Is it not suggestive that we should find the

great keywords of the Pauline theology in the least theological of

his Epistles ? In this same Epistle to the Corinthians we find a

very definite and rich teaching about the Holy Spirit, an eschato-

logical doctrine of great range and richness, the most careful

moral teaching, and the delivery of practical rules, customs of the

Christian society, which the Apostle does not hesitate to impose

on the Corinthians. No doubt St. Paul stood out from the

apostolic company as a great constructive theologian, and we

cannot suppose that the other Apostles, with the exception of

St. John, were able to bring to their converts so rich and varied

ACTS ii. 42 51

science; but then we must remember that

St. Paul, to use his own phrase, " laboured more abundantly than

they all," and that, even in the apostolic age, his Epistles were

widely disseminated. In the New Testament, then, alone we

have abundant evidence of fche active vitality of the teaching of

the Apostles.

(2) But we can also bring evidence outside the New Testament.

Two documents have come down to our own time with the claim

to embody " the teaching of the Apostles," and though neither can

vindicate an apostolic origin, yet both do certainly perpetuate

aspects of the work of the Apostles as the teachers of the Christian

society. The oldest of these documents is a curious moral treatise

dating probably from the first half of the second century, though

it may be much older, and actually entitled The Teaching of the

Twelve Apostles. It illustrates the work which, especially among

the Gentile converts, fell on the Apostles as creators of a Christian

morality, which should replace the depraved and perverted tradi

tions of heathen life. The other document, later in actual com

position, is not less apostolic in character. It is known through

out the world as " the Apostles Creed." Of course we must be

watchful against the anachronism which would credit the Apostles

with precise dogmatic forms, such as were afterwards received in

the Church on the authority of their names. But though the

so-called Apostles Creed did not exist in apostolic times, we must

admit that the substance of its teaching was primitive. The

Ignatian Epistles, which are the connecting link between the

Pastoral Epistles and the Apologists of the second century, prove

that instruction was given in Antioch on all the points character

istic of the teaching of the developed creed.

(3) But by the " teaching of the Apostles," in which the first

Christians continued, we are not to understand a detailed moral

code, or an elaborated creed, but rather a progressive instruction,

which included both morals and doctrine, which addressed itself

with rare versatility to the novel and ever-varying requirements

of a quickly expanding society ; and always laid the emphasis on

the things which were fundamental.

TJ I like the advice which Mr. Birrell gave at Whitefield s

Institute: "Do not worry too much over the many things you

are in doubt about ; hang on with all your weight to the things.

52 APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY

however few, about which you are certain, and on the top of these

certainties pile up work, work, work ! " May I take a little liberty

with one of the great sayings of Shakespeare, a liberty which does

no fundamental violence to the text, " The truths thou hast, and

their adoption tried, grapple them to thy heart with hoops of

steel" l

4. Thus from the beginning, the Church has possessed and

depended upon a (< teaching ministry " ; and, though in later times

the reason of that dependence may seem less evident, and though,

for obvious reasons, the functions of the ministry have taken a

less exalted character, yet, when we consider that every genera

tion comes fresh to its problems, and that the unalterable prin

ciples of the Gospel have to find application to circumstances

which are always novel, we shall be little disposed to question the

title which the teaching ministry can still advance to the regard

and consideration of believers. It is still the case of loyal and

prudent Christians that "they continue steadfastly in the

apostles teaching," when they impose on themselves as a standing

obligation of a well-ordered Christian life, the regular and devout

attendance on the work of the Christian preacher. 8

II. THE FELLOWSHIP.

The word translated "fellowship" (xo/vwv/a) comes from a root

which means literally sharing in common. The practical nature of

the fellowship is very clearly seen by comparing the ways in

which the same word is translated in other places in the New

Testament. As a rule Scripture is its own best interpreter. In

Rom. xv. 26 the same word here translated "fellowship" is

rendered " contribution " " It hath pleased them of Macedonia

and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor saints

which are at Jerusalem." In 2 Cor. ix. 13 it is " distribution "

"Your liberal distribution unto them, and unto all men." In

Heb. xiii. 16 it is "communicate" "To do good and to

communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well

pleased." In 1 Cor. x. 16 it is "communion" "The cup of

1 J. H. Jowett, in Examiner, 9tli February 1905. a H. H. Henson.

ACTS a. 42 53

blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of

Christ." While in Phil. i. 5 ; ii. 1 ; iii. 10 it is plainly used in the

sense of " participation." From all these Scriptures, the meaning

of the word is clearly defined. It was the word used for the

collection of money for the poor saints, and for the share which

believers took in transmitting these alms to those in need.

Fellowship in this sense is a most exalted and noble thing, and

a privilege not to be lightly esteemed. It showed the oneness of

the whole body of the faithful in state, in privilege, and in

obligation. Sharing thus in common there was created a spirit

of mutual recognition, a manifestation of common interests, and

a closer partnership with each other in the blessings and privileges

of the Gospel leading them to share joyfully their goods with

others. Taking the word in the meaning thus given, we cannot

fail to see that the contribution or collection became a regular,

an abiding institution in the Church of Christ.

1. There are thus three aspects in which to regard the

Fellowship

(1) It is evident that they encouraged each other in the things

of God and continued to do so. They were as one loving family,

and loving each other they took every means in their power to

keep the glow of love aflame. " As iron sharpeneth iron, so a

man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend." What better

means of encouraging the members of the Church can there be

than by conversing freely together of the things of God ? As the

fellowship meant participation, communion ; so in their intercourse

with each other there was a constant interchange of thought in

matters of spiritual experience.

^ I fear this aspect of fellowship has been sadly lost in these

days. How seldom we talk about God ! We talk about anything

everything else about leaders, teachers, sermons, books; but

how seldom do we find the conversation, even among a party of

Christians, centring round God; and yet one of the sweetest of

the " precious and exceeding great promises " is given to those who

practise the habit of speaking about God, and the things of God.

In the same chapter in which we read of bringing " all the tithes

into the storehouse," and so paying attention to the contribution,

the collection, and proving the Lord of Hosts herewith, we also

read these precious words : " Then they that feared the Lord spake

one with another ; and the Lord hearkened, and heard, and a book

of remembrance was written before Him, for them that feared the

Lord, and that thought upon His name. And they shall be mine,

saith the Lord of Hosts, in the day that I do make, even a peculiar

treasure, and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son

that serveth him. Then shall ye return, and discern between the

righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him

that serveth him not" (Mai. iii. 16-18). 1

(2) They had a mutual regard for each other s welfare, and

continued to show it. Communion, participation, fellowship

cannot exist where one member is indifferent in the smallest

degree to anything that affects the interest of another. The

member who takes no interest in the welfare of his fellow-members

is guilty of violating the partnership in which all believers are

embraced. If I am one with him, what touches him, touches me ;

his sorrows, dangers, duties, joys, prosperity, or adversity are mine,

In true fellowship there can be no isolation, no independence:

all are sharers in common. If we are members of the body of

Christ, then, in a very real sense, " there should be no schism in

the body ; but the members should have the same care one for

another. And whether one member suffereth, all the members

suffer with it; or one member is honoured, all the members

rejoice with it " (1 Cor. xii. 25, 26).

(3) There was also regular, systematic provision made for

practical help as it was required. Continuing in the Apostles

fellowship, it is clear that the members of the Church gave freely

and willingly " as the Lord had prospered them " for the relief of

poor saints, and that a regular distribution of the contributions

so given was made to those in need. Later on, " when the number

of the disciples was multiplied," it was found absolutely necessary

to appoint deacons to take this matter in charge, that they, over

looking the temporal affairs, might leave the Apostles free to

attend to the purely spiritual matters. That these contributions

became a regular institution, a weekly ordinance, in the Churches

of Christ, is clear from Paul s words to the " Church of God

at Corinth." Following immediately upon the greatest, the

profoundest treatise ever written upon the fundamental doctrine

of the " resurrection," the Apostle, without pause or break, says

" Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given

1 J. D. Gilmore.

ACTS ii. 42 55

order to the Churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first

day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God

hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come "

(1 Cor. ivi. 1, 2).

2. St. Luke, according to the translation adopted in our

versions, links together "teaching and fellowship"; but he

certainly does not mean that the early Christians were taught to

combine as they did. They entered into an intelligent unity

sustained by intelligent communication; but their intercourse

was the spontaneous outflow of the new life which, as believers

in Christ, they had received. It was a Divine instinct, a soul of

brotherhood, a disposition which breathed the atmosphere of " the

household of faith." Good nature could find no sphere large

enough for its expression. It was the observance of the second

commandment in the most Christlike form the world had ever

seen. It was the attainment of the mind of Christ in a measure

which overflowed all human relationships. From the first we get

an impression of wonderful unity and brotherliness as marking

the Messianic community. With what moving power would the

Master s words be rehearsed by men in whose imaginations the

Speaker s looks and tones, as He had spoken them, still lived and

gave each saying life ! In the atmosphere of soul thus created

self-contained isolation was simply impossible to believers. The

impulse to " fellowship " of the most intimate and complete

character mastered every other feeling. And in that fellowship

they found their strength and stability.

TJ One of the most remarkable methods of preventing the en

croachments of the sea upon the land, and fixing the loose sand

along the shore, is by means of plants specially adapted for the

purpose. These plants belong mostly to the grass tribe, though

some are furnished with the flowers and foliage of higher orders.

But they all possess in common the peculiarity of creeping under

ground stems, which at short intervals send up fresh shoots above

the surface, and root themselves in the soil. These creeping

underground stems enable them to subsist in the barren sand,

and endure long periods of drought and sterility; while the

rooting of the stems at frequent intervals, producing new indi

viduals at every joint, all linked together, enables them to offer

an effectual resistance to the storm. If undisturbed, these

wonderfully constructed plants would speedily cover the largest

tract of sea-shore spontaneously, prevent the loose masses oi

sand thrown up by the waves from drifting, and render the soil

sufficiently stable to support higher vegetation. Man has taken

advantage of the peculiar habit of these seaside plants, and

planted them along the banks which he erects ag a barrier against

the sea, and which without these would be blown away by the

first hurricane. The enormous dykes which the people have con

structed in Holland, to keep out the inundations of the German

Ocean, owe their stability to these plants, which are carefully

protected by the Government ; and along the low eastern side of

England, where the sea is seeking continually to encroach upon

the shore, and is with great difficulty kept back, a large quantity

of dry land has in this way been reclaimed from the waters. It

is the social habit of these seaside plants that gives them their

wonderful tenacity of life, and admirably adapts them for the

conditions in which they grow. Each separate plant is weak

and fragile; and if left to itself it would speedily perish in its

sterile situation, and would be uprooted and swept away by the

fury of the tide. But when linked and interlaced in the closest

fashion, by a vital bond, with the whole mass of similar plants

growing around, it can hold its own against the strongest forces

of the ocean. It is as nearly indestructible from natural causes

as anything can be ; and it is one of the most striking proofs of

the power of feeble things that are endowed with life, to resist,

when in combination, the mightiest forces of mechanical nature. 1

IIL THE BREAKING OF BREAD.

We pass on now to the "breaking of bread. There can be no

question that here we have " the Holy Communion in its primitive

form as an Agape or supper of communion," 2 or rather as a

commemoration associated with an Agape or supper of communion.

For it is manifest that, in considering the language of St. Luke,

we cannot separate it from <Jiat of his great master, St. Paul.

We are compelled to seek in the First Epistle to the Corinthians

the meaning of this simple expression, characteristic of the Acts.

" the breaking of bread." Now, in the tenth and eleventh chapter?

of that Epistle, St. Paul evidently describes the Agape as preceding

the Eucharist. The latter he clearly asserts to be an institution

1 Hugh MacmiUau. f F. J. A. Hort

ACTS ii. 42 57

of Christ, and to bear a character of the utmost gravity. He

rehearses the history of that institution, and bases on it some

stern and awful censures of the profaneness which marked the

Corinthian practice. The " breaking of the bread " was something

more than the formal act by which a social festivity was inaugur

ated. It was more than an eloquent symbol more than a solemn

act of commemoration. It was the current phrase for a religious

rite to which the Apostle evidently attributed the greatest

importance. The very phrase had historic reference ; it was an

appeal to the devout recollection of Christians it recalled and

set before them the Master Himself in " the night in which he

was betrayed." The bread which then He blessed and brake

was identified with the bread there placed on the table of the

Eucharist, and the cup was the same. So the Apostle links

together the profanities of the Corinthian Eucharist and that

last supper in the room at Jerusalem, where Christ Himself had

instituted the sacrament. "For as often as ye eat this bread

and drink the cup ye proclaim the Lord s death till he come.

Wherefore whosoever shall eat the bread or drink the cup of

the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and the blood

of the Lord. But let a man prove himself, and so let him eat

of the bread, and drink of the cup. For he that eateth and

drinketh, eateth and drinketh judgment unto himself, if he discern

not the body."

f How much lies behind that simple phrase " the breaking

of bread ! " However close the association of the Eucharist with

the Agape was in the apostolic age, it never went so far as to

submerge the distinctive character of the Sacrament. St. Paul s

Epistle to the Corinthians, not to say, also, the Gospel of St.

John, which certainly reflects the eucharistic doctrine of the

later apostolic age, absolutely prohibits the popular notion that

the unique and awful significance of the Holy Communion belongs

to the later period of the Church. 1

^| It is not uninteresting to compare with St. Paul s language

the eucharistic prayer preserved in The Teaching of the Twelve.

Apostles. " As this broken bread was scattered upon the

mountains and gathered together became one, so let Thy Church

be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Thy

kingdom, for Thine is the glory and the power through Jesus

Christ for ever " (Didache, i. 4).

1 H. H. Henson.

1. Now we have seen that St Paul was very careful to dwell

on the deep significance of the Holy Communion, and circum

stances proved at this time how necessary this was. But the great

precaution which was taken to guard the sacred observance of

the Holy Communion does not preclude the joyful association which

essentially attached to the " breaking of bread." The " Eucharist,"

the name given to that service, in itself indicates the manner in

which the primitive Christians regarded it. "And this food is

called among us EucKaristia, of which no one is allowed to partake

but the man who believes that the things which we teach are

true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the

remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as

Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common

drink do we receive these ; but in like manner as Jesus Christ

our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both

flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught

that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and

from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished,

is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." 1

^[ In " The Breaking of Bread " the Apostolic Christians possessed

one abiding and unchanging secret in which their whole spiritual

being stood rooted, in possession of which they could face all that

was before them, whatever the long and cruel years might bring.

Here that secret was embodied. The innermost soul of this

integral life was an act of organic worship, " the breaking of bread."

Christ has passed out of sight, they see Him no more, and they

now therefore have sorrow. Sorrow there must be. Nevermore

would they have His visible presence in their midst, His voice in

their ears, His breath on their brows. Nevermore would they

move and walk and talk together, and sit at the same table, and

eat in the same room. Nevermore the intimate and enthralling

joy of that brief earthly companionship. " And ye now, therefore,

have sorrow, but I will not leave you comfortless ; I will come

unto you, and your joy shall be full, and that joy no man can ever

take from you." So He had promised, and the pledge of that

promise being fulfilled came out of the heart of those days now

gone, when they had eaten and drunk with Him as His friends

that last meal in which the sweet earthly companionship had

crowned its blessed intimacy, that last meal in which the old

days of friendship had come to a close, and had said their last

1 Justin Martyr, Apol. i. 64.

ACTS IL 42 59

farewell so that it seemed to them that a meal of wasted hope

and broken hearts was indeed never to pass away. Protected

from the fickleness and frailties of change, it was itself to become

the undying form of that new companionship with the risen

Master, by which and in which, through the working of the

Spirit, He, with the Father to whom He had gone, would for ever

come again to them and sit down with them, and eat and drink

with them, and make His ever-living abode with them, drinking

with them the new blood of the grape, as it is drunk in the

kingdom of God.

2. Observe the witness which the Sacrament bears to the

truths of Christian belief.

(1) And first of all the wonder that such a thing as this, a

little bread and wine given as a keepsake by a Jewish man about

to die the next day, should have become what the Christian

Sacrament has been in the world for two thousand years, should

have been found such as it has certainly been found by men a

treasure of truth to great thinkers ; of sweet grace to saints and

heroes ; of simple blessing to homely and plain people ; of deep

mystery to philosophers and poets ; that it should have gone with

equal power through times so extraordinarily different, and among

men of so many races and lands; nay, should have borne this

witness of itself to men, who were engaged sometimes in keenest

unhappy controversy about some part of its nature and

meaning.

(2) Then what are we to say of Him who, on the edge of death,

calmly appointed this thing ? Nothing gives stronger witness to

the Divine Power, hidden in the Death of Christ, than this, that

these words and acts of a dying man became at once the best

offering to God, all other sacrifice being put away. And the

observance of it, not as a sad memorial of a departed saint, or

prophet, or teacher, but as the glad remembrance of a living Lord,

is the best of witnesses to the truth of the Resurrection. It was

a great Protestant theologian in Germany who spoke of it as the

" climax of the early Christian worship," and found " in its con

tinuing celebration the first proof of the constant belief of

Christians in the Divine nature of Christ." Could any mere

memorial of the dead have kept its place, and shown the power

of the Eucharist all down the centuries till now ?

Sometimes I hear the happy birds

That sang to Christ beyond the sea,

And softly His consoling words

Blend with their joyous minstrelsy.

Sometimes in royal vesture glow

The lilies that He called so fair,

Which never toil nor spin, yet show

The loving Father s tender care.

And then along the fragrant hills

A radiant presence seems to move,

And earth grows fairer, as it fills

The very air I breathe with love.

And now I see one Perfect Face,

And, hastening to my church s door.

Find Him within the holy place

Who, all my way, went on before, 1

IY. THE PRAYERS.

Finally, there is mention made of " the prayers." These, in

Dr. Hort s opinion, are probably Christian prayers at stated hours,

answering to Jewish prayers. If we knew more of the synagogue

services in Palestine as they were before the fall of Jerusalem,

we should perhaps find that these Christian prayers replaced

synagogue prayers (which, it must be remembered, are not

recognized in the law), as the Apostles teaching may be supposed

to have replaced that of the scribes. 2 We know that the Chris

tians in Jerusalem, so long as the temple existed, were accustomed

to attend its regular services, and it may well be the case that

they also developed a synagogue service of their own. St. James,

who presided over that Church, speaks of the Christian "synagogue."

It is certain that the synagogue provided the model after which

the liturgical services of the Church were originally fashioned

although from the first there were new elements, such as the

reading of the apostolic epistles, the exercise of spiritual gifts,

1 Horatio Nelson Powers. * Judaistie Ohristianity, 44.

ACTS n. 42 6 1

the use of the Lord s Prayer, and, possibly also, Christian hymns,

which gave a distinctive aspect to the worship of the Christian

synagogue.

Now let us notice two points in connexion with " the prayers "

of which we may well make practical application the place of

prayer in public worship, and the value of united prayer.

1. The Place of Prayer in Public Worship. Those who were

converted by St. Peter s address remained steadfast in prayer : by

which it is intended, not merely that they prayed privately by

themselves, for this probably they did before, but that they were

regular in attending the prayers of the Christian Church. The

Church, though in its infancy, had yet its public services, and

those who joined the Apostles fellowship joined them in their

united worship before the throne of God s grace. And this, it

should be observed, is the proper fruit of a sermon ; the sermon is

rightly appreciated, is manifestly blessed by the Holy Spirit, when

it leads persons to value and join heartily in the Church s prayers :

the prayers are not the mere introduction to preaching, but

preaching is intended to make people pray. This is the right

order of things, and this is what we find in the history of the

great Pentecostal Day. Whether or not this is so in these days

is a question to be determined by experience ; but this is certain,

if any preaching is followed after merely for its own sake, and if

the effect is not found to be greater earnestness and devotion in

the prayers, then it may be the fault of the preacher, or it may

be the fault of the people, but there is a fault somewhere, the

preacher has missed his aim, his arrows have flown wide of the

mark. The same Holy Spirit who came down upon the Church

upon the Day of Pentecost, and made the preaching of St. Peter

effectual to the conversion of three thousand souls, is with the

Church still ; and if it is found that in these days many people

listen to sermons and yet do not show forth in their lives such

clear, practical, almost unmistakable marks of the preaching

having touched their hearts, then there is a fault somewhere. It

cannot be with God s Holy Spirit ; therefore it must needs lie

between minister and people.

It is said about us Free Churchmen that we think a great

deal too much of preaching and a great deal too little of the

prayers of the congregation. That is a stock criticism. I am

bound to say that there is a grain of truth in it, and that there is

not, with too many of our congregations, as lofty a conception of

the power and blessedness of the united prayers of the congrega

tion as there ought to be, or else you would not hear about

"introductory services." Introductory to what? Do we speak

to God merely by way of preface to one of us talking to his

brethren ? Is that the proper order ? " They continued steadfastly

in the Apostles teaching" no doubt; but also "steadfastly in

prayer." 1

2. The Value of United Prayer. Can there be any one who

has never felt how the sympathy of others multiplies joy and

mitigates sorrow ? and in the domain of religion this is doubly

and trebly true. Prayer and meditation upon God come so

reluctantly from my heart when I pray and meditate alone, but

seem as if they were winged when hundreds begin to pray and

sing along with me, and seal the same confession with one

general Amea

*([ I often think of the negro woman who was once asked by

the governor of Surinam why she and her fellows always prayed

together. Could they not do it each one for himself? He

happened to be standing at the time before a coal-fire, and the

woman answered: "Dear sir, separate these coals from each

other, and the fire will go out ; but see how brisk the flame when

they burn together." From the mere circumstance that when in

fellowship with others our hearts grow warm, we can easily

understand what the Saviour means when He says, " Where two

or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the

midst of them." And again, " If two of you shall agree on earth

as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them

of my Father which is in heaven." This, says a devout man, is as

when the whole children of a family take heart, and with one

accord beseech the father for a boon. It is then far harder for

him to refuse. 2

^[ Prayer is much weaker than its real self if many do not

join in it. 8

grant me, Lord, that in my fight

With foes unseen by day and night,

Whether I watch, or praise, or pray,

Victor or vanquished, still I may

Know myself one of an unnumbered host,

Nor feel, like severed branch, my labour lost.

4 A. Maclaren. * A Tholuck. St. Basil, Ep. 68.

ACTS ii. 42 63

When singly I the foe provoke,

I fall beneath some sudden stroke

Aimed at my solitary head;

But if in compact rank arrayed,

I fight with millions at my side, no foe,

Whoe er he be, has power to lay me low.

V. THEY CONTINUED STEADFASTLY.

1. Sudden conversions are not always lasting. Many causes

besides enlightened conviction may bring about a change of view ;

and not the least powerful of those other causes is moral contagion.

When a mass of men is moved deeply by impassioned eloquence,

it is difficult even for a man of calm self-possession to retain the

mastery of his emotions, and keep himself free from the influence

of that strong sympathetic feeling which, like an electric current,

runs through a crowd, and moves many souls, as the mighty

rushing wind heaves and tosses the waves of the deep. And

what is too often the sequel ? Why, the utter absence of stead

fastness in the doctrine of Christ. When the cause ceases, the

effect disappears. The sympathy dies out for want of fresh

stimulus. Then all is dead. Like a house without a foundation,

the assumed Christian profession may be swept away into utter

and irretrievable ruin by the first tempest that beats upon it. It

is like a human body whose spinal column has been materially

damaged ; artificial props and stays are necessary to shore it up

and prevent its collapse. One test then of sincere adhesion to

Christ is steadfast adherence to His doctrine or His teaching a

walk and conversation in accordance with His mind and His

precepts.

If I have sometimes heard of converts and workers at exciting

revivals, who afterwards became limp and languid. When the

missioner had departed, they felt like a wedding party when the

bride and bridegroom have gone. When the huge choir was

disbanded, the little chapel choir appeared so tame and common

place, and worship indeed had come to its dregs ! But here in

the apostolic times the exciting day was over, the wonder had

somewhat passed, but there was no perilous relapse. They

continued in the same road, stepping out determinedly, continuing

steadfast in the way of life. 1

2. Steadfastness implies in particular two points. It implies

definitentss and it implies diligence. It suggests either a definite

standpoint and diligence to maintain it, or a definite aim and

diligence to achieve it. Examples are plentiful to illustrate oar

meaning. The sentinel at Pompeii who remained firm at his post

until the stream of lava engulfed him in its fiery embrace he

was steadfast. The soldiers on the ship Birkenhead who stood

in their serried ranks on deck while the women and children got

safely off in the boats, and who went down in unbroken order into

their vast and wandering grave they were steadfast. They had

a definite standpoint, and they were diligent to maintain it. Nor

are instances wanting of definiteness of aim and diligence to

achieve it.

T Perhaps one of the most striking is presented to us in the;

history of the famous Warren Hastings. Hastings, when but a

boy, conceived a passionate longing to regain for his family the

ancient home of his forefathers, Daylesford, which, owing to

monetary losses, had passed into the hands of strangers. He

was but a poor lad when first the desire seized his mind ;

but all through his long and chequered career this desire never

left him, until towards the end of his life he accomplished his

object, and purchased the ancestral home, where he ultimatel}

died. 8

* J. H, Jowett a 0, Lowry,

CONSTABLE, "These new converts along with the disciples gave ("devoted,"

Gr. proskartereo, cf. Acts 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. [Note: See 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.]

"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." [Note: Barrett, 1:163.]

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

extended to 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. Acts 2:46; Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 10:16; 1

Corinthians 11:23-25; Judges 1:12). [Note: Kent, pp. 34-35; Blaiklock, p. 61.]

Elsewhere the phrase describes both an ordinary meal (Luke 24:30; Luke

24:35; Acts 20:11; Acts 27:35) and the Lord's Supper (Luke 22:19; 1

Corinthians 10:16; 1 Corinthians 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. [Note: Neil, p. 81.]

In "the prayers" the believers must have praised and thanked God as well as

petitioning and interceding for His glory (cf. Matthew 6:9-13). The article

with prayer probably implies formal times of prayer (cf. Acts 1:14), though

they undoubtedly prayed together at other times too. [Note: See 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.]

"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." [Note: Longenecker, 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.]

"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." [Note: Ironside,

Lectures on . . ., p. 77.]

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 (Acts 1:1).

43Everyone was filled with awe, and many

wonders and miraculous signs were done by the

apostles.

BARNES, "And fear came - That is, there was great reverence or awe. The multitude had just before derided them Act_2:13; but so striking and manifest was the power of God on this occasion, that it silenced all clamors, and produced a general veneration and awe. The effect of a great work of God’s grace is commonly to produce an unusual seriousness and solemnity in a community, even among those who are not converted. It restrains, subdues, and silences opposition.

Every soul - Every person or individual; that is, upon the people generally; not only on those who became Christians, but upon the multitudes who witnessed these things. All things were suited to produce this fear: the recent crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth; the wonders that attended that event; the events of the day of Pentecost; and the miracles performed by the apostles, were all suited to diffuse solemnity, thought, anxiety through the community.

Many wonders and signs - See the notes on Act_2:22. This was promised by the Saviour, Mar_16:17. Some of the miracles which they performed are specified in the following chapters.

CLARKE, "And fear came upon every soul - Different MSS. and versions read this clause thus, And Great fear and Trembling came upon every soul in Jerusalem. For several weeks past they had a series of the most astonishing miracles wrought before their eyes; they were puzzled and confounded at the manner in which the apostles preached, who charged them home with the deliberate murder of Jesus Christ, and who attested, in the most positive manner, that he was risen from the dead, and that God had sent down that mighty effusion of the Spirit which they now witnessed as a proof of his resurrection and ascension, and that this very person whom they had crucified was appointed by God to be the Judge of quick and dead. They were in consequences stung with remorse, and were apprehensive of the judgments of God; and the wonders and signs continually wrought by the apostles were at once proofs of the celestial origin of their doctrine and mission, and of their own baseness, perfidy, and wickedness.

GILL Verse 43. And fear came upon every soul,.... Upon every inhabitant of Jerusalem,

at least upon a great many of them; and upon all, or the greater part of them that saw, and

heard these things; that heard the apostles speak with divers tongues, and Peter preach in

the awful manner he did, and saw so many thousands at once embrace the Gospel of

Christ, and profess his name, when it now, by reason of his crucifixion but a few weeks

ago, lay under the greatest reproach and scandal; and such a number baptized in water;

and also because of the miracles done by the apostles, after mentioned. The Ethiopic

version is very odd, "and all animals feared the apostles": as if the very brute creatures

stood in awe of them:

and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles: the Vulgate Latin, and Syriac

versions add, "in Jerusalem"; such as casting out devils, healing the sick, causing the lame

to walk, &c. which were promised by Christ should be done by them; and which were

necessary for the confirmation of the Gospel, and of the apostles' mission to preach it.

The Vulgate Latin version adds another clause, much like the first part of the text, "and

great fear was upon all": and the Alexandrian copy, and some others, read, "in Jerusalem,

there was great fear upon all."

HENRY, " God owned them, and gave them signal tokens of his presence with them (Act_2:43): Many wonders and signs were done by the apostles of divers sorts, which confirmed their doctrine, and incontestably proved that it was from God. Those that could work miracles could have maintained themselves and the poor that were among them miraculously, as Christ fed thousands with a little food; but it was as much for the glory of God that it should be done by a miracle of grace (inclining people to sell their estates, to do it) as if it had been done by a miracle in nature.

But the Lord's giving them power to work miracles was not all he did for them; he added to the church daily. The word in their mouths did wonders, and God blessed their endeavours for the increase of the number of believers. Note, It is God's work to add souls to the church; and it is a great comfort both to ministers and Christians to see it.

IV. The people were influenced by it; those that were without, the standers by, that were spectators. 1. They feared them, and had a veneration for them (Act_2:43): Fear came upon every soul, that is, upon very many who saw the wonders and signs done by the apostles, and were afraid lest their not being respected as they should be would bring desolation upon their nation. The common people stood in awe of them, as Herod feared John. Though they had nothing of external pomp to command external respect, as the scribes' long robes gained them the greetings in the market-places, yet they had abundance of spiritual gifts that were truly honourable, which possessed men with an inward reverence for them. Fear came upon every soul; the souls of people were strangely influenced by their awful preaching and living. 2. They favoured them. Though we have reason to think there were those that despised them and hated them (we are sure the Pharisees and chief priests did), yet far the greater part of the common people had a kindness for them - they had favour with all the people. Christ was so violently run upon and run down by a packed mob, which cried, Crucify him, crucify him, that one would think his doctrine and followers were never likely to have an interest in the common people any more. And yet here we find them in favour with them all, by which it appears that their prosecuting Christ was a sort of force put upon them by the artifices of the priests; now they returned to their wits, to their right mind. Note, Undissembled piety and charity will command respect; and cheerfulness in serving God will recommend religion to those that are without. Some read it, They had charity to all the

people - charin�echontes�pros�holon�ton�laon; they did not confine their charity to those of

their own community, but it was catholic and extensive; and this recommended them very much. 3. They fell over to them. Some or other were daily coming in, though not so many as the first day; and they were such as should be saved. Note, Those that God has designed for eternal salvation shall one time or other be effectually brought to Christ: and those that are brought to Christ are added to the church in a holy covenant by baptism, and in holy communion by other ordinances.

CALVIN 43. And there came. He signifieth unto us that the show and sight of the Church

was such, that it made others afraid which did not consent unto [its] doctrine; and that

was done for the preserving and furthering of the Church. When there ariseth any seen all

men set themselves stoutly against the same; and as novelty is odious, the Jews would

never have suffered the Church of Christ to stand one minute of an hour, 1 unless the

Lord had restrained them with fear as with a bridle. Furthermore, Luke noteth the manner

of fear, that it was no such fear as bringeth men unto the obedience of Christ, but such as

causeth men to stand in a doubt, and so, consequently, doth, as it were, so bind them hand

and foot, 2 that they dare not hinder the Lord's work. Like as there be some at this day

who will willingly be ignorant of the gospel; or, at least, are so holden 3 with the cares of

this world, that they cannot thoroughly join themselves unto Christ; and yet they are not

so hard-hearted but that they confess that the truth is on our side; and, therefore, they rest,

as it were, in the middle way, neither do they favor the cruelty of the wicked, because

they are afraid to strive against God. And whereas he saith, Every soul, he speaketh thus

by synecdoche. For it is certain that many did contemn the hand of God, and that other

some were stricken with no great fear, but that they did furiously rage together against the

Church. 4 But Luke's meaning was this, that there appeared such power of God in the

Church, that the people for the most part had not one word to say. 5

And many wonders. This member serveth also to the showing of the cause. For

the miracles served to make them afraid, together with other works of God,

although this was not the only reason, but one of many, why they were afraid

to set themselves against God, who was on that side, as they did gather by the

miracles; whence we gather that they are not only profitable for this to bring

men to God, 6 but also to make the wicked somewhat more gentle, and that

they may tame their furiousness. Pharaoh was a man of desperate

stubbornness, (Exodus 8:8, etc. 19,) and yet we see how miracles do

sometimes pierce his obstinate heart. He forgetteth them by and by; but when

the hand of God is heavy upon him, he is compelled through fear to yield. To

be brief, Luke teacheth that the Jews were by this means kept back, that the

Church, which might easily have been destroyed, might have got up her head.

7 Which thing we have oftentimes tried 8 even in our time. And he doth not

only declare that they were bridled with fear, lest they should be so bold as to

attempt so much as they lusted to do hurt to the Church, but that they were

also humbled with reverence to the glory of the gospel.

COFFMAN, "This verse is the proof of the deductions given earlier in this

chapter to the effect that only the Twelve were baptized in the Holy Spirit.

Here it is clear enough that the one hundred twenty were not able to do the

wonders and signs which accompanied the Twelve, indicating most certainly

that they, the one hundred twenty, were not included in the baptism of the

Holy Spirit which the apostles received.

Regarding what these signs were, conjecture is idle; however, it is reported

later in Acts that Peter raised Dorcas from the dead (Acts 9:41). The signs here

mentioned were of such a powerful and supernatural nature that fear came

upon the whole community of Christians, and presumably upon many in

Jerusalem besides these.

CONSTABLE, "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 Acts 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. [Note:

For 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 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.]

44All the believers were together and had

everything in common.

BARNES, "All that believed - That is, that believed that Jesus was the Messiah; for that was the distinguishing point by which they were known from others.

Were together - Were united; were joined in the same thing. It does not mean that they lived in the same house, but they were united in the same community, or engaged in the same thing. They were doubtless often together in the same place for prayer and praise. One of the best means for strengthening the faith of young converts is for them often to meet together for prayer, conversation, and praise.

Had all things common - That is, all their property or possessions. See Act_4:32-37; Act_5:1-10. The apostles, in the time of the Saviour, evidently had all their property

in common stock, and Judas was made their treasurer. They regarded themselves as one family, having common needs, and there was no use or propriety in their possessing extensive property by themselves. Yet even then it is probable that some of them retained an interest in their property which was not supposed to be necessary to be devoted to the common use. It is evident that John thus possessed property which he retained, Joh_19:27. And it is clear that the Saviour did not command them to give up their property into a common stock, nor did the apostles enjoin it: Act_5:4, “While it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold was it not in thine own power?” It was, therefore, perfectly voluntary, and was as evidently adapted to the special circumstances of the early converts. Many of them came from abroad. They were from Parthia, and Media, and Arabia, and Rome, and Africa, etc. It is probable, also, that they now remained longer in Jerusalem than they had at first proposed; and it is not at all improbable that they would be denied now the usual hospitalities of the Jews, and excluded from their customary kindness, because they had embraced Jesus of Nazareth, who had been just put to death. In these circumstances, it was natural and proper that they should share their property while they remained together.

CLARKE, "And, all that believed - Ο!�πιστευοντες, The believers, i.e. those who

conscientiously credited the doctrine concerning the incarnation, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ, and had, in consequence, received redemption in his blood.

Were together - Επι�το�αυτο. “These words signify either, in one time, Act_3:1; or in

one place, Act_2:1; or in one thing. The last of these three senses seems to be the most proper here; for it is not probable that the believers, who were then 3000 in number, Act_2:41, besides the 120 spoken of Act_1:15, were used all to meet at one time, or in one place, in Jerusalem.” See Bp. Pearce.

And had all things common - Perhaps this has not been well understood. At all the public religious feasts in Jerusalem, there was a sort of community of goods. No man at such times hired houses or beds in Jerusalem; all were lent gratis by the owners: Yoma, fol. 12. Megill. fol. 26. The same may be well supposed of their ovens, cauldrons, tables, spits, and other utensils. Also, provisions of water were made for them at the public expense; Shekalim, cap. 9. See Lightfoot here. Therefore a sort of community of goods was no strange thing at Jerusalem, at such times as these. It appears, however, that this community of goods was carried farther; for we are informed, Act_2:45, that they sold their possessions and their goods, and parted them to all, as every man had need. But, this probably means that, as in consequence of this remarkable outpouring of the Spirit of God; and their conversion, they were detained longer at Jerusalem than they had originally intended, they formed a kind of community for the time being, that none might suffer want on the present occasion; as no doubt the unbelieving Jews, who were mockers, Act_2:13, would treat these new converts with the most marked disapprobation. That an absolute community of goods never obtained in the Church at Jerusalem, unless for a very short time, is evident from the apostolical precept, 1Co_16:1, etc., by which collections were ordered to be made for the poor; but, if there had been a community of goods in the Church, there could have been no ground for such recommendations as these, as there could have been no such distinction as rich and poor, if every one, on entering the Church, gave up all his goods to a common stock. Besides, while this sort of community lasted at Jerusalem, it does not appear to have been imperious upon any; persons might or might not thus dispose of their goods, as we learn front the case of Ananias, Act_5:4. Nor does it appear that what was done at

Jerusalem at this time obtained in any other branch of the Christian Church; and in this, and in the fifth chap., where it is mentioned, it is neither praised nor blamed. We may therefore safely infer, it was something that was done at this time, on this occasion, through some local necessity, which the circumstances of the infant Church at Jerusalem might render expedient for that place and on that occasion only.

GILL Verse 44. And all that believed were together,.... Not in one place, for no one house

could hold them all, their number was now so large; but they "agreed together," as the

Arabic version renders it: all these believers were of one mind and judgment, as to

doctrines, they agreed in their sentiments and principles of religion; and they were of one

heart and soul, were cordially affected to each other, and mutually were assisting to one

another in temporals, as well as in spirituals:

and had all things common: that is, their worldly goods, their possessions and estates; no

man called anything peculiarly his own; and whatever he had, his brother was welcome

to, and might as freely take, and use it, as if it was his own.

HENRY, "They had frequent meetings for Christian converse (Act_2:44): All that believed were together; not all those thousands in one place (this was impracticable); but, as Dr. Lightfoot explains it, they kept together in several companies or congregations, according as their languages, nations, or other associations, brought them and kept them together. And thus joining together, because it was apart from those that believed not, and because it was in the same profession and practice of the duties of

religion, they are said to be together, epi�to�auto. They associated together, and so both

expressed and increased their mutual love.

2. They had all things common; perhaps they had common tables (as the Spartans of old), for familiarity, temperance and freedom of conversation; they ate together, that those who had much might have the less, and so be kept from the temptations of abundance; and they who had little might have the more, and so be kept from the temptations of want and poverty. Or, There was such a concern for one another, and such a readiness to help one another as there was occasion, that it might be said, They had all things common, according to the law of friendship; one wanted not what another had; for he might have it for the asking.

3. They were very cheerful, and very generous in the use of what they had. Besides the religion that was in their sacred feasts (their breaking bread from house to house) a great deal of it appeared in their common meals; they did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart. They brought the comforts of God's table along with them to their own, which had two good effects upon them: - (1.) It made them very pleasant, and enlarged their hearts with holy joy; they did eat their bread with joy, and drank their wine with a merry heart, as knowing that God now accepted their works. None have such cause to be cheerful as good Christians have; it is a pity but that they should always have hearts to be so. (2.) It made them very liberal to their poor brethren, and enlarged

their hearts in charity. They did eat their meat with singleness of heart, en�aphelotēti�

kardias - with liberality of heart; so some: they did not eat their morsels alone, but bade

the poor welcome to their table, not grudgingly, but with all the hearty freedom imaginable. Note, It becomes Christians to be open-hearted and open-handed, and in

every good work to sow plentifully, as those on whom God hath sown plentifully, and who hope to reap so.

CALVIN, "44. And all. Whereas I have translated it joined together, it is word

for word in St Luke, Into the same, or into one, which may be expounded of

the place; as if he should have said that they were wont to dwell together in

one place. Notwithstanding, I had rather understand it of their consent (and

agreement;) as he will say in the fourth chapter, "That they had one heart,"

(Acts 4:32.) And so he goeth forward orderly, when, as he beginneth with their

mind, he addeth afterward their bountifulness, as a fruit proceeding thence.

Therefore, he giveth us to understand that they were rightly joined together

with brotherly love amongst themselves, and that they did indeed declare the

same, because the rich men did sell their goods that they might help the poor.

And this is a singular example of love, and therefore doth Luke record the

same, to the end we may know that we must relieve the poverty of our

brethren with our plenty.

But this place hath need of a sound exposition, because of fantastical

[fanatical] spirits, which do feign a commonalty or participation together of

goods, whereby all policy or civil government is taken away; as in this age the

Anabaptists have raged, because they thought there was no Church unless all

men's goods were put and gathered together, as it were, in one heap, that they

might all one with another take thereof. Wherefore, we must in this point

beware of two extremes. For many, under color of policy, do keep close and

conceal whatsoever they have; they defraud the poor, and they think that they

are twice righteous, so they take away no other men's goods. Other some are

carried into the contrary error, because they would have all things confused.

But what doth Luke? Surely he noteth another order, when he saith that there

was choice made in the distribution. If any man object that no man had any

thing which was his own, seeing all things were common, we may easily

answer. For this community or participation together must be restrained unto

the circumstance which ensueth immediately; to wit, that the poor might be

relieved as every man had need. We know the old proverb, "All things are

common amongst friends." When as the scholars of Pythagoras said thus, they

did not deny but that every man might govern his own house privately, neither

did they intend to make their own wives common; so this having of things

common, whereof Luke speaketh, and which he commendeth, doth not take

away household government; which thing shall better appear by the fourth

chapter, whereas he nameth two alone which sold their possessions of so many

thousands. Whence we gather that which I said even now, that they brought

forth and made common their goods in no other respect, save only that they

might relieve the present necessity. And the impudency of the monks was

ridiculous, who did profess that they did observe the apostles' rule, because

they call nothing their own; and yet, nevertheless, they neither sell any thing,

neither yet do they pass for any man's poverty;9 but they stuff their idle bellies

with the blood of the poor, neither do they regard any other thing in their

having of things common, save only that they may be well filled and daintily,

although all the whole world be hungry. Wherein, then, are they like to the

first disciples, with whom they will be thought to be able to compare? 10

COFFMAN, "COMMUNISM

This writer has seen Earl Browder's greasy little tract in the Library of

Congress in which he declared that "We communists are only doing the thing

commanded in your Christian Scriptures, and which you do not have the guts

to do!" He went on to quote the above verses. Even the Red Dean of

Canterbury, only a few years ago, identified communism with this passage;

and how about that? All right, HOW ABOUT IT?

To begin with, there were certain unique conditions in that New Testament

situation that are not matched in modern times anywhere at any time.

Furthermore, it must be remembered that the New Testament experiment

lasted but a short while, was not undertaken upon the basis of any command

of Christ or the apostles, and that there was never any teaching whatever set

up with a view for perpetuating what is in view here. Most importantly of all,

the experiment failed, human nature proving then, as it ever has, an

insurmountable obstacle forbidding the success of any such society.

However, we shall waive all the differences just noted, for the sake of an

objective contrast between the so-called "Christian communism," as in Acts,

and the organized ungodliness which today would be very pleased to identify

itself with the sacred Scriptures.

In the book of Acts, the disciples were all in the temple praising God; in

communist camps, people are all together blaspheming God, denying Christ,

and desecrating every holy thing.

In the book of Acts, holy men gave into the treasury of a common fund. The

collectivists known as communists rob, plunder, expropriate, and confiscate

the goods of all men, doing so by violence and force. See any difference here?

Christians, through love, parted their goods unto all men. Communists part all

men from their goods. They are enlarging their horizons and are in the process

of parting all nations from their goods, South Vietnam being the latest in a

long bloody list.

Christians enjoyed the fellowship of the saints from house to house. The

communists spread terror from house to house, as their dreadful secret police

move from house to house at night to plunder, to kill, to deport, to confiscate,

and to murder. See any difference?

Over the camp of the Christians is raised the banner of the cross of Christ,

emblem of the world's salvation; but over the camp of the communists flies

the hammer and sickle, perverted variations of the sword and the club, the red

banner of anti-religion, robbery, rape, and revolution.

Christians give. Communists take. Christians love. Communists hate.

Christians worship. Communists blaspheme. One of these societies is of God.

The other is of Satan, of hell, and destruction. See any difference?

Another notable difference in the Christian experiment with so-called

communism and the collectivist madness of modern times is in the fact that

the Christians individually retained the means of production.

Dr. Kenneth H. Hunter, an outstanding economist of Washington, D.C., and

former professor of economics in American University, said:

The so-called communism in Acts, to the extent it might be called that, was a

communism of distribution, not of production. The means of production were

still owned and retained by the individual. In my opinion, there is no fallacy of

modern collectivism that has deceived more people than the glib catch-phrase,

"from each according to his ability; to each according to his need." The fallacy

is that in the collectivist society, the individual has absolutely nothing

whatever to say either about his ability or his need. All vital decisions are

made for him by the Party through the endless inefficiency and red tape of its

infinite bureaucracy.

So much, then, for the so-called communism of Acts. It bears exactly the same

relation to world communism of today that a collection plate bears to a gun in

the hands of a robber.

BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR, "All that believed were together, and had all things common.

The primitive Christians, as here depicted

I. Presented a new social development, marked—

1. By community of goods.

2. By judicious distribution to the needy. Poor people had, of course, been relieved before, but not in the systematic way which is here seen to mark the beneficence of the early Church.

3. By a new and separate place of worship. Religious exercises were conducted “at home” as well as in the Temple. Thus the disciples were both conformists and nonconformists.

II. Exhibited notable personal characteristics.

1. They were strongly attached to one another.

2. They kept a good conscience, “singleness of heart.”

3. They lived in happiness, “gladness.”

4. They mingled devotion with all their actions, “praising God.”

III. Commanded the esteem of observers,” having favour with all the people.”

IV. Witnessed the constant extension of the work of God (Act_2:47). (W. Hudson.)

The communism of Christianity

To those whose eyes are opened wide, because their hearts are truly loving, there is no time in God’s whole year that is equal to this (Whitsuntide) time of fullest bloom. The soul of man is greatened by promises of the future, and he walks the earth in gladness because of the glorious bloom around him. But it is sad when autumn comes to see the pitiful harvest. I have seen that of a hundred blossoms on a given tree only one came to perfection. There is pathos and tragedy in that, for I see in it human life. Of a thousand babes that are born—God’s holiest blossoms—how many come to manhood? Why this waste? Yet God knows best. It is His law that the bloom shall be plentiful, and that some may remain for fruit. Some must fall, but the few that remain are a prophecy of what shall be, and man must learn that a little fruit of God is worth a great waste of bloom. “All that believed were together,” etc.: the doctrine was received into gladsome hearts. The spring heat was come, the winter had vanished. But what became of it? When a man looks round the world nowadays, what a strange blossom that seems to be! Who would try to gather it? When lovers, newly entranced, are scarce able to see common daylight, or to comport themselves with common sense, what are they to do? Bloom, blossom! But the blossom will not last. It is so like that outbreak of communism—and we know that did not last. But it will come again ultimately. It is the Word of God, the end of civilisation, the aim of all holy souls, that the holy city, the New Jerusalem, shall descend to earth. Here, then, is this first blossom of Christian faith, which was the natural outbreak of loving hearts. But these blossoms could not last, because the blossoms of love have to blow out in the cold, and be tried by the storm, as the blossoms of the tree must have the wind to nip them—but they prophesied as they died. Watching a little child’s life, what glorious blossoms of unselfishness we see sometimes I But they don’t last. The cynic sneers at this, but the wise man rejoices, for these blossoms tell him of what man may come to under more perfect conditions. And so these men got scattered, and by degrees the old world resumed its sway over them. Nevertheless, there yet remains the ultimate outcome of the Christian faith. We smile at these men, but only as a loving father smiles upon his little child who cries for the moon, because his ambition is so lofty and its realisation so impossible. Yet the Christian religion is making progress, and having its effect in working out of us what is evil and low, and what it is working out of us it will ultimately work out of the whole world. For what else mean the various efforts to put all things at the service of all men? Some of you who are much given to admiring the pictures of saints can now have a library full of the souls of the ancients; for far beyond all the saints you can paint on windows are those shelves filled with the books of the men of olden time. For in these books are the spirits of the fathers—of John Milton, of William Shakespeare—the thoughts of the wise, the songs of the minstrels, the gathered honey of all nations. And over all this is written “Free Library”—holy words which the Holy Ghost Himself might have inspired. By and by education too shall be like the gospel—free to all, crying, “Come unto me, all ye that labour,” and “he that hath no money, come buy wine and milk without money and without price.” Since I was a boy

what has not been done to restore Pentecost? I have long given up the dream of my youth—that all men could do as these men did—live in a community. Robert Owen tried it; thousands have tried it, but they have given it up. All attempts at communism, in any practical form, have died out, gone into history, but the fruit remains. At every point we are winning—hours of leisure, places of recreation, flee libraries, free roads, free churches, free speech, cheap books. Therefore when I hear that the National Gallery is opened free to the public my soul is glad. For the beautiful works of art of the nation are there; they are not now shut up in rich men’s houses, but belong alike to all. What has God to do with the rich? Did He send His sun to shine simply for the rich? Nay, but for the beggar also. The Spirit of Christ is always toward the Pentecostal blossom; but that it may become golden fruit there must be large loving; all thought of self must be consumed by the love of God. God’s gifts are many; strive as far as possible to have all things common, especially the greatest things. I smile when I see men saving a little property of their own, and keeping apart from one another; for the best and greatest things are fast passing into the hands of every one. Books are cheap, and when books are cheap the inspiring things of God belong to all. High price of books means Pentecost impossible. Let every man judge his own heart to what degree the love of God has entered it, for in that degree he will be willing that all things should be common, especially the highest and greatest things. Some men smile at this doctrine, and think that we mean the dividing of money or property. No, keep your money! Free libraries, picture galleries, churches, etc.

all these we have won, and we shall win more yet. So you may keep your old purse. Those blossoms that did stop on the tree are now bearing rich and golden fruit which shall last for ever. Christianity is the death-blow of privilege, the scorner of pedigree, the ridiculer of fine linen. It turns its back on all these and says, “When thou makest a feast, call the poor,” etc.; for the Christian religion means the opening of the gate of heaven to all men. It is the religion whose first miracle was to turn water into wine for humble people, and is slowly bringing back the Pentecostal spirit; not with a mighty rushing wind and tongues of fire, but with the sweetness of charity. You would do well to get it into your plans of daily life, that the day will come when all the nations of Europe shall be Pentecostal, for they shall have passed from feudalism to federalism, and the custom-house shall be abolished, and all nations shall be “together and have all things common.” (Geo. Dawson, M. A.)

Communism

What about this so-called communism in the early Church? What was it in nature and extent? The passage describing the community of goods is critical. Social reformers, not always Christian, point to this as the ideal state from which the Church has wandered.

1. The arrangement was purely voluntary. What any man put in was still his. The sin of Ananias was not that he had kept back a portion of his estate by fraud, but that he lied about it. It was still in his power after the sale as before. The community of property flowed out of the new spiritual life. (See Act_4:32-37.) “In point of fact, their experiment was simply the assertion of the right of every man to do as he chooses with his own; and they chose to live together and help each other. It was a fraternal stock company for mutual aid and protection. No man was bound to come into it unless he wished; but if he did come in, he was bound to act honestly.”

2. It was a spiritual result, and not a social experiment. It cannot be explained except on the spiritual basis. It must be studied in its true setting. The Brook Farm,

“Utopia,” and all kindred institutions, have been social experiments. Bellamy’s “Looking Backward” Society is allied with them. They have arisen for lack of the Holy Spirit. This sprung up spontaneously because of Pentecost.

3. The community of goods seems to have been a community of use, not ownership. Nobody said that aught that he possessed was his own. They were of one heart. The circumstances were peculiar. Many of the people were away from home. All had to be cared for. No one should suffer.

4. The plan was local. Jerusalem was the only city where it was tried. No trace of it is to be found in any ether Church. It evidently did not commend itself to other churches as a wise plan. The other churches took up collections just as now when a case of need was presented. (See 1Co_16:2; 2Co_9:6-7.)

5. It was temporary. It lasted while the circumstances in which it arose continued.

6. It did not relieve poverty. It was not devised for that purpose. Many writers insist upon seeing a close connection between this incident and the subsequent poverty in Jerusalem. Thus Meyer: “And this community of goods at Jerusalem helps to explain the great and general poverty of that Church. It is probable that the apostles were prevented by the very experience acquired in Jerusalem from advising or introducing it elsewhere.” Thus Gulliver: “Under such sublime inspirations it is easy to see that a communism, impossible to ordinary human nature, might temporarily flourish. But it is as easy to see that it would gradually settle to the level of ordinary motive, and would be subjected to the disturbances of inevitable inequalities in capacity and industry, as well as in piety. The Plymouth Pilgrims were, perhaps, the most single-minded men of modern times. Yet it was not till the community of lands and goods which obtained in the early years of their settlement gave place to farms in severalty, and to private property protected by law, that the annually recurring danger of absolute starvation in their colony disappeared. The lesson of such a history is, therefore, not solely the lesson of Christian consecration. It includes the utility and the sacredness of the personal control of property. It places before us the problem of combining the largest Christian benevolence with the strict maintenance of proprietary rights.”

7. It was not modern communism. Says Gerok: “That holy community of goods proceeded from love to the poor; but that which is now proclaimed is the result of a hatred to the rich.” And Van Dyke: “Of late years the communistic doctrine has begun to present itself in another shape. It has laid aside the red cap and put on the white cravat. It invites serious and polite inquiry. It quotes Scripture and claims to be the friend, the near relative, of Christianity. So altered is its aspect that preachers of religion are discovering that it has good points, and patting it on the back somewhat timidly, as one might pat a converted wolf who had offered his services as watch-dog.” There is a fundamental and absolute difference between the doctrine of the Bible and the doctrine of the communiser. For the Bible tells me that I must deal my bread to the hungry; while the communiser tells the hungry that he may take it for himself, and if he begins with bread there is no reason why he should draw the line at cake. The Bible teaches that envy is a sin; the communiser declares that it is the new virtue which is to regenerate society. The communiser maintains that every man who is born has a right to live; but the Bible says that if a man will not work neither shall he eat; and without eating life is difficult. The communiser holds up equality of condition as the ideal of Christianity; but Christ never mentions it. He tells us that we shall have the poor always with us, and charges us never to forget, despise, or neglect them. Christianity requires two things from every man that

believes in it: first, to acquire his property by just and righteous means; and, secondly, to look not only on his own things, but also on the things of others. (W. F. McDowell.)

The equalities and inequalities of human lots

The infant Church, from the nature of the case, was composed mainly, though not exclusively, of the less prosperous classes. The work it had to do at Jerusalem brought together a number of persons whose homes were elsewhere, and whose ordinary occupations were suspended, and it became necessary to face the all-important question of their simplest food and lodging. For this purpose a common fund was instituted, to which those who had money or other property might contribute for the temporary support of those who had none. There is no evidence that these were anything but voluntary offerings. There follow, for example, repeated references to the existence of rich and poor side by side in the same Church, and to the need and duty of almsgiving. Had there been any system in force, tantamount to a “community of goods,” neither of these things could possibly have survived. It might seem, indeed, superfluous to argue such a point were it not for two reasons—one, that there are always to be found well-meaning persons who, believing that the earliest type of Church, before corruption entered and human frailty overthrew Divine institutions, was and must be the best, and the one we ought to seek to restore, look back with yearning upon a state of things so different from our own, and resolve that our faces ought to be firmly set towards reviving the primitive usage. Imagining that true Christian equality involves equality of conditions and advantages, they see in the phenomena of our modern Church only the most terrible of inconsistencies. Many of these objectors are genuine friends and adherents of Christianity, and as such demand our warm sympathy. But there are others, I need not say, hostile to our religion, who in all times have made useful capital out of these alleged discrepancies. We cannot but notice that one chief grievance against Christianity in our day is that it does not tend to rectify human inequalities; that while it professes to hold all men equal in the sight of God, it seems quite content that they should remain unequal in their own. But though the objection is put as one against religion, it is obvious that the grievance is really one against Providence, or rather (since this form of socialism is almost always atheistic) against fate, which has allowed one man to enter the world better equipped than another for the struggle of life. Hence this form of socialism, which we see more and more asserting itself, is not merely atheistic, it is bitterly antitheistic, since it chiefly resents inequalities, due not to defective laws, but to natural, inborn, inherited differences. Such socialism demands, as the first right of humanity, that society should aim at compensating the feeble for their feebleness at the expense of the strong; or rather, that arrangements should be made that neither weak nor strong should be at any expense; that society should be restored to one level, and that of universal prosperity and comfort. This, it asserts, a reform in the world’s laws might and would effect. Religion, it alleges, is a failure; civilisation is a failure; legislation is a failure, seeing that all these have so far failed to bring about an equalisation of human lots. Those who use this language and lead captive many willing listeners are at least thus far justified in that Christianity has beyond question failed to bring about the result they desire; and they might even go further and object that Christianity does not start from any such assumption as the equal rights of human beings. From first to last the Bible nowhere teaches this kind of equality among men; nor their equal right, nor the right of any individual among them, to prosperity and comfort. It does not even regard these things as the aim towards which human effort should be directed. Its

millennium is not in any sense a millennium of an equally distributed prosperity. Every counsel and command addressed to the rich and strong is, on the contrary, framed on the evident expectation that inequalities of condition would always exist. It must be frankly admitted that Jesus Christ accepted such inequality as a fact of human existence, and addressed His teaching to show how that fact might be made the best of—how it might minister to the discipline of man’s nature, and its preparation for the kingdom of God. Christ’s teaching abounds in denunciations of the rich. But it is never for being rich, but for not recognising and accepting the responsibility of riches. He enunciated no fixed and rigid rules for the regulation of society. He enjoined no pouring of the world’s wealth into a common stock, from which the once rich and the once poor should be endowed anew on one uniform and unchangeable scale. He never offered to put back the clock of time, and to start all men on the race of life afresh. He took society as it existed in his day, and propounded the law and the spirit by which it might be made ever sounder and sounder, even while the weak and the strong, the rich and the poor, lived and worked side by side. A vulgar Socialist, aiming first at winning adherents, might have preached vaguely how all this would speedily be at an end; how no one should suffer much longer from his present disabilities, but that all should share and share alike when new laws should be passed in the Constitution he would frame and establish. But Jesus promised no such thing; He introduced no such topic. He dealt, indeed, persistently with the subject of equality. He called all men, without distinction, His brethren; He spoke of them all as alike dear to the heart of God, and as equally invited to the highest blessings that God confers. He appealed to all who were weary and heavy laden to come to Him (Jesus) and He would give them rest. And, before all things, He insisted that in that kingdom there is no such thing as caste. The first upon earth might be the last in that kingdom, and the lowliest on the earth the highest and greatest there. Who can doubt that it was this Christian doctrine of equality—this form of Christian Socialism (“fellowship,” “membership in one Body,” He preferred to call it) that fell like music on the wearied spirits of that motley crowd? No religious caste—no intellectual caste—no social caste—each man’s acceptance of the responsibilities of sonship; each man’s faithful cultivation of the talent entrusted to him—this, the one way of working out his own salvation, and entering upon eternal life. This was the one only equality that Christ recognised and proclaimed. As to inequalities of human fortune, so-called, and their methods of equalisation, it apparently did not enter into His plan to speak. On such subjects as a man’s right or duty to “better himself” in his earthly position He said nothing. He neither commanded nor forbade a man to do his utmost in that kind. There is a common sneer against religion that it looks with coldness upon the ambition which natures, not apparently vicious, are aware of, to rise in the world, and to win fame, position, and wealth by the effective use of the talents confided to them. Whatever can be reasonably inferred from the Bible’s teaching is to the very opposite effect. A gospel which enjoins its followers to cherish and improve every talent committed to them is in itself a command to excel, and therefore to advance, in whatever the hand, or the intellect, findeth to do. And to excel, and to advance, means and implies (let us not be afraid of the word) competition. If, of two men to whom talents are entrusted, one cultivates them and the other neglects them, what power that we can even guess at can prevent one of these men outstripping the other in the course of pre-eminence? If one man rises through moral character and fidelity to the talents given him, and another sinks through moral weakness and indolence, who can deny that in that contrast is witnessed a survival of the fittest? And the gospel of Christ did not interpose to remove such inequalities. But the primary purpose of the revelation of God to men was to change their conceptions of success and failure; to alter the world’s standpoint as to happiness. “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth

of God.” And who can fail to observe that whichever be cause and which effect, the decay of belief in a God, and the assertion of every man’s right to be prosperous, always appear together? It cannot be otherwise; for belief in the God whom Christ revealed is not consistent with belief that we have all, or any of us, a right to any blessing or comfort save one, the greatest and most blessed of all. We have no rights as against God: we have only obligations. The very things that difference us from other men are our talents. We are forgetting to thank God for what He takes away. Prosperity—equal prosperity—and the gradual extinction of bodily pain and mental distress—this is the earthly paradise to which thousands are now being taught to look forward. Does it harmonise well with the teaching of Him who claimed to be the Elder Brother of the race, whose appointed life was suffering and self-denial, and whose death was the death of the Cross? The cure for discontent is to turn our thoughts to the noblest, purest, best Friend of our spirits; and then, recalling what He has been to us in the past, and what things He has prepared for us in the future, we may well feel that with all our unworthiness, all our weakness and disappointments, our profoundest sorrows and anxieties, we are more than conquerors; that having received this pledge of victory, we may indeed scorn to “change our state with kings.” (Canon Ainger.)

The apparent communism of the infant Church

Under the shadow of a great calamity, or the strain of a great excitement, the lines that divide classes or limit possessions vanish like snow-wreaths in the noonday sun. “All ye are brethren” is the word of the great occasions that stir and shake society to its depths. It is an easy step to the conclusion that that which associates men lies deeper in their nature and in the nature of society than that which divides them. It is a tempting step, though a false one, from this position to the principle that that which creates and maintains the differences cometh of evil, and is to be fought against as evil. This is the conviction out of which the nobler idea and form of communism spring; that which is rooted in love of humanity, in the desire for human progress, and the realisation of a condition in which society will not have to weep tears over the miseries of the poor. Whether the communistic conviction and plan of working out the regeneration of society have any root in the nature of things, or the Word of God, is one of the most profoundly important social questions of our times. Let us consider—

I. The remarkable appearance of a communistic organisation in the Church. Nothing can look more like communism on the outside. Make this arrangement universal, a communist would say, and the social millennium will come in. It will help us to estimate the countenance which Christianity lends to communistic ideas to consider—

1. How far was this universal in the Church? It seems to have been born and to have died at Jerusalem. There appears to have been no attempt even to extend it in the Church. It was a beautiful outburst of heavenly charity and zeal; but it bloomed, flourished, and faded, so to speak, in an hour. Churches were planted everywhere, but there is not the faintest attempt to repeat the experiment. Further, it was not universal even in Jerusalem. In chap. 5:1-4 St. Peter recognises that Ananias was free to adopt the plan or to decline it; and it appears from Act_12:12 that some members retained their property, and had their households, children and servants, round them as before. It would appear that it was but a partial and temporary arrangement even in the Church which adopted it, growing out of a moment of pressure, and quietly dying away. But—

2. How far are we justified in regarding it as an arrangement or organisation of the

infant society at all? Both terms are misapplied. Organisation implies a definite principle of action for a definite purpose, adopted by competent authority, and binding upon all over whom the authority extends. We find nothing of this kind in the action of the apostles and of the Church. It was a spontaneous outburst of feeling—nothing like a plan. The man who had the best right to speak for the community expressly disclaims any plan or arrangement binding on the members of the community; he recognises their entire freedom. Far from making this a primary law of the Church of Jerusalem, it was in no sense a law at all, but simply a voluntary action on the part of individuals; beautiful, heavenly in its inspiration, but valid only while the inspiration lasted, and having no beauty, no virtue apart from the spirit which gave it birth.

3. The light cast upon the institution by the legislation of the apostolic age. Remember that the Church had before it the very problems with which communism professes to be able to deal—the wrongs of oppressed classes and the miseries of the poor. No literature of communism is so charged with passionate sympathy for the oppressed and the wretched, such burning indignation against strong-handed wrong, such tender, cherishing compassion for the poor and helpless, as those Old Testament prophecies to which Christ appealed to explain His mission (Luk_4:18-21). “The poor have the gospel preached unto them” was the very crown of miracles in the Saviour’s judgment; and the words—“Only they would that we should remember the poor”—tells us how sacredly the mission was cherished in the Apostolic Church. It was through no oversight of this its great function, to save the poor and so to begin at the right end the salvation of society, that the apostles suffered this institution to drop out of the habit of the Church. They were as intensely eager to enfranchise the enslaved, to deliver the oppressed, to comfort and to elevate the poor, as the most passionate of social reformers; and yet, having to deal with three great classes whose woes and wrongs were rending society in pieces—the slaves, the women and the poor—instead of proclaiming universal emancipation and community of possessions, they deliberately left the slave to the Christian brotherhood of his master, the woman to the Christian fellowship of her husband, and the poor to the Christian justice and charity of mankind. There was no attempt at a rearrangement of society, save as it might grow naturally and healthfully out of better and holier spiritual relations between class and class, and man and man. Thus they addressed themselves to the terrible social problems of their times: on this basis they sought to work out their solution. They showed themselves, like Christ, studious to maintain the existing order against violent disturbance or readjustment from without. When hardy Galileans would take Christ by force, and make Him a king, giving Him, as they dreamed, the grand opportunity to work out His glorious plans, He withdrew Himself to a desert place and prayed. The only power which could regenerate the world must come from that fountain. The Church sought to redress the wrongs, to adjust the inequalities, to heal the maladies and the miseries of society, by proclaiming the brotherhood of man under the Fatherhood of God, revealed in Him who is the Elder Brother of the poorest, the most crushed of the human race. You may say in answer, “Look round and see what it has wrought! Look round in Lambeth, in Bethnal Green, on burning Paris, on luxurious, dissolute New York. Is this salvation?” I feel the full pressure of the question. “How long, O Lord, how long?” is the cry that is ever rising from watching, breaking hearts. But I see also this, that the selfish lust and passion which make the day of the Lord so long, and the progress of the kingdom so slow, would bury in wreck or drown in blood every poorer and weaker attempt to work out more swiftly and vehemently the salvation of

society.

II. But, what then was this, “they had all things common”? Was it a mistake?

1. On the contrary it was an inspiration; an outlet of love and joy when man’s heart was bursting with them; and a holy and beautiful prophecy of what Christianity will one day accomplish for the salvation of the poor. There is many a beautiful, elevating, purifying action of the spirit in its intercourse with spirits, which if it were organised into an institution would be fatal to society. This action of the Church belongs to the same sphere as the holy waste of Mary. The money might have been saved and given to the poor, and the Master none the worse. But the prompting of the spirit which found that expression held within its glow more benediction to the poor in the long run, than the pence that might have been saved a thousand times told.

2. This action was an irrepressible outburst of joy and thankfulness. Travellers meeting in the heart of a great desert are ready to make “all things common” under the human sympathy which the new and glad experience kindles within. A shipwrecked company gathered on the shore of a desert island is ready to make “all things common,” through the joy of deliverance, and shame that any of the saved should want. There are crises when all that leads a man to say that anything is his own vanishes; when the sense that one great human heart is beating everywhere, and that we are but limbs of one great body, whose private use and pleasure is nothing, whose ministry to the whole is all, possesses us. These are our moments of inspiration, of rapture. They come to us laden with the breath of a purer, brighter region, which, organised as we are, it would waste us to live in, but the breath of which, mingled with our grosser air, lends a more vivid glow to the vital flame in our hearts, and in the heart of society.

3. And it was beautiful as a prophecy. The miracles of Christ were prophecies. And this shone out as a sign, that forces were there at work, whose fountain is the heart of Christ, which will one day, after a Divine fashion, establish—

(1) Liberty, the liberty of a soul and a society under the law to Christ.

(2) Equality, not of lot or of function, but of use and of honour.

(3) Fraternity, not of rights and of claims, but of ministries and loves. (J. B. Brown, B. A.)

Christian and anti-Christian communism

That Christian communism said, What is mine is thine; modern anti-Christian communism says, What is thine is mine. Among those Christians it was said, Take what I have; modern communists say, Give me what thou hast. That holy community of goods was founded on a spirit of love to the poor; this now preached rests on a spirit of hatred to the rich. (C. Gerok, D. D.)

Christian communism distinguished from unchristian

I. Its source. Not an external law or bare power, but the free impulse of love.

II. Its object. Not general equality, but general welfare.

III. The way to effect his object. Not by a community of goods, but by a community of hearts. (C. Gerok, D. D.)

Man’s willingness to trust everything to God but money

Once in a most lively prayer-meeting the preacher who was presiding prayed: “O Lord, help all of us to trust Thee with our whole souls!” And a hundred voices responded, “Amen!” Some also shouted, “Lord, grant it!” and “Amen, amen,” all over the room. Encouraged by such sympathy, he went on: “Help us all to trust Thee wholly with our bodies!” And then the people cried, “Amen!” as heartily as before. Now the exalted sense of consecration rose to its height, and he prayed again: “Oh, help us to trust Thee wholly with our money!” And it is actually reported in private circles since that not a man had a word to say then. (E. S. Robinson.)

And they continuing daily with one accord in the temple.—

Characteristics of the primitive Christians

See—

I. Their constancy—they continued.

II. Their fervour—daily.

III. Their unity—with one accord.

IV. Their audacity—in the temple.

V. Their charity—breaking bread from house to house.

VI. Their familiarity—did eat their meat.

VII. Their alacrity—with gladness.

VIII. Their sincerity—with singleness of heart. (E. Leigh.)

Public worship

I. We ought to worship God in public.

1. It is obvious to the natural reason of mankind that this is a duty.

(1) Even those whose “foolish heart was darkened,” etc., were not so blind as not to see the fitness of their honouring with public worship those whom they accounted Deities. The heathens have their temples to which they resort for the celebration of some rites, whereby they think their idols honoured.

(2) God has formed our nature for society, is it not, then, a dictate of nature that we should associate ourselves for the most important purposes of religion as well as for the lesser purposes of the natural and civil life.

(3) Our Creator has made us capable of signifying to all about us the sense we have of His perfections, and of our obligations to Him. Should we not, then, employ our best powers after that manner in His service, to which they are so wisely fitted? “The heavens declare the glory of the Lord; the firmament showeth

His handiwork. How excellent is His name in all the earth!” And is it not fit that intelligent creatures should show forth His glories by the most open acknowledgment of them? The law of God written in the heart (Rom_2:15) obliges them to the performance of social public worship.

2. God has in His Word given plain significations of His will that men should publicly worship Him.

(1) Public worship was practised long before we have any account of its being required. The light of nature directed men to assemble themselves together for the worship Of God; perhaps, therefore, He did not see it needful expressly to reveal His mind till their natural notions of religion were greatly corrupted by idolatry. Then it pleased God to give a law according to which worship was to be regulated (Exo_23:17). But though Israel were to offer sacrifices only at the tabernacle or temple, yet they did meet together in other places, where they did engage in some parts of Divine worship. This appears from the account given us in Scripture of synagogues (Act_15:21).

(2) Jesus Christ, while He was here on earth, did not only go to Jerusalem at the great feasts, but also attended constantly to the service of the synagogue (Luk_4:16). His example lays a strong obligation upon His followers.

(3) The disciples of Jesus, in the early days of Christianity, discharged their duty in this matter with great diligence, but in process of time the love of some began to cool, which appeared in their neglect of the duties of public worship. To prevent the spreading of this great evil the apostle admonished them (Heb_10:25).

II. The ends of public worship.

1. The glory of God. As He made all things for Himself it is highly reasonable we should principally design the glorifying of His name in all that we do. Now when God is worshipped by His creatures, they own His being, His all-sufficiency, His infinite understanding, that to Him belongeth power and mercy; and the more public their worship is the more clearly they spread abroad the honour of His name. The house of God, where He was publicly worshipped, is called “the place where His honour dwelt” (Psa_26:8), perhaps because He was there honoured in an eminent manner by the social worship of His people. For this reason, as we may justly suppose, the Lord is said to love the gates of Zion (Psa_87:2). This chief end of Divine worship cannot be so well answered by private devotions. The honour of God’s name is more propagated in the congregation than it can be in the family. Though our Saviour far exceeded those in knowledge who officiated in the Jewish synagogue, yet was He stated in His attendance there, for He knew that by so doing He “glorified His Father.”

2. Our spiritual benefit. God has connected our advantage with His own glory. He dispenses to us blessings in that way wherein we show forth the honour of His name. He promised His people of old that in all places where He should record His name he would come unto them and bless them (Exo_20:24). There is no appointment of any particular place under the gospel, but our Lord has said that “where two or three are gathered together in His name, there He is in the midst of them” (Mat_18:20; Rev_1:13). God delights to honour the ordinances of His public worship by making them means of grace (Psa_87:5). Most commonly it is by the means of public worship that sinners are awakened and converted; it is hereby that the saints are for the most part edified and comforted. All the private instructions which the psalmist enjoyed were

not effectual to remove a very perplexing temptation. But when “he went into the sanctuary” so much light was imparted to him there as cleared his difficulty (Psa_73:17). Upon which he concludes (verse 29) that it was good for him to draw near to God, i.e., in the sanctuary. David expected that the clearest and most engaging discoveries of God would be made to him in His house, therefore he was very desirous of having his stated abode there (Psa_27:4; Psa_92:12-14).

3. Communion with one another in the great concerns of religion. The Scripture represents believers as one in God and Christ (Joh_17:20-21). They are spoken of as “members one of another” (Eph_4:25). They have one God and Father, the same Mediator and Saviour; they are animated by one Spirit; they belong to the same family, and they are travelling towards the same heavenly habitation. Now, when as many of them as conveniently can assemble together to partake of the ordinances of the gospel, they hereby denote the oneness.

III. The several parts of public worship as mentioned in the context.

1. Prayer. The house of God is called “the house of prayer” (Mat_21:13). We have all our common wants and weaknesses. Is it not, then, proper we should present our joint supplications to God for supplies and helps? (Mat_18:19).

2. Praise (Psa_48:1; Psa_34:3). We are never in such destitute circumstances as not to be obliged to bless the name of God, therefore are we commanded to add thanksgivings to our supplications (Php_4:6; 1Th_5:17-18). It is proper here to consider that particular method of praising God by singing. It is natural for the joy of men’s hearts to break forth into songs, and it is most fit they should express the delight they take in the perfections and mercies of God by singing His praises (Jas_5:13; Eph_5:19-20; Col_3:16; 1Co_14:14-15; Rev_15:3).

3. Hearing the Word of God. Under the Mosaic constitution the priest’s lips were to keep knowledge, and the people were to seek the law at his mouth (Mal_2:7). Our Lord Jesus Christ has appointed ministers “who are to give themselves continually to prayer and the ministry of the Word; to be instant in season and out of season” in preaching of it. Therefore, certainly it is the duty of Christians to be instant in season and out of season in hearing the gospel (Eph_4:11-13).

4. The Lord’s Supper. This is meant by “breaking of bread” (1Co_10:16-17). Application:

1. How thankful should we be for our liberty to worship God in public.

2. It is matter of great lamentation that there is so much indifference among us to the public worship of God.

3. Let us have a care of “forsaking the assembling of ourselves together as the manner of some is.” In order to press you hereto, consider

(l) That an indifference to the duties of public worship is a dangerous step towards apostacy.

(2) Persons of the most eminent piety have expressed the greatest value for the public worship of God. (S. Price.)

Importance of daily prayer

Great pianists carry the dumb piano with them, which is simply a mechanical keyboard

for the exercising of the fingers. Rubenstein uses it, and on a recent occasion he said, “If I neglect practice a single day, I notice it, and if for two days, my friends notice it, and if for three days the people notice it.” Some Christians leave off practising their religion. First they notice it themselves, then their friends, then the world. Every Christian has his dumb piano on which to practise. True it gives no sound that the world can hear, but it nevertheless accomplishes much; it is the instrument of silent prayer. McCheyne once expressed the belief that no one who prayed daily to God ever became a lost soul. It is well to recall this at times whenever the habit of silent prayer is neglected. Use the dumb piano.

Constancy in the performance of holy duties makes them easy

It is easy to keep that armour bright which is daily used; but hanging by the walls till it be rusty, it will take some time and pains to furbish it up again. If an instrument be daily played upon, it is easily kept in tune; but let it be but a while neglected, and cast in a corner, the strings and frets break, the bridge flies off, and no small labour is required to bring it into order again. And thus, also, it is in things spiritual, in the performance of holy duties, if we continue them with a settled constancy, they will be easy, familiar, and delightful to us; but if once broken off, and intermitted, it is a new work to begin again, and will not be reduced to the former estate but with much endeavour and great difficulty.

Constancy in the performance of holy duties

It is observable that many who have gone into the field, have liked the work of a soldier for a battle or two, but soon have had enough, and come running home again from their colours, whereas few can bear it as a constant trade. War is a thing that they could willingly woo for their pleasure, but are loath to wed upon what terms soever. Thus many are soon engaged in holy duties, easily persuaded to take up a profession of religion, and as easily persuaded to lay it down. Like the new moon, which shines a little in the first part of the night, but is down long before half the night be gone, are lightsome professors in their youth, but whose old age is wrapt up in thick darkness of sin and wickedness. Oh! this constancy and persevering is a hard word! This taking up the cross daffy, this praying always, this watching night and day, and never laying aside our clothes and armour, indulging ourselves to remit and unbend in our holy waiting upon God, and walking with God. This sends many sorrowful from Christ; yet this is the saint’s duty, to make religion his every day’s work, without any vacation from one end of the year to the other.

And breaking bread from house to house did eat their meat with gladness.—

The holy communion a feast of love

Love, as it is undoubtedly one of the most natural and general, so is it likewise one of the most agreeable and delightful emotions of the human heart. Whoever therefore promotes love, at the same time promotes happiness; and the firmer, the purer, the nobler that love is, the more solid is this happiness. And where shall we find a more perfect doctrine of happiness than in Christianity? Tend not all its doctrines, all its precepts, all its promises, all its rites to kindle and inflame the purest, noblest love towards God and man? Such is its whole design; this is the distinctive character of the noble few by whom it is actually attained.

1. The holy communion is a feast of the love of God. Here we see the love of God, our heavenly Father, in all its lustre; here enjoy it in its full measure. Here we draw nigh to Him, not as slaves, not as criminals, trembling at the sight of their judge, but as

children, favoured, eminently endowed, meet together in His house, at His table, and rejoice and glory in His being our Father. Here we are truly blessed in the enjoyment of all the benefits wherewith He has favoured us through His Son Jesus.

2. In like manner is the holy communion a feast of love to Jesus our Lord. This holy feast emphatically reminds us of that sublime, disinterested, unprecedented love to the wandering wretched race of mortals that brought Him from a throne to the condition of a servant, to the Cross and to the sepulchre! And here we enjoy the fruits and effects of this love of our Lord. The effulgence which He brought with Him from heaven enlightens and shines round us; the virtue and the efficacy that are gone out from Him, vivify us; the serenity, the hope which He prepared for mankind reanimate us; the prospects into better worlds which He opened to them are our comfort and joy.

3. Lastly the holy communion is a feast of Christian brotherly love. Far hence away, all such as harbour malice, all cold and selfish hearts, all the slaves of envy, hatred, and revenge! Far hence, every the slightest suggestion of vanity and pride, whereby one exalts himself above another, and one in comparison of himself despises another! Do we not here rejoice and glory in our common deliverance, forgiveness, elevation, and happiness? Come, let us show ourselves glad in Jesus Christ by our love, by our mutual endeavours to become ever more humane, ever more bountiful and generally useful. Let us all rejoice in one another, as He rejoices in us all. Let us serve and assist one another, as He has helped and still helps us all. (G. J. Zollikofer.)

The soul’s atmosphere

This passage points out the characteristic fact of the cheerful social dispositions of the early disciples. The Jewish religion was the only one which ever organised joy as an integral and important part of its services. Christ and the apostles were Jews, and the same joyous spirit came with the new faith; and although they entered upon the organisation of the new life under circumstances calculated to make men bigoted and bitter, yet all the early periods of Christianity were sweet and calm. The earliest Christian art has not a single emblem of suffering or distress. All the representations were those of hope and cheerfulness. Subsequently philosophy almost destroyed this temper, and wrought an atmosphere of stoical hardness and moroseness which was not characteristic of true Christianity. Note:—

I. The nature of the Christian atmosphere. We all know how, in the physical world, that a dull, heavy atmosphere is unfavourable to pleasure or labour. We bear with it, fight our way through it; but it is the clear, bright, genial day that affects our spirits favourably, facilitates our work, and makes things grow. So the soul has an atmosphere of one kind or another. Discouragement, sadness, obscurity of soul makes it hard for a man to live, to be social. It is especially mischievous in religious life; for all the higher graces are such as spring up and bloom only in most genial atmospheres, just as many of our plants can only blossom in a long warm summer. The characteristics of this atmosphere are—

1. Good-nature—a grace not mentioned in Scripture because Paul did not speak English. This is better than genius, property, or honour. When Baxter spoke of marrying a woman who was of a good disposition rather than one who was eminently pious, he said that the grace of God could dwell with many persons that he could not live with. This good disposition is enjoined in “Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love,” etc., and is that charity which is “not easily provoked,”

etc. Now good-natured people are often not geniuses; because to have genius one must have nerves; but men whose nerves are well covered, are relieved from many exasperations and exaggerations which annoy people; but where men have not this protection anal still are good-natured, it is a peculiar grace.

2. Cheerfulness—a hopeful state of life under any conditions; a shining state which amounts to more than contentment.

3. Faith—not simply that act which accepts Christ, but that which includes the whole action of the imagination. A practical, matter-of-fact man is like a waggon without springs—every single pebble on the road jolts him; but the man who has imagination has always the power of glancing off from hard facts, and of overcoming the world.

4. Humour. The sense of the ludicrous is a distinct peculiarity of man as lifted above the brute creation. If it calls to itself an element of distinctiveness it becomes sarcasm. When it holds up a man as an object of mirth it becomes ridicule. When it has a certain element of suppression then it developes humour. It sees things in a funny light. Blessed are the men who are able to put this cushion between themselves and all the sharp edges of affairs—who know how to see something that will convert sorrow into a source of pleasure. A man who has it is always able to call to his side good-nature and happiness, and troubles are not so troublesome, nor cares so sharp to him as they would be if he had no such faculty.

II. Its advantages. He who is cheerful, imaginative, humorous, has summer of the soul, and whatever he has to do he will do better in that than in any other atmosphere. This atmosphere favours—

1. Earnestness and courage. It has been thought to tend to frivolity, but that is not the case. When Napoleon was crossing the Alps, and the strength of the men had almost given out, and there was hesitation, he ordered the band to strike up a cheerful air. The sound of the drums rolled through the mountain passes, and the men, catching exhilaration from the music, applied themselves with renewed earnestness to the task. Now, when we are called to disappointments, if under the influence of imagination we can but feel cheer and good-nature, that temperament of the soul will enable us to hold on our way. What kills men is discouragement. It is sitting down under trouble that destroys men; it is standing up and mocking it that enables men to go through it without harm. “I have thee, O man,” says the Gorgon of disaster. “Not yet,” says the man of hope, with a smiling face, and eludes his grasp.

2. Charity—that which seeks the well-being of men. A man who is without good-nature always judges harshly; but the man who has cheerfulness and humour is at peace with other men. The most difficult people to manage are those who never see a jest or develop a smile; they carry gashing angles to the end of life. And unfortunately among them there are only too many professing Christians; so that men say that if they wanted sympathy in distress they would rather go to their drinking companions than to members of the Church. But a man who is really a Christian is “light of the world”—a man whose temper and disposition make him luminous. Sweet emotions give light to the face, and bitter emotions make it dark. And a man whose face is lit with joy and hope carries among his fellow-men that good will which takes away the friction of life and gives joy to the sorrowful and hope to the sinful.

3. Patience under difficulties. The world is a great deal larger to a man of imagination than to a “Gradgrind”—a man of mere facts—a man of miles who treats the world as though it were a football. The former takes cognisance of things invisible which help him to see that the troubles of to-day are the instruments of the

joys of to-morrow. The man of facts sees only the cloud; the hopeful man sees the sun behind and the fruitful showers after the cloud.

4. Realisation of the presence of God and trust in Him. The trouble with men in this world is that they have no God. A present help in time of trouble is God, and if there be no help for you it is because you have no God that you know how to use. A man might live to the age of Methuselah and never know what music was, if he did not know how to handle the instrument; and a man may live with God around him and yet be without God because he does not know how to use Him.

And the soul’s atmosphere is the medium through which a man discerns God more easily than through any other. In conclusion—

1. You ask, “Does not this tend to relax conscience?” Perhaps it does, and that is the best thing about it so far as some consciences are concerned. A man may be conscientiously wrong and cruel as were Saul of Tarsus and Loyola. What is needed of conscience is that it should act in the sphere of love. Love being the summer atmosphere of the soul, let any faculty act in it, and it will act right.

2. But do not many lack the capacity for such cheerfulness? Yes, but cripples are not to be held up as models of humanity. (H. W. Beecher.)

The atmosphere of a church

There ought to be such an atmosphere in every Christian church, that a man going there and sitting two hours should take the contagion of heaven and carry home a fire to kindle the altar whence he came. (H. W. Beecher.)

Christian festivity

1. When you ascend from the post-apostolic to the apostolic days, you seem to emerge from a stifled, airless cave, where all manner of fungous growths luxuriate, into the open field, where fresh breezes play and sunbeams glitter and dew-besprinkled flowers shed their varied perfume on the air. In the Acts you find not only a purer religion but more of common sense and manliness than in the history of the fathers.

2. We make a great mistake if, while we seek in the Scriptures and by prayer for direction in matters of faith and in the larger turning-points of life, we leave smaller affairs, such as our feasts, to the arbitrament of chance or the example of the world. “In everything by prayer and supplication,” etc. Only on the great things may the stranger approach the king, but in everything is the appeal of the child welcome to the Father.

The disciples did eat their bread—

I. With gladness.

1. A preliminary to this was a liberal contribution to their poorer brethren—a necessary ingredient in all glad Christian festivity.

2. These ancient Christians were not hermits, they enjoyed their food all the more by enjoying it together. The sight of a friend’s face, and the sound of his voice while we eat, are as good gifts of God as food. A convivial meeting is an object of dread to

Christian parents, but it is not in itself evil: in as far as it retains its etymological meaning—eating together—it is good.

3. A good reason for eating with gladness is that we have something to eat, and a self-acting machinery which reminds us when nourishment is needed, and compels us to take it at the proper time.

4. In the case of a Christian the Giver of food is recognised, and therefore he has more gladness than other men.

II. With singleness of heart, as well as gladness, and that without which gladness soon disappears. “A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways.” Simplicity is destroyed and gladness lost—

1. By burdensome and irrational luxury. The cares of the meal are sometimes as heavy as the management of the estate. Instead of singleness, doubleness of a very troublesome type is the occupant of the heart. One half of the mental vision squints aside to calculate the estimation in which the elaborate festival is held by the guests. Simplicity may be marred, too, by the cost of the entertainment; and some approach to it might both replenish the coffers of charitable institutions and facilitate the settlement of tradesmen’s bills. The Christian should “add to his faith courage” here.

2. By immoderately late hours. To turn night into day is not simplicity, and cannot promote gladness. It is like the opinion within lunatic asylums that people should lie in bed while the sun shines, and be active under gaslight during the night. What would you think of the gardener who should cover your greenhouse till noon, and make up for the deficiency of light by burning lamps beside the flowers till midnight. Treat yourselves as you treat your gardens. Young men and women would be more like the lilies in freshness and beauty if they considered and imitated them.

3. The free use and vile abuse of intoxicating drinks. (W. Arnot, D. D.)

The bright side of life

There are two sides to every street and to every life—the bright and the dark. The man who deliberately chooses the latter must look to himself for companionship, but the man who elects the former will not lack society. The double attraction of his circumstances and his example will prove irresistible.

2. The bright side exists not only in spacious avenues fringed with lordly mansions, but in narrow lanes flanked by lowly cottages. The cheerful Christian draws satisfaction from, and shows it in, not only life’s great occasions, but in life’s commonplace acts. You can form no judgment of the spirit of a man when he is being united to his bride, when successful in business, or when on a holiday. Watch him at the table, or in some ordinary duty, and you will be able most accurately to gauge his character.

I. The bright side of life is illumined by a triple light.

1. Gladness. We like to see a man—particularly if he be a guest—thoroughly enjoy his meal. To see him daintily picking over half of it, and sending the other half untasted away, grieves the generous host, and excites commiseration for the man who cannot relish wholesome food. The illustration may be expanded so as to embrace the whole of life. The good workman is glad with his work and glad to do it. There is no gladness for a good mother like that excited by and indulged in home and children.

And for the good Christian perfect gladness is only to be found in the blessed work that God has given him to do. But insipidity or disagreeableness in any of these relations is invariably attended by poor if not bad effects.

2. Singleness of heart—a word only occurring here in the New Testament—means soil from which all stones are cleared; and hence even and smooth, presenting no obstacle to the object passing over it. So these good people did not wait till conscience thundered that while they were feasting others were starving. Nor had they to clear away a number of prudential considerations, and make a number of troublesome calculations before their beneficence could find free play. All hindrances were already swept away by the fresh vigorous tide of charity which resulted from the copious baptism of the Holy Ghost. Surely this singleness of mind is wanted everywhere. What trouble is caused by anxious thought about the future at home and in the market place. What energies are paralysed when the thought of interest is allowed to mingle with the single thought of duty. How many Christians are kept back from joyous Christian service by allowing the disturbing thought of what other people will think or feel to upset the simple conviction that God’s will ought to be done. Get these thoughts swept out of the mind by the power of the Spirit, and then let the current of activity flow straight forward, and life will be bright. Otherwise it will be gloomy-a mixture of light and darkness—or hopelessly dark.

3. Thankfulness. He was a happy man who wrote that 103rd Psalm. The unthankful man is never happy, and cannot be. Selfishness and discontent kill all joy.

II. The bright side is the attractive side. The disciples had “favour with all the people, and the Lord added to the Church.” Thus God blesses those who walk on the bright side, and gives them their heart’s desire, which is success—the gathering to themselves of a like-minded company. Religious increase is brought about in two conceivable ways—by compulsion and by attraction. The first produces hypocrites, the second only true Christians. It is only when Christians win favour that God adds. Apply this to—

1. Families. How many children have simulated godliness when forced upon them only to cast it away with disgust when the time of independence comes; but how many have risen up to call God blessed by the winsome piety they have seen at home.

2. Society. The estimate which worldly men and women form of religion is derived from what they see of professing Christians. And, alas! much of it is wholly and naturally unfavourable. The time has come to re-try the Pentecostal experiment; not in form but in spirit, a spirit that shall work through established social usages—showing how a Christian can comport himself joyously everywhere, and society will not long remain unchristianised.

3. The Church. So-called Christianity has tried force, indifference, and means calculated only to repel. Let Christians try that which will have favour with the people, use means in the best sense popular, and watch the result. (J. W. Burn.)

Gladness and singleness of heart.—

Gladness of heart springs from singleness of heart

They were glad at heart because they were single in heart. Their hearts were not divided between God, or Christ, and the world, and, being wholly the Lord’s, they rejoiced in the Lord.

I. Their gladness was the effect of their singleness of heart towards God, towards God in Christ, whom they called Lord and God, and into whose name they had been baptized for forgiveness of sins, with the promise of receiving from Him, if they repented, the gift or baptism of the Holy Ghost. It was the proper fruit, that is to say, of that awful fear of God, tempered and softened by filial confidence and grateful love, which we see characterised in the context as the habitual frame of mind in which these primitive disciples walked with God, in the exercise of living faith in Jesus Christ. In proportion as they knew God, or knew the gospel of Christ, they saw that He was all in all, that of Him, and through Him, and to Him were all things. They connected all things, little and great, with God. All things were thus to them full of God, and since they rejoiced in God, full of the joy of God. This was the secret of their happiness, this the source, this the sum. And in proportion to the singleness of their hearts towards God, so that He was all in all, and of Him, through Him, and to Him, all things, did the gladness of their hearts become more full and ecstatic, or rise nearer to the blessedness of saints in heaven. Their joy was, then, first of all the joy of godliness and gratitude.

II. Again, this gladness proceeded from the singleness of their hearts towards the world, from the victory over the world, to which they were crucified by the Cross of Christ. A half-hearted Christian, if such a man there be, a worldly-minded professor of Christianity whose heart is divided between God and the world, or rather is not yet given to God, is miserable when he is called to surrender his worldly possessions, and feels his happiness to consist in giving as little as possible to the cause of Christ. But not so the man who with singleness of heart has said, “I am not mine own; I am bought with a price,” therefore must I glorify my Redeemer with all that is mine. The more he can do for God, the more he can contribute to the cause of Christ, the more is his joy made full. His heart being single, his final aim being one, in the fulfilment of that aim, in the extent to which he can contribute by his exertions or possessions to its fulfilment, he is glad.

III. There was, however, another element in the joy of these Christians, for there was another distinguishing feature of their character. Theirs was the joy of mutual love—the sweetest joy which earth can boast. Their hearts were united in the bond of perfectness, charity, and therefore they were glad. That man might well consent to part with the world who, with the world as the price, could purchase a friend, could win to himself the pure love of one purified heart. No wonder they were glad at heart. They loved one another with a pure heart fervently. Their singleness of heart in their attachment to one another made them glad. Love is the proper fruit of the gospel, for faith, which is the reception of the gospel, worketh by love. Love is happiness; pure love is pure happiness; Christian love is Christian happiness, or life eternal in present possession, the life of heaven upon earth. Theirs was therefore the gladness of love free from selfishness, and as free from sectarianism.

IV. But there was one other characteristic of this gladness of heart which must not be omitted, since it points to its source, and is the thing by which it was distinguished from all other joy. This gladness was the joy of faith is Jesus Christ. In all its elements it was the fruit of that faith. Their godliness, their gratitude, was the godliness of faith and the gratitude of faith. Their victory over the world was also the victory of faith: “For this is the victory that overcometh the world, even your faith.” And their love to one another was love in the Lord, love of faith’s producing, for “faith worketh by love,” which is the believer’s life. They were glad at heart, because they believed with all their heart. What, then, is the gladness of faith, as it is described here, compared with other joys? Need I show that it was a joy peculiar in its character, and pre-eminently pure and exalted? Need I show that it was an independent, and uniform, and habitual joy? not arising from circumstances of a variable kind, not like the joy of wealth, or of honour, or of pleasure,

which may come in a night and depart in a night, which return only at intervals, and soon pall and cease to please, the sooner the oftener they return. Faith may flourish whatever fades; and this joy is as independent and as uniform as is the exercise of faith. Need I show that it is a perpetually increasing joy, a light which shineth more and more unto the perfect day? Every view of God increases it, if we see Him as He is in Jesus Christ. All our intercourse with the world calls it into exercise, and gives it, if we overcome the world, renewed strength. And love produces love. By loving we learn to love, as by walking we learn to walk. (R. Paisley.)

COKE, "Acts 2:44-45. And had all things common;— Peculiar reasons made this community of goods eligible at that time; especially as many sojourners, who had come from other parts, would justly be desirous to continue at Jerusalem much longer than they intended when they came up to the feast, in order that they might gain a thorough knowledge of the gospel. But the New Testament abounds with passages, which plainly show, that this was never intended for a general practice: the Gentiles did not fall into it when the gospel came to them; and none of St. Paul's epistles contain intimations or directions for such a practice. The Jewish converts acted thus at this time and place, though not by command, yet doubtless with the approbation of the apostles.Butnonecanreasonablyimaginethatthe number of Christian converts, even then at Jerusalem, is to be accounted for by a desire to share in these divided goods; for it is evident, that as the portion each could have, would be very small, so the hardships to be endured for a Christian profession would soon counter-balance such advantages; and accordingly we find the converts at Jerusalem were soon reduced to such necessitous circumstances, as to need relief by the contributions of their Gentile brethren. Candour would rather lead men to argue the incontestable evidence of the gospel, from its prevailing on the professors of it to part with their estates to relieve persons, who, except in the community of their faith, had no particular claim to their regard. If such instances were numerous, this argument is strengthened in proportion; and if they be supposed few, the objection is proportionably weakened: however, the present is most certainly a noble and eminent instance of that disinterestedness, self-denial, and benevolence, which the gospel was designed to produce in the minds of men; and this is indeed the true Christian spirit, which is carefully to be cultivated bysuch as profess themselves the disciples of Jesus, in everyage and nation; though they are not obliged to exert it in the same kind or degree. See Christ's prayer for the unity of his disciples, John 17 particularly Acts 2:21.

ELLICOTT, "(44) All that believed were together. . . .—The writer dwells with a manifest delight on this picture of what seemed to him the true ideal of a human society. Here there was a literal fulfilment of his Lord’s words (Luke 12:33), a society founded, not on the law of self-interest and competition, but on sympathy and self-denial. They had all things in common, not by a compulsory abolition of the rights of property (see Acts 5:4), but by the spontaneous energy of love. The gift of the Spirit showed its power, not only in tongues and prophecy, but in the more excellent way of charity. It was well that that inimitable glow of love should manifest itself for a time to be a beacon-light to after ages, even if experience taught the Church in course of time that this generous and general distribution was not the wisest method of accomplishing permanent good, and that here also a discriminate economy, such as St. Paul taught (2 Thessalonians 3:10; 1 Timothy 3:8), was necessary as a safe-guard against abuse. It was, we may perhaps believe, partly in consequence of the rapid exhaustion of its resources thus brought about, that the

Church at Jerusalem became dependent for many years upon the bounty of the churches of the Gentiles. (See Note on Acts 11:29.)

45Selling their possessions and goods, they gave

to anyone as he had need.

BARNES, "And sold - That is, they sold as much as was necessary in order to procure the means of providing for the needs of each other.

Possessions - Property, particularly real estate. This word, κτήµατα ktēmata, refers

properly to their fixed property, as lands, houses, vineyards, etc. The word rendered

“goods,” �πάρξεις huparxeis, refers to their personal or movable “property.”

And parted them to all - They distributed them to supply the needs of their poorer brethren, according to their necessities.

As every man had need - This expression limits and fixes the meaning of what is said before. The passage does not mean that they sold all their possessions, or that they relinquished their title to all their property, but that they so far regarded all as common as to be willing to part with it if it was needful to supply the needs of the others. Hence, the property was laid at the disposal of the apostles, and they were desired to distribute it freely to meet the needs of the poor, Act_4:34-35.

This was an important incident in the early propagation of religion, and it may suggest many useful reflections:

1. We see the effect of religion. The love of property is one of the strongest affections which people have. There is nothing that will overcome it but religion. That will; and one of the first effects of the gospel was to loosen the hold of Christians on property.

2. It is the duty of the church to provide for the needs of its poor and needy members. There can be no doubt that property should now be regarded as so far common as that the needs of the poor should be supplied by those who are rich. Compare Mat_26:11.

3. If it be asked why the early disciples evinced this readiness to part with their property in this manner, it may be replied:

(1) That the apostles had done it before them. The family of the Saviour had all things common.

(2) It was the nature of religion to do it.

(3) The circumstances of the persons assembled on this occasion were such as to require it. They were many of them from distant regions, and probably many of them of the poorer class of the people in Jerusalem. In this they evinced what should be done in behalf of the poor in the church at all times.

4. If it be asked whether this was done commonly among the early Christians, it may be replied that there is no evidence that it was. It is mentioned here, and in Act_4:32-37, and Act_5:1-7. It does not appear that it was done even by all who were afterward

converted in Judea; and there is no evidence that it was done in Antioch, Ephesus, Corinth, Philippi, Rome, etc. That the effect of religion was to make people liberal and willing to provide for the poor there can be no doubt. See 2Co_8:19; 2Co_9:2; 1Co_16:2; Gal_2:10. But there is no proof that it was common to part with their possessions and to lay them at the feet of the apostles. Religion does not contemplate, evidently, that people should break up all the arrangements in society, but it contemplates that those who have property should be ready and willing to part with it for the help of the poor and needy.

5. If it be asked, then, whether all the arrangements of property should be broken up now, and believers have all things in common, we are prepared to answer “No.” Because:

(1) This was an extraordinary case.

(2) It was not even enjoined by the apostles on them.

(3) It was practiced nowhere else.

(4) It would be impracticable. No community where all things were held in common has long prospered. It has been attempted often, by pagans, by infidels, and by fanatical sects of Christians. It ends soon in anarchy, licentiousness, idleness, and profligacy; or the more cunning secure the mass of the property, and control the whole. Until all people are made alike, there could be no hope of such a community; and if there could be, it would not be desirable. God evidently intended that people should be excited to industry by the hope of gain; and then he demands that their gains shall be devoted to his service. Still, this was a noble instance of Christian generosity, and evinced the power of religion in loosing the hold which people commonly have on the world. It rebukes also those professors of religion, of whom, alas, there are many, who give nothing to benefit either the souls or bodies of their fellow-men.

GILL, "And sold their possessions and goods..... Their houses and lands, their fields and vineyards, their goods, moveable or immoveable:

and parted them to all men; that were of their society, not to others:

as every man had need: the rich sold their estates, and divided them among the poor, or gave them such a portion thereof as their present exigencies required. This was done by Jews, and by Jews only; who, when they embraced the Gospel of Christ, were informed that the destruction of their city, and nation, was at hand; and therefore they sold their estates before hand, and put them to this use; which was necessary to be done, both for the support of the Gospel in Judea, and for the carrying and spreading of it among the Gentiles: but is not to be drawn into a precedent, or an example in after times; nor is ever any such thing proposed to the Christian churches, or exhorted to by any of the apostles.

HENRY, "They raised a fund for charity (Act_2:45): They sold their possessions and goods; some sold their lands and houses, others their stocks and the furniture of their houses, and parted the money to their brethren, as every man had need. This was to destroy, not property (as Mr. Baxter says), but selfishness. Herein, probably, they had an eye to the command which Christ gave to the rich man, as a test of his sincerity, Sell that thou hast, and give to the poor. Not that this was intended for an example to be a constant binding rule, as if all Christians in all places and ages were bound to sell their estates, and give away the money in charity. For St. Paul's epistles, after this, often speak of the distinction of rich and poor, and Christ hath said that the poor we always have

with us, and shall have, and the rich must be always doing them good out of the rents, issues, and profits, of their estates, which they disable themselves to do, if they sell them, and give all away at once. But here the case was extraordinary (1.) They were under no obligation of a divine command to do this, as appears by what Peter said to Ananias (Act_5:4): Was it not in thine own power? But it was a very commendable instance of their raisedness above the world, their contempt of it, their assurance of another world, their love to their brethren, their compassion to the poor, and their great zeal for the encouraging of Christianity, and the nursing of it in its infancy. The apostles left all to follow Christ, and were to give themselves wholly to the word and prayer, and something must be done for their maintenance; so that this extraordinary liberality was like that of Israel in the wilderness towards the building of the tabernacle, which needed to be restrained, Exo_36:5, Exo_36:6. Our rule is, to give according as God has blessed us; yet, in such an extraordinary case as this, those are to be praised who give beyond their power, 2Co_8:3. (2.) They were Jews that did this, and those who believed Christ must believe that the Jewish nation would shortly be destroyed, and an end put to the possession of estates and goods in it, and, in the belief of this, they sold them for the

ELLICOTT, "(45) And sold their possessions and goods.—The verbs throughout this description are in the imperfect tense, as expressing the constant recurrence of the act. The Greek words for “possessions” and “goods” both mean “property,” the former as a thing acquired, the latter as that which belongs to a man for the time being. Custom, however, had introduced a technical distinction, and “possessions” stands for real property, “goods” for personal. So in Acts 5:1; Acts 5:3; Acts 5:8, the former word is used interchangeably with that which is translated “field,” and in the LXX. of Proverbs 23:10; Proverbs 31:16, is used both for “field” and “vineyard.”

As every man had need.—The words imply at least the endeavour to discriminate. The money was not given literally to every one who applied for it, and so the way was prepared for more fixed and definite rules.

CONSTABLE, "These early believers had frequent contact with each other. Communal living was voluntary and temporary in the Jerusalem church (Acts 4:32; Acts 4:34-35; Acts 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. [Note: See 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.]

The believers' willingness to sell their property (real estate, cf. Acts 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. [Note: Alan J. Thompson, "Unity in Acts: Idealization or Reality?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 51:3 (September 2008):523-42.] Others have disputed this claim. [Note: E.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).] 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. Beside 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?

46Every day they continued to meet together in

the temple courts. They broke bread in their

homes and ate together with glad and sincere

hearts,

BARNES, "With one accord - Compare Act_1:14; Act_2:1.

In the temple - This was the public place of worship; and the disciples were not disposed to leave the place where their fathers had so long worshipped God. This does not mean that they were constantly in the temple, but only at the customary hours of prayer - at nine o’clock in the morning, and at three o’clock in the afternoon.

And breaking bread - See the notes on Act_2:42.

From house to house - In the margin, “at home.” So the Syriac and Arabic. The common interpretation, however, is, that they did it in their various houses, now in this and now in that, as might be convenient. If it refers to their ordinary meals, then it means that they partook in common of what they possessed, and the expression “did eat their meat” seems to imply that this refers to their common meals, and not to the Lord’s Supper.

Did eat their meat - Did partake of their food. The word “meat” with us is applied to “flesh.” In the Bible, and in Old English authors, it is applied to “provisions” of any kind.

Here it means all kinds of sustenance; what nourished them - τροφ_ς trophēs - and the

use of this word proves that it does not refer to the Lord’s Supper; for that ordinance is nowhere represented as designed for an ordinary meal, or to nourish the body. Compare 1Co_11:33-34.

With gladness - With rejoicing. This is one of the effects of religion. It is far from gloom; it diffuses happiness over the mind; it bestows additional joy in the participation of even our ordinary pleasures.

Singleness of heart - This means with a sincere and pure heart. They were satisfied and thankful. They were not perplexed or anxious; nor were they solicitous for the luxurious living, or aspiring after the vain objects of the people of the world. Compare Rom_12:8; 2Co_1:12; Col_3:22; Eph_6:5.

CLARKE, "They, continuing daily with one accord in the temple - They were present at all the times of public worship, and joined together in prayers and praises to God; for it in not to be supposed that they continued to offer any of the sacrifices prescribed by the law.

Breaking bread from house to house - This may signify, that select companies, who were contiguous to each other, frequently ate together at their respective lodgings

on their return from public worship. But κατ’�οικον, which we translate from house to

house, is repeatedly used by the Greek writers for home, at home, for though they had all things in common, each person lived at his own table. Breaking bread is used to express the act of taking their meals. The bread of the Jews was thin, hard, and dry, and was never cut with the knife as ours is, but was simply broken by the hand.

With gladness and singleness of heart - A true picture of genuine Christian fellowship. They ate their bread: they had no severe fasts; the Holy Spirit had done in their souls, by his refining influence, what others vainly expect from bodily austerities. It may be said also, that, if they had no severe fasts, they had no splendid feasts: all was moderation, and all was contentment. They were full of gladness, spiritual joy and happiness; and singleness of heart, every man worthy of the confidence of his neighbor; and all walking by the same rule, and minding the same thing.

GILL, "And they continued daily with one accord in the temple,.... Every day they went up to the temple, at the time of prayer, or whenever any religious service was to be performed; this was their constant practice, and in this they agreed:

and breaking bread from house to house; either administering the Lord's supper in private houses, as the Jews kept their passover, sometimes administering it at one house, and sometimes at another; or because their number was so large, that one house could not hold them, they divided themselves into lesser bodies; and some met, and had the ordinance administered to them in one house, and some in another: or this may be understood of their common meals, which they ate together at one another's houses in great love and friendship; for

they did eat their meat with gladness; with great thankfulness to the God of their mercies for their daily food, acknowledging that all came from him, and that they were undeserving of it, and with much cheerfulness and affability one among another, without murmuring and repining at their lot, or envying each other, or grudging what each other partook of:

and singleness of heart; without deceit and hypocrisy; either in their thanksgivings to God, or in their welcome and entertainment of each other; and with great sincerity, openness, and frankness before God, and one another. The Syriac version joins this clause with the beginning of the next verse, "with singleness of heart, praising God".

CALVIN 46. Continuing in the temple. We must note that they did frequent the temple

for this cause, because there was more opportunity and occasion offered there to further

the gospel. Neither were they drawn with the holiness of the place, seeing they knew that

the shadows of the law were ceased; neither meant they to draw others by their example

to have the temple in any such reverence; 1 but because there was there great concourse

of people, who having laid aside their private cares, wherewith they had been drawn away

elsewhere, 2 did seek the Lord; they were continually in the temple, that they might gain

such unto Christ. There might be another reason which might induce them hereunto, that

they might have a mutual conference and imparting of doctrine amongst themselves,

which they could not have done so conveniently in a private house, especially seeing they

were so, many.

Breaking bread from house to house. Luke signifieth unto us, that they did not

only show some token of true godliness publicly, but that the course and tenor

of their private life was alone in that respect. For whereas some do think that

in this place, by breaking of bread is meant the Holy Supper, it seemeth to me

that Luke meant no such thing. He signifieth, therefore, unto us, that they used

to eat together, and that thriftily. 3 For those which make sumptuous banquets

do not eat their meat together so familiarly. Again, Luke addeth, in singleness

of heart; which is also a token of temperance. In sum, his meaning is to

declare, that their manner of living was brotherly and sober. Some do join

simplicity and gladness with the praise of God; and both texts may well be

allowed. 4 But because there can be no singleness of heart in praising God,

unless the stone be also in all parts of the life, therefore it is certain, that there

is mention made thereof in this sense, that the faithful did always use the same

in all places. 5 And we must also note the circumstance of time, that, being

environed and beset with many dangers, they were merry and joyful. The

knowledge of God's love toward us, and the hope of his protection, do bring us

this goodness with them, that we praise God with quiet minds, whatsoever the

world doth threaten. And as Luke spoke a little before of the public estate of

the Church, so he declareth now what form and manner of life the faithful did

use; that we may learn by their example a thrifty fellowship in our manner of

living, and in all our whole life to embrace singleness, to enjoy the spiritual

joy, and to exercise ourselves in the praises of God. Furthermore, the

singleness of heart reacheth far; but if you join it in this place with breaking of

bread, it shall signify as much as sincere love, where one man dealeth plainly

with another, neither doth any man craftily hunt after his own profit. Yet had I

rather set the same against that carefulness, wherewith worldly men 6 do too

much torment themselves. For when as we do not cast our care upon the Lord,

this reward hangeth over our heads, that we tremble and quake even when we

take our rest.

GILL Verse 46. And they continued daily with one accord in the temple,.... Every day

they went up to the temple, at the time of prayer, or whenever any religious service was to

be performed; this was their constant practice, and in this they agreed:

and breaking bread from house to house; either administering the Lord's supper in private

houses, as the Jews kept their passover, sometimes administering it at one house, and

sometimes at another; or because their number was so large, that one house could not

hold them, they divided themselves into lesser bodies; and some met, and had the

ordinance administered to them in one house, and some in another: or this may be

understood of their common meals, which they ate together at one another's houses in

great love and friendship; for

they did eat their meat with gladness; with great thankfulness to the God of their mercies

for their daily food, acknowledging that all came from him, and that they were

undeserving of it, and with much cheerfulness and affability one among another, without

murmuring and repining at their lot, or envying each other, or grudging what each other

partook of:

and singleness of heart; without deceit and hypocrisy; either in their thanksgivings to

God, or in their welcome and entertainment of each other; and with great sincerity,

openness, and frankness before God, and one another. The Syriac version joins this clause

with the beginning of the next verse, "with singleness of heart, praising God."

COFFMAN, "At home ... indicates that there had been no abolition of private property,

nor the removal of the means of production from the hands of individuals; and, therefore,

what we behold in the preceding verses is not "communism" at all, but Christian

generosity. There is no reference here to the Lord's Supper.

COKE, "Acts 2:46. They, continuing daily with one accord— Hitherto none of the

Christian converts neglected the Jewish worship, but frequented the courts of the temple

daily, at the usual hours of prayer and devotion. But it is evident from the circumstances

of the times, that these converts could not communicate or receive the eucharist in the

temple: where then could they receive it, but in their own houses? And as the expression

from house to house seems to be peculiar, this particularity cannot be accounted for, but

upon supposition that the preceding words relate to the eucharist, because if they refer

only to a common meal, the peculiarity is lost, and the expression from house to house is

superfluous and unnecessary. Dr. Heylin renders the verse thus, being unanimously

constant in their daily attendance upon public worship in the temple, and at the breaking

of bread at home, they received nourishment with joy and simplicity of heart. "By the

breaking of bread (says he) is meant the celebration of the eucharist; and this, with their

worship in the temple, being spoken of as the occasions of their nourishment, we

conclude that nourishment to be spiritual: as Hebrews 12:14. 1 Corinthians 3:2; 1

Corinthians 3:23."

ELLICOTT, "(46) Continuing daily with one accord in the temple.—At first it would

have seemed natural that the followers of a Teacher whom the priests had condemned to

death, who had once nearly been stoned, and once all but seized in the very courts of the

Temple (John 8:59; John 10:31; John 7:45), should keep aloof from the sanctuary that

had thus been desecrated. But they remembered that He had claimed it as His Father’s

house, that His zeal for that house had been as a consuming passion (John 2:16-17), and

therefore they had attended its worship daily before the Day of Pentecost (Luke 24:53);

and it was not less, but infinitely more, precious to them now, as the place where they

could meet with God, than it had been in the days of ignorance, before they had known

the Christ, and through Him had learnt to know the Father. The apparent strangeness of

their being allowed to meet in the Temple is explained partly by the fact that its courts

were open to all Israelites who did not disturb its peace, partly by the existence of a

moderate half-believing party in the Sanhedrin itself, including Nicodemus, Joseph of

Arimathæa, and Gamaliel (Acts 5:35); and by the popularity gained for a time by the

holiness and liberal almsgiving of the new community.

Breaking bread from house to house.—Better, with the margin, at home—i.e., in their

own house. The Greek phrase may have a distributive force, but Romans 16:5, 1

Corinthians 16:19, Colossians 4:14, where the same formula is used, seem to show that

that is not the meaning here. They met in the Temple, they met also in what, in the

modern sense of the word, would be the “church” of the new society, for the act of

worship, above all, for the highest act of worship and of fellowship, for which the Temple

was, of course, unsuitable.

Did eat their meat . . .—We have again the tense which implies a customary act. The

words imply that as yet the solemn breaking of bread was closely connected with their

daily life. Anticipating the language of a few years later, the Agapè, or Love-feast, was

united with the Eucharistic Communion. The higher sanctified the lower. It was not till

love and faith were colder that men were forced to separate them, lest (as in 1 Corinthians

11:20-21) the lower should desecrate the higher.

Gladness and singleness of heart.—This “gladness” is significant. The word was the same

as that which had been used by the angel to Zacharias (Luke 1:44) in announcing the birth

of the Forerunner. The verb from which the noun was derived had been employed by our

Lord when He bade His disciples rejoice and be glad (Matthew 5:12). The literal meaning

of the word translated “singleness,” which does not occur elsewhere in the New

Testament, was the smoothness of a soil without stones. Thence it came to be used for

evenness and simplicity, unity of character; thence for that unity showing itself in love;

thence, by a further transition, for unalloyed benevolence, showing itself in act.

CONSTABLE, "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. Acts 6:7; Acts 9:31; Acts 12:24; Acts 16:5; Acts 19:20; Acts

28:30-31). [Note: See Witherington's excursus on the summaries in Acts, pp. 157-59.]

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. Acts 3:11;

Acts 5:12). Probably these Jewish believers considered themselves the true remnant

within Israel until they began to realize the distinctiveness of the church. They ate meals

and observed the Lord's Supper together in homes. In the ancient Near East eating

together reflected a common commitment to one another and deep fellowship. A meal

shared together was both a mark 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 time chapter two

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 (Acts 1:1-2), stressed the Lord

Jesus' work in causing the church to grow (Acts 2:47; cf. Matthew 16:18).

"... 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 less mention of the

worship of God, although of course this element was not absent." [Note: Marshall, The

Acts . . ., pp. 85-86.]

"Christianity was no proletarian movement. It appealed to a broad spectrum of classes."

[Note: David 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.]

47praising God and enjoying the favor of all the

people. And the Lord added to their number daily

those who were being saved.

BARNES, "Praising God - See Luk_24:53.

And having favour - See Luk_2:52.

With all the people - That is, with the great mass of the people; with the people generally. It does not mean that all the people had become reconciled to Christianity; but their humble, serious, and devoted lives won the favor of the great mass of the community, and silenced opposition and cavil. This was a remarkable effect, but God has power to silence opposition; and there it nothing so well suited to do this as the humble and consistent lives of his friends.

And the Lord added - See Act_5:14; Act_11:24, etc. It was the Lord who did this. There was no power in man to do it; and the Christian loves to trace all increase of the church to the grace of God.

Added - Caused, or inclined them to be joined to the church.

The church - To the assembly of the followers of Christ - τc�Eκκλησί� tē�ekklēsia. The

word rendered “church” properly means “those who are called out,” and is applied to Christians as being called out, or separated from the world. It is used only three times in the gospels, Mat_16:18; Mat_18:17, twice. It occurs frequently in other parts of the New Testament, and usually as applied to the followers of Christ. Compare Act_5:11; Act_7:38; Act_8:1, Act_8:3; Act_9:31; Act_11:22, Act_11:26; Act_12:1, Act_12:5, etc. It is used in Classic writers to denote “an assembly” of any kind, and is twice thus used in the New Testament Act_19:39, Act_19:41, where it is translated “assembly.”

Such as should be saved - This whole phrase is a translation of a participle - το�ς�

σωζοµένους tous�sōzomenous. It does not express any purpose that they should be saved,

but simply the fact that they were those who would be, or who were about to be saved. It is clear, however, from this expression, that those who became members of the church were those who continued to adorn their profession, or who gave proof that they were sincere Christians. It is implied here, also, that those who are to be saved will join themselves to the church of God. This is everywhere required; and it constitutes one evidence of piety when they are willing to face the world, and give themselves at once to the service of the Lord Jesus. Two remarks may be made on the last verse of this chapter; one is, that the effect of a consistent Christian life will be to command the respect of the world; and the other is, that the effect will be continually to increase the number of those who shall be saved. In this case they were daily added to it; the church was constantly increasing; and the same result may be expected in all cases where there is similar zeal, self-denial, consistency, and prayer.

We have now contemplated the foundation of the Christian church and the first glorious revival of religion. This chapter deserves to be profoundly studied by all ministers of the gospel, as well as by all who pray for the prosperity of the kingdom of God. It should excite our fervent gratitude that God has left this record of the first great work of grace, and our earnest prayers that He would multiply and extend such scenes until the earth shall be filled with His glory.

CLARKE, "Praising God - As the fountain whence they had derived all their spiritual and temporal blessings; seeing him in all things, and magnifying the work of his mercy.

Having favor with all the people - Every honest, upright Jew would naturally esteem these for the simplicity, purity, and charity of their lives. The scandal of the cross had not yet commenced; for, though they had put Jesus Christ to death, they had not get entered into a systematic opposition to the doctrines he taught.

And the Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved - Though many approved of the life and manners of these primitive Christians, yet they did not

become members of this holy Church; God permitting none to be added to it, but τους�

σωζοµενους, those who were saved from their sins and prejudices. The Church of Christ

was made up of saints; sinners ware not permitted to incorporate themselves with it.

One MS. and the Armenian version, instead of τους�σωζοµενους, the saved, have τοις�

σωζοµενοις, to them who were saved; reading the verse thus: And the Lord added daily to

those who were saved. He united those who were daily converted under the preaching of the apostles to those who had already been converted. And thus every lost sheep that was found was brought to the flock, that, under the direction of the great Master

Shepherd, they might go out and in, and find pasture. The words, to the Church, τY�

εκκλησι�, are omitted by BC, Coptic, Sahidic, Ethiopic, Armenian, and Vulgate; and

several add the words επι�το�αυτο, at that tine, (which begin the first verse of the next

chapter) to the conclusion of this. My old MS. English Bible reads the verse thus: For so the Lord encresed hem that weren maad saaf, eche day, into the same thing. Nearly the

same rendering as that in Wiclif. Our translation of τους�σωζοµενους, such as should be

saved is improper and insupportable. The original means simply and solely those who were then saved; those who were redeemed from their sins and baptized into the faith of Jesus Christ. The same as those whom St. Paul addressed, Eph_2:8 : By grace ye are

saved, εστε�σεσωσµενοι; or, ye are those who have been saved by grace. So in Tit_3:5 :

According to his mercy he saved us, εσωσεν�fµας, by the washing of regeneration. And in

1Co_1:18, we have the words τοις�σωζοµενοις, them who are saved, to express those who

had received the Christian faith; in opposition to τοις�απολλυµενοις, to those who are lost,

namely the Jews, who obstinately refused to receive salvation on the terms of the Gospel, the only way in which they could be saved; for it was by embracing the Gospel of Christ that they were put in a state of salvation; and, by the grace it imparted, actually saved from the power, guilt, and dominion of sin. See 1Co_15:2 : I made known unto you, brethren, the Gospel which I preached unto you, which ye have received, and in which ye

stand; and By Which Ye Are Saved, δι’�ο��και�σωζεσθε. Our translation, which indeed

existed long before our present authorized version, as may be seen in Cardmarden’s Bible, 1566, Beck’s Bible, 1549, and Tindall’s Testament, printed by Will. Tylle, in 1548, is bad in itself; but it has been rendered worse by the comments put on it, viz. that those whom God adds to the Church shall necessarily and unavoidably be eternally saved; whereas no such thing is hinted by the original text, be the doctrine of the indefectibility of the saints true or false - which shall be examined in its proper place.

On that awful subject, the foreknowledge of God, something has already been spoken: see Act_2:23. Though it is a subject which no finite nature can comprehend, yet it is possible so to understand what relates to us in it as to avoid those rocks of presumption and despondency on which multitudes have been shipwrecked. The foreknowledge of God is never spoken of in reference to himself, but in reference to us: in him properly there is neither foreknowledge nor afterknowledge. Omniscience, or the power to know all things, is an attribute of God, and exists in him as omnipotence, or the power to do all things. He can do whatsoever he will; and he does whatsoever is fit or proper to be done. God cannot have foreknowledge, strictly speaking, because this would suppose that there was something coming, in what we call futurity, which had not yet arrived at the presence of the Deity. Neither can he have any afterknowledge, strictly speaking, for this would suppose that something that had taken place, in what we call pretereity, or past time, had now got beyond the presence of the Deity. As God exists in all that can be called eternity, so he is equally every where: nothing can be future to him, because he lives in all futurity; nothing can be past to him, because he equally exists in all past time; futurity and pretereity are relative terms to us; but they can have no relation to that God who dwells in every point of eternity; with whom all that is past, and all that is present, and all that is future to man, exists in one infinite, indivisible, and eternal Now. As God’s omnipotence implies his power to do all things, so God’s omniscience implies his power to know all things; but we must take heed that we meddle not with the infinite free agency of this Eternal Being. Though God can do all thinks, he does not all things. Infinite judgment directs the operations of his power, so that though he can, yet he does not do all things, but only such things as are proper to be done. In what is called illimitable space, he can make millions of millions of systems; but he does not see proper to do this. He can destroy the solar system, but he does not do it: he can fashion and order, in endless variety, all the different beings which now exist, whether material, animal, or intellectual; but he does not do this, because he does not see it proper to be done. Therefore it does not follow that, because God can do all things, therefore he must do all things. God is omniscient, and can know all things; but does it follow from this that he must know all things? Is he not as free in the volitions of his wisdom, as he is in the volitions of his power? The contingent as absolute, or the absolute as contingent?

God has ordained some things as absolutely certain; these he knows as absolutely certain. He has ordained other things as contingent; these he knows as contingent. It would be absurd to say that he foreknows a thing as only contingent which he has made absolutely certain. And it would be as absurd to say that he foreknows a thing to be absolutely certain which in his own eternal counsel he has made contingent. By absolutely certain, I mean a thing which must be, in that order, time, place, and form in which Divine wisdom has ordained it to be; and that it can be no otherwise than this infinite counsel has ordained. By contingent, I mean such things as the infinite wisdom of God has thought proper to poise on the possibility of being or not being, leaving it to the will of intelligent beings to turn the scale. Or, contingencies are such possibilities, amid the succession of events, as the infinite wisdom of God has left to the will of intelligent beings to determine whether any such event shall take place or not. To deny this would involve the most palpable contradictions, and the most monstrous absurdities. If there be no such things as contingencies in the world, then every thing is fixed and determined by an unalterable decree and purpose of God; and not only all free agency is destroyed, but all agency of every kind, except that of the Creator himself; for on this ground God is the only operator, either in time or eternity: all created beings are only instruments, and do nothing but as impelled and acted upon by this almighty and sole Agent. Consequently, every act is his own; for if he have purposed them all as absolutely certain, having nothing contingent in them, then he has ordained them to be so; and if no contingency, then no free agency, and God alone is the sole actor. Hence the blasphemous, though, from the premises, fair conclusion, that God is the author of all the evil and sin that are in the world; and hence follows that absurdity, that, as God can do nothing that is wrong, Whatever Is, is Right. Sin is no more sin; a vicious human action is no crime, if God have decreed it, and by his foreknowledge and will impelled the creature to act it. On this ground there can be no punishment for delinquencies; for if every thing be done as God has predetermined, and his determinations must necessarily be all right, then neither the instrument nor the agent has done wrong. Thus all vice and virtue, praise and blame, merit and demerit, guilt and innocence, are at once confounded, and all distinctions of this kind confounded with them. Now, allowing the doctrine of the contingency of human actions, (and it must be allowed in order to shun the above absurdities and blasphemies), then we see every intelligent creature accountable for its own works, and for the use it makes of the power with which God has endued it; and, to grant all this consistently, we must also grant that God foresees nothing as absolutely and inevitably certain which he has made contingent; and, because he has designed it to be contingent, therefore he cannot know it as absolutely and inevitably certain. I conclude that God, although omniscient, is not obliged, in consequence of this, to know all that he can know; no more than he is obliged, because he is omnipotent, to do all that he can do.

How many, by confounding the self and free agency of God with a sort of continual impulsive necessity, have raised that necessity into an all-commanding and overruling energy, to which God himself is made subject! Very properly did Milton set his damned spirits about such work as this, and has made it a part of their endless punishment: -

Others apart sat on a hill retired,In thoughts more elevate; and reasoned highOf providence, foreknowledge, will, and fate;Fixed fate, free-will, foreknowledge absolute,And found no end, in wand’ring mazes lost.Parad. Lost, b. ii. l. 557.

Among some exceptionable expressions, the following are also good thoughts on the flee agency and fall of man: -

- I made him just and right,Sufficient to have stood, though free to fall.Not free, what proof could they have given sincereOf true allegiance, constant faith or love,When only what they needs must do appeared,Not what they would? What praise could they receive?.Useless and vain, of freedom both despoiled,Made passive, both had served Necessity,Not Me. -So without least impulse or shadow of fate,Or aught by me immutably foreseen,They trespass, authors to themselves in allBoth what they judge, and what they choose, for soI formed them free, and free they must remainTill they enthrall themselves: I else must changeTheir nature, and revoke the high decreeUnchangeable, eternal, which ordainedTheir freedom; they themselves ordained their fall.Ibid, b. iii. l. 98, 103, 120.

I shall conclude these observations with a short extract from Mr. Bird’s Conferences, where, in answer to the objection, “If many things fall out contingently, or as it were by accident, God’s foreknowledge of them can be but contingent, dependent on man’s free will,” he observes: “It is one thing to know that a thing will be done necessarily; and another, to know necessarily that a thing will be done. God doth necessarily foreknow all that will be done; but he doth not know that those things which shall be done voluntarily will be done necessarily: he knoweth that they will be done; but he knoweth withal that they might have fallen out otherwise, for aught he had ordered to the contrary. So likewise God knew that Adam would fall; and get he knew that he would not fall necessarily, for it was possible for him not to have fallen. And as touching God’s preordination going before his prescience as the cause of all events this would be to make God the author of all the sin in the world; his knowledge comprehending that as well as other things. God indeed foreknoweth all things, because they will be done; but things are not (therefore) done, because he foreknoweth them. It is impossible that any man, by his voluntary manner of working, should elude God’s foresight; but then this foresight doth not necessitate the will, for this were to take it wholly away. For as the knowledge of things present imports no necessity on that which is done, so the foreknowledge of things future lays no necessity on that which shall be; because whosoever knows and sees things, he knows and sees them as they are, and not as they are not; so that God’s knowledge doth not confound things, but reaches to all events, not only which come to pass, but as they come to pass, whether contingency or necessarily. As, for example, when you see a man walking upon the earth, and at the very same instant the sun shining in the heavens, do you not see the first as voluntary, and the second as natural? And though at the instant you see both done, there is a necessity that they be done, (or else you could not see them at all), yet there was a necessity of one only before they were done, (namely, the sun’s shining in the heavens), but none at all of the other, (viz. the man’s walking upon the earth.) The sun could not but shine, as being a natural agent; the man might not have walked, as being a voluntary one.” This is a good

argument; but I prefer that which states the knowledge of God to be absolutely free, without the contradictions which are mentioned above. “But you deny the omniscience of God.” - No, no more than I deny his omnipotence, and you know I do not, though you have asserted the contrary. But take heed how you speak about this infinitely free agent: if you will contradict, take heed that you do not blaspheme. I ask some simple questions on the subject of God’s knowledge and power: if you know these things better than your neighbor, be thankful, be humble, and pray to God to give you amiable tempers; for the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. May he be merciful to thee and me!

GILL, "Praising God,.... Not only for their temporal mercies and enjoyments of life, which they partook of in so delightful and comfortable a manner; but for their spiritual mercies, that the Lord had been pleased to call them by his grace, and reveal Christ to them, and pardon them who had been such vile sinners, give them a name, and a place in his house, and favour them with the ordinances of it, and such agreeable and delightful company as the saints were, they had fellowship with:

having favour with all the people; they not only behaved with such true and sincere love towards one another in their church state, but with so much wisdom, courteousness, and affability towards them that were without, and walked so becoming the profession they made, that they gained the good will of the generality of the people:

and the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved: partly by the conversation of these young converts, and chiefly by the ministry of the word, many souls were won and gained to Christ, were wrought upon, and converted, whose hearts the Lord inclined to give up themselves to the church, and walk with them in all the ordinances and commandments of the Lord; and these were such whom God had chosen to salvation by Jesus Christ, and whom he had redeemed by his precious blood, and who were now regenerated and sanctified by the Spirit of God, and so should certainly be saved; which is not always the case of persons added to churches, many of whom have not the root of the matter in them, and so fall away; but is of those who are added by the Lord, for there is a difference between being added by the Lord, and being added by men.

JAMISON, "Praising God — “Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart, for God now accepteth thy works” (Ecc_9:7, also see on Act_8:39).

having favour with all the people — commending themselves by their lovely demeanor to the admiration of all who observed them.

And the Lord — that is, JESUS, as the glorified Head and Ruler of the Church.

added — kept adding; that is, to the visible community of believers, though the words “to the Church” are wanting in the most ancient manuscripts.

such as should be saved — rather, “the saved,” or “those who were being saved.” “The young Church had but few peculiarities in its outward form, or even in its doctrine: the single discriminating principle of its few members was that they all recognized the crucified Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah. This confession would have been a thing of no importance, if it had only presented itself as a naked declaration, and would never in such a case have been able to form a community that would spread itself over the whole Roman empire. It acquired its value only through the power of the Holy Ghost, passing from the apostles as they preached to the hearers; for He brought the confession from the very hearts of men (1Co_12:3), and like a burning flame made their souls glow with

love. By the power of this Spirit, therefore, we behold the first Christians not only in a state of active fellowship, but also internally changed: the narrow views of the natural man are broken through; they have their possessions in common, and they regard themselves as one family” [Olshausen].

CALVIN, "47. Having favor. This is the fruit of an innocent life, to find favor

even amongst strangers. And yet we need not to doubt of this, but that they

were hated of many. But although he speak generally of the people, yet he

meaneth that part alone which was sound, neither yet infected with any poison

of hatred; he signifieth briefly, that the faithful did so behave themselves, that

the people did full well like of them for their innocency of life. 7

The Lord added daily. He showeth in these words that their diligence was not

without profit; they studied so much as in them lay to gather into the Lord's

sheepfold those which wandered and went astray. He saith that their labor

bestowed herein was not lost; because the Lord did increase his Church daily.

And surely, whereas the Church is rather diminished than increased, that is to

be imputed to our slothfulness, or rather forwardness.8 And although they did

all of them stoutly labor to increase the kingdom of Christ, yet Luke ascribeth

9 this honor to God alone, that he brought strangers into the Church. And

surely this is his own proper work. For the ministers do no good by planting or

watering, unless he make their labor effectual by the power of his Spirit, (1

Corinthians 3.) Furthermore, we must note that he saith, that those were

gathered unto the Church which should be saved. For he teacheth that this is

the means to attain salvation, if we be incorporate into the Church. For like as

there is no remission of sins, so neither is there any hope of salvation. 10

Furthermore, this is an excellent comfort for all the godly, that they were

received into the Church that they might be saved; as the Gospel is called the

power of God unto salvation to all that believe, (Romans 1:16.) Now,

forasmuch as God doth gather only a part, or a certain number, this grace is

restrained unto election, that it may be the first cause of our salvation.

ELLICOTT, "(47) Having favour with all the people.—The new life of the

Apostles, in part probably their liberal almsgiving, had revived the early

popularity of their Master with the common people. The Sadducean priests

were, probably, the only section that looked on them with a malignant fear.

The Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.—Many of the

better MSS. omit the words “to the Church,” and connect “together,” which in

the Greek is the first word in Acts 3:1, with this verse—The Lord added

together . . . The verb “added” is in the tense which, like the adverb “daily,”

implies a continually recurring act. “The Lord” is probably used here, as in

Acts 2:39, in its generic Old Testament sense, rather than as definitely applied

to Christ. For “such as should be saved”—a meaning which the present

participle passive cannot possibly have—read, those that were in the way of

salvation; literally, those that were being saved, as in 1 Corinthians 1:18; 2

Corinthians 2:15. The verse takes its place among the few passages in which

the translators have, perhaps, been influenced by a Calvinistic bias; Hebrews

10:38, “if any man draw back,” instead of “if he draw back,” being another. It

should, however, be stated in fairness that all the versions from Tyndale

onward, including the Rhemish, give the same rendering. Wiclif alone gives

nearly the true meaning, “them that were made safe.”

COFFMAN, "Favor with all the people ... As Plumptre said:

The new life of the apostles, in part probably their liberal almsgiving, had

revived the early popularity of their Master with the common people. The

Sadducean priests were, probably, the only section that looked on them with

malignant fear.[50]

It is difficult to imagine a more significant chain of events than those related

in this chapter, closing as it does, with this reference to a successful, ongoing

church, faithful to God and to each other. It all began beautifully enough, but

Satan would not long permit the spread of divine truth without opposition; and

Luke quickly moved to relate developments which would disperse this happy

church.

ENDNOTE:

[50] E. H. Plumptre, The Acts of Apostles (Grand Rapids, Michigan:

Zondervan Publishing House, 1959), p. 15.

HAWKER, "REFLECTIONS

Blessed be God; Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, for all the blessings vouchsafed the Church, in all the Covenant purposes, before all worlds: and for all the mercies in the time-state of the Church, through all dispensations. Oh! blessed hour, when Jesus, having finished redemption-work, returned to glory; and God the Holy Ghost came down, to render effectual his great salvation! Do thou blessed holy Lord, still vouchsafe thy Pentecost-days to thy Church; until, not only three thousand souls, but thousands of thousands, yea, everyone to whom this promise is made, to all that are afar off, and to all that are nigh, even as many as the Lord our God shall call, shall know the joyful sound, and walk in the light of thy divine countenance!

Ye ministers of my God! seek for the daily proofs of your Apostle-ship, in the anointings, and ordination of the Lord’s Pentecost visits! And ye, no less, of the Lord’s people, who have hitherto lived, unconscious of the resurrection of Jesus, from any saving testimony of it in your hearts; be on the lookout for those ascension-gifts of a risen and exalted Savior, whose gracious act it is, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of sins. Oh! for the out-pouring of the Spirit upon all the Lord’s redeemed ones, that there may be daily added to the Church, such as should be saved.

SBC, "A pure Church an Increasing Church

Notice here:—

I. The profound conception which the writer had of the present action of the ascended Christ. He adds to the Church, not we—not our preaching, not our eloquence, our fervour, our efforts; these may be the weapons in His hands, but the hand that wields the weapon gives it all its power to wound and to heal, and it is Christ Himself, who by His present energy, is here represented as being the Agent of all the good that is done by any Christian community, and the builder up of those Churches of His, in numbers and in power.

II. Notice how emphatically there is brought out here the attractive power of an earnest and pure Church. Wherever there is a little knot of men obviously held together by a living Christ, and obviously manifesting in their lives and characters the features of that Christ transforming and glorifying them, there will be drawn to them—by the gravitation which is natural in the spiritual realm—souls that have been touched by the grace of the Lord, and souls to whom that grace has been brought the nearer by looking upon them. Wheresoever there is inward vigour of life there will be outward growth; and the Church which is pure, earnest, living, will be a Church which spreads and increases.

III. Observe the definition given here of the class of persons gathered into the community, "Those that were being saved." Through all life the deliverance goes on, the deliverance from sin, the deliverance from wrath. The Christian salvation, then, according to the teaching of this emphatic phrase, is a process begun at conversion, carried on progressively through the life, and reaching its climax in another state. Day by day, through the spring and the early summer, the sun is longer in the sky and rises higher in the heavens. And the path of the Christian is as the shining light. Last year’s greenwood is this year’s hardwood; and the Christian, in like manner, has to grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord and Saviour. So these progressively, and as yet imperfectly saved people, were gathered into the Church.

A. Maclaren, Christ in the Heart, p. 183.

COKE, "Acts 2:47. And having favour with all the people, &c.— Some would translate the original, exercising or shewing charity towards all the people; which the Greek will certainly bear, and which seems to be favoured by the 33rd and 34th verses of the fourth chapter, as well as by the reason of the thing; for as the generality of the Jews were professed enemies to Christ and his disciples, it is not easy to see how they could have been in favour with ALL the people. The Syriac version reads, They gave alms before all the people. The words τους σωζοµενους, rendered such as should be saved, signify properly the saved, such as were now saved, or entered in the sure way to salvation. See Acts 2:40 where St. Peter advised them, σωθητε, be ye saved from this untoward generation. A reformed harlot is called, by Sophocles, σωζοµενη, one that was saved. Pricaeus quotes the table of Cebes, as using the words οι σωζωµενοι, for the reformed. The abandoned, or incorrigibly wicked, are called the lost, απολλουµενοι , 2 Corinthians 4:3. The reformed or regenerated are here called the saved, σωζοµενοι . These two sorts of persons are set in opposition to each other, 1 Corinthians 1:18. 2 Corinthians 2:15. Those who are saved or recovered from sin to holiness, from Satan to God, will, if faithful, be also admitted to eternal salvation; but the word σωζοµενους seems here to denote their being saved from sin to the enjoyment of the favour of God through Christ,

and to a life of holiness. As Christ was sacrificed at the time of the Jewish passover, so we have observed on the former part of this chapter, that the new law of grace was given from mount Sion, at the same time as when the law of Moses was given from mountSinai,—at the feast of Pentecost, when the apostles having received the first-fruits of the Spirit, gathered in three thousand souls, whom they presented unto God and the Lamb, hallowed or anointed with the unction of the Spirit, as a kind of first-fruits of the new creation. Nor did theywant that innocent festivity and joy usual at the great festival of the Pentecost; for the rich among them sold their possessions and their goods, and raised a plentiful fund for the common benefit of the poorer Christians, while they kept together at Jerusalem; and they with harmony and unanimity not only frequented the temple worship every day, but feasted also together in the true spirit of temperance in their upper rooms, with gladness and sincerity of heart, praising God in the most joyous and affectionate manner, and shewing the utmost charity towards all. And then they proceeded to gather in and to complete their great harvest at Jerusalem. Thus were many of the figures and prophesies which went before concerning him, remarkably fulfilled in Christ, and the Christian dispensation.

Inferences drawn from the evangelical account of the descent of the Holy Ghost.—By this miraculous effusion of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles, they were qualified for the conversion of mankind; the Christian church was established; and all those graces and excellencies which have made the names of those immediate disciples of our Lord so precious in the Christian world, were at this time poured forth upon them. To this it is that we owe the sanctity of their lives, the purity of their doctrine, the power of their miracles, and all the glorious acts of their martyrdom.

All the other mysteries of the gospel prepare the way for this, when considered in the utmost extent of its efficacy to the consummation of all things: it is the great end of the incarnation, the grand fruit of the death of Christ, and the full accomplishment of all his designs. He had indeed already in some degree formed the body of his new visible church, while he was here on earth, conversing with and instructing his disciples; but by this last act, the descent of the Holy Ghost, he infused a soul into that his mystical body; he endowed it with a vigorous principle of life and action, a heart that might always correspond and sympathize with him, its head. See 1 Corinthians 12:12-13. For the same Holy Spirit then descended upon all the living members of Christ, according to his gracious promise in the last words of St. Matthew's gospel,—almost the last words which he spoke upon earth: Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.

This promise, I say, is fulfilled in the mission of the Holy Ghost. Christ is now peculiarly present in his church by his Spirit, which as it formerly descended upon the apostles, so it ever shall descend upon all his true disciples unto the end of the world. The sacred Fountain still stands open, and nothing is retrenched from the bounteous efflux of divine grace, but only the outward prodigies which attended it at the beginning of its course. Now indeed it flows on in general, as some peaceful river, through opened channels, with a silent stream, and marking its way chiefly by the riches it spreads in the parts it passeth through: but the season here celebrated was the time of its grand eruption, if I may so speak, when it rapidly issued forth from the divine source to replenish the apostles, who were the conduits prepared to receive and convey it forward to the later generations. At that time, as was usual upon such extraordinary occasions, it manifested

itself even outwardly by sensible representations expressive of its energy, and the effects it produces in the spirits of men.

These sensible representations appeared in the two active elements, air and fire, which kindle and keep up the life of nature. For when the apostles were assembled on the day of Pentecost, that is to say, the day whereon the law was given to the Jews, a double prodigy appeared; a sound was heard from heaven, as of an impetuous wind filling the house; and several distinct flames were seen, one of which resided over each of the apostles. Now these are two proper emblems or symbolical representations; and in order to judge of their significancy, we are to observe, that there is such an analogy and intimate connection between the material and the spiritual worlds, that not only the names of things visible serve to denote things invisible, and are the only names we have for them, which plainly argues a notorious analogy upon which such use of the names is grounded; but also some extraordinary transactions in the higher order pass on and impress themselves upon the lower, so as to affect outward nature in a similar manner; such, I mean, as somehow answer to what is then accomplished in the supernatural state. Thus, for instance, a few weeks before this descent of the Holy Ghost, while our Lord was hanging on the cross, the sun was eclipsed; and, when he expired, outward nature was convulsed with an earthquake. And she sympathized again, yet to a different purpose, in a second earthquake at his resurrection. And now, when his Spirit with the plenitude of divine power was descending upon his apostles, a sound from heaven was heard as of an impetuous wind, and distinct flames were seen over the heads of the apostles.

It will be proper here, as far as our scanty knowledge will permit, to trace out the analogy whereon these two symbols are grounded.

Concerning the first, it has been observed, that among those parts of the material world which are invisible, and whose existence we discover only by their effects, there is scarcely any thing more subtle, more active, and of greater efficacy than wind, that is to say, air in motion, or spirit, according to the primary sense of the word. Hence, in the common use of most languages, the name of wind, or spirit, serves to express those things, which, being not discernible to us by reason of the subtilty or fineness of their substance, are yet conceived to be moved with great agility, and endowed with great force. So naturalists, when they speak of that which is most abstruse, most agile, and most operative, in any liquor or other body, call it spirit. And for the same reason, our souls are called spirits for the subtilty of their nature, and those vital powers wherewith they actuate our bodies.

In regard to our capacity and manner of conceiving things, the holy Scriptures have used this term Spirit to express even the adorable and incomprehensible Deity, signifying his most simple nature, and most powerful energy—his most simple nature, I say, which cannot possibly be the object of any of our senses; and his most powerful energy, which pervades and actuates all things.

This name Spirit, as it is common to the whole Godhead, so it is peculiarly applied to the

third person of the ever-blessed Trinity, styled by way of eminence the Holy Spirit; and the spiritual operations of God towards men, are in an especial manner ascribed to him.

Now in all languages commonly known, the operation of a superior mind upon an inferior to raise and invigorate it, is expressed by the metaphor of inspiration, that is to say, breathing into; and the general consent of mankind in the use of this metaphor, demonstrates its fitness and propriety. And therefore when the infinite mind vouchsafed to communicate itself with such plenitude and force to the minds of his chosen servants assembled on the day of Pentecost, this sound from heaven of a mighty rushing wind, or torrent of mysterious air, was a proper symbol to indicate its decent; as the other miraculous appearance by the element of fire, was proper to represent the effects which it produces.

To enlighten, to purify, and to warm, are the properties of fire. Now if we transfer these to the spiritual world, the light of the soul is truth, the purity of the soul is holiness, the warmth or heat of the soul is an active, vigorous ardour to surmount the obstacles, and zealously prosecute the end proposed. The Holy Ghost produces these three effects, and accordingly the Scriptures describe him as a Spirit of truth, of holiness, and of power. As a Spirit of truth, he enlightens the minds of the faithful, and leads them into all truth fit for them to know: as a Spirit of holiness, by an intimate union with their hearts, he reforms them, and makes them holy: as a Spirit of power, he gives them vigour to resist temptation, strength to bear their crosses, and full ability to work out their salvation. We will consider these three properties of the Holy Ghost separately.

First, He is a Spirit of truth; and so our Lord styled him, when he foretold his descent upon the apostles. I have many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now: howbeit, when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth. Men may teach us divers truths; but to teach all truth is the distinguishing prerogative of the Spirit of God. There are truths, and those too of the utmost importance, which flesh and blood cannot reveal—truths which the world cannot receive; which even the apostles themselves could not bear, much less relish, approve, and fully practise, before they had received the Holy Ghost. Ye cannot bear them now, said Christ, in the passage last quoted; they shock corrupt nature, and our passions recoil at the mention of them. For besides the mysteries of our holy religion, the deep things of God, which cannot be duly apprehended but by minds enlightened by the Spirit of God; besides these, I say, there are many moral truths, whereof we cannot be fully and effectually persuaded, but by the immediate operation of the Holy Ghost: such are those in the beginning of our Lord's sermon on the mount, "That the poor in spirit, the meek, those that mourn and are persecuted, are blessed above other men: that it is better to pull out our eyes, and cut off our hands, than use either in the commission of sin: that our enemies must be loved, and that the most provoking injury ought not only to be forgiven, but requited with benevolence." These, and others that might be named, are certain and saving truths; but no mortal man can convince us of them; I mean with a full, lasting, operative conviction, such as shall determine our practical judgment, and become the habitual rule of our conduct. All demonstration of reason, and arts of persuasion, are vain to this end; and it is in vain that we ourselves endeavour to reason ourselves into these truths. The Holy Ghost only can work this conviction in our minds; and we must seek this conviction from him by prayer, and by opening our minds to his operations, or we shall perish in

our errors. The same power only that made our minds, can reform them. That Holy Spirit of God, which at the first creation brooded over the rude chaos, and produced this orderly world out of darkness and confusion, must also preside in our minds to make the new creation of holiness, to bring forth light out of our darkness, truth out of our errors. St. Paul alludes to this, where he says, God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Such are the advantages of the descent of the divine Spirit; such are the privileges to which we are admitted, if we do not love darkness more than light, because our deeds are evil, and we resolve to continue in them. God's school now stands open to all, his Spirit condescends to be our master, our teacher, and will infallibly lead us into all truth, if we devoutly resign ourselves to his direction.

We cannot have a plainer proof of this than in the history given us in this chapter. Consider the apostles; see how wondrous a change was wrought in them by the illumination of this Holy Spirit. Observe what they were before, what after his descent, and thence learn what inestimable advantages we are entitled to by Christianity.

Three long years had the apostles been in the school of Christ, and had tired even his patience with their gross stupidity, and incapacity to apprehend his spiritual doctrine. Though they had made some progress in the way of truth by leaving their little all to follow him: though they daily heard his precepts, and saw his practice, that living comment upon his doctrine—yet nothing could rectify their false notions, nothing could wean them from their vain desires of secular grandeur and magnificence. When our Lord informed them of the necessity of sufferings, the benefits of poverty, the blessedness of persecution, it was all a riddle to them. They understood none of these things; these sayings were hid from them, neither knew they the things that were spoken, Luke 18:34. Even after the resurrection of Christ the cloud was still upon their minds, and they were yet hankering after an immediate possession of worldly grandeur and dominion. Lord, say they, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? Acts 1:6. Christ no longer opposed their carnal prejudices, but referred them to the Holy Ghost for full information and conviction.

According to the promise of Christ, the Holy Ghost came. Immediately, all darkness, error, and mistake fled before him. They understood, they believed, they taught, they practised, they were ready to lay down their lives for those truths, which before they could not receive, they could not bear, nor endure. The cross of Christ was no longer an offence to them, but their boast and their glory; and they rejoiced, that they themselves were counted worthy to partake of it, and to suffer shame for his name. Such and so effectual were the fruits of the Spirit, enlightening the minds of the apostles as a Spirit of truth. We are, in the next place, to consider him as a Spirit of holiness. He is not only, by way of eminence, the Holy Spirit, but also the hallowing, that is to say, sanctifying Spirit, whence all holiness in the creatures is derived. It would be endless to mention the places of Scriptures where this property is ascribed to him. It is of more concern, how to explain the precise meaning of the word holiness, which is to be considered in two respects; first, as it is proper to God alone, and, secondly, as it is the privilege and duty

of a creature. According to the first sense, we may say, Thou only art holy, as Thou only art the Lord. This holiness peculiar to God, consists in the singularity of his nature, even that surpassing transcendant excellence, which leaves all creatures at an infinite distance beneath his majesty.

It is a common error in men's notions of God, that they conceive of him as one Being among many, greater indeed, and higher, and better than all the rest, but yet as one among others, one that may be named with them, and however superior, yet not absolutely distinct from the rest. This is a wrong conception, for God is not only Unus but Unicus—He is one Alone, the First, without any second or like. But this is a subject to which no speculations can do justice, and which should naturally sink the mind into the profoundest devotion.

Suffice it then to say, that this sublime exaltation and infinite distance of the Creator from the creatures, constitutes his holiness. The Hebrew word signifies separation, and, when applied to God, imports that unconceivable elevation, whereby he is distinguished, and stands alone in his universe. Thus we read; There is none holy as the Lord: for there is none beside Thee. There is none beside Him: He is a whole genus by himself; and this surpassing, singular excellence, which excludes all possible comparison, constitutes his holiness; and the exercise of it tends solely to the promoting of his own glory. He is glorious in (or by) holiness, says Moses; and the angels incessantly celebrate him by this title, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God of hosts: heaven and earth are full of thy glory. The holiness of God is founded, as was said, in the supremacy of his nature; and it is perpetually exercised in maintaining that supremacy, in treating himself worthily, exerting all his attributes, and directing all his acts, to one certain point, which is his glory, the exaltation of his nature, the effulgency of his excellence. The reason why God does all things for his own glory is, because that is the end most worthy of God; his supreme excellence requires it of him as a due to himself by the eternal laws of righteousness: truth and justice make this necessary in God. The glory of God therefore being the end most worthy of God, and all his acts centering therein, all his acts are holy, that is to say, pure from all allay of inferior motives, from every thing that does not inflexibly promote that end.

Such is the holiness of God. The creatures too are holy, when they prosecute the same end that God does, the end for which he created them; that is to say, the glory of God. We call things or persons holy, when they are separated from common use, and dedicated to the service of God, devoted to his glory: to apply them to any other is to profane them. All the laws of God are boundaries set to fence in the way that leads to God's glory; and we never transgress those laws, but we at the same time deviate from it. And therefore St. Paul defines sin to be a falling short of the glory of God. All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. Holiness, on the contrary, aims all our actions aright, making the glory of God our scope and design. In a word, every action directed to that end, is a holy action, and leads us on towards the participation of the divine glory which we had regard to in performing it; and when it is said that the Holy Ghost sanctifies Christians, the meaning is, that he infuses this general motive, extinguishing the narrow principles of covetousness, pride, and sensuality, and exalting our nature to the noble disinterested purpose of glorifying our Maker.

Those corrupt motives of covetousness, sensuality, and pride, cleave intimately to our souls in the present depraved state, rendering all actions that proceed from them, unholy: and the Spirit of God does then sanctify us, when it disengages us from those corrupt motives. To wash, cleanse, baptize with the Holy Ghost, and sanctify, are commonly synonymous in Scripture; hence the phrase of being baptized with the Holy Ghost, which is elsewhere called being baptized with fire, to signify the universal and intimate purification of the inmost springs of action thereby. With this view the prophet Malachi compares the Spirit to a refiner of gold or silver, destroying the dross, and separating all heterogeneous particles from those metals by force of fire, till they are reduced to perfect purity. Thus the Spirit sanctifies the soul, by abolishing all sordid inclinations, by purging away the multiplicity of carnal desires, and reducing all the powers of the mind to one simple constant pursuit, viz. that of God's glory. This renders the soul holy, that is to say, pure, all of a kind, concentered in the end of its creation, even the glory of its Maker.

To shew how the apostles were thus sanctified, were to relate their history, which is but one continued narrative of their holiness. They were purified from all corrupt principles of action. The love of riches moved them not: for they had all the treasures of the faithful laid at their feet, without any other concern than for the right distribution of them in charity. The love of ease and pleasure moved them not: for their life was spent in incessant labours: they traversed the face of the earth, doing good, and suffering evil in all the parts that they visited. The love of glory and applause moved them not, for they gladly suffered reproach in their Master's cause: and when divine honours were offered to two of them at Lystra, they rent their clothes, and expressed a greater concern for the misplaced reverence of the multitude, than for all the ill usage they had ever met with. And lastly, the love of life itself moved them not, when the glory of God required them to resign it. They rejoiced that they were accounted worthy to die in so great and good a cause. They went cheerfully to death, although the wit and malice of their persecutors had so circumstanced it with a horrid variety of tortures, that only the manner of dying was the punishment, and death itself the deliverance.

Such was the holiness of the apostles: it was the purity of their hearts, the unity of their desires, all meeting in one point, the glory of God.

This one thing only they desired: this one thing only they pursued: they pursued it through poverty, infamy, and distress; through numberless toils and torments. Death in vain came athwart their passage; they leaped the gulph, and were received into glory, that glory for which they had been so zealous.

If we would arrive where they are ascended, we must follow their steps; we must be holy; as they were holy; that is to say, we must absolutely prefer the glory of God to all other considerations; for heaven stands open to none but saints; and without holiness no man shall see the Lord.

That we may not be disheartened in so arduous a work, there are the greatest

encouragements, in the third place; namely, that this Spirit of holiness is also a Spirit of power, inspiring zeal, magnanimity, and fortitude, sufficient to surmount all difficulties that occur in the arduous paths of duty. And of this also the apostles were very remarkable instances.

Our Lord, having had a long experience of their natural weakness and pusillanimity, commanded them, when he appeared to them after his resurrection, to live retired for a time, and wait for the promise of the Father. But, said he, ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you, and then ye shall be witnesses unto me, both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost parts of the earth. And his prediction was gloriously accomplished as soon as the Holy Ghost came. The zeal which inflamed their hearts, found a ready channel into their tongues: their tongues were as tongues of fire, communicating, through grace, their sacred ardour to the hearts of all that heard them.

That conceit of the ancients, who represented their famous orator as brandishing flames of lightning with a thunder-bolt, was never so nearly verified as in the apostles: they flashed conviction into the minds of their hearers, and bore down all opposition of reluctant passion or prejudice with a force and energy most irresistible. They made those very Jews, who had lately condemned our Lord, and with bloody cries solicited Pilate for his crucifixion, now condemn themselves with bitter remorse and compunction. It is said, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter, and the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Three thousand were thus converted under the power of the Holy Spirit, in one day and one place; which, considering the natural weakness of the preachers, with the rooted prejudices and noted obstinacy of the audience, we may account one of the greatest miracles of our religion.

The apostles bear witness of Christ, not only before his friends, or even persons indifferent, but before those that murdered him—even those apostles who had deserted him shamefully at his being first seized, so far were they from bearing witness for him at his trial: Peter, in particular, who, trembling before a servant-maid, had three times renounced him with oaths, now standing up with the eleven, lift up his voice and said: Ye men of Judea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words. You see he makes no timorous apology, he uses none of the little arts to gain benevolence; but, conscious of the divine authority wherewith he stood invested, he charges his hearers with all the enormity of their crime. Ye have killed (said he) the Lord of life: he tells them, that the person, whom they had with wicked hands crucified and slain, was the Messias; and he proves him to be so, by bearing testimony of his resurrection: him God hath raised up from the dead, whereof we are witnesses. And he backs his own evidence with irrefragable arguments from scriptures, which he at the same time explained with such force and perspicuity, as extorted assent from the most obdurate. Is this the illiterate fisherman? Is this the carnal disciple who presumed to rebuke his Lord, when he first mentioned the cross to him? Is this the fugitive apostate, the abjuring Peter? But with God all things are possible. Peter had now received the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Power, whose property it is to strengthen us with might in the inward man, to create a new heart, and renew a right spirit within us.

Thus have we endeavoured to represent to our readers this Holy Spirit in his operations of truth, holiness, and power. We would now only add a word or two concerning the disposition by which we must prepare our hearts to receive him: and this, as our Lord teaches us, is earnest and persevering prayer. We have his direction, Luke 11. Ask, and it shall be given you; seek and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.—If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? how much more shall your heavenly Father give the holy Spirit to them that ask him? The terms, you see, are very easy, are highly reasonable: if we do not perform them, we shall be without excuse. But if by humble, fervent, incessant prayer, we seek from our heavenly Father the gift of his Spirit, we shall infallibly receive it, we shall be enlightened, purified, and confirmed in all goodness, we shall advance from strength to strength, till, if faithful to death, we become meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light.

REFLECTIONS.—1st, The great promise here receives its accomplishment in the mission of the Holy Ghost upon the disciples. We have,

1. The time: when the day of pentecost, the fiftieth from the passover, was fully come, in the morning, they were all with one accord in one place; it being the first day of the week, which they observed in memory of their Lord's resurrection, and was consecrated also now by the pouring out of the Spirit upon them. No longer strifes or discord divided them; united in fervent charity, they waited the fulfilment of their Master's promise. Note; (1.) They who wait upon God in the assembly of his saints, shall find him by his Spirit still present in the midst of them. (2.) God will delight to dwell with those whose hearts, by fervent love, are united in his service.

2. The manner in which the Holy Ghost descended. Suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, an emblem of the Spirit's divine energy on the minds of men; and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues, like as of fire, signifying the illuminating, warming, and purifying influences of the Spirit upon their souls, and the amazing gift of tongues bestowed upon them, with that freedom of utterance, whereby they were enabled to preach the gospel among all nations; and it sat upon each of them; the Holy Ghost, in all the fulness of his miraculous operations, now taking up his constant residence in them, to qualify them for the arduous service to which they were ordained. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost; not only the apostles, but all the disciples; experiencing such divine joys and consolations as they had never experienced before; and began to speak with other tongues, in all the variety of languages, as the Spirit gave them utterance, suggesting both the matter and words, and enabling them with the greatest copiousness and most forcible energy to declare the wonderful works of God, in the gospel of his dear Son.

2nd, Such an extraordinary occurrence was soon spread abroad, and brought a vast concourse together. We have,

1. The persons. Devout men who dwelt at Jerusalem, out of every nation under heaven;

both Jews, and proselytes, who were now assembled at the feast of Pentecost, or, as some suppose, had taken up their residence there, in expectation of the speedy appearing of the Messiah.

2. The amazement which filled them at hearing these men, who were poor illiterate Galileans, speak with such fluency and propriety all the various languages and dialects of their respective countries, Parthians, Medes, &c. They could not, therefore, but with wonder and surprize, observe to each other how astonishing was this miracle, and question what could be the meaning of it, and whether it ushered in the long-expected kingdom of the Messiah? for they heard them speak in their several native tongues the great things of God, respecting the redemption which was in Jesus Christ, and the glorious privileges obtained by his death, resurrection, and ascension, for all believers.

3. Some mocking, said, These men are full of new wine; a cavil most wicked, absurd, and blasphemous. Probably these were inhabitants of Jerusalem, the scribes and Pharisees, who, not understanding the languages which the inspired disciples spoke, thought the whole to be nonsense, and would fain have branded them as drunkards, that they might prejudice the people against them by this most malicious falsehood. Note; There are still too many to whom the great things of God appear unintelligible; and because they are themselves destitute of spiritual understanding, and are perfectly ignorant of divine and experimental truths, they brand the preachers of them as enthusiasts, speaking evil of the things they know not.

3rdly, In answer to the malicious cavil of these enemies to the truth, Peter, the zealous speaker, and now inspired by peculiar influences from on high, arose, and boldly addressed to these mockers the awakening discourse contained in this chapter.

1. He stood up with the eleven, to shew the falsehood of the charge, and to vindicate himself and his brethren from so malicious an accusation: and directing his discourse aloud to the Jews who were present, begs attention to the words of truth and soberness, which he was about to utter. Note; We must not return a sharp answer to a reviling accusation, but with meekness answer those who oppose themselves against us.

2. He denies the calumny, and shews it to be as absurd as malicious. These men are not drunken, as ye suppose and would insinuate, seeing it is but the third hour of the day, but nine o'clock in the morning; and till that hour, on the sabbaths and festivals, the Jews usually did neither eat nor drink; nor was it at all probable, that so many as they were, they should have been guilty of such a debauch, or dare appear intoxicated on so solemn an occasion.

3. He explains to them an affair which they counted so strange, which some admired and others ridiculed. This was the accomplishment of the prophesy of Joel, Ch. Acts 2:28-32 which he cites at large; for though himself inspired, the Spirit was not given to supersede the Scriptures, but to enable us to understand them. God had promised in respect to the last days, the days of the Messiah, which ushered in the last dispensation of grace, I will

pour out of my Spirit, in a more extraordinary measure than ever before, upon all flesh, upon Gentiles as well as Jews: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, foretelling future events, Ch. Acts 21:9-10 and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; God in these ways revealing to them his mind and will: and on my servants, and on my handmaidens, on persons of all conditions, I will pour out in those days of my Spirit, as from an inexhaustible fountain, and they shall prophesy: and I will shew wonders in heaven above, dreadful prodigies in the air, which were the prelude to the approaching ruin of the Jewish nation, for their obstinate infidelity and rejection of the Messiah; and signs in the earth beneath, dire presages of impending woes: blood and fire, and vapour of smoke, the blood of the people shed by the invading foe whose devastations should spread through the country, and the smoke of their cities consumed in flames which should obscure the sky. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, suffering unusual eclipses, or looking red, through the dusky clouds of smoke; or this may signify the approaching total dissolution of their government, before that great and notable day of the Lord come, when he shall execute such condign vengeance on his murderers, as no nation, since the burning of Sodom, ever suffered, and when he shall be glorified in his judgments. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever, discerning the signs of these times shall call on the name of the Lord, the Almighty Jehovah, Jesus, spoken of in this prophesy, placing their dependance on him alone for salvation, and in fervent prayer making their application to him for help, and persevering in faith and love to him,—they shall be saved by his power and grace from all the evils they fear in time or eternity, and be made partakers of his eternal glory. Lord, pour out a spirit of prayer and supplication upon me, that I may be of this blessed number!

4. He improves this occasion in order to preach to them Jesus, whose gift this Spirit was, which now was shed abroad so abundantly upon them, entreating their attention to the important truths that he was about to deliver.

[1.] He reminds them of his well-known life and character—Jesus of Nazareth, a name which they gave him by way of reproach, but a man approved of God among you; evidently signalized with his peculiar favour, by miracles, and wonders, and signs, which he wrought in proof of his divine mission, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know; bearing his attestation to the character that he assumed; and they themselves had been eye-witnesses of these wonderful works.

[2.] They had, notwithstanding, rejected his credentials, and hung him on a tree. Him, this glorious Messiah, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ordained as a sacrifice to divine justice, ye have taken and seized as a criminal, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain; engaging the Gentile governor to bring him to this ignominious death; and his innocent blood is now upon your heads.

[3.] God had raised him, notwithstanding all their enmity, rage, and malice; having loosed the pains of death, judicially discharging him from the grave, and from all the sorrows of death, which as the substitute of the fallen race, and more especially of them who perseveringly believe, he consented to endure, because it was not possible that he should be holden of them. The dignity of his person, the perfection of his sacrifice, and

the prophesies concerning him, rendered it impossible that he should remain longer the prisoner of death; whom by dying he had destroyed, and, as a triumphant conqueror, rose to lead captivity captive.

[4.] He shews that this was foretold by the royal Psalmist, who personating Jesus, the true Messiah, thus speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face; he walked under the constant sense of his Father's presence, and with an eye to his glory; for he is on my right hand, to support and carry me through my arduous undertaking, that I should not be moved with any of the sufferings of life, or the terrors of death. Therefore did my heart rejoice in his power, faithfulness, and love, and my tongue was glad, praising him for the experience of his almighty grace: moreover also, my flesh shall rest in hope, entirely satisfied of a glorious issue, and entering the grave in the fullest assurance of a speedy resurrection; because, or that thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, to abide, like other departed spirits, in the invisible world; nor his body in the dust; neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one to see corruption, and putrify in the tomb: being the holy one of God, and having by a perfect obedience to death, even the death of the cross, completed the great atonement, he had a right to a speedy discharge from that lowest step of his humiliation. Thou hast made known to me the ways of life, which lie through the gates of death; and Christ, the first-fruits of those that slept, is gone before; having raised himself to an endless life, and leading his faithful people after him to a glorious immortality: thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance, in that state of bliss and blessedness to which, as Mediator, he should be exalted: and what is here primarily spoken concerning the great Head of the church, is true of every real member of his body mystical perseveringly cleaving to him. (1.) They live for God, designing his glory as their end, and resting upon his promises, his power, and grace, as their abiding support, comfort, and joy. (2.) They die in hope, committing their souls into the hands of a faithful Creator, and rejoicing in the prospect of eternal life and glory which the gospel sets before them, and of which faith assures them.

[5.] He comments on the text that he had quoted. Great and respectable as the patriarch David was, the head of the royal race of Judah, yet he saw corruption; and they, as reasonable men, and his countrymen, if they dispassionately considered these words, must needs be convinced that the Psalmist spake not this of himself; he dying, and being buried, as other men; and his tomb being extant to that day: but being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, Psalms 132:11 that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne, as Israel's king, in the most exalted sense, reigning in the hearts of his believing people—he seeing this before, by the spirit of prophesy, spake of the resurrection of Christ, whom he personates when he says, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus, who lately lay in the grave, the son of David after the flesh, the person of whom he David, as a prophet, speaks, hath God raised up; whereof we all are witnesses: having been his constant followers before his death, and having often seen, conversed, and ate and drank with him since his resurrection, till the day that we beheld him ascend up to heaven.

[6.] The gifts of the spirit were the fruit of his exaltation. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted to the mediatorial throne, and possessed of the most transcendent dignity and glory, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, the

purchase of his obedience to death, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear; the flames of fire, and gift of tongues, which appeared to them so strange. And his ascension also David had foretold, Psalms 110:1. For David is not ascended into the heavens, as the Person, in whose name he speaks, evidently was; but the Lord Jesus is gone thither, as he saith himself, The Lord God the Father, said unto my Lord, the Messiah, Sit thou on my right hand, in the highest dignity, and possessed of universal dominion and authority, until I make thy foes thy footstool; until sin, satan, death, and every enemy of the Redeemer and his faithful people, shall be finally and for ever destroyed.

[7.] He warmly applies the matter to their consciences. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, as a truth most infallible and certain, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified both Lord and Christ; and there could not be a greater aggravation of their wickedness than this, that whom the Lord had glorified, they had crucified; nor a more tremendous consideration, than that he was now exalted to a throne of glory to execute vengeance on all his murderers, who obstinately persisted in their impenitence.

4thly, The power of the Spirit upon the apostles themselves appeared gloriously evident in the boldness wherewith he inspired them, as well as in the miraculous gifts with which he endued them: and we have also a proof of his energetic influence on the consciences of the hearers, accompanying his own word in the mouths of his servants.

1. Many of the hearers, struck with conscious guilt at what they heard, were pricked in their heart with sharp and deep convictions of their sin and danger, and, in great distress of conscience, said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do, to avert the dire vengeance that we have provoked, and to obtain pardon for a deed so atrocious? Note; (1.) When the Spirit of God opens the conscience of the sinner to discern his hell-deserving guilt, his hard heart then is broken with the most fearful apprehensions of his danger. (2.) Ministers are the physicians to whom convinced sinners should apply, and they have balm to cure the mortal wound which sin has made in their souls. (3.) They who truly feel their lost estate, cannot but desire, above all things, to know if yet there may be hope.

2. Peter, in the name of his brethren, said unto them, Your case, however dangerous, is not desperate, Repent—under a sense of redeeming love be deeply humbled for your guilt and ingratitude; and with deep self-abhorrence turn unto the Lord, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ; professing your faith in him as the true Messiah, and sincerely yielding up yourselves to him as his willing subjects; for the remission of sins, purchased by him, and freely bestowed on the chief of sinners; and herewith also ye shall receive the give of the Holy Ghost, of his comforting and sanctifying influences; as also (it is probable) of his miraculous powers in respect to many. For the promise, of pardon and the Holy Ghost, or the great promise made to Abraham and his seed, is unto you, and to your children, his descendants, and to all that are afar off, Jews or Gentiles, even as many as the Lord our God shall call to this high and glorious dispensation—all such shall have the invaluable opportunity of becoming members of the Messiah's peculiar kingdom here below, and of enjoying the higher

glories awaiting faithful Christians in his kingdom above. Note; No sinner need despair; the gospel holds forth, through the blood of Jesus, a free pardon to the most guilty of the sons of Adam; and he that believes, shall be saved.

3. The apostle enlarged on this subject. And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation; come out from among them, and be ye separate; renounce the false tenets and corrupt practices of the scribes and Pharisees, that you may escape the plagues ready to descend upon this sinful people, abandoned to their infidelity and destruction. Note; They who would be saved among Christ's faithful people, must be separated from the ways of this wicked world, and from the familiar society of careless sinners, shunning their assemblies, as a man dreads the house infected by the plague.

4. Great was the effect produced by this discourse, through the Spirit's mighty energy. No less than three thousand souls immediately embraced, and gladly received, the word of gospel grace; and, believing in a crucified Redeemer now risen from the dead, made open profession of their faith, and were baptized in his name. Note; (1.) The salvation which is by Jesus Christ, is glad news to the sinner who is pricked to the heart with a sense of his guilt and danger. (2.) They who are truly turned to the Lord, will boldly make profession of his name, and join themselves to the society of the faithful, whatever danger or reproach they may be exposed to thereby.

5thly, We have the practice of the primitive church.

1. They were united in holy ordinances. They continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine, professing their faith in Christ and his gospel, and attending on the apostles ministry and fellowship, maintaining the closest communion with them and each other; and in breaking of bread, celebrating the Lord's supper, and in prayers, social and public, continuing daily with one accord in the temple at the stated hours of service, and praising God for all the inestimable blessings bestowed, through Jesus Christ, upon them. Note; They who have tasted of the blessing of communion with God, will delight to maintain it in the diligent use of all holy ordinances.

2. A solemn awe restrained their enemies from molesting them. Fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles, so that it evidently appeared that God was with them. Note; God can put his bridle in the jaws of persecutors, and say, Touch not my prophets, and do my anointed no harm.

3. A spirit of most noble and disinterested charity appeared among them. All that believed were together; they were of one heart and mind, and assembled in several companies, as many as conveniently could meet in one place, and had all things common, each casting his all into the common stock; and as the necessity of the times was urgent, they sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man of their society had need. And as they assembled daily with one accord in the temple, so did they break bread from house to house, provided out of the common stock,

eating their meat together with gladness and singleness of heart; fervent in love to each other, thankful to God, and conscious of their own undissembled simplicity and sincerity before him. Note; Who should rejoice, if the children of God do not?

4. They were highly esteemed, and their numbers daily increased. They had favour with all the people; their undissembled piety commanded respect; the miraculous powers with which so many of them were invested, excited reverence; and their charitable actions abounded; and the Lord so eminently blessed their ministrations, that there were added to the church daily such as should be saved, or the saved. See the original Greek, and the note on Acts 2:47.

Footnotes:

o. Acts 2:4 Or languages; also in verse 11

p. Acts 2:13 Or sweet wine

q. Acts 2:21 Joel 2:28-32

r. Acts 2:23 Or of those not having the law (that is, Gentiles)

s. Acts 2:28 Psalm 16:8-11

t. Acts 2:31 Or Messiah. "The Christ" (Greek) and "the Messiah" (Hebrew) both mean "the Anointed One"; also in verse 36.

u. Acts 2:35 Psalm 110:1