Atti 6:10 Commento

In this chapter we have, I. The discontent that was among the disciples about the distribution of the public charity (Act 6:1). II. The election and ordination of seven men, who should take care of that matter, and ease the apostles of the burden (Act 6:2-6). III. The increase of the church, by the addition of many to it (Act 6:7). IV. A particular account of Stephen, one of the seven. 1. His great activity for Christ (Act 6:8). 2. The opposition he met with from the enemies of Christianity, and his disputes with them (Act 6:9, Act 6:10). 3. The convening of him before the great sanhedrim, and the crimes laid to his charge (Act 6:11-14). 4. God's owning him upon his trial (Act 6:15).

And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied,.... From an hundred and twenty to three thousand more, from thence to five thousand more, and after that a multitude of men and women were added, and still they were increasing; see Act 1:15 Act 2:41. This increase of the disciples agrees with what Maimonides says (z), before observed, that "in the days of Gamaliel, , "the heretics were multiplied in Israel".'' The word "disciples" was a common name to all Christians, to all that believed in Christ, and was the name they went by, before they were called Christians, Act 11:26 there arose a murmuring of the Grecians, or Hellenists, against the Hebrews; by the Hebrews are meant the Jews that dwelt in Judea, and were the inhabitants of that country, and chiefly of Jerusalem, who spoke the Hebrew, or rather the Syriac language; and by the Grecians, or Hellenists, are meant, not the Greeks that were proselyted to the Jewish religion, though there might be some few among them; but Jews who were born, and had dwelt, in some parts of Greece, and spoke the Greek language, and used the Septuagint version of the Bible; between these two a murmuring arose, a complaint was made by one against the other: so that, as it appears from the instance of Ananias and Sapphira, that this first and pure Gospel church was not free from hypocrites; it is also manifest, that though they were at first so united and harmonious in their affections and judgments, yet they were not always clear of feuds, animosities, and contentions; Satan bestirred himself, and got footing among them, as he commonly does where the Gospel is preached, and there is an increase of it: the reason of this uneasiness was, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration; that is, they had not that distributed which was necessary for them, nor so much as the Hebrew widows; they complained of partiality, as if because the Hebrew widows were the natives of the country, and might be nearly related to many of the community, that therefore they were more regarded and better supplied every day, than their widows were, whose husbands had dwelt in foreign lands, and were not so well known, and had fewer acquaintance and relations; for it seems the ministration or distribution was made every day: and such a practice obtained among the Jews in common, who used to collect every day for the poor, and give it daily to them. Maimonides (a) speaks of it in this manner; "they appoint collectors, who receive "every day", from every court, a piece of bread, or any sort of food, or fruit, or money, from whomsoever that offers freely for the time; and they divide that which is collected, "in the evening", among the poor, and they give to every poor person of it "his daily sustenance"; and this is called "Tamchui", or "the alms dish".'' And from hence the apostles might take up this custom, and follow it. The Ethiopic version renders it, "because they saw their widows minister", or "employed daily"; as if the complaint was, that their widows were too much made use of, and obliged to more frequent and to harder service in taking care of the poor, the sick, and helpless, than the other widows were, who had not their share of labour with them, but lived more at ease. Though others rather think the murmur was, because the Grecian widows were not taken into the number, and employed in taking care of the poor, as the Hebrew widows were; but the sense first given, of not having so good a share in the distribution, seems to be the best. (z) Hilchot Tephilla, c. 2. sect. 1. (a) Hilchot Mattanot Annayim, c. 9. sect. 2.

And they were not able to resist the wisdom,.... In Beza's most ancient copy, and in another manuscript it is added, "which was in him"; that divine wisdom, which the Spirit of wisdom gave him; they were not a match for him with respect to the knowledge of divine things; they could not answer the wise arguments he made use of, fetched out of the Scriptures of truth, in which he was well versed, and had a large knowledge of: and the Spirit by which he spake; that is, the Holy Spirit, as the above exemplars of Beza, and the Ethiopic version read; the meaning is, they could not resist the Holy Spirit, by which Stephen spake, so as to overcome him, or put Stephen to silence, or confute him; otherwise they did resist him, or oppose themselves to him, but in vain, and without success; for they always resisted the Holy Ghost in Christ and in his apostles, as their fathers before them resisted him in the prophets, as Stephen observes to them, Act 7:51 hereby was fulfilled what our Lord promised to his disciples, Mat 10:19.

"Disputing with Stephen." Observe him, not taking upon him to teach, but forced to do so. The miracles once more brought him into ill-will; but when he overcame in argument, it was false-witness! For they did not wish to kill intolerable to them. "They could not resist, etc.: then they suborned men." Everywhere out of hand, but by means of a sentence, that they might hurt their reputation also: and leaving those (the Apostles), they attack these (the disciples), thinking in this way to terrify those also.

Observe the power of the preaching, that, though they are not only scourged but stoned, it still prevails: not only, private individuals as they are, dragged to the bar, but assailed from all quarters: and, their enemies themselves being witnesses, not only were these worsted, but "they were not able" even "to resist," though they were exceeding shameless: so mightily did it overthrow them, for all that they could do with their preposterous figments (as the saying that He had a devil - He that cast out devils!). For the battle was not man's, but God's against men. And there were many combined together; not only they in Jerusalem, but others as well.

He says that their frenzy and momentum rose again and that they were not only roused against themselves but also would soon debate and sophisticate with another crowd, perhaps Libertines, and Alexandrians, and Cyrenaicans, and Cilicians, and Asians. And just as the discussion proceeds through another crowd, so likewise the accusation through others, and the plot of tricksters and desperate men. For, being prevented by Gamaliel from attempting anything against the apostles, and having nothing to charge against them, they now attack Stephen with slander, having missed the debate held in the clubs of talkers, and he says they perhaps call the Romans Libertines, having styled themselves after Livia the wife of Augustus, since the woman was also visible and especially loved for her virtue by Augustus. Indeed she herself lived on in return, persistently attending upon the tomb of Augustus.

In another way: the Libertines and Cyrenians from beyond Alexandria, since they were thought to surpass the Jews in sophistry. Therefore various synagogues were stationed in Jerusalem according to nations. And they had places set apart for the reading of the laws of Moses. For many of those who came up to Jerusalem to worship, especially at the Passover, which it was not lawful to celebrate outside Jerusalem, lodged there. So that, in order not to be compelled to emigrate from their homelands, they frequented Jerusalem and ministered there. The freedmen of the Romans were called Libertines. And when Stephen therefore despised them, as men hardened in heart and unwilling to converse, they, emboldened by their own vanity, were foremost in disputing with him. But to him alone, not to another, one thing: to bring shame upon the signs performed by him from envy, as if they might somehow place him in difficulty; and to those acting as representatives, out of ignorance; the other, that by diverting their discussion toward him they might keep him from attending to the signs. Therefore, when these things were present, and in addition they craftily introduced something against the law, so also all their zeal, he himself, having anticipated their craftiness, did this first, having launched a more combative attack upon them, and by the power of the divine Spirit and wisdom in him he shut them up in confusion; then, when they wanted to reply in a more puzzling fashion, so that they might not even then be intelligible. For this reason their proceedings already became more like robbery. And he himself most plainly attacked them through their desires. What was this? The abolition of the law. He did not say these things, but he routed them. For if he had spoken openly, they would not have needed false witnesses. Which outcome was the desired end for him, but for them he stored up destruction.

And they could not withstand the wisdom and the Spirit with which he spoke. This is what the Lord Himself says to His martyrs: For I will give you words and wisdom that none of your adversaries will be able to resist or contradict. It was fitting that in the first martyr, what He deigned to promise to all who are betrayed for His name should be confirmed.

And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the Holy Spirit who spoke. In the Greek text, there is more: "And they were not able to resist the wisdom that was in him, and the Holy Spirit who spoke: for which reason they were reproved by him with all confidence." Therefore, when they could not contradict the truth, then they suborned men who said, etc.

"They entered into a dispute with Stephen." In irritation and anger they argue in order to force him to say something. And he, perhaps, was speaking very openly and was talking about the cessation of the law, or rather, he was not speaking directly but hinting, because if he had spoken clearly, these "certain ones" would have had no need for false witnesses. But notice: he does not take upon himself the right to teach, but is compelled to do so by those who argue with him.

The Hellenistic Jews complain against the Hebrews, that their widows were neglected in the daily ministration, Act 6:1. To remedy the evil complained of, the apostles appoint seven deacons to superintend the temporal affairs of the Church, Act 6:2-6. The progress of the word of God in Jerusalem, Act 6:7. Stephen, one of the deacons, becomes very eminent, and confounds various Jews of the synagogues of the Libertines, etc., Act 6:8-10. They suborn false witnesses against him, to get him put to death, Act 6:11-14. He appears before the council with an angelic countenance, Act 6:15.

They there not able to resist the wisdom, etc. - He was wise, well exercised and experienced, in Divine things; and, as appears by his defense, in the following chapter, well versed in the Jewish history. The spirit by which he spake was the Holy Spirit, and its power was irresistible. They were obliged either to yield to its teachings, or were confounded by its truth. Several MSS. add to this verse, because he reproved them with boldness, they could not resist the truth. This reading is not genuine, though it exists (but in different forms) in some good MSS.

FIRST ELECTION OF DEACONS. (Act 6:1-7) the Grecians--the Greek-speaking Jews, mostly born in the provinces. the Hebrews--those Jews born in Palestine who used their native tongue, and were wont to look down on the "Grecians" as an inferior class. were neglected--"overlooked" by those whom the apostles employed, and who were probably of the Hebrew class, as being the most numerous. The complaint was in all likelihood well founded, though we cannot suspect the distributors of intentional partiality. "It was really just an emulation of love, each party wishing to have their own poor taken care of in the best manner" [OLSHAUSEN]. the daily ministration--the daily distribution of alms or of food, probably the latter.

not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake--What he said, and the power with which he spake it, were alike resistless.