Atos 7
Warren Wiersbe · Citado em PreceptAustin
Atos 7
Wiersbe summarizes Stephen's "accusations" against his accusers in Acts 7 (Acts 7:1-8) They misunderstood their own spiritual roots (Acts 7:9-36) They rejected their God-sent deliverers (Acts 7:37-43) They disobeyed their law (Acts 7:44-50) They despised their temple (Acts 7:51-53) They stubbornly resisted their God and His truth Paul Apple gives us the background to this long chapter... What are the chances you will miss Christmas this year? Saturday will come and go and you will somehow just miss it? The Sanhedrin had not only missed the coming of Christ, but after His resurrection they continued to cover up and deny the historical reality of His appearing. The account of Stephen appearing before the angry Sanhedrin in Acts chapter 7 marks a pivotal watershed in God’s dispensational dealings with His people. You know what a watershed is. You see the sign on the highway: marks a great divide between the waters flowing in one direction or the other. We have seen how Peter attempted to re-offer the kingdom to the Jewish nation if they would only repent and trust in the risen Lord Jesus. But they persisted in their rejection and rebellion. So at this point Stephen -- rather than defending himself against the false charges of speaking blasphemy against Moses and God, and trying to tear down the Law and the temple and the Jewish traditions – actually presents God’s final indictment against the nation of Israel. God is now going to switch directions and take this new gospel message directly to the despised Gentiles. The Jews could not abide this change in approach and the loss of their favored status – even though God was not permanently setting them aside. They have proven by their actions that they follow in the footsteps of their OT brethren who consistently resisted the work of the Holy Spirit and persecuted God’s appointed messengers. As Stephen faced death himself, his mind was not spinning out of control in panic; instead he calmly reviews with these Jewish religious leaders the history of their stubborn arrogance and self righteousness. They had failed to respond in faith to God’s gracious initiation. They thought they could confine God to a box of a physical connection to the temple in Jerusalem. So Stephen gives a brief historical theology of four different epochs of God’s interactions with His chosen nation. Acts 7:1-8 – dealing with God’s sovereign election and effectual calling with respect to Abraham and the patriarchs. [Good opportunity for us to get back into the OT some.] The Sanhedrin wrongly took confidence in their spiritual lineage – thinking that God was limited to dealing with the physical descendants of Abraham and those who would become proselytes of their pattern of temple worship centered in the holy city of Jerusalem. But they proved to be ignorant of God’s intentions of bringing about the fulfillment of the law and the OT types in the person of His Son Jesus Christ who came to fully reveal grace and truth. (The Spread of the Gospel) Many followers of Christ today are effectively "functionally" ignorant of much of the Old Testament which is very sad. They might go to the Psalms and Proverbs for devotionals but generally spend little time in this treasure chest of inspired truth which is the foundation for the NT. John
Atos 7
Wiersbe adds that "Abraham was the founder of the Hebrew nations, and his relationship to God was one of grace and faith. God had graciously appeared to him and called him out of heathen darkness into the light of salvation, and Abraham had responded by faith. Abraham was saved by grace, through faith, and not because he was circumcised, kept a law, or worshipped in a temple. All of those things came afterward (see Ro 4; Gal. 3). He believed the promises of God and it was this faith that saved him." (Bible Exposition Commentary) Neil writes that "On the surface it appears to be a rather tedious recital of Jewish history which has little relevance to the charges on which Stephen has been brought to trial; on closer study, however, it reveals itself as a subtile and skilful proclamation of the Gospel which, in its criticism of Jewish institutions, marks the beginning of the break between Judaism and Christianity, and points forward to the more trenchant exposition of the difference between the old faith and the new as expressed by Paul and the author of the Letter to the Hebrews." (The Acts of the Apostles - New Century Bible Commentary) Stephen's presentation illustrates an important principle for all Christ followers - "Stephen was a faithful servant before he became a martyr. Thus, when this moment arrived, he was ready. What steps have you taken to defend your faith? Could you be as faithful as Stephen under such criticism and scrutiny?" (Bruce Barton) William Larkin makes an interesting introductory statement that "Human religious effort is a fact of life in almost every culture. Yet Stephen declares it is such effort that has kept Israel from knowing the righteous Savior and true worship. Stephen's opponents see in his preaching a challenge to first-century Judaism's twin pillars of piety: the law and the temple (Acts 6:11, Acts 6:13-14). Stephen now proceeds to answer these charges, not as one defending himself but as a witness to the gospel (Lk 21:13). He exposes the falseness of the charges as he affirms his loyalty to God's law and true worship. But more important, he reveals how religious effort, in this case first-century Judaism, is an obstacle to the true knowledge of God's saving provision, the Messiah. The words of historian John MacMurray about Jesus may be appropriately applied to Stephen: “The great contribution of the Hebrew to religion was that he did away with it.”" (Acts 7:1-53 Stephen's Speech) Stanley Touissaint explains that Stephen gave far more than an OT lesson in history noting that while he "touched on the accusations made against him, Stephen did not give a legal defense of himself. Rather, he set forth Israel’s past history and God’s past workings in order to vindicate Christianity. In this discourse three ideas run like cords through its fabric: (1) There is progress and change in God’s program. God was creative and innovative in His dealings with humans and particularly with Israel....(2) The blessings of God are not limited to the land of Israel and the temple area. Some of Israel’s greatest favors were bestowed apart from the temple and the land....(3) Israel in its past always evidenced a pattern of opposition to God’s plans and His men." (Bible Knowledge Commentary) Warren Wiersbe feels that the illustration of Abraham (Acts 7:2-8) demonstrates that "they misunderstood their own spiritual roots." Stephen (4736)(stephanos from stepho = to encircle, twine or wreathe) means crown. It was "the victor's crown," a symbol of triumph in the Grecian athletic games. How fitting that it is the name of this godly saint who paid the highest price when he was stoned to death for speaking the truth of the Gospel! Hear me (Listen to me! Give me your attention now!, cf Acts 2:22) - Stephen was filled with faith, filled with the Spirit (Acts 6:5+), filled with grace, filled with power (Acts 6:8+). He had to be bold in order to issue this command in the aorist imperative (Just do it! Speaks of urgency!) to "Hear!" or "Listen!" He is calling for the high priest's full attention (as well as the entire Sanhedrin) with the further implication that hearing is most truly "hearing" when it is united with heeding or obedience. While it may be unintended (I think it was intentional!), it is fascinating that Stephen's first word is the command to hear which mimics the greatly revered words of the Jewish "Shema" (cf shama, What is the Shema?) “Hear (Lxx has same verb akouo as Stephen uses but in present imperative), O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one! 5 “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. (Dt 6:4-5) Comment: Can we not hear at least a faint allusion or echo of Moses in Stephen's opening words in Acts 7:2! Gilbrant writes that "In the Septuagint akouein translates the Hebrew shama’, which became a virtual trademark of the Jewish religion and was recited throughout the day (“Hear O Israel,” Deuteronomy 6:4). Keep in mind that this is the third time the Sanhedrin have received a Spirit filled presentation of the Gospel (First - Acts 4:7-15+, Second - Acts 5:27-28, 29-33+). How longsuffering and mercy filled is our God! In the second Gospel presentation by all 12 apostles the Sanhedrin reacted with venom as they were "cut to the quick and intended to kill them" (Acts 5:33+) There is a saying that the "third time is the charm" but in this case is functioned not as a "charm" to convince them to receive the Gospel, but more like a "curse" causing them to kill the Gospel messenger! A major theme of Stephen's speech is that Israel had always rejected those He has sent, and the murder of Christ was the climax of their rejection. Furneaux says "Stephen read the history of the Old Testament with new eyes in the light of the life and death of Jesus” Kent puts it this way saying that Stephen was seeking "to show how the Christian message was fully consistent with and the culmination of OT revelation.” R C H Lenski feels that Stephen was "Apparently not making a special defense at all or with one syllable referring to his accusers and their false witnesses, he is yet utterly refuting them and making the most effective defense.” In other words he is not seeking to defend himself per se but to give a Scriptural defense of the Gospel and of Jesus. Richard Longenecker - The defense of Stephen before the Sanhedrin is hardly a defense in the sense of an explanation or apology calculated to win an acquittal. Rather, it is a proclamation of the Christian message in terms of the popular Judaism of the day and an indictment of the Jewish leaders for their failure to recognize Jesus of Nazareth as their Messiah or to appreciate the salvation provided in him. (Expositor's Bible Commentary)
Atos 7
Wiersbe comments that "Stephen's address opens with the God of glory and closes with the glory of God (Acts 7:55); and all the time he spoke, his face radiated that same glory! Why? Because Israel was the only nation privileged to have the glory of God as a part of its inheritance (Ro. 9:4). Alas, the glory of God had departed, first from the tabernacle (1 Sa 4:19-22) and then from the Temple (Ezek 10:4, 18)(Ed: See Glory of God). God's glory had come in His Son (John 1:14), but the nation had rejected Him." (Bible Exposition Commentary – Be Dynamic). Glory (1391) (doxa from dokeo = to think) in simple terms means to give a proper opinion or estimate of something. Glory is something that is a source of honor, fame, or admiration. Doxa conveys ideas of weight (OT word for glory is kabod = "heavy"), worth, wealth, splendor, and dignity. The glory of God expresses all that He is in His Being and in His nature, character, power and acts. He is glorified when He is allowed to be seen as He really is. To be where God is, is glory, which is every believer's reward! To be what God intended will be glory (cf 1 Jn 3:2). To do what God purposed will be glory. Charles Ryrie says that the glory of God "is the manifestation of any or all of His attributes. In other words, it is the displaying of God to the world. Thus, things which glorify God are things which show the characteristics of His being to the world." I like the way Puritan writer Thomas Watson described the glory of God - Glory is the sparkling of the Deity…We may see God's glory blazing in the sun and twinkling in the stars (Ps 19:1)… A sight of God's glory humbles. The stars vanish when the sun appears." In summary, in the present context glory describes the essential character of God God of glory is a very significant name of God. Why? See below... First note that God of glory is used only one other place in the Scripture. The voice of the LORD is upon the waters; The God of glory thunders, The LORD is over many waters. (Ps 29:3).
Atos 7
Wiersbe - Abraham was the founder of the Hebrew nation, and his relationship to God was one of grace and faith. (ED: NOT LIKE THAT OF THE SANHEDRIN WHICH WAS BASED ON LAW AND WORKS!) God had graciously appeared to him and called him out of heathen darkness into the light of salvation, and Abraham had responded by faith (Hebrews 11:8-9, 17-19). Abraham was saved by grace, through faith, and not because he was circumcised, kept a law, or worshiped in a temple. All of those things came afterward (see Ro 4; Gal. 3). He believed the promises of God and it was this faith that saved him....The Jews were blind to the simple faith of Abraham and the patriarchs, and they had cluttered it with man-made traditions that made salvation a matter of good works, not faith. God has no grandchildren. Each of us must be born into the family of God through personal faith in Jesus Christ (John 1:11-13). (Ibid) As an aside not only does Stephen refer to Abraham as OUR father, but he uses this same plural possessive pronoun (OUR) 11 times in 9 verses - our fathers (Acts 7:11, 12, 15, 19, 38, 39, 44, 45-twice) and our race (Acts 7:19). Clearly he is identifying himself with his Jewish brethren. However, it is interesting that he switches pronouns after reviewing Israel's OT history, and refers to "your fathers" (twice) in his indictment of the Sanhedrin in Acts 7:51, 52+. When he was in Mesopotamia (“between the rivers” - area of the "Fertile Crescent" the presumed site of the Garden of Eden -note) - Mesopotamia designates the area between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and more generally to the entire Tigris-Euphrates valley where Babylon would later be located and location of modern day Iraq. See Map. Abram was originally from Ur of the Chaldeans in southern Mesopotamia and journeyed to Haran, in northern Mesopotamia, . Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran, his grandson, and Sarai his daughter-in-law, his son Abram’s wife; and they went out together from Ur of the Chaldeans (Chaldea in Wikipedia) in order to enter the land of Canaan; and they went as far as Haran, and settled there. (Ge 11:31) See map of Abraham's travels from Ur to Haran to Canaan Before he lived in Haran - Haran was about 500 miles NW of Ur (See Ur and Haran on this Map). Genesis 29:4-5 confirms that Haran remained the permanent residence of Abraham's relatives even in the days of Jacob. Bruce Barton - Stephen's point seems to be that the glory of God came to Abraham while he was still in Mesopotamia. These religious leaders were too Jerusalem focused, too temple obsessed. They had better get their eyes open, Stephen was saying, or they would miss what God was doing. It was happening, not in the temple recesses, in the Holy Place, or Holy of Holies, but rather in the temple courtyard and in the streets of Jerusalem. There the gospel of Jesus Christ was being preached and confirmed with powerful exhibitions of God's power working through the apostles. (Life Application Bible Commentary – Acts) Most commentaries note that Stephen's speech has several differences from related passages in the Old Testament. While there are some differences, I believe that both records are inspired and inerrant and therefore both are God's Word. Because it would be unwieldy to discuss all of the allegations in detail, below is a summary of alleged "discrepancies" and suggested resolutions. This table is modified from a table in Believer's Study Bible. I appreciate John MacArthur's advice regarding our approach to these alleged discrepancies between Acts 7 and the Old Testament - To charge either Luke or Stephen with an error has serious implications for the doctrine of inspiration. To do so is either to affirm that the Spirit of Truth inspired error, or to deny that all the Bible is inspired. The former is absurd to the point of blasphemy; the latter contradicts 2 Timothy 3:16. And if all of Scripture is not inspired, who decides what is and is not inspired? Fallible human reason is certainly not qualified to sit in judgment on the Word of God. The problem, then, lies with the veracity of neither Stephen nor Luke, but only with our lack of complete information. (MacArthur New Testament Commentary – Acts) Related Resources: Stephen's Speech: A Theology of Errors? - Rex A Koivisto - Grace Theological Journal. 8.1 (1987). Pages 101-114. RESOLUTION OF ACCOUNTS: STEPHEN'S IN ACTS 7 & RELATED OLD TESTAMENT PASSAGES Stephen's Statement Alleged Discrepancy Resolution of Acts 7 and Old Testament Description Acts 7:2–4 Appearance of God to Abraham in Ur God calls Abraham in Haran (Ge 12:1–4) (1) God spoke to Abram in Ur (from Ge 15:7, Neh 9:7) but then again in Haran, thus the accounts are complementary. (2) Ge 11:27–32 may be a parenthetical background to Ge 12:1–4 and the call did come in Ur. Abraham leaves Haran after the death of his father. Abram leaves Haran 60 years before the death of his father (Ge 11:26, 32; 12:4) Abram is listed first in Ge 11:26 which some assume indicates he was firstborn. However, it is more probable that he is mentioned first because of his prominence, not because of his priority in time (Ge 5:32, 10:1 first son listed is clearly not eldest). Therefore there is no indication of Terah’s age when Abram was born. (See Kent's and Larkin's analyses) 400 years in a foreign country (Ge 15:13) 430 years in Egypt (Ex. 12:40, Gal 3:17). Note also 450 yrs = Acts 13:19-20. Acts & Ge 15:13 are examples of rounding off numbers. See Chart Comparing 400 years to 430 years. Acts 7:7 Is “this place” (word to Abraham in Gen. 15:13) Mt. Gerizim or Mt. Horeb? [Note that neither Mt. Gerizim nor Mt. Horeb is actually named.] “This mountain” (word to Moses in Ex. 3:12) is Mt. Horeb. Stephen apparently conflates or “telescopes” two separate texts (later in v. 16, he will telescope or conflate two separate incidents). This was a popular method of recounting history in Stephen’s day. The statement is true as we recognize that in one breath Stephen alludes to two different texts. Further, the fact is that they did worship God both in “this place” (Canaan, Gen. 15:13–15) and on Mt. Horeb (Ex. 3:12). Acts 7:14 75 people went to Egypt. 70 people went to Egypt (Gen. 46:27; Ex. 1:5; Deut. 10:22). The LXX was the text Stephen followed, and at Gen. 46:20 it adds two sons of manasseh, two sons of Ephraim, and one grandson of Ephraim, making the total 75. Acts 7:16 Abraham bought a tomb in Shechem. Abraham bought a tomb in Machpelah (cave/field) near Mamre, which is Hebron; Jacob bought a field in Shechem (Ge 23:17, 18; 33:19; Josh. 24:32). (1) It is possible that Abraham made the original purchase from sons of Hamor (the owners) in Shechem. He built an altar there (Ge 12:6-7) and quite likely purchased the plot of ground on which he built it. Abraham did not settle there and over time the site may have reverted to the occupying people of Hamor, thus necessitating Jacob's repurchase of it (2) The use of the plural in Acts 7:16 (“they”) tips us off that Stephen is conflating or telescoping several familiar accounts into a summary statement. Thus Stephen telescopes accounts of Abraham's purchase of Machpelah site and Jacob's acquisition of Shechem site which would be consistent with his telescoping of the two calls of Abraham in Acts 7:2 (3) Some argue that Jacob bought Shechem burial ground in the name of Abraham. Acts 7:16 Jacob and his sons (including Joseph) were buried in Shechem, but nothing is said about the burial of Abraham Abraham and Jacob were buried in Shechem, but nothing is said about the burial of Jacob’s other sons (Ge 23:9–20; 25:8–10; 33:19; 49:30, 31; 50:13; Josh. 24:32). See above, resolution (2). That argument holds for this point also, though the complementary nature of the accounts, and the possibility of Stephen’s utilizing extra-biblical tradition, is clearly evident. Interestingly, Josephus informs us of a tradition that says the brothers of Joseph were buried at Hebron. Acts 7:22 Moses “a man in mighty words” Moses a man “not eloquent” in speech (Ex. 4:10–16) Exodus 4 reveals Moses’ self-evaluation early in his ministry. With the help of Aaron, and ultimately, through training on the hob, Moses became a man “might in words and deeds” (Acts 7:22) Acts 7:26 Moses tried to make peace between two Israelites who were fighting. Moses took the side of one of the quarreling parties (Ex. 2:13). Exodus 2:13 gives a more detailed analysis. That Moses sided with one in no way negates his attempt to make peace between the two. Thus, both statements are true, Stephen again providing a general or summary statement. Acts 7:29 Moses fled because he was rejected by his people. Moses fled because of the king of Egypt (Ex. 2:15) both are correct and again complementary; Ex. 2:15ff. also affirms that Moses fled for fear and because of the rejection of his people. Acts 7:32, 33 God reveals Himself to Moses before He tells him to take off his sandals. God reveals Himself to Moses after He tells him to take off his sandals (Ex. 3:5, 6). Stephen simply reverses the chronological order out of theological/topical concerns, so that the initial emphasis is that it is the god of Moses’ ancestors (i.e., Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob) who is revealing Himself. This is in Keeping with Stephen’s overall purpose in his speech, Furthermore, the opening phrase of Acts 7:33 (eipen de, Gk. “and” or “but he said”) does not require temporal or chronological sequence. Acts 7:38 An angel speaks to Moses (see also Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19; Heb. 2:2) YAHWEH/the Lord/God speaks to Moses (Ex. 19) Two solutions are possible: (1) Stephen simply supplements the Exodus account, noting that the means whereby god spoke to Moses was an angel. (2) Numerous biblical students note that “the angel of YAHWEH” may very well be God Himself via a Christopahny, i.e., a preincarnate appearance of the Son of God. Acts 7:42, 43 Israel’s time in the wilderness was one of apostasy. Israel’s time in the wilderness is exemplary. (Amos 5:25) Some misread or misinterpret the Amos text. Amos is also denouncing Israel. Acts 7:43 “tabernacle…Moloch…Remphan.” ”Sikkuth you king and Chiun” (Amos 5:26, see notes in center column there). Stephen follows the LXX, which has paraphrased a very difficult Hebrew reading. This particular difficulty is best resolved by understanding that Stephen is following the LXX in its paraphrase of the Hebrew text of Amos 5:25–27, giving the text a different emphasis or application. The complexity of these texts really goes beyond the limits of these study notes. Acts 7:43 “away beyond Babylon” “captivity beyond Damascus” (Amos 5:27) Stephen, wishing to show that idolatry and disobedience to the Lord brought both Israel (by the Assyrians, capital Damascus) and Judah (by the Babylonians, capital Babylon) into captivity, broadens or expands upon the prophecy of Amos to include both exiles. This was a purposeful change to include all in the Exile(s). His audience would have clearly understood his application of the Amos text, though they no doubt did not appreciate it! Acts 7:3 and said to him, 'LEAVE YOUR COUNTRY AND YOUR RELATIVES, AND COME INTO THE LAND THAT I WILL SHOW YOU.' (NASB: Lockman) KJV Acts 7:3 And said unto him, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee. LEAVE YOUR COUNTRY Ge 12:1; Mt 10:37; Luke 14:33; 2 Cor 6:17; Heb 11:8 COME INTO THE LAND Ge 13:14-17; 15:7; Joshua 24:3; Neh 9:8 Acts 7 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries LEAVE AND COME! Thomas calls us to remember that "Stephen’s point now was to prove that God’s presence had never been limited to a geographical zip code, not even Mount Zion where the temple was built, the very place where Abraham offered his son Isaac as a sacrifice. Thus, Stephen traced the history of Abraham." (Ibid) See map of Abraham's travels from Ur to Haran to Canaan LEAVE YOUR COUNTRY AND YOUR RELATIVES AND COME INTO THE LAND THAT I WILL SHOW YOU- This sentence is from Genesis 12:1+ and is virtually a word for word translation of the Septuagint rather than from the Hebrew text. In fact all of Stephen's quotes from the Old Testament come from the Septuagint and account for some differences between the NT quote and the original OT verse (which is based on the Hebrew text). Alexander - A beautiful comment is afforded by the last clause of the parallel passage in Heb. 11:8, “he went out, not knowing where he was going.” Leave is aorist imperative, a command to do this now. This is amazing as Abraham is still not a believer (Ge 15:6+) and yet he obeyed God. Apple comments that "God of Sovereign Direction Graciously Commands (1) Based on Divine Election, (2) Based on Effectual Calling and (3) Based on Providential Leading/Pushing." (The Spread of the Gospel) Will show (1166) (deiknuo) means to show and has the sense of to draw attention to, to point out, to show, to make known, to exhibit something (by visual, auditory, gestural, or linguistic means) so that it can be apprehended by the senses, to cause to see. As when the devil showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the world (Mt 4:8, Lk 4:5) F F Bruce comments - Beginning with the patriarchal age, then, he (Stephen) reminds his hearers that it was in Mesopotamia, far from the promised land, that God first revealed himself to Abraham. One might well ask what could have persuaded Abraham to uproot himself as he did from the land of his birth and set out on a journey whose goal he did not know in advance. By all the prudential canons of ordinary life, it was a mad adventure; but as related in the biblical narrative it was an act of true wisdom. It was the God of glory who appeared to him and summoned him to embark on the path of faith, and the use of that title implies that God manifested himself to Abraham in glory so compelling (ED: cf Shekinah glory) that Abraham had no option but to obey. Those who are obedient to the heavenly vision, Stephen seems to suggest, will always live loose to any particular earthly spot, will always be ready to get out and go wherever God may guide. (NICNT- Acts) (Bold added) Acts 7:4 "Then he left the land of the Chaldeans and settled in Haran. From there, after his father died, God had him move to this country in which you are now living. (NASB: Lockman) KJV Acts 7:4 Then came he out of the land of the Chaldaeans, and dwelt in Charran: and from thence, when his father was dead, he removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell. Then he left the land of the Chaldeans Ge 11:31,32; 12:4,5; Isa 41:2,9 Acts 7 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries ABRAHAM'S OBEDIENCE GOD'S "DIVINE PUSH" Then he left - Why did he leave? He had seen and heard God Who gave him a command. And so he obeyed. Here's the point - Abraham obedience was based on his faith in God. So at the very outset Stephen is showing the Sanhedrin that a relationship with God is not based on works or keeping the Law which was the "religion" of the Sanhedrin. Abraham's obeyed because he believed God. Stated another way his relationship with God was based on faith. Furthermore, he actually saw God and heard God, something that none of the Sanhedrin had ever done (of course they had seen Jesus but refused to recognize Him as God). And one other point is that God initiated a relationship with Abraham when he was a pagan, living in an idolatrous land. These "religious" leaders were living in the Holy Land and had no relationship with the living God as had Abraham. While Stephen did not specifically point out these distinctions between Abraham and the religious leaders, his recital of the journey of the man they held in high esteem as their "spiritual" father would remind that their approach to God was radically different than Abraham's approach. Apple - The key to obedience is obeying when you cannot see what the consequences will be.(The Spread of the Gospel) Maples - Abraham came to God through faith, not through the temple. The land of the Chaldeans and settled in Haran - Haran was about 500 miles NW of Ur (See Ur and Haran on this Map) and know for its moon worship. Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran, his grandson, and Sarai his daughter-in-law, his son Abram’s wife; and they went out together from Ur of the Chaldeans (Chaldea in Wikipedia) in order to enter the land of Canaan; and they went as far as Haran, and settled there. (Ge 11:31) From there, after his father died, God had him move to this country in which you are now living - NET says God "made him move" indicating God was the active force. ESV says "God removed him from there." This verb emphasizes God's sovereign hand in leading Abraham to move from Haran to Canaan on the death of his father. In Ge 12:1 we read "the LORD said to Abram, “Go forth from your country" and in Ge 12:4 we read "So Abram went forth as the LORD had spoken to him." As
Atos 7
Wiersbe comments "The Jews prided themselves in their circumcision, failing to understand that the rite was symbolic of an inner spiritual relationship with God (Dt. 10:16; Jer. 4:4; 6:10; Acts 7:51; Gal. 5:1-6; Php 3:3; Col. 2:11-12+). Over the years, the fulfilling of ritual had taken the place of the enjoyment of reality. This happens in churches even today. (Bible Exposition Commentary). Thomas Constable sums up Stephen's first section of teaching on Abraham noting that "Throughout his speech Stephen made many statements that had revolutionary implications for traditional Jewish thinking of his day. He did not expound these implications, but they are clear in view of what the disciples of Jesus were preaching. As such his speech is a masterpiece of understatement, or rather non-statement. That the Sanhedrin saw these implications and rejected them becomes clear at the end of the speech when they reacted as negatively as possible." (Acts 7 Commentary) Polhill - This was not just a matter of covenant obedience....It was a matter of God’s covenant faithfulness. Stephen is no blasphemer. He approves of God’s covenant ways. (NAC-Acts) John Stott - We cannot miss Stephen’s emphasis on the divine initiative. It was God who appeared, spoke, sent, promised, punished and rescued. From Ur to Haran, from Haran to Canaan, from Canaan to Egypt, from Egypt back to Canaan again, God was directing each stage of his people’s pilgrimage. Although the whole fertile crescent from the River Euphrates to the River Nile was the scene of their migrations, God was with them. Why was this? It was because he gave Abraham the covenant of circumcision (8), that is, made a solemn promise to Abraham to bless him and his posterity, and gave him circumcision to signify and seal this covenant. So, long before there was a holy place, there was a holy people, to whom God had pledged himself. He then renewed the promise he had made to Abraham, first to his son Isaac, then to his grandson Jacob, and then to his great-grandsons the twelve patriarchs (8b). Thus Stephen makes the transition from Abraham to Joseph, the second great figure of the Old Testament he singles out (9–16). (Message of Acts) Ray
Atos 7
Wiersbe points out that in Acts 7:9-36 Israel "rejected their God-sent deliverers." This would certainly prepare them for Stephen's accusation that just like their fathers the Sanhedrin had rejected their Deliverer the Righteous One (Acts 7:51-53)
Atos 7
Wiersbe - No sooner had the people received the Law than they disobeyed it by asking Aaron to make them an idol (Ex. 32:1-8), and thereby broke the first two of the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:1-6). The Jews had worshiped idols in Egypt Gosh. 24:14; Ezek. 20:7-8), and after their settlement in the Promised Land they gradually adopted the gods of the pagan nations around them. God repeatedly disciplined His people and sent them prophets to warn them, until finally He carried them off to Babylon where they were finally cured of idolatry. (Bible Exposition Commentary – Be Dynamic). Marvin