Verse-by-Verse Bible Commentary
Acts 1:23

Clarke's Commentary

Verse Acts 1:23. They appointed two — These two were probably of the number of the seventy disciples; and, in this respect, well fitted to fill up the place. It is likely that the disciples themselves were divided in opinion which of these two was the most proper person, and therefore laid the matter before God, that he might decide it by the lot. No more than two candidates were presented; probably because the attention of the brethren had been drawn to those two alone, as having been most intimately acquainted with our Lord, or in being better qualified for the work than any of the rest; but they knew not which to prefer.

Joseph called Barsabas — Some MSS. read Joses Barnabas, making him the same with Joses Barnabas, Acts 4:36. But the person here is distinguished from the person there, by being called Justus.

Bridgeway Bible Commentary

A replacement for Judas (1:12-26)

After Jesus’ departure, the apostles returned to Jerusalem, where they met and prayed with various people, among them Jesus’ mother and brothers. During the time of Jesus’ ministry, his brothers had not believed in him as the Son of God, but the resurrection must have turned them to true faith (12-14; cf. John 7:5; 1 Corinthians 15:7; 1 Corinthians 15:7).

Soon after, the apostles met with just over a hundred other Christians in Jerusalem to choose an apostle to replace Judas. Luke adds a note outlining how Judas had died. When Judas returned the betrayal money to the priests, the priests felt they could not put the money into the temple treasury, so used it to buy a field in Judas’ name. This field was the place where Judas killed himself, and later it became a cemetery for Gentiles (15-20; see Matthew 27:3-10).

The replacement apostle had to be an eye witness of the events of Jesus’ public ministry, and particularly of his resurrection. Two were found, equally qualified and apparently equally suitable. The apostles therefore laid the matter before God in complete faith, believing that if they drew lots to decide between the two, the result would indicate God’s choice (21-26).

Apostles and their duties

The word ‘apostle’ meant ‘a sent one’. Jesus gave the name to his chosen twelve because he sent them out, equipped with his messianic powers, to spread the message of the kingdom (Matthew 10:1-7; Luke 6:13). They were to spread the message throughout Israel first (Matthew 10:5-7), as preparation for the worldwide mission to follow (Matthew 28:19-20). The significance of the number twelve was that just as twelve tribes had been the basis of the old people of God, so twelve apostles would be the basis of the new people of God, the Christian church (Matthew 16:18; Ephesians 2:20; Revelation 21:12,Revelation 21:14).

By choosing a replacement for Judas, the apostles showed that at first they considered it necessary to maintain the unit of twelve. Some years later when James was executed (Acts 12:1-2), they did not feel the same need to find a replacement, probably because by that time the original twelve-member group had largely fulfilled its purpose. It had provided the first-hand witness to Jesus’ life, death and resurrection that Jesus wanted (Luke 24:46-48; John 15:27; Acts 1:21-22), it had established the church on the basis of Jesus’ teaching (John 14:26; Acts 2:42; Acts 6:4) and it had overseen the expansion of Christianity from Jerusalem into the wider world beyond (Matthew 28:19-20; Acts 1:8; Acts 8:14; Acts 10:44-48). It no longer functioned as a group and the unit of twelve no longer needed to be maintained.

However, the office of apostle continued to be recognized, and as the church grew, an increasing number of people were recognized as apostles (Acts 14:14; Romans 16:7). It even became necessary to warn against false apostles (2 Corinthians 11:13; Revelation 2:2). From this it is clear that the title of apostle applied to a wider group of people than the twelve (1 Corinthians 9:1; 1 Corinthians 15:8-11; Galatians 1:19).

Apostles in this broader sense continued to preserve, teach and develop the truths of the Christian gospel, and people accepted their teaching as having the authority of God’s Word (1 Corinthians 1:1; 1 Corinthians 12:28; 1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Thessalonians 2:15; 2 Thessalonians 2:15; 2 Peter 3:15-16; 2 Peter 3:15-16; cf. John 16:13-14). This apostolic authority extended to all aspects of the church’s life (Acts 5:1-11; 2 Corinthians 12:12; 2 Corinthians 12:12; 2 Corinthians 13:1-3; 2 Thessalonians 3:4; 2 Thessalonians 3:4,2 Thessalonians 3:14), though apostles rarely forced their authority upon people. They usually preferred that Christians develop maturity by making their own decisions and using their spiritual gifts (Acts 15:6; 2 Corinthians 1:24; 2 Corinthians 1:24; 2 Corinthians 13:10; Ephesians 4:11-13).

It seems that apostles did not pass on their office to the next generation. They had been God’s provision to link the ministry of Christ with the birth of the church, and to ensure that the church was built upon a proper foundation (Ephesians 2:20). As the Christian teaching became firmly established in written form (2 Thessalonians 2:15) and as the churches became firmly established through local elders (Acts 14:23; Acts 20:28), the necessity for apostles decreased. The apostolic office had fulfilled its purpose and after the first century it died out.

Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible

And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.

They put forward … Who did the putting forward? Is it to be supposed that the 120 disciples mentioned a little later did this? There is no evidence whatever that such a group had been disciples from the beginning of John's baptism; and thus it is not reasonable to suppose that anyone participated in the selection of Justus and Matthias except the apostles. Furthermore, there is a strong inference in this passage that only two qualified men could be found, other than the apostles themselves. It appears that those two were equally qualified, hence the decision through casting lots.

Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible

And they appointed two - They proposed, or, as we should say, nominated two. Literally, they placed two, or made them to stand forth, as persons do who are candidates for office. These two were probably-more distinguished by prudence, wisdom, piety, and age than the others, and they were so nearly equal in qualifications that they could not determine which was the best suited for the office.

Joseph called Barsabas ... - It is not certainly known what the name Barsabas denotes. The Syriac word “Bar” means “son,” and the word “Sabas” has been translated “an oath, rest, quiet, or captivity.” Why the name was given to Joseph is not known but probably it was the family name - Joseph son of Sabas. Some have conjectured that this was the same man who, in Acts 4:36, is called Barnabas. But of this there is no proof. Lightfoot supposes that he was the son of Alpheus and brother of James the Less, and that he was chosen on account of his relationship to the family of the Lord Jesus.

Was surnamed Justus - Who was called Justus. This is a Latin name, meaning just, and was probably given him on account of his distinguished integrity. It was not uncommon among the Jews for a man to have several names, Matthew 10:3.

And Matthias - Nothing is known of the family of this man, or of his character, further than that he was numbered with the apostles, and shared their lot in the toils, the persecutions, and the honors of preaching the gospel to mankind.

Calvin's Commentary on the Bible

23.They were to choose one only into the room of Judas; they present two. Here may a question be asked, Why they were not contented with one only? Was it because they were so like, that they could not discern whether was more fit? This truly had been no sufficient reason why they should suffer it to be decided by lots. And also it seemeth that Joseph was of greater estimation otherwise; or was it because they were diversely affectioned? But this seemeth scarce probable, neither is this to be admitted as true, because of that most excellent testimony which Luke did give a little before of their unity and agreement. Lastly, It had been very absurd for them to have polluted the election of the apostle with such strife and contention. ⁽⁷⁰⁾ But for this cause did they use the casting of lots, that it might be known that Matthias was not only chosen by the voices of men, but also that he was made by the determination and judgment of God.

For there was this difference between the apostles and the pastors, that the pastors were chosen simply by the Church, the apostles were called of God. In which respect Paul, in the preface of his Epistle to the Galatians, (Galatians 1:2,) doth profess himself to be an apostle, “neither of men, neither made by man.” Therefore, like as the dignity of this function was excellent, so was it meet that in the choosing of Matthias, the chief judgment should be left unto God, howsoever men did their duty. Christ by his own mouth did appoint the rest; therefore, if Matthias had been chosen only by man to be one of them, he should have had less authority than they. This was very orderly done, ⁽⁷¹⁾ that the disciples should present unto God those whom they thought to be the best; and he should choose to himself whom he knew to be most fit, so that God, by the fall of the lot, doth pronounce that he did allow of the apostleship of Matthias. But the apostles might seem to have dealt very rashly and disorderly, which laid so great and weighty a matter upon a lot; for what certainty could they gather thereby? I answer, that they did it only as they were moved thereunto by the Holy Spirit; for although Luke doth not express this, yet, because he will not accuse the disciples of rashness, but rather doth show that this election was lawful and approved of God; I say, therefore, that they went this way to work, being moved by the Spirit, like as they were directed in all the action by the same Spirit. But why do they not pray that God would choose whom he would out of the whole multitude? Why do they restrain his judgment unto two? Is not this to rob God of his liberty, when as they tie him, and, as it were, make him subject unto their voices and consents? ⁽⁷²⁾ But whosoever shall quietly ponder the matter shall plainly perceive, by the drift of Luke, that the disciples durst do nothing but that which they knew was their duty to do, and was commanded them by the Lord. As for the contentious, let them go shake their ears. ⁽⁷³⁾

(70) “Tali dissidio,” with such dissension.

(71) “Medium fuit temperamentum.” a middle course was adopted.

(72) “Suis suffragiis,” their suffrages.

(73) “Valere sinamus,” let us leave them alone, bid them good day.

Smith's Bible Commentary

Shall we turn to the book of Acts, chapter one, as we begin our study of the early church.

Luke, the author of the book of Acts, a companion of Paul the apostle, who was author also of the Gospel According to Luke, wrote these two treatises to a friend, Theophilus. Theophilus is a Greek name. It's a name that has a beautiful meaning. The name means lover of God. There are some who believe that it was not a man at all, but that the gospel and the book of Acts were addressed to the lovers of God, whoever you may be. There are other traditions that say that Theophilus was actually Luke's master. That in those days physicians were slaves, usually the slave of a wealthy patron. So that Luke's master was Theophilus, and he released Luke to be with Paul on the missionary journeys. Thus, Luke is writing back to his former master. This is an early tradition of the church, but it is, of course, impossible to prove, like so many of the traditions.

There are also those who believe that when Paul was in Troas and he received a vision of a man calling unto him saying, "Come over to Macedonia and help us," that that man in Paul's vision was none other than Luke. For the first one that Paul really met when he came to Macedonia was Luke. And as we are in the book of Acts, you will find that when we get to that portion of the book of Acts, Luke begins to write more in the first person rather than the third person. So it is, evidently, at this particular point in the Acts of the Apostles that Luke became a companion of Paul and began to journey with him. He began to use the pronouns "we" and "us" instead of "they" and "them." This is, no doubt, where Luke became a participant and an eyewitness of those things that were happening from this point on. We will bring this out to you when we get to that point.

He begins the Acts of the Apostles by tying it with the Gospel According to Luke. It is interesting that the very last thing that Luke records in his gospel is the very first thing he records in the Acts of the Apostles. We find the gospel of Luke closing as Jesus is telling His disciples to wait in Jerusalem until they be endued with power from on high. And then Jesus ascended up into heaven, and so he closes the gospel. In opening the Acts of the Apostles, he writes,

The former treatise [that is, the Gospel According to Luke,] have I written unto you, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach ( Acts 1:1 ),

The key word is began. The Gospel According to Luke is not the full story of the ministry of Jesus Christ. It is only the beginning of the ministry of Jesus Christ. Jesus continues to minister to the needs of people. Jesus continues to heal the sick. Jesus continues to raise the dead. Jesus continues to minister His love and His gospel to the world, only now He is ministering through those disciples who have been anointed with His Holy Spirit. But the ministry of Christ is continuing; basically, is the premise that Luke takes in the Acts of the Apostles. The former treatise of all that Jesus began, both to do and to teach.

Now because of that, the Acts of the Apostles is an unfinished book: in that the Lord today continues to work through the lives of those who have dedicated themselves to be the instruments of God. To be led and guided and anointed by His Holy Spirit, to continue the ministry of Jesus in the world today. Now God has ordained that His work should be accomplished through human instruments. I do not say that it must be accomplished. God can use angelic beings for His work, and there will come a time, during the book of Revelation when God will use angels to proclaim His gospel to people all over the world. Revelation, chapter 14, "The first angel flying through the midst of heaven having the everlasting gospel" ( Revelation 14:6 ). But at the present time, God has chosen to use human instruments. As imperfect as they may be, yet that's what God has ordained to use. The exciting thing about that is, God will use me and God will use you. So many times, we're begging off, "O Lord, I can't speak. I've never been able to speak before or even now, Lord." As Moses tried to beg off the call of God. Jeremiah said, "Lord, I'm just a kid; no one's going to listen to me." And we all have our excuses why we can't be used. Don't we? We all know the reasons why God couldn't use us.

One time, as the Lord was calling a prophet to do His work, he said, "Lord, send whoever you want." The Lord said, "Hey, I've called you." "Lord, good idea; send whoever you want." So often we're in that position, "Lord, send by the hand of whomsoever you will, anybody but me Lord." And yet, God has ordained to use us.

Now, each of us can show our own imperfections. Each of us can point out our own inabilities, and all of us can find an excuse why God wouldn't want to use me. But yet, God has chosen to use you. That through your life He might reveal Himself to a needy world. You wonder when God has such instruments to use how He ever got the job done, don't you?

Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Spirit had given commandments to the apostles whom he had chosen ( Acts 1:2 ):

That is what he ended the Gospel of Luke with. The day that Jesus was taken up, after He had told the apostles to wait for the endowment of power.

To whom he also [that is the apostles he also] showed himself alive to them after his passion [or death] by many infallible proofs ( Acts 1:3 ),

It is difficult to deny the fact of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. I was amused, as well as annoyed and irritated, by an article I read in the Santa Ana Register this last Saturday. Of the creation science and evolutionary theories being presented in the county schools. How that, this one professor said that he teaches a science class, and thus, they deal only in facts, and that they don't have any place for theories. Because science is based upon fact and creation is based upon religious superstitions. It takes a lot of faith to believe the religious theories. When you are dealing with facts, you can just accept them. I thought, "Very interesting in that science class, they taught me it was a fact that the world was four billion years old. Now today they are teaching it's a fact that the world is twelve billion years old. And it wasn't that long ago that I went to school."

It's interesting that the Bible has never needed to be revised or updated to meet the current data that men have discovered. And yet, if you would take my high school science textbooks today and try to teach a science class from them, you would find that many of the things that were taught as scientific fact when I was in high school are no longer recognized as scientific fact. The simple cell protoplasm is no longer a simple cell, but extremely complex. If there is any fact that can be attested to in history it is the fact of the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

We have a jurisprudence system that is based upon the testimony of witnesses. If a man is accused of a crime and there are people who witnessed that crime while it was being committed, and they are brought to the standard, and they swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help them God. And in their questioning they affirm that, "I saw that man in the bank on May twenty-third. I saw him pull out a gun from his coat. I heard him demand that all of the money be given to him. I saw him as he left the bank. I saw him as the officer apprehended him outside." And if you can get three or four witnesses to point to that man and will keep their testimony under cross-examination, that man is judged to be guilty. He is the one who did it. We have two or three witnesses that are testifying the same story about that man, and it is accepted as fact that he is the one who perpetrated the crime and is guilty. You've got witnesses who have sworn to tell the truth that are verifying.

After the death of Jesus, when He rose again, He appeared unto many different people who gave sworn testimony that they saw Him. That they talked to Him, that He appeared to them in various places under different circumstances. And for a period of forty days was visiting with them. And at one time, up to as many as five hundred people who were gathered at one place, He appeared. It's difficult to just cast aside or deny the witness of these people. To do so is to discredit our whole jurisprudence system. But not only that, these men who testified that they saw the risen Lord, that they talked to Him, that they ate with Him, they, all of them, with the exception of one, met violent deaths at the hands of other people because of their affirming that the story they told was true. You talk about witnesses sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. If a person's life was threatened because of that witness, and it was a lie, at least one them would've broken under the pressure. They would've confessed to the entire hoax. "He showed Himself alive after His passion by many infallible proofs."

being seen of them for forty days, speaking to them of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God ( Acts 1:3 ):

Sometimes we fault the disciples because of their questions of the timing of the kingdom of God. Let it be remembered that the kingdom of God was the favorite subject of Jesus Christ. He was always talking about the kingdom of God, and it is a great hope that He was planting into the hearts of all men. Things are not always going to continue corrupted as they are. The world is not going to go forever under the power of darkness, under the bondage of evil. God is going to one day establish His kingdom upon the earth. A kingdom of righteous joy and peace. "Jesus shall reign, where ere the sun doth her successive journeys run. And His kingdom will extend from shore to shore." And that day will be the most glorious day the world has ever seen, as sickness and suffering and pain will be abolished in His kingdom. As sin and greed and these things that have made the world such an intolerable place will be abolished in His kingdom. The godless commercialism, the exploitation of man, all of these things abolished in His glorious kingdom when He reigns. No wonder the disciples were anxious to get it on. I'm anxious to get it on; I'm anxious for His kingdom to come. And Jesus told us when we pray, the first petition is, "Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven" ( Matthew 6:10 ). This is the right kind of a desire that we should all have. I desire the kingdom of God. And so He was talking to them, during this forty-day period, of the kingdom.

And, being assembled together with them, he commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, you have heard of me ( Acts 1:4 ).

He said, "Now look, wait here in Jerusalem until you receive the promise of the Father." This promise that He is referring to is, no doubt, the promise in Joel where the Lord promised, "And it shall come to pass in the later days, saith the Lord, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and daughters will prophesy, and your young men shall dream dreams, your old men shall see visions: and upon my servants and my handmaidens shall I pour out my Spirit, saith the Lord" ( Joel 2:28-29 ). The promise of the Father: the day is going to come when God is going to pour out His Spirit upon all flesh, all of the believers. They will, each one, receive that dynamic from God.

For John [He said,] truly baptized with water; but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now ( Acts 1:5 ).

The idea of baptism was that of emersion, the bapteedzo. John baptized with water, submerged the people in water, "you're going to be submerged in the Holy Spirit in not many days."

Now when they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel? ( Acts 1:6 )

"When is it going to be, Lord? When's the time for this restoration?" And Jesus is talking to them now, not about the kingdom, but about the power that they're going to receive for service. And so He brushes aside their question.

Saying unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father has put in his own power ( Acts 1:7 ).

"It's not for you to know." They lived constantly in the anticipation of the immediate setting up of the kingdom. During the entire lifetime of Jesus, they were expecting Him at any moment to go into the phone booth and come out as the savior of the world. Shazzam! Showing His power and overthrowing the governments of the world, establishing God's kingdom upon the earth. And they were waiting daily for this change to transpire. And whenever Jesus would talk about going to Jerusalem, being turned over into the hands of sinful man, and then being crucified, "Oh, oh no, Lord. No, no you don't understand the kingdom, Lord. Be that far from Thee." When Jesus died on the cross, they were all greatly disappointed.

The two disciples on the road to Emmaus, so sad. "Hey, fellows. How come you're so sad as your walking along?" "What do you mean? You must be a stranger around here if you don't know the things that have been happening lately in Jerusalem." "What things?" "Oh, a fellow by the name of Jesus of Nazareth...oh man, it was mighty and powerful. The anointing of God was upon His life. We had hoped that in Him was the deliverance of Israel, but they crucified Him. We had hoped . . . now it's dead." Now He's risen, and He's saying, "In a few days, fellows, you're going to receive the promise of the Father." "Oh, what promise? The promise of the establishing of the kingdom?" You see, it was legitimate that they should ask. "Is this it Lord? Alright! Is this the time? Are you going to set up your kingdom now?" "No. It's not for you to know those times that the Father's appointed or that the Father has in His own power. But, you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you."

Now here, the Greek preposition epi is used to signify a new relationship that they were to have with the Holy Spirit. In the Gospel According to John, chapter 14, as Jesus is there promising to send the Holy Spirit, He said, "I will not leave you comfortless. I will come to you, and I will pray the Father, and He will send to you another comforter, even the Spirit of Truth whom the world cannot receive because it seeth Him not neither knows Him, but you know Him for He dwells with you, and He shall be in you" ( John 14:17-18 ). Same Greek preposition as ours, only they spell it "en" instead of "in." Two-fold relationship there in John: He is with you, but He's going to be dwelling in you. But now Jesus said you're going to receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you. The Greek preposition epi, which is translated in different texts throughout the New Testament as "upon" or "over" or I like it, "overflows."

In the seventh chapter of the gospel of John: "On the last day, the great day of the feast when Jesus stood there on the Temple Mount and cried to the people, 'If any man thirst let him come unto Me and drink: and he who drinks of the water that I give, out of his innermost being there will gush torrents of living water.'" John said, "This spake He of the Spirit, which was not yet given which they who believe on Him should receive" ( John 7:37-39 ). What did He speak of the Spirit? That it would be like a torrent of living water flowing out. I like, "When the Spirit overflows you," upon you, or over you, or overflows from you. So the three-fold relationship: He is with you prior to your conversion, He is the one who causes you to realize that you are a sinner, He is the one who points to Jesus Christ as the answer as He convinces the world of sin, of righteous, and of judgment. The moment you open your life and heart to Jesus Christ and invite Him to come in, the Holy Spirit comes and begins to indwell you. He shall be in you. "Know ye not that you are not your own, you have been bought with a price, therefore glorify God in your body and your spirit which are His. And know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you? Be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess, but be filled, or be ye being filled with the Spirit" ( 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 ,Ephesians 5:18 ). But now here's a third relationship. This is an empowering experience.

You will receive [the dunamus] the dynamics, when the Holy Spirit has come [epi] upon you [or over you, or when there is that overflow from you]: and ye shall be witnesses unto me ( Acts 1:8 )

And so the dynamic, to be a witness for Jesus Christ. It is interesting that the word witness in Greek is the word martus from where we get our word martyr. And in Greek it does mean martyr. A witness is one who not only proclaims what he believes, he lives what he believes, he is what he believes, and he believes it so strongly, that if necessary, he'll die for what he believes. That's how strong is his belief. He's a martus. You can't stop him. He's not afraid to die for what he believes.

You remember when Paul was on his way back to Jerusalem and Agabus came down from Caesarea and he took Paul's girdle and tied himself up and he said, "So is the man who owns this girdle to be bound when he gets to Jerusalem." And Paul's friends began to weep, saying, "Oh, Paul, don't go, don't go." And he said, "What do you mean by these tears? Do you think you're going to dissuade me? Do you think I'm worried about being bound? I'm ready to die." He was a martus. "I'm ready to die." Being put to death for your faith did not make you a martyr; because you were a martyr, you were put to death. Because you were a witness, because you believed it so strong. So, it did not make you a witness, it only proved what you were. You were a witness all along. If you hadn't been a martus, you would've never gone to your death. You would've recanted; you would've said, "Whoa, whoa, wait, wait. Hold on, let's change course here. I think that I may have made a mistake." Then you say, "Well, he wasn't a martus. Stealing a horse doesn't make you a horse thief; it only proves that you were. No one steals a horse unless he's a horse thief. So, stealing it doesn't make you a horse thief, it only proves that you were all along. Being martyred only proves what you were a witness, a martus. "And you will be witnesses." And isn't it interesting that most of them were martyred? "Witnesses unto Me."

The witness was to be both in Jerusalem, and in all of Judea ( Acts 1:8 ),

The witness began right at home. The hardest place, isn't it? It's to start right at home in Jerusalem, and then the area around Jerusalem, the area of Judea. And then it was to spread up into Samaria. And then it was to go out into the uttermost parts of the world. And as we study the book of Acts, we will see this very progression. How the witness began in Jerusalem. We'll get that in the next chapter. And then we'll see how it began to spread through out Judea. And then Phillip went up into Samaria, and then finally Paul and Barnabas are called to go into the uttermost parts of the world. And so the witness spread through the anointing and the empowering of the Holy Spirit.

Now when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight ( Acts 1:9 ).

This is the final promise made by Jesus to His disciples. This is it, the final words prior to His ascension. Of course, later He came and talked to Paul and others, but prior to His ascension, this is His final word. And upon this, when He had spoken these things, while they were watching Him, He was taken up and a cloud received Him out of their sight.

And while they were looking steadfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, there were two men who stood by them in white apparel ( Acts 1:10 );

We assume they were angels.

Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as you have seen him go into heaven ( Acts 1:11 ).

They saw Him as He ascended up into heaven and they will behold Him when He comes again. "Behold the Lord cometh with ten thousands of His saints, to execute judgement upon the earth" (Jud 1:14-15). And then, "Unto Him who loved us and gave Himself for us and who has made us unto our God, kings and priests who shall reign with Him upon the earth, behold the Lord cometh, and every eye shall see Him, and they also who pierced Him shall mourn" Revelation 1:5-7 ). So the Lord's coming. Every eye shall see Him. The Jehovah Witnesses say that He is already come, but it was a secret coming. As it was only the disciples that saw Him go, it was only the disciples, of the Jehovah Witnesses, who saw Him return. But Jesus said, "If they say unto you, 'He has come in secret and has gone into a secret chamber don't believe it'" ( Matthew 24:26 ). So you have to choose, to believe Jesus or them.

"This same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as you've seen Him go into heaven."

Now there's a very interesting verse in II John, verse Acts 1:7 , "For many deceivers are entered into the world who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh." That, unfortunately, is a poor translation of the Greek. For this participle is in the present tense and should be translated "is coming in the flesh." Those who would deny that Jesus Christ is coming in the flesh. What does John say of them? "They are a deceiver and an antichrist. Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. For whosoever transgresses and abides not in the doctrine of Christ, has not God. He that abides in the doctrine of Christ, he has both the Father and the Son. And if there come any unto your door (on Saturday morning) and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, and neither bid him good-bye. For he that bids him good-bye is a partaker of his evil deeds" (2Jn 1:7-11). Ask them one question, "Is Jesus coming in the flesh?" Just ask them that question. And if they say no, just remember what John warned you and what John told you. "If any confess not that Jesus Christ is coming in the flesh." Do you remember when He was with the disciples and He said, "Give me something to eat"? He said, "You know, spirits don't eat; touch me. See? It's me." So, this same Jesus is coming again in the same manner in which they saw Him go into heaven. And I, for one, believe that that coming is very soon.

Then retuned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a Sabbath's day journey [about two-thirds of a mile]. And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where there abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, and Phillip, and Thomas, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James. And these all continued in one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers ( Acts 1:12-14 ).

This is the last mention of Mary the mother of Jesus. At this point and from this point on, there is no further mention of her in the Acts of the Apostles or in the epistles. No mention of her death or of her miraculous ascension into heaven, without death. Nothing is mentioned in the scripture. It is silent.

His brethren would be a reference probably to James and to Jude and to those other brothers who were sons of Joseph and Mary.

The upper room--there are some who say that it is the same upper room in which Jesus had the Last Supper with His disciples. And yet, there are others who hold to this upper room being a room in the temple precincts where the early church met. Take your choice.

And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of their names together were about one hundred and twenty,) men and brethren, this Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was a guide to those who took Jesus ( Acts 1:15-16 ).

Here again, Peter still his same impetuous self. They're waiting in prayer and supplication, and Peter stands up and says, "Fellows, there's a scripture that's gotta be fulfilled." And you know he's going to move ahead, "Let's get the program going; let's cast lots and find out who's going to take Judas' place." I do feel that Peter was again in the flesh, manifesting that impetuous nature that was his. And I think that the future history of the church in the book of Acts points this out. I am interested in Peter's understanding of the scriptures, how that he is quoting from so many places in the Old Testament. Peter does manifest a very great understanding of the Old Testament scriptures which is a point in his favor.

Notice that Peter ascribes to the Holy Spirit those things that David wrote. So that, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God" ( 2 Timothy 3:16 ). Not part of the scriptures. Because, if you tell me that part of the scriptures are given by inspiration of God, then I must ask you, "What parts are by inspiration and what parts are not by inspiration?" And then you are then the authority who tells me what part I can believe and what part I can't believe. And the minute that God is no longer the authority but you're the authority, I'm in trouble. Beware of those who say, "Well, you can't believe all of the scriptures." The scriptures themselves say, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God." And here, Luke in writing of what Peter was saying, declares that David was actually the spokesman for the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit, by the mouth of David, spake concerning Judas.

For he was numbered with us, [he was one of the twelve] he had obtained a part of this ministry. But now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong ( Acts 1:17-18 ),

He purchased the field, the potter's field as Zachariah the eleventh chapter declares.

and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out ( Acts 1:18 ).

There are those who find a discrepancy in the scriptures, because in one of the gospels we are told that when Judas came back and tried to return the money, and they said, "Hey, it's your problem. We can't take it." And put it back in the temple treasury. "It's blood money." Then he threw it there on the floor of the temple and he went out and hung himself. Here Peter tells us that he fell headlong and just popped. And there are those who imagine a discrepancy. Very simple, he went up into the tree to hang himself, tied the rope around his neck and tied it to the limb and jumped. And the force of the fall either snapped the rope or his head, and he fell on down into the canyon and just as he said it here.

It was known to all of the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch that the field is called in their tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood. For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and, His bishoprick let another take ( Acts 1:19-20 ).

Now in reality he's quoting from two different Psalms here. From Psalms 69:25 ,he puts it together with Psalms 109:8 . And putting the two together he finds these prophecies concerning Judas.

Wherefore of these men ( Acts 1:21 )

Now here is where they are looking for someone to take Judas' place to be an apostle. Here are the qualifications they looked for in that time.

Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus when in and out among us ( Acts 1:21 ),

Now you remember there were many disciples, many disciples of which Jesus chose ten to be apostles. And the word apostle means "one who is sent out." Or chose twelve to be apostles, so He sent out the twelve. The number of human government. "We only have eleven. We need one to take Judas' place, but we need one who has been with us all the while from the beginning with Jesus."

From the time he was baptized by John, until the day he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness [of what?] of His resurrection ( Acts 1:22 ).

So these were the requirements they were looking for. Someone who had been around the whole while. From the time of John's baptism to the ascension. And one who saw the risen Lord, and thus could bear fact of the resurrection, their testimony to the fact.

Now Paul the apostle, later in asserting the fact that he was an apostle said, "Have I not seen the risen Christ?" Evidently that was one of the requirements of apostleship. Someone asked me, "Are there apostles today?" Well, I don't know. I don't think that there are in the same sense that they were in the New Testament. Surely there is none today who can bear witness to the resurrection as they did.

They appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, show whether of these two that you have chosen ( Acts 1:23-24 ),

I think that we often make this mistake of giving the Lord two choices, both wrong. Limiting God, you see. We're so prone to do this. Obviously, Paul was God's choice. Peter was impetuous, and jumping the gun said, "Hey, we've got to do something, you know, gotta help God out. You know, one's missing and we've got to fill him in." And yet, "God, which one of these two do you want?" And giving God the two choices.

That he may take part of this ministry and this apostleship, from which Judas by the transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. And so they gave forth their lots ( Acts 1:25-26 );

An interesting way by which they sought to determine the will of God. Let's throw dice, find out what God's will is here. It's interesting to me, the various ways that people have devised to discern the will of God. Now, in the Old Testament times they had an interesting way of coming to the priest, who would inquire of the Lord for them through the Urim and the Thummim, the "lights and perfections." Just what these Urim and Thummim were, we don't know. I'm sure they were not the colored glasses that Joseph Smith found with the Golden Tablets; the magic glasses, that when you put them on, you could suddenly read the hieroglyphic writing.

There are those who say that the Urim and Thummim were actually a black and a white stone that was worn in a pouch on the chest of the priest. They would pray and ask the Lord a particular question. You remember that David was asking the Lord definite questions: "Lord, shall we go out against the Philistines?" The answer was, "No." So again, the next day, "Lord, shall we go out against the Philistines?" The answer was, "Yes." "When shall we go?" They would ask specific questions, and the Lord would direct them through the Urim and the Thummin. They say that the priest would pray, seek God, and then reach in and pull out one of the two stones. If it was the white stone, it was a yes answer. If it was a no, then it would be the black stone that he would pull out. Some even say we get the term blackballed from this Urim and Thummim. Actually, back in the original it is a no vote against a particular project or idea. Just what the Urim and Thummim were, we don't know. But during the Old Testament period, they did use a method of casting lots to determine the will of God.

So here the disciples are picking up on the same thing as they are throwing the dice to see which of the two fellows that God had chosen to replace Judas Iscariot.

the lot fell on Matthias; he was numbered with the eleven ( Acts 1:26 ).

Now who in the world is Matthias? No one ever heard of him before or since. It'll be interesting to meet Matthias and find out who he is and what he did. I think from the subsequent history, it's obvious to assume that God chose Paul as an apostle. Paul declares it himself. Now this is the last time we ever read of them seeking to discern the will of God by the casting of lots or by a chance kind of a thing.

I know a fellow today, in seeking to discern the will of the Lord, will pray and ask the Lord a question. He'll have ten pennies in his pocket, and as he's praying, he'll take the pennies with his eyes closed and put them down on the table, and if they all come up heads, it's a yes. An interesting thing, every once in a while, they'll all come up heads, and that's pretty good odds. Yet, we don't find any pattern for this after the Holy Spirit was given. Once the Holy Spirit came upon the church, then the Holy Spirit began to speak to them and direct them. And the Holy Spirit said, "Separate unto me Paul and Barnabas for the ministry where I have called them" ( Acts 13:2 ). And the Holy Spirit sent them forth. So we find the church more directly guided by the Holy Spirit. Once the Holy Spirit came, this throwing dice to find out the will of God was set aside.

"

Contending for the Faith

And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.

And they appointed two: Of those who qualify, two are selected, or nominated, to be considered for the appointment.

Joseph called Barsabas: The name Barsabas literally means son of Saba.

who was surnamed Justus: Justus is a Latin name, meaning just, more than likely given him because he was known as a man of integrity (Barnes 375).

and Matthias: Very little is known of the family or background of this man. The name Matthias literally means "gift of Jehovah" (The Bible Encyclopedia and Scriptural Dictionary 1128).

Dr. Constable's Expository Notes

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

Peter perceived the importance of asking God to identify Judas’ successor in view of the ministry that Jesus had said the Twelve would have in the future. He led the disciples in obtaining the Lord Jesus’ guidance in this important matter (cf. Acts 1:21; Acts 1:24). From his viewpoint, the Lord could have returned very soon to restore the kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6), so the Twelve had to be ready for their ministry of judging the twelve tribes of Israel when He did.

Dr. Constable's Expository Notes

The choice of Matthias 1:15-26

Dr. Constable's Expository Notes

Those present, probably the other apostles, nominated two apparently equally qualified men. Joseph is a Hebrew name, Barsabbas is Aramaic meaning "Son of the Sabbath," and Justus is Roman. Matthias is Hebrew and is a short form of Mattithia. The apostles then prayed for the Lord to indicate which one He chose (cf. Acts 6:6; Acts 13:3; Acts 14:23; 1 Samuel 22:10; 1 Samuel 23:2; 1 Samuel 23:4; 1 Samuel 23:10-12). They acknowledged that only God knows people’s hearts (1 Samuel 16:7) and did not make the mistake that the Israelites did when they chose King Saul. They wanted God to identify the man after His heart as He had done with David. Next they cast lots probably by drawing one of two designated stones out of a container or by throwing down specially marked objects (cf. Leviticus 16:8; Joshua 14:2; 1 Samuel 14:41-42; Nehemiah 10:34; Nehemiah 11:1; Proverbs 16:33). The ancient Greeks often used pebbles in voting, black for condemning and white for acquitting. [Note: A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, 3:19, 446.] The Lord identified Matthias as His sovereign choice to fulfill the ministry (service) and apostleship (office) of Judas. Judas’ "own place" was a place different from that of the Eleven, namely, perdition. Matthias received no further mention in the New Testament. Legend has it that he died as a martyr in Ethiopia. [Note: Blaiklock, p. 53.]

". . . it was not enough to possess the qualifications other apostles had. Judas’s successor must also be appointed by the same Lord who appointed the Eleven." [Note: Longenecker, p. 266.]

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

Was Peter correct in leading the believers to recognize a twelfth apostle, or did God intend Paul to be the replacement? Several commentators believed that Paul was God’s intended replacement. [Note: E.g., Blaiklock, p. 53; Morgan, p. 24; and J. Vernon McGee, Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee, 4:514.] Paul was, of course, an apostle with authority equal to that of the Twelve. However, Paul had not been with Jesus during His earthly ministry. Luke, Paul’s friend, spoke of the Twelve without equivocation as an official group (Acts 2:14; Acts 6:2). Furthermore the distinctly Jewish nature of the future ministry of the Twelve (Matthew 19:28) supports Paul’s exclusion from this group. His ministry was primarily to the Gentiles (Galatians 2:9). Paul never claimed to be one of the Twelve, though he did contend that his official apostleship had come to him as a direct commission from the Lord. However, it came from the risen Lord, and he considered himself abnormally born as an apostle (1 Corinthians 15:7-8). Finally, there is no hint in Scripture that the decision made on this occasion was a mistake.

". . . the pericope suggests that a Christian decision regarding vocation entails (1) evaluating personal qualifications, (2) earnest prayer, and (3) appointment by Christ himself-an appointment that may come in some culturally related fashion, but in a way clear to those who seek guidance." [Note: Longenecker, p. 266.]

"Matthew concludes with the Resurrection, Mark with the Ascension, Luke with the promise of the Holy Spirit, and John with the promise of the Second Coming. Acts 1 brings all four records together and mentions each of them. The four Gospels funnel into Acts, and Acts is the bridge between the Gospels and the Epistles." [Note: McGee, 4:515.]

Barclay's Daily Study Bible

Chapter 1

POWER TO GO ON ( Acts 1:1-5 )

1:1-5 My Dear Theophilus, I have already given you an account of all the things that Jesus began to do and to teach, right up to the day when he was taken up to heaven, after he had, through the Holy Spirit, given his instructions to the apostles whom he had chosen. In the days that followed his sufferings he also showed himself living to them by many proofs, for he was seen by them on various occasions throughout a period of forty days; and he spoke to them about the kingdom of God. While he was staying with them he told them not to go away from Jerusalem but to wait for the Father's promise, "which," he said, "I told you about; for I told you that John baptized with water but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit before many days have passed."

In two senses Acts is the second chapter of a continued story. First, it is the second volume which Luke had sent to Theophilus. In the first volume, his Gospel, Luke had told the story of the life of Jesus upon earth. Now he goes on to tell the story of the Christian Church. Second, Acts is the second volume of a story which has no end. The Gospel was only the story of what Jesus began to do and to teach.

There are different kinds of immortality. There is an immortality of fame. In Henry the Fifth Shakespeare puts into the king's mouth a speech which promises an immortal memory if the Battle of Agincourt is won.

This story shall the good man tell his son;

And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,

From this day to the ending of the world,

But we in it shall be remembered.

Beyond a doubt Jesus did win such an immortality, for his name will never be forgotten.

There is an immortality of influence. Some men leave an effect in the world which cannot die. Sir Francis Drake was the greatest of English sailors and to this day the Royal Naval Barracks at Plymouth is called H.M.S. Drake so that there may always be sailors armed with "that crested and prevailing name." Beyond a doubt Jesus won an immortality of influence for his effect upon the world and the life of men cannot die.

Above all, there is an immortality of presence and of power. Jesus not only left an immortal name and influence; he is still alive and still active. He is not the one who was; he is the one who is.

In one sense it is the whole lesson of Acts that the life of Jesus goes on in his Church. Dr. John Foster tells how an inquirer from Hinduism came to an Indian bishop. All unaided he had read the New Testament. The story had fascinated him and Christ had laid his spell upon him. "Then he read on...and felt he had entered into a new world. In the gospels it was Jesus, his works and his suffering. In the Acts ... what the disciples did and thought and taught had taken the place that Christ had occupied. The Church continued where Jesus had left off at his death. 'Therefore,' said this man to me, 'I must belong to the Church that carries on the life of Christ.'" The book of Acts tells of the Church that carries on the life of Christ.

This passage tells us how the Church was empowered to do that by the work of the Holy Spirit. We often call the Holy Spirit the Comforter. That word goes back to Wycliff; but in Wycliff's day it had a different meaning. It comes from the Latin fortes, which means brave; the Comforter is the one who fills men with courage and with strength. In the book of Acts, indeed all through the New Testament, it is very difficult to draw a line between the work of the Spirit and the work of the Risen Christ; and we do not need to do so, for the coming of the Spirit is the fulfillment of the promise of Jesus, "Lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age." ( Matthew 28:20.)

Let us note one other thing. The apostles were enjoined to wait on the coming of the Spirit. We would gain more power and courage and peace if we learned to wait. In the business of life we need to learn to be still. "They who wait for the Lord shall renew their strength." ( Isaiah 40:31). Amidst life's surging activity there must be time to receive.

THE KINGDOM AND ITS WITNESSES ( Acts 1:6-8 )

1:6-8 So when they had met together they asked him, "Lord, are you going to restore the kingdom of Israel at this time?" But he said to them, "It is not yours to know the times and the seasons which the Father has appointed by his own authority. But when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, you will receive power; and you will be my witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judaea and in Samaria and to the farthest bounds of the earth."

Throughout his ministry Jesus laboured under one great disadvantage. The centre of his message was the kingdom of God. ( Mark 1:14); but he meant one thing by the kingdom and those who listened to him meant another.

The Jews were always vividly conscious of being God's chosen people. They took that to mean that they were destined for special privilege and for world-wide dominion. The whole course of their history proved that humanly speaking that could never be. Palestine was a little country not more than 120 miles long by 40 miles wide. It had its days of independence but it had become subject in turn to the Babylonians, the Persians, the Greeks and the Romans. So the Jews began to look forward to a day when God would break directly into human history and establish that world sovereignty of which they dreamed. They conceived of the kingdom in political terms.

How did Jesus conceive of it? Let us look at the Lord's Prayer. In it there are two petitions side by side. "Thy kingdom come; thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven." It is characteristic of Hebrew style, as any verse of the Psalms will show, to say things in two parallel forms, the second of which repeats or amplifies the first. That is what these two petitions do. The second is a definition of the first. Therefore, we see that by the kingdom Jesus meant a society upon earth where God's will would be as perfectly done as it is in heaven. Because of that it would be a kingdom founded on love and not on power.

To attain to that men needed the Holy Spirit. Twice already Luke has talked about waiting for the coming of the Spirit. We are not to think that the Spirit came into existence now for the first time. It is quite possible for a power always to exist but for men to experience or take it at some given moment. For instance, men did not invent atomic power. It always existed; but only in our time have men tapped it. So God is eternally Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but there came to men a special time when they experienced to the full that power which had always been present.

The power of the Spirit was going to make them Christ's witnesses. That witness was to operate in an ever-extending series of concentric circles, first in Jerusalem, then throughout Judaea; then Samaria, the semi-Jewish state, would be a kind of bridge leading out into the heathen world; and finally this witness was to go out to the ends of the earth.

Let us note certain things about this Christian witness. First, a witness is a man who says I know this is true. In a court of law a man cannot give in evidence a carried story; it must be his own personal experience. There was a time when John Bunyan was not quite sure. What worried him was that the Jews thought their religion the best; the Mohammedans thought theirs the best; what if Christianity were but a think-so too? A witness does not say, "I think so"; he says "I know."

Second, the real witness is not of words but of deeds. When Stanley had discovered Livingstone in Central Africa and had spent some time with him, he said, "If I had been with him any longer I would have been compelled to be a Christian and he never spoke to me about it at all." The witness of the man's life was irresistible.

Third, in Greek the word for witness and the word for martyr is the same (martus, G3144) . A witness had to be ready to become a martyr. To be a witness means to be loyal no matter the cost.

THE GLORY OF DEPARTURE AND THE GLORY OF RETURN ( Acts 1:9-11 )

1:9-11 When he had said these things, while they were watching, he was taken up and a cloud received him and he passed from their sight. While they were gazing into heaven, as he went upon his way, behold, two men in white garments stood beside them; and they said to them, "Men of Galilee, why are you standing looking up into heaven? This Jesus who has been taken up into heaven from you will come again in the same way as you have seen him go to heaven."

This short passage leaves us face to face with two of the most difficult conceptions in the New Testament.

First, it tells of the Ascension. Only Luke tells this story and he has already related it in his gospel. ( Luke 24:50-53.) For two reasons the Ascension was an absolute necessity. One was that there had to be a final moment when Jesus went back to the glory which was his. The forty days of the resurrection appearances had passed. Clearly that was a time which was unique and could not go on forever. Equally clearly the end to that period had to be definite. There would have been something quite wrong if the resurrection appearances had just simply petered out.

For the second reason we must transport ourselves in imagination back to the time when this happened. Nowadays we do not regard heaven as some local place beyond the sky; we regard it as a state of blessedness when we will be forever with God. But every man, even the wisest, in those days thought of the earth as flat and of heaven as a place above the sky. Therefore, if Jesus was to give his followers unanswerable proof that he had returned to his glory, the Ascension was absolutely necessary. But we must note this. When Luke tells of this in his gospel he says, "They returned to Jerusalem with great joy." ( Luke 24:52.) In spite of the Ascension, or maybe because of it, the disciples were quite sure that Jesus was not gone from them but that he was with them forever.

Second, this passage brings us face to face with the Second Coming. About the Second Coming we must remember two things. First, to speculate when and how it will happen is both foolish and useless, Jesus said that not even he knew the day and the hour when the Son of Man would come. ( Mark 13:32.) There is something almost blasphemous in speculating about that which was hidden from even Christ himself. Second, the essential teaching of Christianity is that God has a plan for man and the world. We are bound to believe that history is not a haphazard conglomeration of chance events which are going nowhere. We are bound to believe that there is some divine far off event to which the whole creation moves and that when that consummation comes Jesus Christ will be Judge and Lord of all. The Second Coming is not a matter for speculation and for illegitimate curiosity; it is a summons to make ourselves ready for that day when it comes.

THE FATE OF THE TRAITOR ( Acts 1:12-20 )

1:12-20 Then they made their way back to Jerusalem from the hill which is called the Mount of Olives, which is near Jerusalem, about half a mile away. When they came in. they went up to the upper room where they were staving; Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot and Judas the son of James were there. All of them with one united heart persevered in prayer, together with certain women and with Mary, Jesus' mother and with his brothers,

Before we come to the fate of the traitor Judas there are certain things we may notice in this passage. For the Jew, the Sabbath was entirely a day of rest when all work was forbidden. A journey was limited to 2,000 cubits and that distance was called a Sabbath day's journey. A cubit was eighteen inches; so a Sabbath day's journey was rather more than half a mile.

It is interesting to note that Jesus' brothers are here with the company of the disciples. During Jesus' lifetime they had been among his opponents ( Mark 3:21). It may well be that for them, as for so many others, the death of Jesus opened their eyes and stabbed their hearts as even his life could not do.

We are told that the number of the disciples was about 120. That is one of the most uplifting things in the New Testament. There were only 120 pledged to Christ and it is very unlikely that any of them had ever been outside the narrow confines of Palestine in his life. Since there were about 4,000,000 Jews in Palestine, this means that fewer than I in 30,000 were Christians. On the same basis it would mean that it was like there being only 300 Christians in the whole of Glasgow or 12 in Edinburgh; and these 120 simple folk were told to go out and evangelize the whole world. If ever anything began from small beginnings the Christian Church did. We may well be the only Christians in our shop, our factory, our office, in our circle. These men gallantly faced their task and so must we; and it may be that we too will be the small beginning from which the kingdom in our sphere will spread.

The great interest of this passage is the fate of Judas. What exactly the Greek here means is uncertain, but in Matthew's account ( Matthew 27:35) we are left in no doubt that Judas committed suicide. It must always be a matter of wonder why Judas betrayed Jesus. Various suggestions have been put forward.

(i) It has been suggested that Iscariot means man of Kerioth. If it does. Judas was the only non-Galilaean in the apostolic band. It may be that he felt himself the odd man out and grew so embittered that he did this terrible thing.

(ii) It may be that Judas turned king's evidence to save his own skin and then saw the enormity of what he had done.

(iii) It may be that he did it simply out of greed for money. If he did. it was the most dreadful bargain in history, for he sold his Lord for thirty pieces of silver which was less than L4.

(iv) It may be that Judas came to hate Jesus. From others he could disguise his black heart; but the eyes of Jesus could penetrate to the inmost recesses of his being. It may be that in the end he was driven to destroy the one who knew him for what he was.

(v) It may be that Iscariot is a form of a Greek word which means a dagger-bearer. The "dagger-bearers" were a band of violent nationalists who were prepared to undertake assassination and murder in a campaign to set Palestine free, Perhaps Judas saw in Jesus the very person who could lead the nationalists to triumph; and when he saw that Jesus refused that way he turned against him and in his bitter disappointment betrayed him.

(vi) It is likeliest of all that Judas never meant Jesus to die but betrayed him with the intention of forcing his hand. If that be so, Judas had the tragic experience of seeing his plan go desperately wrong; and in his bitter remorse he committed suicide.

However it may be, Judas goes down to history as the blackest name among men. There can never be any peace for the man who betrays Christ.

THE QUALIFICATIONS OF AN APOSTLE ( Acts 1:21-26 )

1:21-26 "So then, of the men who were with us during all the time our Lord went in and out amongst us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day on which he was taken up from us--of these we must choose one to be a witness of the resurrection along with us." So they selected two, Joseph, who was called Barsabbas, whose surname was Justus, and Matthias. Then they prayed and said, "O Lord. who knowest the hearts of all, do thou show us which of these two thou hast chosen to take his place in this service and in the apostleship. from which Judas fell away and went to his own place." So they made them draw lots and the lot fell on Matthias, and he was elected to be along with the eleven apostles.

We look briefly at the method of choosing someone to take Judas' place in the number of the apostles. It may seem strange to us that the method was that of casting lots. But amongst the Jews it was the natural thing to do because all the offices and duties in the Temple were settled that way. The names of the candidates were written on stones'. the stones were put into a vessel and the vessel was shaken until one stone fell out; and he whose name was on that stone was elected to office.

The great fact about this passage is that it gives us two supremely important truths.

First, it tells us that the function of an apostle was to be a witness to the resurrection. The real mark of a Christian is not that he knows about Jesus but that he knows Jesus. The basic mistake in Christianity is to regard Jesus as someone who lived and died and whose life we study and whose story we read. Jesus is not a figure in a book, he is a living presence; and the Christian is a man whose whole life is a witness to the fact that he knows and has met the Risen Lord.

Second, it tells us that the qualification of an apostle was that he had companied with Jesus. The real Christian is the man who lives day by day with Jesus. It was said of John Brown of Haddington, the great preacher, that often when he preached he paused as if listening for a voice. Jerome K. Jerome tells of an old cobbler who, on the coldest day, left the door of his shop open, and on being asked why, replied, "So that Jesus can come in if he is passing by." We often speak about what would happen if Jesus were here and how differently we would live if he were in our homes and at our work. Lady Acland tells how once her little daughter had a spasm of temper. After the storm she and the daughter were sitting on the stairs making things up again and the little girl said, "I wish Jesus would come and stay in our house all the time." But the fact is that Jesus is here; and the real Christian is the man who lives all his life with Christ.

-Barclay's Daily Study Bible (NT)

Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible

And they appointed two,.... The motion made by Peter was attended to by the whole company; they approved of it, and accordingly proposed two persons by name; one of which was to be chosen, not by the apostles, but by the whole assembly. The Arabic version reads, "he appointed two", as if Peter singly did this: contrary to all copies, and other versions, and to the context; which shows, that the whole body of the people were concerned in this affair, who prayed and gave forth their lots and suffrages: the persons nominated were,

Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. The former of these has three names; in one ancient copy of Beza's he is called Joses; and by some thought to be the same with Joses, surnamed Barnabas, in Acts 4:36 partly because in one copy, and in the Syriac version there, that Joses is called Joseph; and partly, because of the nearness in sound between Barsabas and Barnabas: hence the Ethiopic version here reads, "Joseph, who was called Barnabas", and so Beza's most ancient copy; but though Joses is here meant for Jose, or Joses is, with the Jews, an abbreviation of Joseph; yet not Joses the Levite, who was of the country of Cyprus, but Joses of Galilee, the son of Alphaeus and Mary; and who had two brothers, James and Jude, already apostles; see Matthew 13:55. Moreover, though the two names, Barnabas and Barsabas, differ little in sound, yet much in sense: the former is interpreted "the son of consolation", Acts 4:36 but the latter signifies much the same with Bathsheba; as that may be interpreted "the daughter", this "the son of an oath"; or as others, "a son of wisdom"; and by others, "the son of fulness"; I should choose to take it to be the same name with

בר סבא, and interpret it, "the son of an old man"; as Alphaeus might be, when Joses, or Joseph was born, and he be the younger brother of James and Jude; as for his surname Justus, this was a name not only in use among the Grecians and Romans, especially the latter, but among the Jews: hence we often read of Rabbi יוסטא, "Justa", and sometimes, יוסטי, "Justi", and at other times, יוסטאי "Justai" x whether he had this surname from his being a very just man, as Aristides was called Aristides the just; and so Simeon the high priest, the last of Ezra's great synagogue, was called Simeon the just y; and so James the brother of this Joseph, or Joses, was called by the Jews z; and it may be, that he himself might have his name from the patriarch Joseph, who used to be called by them, Joseph, הצדיק, "the just" a: for Matthias, his name is Jewish, and he was no doubt a Jew; hence we read רבי מתיא, "Rabbi Matthia ben Charash" b; his name signifying the same as Nathanael does, namely, the gift of God, made Dr. Lightfoot conjecture they might be the same; but this agrees not with another conjecture that learned man, who elsewhere thinks, that Bartholomew and Nathanael were the same; and if so, he must have been an apostle already; Clemens of Alexandria was of opinion, that this Matthias was Zacchaeus c.

x T. Hieros. Beracot, fol. 12. 3. & Trumot. fol. 48. 1. & Erubin, fol. 19. 3. & 23. 3. T. Bab. Zebachim, fol. 99. 1. & Juchasin, fol. 95. 2. & 96. 1. Shirhashirim Rabba, fol. 17. 4. y Pirke Abot, c. 1. sect. 2. z Euseb. Eccl. Hist. l. 2. c. 23. a Zohar in Exod. fol. 104. 1. b T. Bab. Yebamot, fol. 61. 2. & Juchasin, fol. 108. 1. c Stromat, l. 4. p. 488.

Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible

      15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)   16 Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.   17 For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry.   18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.   19 And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.   20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishopric let another take.   21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,   22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.   23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.   24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, show whether of these two thou hast chosen,   25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.   26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

      The sin of Judas was not only his shame and ruin, but it made a vacancy in the college of the apostles. They were ordained twelve, with an eye to the twelve tribes of Israel, descended from the twelve patriarchs; they were the twelve stars that make up the church's crown (Revelation 12:1), and for them twelve thrones were designated, Matthew 19:28. Now being twelve when they were learners, if they were but eleven when they were to be teachers, it would occasion every one to enquire what had become of the twelfth, and so revive the remembrance of the scandal of their society; and therefore care was taken, before the descent of the Spirit, to fill up the vacancy, of the doing of which we now have an account, our Lord Jesus, probably, having given directions about it, among other things which he spoke pertaining to the kingdom of God. Observe,

      I. The persons concerned in this affair. 1. The house consisted of about a hundred and twenty. This was the number of the names, that is, the persons; some think the men only, distinguished from the women. Dr. Lightfoot reckons that the eleven apostles, the seventy disciples, and about thirty-nine more, all of Christ's own kindred, country, and concourse, made up this one hundred and twenty, and that these were a sort of synod, or congregation of ministers, a standing presbytery (Acts 4:23; Acts 4:23), to whom none of the rest durst join themselves (Acts 5:13; Acts 5:13), and that they continued together till the persecution at Stephen's death dispersed them all but the apostles (Acts 8:1; Acts 8:1); but he thinks that besides these there were many hundreds in Jerusalem, if not thousands, at this time, that believed; and we have indeed read of many that believed on him there, but durst not confess him, and therefore I cannot think, as he does, that they were now formed into distinct congregations, for the preaching of the word and other acts of worship; nor that there was any thing of this till after the pouring out of the Spirit, and the conversions recorded in the following chapter. Here was the beginning of the Christian church: this hundred and twenty was the grain of mustard-seed that grew into a tree, the leaven that leavened the whole lump. 2. The speaker was Peter, who had been, and still was, the most forward man; and therefore notice is taken of his forwardness and zeal, to show that he had perfectly recovered the ground he lost by his denying his Master, and, Peter being designed to be the apostle of the circumcision, while the sacred story stays among the Jews, he is still brought in, as afterwards, when it comes to speak of the Gentiles, it keeps to the story of Paul.

      II. The proposal which Peter made for the choice of another apostle. He stood up in the midst of the disciples,Acts 1:15; Acts 1:15. He did not sit down, as one that gave laws, or had any supremacy over the rest, but stood up, as one that had only a motion to make, in which he paid a deference to his brethren, standing up when he spoke to them. Now in his speech we may observe,

      1. The account he gives of the vacancy made by the death of Judas, in which he is very particular, and, as became one that Christ had breathed upon, takes notice of the fulfilling of the scriptures in it. Here is,

      (1.) The power to which Judas had been advanced (Acts 1:17; Acts 1:17): He was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry which we are invested with. Note, Many are numbered with the saints in this world that will not be found among them in the day of separation between the precious and the vile. What will it avail us to be added to the number of Christians, if we partake not of the spirit and nature of Christians? Judas's having obtained part of this ministry was but an aggravation of his sin and ruin, as it will be of theirs who prophesied in Christ's name, and yet were workers of iniquity.

      (2.) The sin of Judas, notwithstanding his advancement to this honour. He was guide to those that took Jesus, not only informed Christ's persecutors where they might find him (which they might have done effectually though he had kept out of sight), but he had the impudence to appear openly at the head of the party that seized him. He went before them to the place, and, as if he had been proud of the honour, gave the word of command: That same is he, hold him fast. Note, Ringleaders in sin are the worst of sinners, especially if those that by their office should have been guides to the friends of Christ are guides to his enemies.

      (3.) The ruin of Judas by this sin. Perceiving the chief priests to seek the life of Christ and his disciples, he thought to save his by going over to them, and not only so, but to get an estate under them, of which his wages for his service, he hoped, would be but an earnest; but see what came of it. [1.] He lost his money shamefully enough (Acts 1:18; Acts 1:18): He purchased a field with the thirty pieces of silver, which were the reward of his iniquity. He did not purchase the field, but the wages of his unrighteousness did, and it is very elegantly expressed thus, in derision of his projects to enrich himself by this bargain. He thought to have purchased a field for himself, as Gehazi did with what he got from Naaman by a lie (see 2 Kings 5:26), but it proved the purchase of a field to bury strangers in; and what was he or any of his the better for this? It was to him an unrighteous mammon, it deceived him; and the reward of his iniquity was the stumbling-block of his iniquity. [2.] He lost his life m ore shamefully. We were told (Matthew 27:5) that he went away in despair, and was suffocated (so the word signifies there, and no more); here it is added (as latter historians add to those who went before) that, being strangled, or choked with grief and horror, he fell headlong, fell on his face (so Dr. Hammond), and partly with the swelling of his own breast, and partly with the violence of the fall, he burst asunder in the midst, so that all his bowels tumbled out. If, when the devil was cast out of a child, he tore him, threw him down, and rent him, and almost killed him (as we find Mark 9:26; Luke 9:42), no wonder if, when he had full possession of Judas, he threw him headlong, and burst him. The suffocation of him, which Matthew relates, would make him swell till he burst, which Peter relates. He burst asunder with a great noise (so Dr. Edwards), which was heard by the neighbours, and so, as it follows, it came to be known (Acts 1:19; Acts 1:19): His bowels gushed out; Luke writes like a physician, understanding all the entrails of the middle and lower ventricle. Bowelling is part of the punishment of traitors. Justly do those bowels gush out that were shut up against the Lord Jesus. And perhaps Christ had an eye to the fate of Judas, when he said of the wicked servant that he would cut him in sunder,Matthew 24:51.

      (4.) The public notice that was taken of this: It was known to all the dwellers in Jerusalem. It was, as it were, put into the newspapers, and was all the talk of the town, as a remarkable judgment of God upon him that betrayed his Master, Acts 1:19; Acts 1:19. It was not only discoursed of among the disciples, but it was in every body's mouth, and nobody disputed the truth of the fact. It was known, that is, it was known to be true, incontestably so. Now one would think this should have awakened those to repentance that had had any hand in the death of Christ when they saw him that had the first hand thus made an example. But their hearts were hardened, and, as to those of them that were to be softened, it must be done by the word, and the Spirit working with it. Here is one proof of the notoriety of the thing mentioned, that the field which was purchased with Judas's money was called Aceldama--the field of blood, because it was bought with the price of blood, which perpetuated the infamy not only of him that sold that innocent precious blood, but of those that bought it too. Look how they will answer it, when God shall make inquisition for blood.

      (5.) The fulfilling of the scriptures in this, which had spoken so plainly of it, that it must needs be fulfilled,Acts 1:16; Acts 1:16. Let none be surprised nor stumble at it, that this should be the exit of one of the twelve, for David had not only foretold his sin (which Christ had taken notice of, John 13:18; Psalms 41:9, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up the heel against me), but had also foretold, [1.] His punishment (Psalms 69:25): Let his habitation be desolate. This Psalm refers to the Messiah. Mention is made but Psalms 69:21; Matthew 27:34 of their giving him gall and vinegar, and therefore the following predictions of the destruction of David's enemies must be applied to the enemies of Christ, and particularly to Judas. Perhaps he had some habitation of his own at Jerusalem, which, upon this, every body was afraid to live in, and so it became desolate. This prediction signifies the same with that of Bildad concerning the wicked man, that his confidence shall be rooted out of his tabernacle, and shall bring him to the king of terrors: it shall dwell in his tabernacle, because it is none of his; brimstone shall be scattered upon his habitation,Job 18:14; Job 18:15. [2.] The substitution of another in his room. His bishopric, or his office (for so the word signifies in general) shall another take, which is quoted from Psalms 109:8. With this quotation Peter very aptly introduces the following proposal. Note, We are not to think the worse of any office that God has instituted (whether magistracy or ministry) either for the wickedness of any that are in that office or for the ignominious punishment of that wickedness; nor will God suffer any purpose of his to be frustrated, any commission of his to be vacated, or any work of his to be undone, for the miscarriages of those that are entrusted therewith. The unbelief of man shall not make the promise of God of no effect. Judas is hanged, but his bishopric is not lost. It is said of his habitation, that no man shall dwell therein, there he shall have no heir; but it is not said so of his bishopric, there he shall not want a successor. It is with the officers of the church as with the members of it, if the natural branches be broken off, others shall be grafted in,Romans 11:17. Christ's cause shall never be lost for want of witnesses.

      2. The motion he makes for the choice of another apostle, Acts 1:21; Acts 1:22. Here observe, (1.) How the person must be qualified that must fill the vacancy. It must be one of these men, these seventy disciples, that have companied with us, that have constantly attended us, all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, preaching and working miracles for three years and a half, beginning from the baptism of John, from which the gospel of Christ commenced, unto that same day that he was taken up from us. Those that have been diligent, faithful, and constant, in the discharge of their duty in a lower station, are fittest to be preferred to a higher; those that have been faithful in a little shall be entrusted with more. And none should be employed as ministers of Christ, preachers of his gospel, and rulers in his church, but those that are well acquainted with his doctrine and doings, from first to last. None shall be an apostle but one that has companied with the apostles, and that continually; not that has visited them now and then, but been intimately conversant with them. (2.) To what work he is called that must fill up the vacancy: He must be a witness with us of his resurrection. By this it appears that others of the disciples were with the eleven when Christ appeared to them, else they could not have been witnesses with them, as competent witnesses as they, of his resurrection. The great thing which the apostles were to attest to the world was Christ's resurrection, for this was the great proof of his being the Messiah, and the foundation of our hope in him. See what the apostles were ordained to, not to a secular dignity and dominion, but to preach Christ, and the power of his resurrection.

      III. The nomination of the person that was to succeed Judas in his office as an apostle.

      1. Two, who were known to have been Christ's constant attendants, and men of great integrity, were set up as candidates for the place (Acts 1:23; Acts 1:23): They appointed two; not the eleven, they did not take upon them to determine who should be put up, but the hundred and twenty, for to them Peter spoke, and not to the eleven. The two they nominated were Joseph and Matthias, of neither of whom do we read elsewhere, except this Joseph be the same with that Jesus who is called Justus, of whom Paul speaks (Colossians 4:11), and who is said to be of the circumcision, a native Jew, as this was, and who was a fellow-worker with Paul in the kingdom of God and a comfort to him; and then it is observable that, though he came short of being an apostle, he did not therefore quit the ministry, but was very useful in a lower station; for, Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Some think this Joseph is he that is called Joses (Mark 6:3), the brother of James the less (Mark 15:40), and was called Joses the just, as he was called James the just. Some confound this with that Joses mentioned Acts 4:36. But that was of Cyprus, this of Galilee; and, it should seem, to distinguish them, that was called Barnabas--a son of consolation; this Barsabas--a son of the oath. These two were both of them such worthy men, and so well qualified for the office, that they could not tell which of them was the fitter, but all agreed it must be one of these two. They did not propose themselves nor strive for the place, but humbly sat still, and were appointed to it.

      2. They applied to God by prayer for direction, not which of the seventy, for none of the rest could stand in competition with these in the opinion of all present, but which of these two?Acts 1:24; Acts 1:25. (1.) They appeal to God as the searcher of hearts: "Thou, Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, which we do not, and better than they know their own." Observe, When an apostle was to be chosen, he must be chosen by his heart, and the temper and disposition of that. Yet Jesus, who knew all men's hearts, for wise and holy ends chose Judas to be one of the twelve. It is comfortable to us, in our prayers for the welfare of the church and its ministers, that the God to whom we pray knows the hearts of all men, and has them not only under his eye, but in his hand, and turns them which way soever he will, can make them fit for his purpose, if he do not find them so, by giving them another spirit. (2.) They desire to know which of these God had chosen: Lord, show us this, and we are satisfied. It is fit that God should choose his own servants; and so far as he in any way by the disposals of his providence or the gifts of his Spirit, shows whom he hath chosen, or what he hath chosen, for us, we ought to comply with him. (3.) They are ready to receive him as a brother whom God hath chosen; for they are not contriving to have so much the more dignity themselves, by keeping out another, but desire to have one to take part of this ministry and apostleship, to join with them in the work and share with them in the honour, from which Judas by transgression fell, threw himself, by deserting and betraying his Master, from the place of an apostle, of which he was unworthy, that he might go to his own place, the place of a traitor, the fittest place for him, not only to the gibbet, but to hell--this was his own place. Note, Those that betray Christ, as they fall from the dignity of relation to him, so they fall into all misery. It is said of Balaam (Numbers 24:25) that he went to his own place, that is, says one of the rabbin, he went to hell. Dr. Whitby quotes Ignatius saying, There is appointed to every man idios topos--a proper place, which imports the same with that of God's rendering to every man according to his works. And our Saviour had said that Judas's own place should be such that it had been better for him that he had never been born (Matthew 26:24) --his misery such as to be worse than not being. Judas had been a hypocrite, and hell is the proper place of such; other sinners, as inmates, have their portion with them, Matthew 24:51. (4.) The doubt was determined by lot (Acts 1:26; Acts 1:26), which is an appeal to God, and lawful to be used for determining matters not otherwise determinable, provided it be done in a solemn religious manner, and with prayer, the prayer of faith; for the lot is cast into the lap, but the whole disposal thereof is of the Lord,Proverbs 16:33. Matthias was not ordained by the imposition of hands, as presbyters were, for he was chosen by lot, which was the act of God; and therefore, as he must be baptized, so he must be ordained, by the Holy Ghost, as they all were not many days after. Thus the number of the apostles was made up, as afterwards, when James, another of the twelve, was martyred, Paul was made an apostle.

Kelly Commentary on Books of the Bible

First of all we see man in an entirely new place man risen from among the dead and ascending to heaven. The risen ascended man, Christ Jesus, is the new starting-point of the dealings of God. The first man afforded the great and solemn and saddening lesson of human responsibility. The cross had just closed the history of the race; for Jesus in no way shrank from all that was connected with the creature responsible here below, but met it to God's glory. He alone was capable of doing all; He alone solved every question; and this as a perfect man, but not a perfect man only, because He was very God. Thus was glory brought to His Father all through His life, to God as such in His death; and glory to God not merely as one who was putting man to the test, but who was removing from before His face the root and the fruits of sin; for this is the wonderful specialty of the death of the Lord Jesus, that, in Him crucified, all that had hindered, all that had dishonoured God, was for ever met, and God infinitely more and after a better sort glorified than if there never had been sin at all.

Thus on the setting aside of the old creation, the way was clear for man in this new place; and we shall see this in the blessed book before us-the Acts of the Apostles, although I am far from meaning that the title is an adequate statement of its contents: it is but its human name, and man is not capable even of giving a name. It is a book of deeper and more glorious purpose than acts of the apostles could be, however blessed in their place. Flowing down from the risen man in heaven, we have God Himself displaying fresh glory, not merely for but in man, and this so much the more because it is no longer a perfect man on earth, but the working of the Holy Ghost in men of like passions as ourselves. Nevertheless, through the mighty redemption of the Lord Jesus, the Holy Ghost is able to come down holily and righteously, willing in love to take His place, not merely in the earth, but in that very race that had dishonoured God down to the cross of Christ, when man could go no lower in scorn and hatred of that one man who in life and death has thus changed all things for God and for us.

Accordingly this first chapter, and more particularly the verses (1-11) that I have read, show us the groundwork, by no means unconnected with all that follows, but the most fitting introduction, as the facts were the necessary basis of it; and this the more strikingly because at first sight no man perhaps could have understood it thus. Indeed I doubt that any believer could have scanned this until there was a fair measure of intelligence in the revealed truth of God. And I do not mean merely now that truth which, being received, constituted him a believer, but the large infinite truth which it is the object of the Holy Ghost to bring out in this book as also throughout the New Testament. At first sight many an one may have found a difficulty why it was that the Spirit of God, after having in the gospel of Luke shown us Jesus risen and Jesus ascended, should take it up again in the beginning of the Acts. If we have had such questions, we may at least learn this lesson, that it is wise and good, yea, the only sound wisdom for us, and that which pleases our God, to set it down as a fixed maxim that God is always right, that His word never says a thing in vain, that if He appear to repeat, it is in no way repetition after a human infirm sort, but with a divine purpose; and as the resurrection and the ascension too were necessary to complete the scheme of truth given us in the gospel of Luke, so the risen man ascending to heaven was necessary to be brought in again as a starting-point by the very same writer, when God gives by him this new unfolding of the grace and ways of God in man.

We see then the Lord Jesus risen from the dead. We have the remarkable fact that He does not act independently of the Holy Ghost in His risen character any more than as man here below. In short, He is man, although no longer in that life which could be laid down but risen again; and the blessedness of man always is to act and speak by the Holy Ghost. So with the Lord Jesus, until the day in which He was taken up, it is said, after that He, through the Holy Ghost, had given commandments unto the apostles whom He had chosen. Resurrection does not supersede the Holy Ghost. The action of the Holy Ghost may be very different in resurrection, but there is still the blessedness of the power of the Spirit of God working by Him even though risen from the dead. It is not only that the disciples needed the Spirit of God, but that Jesus was pleased still through the Holy Ghost to deal with us so. But this is not all. Assembled with them, He explains that the Holy Ghost was to be given to themselves, and this not many days hence. It was the more important to state this great truth, because He had said a short time before "Receive ye the Holy Ghost;" and the ignorance that is natural to us might have used the words in John 20:1-31 to deny the further power and privilege that was about to be conferred in the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven. They were both of the deepest importance. It is not for us to compare for our preference. But of this I am persuaded, that to have the Holy Ghost according to the Lord's words on the resurrection-day has its own blessedness as decidedly as the gift of the Holy Ghost sent down from above: the one being more particularly that which forms the intelligence of the new man; the other, that power which goes forth in testimony for the blessing of others. I need not say the order too was perfect, not in power for others first, but as spiritual intelligence for our own souls. We are not fit vessels for the good of others until God has given us divine consciousness of a new being according to Christ for ourselves.

But there is more still. It was necessary too that they should know the vast change. Their hearts, spite of the blessing, had little realized the ways of God that were about to open for them. Thus not only do we hear the Lord intimating that the promise of the Father must be poured out upon them, but further, even after this, they asked Him whether He was at this time about to restore again the kingdom to Israel. This furnishes, as our foolish questions often do, the inlet for divine instruction and guidance. We need not always repress these enquiries from the Lord: it is well to let that which is in the mind come out, especially if it be to Him. Nor must His servants be impatient even at the curious questions of those that least understand; for the importance is not so much in that which is asked as in the answer. Certainly this was ever the case with our Lord and the disciples. "It is not for you," says He, "to know the times and the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own authority, but ye shall receive power." The measures and the fit moments that had to do with earthly changes were in the sole control of Him to whom all belonged. "But ye shall receive power" (for the two words are different), "after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me." It was not the time for the kingdom in the sense of manifested power; and this was in their desires. The kingdom in a mysterious form no doubt there is, and we are translated into it., and it is in the power of the Spirit. But emphatically it was to be a time of testimony till He returns in glory. Such is our place. Blest perfectly according to all the acceptance of Christ exalted in the glory of God, our business is to be witnesses to Him. And so the Lord tells the apostles, "Ye shall receive power when the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."

Then we have the finishing touch, if one may so say, to this introduction. The Lord ascends to heaven, but not with whirlwind nor with chariot of fire. It is not simply that He was not, for God took Him, as is said of Enoch, but in a way more suitable to His glory it is written here that "he was taken up, and a cloud" (the special token of the divine presence) "received him out of their sight."

While they looked steadfastly toward heaven, they hear from the angels who stood by them in white, that this Jesus that was taken up from them should thus come in like manner as they had beheld Him going into heaven.

Thus the only true foundation is laid, and heaven becomes the point of departure not the earth, nor the first man, but the second man, the last Adam, from the only place that was suitable for Him according to the counsels of God. Such is the basis of Christianity. Altogether vain and impossible, had not redemption been accomplished, and a redemption by blood and in the power of resurrection. Redemption in se does not give us the full height and character of Christianity: man risen, and ascended to heaven, after the full expiation of sins on the cross, is necessary to its true and complete expression.

A further scene follows, by no means possible to be absent without a blank for the spiritual understanding. It must be proved manifestly that God had given even now a new place of blessing, and a new power too, or spiritual competency, to the disciples. At the same time they would have to wait for power of the Spirit in gift to act on others. Accordingly we see the disciples together, "continuing with one accord in prayer and supplication;" and in those days Peter stands up, and brings before them the gap made in the apostolic body by the apostasy and death of Judas. Observe how he brings out with an altogether unwonted force the scripture that applied to the case. This was in virtue, not of the promise of the Father for which they were waiting, but of that which they had already from Jesus risen from the dead. Hence without delay the disciples proceed to act. Peter says, "Of these men which have companioned with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be a witness with us of his resurrection."

It will be noticed that the words "ordained to be" are left out. Every one ought to be aware indirectly, if not from his own knowledge, that there is nothing in Greek to represent them. There is not, and there never was, the smallest pretence of divine authority for their insertion. It is hard to say how godly men endorsed so pure an interpolation with what object can be easily surmised: it does not require a word from me.

"And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias." For these two had qualifications, as far as man knew, suitable to the requirements for an apostle, being the companions of the earthly path of the Lord Jesus. They had seen Him risen from the dead. Unable to judge between them definitely, the rest spread the matter before the Lord who must choose His own apostle. The mode of the disciples in this case, it is true, might seem peculiar to us; but I have no doubt that they were guided of the Lord. There is no reason from scripture to believe that Peter and the others acted hastily, or were mistaken. The Spirit of God in this very book sanctions the choice that was made that day, and never alludes to Paul as the necessary twelfth apostle. To do so would be, in my judgment, to weaken if not to ruin the truth of God. Paul was not one of the twelve. It is of all consequence that he should be permitted to retain a special place, who had a special work. All was wisely ordered.

Here then they prayed, and said, "Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, show whether of these two thou hast chosen." Man never chooses an apostle; apostles did not, could not, elect an apostle: the Lord alone chose. And so they gave forth their lots after a Jewish fashion. The twelve apostles were clearly, as it seems to me, in relation to the twelve tribes of Israel, "and they gave forth their lots." This was sanctioned of God in the Old Testament when Israel was before Him; it will be sanctioned of God when Israel returns on the scene in the latter day. No doubt, when the assembly of God was in being, the lot disappears; but the assembly of God was not yet formed. All would be in order in due time. "They gave forth their lots;* and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles." We shall find a little later, yet before Paul appears, that "the twelve" are recognised. So says the Spirit of God.

* The true reading, as arrested by , A, B, C, D (corr.), and many ancient versions, is αὐτοῖς (not αὐτῶν , as in D, E, the mass of cursives, etc.). The meaning is, "they gave lots for them." This meets the chief reasoning founded on the common text which Mosheim urges with his usual force against the view in which, he confesses, and the commentators agree (i.e., in representing Matthias as having been chosen an apostle by lot, agreeably to the ancient Jewish practice). It is evidently of no consequence who they were that set forth or appointed ( ἔστησαν ) the two: some, like Alford, arguing that the whole company thus produced them; others, like Mosheim, contending that it must in all propriety have been the eleven apostles. I think that the vagueness of the phrase, without a defined subject, shows that the stress laid on either side is a mistake. It suffices to say, that two candidates were brought forward, possessed, as far as either apostles or disciples could say, of adequate qualifications. The Lord alone could decide: to Him all looked after the manner so familiar to the people of God. But Mosheim's conclusion destroys the whole point, besides doing violence to the text by confounding κλῆρος "lot" with ψῆφος vote or suffrage. It would bring in man's will and voice where the prayer just offered was an abandonment of it for the intervention of the heart-searching God. This, no doubt, was natural to one who was swayed by Lutheran prejudice, and strengthened by the practice which undoubtedly prevailed (from the third century at latest), the assembly deciding by suffrage, not by lot, between the candidates proposed by those who took the lead in their affairs. There seems little difficulty in understanding. a Hebraistic extension of the word "gave" (1 Samuel 14:41) for the more common "cast"; and as to the pronoun, it is as intelligible and correct in the dative, as in the genitive it is perplexing in sense, and, I think, inaccurate in form; for the article would be requisite with the substantive if it were the true reading. Compare J. L. Moshemii de rebus Christianorum ante Const. M. Comm. Saec. Pr. § xiv. pp. 78-80.

But now, when the day of Pentecost was running its course, they were all with one accord together; for God put the disciples in waiting in the attitude of expectation and prayer and supplication before Him. It was good that they should feel their weakness; and this was indeed the condition of true spiritual power, as it always is for the soul (if not for testimony, certainly for the soul). "And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." The manner of the Holy Spirit's appearing thus it is well to notice. It was exactly adapted to the intent for which He was given. It was not, as in the gospels, a testimony to the grace of the Lord, although nothing but grace could have given Him to man. It was not, as we find it afterwards in the Revelation, where mention is made of the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth. The tongues were parted; for it was not a question of people being now made to speak of one lip. God was meeting man where he was, not setting aside the ancient judgment of his pride, yet graciously condescending to man, and this to mankind as they were. It was no sign of government, still less of government limited to a special nation. The parted tongues clearly showed that God thought of the Gentile as of the Jew. But they were "as of fire;" for the testimony of grace was none the less founded on righteousness. The gospel is intolerant of evil. This is the wonderful way in which God now speaks by the Holy Ghost. Whatever the mercy of God, whatever the proved weakness, need, and guilt of man, there is not nor can be the least compromise of holiness. God can never sanction the evil of man. Hence the Spirit of God was thus pleased to mark the character of His presence, even though given of the grace of God, but founded on the righteousness of God. God could afford fully to bless. It was no derogation from His glory; it was after all but His seal on the perfectness of the work of the Lord Jesus. Not only did He show His interest for man, and His grace to the evil and lost, but, above all, His honour for Jesus. There is no title nor ground so secure for us. There is no spring of blessing that we are entitled so to boast of as the Lord: there is none that so delivers from self.

At this time too there were dwelling at Jerusalem men from all nations, we may say, generally speaking, under heaven "Jews, devout men." And when it was noised abroad that the Holy Ghost had thus been given to the congregated disciples "the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speaking in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all of these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judea, 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, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this? Others mocking said, These men are full of new the (or sweet) wine. But Peter, standing up with eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem." For he first addresses them on a narrower ground than that into which he afterwards branches out, and both with a wisdom that is not a little striking. Here he is about to apply a portion of the prophecy of Joel. It will be seen that the prophet takes exactly the same limited ground as Peter does. That is, the Jews, properly so called, and Jerusalem, stand in the foreground of Joel 's prophecy: so admirably perfect is the word of God even in its smallest detail.

The point he insists on, it will be noticed, was this that the wonder then before them in Jerusalem was after all one for which their own prophets ought to have prepared them. "This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel." He does not say that it was the fulfilment of the prophet. Men, divines, have so said, but not the Spirit of God. The apostle simply says, "This is that which was spoken." Such was its character. How far it was to be then accomplished is another matter. It was not the excitement of nature by wine, but the heart filled with the Spirit of God, acting in His own power and in all classes. "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: and on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: and I will show wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: the sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: and it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved." There he stops, as far as Joel is concerned.

Then, verse 22, he addresses them as "men of Israel," not merely of Judea and Jerusalem, but now breaking out into the general hopes of the nation, he at the same time proves their common guilt. "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: him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it."

And this the apostle supports by what David had spoken inPsalms 16:1-11; Psalms 16:1-11: "I foresaw the Lord always before my face." The same psalm affords the clearest proof that the Messiah (and no Jew could doubt that the Messiah was in question there) would be characterised by the most absolute trust in God through an His life; that he was to lay down His life with trust in God just as unbroken and perfect in death as in life; and finally that He would stand in resurrection. It is the psalm therefore of confidence in God that goes right through life, death, resurrection. It was seen in Jesus, and clearly not applicable to David its writer. Of all whom a Jew could have put forward to claim the language of such a psalm, David would have been perhaps the uppermost one in their hearts. But it was far beyond that famous king, as Peter argued: "Men [and] brethren,* let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 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; he seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses."

* It may be well to guard the English reader from supposing that two classes are intended. The phrase is literally "men-brethren," and means simply men who were brethren. Let me add, that the true text in the last clause of verse 30 is simply, "to seat from the fruit of his loins on his throne."

Thus the fresh and notorious facts as to Jesus, and no one else, completely agreed with this inspired testimony to the Messiah. Nor was it confined to a single portion of the Psalms. "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." But David is not ascended into the heavens. Thus Peter cites another psalm to show the necessary ascension of Messiah to sit at the right hand of Jehovah, just as much as he had shown resurrection to be predicted of Him as of no other. "for he says himself, Jehovah said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thy foes thy footstool." Who was the man that sat at God's right hand? Certainly none could pretend it was David, but his Son, the Messiah; and this entirely corresponded with the facts the apostles had beheld personally. "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ." Thus the proof was complete. Their psalms found their counterpart in the death, resurrection, and ascension of the Lord Jesus the Messiah. God had made Him "both Lord and Christ;" for here the testimony is very gradual, and the wisdom of God in this we may well admire and profit by. In meeting the Jews, God condescended to put forth the glory of His own Son in the way that most of all attached itself to their ancient testimonies and to their expectations. They looked for a Messiah. But apparently all was lost. for they had refused Him; and they might have supposed that the loss was irretrievable. Not so: God had raised Him from the dead. He had shown Himself therefore against what they had done; but their hope itself was secure in the risen Jesus, whom God had made to be Lord and Christ. Jesus, spite of all that they had done, had in nowise given up His title as the Christ; God had made Him such. After they had done their worst, and He had suffered His worst, God owned Him thus according to His own word at His own right hand. Other glories will open there too; but Jesus Christ, of the seed of David, as Paul says, was to be raised from the dead according to his gospel. Timothy was to remember this; and Paul can descend to show the connection of the glorious person of the Lord Jesus with the Jew on earth, as he loved for his own relationship to behold Him in heavenly glory. Thus the link with the expectations of the earthly people, though broken by death, is reset for ever in resurrection.

Surprised, grieved, alarmed to the heart by that which Peter had thus forcibly brought before them, they cry to him and the other apostles, "Men [and] brethren, what shall we do?" This gives the opportunity for the apostle to set out in the wisdom of God a very weighty application of the truth for the soul that hears the gospel: "Repent," says he, which is a far deeper thing than compunction of heart. This they had already, and it leads to that which he desired for them: "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." There is no true repentance unto life without faith. But it is according to God that repentance is put forward here rather than faith. The Jews had the testimony of the gospel, as well as the law; and now it had been pressed on them by Peter. Because they believed that testimony, brought home to their consciences, as we have seen, their hearts were filled with sorrow.

But the apostle lets them know that there is a judgment of self that goes far below any outburst of grief, any consciousness and hatred, even of the deepest act of evil, as undoubtedly the crucifying of Jesus was. Repentance is the abandonment of self altogether, the judgment of what we are in the light of God. And this was to be marked, therefore, not only by the negative sign of giving themselves up as altogether evil before God, but by receiving the rejected and crucified man, the Lord Jesus. Hence, to be baptized each one of them in His name for the remission of sins follows; "and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

This, therefore, is entirely distinct from faith or repentance. Believing, they had of necessity a new nature they had life in Christ; but receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost is a privilege and power beyond; and in this case it was made to be attendant on one's being baptized as well as repenting, because in Jews it was of the utmost moment that they should give a public witness that all the rest and confidence of their souls lay in Jesus. Having been guilty of crucifying the Lord, He must be manifestly the object of their trust. And so it was that they were to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

But indeed this gift is always consequent on faith never identical with it. This is as sure as it is important to assert and to insist on, as well as to believe. It is no question of notion or tradition, the subject of which runs in quite another direction. I do not even allow it to be an open question, nor a matter of opinion; for plainly in every instance of each soul, of whom Scripture speaks, there is an interval however short. The gift of the Holy Ghost follows faith, and is in no way at the same instant, still less is it the same act. It supposes faith already existing, not unbelief; for the Holy Ghost, though He may quicken, is never given to an unbeliever. The Holy Ghost is said to seal the believer; but it is a seal of faith, and not of unbelief. The heart is opened by faith, and the Holy Ghost is given by the grace of God to those that believe, not in order to their believing. There is no such thing as the Holy Ghost given in order to believe. He quickens the unbeliever, and is given to the believer. Although we do not hear of faith in the passage, yet from the fact that the converted only were called on to repent, we know that they must have believed. True believing necessarily goes along with true repentance. The two things are invariably found together; but the gift of the Holy Ghost is consequent on them both.

And so the apostle explains. He says, "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." His words seem to carry a sense beyond Israel: how far he entered into the force of them himself it is not perhaps for any of us to say. We know that afterwards, when Peter was called upon to go to the Gentiles, he found difficulties. It is hard to suppose, therefore, that he fully understood his own words. However. this may be, the words were according to God, whether or not fully appreciated by Peter when he uttered them. God was going to gather out of the Jews themselves and their children, but, more than that, "those that were afar off, as many as the Lord our God should call."

And then we have the beautiful picture that the Spirit of God gives us of the scene that was now formed by His own presence here below, "Then they that [gladly]* received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls." They were added to the original nucleus of disciples, and "continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, [and] in breaking of bread and prayers."

* It appears to me that ἀσμένως , "gladly," was inserted in the commonly received text against the best testimony, as well as internal reasons. For the great uncials (M, A, B, C, D, etc.), supported by the Vulgate and Aethiopic, omit the word, which was probably suggested byActs 21:17; Acts 21:17, where it falls in as admirably as here it sounds somewhat out of season. Nearly the same authorities concur in omitting καὶ , "and," between "the fellowship" and "the breaking of bread." This serves to strengthen the view that "the fellowship" goes with "the teaching of the apostles," though put as two objects instead of being combined by a single article in one idea; and it would throw the breaking of bread and the prayers similarly together.

Thus, after being brought into the new association, there arose a need of instruction; and the apostles were pre-eminently those that God vouchsafed in the infant days of His assembly. Inasmuch as it was of the utmost importance that all should be thoroughly established in the grace and truth that came by Jesus Christ, they had a place peculiar to themselves, as above all others chosen of the Lord to lay the foundation of His house, and to direct and administer in His name, as we see through the New Testament. And then as the fruit of it, and specially connected, there was "the fellowship" of which we next read. Next followed the breaking of bread, the formal expression of Christian fellowship, and the special outward sign of remembering Him to whose death they owed all. Finally, but closely following the Lord's supper, come "the prayers," which still showed that, however great might be the grace of God, they were in the place of danger, and needed dependence here below.

"And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. And all that believed were together, and had all things common." This peculiar feature is found in Jerusalem, beautiful and blessed in its season, but, I have no doubt, special to the Jerusalem condition of the church of God. We can easily understand it. in the first place all that composed the church were at that time in the same place. We can feel readily, therefore, that there would be a real and strong family feeling, but I doubt whether their mutual affections then rose higher than the sense of their being God's family. They really did constitute the body of Christ; they were baptized by one Spirit into one body; but to be that one body, and to know that such they were, are two very different things. The development was reserved for another and still weightier witness of the glory of the Lord Jesus. But having in its strength the sense of family relationship, the wonderful victory of grace over selfish interests was the fruit of it. If he or she belonged to the household of God, this was the governing thought not one's own possessions. Grace gives without seeking a return; but grace on the other side seeks not its own things, but those of Christ.

Another trait is, that all savoured of divine as well as family life. The breaking of bread every day, for instance, was clearly a striking witness of Christ ever before their hearts, though also a kindred effect of the same feeling. Thus they sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all, as one might have need.

And they "continued daily with one accord in the temple." This is another peculiarity. There was by no means as yet a manifest severance of the tie with Judaism, at least with the circumstances of its worship. We know that in principle the cross does make a breach, and an irreparable one, with all that is of the first man; but the power of old habits with the joy that overflowed their souls made them for the moment to be, I may say, better Jews. There was that now within which was far stronger liquor than had ever filled the old skins of the law, and these were sure to be broken in no long time. But for the present nothing was farther from the disciples' minds: they continued daily with one accord in the temple. Along with it was joined this new element breaking bread at home; not "from house to house," as if it were a migratory service. There is no real ground to infer that they shifted the scene of the Lord's supper from one place to another. This is not the meaning. The margin is correct. They broke bread at home, in contrast with the temple. It might be the very same house in which the breaking of bread always took place. They would naturally choose the most suitable quarters, which combined convenience as to distance with commodiousness in receiving as many brethren and sisters as possible.

Thus these two features were seen to meet together in the Pentecostal church the retaining of Jewish religious habits in going up to the temple for prayer, and at the same time the observance of that which was properly Christian the breaking of bread at home. No wonder the new-found joy overflowed, and they were found "eating their meat with gladness and singleness of heart." There is no reason to confound the breaking of bread with eating their meat. They are two different things. We find the religious life, so to speak, expressed in their going up to the temple, and in their breaking bread at home. We find the effect upon their natural life in their "eating their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, praising God, and having favour with all the people." There is the same double character.

"And the Lord added to the church," or " together," (for there is a fair question that may be raised as to the text in this last clause) "daily such as should be saved," or those that God was about to separate from the destruction that was impending over the Jewish nation, and, further, to bring by a blessed deliverance into the new Christian estate. The word σωζομένους does not express the full character of Christian salvation which was afterwards known. Of course we know that they were saved; but this is not what the word in itself means. It is simply that the Lord was separating those that were to be saved. The English version gives it on the whole very justly. Carefully remember that the meaning is not that they were saved then. The phrase in Luke has nothing to do with that question; it refers simply to persons destined to salvation without saying anything farther.

In the next chapter (Acts 3:1-26) a miracle is related in detail, which brought out the feelings of the people, especially as represented by their leaders (Acts 4:1-37). In going up to the temple, (for the apostles themselves went there,) Peter and John met with a man that was lame; and as he asked for alms Peter gave him something better (as grace, poor in this world's resources and estimate, always loves to do so). He tells the expecting man, "Silver and gold have I none, but such as I have given thee. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk." The man instantly rises, according to the power of God, and is found with them, "walking, and leaping, and praising God; and all the people saw him."

This arrests universal attention, and Peter preaches a new discourse that which has been justly enough called a Jewish sermon. It is thus evident that his indication of the Christian place of blessing in the chapter before (Acts 2:1-47) does not hinder him from setting before the men of Israel (for so he addressed them here), first, their awful position by the rejection of Jesus, and, next, the terms that God in His grace sets before them in answer to the intercession of Christ. "The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his" not "son," but " servant Jesus." We know Him (and the Spirit of God, who wrote this book, infinitely better knew Him) to be the Son of God. But we must always hold to what God says; and the testimony of God did not yet and especially in dealing with the Jews set forth all the glory of Christ. It was gradually brought out; and the more that man's unbelief grew, so much the more God's maintenance of the Lord's glory was manifested. And so, if they had with scorn refused Him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go, if they had denied the Holy One and Just, and desired a murderer to be granted, if they had killed the Prince [leader, originator] of life, whom God raised from the dead, they had simply shown out what they were. On the other hand, His name, through faith in His name, (and they were witnesses of its power,) had made this man strong, whom they saw and knew: "Yea, the faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all. And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers. But those things, which God before had showed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled."

And then he calls upon them to repent, and be converted, that their sins might be blotted out, so that times of refreshing might come from the presence of the Lord. "And he shall send Jesus Christ, who was fore-appointed for you: whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began." God has accomplished His word by Moses the prophet; for Moses in no way took the place of being the deliverer of Israel, but only a witness of it, a partial exemplification of God's power then, but looking onward to the great Prophet and Deliverer that was coming. Now He was come; and so Peter sets before them, not only the coming, the Blesser's arrival and rejection in their midst, but the awfulness of trifling with it. Whoever would not bow to Him was to be cut off by their own Moses's declaration: "Every soul who will not hear that prophet shall be destroyed from among the people." And so it was that all the prophets had testified of those days: and they were the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with their fathers, saying unto Abraham, "And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." The Seed was now come. It was for them, therefore, to declare themselves. Alas! they had already set up their will against Him; but at His intercession (what grace!) God was willing to pardon it all, did they but repent and be converted for the blotting out of their sins.

Thus we have here an appeal to the nation as such; for in all this it will be observed he does not speak a word to them of the Lord Jesus as Head of the church. We have no hint of this truth yet to anybody. Nay, we have not Jesus spoken of even in the same height as in the preceding chapter 2. We have Him in heaven, it is true, but about to return and bring in earthly power, blessing, and glory, if Israel only turned with repentance to Him. Such was the testimony of Peter. It was a true word; and it remains true. When Israel shall turn in heart to the Lord, He who secretly works this in grace will return publicly to them. When they shall say "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of Jehovah," the Messiah will come in fulness of blessing. The heavens will retain Him no more, but give Him up who will fill earth as well as heaven with glory. No word of God perishes: all abides perfectly true.

Meanwhile other and deeper counsels have been brought to light by the unbelief of Israel. This unbelief comes out in no small measure in the next chapter, which follows but might properly have formed a part of Acts 3:1-26; for in sense it is a continuous subject. "And as they spake unto the people, the priests, and the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees, came upon them, being grieved that they taught the people, and preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead. And they laid hands on them, and put them in hold unto the next day: for it was now eventide. Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand." Then, on the morrow, we have the council; and Peter, being by the chiefs demanded by what power or name they had wrought the deed, filled with the Holy Ghost, answers, "Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel, if we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole; be it known unto you all," (he is throughout bold and uncompromising) "and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner." Thus again reference is made to their own testimonies. "Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."

Unscrupulous as they were, they were thus confounded by the calm confidence with which the truth armed the apostles; and the more so, because their tone and language gave evidence that, whatever the power of the Holy Ghost wrought, it did not set aside 'their condition as illiterate men. Their words, etc., bore no polish of the schools; and truth spurns, as it needs not, dialectic subtlety. This magnified, therefore, the power of God so much the more, as man's skill was null. But at the same time there was the witness of the miracle that had been done. In presence, then, of the apostles clothed with the irresistible might of the Lord, and of the man whose healing silently attested it even as to the body, they could only command them to go aside, while they conferred together. A guilty conscience betrays its conscious weakness, however wilful. God invariably gives sufficient testimony to condemn man. He will prove this in the day of judgment; but it is certain to our faith now. He is God, and cannot act below Himself when it is a question of His own revelation.

On such occasions even those who profess most are apt to speak together, as if there were no God, or as if He did not hear them saying, "What shall we do to these men? for that indeed a notable miracle hath been done by them is manifest to all them that dwell in Jerusalem; and we cannot deny it." They would, if they could. Their will was engaged (sad to say!) against God, against the truth, against Jehovah and His anointed. "But that it spread no further among the people, let us straitly threaten them, that they may speak henceforth to no man in this name." Thus their lack of conscience could not be hid: witness their opposition to facts that they knew, and to truth that they could not deny. The apostles cannot but take the real seat of judgment, searching the hearts of their judges: "Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard. So when they had further threatened them, they let them go, finding nothing how they might punish them, because of the people: for all men glorified God for that which was done. And being let go, they went to their own [company]." It is seen in this passage bow truly it has been said that we have a new family. They went to their own [company], and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them." Accordingly we find them speaking to God in a new manner, and suitably to the occasion: "Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is: who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen race, and the people imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together in this city [these last words being wrongly omitted in the received text] against the Lord, and against his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy servant [again it is servant ] Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, for to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done. And now, Lord, behold their threatenings: and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word, by stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy servant Jesus." And God answered. "When they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost." They had received the Holy Ghost before; but to be "filled" with Him goes farther, and supposes that no room was left for the action of nature, that the power of the Holy Ghost absorbed all for the time being. "They were filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness." Such was the effect. They were to be witnesses of Him.

"And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things in common." The Spirit of God repeated this, I suppose, as having a further proof of His action on their souls at this time, because many more had been brought in. "And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet," a slightly different development from the second chapter. There we find that there was what might seem a greater freeness, and perhaps to some eyes a more striking simplicity. But all is in season, and it seems to me that, while the devotedness was the same (and the Spirit of God takes pains to show that it was the same, spite of largely increased numbers, by the continued mighty action of the Holy Ghost), still with this advance of numbers simplicity could not be kept up in the same apparent manner. The distribution made to each before was more direct and immediate; now it takes effect through the apostles. The possessions were laid at the apostles' feet, and distribution was made to every one according as he had need. Among the rest one man was conspicuous for the heartiness of his love. It was Barnabas, of whom we are afterwards to hear much in other ways of still more lasting moment.

But there is rarely a manifestation of God in the church without a dark shadow that accompanies it from the evil one. And farther we find this immediately. We are not to be alarmed by the presence of evil, but rather to be sure that where God works Satan will follow, seeking to turn the very good in which the Spirit acts into a means for introducing his own counterfeit to the dishonour of the Lord. Thus in the present instance Ananias and Sapphira sell some of their property, but keep back part of the price; and this was done deliberately by concert for the purpose of gaining the character of devotedness without its cost. in principle they made the church their world, in which they sought to give the impression of a faith that confided in the Lord absolutely, while at the same time there was a secret reserve for themselves. Now the manifest point of that which was then wrought by the Spirit of God was grace in faith: there was in no way a demand. Nothing could more falsify the fruit of the Spirit of God here than converting it into a tacit rule: there was no compulsion whatever in the case. Nobody was asked to give anything. What was gold or silver, what houses or lands, to the Lord? The worth of it all depended on its being the power of the Spirit of God the fruit of divine grace in the heart. But Satan tempted them in the manner here described; and Peter, by whatever means he arrived at the conviction of it, arraigns the husband alone first. "Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost

It is a solemn thing to remember, that all sin now is against the Spirit. There may be, no doubt, the unpardonable sin of blasphemy against Him; but in truth all sin is sin against the Holy Ghost; and for this simple reason, that He has taken His place here. In Israel the sin was against the law, because the law was the testimony that God set in His sanctuary. By the law sin was measured in Israel; but it is not so for the Christian. There is now a far more serious and searching and thorough standard. Those that use the law now as a measure among Christians lower the test of judgment incomparably. Such a misuse of the law for righteous men does not at all prove that they are anxious about holiness or righteousness; it is a proof of their ignorance of the presence of the Holy Ghost, and the just and necessary effects of His presence. One has no thought, I repeat, of implying that it is not well meant. To be sure it is. It is simply that they do not understand the distinctive character of Christianity.

But this is a most serious error; and I doubt much whether all who in appearance and by profession take the place of owning the presence of the Spirit of God have by any means an adequate sense either of the privileges which are theirs or of the gravity of their responsibility. Now, Peter had. The days were early. There was much truth that had yet to be communicated and learnt; but the power of the presence of the Holy Ghost made itself felt. He at least seems to have realised the bearing of all, and so he deals with the sin of Ananias as one who had lied to the Holy Ghost. He bad kept back part of the price of the land. "Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power?" It was still his own. "Why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God."

Forthwith Ananias comes under the judgment of the Lord. He fell asleep, and great fear came upon all them that heard these Words. "And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him. And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in. And Peter said to her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much?" Thus there was an appeal to her conscience, without an atom of harshness in it. She had longer time to weigh what they were about; but in truth it was a conspiracy; not so much to injure others as to exalt themselves; but the end was as bad as the means were evil and odious in the sight of God. Christ entered into none of their thoughts or desires. Many a thing has been said untruly since, which was not so judged of God. But there was an especial offence at this time, in that, He having wrought so wondrously in blessing man with the best blessings through Christ our Lord, the practical denial of the presence of the Spirit should have so deliberately and quickly manifested itself for the express purpose of exalting the flesh which Christianity has set aside for ever. Hence Peter says, "How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and they shall carry thee out . . . . And great fear came upon all the church."

Then we find the Lord accomplishing His word: greater works were to be done by them than even He Himself had wrought: never do we hear of the Lord's shadow curing the sick. And believers were the more added to the Lord. The unbelievers were warned, "and of the rest durst no man join himself unto them." Souls that bowed to the word were attracted, multitudes both of men and women; and the enemy was awed, in some quarters alarmed, and irritated in others. "The high priest rose up, and all they that were with him, and were filled with indignation. They laid their hands on the apostles, and put them in the common prison."

But the angel of the Lord shows his power; for this chapter is remarkable in giving us a picture not merely of the sweet activity of grace, but of divine power in presence of evil. We have seen the positive interference of the Spirit of God. At the end of the chapter before we had the second witness of it, after the foundation laid, and first witness given, in chapter 2. But here we have the proofs of His presence in other ways power in dealing with the evil, and judging it within the church of God; next, power by angelic deliverance; thirdly, power by men in providence. Gamaliel in council is just as truly the effect of God's power working by man, as the angel in opening the doors of the prison and bringing the apostles out, not, of course, so wonderful, but as real a part of God's working in behalf of His assembly and servants.

But there is another case. The very same men who were delivered by divine power are allowed to be beaten by man. Nay, not only do they take it quietly these men about whom all the power of God was thus seen in action in one form or another; but they rejoice that they were counted worthy to suffer. Are we prepared for the same thing? Be assured, brethren, if we have any tie with Christ by grace, we belong to the same company: it is our own company; it is a part of our own heritage of blessing. It is not, I admit, according to the spirit of the age to deal with us after the same sort; but there is no real change for the better in the world to hinder the outbreak of its violence at any time. Is it not well therefore for us to realize to what we belong, and what the Lord looks for from us, and what it is He has recorded for our instruction as well as comfort?

After all this then we find that "they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for His name. And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ." It is impossible that a human authority could be entitled to set aside the direct command of the Lord Jesus. The Lord had commanded them to go and preach the gospel to every creature. Men had forbidden this. It is very clear that the apostle Peter gives the prohibition only a human place now (Acts 5:29). If men had told them to be silent, and the Lord bid them preach, the highest authority must be paramount.

Another form of evil betrays itself in the next chapter (Acts 6:1-15); and here again we find in the very good that God had wrought evil murmuring is found. It is not merely individuals as before; in some respects it is a more serious case: there are complaints heard in the church the murmuring of Grecians against the Hebrews (that is, of the foreign speaking. Jews against the Jews, proper of the Holy Land), because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. This forms the occasion for the provisional wisdom of the Spirit of God.

We have already seen with abundant evidence how truly the church is a divine institution, founded upon a divine person (even the Holy Ghost) coming down and, making it, since redemption, His dwelling-place here below. Besides, we may now learn the working of this living power that is drawn out by the circumstances which call it forth. It is not a system of rules; nothing is more destructive of the very nature of the church of God. It is not a human society, with either the leaders of it or the mass choosing for themselves what or whom they think best, but the Spirit of God who is there meets in His wisdom whatever may be necessary for the glory of Christ. All this is preserved in the written word for our instruction and guidance now.

Here we have the institution of seven men to look after the poor who were in danger of being forgotten, or in some way neglected at any rate, so they had complained. To cut off the appearance of it, and at the same time to leave the apostles free for their own proper work of a more spiritual kind, "the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.

Thus we find two things: not only the apostles formally appointing, but the multitude of the believers left to choose, where it was a question that cone the distribution of their gifts. On the part of that governed the church of God, there ought not to be the appearance of coveting the property of God's people, or the disposal of it. At the same time the apostles do appoint those who were thus chosen over this matter. They were called of God to act, and so they do. "But we will give ourselves continually to prayer and the ministry of the word."

The principle of the choice too is striking; for all these names, it would appear, were Grecian. What gracious wisdom! This was clearly to stop the mouths of the complainants. The Hellenists, or Grecians, were jealous of the Palestinian Jews. The persons appointed were, judging from their names, every one of them Hellenists, or foreign-speaking Jews. The troublers ought to have been not only satisfied but somewhat ashamed. Thus it is that grace, while it discerns, knows how to rise above evil; for murmuring against others is not the way to correct anything that is wrong, even if it be real. But the grace of the Lord always meets circumstances, and turns them to a profitable account, by a manifestation of wisdom from above. The field was about to be enlarged; and although it was but a poor root of man's complaints which led to this fresh line of action, God was moving over all, could use these seven, and would give some of them a good degree, as we find in Stephen soon and in Philip later. But He marked it in another way too, which showed His approbation. "The word of God increased," spite of murmuring; "and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly;" and a new feature appears "a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith."

Stephen then, full of grace and power (but One could be said to be full of grace and truth), is found doing great wonders. This draws out the opposition of the leaders of the Jews, who "were not able to resist the spirit and the wisdom with which he spake. Then they suborned men, who said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God. And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the council, and set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law: for we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us."

Accordingly, thus accused, Stephen answers the appeal of the high priest, "Are these things so?" And in his wonderful discourse (Acts 7:1-60), on which I can but touch, he sets before them the prominent facts of their history, which bear on God's question with the Jews at this moment. God had brought out their forefather Abraham, but He never gave him actually to possess this land. Why, then, boast of it so much? Those who, according to nature, vaunted loudly of Abraham and of God's dealings, were clearly not in communion with God, or even with Abraham. Spite of the love and honour that God had for their forefathers, he never possessed the land. Why, then, set such stress on that land?

But more than this. There was one of the descendants of the fathers who stands out most especially, and above all of the family of Abraham, in the book of Genesis one man who, more than any other, was the type of the Messiah. Need I say it was Joseph? And how did he fare? Sold by his brethren to the Gentiles. The application was not difficult. They knew how they had treated Jesus of Nazareth. Their consciences could not fail to remind them how the Gentiles would have willingly let Him go, and how their voices and will had prevailed against even that hardened governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate. Thus it was manifest that the leading points of Joseph's tale, as far as the wickedness of the Jews, and the selling to the Gentiles, were rehearsed again in Jesus of Nazareth.

But, coming down later still, another man fills the history of the second book of the Bible, and indeed has to do with all the remaining books of the Pentateuch. It was Moses. What about him? Substantially the same story again: the rejected of Israel, whose pride would not hear when he sought to bring about peace between a contending Israelite and his oppressor, Moses was compelled to fly from Israel, and then found his hiding-place among the Gentiles. How far Stephen entered intelligently into the bearing of these types it is not for one to say; but we can easily see the wisdom of God; we can see the power of the Holy Ghost with which he spake.

But there was another element also. He comes down next to their temple; for this was an important point. It was not only that he had spoken of Jesus of Nazareth, but they had also charged him with saying that He would destroy this place, and change their customs. What did their own prophets say? "But Solomon built him a house. Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in [places] made with hands; as saith the prophet, Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest? Hath not my hand made all these things?" In short, he shows that Israel had sinned against God in every ground of relationship. They had broken the law; they had slain the prophets; they had killed the Messiah; and they had always resisted the Holy Ghost. What an awful position! and the more awful, because it was the simple, truth.

This brought out the frenzied rage of Israel, and they gnashed on him with their teeth; and he that charged them with always resisting the Holy Ghost, as their fathers did, full of the Holy Ghost looks up into heaven, and sees the Son of man, and bears witness that he sees Him standing at the right hand of God. And thus we have what I began with: we have the manifestation of the character of Christianity, and the perception of its power, and the effect produced upon him that appreciated it. We have not merely the Lord going up to heaven, but His servant, who saw heaven, open, and Jesus, the Son of man, standing at the right hand of God.

But there is more: for while they rushed now to silence the mouth which so completely proved their nation's habitual sin against the Spirit, they stoned him indeed, but they stoned him praying, and saying, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." They could not silence the words that told how deeply he had drunk into the grace of the Lord Jesus. They could not silence his confidence, his peaceful entrance into his place with Christ, associated consciously with Him as he was. And then we learn (it may be without a thought on his part) how grace conforms to the words of Jesus on the cross, and certainly without the smallest imitation of it, but so much the more evincing the power of God. For Jesus could say, and He alone could say rightly, "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." Jesus alone fittingly could say, "I commend my spirit." He who could lay down His life, and could take it again, could so speak to the Father. But the servant of the Lord could say, and rightly and blessedly, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." Nor was this all; the same heart that thus confided absolutely in the Lord, and knew his own heavenly portion with Jesus, kneels down and cries with a loud voice. This was not directed to Jesus only: no loud voice was needed there: a whisper would be enough for Him. The loud voice was for man, for his dull ears and unfeeling heart. With a loud voice he cries, "Lord, lay not this sin to their charge." What simplicity, but what fulness of communion with Jesus! The same who had prayed for them reproduced His own feelings in the heart of His servant.

I shall not now develop this subject more than other scenes of the deepest interest, but just simply and shortly commend to all that are here the beautiful witness that it affords us of the true place, power, and grace of a Christian.