Acts of the Apostles Chapter 8 Sunday School Notes

Here are some of my notes for Sunday, June 22, 2008 based on the Lifeway Explore the Bible curriculum

 Reference works cited include:

1) The Acts of the Apostles: Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary by F. F. Bruce

2) The Acts of the Apostles: A Social-Rhetorical Commentary by Ben Witherington III 

3)The Acts of the Apostles: Anchor Bible Commentary by Joseph Fitzmyer

 
Acts 8:1
Saul agreed with putting him to death- Saul’s agreement doesn’t necessarily make him a member of the Sanhedrin as some have suggested. Saul might have been the herald Jewish law required to announce a death sentence and execution. And even without an official position, Saul’s keeping the robes of the stoners shows his complicity in Stephen’s death.

Stephen’s execution allowed Christian opponents to portray the church as hostile to the temple, which was protected by Roman law and the stewardship of the high priest and the captain of the Temple. This is strictly Jewish persecution at this point, for Christianity is commonly held to have been protected by Rome under the same laws that protected Judaism for some decades.(Bruce)

On that day a severe persecution broke out against the church in Jerusalem- The general consensus is that it was the Hellenist/ Greek-speaking Christians who were dispersed by persecution. Thus the Jerusalem church because effectively “Hebrew”.

persecution is actually diogmos, “pursuit”, but is used exclusively of persecution in the NT. (Fitzmyer)

all except the apostles were scattered- The apostles stayed partly as examples of resistance to persecution, partly because they were Hebrew-speaking Christians and thus likely less persecuted, and also because Jerusalem was the obvious Christian HQ.

Acts 8:2
devout men- The Greek is sufficiently obscure that there is debate over whether it refers to Christians who buried and mourned Stephen before the scattering, or Jews who sympathized with Stephen. Later Jewish tradition allowed a stoned person only to be buried in a common grave and given no public mourning. (Fitzmyer)

Acts 8:3
Saul, however, was ravaging the church- the Greek verb translated “ravage” is lumainomai, and was used of an animal tearing apart a carcass. Paul himself would use the term partheo, a Greek word for the sacking of cities. (Bruce)

Acts 7:58 calls Saul “a young man” Greek neanias being a term for one younger than forty years old. (Fitzmyer)

How Saul got the authority to enter homes and imprison people isn’t revealed.

Acts 8:4- The verse points out God’s typical use of evil to work a greater good. The scattering of the Christians meant the Gospel was announced in a wider area than before.

Indeed these first few verses can be seen as fulfillment of predictions made by Jesus of his followers persecution and of the spread of the Gospel. (Witherington)

Acts 8:5
Philip went down to a city in Samaria-

Philip was one of the seven Greek-speaking deacons, and here begins a good twenty years of evangelism.

“down” is used traditionally, because Jerusalem was built on an elevation. In actual fact Philip went N.

Samaria comes from Hebrew Someron. It was originally the name of a town built by Omri, King of Israel, about 884 BC, who likely made a double meaning of the name, since Omri bought the hill with the flat top that became Samaria from one Shemer, while the Hebrew term shamar “to watch” fits the location as a sort of watchtower. Samaria later came to be used to describe the whole region around the town. It was variously occupied over the centuries. John Hyrcanus (134-104 BC) destroyed the city and the Samaritan temple on Mt. Gerizim in his attempt to settle the ancient Jew/Smaritan dispute, but his son Alexander Jannai (103- 76 BC) apparently repopulated the city to some extent. In 63 BC Pompey’s conquest of Judea added Samaria to the new Roman province of Judea, In 30 BC, Caesar Augustus gave the city to Herod the Great, who promptly renamed it to Sebaste, from the Greek Sebastos, equivalent to Latin Augustus. Herod typically did much building in the city. Sebaste was a thoroughly Hellenistic city, which explains Philip’s ease with going there. (Bruce, Fitzmyer, Witherington, Wikipedia)

preached the Messiah- Intriguing term, since the Samaritans didn’t accept any of the Hebrew bible but the Torah, the five books of Moses. Their idea of a Messiah was based on Deu 18:15, a “prophet like Moses”, and indeed their name for that prophet was the Taheb, the “Returning One”, based on the idea that he might even be Moses himself come back.(Fitzmyer)

Acts 8:6-7- like the apostles, Philip’s preaching was accompanied by miracles that affirmed his genuineness.

unclean spirits- as today, one suspects this includes a mix of genuine possessions and the mentally ill. That demon possession is not used to describe all sickness is shown by the separation of the unclean spirit people and the paralyzed and lame.

Acts 8:9
Simon- traditionally called Simon Magus. The Magoi were originally a tribe of priests among the Medes, later the term was used of fire priests, teachers, magicians, astrologers, and even “quacks”. The Church Fathers claimed Simon Magus was the father of gnosticism, especially Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and Epiphanus. That’s an exaggeration, since all signs point to Gnosticism developing at the end of the first century AD and especially in the second century AD, not so early as this. That some Gnostic sects claimed Simon for their own likely further ruined his already poor reputation among Christians. He was presumably Samaritan.(Fitzmyer, Bruce)

claiming to be somebody great- Simon’s actions in the book are those of a man interested in fame and power.

Acts 8:10
“Great Power of God” is a term found in later Gnostic texts, which likely is what damaged what reputation Simon had among Christians. Great Power, the Power are circumlocutions for God among Jews and Samaritans. It might be used in the sense of “God and his great one”, Simon as the representative of God.(Fitzmyer, Bruce)

Acts 8:11
Simon, like Philip, gathered people’s attention because of his “wonders”.

Acts 8:13
even Simon himself believed- was he sincere or simply impressed by the miracles that accompanied Philip? The text seems to indicate his fascination with the signs of Christianity, not its message. This is not a good sign, for Jesus himself was known to decry this attitude repeatedly “Unless you see signs, you will not believe”.

Scholarly opinion is split on Simon’s sincerity, often based on their take on the subsequent story, and whether it is possible for a believer to truly apostatize, to lose a once genuine faith.

Acts 8:14
Peter and John were likely sent to Samaria as official representatives of the Twelve, who presumably saw themselves responsible for guarding the spread and orthodoxy of the new faith. Samaritans’ religious split from Judaism and the centuries old racial split made them suspect in the primarily Jewish Christian church. Thus the two apostles are sent to officially certify the Samaritans entrance into the faith.

Acts 8:15
After they went down there, they prayed for them- Peter and John, seeing the genuineness of the Samaritans faith, pray for them, their certification of the Samaritans’ true belief.

Acts 8:16
in the name of- This was a common phrase in ancient banking, where money was put into an account “in the name of” that person. Thus the baptized became the “property” of Jesus.

Why were they baptized “in the name of the Lord Jesus”, and not in the traditional Trinitarian formula? There is much discussion that way. Many feel that the Trinitarian formula was used, only Jesus is emphasized in scripture. Others think the formula varied in earliest times according to your racial heritage. The Jews and Samaritans already acknowledged Jehovah as God, thus they only had to explicitly affirm Jesus. When Gentiles began to enter the church, then the Father and the Son both had to be acknowledged as part of baptism. (Bruce)

Acts 8:17
Laying on of hands and prayer were the same rituals used to commission the seven deacons, and the general consensus is that Peter and John here are again commissioning leaders, this time for the Samaritans. Not all Samaritans are involved in this ritual. Laying on of hands has a formal membership, continuity aspect to it. The ceremony thus serves to certify the Samaritans as a whole as genuine members of the until now Jewish Christian community.(Bruce)

they received the Holy Spirit- presumably just the select group Peter and John prayed and laid hands on, otherwise Simon would have been immediately marked out as a non-believer by his lack of the Spirit.

Acts 8:18-19
Here Simon’s actions create the term simony, the attempt to purchase spiritual offices through money.
Note Simon doesn’t ask for the Spirit Himself, but the ability to give the Spirit and His signs to others. Surely the man was no believer, to think of buying something only God can do of His own will.

Acts 8:20-24
Peter makes no bones about Simon’s sin, thinking a gift of God can be bought. This is either a curse or a prediction.

No part nor share- It doesn’t explicitly deny Simon was ever a believer, but does paint him as outside God’s will now.

repent, pray, may be forgiven- Whether a fallen believer or an unbeliever pretending to be a member of the church, Simon is not entirely without hope, though Peter’s language indicates serious doubt as to Simon’s eternal destination. He must repent and pray for forgiveness.

pray to the Lord for me- It is hard to know how to take this, again. Surely a believer would immediately start praying upon hearing this dire pronouncement from Peter, but Simon instead asks Peter to pray for him. This can either mean:
1. Simon doesn’t understand or accept his danger, presumably because he isn’t a true believer
2. Simon thinks Peter’s prayer will have more effect than his own, again a sense that Simon is concerned with apparent power.
3. Simon is asking Peter to pray with him for his forgiveness, never a bad idea for a believer.

Ben Witherington gives three views of Simon and the Spirit:
1. Simon really converted, but only Samaritans received the Spirit
2. Simon not converted, but Samaritans were
3. Samaritans only fully Christian upon reception of the Spirit, and Simon never was

Witherington further gives 6 reasons Simon was not a genuine believer:
1. His bad introduction
2. Nothing said about what Simon believed, while Samaritans believe the Gospel. Presumably Simon believed the miracles genuine.
3. The use of kai (and) in Acts 8:13 splits Simon from the Samaritans
4. Simon is so off as to try to buy power
5. Simon’s description in Acts 8:23 is a good description of any unrepentant person
6. Acts 8:24 speaks only of Simon’s apparent fear, not his repentance.(Witherington)

Witherington notes Acts of the Apostles shows no single pattern of reception of the Spirit. Here it comes after baptism; in Acts 10:44 the Spirit comes before baptism; in Acts 8:39 the eunuch seems to receive the Spirit at baptism.

Acts 8:25
Another typical Lukan summary, showing the apostles Peter and John and presumably Philip with them, preaching their way back to Jerusalem through Samaria, further increasing the Samaritan membership in the church.

Acts 8:26
Gaza- there was one road from Jerusalem that joined the Egyptian highway N at Lydda (Lod). But more likely Philip took the Betogabris road that met the Egyptian highway N of Gaza.

Gaza was one of the five ancient cities of the Philistines. It was captured after a famous five month siege by Alexander the Great in 332 BC, destroyed by Hasmonean king Alexander Jannai (103-76 BC) in 96 BC, then rebuilt closer to the sea under Rome’s Syrian proconsul Gabinius in 57 BC.(Bruce)

Acts 8:27
Ethiopia- a kingdom from the eight century BC, with two chief cities Meroe and Napata. Ancient Greeks often termed Ethiopia the end of the earth. Aithiopis = “people with burnt faces”.(Fitzmyer)

eunuch- Greek eunochos and Hebrew saris were terms for castrated males that came to be broadened in use to include “court official”, because many Ancient Near East governments employed eunuchs as officials. Thus our man here might have be a normal male, or a genuine eunuch.(Fitzmyer)

high official- Greek dynastes, “powerful man”, a term for rulers and high court officials

Candace- Greek transliteration of title for Ethiopian queen mother rulers, whose sons were considered sons of the sun god and king.(Bruce)

The eunuch was in all likelihood a Gentile, either a proselyte to Judaism or a “godfearer”, one who followed but was not an actual member of Judaism.(Bruce)

Acts 8:28
reading the prophet Isaiah- almost certainly aloud, as reading was so commonly done aloud, even in private, that Augustine made a point of noting that Ambrose read silently to himself.(Bruce)

The several copies of Isaiah among the Dead Sea Scrolls points to Isaiah’s popularity among Jews in the Second Temple period.(Fitzmyer)

The quote, Philip’s Hellenistic background, and the eunuch’s Ethiopian race all make it likely the eunuch was read the Greek translation of Isaiah. (Fitzmyer)

Acts 8:34
There are three traditional interpretations of Isaiah’s Servant Song (Is 52:13- 53:12):
1. servant of God = Israel
2. servant of God = Isaiah
3. servant of God = the Messiah or Elijah returned.

Acts 8:35
This is Acts’ first explicit identification of Jesus with Isaiah’s suffering servant, though it is implied in Acts 3:13 and through the use of the Greek pais (child or servant) in Acts 3:26, 4:27, and 4:30. Jesus had understood it the same as shown by Mark 9:12 and 10:45.

Targum Jonathan splits the Suffering servant poem into two: the suffering refers to Israel, the prosperity to the Messiah. Though the Messianic identification was popular in early Christian era among Jews, by the Middle Ages they opted for seeing the poem as being about Israel alone, doubtless in reaction to Christian interpretations of the poem.(Bruce)

Acts 8:36
baptized- Though baptism was far from unknown among Jews (traditionally used for ceremony initiating proselytes into Judaism, here one suspects Philip mentioned baptism as part of the entry rite into Christianity.

Acts 8:37
This verse is not found in ancient NT manuscripts before the 500s AD. However, the tradition of the eunuch’s confession is as old as Irenaeus’ writings from the second century. The common assumption is Philip and the eunuch’s extra conversation here, an apparent question and confession rite common very early in Christian baptism, was added to an ancient manuscript’s margin as commentary or a notation, and a subsequent scribe, knowing the tradition and the rite, added the marginal notation into the main text of his manuscript, assuming it was a correction. From there the addition got repeated into the repeatedly copied manuscript family behind the KJV.(Bruce)

Acts 8:39
The eunuch is apparently joyful and enthused about his new religion, but history records no major Christian presence in Ethiopia before the 300s AD. (Bruce)

Acts 8:40
Azotus- This is the ancient Philistine city of Ashdod, twenty miles north of Gaza, and about 35 miles west of Jerusalem. It was part of the Roman province of Syria until given to Herod the Great, who bequeathed it to his sister Salome. Both Azotus and Caesarea were very Hellenized, which Lydda and Joppa, on Peter’s itinerary in Acts 9, were more Hebrew.

Caesarea was built by Herod the Great on an ancient Phoenicia site called Strato’s Tower. Herod built a Hellenistic city with a great harbor there which he completed in 13 BC. After 6 AD it fell back into the lands controlled by Rome, this time under the province of Judea.(Bruce)