Acts 8

Acts 8:1-40

The Acts of the Apostles Chapter 8:1-40 Acts 8:1-13 The martyrdom of Stephen created a crisis in the history of the Church. In reading the Acts, we find that from this point onward Jerusalem is no longer the centre of interest. It almost fades from the page. This is not loss; but great gain. When Jerusalem ceases to be the centre of interest, the record does not suffer in any way, nor does it reflect upon Jerusalem. The local, the temporal, the material, are of little importance in the Church of God.

The universal, the eternal, the spiritual are supreme. It was of the very spirit of an old and past economy to fasten upon a geographical centre, and to depend upon material symbols. The Church now moves out upon the great pathway of her victorious business, independent of Jerusalem. That is the supreme revelation of this book of the Acts of the Apostles. Not easily did they learn the lesson, for the apostles clung to Jerusalem; but the great spiritual movement, independent of Jerusalem and of apostles, went forward; not slighting Jerusalem, not unmindful of Jerusalem, nor careless of its past history and early contribution; but far more influenced by the vision of Jerusalem from on high, the mother of us all, a spiritual ideal and victory. No longer hampered by localities and temporalities, the surging spiritual life of the Church swept them all away, and moved quietly and majestically on to new quests and new triumphs.

Church failure has invariably resulted from an attempt to check that spiritual movement which is independent of locality, and of all things material. Whenever the Church is governed from Jerusalem, or from Rome, or from anywhere else other than Heaven, it is hindered and hampered and prevented from fulfilling the great functions of its life.

The paragraph now under consideration falls into three parts; the events chronicled gather around three persons, Saul, Philip, and Simon; and three words suggest its values: persecution, power, and peril. The story of persecution, breaking out in Jerusalem and scattering the disciples, centres around Saul. The story of power, manifesting itself in strange circumstances and new surroundings and peculiar atmospheres, centres around Philip. The story of peril centres around Simon. Let us first examine the passage, and then attempt to observe its spiritual significance.

The story of persecution centres around Saul. In the seventh chapter, at verse fifty-eight (Acts 7:58), we find the words which introduce this man to our notice: “The witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a young man named Saul.” Then immediately follow the first words in the present paragraph: “And Saul was consenting unto his death.” The question naturally arises: Who is this man? We find his own account of himself, as he was in those days, in his letter to the Philippians: “Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; as touching zeal, persecuting the Church; as touching the righteousness which is in the law, found blameless.” This account becomes the more remarkable when it is remembered that it was written not less than thirty years after his apprehension by Christ. After thirty years of Christian experience, thirty years’ fellowship with the risen Lord, he looked back to what he was in the old days. Beginning on the level of the flesh, he indicated his relationship to the ancient economy. “Circumcised the eighth day.” There was no carelessness in the matters of ritual observance on the part of his parents. “Of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin.” He was a Hebrew, purely and wholly so, of Hebrew parents. “As touching the law, a Pharisee.” He was of the spiritual party in the Hebrew nation. “As touching zeal, persecuting the Church.” He was intense in his devotion to what he believed to be true. “As touching the righteousness which is in the law, found blameless.” He was true to the light as he saw it.

So Saul comes into view; a Hebrew of Hebrews; a spiritual ritualist; a zealous man; a man convinced; a man sincere; a man ardent and passionate; a man determined; a man with a clean moral record. Around this remarkable man the story of persecution gathers.

The words of Luke reveal the turmoil in the city. “Devout men buried Stephen and made great lamentation over him.” I personally believe that Stephen was buried, not by Christian men, but by Hebrews. The phrase “Devout men” is peculiar and suggestive. Devout men, not believers or disciples, but the devout men in Hebraism carried Stephen to his burial. “But Saul laid waste the Church, entering into every house, and dragging men and women committed them to prison.”

In that double declaration there is manifested a division of opinion, even among Hebrew people, concerning the death of Stephen. Some of them lamenting the brutality, tenderly buried him with great lamentation. Others, strangely stirred, broke out into wild and uproarious persecution of the Christians. Jerusalem was filled with the noise and the turmoil of persecution.

Two forces were in opposition in Jerusalem. They had been in opposition ever since the ministry of Jesus began. Now they were coming into conflict again most definitely. On the one hand was Sadducean Judaism, and on the other, spiritual Christianity. The remarkable fact here is, that Sadducean Judaism was being led in its opposition to Christianity by a Pharisee. Saul of Tarsus, a Pharisee, was already acting contrary to his deep religious convictions, perhaps unconsciously, when he led that Sadducean opposition to Jesus Christ. He was no lover of the Sadducean high priest. By virtue of his early Pharisaic training, he was utterly opposed to the Sadducean philosophy. Moreover, he had seen Stephen die. To all that we shall return when we come to the story of his conversion.

All this turmoil grew out of Stephen’s speech and death. We see the base, attempting to rid itself of the high; we see materialism, attempting to silence the voice of spirituality. We see Calvary repeated. They put Christ to death because His conceptions were spiritual and theirs were material. They put Him to death because He insisted upon the supremacy of the spiritual, while they grovelled in the dust of materialism. Now these people, living by the impulse of His indwelling life, must come to the same conflict.

As we watch that scattering crowd, we are observing the progress of the Christian Church. They were entering into fellowship with His sufferings, and therefore they were entering into the fulfillment of His purpose for Judaea and Samaria. “There arose on that day a great persecution against the Church which was in Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria.” Thus were they scattered through the regions which Jesus had told them to pass over, and announce His Gospel, and they were going in fellowship with His sufferings.

So we pass to the story of Philip, and of power. Philip is introduced in chapter six, verses three to six (Acts 6:3-6), “Look ye out therefore, brethren, from among you seven men of good report, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business . . . and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip.” In the twenty-first chapter, verse seven (Acts 21:7), we find these words: “And when we had finished the voyage from Tyre we arrived at Ptolemais; and saluted the brethren, and abode with them one day. And on the morrow, we departed and came unto Caesarea; and entering into the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, we abode with him. Now this man had four daughters, virgins, who prophesied.” Philip the deacon, one of the seven, became Philip the evangelist. He was among the number of those who were driven from Jerusalem by Saul’s persecution. In the twenty-first chapter, Philip is seen entertaining Paul on his missionary journey. How they must have talked together of those early days, and of the martyred Stephen.

“Saints, did I say? with your remembered faces, Dear men and women, whom I sought and slew 1 Ah, when we mingle in the heavenly places How will I weep to Stephen and to you!

“Oh for the strain that rang through our reviling, Still, when the bruised limbs sank upon the sod, Oh for the eyes that looked their last in smiling, Last on this world here, but their first on God!” I think they talked of that at Csesarea.

This man Philip then was the centre of the wonderful movement in the city of Samaria. Jews have no dealings with Samaritans, but Christians have, and Philip came to Samaria. There he proclaimed the Messiah. In the course of this passage two great words for preaching are used in describing the work of Philip. He proclaimed the Christ and that is the Greek word kerusso, which means to proclaim as a herald. We find later that Philip preached the Gospel, and that is the Greek word euaggelizo, which indicates the proclamation of good news.

The message concerning Christ, delivered through the deacon-evangelist Philip, arrested Samaria. In Samaria the Christian preacher found a new atmosphere and a new outlook. Moreover, Samaria was at the time under the spell of Simon the sorcerer. To Samaria, driven by persecution, there came, not an apostle, but a man set apart to serve tables, in order that the apostles migiit be set apart to preach the Word. He proclaimed Christ, and his preaching was accompanied by mental and physical signs. Unclean spirits were cast out, and men were healed.

The city was full of joy, resulting from these things; and in that attitude of amazement, of surprise, and of joy, they listened. This story of Philip is but an illustration of a much wider movement. The whole Church, driven by persecution, was proceeding in power.

So we come to the story of Simon, and of peril. Simon had amazed the city of Samaria with sorcery, and had gathered around him a great company of people. He had flung the spell of his personality over the city by his self-advertisement: “Giving out that himself was some great one.” How is a city to be delivered from that kind of spell?

To Samaria Philip came, full of the Spirit, and driven by the indwelling life of the Christ, and there he proclaimed the Christ. Observe the difference: Philip proclaimed another, the Messiah; Simon proclaimed himself.

The third part of our paragraph elaborates the declaration of the second. The second says that “he proclaimed Christ”; the third that he preached “the Kingdom of God and the Name of Jesus Christ”; and this with power because he himself was submitted to it, and driven by it. “The Kingdom of God and the Name of Jesus Christ”; that was a new centre for a new society.

The people who had been under the spell of the sorcerer, listened. They believed, and they were baptized. The most marvellous victory in Samaria-for victory it was was the belief and the baptism of Simon. We have no right to say that Simon was insincere. The very words used of the multitude are used also of Simon, and I believe his belief was as sincere as that of the rest, and his baptism was as valid as theirs.

But there was a great incompleteness in the whole of this. The belief was intellectual assent, and the baptism was intellectual consent. In the fourteenth verse to which we come in our next study, we read that the apostles heard that they had “received the Word of God.” That is to say that they had received it intellectually. They had not received the Spirit which brings regeneration, the beginning of the new life. This first victory broke the spell of the sorcerer. He himself was captured, and the city passed under the spell of the evangel. Great multitudes intellectually accepting the truth of what Philip had declared, submitted themselves to the rite of water baptism as an indication of their acceptance. It was a remarkable triumph.

The enquiry necessarily arises at this point, as to how it was that these people did not receive the Spirit immediately upon their intellectual assent to the truth. I have no answer. Whether the reason was spiritual or psychological is debatable. The story as it stands reminds us once more that we have no right to base a system or economy on any one picture given to us in the Acts of the Apostles. Here were people believing on Jesus, and subsequently receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit. There are other pictures where people believing received the Spirit immediately.

We cannot, I repeat, base an economy or a system on any one instance. Our economy must be based rather on the whole revelation of the Acts of the Apostles. As in the Gospel stories, we see that Jesus did not fulfill His ministry in the souls of two men in the same way, that there was infinite variety in His method; so in the Acts of the Apostles we see that Christian experience cannot be tabulated and systematized in the case of any one, for all are different. God fulfils Himself in many ways. Let us make room for Him in the experience of other men, and not attempt to say that thus and so, and by sequence which we have systematized in our theology, must men pass into fullness of life. Here is a case, for some reason which cannot be discovered, in which men came into intellectual assent and consent, and yet lacked for a little while the real touch of life which made them members of the Church, and witnesses of the Christ.

When presently the apostles came, they found Simon and the rest lacking the Spirit. Then came differentiation and discrimination, resulting from the next attitude taken up by Simon, and the rest.

What are the spiritual significances of this passage? First of all it is singularly impressive in its revelation of the sovereignty of the Lord Jesus. Note well His compelling power. He said to these men: “Ye shall be My witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and to the uttermost part of the earth.” They halted, and waited, and failed to go forward. Then, through the fidelity of Stephen He ultimately compelled their teaching and preaching in Samaria, though He drove them out by persecution.

His sovereignty is seen, not only in His compelling power, but in His continued fellowship with these men. Persecution never for a moment weakened their consciousness of Christ, or their loyalty to Him. That is always so with martyrs, with witnesses, with those in whom He dwells. Here is a man, loud-voiced in his profession of loyalty to Christ, and when persecution begins, his testimony ceases. That man never really knew Christ in his inner life. Christ was external to his life.

The one thing persecution can never do for a true witness, is to blur the vision of Christ, or change the loyalty of the witness to Him. One little word occurs here, which alone has no significance, but in its connection is full of most exquisite beauty. “They therefore that were scattered abroad went about preaching the Word.” Wherefore? Because they were persecuted and driven out. How revealing is that! Persecuted and driven out, He yet held His throne in them; and secured their loyalty, for He never parted company with them in spiritual experience.

The next lesson is that of the universality of the Gospel. In Samaria we see the Gospel in a new atmosphere. That matters nothing. Christ arrests Samaria as easily as He arrested Jerusalem. The evangel brings conviction in Samaria, as surely as it brought it in Jerusalem.

Finally, we learn the lesson of the spirituality of the Church. Mark the obscurity of the apostles. All were driven from Jerusalem, except the apostles. The majority of expositors say that it was necessary that the apostles should remain at Jerusalem for purposes of government. I respect that view, but I am not sure. I am rather inclined to think that they should have been out on the highway of witness. When apostles stay at a geographical centre, they may do more harm than good. If they had been out upon the missionary pathway they would have been fulfilling the meaning of the word apostle, as they were not when remaining at a centre.

God is not, however, dependent upon apostles that stay at Jerusalem. He has Philip the deacon, the evangelist. The Christian Church in her spiritual conception is independent of localities and men. She fulfils her true function by the presence and power of the Spirit in all such as allow Him right of way to administer the affairs of the Christ.

Acts 8:14-25 This paragraph has still to do with the work of the early Church in Samaria, and is the sequel to our previous study. Samaria as a centre of operation was not chosen by the council of the apostles in Jerusalem. It was undoubtedly in the original intention of the Christ. Persecution had broken out in Jerusalem, and the saints were scattered here, there, and everywhere; and among the rest, Philip had come to Samaria and preached the Gospel.

In this paragraph Jerusalem and the apostles reappear. The news reached Jerusalem that Samaria had received the Word of God, a statement which must have powerfully affected that group of men, who still retained some of their old Jewish prejudice against Samaria; for it is evident that Hebrew believers did carry over with them into their new relationship to Christ, the old prejudices against all things outside the Hebrew economy. Immediately, however, the apostles fell into line, and cooperated, sending two of their number to Samaria. We see here a new cooperation in spiritual ministry.

Another thing that impresses us is that the apostles themselves became evangelists. Peter and John having been to Samaria, having seen the work of God, having been the instruments for consolidating that work, and for purifying it at its very beginning by the exclusion of Simon, went back again to Jerusalem; but as they went, they “preached the Gospel to many villages of the Samaritans.”

This paragraph then falls into three sections: first the apostolic visitation of Samaria; secondly the apostolic discipline in the case of Simon; and thirdly the apostolic evangelism through the villages of Samaria.

It is impossible to read this story without once more being impressed with something we have already noticed in an earlier chapter-the comradeship of these two men Peter and John. We shall not have occasion to refer to it again in the course of this book, because John here passes out of the record. He is never seen again in the New Testament history, save when Paul refers to his being in Jerusalem in the Galatian letter, and in his own references to his sojourn in Patmos in the Apocalypse. In this companionship of Peter and John, we see the spiritual fellowship of opposites in Christian service. How utterly and absolutely different they were! Peter the practical; John the poet.

Peter the man of deeds; John the dreamer. When the work in Samaria had to be inspected,-for I think that was the first apostolic intention,-the Spirit, acting through the apostles, sent these two; the man of deeds, and the man of dreams.

The whole fiction of Petrine supremacy breaks down in the light of this story. If it be true that Peter was the chief, how comes it that he was sent by his brethren? Peter and John were sent in a holy fellowship by the Spirit of God Who in the Church at Jerusalem was still acting, and that as the Interpreter of the Will of Christ the only Head of the Church.

We turn our attention to the Samaritans. What is the story of these men in Samaria? First that they “received the Word of God.” Secondly they were “baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.” Thirdly they had not received the Holy Spirit.

Let us institute a simple enquiry. Why did they not receive the Spirit of God immediately? In the paragraph concerning the teaching of Philip, we learned that he proclaimed Christ as Messiah; and that he preached good tidings of the Kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus. I lay emphasis upon those two statements because they cover the whole outlook of New Testament preaching. There are many words in the Greek New Testament translated preach; but there are two principal words, and both of them are used here about Philip. The two great ideals of preaching are discoverable in what Philip did in Samaria; the word kerusso, which suggests the proclamation of a herald; the word euaggelizo which suggests the declaration of good news.

Philip did both. He proclaimed as a herald the Messiahship of Christ.

He preached as an evangelist the good news of the Kingdom of God, and of the name of Jesus. This double declaration concerning the preaching of Philip shows that there was nothing lacking in his preaching. We must not account for the fact that when these people believed and were baptized they did not receive the Spirit, by saying that the preaching of Philip was faltering. Further on in our studies we shall find that there were men in Ephesus, who had not received the Spirit. The preaching of Apollos was faulty. Apollos had not known, but Philip did know.

Here was preaching which was preaching in the fullest New Testament sense of the word, the authoritative proclamation of the Lordship of Jesus; the glad telling of the good news of the Kingdom of God, and of the name of Jesus-the name of Jesus being the symbol of salvation. The preaching was complete.

Why then was it that when people believed into that very Name which he preached, and evidently were baptized in water, that they did not receive the Spirit? There is no answer. There is no reason to be discovered in the Acts of the Apostles for that delay. If that statement appears to be most unsatisfactory, the fact that there is no answer, is an answer. When the Church of God begins to recognize that, strange and paradoxical as it may appear, we shall be at the end of a vast amount of confusion in systematic teaching concerning the work of the Holy Spirit. The fact is of importance, and so we repeat it.

There was a full preaching, authoritative and evangelistic, of the Messiahship of Jesus, of the Kingdom of God, of the saving name of Christ. Men and women believing into the Name which-is more than believing on it,-submitted themselves to all that the preaching claimed, and were baptized.

Yet they had not received the Spirit.

Peter and John came down to Samaria, and as a result of their visitation these men did receive the Spirit. Let us look then somewhat carefully at the story from that standpoint. What did the apostles do? They prayed for them; they laid their hands upon them; and then they received the Holy Spirit.

In further explanation of the statement that there is no answer to our enquiry; and in the presence of this description of what happened, and of the method by which these men received the Spirit; what light is there upon our problem? We may be inclined to think that in order to the reception of the Spirit it was necessary that there should be apostolic ministry; that while Philip the evangelist could preach a whole gospel and bring men into intellectual assent, and belief, and even to the obedience of baptism, yet because he was not an apostle there could be no reception of the Holy Spirit? If that be set up as a system, then we are face to face with a new problem. The mightiest missionary that ever existed in the early Church, Paul, received the gift of the Holy Spirit by the ministry, not of an apostle nor even of a deacon, but of Ananias a simple disciple. So we must be very careful not to set up a system that will break down presently. Or again we may be inclined to think that while this was not apostolic, yet it was the plan of God that men should only receive the Spirit as hands were laid upon them.

We must not speak slightingly of any material ordinance, if it be in the economy of God. Was it then the laying on of hands which Philip had neglected, and the apostles fulfilled?

Presently Cornelius received the Spirit, and the apostle Peter never laid hands on him. We must be careful not to create a system that does not hold good in all cases. If we say there must be some human intermediation, then why not in the case of Cornelius? The moment we become mystified in the presence of the operations of the Spirit, we have reached the heart of truth. “The wind bloweth where it will, and thou hearest the voice thereof, but knowest not whence it cometh, and whither it goeth.” The moment in which any theologian, or school of theology, attempts to systematize the method of the coming of the Spirit into human lives, in that moment they are excluding a score of His operations, and including only one. These people had not received the Spirit. “The wind bloweth where it will;” and this is the supreme glory of the Christian Church. Its life and its power is not that of organization or ministry, but that of the indwelling Spirit.

But what happened? They received the Holy Spirit. What difference did that make? In the first letter of Paul to the Corinthians, and in that twelfth chapter concerning spiritualities, is this verse “For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body.” What then happened when the Spirit came to these men in Samaria? Exactly the same thing that happened when the Spirit came to the men in the Upper Room on the day of Pentecost. Exactly the same thing that happened when the Spirit came presently to Cornelius, falling upon him as upon those disciples at the first. Exactly what happened when the Spirit came to Saul of Tarsus. Exactly what happened when the Spirit came to the little handful of disciples at Ephesus.

Exactly the same thing that happened when the Spirit of God came into our lives. They were baptized into the one Body of Christ. This is a figure of speech, but it is a supremely beautiful and fitting one. If we would know all the glory of it, and understand what happened to the Samaritan Christians, we must study carefully the teaching of the apostle, in which with inimitable art and matchless skill, he takes the figure of the body with its different parts and members and functions. Therein he speaks of “diversities of gifts.” The word diversities may suggest division; so that we will use another word here, diaereses of gifts, diaereses of ministrations and of workings. The diaeresis indicates a difference, and yet the running together of two letters in close connection as in the word naive.

Now in the body, the diversities in that sense, of gifts, of ministrations, of workings, are in one body; Christ, the Head, and all the members. That is what happened when the Spirit came.

Samaritans were baptized into the one Body; that is to say from henceforth personality to them was to be Christian personality. Intellectually there was the outlook of Jesus; emotionally the passion of Jesus; volitionally the choices of their lives were the choices of Jesus. He in them, would think and love and will. In that moment they were baptized into that one Body; and that meant membership in the Church; all their resources at the disposal of the Church, all the gifts in the Church, were gifts bestowed for their sake, whether they were gifts of the apostles, evangelists, prophets, teachers, or helpers. These people came into the mystic mystery of the one lonely and indivisible Church of Jesus Christ.

The picture that immediately follows emphasizes the teaching by way of contrast. What did Simon ask for, and what did Simon want? It is constantly imagined that he asked for the Holy Spirit, and wanted to buy the Holy Spirit, but the story does not say so. He said to Peter: “Give me also this power that on whomsoever I lay my hands, he may receive the Holy Spirit.” He did not ask for the Holy Spirit; he asked for power to bestow Him. The whole city had been under the spell of this man’s sorceries, and here was something that he lacked. What he craved was not the power of the Spirit, but the power to bestow the Spirit.

There was born that which in the history of the Church has been described as simony, the buying and selling of position and office within the Church; the idea that ecclesiastical preferments can be procured in any denomination by money; the conception that the things of the Holy Spirit and of the Church can be purchased in current coin, of any state, or country. He asked for power to bestow the Spirit; to be admitted into the fellowship of the place in which the apostles stood; and to be brought to the position, where by the laying on of hands he also might confer power. The sin was a desire to possess spiritual power for personal ends. God deliver us from all Pharisaism, and all attempts to make application of that revelation of peril to any other communion than our own. Not merely the man who buys a living in some Church and sells it; but the man who in the great spiritual convention falls into line with certain suggestions of the speaker, and professes, and seems to desire some spiritual blessing 1 , in order to personal aggrandizement and fame; is guilty of the same sin. A man does not receive the Spirit in order to crowd his church, and if a man seeks for a spiritual gift in order that he may enrich himself at any point, in any way, he is attempting to traffic with spiritual things for personal aggrandizement.

Think of the subtle peril of this suggestion to Peter. He rose superior to the temptation, but still mark the temptation, in order that we may learn this fact, that the only way in which to resist this temptation is the way of the fullness of spiritual life. Peter knew full well that the Spirit had not fallen upon these men by the laying on of his hands. That is what Simon thought he saw. Peter knew, and declared that it was the gift of God. Yet how easy it would have been to have agreed to the bargain proposed.

This was the peril confronting the early Church, when a man asked to come into its office in return for money. Looking back over the history of the Christian Church we see that she has not always resisted. Mark well Peter’s almost terrible severity; and I have no explanation of that severity save as I believe that he saw the peril to himself and to the Church: “Thy silver perish with thee, because thou hast thought to obtain the gift of God with money. Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter.” Thou canst not invade the spiritualities with thy carnalities. If the Church believed that today, and acted upon it, she might lack a good deal she possesses, but would be richer for the lack. There is a lack that means power; there is a possession that means paralysis.

But observe the true spirit of the apostle, and the true evidence of the indwelling Spirit in the tender sympathy of Peter for the man, “Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray the Lord, if perhaps the thought of thy heart shall be forgiven thee.” Not in the thunder of a final anathema did the apostolic speech end, but in the tender hope of restoration. That is the Spirit of Christ. Some interpreters have said that when Simon said, “Pray ye for me to the Lord that none of the things which ye have spoken come upon me,” he was impenitent, and only afraid of punishment I do not think we have any right to say so. That is a subject better left where the record leaves it.

Our last paragraph deals with the apostolic evangelization. In this connection it is interesting to turn back to the Gospel of Luke. There, in the ninth chapter and at verse forty-nine (Acts 9:49), we read:

“And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out demons in Thy name; and we forbade him, because he followeth not with us. But Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against you is for you. And it came to pass, when the days were well nigh come that He should be received up, He steadfastly set His face to go to Jerusalem, and sent messengers before His face, and they went and entered into a village of the Samaritans to make ready for Him; and they did not receive Him because His face was as though He were going to Jerusalem. And when His disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt Thou that we bid fire to come down from heaven and consume them? But He turned and rebuked them.”

John would have destroyed the Samaritan village by fire in those early days, but now he is seen preaching the Gospel in the Samaritan village. No comment is necessary. It is such a wonderful revelation of what the spiritual life really is. The man was completely changed. He was still Boanerges, a son of thunder, a man of resolute and determined endeavour; only the whole force of his nature had been turned in another direction. That is the story of the fullness of spiritual life. Let us be careful not to imagine that when the Spirit takes hold of man or woman He makes them all of one pattern. He takes the man and turns the whole force of his life into a constructive instead of a destructive direction.

The abiding truths we have surely seen as we have passed the story in survey. As we read of the coming of the apostles to Samaria, and the reception of the Samaritans of the gift of the Spirit, we learn the truth anew, that nothing short of the actual reception of the Spirit is Christianity. Men may come very near, they may be intellectually convinced of the supremacy of Jesus; they may even decide that they will adopt His ethical ideal; they may go so far as to determine that they will imitate the perfection of His example. But these things do not make men Christians. The whole evangel of the authoritative Christ, of the Kingdom of God, of the saving Name, may be understood, but there may be no touch of life. If men have not received the Holy Spirit, they are not members of the Christ. No man has entered into true Christianity, save as there has come to him that life which is illumination, which is emotion, which is volition, and all which are Christian. “If any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His.”

We learn also from this story, what Christian life really means. There was glorious cooperation in service; apostles and evangelists working together. There is perfect fellowship in all the orders of the Christian ministry in the fullness of the Spirit. Peter and John the apostles, are glad to go down and help consummate the work of Philip the evangelist. There is no antagonism in the heart of Philip against the work of Peter and John.

Again, by the awful and solemn exclusion of Simon, we learn that the Spirit-filled Church is a Church in which simony cannot live.

Finally we have a further illustration of the marvellous power of the Church. One sentence is enough to illustrate it; victory was gained in Samaria. This Judaism had never won. How near the Samaritans had come to Judaism-the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Samaritan circumcision, the Samaritan rite and symbol; but ritualism approximating to ritualism never brings the ritualists together; and Judaism and Samaritanism never merged. Judaism never conquered Samaritanism, but the Word of God won in Samaria. So the triumph of the Church must be that of the Word proclaimed in the power of the Spirit.

Acts 8:26-40 While this paragraph commences with words that suggest intimate relation with what has preceded, there is nevertheless a very definite and decided break in the narrative at this point. The verse begins: “But an angel of the Lord spake unto Philip.” The work of Philip is still in view, and yet, here commenced that wider movement in the activity of the Christian Church, of the beginnings of which, the remainder of this book of the Acts of the Apostles tells the story. It only tells the story of beginnings, because this wider movement in the work of the Church is not yet completed.

We have seen the first movements, indicated in the commission of Jesus, “In Jerusalem, in Judea and Samaria.” Now we have the first movement beyond, toward “the uttermost part of the earth.” We almost invariably speak of the opening of the door to the Gentiles as having taken place in the house of Cornelius, and of Peter being the first messenger of the evangel to the Gentiles. That may be true, or it may not. There is a question as to what the Ethiopian’s nationality really was. I believe that by race he was Ethiopian, that is a Gentile; and therefore, that not to Peter the apostle, but to Philip the deacon was given the work of first expanding the commission of Jesus so as to win one for Him from among the number of those who by the Jews were looked upon as outside the covenant of promise.

Of the issues of this movement toward Africa, we have no record. There are legends, interesting, but quite unreliable. Our interest in this story is in the movement itself, as this account reveals its direction and methods. So we shall first examine the story, and then attempt to observe its abiding teaching.

Let us first look more carefully at this Ethiopian Eunuch. We are told quite clearly certain things about him. He was “a man of Ethiopia,” he was” a eunuch of great authority under Candace, queen of the Ethiopians”; he “was over all her treasure.” It has been suggested that he was a proselyte to Judaism, a proselyte of the Gate, a proselyte of righteousness. If this was so, he would not be admitted to the inner sanctuary at Jerusalem, but would be allowed to stand in an outer court, in order to worship. There are those who hold that this expression, “a man of Ethiopia” simply means that, being a Jew, he was nevertheless born in Ethiopia, and had risen there to this position of power and eminence. Probably he was indeed a man of Ethiopia in the full sense of the word, a son of Africa, himself one of the race of Ham, a negro.

That is my own personal conviction. I believe he was the first of the African race to become a Christian. It is now established that at least three centuries before Christ Greek literature and thought had permeated that central African district, and that a most remarkable civilization was realized under Candace. Probably this word Candace is not the name of a woman, but rather a title, like Pharaoh. The Egyptian portraiture of the Ethiopians shows the distinct negro type.

I never read this story without wondering how it came about, that seeing this man passed down into Ethiopia so early in the history of the Christian Church, Africa is where she is to-day. In the earliest churches in existence in Africa, we find that they failed to translate the Scriptures into their own language, failed to give the Bible to their own people. The story of missions the whole wide world over, shows that the success or failure of such missions has always been dependent on whether those brought to Christ had the Scriptures in their own language or not.

This man had been to Jerusalem to worship, and he was now on his way back. What had he found in Jerusalem? He went to the Hebrew centre of worship, to the Hebrew priesthood, to the Hebrew temple. He went to that system of worship, a portion of the sacred literature of which he held in his hand, and was reading on his way home. In Jerusalem he found that whole system of worship materialized, under Sadducean influence; materialized, ritualistic, dead.

In some of the things this man said to Philip on his return journey, one can hear the echo of his discontent with everything he had found in Jerusalem. The statement, “He was returning and sitting in his chariot, and was reading the prophet Isaiah,” shows his interest in some of the profotmdest things of the Hebrew religion. Philip had said to him, “Understandest thou what thou readest?” In his answer I can detect the restlessness of a great disappointment and discontent. “How can I, except some one shall guide me?” The word “guide” there is a very technical word. It is used again and again with reference to authoritative teaching and interpretation. Christ described the authoritative teachers of His time as “blind guides.”

This man, profoundly interested in the deepest things of the Hebrew religion-for Hebrew expositors will agree that the great prophecy of Isaiah was reckoned by themselves to be the finest and profoundest of their writings and literature-had found his way back to that writing, and therein to that strange and mystic chapter, telling the story of the Servant of God, suffering, bruised, and through travail proceeding to triumph.

While profoundly interested, he was equally ignorant. Said he, “How can I understand, except some one shall guide me?” . . . “I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other?” If the fact that he read proved his interest, and his confession proved his ignorance; this question proved his intelligence. It was the question of the hour among the expositors. Was that portraiture of the latter part of the prophecy of Isaiah, which at that particular point be comes the portrait of a suffering, bruised, and broken Servant nevertheless emerging into triumph, Isaiah’s account of himself? Or was he speaking of some one else?" Who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?" Was Isaiah uttering a lamentation about the failure of his own ministry, or was he speaking of some One Who should come and should fail? That, moreover, is the question which is still being debated concerning this chapter. There are those to-day who are a little more inclined to be dogmatic than was the Ethiopian Eunuch. It is affirmed that Isaiah had no view and no vision of the ultimate suffering of the Servant of God, but that the whole meaning of the passage was exhausted in his own experience, or possibly in that of Jeremiah. But that is not our subject now.

We are interested in the man. A man of authority, he had been to Jerusalem, seeking to worship; to satisfy in the city of holy associations, in the very central place of worship, the deepest, profoundest, and holiest cravings of his life. This man laden with honour, overwhelmed with responsibility, sitting in his chariot, read aloud as men did in those days, the prophecy of Isaiah, pondering over it, perplexed by it, catching the music in it, and yet wondering what it all meant. He was a hungry soul!

Let us now look at Philip in these new circumstances. “But an angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza; the same is desert.” The word “But” suggests change in the circumstances of Philip’s ministry. From Samaria, the city crowded with interests, and crowded with men, he was sent to the lonely road, that winds away from civilization across the desert, toward another civilization, foreign, alien, different. From a ministry among multitudes, with all its thrill and fascination, to a conversation with one man. Philip did not even know he was going to one man. He only knew he was going to the Desert! Samaria was the city of fellowship, new fellowship, glad fellowship, the fellowship of souls won for his Lord.

Philip the beloved evangelist had been in the midst of that sacred fellowship. He was now disturbed, and sent into loneliness: “Go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza; the same is desert.”

But that is only part of the story. It was an angel who told him to go. When obeying, and having arrived, he saw the retinue passing along the road, and this man sitting in the chariot, it was the Spirit Who whispered in his heart, “Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.” With the company of angels, in fellowship with the Holy Spirit there is no loneliness. In this great life and movement and service of which Philip was an honoured instrument, there are heavenly guidances, and eternal illuminations, and spiritual comradeships, which make men forevermore independent of crowds, or anything else that the world holds to be sacred.

Both the Eunuch and Philip were prepared for this interview. The preparation of the Eunuch consisted in the fact that he had the prophetic writings, and a sense of his own ignorance. The preparation of Philip, in that he knew the historic fulfillment of the writing, and was indwelt by the Spirit of knowledge. On the one hand was a man poring over most wonderful writings, seeing glimpses of light, catching strains of music; but unable to find his way into the fullness of life, unable to catch all the music of the great song. On the other hand was a man who had seen the ancient prophecy wrought out in the experience of One upon Whom his eyes had in all probability rested, and Whom he had come to know more perfectly by the fulfillment in him of the Christ life by the Holy Spirit.

Let us now look at the method of Philip’s approach. He did so with an enquiry, and with a play on words, which cannot easily be translated into English. The Greek word for reading, quite literally, means “to know again.” When a man reads, he is supposed to be knowing again, repeating over again. Some one else had known, had written, and the man reading, knows it again. There is a fine philosophy of how to read suggested by the Greek word for “reading.” The word “understandest” was really the second part of his second word. It is as though he had said, Knowest thou what thou knowest again?

That is a very imperfect way of suggesting the play upon words. In the method there was a gentle raillery, intended to arrest the mind. The question meant, Is there any use in your reading? Do you know what you are reading? Do you know what you are knowing again?

Then mark the answering question, “How can I, except some one shall guide me?” This was the expression of a great discontent. He besought Philip to come up and sit with him. If he was filled with discontent, he was also full of desire for instruction.

Philip had no doubt as to whether the prophet spoke of himself, or of some other. Philip would not have denied that the prophet spoke of himself; but he knew that when he began to speak of himself, “Who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?” he climbed upon that suggestion of the Divine authority of his own mission, and saw through the centuries another Servant of God. He saw the great ultimate working out of the things that he had felt in his own soul. Philip therefore declared that it was Jesus of Whom the prophet wrote. The questions of the Eunuch were answered, as this man, not an apostle, not directed by Jerusalem, but instructed by the Spirit, and guided by the Christ, sat in the chariot, and explained the ancient writing.

What was the issue? On the part of the Eunuch, obedience, implicit and immediate. “Behold, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?” The gloss which was in the text as a verse, now rightly relegated to the margin, may throw some light upon the fact that in preaching Jesus, Philip had led him also toward those final things which Jesus had said concerning conditions; and so he went down into the water, and was baptized.

Philip, having done his work, was caught away by the Spirit, and “was found at Azotus.” It is not at all necessary that this should be accounted a miracle. I am never anxious to read miracles in, where they are not; any more than I am anxious to rule miracles out, where they are in. “The Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip; and the Eunuch saw him no more for he went on his way rejoicing.” He was quite independent of Philip. The picture is not that of the Eunuch left dazed, upon the highway, wondering what had become of Philip. He had forgotten Philip, for he had found all for which his soul was hungry. “He went on his way rejoicing,” the new light upon his brow, the new life thrilling through his spirit, the new love mastering him. He was independent of Jerusalem now, he was independent even of the messenger; because he had found the Master.

The abiding teaching of the story is patent. It is the story of the victorious Christ at work immediately among men. Sang the ancient Psalmist:

“Thou hast ascended on high, Thou hast led away captives; Thou hast received gifts among men, Yea, among the rebellious also.” I go further on in the Psalm, and find these words:

“Ethiopia shall haste to stretch out her hands unto God,” It was the One that had ascended on high, Who had led captivity captive, Who saw Ethiopia stretching out her hands to God. Nay He it was by the Spirit Who caused that stretching out of the hands. He was at work by the Spirit in the heart of the Ethiopian Eunuch before Philip reached him. The Spirit was ahead of Philip, making this man discontented, giving him to know his own ignorance. So we see the Christ preparing this Ethiopian Eunuch; commanding His servant to leave the city for the desert, the crowds for loneliness, the fellowship for isolation. As we see the meeting between these two men, we realize anew that this Christ is He Who opens, and no man shuts; Who shuts, and no man opens.

He is still carrying on these same things in these same ways. He opens doors, and then through His people, enters the doors He opens. Long e’er the missionary comes to the land we call benighted, He is preparing for the coming of the missionary. It is not always by Isaiah that He prepares, but by the fetish, that the Ethiopian carries with him to-day. Happy indeed is that missionary who can do what Philip did, begin just where the enquirer is, and preach Jesus. There is no gleam of light in the world’s religions but that Christ fulfils it; and no discontent of the human heart but that He meets it.

The last thing this story has for us is a revelation of the responsibilities of His own. It may be dismissed in a sentence as to statement! If Christ is hindered, it is because some Philip is not willing to go! It may be pondered long and carefully in application!