Acts 9

Acts 9:1-43

The Acts of the Apostles Chapter 9:1-43 Acts 9:1-9 We now turn to the more definite and systematic expansion of the Christian movement beyond the first circles, and follow the growth of the Christian Churches among those Asian cities which were so largely under Greek influence. This movement is the more remarkable when we remember the antagonism between Hebraism and Hellenism.

This particular paragraph contains the story of the conversion of Saul of Tarsus. It must, however, be related to the whole triumphant movement of Christ, by His Spirit, through His Church. It was not difficult in some senses for Christian Hebrews to evangelize Judaea. Their brethren, after the flesh, dwelt in Judaea, and while it is perfectly true that they were slow to do it, and did not set to work at all systematically until they were driven forth by persecution, still there was no religious revulsion produced in the minds of any as they preached their great evangel through Judaea.

It was a little more difficult to preach in Samaria, for there existed the influences of the ancient traditions, and the habits of long centuries, which were expressed in the familiar words: “Jews have no dealings with Samaritans.” That antagonism to everything Samaritan had manifested itself in the request proffered by one of the sons of thunder when they would have called down fire out of heaven to destroy the Samaritan village which had refused to receive Jesus. But under the conviction of the Spirit, a man full of the Spirit had gone down to Samaria, and had preached, and Samaria had received the Gospel, and the triumph had been won.

But now by far the most difficult work awaited these men. Once they stepped over the boundary-line, and began to touch these ancient cities, with their Jewish customs and Greek influences, they were in a new atmosphere, and one far more difficult for them than any in which they had so far preached the evangel.

The last three prophecies of the Old Testament, those of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, were undoubtedly post-exilic. In the course of the prophecy of Zechariah, with its wonderful visions and strange foretellings of the coming of a King to be rejected, and yet ultimately to be crowned, these words occur, “I will stir up thy sons, O Zion, against thy sons, O Greece.” These words were not mere rhetoric. They are for us revealing words. They had immediate reference to the Greek aggressiveness under Alexander the Great; and they had their first fulfillment in the victory of Judas Maccabseus over Antiochus Epiphanes. These facts are matters of history. Yet, while the words of Zechariah had such fulfilment, they had a deeper significance, for they suggested the diametrically opposed ideals of Hebraism and Hellenism.

We must recognize this antagonism between the two ideals. The ideal of Hebraism was that of the moral, the righteous, the religious, and it insisted upon law. The ideal of Hellenism was that of the culture and freedom of human life, the perfection of the powers of nature, the full play of all the forces of individual life. As we put these two ideals thus into contradistinction, in the measure in which we are Christian we see that they are not really contradictory, but complementary. But for ages this antagonism was very manifest.

To quote from Dr. Hugh Black’s Culture and Restraint: “The policy of Alexander aimed at unifying the various elements that made up his world-wide empire, by the diffusion of a common language and civilization. To this end the Oriental races were to be saturated with Hellenic culture by means of the Greek colonies that followed in the wake of the victorious army. Entirely new Greek towns were founded, while the older cities were leavened by Greek settlements. Thus over one-half of Asia a network of Greek culture was stretched, which had as its object the reducing under its influence of the whole surrounding regions.”

To take one glance again at the Maccabsean rising and victory. Onias, the High Priest, contemporary with Judas Maccabseus, opposed with all the force of his religious fervour the Hellenizing influences which were spreading through the whole region.

Turning to the time of Christ we find the opposing forces represented in the two parties, of the Sadducees and the Pharisees. The Jewish nation had become largely Sadducean. The Sadducees were Hellenists. The Pharisees stood for Hebraism. There, in the last analysis, was the conflict between the Hebrew ideal, which the Pharisee represented, and for which he fought, and for which he made his traditions a safeguard; and the Greek ideal of culture and freedom, the glorification of human life, and the denial of the supernatural, for which the Sadducee stood. This then was the atmosphere at this time. Away beyond Judaea, Galilee, and Samaria, lay these ancient cities that had become Hellenized; and in the midst of them were colonies of Jews; Hellenized Jews; and to these also the Gospel must be preached.

This introduction has been necessary background to a right understanding of the apprehension of Saul of Tarsus. In the very word Tarsus there is significance. He was born there, a Hebrew of Hebrews, as he tells us in one of his epistles. Both his father and mother were Hebrews; there was no mixture in his blood. Timothy was born of Greek and Hebrew parents, but not so Saul. Nevertheless Saul was of Tarsus, a Greek city, the great university city of the time. At about fourteen years of age his parents were anxious that he should not pass under the Hellenizing influences of Tarsus; so they did not send him to the university there, but to Jerusalem; and he was brought up at the feet of Gamaliel.

This man, born in Tarsus, received the earliest and mightiest impressions in the atmosphere of Hellenism. He received his religious education from father and mother, Hebrews, not Sadducees, but Pharisees; and then was sent up to Jerusalem to complete that education at the feet of Gamaliel. This was a wonderful merging; indeed a coming together of opposing forces. The boy had spent his play-time in a Greek atmosphere, and had gained his earliest impressions there, the impressions that will abide, even though the snows of innumerable winters are upon the brow. This man, a Hebrew of Hebrews, a Pharisee, was also a Hellenist. Greece had touched him with its culture, its refinement, its poetry, and all its glory, and his zealous, godly, and much to be reverenced teacher, Gamaliel, was utterly unable to eradicate the poetry and passion of Greece, for he had been too long in Tarsus.

With all that in mind, we turn to our story. It gives the account of the apprehension by Christ of the man who was to be His special instrument in carrying His Gospel to these cities under the influence of Greek culture. We see the wonderful fitness of the choice. Whereas, it is perfectly true, that when the Master has a piece of work to be done, He can take hold of a man devoid of equipment, and bestow upon him fitness for service; again and again the past is taken into account; and the preparation of the earliest years is perpetually preparation within the will of God for the accomplishment of a great purpose. As to natural fitness, Peter would not have been successful, John would have been altogether out of place, James would certainly have failed. But this man Saul was one whose preparation consisted in his blood relationships, and all those years spent in Tarsus. The choosing of the Holy Spirit is not capricious.

Briefly then let us look at the man to be apprehended; at the apprehension itself; and at the man after the apprehension.

The man to be apprehended. There are previous glimpses of him in the eighth chapter. He is there seen minding the clothes of the men who are hurling the stones upon Stephen. The next statement concerning him is that he was “consenting unto his (Stephen’s) death.” In that declaration, which means that he gave his vote for the death of Stephen, is a revelation of the fact that he was a member of the Sanhedrim. He was a man saturated with Greek ideals; yet even bitterly devoted to Hebraism; a man at war with the Sadducean philosophy, profoundly convinced of the divinity of Pharisaism, having given his vote for the dying of Stephen and of others, minding the clothes of such as cast the stones. We are further told, and can dismiss the whole tragic story in the words of the sacred narrative, that “he laid waste the Church.”

Now let us take up the story as it is written: “But Saul, yet breathing threatening and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest.” Let us see the mental mood of this man, so far as we are able. Take that verse again. Vincent translates thus, “Breathing hard, out of threatening and murderous desire.” The Greek form there certainly warrants that translation. It is the picture of a man fiercely opposed, breathing hard, out of threatening and murderous desire. That is too familiar a picture to need exposition. But we have omitted a word. “But Saul yet breathing out threatening and murderous desire,“or” But Saul still breathing out threatening.” That is a small word, which seems as though it mattered little, yet it is full of profound significance.

Surely there is nothing lost by the omission of this word. To omit it is still to have the picture of a fierce man, determined to stamp out the Nazarene heresy, a man definitely appointed as the public prosecutor of Christianity.

But that is not all the picture. The word “yet” or “still,” is one which suggests continuity in an attitude, in spite of something. In this passage certain words are omitted in the Revised Version which appeared in the Authorized. There is no question that they are accurately omitted; but in the twenty-sixth chapter and the fourteenth verse (Acts 26:14), when Paul was telling the story of his conversion, he quoted words which Jesus addressed to him, which are not chronicled in this paragraph: “It is hard for thee to kick against the goad?” The answer of Paul, “What shall I do, Lord?” is also omitted. This is found in the twenty-second chapter, and the tenth verse (Acts 22:10), where Paul was again narrating the fact of his conversion. When Christ said to him, “It is hard for thee to kick against the goad,” what did He mean?

Surely He meant, Saul, there are forces playing about you, that would drive you in one direction; and you are kicking against them. This man, a Hebrew of Hebrews, was determined to stamp out the Nazarene heresy, and he had obtained letters of the high priest, and was on his way to Damascus, to hale men and women to prison; but he was kicking against the goads, he was fighting against conviction.

Let us go back again to the sixth chapter, and to verses eight and nine (Acts 6:8-9):

“And Stephen, full of grace and power, wrought great wonders and signs among the people. But there arose certain of them that were of the synagogue called the synagogue of the Libertines, and of the Cyrenians, and of the Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and Asia, disputing with Stephen.”

This means that Stephen’s conflict was with the Hellenists, not with the Hebrews. The whole of his marvellous address was a protest against Hellenism. Stephen’s fight was not with Pharisaism. We must be fair to Pharisaism. The rags of Pharisaism were its self-sufficiency, its boastfulness, its contempt for others; but the heart of Pharisaism was spiritual, a defence of spiritual religion against rationalism. Stephen’s fight was with Sadduceeism.

Probably Saul had heard that great defence of Stephen; and all his Pharisaic sympathy would be with Stephen. As this man listened to Stephen, he heard a man emphasizing the spirituality of religion, and charging upon them that they were turning from spiritual things. Yet he had consented to his death, had seen him die, and there had been manifested to him, his own belief in the supernaturalism of religion. He had seen a man bloody from the stones, bruised and battered and beaten, going out of life, with his face lit with a glorious light, and had heard his declaration that he had seen into the world beyond, a living Lord and Master. It was the vindication of his own philosophy and profoundest conviction. “Yet breathing threatening and slaughter.” This man was fighting against a strange turmoil of mind, in which mental questionings, enquiries, wonderings, amazement, mingled.

Moreover he had now been to the Sadducean high priest, sacrificing his own deepest religious principle in going; and had asked and obtained from him letters, empowering him to hale to prison and to death men and women who, however much they might seem to be antagonistic to the ancient ritual of his people, did nevertheless hold the spiritual verities which he himself held. So, troubled by all these forces of the past, and this mental turmoil, revealed in a white-hot passion, partly born of the fact that he was violating a growing conviction, Christ apprehended him.

By the omissions here from the text of the words of Christ, Luke fastened attention on the actual person of Christ, without deflecting the thought of the reader more than necessary to Saul. The first phase in the apprehension of Saul was that of a great light shining round about him out of heaven, above the brightness of the sun. It was a moment fraught with tremendous issues in the whole programme of Christ in the world. Then came the enquiry. A voice spoke, not in the Greek, but in the Hebrew tongue, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me?” It was a voice out of heaven, out of the light, asking him, a man on the earth, why he persecuted the One Who spoke. What a strange thing, what a startling thing! “Who art Thou, Lord?” cried the astonished Saul.

Oh, the revolution, the convulsion, the upheaval in the soul of Saul. Then came the most arresting thing. The voice replied: “I am Jesus Whom thou persecutest.” Then there broke upon his consciousness, dimly and indistinctly, more perfectly apprehended in after days, the great truth that Christ and the Church were one. How Paul wrought out this truth in those great letters afterwards, as he insisted upon this unity of the living Lord with His people. It is as though Christ had said to him, Those men and women whom you have haled to prison have suffered; but it is I Who have suffered in their suffering, Saul. The brutal stones that you saw hurled upon Stephen, cutting into his flesh, and giving him physical pain, reached Me, hurt Me.

I felt every throb of Stephen’s pain.

But there was another meaning in the words. “Why persecutest thou Me?” I am above thee in the heavens; thou canst not undo My work; that against which thou art righting, is not the fanaticism of a mistaken fanatic; it is the march of God through human history. “Why persecutest thou Me?” In that moment, nebulously as yet, not perfectly apprehended, the truth was breaking upon the mind of this man, and by implication, ere he knew it, he had yielded himself to the One Who had spoken out of the eternal light, and Who had addressed him by name. “Who art Thou, Lord?” That use of the word Lord revealed a fine recognition of a trained mind, in the presence of such a manifestation of supremacy. When the light came, and the voice spoke, prejudices went, and all the antagonism that created the fever heat of his hostility ended. He was in the presence of supremacy, and he admitted it as he said, Lord!

Then came the revealing words, “I am Jesus.” Again Paul told the story, and in doing so spoke of the answer coming in the form, “I am Jesus of Nazareth.” Who was Jesus to Saul of Tarsus? A dead man, disgraced, and hated! Then there came the light and a voice. In the presence of it he said, “Who art Thou, Lord?” The answer came, “I am Jesus.” The Jesus that he thought dead was alive. The Jesus that he thought disgraced was at the centre of heavenly glory. The Jesus that he hated, spoke to him in the language of an ineffable love. We do not wonder that this man never looked back ! It was a great arrest, a great apprehension.

He was then commanded to do one thing, and that the most simple: “Rise, and enter into the city, and it shall be told thee what tliou must do.” That is always the Master’s method. Was it a simple thing? It was a very severe thing. They were expecting him in Damascus; those opposed to Christ were expecting him as their leader; and those with Christ were expecting him as a great enemy. Christ said, Go into the city, and wait.

So he came to Damascus. Damascus was one of the first cities that Alexander had conquered, and into which he had brought his great influence. Paul came into Damascus led, for he was blind, defeated, and captured. I think when I get to heaven I shall want to know what became of the high priest’s letters. He who had come armed with official authority to end the Nazarene heresy, was led in, the blind slave of the Christ. Those were wonderful days, the three days and nights that the blindness continued!

We are not surprised to read that he ate and drank nothing. What happened in his thinking? One little word in the Philippian letter helps us. “What things were gain to me, these have I counted loss for Christ.” He was finding the balance of things. What things were gain, I counted loss; my Hebrew birthright, for I had been born into Christ; the Hebrew rite of circumcision, and all the observance of the ritual, for I had entered into life in Christ. Did you count the Pharisee’s supernaturalism loss, Paul? Yes, because I gained the spiritualities in Christ.

I think through those three days of blindness and fasting, he was taking stock of the situation, and every hour there came to him a new consciousness, not of loss, but of gain.

Mark again the Master’s fitness in the choice of the instrument. To see the Hebraism and Hellenism merging in Paul read in the Galatian letter these words: “I have been crucified with Christ,” that is Hebraism, restraint; “and it is no longer I that live,” that is Hellenism, culture. Then he merged the two, “but Christ liveth in me,” and that is Christianity. In that final sentence Hebraism and Hellenism have joined hands; culture is seen resulting from restraint, and restraint merging into culture. In this story then, we see Heaven’s arrest of the apostle who passed through the Asian cities to carry the evangel to these regions beyond.

Acts 9:10-22 The opening words of the paragraph suggest continuity. In the first nine verses of this chapter we saw, first the man to be apprehended, Saul of Tarsus; secondly, his apprehension, as on the way to Damascus the light shone round about him and the voice of Jesus spoke to him; and thirdly, the man after his apprehension, in Damascus. The man who had set his face toward Damascus, having obtained letters from the Sadducean high priest in order that he might hale to prison and to death all who were followers of the Nazarene, was led into Damascus weakened, silent, and blind.

We now come to the second stage in the preparation of this man for his work. The contrast is very remarkable between the condition in which we left him in our last study, and that in which we shall leave him at the close of this one. We left him blind; we shall leave him with the scales fallen from his eyes, seeing. We left him silent, we shall leave him in the midst of the Jews of Damascus, preaching and proving that Jesus is the Christ. We left him weakened by the way, broken down, with prejudices swept away as by a hurricane; we shall leave him growing stronger as his face is set toward his great work.

The paragraph presents us with three pictures. The first is that of Ananias and the Lord Jesus. The second is that of Ananias in his dealings with Saul. The third is that of Saul in the synagogues. Let us examine the pictures, and then attempt to gather up the spiritual significance of them.

We are at once arrested by the man Ananias. Nothing is known about him other than that which is revealed in this book of the Acts; and the poverty of the revelation is the richness of the unveiling. He is comparatively obscure. He passes before our vision at this point and never again, save as he is referred to by Paul, and save as his influence can be discovered in the writings and thought of Paul. It is certain that the influence of the first things Ananias said to Saul, and the first things he did for Saul, permeated all the writings of Paul, and had a bearing on all his missionary endeavour. When this man Saul was to be dealt with, and his face set toward the line of his life-work, and when he was to be brought into the reception of all those spiritual forces which were necessary thereto, the instrument employed by God was an obscure man.

We spoil the picture of Ananias which the Spirit has given us, when we add to it the daubing of legends. Ananias is named as a disciple, and nothing more. He held no official position. He was not an apostle. We have already seen how independent the Holy Spirit was, and is, of apostles. He sent the deacon Philip to Samaria.

We now see that He is not even dependent upon deacons, a most salutary lesson, even for the present age. He employed a disciple, neither an apostle, nor a deacon, and made him the instrument through whom the fullness of spiritual blessing came to the man who was to be the pioneer missionary; not only to bring individual men in Asian cities to Christ, but in capturing Hellenism and bringing it to the rebirth, through his profound and Spirit-inspired ministry.

Another thing we must not omit here, although it is found in Paul’s first record of his conversion in chapter twenty-two. In making his defence he referred to this man thus: “One Ananias, a devout man according to the law.” Now this was not a description of his Christian character, but of his Hebrew character. Paul was the last man to describe a Christian as a devout man according to the law. He was “a devout man according to the law, well reported of by all the Jews that dwelt there.” This meant that Ananias was not a Hellenist, but a Hebrew. Saul, who by religious education was preeminently a Hebrew, but who by all the influences of childhood was a Hellenist, was now to be sent to the Greek cities; and the man sent to lead him into fullness of life was a Hebrew, having the Hebrew ideal as the master ideal of his Christianity.

Jesus spoke in a vision to this man Ananias, calling him by name. His response was quick and immediate, “Behold, I am here, Lord.” Jesus told him what He would have him do, listened patiently to his protest, and urged him to obedience.

This story impresses us with the naturalness of the supernatural to those early Christians. Luke writes it without any defence, does not for a single moment think it necessary to explain, or to account for it. No surprise is expressed that the voice of the Lord was actually heard by this man, that there was direct and immediate communication between them. Jesus was alive from the 4ead, and Ananias was not surprised when he heard Him speak. Moreover Ananias did not get ready to reply, he was ready. It is a glorious picture of wonderfully tender, direct, and immediate familiarity between Christ and His own.

Jesus speaking to Ananias referred to “Saul, a man of Tarsus.” Tarsus was the centre of Hellenistic education, and to name it to such a man was to suggest that against which the whole of his philosophy was at war. The objection of Ananias was a perfectly natural one. Saul’s reputation had preceded him. The purpose of Saul’s mission to Damascus was known. Ananias said, “I have heard from many of this man, how much evil he did to Thy saints at Jerusalem; and here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call upon Thy name.” It is interesting to notice in passing that the word saints has only been used once before in the New Testament. It is found in the Gospel of Matthew, but there it is applied to men of the old economy, as it speaks of the saints who came out of their graves.

It had never been applied to Christians until now. It is peculiarly a Pauline word. I think he learned it from Ananias. It is followed by a definition of saints, “All that call upon Thy name.” The Corinthian letter,-a letter peculiarly written for the sake of Christians living in the midst of Hellenist Judaism,-commenced, “Paul, called an apostle. . . unto the Church of God which is at Corinth . . . called saints, with all that call upon the name” The similarity is at least significant.

To Ananias the Lord gave the secret of His own heart about Saul in the words: “He is a chosen vessel unto Me, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings, and the children of Israel.” So Ananias was sent.

The next picture is that of Ananias and Saul. Saul spent three days in the “street which is called Straight.” Visitors to Damascus know the street. It is still there, and constitutes the main highway. Along that street he passed, led blind to the house of one Judas, which now lies below the rubbish. That street in Damascus stretched from the western to the eastern gate. In the days of Saul it was very beautiful, typical in every way of that Greek movement to which we have made so many references; a great highway through the city of Damascus, the principal highway, divided by Corinthian columns into three avenues, along the centre one of which the footmen walked, while along that on one side all the traffic proceeded to the western gate, and along the other moved the traffic to the eastern gate.

There, in one of the principal residences, as befitted the reception of the representative of the high priest in Jerusalem, Saul of Tarsus was received; and there in his blindness he spent three days. The attempt to identify the Judas of that house with a Judas of the New Testament is utterly unwarranted. The Judas who entertained Saul entertained him as the ambassador of the high priest, and was full of amazement at the strange thing that had happened to him in those days.

To that house, befitting the reception of the representative of the high priest in Jerusalem, Ananias made his way. When he arrived he laid his hands upon him, and said, “Saul, brother.” He thus immediately recognized the new relationship. Then, proceeding he referred to “the Lord.” That was the word which Saul had used on the way to Damascus, when he said, “Who art Thou, Lord?” The answer given to him was: “I am Jesus Whom thou persecutest.” Now Ananias said: “The Lord, even Jesus, Who appeared unto thee in the way which thou earnest, hath sent me, that thou mayest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” That message was delivered, while the hands of Ananias lay upon Saul.

Then, “Straightway there fell from his eyes as it were scales, and he received his sight.” We are certainly warranted in believing that while only the falling of the scales is mentioned, the full experience came to him, to which Ananias had referred; he received his sight, and the fullness of the Holy Spirit. Carefully observe that these were not the hands of an apostle, not the hands of a deacon, but the hands of a disciple. Christ sent a disciple, he laid his hands upon this chosen vessel who was to bear Christ’s name before kings and Gentiles. In simple address, with nothing in it that was official, with all brotherliness, and in simple obedience he put his hands upon him, and said to him, “Saul, brother, the Lord, even Jesus . . . hath sent me that thou mayest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit”; and immediately he received the fullness of the Spirit.

From subsequent stories we learn that Ananias commanded him to be baptized, and to wash away his sins after he had received the fullness of the Spirit. This of course was the baptism of water, and was the sign of a break with the past, and in all external things, a falling into line with the spiritual change that had been wrought in him. The baptism of the Spirit in this case, was followed by the baptism which was for outward confession.

The last picture is that of Saul in the synagogues. But between the picture of Saul and Ananias and this one, at least two years had elapsed, during which Saul had been in Arabia. This we learn from his letter to the Galatians. From that period of solemn solitude under the shadow of Sinai he returned to Damascus. He had started forth from Jerusalem to reach these synagogues as the persecutor; he now came as the preacher. He started for them in order to put an end to the Nazarene heresy; he reached them as the great apostle of the Way of Life through the Nazarene. “Straightway in the synagogues he proclaimed Jesus,” and mark carefully what follows, he preached that Jesus “is the Son of God.” That was a new departure, an enlargement of the evangel.

It is interesting to discover when we turn to the writings of the apostles, that the phrase “the Son of God” is peculiarly that of Paul and of John. Preeminently it is that of John, for in his brief epistles in which there are seven chapters, the phrase is found twenty-three times. In all of Paul’s writings, including the Hebrews for the sake of this argument, it occurs twenty-nine times. Peter was the first to use it at Csesarea Philippi, but it is only found once in his letters. It is the full statement of the mystery of the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ, and straightway this man commenced to preach that. What a wonderful contrast between this proclamation of Saul in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God, and the intention with which he had come there!

He started, a sincere man, to persecute those who differed from him. He stood in the synagogues, a sincere man, but with no thought of persecuting those who differed from him now. He would preach to them, persuade them, argue with them, but there was no persecution.

As we review the whole paragraph, what are its supreme spiritual values? First, its revelation of the living Christ dealing immediately with His own, accomplishing His purposes, through His own, enlarging His operations in the world by joining others to Himself. The living Lord, the risen Lord, is seen carrying on His own work; in a vision appearing to Ananias; in a vision appearing to Saul; and so bringing them together. The living Christ was at work. Oh for a recovery of this lost sense! How often we seem to put Him at a distance.

We pray to Him as though we had to travel leagues to find Him. We treat Him as though from some high altitude He had committed the work to us, and was unmindful of it, save as we persuaded Him to look at it. The picture here is that of the overruling and living Person, knowing the right man for the right place, and the right message for the right man.

And once again we have an illustration of the truth of the words Jesus uttered: “the Spirit bloweth where He will.” We cannot compel this Spirit into any particular line of action. No apostle, no deacon, but a disciple, laid hands upon this man, and the fullness of the Spirit was received.

Observe also the first thing Paul did after receiving the fullness of the Spirit. “He took food.” He fasted until he received the Spirit, but the first thing he did after receiving the Spirit was to eat a meal. Do not let us imagine that we demonstrate the fact that we are full of the Spirit when we trifle with our physical life. He ate his meal, and then in the strength of the fullness of the Spirit and a meal, he left for Arabia. That is the whole philosophy of common-sense Christianity.

Acts 9:23-30 We now come to the third, and last section, in the account of the apprehension of Saul of Tarsus, in which there are four stages. The first is covered by the words, “When many days were fulfilled.” During those days, Saul passed into Arabia and tarried there probably for two years. The second is that of his return to Damascus. The third is that of his return to Jerusalem. The fourth is that of his return to Tarsus.

At once the supreme interest of the story becomes manifest. At the commencement of the chapter we saw Saul leaving Jerusalem for Damascus, and read of the happening by the way. We looked at him in those hours of darkness, when all external things being excluded by the beneficence of his blindness, his thoughts were inevitably turned to his inner and deeper life. We saw him receiving the fullness of the Holy Spirit in that hour of the coming of Ananias.

We shall now attempt to see him in that period over which a veil is drawn to a very large extent; the period of the sojourn in Arabia. Then we shall watch him moving back over the pathway; first to Damascus; then to Jerusalem, from which he had started as the officially appointed prosecutor of such as named the name of Jesus; and so back to Tarsus, to the home of his boyhood. We see nothing more of him, until, because of the new movement in Antioch, Barnabas went down to Tarsus, and found him. Between the apprehension on the Damascus road and his return to Jerusalem three years elapsed. “He was certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus (Acts 9:19).” “And when many days were fulfilled (Acts 9:23).”

What happened within the compass of the “many days “with which this paragraph opens? The answer is to be found in the Galatian letter, chapter one, verse seventeen, “Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them that were apostles before me; but I went away into Arabia; and again I returned unto Damascus.” Within the compass of that indefinite phrase “many days” Saul went into Arabia. There are chronological uncertainties here. Some think the visit to Arabia was one of brief duration, and that he returned almost immediately to spend the greater part of the three years in Damascus. That may be so. A careful reading of the story leads me to the belief that the greater part of that time was spent in Arabia, in quietness, in seclusion.

This man, arrested for special work, for further preparation passed almost immediately after the arrest, and the filling with the Spirit, into the lonely, splendid region of Arabia. What associations the place must have had for Saul! Under the shadow of Sinai the great lawgiver of the people to whom he also belonged, had spent forty years of preparation for service. In the same country, majestic by reason of its rugged splendour and lonely grandeur, he had received the law. Moreover it was from that same district that the next outstanding figure in the history of the people, Elijah the prophet, had suddenly appeared. These two, Moses and Elijah, the great lawgiver, and the great reformer, had spoken upon the mount with Jesus of His exodus; and these men had received the training of the desert for their ministry among the multitudes.

Some ancient expositors believe that Saul went to Arabia and evangelized, that he was busy among the scattered and wild peoples inhabiting the district. All that is quite uncertain. I believe that F. W. H. Myers came nearer to the truth about that period when he wrote, as though they were the words of Paul himself,

“How have I seen in Araby, Orion, Seen without seeing, till he set again, Known the night noise and thunder of the lion, Silence and sounds of the prodigious plain! How have I knelt with arms of my aspiring Lifted all night in irresponsive air. Dazed and amazed with overmuch desiring, Blank with the utter agony of prayer!” Paul makes two references to this period. Both are in Galatians; the first in Galatians 1:17, and the other in Galatians 4:25. In writing to the Galatian Christians he states that he “went away into Arabia”; and later, in the course of the argument there is another incidental reference, merely geographical, “Now this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia.” Ambiguous as the references seem to be, there is much light in them. It should be remembered that this Galatian letter is one which reveals the conflict between Jerusalem and Antioch; and Paul’s contempt for the officialism which had manifested itself in the college of the apostles is patent throughout. One touch shows how he felt. Writing of those whom he had met in Jerusalem, in a parenthesis he described them as “they who were reputed to be pillars.” Throughout the letter he was defending his apostleship, and his gospel, against the influence of Judaizing teachers.

With that background in mind, notice where these references to Arabia occur. He first declared to those to whom he wrote, that he did not receive his apostleship from men, that his appointment to apostleship was not mediated, but immediate. He declared moreover that he did not receive his gospel from men, but directly from the Lord Christ. In order to emphasize this fact he gave the history of his missionary days, introducing it with the word that showed how he recognized the Divine government:

“When it was the good pleasure of God, Who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me through His grace, to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went away into Arabia.”

The contrast in the paragraph immediately throws light upon the sojourn in Arabia. He did not confer with flesh and blood; he went into Arabia to confer with his Lord. Remembering the Hellenistic atmosphere of his boyhood’s days in Tarsus; the religious convictions created by his Hebrew blood and training; and the strange experience through which he had passed in his apprehension by the One Whom he had thought dead and disgraced, but Whom he had discovered to be alive and glorified; what was more natural than that he should desire a period of reconstruction? The arrest had been an earthquake, and the whole superstructure of past years had tottered and fallen, and lay in ruins about him. He was quite certain that the One Whom he had persecuted was the risen Lord; but he wanted time now to confer with Him alone. We can follow him in imagination back to the desert, to the splendour of its loneliness; and see him entering into conference, into consultation with Christ.

In his letters we find how often he referred to things he had received from Christ. In writing to the Corinthians he said, “I received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you.” That is but a simple illustration, but it is full of light. I believe in that period in Arabia there was close, intimate, personal, definite and clear conference between this man and Christ.

But the second reference, in the fourth chapter, is equally interesting and illuminating. He wrote:

“Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, one by the handmaid, and one by the freewoman.” Then he went back to Arabia, to Sinai, to the place where the law was given, to the place where the great founder of the nation received instructions concerning the ritual of worship. Sinai stood for Hebraism; and he went back to the shadow of that mountain, back into all the lonely splendour of that very area where Moses had received the law directly from God. He went back to put Hebraism in the light of the new revelation. The result was that he looked at Jerusalem, and declared that Jerusalem as he found her, was in bondage. But a little while before, he had left Jerusalem, the appointed prosecutor of a heresy which seemed to threaten Hebraism. Now from Arabia, looking back upon Jerusalem in the light of the revelation that had come to him upon the Damascene road, he saw Hebraism in bondage; but he saw that the Jerusalem above, the mother of us all, is free.

In the argument of this fourth chapter of the Galatian letter we discover the results of the sojourn in Arabia. There, through the illumination of that Spirit which he had received in fullness; and as the result of his conference, not with flesh and blood, but with the living Christ through the Spirit, this man saw the old in the light of the new. In the figures of speech which he employed, and which mean little if we depart from the atmosphere in which he lived, but which meant very much to the men who read them as they came from Paul’s pen, we discover the merging in his consciousness of the two values which had contributed to the making of his life before he met Christ, the freedom of Tarsus, and the bondage of Jerusalem. Under the shadow of Arabia’s mountain, in conference with Christ, in the light of the Holy Spirit, the two things merged. He still saw Jerusalem, as the city of God, the city of government, the city of righteousness, the city of worship; but he saw Jerusalem free, with her gates open to the four points of the compass, with all the nations of the world pouring their riches into her. He saw no longer a restraint that destroys essential humanity, but a redemption that renews.

All the forces that as a Hebrew he had considered wrong, he now saw redeemed, renewed, and incorporated in the great purpose of God; so that presently, when correcting Corinthian disputes, he could say, “All things are yours; whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours; and ye are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.” There in Arabia, in conference with Christ, by the illumination of the Spirit, in the atmosphere in which Hebraism was born, he came to discover that in the two ideals that he had always considered as being opposed to each other, there were elements of truth; so that when he wrote to the Galatians in defence of freedom, it was in defence of a freedom within the law of love for Christ. He learned those things in the quietness of Arabia; he saw the rough and rugged magnificence of Sinai clothed with asphodel and flowers; he saw the stern element of Judaism laughing into the breadth and beauty of Hellenism. Hellenism was cleansed by Christ from its impurities; Hebraism was delivered by Christ from its austerities.

From Arabia he went back to Damascus, where hostility was stirred up by the Jews, aided by the Damascenes. The burden of his preaching there we have already referred to. It brought persecution upon him. In writing his second letter to the Corinthians he distinctly asserts that those who guarded the gates were under the order of the officers of the King. But the disciples, those very men whom he had come to hale to prison, helped him to escape from prison. Those whom he had come determined to put to death, now aided him to escape from death.

These contrasts are very remarkable. Observe the indignity of the method by which he left Damascus. After Arabia, with its magnificence and revelations, the apostle to the Gentiles escaped from Damascus in a basket, let down over the wall. Yet in that very contrast is the glory of this story. He was not delivered by some miracle, or by some whirlwind, although these were possible in the economy of that God Who had borne away into the land of great distances and silences a prophet in a whirlwind of fire; or Who by the Spirit had swiftly transported Philip from the desert. In this story is a revelation of the tender love of these disciples; and of the fact that the man who passes from a period of conference with Christ may have to exercise his work in the most commonplace way, and sometimes find himself in circumstances which lack dignity.

He then went back to Jerusalem. There is also a touch here full of beauty. Arrived there, he sought out the disciples. In the old days he would have been a welcome guest in the houses of the men of light and leading. Now he did not seek them, but the disciples. Their fear of him was perfectly natural.

Three years had passed since his conversion, and they had not seen him. They had however heard the report of him, and were afraid to receive him; until Barnabas found him and introduced him to the little company. Perchance Barnabas had known Saul before this; for he was a Levite and a native of Cyprus, near to the coast of Cilicia, where Saul had been born. Saul was thus introduced to the little company, and became the guest of Peter for fifteen days, not to seek from him any authority, but to confer with him; as he was careful to state in his Galatian letter.

Then he went straight to the assembly of the Hellenistic Jews, and disputed with them. This word disputed only occurs in this book of the Acts in one other place, in chapter six, and verse nine. Stephen disputed with the Hellenized Jews. Saul had listened in all likelihood, had seen the result when the Jews turned upon him, flung him out, and stoned him to death. He had watched Stephen die, himself consenting to his death. Now when he came back to Jerusalem, he went to the same company of Hellenistic Jews, and did the same thing that Stephen had done.

He took up the ministry of the man to whose death he had consented. The ministry of Stephen had been peculiarly an argument against the Sadducean influence of the hour. Saul, the Hebrew, had violated his deepest religious convictions, when he had agreed to the death of Stephen. Now arrested by Christ, he attempted to make amends for past folly and sin, and so sought out the very place where Stephen had argued, and continued the argument as he disputed with them. The result was that he shared that hostility which brought about Stephen’s death, for “they went about to kill him.” Later on in this book we find that Paul tells us something about this, which Luke does not insert at this point. In the twenty-second chapter, when reviewing his story, he says that the Lord appeared to him here in a trance, in an ecstasy, and bade him depart, for He had other work for him to do.

Once more, aided by the disciples, we see him leaving Jerusalem; going back through Csesarea to Tarsus; back to the old scenes after the new vision, back to the old atmosphere in the power of the new life. There we leave him, until Barnabas presently finds him and leads him back to Antioch.

In our study we have attempted to watch the movement as part of the whole of the activity of the Spirit of God through the Church, in those early days of her history. We have seen the apprehension of this man as part of the Lord’s method for that new campaign. Jerusalem had heard the evangel. It had been preached in Judcea and through Samaria. Now there lay waiting for the Gospel, that wider district of Asia, with those Asian cities, and their strange mixture of Jewish synagogues and Hellenistic thinking. For the doing of that work this man was selected by the Holy Spirit.

As we contemplate this story, we see how the Spirit of God selects the right man, when unhindered by the pride, arrogance, and self-satisfaction of men. Here was a man, in whose preparation we can trace Tarsus and Jerusalem; and more, Rome also. He was not only Hebrew and Greek; he was also Roman, with a passion for empire. So the Spirit of God selects for peculiar work those who are peculiarly fitted for it by their first creation.

But that is not all the equipment needed for the special work. He could not do the work that was to be done, because of Tarsus, because of Jerusalem, or because of Roman imperialism. He must first know the risen Lord. That stands forevermore as the first qualification for Christian service, That was the master note in all his preaching and teaching. Secondly he must receive the Spirit’s fullness. Then there must be Arabia, the desert, and quietness.

The peril of much work to-day is that of imagining that any man, immediately he has been converted can break the bread of life, and tell out the deep things of God, and fulfill a great ministry. It may not always be Arabia as a geographical location, but God never uses for the great work of interpreting His Kingdom any man who has not been definitely called and spiritually trained. Reverently to illustrate here from the life of our Lord, for that is always superlative and therefore final; the Lord Jesus Christ preached for about three years, but there was the long preparation of eighteen years preceding that preaching, in the carpenter’s shop. Even when He came to the hour of His ministry, He was halted again for forty days in the wilderness. Saul began to preach in Damascus immediately after his conversion; but because God had some fuller ministry for him, he had to leave Damascus and go into Arabia. There must be the preparation that comes from conference with Christ, and waiting upon Him.

What did this man leave behind him? Both Hebraism and Hellenism. What did he carry over with him into the new life and ministry? His own personality, redeemed and renewed. Henceforth he was neither Hebrew nor Hellenist, but Christian; a man who in fellowship with the character of Christ had discovered the value of Hebraism, and had sloughed off the things therein that were worthless; a man who in fellowship with the risen Christ, had grasped the secret of Hellenism, and flung away the things that were worthless.

So we leave him for the present in Tarsus, presently to see him again upon the high road of his work for God; having seen in this study how wondrously the Spirit of God selects, equips, prepares.

Acts 9:31 This one verse is of great importance, because it marks a new departure in the story as it gathers up suggestively, certain unrecorded facts. The first word necessarily arrests attention, “So the Church throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria had peace, being edified.” That simple word “so,” suggests the statement of result, and the relation of the result to the cause.

The statement of this verse is generally treated as though the result to which Luke desired to draw attention was that of peace, and as though the cause was the conversion of Saul. I believe that the verse includes much more in each case; that the result referred to is far larger than that of peace, indeed, that peace was temporary and incidental. The essential result is, “Being edified.” Peace very soon passed away, and persecution broke out again; but the edification went on and has continued in the Church until this hour. As to the cause, it certainly is not inaccurate to include Christ’s apprehension of Saul of Tarsus therein, but a great deal more must be included. To get the suggestiveness of this introductory word “so” we must turn back in the story, and call to mind ground which we have already traversed. The last statement of this verse is that the Church “was multiplied.” In chapter six at the first verse we read, “Now in these days, when the number of the disciples was multiplying, there arose a murmuring of the Grecian Jews”; and there follows an account of the setting apart of seven men to the office and dignity of the serving of tables in the power and fullness of the Spirit of God.

After that we read that “the Word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem exceedingly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.” The story of Stephen occupies the remainder of chapter six and the whole of chapter seven. At the commencement of chapter eight we read, “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, except the apostles; and devout men buried Stephen, and made great lamentation over him; but Saul laid waste the Church, entering into every house, and dragging men and women committed them to prison.” We are familiar with all the recorded happenings following that statement up to this thirty-first verse (Acts 9:31), “So the Church throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria had peace, being edified.” Much, however, had happened which is not chronicled. A much wider work was going on than is recorded in this book. Certain outstanding and vital incidents in connection with the movements have been noted; the persecution and scattering of the disciples, and its use by the Holy Spirit. Our attention has been focused upon the apprehension of Saul of Tarsus. But as we have said, much more had been going on; and in this phrase, suggestively and remarkably, Luke draws attention to the much more.

Here we read of “The Church throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria.” That is an entirely new conception, not found in the book of Acts before. This is the first occasion on which the word “Church” is used in that spacious sense. When persecution broke out, the Church at Jerusalem was almost wasted; there, as it seemed, most havoc was wrought; and the disciples were scattered everywhere. We saw the persecution scattering them, and the evangelization of the whole region round about which resulted from the scattering. We noticed carefully the apprehension of one man, the central figure Saul; and now as the result of the persecution which scattered, and as the result of the evangelization that followed, as the result of the arrest of one man who was leading the opposition and his apprehension by Jesus Christ; “The Church throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria had peace, being edified.” The “so” with which the verse opens encompasses the whole movement.

From this verse to the end of the twelfth chapter, Peter again becomes the central figure. Here at the parting of the ways between that vital story of the apprehension of Saul, and the interesting account of Peter’s work, we have a picture of the Church such as has not appeared before. The statement of Luke concerning the Church is a most careful one.

In examining this verse we must bear in mind its completeness as a paragraph. It stands alone in the record, rightly placed. Let us, moreover, carefully notice the divisions of this paragraph. The Text of Westcott and Hort separates it carefully from the following verse; and its punctuation divides it into two parts, by placing a comma after the word “edified.” The punctuation of the Revised Version follows this idea, though with English fullness. Therefore I find that this text has two distinct parts; first, “The Church throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria had peace, being edified”; and secondly, “and, walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, was multiplied.” There are then, two phases of revelation; first of the Church in itself; and secondly, of the Church in its service.

Let us first take time to consider the essential meaning of the word “Church.” The word ecclesla literally means called out. The picture of the Church suggested by the word is that of a company of those who are separated from the nation, and from the race, an entirely new company.

The use of the word is interesting. In the seventh chapter of this book it is used in a way, to notice which, will help us: “This is he that was in the church in the wilderness.” That might be translated quite accurately, “the assembly in the wilderness.” The phrase has reference to the ancient people of God; and in that verse we discover the Hebrew use of the word. When Jesus first made use of it at Csesarea Philippi, saying to Peter, “Upon this rock I will build My Church,” He used a not uncommon word. Those who heard it were arrested not by the use of the word ecclesia, but by the authoritative and possessive pronoun, “My ecclesia,” by the use of which He indicated something with which they were familiar, and something with which they were entirely unfamiliar. The Hebrews understood the word ecclesia as referring to the peculiar people, the chosen nation, the Theocracy, the Divinely-governed people.

But the word had also a Greek meaning, and in this book of the Acts of the Apostles it is used in the Greek sense in the nineteenth chapter and the thirty-second verse (Acts 19:32): “Some therefore cried one thing, and some another: for the assembly was in confusion.” There the reference was to the special gathering of the craftsmen. Then there is the account of the uproar in Ephesus, and twice the assembly is mentioned, where the reference is to the Civic Authority. What then were the peculiarities of the Greek ecclesia? It was composed entirely of free men, no slave was allowed to be a member of the Greek ecclesia; and its function was that of government.

Two ideas are therefore suggested by the word; the Hebrew idea which was that of a God-governed people; and the Greek idea, which was that of a governing community. When Jesus said at Csesarea Philippi “My ecclesia,” He was doubtless perfectly familiar with the two ideas, and He included them both. The word appears upon the pages of this book of the Acts, and refers to the company of those who are following the name of Jesus; and are first, the God-governed people; and secondly, the governing people; the people who hold the keys, not of themselves, the Church, but of the Kingdom; the moral interpreters, those who are to state the standards of life, and who are to insist upon the ethical ideas of Jesus.

Now observe the enlarged conception at this point. The word “Church” had occurred only two or three times previously. In the second chapter it is said, “The Lord added to them,” the Authorized Version renders it “The Lord added to the Church.” The real meaning is that He added to Himself, and so to the Church. Then a little further on, in the fifth chapter we read, “Great fear came upon the whole Church.” In the eighth chapter, again, “There arose on that day a great persecution against the Church. . . . Saul laid waste the Church.” These occasions are grouped in order to note the fact that up to this point every reference to the Church had been to the Church at Jerusalem. But now it is employed with a wider outlook: “The Church throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria.” In the Authorized Version the passage reads “the Churches throughout.” I have no hesitation in saying that the change is not only necessary, but vital to an understanding of this passage.

Later on, there will be recognition of local centres; but here a greater, grander idea than that breaks upon the vision. The preposition is significant, not the church of, but “the Church throughout.” Whenever we lay emphasis upon the preposition of, we wrong the catholic ideal.

The Church of Scotland, the Church of England. There is really no such Church. There is the Church throughout Scotland, England, Ireland, the World! A great spiritual vision breaks upon the sight at this point, of a united Church. Mark the wonderful comprehensiveness of this; Judaea, Galilee, and Samaria were included; and the movement was about to spread. Go back to the Gospel history, and remember how the men of Judaea held in contempt the men of Galilee, as they called it, Galilee of the Gentiles.

Between Judaea and Samaria there was perpetual feud; “The Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.” Yet here we read “the Church throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria”; not one for Judaea, one for Galilee, and one for Samaria, continuing race prejudice, perpetuating bitterness, establishing local geographical centres. This great movement was sweeping all these things away forever.

One ecclesia called out from Judaea, Galilee, Samaria; brought from prejudice, pride, and geographical limitation, into the unity of the Spirit. Here then for the first time there appears upon the page of the Acts of the Apostles, the spacious catholic conception of the Christian Church.

Then let us notice the edification of that Church. I am not careful to dwell upon the “peace,” for, as I have said, that was transitory; the essential thing is “being edified.” This suggests the incompleteness of the Church. The man who wrote that word had no idea that the Church was complete! It was being built. The word also indicates progress; he saw the work going forward. Moreover it looks to finality; that which is building will yet be completed.

Luke, as he wrote, saw not only the spiritual conception of the Church, but its invincibility, the fact that nothing can destroy it. Through opposition and persecution he saw it growing up into the holy Assembly of the Lord; and he saw growing into that whole Assembly the several buildings, the individual churches. Yet he lost sight of the individuality of the local churches, in view of the supreme glory of that ultimate Church which is to be the very Assembly of the living God.

Thus these people are seen passing away from the temple at a centre, and becoming themselves the temple wherever they are. The larger spiritual ideal is emerging, and being realized, the ideal expressed by Christ Himself to one individual,-not a Hebrew, not even a Galilean, but a Samaritan, and more wonderful still, a Samaritan woman, and still more remarkable, a Samaritan woman who was a sinner;-“The hour cometh, when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, shall ye worship the Father . . . the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth.” That is the catholic Church, independent of locality, sweeping over all geographical boundaries.

Where are we to-day? The Church is still being built. If only we could remember, that it is as we discover the simplicities, that we reach the sublimities, we should cease our criticism of parts of the Church. No man has seen the Church; it is not built, it is being built, but it is not completed. Half the things about which we quarrel to-day are scaffolding, rather than essential building.

We turn now to a brief examination of the second part of the verse: “And walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, was multiplied.” That word “walking” has certainly no reference here merely to the habits of life; it is a far profounder word. In Rotherham’s translation it is rendered “the Church . . . going on its way in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit.” The particular word here translated “walking,” is one that always suggests purpose as opposed to aimlessness. There is another Greek word found in the New Testament which is not necessarily that of purpose or finality, and from that word we have derived our word “peripatetic,” which may describe quite an aimless walking around. Not so this word. This is the word that Jesus made use of in the great commission recorded by Matthew, “Go ye therefore and disciple the nations.” He used the same word in the commission as Mark records it, “Go ye into all the cosmos.” At this point Luke takes up that word, a word full of these sacred associations. He was not now describing the habits of individual members of the Church, but the service of the whole Church, going on its way.

The Lord’s intention for His Church, is that it should be an ambassage, a corporation of living souls, sent out upon the King’s business. Luke sees the Church fulfilling this function, going on its way.

The twofold condition of that going is stated. First, “Going in the fear of the Lord.” The Lord had thus commissioned His Church: “Go ye therefore, and disciple the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you”; and again: “Go ye into all the cosmos, and preach the gospel to the whole creation.” The Lordship of Christ to those early disciples was twofold in its application: He was the Lord of life, the authoritative and final one; and He was the greatest of all servants, Himself leading those who serve in places of suffering and toil and travail. Here then we see the Church; a spiritual Body, including all who believe within its boundaries; going on its way in the fear of the Lord. This meant that its life was yielded to His dominion, and itself was forevermore proclaiming His authority, and insisting upon it. It meant also that its life was at the disposal of His suffering ones; as it entered into the cosmos, and placed itself against the wounds and weariness of humanity, touching the degradation of life everywhere, so as to heal it. That is to “go in the fear of the Lord.”

But all this was done “In the comfort of the Holy Spirit.” The word “comfort” is palpably inadequate. The Holy Spirit was spoken of by our Lord as the Paraclete, the One called to the side of His people when He was about to leave them. He came first for comfort, to disannul orphanage, to fill the gap, to console those who were left behind; but He came to be an Exhorter, as well as Comforter, the Advocate Who should plead the cause of the absent Lord. The Greek word here covers the two values, and we may render it walking in the comforting advocacy of the Holy Spirit. In the ministry of the Holy Spirit the Church went forth to work. That ministry was that of making the Lord Himself real to the consciousness of those who went, for witness, for preaching, for insistence upon the Lordship of Christ; for proclamation of His authority over all life, and for revelation of the power of His Saviourhood.

In view of all this we are not surprised to read the last phrase, brief though it is, that the Church “was multiplied.” The idea is not merely that of the numbering of units; it is that of fullness; the Church was made to abound. The Church went forth in abounding power, itself growing and multiplying because of the two facts of its life: the master-principle of the Lordship of Jesus, and the power and comfort of the Holy Spirit.

As we look back to this ancient picture, we earnestly desire new realization in the day in which we live. There are two things we gather from our examination of this verse. First, the spiritual conception of the Church. This is suggested by the phrase “the Church throughout.” By that phrase all geographical boundaries are ignored, all race prejudices are destroyed, all ancient feuds are ended, all religious centres are abolished. Nineteen centuries have gone, and we still have our geographical boundaries, and name our Churches according to them; race prejudices still divide the Church; ancient feuds are still maintained within the Church; and we still go up to some special centre to worship. Let us more carefully contemplate the great ideal. In proportion as our eyes behold it and our hearts desire it, and we in individual life conform to it; we shall hasten the perfecting of the Church, and the accomplishment of the will of God.

It is impossible to read this verse without being reminded of the missionary vocation of the Church. Here the Church is seen going on its way, going in the way the Lord commanded it, going to the nations to disciple them, going into the cosmos to suffer in order to save; and going on its way in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit. These two things are closely united. The first part of the, verse ends “being edified”; the second part ends “was multiplied.” The underlying thought is exactly the same. Consequently if the Church is to be missionary, she must be spiritual; and if the Church is to be spiritual, she must be missionary.

Acts 9:32-43 This paragraph constitutes a link between the story of Saul and that of Cornelius. It is complete in itself, and yet is closely related to that which has preceded it, and that which is to follow.

As to its relation to the preceding one, we remember that Saul was at Tarsus; and that, as the introductory declaration of this paragraph reveals, Peter was going throughout all parts. Saul is now left for a little while at Tarsus, and we have no record of his doings; but are brought back again from this point, and on to the end of the twelfth chapter, to Peter.

This paragraph is related to that which follows in that the last word of this chapter declares that Peter “abode many days in Joppa with one Simon, a tanner”; and immediately following is the account of Cornelius. Peter came to Joppa, which was to be to him a place of new and revolutionary vision.

The paragraph to be considered is of the nature of a page of illustrations. Peter is seen travelling everywhere, exercising his ministry. Certain facts are recorded; those of the healing of AEneas, and the raising of Dorcas; and finally and most significantly, that of Peter lodging in the house of a tanner. These pictures gather up much that has gone before, and illuminate it. As we ponder the pictures there are three things impressed upon the mind, with which we may deal in an ascending order; first, the communion of the saints; secondly, the operations of the Spirit; and thirdly, the victories of the Lord. Beginning on the lowest level, that which is simplest and most apparent; let us see what this paragraph reveals of the communion of saints; then looking behind that manifestation, what it reveals of the operations of the Spirit; and finally that which is the supreme matter, what it reveals of the victories of the Lord.

First then as to the communion of the saints. Reading this story carefully, we are conscious of the influence of a man who is not named. It is a simple and natural question to ask, Whence came there to be saints at Lydda? Let us turn back to chapter eight, to the story of the Ethiopian Eunuch, and all that followed. The last verse reads, “Philip was found at Azotus; and passing through, he preached the gospel to all the cities, till he came to Caesarea.” If we trace Philip’s journey from Azotus to Caesarea on a map, we shall find that the direct road went through Lydda. I think it is a fair conclusion that Lydda was one of the cities where Philip preached.

He had preached in Samaria and a Church had been formed. He had preached to the Ethiopian Eunuch, and had won him for Christ. He had been borne by the Spirit to Azotus, and then started preaching through the cities. It is probable that his preaching in Lydda had been the means of gathering together a number of those who believed on Christ. Here then were the saints at Lydda, as I believe, the result of Philip’s preaching.

Then at Joppa lived Dorcas, whose ministry was that of deft fingers, inspired by a full heart. It was a great ministry. When presently Peter came into that chamber, and the widows about him were lamenting, and handling the garments she had made, what a beautiful revelation we have of the woman! She gave herself to making garments for the poor. It is of course true that her work sprang out of the mastery of the Christ-love, for that is always anxious to clothe the naked. I think however that here are results of Philip’s ministry.

When the dispute arose in Jerusalem in the early days concerning the distribution of alms, the Hellenist widows complained that they were being neglected, and seven deacons were elected, men full of the Holy Spirit and full of wisdom, to set this matter in order, Philip was the second man chosen. When he passed through the cities, I believe he not only preached the Gospel, so that men might be saved, but he showed the lines and directions along which the new Christian life should be used for the blessing of others. I think there is proof of Philip’s ministry in the saints at Lydda, and in Dorcas and her beneficent operations in Joppa. Peter now passed over the ground, and entered into the result of Philip’s ministry. This was part of the communion of saints. Wherever Peter went, he entered into the labours of another.

Such ministry as Peter exercised in Samaria would have been utterly out of place had it not been for the preparatory ministry of Philip. There was no antagonism between the evangelist and the apostle; and wherever it is found to-day it is because either the evangelist or the apostle is out of harmony with the Lord. There was communion of ministry here.

At Joppa we have this wonderful picture of Dorcas. Luke says concerning her that she " was full of good works and almsdeeds.” One would have thought that the story was complete there; but I think that there was Divine purpose in the addition of three small words “which she did.” So many people think of good works and almsdeeds, and dream of them; but she did them. She not only pitied the poor when the sharp wind blew; she ministered with deft fingers to their need. This again is a picture of the communion of saints. These two phases are most suggestive; the communion of saints in the ministries of the Church, that of the evangelist and that of the apostle; that of the proclamation of the first things of salvation, and that of the man who instructs and edifies; that is the communion of ministry. Then we see that little homely group of women, around one who is known forevermore as the one who made coats and garments for the poor.

The communion in each case is the same. The master-principle underlying the comradeship between evangelist and apostle is the same as that which underlies the companionship that exists between the woman of heart and leisure and ability, who makes garments, and the widows who in poverty and need, wear them.

The communion of saints always expresses itself in service. Wherever the apostle urges the saints to be true to the communion, fellowship, the expression of communion must be in service of some kind. The Church does not express its communion when it gathers together in assembly, and asserts it. The Church expresses its communion when in all types and kinds of its manifold ministry, it cooperates and ministers in helpfulness and love.

Then we come to the deeper and underlying matter, of which all that we have seen is but the fruit. Mark the operations of the Spirit as revealed here. The twelfth chapter of 1 Corinthians is an exposition of this paragraph. Take these little pictures of the condition of things in the early days, and then read that great, and magnificent statement of truth concerning the Church’s relation to its Head, and its inter-relationship, and we can account for all we find in these pictures. Or we may account for the clear vision of that statement in the Corinthian letter by the fact that it was written by a man who had entered into this great life of the communion of saints.

First of all there are evidences of the Spirit’s operation in the guidance of the apostle, as he went “throughout all parts”; to the saints at Lydda, to Joppa by the invitation of two men who represented the assembly in trouble because Dorcas was dead; then tarrying in the house of Simon the tanner. Nothing is stated about the activity of the Spirit. This man is travelling throughout all parts, no longer because of persecution, for the Church at this time had peace. Persecution will attack it again presently. The apostles tarried at Jerusalem until they were driven out by persecution; but the period of persecution had passed for the moment. Peter went through Lydda, incidentally, from the human standpoint.

He went to Joppa because two men invited him. He went to lodge with Simon the tanner. This is not the story of haphazard journeying. The Spirit was guiding this man throughout all parts. Whence the liberty, the freedom, the ability to pass from place to place? “Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty.” All the bondage that results from separation, division, as between Christian people, is due to the absence of, or disobedience to, the guidance of the Spirit of God. The operation of the Spirit is plainly manifest, and it becomes the more beautiful when it is seen that the Spirit was guiding the apostle through the simplest human methods.

Two men called him from Joppa, and he went, and entering into the house of Simon the tanner, he lodged there.

The working of the Spirit is manifested in the exercise of gifts; the gift of miracles, the healing of AEneas, a man outside the Church; the raising of Dorcas, a disciple inside the Church. The gift of miracles is not the only gift of the Spirit to be found there. At the conclusion of the Corinthian chapter when the apostle was dealing with the subject of gifts, enumerating them, among other things he referred to “helps.” That gift is illustrated in the case of Dorcas. That is the meaning of helps; to be quite simple and literal it means gifts of relief. When Dorcas was using her deft fingers to make garments, she was doing it in the power of that gift which the Holy Spirit had bestowed; just as surely as Peter raised Dorcas, and healed AEneas, as the result of gifts bestowed by the Spirit. Much of the force of Christian testimony is lost in the world because we forget that such a gift as this is also of the Holy Spirit.

In that Corinthian chapter the apostle gives two lists of the gifts of the Spirit, in the first part one and in the second part another; from the second some of those in the first list are absent, and in the first list some that are in the second are not named. If we refer to other lists in the New Testament of the gifts of the Spirit we shall find that no two are the same.

All of which is of profound significance. What are the gifts of the Spirit? No man can answer. The Church to-day has gifts that she had not in the apostolic age. She had gifts in the apostolic age that she has not now. There are two master statements in the Corinthian letter; the Spirit “dividing to each one severally as He will”; and “God set the members each one of them in the body, even as it pleased Him.” We have no business to be wasting time wondering why we have not the gifts that the early Church possessed. He giveth as He will. If He withdraw the gift of healing which Peter had, I have nothing to do with it, but to be thankful that He still bestows the gift of helps.

If we are tempted to think they are so different; that the one is so small, and the other so great, we are entirely wrong. While men are wondering and hankering after something that is more spectacular, more likely to make them notorious, they neglect the gifts of the Spirit which will make them helpful, and they are hindering the work of God. He gives as He will. If He does not to-day bestow certain gifts, He is always bestowing some. Let us take the gifts He gives, and use them, and not sigh for other gifts that are withheld in wisdom. This is the age of the Spirit.

We are to act, not in imitation of the methods of the apostolic age, but in obedience to the present work and power of the Holy Spirit. When the Spirit of infinite wisdom, giving as it pleases Him, bestows a gift upon a man, the simplest of them all according to the language of human, incompetent thinking; he makes his contribution toward the accomplishment of God’s purpose in the world by using that gift, rather than by sitting down and sighing for the possession of some gift not bestowed.

It may be argued that the apostle finished that very chapter in Corinthians by saying “Desire earnestly the greater gifts,” but if we read on, he also wrote, “And a most excellent way show I unto you,” which was the way of love. Passing through the thirteenth chapter, and on into the fourteenth, we find that he distinctly announced his conviction that the gift of tongues is infinitely inferior to some of the simpler gifts which men have held to be of less value and of less importance. Let us attempt to free ourselves from these false divisions, as between great and small service, important and minor work. The member of the great Church of Christ who out of the welling love, of her heart for the poor and needy, sits in a Dorcas meeting making garments for the poor, is rendering service as sacred as that of the man who ministers to her in holy things. Let us have done with this false idea in the Church that the man who is notorious is great. The peril of life is that of being conspicuous.

We are perpetually in danger of losing the very freshness of the Spirit, because of what men call great opportunities. Garments made by Christian women, members of the perpetual Dorcas Guild, contribute to the victories of the Christ, and the enterprises of the catholicity of the Church, quite as surely as the sermon and argument in defence of the Evangel.

Let us take one other glance over the whole story, at that supreme matter, the victories of the Lord. It would be quite possible to imagine as the story is read, that we were back again in the Gospels. There is first the story o the healing of the body. How careful the apostle was in speaking to AEneas to make clear what happened! “ Jesus Christ healeth thee: arise, and make thy bed.”

We hear again the very echo of the voice of Jesus. The appeal was to the will: Arise. The command was laid upon him to do in his healing what he could not apart from the healing, “Arise, and make thy bed.” There was no condition of faith on the part of the man who was healed. It was a gift of healing bestowed without condition, except that he would rise. He was only asked to exercise his will, which was to express itself in walking. We go back again to the first verse of the book of the Acts (Acts 1:1), “The former treatise I made, O Theophilus, concerning all that Jesus began to do and to teach.” He said to a man, “Arise, take up thy bed and walk.” He was still doing it through a member of His body, Peter the apostle.

Then we come to the raising of the dead. Once again the picture is so like what Jesus did, that some of the ancient commentators have suggested that Peter did actually make use of the very words of Christ, for there is but a letter different. Jesus said, “Talitha cumi.” Peter said, “Tabitha cumi.”

The question may be asked, How is it that men do not still raise the dead? Think again how rarely Christ raised the dead. It is recorded that He only did so on three occasions. What was the immediate purpose in His raising of the dead? In every case, the raising of the little damsel, the young man of Nain, and Lazarus, there is one answer. He raised them for the comfort of those that mourned.

But every one He brought back, came back to suffering. The little damsel came back out of peace into turmoil; the young man came back out of eternal youth, to grow old; Lazarus came back out of infinite peace to conflict. Thank God He did not raise more; and we will not ask for our dear ones back. Notice what Peter did with Dorcas. He gave her back to the saints and widows. It is the same Lord of life on this side Pentecost as on the other; not Peter, not an apostle, but the same Christ.

Why does He not heal so now? Why does He not raise the dead so now? The question can only be answered by Himself. I decline to place any blame for the withholding of this gift upon the Church. I recognize that He is doing His work in other ways, and so my heart rests there.

The last wonder of all in the victory of the Lord is not that of healing the sick, or raising the dead; but the spiritual emancipation of a disciple. Peter went and lodged with one Simon, a tanner. We know the abhorrence the Jew felt for a tanner, and the fact that the tanner was not allowed to follow his calling save at a set, legally denned distance from the city’s limits. But Peter went in to lodge with one Simon, a tanner. That is the victory of Jesus over prejudice. We go back again to a story on the other side of Pentecost, and see the Lord going in to lodge with the very kind of man that the Jew hated, the publican, Zacchseus; as the Pharisees said in their technical cleanness, which was of the essence of pollution: “He is gone in to lodge with a man that is a sinner.” Peter went in to lodge with one Simon, a tanner. It was a movement toward the larger vision, which was immediately to follow.

So we leave the page of pictures, attempting to gather up the great conclusion. The communion of saints is created by the operation of the Spirit, and issues in the victories of the Lord. The operations of the Spirit are for the victories of the Lord through the communion of the saints. Once again the victories of the Lord follow the communion of saints by the operations of the Spirit.

A threefold responsibility is suggested; that we cultivate the communion of the saints; that we do it by submission to the indwelling Spirit; and that the reason shall forever be, our desire to crown Him Lord of all.