The Ethiopian Eunuch and the Body of Christ

Luke has Philip joining an Ethiopian on a road near Gaza, south of Jerusalem. The man was returning from worshiping at Jerusalem, probably after one of its Holy Day seasons, which, in this case, would probably be Passover of 35 CE. (accounting for a six-month ministry for Philip in Samaria).

 

Mark and the Other Synoptics

What makes a “Q” Gospel necessary? All scholars admit that there is absolutely no hard evidence for Q. Some scholars are uncomfortable with Q and actually prefer replacing it with a “Mark First” position. Nevertheless, if an oral tradition is presumed, there is absolutely no reason not to allow any one of the Gospel narratives to be the first written account. A known “oral” tradition makes “Mark First” unnecessary. It would also make Q unnecessary. Would it not?

 

Philip and the Ethiopian Eunuch

The Angel of the Lord appeared to Philip in the Samaritan village as he was ending his ministry there and told him to go south toward Gaza (Acts 8:26). The Apostles had returned to Jerusalem, but Philip was a hunted man, perhaps not by name but because of his faith and how he interpreted that faith. He was more liberal in his faith than the Apostles, who had adopted a more conservative stance of preaching the Gospel. Both expressions of the Messianic faith were used by Jesus to spread the Gospel. Philip could no longer preach openly in Jerusalem during the Holy Days when pilgrims from all over the Empire visited Jerusalem, but the Apostles were still able to do so.

 

Did Everyone Copy Mark?

Many scholars (but not all) claim the New Testament manuscripts (Synoptic Gospels) were copied from one another and were probably written late in the 1st century CE—after the destruction of Jerusalem, or even early in the 2nd century CE. If we assume as reasonably true the tradition of the Christians of the 2nd century, that Mark is actually Peter’s Gospel, written by Mark who traveled with Peter, then we can see how both Matthew and Luke could be very similar to Mark in many places without actually having a copy of Mark before them. How so? Well, if, as is presumed by many, the Gospel accounts were an oral tradition for a number of years, then both Matthew and Luke could be very similar to Mark without their having a copy before them as they wrote their accounts. After all, would any American Christian really need a copy of the hymn, Silent Night, before him or her if one wished to write it out for a friend?

 

The Samaritan Pentecost

When Philip preached in Samaria the people listened, believed the Gospel and were baptized (Acts 8:5-7, 12). However, Luke tells us that, when Peter and John learned of the Samaritan’s repentance and came to the Samaritan village where Philip was preaching (Acts 8:14), they found the new believers had not received the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:16)! Why would this be so? Was anything lacking in Philip’s preaching?

 

Simon the Great One!

While Philip preached the Gospel in a Samaritan village, a man named Simon is said to have believed and was baptized (Acts 8:13). What is interesting is that Philip’s works among the believing Samaritans is contrasted with this man’s works before Philip arrived. Philip did miracles, drove out evil spirits and healed the people (Acts 8:6-7), while Simon used sorcery and bewitched the people (Acts 8:9). Philip preached Christ, but Simon preached himself as a great one. The Greek word megas (G3173) means great one and is the root from which the 2^nd century church fathers derived Simon’s other name, Magus.

 

Samaria Believes!

At long last the word of God is going out to the nations as promised by Jesus in Acts 1:8, but probably not as originally expected by the Apostles. Instead, the Gospel explodes outwardly in the form of evangelism brought on by persecution. It wasn’t planned—at least not by the Church. Nevertheless, the prophecy was fulfilled as the King of the Kingdom of God reached out to embrace the uttermost parts of the earth, beginning with Samaria and bringing all under his authority.

 

The Samaritan ~ The Great Pretender

Even if a persecution did not follow the death of Stephen, the Gospel would have had to break out of the haven at Jerusalem where it was nurtured by the Spirit of God since Pentecost. The Jewish religious authorities, in killing Stephen, had officially rejected Jesus as the Messiah and the Kingdom of God whereby the believer is the bearer of the Shekinah Presence of God and considered thereby to be the Third Temple of God built by the Messiah. Having rejected this, they set up the abomination that eventually made Jerusalem and its Temple a desolation.

 

The Reluctant Evangelists

Our ancient ancestors were not that much different from us? For about three and one-half years the disciples had been witnesses at Jerusalem, the capital of Judaism. Miracles were done in the name of Jesus and the Gospel was preached and believed in power. Thousands were baptized into the Kingdom of God and most of these travelled home to various parts of the Empire taking the Gospel with them. Nevertheless, the power behind the Gospel seemed to build up pressure at the capital like waters behind a damn of clay. Something had to occur sooner or later, and finally it did.

 

Who Were Scattered Abroad?

We now come to Acts 8 when Luke tells us that the believers were scattered abroad due to a great persecution that arose over the death of Stephen. Saul, who is later called Paul of Tarsus, was among the leaders of that persecution (Acts 8:1, 3; cp. Galatians 1:13-14; Philippians 3:6). Strangely enough, Luke tells us that the Apostles didn’t have to leave Jerusalem over the sudden change in the political climate (Acts 8:1). Why would that be, and who had to leave or suffer the consequences, which included loss of life for the unrepentant?

 

The Great Persecution

I think we often read past Acts 8:1-4 just to get to Philip’s ministry to Samaria and the Ethiopian eunuch. Nevertheless, these four verses tell us a great deal, and are pretty much continued at Acts 11:19. It seems Luke placed Philip’s ministry to Samaria and the Ethiopian plus Saul’s conversion plus Peter’s going to the Roman centurion and his household right in the middle of this persecution, or to but it another way: between Acts 8:4 and Acts 11:19. It serves as a kind of parenthesis within the persecution and its information helps us to forget what is really taking place. Believers are dying for their faith.

 

The First to Die for Christ

Stephen’s death (Acts 7:51-60) is probably the most significant chapter in the life of the Church since Pentecost. He is the first believer whose blood was shed in Jesus name, and I don’t believe its significance is fully appreciated in the Church today. It may come as a surprise to know that he was probably stoned on the Day of Atonement 3 ½ years after Jesus’ crucifixion and comes at the culmination of the second half of the 70^th week of Daniels 70 Weeks Prophecy. The first half of that week incorporated Jesus’ public ministry which ended in his crucifixion in the “midst of the week” (cp. Daniel 9:26-27). Both halves equal 7 years or the 70^th Week beginning on the Feast of Trumpets in 27 CE and ending on the Day of Atonement or 10^th day of the seventh month in 34 CE.

 

The Tenth Temptation of God

Whether or not Stephen was concluding his address to the Sanhedrin is not specifically stated in the text. However, it seems by the time he stated that the Most High doesn’t dwell in temples made with hands, quoting Isaiah the prophet, Stephen seems to react to something the crowd said or did, because in Acts 7:51 he complains his audience is reacting just as their fathers had in the past.

 

The Tent of Witness

Without a doubt Stephen’s speech before the Sanhedrin is the most important event concerning the community of believers since Pentecost in Acts 2. Luke devotes more space to what Stephen says than any address spoken by either Peter or Paul in the Book of Acts. It stands out as a defining point for the Church. From this point on the Gospel will go to the nations. From this point on, less and less emphasis is placed upon Jerusalem as the center of the faith. It is almost as though God dwelt there in Jerusalem until blood began to be shed, after which he led his people out—not quite true, but the principle that showed the presence of God was not in a specific place, but wherever his people happened to be is defined here with Stephen’s words: “The Most High dwells not in Temples made with hands!”

 

The Prophet Like Moses and Worship

Remember that Stephen was accused of blasphemy against Moses (or the Law) and against the Temple (Acts 6:13-14). In the last four blogs I’ve shown how Stephen addressed the first accusation. By and large the fathers had rejected both Moses and Joseph and had no faith in God as their father, Abraham had. Their eyes were always upon the past, traditions, where they had been (e.g. in Egypt etc.) and had no vision for the future (promises to be fulfilled). The five books of Moses are what make up the Law (Torah), so blasphemy against either (Moses/Torah) is blasphemy against the other. Not only did Stephen show a reverence toward Moses, but implied the Prophet who was like him (Acts 7:37) fulfilled Moses’ experiences to the letter, i.e. he fulfilled the Law and was rejected and crucified in doing so.