Now there were in the Church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers. Acts 13:1 The nature and sources of the narrative G. V. Lechler, D. D. We now lose sight for a time of the Church of Jerusalem and the apostles, and in the place of Jerusalem, Antioch becomes the centre of Church history. Indeed chaps, 13 and 14 form an independent and self-contained memoir from an Antiochean point of view. And it has, not without plausibility, been supposed that Luke has here made use of an original document and inserted it in his book, which document may have proceeded from the Church at Antioch, or may have belonged to a biography of Barnabas, or may have been a missionary narrative which Barnabas and Saul had made. ( G. V. Lechler, D. D. )

Benson Commentary Acts 13:1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. Acts 13:1 . There were in the church at Antioch certain prophets and teachers — Some of them, it seems, the stated pastors of the church, and some only occasionally resident there: Paul and Barnabas were of the latter. Manaen, who had been brought up with Herod — His foster- brother, now freed from the temptations of a court. As they ministered to the Lord — Which all diligent faithful teachers do: for while they minister to the church in praying and preaching (both which are here included) they minister also unto the Lord, being the servants of the people for Jesus’s sake, ( 2 Corinthians 4:5 ,) and having a continual regard to him in all their ministrations; engaging in, and prosecuting them from a principle of love to him, in obedience to his will, and with an eye to his glory. And fasted — Religious fasting should not be neglected, in our ministering to the Lord; it being both a sign of our humiliation and a means of our mortification. It was not, indeed, much practised by the disciples of Christ, while he, the bridegroom, was with them; yet, after he was taken from them, they abounded in this duty, as persons who had well learned to deny themselves, and to endure hardness. The Holy Ghost said — Namely, by immediate revelation, but in what way communicated we are not informed. Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them — Namely, the extraordinary work of preaching the gospel among the Gentiles — This was not ordaining them; Saul was ordained long before, and that not of men, neither by man, Galatians 1:1 . At his conversion he was expressly called to preach to the Gentiles; and that call was renewed at the time Jesus appeared to him during his trance in the temple: but at what time Barnabas was called by the Holy Ghost to this work, is not said. And when they had fasted and prayed — A certain day being appointed for the purpose; and laid their hands on them — A rite which was used, not in ordination only, but in blessing, and on many other occasions. It was here intended to be a solemn token of their designation to their important office; they sent them away — Dismissed them from Antioch, with all the most affectionate marks of Christian friendship, and fervent desires for the success of their ministry. Acts 13:2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. Acts 13:3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. Acts 13:4 So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus. Acts 13:4-5 . So they being sent forth by the Holy Ghost — By his immediate direction. This seems to be added to signify, that though they were solemnly recommended to God by the prayers of their brethren, their authority was not derived from them, but from the Holy Spirit himself. Departed unto Seleucia — A considerable port on the Mediterranean sea; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus — The island so infamous for the worship of Venus, who was supposed to hold her peculiar residence there, and therefore was commonly called the Cyprian goddess. When they were at Salamis — Situated on the eastern part of the island, and consequently was nearest to the place from whence they came; they preached the word in the synagogues of the Jews — For there were great numbers of that people in Cyprus. They had also John for their minister — Who willingly waited on them, not pretending to a character by any means equal to theirs. Acts 13:5 And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to their minister. Acts 13:6 And when they had gone through the isle unto Paphos, they found a certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew, whose name was Barjesus: Acts 13:6-8 . When they had gone through the isle unto Paphos — Which lay on its western coast; they found a certain sorcerer — Or magician; a false prophet — Who falsely pretended to foretel future events; a Jew, whose name was Bar-jesus — Or the son of one Jesus, or Joshua. “There were many instances of real or pretended sorcery among the Jews in those days, which seems to have been designed by Satan and wicked men to bring into disrepute the miracles of Christ and his apostles. But by comparing them, in several instances, the Christian cause was magnified yet more than it would otherwise have been. Nevertheless, it is to be feared they wrought on many, who were not wise and candid enough to examine, so as to introduce a general contempt of all pretences to supernatural powers as false or inconclusive.” — Doddridge. Which was with the deputy — Which Jew was with the Roman proconsul there, as ????????? , the word here rendered deputy, properly signifies; Sergius Paulus, a prudent man — A man of a steady conduct and thoughtful temper; and therefore not overswayed by the sorcerer, but desirous to inquire further; who called for Barnabas and Saul — Having received some general information of their character and doctrine; and desired to hear the word of God — That he might know what was the purport of their preaching, and what regard was due to it. But Elymas the sorcerer ( for so is his name by interpretation — That is, the word, Elymas, of Arabic or Hebrew derivation, signifies sorcerer, or magician ) withstood them — Being sensible that he should be no more regarded if their doctrine was received, and therefore setting himself with all his might to hinder the effect of it. Seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith — To prevent his embracing it, by a variety of crafty and false insinuations. Acts 13:7 Which was with the deputy of the country, Sergius Paulus, a prudent man; who called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the word of God. Acts 13:8 But Elymas the sorcerer (for so is his name by interpretation) withstood them, seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith. Acts 13:9 Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him, Acts 13:9-11 . Then Saul, who also is called Paul — Moved by an immediate inspiration of the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him — Looked steadfastly on that impostor, and said, with just indignation, O full of all subtlety — ?????? ????? , of all guile, as a false prophet; and all mischief — As a magician; thou child of the devil — A title well suited to a magician; and one who not only was himself unrighteous, but laboured to keep others from all goodness; wilt thou not cease — Even now, when thou hast heard the truth of the gospel; to pervert — By thy crafty and diabolical misrepresentations; the right ways of the Lord — The ways of truth, piety, and virtue; the only right ways. And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee — The hand of the heavy displeasure of the Lord Jesus, whose gospel thou opposest; and thou shalt be blind — Totally so, not seeing even the sun at noon-day, for a season — That thou mayest be convinced of thy sin and folly; and, if possible, be brought to repentance for it. And immediately — While Paul was yet speaking; there fell on him a mist and a darkness — That is, a gradually increasing darkness; and he went about — In the utmost confusion; seeking some to lead him by the hand — As not being able so much as to find the door without a guide, and afraid that he might run upon any person or thing that stood in his way. Acts 13:10 And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? Acts 13:11 And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness; and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand. Acts 13:12 Then the deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord. Acts 13:12 . Then the deputy — Or proconsul; when he saw what was done — What a wonderful miracle was performed, yielding to such convincing evidence; believed the gospel; being astonished — ????????????? , being struck with astonishment; at the doctrine of the Lord — At the confirmation thus given to it, and probably also at the internal evidence which he soon discovered in it, and which broke in with increasing lustre on his mind. The reader will observe, that at this period of the history, Luke has changed Saul’s name, calling him Paul, without assigning any reason for so doing. Some learned men have supposed that this change was made by Saul himself, in honour of the proconsul, who they think was, perhaps, Saul’s first convert from among the idolatrous Gentiles, or the first person of high rank of that character who was converted. For it was customary among the Romans to assume the name of a benefactor whom they highly esteemed. Thus the Jewish historian, Josephus, took the name of Flavius, in compliment to Vespasian, with whom he was in high favour. But it is more probable, that, coming now among the Romans and Greeks, they adapted his name to their own language, and so called him Paul instead of Saul; as one whose Hebrew name was Jochanan, would be called by the Greeks and Latins, Johannes; by the French, Jean; by the Dutch, Hans; and by the English, John. Perhaps, however, the family of the proconsul might be the first who addressed, or spoke to him, by this name. But in whatever manner it happened, it is certain that ever after this he was known only by this name; and, being the apostle of the Gentiles, he himself used it as a name most familiar to them. From this time forth, likewise, Paul is generally mentioned by the historian before Barnabas: because, by his success in preaching at Paphos, and by the greatness of his miracles, he was now shown to be the principal person; although, formerly, he was mentioned after Barnabas, because he was a younger disciple, and because his apostolical authority was not fully understood. Acts 13:13 Now when Paul and his company loosed from Paphos, they came to Perga in Pamphylia: and John departing from them returned to Jerusalem. Acts 13:13 . Note when Paul and his company loosed from Paphos — Sailing to the continent of the lesser Asia; they came to Perga — A city in Pamphylia — Situated on the west side of the river Cestos, about seven miles from the sea. Here there was a celebrated temple of Diana; consequently, many priests and others, whose interest and honour depended upon their maintaining the worship of that idol, and who, no doubt, were not a little displeased with these foreign teachers, for presuming to find fault with the gods of the country, and with the worship that was paid to them. On that occasion, John Mark, who had hitherto accompanied them as their minister, departed from them, and returned to Jerusalem, terrified, perhaps, by the threatening speeches of the priests and bigots, or discouraged by the difficulty and danger of the undertaking. Paul and Barnabas, however, were not discouraged by his deserting them; neither were they moved from their purpose by the little success which they had at Perga: for, after they left that place, they travelled through various countries of the lesser Asia; and, as we shall see immediately, made many converts to Christ, both among the Jews and the Gentiles. Acts 13:14 But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down. Acts 13:14-15 . When they departed from Perga — Proceeding in the prosecution of their important work; they came to Antioch in Pisidia — A country to the north of Pamphylia; and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, (Paul making it a point in every place first to offer salvation to the Jews,) and sat down — Among those that were worshipping there. And after the reading of the law and the prophets — The law was read over once every year, a portion of it being appointed for each sabbath; to which was added a lesson taken out of the prophets; the rulers of the synagogue — Having probably some knowledge of the public character which the two celebrated strangers sustained, and being curious to hear from their own mouth that new doctrine which had made so much noise in other places; sent unto them, saying, If ye have any word of exhortation for the people — Any declaration to make which may conduce to their edification; say on — As this is the proper season for doing it. According to the Jewish writers, (see Maimonides on the Talmud,) after public worship was over, any one might make a speech to the people in the synagogue, on any subject which he apprehended might be for their advantage: this, it seems, however, was seldom done without the permission of the rulers, which was thus given to Paul and Barnabas. Acts 13:15 And after the reading of the law and the prophets the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on. Acts 13:16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience. Acts 13:16 . Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with, or waving, his hand — To render the audience more attentive; said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God — Whether proselytes or heathen; give audience — This expression, Ye that fear God, seems best to suit those who, by embracing the Jewish religion, had entered into covenant with the true God, yet so as also to include any others in whom a filial reverence for the Divine Being was a governing principle. The discourse which the apostle now delivered, seems to have been chiefly intended to illustrate the divine economy, in opening the gospel gradually, and preparing the Jews, by temporal mercies, for others of a more important nature. He had thus a good opportunity of showing his acquaintance with their Scriptures, (which they esteemed the highest part of literature,) and thereby of better engaging their attention. His sermon, which seems to be given us at large, is particularly worthy of our consideration, as being an example of his manner of preaching in all the synagogues, and of the arguments which he used for convincing the Jews and proselytes that Jesus was the Messiah, or Christ, foretold by David, in the second Psalm. See on Acts 17:2 , &c. Acts 13:17 The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with an high arm brought he them out of it. Acts 13:17-18 . The God of this people, &c. — Such a commemoration of God’s favours to their fathers, as he here gives, was at once calculated to conciliate their minds to the speaker, to convince them of their duty to God, and to invite them to believe his promise and its accomplishment. This paragraph contains the whole sum of the Old Testament. See the passages referred to in the margin, and the notes thereon. Chose our fathers — Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to be the objects of his special favour, and for their sakes was pleased to promise most important blessings to their offspring; and exalted the people — Wrought astonishing miracles in their behalf, and raised them from the state of bondage and depression in which they lay prostrate in Egypt; and with a high arm — With an evident and most extraordinary display of uncontrollable and almighty power; brought them out of it — In spite of all the efforts of Pharaoh and his host to detain them in slavery. And forty years suffered he their manners — Greek, ????????????? , he endured their behaviour; by which expression the apostle gives an oblique intimation of that perverseness and ingratitude which so early began to prevail among them. But, according to the Alexandrian and Cambridge manuscripts, and the Syriac, Arabic, Coptic, and Ethiopic versions, the genuine reading is, ????????????? , he nursed, or cherished them: a sense which suggests a fine view of the conduct of Divine Providence toward them; and, as Dr. Hammond observes, is beautifully connected with the expression of taking them up, when they lay like an exposed infant. See Deuteronomy 1:31 ; Ezekiel 16:4-8 . The common reading, however, accords better with Psalm 96:8-10 ; Hebrews 3:8-11 , and a variety of other passages of Scripture, where the perverse and ungrateful behaviour of the Israelites toward God, and his great patience with them, are represented as being so extraordinary as to deserve peculiar attention; and therefore, it seems, that reading ought to be preferred; as also, because it is supported by a much greater number of manuscripts and versions. Acts 13:18 And about the time of forty years suffered he their manners in the wilderness. Acts 13:19 And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Chanaan, he divided their land to them by lot. Acts 13:19-20 . And when he had destroyed seven nations — Enumerated Deuteronomy 7:1 ; in the land of Chanaan — Where they had been long settled, and had erected many kingdoms, defended by fortifications of great strength, as well as by numerous forces of horse and foot; he divided their land — Even the whole country; to them by lot — Or, for an inheritance, as ???????????????? ?????? ??? ??? , seems rather to signify, and supported them in it for many generations. After that he gave them judges — By whose heroic interposition he delivered them from those repeated oppressions and miseries which their frequent revolts to idolatry had brought upon them; until Samuel the prophet — Who was the last of these extraordinary leaders and magistrates. About the space of four hundred and fifty years — As the course of the sacred history will by no means permit us to imagine that the judges, in their succession, continued four hundred and fifty years after the settlement of Israel in Canaan, it being stated, ( 1 Kings 6:1 ,) that Solomon began to build the temple in the four hundred and eightieth year after they came out of Egypt; therefore, Sir Norton Knatchbull (with whom Bengelius, Doddridge, and many other learned men agree) is of opinion, that the apostle is not to be understood as signifying, “how long God gave them judges, but when he gave them.” He therefore refers the first words of this verse, ??? ???? ????? ?? ????? ???????????? ??? ?????????? , to the words going before, ( Acts 13:17 ,) that is, to the time when the God of the children of Israel chose their fathers: and points and renders them thus: And afterward, about four hundred and fifty years, or, and about four hundred and fifty years afterward, he gave them judges, &c. according to which sense, he observes, the old Latin and the Ethiopic interpreters read the passage; adding, ( Annot. on some difficult Texts in the New Testament, p. 131,) “now this time, wherein God may properly be said to have chosen their fathers, about four hundred and fifty years before he gave them judges, is by them computed from the birth of Isaac, in whom God may properly be said to have chosen their fathers; for in his family the covenant was to rest. And, to make this computation evident: From the birth of Isaac to the birth of Jacob, are sixty years; from thence to their going into Egypt, one hundred and thirty; from thence to their coming out, two hundred and ten; from thence to their entrance into the land of Canaan, forty; and from thence to the division of the land, the time wherein it had rest, (about which time, it is probable, they began to settle their government by judges,) seven years; which, altogether, make up four hundred and forty-seven. And if it should be reckoned from the year before, when God established his covenant between himself and Abraham, and all his seed after him, ( Genesis 17:19 ,) then it will be four hundred and forty-eight years, which comes one nearer to our number of four hundred and fifty; and answers sufficiently the apostle’s manner of expression, ?? , about four hundred and fifty years.” Acts 13:20 And after that he gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet. Acts 13:21 And afterward they desired a king: and God gave unto them Saul the son of Cis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, by the space of forty years. Acts 13:21-22 . Afterward they desired a king — Being foolishly desirous of being like the neighbouring nations in that respect, and insensible of the favour which God had done them in assuming the character and relation of a king to them. And God gave them Saul — Whose government, with that of Samuel the prophet, lasted for the space of forty years — So Beza, Grotius, Limborch, and many other eminent critics. And when he had removed him — In his righteous displeasure, from reigning over Israel; he raised up unto them David — Hence they might understand that the dispensations of God admitted of various changes; to whom he gave a more glorious testimony — Than to Saul. See 1 Samuel 13:14 ; Psalm 89:20 . And said, I have found David, &c., a man after my own heart — “This expression is to be taken in a limited sense. David was such at that time, but not at all times. And he was so in the respect here mentioned: he performed all God’s will — In the particulars there spoken of. But he was not a man after God’s own heart in other respects, wherein he performed his own will. In the matter of Uriah, for instance, he was as far from being a man after God’s own heart, as Saul himself was. It is, therefore, a very gross, as well as dangerous mistake, to suppose this is the character of David in every part of his behaviour. We must beware of this, unless we would recommend adultery and murder as things after God’s own heart.” So Mr. Wesley: and in the same sense Dr. Benson understands the words, observing, “when it is said that King David was a man after God’s own heart, it ought to be understood of his public, not of his private character. He was a man after God’s own heart, because he ruled his people Israel according to the divine will. He did not allow of idolatry; he did not set up for absolute power; he was guided in the government of the nation by the law of Moses, as the standing rule of government, and by the prophet, or the divine oracle, whereby God gave directions upon particular emergencies. That this was the meaning of David’s being a man after God’s own heart, will easily appear by comparing 1 Samuel 15:28 ; 1 Samuel 28:17-18 ; 1 Chronicles 9:13-14 ; Psalm 78:70 , &c. Psalm 89:20 , &c.” Acts 13:22 And when he had removed him, he raised up unto them David to be their king; to whom also he gave testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfil all my will. Acts 13:23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus: Acts 13:23-25 . Of this man’s seed — From that rod out of the stem of Jesse, that branch out of his roots; hath God, according to his promise, ( Isaiah 9:6-7 ; Isaiah 11:1 ; Jeremiah 23:5-6 ,) raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus — So long foretold in the sacred oracles. When John had first preached, before his coming — Greek, ??? ???????? ??? ??????? , to introduce his appearance: (so Doddridge:) the baptism of repentance — Even that baptism which, in token of their repentance, they were commanded by God to receive. Of John’s preaching, see the notes on Matthew 3:1 , &c. Luke 3:7-17 . He mentions the preaching of John in this incidental manner as a thing already known to them. And so, doubtless, it was: for it gave so loud an alarm to the whole Jewish nation, as could not but be heard in foreign countries, at least as remote as Pisidia. As John fulfilled his course — His work was quickly finished, and, therefore, might well be termed, a course, or race: he said, Who think ye that I am? I am not he — I am not the person whom you suppose me to be, that is, the Messiah. See the notes on John 1:20 ; John 1:27 . Acts 13:24 When John had first preached before his coming the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel. Acts 13:25 And as John fulfilled his course, he said, Whom think ye that I am? I am not he . But, behold, there cometh one after me, whose shoes of his feet I am not worthy to loose. Acts 13:26 Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent. Acts 13:26-31 . Men and brethren — Even all you who are children of the stock of Abraham — Whether ye are my equals in years, or of more advanced age — And whosoever among you feareth God — Of whatever family or nation you may be; unto you is the word of this salvation sent — A great and important salvation, which I am commissioned to preach and offer to mankind. For they that dwell at Jerusalem, &c. — He here anticipates a strong objection, “Why did not the people at Jerusalem, and especially their rulers, believe?” They knew him not — Though God bore a most convincing testimony to him by the wonderful miracles which he performed; nor yet the voices of the prophets — They did not believe in him, because they understood not those very prophets whose writings they read or heard continually. Their very condemning him, innocent as he was, proves that they understood not the prophecies concerning him. And when they had — Inadvertently, without intending any thing of the kind; fulfilled all that was written of him — In such a circumstantial detail of particulars as is truly astonishing; they took him down from the tree — On which he had expired in the midst of ignominy and torture; and laid him in a sepulchre — Permitted his friends to bury him. But God raised him from the dead — According to the prediction of the prophets, and also his own prediction, frequently repeated, which they had heard from him before; but the accomplishment of which they were unable to hinder. And he was seen many days — After he was risen from the dead; of them which came up with him from Galilee — A little before his death. This last journey both presupposes all the rest, and was the most important of all. Who are his witnesses to the people — Of the Jews, among whom they still reside. Acts 13:27 For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him . Acts 13:28 And though they found no cause of death in him , yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain. Acts 13:29 And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre. Acts 13:30 But God raised him from the dead: Acts 13:31 And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people. Acts 13:32 And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, Acts 13:32-37 . And we declare unto you glad tidings — Tidings which should be in a particular manner acceptable to the Jews; that the promise which was made unto the fathers — And was the hope and joy of their posterity through so many succeeding ages; God hath fulfilled unto us their children — Most signally and manifestly; in that he hath raised up Jesus again — From the dead, and thereby hath declared, in the most convincing manner, that he is indeed his Son, the Messiah; as it is also written in the second Psalm — By this it appears that the Psalms were then placed in the same order as they are now; and it is observable that this is the only quotation of the Old Testament so circumstantially made in the New. Thou art my Son, this day, &c. — It is true, he was the Son of God before his incarnation, yea, from eternity. See notes on John 1:1-5 ; Hebrews 1:2-12 ; Hebrews 7:3 . The meaning, therefore, here is, I have this day declared thee to be my Son, as ( Romans 1:4 ) Paul says, he was declared to be the Son of God with power, by the resurrection from the dead. And it is with peculiar propriety and beauty that God is said to have begotten him when he raised him from the dead, as Jesus seemed then to be born out of the earth anew. And to show that he raised him up, no more to return to corruption — That is, to die no more; he said, I will give you the sure mercies of David — The blessings promised to David in Christ, which are sure, certain, and firm to every true believer in him. Or, “mercies by the resurrection of him whom I have now set upon the throne of David, are made sure to you, and shall prove eternal as his life and reign.” The resurrection of Christ, therefore, is implied in the words: for without it those blessings could not have been given. Wherefore he saith also, (namely, Psalm 16:10 ,) Thou shalt not suffer thy Holy One to see corruption — Words which, it is evident, must refer, not to the inspired writer himself, but to some other person; for David — By whom this Psalm was written; after he had served his own generation, by the will of God — Or, as the words may be rendered, had served the will of God in his generation; fell asleep — That is, died; and saw corruption — In the same manner as other human bodies do, when the soul is separated from them. Observe, reader, the character here given of David; he served the will of God, or, served his generation according to the will of God. This was his business here on earth: he lived for this purpose. What is thy business? Why art thou here? Thou who art yet in the world? Is it not that thou also mayest serve the will of God? Art thou serving it now? Doing all his will? O remember, only he that doth the will of God shall enter the kingdom of heaven, Matthew 7:21 . Acts 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Acts 13:34 And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of David. Acts 13:35 Wherefore he saith also in another psalm , Thou shalt not suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Acts 13:36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption: Acts 13:37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption. Acts 13:38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: Acts 13:38-39 . Be it known unto you, therefore — Be persuaded of this as a most certain and momentous truth, a truth infinitely consolatory; that through this man — This seed of David, and Song of Solomon of God; is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins — The free, full, and assured pardon of all your offences, be they ever so great, and ever so aggravated. And by him — By his mediation, by his sacrifice and intercession; all that believe — Greek, ??? ? ???????? , every one that believeth; namely, in him as the Messiah promised of old, the Saviour of the world, able and willing to save to the uttermost all that come unto God through him; every one that relies entirely on him for salvation, present and eternal, and receives him in all his offices and characters, (of which see the note on John 1:12 ,) every one whose faith in him, and in the declarations and promises of his gospel, worketh by love, Galatians 5:6 ; is justified from all things — Has the actual forgiveness of all his sins, and is accounted righteous by and before God at the very time of his believing. Observe, from all things, not only from the guilt of smaller miscarriages, but even of those things which are in the highest degree criminal; and from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses — By the whole or any part thereof, moral or ceremonial. Not only ye cannot now, but ye never could: for that law afforded no expiation for presumptuous sins, so that the offender should be exempted from temporal punishment, but he was to die without mercy under two or three witnesses, that is, if two or three witnesses attested his guilt; nor could the sacrifices of it remove the guilt of such sins, or indeed of any sin, before God, make an atonement to his justice, or procure the sinner’s reconciliation with him. See Hebrews 10:1-12 . The Mosaic “law appointed sin-offerings to expiate smaller offences, so far as the offender who offered them should be free from all further prosecution on account of them. But this very view

Expositor's Bible Commentary Acts 13:1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. Acts 13:2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. Chapter 9 ST. PAUL’S ORDINATION AND FIRST MISSIONARY TOUR. Acts 13:2-4 ; Acts 13:14 ; Acts 14:1 ; Acts 14:26 We have now arrived at what we might call the watershed of the Acts of the Apostles. Hitherto we have had very various scenes, characters, personages to consider. Henceforth St. Paul, his labours, his disputes, his speeches, occupy the entire field, and every other name that is introduced into the narrative plays a very subordinate part. This is only natural. St. Luke knew of the earlier history by information gained from various persons, but he knew of the later history, and specially of St. Paul’s journeys, by personal experience. He could say that he had formed a portion and played no small part in the work of which he was telling, and therefore St. Paul’s activity naturally supplies the chief subject of his narrative. St. Luke in this respect was exactly like ourselves. What we take an active part in, where our own powers are specially called into operation, there our interest is specially aroused. St. Luke personally knew of St. Paul’s missionary journeys and labours, and therefore when telling Theophilus of the history of the Church down to the year 60 or thereabouts, he deals with that part of it which he specially knows. This limitation of St. Luke’s vision limits also our range of exposition. The earlier portion of the Acts is much richer from an expositor’s point of view, comprises more typical narratives, scenes, events than the latter portion, though this latter portion may be richer in points of contact, historical and geographical, with the world of life and action. It is with an expositor or preacher exactly the opposite as with the Church historian or biographer of St. Paul. A writer gifted with the exuberant imagination, the minute knowledge of a Renan or a Farrar naturally finds in the details of travel with which the latter portion of the Acts is crowded matter for abundant discussion. He can pour forth the treasures of information which modern archaeological research has furnished, shedding light upon the movements of the Apostle. But with the preacher or expositor it is otherwise. There are numerous incidents which lend themselves to his purpose in the journeys recorded in this latter portion of the book; but while a preacher might find endless subjects for spiritual exposition in the conversion of St. Paul or the martyrdom of St. Stephen, he finds himself confined to historical and geographical discussions in large portions’ of the story dealing with St. Paul’s journeys. We shall, however, strive to unite both functions, and while endeavouring to treat the history from an expositor’s point of view, we shall not overlook details of another type which will impart colour and interest to the exposition. I. The thirteenth chapter of the Acts records the opening of St. Paul’s official missionary labours, and its earliest verses tell us of the formal separation or consecration for that work which St. Paul received. Now the question may here be raised, Why did St. Paul receive such a solemn ordination as that we here read of? Had he not been called by Christ immediately? Had he not been designated to the work in Gentile lands by the voice of the same Jesus Christ speaking to Ananias at Damascus and afterward to Paul himself in the Temple at Jerusalem? What was the necessity for such a solemn external imposition of hands as that here recorded? John Calvin, in his commentary on this passage, offers a very good suggestion, and shows that he was able to throw himself back into the feelings and ideas of the times far better than many a modern-writer. Calvin thinks that this revelation of the Holy Ghost and this ordination by the hands of the Antiochene prophets were absolutely necessary to complete the work begun by St. Peter at Caesarea, and for this reason. The prejudices of the Jewish Christians against their Gentile brethren were so strong, that they would regard the vision at Joppa as applying, not as a general rule, but as a mere personal matter, authorising the reception of Cornelius and his party alone. They would not see nor understand that it authorised the active evangelisation of the Gentile world and the prosecution of aggressive Christian efforts among the heathen. The Holy Ghost therefore, as the abiding and guiding power in the Church, and expressing His will through the agency of the prophets then present, said, "Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them"; and that work to which they were expressly sent forth by the Holy Ghost was the work of aggressive effort beginning with the Jews-but not terminating with them-and including the Gentiles. This seems to me thoroughly true, and shows how Calvin realised the intellectual weakness, the spiritual hardness of heart and slowness of judgment which prevailed among the apostles. The battle of Christian freedom and catholic truth was not won in a moment. Old prejudices did not depart in an hour. New principles were not assimilated and applied in a few days. Those who hold nobler views and higher principles than the crowd must not be surprised or dismayed if they find that year after year they have to fight the same battles and to proclaim the same fundamental truths and to maintain what may seem at times even a losing conflict with the forces of unreasoning prejudices. If this was the case in the primitive Church with all its unity and love and spiritual gifts, we may well expect the same state of affairs in the Church of our time. An illustration borrowed from Church history will explain this. Nothing can well be more completely contrary to the spirit of Christianity than religious persecution. Nothing can be imagined more completely consonant with the spirit of the Christian religion than freedom of conscience. Yet how hard has been the struggle for it! The early Christians suffered in defence of religious freedom, but they had no sooner gained the battle than they adopted the very principle against which they had fought. They became religiously intolerant, because religious intolerance was part and parcel of the Roman state under which they had been reared. The Reformation again was a battle for religious freedom. If it were not, the Reformers who suffered in it would have no more claim to our compassion and sympathy on account of the deaths they suffered than soldiers who die in battle. A soldier merely suffers what he is prepared to inflict, and so it was with the martyrs of the Reformation unless theirs was a struggle for religious freedom. Yet no sooner had the battle of the Reformation been won than all the Reformed Churches adopted the very principle which had striven to crush themselves. It is terribly difficult to emancipate ourselves from the influence and ideas of bygone ages, and so it was with the Jewish Christians. They could not bring themselves to adopt missionary work among the Gentiles. They believed indeed intellectually that God had granted unto the Gentiles repentance unto life, but that belief was not accompanied with any of the enthusiasm which alone lends life and power to mental conceptions. The Holy Ghost therefore, as the Paraclete, the loving Comforter, Exhorter, and Guide of the Church, interposes afresh, and by a new revelation ordains apostles whose great work shall consist in preaching to the Gentile world. There seems to me one great reason for the prominent place this incident at Antioch holds. The work of Gentile conversion proceeded from Antioch, which may therefore well be regarded as the mother Church of Gentile Christendom; and the Apostles of the Gentiles were there solemnly set apart and constituted. Barnabas and Saul were not previously called apostles. Henceforth this title is expressly applied to them, and independent apostolic action is taken by them. But there seems to me another reason why Barnabas and Saul were thus solemnly set apart, notwithstanding all their previous gifts and callings and history. The Holy Ghost wished to lay down at the very beginning of the Gentile Church the law of orderly development, the rule of external ordination, and the necessity for its perpetual observance. And therefore He issued His mandate for their visible separation to the work of evangelisation. All the circumstances too are typical. The Church was engaged in a season of special devotion when the Holy Ghost spoke. A special blessing was vouchsafed, as before at Pentecost, when the people of God were specially waiting upon Him. The Church at Antioch as represented by its leading teachers were fasting and praying and ministering to the Lord when the Divine mandate was issued, and then they fasted and prayed again. The ordination of the first apostles to the Gentiles was accompanied by special prayer and by fasting, and the Church took good care afterwards to follow closely this primitive example. The institution of the four Ember seasons as times for solemn ordinations is derived from this incident. The Ember seasons are periods for solemn prayer and fasting, not only for those about to be ordained, but also for the whole Church, because she recognises that the whole body of Christ’s people are interested most deeply and vitally in the nature and character of the Christian ministry. If the members of that ministry are devoted, earnest, inspired with Divine love, then indeed the work of Christ flourishes in the Church, while, if the ministry of God be careless and unspiritual, the people of God suffer terrible injury. And we observe, further, that not only the Church subsequent to the apostolic age followed this example at Antioch, but St. Paul himself followed it and prescribed it to his disciples. He ordained elders in every Church, and that from the beginning. He acted thus on his very first missionary journey, ordaining by the imposition of hands accompanied with prayer and fasting, as we learn from the fourteenth chapter and twenty-third verse { Acts 14:21 }. He reminded Timothy of the gift imparted to that youthful evangelist by the imposition of St. Paul’s own hands, as well as by those of the presbytery; and yet he does not hesitate to designate the elders of Ephesus and Miletus who were thus ordained by St. Paul as bishops set over God’s flock by the Holy Ghost Himself. St. Paul and the Apostolic Church, in fact, looked behind this visible scene. They realised vividly the truth of Christ’s promise about the presence of the Holy Ghost in the Church. They took no miserably low and Erastian views of the sacred ministry, as if it were an office of mere human order and appointment. They viewed it as a supernatural and Divine office, which no mere human power, no matter how exalted, could confer. They realised the human instruments indeed in their true position as nothing but instruments, powerless in themselves, and mighty only through God, and therefore St. Paul regarded his own ordination of the elders whom he appointed at Derbe, Iconium, Lystra, or Ephesus as a separation by the Holy Ghost to their Divine offices. The Church was, in fact, then instinct with life and spiritual vigour, because it thankfully recognised the present power, the living force and vigour of the third person of the Holy Trinity. II. The Apostles, having been thus commissioned, lost no time. They at once departed upon their great work. And now let us briefly indicate the scope of the first great missionary tour undertaken by St. Paul, and sketch its outline, filling in the details afterwards. According to early tradition the headquarters of the Antiochene Church were in Singon Street, in the southern quarter of Antioch. After earnest and prolonged religious services they left their Christian brethren. St. Paul’s own practice recorded at Ephesus, Miletus, and at Tyre shows us that prayer marked such separation from the Christian brethren, and we know that the same practice was perpetuated in the early Church; Tertullian, for instance, telling us that a brother should not leave a Christian house until he had been commended to God’s keeping. They then crossed the bridge, and proceeded along the northern bank of the Orontes to Seleucia, the port of Antioch, where the ruins still testify to the vastness of the architectural conceptions cherished by the Syrian kings. From Seleucia the apostles sailed to the island of Cyprus, whose peaks they could see eighty miles distant, shining bright and clear through the pellucid air. Various circumstances would lead them thither. Barnabas was of Cyprus, and he doubtless had many friends there. Cyprus had then an immense Jewish population, as we have already pointed out; and though the apostles were specially designated for work among the Gentiles, they ever made the Jews the starting-point whence to influence the outside world, always used them as the lever whereby to move the stolid mass of paganism. The apostles showed a wholesome example to all missionaries and to all teachers by this method of action. They addressed the Jews first because they had most in common with them. And St. Paul deliberately and of set purpose worked on this principle, whether with Jews or Gentiles. He sought out the ideas or the ground common to himself and his hearers, and then, having found the points on which they agreed, he worked out from them. It is the true method of controversy. I have seen the opposite course adopted, and with very disastrous effects. I have seen a method of controversial argument pursued, consisting simply in attacks upon errors without any attempt to follow the apostolic example and discover the truths which both parties held in common, and the result has been the very natural one that ill-will and bad feeling have been aroused without effecting any changes in conviction. We can easily understand the reason of this, if we consider how the matter would stand with ourselves. If a man comes up to us, and without any attempt to discover our ideas or enter into sympathetic relations with us, makes a very aggressive assault upon all our particular notions and practices, our backs are at once put up, we are thrown into a defensive mood, our pride is stirred, we resent the tone, the air of the aggressor, and unconsciously determine not to be convinced by him. Controversial preaching of that class, hard, unloving, censorious, never does any permanent good, but rather strengthens and confirms the person against whose belief it is directed. Nothing of this kind will ever be found in the wise, courteous teaching of the apostle Paul, whose few recorded speeches to Jews and Gentiles may be commended to the careful study of all teachers at home or abroad as models of mission preaching, being at once prudent and loving, faithful and courageous. From Seleucia the apostles itinerated through the whole island unto Paphos, celebrated in classical antiquity as the favourite seat of the goddess Venus, where they came for the first time into contact with a great Roman official, Sergius Paulus, the proconsul of the island. From Paphos they sailed across to the mainland of Asia Minor, landed at Perga, where John Mark abandoned the work to which he had put his hand. They do not seem to have stayed for long at Perga. They doubtless declared their message at the local synagogue to the Jews and proselytes who assembled there, for we are not to conclude, because a synagogue is not expressly mentioned as belonging to any special town, that therefore it did not exist. Modern discoveries have shown that Jewish synagogues were found in every considerable town or city of Asia Minor, preparing the way by their pure morality and monotheistic teaching for the fuller and richer truths of Christianity. But St. Paul had fixed his eagle gaze upon Antioch of Pisidia, a town which had been made by Augustus Caesar the great centre of this part of Asia Minor, whence military roads radiated in every direction, lending thereby the assistance of imperial organisation to the progress of the gospel. Its situation was, in fact, the circumstance which determined the original foundation of Antioch by the Syrian princes. Facility of access, commercial convenience were points at which they chiefly aimed in selecting the sites of the cities they built, and the wisdom of their choice in the case of Antioch in Pisidia was confirmed when Augustus and Tiberius, some few years previous to St. Paul’s visit, made Antioch the centre from which diverged the whole system of military roads throughout this portion of Asia Minor. It was a very large city, and its ruins and aqueducts testify to this day concerning the important position it held as the great centre of all the Roman colonies and fortresses which Augustus planted in the year B.C. 6 along the skirts of the Taurus Range to restrain the incursions of the rude mountaineers of Isauria and Pisidia. When persecution compelled the apostles to retire from Antioch they took their way therefore to Iconium, which was some sixty miles southeast of Antioch along one of those military roads of which we have spoken, constructed for the purpose of putting down the brigands which then, as in modern times, constituted one of the great plagues of Asia Minor. But why did the apostles retire to Iconium? Surely one might say, if the Jews had influence enough at Antioch to stir up the chief men of the city against the missionaries, they would have had influence enough to secure a warrant for their arrest in a neighbouring city. At first sight it seems somewhat difficult to account for the line of travel or flight adopted by the apostles. But a reference to ancient geography throws some light upon the problem. Strabo, a geographer of St. Paul’s own day, tells us that Iconium was an independent principality or tetrarchy, surrounded indeed on all sides by Roman territory, but still enjoying a certain amount of independence. The apostles fled to Iconium when persecution waxed hot because they had a good road thither, and also because at Iconium they were secure from any legal molestation, being under a new jurisdiction. After a time, however, the Jews from Antioch made their way to Iconium and began the same process which had proved so successful at Antioch. They first excited the members of the Jewish synagogue against the apostles, and through them influenced the townspeople at large, so that, though successful in winning converts, St. Paul and his companion were in danger of being stoned by a joint mob of Jews and Gentiles. They had therefore to fly a second time, and when doing so they acted on the same principle as before. They again removed themselves out of the local jurisdiction of their enemies, and passed to Derbe and Lystra, cities of Lycaonia, a Roman province which had just been formed by the Emperor Claudius. Then after a time, when the disturbances which the Jews persistently raised wherever they came had subsided, the apostles turned back over the same ground, no longer indeed publicly preaching, but organising quietly and secretly the Churches which they had founded in the different towns through which they had passed, till they arrived back at Perga, Where perhaps, finding no ship sailing to Antioch, they travelled to the port of Attalia, where they succeeded in finding a passage to that city of Antioch whence they had been sent forth. This brief sketch will gave a general view of the first missionary tour made in the realms of paganism, and will show that it dealt with little more than two provinces of Asia Minor, Pisidia and Lycaonia, and was followed by what men would count but scanty results, the foundation and organisation of a few scattered Christian communities in some of the leading towns of these districts. III. Let us now more particularly notice some of the details recorded concerning this journey. The apostles began their work at Cyprus, where they proclaimed the gospel in the Jewish synagogues. They were attracted as we have said to this island, first, because it was the native land of Barnabas, and then because its population was in large degree Jewish, owing to the possession of the famous copper mines of the island by Herod the Great. Synagogues were scattered all over the island and proselytes appertained to each synagogue, and thus a basis of operations was ready whence the gospel message might operate. It was just the same even at Paphos, where St. Paul came in contact with the proconsul Sergius Paulus. The Jewish element here again appears, though in more active opposition than seems to have been elsewhere offered. Sergius Paulus was a Roman citizen like Cornelius of Caesarea. He had become dissatisfied with the belief of his forefathers. He had now come into contact with the mystic East, and had yielded himself to the guidance of a man who professed the Jewish religion, which seems to have charmed by its pure morality and simple monotheism many of the noblest minds of that age. But, like all outsiders, Sergius Paulus did not make accurate and just distinctions between man and man. He yielded himself to the guidance of a man who traded on the name of a Jew, but who really practised those rites of weird sorcery which real Judaism utterly repudiated and denounced. This alone accounts for the stern language of St. Paul: "O full of all guile and all villainy, thou son of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?" St. Paul never addressed a lawful opponent in this manner. He did not believe in the efficacy of strong language in itself, nor did he abuse those who withstood him in honest argument. But he did not hesitate, on the other hand, to brand a deceiver as he deserved, or to denounce in scathing terms those who were guilty of conscious fraud. St. Paul might well be taken as a model controversialist in this respect. He knew how to distinguish between the genuine opponent who might be mistaken but was certainly conscientious, and the fraudulent hypocrite devoid of all convictions save the conviction of the value of money. With the former St. Paul was full of courtesy, patience, consideration, because he had in himself experience of the power of blind unthinking prejudice. For the latter class St. Paul had no consideration, and with them he wasted no time. His honest soul took their measure at once. He denounced them as he did Elymas on this occasion, and then passed on to deal with nobler and purer souls, where honest and good hearts offered more promising soil for the reception of the Word of the Kingdom. Controversy of every kind is very trying to tongue and temper, but religious controversy such as that in which St. Paul spent his life is specially trying to the character. The subject is so important that it seems to excuse an over zeal and earnestness which terminates in bad temper and unwise language. And yet we sometimes cannot shrink from controversy, because conscience demands it on our part. When that happens to be the case, it will be well for us to exercise the most rigorous control over our feelings and our words; from time to time to realise by a momentary effort of introspection Christ hanging upon the cross and bearing for us the unworthy and unjust reproaches of mankind; for thus and thus only will pride be kept down and hot temper restrained and that great advantage for the truth secured which self-control always bestows upon its possessor. There is an interesting illustration of the historic accuracy of St. Luke connected with the apostolic visit to Paphos and to Sergius Paulus the proconsul. Thrice over in the narrative of St. Luke, Sergius Paulus is called proconsul-first in the seventh verse of the thirteenth chapter, where Elymas the sorcerer is described thus, "who was with the proconsul, Sergius Paulus, a man of understanding," while again the same title of proconsul is applied to Sergius in the eighth and twelfth verses. This has been the cause of much misunderstanding and of no small reproach hurled against the sacred writer. Let us inquire into its justice and the facts of the case. The Roman provinces were divided into two classes, senatorial and imperial. The senatorial provinces were ruled by proconsuls appointed by the Senate; the imperial by pro-praetors appointed by the emperors. This arrangement was made by Augustus Caesar, and is reported to us by Strabo, who lived and wrote during St. Paul’s early manhood. But now a difficulty arises. Strabo gives us the list of the provinces senatorial and imperial alike, and expressly classes Cyprus amongst the imperial provinces, which were ruled by propraetors and not by proconsuls. In the opinion of the older critics, St. Luke was thus plainly convicted of a mistake and of a flagrant contradiction of that great authority the geographer Strabo. But it is never safe to jump to conclusions of that kind with respect to a contemporaneous writer who has proved himself accurate on other occasions. It is far better and far safer to say, Let us wait a while, and see what further investigations will reveal. And so it has proved in this special case. Strabo tells us of the original arrangement made about thirty years B.C. between the Emperor Augustus and the Senate, when Cyprus was most certainly numbered amongst the imperial provinces; but he omits to tell us what another historian of the same century, Dion Cassius, does relate, that the same Emperor modified this arrangement five years later, handing Cyprus and Gallia Narbo-nensis over to the rule of the Senate, so that from that date and henceforth throughout the first century of our era Cyprus was governed by proconsuls alone, as St. Luke most accurately, though only incidentally, reports. Here, too the results of modern investigation among inscriptions and coins have come in to supplement and support the testimony of historians. The Greek inscriptions discovered prior to and during the earlier half of this century have been collected together in Boeckh’s "Corpus of Greek Inscriptions," which is, indeed, a vast repertory of original documents concerning the life, Pagan and Christian, of the Greek world. In the inscriptions numbered 2631 and 2632 in that valuable work we have the names of Q. Julius Cordus and L. Annius Bassus expressly mentioned as proconsuls of Cyprus in A.D. 51, 52; while on coins of Cyprus have been found the names of Cominius Proclus and Quadratus, who held the same office. But the very latest investigations have borne striking testimony to the same fact. The name of the very proconsul whom St. Paul addressed appears on an inscription discovered in our own time. Cyprus has been thoroughly investigated since it passed into British hands, specially by General Cesnola, who has written a work on the subject which is well worth reading by those who take an interest in Scripture lands and the scenes where the apostles laboured. In that work, p. 425, Cesnola tells us of a mutilated inscription which he recovered dealing with some subject of no special importance, but bearing the following precious notice giving its date as "Under Paulus the Proconsul"; proving to us by contemporary evidence that Sergius Paulus ruled the island, and ruled it with the special title of proconsul. Surely an instance like this-and we shall have several such to notice-is quite enough to make fair minds suspend their judgment when charges of inaccuracy are alleged against St. Luke dependent upon our own ignorance alone of the entire facts of the case. A wider knowledge, a larger investigation we may well be sure will suffice to clear the difficulty and vindicate the fair fame of the sacred historian. From Cyprus the apostles passed over to the continent, and opened their missionary work at Antioch of Pisidia, where the first, recorded address of St. Paul was delivered. This sermon, delivered in the Pisidian synagogue, is deserving of our special notice because it is the only missionary address delivered by St. Paul to the Jews of the Dispersion which has been handed down to us, unless we include the few words delivered to the Roman Jews reported in the twenty-eighth chapter from the seventeenth to the twenty-eighth verses. Let us briefly analyse it, premising that it should be carefully compared with the addresses of St. Peter to the Jews upon the Day of Pentecost and with the speech delivered by St. Stephen before the Sanhedrin, when all three will be found to run upon the same lines. The apostles having reached Antioch waited until the Sabbath came round, and then sought the local meeting-place of the Jews. The apostles felt indeed that they were intrusted with a great mission important for the human race, but yet they knew right well that feverish impetuosity or restless activity was not the true way to advance the cause they had in hand. They did not believe in wild irregular actions which only stir up opposition. They were calm and dignified in their methods, because they were consciously guided by the Divine Spirit of Him concerning whom it was said in the days of His flesh, "He did not strive nor cry, neither did any man hear His voice in the streets." On the Sabbath day they entered the synagogue, and took their place on a bench set apart for the reception of those who were regarded as teachers. At the conclusion of the public worship and the reading of the lessons out of the law and the prophets, such as still are read in the synagogue worship, the Rulers of the Synagogue sent to them the minister or apostle of the synagogue, intimating their permission to address the assembled congregation, whereupon St. Paul arose and delivered an address, of which the following is an analysis. St. Paul opened his sermon by a reference to the lessons which had just been read in the service, which-as all the writers of the Apostle’s life, Lewin, Conybeare and Howson, and Archdeacon Farrar, agree-were taken from the first chapter of Deuteronomy and the first of Isaiah. He points out, as St. Stephen had done, the providential dealings of God with their forefathers from the time of the original choice of Abraham down to David. The Jews had been divinely guided throughout their history down to David’s days, and that Divine guidance had not then ceased, but continued down to the present, as the Apostle then proceeds to show. In David’s seed there had been left a hope for Israel Which every true Jew still cherished. He then announces that the long-cherished hope had now at last been fulfilled. This fact depended not on his testimony alone. The Messiah whom they had long expected had been preceded by a prophet whose reputation had spread into these distant regions, and had gained disciples, as we shall afterwards find, at Ephesus. John the Baptist had announced the Messiah’s appearance, and proclaimed his own inferiority to Him. But then an objection occurs to the Apostle which might naturally be raised. If John’s reputation and doctrine had penetrated to Antioch, the story of the crucifixion of Jesus may also have been reported there, and the local Jews may therefore have concluded that such an ignominious death was conclusive against the claims of Jesus. The Apostle then proceeds to show how that the providential rule of God had been exercised even in that matter. The wrath of man had been compelled to praise God, and even while the rulers at Jerusalem were striving to crush Jesus Christ they were in reality fulfilling the voices of the prophets which went beforehand and proclaimed the sufferings of the Messiah exactly as they had happened. And further still, God had set His seal to the truth of the story by raising Jesus Christ from the dead according to the predictions of the Old Testament, which he expounds after the manner of the Jewish schools, finding a hint of the Resurrection of Christ in Isaiah 55:3 : "I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David"; and a still clearer one Psalm 16:10 : "Thou wilt not give Thine Holy One to see corruption." The Apostle, after quoting this text, which from its use by St. Peter on the Day of Pentecost seems to have been a passage commonly quoted in the Jewish controversy, terminates his discourse with a proclamation of the exalted blessings which the Messiah has brought, indicating briefly but clearly the universal character of the gospel promises, and finishing with a w