would involve them in danger. With this purpose they implored the protection of God; they asked that he would not suffer them to be deterred from speaking boldly; and they sought that constant and additional proof might be granted of the presence and power of God to confirm the truth of their message. And grant, &c.This is an instance of heroic boldness, and a determination to persevere in doing their duty to God. When we are assailed by those in power, when we are persecuted and in danger, we should commit our way unto God, and seek his aid, that we may not be deterred from the path of duty.

VER. 30. By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.

≈ Chap. ii. 43; v. 12.

By stretching forth thine hand, &c. The apostles not only desired boldness to speak, but they asked that God would continue to work miracles, and thus furnish to them, and to the people, evidence of the truth of what they delivered. They did not even ask that he would preserve their lives, or keep them from danger. They were intent on their work, and they confidently committed their way to God, making it their great object to promote the knowledge of the truth, and seeking that God would glorify himself by establishing his kingdom among men. Signs and wonders.-Miracles. Notes, chap. ii. 43.

VER. 31. And when they had prayed," the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with

boldness.

a Chap. ii. 2, 4; xvi. 26. b Ver. 29.

was

And when they had prayed.-The event which followed was regarded by them as an evidence that God heard their prayer. The place was shaken.-The word which is translated " shaken," commonly denotes violent agitation, as the raging of the sea, the convulsion of an earthquake, or trees shaken by the wind. (Matt. xi. 7. Acts xvi. 26. Heb. xii. 26.) The language here is fitted to express the idea of an earthquake. Whether the motion was confined to the house where they were, is not said. They probably regarded this as an answer to their prayer, or as an evidence that God would be with them, (1.) Because it was sudden and violent, and was not produced by any natural causes; (2.) Because it occurred immediately, while they were seeking divine direction; (3.) Because it was an exhibition of great power, and was an evidence that God could protect them; and (4.) Because a convulsion so great, sudden, and mighty, was fitted at that time to awe them with a proof of the presence and power of God. A similar instance of an answer to prayer by an earthquake is recorded in Acts xvi. 25, 26. Comp. chap. ii. 1, 2. It may be added, that among the Jews

an earthquake was very properly regarded as a striking and impressive proof of the presence of Jehovah. Isa. xxix. 6. Psa. lxviii. 8. "The earth shook, the heavens also dropped at the presence of God, the God of Israel." See also the sublime description in Habakkuk iii. particularly ver. 6-11. Comp. Matt. xxvii. 54. Among the heathen, an earthquake was regarded as proof of the presence and favour of the Deity. (See Virgil, Æneid iii. 89.) They were all filled, &c. -Notes, chap. ii. 4. Their being filled with the Holy Ghost here rather denotes their being inspired with confidence or boldness, than being endowed with new powers, as in Acts ii. 4.

C

VER. 32. And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart, and of one soul: neither said any of them that aught of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.

c Rom. xv. 5, 6. 2 Cor. xiii. 11. Phil. ii. 2. 1 Pet. iii. 8. d Chap. ii. 14.

And the multitude.-The number of believers at this time had become large. In chap. iv. 4, it is said that it was five thousand; and the number was constantly increasing. One heart.-This expression denotes tender union. They felt alike, or were attached to the same things, and this preserved them from jars and dissensions. One soul.-This phrase also denotes close and tender union. No expression could denote it more strikingly than to say of friends they have one soul." Plutarch cites an ancient verse in his life of Cato of Utica, with this very expression-" Two friends, one soul."-Grotius. Thus Diogenes Laertius also (5. i. 11.) says respecting Aristotle, that "being asked what was a friend; answered, that it was one soul' dwelling in two bodies."-Kuinoel. The Hebrews spake of two friends as being "one man." There can be no more striking demonstration of union and love than to say of more than five thousand suddenly drawn together, that they had one soul! And this union they evinced in every way possible; in their conduct, in their prayers, and in their property. How different would have been the aspect of the church, if the union had continued to the present time. Neither said, &c.That is, they did not regard it as their own, but to be used for the benefit of the whole society. See Notes, chap. ii. 44.

Lord Jesus. This was the main point to be established. If it was proved that the Lord Jesus came to life again after having been put to death, it established all that he taught, and was a demonstration that he was sent from God. They exerted, therefore, all their powers to prove this and their success was such as might have been expected. Multitudes were converted to the Christian faith. And great grace, &c.-The word grace means favour. Note, John i. 16. And the expression here may mean either that the favour of God was remarkably shown to them; or that they had great favour in the sight of the people. It does not refer, as the expression now does commonly, to the internal blessings of religion on a man's own soul; to their personal advancement in the Christian graces of humility, &c.; but to the favour or success that attended their preaching. The meaning probably is, that the favour of the people towards them was great; or that great success attended their ministry among them. Thus the same word "grace" (Greek) is used in chap. ii. 47. If this is its meaning, then here is an instance of the power of the testimony of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus to impress the minds of men. But this is not all, nor probably is it the main idea. It is that their union, their benevolence, their liberality in supplying the wants of the needy, was a means of opening the hearts of the people, and of winning them to the Saviour. If we wish to incline others to our opinions, or to bring them to be Christians, nothing is better adapted to it, than to show them kindness, and even to minister to their temporal wants. Benevolence towards them softens the heart, and inclines them to listen to us. It disarms their prejudices, and disposes them to the exercise of the mild and amiable feelings of religion. Hence our Saviour was engaged in healing the diseases,and supplying the wants of the people. He drew around him the poor, the needy, and the diseased, and supplied their necessities, and thus prepared them to receive his message of truth. Thus God is love, and is constantly doing good, that his goodness may lead men to repentance. (Rom. ii. 4.) And hence no persons have better opportunities to spread the true sentiments of religion, or are clothed with higher responsibilities, than those who have it in their power to do good; or than those who are habitually engaged in bestowing favours. Thus physicians have access to the hearts of men which other persons have not. Thus parents have an easy access to the minds of children, for they are constantly doing them good. And thus Sunday-school teachers, whose whole work is a work of benevolence, have direct and most efficient access to the hearts of the children committed to their care.

VER. 34. Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses, sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,

That lacked. That was in want; or whose wants were not supplied by the others. As many as, &c.-The word used here is employed in a

large, indefinite sense; but it would be improper to press it so as to suppose, that every individual that became a Christian sold at once all his property. The sense doubtless is, that this was done when it was necessary; they parted with whatever property was needful to supply the wants of their poor brethren. That it was by no means considered a matter of obligation, or enjoined by the apostles, is apparent from the case of Ananias. (Chap. v. 4.) The fact that Joses is particularly mentioned, (ver. 36,) shows that it was by no means a universal practice thus to part with all their possessions. He was one instance in which it was done. Perhaps there were many other similar instances; but all that the passage requires us to believe is, that they parted with whatever was needful to supply the wants of the poor. This was an eminent and instructive instance of Christian liberality, and of the power of the gospel in overcoming one of the strongest passions that ever exist in the human bosom-the love of money. Many of the early Christians were poor. They were collected from the lower orders of the people. But all were not so. Some of them, it seems, were men of affluence. The effect of religion was to bring them all, in regard to feeling at least, on a level. They felt that they were members of one family; belonging to the same Redeemer; and they therefore imparted their property cheerfully to their brethren. Besides this, they were about to go to other lands to preach the gospel. They were to leave their native country; and they cheerfully parted with their lands, that they might go and proclaim the unsearchable riches of Christ. See Notes, chap. ii. 44.

mitted the money received for their property to And laid them down, &c.-That is, they comthe disposal of the apostles, to distribute it as was necessary among the poor. This soon became a burdensome and inconvenient office, and they therefore appointed men who had especial charge of it. (Chap. vi. 1, 2,) &c.

VER. 36. And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus,

37. Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles' feet.

And Joses.-Many manuscripts instead of Joses here read Joseph. The reasons why this individual is selected and specified particularly were, doubtless, because he was a foreigner; because it was a remarkable instance of liberality; and because he subsequently distinguished himself in the work of the ministry. He gave himself, his property, his all, to the service of the Lord Jesus, and went forth to the self-denying labours of the

gospel. He is elsewhere mentioned with honour in the New Testament, (Acts xi. 24, 30;) and usually as the companion of the apostle Paul. The occasion on which he became connected with Paul in the ministry was, when he himself was sent forth by the church at Jerusalem to Antioch. There, it seems, he heard of the fame of Paul, and went to Tarsus to seek him, and brought him with him to Antioch. (Acts xi. 22-26.) Before this, he had been acquainted with him, and had introduced him to the other apostles at a time when they were afraid of Paul, and unwilling to acknowledge him as an apostle. (Acts ix. 26, 27.) At Antioch, Barnabas was led into dissimulation by Peter in regard to the Gentiles, and was reproved by his friend and companion, Paul. (Gal. ii. 13.) He and Paul continued to travel in fellowship until a dispute arose at Antioch about Mark, and they separated, Paul going with Silas through Syria and Cilicia, and Barnabas with Mark sailing for his native place, Cyprus. (Acts xv. 35-41.) See the following places for particulars of his history: Acts xi. 22, 25, 30; xii. 25; xiii. 1, 2, 50; xiv. 12; XV. 12. 1 Cor. ix. 6. Gal. ii. 1, 9. Who by the apostles was surnamed, &c.-This name was doubtless given by the apostles. The practice of giving surnames, as expressive of character, was not uncommon. Thus Simon was called Peter, or Cephas, (John i. 44;) and thus James and John were surnamed Boanerges. (Mark iii. 17.) Barnabas, which is, &c.-This word properly denotes "the son of prophecy." It is compounded of two Syriac words, the one meaning son, and the other prophecy. The Greek word which is used to interpret this (πapakλŋσiç,) translated "consolation," means properly also, exhortation, entreaty, petition or advocacy. It also means consolation, or solace; and from this meaning the interpretation has been given to the word Barnabas, but with evident impropriety. It does not appear that the name was bestowed on account of this, though it is probable that he possessed it in an eminent degree, but on account of his talent for speaking, or exhorting the people to holiness, and his success in preaching. Comp. Acts xi. 23. A Levite. One of the descendants of Levi employed in the lower services of the temple. The whole tribe of Levi was set apart to the service of religion. It was divided into Priests and Levites. The three sons of Levi were Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. Of the family of Kohath, Aaron was descended, who was the first highpriest. His eldest son succeeded him, and the remainder of his sons were priests. All the others of the tribe of Levi were called Levites, and were employed in the work of the temple, in assisting the priests in performing sacred music, &c. (Numb. iii. Deut. xii. 18, 19; xviii. 6-8. 1 Chron. xxiii. 24.) Of the country of Cyprus. -Cyprus is the largest island in the Mediterranean; an island extremely fertile, abounding in wine, honey, oil, wool, &c. It is mentioned in Acts xiii. 4; xv. 39. The island is near to Cilicia, and is not far from the Jewish coast. is mentioned by Dion Cassius, (lib, 68, 69,) that the Jews were very numerous in that island. -Clark.

It

Barnabas afterwards became, with Paul, a dis

tinguished preacher to the Gentiles. It is worthy of remark, that both were born in heathen countries, though by descent Jews; and as they were trained in heathen lands, they were better fitted for their peculiar work. The case of Barnabas is that of a man who had property, who entered the ministry, and gave up all for the Lord Jesus. The great mass of ministers, like very many who have been distinguished in other professions, have been taken from the poor, and from humble ranks in life. But all have not been. Many have been wealthy, and have devoted all to Christ; and in regard to others, it is to be remarked, that a very considerable proportion of them could have gained more wealth in some other profession than they do in the ministry. The ministry is a work of self-denial; and none should enter it who are not prepared to devote all to the service of the Lord Jesus Christ.

CHAPTER V.

VER. 1. But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira bis wife, sold a possession,

But a certain man.-In the previous chapter, the historian had given an account of the eminent liberality and sincerity of the mass of early Christians, in being willing to give up their property to provide for the poor, and had mentioned the case of Barnabas as worthy of special attention. In this chapter he proceeds to mention a case, quite as striking, of insincerity and hypocrisy, and of the just judgment of God on those who were guilty of it. The case is a remarkable instance of the nature of hypocrisy, and goes to illustrate the art and cunning of the enemy of souls in attempting to corrupt the church, and to pervert the religion of the gospel. Hypocrisy consists in an attempt to imitate the people of God, or to assume the appearance of religion, in whatever form it may be manifested. In this case religion had been manifested by great selfdenial and benevolence. The hypocrisy of Ananias consisted in attempting to imitate this appearance, and to impose in this way on the early Christians and on God. With Sapphira his wife.

With her concurrence or consent.

It was a

matter of agreement between them. (Ver. 2, 9.) Sold a possession.-The word here used (μα) does not indicate whether this was land or some other property. In ver. 3, however, we learn that it was land that was sold; and the word here translated "possession" is translated in the Syriac, Arabic, and the Latin Vulgate, "land." The pretence for which this was sold was doubtless to have the appearance of religion. That it was sold could be easily known by the Christian society, but it might not be so easily known for how much it was sold. Hence the attempt to impose on the apostles. It is clear that they were not under obligation to sell their property. But having sold it for the purposes of religion, it became their duty, if they professed to devote the avails of it to God, to do it entirely, and without any reservation.

a

a

And kept back.-The word here used means properly to separate, to part; and then it means to separate surreptitiously or clandestinely for our own use a part of public property, as taxes, &c. It is used but three times in the New Tes

tament, (ver. 3, and in Titus ii. 10,) where it is rendered "purloining." Here it means that they secretly kept back a part, while professedly devoting all to God. His wife being privy to it.His wife knowing it, and evidently concurring in it. And laid it at the apostles' feet. This was evidently an act professedly of devoting all to God. Comp. chap. iv. 37, also ver. 8, 9. That this was his profession, or pretence, is further implied in the fact that Peter charges him with having lied unto God. (Ver. 3, 4.) VER. 3. But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of

the land?

b Luke xxii. 3.

cor, to deceive.

d Ver. 9.

e Num. xxx. 2. Deut. xxiii. 21. Eccl. v. 4. But Peter said, &c.-Peter could have known this only by revelation. It was the manifest design of Ananias to deceive; nor was there any way of detecting him but by its being revealed to him by the Spirit of God. As it was an instance of enormous wickedness, and as it was very important to detect and punish the crime, it was made known to Peter directly by God. Why hath Satan.-Great deeds of wickedness in the Scripture are traced to the influence and temptation of Satan. Comp. Luke xxii. 3. John xiii. 27. Especially is Satan called the father of lies. (John viii. 44, 45. Comp. Gen. iii. 1-5.) | As this was an act of falsehood, or an attempt to deceive, it is with great propriety traced to the influence of Satan. The sin of Ananias consisted in his yielding to the temptation. Nowhere in the Bible are men supposed to be free from guilt, from the fact that they have been tempted to commit it. God requires them to resist temptation; and if they yield to it they must be punished. Filled thine heart.-A man's heart or mind is full of a thing when he is intent on it; when he is strongly impelled to it; or when he is fully occupied with it. The expression here means that he was strongly impelled or excited by Satan to this crime. To lie to.-To attempt to deceive. The deception which he meant to practise was, to keep back a part of the price, while he pretended to bring the whole of it; thus tempting God, and supposing that he could not detect the fraud. The Holy Ghost, rò Ïlvevμa тò ❝ytov.The main inquiry here is, whether the apostle Peter intended to designate in this place the third person of the Trinity; or whether he meant to speak of God as God, without any reference to the distinction of persons; or to the divine influence which inspired the apostles, without reference to the peculiar offices which are commonly

Acts

is there a distinction here recognised between the Father and the Holy Spirit? That there is, will be apparent from the following considerations: (1.) If no such distinction is intended, it is remarkable that Peter did not use the usual and customary name of God. It does not appear why he guarded it so carefully as to denote that this offence was committed against the Holy Ghost, and the Spirit of the Lord. (Ver. 9.) (2.) The name here used is the one employed in the Scriptures to designate the third Person of the Trinity, as implying a distinction from the Father. See Matt. iii. 16; i. 18, 20; iii. 11; xii. 32; xxviii. 19. Mark i. 8; iii. 29; xii. 36. Luke xii. 10. John xiv. 26; vii. 39; xx. 22. iv. 8; v. 32, &c. (3.) Peter intended, doubtless, to designate an offence as committed particularly against the person, or influence, by which he and the other apostles were inspired. Ananias supposed that he could escape detection: and the offence was one, therefore, against the Inspirer of the apostles. Yet that was the Holy 16, 17, 26; xv. 26; xvi. 7-11; xx. 22. Comp. Acts v. 32. The offence, therefore, being against him who was sent by the Father, who was appointed to a particular work, clearly supposes that the Holy Spirit is distinct from the Father. (4.) A farther incidental proof of this may be found in the fact that the sin here committed was one of peculiar magnitude; so great as to be deemed worthy of the immediate and signal vengeance of God. Yet the sin against the Holy Ghost is uniformly represented to be of this description. Comp. Matt. xii. 31, 32. Mark iii. 28, 29. As these sins evidently coincide in enormity, it is clear that the same class of sins is referred to in both places; or, in other words, the sin of Ananias was against the third Person of the Trinity.-Two remarks may be made here. (1.) The Holy Ghost is a distinct person from the Father and the Son; or, in other words, there is a distinction of some kind in the Divine nature that may be denominated by the word person. This is clear from the fact that sin is said to have been committed against him; a sin which it was supposed could not be detected. Sin cannot be committed against an attribute of God, or an influence from God. We cannot lie unto an attribute, or against wisdom, or power, or goodness; nor can we lie unto an influence, merely, of the Most High. Sin is committed against a being, not against an attribute; and as a sin is here charged on Ananias against the Holy Ghost, it follows that the Holy Ghost has a personal existence; or there is such a distinction in the Divine essence as that it may be proper to specify a sin as committed peculiarly against him. In the same way sin may be represented as committed peculiarly against the Father, when his name is blasphemed; when his dominion is denied; when his mercy in sending his Son is called in question. Sin may be represented as committed against the Son, when his atonement is denied, his divinity assailed, his character derided, or his invitations slighted. And thus sin may be represented as committed against the Holy Ghost, when his office of re

Ghost as distinct from the Father. See John xiv.