Acts - 7:1



1 The high priest said, "Are these things so?"

Verse In-Depth

Explanation and meaning of Acts 7:1.

Differing Translations

Compare verses for better understanding.
Then said the high priest, Are these things so?
And the chief priest said, 'Are then these things so?'
Then the High Priest asked him, "Are these statements true?"
Then the high priest said, Are these things true?
Then the high priest asked, "Is this true?"

*Minor differences ignored. Grouped by changes, with first version listed as example.


Historical Commentaries

Scholarly Analysis and Interpretation.

There appeareth as yet some color of equity in the high priest and in the council; and yet, notwithstanding, there is a most unjust prejudice in his words; for he asketh him not what cause he had to teach thus, neither doth he admit him unto the defense of right, (which was, notwithstanding, the chief;) but he demanded precisely whether Stephen uttered these words, whatsoever they were; as the Papists at this day will not demand what doctrine it is, and whether it can be proved out of the Scriptures; but they inquire [1] whether any man durst mutter against their superstitions, that so soon as he is convict, they may forthwith burn [2] him. Furthermore, Stephen's answer may seem at the first blush absurd and foolish. He beginneth first at the very first beginning; afterwards he maketh a long narration, wherein there is no mention made, in a manner, of the matter in hand; and there can be no greater fault than to utter many words which are nothing appertinent unto the matter; [3] but whosoever shall thoroughly consider this long speech, he shall find nothing therein which is superfluous; and shall full well perceive that Stephen speaketh very ap-pertinently, [4] as the matter requireth. He was accused as an apostate (or revolt,) which did attempt the overthrow of religion and the worship of God; therefore, he beateth in [5] this diligently, that he retaineth that God which the fathers have always worshipped, so that he turneth away the crime of wicked backsliding; [6] and declareth that his enemies were pricked forward with nothing less than with the zeal of the law, for they bear a show that they were wholly determined [7] to increase the glory of God; therefore, he wringeth from them this false boasting, and because they had the fathers always in their mouths, because they were puffed up with the glory of their nation, Stephen declareth also that they have no cause to be proud of this, but rather that the corruptions of the fathers were so great and so many, that they ought to be ashamed and humbled. As concerning the principal state of the cause, because the question was concerning the temple and the ceremonies, he affirmeth plainly that their fathers were elected of God to be a peculiar people before there was any temple, and before Moses was born; and to this end tendeth that exordium or beginning which is so far fet, (fetched.) Secondly, he telleth them that all external rites which God gave by the hand of Moses were fashioned according to the heavenly pattern. Whereupon it followeth, that the ceremonial law is referred unto another end, and that those deal foolishly and disorderly who omit the truth, and stay only in the signs. If the readers shall refer the whole oration of Stephen unto these points, they shall find nothing therein which agreeth not very well with the cause, as I shall declare again briefly in the end; nevertheless, that scope of the whole oration shall not hinder but that we may discuss all things briefly which are worth the noting.

Footnotes

1 - "Sed tanum hoc quaerint," but the only thing they ask is.

2 - "Vulcano devoveant," devote him to Vulcan, (to the flames.)

3 - "Et extra rem vagari," and wander from the subject.

4 - "Apposito," appositely.

5 - "Sedulo igitur inculcat," he therefore strenuously maintains.

6 - "Ita impiae defectiones cremen avertit," he thus repels the charge of impious defection or revolt.

7 - "Simulabant enim nihil sibi esse propositum quam," for they pretended that their only object was.

Then said the high priest - See the notes on Matthew 2:4. In this case the high priest seems to have presided in the council.
Are these things so? - To wit, the charge alleged against him of blasphemy against Moses and the temple, Acts 6:13-14.

Are these things so? - Hast thou predicted the destruction of the temple? And hast thou said that Jesus of Nazareth shall change our customs, abolish our religious rites and temple service? Hast thou spoken these blasphemous things against Moses, and against God? Here was some color of justice; for Stephen was permitted to defend himself. And, in order to do this he thought it best to enter into a detail of their history from the commencement of their nation; and thus show how kindly God had dealt with them, and how ungraciously they and their fathers had requited Him. And all this naturally led him to the conclusion, that God could no longer bear with a people the cup of whose iniquity had been long overflowing; and therefore they might expect to find wrath, without mixture of mercy.
But how could St. Luke get all this circumstantial account? He might have been present, and heard the whole; or, more probably, he had the account from St. Paul, whose companion he was, and who was certainly present when St. Stephen was judged and stoned, for he was consenting to his death, and kept the clothes of them who stoned him. See Acts 7:58; Acts 8:1; Acts 22:20.

Then (1) said the high priest, Are these things so?
(1) Steven is allowed to plead his cause, but for this reason and purpose, that under a disguise and pretence of the Law he might be condemned.

Then said the high priest,.... The Ethiopic version adds, "to him"; that is, to Stephen; for to him he addressed himself: or he "asked him", as the Syriac version renders it; he put the following question to him:
are these things so? is it true what they say, that thou hast spoken blasphemous words against the temple, and the law, and hast said that Jesus of Nazareth will destroy the one, and change the other? what hast thou to say for thyself, and in thine own defence? this high priest was either Annas, or rather Caiaphas; See Gill on Acts 4:6.

Stephen was charged as a blasphemer of God, and an apostate from the church; therefore he shows that he is a son of Abraham, and values himself on it. The slow steps by which the promise made to Abraham advanced toward performance, plainly show that it had a spiritual meaning, and that the land intended was the heavenly. God owned Joseph in his troubles, and was with him by the power of his Spirit, both on his own mind by giving him comfort, and on those he was concerned with, by giving him favour in their eyes. Stephen reminds the Jews of their mean beginning as a check to priding themselves in the glories of that nation. Likewise of the wickedness of the patriarchs of their tribes, in envying their brother Joseph; and the same spirit was still working in them toward Christ and his ministers. The faith of the patriarchs, in desiring to be buried in the land of Canaan, plainly showed they had regard to the heavenly country. It is well to recur to the first rise of usages, or sentiments, which have been perverted. Would we know the nature and effects of justifying faith, we should study the character of the father of the faithful. His calling shows the power and freeness of Divine grace, and the nature of conversion. Here also we see that outward forms and distinctions are as nothing, compared with separation from the world, and devotedness to God.

Are these things so? As president, the high priest asks what reply Stephen has to make to the charges.

*More commentary available at chapter level.


Discussion on Acts 7:1

User discussion of the verse.






*By clicking Submit, you agree to our Privacy Policy & Terms of Use.