Commentary on Acts 7:55-60

By Bob Myhan

⁵⁵ But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, ⁵⁶ and said, "Look! I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!"

In all likelihood Stephen’s seeing Jesus is a miraculous vision not shared with the council. It would be similar to that of Saul which was not shared by those who were with him. (9:1-7)

The “right hand of God” is a position of authority. Other than the gospels, the designation “Son of Man” is used only in Acts, Hebrews and Revelation. Even in the gospels it is used almost exclusively by Jesus Himself. In fact, the last time the council heard the term was when Jesus was standing before them.

Now the chief priests, the elders, and all the council sought false testimony against Jesus to put Him to death, but found none. Even though many false witnesses came forward, they found none. But at last two false witnesses came forward and said, "This fellow said, 'I am able to destroy the temple of God and to build it in three days.'" And the high priest arose and said to Him, "Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?" But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, "I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!" Jesus said to him, "It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven." (Matthew 26:64; see also Mark 14:62; Luke 22:69)

Jesus was not the Son of a man but the Son of Man. The term probably did not mean merely that Jesus partook of humanity but that He was the epitome of manhood. And, as the Son of God, He was the epitome of Sonship.

They would not literally see Jesus “sitting at the right hand of God” but figuratively see Him there as they witnessed the establishment and enlargement of the spiritual kingdom from which they excluded themselves by their attitude.

Then Paul and Barnabas grew bold and said, "It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles.” (13:46)

⁵⁷ Then they cried out with a loud voice, stopped their ears, and ran at him with one accord; ⁵⁸ and they cast him out of the city and stoned him. And the witnesses laid down their clothes at the feet of a young man named Saul.

They were furious at his charge concerning their attitude (verse 54), proving him correct in his assessment, and they were even more so when he announced that the One whom they had crucified was “standing at the right hand of God” just as Jesus predicted. The terms, “sitting” and standing” are not to be taken literally.

J.W. McGarvey makes this observation.

“This was a strange way for a court to break up; the whole body of seventy grave rabbis, whose official duty it was to watch for the faithful and regular proceedings of law, leaving their seats, and rushing with the wild mob, amid hideous outcries and tumultuous rage, to the sudden execution of a prisoner absolutely untried and uncondemned. But the maddest pranks ever played upon this mad earth are witnessed when wicked men set themselves in uncompromising opposition to God and his holy truth. So uniformly has this been true in history, that, at the present day, when such opposition is to be sustained, whether on great or insignificant occasion, no well-informed man expects aught else than disregard of all the rules of justice and propriety. If the infuriated scenes which have been enacted under such circumstances, in the history of Christianity, could be dramatically represented, the performance might be appropriately styled, The Madman's Drama.” (A Commentary on Acts of Apostles, with a Revised Version of the Text)

The role of Saul here is not that of an innocent onlooker or passerby but of a proud instigator who refuses to soil his own hands by engaging directly in the dirty deed. He himself later said, “And when the blood of Your martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by consenting to his death, and guarding the clothes of those who were killing him.” (22:20)

⁵⁹ And they stoned Stephen as he was calling on God and saying, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." ⁶⁰ Then he knelt down and cried out with a loud voice, "Lord, do not charge them with this sin." And when he had said this, he fell asleep.

Stephen is a prime example of one who was “ready to give a defense to everyone who asks . . . a reason for the hope.” (1 Peter 3:15) He truly committed his soul “to Him in doing good, as to a faithful Creator.” (1 Peter 4:19)

It would be difficult to conceive of a better death than that of Stephen. He died for the greatest cause on earth—the salvation of human souls. More than that, he died praying. To die at the hands of others with Jesus’ name of one’s lips is the result of moral courage. What is even more profound is to die at the hands of others while praying for those responsible.

(To be continued)

The Lord’s People Part #3

By Bob Myhan

Entrance into the family of God is a simple matter. First, one must do the will of the Father in heaven (Matt. 12:48-50). But what does God will that we do in order to enter into His family? He wills that we have faith (Gal. 3:26; Heb. 11:6).

Of course, those who believe “he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him” will seek Him diligently. However, it is necessary to seek Him within the pages of His word; “faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:17). But “Faith without works is dead” (James 2:20, 26); therefore the only faith that will please God is “obedient faith” (Rom. 1:5; 16:25-26). When one has enough faith to repent and be baptized in water for the remission of sins, he is adopted into the family of God (Mark 16:15-16; Acts 2:38; 10:45; 22:16; Gal. 3:26-27; 4:1-7).

Just as those in the universal family of man are divided into individual, local families, those in the universal family of God are divided into individual, local families (Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:5; Acts 14:23; 20:17, 28; 1 Peter 5:1-2).

The Kingdom of God

Another figure Jesus used for the relationship between Him and His Father, on the one hand, and the Lord’s people, on the other hand, is that of a political kingdom (Dan. 2:36-44). Let us notice the essential elements of a kingdom.

There are four essential elements of a kingdom.

1. There is a king. God the father, by virtue of His position in the Godhead, is Absolute Sovereign (Matt. 28:19; Eph. 4:6; Matt. 6:9-10; Mark 1:14-15). He has given all authority in the kingdom to His Son, Jesus Christ (Matt. 28:18; Rev. 1:9; 1 Cor. 15:23-28).

2. There are subjects over whom the king reigns. The subjects are all those who have been “born again” “of water and of the Spirit” (John 3:3-5) and have been “delivered…from the power of darkness, and…translated…into the kingdom of his dear Son” (Col. 1:12-13).

3. There is the territory over which the king reigns. Inasmuch as the Kingdom of God is spiritual in nature (John 18:36), its territory is likewise spiritual—the human heart (Luke 17:20-21; Matt. 4:17; 28:18).

4. There must be a law, an expression of the king’s will. The law of the Kingdom of God is the New Testament—the revelation of God through His Son (Heb. 1:1-2; John 6:44-45; 12:48; 14:6; 1 Cor. 9:21). Second, they have the responsibility to be obedient to their Father, and to those whom the Father has appointed over them (Romans 8:12-17; Ephesians 5:22-24; 6:1-3, 5-8; Hebrews 13:7, 17; 1 Peter 1:13-17).

(To be continued)

Melchizedek: A Type of Christ

By Bob Myhan

Many are confused about the identity of Melchizedek but they need not be. Melchizedek is first introduced in Genesis 14:1-20. He is not mentioned again until Psalm 110:4 where David, by inspiration, uses him as a type of the Priesthood of Christ. He was a human being and, as such, he had both a mother and a father. However, since he is introduced as a full grown man, his death is nowhere recorded and the Scriptures are also silent regarding the line of priests who may or may not have followed him, "He is without father or mother or genealogy, having neither beginning of days not end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever" in the biblical account.

Jesus—as a man—had both a mother and a genealogy but He did not inherit His priesthood from either a male or female parent. Nor did He inherit the priesthood due to His genealogy. And His earthy life had both a beginning and an end. We should not, therefore, think Melchizedek was an angel or a pre-incarnation of Jesus.

For those who never saw a typewriter, the type was at the end of a long arm hinged near the roller where the paper was. Each arm was also connected to the various keys on the keyboard. As the keys were struck by the fingers, the type would strike the paper (with the ribbon between the two) and produce the desired character (the anti-type) on the page. There was a resemblance between the type and anti-type but only in the case of the A, H, I, M, O, T, U, V, W, X and Y were they identical. &