Acts 6:13

Act 6:13. Οὐ παύεται, ceaseth not) They attempt to create odium against him.—ῥήματα λαλῶν, to speak words of blasphemy) The same phrase occurs in Luk 12:10.—τοῦ νόμου, the law) See Act 6:14, at the end. Comp. ch. Act 21:28.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Act 6:13 . οὗτος : here and in Act 6:14 used contemptuously, iste , so Vulgate; cf. Act 7:40 , Act 18:18 , Act 19:26 , ὁ Παῦλος οὗτος . οὐ παύεται λαλῶν : the words in themselves are sufficient to indicate the exaggerated and biassed character of the testimony brought against Stephen “invidiam facere conantur,” Bengel, βλάσφημα omitted, see above. μάρτυρας ψευδεῖς , “false,” inasmuch as they perverted the meaning of Stephen’s words, which were no blasphemy against Moses or against God, although no doubt he had taught the transitory nature of the Mosaic law, and that the true worship of God was not confined to the Temple (see Weizsäcker, Apostolic Age , i., 64, 83, E.T., and Wendt, p. 148 (1899)). So also in the very same manner Christ’s words had been perverted (Joh 2:21 , cf. Mar 14:56 , Mat 27:63 ), and it is likely enough that the spirit of His teaching as to the Sabbath, the laws of purifying, the fulfilling of the law, breathed again in the words of His disciples. But such utterances were blasphemous in the eyes of the Jewish legalists, and Stephen’s own words, Act 7:48-49 , might well seem to them an affirmation rather than a denial of the charges brought against him. κατἀ τοῦ τόπου τοῦ ἁγίου τούτου : if τούτου is retained (W.H [198] ), phrase could refer not only to the Temple as the holy place, but also to the place of assembly of the Sanhedrim, where according to Act 6:15 the charge was brought, which was probably situated on the Temple Mount on the western side of the enclosing wall, Schürer, Jewish People , div. ii., vol. i., p. 190, E.T., so Hilgenfeld and Wendt, and also Blass, who adds “itaque etiam τούτου (, cf. 14) recte se habet,” although he omits the word in his own text. Weiss thinks that the word dropped out because it could have no reference to a scene in the Sanhedrim.

[198] Westcott and Hort’s The New Testament in Greek: Critical Text and Notes.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

An example of cavillers or false accusers, which gather false conclusions of things that are well uttered and spoken.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Verse 13. Against this holy place] The temple, that it shall be destroyed.

And the law] That it cannot give life, nor save from death. It is very likely that they had heard him speak words to this amount, which were all as true as the spirit from which they proceeded; but they gave them a very false colouring, as we see in the succeeding verse.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(13) Against this holy place.—The new feature of Stephen’s preaching comes into greater prominence.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

13. and set up false witnesses which said] Their falseness consists in the perverted turn which they gave to the words of Stephen. Though we have no words of his hitherto recorded, we can see from the character of his defence in the next chapter that he must have been heard to declare that the worship of God was no longer to be restricted as it had been to the Temple at Jerusalem. And just as in the accusation of Christ (Mat_26:61) the witnesses (called, as here, false, and for a like reason) perverted a saying of Jesus, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up,” which St John (Joh_2:21) explains, into “I am able to destroy the temple of God and to build it in three days,” so the words of Stephen which spake of a worship now “to be bound to no fixed spot, and fettered by no inflexible externality” (Zeller), were twisted into blasphemy against the Temple and the law, called in Act_6:11 blasphemy against Moses and against God; and by the use of these two phrases as equivalent the one to the other, they shew us how God and Moses meant for them no more than their Temple and its ritual.

This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words] The best authorities omit blasphemous.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And set up false witnesses,.... Having hired them, they brought them and set them before the sanhedrim, to bear witness against Stephen:

which said, this man; meaning Stephen, who was now before the council, at whom they pointed, and whose name, through contempt, they would not mention:

ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place; either the city of Jerusalem, which is sometimes called the holy city, and which was foretold by the angel to Daniel, and by Christ, that it should be destroyed, and which Stephen might speak of; or rather the temple, so the Ethiopic version; in a part of which, or in a place contiguous to it, the sanhedrim might now be sitting:

and the law; the ceremonial law: the sense is, that Stephen was continually telling the people, that in a little time their temple would be destroyed, and an end be put to temple worship, and to all the rituals and ceremonies of the law of Moses; the Vulgate Latin and Syriac versions leave out the word "blasphemous"; and so do the Alexandrian copy, and Beza's most ancient one; but as Beza observes, it is certain, or at least it is most likely, that it was not omitted by the false witnesses; though speaking against the temple and the law was sufficient to make good a charge of blasphemy.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

13 And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law:

Ver. 13. Blasphemous words] So was Athanasius accused.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And set up false witnesses - It has been made a question why these persons are called “false” witnesses, since it is supposed by many that they reported merely the “words” of Stephen. It may be replied that if they did report merely his “words”; if Stephen had actually said what they affirmed, yet they perverted his meaning. They accused him of “blasphemy”; that is, of calumnious and reproachful words against Moses and against God That Stephen had spoken in such a manner, or had designed to “reproach” Moses, there is no evidence. What was said in the mildest manner, and in the way of cool argument, might easily be perverted so as in “their view” to amount to blasphemy. But there is no evidence whatever that Stephen had ever used these words on any occasion, and it is altogether improbable that he ever did, for the following reasons:

Jesus himself never affirmed that he would destroy that place. He uniformly taught that it would be done by the “Gentiles,” Matt. 24. It is altogether improbable, therefore, that Stephen should declare any such thing.

(2)It is equally improbable that he taught that Jesus would abolish the special customs and rites of the Jews. It was long, and after much discussion, before the apostles themselves were convinced that they were to be changed, and when they were changed it was done gradually. See Act 10:14, etc.; Act 11:2, etc.; Act 15:20; Act 21:20, etc. The probability therefore is, that the whole testimony was “false,” and was artfully invented to produce the utmost exasperation among the people, and yet was at the same time so plausible as to be easily believed. For on this point the Jews were particularly sensitive; and it is clear that they had some expectations that the Messiah would produce some such changes. Compare Mat 26:61 with Dan 9:26-27. The same charge was afterward brought against Paul, which he promptly denied. See Act 25:8.

This holy place - The temple.

The law - The Law of Moses.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

It was true that Jesus would destroy the place, and change their traditions, yet they were false witnesses, because they deposed, that Stephen had made these assertions, which he had not, purposely to excite the Jews to rise up against him, and put him to death. Besides, had Stephen spoken what was advanced against him, they still would have been false witnesses, for the words were in fact words of truth, which these suborned men called, words of blasphemy. See ver. 11.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

They mingled in their testimony false things with truths, as they who witnessed against our Saviour had done. St. Stephen might possibly have inculcated what our Saviour had foretold, Luk 19:43,44, and both have been very innocent; for neither of them spake with any abhorrence of, much less blasphemy against, the law or the temple; but in that the witnesses perverted and added to their words, they are deservedly branded as false witnesses. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, is a granted maxim in the case of witness bearing.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

13. Set up—Made stand.

False witnesses—Before the council or Sanhedrin. The facts adduced by these witnesses were mainly true; but the witnesses infused a false spirit and intent into them as to make facts be lies.

There were five things of which Stephen is charged with blasphemously predicting a change, namely: Moses, Jehovah, (Moses taking precedence in their talk,) this holy place, (the temple and perhaps city,) the law, (place takes precedence of law with them,) and the customs, or entire body of ritual observances. Touching all these, the predictions of Stephen have become history. The perjury of the witnesses which unjustly produced his death consisted in inventing a blasphemous or hostile animus. Stephen announced the disappearance of all that was transient in these, yet not as necessarily, destroyed, but living essentially in their permanent elements with a renewed vitality in the new Christianity. Hence in his defence Stephen seeks to give such a rehearsal of Israel’s whole history as to show that his Christianity joins on to it as the latest and most natural development of the New from the Old. So far from hostility or blasphemy against these venerable five, he reverently claims them as among the antecedents to the divine consequents embraced in Jesus Messiah, and would urge his countrymen to identify themselves while they may with the coming New.

And here commences the great fracture anticipated in our note on Act_4:1, between Judaism and Christianity, which scattered the Pentecostal Church, and has lasted for ages. (See note on Act_10:1.) Its termination is indicated in Rom_11:32-36.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Words for blasphemous words, A.V. and T.R. Set up false witnesses. The similarity of Stephen"s trial to that of our Lord is striking. The same set purpose to silence a true-speaking tongue by death; the same base employment of false witnesses; the same wresting of good words into criminal acts; and the same meekness and patience unto death in the righteous martyrs. Blessed servant to tread so closely in thy Lord"s steps! (Mat_5:11, 12 1Pe_4:14-16) This holy place; the Sanhedrim sat in one of the chambers of the temple, called Gazith. This had been prohibited by the Romans, but the prohibition was in abeyance in the present time of anarchy (Lewin).

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

See notes on verse 11

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

13, 14. Set up false witnesses. False, in that they perverted what he said, so as to give it a meaning not meant. Against this holy place. The temple. He may have said that it would be destroyed (see Matt. 24:2). And the law. He probably said what Paul so often said. See Gal. 3:24, 25. The next verse shows the tenor of his preaching. He no doubt did preach the end of the Jewish dispensation and the reign of Christ, but he neither blasphemed Moses nor God.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

13. λαλῶν ῥήματα omitting βλάσφημα with אABCD. Vulg. ‘loqui verba’ only.

τούτου omitted with אDEHP. Vulg. ‘locum sanctum’ only.

13. μάρτυρας ψευδεῖς, false witnesses. Their falseness consists in the perverted turn which they gave to the words of Stephen. Though we have no speech of his hitherto recorded, we can see from the character of his defence in the next chapter that he must have been heard to declare that the worship of God was no longer to be restricted as it had been to the Temple at Jerusalem. And just as in the accusation of Christ (Mat 26:61) the witnesses (called, as here, false, and for a like reason) perverted a saying of Jesus, ‘Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up,’ which St John (Joh 2:21) explains, into ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God and to build it in three days,’ so the words of Stephen, which spake of a worship now ‘to be bound to no fixed spot, and fettered by no inflexible externality’ (Zeller), were twisted into an utterance against the Temple and the Law, called in Act 6:11 blasphemy against Moses and against God; and by the use of these two phrases as equivalent the one to the other, they shew us how God and Moses meant for them no more than their Temple and its ritual.

οὐ παύεται λαλῶν ῥήματα, ceaseth not to speak words.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

13. ψευδεῖς] The falsehood of their witness consisted, as in the similar case of our Lord, in taking Stephen’s words out of their context, and misrepresenting what perhaps, totidem verbis, he had actually said.

τοῦ τόπ. τ. ἁγ.] The temple, see reff.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.