Charles Ellicott Commentary Acts 8:1

"And Saul was consenting unto his death. And there arose on that day a great persecution against the church which was in Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles." — Acts 8:1 (ASV)

And Saul was consenting to his death.—The word seems carefully chosen to convey the fact that he did not himself take part in the stoning, but contented himself with guiding and directing the murder. He kept the garments of the witnesses who flung the stones (Acts 22:20). The statement came, we can scarcely doubt, from St. Paul’s own lips, and in his use of the same word in the passage just referred to, and in Romans 1:32, we may see an indication that he had learnt to see that his guilt in so doing was greater, and not less, than that of the actual murderers.

There was a great persecution against the church.—It is clear that this involved much suffering: imprisonment , perhaps the plundering of their goods, and being made a gazing stock by reproaches and afflictions (Hebrews 10:33–34). In St. James’s description of the sufferings of the brethren (James 2:6–7), we may see at once the measure of the violence of the persecution, and the prominence in it (though Saul, the Pharisee, was for the time the chief leader) of the priesthood and the rich Sadducean aristocracy.

Throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria.—Jerusalem was naturally the chief scene of the persecution, and the neighbouring towns—Hebron, Gaza, Lydda, and Joppa—became places of refuge. It was probably to this influx of believers in Christ that we may trace the existence of Christian communities in the two latter cities (see Notes on Acts 9:32; Acts 9:36). The choice of Samaria was, perhaps, suggested by the hatred of that people for the Jews.

Those who were fleeing from a persecution instigated by the priests and rulers of Jerusalem were almost ipso facto sure of a welcome in Neapolis and other cities. But the choice of this as a place of refuge indicated that the barriers of the old antipathy were already partly broken down.

What seemed the pressure of circumstances was leading indirectly to the fulfilment of our Lord’s commands that the disciples should be witnesses in Samaria as well as in Judea (Acts 1:8). It seems probable, as already suggested (see Note on Acts 7:16), that there was some point of contact between the Seven, of whom Stephen was the chief, and that region.

Except the apostles.—The sequel of the history suggests two reasons for their remaining:

1. The Twelve had learnt the lesson which their Master had taught them, that the hireling fleeth because he is an hireling (John 10:13), and would not desert their post. A tradition is recorded by Clement of Alexandria (Strom. vi. 5, § 43) and Eusebius (Hist. v. 13), that the Lord had commanded the Apostles to remain for twelve years in Jerusalem lest any should say, “We have not heard,” and after that date to go forth into the world.

2. The persecution which was now raging seems to have been directed specially against those who taught with Stephen that the “customs” on which the Pharisees laid so much stress should pass away.

The Apostles had not yet proclaimed that truth; perhaps they had not yet been led to it. They were conspicuous as worshippers in the Temple, kept themselves from all that was common and unclean (Acts 10:14), and held aloof from fellowship with the Gentiles (Acts 10:28). They may well have been protected by the favour and reverence with which the great body of the people still looked on them, and so have been less exposed than the Seven had been to the violence of the storm. It was probable, in the nature of the case, that the Hellenistic disciples, who had been represented by Stephen, would suffer more than others. It was from them that the next great step in the expansion of the Church in due course came.