Attack on Stephen. This Hellenist Christian draws upon himself the attention of the people. He was full of grace; the inspiration which gave him his power led to disturbance from a synagogue or synagogues of foreign Jews from various countries settled at Jerusalem. Hellenistic Jews could be as narrow as those at Jerusalem (cf. 2 Corinthians 10-13). To the statement that they could not resist him D adds: because they were boldly confuted by him and could not face the truth. These disputes not yielding any matter for a charge, they got others to come forward and accuse him of attacking Moses and God, and thus stirred up the people, till now so favourable to the believers. The elders and scribes are also worked upon; Stephen is brought before the Sanhedrin. The charges are, to some extent, borne out by the following speech (Acts 7:48), as the charge against Jesus (Mark 14:58) was by His words (Mark 13:2). To a Christian writer they are false charges, because directed against Christ. Cf. the charge made against Paul by Jews of Asia (Acts 21:28). Acts 6:14 enables us to understand the tendency of Stephen's teaching up to this point, as well as the change of popular feeling, at least towards Stephen's section of the Church. Paul's doctrine completes the theme announced by Stephen. It is Jesus, this Nazorean (Acts 2:22 *) who is to destroy the Temple and change the ritual (customs, cf. Acts 15:1, Acts 16:21; Acts 21:21; Acts 26:3; Acts 28:17). The illumination of the face of the martyr who saw the Divine glory is mentioned in several early martyrdoms.
[ Acts 6:9. Libertines: i.e. freedmen. But probably we should read Libyans (i.e. Libustinô n for Libertinon. This emendation is as old as Œ cumenius. It was proposed in modern times by Beza, in the first and second editions of his Annotations, and subsequently withdrawn. Wetstein retains Libertines, but explains it as equivalent to Libystines (Libyans). In his Philology of the Gospels (pp. 69 f.), on the basis of Libyans read by Armenian versions of the Acts and commentaries, Blass suggested Libustinon, in complete ignorance that it had been suggested before, though a glance at Wetstein, or even at Meyer, would have shown him that he had been anticipated. It suits geographically the combination with Cyrenians and Alexandrians. No synagogue of the Libertines is known in Jerusalem, though there may have been one in Pompeii. The emendation has been accepted by several scholars. Preuschen reads Libyans. See further Rendel Harris, Sidelights on NT Research, pp. 181 f. A. S. P.]