Okay, if we look at verse 9 and
read down through verse 15 again for those on the tapes, then
there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue
of the Libertines and Cyrenians and Alexandrians, and them of
Cilicia and of Asia disputing with Stephen. And they were not
able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spoke.
Then they suborned men, which said, We have heard him speak
blasphemous words against Moses and God. And they stirred up
the people and the elders and the scribes, and came upon him,
and caught him, and brought him to the council, and set up false
witnesses, which said, This man ceases not to speak blasphemous
words against this holy place and the law. For we have heard
him say that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and
shall change the customs which Moses delivered us. And all that
sat in the council, the Sanhedrin, looked steadfastly on his face
as it had been the face of an angel." Now, I want you to notice
that particular part. Verse 14, we've heard this man
say that Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and change
the custom which Moses has delivered unto us. Now, concerning the
period of the transition, it is the book of Acts, more than
any other, that traces out the great transition from the old
economy unto the new economy. What some have called, and I
like to refer to it as, the transition period. What Hebrews 8 and verse
6 call a better covenant, which is established upon better promises. A better one is coming in the
place of the old. And this was because, says Hebrews,
of the imperfection of the First Testament or the First Covenant,
it was not faultless, the Apostle said, in that its priest was
a sinner and subject unto death. its sacrifices were beasts of
the field, its sanctuary was earthly or worldly on the earth,
and it consisted in types and shadows of good things to come,
but they were not themselves the very substance of the thing,
and its sacrifices could not take away sin, nor could they
perfect the worshipper. We see that in Hebrews 10, 1-4. That these things were not able
to perfect the worshippers or bring them to God in the sense
that Christ did. And besides, in Jeremiah 31 and
31-34, quoted in Hebrews 8, 8-13 by the apostle, It was declared back there, Jeremiah,
by the prophet of God, that a new covenant would be made with the
house of Israel and of Judah, and that this new covenant would
not be like the old covenant that was made yonder at Mount
Sinai, which consisted in many outward observances and ceremonies. While in the New Covenant, God
would write His law literally upon the heart of the minds of
men, and they would be taught directly by God. In other words,
they would receive spiritual and inward instruction, where
under the old they received oral instruction concerning the law. And in the New Testament, I believe
that there are two books that are very pertinent and important
to our understanding of this thing, the transition period,
as we look at it. First of all, the first book
is that of the book of Acts. as it traces out as the gospel
spread, spread from the Jews, spread to Judea, finally to the
uttermost part of the world, or among the Gentiles. And the
second New Testament book that is mighty important here, you
guessed it, is the book of Hebrews. Now, Hebrews sets it forth from
the theological standpoint. Acts it is that traces it out
in the actual transition of it. The outworking of the great change
from Judaism unto Christianity is traced out mostly in the book
of Acts. Now, the transition was not instantaneous
nor immediate. They did not change, boom, one's
gone and the other has come in his place. But as we read the
book of Acts, we see that the actual and full transition actually
took several years for it to accomplish reading through the
book of Acts. The gospel spread to the Samaritan
from the Jew, and then it spread unto the Gentile. And for a time,
both Jew and Gentile participated together in the temple services
and gospel worship. Both there were Jew and Gentile. And for a while, they continued
to observe the Sabbath day, and also observing the Lord's day,
then going back to the temple, and also to private houses. This
continued for a few years. In other words, let me say it
this way, that the two economies for a time did overlap. And you see that clearly in the
book of the Acts. They overlap for a time as the
Christian Jews were being weaned off of the Mosaic ceremonies,
while the Gentiles were being spared the yoke of the ceremonial
law, and that was written at the Council in Acts 15 in Jerusalem. We'll look at that a little bit
later. The book of Acts begins with a great work of God among
the Jews. Many believe, many submitted
unto baptism in Acts 2, and closes with Paul, the book of Acts,
closes with Paul telling the Jews in Acts 28, 25-28, quoting
from Isaiah 6, 9 and 6. And in Acts 28, 28, Paul
said, Vietnam, therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is
sent unto the Gentiles, and they will hear it. Now, this transition
from Judaism over to Christianity was the source of much contention
and much squabbling and much divisiveness in some of the early
churches. In what we call the early church,
or the church in or right after the apostolic age. the church
of the first century, in other words. One of the first to engage
the Jews about this matter of the transition, and they to engage
him, was Stephen, one of the seven that was chosen in Jerusalem
to minister unto the needy. Well, this man was not an ordinary
man in that sense of the word. The Scripture said that he was
a man full of the faith and full of the Holy Spirit in verse 5,
who soon broke the bound from serving widows and was greatly
used by God, so that in Acts chapter 6 and verse 8, he being
full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among
the people. that no doubt as a seal of his
being empowered by God and the seal of the Lord upon his ministry. However, it was not his faith,
it was not his wonders or his miracles that brought the wrath
of the Jews down upon the head of him. Rather, it was the teaching
of Stephen, what he had heard and learned of the Lord and was
teaching. It was his teaching, his preaching
of the Word of the Lord, and especially his preaching concerning
Christ unto the people. For from Acts 6 and 11 and 13
and 14, Stephen must have emphasized that the new form that the old form was to be superseded
by the new form, just as the Lord said to the Samaritan woman
that I quoted in John 4, 20-26. You have worshiped in this way.
Henceforth, a new form of worship will be instituted. In verse
9 of our text in Acts 6, Stephen spoke of these things in a synagogue
where the Jews were in attendance. And some there were who took
very strong exception to his words, and they disputed against
Stephen and his word. They argued with him, because
I think the word includes the meaning of questioning, of reasoning,
of inquiring, and to dispute against. so that they began to
dispute against what Stephen was preaching. But in verse 10,
Stephen being a spirit-filled man from the Spirit of the Lord,
they were not strong enough in their argument or in their wisdom
or in their knowledge to withstand the things that Stephen was saying. They were losing the debate and
losing it badly as Stephen stood upon the faith of Christ. Stephen
bested them in this debate or in this argument or contestation
and they found themselves losing the war of words. So they did
something that many people do. They resorted to deceit. They
suborned men to give false testimony against Stephen, what he had
said, what he had preached. Now, suborn means to solicit
a person to give false testimony under oath and so perjure themselves."
This is the only time that this word appears in all of the New
Testament, and it literally means to throw by stealth or to use
collusion. Remember, they did the same thing
to the Lord in Matthew 26, verse 59 through 61. They brought in
false witnesses against our Lord and our Christ. Then note the
testimony they suborned. And by the way, this was before
the Sanhedrin council that they went. Verse 12. Verse 13, they
set up false witnesses and those false witnesses told the council
that Stephen was constantly and unceasingly, time and time again,
is the meaning of the word, he kept on saying. He repeated these
things incessantly, over and over. And they were words blasphemous,
in their nature, in the Jews' opinion, and they were spoken
against this holy place and against the law. That is, against the
temple, which was the holiest place on earth to the Jews of
that time. And in verse 14, they claim that
they had men who had actually been witnesses to the words of
Stephen, and that they had heard with their own ears the words
from Stephen's very own mouth to this effect, that Jesus the
Nazarene will destroy this place. He will change the custom handed
down to us by Moses. We should know in v. 13 and v. 14, that they should go together.
That v. 14 expands upon what is said
in v. 13, that the blasphemous words
which they are imputing unto Stephen was his saying that Jesus
the Nazarene would bring down the revered temple and do away
with the Mosaic rites altogether and put something else in their
place, is what Stephen had been accused of preaching. They would
replace that which had stood for century after century after
century. Replace that which God had actually
given under the patriarch Moses. Their ages-old religion, having
credit among the Jews, the sacred ceremonies, The cherished tradition
they received from their fathers, they said, are in danger at the
hands of this man called Jesus of Nazareth. Oh, by the way,
the same charge is laid against Paul of which we read in Acts
chapter 21. Let's set the scene there in
Acts chapter 21. It occurred in Jerusalem, probably
at the Feast of Pentecost. Paul was there, and he came and
he met with James, and he met with the elders of the Jews in
the church at Jerusalem, and also with Jewish brethren. You
have it in Acts 21 and verses 17 and 18. And as Paul came,
he declared to them, he declared to James and to others, what
mighty works God had done, what He had wrought among the Gentiles
by and through His ministry. Verse 19, And hearing the good
report, the Jewish brethren at Jerusalem glorified God, In verse
20, they rejoiced. The believing Jews with James
received Paul's missionary report with joy and thanksgiving unto
God. Nevertheless, they... Now watch
this. That is, James and the elders
in Jerusalem took the opportunity to speak to Paul about a matter
concerning the Jews, telling Paul on this occasion As Lange's
commentary put it, I quote, "...of the prejudice which large numbers
of the converted Jews entertained against him." Telling him, that
is telling Paul, James and the elders telling Paul this, Brother,
see the thousands of Jews there are here that believe and how
they are great in their number. and also that they are zealous
of the law of Moses. They are Jews that believe and
they are zealous in behalf of the law. I agree with John Gill
that he speaks of the mosaic or the ceremonial law which they
strongly believe to still be in force even after the death
of Christ. And yet, they had heard about
Paul's practice. Word had reached them of Paul's
evangelizing method. The Jews, which were among the
Gentiles, that Paul, they said, taught those Jews to forsake
Moses. See it there in chapter 21 of
the book of Acts? to disregard the ceremonial law. Secondly, that Paul was telling
Jews out among the Gentiles to not circumcise their children,
which covenant stood since the time of Abraham. And thirdly,
not to observe the custom, nor to walk in, not to observe their
ancestral custom, but to quit them and to leave them off. Now the city, Jerusalem, in Acts
21, was full of Jews. They had come for the festival,
and James says, look, they're going to hear that you're in
the city. They're going to find out. Word's
going to spread that you are here in the city. Now I want
you to look at verse 22. The question is raised, Acts
21, 22, what is it? Or perhaps the question is, what
is to be done? What are we or what should we
do concerning this matter? For it is sure to come to a head. What is the proper course of
action? What is the best way to handle
this? that Jews are here and they have
heard that you are teaching Jews to forsake Moses. And it would
be an offense, it would be a stumbling block to such Jews as James refers
to in this particular passage of the Scripture. And if you
can believe your eyes, look at verse 23 and verse 24. They suggest that Paul join with
four men that were there who were under a vow, and that Paul
take part with them in the purification rites, and even share the cost
of the expenses of their purification sacrifices, entering into the
temple with them. And in verse 25, they assure
Paul that they would in no wise seek to bring the Gentiles under
the same ceremonial law as the Jews were jealous of. Now, are you surprised that Paul
fell in with it? Are you surprised that Paul actually
did it? In Acts 18 and 18, we read that
Paul shaved his head on a certain occasion and that he had a vow. But the question is, was Paul
compromising here, or was he acting on the principle of Christian
charity? Was Paul here compromising the
principles of the gospel are acting upon the principle that
he declared that guided him in the exercise of his ministry
in 1 Corinthians chapter 9 and verse 19 through 23. Essentially, he says there, to
the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jew. To them
under the law, I became as under the law, that I might gain them
under the law. To them without law, I became
as without law, Not that I am an outlaw to Christ, he said,
but that I might gain them without law. To the weak I became as
the weak, that I might gain them. He concluded this, I am made
all things to all men that I might save some. I do these things. I become as a Jew. I become as
one under law. I become as one without law.
I become as one weak. Secondly, he said, this I do
for the gospel's sake. There is not any violation of
the principle of the gospel in it. Now, of course, this logic
would not justify some things that I have heard in my lifetime. For example, it would not justify
one going out and becoming a drunk in order that he might win a
drunk, or becoming a gambler in order that he might win a
gambler, or a fornicator in order that he might win a fornicator,
and so on down the line. I've often thought of a neighbor
of ours, a thousand times, It has come into my mind. A neighbor,
a friend of ours, who also was at the time a member of the church. And he had a brother that drank
excessively. And one Sunday evening, he found
out his brother was going to be in the honky-tonk drinking. So he says, I'm going over there
and talk to him about Jesus. And he went over to that honky-tonk,
and you know what happened? The brother with good intentions
got drunk. and came home drunk that evening.
So there are some limits upon Paul's saying, I become all things
unto all men. But again, did Paul's actions
in both Acts 18 and Acts 21 have to do with the transition period
that we're talking about? And what about Paul having Timothy
circumcised because of the Jews in Acts 16, while refusing to
have Titus circumcised because he was a Gentile? The reason
that the first involves no principle of the gospel, because Timothy
was the son of a Jewish mother, and Titus was a full Gentile. And having forced him to submit
to what was a Jewish right as a part of his justification would
be a violation of the principle of the gospel, and Paul stood
steadfastly. Now, some Arminians not knowing
how to account for these actions of Paul, have called Paul a compromiser
in the case of Timothy, right on the heels of the meeting in
Jerusalem in Acts 15. Now concerning the accusations
against both Stephen and Paul, that they, this Jesus of Nazareth,
will destroy this place, He will change the custom which Moses
delivered unto us. Or, as they said against Paul,
that he taught the Jews who were out among the Gentiles to forsake
Moses. That is, the ceremonial law. And even to cease circumcising
their sons and observing the custom passed down from the forefather. But, both Paul and Stephen understood
what many Jews did not understand, at least not yet. And that was
that the appearing and the death of Messiah upon the cross, His
offering Himself once and for all as the great sacrifice for
sin, signaled the end or the cessation of the whole temple
order of worship and the system of priests and sacrifices that
had stood for centuries. This is the significance of the
rented veil in the Jewish temple when Christ died upon the cross. When Christ died and that veil
rent into, it was the end of Judaism. In Matthew 12 and 6,
Christ is greater than the temple. Most Jews, even believing Jews,
did not see at first what Paul and Stephen saw, that a new form
of worship was to supersede the old. That Judaism was to melt
into Christianity. And that the times of the Gospel
meant the end of the Mosaic system and the ceremonial laws and the
temple worship that they had carried on for years. And also
what F.F. Bruce said in his commentary
on the books of Acts, and he called, quote, the outward and
visible signs of Jewish particularism, unquote. Those are now at an
end. Being not enlightened of these
things, the Jews, at least many of them, and especially those
that we call Judaizers today, sought to Judaize Christianity. I want you to get that expression.
Those Jews sought to Judaize Christianity when it came. To
impose the ceremonial law upon the Gentiles and to make them
more a Jew than a Christian. To make Moses a co-savior with
the Lord Jesus Christ. Do you remember that even the
Apostle Peter for a time himself was ignorant of the alteration
made by the death of Christ? Do you remember how his views
were corrected only after a great vision and dream on the housetop
in Joppa in Acts chapter 10, that it might prepare him to
preach to the Gentiles at the house of Carnelius. Without that
vision, Peter had not done so. But the Lord taught him a valuable
lesson in that vision. And he came to Carnelius' house,
preached unto them, And God opened the door of faith to the Gentiles. Acts 14, 27. Gave them repentance
unto life. Acts 11 and verse 18. Gave them
the Holy Spirit exactly as He had done to the Jews at the beginning
are at Pentecost. Acts 15 verse 8 and verse 9. Now one of the great important
chapters of the book of Acts is chapter 15, where there was
convened a council in Jerusalem for the purpose of considering
and settling once and for all the question that was a divisive
and caused such a contention between the Jew and the Gentile
out in the churches. Now, at issue was the question,
are the Gentiles subject to the ceremonial law? That was the
question that was discussed and settled here. Must believing
Gentiles Submit to circumcision in order to be saved. Some Jews
said yes. Acts 15 and verse 1, except you
be circumcised, you cannot be saved. And also in Acts 15 and
verse 5, some believing Pharisees insisted concerning those Gentiles,
quote, that it was needful to circumcise them and to command
them to keep the law of Moses, unquote. Paul took the opposite
view in preaching the gospel. And so in Acts 15 and verse 6,
a convention or meeting or assembly came together for to consider
this matter. From Antioch came Paul and Barnabas
and other certain respected and dignified brethren. From Jerusalem
were the apostles and the elders, in verse 2 and verse 6. Especially
Peter and James were there. And after much debate, much questioning,
back and forth, after the matter was debated at some great length
and all had asked all the questions that they wished to ask, when
many had been heard, The Apostle Peter in v. 7-11, Acts 15, tells what happened
in Caesarea at the house of Carnelius to those Gentiles. He gave his
experience how God moved and what He did. In v. 12, Paul and Barnabas take the
floor to tell of the work of God among the Gentiles. Then in v. 13 and following,
James takes the floor and proposes that what Peter experienced was
in accordance with the Old Testament prophecy of the Scripture. And that his judgment, that is,
James says, my judgment or my opinion is that we not trouble
the Gentiles which are turning unto God, verse 19, and that
all ask of the Gentiles is summed up in verse 20. And they composed
an encyclical letter or a directive from all of these leaders to
be read among the Gentiles stating that they were indeed exempt
from circumcision and the ceremonial law. that the Gentiles were not
to have it imposed upon them when they were called and when
they were converted. And this was a victory. It was a victory for the truth
of the gospel of grace and salvation. And especially a victory for
the sake of the Gentiles. as the fundamental and unlying
principle of the gospel was upheld by the council in Jerusalem.
Grace was independent of the ceremonial law, and the Jew had
no reason to take offense, or was the liberty of the Gentile
in any way restricted in any sense. Nor were the Jews deprived
of Moses, For they had those that read him every Sabbath in
the synagogue. Now, if we have charged the Jews
of speaking to Judaized Christianity, then it is also true that some,
through the years and in our day, have sought to Christianize
Judaism. And one has done one and one
the other, bringing many things to bear upon Christians that
belong only to the old dispensation, and which were done away forever
in the Lord Jesus Christ. And some have erred in making
doctrine from things in the transition period, those years that we're
talking about this evening. Such as one example, there are
many today, mainly among the Pentecostal deeper life folk,
who sincerely believe and teach and hope and pray for a repetition
of penny cost. And they say, we can have it.
We can have it if we'll pay the cost. That was a once-forever
work of God, unrepeatable. It did its work, and it never
need be repeating. Now, let's wind the study down
by considering the transition. And for a time, the overlapping
of the two economies that the mixing of Jew and Gentile together
in one or the same church was for a time the occasion of much
dissension between the two people. And that at times it was violent,
and Paul suffered for the purity of the gospel again and again,
almost always at the hands of the Jew. This great change, this
great transition, here's a final point to consider. It required
a specially called, prepared, and commissioned apostle to the
Gentile, Paul, to proclaim and defend the gospel, to oversee
the admission of the Gentile into gospel worship. to stand
fully upon grace, to defend the gospel against all enemies foreign
and domestic. How much are we indebted to God
for having raised up Paul in the early church. Those things
that caused division are now gone. Long gone they are, but
they have been new requirements that have been added. We do not
hear anybody say today, Except you keep the ceremonial law,
except you be circumcised, you cannot be saved. But we do hear
people say, except you be baptized, except you belong to our church,
except you do this or that, you cannot be saved. And the war
rages on for the purity of the gospel. One final thought. How
ironic I think it is. The Jews once told the Gentiles,
Once the Jews insisted to the Gentiles, you cannot be saved
apart from the Mosaic Law. Except you keep it, you cannot
be saved. Here's the ironic part. We tell
the Jews today, you cannot be saved apart from Jesus Christ. Except you be saved by Christ,
you cannot be saved. We preach to them that the Jewish
race led the crucifixion of our Lord and of our Savior, and they
call us anti-Semite. They call that anti-Semitism
and have been instrumental in the passing of hate crime laws. They are essentially protected.
If you don't know it, you should read that. Let me close with
an example. One morning, I finished preaching. And it was about to dismiss and
a lady back here, two thirds back, began to cry uncontrollably. She wept and wept and wept. My goodness, what is the matter?
We spoke to her. She said the Lord was dealing
with her heart. I said, OK, I'll be by your house
this week to visit with you and to discuss the matter. And so
I did. And the lady, I told her, you
know, the Lord has worked and the Lord has revealed himself
to you. has saved you and you follow
Him in baptism. And she looked up at me and she
said, does this mean I have to give up my Mormonism? And I said,
well, you ought to. It almost sent you to hell. But
she wasn't able to. Must I give up my Mormonism?
And that's kind of the plight of the Jews. Must we give up
Moses? Must we give up the ceremonial
law? Must we give up the temple? You
can understand how hard that was for them. And Paul, God bless
for Paul, he quickly was converted to understand the truth of this
matter and stood for it and preached it far and wide. Okay, thank
you. And if we might stand for prayer,
we'll be dismissed.