sign in sign up
<<
Home , Acts 8

The Samaritan Acts 8:9–25 May 2, 2021

I know how we all like to talk about the Armenians. Last fall, after weeks of heavy fighting, Russia brokered a peace deal between the neighboring countries Azerbaijan and Armenia. As part of this deal, areas where a number of ethnic Armenians lived was ceded to the Azeris. While the deal didn’t demand the Armenians leave––they could stay––nearly all of them abandoned their villages, saying upon departure that the two groups couldn’t possibly coexist. Further, as an expression of their vitriol toward the incoming Azeris, they made sure not to leave the place the way they found it. They cut down trees, burned down schools, and––most shocking––before leaving, many dug up their dead. They didn’t trust that the Azeris wouldn’t desecrate the graves. A leader in the region said this, “You can’t measure the level of distrust between two people.”1 They’re not the first neighbors to distrust, or dislike, one another. For hundreds of years, the Samaritans were hated by the residents to their south, the Jews. We mentioned some of this last week, but in the 4th century BC the Samaritans built their own––maybe you’d say rival––temple. The Samaritans used separate priests. Further, other than the Pentateuch, they dismissed the Old Testament Scriptures. The Jewish people considered those from hybrids of race and religion, labeling them schismatics and heretics.2 That kind of animosity stewed for years and years. Then, during the first–century a couple events exacerbated those tensions. First, between AD 6 and 9, a few Samaritans smuggled themselves into the Jewish Temple alongside Passover pilgrims. Once inside, they desecrated the holiest place on the Jewish globe, spreading human bones in the portico and sanctuary. Then, around AD 51––40 years later, Samaritans from the village of Ginae gruesomely murdered Passover pilgrims on their way to . When this happened, the Jews appealed to the Romans for justice. ’s ears were closed. So, a mob from Jerusalem made their way to that very village, massacred all of the inhabitants, and burned it to the ground.3 That was AD 51. That event happened after the crucifixion and resurrection of , but before Luke wrote this book. Therefore, everyone who read Luke’s first or second volume would also know with harrowing detail the tension between Jerusalem and Samaria. To understand our text today, we must grapple with the ethnic and religious tension between these two neighbors. I don’t think it’s speculative to imagine that when Jesus gave the Apostles their commission in :8––what many consider to be the Table of Contents for the book––they nodded their heads enthusiastically when told to be witnesses in Jerusalem. Then, when told to go witness in , they too respond, “Yes, absolutely.” However, when He tells them to do the same

1 “Anger, Fear, and Sorrow Consume Armenians Leaving Land Returned to Azerbaijan,”: https://www.wsj.com/articles/anger-fear-and-sorrow-consume-armenians-leaving-land-returned-to-azerbaijan- 11606059000 2 John Stott, The Message of Acts, BST, 147. 3 From J. Daniel Hays, From Every People and Nation, NSBT, 166.

1 thing in Samaria, that part of town they made sure to avoid, full of those people they’d been taught to hate, it’s quite possible they balked within, wondering, “we’re to go there too?” In 2021, the Armenians can’t stand––don’t trust––the Azeris. Thousands of years prior, first–century Jewish culture abhorred many, many aspects of Samaria and its people. Those groups’ feelings toward one another have been shared by countless neighbors throughout history. And in today’s text, God himself shows us His power over that brand of strife.

1. The Apostles witness true conversion in Samaria (vv. 9–17)

Last week we noted the great persecution that came upon the church in Jerusalem, at the hands of a young man named Saul. He ravaged house after house, dragging men and women from the comfort of their beds to the perils of prison. Ironically, what Saul did failed miserably in marginalizing the message; instead, inadvertently, he scattered seeds in Samaria. One of those seeds, Philip, went and proclaimed the Christ. Luke records in verse 6: the crowds with one accord paid attention to what was being said by Philip. At the good news Philip shared, and in response to the clear manifestations of God’s inbreaking kingdom, verse 8 expresses the state of Samaria: So there was much joy in that city. In our text today, Luke gives a bit more background concerning what preceded the arrival of Philip in Samaria. He’d walked into a particular context with inherent challenges, one of which is described in verse 9: But there was a man named Simon, who had previously practiced magic in the city and amazed the people of Samaria, saying that he himself was somebody great. I’m confident Samaria didn’t have roads with yellow brick, but they did have a conman magician who loved to glory in himself. Simon says he’s great. This same Simon carried legendary status in the writings of early church history. Justin Martyr, from Samaria himself, described him as empowered by demons to perform magic, empowered to such a degree that he was later honored in Rome with a statue on Tiber Island.4 described Simon the sorcerer as one “from whom all sorts of heresies derived their origin.”5 And if you were to read Roman Catholic history, you’ll find Simon mentioned as one of the primary antagonists to Peter, building the anti–church to Peter’s “true” Roman church. Further, the apocryphal6 Acts of Peter claims that this magician had such power that he was able to levitate.7 Even if those accounts stretch the truth––and they do––Simon carried a reputation of renown. In verse 9, he called himself great. According to Luke’s inspired account, Samaria agreed. Verse 10: They all paid attention to him, from the least to the greatest, saying, “This man is the power of God that is called Great.” What Simon claimed, the Samaritans affirmed. And here in verse 10, the religious dimension of the influence Simon held among the Samaritans becomes apparent.8 According to them, he’s not only great, he’s wielding something like the power of God. The verb “paid attention” in verses 10 and 11 happens to be the same verb Luke used back in verse 6. What that repetition means is this: before the crowds “paid attention” to Philip, they’d paid close attention to Simon. And they’d done this for more than a moment, according to verse 11, and they paid attention to him because for a long time he had amazed them with his magic. That’s the context Philip walks into. They’d been amazed by Simon. They’d paid attention for a long time to the one who amazed them. One might say when Philip arrived, the attention they’d

4 See David Peterson, The , 282. 5 Ibid, 282. 6 Meaning we consider it to be uninspired. 7 Eckhard Schnabel, Acts, ZECNT, 408. 8 Peterson, 282.

2 persistently paid Simon found a competitor. In the city of Samaria, the conman’s curtain was pulled back. Verse 12: But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Simon paraded through Samaria, announcing his own greatness. Philip, as scattered seed, came announcing Another. Luke takes pains to make clear that Philip preached the same, orthodox message that had been declared prior. The word for “preached good news”9 is used five times in this chapter alone (v. 4, 12, 25, 35, 40). It’s merely the verbal form of good news, carrying the idea of goodnews–ing or gospelizing.10 Philip’s not coming up with something new. It’s the same word used to describe what the Apostles proclaimed in :42. Further, as Peter preached at Pentecost, Philip tells them about the name of Jesus Christ. In response to this message, instead of listening to Simon anymore, the Samaritans pay attention to Philip. Instead of being amazed by Simon’s magic anymore, they’re amazed at the miracles God does through Philip. Instead of acknowledging Simon’s claims to power, they believe and receive the word about Jesus.11 And like , verse 12 indicates they believe, signifying that belief by being baptized. Shockingly, to Luke and likely to others, verse 13 records: Even Simon himself believed, and after being baptized, he continued with Philip. And seeing signs and great miracles performed, he was amazed. The amazing one is himself amazed. We’ll come back to Simon in verses 18–24, but Luke does drop a slight hint about the nature of Simon’s following. Keep in mind that verse 6 described signs being done through Philip, unclean spirits departing, and the lame being healed. Verse 13 uses an interesting verb to describe Simon’s continuing with Philip. It’s the same verb Luke used in Acts 2 to describe the early church being devoted to the Apostles’ teaching (2:42).12 It’s the same word the Apostles themselves used in to describe their being devoted to prayer and the ministry of the word (6:4). Here Luke uses it to describe Simon’s devotedness, not to the message, but to Philip himself, a comment that seems a bit out of place or unusual.13 He’s devoted to Philip? Another hint: what is Simon amazed by? The signs and miracles. Then, if we underestimate or downplay the strife between the Jewish people and the Samaritans, what happens next could hardly be more strange. I. Howard Marshall calls this, “perhaps the most extraordinary statement in Acts.”14 Verse 14: Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. About 15 years ago, early one morning I was sitting in a coffee shop in Sparta studying the with a few friends of mine. It was a small town, so we knew nearly everyone in the room. One of those guys in the room saw what we were doing, asked if he could sit down with us, opened up to this passage in Acts 8, and began to tell us how this proves the baptism of the Spirit was an experience that happened after conversion. In other words, just because someone believed the gospel and was converted at some point in the past, that didn’t mean they shouldn’t seek a second conversion–like experience, the baptism of the Spirit.

9 Ευαγγελιζω (euangelizō) 10 As we noted in last week’s text, “preach” here certainly does not necessitate a title or a pulpit. The scattered, many more than the apostles, went about speaking this good news. 11 See Schnabel for those contrasts, 407. 12 Προσκαρτερεω (proskartereō) 13 Peterson, 284. 14 Quoted in Stott, 150.

3 Acts 8 is a significant text for a few traditions. Pentecostals use Acts 8 to undergird their understanding of the “second experience” work of the Spirit. The Roman Catholic tradition uses Acts 8 to bolster their take on the relationship between infant baptism and later “confirmation.”15 To put it simply, both of those conclusions assume what Luke describes here is something normative for the church today. Pay attention to how Luke describes what happened. First, in verse 16, of the Spirit he writes, for he had not yet fallen on any of them. If this passage intended to portray the normative pattern of the Spirit’s work, why would Luke take time to point out the oddity of the delay? If there was supposed to be a time interval between conversion/baptism and the giving of the Spirit, why would Luke even include this explanation?16 Grammatically, the adverb translated “not yet” indicates how unthinkable the circumstances actually were.17 Verse 16 goes on, for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. John Stott notes that the word “only” implies that these two things––baptism and the giving of the Spirit––were expected to go together.18 Further, if everything went in Samaria as it had in Jerusalem, or it normally would in the future, why send Peter and John at all? Were Peter and John going to go everywhere someone believed? While many aspects of Acts instruct us concerning proclamation of the gospel, church life, etc, not everything Luke describes in this book intends to be replicated. In sum, if you read these three verses carefully, nothing indicates that what occurred here in Samaria was normative. That’s to merely look at the literary aspects of the verses. But when you add the historical context to it, the intent of Acts 8 becomes even more clear. Who went down to verify the surprising news of the Samaritans’ belief? Peter and John. Remember that in Luke’s first volume, when the Samaritans rejected Jesus, that same John said this, “Lord, do you want us to tell fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” I don’t know about you, but I’ve always thought, “whoa, that escalated quickly.” John, like many of his fellow Jews, were not too impressed with their neighbors to the north. Historically, this is a unique circumstance, being the first time the gospel of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection had gone to people outside Jerusalem.19 Further, it went to a people group those in Jerusalem could not stand. And now that the Samaritans believed, the question is: would the tension between the Jerusalem church and the new Samaritan believers be eased? Schnabel writes, “The latter would naturally be prone to reject the authority of the Jewish leaders of the church in Jerusalem. At the same time, the Jewish believers in Jerusalem might have been easily skeptical regarding Samaritans being granted salvation.”20 At this crucial missiological moment, church division stood at the threshold. So, God withholds the Spirit, making sure that Peter and John get to see what God had done. And verse 17: Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. The Apostles didn’t need to preach to them again. They’d already believed. But they needed to witness, with their own eyes, the conversion of the Samaritans. In an expression of solidarity, they lay their hands on these new believers. Michael Green calls these unique circumstances, “a divine veto on schism in the infant church.”21 The picture is significant. Hate and division have been replaced. Jews and Samaritans have gathered, praying together, worshipping together, in one accord. Loving God’s people, no matter the bad history, is fruit of true conversion.

15 See John Stott on both these errors. 16 Schnabel, 410. 17 Scott Kellum, Acts, EGGNT, 101. 18 Stott, 156. 19 Schnabel, 412. 20 Schnabel, 411. 21 Quoted in Stott, 158.

4 The literary clues and the historical context help us to interpret this passage. But let’s say you don’t have a commentary at hand. What do you do? If a passage appears to be unclear at first, you interpret Scripture with other Scripture. And you interpret the unclear by what is clear. So, for example, what does Paul write in Romans 8:9? This is one passage we took that brother to in the coffee house in Sparta back in 2005ish: Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. Yet, even without those other passages, the purpose for Acts 8’s unique circumstances are fairly clear. The Samaritan believers needed to know something of the authority Christ gave the 12. The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph. 2:20). Secondly, when the Spirit indwelt them, the Samaritans needed to know they were connected to that which occurred in Acts 2 with the Jerusalem church. There is one body because there is one Spirit. Third, when Peter and John returned, the Jerusalem church would know that the Samaritans were no longer to be treated as outsiders. Luke records the Samaritan Pentecost because God wanted the Jerusalem church to know, and He wants us to know, that the gospel is for all the nations. He withheld the Spirit to force Peter and John to travel and see His power up close. And Luke records it so we might see it too. We dare not dismiss it. This God, this gospel, unites the nations. Does relational strife persist with you and another? Do you believe the gospel’s power for that relationship? Do you think your history with this person, or with this group of people, is more complicated than the relationship between these two groups in Acts 8? In Memphis in 2021, I venture to say this text might apply. The evangelical church in America needs to be reminded. Acts 8 isn’t about some experience many long for. It’s not about us at all. Acts 8 is about the Spirit and what He’s made possible. The Apostles witness true conversion in Samaria.

2. The Apostles warn a false convert in Samaria (vv. 18–24)

There’s the good Samaritan. And then there’s a different one. Simon, introduced in verse 9, “believing” in verse 13, returns in verse 18: Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money, saying, “Give me this power also, so that anyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.” As a quick application, David Peterson reminds, “Whenever and wherever God is at work among people, there are not only genuine responses but also counterfeit ones.”22 Gospel work, church life, can be messy. That’s the pattern in Acts thus far. Gospel advance. Opposition. Gospel Advance. Conflict. Repeat. Simon’s request could hardly be more self–serving.23 Keep in mind the sway he’d held over the Samaritans prior to Philip’s arrival. It’s almost certain he saw buying this power as a means to regain, and hold onto, his influence over the Samaritans.24 However, when you understand what happened in verse 17 as merely Peter and John witnessing the prior belief and salvation of the Samaritans, you know that they were not the dispensers of the Holy Spirit. Yet Simon completely misunderstood the nature of saving faith. Instead, he subsumed the gospel into his understanding of magic. In his mind, if Peter and John sold him this power, anyone on whom he laid his hands would receive God’s Spirit.

22 Peterson, 290. 23 Kellum, 101. 24 Peterson, 288.

5 Can you imagine the look on Simon Peter’s face when Simon the magician slaps a “for sale” sign on that which Jesus died for? Verse 20: But Peter said to him, “May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! You have neither part nor lot in this matter, for your heart is not right before God.” Peter pinpoints the core issue concerning the sin in Simon’s life. May your silver perish with you employs Old Testament language of destruction for those in rebellion.25 Though Simon had not yet acted on his twisted notion, Peter calls down judgment upon him for even thinking it. You’ll note that Peter locates the sin to Simon’s inner person: your heart is not right before God. With Simon, there’s an underlying, deep–seated rebellion.26 Because of that, Peter makes plain in verse 21: You have neither part nor lot in this matter. Whether he’s referring to the gospel message,27 or sharing in the Holy Spirit, Simon finds himself outside God’s people, no matter the public profession he’d made. Neither portion nor lot is stacked for emphasis. Simon has absolutely no part in what God was doing in Samaria.28 Though some think Simon was a believer, that verse and the ones ahead lead Pastor Phil and me to think otherwise. Verse 22: Repent, therefore, of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that, if possible, the intent of your heart may be forgiven you. Again, Peter shines the light on Simon’s heart, commanding Simon to repent of his wickedness. Verse 23 contains more evidence of Simon’s damning motives and deceitful ways: For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity. Peter doesn’t mince words. Simon’s bitterness poisoned him; his iniquity enchained him. Listen again to all of Peter’s response: May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! You have neither part nor lot in this matter, for your heart is not right before God. Repent, therefore, of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that, if possible, the intent of your heart may be forgiven you. For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity. Now Simon responds to Peter’s direct rebuke in verse 24: And Simon answered, “Pray for me to the Lord, that nothing of what you have said may come upon me.” I’m with John Stott, who wrote that in this statement is “no sign of repentance.”29 Instead, Simon seems to, like many of us have done, long to escape from the consequences of his sin. While the issue is his heart, his response says little to nothing of amending his inner person.30 Luke doesn’t give us closure, but this could be explained by the original hearers knowing what happened with Simon after this text. Even if Justin Martyr and other church history embellished matters somewhat, it’s not likely they were all completely wrong on the trajectory of Simon the magician. There’s much to apply from this portion of Scripture. First, though Simon was baptized, he was far from genuine. We take great many precautions at this fellowship to prevent that kind of pretender, from membership classes to membership interviews, but we’re not infallible. Further, most churches in our day take little to no steps to verify the Spirit’s work. Come on down; you’re a follower of Christ. That approach has deeply compromised the church’s witness. Because if the “church” isn’t made up of those redeemed by Christ, I’m not sure why we’d expect them to live any differently than the world.

25 Schnabel, 413. 26 Peterson, 289. 27 Because Luke uses the term λογος (logos) 28 Kellum, 102. 29 Stott, 151. 30 Peterson, 290.

6 Second, to church leaders or those aspiring to that kind of role. Check your motives. We’ve had quite enough charlatans in our day, from those teaching apologetics, to those leading “Christian” colleges, to those standing behind pulpits. Simon loved himself; and he loved having sway over people. If you just want power, don’t call it Christian. Third, to individuals who’ve professed Christ. Have you just added Jesus to what you already believe about the world? Or has He redefined your life, changing what you believe and how you live? Fourth, related, are you pretending? The Apostles witness true conversion in Samaria. The Apostles warn a false convert in Samaria. Third,

3. The Apostles love the Samaritans (v. 25)

Peter and John didn’t judge the entirety of this people group because of one bad Samaritan. Verse 25 bookends verse 4: Now when they had testified and spoken the word of the Lord, they returned to Jerusalem, preaching the gospel to many villages of the Samaritans. They head toward Jerusalem to tell the church there the good news of God saving the Samaritans. But, unlike their typical practice, they don’t walk around Samaria, they go right through the villages. Peter and John have seen it with their eyes. God is drawing the nations to Himself. And they long to be part of it.

Conclusion

Donald McGavran popularized a church growth tenet called, “The Homogeneous Unit Principle.” He summarized his thesis in these terms, “People like to become without crossing racial, linguistic, or class barriers. This principle is an undeniable fact.”31 Now, to some degree, I’d say, “Yes, you’re right Dr. McGavran.” People, sinners, do not like to cross those barriers. The Azeris hate the Armenians. The Jews hated the Samaritans. And I’m guessing we could read history or the newspaper or our own hearts to come up with a few more examples. Yet, do society’s norms––or what people like––define for us the power of the gospel message? Acts 8 describes a different kingdom. A kingdom ruled by a risen King who transforms hearts by His Spirit, uniting men and women from every nation. So what might Acts 8 say to Donald McGavran? What God has joined together, let not man divide.

31 Donald McGavran, Understanding Church Growth (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 163.

7