Acts 8:28Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

And why does he meet Philip not before visiting Jerusalem, but afterward? He was not to see the Apostles persecuted, because he was still weak. It would not have been so suitable earlier as it was then, when the prophet had instructed him.

So now too, if any of you wished to heed the prophets, he would not need signs. Truly, the reading of the Scriptures is a great thing.

Thus the saying of Moses was fulfilled: “When you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise,” remember the Lord your God (Deut 6:7).

Especially on the road, in the wilderness, when no one hinders us, we are more fit for meditation. The eunuch believed on the road, and Paul also believed on the road.

But Paul was drawn not by another, but by Christ Himself. This is greater than what the Apostles did. It is greater because, while the Apostles were in Jerusalem and none of them was in Damascus, Paul returned from there a believer.

Those who were in Damascus knew that he had come from Jerusalem still unbelieving, since he was carrying letters to bind the faithful. As a skilled physician applies medicine when the fever is still at full strength, so Christ at that time gave him weakness.

For he had to be restrained in the midst of his very frenzy. Then he was better humbled and repented of his cruel undertakings.

But again we must turn our discourse to you. Tell me, what are the Scriptures for? If it depended on you, all of them would be destroyed.

What is the Church for? Bury the books in the earth. Perhaps then such condemnation and such punishment would not come upon you.

If someone buried them in mud and did not listen to them, even then he would not insult them as much as now. Tell me, what insult is there in that case?

That someone buried them. And what insult is there here? That we do not listen to them.

Tell me, when does a man insult more: when he does not answer one who is silent, or when he does not answer one who is speaking? Certainly, when he does not answer one who is speaking.

So now too, you offer greater insult and greater contempt when you do not listen to one who speaks. “We will not listen to you,” the Jews of old said to the prophets (1 Sam 8:19; Jer 44:16).

You do worse, saying: do not speak, we will not act. They restrained the prophets from speaking, as though from a certain reverence for their words. But you, through extreme negligence, do not even do this.

Believe me, if you closed our mouths by putting your hands upon them, you would still not insult us as much as now. Tell me, who shows greater contempt: the one who listens and does not obey, or the one who does not listen at all?

But let us examine this matter concerning insult. If one man restrained someone who reproached him and closed his mouth, because he felt his rebukes, while another cared nothing and paid no attention to him, which showed greater contempt?

Was it not the latter? For the first shows that he feels the blow. But the other, as it were, closes the very mouth of God.

Did what was said horrify you? Then hear how this happens. The mouth through which God speaks is the mouth of God.

As these lips are the lips of our soul, although the soul properly has no lips, so the lips of the prophets are God’s. Listen and be horrified.

The deacon stands on behalf of all and cries out loudly: “Let us attend.” He does this often. The voice he utters is the common voice of the Church, yet no one attends.

After him the reader begins: “The prophecy of Isaiah.” Again no one attends, although the prophecy contains nothing human. Then he proclaims in the hearing of all: “Thus saith the Lord.” Still no one attends.

But what am I saying? Something fearful and terrible is read, and even then no one attends. What do many say? “The same thing is always read,” they say.

This especially is what destroys you. If you knew all this, you ought all the more not to show contempt. At the spectacles the same thing always happens, yet you do not know satiety there.

What “same thing” do you dare speak of, when you do not even know the names of the prophets? Are you not ashamed to say that you do not listen because the same thing is always read, when you do not even know the names of the writers read?

You hear the same thing always, as you say. You yourself have confessed that the same thing is read.

If I said this to condemn you, you ought to turn to some other defense, not to one that condemns you. Tell me, do you not instruct your son?

If he said that it is always the same thing, would you not take this as an insult? It would be possible not to say the same thing if we both knew it and showed it by our deeds.

Or rather, even then the reading of the same thing would not be superfluous. What can be compared with Timothy? Yet even to him Paul said in the epistle: “Attend to reading, exhortation, and teaching” (1 Tim 4:13).

It is impossible, never possible, to exhaust the meaning of the Scriptures. They are a certain spring without limit.

They say, “I have learned, and this is enough for me.” But do you wish me to show that it is not all the same?

How many, do you think, have spoken about the Gospels? And all of them have said something new and distinctive. The more one occupies himself with the Scriptures, the more clearly he sees, and the more he contemplates the pure light.

And how much more can I say? Tell me, what is prophecy? What are narratives? What are proverbs? What is allegory? What is type? What is symbol? What are the Gospels?

Tell me only about what is clear: why are the Gospels so called? You have often heard that good tidings, ευαγγέλια, should contain nothing grievous. Yet in them there is much that is grievous.

“In them,” it says, “their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched” (Mk 9:44). Again: “He will cut him in two and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites” (Mt 24:51).

Again: “Then I will declare to them, I never knew you; depart from Me, you who work iniquity” (Mt 7:23).

Let us not deceive ourselves by imagining that they are called this only among us in Greek, or that all this does not apply to us. But you have become mute, and you stand amazed, looking down.

Good tidings should not contain any rules of conduct, but only express something favorable. Yet in them there are many rules of conduct, such as: “Whoever does not hate his father and mother cannot be My disciple” (Lk 14:26).

And again: “I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Mt 10:34). And again: “In the world you will have tribulation” (Jn 16:33).

These are fine teachings, but they are not good tidings. Good tidings would be this: “It will be well for you,” as people usually say to one another.

“What pleasant thing will you tell me?” “Your father is coming, your mother is coming.” They do not say, “Do this or that.”

Again tell me: how do the Gospels differ from the prophetic books? Why are those not called Gospels, although they too contain good tidings, such as: “The lame man shall leap like a deer” (Is 35:6)?

“The Lord gave the word to those who proclaim good tidings with great power” (Ps 67:12). “I make a new heaven and a new earth” (Is 65:17).

Why are those not called Gospels, or why are these called prophecy? If you do not know what the Gospels are, and yet so despise the reading of the Scriptures, what shall I say to you?

I shall ask something else. Why are there four Gospels? Why not ten? Why not twenty? Why did not many undertake the composition of Gospels? Why not one? Why the disciples of Christ? Why not those who were not disciples?

Why, in general, are the sacred books called Scriptures? Yet, on the contrary, in the Old Testament it says: “I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer 31:31).

Where are those who say that the same thing is always read? If you knew that, even if a man lived thousands of years, there would still not be the same thing here for him, you would not say this.

Believe me, I shall say nothing more to you about this, either privately or publicly. If someone asks, I shall not refuse to answer. But if not, I shall leave it.

We have already caused you sorrow by always speaking about everything plainly and omitting nothing necessary. See, you have heard enough questions. Examine them and tell the reason.

Why are they called Gospels? Why not prophecies? Why are there rules of conduct in the Gospels? If one person is perplexed, let another consider it, and communicate your thoughts to one another.

After this, we shall be silent. If what has been said has brought you no benefit, it would be still more useless if we added anything else. Truly, we would be pouring water into a leaky barrel.

From this, greater punishment would come upon you. Therefore we shall be silent. That this may not happen depends on you.

If we see your zeal, perhaps we shall speak again, so that you may advance more and more, and we may rejoice over you, glorifying in all things God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

To Him be glory, dominion, majesty, and honor, with the unoriginate Father and His Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

For according to the Law of Moses, Deut 23:1, a eunuch could not be admitted into the assembly of Jehovah.

The conversion of the Ethiopian man was especially important because, in this case, one deemed worthy of admission into Christ's Church was not merely an unclean Jew, nor even a Samaritan.

He was a Gentile by birth and blood, although a Jew by faith.

Moreover, this Ethiopian man was also a Gentile by the place where he lived. Therefore, by his conversion to Christ, the Church spread far beyond the borders of orthodox Judea, and directly into a Gentile country.

For this reason the conversion to faith in Christ of the Ethiopian man occurs by a special and extraordinary prompting and ordering.

The Angel of the Lord visibly appears to Philip while he still remained in Samaria. He then defines with the greatest exactness the place toward which Philip must direct his preaching journey.

Even this was not enough. When Philip came to the place indicated by the angel, he saw there the Gentile courtier sitting in a chariot and occupied with reading the word of God.

Then there followed a special prompting of the Spirit of God to Philip, that he should begin preaching Christ to this particular man.

The opinion of some interpreters, such as Olshausen, that he was a Jew born in Ethiopia, rests on the fact that he was reading the prophet Isaiah.

This would be well founded if one supposed that he read the prophetic book in the Hebrew text, and not in the Greek translation.

A proselyte is a person who has accepted a new confession of faith, in this case Judaism.

In the East, not only eunuchs in the strict sense were called eunuchs. The name was also given to all persons who occupied the highest offices of state.

Yet here the word "eunuch" is used in the strict sense. This is shown by the fact that this eunuch was a courtier attached to the queen.

It is also shown by the fact that otherwise the word "eunuch" would be superfluous here. The man's high position and office are indicated in the same place by other words.

He was a courtier of Candace, a common title in Ethiopia, like Pharaoh in Egypt, queen of the Ethiopians, and keeper of all her treasures.

Even on the return road, sitting in his chariot, he was instructed in the word of God. It was as though he continued his spiritual conversation with God in the temple by immersing his attention in one of the books of the greatest Old Testament prophets.

Perhaps, and probably, while in Jerusalem he had heard accounts of the Lord Jesus Christ, Lk 24:18. A good religious feeling drew him to read the book of the Old Testament evangelist.

He read precisely the passage about the suffering Servant of Jehovah. There the prophet, as though standing before the Cross of the Lord who suffered innocently, depicted His sufferings and death with an evangelist's clarity.

This became Philip's immediate occasion to begin speaking with the stranger and to preach Christ to him.

The eunuch himself had probably often been there and could easily acquire these books, despite their cost. He was undoubtedly not poor, since he was a courtier and keeper of all the queen's treasures.

Having come to know the true God, he became a proselyte of the gate, see Jn 12:20. Because he was a eunuch, he could not be admitted into closer communion with the Jews, see Deut 23:1.

Meanwhile he was so pious that, despite the great distance, he traveled to Jerusalem, probably for the feast of Pentecost. He wished to take what part he could in the prayers and celebrations around the holy temple of Jerusalem.

His piety was so great that he read the word of God spoken through the prophet even while traveling by a difficult, desert, indirect road. It was safer than other roads, though they were straighter and better prepared.

It is reported that the Ethiopian queens received the kingdom by right of inheritance. The name Candace was common to them, as Pharaoh was to the Egyptian kings.