ARE THERE ANY BLACK INDIVIDUALS MENTONED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT?

The Queen of Sheba (Matthew 12:42; Luke 11:31)

This OT personage appears in the NT when Jesus makes an allusion to her in his encounter with unbelieving scribes and Pharisees. His words are, “The queen of the South will be raised up at the judgment with this generation and will condemn it, because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and I tell you that something more than Solomon is here.”

France says, “We have noted probable echoes of the story of the Queen of Sheba (I Kgs 10:1-13) in the coming of the magi to look for the new king of the Jews in Jerusalem ([Matt] 2:1-12)...But Matthew's interest is not only in the responsive pagans, but in the nature of the Israelite leaders to whom they responded...Solomon, the son of David, represents not only Israel's wisdom tradition (and it was 'to hear his wisdom' that the Queen of Sheba came, I Kgs 10:1,3,4) but also its monarchy.”

The Ethiopian Eunuch (Acts 8:27-39)

Controversy also surrounds this anonymous character. Bruce says, The ancient kingdom of Ethiopia corresponded to the modern Nubia, rather than to Abyssinia...The chamberlain was probably a God-fearing Gentile.” And according to Deuteronomy 23:1, the Ethiopian treasurer could not have become a full proselyte. If that is true, then he was no different in status than the many God-fearers in attendance in the synagogues, those which Paul later converted.

On the other hand, Stott says, “The Ethiopian official to whom Philip was sent was her [Candace's] treasurer or chancellor of the exchequer, presumably a black African. But he had gone to Jerusalem to worship...This may mean that he was actually Jewish, either by birth or by conversion, for the Jewish dispersion had penetrated at least into Egypt and probably beyond, and perhaps by now the promise to eunuchs of Isaiah 56:3-4 had superseded the ban of Deuteronomy 23:1. It seems unlikely that he was a Gentile, since Luke does not present him as the first Gentile convert; that distinction he reserves for Cornelius.”

Fitzmyer recognizes the ambiguity here. He asks, “How is one to understand this individual? Is he a Gentile? Or a diaspora Jew? Eusebius regarded the eunuch from Ethiopia as 'the first of the Gentiles' to be converted to Christianity.” Fitzmyer lists an impressive number of modern scholars who feel the same way. However, he ultimately feels that would cause a problem with Peter's words in 15:7 and the notice of Paul being chosen later as the one to evangelize the Gentiles (Acts 10).

Fitzmyer is obviously being a little inconsistent in his argument here since he is conveniently ignoring that fact that it was Peter, not Paul, who evangelized to Cornelius. But he concludes, “So in the Lucan story line the Ethiopian eunuch is to be understood as a Jew, or possibly a Jewish proselyte, who comes from a distant land, despite the difficulty that this understanding may create.”

And regarding Stott's comment regarding the eunuch worshiping in Jerusalem, Neil responds by saying, “The eunuch, who was apparently the court chamberlain, was returning from a pilgrimage to worship in Jerusalem. This implies that he was a 'God-fearing Gentile', i.e. an adherent of the Jewish faith but unwilling (or in this particular case, unable) to become a full proselyte.”

Spencer: “Ethnically, Philip evangelizes a black African, Jewish-sympathizing Gentile ('God-fearer'). Socially, Philip's witness spans two poles. On the one hand he advises an elite government official (dynastes), the queen's treasurer (Acts 8:27). On the other hand, however, he reaches out to a castrated male (eunouchos), who, despite his interest in Judaism, would have been regarded according to traditional law as impure and disgraceful, forever cut off from the covenant community (Lev 21:18-20; Deut 23:1).”

Hubbard: “Barred from active participation in the Jewish rites by his race and his emasculation (Dt. xxiii.1), he may have been a proselyte of the gate. His acquaintance with Judaism and the Old Testament...is not completely unexpected in light of Jewish settlements in Upper Egypt and the considerable impact made by Jewish life and thought on the Ethiopians...Ethiopian tradition claims him as his country's first evangelist.”

Finally, Hagner says, “In Acts we first encounter a Gentile Christian, excluding the exception of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8:27-39...” I think that the balance of opinion is that this Ethiopian eunuch has the distinction of being the first Gentile convert to Christianity mentioned in the New Testament.

Simon of Cyrene (Mark 15:21; Luke 23:26), Symeon, surnamed Niger (Acts 13:1), Rufus (Mark 15:21), and the mother of Rufus (Romans 16:13)

Finally, we come across the above individuals, who may or may not be related to one another. Simon of Cyrene, a part of northern Africa, was the man compelled by the Romans to carry Jesus' cross when Jesus became too weak to do so. This Simon was the father of Rufus and Alexander, names apparently familiar to the early church. Then there is Symeon, surnamed Niger (“black”) who a few years later appears in the church at Antioch as a prophet associated with Lucius of Cyrene. And finally, the mother of a man named Rufus ministered to Paul. The relationship of these people is a very debatable topic, as you can see below:

Toussaint: “Simeon was also a Jew, but his Latin nickname Niger not only indicates he was of dark complexion but also that he moved in Roman circles. He could be the Simon of Cyrene who carried Christ's cross..., but this is highly debatable.”

Nixon: “He was surnamed Niger, which suggests that he was an African, but he has not been proved to be the same person as Simon of Cyrene (Lk. xxiii.26, etc).” (Nixon)

Neil says that “Symeon who was called Niger – i.e. 'the Black' – may have been an African. Some have identified him with Simon of Cyrene.”

Stott states that “there was Simeon (a Hebrew name) called Niger ('black') who was presumable a black African, and just as conceivably none other than the Simon of Cyrene who carried the cross for Jesus and who must have become a believer, since his sons Alexander and Rufus were known to the Christian community...”

Bruce: “The reason for the nickname, apart from its Latinity, is at any rate hardly to be doubted; he was presumably of dark complexion. In that case one begins to wonder if he was that 'Simon of Cyrene...the father of Alexander and Rufus' (Mark 15:21) who carried the cross of Jesus. Mark mentions Alexander and Rufus presumably because they were well known in the Roman church when he wrote his gospel. One may speculate further. Among the Roman Christians to whom Paul sends greetings in Rom. 16 is one 'Rufus the chosen in the Lord,' (v. 13). If this Rufus was the son of Simon of Cyrene, it is tempting to explain Paul's reference to the mother of Rufus 'his mother and mine' – by supposing that Paul lodged in their home while he was in Antioch, and that it was there that the mother of Rufus proved herself a mother to Paul as well. But our speculations take us only so far and no farther. If Symeon of this passage was Simon of Cyrene, it is curious that not he, but his fellow-prophet Lucius is here called a Cyrenean by Luke [while that designation is not used for Symeon].”